Bearing capacity of a strip footing situated on soil slope using a non-associated flow rule in lower bound limit analysis

Halder, Koushik; Chakraborty, Debraj; Dash, Sujit Kumar

doi:10.1080/19386362.2017.1325119

Cited by 27 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Xie and Leshchinsky (2017) using limit analysis (LA) along with discontinuity layout optimization (DLO), computed the carrying pressure of spread shape footing close to cohesive-frictional slopes. In the investigation of Halder et al (2017), the strip footing carrying capability placed on the granular slope was calculated by advanced FELA analysis. In 2018, Zhou et al, utilized DLO to provide diagrams for the load-settlement behavior of strip loading located on the crest of a slope.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of reinforcement on the load-settlement behavior of a strip footing adjacent to granular soil excavation

Ahmad

2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

By adding a geogrid, the granular soils are improved as far as their load-settlement behavior is concerned. It is often necessary to build new buildings adjacent to existing buildings because of a shortage of urban land. It is necessary, therefore, to excavate. An excavation's surface foundations have less information on their behavior. Two types of granular soil were employed in experiments using finite elements in a series of numerical analyses near excavations loaded with a strip footing to investigate reinforced and unreinforced granular soils. The simulation of granular soil behavior is therefore carried out using the hardening soil model (HSM). A couple of closed footings adjacent to the pit were investigated to evaluate the effect of the geogrid reinforcement on their behavior during the response to load. In this research, footing spacing from various granular excavation edges varied with sand excavations (H=3B). The highest bearing capacity was achieved using various geogrid layers. By utilizing three existing reinforcement layers and increasing the pit setback, it is demonstrated that the final settlement of the footings can be greatly reduced. Based on the findings of this study, the final loading capacity could be increased considerably when three layers of reinforcement are applied to granular soils. Furthermore, the bearing capacity will also increase in a nonlinear manner as the excavation is distanced from its edge. Consequently, it is important to determine the location of the footings carefully. A second advantage is the ability to place foundations adjacently, which increases their bearing capacity and efficiency factor. There is no effect on the effect of interference when the distance between the surface foundations (D) is more than 5 times the foundation width (B).

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of reinforcement on the load-settlement behavior of a strip footing adjacent to granular soil excavation

Ahmad

2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Xie and Leshchinsky (2017) using limit analysis (LA) along with discontinuity layout optimization (DLO), computed the carrying pressure of spread shape footing close to the coehsive-frictional slopes. In the investigation of Halder et al (2017), the strip footing carrying capability placed on the granular slope by advanced analysis FELA was calculated. Zhou et al in 2018, utilized DLO to provide the diagrams for load-settlement behavior of the strip loading located on the crest of slope.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of reinforcement on load-settlement behavior of a strip footing adjacent to granular soils-excavation

Ahmad

2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Improvement the granular soils by the inclusion geogrid makes to increase the load-settlement behavior of strip footing-soil-sheet wall system. The lack of urban land, usually the construction of new buildings adjacent to the old buildings are used. To this end, excavation is required. There is less information on the behavior of surface foundations adjacent to an excavation. In the present work, a series of numerical studies using an analysis of finite elements in reinforced and unreinforced granular soils adjacent to excavations loaded with a strip footing were carried out using two granular types soil. Therefore, selecting the hardening soil model (HSM) to simulate the granular soils behavior is utilized. This work aimed to define the impact of the geogrid reinforcement on load-settlement of that footing, suggest an optimal number of reinforcements, and investigate the behavior of two closed footings adjacent the pit. The research was carried out on sandy excavations (H=3B) by altering the distance between the footing from the edge of the various granular excavations. Various geogrid layers were used to achieve the highest bearing capacity. It is demonstrated that the final settlements of the footings can be greatly decreased by both existing three reinforcement layer and increasing the setback of pit. In this study, it was obtained that for granular soils using three layers of reinforcement, the final loading capacity of it will be considerably increased. Moreover, it is obvious that the final bearing capacity will increment in a non-linear manner by incrementing the distance from the edge of the excavation. As a result, a lot of care should be done to determine the footing location. Finally, the placement of foundations adjacent to each other increases their bearing capacity and efficiency factor. In the ratio of the distances between the surface foundations (D) beyond 5 times the foundation width (B), the effect of interference is negligible.

show abstract

“…Lesniewska [6] used RES analysis software and the rigid-plastic theory of reinforced soil to analyze the differential boundary value of the bearing capacity of reinforced and unreinforced soil embankment slopes. Halder et al [7] combined the lower bound finite element limit analysis method, anisotropic random field modeling method, and Monte Carlo simulation analysis to calculate the bearing capacity of the cohesive soil-reinforced embankment slope. Nouri et al [8] used the limit equilibrium horizontal slice method to evaluate the pseudostatic acceleration and amplification effect of reinforced soil slopes and retaining walls.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Model Test Study on Dynamic Response of Expressway Plastic-Reinforced Earth Embankment under Earthquake

Han

et al. 2021

Geofluids

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aiming at the seismic response of plastic geogrid-reinforced embankments, with Zhounan Expressway as the research engineering background, a self-designed seismic-rainfall coupled slope model test system was designed and used to produce 1 : 20 scale plastic geogrid-reinforced embankments. Moreover, the physical model of the unreinforced embankment under Hanshin wave, Wenchuan wave, Tianjin wave, etc. was also studied to carry out comparative analysis on seismic response and dynamic response on test model. The dynamic characteristics and dynamic response of the embankment model were tested from low to high seismic intensity; the changes of the embankment’s natural frequency, damping ratio, acceleration at the measuring point, and dynamic earth pressure were analyzed; and the main influencing factors and damage to the embankment seismic response feature were discussed herein. The test results showed that the initial natural frequency of the reinforced embankment was 42.4% higher than that of the unreinforced embankment, and its initial damping ratio reduced by 19.4%. The attenuation effect of the natural frequency and damping ratio of the reinforced embankment with the loading history was significantly lower than that of the unreinforced embankment. Embankment reinforcement exhibited a very good inhibitory effect on the PGA amplification effect of the embankment, and the inhibitory effect on the interior of the slope was more significant than that on the slope. Moreover, the type of seismic wave, the amplitude of the seismic wave, and the frequency of the seismic wave significantly influenced the PGA amplification effect of the embankment. The peak dynamic soil pressure of the unreinforced embankment at the same location was significantly greater than that of the reinforced embankment. The two embankment models showed significantly different antivibration damage performance. After the peak acceleration of 2 m s-2 was loaded, no cracks were seen on the surface of the embankment model. When the peak acceleration of 3 m s-2 was loaded, on the slopes of the two embankment models, smaller cracks were observed in the middle and upper parts of the face. When the peak acceleration of 4 m s-2 was loaded, the failure of the unreinforced embankment model was obvious. Large cracks on the top of the slope could reach 16 mm in width, and 27 mm settlement appeared at the top, and the slope was convex. The reinforced embankment model was only on the slope shoulder. Moreover, there were fine cracks on the top, and the slope top settlement was less than 5 mm. The research results provide theoretical support for preventing and controlling the road embankment vibration diseases and improving highway durability design.

show abstract

Bearing capacity of a strip footing situated on soil slope using a non-associated flow rule in lower bound limit analysis

Cited by 27 publications

References 27 publications

Impact of reinforcement on the load-settlement behavior of a strip footing adjacent to granular soil excavation

Impact of reinforcement on the load-settlement behavior of a strip footing adjacent to granular soil excavation

Impact of reinforcement on load-settlement behavior of a strip footing adjacent to granular soils-excavation

Model Test Study on Dynamic Response of Expressway Plastic-Reinforced Earth Embankment under Earthquake

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About