Deformations of geosynthetic reinforced soil under bridge service loads

Nicks, Jennifer; Esmaili, Danial; Adams, Michael T.

doi:10.1016/j.geotexmem.2016.03.005

Cited by 43 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Geosynthetic-reinforced soil (GRS) bridge abutments have been widely adopted as a 40 result of construction, performance and cost advantages over traditional pile-support designs, and 41 significant experimental and numerical modeling research has been conducted for static loading 42 conditions (Wu et al 2001(Wu et al , 2006Helwany et al 2007;Nicks et al 2013Nicks et al , 2016Zheng andFox 43 2016, 2017). However, seismic events represent a severe loading condition and there is some 44 reluctance to use this technology in high seismic areas without further testing and evaluation.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Shaking Table Test of a Half-Scale Geosynthetic-Reinforced Soil Bridge Abutment

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents an experimental study of the dynamic response of a half-scale geosynthetic-reinforced soil (GRS) bridge abutment system using a shaking table. Experimental design of the model specimen followed established similitude relationships for shaking table tests of reduced-scale models in a 1g gravitational field, including scaling of model geometry, geosynthetic reinforcement stiffness, backfill soil modulus, bridge load, and characteristics of the earthquake motions. The 2.7 m-high GRS bridge abutment was constructed using well-graded sand backfill, modular facing blocks, and uniaxial geogrid reinforcement with a vertical spacing of 0.15 m in both the longitudinal and transverse directions. A bridge beam was placed on the GRS bridge abutment at one end and on a concrete support wall resting on a sliding platform off the shaking table at the other end. The GRS bridge abutment system was subjected to a series of input motions in the longitudinal direction. Results indicate that the testing system performed well, and that the GRS bridge abutment experienced small deformations. For two earthquake motions, the maximum incremental residual facing displacement in model scale was 1.0 mm, and the average incremental residual bridge seat settlement in model scale was 1.4 mm, which corresponds to a vertical strain of 0.7%.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Shaking Table Test of a Half-Scale Geosynthetic-Reinforced Soil Bridge Abutment

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several case histories of in-service GRS bridge abutments have been reported in the literature and indicate good performance in terms of facing displacements and bridge seat settlements (Abu-Hejleh et al 2002;Adams et al 2011;Saghebfar et al 2017;Talebi et al 2017;Gebremariam et al 2020aGebremariam et al , 2020b. Field and laboratory loading tests have also been conducted on GRS piers and abutments and yielded important findings (e.g., Wu et al 2001Wu et al , 2006Pham 2009;Nicks et al 2013Nicks et al , 2016Adams et al 2014;Iwamoto et al 2015;Xiao et al 2016;Xu et al 2019;Zheng et al 2019aZheng et al , 2019b. Such experimental studies are typically time-consuming, labor intensive and costly.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

2D and 3D simulations of static response of a geosynthetic reinforced soil bridge abutment

Zheng

Guo

Fox

et al. 2022

Geosynthetics International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents two-dimensional (2D) and three-dimensional (3D) numerical simulations of a half-scale geosynthetic reinforced soil (GRS) bridge abutment during construction and bridge load application. The backfill soil was characterized using a nonlinear elasto-plastic model that incorporates a hyperbolic stress-strain relationship and the Mohr-Coulomb failure criterion. Geogrid reinforcements were characterized using linearly elastic elements with orthotropic behavior. Various interfaces were included to simulate the interaction between the abutment components. Results from the 2D and 3D simulations are compared with physical model test measurements from the longitudinal and transverse sections of a GRS bridge abutment. Facing displacements and bridge seat settlements for the 2D and 3D simulations agree well with measured values, with the 2D simulated values larger than the 3D simulated values due to boundary condition effects. Results from the 3D simulation are in reasonable agreement with measurements from the longitudinal and transverse sections. The 2D simulation can also reasonably capture the static response of GRS bridge abutments and is generally more conservative than the 3D simulation.

show abstract

“…Field and laboratory loading tests have been conducted on GRS bridge piers and abutments, and generally indicate relatively small deformations under service load conditions and large bearing capacity (Adams 1997;Gotteland et al 1997;Ketchart and Wu 1997;Wu et al 2001Wu et al , 2006Lee and Wu 2004;Adams et al 2011b;Nicks et al 2013Nicks et al , 2016Adams et al 2014;Iwamoto et al 2015;Xu et al 2019). Lee and Wu (2004) reviewed the results of several loading tests and suggested that bearing capacity can be as high as 900 kPa for closely spaced geosynthetic reinforcement and well-graded, well-compacted backfill soil.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The section with stronger reinforcement did not reach failure for applied vertical stresses in excess of 800 kPa, while the other section with weaker reinforcement experienced excessive deformations for an applied vertical stress of approximately 400 kPa. Nicks et al (2013Nicks et al ( , 2016 conducted a series of loading 4 tests on 2 m-high GRS mini-piers and found that reinforcement vertical spacing and reinforcement strength have the most important effects on the deformation response and ultimate bearing capacity.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Physical Model Tests of Half-Scale Geosynthetic Reinforced Soil Bridge Abutments. I: Static Loading

Zheng

McCartney

Shing

et al. 2019

J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents experimental results from physical model tests on four half-scale geosynthetic reinforced soil (GRS) bridge abutment specimens constructed using wellgraded angular backfill sand, modular facing blocks, and uniaxial geogrid reinforcement to investigate the effects of applied surcharge stress, reinforcement vertical spacing, and reinforcement tensile stiffness for working stress, static loading conditions. Facing displacements increased for the upper section of the walls after the application of surcharge stress and were greater for larger reinforcement vertical spacing and reduced reinforcement tensile stiffness. Bridge seat settlements were proportional to the applied surcharge stress, strongly affected by larger reinforcement vertical spacing, and only slightly affected by reduced reinforcement tensile stiffness. Measured vertical and lateral soil stresses generally were lower than calculated values for static loading conditions. The maximum tensile strain in each reinforcement layer occurred near the facing block connection for lower layers and under the bridge seat for higher layers. A companion paper presents experimental results for the same GRS bridge abutment specimens under dynamic loading conditions.

show abstract

Deformations of geosynthetic reinforced soil under bridge service loads

Cited by 43 publications

References 10 publications

Shaking Table Test of a Half-Scale Geosynthetic-Reinforced Soil Bridge Abutment

Shaking Table Test of a Half-Scale Geosynthetic-Reinforced Soil Bridge Abutment

2D and 3D simulations of static response of a geosynthetic reinforced soil bridge abutment

Physical Model Tests of Half-Scale Geosynthetic Reinforced Soil Bridge Abutments. I: Static Loading

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About