Energy-based fibre bundle model algorithms to predict soil reinforcement by roots

Ji, Jinnan; Mao, Zhun; Qu, Wenbin; Zhang, Zhiqiang

doi:10.1007/s11104-019-04327-z

Cited by 30 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 49 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This 'sawtooth' effect may be partially responsible for FBMs overestimating experimentally-measured root reinforcement as the number of classes used in practice is relatively small, e.g. 4 (Genet et al 2008;Mao et al 2012;Ji et al 2020), 15 (Schwarz et al 2010;Moos et al 2016) or 20 (Comino et al 2010). Adding Weibull survival functions reduces but not eradicates this error.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This error may also be reduced by artificially distributing the root diameters within each class, for example by using probabilistic functions (e.g. Ji et al 2020). Using the continuous approach eliminates the need for iterative calculation algorithms which may a source of additional (numerical) errors.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…β F = {2, 2.5 or 3} + 0.5β E (or β F = {2, 2.5 or 3} + 0.5β t − 0.5β ): This is underlying assumption in the energy-based models (FBM-W) proposed by Ji et al (2020), in the case of linear elastic roots. In these models, the tensile force is distributed according to the mechanical work (energy) per unit cross-sectional area of root (W r ) required to elongate a root with initial length L gauge by a distance u r in a uniaxial tension test:…”

Section: Existing Load Sharing Lawsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Commonly, root diameters are grouped into a finite number of root diameter classes (e.g. Genet et al 2008, Ji et al 2020. All roots within each class must be assigned a diameter (this may be the average diameter in the class, or may follow some other rule, see for example Thomas andPollen-Bankhead 2010, Ji et al 2020).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

A generic form of fibre bundle models for root reinforcement of soil

Meijer

2021

Plant Soil

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The mechanical contribution of plant roots to the soil shear strength is commonly modelled using fibre bundle models (FBM), accounting for sequential breakage of roots. This study provides a generic framework, able to includes the many different existing approaches, to quantify the effect of various model assumptions. Methods The framework uses (1) a single model parameter determining how load is shared between all roots, (2) a continuous power-law distribution of root area ratio over a range of root diameters, and (3) power-law relationships between root diameters and biomechanical properties. A new load sharing parameter, closely resembling how roots mobilise strength under landslide conditions, is proposed. Exact analytical solutions were found for the peak root reinforcement, thus eliminating the current need for iterative algorithms. Model assumptions and results were validated against existing biomechanical and root reinforcement data. Results Root reinforcements proved very sensitive to the user-defined load sharing parameter. It is shown that the current method of discretising all roots in discrete diameter classes prior to reinforcement calculations leads to significant overestimations of reinforcement. Addition of a probabilistic distribution of root failure by means of Weibull survival functions, thus adding a second source of sequential mobilisation, further reduced predicted reinforcements, but only when the reduction due to load sharing was limited. Conclusion The presented solutions greatly simplify root reinforcement calculations while maintaining analytical exactness as well as clarity in the assumptions made. The proposed standardisation of fibre bundle-type models will greatly aid comparison and exchange of data.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Existing Load Sharing Lawsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A generic form of fibre bundle models for root reinforcement of soil

Meijer

2021

Plant Soil

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…e e e d 0 W r , also called deformation energy, represents the ability of a root to absorb energy without failing and is an intrinsic mechanical quality of root tissue as a material that jointly considers strength and deformation (Ji et al 2020). The higher W r value that a root possesses, the tougher the root tissue.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intra‐ and inter‐specific variation in root mechanical traits for twelve herbaceous plants and their link with the root economics space

Mao

Roumet

Rossi

et al. 2022

Oikos

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Plant root traits are diverse and variable, and the way in which they interact has consequences for fundamental functions such as anchorage, or services such as soil fixation. Here, we characterize mechanical traits related to anchorage (tensile strength, strain, stiffness and toughness) at both intra‐ and inter‐specific levels and examine how they covary with other traits related to the root economics space. We grew twelve herbaceous species from contrasting taxonomical families in a common garden experiment. For each species, we excavated root systems and measured mechanical, morphological and chemical traits at two locations (proximal versus distal) for two root types (absorptive versus transport roots). At the intraspecific level, transport roots tended to be stronger and tougher than absorptive roots and could extend further before failure, but were as stiff as absorptiveroots. Where the root was sampled (proximalversus distal) had a limited effect on any root mechanical trait. The five monocots (Poaceae) had stronger and tougher root material than the seven dicots (Fabaceae, Plantaginaceae and Rosaceae), but there were no differences in stiffness. At the interspecific level, mechanical traits covaried positively and were strongly and positively correlated with specific root length (a trait related to the ‘do‐it‐yourself' soil exploration strategy), and negatively with root diameter (a trait related to the ‘outsourcing' soil exploration strategy) and root tissue density (a trait related to root lifespan). We demonstrate the important role of species' taxonomical subgroup (monocot versus dicot) and root type in governing mechanical trait variation at both intra‐ and inter‐specific levels. Our results can be regarded as the first evidence of a link between root mechanical robustness and the root economics space, through a strong association with the ‘do‐it‐yourself' soil exploration strategy.

show abstract