Influence of toe restraint on reinforced soil segmental walls

Huang, Bingquan; Bathurst, Richard J.; Hatami, Kianoosh; Allen, Tony M.

doi:10.1139/t10-002

Cited by 108 publications

(49 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Two numerical methods are generally used to model MSE walls: (a) finite element method (e.g., [3][4][5][6][7][8]), and (b) finite difference method (e.g., [9][10][11][12][13][14][15]). …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of choice of FLAC and PLAXIS interface models on reinforced soil–structure interactions

Damians

Bathurst

2015

Computers and Geotechnics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tThe choice of structure element to simulate soil reinforcement and soil-structure interaction details for numerical modelling of mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) walls can have a significant influence on numerical outcomes. Program FLAC (finite difference method) offers three different options (beam, cable and strip element) to model the reinforcement and program PLAXIS (finite element method) has two (beam and geogrid element). Both programs use different models and properties to simulate the mechanical behaviour of the interface between dissimilar materials. The paper describes the details of the linear elastic Mohr-Coulomb interface model available in the two software packages to model material interaction and how to select model parameters to give the same numerical outcomes. The numerical results quantitatively demonstrate the conditions that give good agreement between the two programs for the same steel strip reinforced soil-structure problem and the situations where they do not. For example, the paper demonstrates that results can be very different depending on the type of structure element used to model horizontal reinforcement layers that are discontinuous in the plane-strain direction.

show abstract

“…Two numerical methods are generally used to model MSE walls: (a) finite element method (e.g., [3][4][5][6][7][8]), and (b) finite difference method (e.g., [9][10][11][12][13][14][15]). …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of choice of FLAC and PLAXIS interface models on reinforced soil–structure interactions

Damians

Bathurst

2015

Computers and Geotechnics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Additional earth loads not transferred to the reinforcement strips may be carried by the facing due to the frictional interface between the bottom panel and the concrete foundation at the base of the test pit. The contribution of a restrained toe at the base of reinforced soil walls with rigid structural facings has been demonstrated to be a potentially significant contributor to lateral earth load capacity based on results of physical experiments (Bathurst et al, 2006) and numerical modelling (Huang et al, 2010) of reinforced soil walls. 4.…”

Section: Full-scale Test Wallsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of transient flooding on steel strip reinforced soil walls

Miyata

Bathurst

Otani

et al. 2015

Soils and Foundations

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paper presents the results of three full-scale tests that were carried out to investigate the influence of transient (cyclic) flooding on the performance of steel strip reinforced soil walls (SSWs). The walls were constructed to a height of 6 m and then flooded and drained to about midheight in four cycles. The walls were constructed with three different granular soils varying with respect to permeability, fines content and shear strength. Earth pressures and reinforcement loads were recorded at end of construction and at the end of each flooding cycle prior to draining. Hence, for the purposes of analysis, the walls were treated as either in a drained or flooded steady state condition. In-situ steel strip pullout tests were also performed. The wall facings were very permeable and thus prevented unbalanced hydrostatic and seepage forces from developing during drawdown that could increase reinforcement strip loads beyond drained condition values. The effects of soil type on measured loads at the connections and peak tensile loads located within the reinforced soil zone are identified. Measured reinforcement tensile loads at end of construction and at the end of peak flood stages are compared to predictions using different analytical models for the (dry) EOC condition. Similar comparisons are made using measured pullout test results and predictions using different pullout models. Implications for current design practice and wall performance in transient flooding environments are reported.

show abstract

“…Nevertheless, it is not possible to know from the current investigation if the fraction of load carried by the toe will decrease with the height of the wall. There is some evidence from numerical Notes: n＝number of data points; bias＝ratio of measured to predicted Tmax; COV＝standard deviation of bias values/mean of bias values modeling of hard-faced geosynthetic reinforced soil walls that this is the case (Huang et al, 2010).…”

Section: Full-scale Test Wallsmentioning

confidence: 99%