Net Vertical Loads on Geosynthetic Reinforcement in Column-Supported Embankments

Filz, George M.; Smith, Miriam E.

doi:10.1061/40916(235)1

Cited by 21 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, the concept of "Load-Displacement compatibility method" in the present research is adopted from fundamental laws of physics. Similar concept was implemented by Smith (2005) and Filz and Smith ( 2007) for design of bridging layers in geosynthetics reinforced embankments. Hence, to satisfy the vertical deformation continuity, the following conditions should be satisfied.…”

Section: Formulation Of the Problemmentioning

confidence: 92%

Analytical study for double-layer geosynthetic reinforced load transfer platform on column improved soft soil

Ghosh

Fatahi

Khabbaz

et al. 2017

Geotextiles and Geomembranes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective of this study is to propose a reasonably accurate mechanical model for double-layer geosynthetic reinforced load transfer platform (LTP) on column reinforced soft soil which can be used by practicing engineers. The developed model is very useful to study the behaviour of LTP resting on soft soil improved with conventional columns such as concrete columns, piles, and deep soil mixing columns. The negligible tensile strength of granular material in LTP, bending and shear deformations of LTP, compressibility and shearing of soft soil have been incorporated in the model. Furthermore, the results from the proposed model simulating the soft soil as Kerr foundation model are compared to the corresponding solutions when the soft soil is idealised by Winkler and Pasternak foundation models. It is observed from the comparison that the presented model can be used as a tool for a better prediction of the LTP behaviour with multi layers of geosynthetics, in comparison with the situation that soft soil is modelled by Winkler and Pasternak foundations. Furthermore, parametric studies show that as the column spacing increases, the maximum deflection of LTP and normalised tension in the geosynthetics also increase. Whereas, the maximum deflection of LTP and normalised tension in the geosynthetics decrease with increasing LTP thickness, stiffness of subsoil, and stiffness of geosynthetic reinforcement. In addition, it is observed that the use of one stronger geosynthetic layer (e.g. 1×2000 kN/m) with the equivalent stiffness of two geosynthetic layers (e.g. 2×1000 kN/m) does not result in the same settlement of LTP and the tension of the geosynthetic reinforcement when compared to two weaker geosynthetic layers.

show abstract

Section: Formulation Of the Problemmentioning

confidence: 92%

Analytical study for double-layer geosynthetic reinforced load transfer platform on column improved soft soil

Ghosh

Fatahi

Khabbaz

et al. 2017

Geotextiles and Geomembranes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In agreement with what done by other authors, the large-displacements numerical analyses were performed by assuming an elastic-perfectly plastic constitutive relationship for the soil 29,32,34,36,61,[71][72][73] whereas an elastic behaviour for both pile and reinforcement. 27,34,63,74 This latter is assumed to behave as an isotropic membrane 27,34,63,74 with nil flexural stiffness. Since geosynthetics are very often anisotropic (their stiffness/strength is different depending on the loading direction), the values of stiffness/strength to be assigned to the equivalent isotropic membrane are the average ones.…”

Section: Numerical Evidence For Grps Embankmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As was previously mentioned, the attempts of introducing a simplified numerical model dealing with both stresses and settlements are very few. For instance, although with reference to the classical trapdoor problem, Filz and Smith 63 and Filz et al 64,65 proposed a model putting in relation vertical stress transfer to differential displacements at the embankment base. Very recently, di Prisco et al 40 proposed a generalised constitutive relationship to evaluate, under drained conditions, both differential and average settlements at the top of the unit cell caused by CPS embankment construction.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mathematical modelling of the mechanical response of geosynthetic‐reinforced and pile‐supported embankments

Mangraviti

Flessati

Prisco

2023

Num Anal Meth Geomechanics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Piled foundations are commonly employed to reduce settlements in artificial earth embankments founded on soft soil strata. To limit the number of piles and, consequently, construction costs, popular is the use of geosynthetic reinforcements laid at the embankment base. Nowadays, the complex interaction between geosynthetics, piles and soil is not yet fully understood and, in the scientific literature, simplified displacement‐based approaches to choose reinforcements, pile diameter and spacing are missing. In this paper, the authors, starting from the critical analysis and theoretical interpretation of finite difference numerical results, introduce a new mathematical model to rapidly assess both (i) differential/average settlements at the top of the embankment and (ii) maximum tensile forces in the basal reinforcement. The model, conceived to reproduce the response of a pile belonging to the central part of the embankment, is the result of an upscaling procedure based on a suitable sub‐structuring of the spatial domain (an axisymmetric unit cell) and on the concept of plane of equal settlements. For the foundation soil, drained conditions are considered, the pile skin roughness is disregarded, and piles are assumed to get the rigid bedrock. As generalised kinematic variables average and differential settlements are employed, whereas as generalized static ones the embankment height and the geosynthetic axial force. The model is validated against field measurements (where layered foundation soil and pile caps are included) and an application example of the model, used as a preliminary design tool in a displacement‐based perspective, is finally provided.

show abstract

“…The bearing capacity of the subsoil should not be neglected in design, and it provides certain support to the upper embankment, although it usually has high compressibility, low shear strength, and a long consolidation time. Filz and Smith's [9] method considered the influence of subsoil when calculating the deflection of geosynthetics under linear elastic conditions and demonstrated that the subsoil contributes to the support of the embankment's residual load. Zhuang et al [10] presented that subsoil has a major contribution to the overall vertical equilibrium of GRPEs.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Design Chart for the Analysis of the Maximum Strain of Reinforcement in GRPEs Considering the Arching and Stress History of the Subsoil

Zhuang

Zhang

et al. 2022

Applied Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Geogrid-reinforced piled embankments (GRPEs) provide an economical and effective way to construct highways and railways on soft soil foundations. This paper proposed a new design method for GRPEs. The method was based on the soil arching and tensioned-membrane effects, the bearing capacity of the subsoil was considered as well. The originality of the proposed method lies in considering the stress history of the subsoil, and different over-consolidation ratios (OCRs) were used in calculating the settlement of subsoil. This design method, initially, established the vertical equilibrium of the unit body between the pile caps immediately above the subsoil. After that, the design charts were produced by solving the overall equilibrium equation from which engineers can intuitively obtain the maximum strain of reinforcement, and the tensile force can be used in the ultimate limit state analyses. The design method was then validated by three case studies, which showed good reliability with the maximum error being less than 18%. Parameter study results indicated that the maximum strain of reinforcement for the under-consolidated soil was 80–120% larger than that for normally consolidated soil and more than four times greater than that for over-consolidated soil.

show abstract

Net Vertical Loads on Geosynthetic Reinforcement in Column-Supported Embankments

Cited by 21 publications

References 3 publications

Analytical study for double-layer geosynthetic reinforced load transfer platform on column improved soft soil

Analytical study for double-layer geosynthetic reinforced load transfer platform on column improved soft soil

Mathematical modelling of the mechanical response of geosynthetic‐reinforced and pile‐supported embankments

A Design Chart for the Analysis of the Maximum Strain of Reinforcement in GRPEs Considering the Arching and Stress History of the Subsoil

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About