Soil–geosynthetic inclined plane shear behavior: influence of soil moisture content and geosynthetic type

Abstract

This paper deals with the inclined plane shear on three different geosynthetics (a geocomposite (GC), a non-woven geotextile (GTX), and an extruded geogrid (GGR)) with a residual soil from granite. Soil and geosynthetic properties, test equipment, and procedures are described. The influence of soil moisture content and geosynthetic type on soil-geosynthetic interaction behavior is discussed by analyzing the results of the inclined plane shear tests. The main conclusions that can be outlined from the present study are the following: (1) the influence of soil moisture content was relevant for the soil-GTX and soil-GC interfaces. Indeed, the resistance of those interfaces decreased with the increase of soil moisture content. No significant differences were observed between the behavior of those geosynthetics; (2) the influence of soil moisture content on the behavior of the soil-GGR interface was less evident. A slight decrease on the interface friction angle was only observed for the highest soil moisture content; (3) the dry soil-GGR interface resistance was lower than that observed for the other two geosynthetics due to the relevance of soil-soil friction at the GGR apertures, to the high percentage of fines of the soil used in the research (D 50 51?00 mm), and to the smoother solid lateral surface of the extruded GGR when compared with the surface of the GTX or GC.

Direct shear behaviour of residual soil–geosynthetic interfaces – influence of soil moisture content, soil density and geosynthetic type

“…Several experimental methods have been developed for the analysis of soil-geosynthetic interaction, including direct shear tests, pullout tests, in-soil tensile tests and inclined plane tests (e.g. Alfaro et al 1995;Lopes andLadeira 1996a, 1996b;Raju and Fannin 1998;Pinho-Lopes and Lopes 1999;Costa-Lopes et al 2001;Ramirez and Gourc 2003;Mendes et al 2007;Liu et al 2009;Ferreira et al 2012Ferreira et al , 2013Ferreira et al , 2014Vieira et al 2013;Lopes et al 2014). Among them, pullout and direct shear tests are the most commonly used.…”

Special Issue on Geosynthetics

“…This special issue of the International Journal of Geotechnical Engineering contains contributions on several applications and aspects of geosynthetics, namely, retaining walls (Damians et al, 2014), embankments (Hatami et al, 2014), pavements (Jha et al, 2014;Rajagopal et al, 2014), slopes -stabilization (Latha and Varman, 2014), slopes -erosion control (Li, 2014;Tanchaisawat et al, 2014), fiber reinforced soils (Jha et al, 2014;Neeraja et al, 2014), and soil-geosynthetic interaction (Lopes et al, 2014). I do hope the researchers and the engineers may find all the contributions very useful.…”

“…The results show that the fibers aligned in horizontal direction in the direction of maximum extension are most beneficial. The ninth paper by Lopes et al (2014) deals with the inclined plane shear test on three different geosynthetics with a residual soil. The influence of soil moisture content and geosynthetic type on soil-geosynthetic interaction behavior is discussed by analysing the results of the inclined plane shear tests.…”

Improved performance of geosynthetics enhanced ballast: laboratory and numerical studies

“…These simulations did not properly capture the irregularly shaped aggregates where either only two-ball clumps or circular balls were simply used to model particles. It is noted that most of the previous studies have been conducted to assess the behaviour of geosyntheticreinforced soils and there have been only limited attempts to study geogrid-reinforced ballast either in the laboratory or through numerical modelling (Biabani et al, 2016a;Ferreira et al, 2016b;Jeon, 2010;Lopes et al, 2014;Sitharam and Sireesh, 2004). Tutumluer et al (2012) adopted an aggregate image aided DEM modelling approach to study the interaction and interlock mechanisms between geogrids and aggregates.…”