Bearing capacity of shallow foundations considering geological uncertainty and soil spatial variability

Zhang, Dong-Ming; Jiang, Qi-Hao; Zhang, Jin-Zhang; Huang, Hong-Wei

doi:10.1007/s11440-023-02091-0

Cited by 5 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…: Brisson et al (2023); Yan et al (2023)), geotechnical uncertainty also termed "parameter uncertainty" or "spatial variability" (recent literature e.g. : Li et al (2021); Zhang et al (2023)), transformation uncertainty also called "model uncertainty" (recent literature e.g. : Phoon and Tang (2019)), and method uncertainty (pertaining to the calculation method used in a model, e.g.…”

Section: Motivationmentioning

confidence: 99%

A consistent terminology to communicate ground-related uncertainty

Erharter,

Lacasse,

Tschuchnigg

2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Engineering geology is highly affected by uncertainty related to the geology, geotechnical parameters, models used and methods. While the technical aspects of ground-related uncertainty are increasingly investigated, the terminology to communicate uncertainty (i.e. phrases such as “it is very likely that”) has not yet been unified and experts use it however they see fit. The problem arises that due to varying levels of experience, personal biases and cultural backgrounds, people may understand uncertainty statements very differently, which is misleading and can even result in legal disputes. This contribution investigates the usage of uncertainty terminology in ground-related disciplines and finds that there is a pronounced prevalence of uncertainty terminology in disciplines dealing with geo-materials and that there is a special need to express uncertainty related to quantities (e.g. “most of the tunnel consists of…”). In response, we propose a consistent framework to communicate ground-related uncertainty consisting of three steps: 1. if facts are to be described, describe them as such; 2. assess and state the degree of confidence in a statement based on the quantity and quality of the available evidence vs. the agreement of the evidence; 3. if high or very high confidence is achieved, describe the likelihood or quantity in a consistent manner. Using consistent ground-related uncertainty communication is essential to avoid misunderstandings which can lead to dire consequences. The proposed approach is in line with new standards, such as Eurocode 7, that demand an explicit treatment of uncertainty.

show abstract

Section: Motivationmentioning

confidence: 99%

A consistent terminology to communicate ground-related uncertainty

Erharter,

Lacasse,

Tschuchnigg

2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Effects of subgrade spatial variability on critical strains and effectiveness of geogrid reinforcement in flexible pavement

Xiao,

Xue

2024

Acta Geotech.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The objective of this study is to assess the impact of spatial variability in the subgrade layer on the critical response of pavements and the effectiveness of geogrid reinforcement, employing the random field finite difference analysis (RFFDA). A comprehensive parametric study was conducted to examine the influence of two crucial factors: the coefficient of variation ($${{\text{COV}}}_{E}$$ COV E ) and scale of fluctuation (SOF) of the subgrade modulus. Further investigation was conducted to uncover the statistical and mechanical mechanisms underlying the impact of subgrade spatial variability with emphasis on the critical strain distributions and their correlation with both the overall modulus and the local spatial variability of the key influence zone. Furthermore, this study explored the influence of subgrade spatial variability on the effectiveness of geogrid in reducing critical strains, considering various placement positions and geogrid moduli. The following main conclusions are drawn: (a) subgrade spatial variability has a substantial amplifying effect on critical pavement strains due to low modulus dominating effect, (b) there exists a worst value of SOF that results in the most unfavorable statistics of critical subgrade strain, (c) the effect of subgrade spatial variability on critical subgrade strain is more pronounced compared to its effect on critical asphalt strain, (d) the mean value of critical subgrade strain in RFFDA can be significantly underestimated when assuming fixed location for the strain, and (e) the effectiveness of geogrid in reducing critical strains is impacted by subgrade spatial variability, with the impact varying with the type of critical strain and geogrid location. Specifically, when placed at the base course–subgrade interface, the ability of geogrid to reduce critical subgrade strain is significantly compromised due to the subgrade spatial variability.

show abstract