Evaluation of the effect of compaction on the behavior of geosynthetic-reinforced soil walls

Ehrlich, M.; Mirmoradi, S.H.; Saramago, R.P.

doi:10.1016/j.geotexmem.2012.05.005

Cited by 96 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This indicates that the effect of compaction on maximum tensile forces is nearly nullified by the bridge load because the lateral stresses after application of bridge load exceed the locked-in compaction stresses applied during construction of the GRS wall. This also agrees with the observation from large-scale model tests by Ehrlich et al (2012). …”

Section: Maximum Tensile Forcessupporting

confidence: 92%

“…Recent experimental studies found that backfill soil compaction has an important effect on the behavior of GRS walls (Bathurst et al 2009;Ehrlich et al 2012). The lateral facing displacements and maximum tensile forces in reinforcement layers at the end of construction are much larger for GRS walls constructed using a heavy compactor than a light compactor.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Numerical Study of the Compaction Effect on the Static Behavior of a Geosynthetic Reinforced Soil-Integrated Bridge System

Zheng

Fox²,

McCartney

2017

Geotechnical Frontiers 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents a numerical study on the effect of backfill compaction on the static response of geosynthetic reinforced soil-integrated bridge system (GRS-IBS). The numerical simulations were performed in stages to simulate the construction process, and considered soil-geotextile, soil-block, geotextile-block, and abutment-bridge interactions. Backfill compaction was simulated using a temporarily-applied uniform vertical stress to each lift during construction. Simulation results of the GRS-IBS behavior corresponding to various levels of compaction effort are presented and discussed, including lateral facing displacements, settlements, and maximum tensile forces in the reinforcement layers. Results indicate that greater backfill compaction leads to smaller bridge seat settlement and backfill compression, but also results in larger lateral facing displacements.

show abstract

Section: Maximum Tensile Forcessupporting

confidence: 92%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Numerical Study of the Compaction Effect on the Static Behavior of a Geosynthetic Reinforced Soil-Integrated Bridge System

Zheng

Fox²,

McCartney

2017

Geotechnical Frontiers 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These mainly limit-equilibrium-based design methods have been shown to be overly conservative in determining realistic forces and deformations in GRS Bathurst et al 2010). However, by considering additional factors such as toe embedment, reinforcement stiffness and compaction it is possible to achieve closer agreement (Ehrlich and Mirmoradi 2013;Ehrlich et al 2012). Explicit serviceability limit state (SLS) design methodologies, considering deformation are not typically included within these design documents (Scotland et al 2012).…”

Section: Design and Deformationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There are many other factors contributing to deformational performance in GRS, such as compactive effort Ehrlich et al 2012), global and relative reinforcement stiffness (Christopher 1993;Ehrlich and Mitchell 1994) among others. Further work is necessary to adapt the model for these variables and application with granular fills that have low shear strength and cohesive fills.…”

Section: Deformation Guidance Validitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Modelling deformation during the construction of wrapped geogrid-reinforced structures

Scotland

Dixon

Frost

et al. 2016

Geosynthetics International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although geogrids and geotextiles have been successfully used for over a quarter of a century to reinforce soil, there are currently no commonly agreed analytical methods to model their deformation behaviour. The serviceability limit state is becoming an ever more important design consideration, as structures are built with increasingly tighter tolerances. Although there are many deformation databases and design charts available, providing information and guidance on the sensitivity to certain design variables, these are largely focused on facets such as height, shear strength and geogrid ultimate strength and do not consider construction method. Following a review of existing analytical and empirical guidance, this paper presents numerical modelling-derived guidance for flexible faced geogrid-reinforced structures constructed using cohesionless fill that incorporates installation methods. The modelling approach is validated against measured results from three varied case studies, before analysing the changes in deformation distribution resulting from two different construction methods (layer-by-layer and full height construction). For the conditions analysed, including height of the structure, the lateral deformation resulting from layer-by-layer construction, was shown to be consistently greater, than for full height construction. In contrast, an analysis of post-construction deformation, for each of the construction methods, found full height construction to be more sensitive to post-construction loading, for the conditions considered. For low wall height structures constructed using the layer-by-layer method, < 5 m, the present study indicates that horizontal face deformations are underestimated by current guidance.

show abstract

“…Some researchers considered the compaction effect by applying only a surcharge load over the soil layers (Gotteland et al [10]; Hatami and Bathurst [3,4]; Huang et al [11]) in numerical analysis. However, Ehrlich and Mirmoradi [12], Ehrlich et al [13] and Mirmoradi and Ehrlich, [14,15] modeled the compaction load with using two equal distributed loads at the top and bottom of each soil layers.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Different Loading Systems for Reinforced Earth Walls under Strip Footing Load

Ahmadi¹,

Bezuijen²

2017

Proceedings of the 2nd World Congress on Civil, Structural, and Environmental Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

-In this paper the behavior of reinforced earth walls with rigid and flexible faces under strip footing load was studied by numerical analysis. In one numerical model the strip footing load was free to have horizontal and vertical movements and in another the horizontal movement of the strip footing load was restricted. By considering these two different models, the results of 2D and 3D numerical analysis (Plaxis) were compared with the full scale test results about the horizontal earth pressures, lateral wall deflections and consequently maximum tensile force on reinforcement layers. For modeling the compaction loads in each layer two equal distributed loads were considered in the top and bottom of each soil layer and also the influence of sidewall friction was studied in a 3D numerical analysis. Results showed that there is good agreement between 3D numerical analysis and full scale test results by considering the horizontal restriction for the strip footing load.

show abstract

Evaluation of the effect of compaction on the behavior of geosynthetic-reinforced soil walls

Cited by 96 publications

References 32 publications

Numerical Study of the Compaction Effect on the Static Behavior of a Geosynthetic Reinforced Soil-Integrated Bridge System

Numerical Study of the Compaction Effect on the Static Behavior of a Geosynthetic Reinforced Soil-Integrated Bridge System

Modelling deformation during the construction of wrapped geogrid-reinforced structures

Different Loading Systems for Reinforced Earth Walls under Strip Footing Load

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About