Load Distribution on Geosynthetic Reinforcement in Column-Supported Embankments

Filz, George M.; Sloan, Joel A.

doi:10.1061/9780784412787.183

Cited by 8 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…3). Van Eekelen et al (2012a,b, also discussed in Filz andSloan, 2013) concluded that this distribution approaches the inverse triangular distribution as opposed to the triangular distribution of EBGEO (2010); CUR (2010) and Zaeske (2001) and the uniform distribution of BS8006 (2010). This is also confirmed by the findings of, for example, Han and Gabr (2002).…”

Section: Step 2: Load Deflection Behaviourmentioning

confidence: 90%

Validation of analytical models for the design of basal reinforced piled embankments

Eekelen

Bezuijen

Tol

2015

Geotextiles and Geomembranes

104

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c t Van Eekelen et al. (2012a,b, 2013 have introduced an analytical model for the design of the geosynthetic reinforcement (GR) in a piled embankment. This paper further validates this model with measurements from seven full-scale tests and four series of scaled model experiments. Most of these measurements have been reported earlier in the literature.The new model describes arching with the "Concentric Arching model" (CA model). This model is an extension of the single arch model of Hewlett and Randolph (1988) and the multi-scale model of Zaeske (2001), which is also described in Kempfert et al. (2004). For load-deflection behaviour, Van Eekelen et al. (2012a,b, 2013) proposed the use of a net load distribution that is inverse triangular instead of uniform or triangular. These authors also proposed the inclusion of all the subsoil support beneath the GR in the calculations.On the basis of comparisons between the measurements and calculations, it is concluded that the CA model matches the measurements better than the models of Zaeske or Hewlett and Randolph.Where there is no subsoil support, or almost no subsoil support, the inverse triangular load distribution on the GR strips between adjacent piles gives the best match with the measurements. Cases with subsoil support generally lead to less GR strain. In the cases with significant subsoil support, the load distribution is approximately uniform. In the cases with limited subsoil support, it should be determined which load distribution gives the minimum GR strain to find the best match with the measurements.

show abstract

Section: Step 2: Load Deflection Behaviourmentioning

confidence: 90%

Validation of analytical models for the design of basal reinforced piled embankments

Eekelen

Bezuijen

Tol

2015

Geotextiles and Geomembranes

104

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It has been shown that these methods give different results in terms of the load distribution between the piles and the subsoil [19]. When it comes to the membrane effect of the deflected geosynthetic, the load distribution on the geosynthetic has a strong influence on the calculated strain, several load-deformation expressions of geosynthetic are available in the literature, and can be organized into categories: (a) catenary-shaped under a uniform load [20] (Jones C., 1990); (b) arc-shaped under a uniform load [12], [21]; (c) high-order curve-shaped deformation under a triangular distributed load [14]; (d) high-order curve-shaped deformation under an inverse triangular distributed load [22], [8]. The subsoil reaction has an important influence.…”

Section: A Simplified Methods To Analyze Pile-supported and Geosynthetmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition, some authors discussed the influence of some design factors on the load-transfer mechanisms via their own method and claimed that the working stress of the geosynthetic relies on the complex interaction of fill properties, soft soil properties, and geosynthetic properties [21], [23]. However, the influence significance of these properties on the load-transfer mechanisms are not clear yet, but a distinct understanding of influence significance of those designing factors on the working mechanisms helps to optimize the designing of the PSGR embankment.…”

Section: A Simplified Methods To Analyze Pile-supported and Geosynthetmentioning

confidence: 99%

A simplified method to analyze pile-supported and geosynthetic-reinforced embankments and the influence significance analysis of the design parameters

Feicheng¹,

Zhang²,

Yan³

et al. 2018

ActaGeotechSlov

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A simplified method for evaluating a pile-supported embankment reinforced with geosynthetic (PGRS embankment) is proposed in this paper. The method takes into account not only the arching effect, the membrane effect of the deflected geosynthetic, and the subsoil reaction, but also the pile head settlement, which makes the method applicable for floating piles, as well as piles seated on a firm soil layer. The settlement of the subsoil surface is considered to consist of two parts: (a) the settlement of the subsoil surface equals that of the pile cap with no deformation in geosynthetic yet; (b) the subsoil surface subsides along with the geosynthetic deforming, and the deflected geosynthetic being considered as catenary shaped. The formula for the maximum differential settlement between the subsoil surface and the piles is worked out by analyzing the force equilibrium of the geosynthetic and the stress-strain relationship of the geosynthetic at the edge of the pile cap. The comparison of the calculated results with the observed data and the six current analytical methods has been implemented to verify the proposed method. The influence of the tensile stiffness of the geosynthetic, compression modulus of soft soil, soft soil thickness, embankment height, internal friction angle of the embankment fill and the pile spacing on the subsoil reaction, the stress concentration ratio (SCR) and the tension of the geosynthetic are investigated using the proposed method. The influence significance of these factors has been investigated using the evaluation theory of binary variance analysis for the non-repeatability tests, which helps optimize the design of the PGRS embankment.

show abstract

“…The Excel workbook incorporates factors like thickness and type of the bridging soil layer, type of geosynthetic reinforcement, and the embankment settlement . Other studies related to geosynthetic‐reinforced earth platform can be found elsewhere …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…74 Other studies related to geosynthetic-reinforced earth platform can be found elsewhere. [75][76][77][78][79][80][81][82][83][84][85] Rui et al 86 used the discrete element method (DEM) to study the pile-supported earth platform without geosynthetic reinforcement. The DEM microparameters were calibrated against tests based on sand specimens.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Numerical study on the effect of rigid inclusions on existing railroads

Wang

Sánchez

Briaud

2019

Num Anal Meth Geomechanics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary Railroad track problems have been exacerbated by the continuous increase in freight loads and train traffic. The need to implement soil improvement technique in a relatively short window‐time (ie, to minimize train‐traffic disruption) is a key aspect to be considered when adopting a convenient remedial solution to control settlements in railroads constructed on problematic subgrades. Rigid inclusions are selected in this paper because they are reliable solutions relatively easy to implement. Furthermore, they can be used in different ground conditions and are suitable for short construction times (eg, do not require a curing time, as in grouting methods). Typical (analytical) methods for the design of rigid inclusions are adopted in this paper to define an optimal distribution of piles for the case of existing railroads. The selected layout is then analyzed in detail by means of a 3‐D dynamic finite element simulator using both, elastoplastic and elastic models. The performance of rigid inclusions is studied considering different operational scenarios, with dynamic and static loads, as well as involving subgrades with different plasticity index values. It is found that the predictions from the analytical design methods for rigid inclusion tend to be unconservative when compared against the finite element results. As for the numerical solutions, the most unfavorable stress condition is associated with the dynamic elastoplastic finite element solution. It is estimated that the rigid inclusions will contribute to a reduction in the ground settlements of around 15% to 20%, depending on the subgrade plasticity index.

show abstract

Load Distribution on Geosynthetic Reinforcement in Column-Supported Embankments

Cited by 8 publications

References 3 publications

Validation of analytical models for the design of basal reinforced piled embankments

Validation of analytical models for the design of basal reinforced piled embankments

A simplified method to analyze pile-supported and geosynthetic-reinforced embankments and the influence significance analysis of the design parameters

Numerical study on the effect of rigid inclusions on existing railroads

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About