Anda di halaman 1dari 17
SOILS AND FOUNDATIONS Val 33, No 4 I-i7, Dee 1m Sapanse Society of Soll Michi and Founcaton Enalettion PERFORMANCE OF REINFORCED EMBANKMENT ON MUAR CLAY DEPOSIT JINCHUN CHAM and DENNES T. Bexoano! ABSTRACT ‘The finite element method has been used to analyze two geogrid reinforced embankments on Muar clay depasit in Malaysia, One embankment is witha berm and the other i without aber, {In int element modelling, wwo diferent soll/reinfotcement interaction mode, ie. direct shear and pullout have been considered. The large deformation phenomenon has been tls0 approximately simulated. Comparing the fnite element results with the fild data in terms of excess pore pressures, settlements, and lateral displacements, the performance of the stage constructed reinforced embankment can be systematically simulated using the finite element ‘method. The reinforcement tension force and sol/ reinforcement shear stress mobilization proc- ss and distribution pattern, the soil/reinforeement interaction mode (ditect shear or pullott), and the effet of reinforcement on embankment stability are also analyzed Key words: analysis, embankment, reinforced soll, tres, deformation (IGC: E2/E13) stifness on the soft foundation soll lateral INTRODUCTION displacements (Hird and Kwok, 1939) and the For the case of using reinforcement to con- effect of embankment geometry and depth of structahighembankment on soft round, usu- soft soil deposit on reinforcement tension ally the reinforcement is placed at the base of force mobilization (Rowe and Soderman, the embankment to reduce the lateral 1987). However, additional research is war- spreading force from the embankment and in- ranted with respect 0 modelling the rein- crease the foundation bearing capacity. The foreed embankment on soft stound, in Dehavior of base reinforced embankments on _vestigating the variation of tension force inthe soft ground has been analyzed by several in- reinforcement during the soft ground con- vestigators using the finite element method — solidation process, and the influence of rein- (owe, 1984; Rowe and Soderman, 1985, forcement on embankment stability. At pre- 1987; Humphery et al, 1986; Schaefer and sent, the properties of scil/reinforeement Duncan, 1988; Hird and Kwok, 1989, 1990), interface ae determined by ether direct shear And some important factors have been found, or pullout tests (Schmertmann et al., 1985). such a5 the influence of the reinforcement However, these two different veils yield 2 Senor Research Engineer, Kio-Jiban Constants Co Lit, +5 Kado, Chiyodh, Tkyo 02 * Assoute Profesor, Sebo! of Ci Eninenring, Avan Instat of Technology, GPO. Bon 273, Baaghok 1030), Thala ‘Manip nas eave for review on Jy 8,182 ‘Westen dcusions on thi paper shold be wbrited before July 1, 1984 tothe Japanese Soci of Soll Mechais and Function Egineting,Sugayara Bld. 4F, Kanda Awajcho 225, Chiyots tu, Tok 1 ‘apa. Uron regan the sing date may be eended ne oth. 2 (HAL AND aBRGADO diferent interface properties, especially for rid reinforcements. It is necessary in numerical modelling to use different interface properties for different interaction modes, direct shear or pullout (Rowe and Myilevil 1988). In fiite clement analysis, the suitable way to apply the incremental embankment load is by placing anew layer of embankment elements, However, for an embankment on soft ground, considerable settlement may oc- Gur dusing the construction period. Tf the thickness of the fill material is specified, the coordinates of te elements above the current construction level need to be updated during sncremental analysts. ‘The main purpose of using the reinforce- ment for embankments constructed on sott ground is to improve the stability of the system. However, this improvement depends ‘on the magnitude of mobilized reinforcement tension foree, The analysis of reinforcement tension force mobilization process, and inter- face shear stest transfer mechanism and the Influence factors will help to fundamentally understand the effect of the reinforcement for embankment constriction and to imprave the design methodology. Ta thie paper, the concepts of modelling rsin- forced embankment on soft ground system land the mcthodology for stability enalysi are discussed fist. Then, the results of finite ele- feat alysis of Gro gougsids ruforeed Dankments on a Muar clay deposi presented and compared witn the Neld data in terms of excess pore pressures, settlements, ‘and lateral displacements. Finally, the hme element results on the reinforcement tension force and interface shear stress mobilization process and distribution pattern have been dis- ‘cussed, The influence of the einforcement on ‘embankment stability has been analyze. are FINITE ELEMENT MODELLING Goneral Aspects “The reinforced embankment on soft ground systems tias been siodelled by finite element method under a plane strain condition. The Aiserete material approach is used to model the reinforced wall/embankment on soft ground system because the properties and response of the sol/ reinforcement interaction can be directly quantified. The soil elements are 6018 node linear strain elements. The con- solidation elements have additional 3 (for 6 rode elements) or 4 (for 8 node elemeats) pore pressure degrees of freedom. Roth 3 node bar elements and 6 node zero thickness interface lements are used to represent the rsinforce ‘ment and soil/ reinforcement interface, respec- tively. “The behavior of the soft foundation soll is conuolled by the modified Cam day model (Roscoe and Burland, 1968). The backfill sll 4 modelled by hyperootte consicurve taw (Duncan et al., 1980). The consolidation proc- 58 ihe sot clays simulated by coupled con- solidation theory (Biot, 1941. Modelling of Interface Behavior Soil/ reinforcement interaction mode can be either direct shear or pullout. In order to Simulate these two different interaction modes. the interface elements above and below” the reinforcement, work as pait elements nd the signe ofthe shene sees in the interface elements above and below the rein- forcement are compared to determine whether the direct shear mode (Same sign) or the pullout mode (different sign) is the acting ‘mode, This approach basically follows the con- tept proposed by Rowe and Myllevile (1985). Different constitutive models are used to simulate the diferent soll/ reinforcement In- teraction modes. The hyperbolic shear slress/shear displacement model (Clougt and Duncan, 1971) is used to represent the direct shear soil/reinforcement interaction mode. While pullout of reinforcement, especially the grid reinforcement from the sol, is truly three dimensional problem. and it can only be approximately modelled in & two-dimensional i tesietance of grid reinforce. jction from the longitudinal membere and bearing resistance from the transverse members. Based on Laboratory pullout test results of steel bars, the skin friction is modelled by linear elastic- perceclyplastc model and she pullour bearing resistance is simulated by an empirical hyper- esto EMUARRMENE UN LAY a bolic bearing resistance model which is only valid for grid reinforcements (Chai, 1992) For soil/reinforcement pullout interaction mode, the interface shear siffaetsconciet of skin ftition resistance part, ky, and passive bearing resistance part, Ky respectively. The total equivalent tangential shear sifaess, ky is Ue st of Aya hy heaky the w ‘The kiy con be expressed as follows: (cobonten d)-Ay he deta, ° where cz is adhesion between reinforcement friction area and soi; 5 is skin friction angle; Aris skin friction area: du is limit relative displacement (when the relative displacement ie greater than dy, there ena moe inceeate in fiction resistance and ky becomes 20); 4,15 total interface area above or below the rein- forcement; and o, is normal sess acting on the interfaces, ‘The expression of ky is derived from the em- pital yperbolie pullout sesistame aiodel (Chai, 1992) and as follows: kgnse (1-257) 2, ay rs) @ where Dis thickness ofthe reinforcement bear- ing member (or diameter; Sis spacing of bear- ing members; Rj is pullout failure ratio, and the value is approximately the same at the failure ratio ofthe backfill material in triaxial test; £, is initial slope of pullout bearing rasstance (stres), a, versus normalized pullout displacement, dy, curve (@, is the pallout displacement divided by the bearing member thickness, D); gq is maximum pullout bearing stress_on grid bearing members; and r is equivalent interface shear sissy frou pullout beating. sesisauce, uy which is calculated by the empirical hyperbolic function, a Ripe All the parameters are as defined previously. 06 o Correction of Node Coordinates During In- cremental Analysis ‘The node coordinates are updated to con- sider the large deformation phenomenon during. inctemental analysis, For the ém- ‘banlements to be analyzed, the Bl thickness is specie. In order to simulate the actual con- suuction procedase and eusute tal he xe plied fll thickness is the same as the eld value, iis necessary to allow tne embankment elements above the current construction level {0 follow the settlement of the foundation soil, The method used in this study is 9 cor- rect the coordinates of the embankment elements above the current construction level at the end of each ineremencal analysis, The following assumptions are used: (a) for finite element mesh above current construction level. the original vertical lines are kept ver- tical, and the horizontal lines remain straight, (h) the incremental ienlacemente af the nadet above current construction top surface are linearly interpolated from tho incremental displacements of the two end nodes (eft and right) of current construction top surface ae- cording to their horizontal coordinates. ‘As shown in Fig. 1, node C (x, 7) is above current consteuction top surface. The in- cremental Uplacement of node € (Ax, A) is caleulated by using the incremental displacements of node A (4%, 4).), Node & (4%, 49»), and their xooordinates, x, and x, as follows: Fle 1. Conteuation of 2 embankment