Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
Procedia Engineering 189 (2017) 372 – 378

Transportation Geotechnics and Geoecology, TGG 2017, 17-19 May 2017, Saint Petersburg,
Russia

Numerical simulation of station tracks on soft soils

Ye. V. Fedorenkoa*, T.S. Vavrinyuka, D.Ye. Yerchenkoa
A.I. Kovalskyb
a Miakom LLC, 197341 St.-Petersburg, Medikov 5, Russia
b Lengiprotransput JSC, 197341 St.-Petersburg, Fontanki nab 117, Russia

Abstract

The article presents the results of computing simulation of station tracks on soft soils
represented by post-glacial clay sediments. As stabilizing measures, the article considers the
dumping of a pilot berm with the determination of the holding time for each layer according to
the criterion of the stability factor and base strengthening with a high-strength woven geotextile.
An analysis has been conducted with respect to laboratory and field tests, the parameters have
been selected for soil models, and virtual laboratory tests have been performed with a view to
verify the repeatability of the models. When performing calculations in the Plaxis software
package, Soft Soil soil models have been used with the behavior type Undrained A.

©©2017
2017TheThe Authors.
Authors. Published
Published by Elsevier
by Elsevier Ltd.is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
Ltd. This
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the International conference on Transportation Geotechnics and
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Geoecology.
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the International conference on Transportation Geotechnics and Geoecology

Keywords: Factor of safety (FS), Plaxis, SoilTest, Soft Soil model; woven geotextile, geosynthetic materials.

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +7-921-952-58-09.

E-mail address: evgeniy@miakom.ru

1877-7058 © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the International conference on Transportation Geotechnics and Geoecology
doi:10.1016/j.proeng.2017.05.059
 Ye. V. Fedorenko et al. / Procedia Engineering 189 (2017) 372 – 378 373

1. Introduction

During the reconstruction of station tracks in the Leningrad region, a task has been set before the designers to
design an embankment on soft soil. Almost along the entire length of the revamping site of the station at the base of
the subgrade, the so-called "post-glacial" clay sediments with fluid-plastic and fluid consistency and with a capacity
of up to 14.7 m lie. These soil types are highly sensitive: when crumpled, there is a complete violation of structural
bonds, and shear strength is reduced to almost zero [4, 5]. The distinctive feature of geologic structure is the
presence in the upper part of the layer of more durable soil with a capacity from 0.1 m to 3.5 m. The crust has soft-
plastic to fluid consistency.
The results of field tests of soils based on the method of rotational shear have shown that the resistance of post-
glacial clay sediments to shear averaged to 0.010-0.013 MPa in terms of the depth of the stratum under investigation.
The laboratory studies of the mechanical properties of these clays have revealed extremely low values of strength
and strain characteristics.

2. Possible technical solutions.

When developing the design documentation, the following subgrade structures have been considered:
1. Construction of a non-settlement embankment by arranging a pile field at the base of the embankment with a
flexible girder grill. This option is not discussed further in connection with a high-speed throughway passing near
and the need to perform work on the arrangement of a pile field at a safe distance of at least 15-20m away from the
existing tracks [6].
2. The option of construction of a light embankment of foam blocks was not adopted due to the fact that its
implementation required to lift the profile for 1.5 m- 2.5 m.
3. The construction of the subgrade on a soft soil reinforced with textile and sand piles with a flexible girder grill
also was not adopted in connection with the need to lift the profile with a view to form soils above the flexible girder
grill. In both cases, lifting would require to close the station for a long time.
The main option was the reinforcement of the embankment base with high-strength geotextile together with the
dumping of cantledge berms. To implement this option, it was necessary to lift the profile for 0.5 m with the
preservation of the park operation, which was caused by the gradual performance of work. To perform the work
aimed at revamping the subgrade and constructing the infrastructure, it was necessary to close 2 or 3 station tracks
temporarily.
The reinforcement of the lower part of the subgrade almost all over the designing area only through the use of a
geosynthetic platform is insufficient. To ensure the bearing capacity and stability of the soft soil, the design
documentation has provided for the dumping of the side cantledge berm from the drainage soil. The berm is dumped
with longitudinal catches with a width of 8-10 m starting from the field side (the so called method of dumping of a
“pilot” berm). The steepness of the slope ratio of the berm was assumed as 1:3 to exclude the possibility of
squeezing the soft soil beneath the berm and to ensure the stability of its slope.
Taking into account the specific properties of post-glacial (highly sensitive) clay, pressure from the construction
must not exceed the structural strength (preconsolidation pressure σ’v) [1]. The pilot berm must be dumped with the
use of a two-step loading technology, with the holding of each stage in order to reduce the excess pore pressure and
harden the soil.

3. Determination of soil parameters

The soil model is described with two sets of parameters: those related to strength and those related to stiffness.
Strength parameters were determined in laboratory tests and include two sets:
1) non-stabilized strength of undrained strength obtained by means of unconsolidated-undrained (UU) tests;
2) stabilized strength, corresponding to the completed stage of filtration consolidation, obtained by means of
consolidated-drained (CD) tests.
374 Ye. V. Fedorenko et al. / Procedia Engineering 189 (2017) 372 – 378

As a result of consolidated-drained tests, stress circles have been built and the parameters of efficient strength
have been obtained: φ’= 7º, as well as secant stress-strain moduli E50. Triaxial UU-tests made it possible to
determine the strength in the destabilized condition in the form of undrained strength Cu.

Stiffness parameters for models describing soft soils must take into account the nonlinearity of the stress-strain
dependence, which is associated with a significant bending of compression curves and the inability to correctly
describe their behavior with a single value of the stress-strain modulus.
Behavior of soft soil under pressure is shown in Figure 1.

Fig 1. The relationship between the stiffness and porosity for different boreholes (boreholes figures listed number)

According to the results of the tests performed, the initial parameters of soil models have been determined and
virtual tests have been performed in a virtual laboratory of the SoilTest subprogram of the Plaxis software. Two soil
models have been selected: SoftSoil (SS) model and HardeningSoil (HS) model. Both models are tent-shaped and
take into account the nonlinearity of volumetric strains, and the undrained behavior of the HS model is more
realistic compared to the SS model.
The following characteristics of soils have been assumed:
- Soft Soil model with the following parameters: λ*=0.07; κ*=0.04; с’=2 kPa; φ’=7°.
- Hardening Soil model with the following parameters: E50 = 750 kPa; Eoed = 2224 kPa; Eur = 3480 kPa; m = 1;
c’= 2 kPa; φ’= 7°.
The results of comparative tests are shown in Table 1.

Table 1 The main results

Model
Test type σ3, kPa Indicator Sample SS Model
HS
E50, kPa 1100 - 1,180
150
σ1, kPa 195 195 191
Drained loading (CD)
E50, kPa 1500 - 1,600
200
σ1, kPa 260 260 255
71 σ1, kPa 80 84 82
Non-drained loading (UU)
96 σ1, kPa 112 113 111
σn=400 kPa ε 0.28 0.278 0.28
Compression pressure
σn=100 kPa ε 0.17 0.19 0.18

Comparative graphs with respect to the behavior of the mathematical and physical model in case of collapse
 Ye. V. Fedorenko et al. / Procedia Engineering 189 (2017) 372 – 378 375

compression are shown in Figure 2.

Fig. 2. Comparison of the behavior of models and laboratory sample in case of collapse compression.

As can be seen in Figure 2, the models show satisfactory repeatability with the test results and can be used to
simulate the interaction between the structure and soil ground. However, to calculate the settlement, clarifications
have been made and model parameters have been received describing the nature of the stress-strain curve in more
detail to a stress intensity of 100 kPa.
An analysis of tests of undrained strength provided the opportunity to determine the depth profile in terms of depth:
3 kPa at a depth of 2 m to 7 kPa at a depth of over 7 m (figure 3).

Fig. 3. Profile of undrained strength in terms of depth.

4. Calculations.
376 Ye. V. Fedorenko et al. / Procedia Engineering 189 (2017) 372 – 378

Calculations with respect to the subgrade have been performed in the software GEO5 Slope stability and
Settlement, as well as by means of computing simulation in the Plaxis software package.
When selecting the subgrade structure, the following calculations have been performed:
x calculation of safety factor;
x calculation of load-bearing capacity;
x determination of the final settlement and the timing of its implementation;
x determination of the holding time of each loading stage;
x bearing capacity.
The calculations stability of the embankment without reinforcement show that the embankment is failed SF<1.
The calculations with high-strength geotextiles Armostab PET 600/100 also fail to ensure the stability SF < 1. There
is a loss of stability of the base in the form of soil extrusion from under the bottom of the reinforced embankment [2,
3]. This is confirmed by the results of calculations of shear strains shown in Figure 4, in which it is clearly seen that
due to the reinforcing interlayer in the base of the embankment, the sliding surface is formed in the soft ground
under the embankment bottom and rests on more solid soil layer (crust of “post-glacial” clay sediments), under
which there is a longitudinal shear with the formation of a bottom heave.

Fig. 4. Shadow of shear displacements at the base of the reinforced embankment.

In this case, the most efficient way to ensure stability is to use reinforcement in the form of a cantledge berm in
combination with high-strength geotextile laid at the base of the embankment and berm as a single bed. With this
structure, the berm will ensure the base stability, i.e. prevent the formation of a heave, and an interlayer of geotextile
will ensure an increase in the stability of the embankment itself. The berm redirects the sliding surface from under
the embankment to the depth, and increases the stability of the embankment itself, as well as ensures the stability of
the berm.
The embankment stability analysis with the design load are shown in Figure 5, performed with the mutual
verification by means of computing simulation (SRM – strength reduction method) and analytical calculation (the
limit equilibrium method of Morgenstern-Price) [7] and show a sufficient capacity, SF = 1.31 SF = 1.28,
respectively. The results showed that the calculations made with the use of different methods and in different
software (Plaxis and GEO5 Slope Stability) correlate well with each other. The sliding surface is passing in “post-
 Ye. V. Fedorenko et al. / Procedia Engineering 189 (2017) 372 – 378 377

glacial” clay sediments and comes to the surface outside of the berm; this type of failure is typical for these soils and
is similar to the characteristics of the line in the silt (Figure 5).

Fig. 5. The sliding surface for the reinforced embankment when applying a load (FEM - PLAXIS).

Thus, as the soil reinforcement, a structure is assumed in the form of a cantledge berm and interlayer of high-
strength geotextile laid at the base of the embankment and berm.
On the basis of the calculations stability of the embankment, reinforcement will also be required for the cantledge
berm in order to ensure the stability of slopes and increase the stability of the base preventing the formation of a
heave from under the bottom.
To prevent soil extrusion from under the bottom, researchers use the method of step-wise erection with the
holding of each dumped layer, during which the excess pore pressure is decreased and soil is hardened. The required
time is determined by changing the stability factor Fstab (the value opposite to that of the relative shear stress τrel).
Figure 6 show the shadow of stability factors after the dumping of the second layer of the berm and its holding
during 100 days.
When the upper layer of the pilot berm has been dumped, an area is formed at the base with the minimum Fstab =
1.09. After holding, the stability factor increases up to 1.25.
a) b)

Fig. 6. Shadow of the stability factor: (a) after the dumping of the second layer of the berm; (b) after holding during 100 days.

By analyzing the results of the calculations, one can see that after holding the excess pore pressure have
decreased from 28 kN/m2 to 9.5 kN/m2.
When the “pilot” berm has been erected and the subgrade body has been dumped, a sliding surface is formed,
which rests on the dumped berm. This is how the goal pursued by the dumping of the “pilot” berm is reached. The
result of stability analysis after the erection of the “pilot” berm and subgrade body is satisfactory, SF = 1.36.

5. Conclusion

The conducted geotechnical analysis provided the opportunity to develop the technology intended for the erection
of the embankment on soft soils with high sensitivity. Using the stability factor as a criterion for the determination of
the hardening time, the duration of holding has been determined with respect to each stage in case of dumping of the
pilot berm.
378 Ye. V. Fedorenko et al. / Procedia Engineering 189 (2017) 372 – 378

The analysis in question has been performed through computing simulations by means of tent-shaped models
with the undrained type of behavior. The model parameters have been selected through tests performed in the virtual
laboratory and the comparison of the nominal data of soils with the behavior of the mathematical model.

References

[1] M.Yu. Abelev Soft water-saturated clay soils as the basis of structures Moscow, Stroyizdat, 1973.
[2] T.S. Vavrinyuk, Ye.V. Fedorenko Concerning the determination of the permissible load on a soft soil of the subgrade. Track and track
facilities. - 2015. - No. 10. p.10-1 ISSN 0033-4715
[3] T.S. Vavrinyuk, Ye.V. Fedorenko Principles of modeling of geosynthetic materials in the calculations of stability with numerical methods.
Transport construction. 2013. No. 10. Pp. 25-28.
[4] Methodological guidelines for the design and technology of the construction of subgrade of automobile roads in the areas where post-glacial
clay sediments are spread. Moscow: Soyuzdornii, 1973.
[5] Principles of simulation of subgrade on soft soils. Moscow: Orgtransstroy, 1968.
[6] Set of Rules SP 32-104-98 "Design of the Railroad Subgrade with a Tread of 1520mm." Technical guidelines for the stabilization of the
subgrade and ballast body, Central Research and Design Institute CPI-32.
[7] Ye.V. Fedorenko The method of calculation of stability by reducing the strength characteristics. Design of the development of the regional
railroad network. 2014. No. 2. Pp. 124-130.
[8] R.B.J. Brinkgreve, W. Broere, D. Watterman. Plaxis: 2D-version 8, Netherlands: Delft University 2006.
[9] E.J. den Haan and A. Feddema. Deformation and strength of embankments on soft dutch soil. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil
Engineers - Geotechnical engineering, 166(3):239-252, 2010.
[10] E.J. den Haan. Vertical Compression of Soils. PhD thesis, Technical University of Delft, 1994.
[11] P.A. Vermeer and H.P. Neher. A soft soil model that accounts for creep. In Ronald B. J. Brinkgreve, editor, Proceedings of the International
Symposium Beyond 2000 in Computational Geotechnics, pages 249-261. A.A. Balkema, March 1999.
[12] P. S. Wulandari, D.Tjandra, Determination of optimum tensile strength of geogrid reinforced embankment, International Civil Engineering
Conference "Towards Sustainable Civil Engineering Practice", Surabaya (2006) 187-193.
[13] F. Kasim, A. Marto, B. A. Othman, I. Bakar, M. F. Othman, Simulation of safe height embankment on soft ground using Plaxis, APCBEE
Proceedia 5 (2013) 152–156.
[14] J. M. Vashi, A. K. Desai, C. H, Solanki, Analysis of geotextile reinforced embankment on difficult subsoil condition, International Journal of
Scientific & Engineering Research Volume 4 Issue 5 (2013) 41–44