(18.207.253.100) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/05/06 09:13
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果

詳目顯示:::

我願授權國圖
: 
twitterline
研究生:Suliman Badawi Ahmed Mohamed
研究生(外文):Suliman Badawi Ahmed Mohamed
論文名稱:NUMERICAL ANALYSES AND DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS OF GEOSYNTHETIC-REINFORCED TWO-TIER WALLS
論文名稱(外文):NUMERICAL ANALYSES AND DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS OF GEOSYNTHETIC-REINFORCED TWO-TIER WALLS
指導教授:楊國鑫楊國鑫引用關係
指導教授(外文):Kuo-Hsin Yang
口試委員:楊國鑫
口試委員(外文):Kuo-Hsin Yang
口試日期:2013-12-27
學位類別:博士
校院名稱:國立臺灣科技大學
系所名稱:營建工程系
學門:工程學門
學類:土木工程學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2014
畢業學年度:102
語文別:英文
論文頁數:171
中文關鍵詞:Geosynthetic-reinforced soil wallTwo-tier wallCentrifuge testLimit equilibriumFinite elementOffset distanceEarth pressure coefficientReinforcement tensile load.
外文關鍵詞:Geosynthetic-reinforced soil wallTwo-tier wallCentrifuge testLimit equilibriumFinite elementOffset distanceEarth pressure coefficientReinforcement tensile load.
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:128
  • 評分評分:系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔
  • 下載下載:16
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:0
Geosynthetic-reinforced soil (GRS) walls in a tiered configuration are acceptable alternatives to conventional retaining wall systems because of several benefits such as cost, stability and construction constraints, and aesthetics. Current design methods for analyzing GRS multitier walls are based on the lateral earth pressure method, an extension of the design method for analyzing single-tier reinforced walls. The design approaches in these guidelines are considered empirical and are geometrically derived based on the offset distance between upper and lower tiers. However, some studies have questioned using this empirical approach. Very few studies have confirmed that the earth pressure method is effective for designing multitier reinforced walls, and few have investigated the behavior and performance of multitier geosynthetic-reinforced soil (GRS) walls with various offset distances.
Consequently, this dissertation presents the procedure and results of the limit equilibrium (LE) and finite element (FE) analyses of a series of centrifuge tests on two-tier geosynthetic-reinforced soil (GRS) wall models with various offset distances. Both methods were considered useful tools for engineering application. The objectives were: 1) to evaluate the applicability of LE and FE methods for analyzing and designing two-tier GRS walls; 2) to examine the modeling assumption of reinforcement tensile loads in LE analysis and the design methods in current design guidelines; 3) to investigate the performance and behavior of two-tier GRS walls in various stress states; and 4) to investigate the interactive mechanism between two tiers. The variables considered in the centrifuge testing program were offset distance and reinforcement length.
In the first part of this research work, the evaluation of limit equilibrium method studies undertaken to assess the validity of LE as a basis for design of two-tier GRS walls. The LE analyses are the most common approach for slope stability in current practice. Parametric studies were first performed to evaluate the effects of modeling assumptions of reinforcement force on LE results, including reinforcement force orientation, reinforcement overlaps layers, and reinforcement tensile load distribution with depth. The suitability of LE for the analysis of two-tier GRS walls and design implications were then discussed. According to LE results, good agreement existed between LE and centrifuge models in locating failure surfaces. The LE results also indicate that offset distance correlated negatively with the effective overburden pressure on the reinforcement and the resulting confined Tult of the reinforcement. The critical offset distance of 0.7 times the lower tier height was determined when the decrease in confined Tult value as D increases reached a constant value. Last, the effect of offset distance on the normalized reinforcement tension summation coefficient, KT, indicates that single and independent wall models yielded a single consistent KT value. For compound wall models, the KT value decreases as offset distance D increases.
In the second part, the finite element study investigated the performance and behavior of two-tier GRS walls in various stress states. The FE simulations were first verified according to the centrifuge test results by comparing the locations of failure surfaces. The FE results were then used to investigate the effective overburden pressure, mobilization and distribution of reinforcement tensile loads, and horizontal deformation at the wall faces. The interaction between two tiers was investigated based on the FE results, which were also used to examine the modeling assumption of reinforcement tensile loads in LE analysis and to evaluate the design methods in current design guidelines. This study demonstrated favorable agreement between FE and the centrifuge model in locating the failure surface. The FE results indicated that as the offset distance increased, the reinforcement tensile load and wall deformation decreased in both the upper and lower tiers, suggesting the attenuation of interaction between the two tiers. The maximum tensile loads of all reinforcement layers at the wall failure predicted using FE and LE analyses, assuming uniform distribution of reinforced tensile loads, were comparable. Compared with the FE results, the FHWA design guidelines are conservative in determining the effect of overburden pressure, required tensile strength, location of maximum tension line (for designing the reinforcement length), and the critical offset distance.
Geosynthetic-reinforced soil (GRS) walls in a tiered configuration are acceptable alternatives to conventional retaining wall systems because of several benefits such as cost, stability and construction constraints, and aesthetics. Current design methods for analyzing GRS multitier walls are based on the lateral earth pressure method, an extension of the design method for analyzing single-tier reinforced walls. The design approaches in these guidelines are considered empirical and are geometrically derived based on the offset distance between upper and lower tiers. However, some studies have questioned using this empirical approach. Very few studies have confirmed that the earth pressure method is effective for designing multitier reinforced walls, and few have investigated the behavior and performance of multitier geosynthetic-reinforced soil (GRS) walls with various offset distances.
Consequently, this dissertation presents the procedure and results of the limit equilibrium (LE) and finite element (FE) analyses of a series of centrifuge tests on two-tier geosynthetic-reinforced soil (GRS) wall models with various offset distances. Both methods were considered useful tools for engineering application. The objectives were: 1) to evaluate the applicability of LE and FE methods for analyzing and designing two-tier GRS walls; 2) to examine the modeling assumption of reinforcement tensile loads in LE analysis and the design methods in current design guidelines; 3) to investigate the performance and behavior of two-tier GRS walls in various stress states; and 4) to investigate the interactive mechanism between two tiers. The variables considered in the centrifuge testing program were offset distance and reinforcement length.
In the first part of this research work, the evaluation of limit equilibrium method studies undertaken to assess the validity of LE as a basis for design of two-tier GRS walls. The LE analyses are the most common approach for slope stability in current practice. Parametric studies were first performed to evaluate the effects of modeling assumptions of reinforcement force on LE results, including reinforcement force orientation, reinforcement overlaps layers, and reinforcement tensile load distribution with depth. The suitability of LE for the analysis of two-tier GRS walls and design implications were then discussed. According to LE results, good agreement existed between LE and centrifuge models in locating failure surfaces. The LE results also indicate that offset distance correlated negatively with the effective overburden pressure on the reinforcement and the resulting confined Tult of the reinforcement. The critical offset distance of 0.7 times the lower tier height was determined when the decrease in confined Tult value as D increases reached a constant value. Last, the effect of offset distance on the normalized reinforcement tension summation coefficient, KT, indicates that single and independent wall models yielded a single consistent KT value. For compound wall models, the KT value decreases as offset distance D increases.
In the second part, the finite element study investigated the performance and behavior of two-tier GRS walls in various stress states. The FE simulations were first verified according to the centrifuge test results by comparing the locations of failure surfaces. The FE results were then used to investigate the effective overburden pressure, mobilization and distribution of reinforcement tensile loads, and horizontal deformation at the wall faces. The interaction between two tiers was investigated based on the FE results, which were also used to examine the modeling assumption of reinforcement tensile loads in LE analysis and to evaluate the design methods in current design guidelines. This study demonstrated favorable agreement between FE and the centrifuge model in locating the failure surface. The FE results indicated that as the offset distance increased, the reinforcement tensile load and wall deformation decreased in both the upper and lower tiers, suggesting the attenuation of interaction between the two tiers. The maximum tensile loads of all reinforcement layers at the wall failure predicted using FE and LE analyses, assuming uniform distribution of reinforced tensile loads, were comparable. Compared with the FE results, the FHWA design guidelines are conservative in determining the effect of overburden pressure, required tensile strength, location of maximum tension line (for designing the reinforcement length), and the critical offset distance.
ABSTRACT i
TABLES OF CONTENTS vii
LIST OF TABLES x
LIST OF FIGURES xi
NOTATIONS xvi

CHAPTER 1 1
INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Motivation and Objectives 1
1.2 Scope of Dissertation 5

CHAPTER 2 9
LITERATURE REVIEW 9
2.1 Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) 9
2.1.1 Reinforcement Rupture 12
2.1.1.1 Additional Vertical Stress on the Reinforcement from Upper Tier 12
2.1.1.2 Vertical Stress on the Reinforcement 14
2.1.1.3 Horizontal Stress on the Layer of Reinforcement 14
2.1.1.4 Maximum Reinforcement Tension 15
2.1.1.5 Factor of Safety Against Rupture 16
2.1.2 Reinforcement Pullout 16
2.2 National Concrete Masonry Association (NCMA) 17
2.3 Field Monitoring 19
2.4 Full- Scale Test 23
2.5 Reduced-Scale Test 25
2.6 Centrifuge Model Test 26
2.7 Numerical Simulation 28


CHAPTER 3 39
CENTRIFUGE MODEL TESTS 39
3.1 Background of Centrifuge Modeling 39
3.2 Scaling Law 41
3.3 Centrifuge Testing Program 42
3.4 Material Properties 45
3.5 Summary of Centrifuge Test Results 51

CHAPTER 4 57
LIMIT EQUILIBRIUM ANALYSES 57
4.1 Limit Equilibrium Analyses Background 58
4.2 Limit Equilibrium Modeling 67
4.2.1 Modeling of Two-Tier Wall Systems 67
4.2.2 Modeling of Backfill 69
4.2.3 Modeling of Reinforcement 69
4.2.3.1 Tensile Forces 70
4.2.3.2 Overlap Layer of Reinforcement 72
4.2.3.3 Orientation of Reinforcement Force 72
4.2.3.4 Searching for Critical Failure Surface 72
4.3 Evaluation of Modeling Assumptions of Reinforcement Load 76
4.3.1 Effect of Reinforced Tensile Load Distribution 76
4.3.2 Effect of Orientation of Reinforcement Forces 85
4.3.3 Effect of Geotextile Overlaps 90

CHAPTER 5 93
LIMIT EQUILIBRIUM ANALYSES RESULTS 93
5.1 Comparison of Failure Surface Location 93
5.2 Effect of Offset Distance on Confined Tult 101
5.3 Determination of Critical Offset Distance 101
5.4 Examination of Methods to Evaluate Effective Overburden Pressure 104
5.5 Effect of Reinforcement Length 109
5.6 Normalization of Reinforcement Tension Summations 110

CHAPTER 6 113
FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSES 113
6.1 Finite Element Program 113
6.2 Finite Element Model 116
6.2.1 Backfill Soil Modeling 116
6.2.2 Reinforcement Modeling 121
6.3 Calculation Procedure 123
6.4 Model Verification 127
6.4.1 Comparison of Failure Surface Location 127
6.4.2 Comparison of Mobilized Maximum Tensile Load 128

CHAPTER 7 135
FINITE ELEMENT RESULTS AND COMPARISON 135
7.1 Effective Overburden Pressure 135
7.2 Reinforcement Tensile Load 139
7.3 Horizontal Wall Deformation 148
7.4 Effect of the Offset Distance on Two-Tier Interaction 153
7.5 Critical Offset Distance 155

CHAPTER 8 158
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS 158
8.1 Summary of Research Components 158
8.2 Conclusions of Each Research Component 159
8.2.1 Limit Equilibrium Analyses and Design Implications 159
8.2.2 Finite Element Analyses and Design Implications 161
8.3 Recommendations for Future Research 162

REFERENCES 163
VITA 171
AASHTO. (1996). Standard specifications for highway bridges. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Sixtenth Edition, Washington, D.C., with interims.
Abramson, L. W., Lee, T. S., Sharma, S., Boyce, G. M. (2002). Slope stability concepts. Slope Stability and Stabilization Methods, Second edition, published by John Willey and Sons, Inc., pp. 329‐461.
Allen, T.M., Bathurst, R.J, (2002). Soil reinforcement loads in geosynthetic walls at working stress conditions. Geosynthetics International, 9 (5-6), 525-566.
Allen, T.M., Bathurst, R.J., Holtz, R.D., Walters, D., Lee, W.F, (2003). A new working stress method for prediction of reinforcement loads in geosynthetic walls. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 40 (5), 976-994.
Allen, T. M., Bathurst, R. J., Holtz, R. D., Walters, D., Lee, W. F., (2004). A new method for prediction of loads in steel reinforced soil walls. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 130(11), 1109–1120.
Allen, T. M., Christopher, B. R., Elias, V., DiMaggio, J. A., (2001). Development of the simplified method for internal stability design of mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) walls. WSDOT Research Rep., WA-RD 513.1.
ASTM (1996). Standard test method for tensile properties of geotextiles by the wide-width strip method. ASTM D4595. In: Annual book of ASTM standards, vol. 4.09, West Conshohocken, PA, pp. 698-708.
ASTM D7181. Standard test method for consolidated drained triaxial compression test for soils. The American Society for Testing and Materials. West Conshohocken, PA, USA.
Bathurst, R.J., Miyata, Y., Nernheim, A., Allen, T.M., (2008). Refinement of K-stiffness method for geosynthetic reinforced soil walls. Geosynthetics International, 15 (4), 269-295.
Berg, R., Christopher, B. R., Samtani, N., (2009). Design of mechanically stabilized earth walls and reinforced soil slopes. Vol. I and II. Report No. FHWA-NHI-10-024, Federal Highway Administration, 684 pp.
Bishop, A. W., (1955). The use of slip circles in the stability analysis of earth slopes. Geotechnique, U. K., 5(1), 7–17
Bolton, M. D., (1986). The strength and dilatancy of sands. Geotechnique 36, (1), 65-78.
Boyle, S. R., Gallagher, M., Holtz, R. D., (1996). Influence of strain rate, specimen length and confinement in measured geotextile properties. Geosynthetics International, 3 (2), 205-225.
Christopher, B.R., Holtz, R.D., Bell, W.D., (1986). New tests for determining the in-soil stress-strain properties of geotextiles. Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Geotextile, Vienna, Austria, pp. 683-686.
Duncan, M., Wright S. G., (2005). Soil strength and slope stability. John Wiley and Sons, Inc. 297 pp.
Ehrlich, M., Mitchell, J. K., (1994). Workinalls under working stress conditions. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 67 (4), 1066-1085.
Hatami, K., Bathurst, R. J., (2006). Numerical model for reinforced soil segmental walls under surcharge loading. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, ASCE, 132 (6), 673-684.
Hung, W.Y., (2008). Breaking failure behavior and internal stability analysis of geosynthetic reinforced earth walls. Ph.D. dissertation, National Central University, Jhongli, Taiwan, 200 pp.
Janbu, N., (1954). Application of composite slip surface for stability analysis. Proceedings of the European Conference on Stability of Earth Slopes, Stockholm, 3, pp. 43–49.
Janbu, N., (1963). Soil compressibility as determined by oedometer and triaxial tests. Proceedings Fourth European Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Wiesbaden, 1, pp. 19-25.
Jewell, R. A., (1991). Application of revised design charts for steep reinforced slopes. Geotextiles and Geomembranes, 10 (3), 203-233.
Karpurapu, R. G., Bathurst, R. J., (1995). Behaviour of geosynthetic reinforced soil retaining walls using the finite element method. Computers and Geotechnics, 17 (3), 279-299.
Ko, (1988). The Colorado centrifuge facility. Proc. Intl. Conf. Centrifuge 88, Corte (ed), Paris, pp. 319-324.
Koerner, J., Soong, T.-Y., Koerner, R.M., (1998). Earth retaining wall costs in the USA. Geosynthetic Institute, Folsom, PA, USA.
Lade, P.V., Lee, K.L., (1976). Engineering properties of soils. Report UCLA-ENG-7652, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, 145 pp.
Leshchinsky, D., Boedeker, R.H., (1989). Geosynthetic reinforced soil structures. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE 115 (10), 1459-1478.
Leshchinsky, D., Han, J., (2004). Geosynthetic reinforced multi-tiered walls. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, ASCE 130 (12), 1225-1235.
Leshchinsky, D., Zhu, F., Meehan, C., (2010). Required unfactored strength of geosynthetic in reinforced earth structures. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, ASCE 136 (2), 281-289.
Liang, R. K., Tse, E. C., Kuhn, M. R., Mitchell, J. K., (1984). Evaluation of a constitutive model for soft clay using the centrifuge. Proc. Symp. On Recent Advances in Geotechnical Centrifuge Modeling, University of California at Davies, pp. 55-70.
Liu, H., (2011). Comparing the seismic responses of single- and multi-tiered geosynthetic reinforced soil walls. Geo-Frontiers 2011, pp. 3478-3486.
Ling, H. I., Cardany, C. P., Sun, L-X., Hashimoto, H., (2000). Finite element analysis of a geosynthetic-reinforced soil retaining wall with concrete-block facing. Geosynthetics International, 7(3), 163-188.
Lopes, M. L., Cardoso, A. S., Yeo, K. C., (1994). Modelling performance of a sloped reinforced soil wall using creep function. Geotextiles and Geomembranes, 13(3), 181-197.
Lowe, J., III, Karafiath, L., (1960). Effect of anisotropic consolidation on the undrained shear strength of compacted clays. Proceedings of the ASCE Research Conference on Shear Strength of Cohesive Soils, Boulder, CO, pp. 837-858.
Marachi, N., Duncan, J.M., Chan, C., and Seed, H.B., (1981). Plane-strain testing of sand. laboratory shear strength of soil. ASTM Special Technical Bulletin 740, R. N. Yong and F. C. Townsend, eds., American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, pp. 294-302.
Mitchell, J. K., Jaber, M., Shen, C. K., Hua, Z. K., (1988). Behavior of reinforced soil walls in centrifuge model tests. Proc. of the Intl. Conf. Centrifuge 88, Corte (ed), Paris, pp. 259-271.
Morgenstern, N. R., Price, V. E., (1965). The analysis of the stability of general slip surfaces. Geotechnique, 15(1), 79-93.
NCMA, (2010). Design manual for segmental retaining walls, third ed. National Concrete Masonry Association, Herndon, Virginia, USA, 282 pp.
Osborne, W. N., Wright, S. G., (2004). An examination of design procedures for single- and multi-tier mechanically stabilized earth walls. Report No. FHWA/TX-05/0-4485-1, Austin, Texas, 202 pp.
Palmeira, E. M., Jose H.F. Pereira, Antonio R.L. da Silva, (1998). Back analyses of geosynthetic reinforced embankments on soft soils. Geotextiles and Geomembranes, 16 (5), 273-292.
PLAXIS, (2005). Plaxis finite element code for soil and rock analyses. Version 8.2, P.O. Box 572, 2600 AN Delft, Netherlands.
Porbaha, A., Goodings, D. J., (1996). Centrifuge modeling of geotextile reinforced cohesive soil retaining walls. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, ASCE 122 (10), 840–848.
Rocscience, (2011). Slide Ver. 6.009-2D Limit Equilibrium Slope Stability Analysis. Rocscience, Inc., Toronto, Canada.
Sankey, J. E., Soliman, A., (2004). Tall wall mechanically stabilized earth applications. Geo-Trans 2004, GSP No. 126, ASCE, Reston, VA, 2149–2158.
Schanz, T., Vermeer, P.A., Bonnier, P.G., (1999). The Hardening soil model: formulation and verification. Proc. Beyond 2000 in Computational Geotechnics, Balkema, Rotterdam, Netherlands, pp. 281–290.
Schlosser, F., (1978). History, current development, and future developments of reinforced earth. Symp. on Soil Reinforcing and Stabilizing Techniques, sponsored by New South Wales Institute of Technology and Univ. of Sydney, Australia.
Schmertmann, G. R., Chouery-Curtis, V. E., Johnson, R. D., Bonaparte, R., (1987). Design charts for geogrid-reinforced soil slopes. Proc., Geosynthetics 87 Can., New Orleans, La., pp. 108-120.
Schofield, A.N., (1980). Cambridge geotechnical centrifuge operations. Geotechnique, 20 (3), 227-268.
Spencer, E., (1967). A method of analysis of the stability of embankments assuming parallel inter-slice forces. Geotechnique, 24 (4), 661-665.
Stuedlein, A.W., Allen, T.M., Holtz, R.D., Christopher, B.R., (2012). Assessment of reinforcement strains in very tall mechanically stabilized earth walls. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 138 (3), 345-356.
Stuedlein, A.W., Bailey, M., Lindquist, D., Sankey, J., Neely, W. J., (2010). Design and performance of a 46-m-high MSE wall. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 136 (6), 786-796.
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, (1970). Engineering and Design: Stability of Earth and Rock-Fill Dams. Engineer Manual EM 1110-2-1902, Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers, Office of the Chief of Engineers, Washington, DC, April.
Wright, S. G., (2005). Design guidelines for multi-tiered MSE walls. Report No. FHWA/TX-05/0-4485-2, Austin, Texas, 118 pp.
Wright, S.G., Duncan, J.M., (1991). Limit equilibrium stability analysis for reinforced slopes. Transportation Research Record, 1330, pp. 40-46.
Yang, K-H., Zornberg, J.G., Liu, C-N, Lin, H-D., (2012). Stress distribution and development within geosynthetic-reinforced soil slope. Geosynthetics International, 19 (1), 62-78.
Yoo, C., Jang, Y. S., Park, I. J., (2011). Internal stability of geosynthetic-reinforced soil walls in tiered configuration. Geosynthetics International, 18 (2), 74-83.
Yoo, C., Jung, H. S., (2004). Measured behavior of a geosynthetic reinforced segmental retaining wall in a tiered configuration. Geotextiles and Geomembranes, 22 (5), 359-376.
Yoo, C., Kim, S. B., (2008). Performance of a two-tier geosynthetic reinforced segmental retaining wall under a surcharge load: full-scale load test and 3D finite element analysis. Geotextiles and Geomembranes, 26 (6), 447-518.
Zornberg, J. G. (1994). Performance of geotextile reinforced soil structures. PhD dissertation, Department of Civil Engineering, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA, 504 pp.
Zornberg, J. G., Mitchell, J. K., Sitar, N., (1997). Testing of reinforced slopes in a geotechnical centrifuge. Geotech. Testing J., 20 (4), 470-480.
Zornberg, J. G., Sitar, N., Mitchell, J. K., (998a). Performance of geosynthetic reinforced slopes at failure. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, ASCE 124 (8), 670-683.
Zornberg, J. G., Sitar, N., Mitchell, J. K., (1998b). Limit equilibrium as basis for design of geosynthetic reinforced slopes. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, ASCE 124 (8), 684-698.
連結至畢業學校之論文網頁點我開啟連結
註: 此連結為研究生畢業學校所提供,不一定有電子全文可供下載,若連結有誤,請點選上方之〝勘誤回報〞功能,我們會盡快修正,謝謝!
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
系統版面圖檔 系統版面圖檔