Table 2 - uploaded by Erol Sadoglu
Content may be subject to copyright.
Source publication
Geosynthetics have been proposed for use as a method of increasing the bearing capacity of a soil medium below a footing, and of reducing settlement. In this study, load-settlement behaviour of strip footings was investigated experimentally and numerically. The ultimate load of centrally and eccentrically loaded model strip footings resting on rein...
Context in source publication
Similar publications
The increasing world population and necessity of optimum using the shore lands have brought about more researches on designing and performing shore dikes and rebirth of shore lands. Different computer models have been improved for designing the dikes. In last de code, Netherland as one of the first countries in performing shore dikes has improved t...
Due to less shear strength and high compressibility of soft soils, construction of soil embankment on these types of soils leads to problems such as big and non-uniform settlements. Nowadays, soil reinforcement is used as a trustable and efficient way for increasing soil strength and stability of it. Usage of geosynthetics for increasing height of...
Abstract: The increasing world population and necessity of optimum using the shore lands have brought about
more researches on designing and performing shore dikes and rebirth of shore lands. Different computer models
have been improved for designing the dikes. In last de code, Netherland as one of the first countries in
performing shore dikes has...
The increasing world population and necessity of optimum using the shore lands have brought about more researches on designing and performing shore dikes and rebirth of shore lands. Different computer models have been improved for designing the dikes. In last de code, Netherland as one of the first countries in performing shore dikes has improved t...
In this paper, we numerically analyze a 9.0-m-tall reinforced soil retaining wall in a platform embankment, simulating the behaviour of its various components by using software and material models. The two basic constituents of the structure are the fill material and reinforcement. The designed reinforced soil retaining wall was built using local m...
Citations
... The performance of the footings is closely related to loading conditions that may be non-uniform, causing eccentricity due to wind, wave or seismic forces. Therefore, several researchers (Sadoglu et al., 2009;Turker et al., 2014;Badakhshan and Noorzad, 2015;Sadoglu, 2015;Sharma and Kumar, 2018;Dal et al., 2019;Dastpak et al., 2020) have investigated the performance of the footing reinforced with planar geosynthetic reinforcement materials, including geogrids, geonets and geotextiles, under eccentric loading. Their findings indicated that such planar reinforcements markedly improved the footing behavior under these eccentric loading conditions. ...
... However, the model test results, such as pressure-settlement responses, may differ from those gathered in large-scale experiments due to the scale effects, potentially leading to overestimating the geocell reinforcement effect (Vesic, 1973;Ovesen, 1979;Yetimoglu et al., 1994;Krishnaswamy et al., 2000;Gurbuz and Mertol, 2012;Hegde, 2017;Kargar and Mir Mohammad Hosseini, 2017;Lal et al., 2017;Sheikh and Shah, 2021). In small-scale models, dimensional analysis and scale law can be thoroughly examined to mitigate the scale effect and to predict the performance of the prototype (Langhaar, 1962;Fakher and Jones, 1996;Butterfield, 1999;Sadoglu, 2015;Nasr and Azzam, 2017;Hegde and Sitharam, 2017;Shadmand et al., 2018;Yunkul and Gurbuz, 2022). The principal parameters dominating the behavior of geocell-reinforced systems in the tests are: f (B, L, D 50 , γ, E s , e, h, u, d, ∅ , G) (1) ...
In this pioneering study, the performance of an eccentrically loaded strip footing on geocell-reinforced sand was assessed with instrumented laboratory model tests in terms of pressure-settlement response, surface displacement profiles, failure mechanisms and ultimate bearing capacity considering load eccentricity, geocell height, geocell material stiffness and the relative density of the soil. The results indicated that strip footings on the geocell-reinforced sand outperformed those on unreinforced soils, with up to a 6.5-fold increase in the bearing capacity and significant improvements in the initial slope of the pressure-settlement curve. Furthermore, the strip footing under centric loading on the geocell-reinforced loose and dense sand exhibited either only punching or local shear failure while load eccentricity on the strip footing could lead to the shear failures including punching, local and general. In this research, both a design chart for predicting failure modes of geocell-reinforced strip footings and a new interpretation method to evaluate ultimate bearing capacity were proposed. Increasing the relative density of the soil and material stiffness enhanced the ultimate bearing capacity of geocell-reinforced strip footings under both centric and eccentric loading conditions, with stiffer materials resulting up to 25% increase. However, increased geocell height had no significant impact on bearing capacity.
... The positive influence of the inclusion of geosynthetic materials in the granular soil beneath the shallow foundation has been focus of several experimental/field (Shin and Das, 2000;Moroglu et al., 2005;Abu-Farsakh et al., 2008;Moghaddas Tafreshi and Dawson, 2010;Demir et al., 2013;Moghaddas Tafreshi et al., 2013;Demir et al., 2014;Deb 2017a and2017b;Dastpak et al., 2020) and numerical (Yu and Sloan, 1997;Michalowski, 2004;Kumar and Sahoo, 2013;Chakraborty and Kumar, 2014a, 2014b, 2015Biswas and Ghosh, 2019;Yuan, 2021) studies in the literature. In separate experimental studies, Moroglu et al. (2005), Sadoglu et al. (2009) and Dastpak et al. (2020) carried out physical model tests on eccentrically-loaded strip and circular footings resting on geosynthetic-reinforced soil and showed that their ultimate bearing capacity notably increases with the inclusion of a geosynthetic reinforcement in the soil layer beneath the foundation. ...
... Unlike the unreinforced soil condition discussed above, in all the numerical studies conducted on the ultimate bearing capacity of surface footings on geosynthetic-reinforced granular soils, the underlying soil deposit has been considered to be isotropic, most probably on the ground of simplicity. Assuming the soil layer to be an isotropic medium, a multitude of research has been conducted in the literature on the ultimate bearing capacity of shallow foundations by considering the impacts of various factors, such as embedment depth and ultimate tensile strength of the geosynthetic layer (Michalowski, 2004;Moroglu et al., 2005;Sadoglu et al., 2009;S ßadoglu (2015); S ßadoglu (2015); Sahu et al., 2019;Badakhshan and Noorzad, 2017;Ouria and Mahmoudi, 2018;Dastpak et al., 2020;Yuan, 2021;Rezai Soufi et al., 2022;Fathipour and Payan, 2023). However, as highlighted above, the soil inherent anisotropy can have an appreciable impact on the contribution of the reinforcement layer to the overall bearing capacity of shallow foundations. ...
... Unlike the unreinforced soil condition discussed above, in all the numerical studies conducted on the ultimate bearing capacity of surface footings on geosynthetic-reinforced granular soils, the underlying soil deposit has been considered to be isotropic, most probably on the ground of simplicity. Assuming the soil layer to be an isotropic medium, a multitude of research has been conducted in the literature on the ultimate bearing capacity of shallow foundations by considering the impacts of various factors, such as embedment depth and ultimate tensile strength of the geosynthetic layer (Michalowski, 2004;Moroglu et al., 2005;Sadoglu et al., 2009;S ßadoglu (2015); S ßadoglu (2015); Sahu et al., 2019;Badakhshan and Noorzad, 2017;Ouria and Mahmoudi, 2018;Dastpak et al., 2020;Yuan, 2021;Rezai Soufi et al., 2022;Fathipour and Payan, 2023). However, as highlighted above, the soil inherent anisotropy can have an appreciable impact on the contribution of the reinforcement layer to the overall bearing capacity of shallow foundations. ...
This study aims to explore the significant impact of soil fabric anisotropy on the ultimate bearing capacity of eccentrically and obliquely loaded shallow foundations overlying a geosynthetic-reinforced granular deposit. For this purpose, the well-established lower bound theorems of limit analysis (LA) in conjunction with the finite elements (FE) formulations and second-order cone programming (SOCP) are exploited to perform the bearing capacity estimations. The consideration of the soil mass's inherently anisotropic response in the granular layer involves the utilization of distinct internal friction angles in various directions. The lower bound FELA framework adopted in this study incorporates both the pull-out and tensile mechanisms of failure in the reinforcement layer. The marked contribution of soil inherent anisotropy to the impacts of ultimate tensile strength (T u) and embedment depth (u) of the geosynthetic reinforcement on the failure mechanism, bearing capacity ratio (BCR), and failure envelope of the overlying obliquely/eccentrically strip footing is rigorously examined and discussed. It is generally concluded that for a given embedment depth, failure envelopes of the surface footing in both V-H and V-M planes shrink appreciably with the increase in the soil anisotropy ratio as well as the decrease in the geosynthetic ultimate tensile strength. Moreover, the influence of soil inherent anisotropy on the overall bearing capacity of shallow foundations is more evident in the case of using strong reinforcement compared to the weak geosynthetic. The findings of this investigation demonstrate that overlooking the soil inherently anisotropic behaviour in the numerical analysis of shallow foundations would give rise to undesirable non-conservative and precarious designs.
... However, the results obtained from the laboratory model tests may differ from those gathered in large-scale experiments due to the scale effect [2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10]. Dimensional analysis, which is based on scale law and used for small-scale models, is preferred to predict the performance of the prototype geosynthetic reinforced footing in field conditions [11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20]. However, a limitation arises when using conventional commercial geocells in the experimental studies. ...
The complexities of scaling have long presented challenges in applying small-scale test results of geocell-reinforced footings to field conditions in geosynthetic engineering. There has been no research that thoroughly examines the scaling of both geometry and material stiffness in geocell-reinforced footing systems although limited studies have attempted to scale geocells using alternative materials with lower strength, such as simile paper, non-woven geotextile etc. Therefore, this is a leading study to address the complexities of scaling using 3D-printing technology, where both geometry and tensile stiffness of geocell were accurately scaled using scaling laws. In the present study, the impact of scaling on the performance of strip footings reinforced with both traditional fabricated and 3D-printed geocells in terms of pressuresettlement response and improvement factors were assessed. The results indicated that 3Dprinted geocells offered significant advantages in customization and rapid prototyping of field scale. Specifically, the strip footings reinforced with fabricated geocells showed up to 65% higher improvement factors in both loose and dense soils compared to those using the scaled 3D-printed geocells. Furthermore, the footings reinforced with scaled geocells using 3Dprinting technologies closely aligned with existing large-scale test results regarding improvement factors, which were further validated through various numerical analyses. These findings offer new perspectives for optimizing and applying 3D-printed geocells in geotechnical engineering and address the longstanding challenge of scaling geocellreinforcement systems in small-scale model tests.
... Soil reinforcement with different types of geosynthetic materials, including geogrids, geotextiles, geomembranes, geonets and geocells, is widely utilized in practice to effectively increase the soil shear strength and stiffness and to substantially reduce undesired excessive settlements in a variety of geo-structures, such as shallow foundations, retaining walls, earth slopes, and so on. Embedment of geosynthetic layer offers an augmented equivalent shear strength to the soil mass, thus rendering enhanced overall stability to geotechnical systems (Shin and Das 2000;Bathurst et al. 2003;Blatz and Bathurst 2003;Michalowski 2004;Moroglu et al. 2005;Sadoglu et al. 2009;Kumar 2014a, 2014b;Sahu et al. 2016;Biswas and Ghosh 2019;Dastpak et al. 2020;Yuan 2021;Rezai Soufi et al. 2022). This contribution turns out to be more pronounced when encountering relatively weak grounds and soft soils of substantially low strength for construction purposes. ...
... The positive effect of the inclusion of geosynthetic reinforcements in the soil below shallow foundations and its dependence on various parameters have been examined in a large volume of research studies throughout the literature, most of which have mainly focused on the ultimate bearing capacity under vertical concentric loading. These studies have been conducted using either experimental (Shin and Das 2000;Michalowski and Shi 2003;Patra et al. 2005;Chen et al. 2009;Sharma et al. 2009;Moghaddas Tafreshi and Dawson 2010;Krabbenhoft et al. 2012;Demir et al. 2013Demir et al. , 2014Moghaddas Tafreshi et al. 2013;Raheem and Abdulkarem 2016;Huang 2017;Mehrjardi and Khazaei 2017;Deb 2017a, 2017b;Aria et al. 2019;Xu et al. 2019;Wang et al. 2021) or numerical/analytical (Yu and Sloan 1997;Ukritchon 1998;Michalowski 2004;Basudhar et al. 2007Basudhar et al. , 2008Laman and Yildiz 2007;Chen et al. 2009Chen et al. , 2021Latha and Somwanshi 2009;Sharma et al. 2009;Lovisa et al. 2010;Huang 2011aHuang , 2011bKumar and Sahoo 2013;Demir et al. 2014;Chakraborty and Kumar 2014a, 2014bChen and Abu-Farsakh 2015;Tran et al. 2015;Oliaei and Kouzegaran 2017;Arvin and Beigi 2018;Gao and Meguid 2018;Ouria and Mahmoudi 2018;Biswas and Ghosh 2019;Xu et al. 2019;Kumar and Chakraborty 2020;Wang et al. 2020;Yuan 2021;Rezai Soufi et al. 2022). The very first attempts in order to simulate geosynthetic reinforcement with the finite element limit analysis were undertaken by Yu and Sloan (1997) and Ukritchon (1998) who studied the ultimate vertical bearing capacity of surface footings founded on reinforced soils. ...
... In this study, two modes of structural and slip failures of the reinforcement elements are considered and the influence of soil mechanical properties as well as reinforcement mechanical and geometric specifications such as embedment depth, length, and tensile strength on the bearing capacity is studied. In a recent study, Rezai Soufi et al. (2022) adopted the classical upper bound limit analysis method to study the bearing capacity of strip footings resting on reinforced soil under pseudo-static seismic loading conditions and presented a new extended bearing capacity equation accordingly. ...
In this study, the ultimate bearing capacity of shallow strip footings resting on a geosynthetic-reinforced soil mass subjected to inclined and eccentric combined loading is rigorously examined through the well-established method of lower bound limit analysis (LA) in conjunction with finite element (FE) and second-order cone programming (SOCP). Lower bound limit analysis formulation is modified to consider the ultimate tensile force of the geosynthetic layer in the soil mass so as to account for both pullout (sliding) and rupture (structural) modes of reinforcement failure. The effects of several parameters, including the embedment depth (u) and the ultimate tensile force (T u ) of the geosynthetic layer along with load inclination angle (α) and load eccentricity (e), on the bearing capacity ratio (BCR) and failure envelopes of the overlying shallow foundation are examined and discussed. The results generally show a marked increase in the ultimate bearing capacity of the surface footing against combined loading with the inclusion of a single geosynthetic layer. Results also reveal that a second intermediate reinforcement might be required to bear a dual performance against both vertical concentric and combined loading so as to more effectively support the footing.
... The interface between soil and geotextile was defined as the fully-bonded interface (Rinter=1), as the occurrence of full friction caused by the texture of the geotextile and relative movement was not observed between the soil and geotextile [31]. Accordingly, the friction angle at the sand-reinforcement interface is assumed to equal the sand's friction angle in the adjacent zone. ...
... It has gained popularity due to its wide range of uses. Henry Vidal, a French engineer, was the first to pioneer the approach [2]. Engineers have been researching the usage of geosynthetics to raise the efficiency of shallow foundations over the last two decades. ...
The term "reinforced soil" refers to a composite material with high tensile-strength components that enhance the soil's tensile strength. One of the most common kinds of geosynthetic fabric utilized for soil reinforcement is geotextiles. This article investigates woven geotextile's potential benefits in enhancing the maximum load-carrying capacity of footings resting upon silty sand soil. The foundation was constructed of a 10 mm thick strong carbon steel plate of 100 mm×100 mm. The factors examined in this research were the first geotextile layer's depth, the geotextile layer's width, the number of layers of reinforcing material, and the vertical spacing between geotextile layers. The impact of geotextile strengthening configurations on the load-carrying capacity of strengthened soil foundations was also studied. The results of the experiments indicated that geotextile reinforced soil could help to grow the soil bearing capacity. The testing findings revealed that the system with three geotextile layers, 0.25B vertical distance among geotextile layers, and a geotextile width of 5B, B denotes the plate's width, achieves the most significant bearing capacity. The test findings also revealed that the reinforcement configuration greatly impacted the reinforced silty sand on the foundation's behavior.
... The distribution of displacement field, stress field and tensile force of reinforcement in the foundation are obtained and analyzed. [14] Finite element -Square -Lee et al. [70] Finite element PLAXIS 2D Strip Geotextile Basudhar et al. [5] Finite difference FLAC 2D Circular Geotextile Laman and Yildiz [13] Finite element PLAXIS 2D Ring Geogrid Deb et al. [18] Finite difference FLAC 2D Strip -Basudhar et al. [71] Finite element -Strip Geotextile Ghazavi and Lavasan [72] Finite difference FLAC 3D Square Planar geosynthetic Latha and Somwanshi [10] Finite difference FLAC 3D Square Geogrid, Geonet Latha and Somwanshi [42] Finite difference FLAC 3D Square Geogrid, Geonet Zidan [73] Finite element PLAXIS 2D Circular Geogrid Chakraborty and Kumar [74] Finite element -Circular Geogrid Demir et al. [15] Finite element PLAXIS 3D Circular Geogrid Naderi and Hataf [16] Finite element PLAXIS 3D Circular, Ring Geogrid Noorzad and Manavirad [75] Finite element PLAXIS 2D Strip Geotextile Bhandari et al. [22] Discrete element PFC 2D -Geogrid Kazi et al. [76] Finite element PLAXIS 2D Strip Geotextile Şadoğlu [77] Finite element PLAXIS 2D Strip Geotextile Tran et al. [78] Finite element Discrete element ...
Geosynthetics-reinforced soil (GRS) foundation can improve the bearing capacity of the foundation and reduce the settlement of the footing, which has been widely applied to the treatment and improvement of soft soil foundation. In recent years, scholars have carried out a large number of studies to reveal the influence of different factors on the load and settlement behaviors of GRS foundations. In this study, the reinforcing mechanisms of reinforced materials are first summarized, and then the literature review of planar geosynthetic-reinforced foundations from the aspects of experimental studies, numerical simulations and theoretical analyses are presented. Finally, the current research trend of reinforced foundation and the prospects in the future study are discussed. Although the researches on the performance of GRS foundations are conducted extensively, there is no unified understanding on the failure mode and reinforcing mechanism of reinforced foundation. It is necessary to propose the accurate and simple calculation method to evaluate the ultimate bearing capacity of reinforced foundations based on the reinforcing mechanism and failure mode. In addition, the dynamic response of GRS foundations under cyclic loading and earthquake needs to be studied intensively. The paper summarizes the past and present developments of the GRS foundations and provide the views for the further researches.
... The ultimate bearing capacity of footings has been studied since the 1920's via theoretical analyses (Terzaghi 1943), largescale loading tests (Briaud and Gibben 1999), reduce-scale model tests (Huang et al. 1994;Kumar and Chakraborty 2015), limit analyses (Ukritchon et al. 2003;Zhu and Michalowski 2005;Georgiadis 2010) and numerical analyses (Kotake et al. 2001;Sadoglu 2015). Formulas for evaluating the ultimate bearing capacity of a footing (qu) and the correction factors for taking into account various boundary and loading conditions are well established (Meyerhof 1957(Meyerhof , 1963Hansen 1970;Vesic 1973Vesic , 1975. ...
Loading tests on model horizontal grounds and slopes are performed using a 100-mm-wide strip footing with restrained and free-rotation conditions. Test results reveal that complete restraint against rotations on the footing generates larger values of ultimate bearing capacity and deeper failure surfaces than those for footings with a free-rotation condition. This is true for horizontal and slanted grounds with various slope angles. Test results also reveal that for a vertically loaded footing, a major factor that influences the ultimate bearing capacity of the footing (q u ) is the load eccentricity (e c ) at the footing base. The influence of load inclination on the values of q u for free-rotating and fixed footings is minor because the load inclination angles measured during the loading tests were negligibly small. In the case of a footing placed on a slanted ground, a load eccentric toward the heel of the footing is associated with a larger value of q u than that for a load eccentric toward the toe of the footing when subjected to similar extents of load eccentricity. This observation suggests that the currently used formula for correcting load eccentricity (e c ) has to be updated in order to address the issue of increased q u induced by a load eccentricity toward the heel of the footing.
... Due to such a sharp reduction of soil capacity under eccentric loads, attempts have been made to enhance the bearing capacity by the use of geosynthetic products. Studies conducted in the past have demonstrated that use of geosynthetic reinforcement can effectively increase the strength of soil subjected to such loads [39,49,45,50,45,7,47,8,9]. All the model footing studies conducted in the past largely focused on the use of planer geosynthetic techniques. ...
... Due to such a sharp reduction of soil capacity under eccentric loads, attempts have been made to enhance the bearing capacity by the use of geosynthetic products. Studies conducted in the past have demonstrated that use of geosynthetic reinforcement can effectively increase the strength of soil subjected to such loads [39,49,45,50,45,7,47,8,9]. All the model footing studies conducted in the past largely focused on the use of planer geosynthetic techniques. ...
Growing generation of waste tires represents a serious danger to the environment and human well-being. This paper focusses on applications of tire wastes in shallow footings subjected to eccentric loading. Presence of eccentric loads significantly reduces the load carrying capacity of the soil. Therefore, laboratory model tests were conducted on tire chip reinforced sand subjected to eccentric loading conditions. Parameters considered for the study were waste tire chip content, reinforcement depth and relative density while eccentricity of the loading was varied as 0.1B and 0.2B, where B is the width of the footing. A substantial increase in bearing capacity was observed at all strains. Based on the experimental results, the optimum quantity of tire waste and the depth of reinforcement recommended is 30% (by weight) and 1B respectively. The improvements were more significant at higher eccentricities with bearing capacity ratio obtained as high as 5.77 and 7.46 at low and high strains respectively. Moreover, the beneficial effects of the proposed technique were visible at both the dense as well as loose states.
... The most common investigation parameters in the literature which were analyzed with experimental and numerical studies, are the type and the parameters of layered soils, granular thickness of fill layer, type of geosynthetic material (geocell, geotextile, geogrid etc.), number of geosynthetics (N), first geosynthetic layer depth (u), spacing between geosynthetic layers (h), length of geosynthetics etc. (Hegde and Sitharam, 2015b, Latha and Somwanshi, 2009, Lal et al., 2017, Cicek et al., 2015, Harikumar et al., 2016, Dutta and Mandal, 2016, Badakhshan and Noorzad, 2017, Oliaei and Kouzegaran, 2017, Demir et al., 2014, Kazi et al., 2015a, Kazi et al., 2015b, Belal et al., 2015, Sadoglu, 2015, Ronad, 2014, Lai et al., 2014, Abaidalla, 2011, Shadmand et al., 2018, Shahin et al., 2017, Mousavi et al., 2017. Thus, the aim of these studies is to find optimum design parameters for the investigated variables. ...
