Field study on performance of new technique of geosynthetic-reinforced and pile-supported embankment at bridge approach
Source abstract
Abstract
Vehicle bumps at a bridge approach caused by the differential settlement between a bridge and an adjacent backfill embankment are one of the most difficult problems in geotechnical engineering. Large vehicle bumps make drivers uncomfortable and cause large impact loads on vehicles and the bridge abutment. A new ground-improvement technique called fixed-geosynthetic-reinforced and pile-supported embankment (FGT embankment) was developed and used to alleviate vehicle bumps at a trial bridge-approach site located in central China. To distribute the differential settlement between the bridge and adjacent backfill embankment over a long transition zone, the following three techniques were used at the trial bridge-approach site: (a) the FGT embankment, (b) conventional geosynthetic-reinforced and pile-supported embankment (CT embankment), and (c) geosynthetic-reinforced embankment without piles (GR embankment). The performance of all three techniques in the field trial was investigated by field measurements involving earth pressure cells, geosynthetic deformation sensors, and settlement gauges. The FGT and CT embankments exhibited better performance than the GR embankment. Compared with the CT embankment, the FGT embankment was more effective at ground improvement. At an elevation of 4.0 m from the base of the embankment, the pressures below the geosynthetic were smaller than those above the geosynthetic at the closest measurement point. The difference between the pressures between above and below the geosynthetic tended to increase with the embankment height.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Geotechnical Engineering and Soil Stabilization · Grouting, Rheology, and Soil Mechanics · Structural Behavior of Reinforced Concrete
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (40)
Show source-provided references
1. Lewis W A. The settlement of the approach embankments to a new road bridge at Lackford, West Suffolk. Geotechnique, 1956, 6: 106–11410.1680/geot.1956.6.3.106 ↗
2. Lin K Q, Wong I H. Use of deep cement mixing to reduce settlements at bridge approaches. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng, 1999, 125: 309–32010.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(1999)125:4(309) ↗
3. Helwany S M B, Wu J T H, Froessl B. GRS bridge abutments—an effective means to alleviate bridge approach settlement. Geotext Geomembranes, 2003, 21: 177–19610.1016/S0266-1144(03)00004-9 ↗
4. Cai C S, Shi X M, Voyiadjis G Z, et al. Structural performance of bridge approach slabs under given embankment settlement. J Bridge Eng, 2005, 10: 482–48910.1061/(ASCE)1084-0702(2005)10:4(482) ↗
5. Hoppe E J. Guidelines for the use, design, and construction of bridge approach slabs. Final Report No. VTRC 00-R4, Virginia Transportation Research Council, Charlottesville, Virginia, 1999
6. Skinner G D, Rowe R K. Design and behaviour of a geosynthetic reinforced retaining wall and bridge abutment on a yielding foundation. Geotext Geomembranes, 2005, 23: 234–26010.1016/j.geotexmem.2004.10.001 ↗
7. Zhang H L, Hu C S. Determination of allowable differential settlement in bridge approach due to vehicle vibrations. J Bridge Eng, 2007, 12: 154–16310.1061/(ASCE)1084-0702(2007)12:2(154) ↗
8. Liu D W. Research on the geogrid solving bumping at bridgehead in LiuQian Highway (in Chinese). Ph. D. Dissertation, Liaoning Technical University, 2009
9. Monley G J, Wu J T H. Tensile reinforcement effects on bridgeapproach settlement. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng, 1993, 119: 749–76210.1061/(ASCE)0733-9410(1993)119:4(749) ↗
10. Jamnongpipatkul P, Dechasakulsom M, Sukolrat J. Application of air foam stabilized soil for bridge-embankment transition zone in Thailand. Geotechnical Special Publication, 2009, 190: 181–193
11. Saride S, Puppala A J, Williammee R, et al. Use of lightweight ECS as a fill material to control approach embankment settlements. J Mater Civil Eng, 2010, 22: 607–61710.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0000060 ↗
12. Saride S, Archeewa E, Puppala A J, et al. Deep soil mixing (DSM) columns to improve foundation support for bridge approach embankments. Proceeding of the GeoFlorida 2010 Conference: Advances in Analysis, Modeling and Design, Florida, 2010. 1866–187510.1061/41095(365)189 ↗
13. Reid W M, Buchanan N W. Bridge approach support piling. Proceedings of Conference on Advances in Piling and Ground Improvement, London, 1983. 267–274
14. Han J, Gabr M A. Numerical analysis of geosynthetic-reinforced and pile-supported earth platforms over soft soil. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng, 2002, 128: 44–5310.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2002)128:1(44) ↗
15. Almeida M S S, Ehrlich M, Spotti A P, et al. Embankment supported on piles with biaxial geogrids. P I Civil Eng-Geotec, 2007, 160: 185–19210.1680/geng.2007.160.4.185 ↗
16. Liu H L, Ng C W W, Fei K. Performance of a geogrid-reinforced and pile-supported highway embankment over soft clay: Case study. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng, 2007, 133: 1483–149310.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2007)133:12(1483) ↗
17. Chen Y M, Cao W P, Chen R P. An experimental investigation of soil arching with basal reinforced and unreinforced piled embankments. Geotext Geomembranes, 2008, 26: 164–17410.1016/j.geotexmem.2007.05.004 ↗
18. Abusharar S W, Zheng J J, Chen B G. A simplified method for analysis of a piled embankment reinforced with geosynthetics. Geotext Geomembranes, 2009, 27: 39–5210.1016/j.geotexmem.2008.05.002 ↗
19. Huang J, Han J, Oztoprak S. Coupled mechanical and hydraulic modeling of geosynthetic-reinforced column-supported embankments, J Geotech Geoenviron Eng, 2009, 135: 1011–102110.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0000026 ↗
20. Liu H L, Chu J, Deng A. Use of large-diameter, cast-in situ concrete pipe piles for embankment over soft clay. Can Geotech J, 2009, 46: 915–92710.1139/T09-032 ↗
21. Van Eekelen S J M, Bezuijen A, Van Tol A F. Analysis and modification of the British Standard BS8006 for the design of piled embankments. Geotext Geomembranes, 2011, 29: 345–35910.1016/j.geotexmem.2011.02.001 ↗
22. Eskisar T, Otani J, Hironaka. Visualization of soil arching on reinforced embankment with rigid pile foundation using X-ray CT. Geotext Geomembranes, 2012, 32, 44–5210.1016/j.geotexmem.2011.12.002 ↗
23. Van Eekelen S J M, Bezuijen A, Lodder H J, et al. Model experiments on piled embankments. Part I. Geotext Geomembranes, 2012, 32: 69–8110.1016/j.geotexmem.2011.11.002 ↗
24. Van Eekelen S J M, Bezuijen A, Lodder H J, et al. Model experiments on piled embankments. Part II. Geotext Geomembranes, 2012, 32: 81–94
25. Huang J, Han J. 3D coupled mechanical and hydraulic modeling of a geosynthetic-reinforced deep mixed column-supported embankment. Geotext Geomembranes, 2009, 27: 272–28010.1016/j.geotexmem.2009.01.001 ↗
26. Zheng J J, Chen B G, Abusharar S W, et al. The performance of an embankment on soft ground reinforced with geosynthetic and pile walls. Geosynth Int, 2009, 16: 171–18110.1680/gein.2009.16.3.173 ↗
27. Xia T D, Wang M, Shou X, et al. Field test study of reinforced embankment supported by cast-in-situ thin-wall tubular piles (in Chinese). Chin J Rock Mech Eng, 2010, 29: 1929–1936
28. Zhang J, Zheng J J, Ma Q. Performance of fixed geosynthetic technique of GRPS embankment. J Cent South Univ, 2013, 20: 2245–225410.1007/s11771-013-1731-4 ↗
29. Zhang J, Zheng J J, Chen B G, et al. Coupled mechanical and hydraulic modeling of a geosynthetic-reinforced and pile-supported embankment. Comput Geotech, 2013, 52: 28–3710.1016/j.compgeo.2013.03.003 ↗
30. Goh A T C, Teh C I, Wong K S. Analysis of piles subjected to embankment induced lateral soil movement. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng, 1997, 123: 792–80110.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(1997)123:9(792) ↗
31. Zhang J, Zheng J J, Ma Q, et al. Study on fixed geosynthetic technique of geosynthetic reinforced and pile supported embankment (in Chinese). J Huazhong Univ Sci Tech: Natural Science Edition, 2012, 47: 63–66
32. The Professional Standards Compilation Group of Peoples Republic of China. JTG30—2004 Specifications for design of highway subgrades (in Chinese). Beijing: China Communications Press, 2004
33. The National Standards Compilation Group of People’s Republic of China. GB/T 50123-1999 Standard for soil test method(in Chinese). Beijing: China Planning Press, 1999
34. Hewlett W J, Randolph M F. Analysis of piled embankment. Ground Eng, 1988, 21: 12–18
35. Lai H J, Zheng J J, Zhang J, et al. DEM analysis of “soil”-arching within geogrid-reinforced and unreinforced pile-supported embankments. Comput Geotech, 2014, 61: 13–2310.1016/j.compgeo.2014.04.007 ↗
36. Tanchaisawat T, Bergado D T, Voottipruex P. Numerical simulation and sensitivity analyses of fullscale test embankment with reinforced lightweight geomaterials on soft Bangkov clay. Geotext Geomembranes, 2008, 26: 498–51110.1016/j.geotexmem.2008.05.005 ↗
37. Zhuang Y, Ellis E A, Yu H S. Three-dimensional finite-element analysis of arching in a piled embankment. Geotechnique, 2012, 62: 1127–113110.1680/geot.9.P.113 ↗
38. Xing H F, Zhang Z, Liu H B, et al. Large-scale tests of pile-supported earth platform with and without geogrid. Geotext Geomembranes, 2014, 42: 586–59810.1016/j.geotexmem.2014.10.005 ↗
39. Giroud J.P, Bonaparte R, Beech J F, et al. Design of soil layer-geosynthetic systems overlying voids. Geotext Geomembranes, 1990, 9: 11–5010.1016/0266-1144(90)90004-V ↗
40. Low B K, Tang S K, Choa V. Arching in piled embankments. J Geotech Eng, 1993, 120: 1917–193810.1061/(ASCE)0733-9410(1994)120:11(1917) ↗