Influence of Apparatus Scale on Geogrid Monotonic and Cyclic/Post-Cyclic Pullout Behavior in Cohesive Soils
Geosynthetics have increasingly been applied to geotechnical engineering works due to their numerous advantages, including cost-effectiveness and their significant role in sustainable development. When geosynthetics are used as reinforcement in earth structures, such as embankments, retaining walls...
| Autores: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2024 |
| País: | Brasil |
| Recursos: | Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP) |
| Repositorio: | Repositório Institucional da UNESP |
| Idioma: | inglés |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/300793 |
| Acesso em linha: | http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/app14135861 https://hdl.handle.net/11449/300793 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palavra-chave: | apparatus scale cyclic loading geogrid pullout test reinforced soil |
| Resumo: | Geosynthetics have increasingly been applied to geotechnical engineering works due to their numerous advantages, including cost-effectiveness and their significant role in sustainable development. When geosynthetics are used as reinforcement in earth structures, such as embankments, retaining walls and bridge abutments, soil–geosynthetic interface shear behavior is a critical parameter involved in the design. This paper presents a series of monotonic and cyclic/post-cyclic pullout tests carried out to examine the apparatus scale effect on the pullout response of a geogrid embedded in two different soils. To assess the small-scale equipment feasibility, comparisons were made between pullout test parameters derived from small- and large-scale equipment. The test results indicate that, under a low confining stress of 25 kPa, using a smaller-sized apparatus results in lower values of geogrid pullout resistance and maximum mobilized shear stress, but higher values of confined tensile stiffness at low strains. On the other hand, as the confining stress increases (i.e., 50 kPa and 100 kPa), the difference between the results becomes less significant and similar trends are observed regardless of the equipment type. Adopting small-scale equipment enables obtaining soil–reinforcement interaction parameters using test procedures that are less time-consuming than those associated with large-scale pullout tests. However, proper scale effect correction factors may be considered for more consistent estimates of the interface strength parameters under low normal stress values. |
|---|