Loading…

Interference effect of shallow foundations constructed on sand reinforced with geosynthetics

This paper numerically examines the bearing capacity ratio for rough square footings located at the surface of a homogeneous sandy soil reinforced with a geogrid. The failure stage in the sand was controlled using the Mohr–Coulomb criterion and a non-associated flow rule. Numerical results were comp...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Geotextiles and geomembranes 2008-10, Vol.26 (5), p.404-415
Main Authors: Ghazavi, Mahmoud, Lavasan, Arash Alimardani
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:This paper numerically examines the bearing capacity ratio for rough square footings located at the surface of a homogeneous sandy soil reinforced with a geogrid. The failure stage in the sand was controlled using the Mohr–Coulomb criterion and a non-associated flow rule. Numerical results were compared with those obtained from other experiments and were found to be in good agreement. A parametric study revealed the role of the distance between reinforcing layers and footings and the width and depth of reinforcing layers on the bearing capacity. The distribution of shear strain and displacement in the soil for both reinforced and unreinforced footings was investigated. In short, the results showed that the bearing capacity of interfering footing increases with the use of geogrid layers, depending on the distance between two footings. The best geometry and orientation of the geogrid layers were determined to achieve maximum bearing capacity for closely spaced square footings. Parametric studies demonstrated that the efficiency of reinforcement on the bearing capacity of interfering footings is greater than that on an isolated reinforced footing. In addition, reinforcement caused the bearing capacity of interfering footings to increase by about 1.5 and 2 for one and two reinforcement layers, respectively. Design charts are presented.
ISSN:0266-1144
1879-3584
DOI:10.1016/j.geotexmem.2008.02.003