Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Effect of number of layers on coir geotextile reinforced sand under cyclic loading

Effect of number of layers on coir geotextile reinforced sand under cyclic loading sridharrajagopalg@gmail. com The present investigation is on the behavior of coir geotextile-reinforced sandy soil Department of Civil foundations and to study the effect of different parameters contributing to their Engineering, Sri Venkateswara College performance using laboratory model tests. The parameters investigated in this of Engineering, Bengaluru, study included top layer spacing, number of reinforcement layers and vertical spac- Karnataka, India ing between layers. The effect of coir geotextile reinforcement on the vertical stress Full list of author information is available at the end of the distribution in the sand and the strain distribution along the reinforcement were also article investigated. The test results established the potential benefit of using coir geotextile- reinforced sand foundations. The test results also showed that the reinforcement con- figuration/layout has a significant effect on the behavior of reinforced sand foundation. With two or more layers of reinforcement, the settlement can be reduced at all footing pressure levels. The inclusion of reinforcement can redistribute the applied footing load to a more uniform pattern, hence reducing the stress concentration, which will result reduced settlement. Keywords: Cyclic stress ratio, Cyclic settlement, Coir geotextile Introduction Reinforcing soil under the foundations is becoming a reliable technique due to the advent of materials such as grids/mats that can be made of both natural and synthetic materials. Natural products such as coir mats and coir grids with are emerging as viable reinforcing material, when introduced in the soil. Reinforced soil has performed satisfac- tory under monotonic/static loadings. Several literatures are available support the above fact [1]. Structural engineers come across situations wherein live loads in a structure may be greater than the dead load of the structure itself. Further these kinds of live loads are also found to change with time, thereby subjecting the underlying soil to the repeated or cyclic loads. Thus the performance of foundations under such situations mainly depends on frequency and amplitude of the cyclic loading. Further, foundations are also subjected to vibrations during seismic activity as well as foundations under machines. Studies on performance of footings under cyclic loading are very few in literatures Gray and Ohashi [2], Chang et al. [3], Gray. and Talal Al-Refeai [4], Guido et al. [5], Raymond & comos [6], Wasti and Butun (1996), Chen et al. [7]. The application of reinforced soil under cyclic load has enormous potential in many applications of civil engineering. It shall be noted that the settlements under cyclic loads are far greater than those produced under static © The Author(s) 2018. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creat iveco mmons .org/licen ses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. Sridhar and Prathap Kumar Geo-Engineering (2018) 9:11 Page 2 of 14 loads by [8–16]. The overall behavior of the reinforced mass depends on the reinforce - ment material. Reinforcement when introduced into soil and aligned in the direction of the tensile strain arc disrupts the uniform pattern of strain that would develop if the reinforcement did not exist. The reinforcement also inhibits the formation of continuous rupture sur - faces through the soil, resulting in improved stiffness and shear strength. Jewell [17] has shown the improved behaviour of reinforced dense sand. The Properties of reinforcement, soil characteristics and the nature of the interaction between the soil and the reinforcement influences the performance of the reinforced soil. The interaction mechanism is affected by factors such as: state of stress within the reinforced mass; nature of loading; direction of reinforcement; boundary conditions; and material and interface properties. In the case of monotonic loading, three mech- anisms of interaction have been identified: passive anchorage; enhanced confinement; and tensile membrane action. Under cyclic loading conditions, other mechanisms such as dynamic interlock have been observed [18]. Shin et al. [19] investigated the prospect of reinforcing geogrid layers in soil to reduce the settlement of a railroad bed and sub- ballast layer subjected to cyclic load. Moghaddas Tafreshi and Dawson [20] found when reinforcement were placed in optimum depth from the surface of footings such as strip, square, rectangular foundations, the maximum advantage of reinforcement in bearing capacity was obtained. Naeini and Gholampoor [21] investigated number of cyclic tri- axial tests on specimens of 70 mm diameter to study the cyclic performance of dry silty sand reinforced with a geotextile. Factors affecting the cyclic behavior, viz. the arrange - ment and number of geotextile layers, confining pressures and silt content were varied in the tests. It was concluded that geotextile reinforcement causes considerable increase in the cyclic axial modulus of dry sand and sand mixed with varying amounts of silt and the effect was more prominent when the geotextile was placed near the surface of the sample. This tendency indicates that the reinforced soil behaves in a different manner under cyclic loading. Hence a clear understanding of the mechanism or settlement of reinforced soil under cyclic loading needs to be understood. Hence in the present experimental investigation a natural bi-product such as coir mat has been used as rein- forcement and experimental studies using model footings subjected to cyclic loading resting on reinforced sand beds is proposed to understand the settlement behavior of footings and number of layers of reiforcement under cyclic loading with different excita - tion parameters. Materials The sand used in the present investigation is locally available medium silica river sand, dried and sorted by particle sizes. The sand was sieved through 1 mm IS sieve in order to make it a uniformly graded, to minimize effect of segregation during preparation of the sand bed. Table 1 shows the properties of sand used. Coir mat procured from Karnataka coir Federation, Bangalore was used in the pre- sent study. The size of the opening of the coir mat was kept equal to 20 × 20 mm. It was found from direct shear test results that the coir mat opening of size 20 × 20  mm gave Sridhar and Prathap Kumar Geo-Engineering (2018) 9:11 Page 3 of 14 Table 1 Properties of sand used Property Values Specific gravity, G 2.67 Coefficient of uniformity, C 1.4 Coefficient of curvature, Cc 1.03 Eec ff tive diameter of particle, D (mm) 0.2 Maximum dry density (kN/m ) 18.7 Minimum dry density (kN/m ) 14.7 Compacted density (kN/m ) 16.9 Relative density (kN/m ) 60 Elastic modulus (MPa) 30 Table 2 Mechanical properties of coir mat used Mass/unit area (g/m ) 835 Thickness (mm) 6.81 Yarn count Direction A (Ne) 2/0.24 Direction B (Ne) 2/0.22 No. of yarns/dm Direction A/dm 7 Direction A/dm 9 Yarns twist ( Turns/m) Direction A 73 Direction B 63 Cover factor 10.8 Breaking load (N) 252 Elongation (%) 31 optimum value of internal friction [22] The typical properties of the coir mats are as shown in Table 2. Methodology Preparation of the sand bed In the present investigation, sand bed was compacted in the test tank by raining tech- nique to attain a compacted density of 16.9  kN/m with a relative density of 60%. Pre- determined weight of sand was poured using a funnel from a specified height so that the essential relative density of 60% is achieved. The sand was spread uniformly during pouring in layers. Uniformly distributed blows of about 20 numbers using a standard 4.5  kg rammer falling though a height of 45  cm were also given to level of compacted sand. Empty cups were placed during filling to determine the density of the sand in the cup. Several trials were done to determine the height of fall of sand to keep the uniform- ity in compaction to give the desired relative density. Figure 1 shows the pouring of sand in the test tank by raining technique. For the case of unreinforced sand, the sand was compacted in three layers of equal height. For the case of reinforced sand, coir mat was placed so that specified clearance of about 40 mm from the sides of tank was maintained in order to avoid side friction. Sridhar and Prathap Kumar Geo-Engineering (2018) 9:11 Page 4 of 14 Fig. 1 Pouring of sand in test tank Fig. 2 Plan and section of placement of number layers of coir mat in sand The configuration of coir mat reinforcement used in the investigation was shown in Fig. 2 placed in number of layers NL = 1, 2, 3 and 4 and the details of the parameters are as shown in the Table  3. To represent the practical situation regarding ratio of model footing and tank size used, followed the procedure as per IS: 1888 (1982) and the load increment was maintained until the rate of settlement reduced to a value 0.02 mm/min. The footing of diameter 100  mm was placed on the surface of the sand bed and cyclic load was applied using hydraulic actuator placed vertically in line with load cell and piston. Both reinforced and unreinforced sand beds were subjected to cyclic Sridhar and Prathap Kumar Geo-Engineering (2018) 9:11 Page 5 of 14 Table 3 Configuration of coir mat reinforcement Reinforcement distribution Excitation parameters Type of Rein- u/B b/B h/B No. of layers (NL) Waveform type Frequency Hz Cyclic pressure kPa forcement Reinforced 0.3, 0.6, 1.0 4.4 – 1, 2, 3, 4 Sine 0.5, 1.0, 1.5 100, 200, 300 Fig. 3 Schematic diagram of test setup used in the present investigation loading. The excitation values such as type of wave form, frequency and cyclic pres - sure were fed as input values using MOVICON 11.2 software. In the present investigation, half wave sine form was used throughout the loading of the model footing. Tests were done under a constant cyclic pressure of 100, 200 and 300 kPa and under each constant cyclic pressure; the frequency of the sine wave was varied from 0.5, 1 and 1.5  Hz. Figure  3 shows schematic diagram of entire test setup used in the present investigation. For very lightly loaded footings the natural frequency is almost independent of the footing size for a given load intensity, but for high loads it is almost inversely proportional to the foundation width. For inundated foundations the natural frequencies were again almost independent of the footing shape at low load intensities, but the frequencies were only a little over half those on the dry sand. At high loads the frequency was again roughly inversely proportional to the footing width but was not nearly so low relative to the value for a corresponding footing on dry sand as it was at low load intensities [23]. Series of such test were conducted for reinforced sand bed with number of lay- ers being varied from 1, 2, 3 and 4. The layers of mat reinforcement were positioned at specified locations and load tests were done until the cyclic settlements showed sudden increase indicating significant penetration of the model footing after certain Sridhar and Prathap Kumar Geo-Engineering (2018) 9:11 Page 6 of 14 number of load cycles. Tests results were plotted as variation of number of cycles on log scale with corresponding cyclic settlements to determine and analyze the effect of number of layers as well as to assess the comparative performance of coir mat rein- forced sand with unreinforced sand. Cyclic load settlement behavior of unreinforced sand The results of the cyclic loading test on model footings resting on unreinforced sand and coir mat reinforced sand with coir mat placed at different configurations have been presented. Analysis of the results under different excitation parameters such as effect of frequency, effect of amplitude of loading in terms of cyclic pressure is determined. The test results recorded for model footing resting on unreinforced sand and at excitation parameters such as frequency (F) = 0.5  Hz and cyclic pressure (CP) = 100, 200 and 300  kPa. Figure  4 shows the typical variation of number of cycles versus cumulative cyclic settlement, henceforth called as cyclic settlement at F = 0.5, 1 and 1.5  Hz and at CP = 100, 200 and 300  kPa. It can be seen from Fig.  4 that for a con- stant frequency of 0.5 Hz, increase in cyclic pressure increases settlement. From these plots, it can be inferred that for a given frequency and cyclic pressure, the rate of set- tlement increases after a certain number of cycles are reached. The unreinforced sand is set to yield at approximately number of cycles N = 2000 corresponding to F = 0.5  Hz and CP = 100  kPa. Similar trends have been obtained for unreinforced sand tested under different frequencies and different cyclic pressures, in all these cases it can be seen that with increase in cyclic pressure and at a constant fre- quency the number of cycles required to cause yielding decreases. Figure  4 shows such a variation where it can be seen that for a given constant frequency increase in cyclic pressure causes soil to yield at a smaller number of cycles. Similarly for a constant cyclic pressure increase in frequency causes soil to yield at lower value of number of cycles. No. of cycles (N) 110100 1000 10000 F= 0.5Hz, CP 10 100 kPa F= 0.5Hz, CP 200kPa F= 0.5Hz, CP 300kPa Fig. 4 Variation of cyclic settlement with cumulative number of cycles for frequency 0.5 Hz and varying cyclic pressure for unreinforced sand Cyclic Selement Sridhar and Prathap Kumar Geo-Engineering (2018) 9:11 Page 7 of 14 Table 4 CSR values for NL = 1 and CP = 100 kPa under varying frequency CSR N=1 Settlement NL = 1; CP = 100 kPa 0.5 Hz 1.0 Hz 1.5 Hz Reinforced Unreinforced CSR Reinforced Unreinforced CSR Reinforced Unreinforced CSR 5 4000 1000 4.00 1700 500 3.40 1250 50 25.00 10 20,000 2800 7.14 15,000 1000 15.00 11,500 700 16.43 15 30,000 3800 7.89 31,000 1400 22.14 28,000 950 29.47 20 68,000 4600 14.78 51,000 1750 29.14 47,000 1300 36.15 25 100,000 5400 18.52 70,000 2500 28.00 65,000 1900 34.21 No. of cycles (N) 110 100 1000 10000 100000 1000000 Frequency= 0.5Hz NL=1 , CP100 Frequency= 0.5Hz NL=2, CP100 Frequency= 0.5Hz NL=3, CP100 Frequency= 0.5Hz NL=4, CP100 Fig. 5 Variation of cyclic settlement with number of cycles for different layer configuration at CP = 100 kPa and F = 0.5 Hz Cyclic load settlement behaviour of reinforced sand Cyclic load were also applied for model footings resting on reinforced sand bed by plac- ing single layer, two layers, three layers and four layers as per the test configuration shown in Table 4, to determine effect of frequency and amplitude of cyclic loading. The results were analyzed to determine optimum number of layers, that are most beneficial in reducing the settlement as well as increasing the number of load cycles before yielding and hence to increase the cyclic load carrying capacity of reinforced sand. Figure  5 shows typical variation of cyclic settlement with number of cycles for differ - ent layers configuration used in the present study. It can be seen from all these figures that for a constant frequency and constant amplitude in terms of CP the sand reinforced with NL = 2 has been more effective in resisting cyclic load compared to NL = 1, 3 and 4 layers. The sand with NL = 1 is the least resistant as the cyclic settlement recorded cor- responding to different cycles of loading is significantly large when compared with 2, 3 and 4 layers. Further the cyclic settlement recorded for reinforced sand with NL = 3 and 4 shows marginal variations in cyclic settlement with number of cycles between them. Cyclic selement Sridhar and Prathap Kumar Geo-Engineering (2018) 9:11 Page 8 of 14 Also for a given number of load cycles the cyclic settlement recorded for NL = 3 and 4 are higher than those recorded for NL = 1 layer for a constant frequency and cyclic pressure. The reason for the above trend can be attributed to the following: It is known that provision of reinforcement increases stiffness of the sand. Further mat or grid form of reinforcement provides inter locking effect, by locking the sand particles in the space/ grid of the reinforcement. This restrains the lateral movement of the soil particles, caus - ing increased cyclic resistance of reinforced sand. However, the increased cyclic resist- ance also depends on location or position of the reinforcement below the model footing. Due to repeated load cycles on the geogrid-reinforced soil beds, the soil particles are locked into the apertures of mat during the loading stage and prevent the full recov- ery of elastic and time-dependent strains to develop during the unloading stage. This is concept is known as “Dynamic Interlock”. The dynamic interlock in soil structures induces soil confining stresses as a result of the compaction process, which strength - ens the reinforced soil medium. In the present experimental investigation number of layers were varied from 1, 2, 3 and 4 by varying u/B = 0.3 and h/B ratio was kept con- stant = 0.5 between different layers. The trend in the results indicates that the introduc - tion of two layered reinforcement is more effective. This is due to the fact that, when two layers are placed with u/B = 0.3 and h/B = 0.5 it will lie in the probable shear failure zone below the model footing. Theoretically the depth of the shear failure zone will extend to a depth of 0.5–1.2 B, depending on angle of internal friction of compacted sand. For other layer configurations such as for NL = 3 and 4, the third and fourth layer may be located below the shear failure zone. Thus the trend in test results clearly indicates that NL = 2 is most effective in increase in cyclic resistance. However, it can also be noted that introduction of reinforcement causes a significant increase in cyclic resistance when compared to unreinforced sand as the number of load cycles required for the soil to yield is significantly larger when compared with that obtained for unreinforced sand. The rate of change of peak settlement and residual settlement reduces as the number of cycles increases and that a small reduction in amplitude (i.e. the difference between these two settlements) is also apparent. Often, the variation of settlement becomes stable after number cycles. This stabilizing response indicates that the early process of reorienta - tion of particles, causing local fill stiffening, ceases relative rapidly and the system then reaches the ‘‘plastic shakedown’’ condition defined by Werkmeister et al. [24], in which subsequent deformation is fully recovered in each cycle. These values entail that the rela - tive decrease in footing settlement for a variation of N between 1 and 2 is significantly greater than those for variation of N between 2 and 4. Despite the fact that the mass used for N = 1 and N = 2 are, respectively, two and four times of N = 1. Moghaddas Tafreshi and Khalaj [25] investigated the decrease in the settlement of the overlying soil surface under repeated loads can be reduced significantly by using geogrid reinforcement, while the effectiveness of the reinforcement was decreased by increasing the number of rein - forcement layers. Effect of frequency of cyclic loading Figure  6 shows effect of frequency of cyclic loading with number of layers. It clearly shows that with NL = 2 layers there is a significant reduction in settlement with a Sridhar and Prathap Kumar Geo-Engineering (2018) 9:11 Page 9 of 14 No. of cycles (N) 110 100 100010000 100000 1000000 NL=1 , CP100, F=0.5Hz NL=1, CP 100, F=1Hz NL=1, CP 100, F=1.5Hz NL=2, CP100, F=0.5Hz NL=2, CP100, F=1 Hz 20 NL=2, CP 100, F=1.5 Hz UR, CP 100, F= 0.5Hz Fig. 6 Eec ff t of frequency of cyclic loading and number of layers No. of cycles (N) 110100 1000 10000 100000 1000000 NL=1 , CP 100kPa, F=0.5Hz NL=1 , CP 200kPa, F=0.5Hz NL=2, CP 100kPa,F=0.5Hz NL=2, CP 200kPa, F=0.5Hz UR, CP 100 kPa, F=0.5Hz UR, CP 200kPa, F=0.5Hz Fig. 7 Eec ff t of cyclic pressure (amplitude) of cyclic loading and number of layers corresponding increase in number of load cycles required to cause yield. Further it can also be seen that the cyclic resistance of unreinforced sand is significantly lower than those for reinforced sand. With increase in frequency of cyclic loading the number of cycles required to cause yielding of sand decreases, which is in confirmation with earlier literatures. Effect of cyclic pressure Figure  7 shows variation of cyclic settlement with number of cycles at different cyclic pressure. It can be seen that increase in cyclic pressure/amplitude of cyclic load- ing increases the cyclic settlement for a constant frequency of 0.5  Hz. Thus increase in amplitude of cyclic loading causes the soil to yield at earlier cycles and the trend in results once again indicates that NL = 2 layers is more effective in retarding cyclic settle - ment under all excitation parameters such as frequency and amplitude of cyclic loading. Cyclic Selement Cyclic selement Sridhar and Prathap Kumar Geo-Engineering (2018) 9:11 Page 10 of 14 CSR 0.05 NL=1, F=0.5 NL=2, F=0.5 0.1 NL=3, F=0.5 NL=4, F=0.5 0.15 0.2 0.25 Fig. 8 CSR with s/B for different layer configuration under F = 0.5 Hz and CP = 100 kPa CSR 0.05 0.1 0.15 NL=1, F=0.5 0.2 NL=2, F=0.5 0.25 Fig. 9 CSR with s/B for different layer configuration under F = 0.5 Hz and CP = 300 kPa Effect of frequency and amplitude of loading on cyclic settlement ratio To analyze the effect of introduction of different number of layers of coir mat and to determine optimum number of layers which is more effective in increasing the cyclic resistance of reinforced sand, the cyclic stress ratio (CSR) was calculated for differ - ent number of cycles. Table  4 shows typical calculated values of CSR corresponding to NL = 1, CP = 100 kPa and varying frequencies. Figure 8 shows variation of CSR with s/B under different frequencies and different cyclic pressure obtained for different layer con - figurations. Majority of the trend in results indicate that CSR increases with increase in s/B ratio for all layer configurations. It can also be seen that for a given s/B ratio max - imum CSR is obtained for NL = 2 layers and marginal variations have been indicated with regard to CSR values for NL = 3 and 4 layers. Figure 9 shows values of CSR with s/B for single and double Layer Configuration under F = 0.5 Hz and CP = 300 kPa. s/B s/B Sridhar and Prathap Kumar Geo-Engineering (2018) 9:11 Page 11 of 14 However, at higher frequency and at higher cyclic pressure CSR reaches maximum with a subsequent reduction in CSR with increase in s/B ratio. This trend in higher CSR at lower s/B ratio when frequency and amplitude of loading is higher is due to the effect of particle being rearranged under initial rigorous shaking to achieve higher compaction at lower values of settlement- leading to higher initial cyclic resistance. Continued shak- ing ultimately breaks the confining effect provided by compacted sand and hence CSR reduces and shows decreasing trend with increasing s/B. However, CSR values for all s/B ratios lies in the range higher than 50 indicating cyclic resistance of reinforced sand bed is significantly high when compared with cyclic resistance of unreinforced sand. To confirm the above trend in variation of CSR, the stiffness of reinforced sand bed were also calculated in terms of cycles per mm. The calculated values of stiffness obtained for both unreinforced and reinforced sand with NL = 1, 2, 3 and 4 layers and at CP = 100, 200 and 300 kPa at a constant frequency of 0.5 Hz. Figure  10 shows typical variation of stiffness with number of cycles for different layer configuration under different excitation parameters. It can be seen that stiffness increases with increase in number of cycles and stiffness of unreinforced sand is sig - nificantly lower when compared with reinforced sand. The trend in results indicates only marginal variation in stiffness when sand is reinforced with NL = 3 and 4 layers. Further the stiffness obtained corresponding to NL = 3 and 4 layers is lower than those obtained for NL = 2 layers at all excitation parameters of cyclic loading but greater than that obtained for unreinforced sand. Analysis of trend in results in terms of CSR and stiffness of reinforced sand bed have indicated the following: (i) The performance of the reinforced sand bed is better than unreinforced sand bed under cyclic loading and at all excitation parameters such as fre- quency and amplitude of loading.(ii) Increase in frequency and amplitude of cyclic load- ing increases the settlement of the footing, but the corresponding settlement obtained for unreinforced sand is significantly larger—indicating reinforcing sand using grid/mat type of reinforcement increases the efficiency and performance of foundations to resist cyclic or repeated loads. (iii) The optimum number of layers corresponds to NL = 2 45000 unreinforced 40000 NL=1 35000 NL=2 NL=3 NL=4 0.00 1000.00 2000.00 3000.00 4000.00 5000.00 6000.00 7000.00 Stiffness Fig. 10 Stiffness with no. of cycles for different layer configuration under F = 0.5 Hz and CP = 100 kPa No. of cycles (N) Sridhar and Prathap Kumar Geo-Engineering (2018) 9:11 Page 12 of 14 which causes significant retardation in settlement and also causes significant increase in number of cycles required to cause yielding of soil. (iv) The optimum number of layers required for cyclic loading is also same as that required for static loading, (as per studies conducted by Binquet and Lee [26]; Akinmusuru and Akinbolade [27]). (v) The perfor - mance of reinforced sand bed mainly depends on location of the reinforcement. By placing NL = 2 layers, reinforcement are enclosed in the shear zone below the foot- ing and helps to restrain the soil deformation that occurs in the failure zone to a great extent. Hence efficiency of reinforced sand bed under cyclic loading becomes maximum under all excitation parameters with NL = 2 layers. Two important observations from this plot are: Introducing of Reinforcement, increased with the number of layers at all confining pressures; Increase in confining pressure resulted in the decrease in the benefit for any precise amount of reinforcement. These results are in accord with the observations by Haeri et al. [28]. Increase in the per - formance due to reinforcement is nonlinear with the increase in quantity of reinforce- ment, the nonlinearity decreasing with the increase in confining pressure. Conclusions The behavior of model footings resting on coir mat reinforced sand bed as well as unre - inforced sand bed was studied. Cyclic load was applied till sufficient number of load cycles was reached to cause yielding of soil. Reinforcement parameters such as number of layers and excitation parameters such as frequency and amplitude of cyclic loading were studied by compact the sand to a relative density of 60%. Based on the analysis of test results the following conclusions are drawn: 1. Structures that are sensitive to settlement, as well as structures that are subjected to repeated or cyclic loading, the load carrying capacity can be increased and the settle- ment can be decreased to a much lower magnitude by reinforcing the soil using mat/ grid form of reinforcement. 2. The rate of settlement, magnitude of settlement, the number of cycles required to cause yielding of soil are a function of frequency and amplitude of cyclic loading. 3. For given amplitude of cyclic loading, increase in number of layers of reinforcement, decreases the settlement as well as the number of load cycles required to cause yield- ing increases. Similar trend has been obtained for a given value of frequency of cyclic load. 4. Under a constant frequency and for a given reinforcement configuration, increase in amplitude of cyclic loading increases the settlement under same number of load cycles. Similarly for constant amplitude of loading, increase in frequency of cyclic load increases the settlement. 5. Increase in amplitude and frequency of cyclic load increases the footing settlement irrespective of increase in number of layers. 6. With increasing number of layers, the number of cycles required to cause failure increases—indicating increase in load carrying capacity of reinforced sand. However, the footing settlement under the same number of cycles increases, with increase in number of layers greater than two layers. Thus the efficiency of the reinforcement is decreased by increase in mass of the reinforcement. Sridhar and Prathap Kumar Geo-Engineering (2018) 9:11 Page 13 of 14 7. The location of the reinforcement below the footing plays an important role in increasing the performance of reinforced sand bed under cyclic loading. Efficiency of reinforced sand is best when reinforcement is placed in such a way that it is able to intercept the shear failure zone to its maximum thereby causing maximum lateral restraint of deformed zone below the model footing. 8. Variation in terms of cyclic settlement ratio and stiffness of reinforced sand indicates that introduction of the reinforcement increases the stiffness of the sand significantly and hence decreases the settlement when compared to the reinforcement. 9. The rate of footing settlement is significantly low at lower load cycles (between 0 and 1000 cycles) for reinforced sand when compared with unreinforced sand. Author details 1 2 Department of Civil Engineering, Sri Venkateswara College of Engineering, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India. Department of Civil Engg., RNS Institute of Technology, Bangalore, Karnataka, India. Authors’ contributions RS and MTPK carried out investigation on shear strength parameters of coir fiber reinforced sand and coir mat reinforced sand. Both authors read and approved the final manuscript. Competing interest The authors declare that they have no competing interests. Ethics approval and consent to participate Not applicable Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Received: 6 May 2017 Accepted: 30 May 2018 References 1. Vesic AS (1973) Analysis of ultimate loads of shallow foundations. Soil Mech Found Division ASCE 94(SM3):661–688 2. Gray DH, Ohashi H (1983) Mechanics of fiber reinforcement in sand. J Geotech Eng 109(3):335–353 3. Chang DT, Wang WJ, and Wang YH. (1998) Laboratory study of the dynamic test system on geogrid reinforced subgrade—soil. In: Proc. 6th I.C. on geosynthetics, vol 2 Atlanta, USA, pp 967–970 4. Gray DH, Al-Refeai T (1986) Behavior of fabric-versus fiber-reinforced sand. Int J Geotech Eng 112:804–820 5. Guido VA, Chang DK, Sweeney MA (1986) Comparison of geogrid and geotextile reinforced earth slabs. Can Geo- tech J 23:435–440 6. Raymond GP, Comos FE (1978) Repeated load testing of a model plane strain footing. Can Geotech J 15:190–201 7. Chen X, Zhang J, Li Z (2014) Shear behaviour of a geogrid-reinforced coarse-grained soil based on large-scale triaxial tests. Geotext Geomembr 42(4):312–328 8. Das BM, Shin EC (1994) Strip foundation on geogrid-reinforced clay: behavior under cyclic loadings. Geotext Geomembr 13:657–667 9. Gray DH, Maher MH (1989) Admixture stabilization of sands with discrete, randomly distributed fibers. In: Proc., XII int. conf. on soil mech. and found. engg, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil 10. Raymond GP (2002) Reinforced ballast behavior subjected to repeated load. Geotext Geomembr 20:39–61 11. El Sawwaf M, Nazir AK (2010) Behavior of repeatedly loaded rectangular footings resting on reinforced sand. Alexan- dria Eng J 49(4):349–356. https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.aej.2010.07.002 12. Omar MT, Das BM, Puri VK, Yen SC (1993) Ultimate bearing capacity of shallow foundations on sand with geogrid reinforcement. Can Geotech J 30:545–549 13. Das BM, Omar MT (1994) The effects of foundation width on model tests for the bearing capacity of sand with geogrid reinforcement. Geotech Geol Eng 12:133–141 14. Das BM, Puri VK, Omar MT, Evgin E. (1996) Bearing capacity of strip foundation on geogrid reinforced sand-scale effects in model tests. In: Proceedings of the sixth international conference on offshore and polar engineering, vol I, Los Angeles, USA, pp 527–530 15. El Sawwaf M (2007) Behavior of strip footing on geogrid-reinforced sand over a soft clay slope. Geotext Geomembr 25:50–60 16. El Sawwaf M (2009) Experimental and numerical study of eccentrically loaded strip footings resting on reinforced sand. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 135(10):1509–1518 Sridhar and Prathap Kumar Geo-Engineering (2018) 9:11 Page 14 of 14 17. Jewell RA (1980) Some effects of reinforcement on the mechanical behaviour of soils, Ph.D. thesis. University of Cambridge, England 18. McGown A, Yeo KC, Yogarajah I (1990) Identification of a dynamic interlock mechanism. In: Proceedings Interna- tional Conference on Reinforced Soil. Thomas Telford, London, UK, pp 377–380 19. Shin EC, Kim DH, Das BM (2002) Geogrid-reinforced railroad bed settlement due to cyclic load. Geotech Geol Eng 20:261–271 20. Moghaddas Tafreshi SN, Dawson AR (2010) Comparison of bearing capacity of a strip footing on sand with geocell and with planar forms of geotextile reinforcement. Geotext Geomembr 28(1):72–84 21. Naeini SA, Gholampoor N (2014) Cyclic behaviour of dry silty sand reinforced with a geotextile. Geotext Geomembr 42(6):611–619 22. Sridhar R, Prathapkumar MT (2016) Comparison on shear strength of coir mat and coir fiber reinforced sand. Electr J Geotech Eng 22(03):1015–1023 23. East wood W. (1953) The factors which affect the natural frequency of vibration of foundations, and the effect of vibrations on the bearing power of foundations on sand. Struct Eng 31(3) 24. Werkmeister S, Steven BD, Alabaster DJ, Arnold G, Oeser M. (2005) 3D Finite element analysis of accelerated pave- ment test results from New Zealand’s CAPTIF facility, bearing capacity of roads, railways and airfields. In: Proceedings of the 7th international symposium on the bearing capacity of roads and airfields (BCRA), June 24–26, Trondheim 25. Moghaddas Tafreshi SN, Khalaj O (2008) Laboratory tests of small-diameter HDPE pipes buried in reinforced sand under repeated load. Geotext Geomembr 26(2):145–163 26. Binquet J, Lee KL (2002) Bearing capacity tests on reinforced earth slabs. J Geotech Eng Div ASCE 101:1241–1255 27. Akinmusuru JO, Akinbolade JA (1981) Stability of loaded footings on reinforced soil. J Geotech Eng Div ASCE 107(6):819–827 28. Haeri SM, Noorzad R, Oskoorouchi AM (2000) Eec ff t of geotextile reinforcement on the mechanical behaviour of sand. Geotext Geomembr 18(6):385–402 http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png International Journal of Geo-Engineering Springer Journals

Effect of number of layers on coir geotextile reinforced sand under cyclic loading

Download PDF
14 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer-journals/effect-of-number-of-layers-on-coir-geotextile-reinforced-sand-under-angr5QbWO6

References (35)

Publisher
Springer Journals
Copyright
2018 The Author(s)
ISSN
2092-9196
eISSN
2198-2783
DOI
10.1186/s40703-018-0078-y
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

sridharrajagopalg@gmail. com The present investigation is on the behavior of coir geotextile-reinforced sandy soil Department of Civil foundations and to study the effect of different parameters contributing to their Engineering, Sri Venkateswara College performance using laboratory model tests. The parameters investigated in this of Engineering, Bengaluru, study included top layer spacing, number of reinforcement layers and vertical spac- Karnataka, India ing between layers. The effect of coir geotextile reinforcement on the vertical stress Full list of author information is available at the end of the distribution in the sand and the strain distribution along the reinforcement were also article investigated. The test results established the potential benefit of using coir geotextile- reinforced sand foundations. The test results also showed that the reinforcement con- figuration/layout has a significant effect on the behavior of reinforced sand foundation. With two or more layers of reinforcement, the settlement can be reduced at all footing pressure levels. The inclusion of reinforcement can redistribute the applied footing load to a more uniform pattern, hence reducing the stress concentration, which will result reduced settlement. Keywords: Cyclic stress ratio, Cyclic settlement, Coir geotextile Introduction Reinforcing soil under the foundations is becoming a reliable technique due to the advent of materials such as grids/mats that can be made of both natural and synthetic materials. Natural products such as coir mats and coir grids with are emerging as viable reinforcing material, when introduced in the soil. Reinforced soil has performed satisfac- tory under monotonic/static loadings. Several literatures are available support the above fact [1]. Structural engineers come across situations wherein live loads in a structure may be greater than the dead load of the structure itself. Further these kinds of live loads are also found to change with time, thereby subjecting the underlying soil to the repeated or cyclic loads. Thus the performance of foundations under such situations mainly depends on frequency and amplitude of the cyclic loading. Further, foundations are also subjected to vibrations during seismic activity as well as foundations under machines. Studies on performance of footings under cyclic loading are very few in literatures Gray and Ohashi [2], Chang et al. [3], Gray. and Talal Al-Refeai [4], Guido et al. [5], Raymond & comos [6], Wasti and Butun (1996), Chen et al. [7]. The application of reinforced soil under cyclic load has enormous potential in many applications of civil engineering. It shall be noted that the settlements under cyclic loads are far greater than those produced under static © The Author(s) 2018. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creat iveco mmons .org/licen ses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. Sridhar and Prathap Kumar Geo-Engineering (2018) 9:11 Page 2 of 14 loads by [8–16]. The overall behavior of the reinforced mass depends on the reinforce - ment material. Reinforcement when introduced into soil and aligned in the direction of the tensile strain arc disrupts the uniform pattern of strain that would develop if the reinforcement did not exist. The reinforcement also inhibits the formation of continuous rupture sur - faces through the soil, resulting in improved stiffness and shear strength. Jewell [17] has shown the improved behaviour of reinforced dense sand. The Properties of reinforcement, soil characteristics and the nature of the interaction between the soil and the reinforcement influences the performance of the reinforced soil. The interaction mechanism is affected by factors such as: state of stress within the reinforced mass; nature of loading; direction of reinforcement; boundary conditions; and material and interface properties. In the case of monotonic loading, three mech- anisms of interaction have been identified: passive anchorage; enhanced confinement; and tensile membrane action. Under cyclic loading conditions, other mechanisms such as dynamic interlock have been observed [18]. Shin et al. [19] investigated the prospect of reinforcing geogrid layers in soil to reduce the settlement of a railroad bed and sub- ballast layer subjected to cyclic load. Moghaddas Tafreshi and Dawson [20] found when reinforcement were placed in optimum depth from the surface of footings such as strip, square, rectangular foundations, the maximum advantage of reinforcement in bearing capacity was obtained. Naeini and Gholampoor [21] investigated number of cyclic tri- axial tests on specimens of 70 mm diameter to study the cyclic performance of dry silty sand reinforced with a geotextile. Factors affecting the cyclic behavior, viz. the arrange - ment and number of geotextile layers, confining pressures and silt content were varied in the tests. It was concluded that geotextile reinforcement causes considerable increase in the cyclic axial modulus of dry sand and sand mixed with varying amounts of silt and the effect was more prominent when the geotextile was placed near the surface of the sample. This tendency indicates that the reinforced soil behaves in a different manner under cyclic loading. Hence a clear understanding of the mechanism or settlement of reinforced soil under cyclic loading needs to be understood. Hence in the present experimental investigation a natural bi-product such as coir mat has been used as rein- forcement and experimental studies using model footings subjected to cyclic loading resting on reinforced sand beds is proposed to understand the settlement behavior of footings and number of layers of reiforcement under cyclic loading with different excita - tion parameters. Materials The sand used in the present investigation is locally available medium silica river sand, dried and sorted by particle sizes. The sand was sieved through 1 mm IS sieve in order to make it a uniformly graded, to minimize effect of segregation during preparation of the sand bed. Table 1 shows the properties of sand used. Coir mat procured from Karnataka coir Federation, Bangalore was used in the pre- sent study. The size of the opening of the coir mat was kept equal to 20 × 20 mm. It was found from direct shear test results that the coir mat opening of size 20 × 20  mm gave Sridhar and Prathap Kumar Geo-Engineering (2018) 9:11 Page 3 of 14 Table 1 Properties of sand used Property Values Specific gravity, G 2.67 Coefficient of uniformity, C 1.4 Coefficient of curvature, Cc 1.03 Eec ff tive diameter of particle, D (mm) 0.2 Maximum dry density (kN/m ) 18.7 Minimum dry density (kN/m ) 14.7 Compacted density (kN/m ) 16.9 Relative density (kN/m ) 60 Elastic modulus (MPa) 30 Table 2 Mechanical properties of coir mat used Mass/unit area (g/m ) 835 Thickness (mm) 6.81 Yarn count Direction A (Ne) 2/0.24 Direction B (Ne) 2/0.22 No. of yarns/dm Direction A/dm 7 Direction A/dm 9 Yarns twist ( Turns/m) Direction A 73 Direction B 63 Cover factor 10.8 Breaking load (N) 252 Elongation (%) 31 optimum value of internal friction [22] The typical properties of the coir mats are as shown in Table 2. Methodology Preparation of the sand bed In the present investigation, sand bed was compacted in the test tank by raining tech- nique to attain a compacted density of 16.9  kN/m with a relative density of 60%. Pre- determined weight of sand was poured using a funnel from a specified height so that the essential relative density of 60% is achieved. The sand was spread uniformly during pouring in layers. Uniformly distributed blows of about 20 numbers using a standard 4.5  kg rammer falling though a height of 45  cm were also given to level of compacted sand. Empty cups were placed during filling to determine the density of the sand in the cup. Several trials were done to determine the height of fall of sand to keep the uniform- ity in compaction to give the desired relative density. Figure 1 shows the pouring of sand in the test tank by raining technique. For the case of unreinforced sand, the sand was compacted in three layers of equal height. For the case of reinforced sand, coir mat was placed so that specified clearance of about 40 mm from the sides of tank was maintained in order to avoid side friction. Sridhar and Prathap Kumar Geo-Engineering (2018) 9:11 Page 4 of 14 Fig. 1 Pouring of sand in test tank Fig. 2 Plan and section of placement of number layers of coir mat in sand The configuration of coir mat reinforcement used in the investigation was shown in Fig. 2 placed in number of layers NL = 1, 2, 3 and 4 and the details of the parameters are as shown in the Table  3. To represent the practical situation regarding ratio of model footing and tank size used, followed the procedure as per IS: 1888 (1982) and the load increment was maintained until the rate of settlement reduced to a value 0.02 mm/min. The footing of diameter 100  mm was placed on the surface of the sand bed and cyclic load was applied using hydraulic actuator placed vertically in line with load cell and piston. Both reinforced and unreinforced sand beds were subjected to cyclic Sridhar and Prathap Kumar Geo-Engineering (2018) 9:11 Page 5 of 14 Table 3 Configuration of coir mat reinforcement Reinforcement distribution Excitation parameters Type of Rein- u/B b/B h/B No. of layers (NL) Waveform type Frequency Hz Cyclic pressure kPa forcement Reinforced 0.3, 0.6, 1.0 4.4 – 1, 2, 3, 4 Sine 0.5, 1.0, 1.5 100, 200, 300 Fig. 3 Schematic diagram of test setup used in the present investigation loading. The excitation values such as type of wave form, frequency and cyclic pres - sure were fed as input values using MOVICON 11.2 software. In the present investigation, half wave sine form was used throughout the loading of the model footing. Tests were done under a constant cyclic pressure of 100, 200 and 300 kPa and under each constant cyclic pressure; the frequency of the sine wave was varied from 0.5, 1 and 1.5  Hz. Figure  3 shows schematic diagram of entire test setup used in the present investigation. For very lightly loaded footings the natural frequency is almost independent of the footing size for a given load intensity, but for high loads it is almost inversely proportional to the foundation width. For inundated foundations the natural frequencies were again almost independent of the footing shape at low load intensities, but the frequencies were only a little over half those on the dry sand. At high loads the frequency was again roughly inversely proportional to the footing width but was not nearly so low relative to the value for a corresponding footing on dry sand as it was at low load intensities [23]. Series of such test were conducted for reinforced sand bed with number of lay- ers being varied from 1, 2, 3 and 4. The layers of mat reinforcement were positioned at specified locations and load tests were done until the cyclic settlements showed sudden increase indicating significant penetration of the model footing after certain Sridhar and Prathap Kumar Geo-Engineering (2018) 9:11 Page 6 of 14 number of load cycles. Tests results were plotted as variation of number of cycles on log scale with corresponding cyclic settlements to determine and analyze the effect of number of layers as well as to assess the comparative performance of coir mat rein- forced sand with unreinforced sand. Cyclic load settlement behavior of unreinforced sand The results of the cyclic loading test on model footings resting on unreinforced sand and coir mat reinforced sand with coir mat placed at different configurations have been presented. Analysis of the results under different excitation parameters such as effect of frequency, effect of amplitude of loading in terms of cyclic pressure is determined. The test results recorded for model footing resting on unreinforced sand and at excitation parameters such as frequency (F) = 0.5  Hz and cyclic pressure (CP) = 100, 200 and 300  kPa. Figure  4 shows the typical variation of number of cycles versus cumulative cyclic settlement, henceforth called as cyclic settlement at F = 0.5, 1 and 1.5  Hz and at CP = 100, 200 and 300  kPa. It can be seen from Fig.  4 that for a con- stant frequency of 0.5 Hz, increase in cyclic pressure increases settlement. From these plots, it can be inferred that for a given frequency and cyclic pressure, the rate of set- tlement increases after a certain number of cycles are reached. The unreinforced sand is set to yield at approximately number of cycles N = 2000 corresponding to F = 0.5  Hz and CP = 100  kPa. Similar trends have been obtained for unreinforced sand tested under different frequencies and different cyclic pressures, in all these cases it can be seen that with increase in cyclic pressure and at a constant fre- quency the number of cycles required to cause yielding decreases. Figure  4 shows such a variation where it can be seen that for a given constant frequency increase in cyclic pressure causes soil to yield at a smaller number of cycles. Similarly for a constant cyclic pressure increase in frequency causes soil to yield at lower value of number of cycles. No. of cycles (N) 110100 1000 10000 F= 0.5Hz, CP 10 100 kPa F= 0.5Hz, CP 200kPa F= 0.5Hz, CP 300kPa Fig. 4 Variation of cyclic settlement with cumulative number of cycles for frequency 0.5 Hz and varying cyclic pressure for unreinforced sand Cyclic Selement Sridhar and Prathap Kumar Geo-Engineering (2018) 9:11 Page 7 of 14 Table 4 CSR values for NL = 1 and CP = 100 kPa under varying frequency CSR N=1 Settlement NL = 1; CP = 100 kPa 0.5 Hz 1.0 Hz 1.5 Hz Reinforced Unreinforced CSR Reinforced Unreinforced CSR Reinforced Unreinforced CSR 5 4000 1000 4.00 1700 500 3.40 1250 50 25.00 10 20,000 2800 7.14 15,000 1000 15.00 11,500 700 16.43 15 30,000 3800 7.89 31,000 1400 22.14 28,000 950 29.47 20 68,000 4600 14.78 51,000 1750 29.14 47,000 1300 36.15 25 100,000 5400 18.52 70,000 2500 28.00 65,000 1900 34.21 No. of cycles (N) 110 100 1000 10000 100000 1000000 Frequency= 0.5Hz NL=1 , CP100 Frequency= 0.5Hz NL=2, CP100 Frequency= 0.5Hz NL=3, CP100 Frequency= 0.5Hz NL=4, CP100 Fig. 5 Variation of cyclic settlement with number of cycles for different layer configuration at CP = 100 kPa and F = 0.5 Hz Cyclic load settlement behaviour of reinforced sand Cyclic load were also applied for model footings resting on reinforced sand bed by plac- ing single layer, two layers, three layers and four layers as per the test configuration shown in Table 4, to determine effect of frequency and amplitude of cyclic loading. The results were analyzed to determine optimum number of layers, that are most beneficial in reducing the settlement as well as increasing the number of load cycles before yielding and hence to increase the cyclic load carrying capacity of reinforced sand. Figure  5 shows typical variation of cyclic settlement with number of cycles for differ - ent layers configuration used in the present study. It can be seen from all these figures that for a constant frequency and constant amplitude in terms of CP the sand reinforced with NL = 2 has been more effective in resisting cyclic load compared to NL = 1, 3 and 4 layers. The sand with NL = 1 is the least resistant as the cyclic settlement recorded cor- responding to different cycles of loading is significantly large when compared with 2, 3 and 4 layers. Further the cyclic settlement recorded for reinforced sand with NL = 3 and 4 shows marginal variations in cyclic settlement with number of cycles between them. Cyclic selement Sridhar and Prathap Kumar Geo-Engineering (2018) 9:11 Page 8 of 14 Also for a given number of load cycles the cyclic settlement recorded for NL = 3 and 4 are higher than those recorded for NL = 1 layer for a constant frequency and cyclic pressure. The reason for the above trend can be attributed to the following: It is known that provision of reinforcement increases stiffness of the sand. Further mat or grid form of reinforcement provides inter locking effect, by locking the sand particles in the space/ grid of the reinforcement. This restrains the lateral movement of the soil particles, caus - ing increased cyclic resistance of reinforced sand. However, the increased cyclic resist- ance also depends on location or position of the reinforcement below the model footing. Due to repeated load cycles on the geogrid-reinforced soil beds, the soil particles are locked into the apertures of mat during the loading stage and prevent the full recov- ery of elastic and time-dependent strains to develop during the unloading stage. This is concept is known as “Dynamic Interlock”. The dynamic interlock in soil structures induces soil confining stresses as a result of the compaction process, which strength - ens the reinforced soil medium. In the present experimental investigation number of layers were varied from 1, 2, 3 and 4 by varying u/B = 0.3 and h/B ratio was kept con- stant = 0.5 between different layers. The trend in the results indicates that the introduc - tion of two layered reinforcement is more effective. This is due to the fact that, when two layers are placed with u/B = 0.3 and h/B = 0.5 it will lie in the probable shear failure zone below the model footing. Theoretically the depth of the shear failure zone will extend to a depth of 0.5–1.2 B, depending on angle of internal friction of compacted sand. For other layer configurations such as for NL = 3 and 4, the third and fourth layer may be located below the shear failure zone. Thus the trend in test results clearly indicates that NL = 2 is most effective in increase in cyclic resistance. However, it can also be noted that introduction of reinforcement causes a significant increase in cyclic resistance when compared to unreinforced sand as the number of load cycles required for the soil to yield is significantly larger when compared with that obtained for unreinforced sand. The rate of change of peak settlement and residual settlement reduces as the number of cycles increases and that a small reduction in amplitude (i.e. the difference between these two settlements) is also apparent. Often, the variation of settlement becomes stable after number cycles. This stabilizing response indicates that the early process of reorienta - tion of particles, causing local fill stiffening, ceases relative rapidly and the system then reaches the ‘‘plastic shakedown’’ condition defined by Werkmeister et al. [24], in which subsequent deformation is fully recovered in each cycle. These values entail that the rela - tive decrease in footing settlement for a variation of N between 1 and 2 is significantly greater than those for variation of N between 2 and 4. Despite the fact that the mass used for N = 1 and N = 2 are, respectively, two and four times of N = 1. Moghaddas Tafreshi and Khalaj [25] investigated the decrease in the settlement of the overlying soil surface under repeated loads can be reduced significantly by using geogrid reinforcement, while the effectiveness of the reinforcement was decreased by increasing the number of rein - forcement layers. Effect of frequency of cyclic loading Figure  6 shows effect of frequency of cyclic loading with number of layers. It clearly shows that with NL = 2 layers there is a significant reduction in settlement with a Sridhar and Prathap Kumar Geo-Engineering (2018) 9:11 Page 9 of 14 No. of cycles (N) 110 100 100010000 100000 1000000 NL=1 , CP100, F=0.5Hz NL=1, CP 100, F=1Hz NL=1, CP 100, F=1.5Hz NL=2, CP100, F=0.5Hz NL=2, CP100, F=1 Hz 20 NL=2, CP 100, F=1.5 Hz UR, CP 100, F= 0.5Hz Fig. 6 Eec ff t of frequency of cyclic loading and number of layers No. of cycles (N) 110100 1000 10000 100000 1000000 NL=1 , CP 100kPa, F=0.5Hz NL=1 , CP 200kPa, F=0.5Hz NL=2, CP 100kPa,F=0.5Hz NL=2, CP 200kPa, F=0.5Hz UR, CP 100 kPa, F=0.5Hz UR, CP 200kPa, F=0.5Hz Fig. 7 Eec ff t of cyclic pressure (amplitude) of cyclic loading and number of layers corresponding increase in number of load cycles required to cause yield. Further it can also be seen that the cyclic resistance of unreinforced sand is significantly lower than those for reinforced sand. With increase in frequency of cyclic loading the number of cycles required to cause yielding of sand decreases, which is in confirmation with earlier literatures. Effect of cyclic pressure Figure  7 shows variation of cyclic settlement with number of cycles at different cyclic pressure. It can be seen that increase in cyclic pressure/amplitude of cyclic load- ing increases the cyclic settlement for a constant frequency of 0.5  Hz. Thus increase in amplitude of cyclic loading causes the soil to yield at earlier cycles and the trend in results once again indicates that NL = 2 layers is more effective in retarding cyclic settle - ment under all excitation parameters such as frequency and amplitude of cyclic loading. Cyclic Selement Cyclic selement Sridhar and Prathap Kumar Geo-Engineering (2018) 9:11 Page 10 of 14 CSR 0.05 NL=1, F=0.5 NL=2, F=0.5 0.1 NL=3, F=0.5 NL=4, F=0.5 0.15 0.2 0.25 Fig. 8 CSR with s/B for different layer configuration under F = 0.5 Hz and CP = 100 kPa CSR 0.05 0.1 0.15 NL=1, F=0.5 0.2 NL=2, F=0.5 0.25 Fig. 9 CSR with s/B for different layer configuration under F = 0.5 Hz and CP = 300 kPa Effect of frequency and amplitude of loading on cyclic settlement ratio To analyze the effect of introduction of different number of layers of coir mat and to determine optimum number of layers which is more effective in increasing the cyclic resistance of reinforced sand, the cyclic stress ratio (CSR) was calculated for differ - ent number of cycles. Table  4 shows typical calculated values of CSR corresponding to NL = 1, CP = 100 kPa and varying frequencies. Figure 8 shows variation of CSR with s/B under different frequencies and different cyclic pressure obtained for different layer con - figurations. Majority of the trend in results indicate that CSR increases with increase in s/B ratio for all layer configurations. It can also be seen that for a given s/B ratio max - imum CSR is obtained for NL = 2 layers and marginal variations have been indicated with regard to CSR values for NL = 3 and 4 layers. Figure 9 shows values of CSR with s/B for single and double Layer Configuration under F = 0.5 Hz and CP = 300 kPa. s/B s/B Sridhar and Prathap Kumar Geo-Engineering (2018) 9:11 Page 11 of 14 However, at higher frequency and at higher cyclic pressure CSR reaches maximum with a subsequent reduction in CSR with increase in s/B ratio. This trend in higher CSR at lower s/B ratio when frequency and amplitude of loading is higher is due to the effect of particle being rearranged under initial rigorous shaking to achieve higher compaction at lower values of settlement- leading to higher initial cyclic resistance. Continued shak- ing ultimately breaks the confining effect provided by compacted sand and hence CSR reduces and shows decreasing trend with increasing s/B. However, CSR values for all s/B ratios lies in the range higher than 50 indicating cyclic resistance of reinforced sand bed is significantly high when compared with cyclic resistance of unreinforced sand. To confirm the above trend in variation of CSR, the stiffness of reinforced sand bed were also calculated in terms of cycles per mm. The calculated values of stiffness obtained for both unreinforced and reinforced sand with NL = 1, 2, 3 and 4 layers and at CP = 100, 200 and 300 kPa at a constant frequency of 0.5 Hz. Figure  10 shows typical variation of stiffness with number of cycles for different layer configuration under different excitation parameters. It can be seen that stiffness increases with increase in number of cycles and stiffness of unreinforced sand is sig - nificantly lower when compared with reinforced sand. The trend in results indicates only marginal variation in stiffness when sand is reinforced with NL = 3 and 4 layers. Further the stiffness obtained corresponding to NL = 3 and 4 layers is lower than those obtained for NL = 2 layers at all excitation parameters of cyclic loading but greater than that obtained for unreinforced sand. Analysis of trend in results in terms of CSR and stiffness of reinforced sand bed have indicated the following: (i) The performance of the reinforced sand bed is better than unreinforced sand bed under cyclic loading and at all excitation parameters such as fre- quency and amplitude of loading.(ii) Increase in frequency and amplitude of cyclic load- ing increases the settlement of the footing, but the corresponding settlement obtained for unreinforced sand is significantly larger—indicating reinforcing sand using grid/mat type of reinforcement increases the efficiency and performance of foundations to resist cyclic or repeated loads. (iii) The optimum number of layers corresponds to NL = 2 45000 unreinforced 40000 NL=1 35000 NL=2 NL=3 NL=4 0.00 1000.00 2000.00 3000.00 4000.00 5000.00 6000.00 7000.00 Stiffness Fig. 10 Stiffness with no. of cycles for different layer configuration under F = 0.5 Hz and CP = 100 kPa No. of cycles (N) Sridhar and Prathap Kumar Geo-Engineering (2018) 9:11 Page 12 of 14 which causes significant retardation in settlement and also causes significant increase in number of cycles required to cause yielding of soil. (iv) The optimum number of layers required for cyclic loading is also same as that required for static loading, (as per studies conducted by Binquet and Lee [26]; Akinmusuru and Akinbolade [27]). (v) The perfor - mance of reinforced sand bed mainly depends on location of the reinforcement. By placing NL = 2 layers, reinforcement are enclosed in the shear zone below the foot- ing and helps to restrain the soil deformation that occurs in the failure zone to a great extent. Hence efficiency of reinforced sand bed under cyclic loading becomes maximum under all excitation parameters with NL = 2 layers. Two important observations from this plot are: Introducing of Reinforcement, increased with the number of layers at all confining pressures; Increase in confining pressure resulted in the decrease in the benefit for any precise amount of reinforcement. These results are in accord with the observations by Haeri et al. [28]. Increase in the per - formance due to reinforcement is nonlinear with the increase in quantity of reinforce- ment, the nonlinearity decreasing with the increase in confining pressure. Conclusions The behavior of model footings resting on coir mat reinforced sand bed as well as unre - inforced sand bed was studied. Cyclic load was applied till sufficient number of load cycles was reached to cause yielding of soil. Reinforcement parameters such as number of layers and excitation parameters such as frequency and amplitude of cyclic loading were studied by compact the sand to a relative density of 60%. Based on the analysis of test results the following conclusions are drawn: 1. Structures that are sensitive to settlement, as well as structures that are subjected to repeated or cyclic loading, the load carrying capacity can be increased and the settle- ment can be decreased to a much lower magnitude by reinforcing the soil using mat/ grid form of reinforcement. 2. The rate of settlement, magnitude of settlement, the number of cycles required to cause yielding of soil are a function of frequency and amplitude of cyclic loading. 3. For given amplitude of cyclic loading, increase in number of layers of reinforcement, decreases the settlement as well as the number of load cycles required to cause yield- ing increases. Similar trend has been obtained for a given value of frequency of cyclic load. 4. Under a constant frequency and for a given reinforcement configuration, increase in amplitude of cyclic loading increases the settlement under same number of load cycles. Similarly for constant amplitude of loading, increase in frequency of cyclic load increases the settlement. 5. Increase in amplitude and frequency of cyclic load increases the footing settlement irrespective of increase in number of layers. 6. With increasing number of layers, the number of cycles required to cause failure increases—indicating increase in load carrying capacity of reinforced sand. However, the footing settlement under the same number of cycles increases, with increase in number of layers greater than two layers. Thus the efficiency of the reinforcement is decreased by increase in mass of the reinforcement. Sridhar and Prathap Kumar Geo-Engineering (2018) 9:11 Page 13 of 14 7. The location of the reinforcement below the footing plays an important role in increasing the performance of reinforced sand bed under cyclic loading. Efficiency of reinforced sand is best when reinforcement is placed in such a way that it is able to intercept the shear failure zone to its maximum thereby causing maximum lateral restraint of deformed zone below the model footing. 8. Variation in terms of cyclic settlement ratio and stiffness of reinforced sand indicates that introduction of the reinforcement increases the stiffness of the sand significantly and hence decreases the settlement when compared to the reinforcement. 9. The rate of footing settlement is significantly low at lower load cycles (between 0 and 1000 cycles) for reinforced sand when compared with unreinforced sand. Author details 1 2 Department of Civil Engineering, Sri Venkateswara College of Engineering, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India. Department of Civil Engg., RNS Institute of Technology, Bangalore, Karnataka, India. Authors’ contributions RS and MTPK carried out investigation on shear strength parameters of coir fiber reinforced sand and coir mat reinforced sand. Both authors read and approved the final manuscript. Competing interest The authors declare that they have no competing interests. Ethics approval and consent to participate Not applicable Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Received: 6 May 2017 Accepted: 30 May 2018 References 1. Vesic AS (1973) Analysis of ultimate loads of shallow foundations. Soil Mech Found Division ASCE 94(SM3):661–688 2. Gray DH, Ohashi H (1983) Mechanics of fiber reinforcement in sand. J Geotech Eng 109(3):335–353 3. Chang DT, Wang WJ, and Wang YH. (1998) Laboratory study of the dynamic test system on geogrid reinforced subgrade—soil. In: Proc. 6th I.C. on geosynthetics, vol 2 Atlanta, USA, pp 967–970 4. Gray DH, Al-Refeai T (1986) Behavior of fabric-versus fiber-reinforced sand. Int J Geotech Eng 112:804–820 5. Guido VA, Chang DK, Sweeney MA (1986) Comparison of geogrid and geotextile reinforced earth slabs. Can Geo- tech J 23:435–440 6. Raymond GP, Comos FE (1978) Repeated load testing of a model plane strain footing. Can Geotech J 15:190–201 7. Chen X, Zhang J, Li Z (2014) Shear behaviour of a geogrid-reinforced coarse-grained soil based on large-scale triaxial tests. Geotext Geomembr 42(4):312–328 8. Das BM, Shin EC (1994) Strip foundation on geogrid-reinforced clay: behavior under cyclic loadings. Geotext Geomembr 13:657–667 9. Gray DH, Maher MH (1989) Admixture stabilization of sands with discrete, randomly distributed fibers. In: Proc., XII int. conf. on soil mech. and found. engg, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil 10. Raymond GP (2002) Reinforced ballast behavior subjected to repeated load. Geotext Geomembr 20:39–61 11. El Sawwaf M, Nazir AK (2010) Behavior of repeatedly loaded rectangular footings resting on reinforced sand. Alexan- dria Eng J 49(4):349–356. https ://doi.org/10.1016/j.aej.2010.07.002 12. Omar MT, Das BM, Puri VK, Yen SC (1993) Ultimate bearing capacity of shallow foundations on sand with geogrid reinforcement. Can Geotech J 30:545–549 13. Das BM, Omar MT (1994) The effects of foundation width on model tests for the bearing capacity of sand with geogrid reinforcement. Geotech Geol Eng 12:133–141 14. Das BM, Puri VK, Omar MT, Evgin E. (1996) Bearing capacity of strip foundation on geogrid reinforced sand-scale effects in model tests. In: Proceedings of the sixth international conference on offshore and polar engineering, vol I, Los Angeles, USA, pp 527–530 15. El Sawwaf M (2007) Behavior of strip footing on geogrid-reinforced sand over a soft clay slope. Geotext Geomembr 25:50–60 16. El Sawwaf M (2009) Experimental and numerical study of eccentrically loaded strip footings resting on reinforced sand. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 135(10):1509–1518 Sridhar and Prathap Kumar Geo-Engineering (2018) 9:11 Page 14 of 14 17. Jewell RA (1980) Some effects of reinforcement on the mechanical behaviour of soils, Ph.D. thesis. University of Cambridge, England 18. McGown A, Yeo KC, Yogarajah I (1990) Identification of a dynamic interlock mechanism. In: Proceedings Interna- tional Conference on Reinforced Soil. Thomas Telford, London, UK, pp 377–380 19. Shin EC, Kim DH, Das BM (2002) Geogrid-reinforced railroad bed settlement due to cyclic load. Geotech Geol Eng 20:261–271 20. Moghaddas Tafreshi SN, Dawson AR (2010) Comparison of bearing capacity of a strip footing on sand with geocell and with planar forms of geotextile reinforcement. Geotext Geomembr 28(1):72–84 21. Naeini SA, Gholampoor N (2014) Cyclic behaviour of dry silty sand reinforced with a geotextile. Geotext Geomembr 42(6):611–619 22. Sridhar R, Prathapkumar MT (2016) Comparison on shear strength of coir mat and coir fiber reinforced sand. Electr J Geotech Eng 22(03):1015–1023 23. East wood W. (1953) The factors which affect the natural frequency of vibration of foundations, and the effect of vibrations on the bearing power of foundations on sand. Struct Eng 31(3) 24. Werkmeister S, Steven BD, Alabaster DJ, Arnold G, Oeser M. (2005) 3D Finite element analysis of accelerated pave- ment test results from New Zealand’s CAPTIF facility, bearing capacity of roads, railways and airfields. In: Proceedings of the 7th international symposium on the bearing capacity of roads and airfields (BCRA), June 24–26, Trondheim 25. Moghaddas Tafreshi SN, Khalaj O (2008) Laboratory tests of small-diameter HDPE pipes buried in reinforced sand under repeated load. Geotext Geomembr 26(2):145–163 26. Binquet J, Lee KL (2002) Bearing capacity tests on reinforced earth slabs. J Geotech Eng Div ASCE 101:1241–1255 27. Akinmusuru JO, Akinbolade JA (1981) Stability of loaded footings on reinforced soil. J Geotech Eng Div ASCE 107(6):819–827 28. Haeri SM, Noorzad R, Oskoorouchi AM (2000) Eec ff t of geotextile reinforcement on the mechanical behaviour of sand. Geotext Geomembr 18(6):385–402

Journal

International Journal of Geo-Engineering – Springer Journals

Published: Dec 1, 2018

There are no references for this article.