See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/296455569

NUMERICAL MODELLING OF SOIL

REINFORCEMENT USING GEOGRIDS
Conference Paper February 2016

READS

74

1 author:
A. B. Salahudeen
Ahmadu Bello University
14 PUBLICATIONS 12 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE

All in-text references underlined in blue are linked to publications on ResearchGate,

letting you access and read them immediately.

Available from: A. B. Salahudeen

Retrieved on: 24 April 2016

Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Engineering

and Technology Research February 23 - 25, 2016 ISBN: 978-2902-58-6 Volume 4

NUMERICAL MODELLING OF SOIL REINFORCEMENT USING GEOGRIDS

Salahudeen, A. B.* and Sadeeq, J. A.**
*Samaru College of Agriculture, Division of Agricultural Colleges, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Nigeria
**Department of Civil Engineering, Ahmadu Bello University, Zaria, Nigeria
Corresponding Author: basalahudeen@gmail.com

Abstract
This study investigated the use of geosynthetics for ground improvement based on numerical analysis using PLAXIS
software. Owing to the low shear strength and excessive settlement of soft soils, geosynthetics materials were used to
reinforce the soft soil taking advantage of their good tensile and compressive strengths. Geosynthetics were applied in
varying locations where shear stresses are expected to be generated. The reinforced mechanism of geosynthetics was
analysed based on modelling outputs and results. Output results from the PLAXIS software showed a significant
decrease in displacement after reinforcing the soil with geosynthetic materials. The total displacement in the
unreinforced slope is 569.00 mm which reduced to 65.80 mm when reinforced with geogrids. This reduction is over 800 %
-3
of the original total settlement. The shear strains increased from 9.71 x 10 % for the unreinforced slope embankment to
-3
29.13 x 10 % when the slope was reinforced. Based on the results of this study, it was concluded that geosynthetics
could be used as soil reinforcement materials to improve the shear strength of the soil and reduce its settlement
potential significantly.
KEYWORDS: Geosynthetics, Soil reinforcement, Shear strength, Settlement, Numerical modelling
Geosynthetics has been defined by Holtz (2001) as a
planar product manufactured from a polymeric
material used with soil, rock, earth, or other
geotechnical-related material as an integral part of a
civil engineering project, structure, or system. Most
common types of geosynthetic include; geotextiles,
geomembranes, geogrids, geocomposites, geofoams,
geocells and geotubes. Geosynthetics have been
increasingly used in geotechnical and environmental
engineering for the last four decades (Palmeira et al.,
2008). Over the years, these products have helped
designers and contractors to solve several types of
engineering problems where the use of conventional
construction materials would be restricted or
considerably more expensive. There is a significant
number of geosynthetic types and geosynthetic
applications in geotechnical and environmental
engineering. This study examined the advances on the
use of these materials in slope embankment
reinforcement only. A convenient classification system
for geosynthetics is shown in Plate1.A numerical model
is a mathematical simulation of a real physical process.
There are generally two types of analysis that are used
in industry: 2-D modelling, and 3-D modelling. While 2D modelling conserves simplicity and allows the
analysis to be run on a relatively normal computer, it
tends to yield less accurate results. 3-D modelling,
however, produces more accurate results while

Introduction
Soil is aweak structural material in tension. Reinforced
soil is a generic term that is applied to structures or
systems constructed by placing reinforcing elements
(e.g., steel strips, plastic grids, or geotextile sheets) in
soil to provide improved tensile resistance. Reinforced
soil structures are very cost-effective due to readily
availability of the reinforcements which explains why
the concept has emerged as one of the most exciting
and innovative civil engineering technologies in recent
times (Christopher et al., 1990). Reinforced soil walls
and slopes are cost-effective soil retaining structures
which can tolerate much larger settlements than
reinforced concrete walls.
By placing tensile
reinforcing elements (inclusions) in the soil, the
strength of the soil can be improved significantly such
that the vertical face of the soil/ reinforcement system
is essentially self supporting. Use of a facing system to
prevent soil raveling between the reinforcing elements
allows very steep slopes and vertical walls to be safely
constructed. In some cases, the inclusions can also
withstand bending or shear stresses providing
additional stability to the system (Christopher et al.,
1990).

345

sacrificing the ability to run on all but the fastest

computers effectively. Within each of these modelling
schemes, the programmer can insert numerous
algorithms (functions) which may make the system
behave linearly or non-linearly. Linear systems are far
less complex and generally do not take into account
plastic deformation. Non-linear systems do account for
plastic deformation, and many also are capable of
testing a material all the way to fracture (Widas, 1997).

bearing capacity characteristics with the variation in

the footing size.
High performance parallel computing is gradually
becoming a main-stream tool in geotechnical
simulations (e.g., Bielak et al. 2000; Yang 2002; Lu et al.
2004; Peng et al. 2004; Lu 2006). The need for high
fidelity and for modelling of large three-dimensional
(3D) spatial configurations is motivating this direction
of research (Lu et al. 2013). Finite element method
(FEM) consists of a computer model of a material or
design that is stressed and analyzed for specific results.
It is used in new product design, and existing product
refinement (Widas 1997). According to Barbour and
Krahn (2004), the role of modelling within geotechnical
engineering practice was clearly illustrated by
Professor John Burland from Imperial College, London
in his 1987 Nash Lecture, entitled The Teaching of Soil
Mechanics a Personal View (Burland 1987).

Small-scale model footing tests produce higher values

for the bearing capacities than those of theoretical
equations and therefore they should not be used for
the design of full-scale footings without a reduction
(Cerato and Lutenegger, 2007; Dewaiker and
Mohapatro, 2003). The difference in performance
between the actual large and/or full scaled soil footings
and the model footing tests should be considered. The
relationship between the tests with small and largescaled footing is known as the scale effect in
geotechnical engineering. Siddiquee et al. (1999)
reported that the scale effect is the variation in the

Plate1: Types of geosynthetic materials

critical point at several places. Embankments are
typically built by compacting earthen materials in
place, so the compaction properties of the soil are very
important for stability and performance. The
compressibility and shear strength are also important
measures for the compacted material. The
embankment fill was assumed to be a purely frictional
granular soil with a friction angle, is 30, dilatancy

Materials and Methods

Materials
Embankment fill parameters: An embankment usually
refers to an earthen structure that is used to raise the
elevation of the surrounding area. For these studies,
embankment is done on a slope to strengthen the

346

angle is 0 and a unit weight is 20 kN/m3 The friction

angle of the fill material has some effects on the
ultimate height of the embankment but a lower friction
angle would have very little effect on the time
dependent deformation of the embankment and
reinforcement since the creep deformations are
governed by the viscoelastic properties of the
geosynthetics and viscoplastic properties of the
foundation soils. Table 1 show the properties of sand
used in the embankment.

which is the combination of the elastic and plastic

theories obtained from mechanics of material. The
appropriate elasto-plastic constitutive law for the soil
continuum, the geometric modelling of the contact
zone and other parts along with the numerical step by
step simulation, are the major parts of the numerical
models.
Plaxis 2D: In this study, foundation settlement was
modelled by the use of Plaxis software program based
on finite element method. Plaxis 2D is a finite element
package used for the two-dimensional analysis of
deformation and stability in geotechnical engineering.
It uses advanced soil constitutive models for the
simulation of the non-linear, time dependent and
anisotropic behaviour of soils and rocks. Plaxis 2D
models the geogrids, the embankment soil and the
interaction between the geogrid structure and the soil.
Soil layers and foundation structure parameters are
inputted into Plaxis and the construction stages, loads
and boundary conditions are defined in an already
defined geometry cross-section containing the soil
model then the Plaxis automatically generates the
unstructured 2D finite element meshes with options of
global and local mesh refinements. Using its calculation
facilities, Plaxis 2D will undergo a calculation process
and present the calculation and model outputs which
can be accessed in animation and/or numerical forms
(Plaxis 2D manual 2012). The parameters used in
numerical modelling are in Table 1.

Geosynthetic: The geosynthetic used for the

construction of embankment was a geogrid, which are
primarily used for reinforcement; they are formed by a
regular network of tensile elements with apertures of
sufficient size to interlock with surrounding fill
material. The geogrid has an axial stiffness (EA)
properties of 73 kN/m
Table 1: Embankment Fill Properties
PARAMETERS
VALUES
3

Unsaturated Unit Weight

17 kN/m

Saturated Unit Weight

20 kN/m

Permeability horizontal and vertical

1.000 m/day

Reference Youngs Modulus

1300 kN/m

Poissons Ratio

0.3

Cohesion

5 kN/m

Friction Angle

30

Dilatancy Angle

Interface Strength

0.8

Results and Discussions

Plaxis outputs of embankment models
When the geometry model is complete, the finite
element model (mesh) can be generated. PLAXIS
allows for a fully automatic mesh generation
procedures, in which the geometry is automatically
divided into element of the basic element type and
compatible structural elements (e.g. geogrids). The
mesh generation takes full account of the position of
points and lines in the geometry model, so that the
exact position of layers, loads and structures is
reflected by the finite element mesh. The generation
process is based on a robust triangulation principle
that searches for optimized triangles, which results in
an unstructured mesh. The embankment models are
shown in Figures 1 to 4. This slopes are without any
surcharge load.

Methods
Numerical modelling: The available theory for
elasticity was developed and established on the basis
of homogenous and isotropic behaviour of
construction materials like steel, iron, rubber (Sinha,
2013). The strong ionic bond in between the particles
holds the elastic property within the elastic limit. Soil,
on the other hand, is an anisotropic, non-homogenous,
three-phase material, where a little (cohesive soil) or
no (granular) bonding force in between the particles
exists. Therefore, the behaviour of soil mass, which is a
combination of a number of discrete particles, cannot
be modelled by the pure elastic or plastic theories.
Hence, the researcher represents the soil stress-strain
constitutive behaviour by means of elasto-plastic
constitutive model (modified Mohr-Coulomb model),

347

Figure 1: Embankment model without reinforcement

Figure 2: Reinforced embankment model

348

Figure 3: Generated mesh for non reinforced embankment

Figure 4: Generated mesh for reinforced embankment

349

also involve structural elements for which structure

forces are calculated. The output results for the
unreinforced and reinforced embankments including
stresses and displacements are shown in Figures 5 to
14.

Analysis of the Effectiveness of Geosynthetic Material

on an Embankment
The main output quantities of a finite element
calculation are the displacement at the nodes and the
stresses at the stress points. The finite element models
Output for unreinforced embankments

Figure 5: Deformed mesh of unreinforced embankment

350

Figure 6: Total stresses distribution of unreinforced embankment

Figure 7: Total displacement of unreinforced embankment

Figure 8: Vertical displacement of unreinforced embankment

351

Figure 9: Horizontal displacement of unreinforced embankment

Output for reinforced embankments

Figure 10: Deformation mesh of reinforced embankment

352

Figure 11: Total stresses of reinforced embankment

Figure 12: Total displacement of reinforced embankment

353

Figure 13: Horizontal displacement of reinforced embankment

Figure 14: Vertical displacement of reinforced embankment

Comparison of settlement between the embankment
with and without geogrids as clearly shown in Figures

354

5 to 14 indicated that the use of geogrids in slope

embankment reduces the settlement of the
embankment fill materials. The total displacement in

the unreinforced slope is 569.00 mm which reduced to

65.80 mm when reinforced with geogrids. This
reduction is over 800 % of the original total
settlement. This shows that the use of geogrids could
be very useful in reducing settlement of embankment
of slopes and geosynthetic materials can complement
soils that are weak in tension. It can increase the
shear strength by reducing the pore water pressures
within the slope during rainy season it also prevents
the migration of soil or sometimes called the internal
erosion within the slope. Geosynthetic reinforces the
soil along potential sliding zones or planes.

reinforcements placed under the surcharge and not in

full length as in the first case. Results of mesh
deformation and shear strain distributions (see Figures
15 to 18) show that that there are serious
improvements in the reinforced slopes compared with
those that are unreinforced. The total displacement
(settlement) in the unreinforced slope embankment is
306.47 mm which reduced to 192.27 mm when the
slope was reinforced. The shear strains increased from
-3
9.71 x 10 % for the unreinforced slope embankment
-3
to 29.13 x 10 % when the slope was reinforced
knowing that the higher the shear strains the lower will
be the deformation tendencies and the lower will be
the displacement (settlement).

Embankments with surcharge load

The modelling procedure was repeated with an applied
2
surcharge load of 100 kN/m with the geogrid

Figure 15: Deformed mesh for the loaded unreinforced embankment

355

Figure 16: Deformed mesh for the loaded reinforced embankment

Figure 17: Shear Strain for the loaded unreinforced embankment

356

Figure 18: Shear Strain for the loaded reinforced embankment

Conclusions

Bielak, J., Hisada, Y., Bao, H., Xu, J., and Ghattas, O.
(2000). "One- vs two- or three-dimensional
effects in sedimentary valleys." Proceedings
of 12th World Conference on Earthquake
Engineering, New Zealand, February.

Based on the analysis of the results of this study, the

following conclusions were drawn:
1. The stability analysis of embankment of
geosynthetic material reinforcement by using
Finite Element Method (Plaxis 8.6) gives
acceptably approximate results which can be
determined in real case situation and can
simulate construction stages as in real physical
scenario.
2. The slopes with geosynthetic material
reinforcement are safer and yielded better
results of settlement and shear strains than the
slope of embankments without geosynthetic
material reinforcements.
3. Insertion of a geogrid reinforcement layers at
a suitable location within the slope fill
considerably improves the load carrying
capacity of footings located on such slopes.
4. Geogrids could be very useful in reducing
settlement of embankment of slopes and
geosynthetic materials can complement low
strength soils.

Burland, J.B. (1987). Nash Lecture: The Teaching of

Soil Mechanics a Per-sonal View.
th
Proceedings, 9 ECSMFE, Dublin, Vol. 3, pp
1427-1447.
Cerato, A. B. and Lutenegger, A. J. (2007). Scale effects
of shallow foundation bearing capacity on
granular material. Journal of Geotechnical
and Geoenvironmental Engineering, ASCE,
133(10), 1192-1202.
Christopher, B. R., Gill, S. A., Giroud, J. P., Juran, I.,
Mitchell, J. K., Schlossser, F. and Dunnicliff, J.
(1990). Reinforced soil structures design and
construction guidelines. Report No. FHWARO-89-043
PB91-1 912 69, Office of
Engineering and Highway Operations, R&D
Final Report Federal Highway Administration
6300 Georgetown Pike McLean, Virginia
22101-2296, USA.

References

Dewaiker, D. M. and Mohapatro, B. G. (2003).

Computation of bearing capacity factor NTerzaghis
mechanism.
International
Journal of Geomechanics, 3(1), 123-128.

Barbour, S. L. and Krahn, J. (2004). Numerical

Modelling Prediction or Process? Geotechnical
News, December 2004, GEOSPEC.

357

Holtz,

R. D (2001) Geosynthetic for Soil

Reinforcement The Ninth spencer J.
Buchanan Lecture, Department of Civil &
Environmental Engineering, university of
Washington.

Lu, J., Peng, J., Elgamal, A., Yang, Z., and Law, K. H.
(2004). Parallel finite element modeling of
earthquake
liquefaction
response.
International
Journal
of
Earthquake
Engineering and Engineering Vibration, 3(1),
23-37.
Lu, J. (2006). "Parallel finite element modelling of
earthquake site response and liquefaction,"
Published PhD Thesis, Department of
Structural
Engineering,
University
of
California, San Diego, La 19Jolla, CA.
Lu, J., Elgamal, A., Yan, L, Law, K. H. And Conte, J. P.
(2013). Large scale numerical modelling in
geotechnical
earthquake
engineering.
University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA
92093-0085, USA.
Palmeira, E. M., Tatsuoka, F., Bathurst, R. J., Stevenson,
P. E. and Zornberg, J. G. (2008). Advances in
Geosynthetics Materials and Applications for
Soil Reinforcement and Environmental
Protection Works. Electronic Journal of
Geotechnical Engineering (EJGE), Bouquet.
Siddiquee, M. S. A., Tanaka, T., Tatsuoka, F., Tani, K.
and Morimoto, T. (1999). Numerical
simulation of bearing capacity characteristics
of strip footing on sand. Soils and
Foundations, 39 (4), 93-109.
Peng, J., Lu, J., Law, K. H., and Elgamal, A. (2004). "Par
CYCLIC: Finite element modelling of
earthquake liquefaction response on parallel
computers."
International
Journal
for
Numerical and Analytical Methods in
Geomechanics, 28(12), 1207-1232.
Widas, P. (1997). Introduction to Finite Element
Analysis. Virginia Tech Material Science
and Engineering.
Yang, Z. (2002). "Development of geotechnical
capabilities into Open Sees platform and
their applications in soil-foundationstructure interaction analyses." Published
PhD Thesis, University of California, Davis,
CA.

358