Geo-China 2016 GSP 259 210

Dynamic Characteristics Study of Geosynthetic-Reinforced Soil under Cyclic Loading

Wei Shi1; Tao Lu2; Longlong Zhang3; and Yue Pan4

1
School of Civil Engineering, Qingdao Technological Univ., Qingdao 266033, China. E-mail:
susan.sw@163.com
2
School of Civil Engineering, Qingdao Technological Univ., Qingdao 266033, China. E-mail:
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tufts University on 09/27/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

313892957@qq.com
3
School of Civil Engineering, Qingdao Technological Univ., Qingdao 266033, China. E-mail:
897334337@qq.com
4
School of Civil Engineering, Qingdao Technological Univ., Qingdao 266033, China. E-mail:
852469349@qq.com

Abstract: The technology of geosynthetic reinforced soil has been widely used in the structural
strengthening of highway subgrade. It can improve the bearing and deformation resistance
capacity of the subgrade effectively, prolong the service period of the road to ensure the safety
and comfort of the vehicle. So far, the quasi-static method to design the geosynthetic reinforced
subgrade under the action of traffic load is not perfect enough. The study on dynamic property,
design theory and parameters lags far behind the application and improvement of the
geosynthetic reinforced soil technology. This paper used the dynamic triaxial test in laboratory
by taking different kinds of soil (clay and silt), different confining pressure (50kPa, 100kPa, and
150kPa) and different reinforcement layer (0 layer, 1 layer, and 2 layers) to study the change rule
and influence factors of dynamic modulus of elasticity. This study would provide the gist for the
improvement of dynamic design theory and parameter choice of geosynthetic reinforced
subgrade with the effect of traffic load.
Keywords: Dynamic triaxial test; Geosynthetics; Dynamic elasticity modulus.

INTRODUCTION
Traffic load is a kind of special cyclic load with randomness. At present, the main design
method of reinforced soil subgrade engineering under traffic load is pseudo static method, which
is not perfect. This paper adopted the dynamic triaxial test, used the window screening as
geosynthetics to study the dynamic characteristics of reinforced soil under cyclic load. Through
this test to analyze the deformation behavior of reinforced soil subgrade, which would provide
the basis for the design of the reinforced soil under the cyclic load.
Experiment scheme
In this experiment, in order to make the soil sample generate stress and shear stress of cyclic
periodic change, the dynamic stress of periodic change was applied to the soil sample, while its
horizontal axial stress was in a static state.

© ASCE

Geo-China 2016
 Geo-China 2016 GSP 259 211

Experimental material
Because the mesh of geogrid is large，if the geogrid was used as the reinforced material, the
accuracy of the test could not be guaranteed. In the dynamic characteristics study of the
reinforced soil, the scholars of our country have already used the window screening to replace
the geogrid and achieved the desired results. In addition, the physical parameters of the window
screening and geogrid are similar, so this experiment used the window screening to replace the
geogrid. Table 1 shows the physical parameters of the window screening.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tufts University on 09/27/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Table 1. Physical parameters of the window screening

Tensile strength（kN/m Modulus of
Thickness(mm)
） elasticity(MPa)
0.755 0.4273 0.22
This experiment used the clay and silt of Qingdao area as the soil samples. Table 2 shows the
physical properties of the two soil samples.
Table 2. Physical properties of the clay and silt
Internal
Cohesive Modulus of Plastic
Density（ friction Poisson Plasticity
strength elasticity（ limit
kg/m³） angle ratio index
（kPa） MPa） （％）
（°）
clay 1950 45 32 0.35 10 18 17
silt 1800 24 22 0.30 15 26.3 7.6

The test sample was a kind of remodeling soil sample, its optimum water content and
maximum dry density were determined by the compaction test. Test results are shown in Figure 1
and Table 3.
1.80 1.75

1.75 1.70
Dry Density(g/cm 3 )

Dry Density(g/cm 3 )

1.70 1.65

1.65 1.60

1.60 1.55

1.55 1.50
10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34
Water Content(%) Water Content(%)

a) Clay b) Silt
Figure 1. Relationship curves of dry density and water content of two kinds of soil samples

© ASCE

Geo-China 2016
 Geo-China 2016 GSP 259 212

Table 3. The optimum moisture content and maximum dry density of soil samples

Soil sample Clay Silt

Optimal water content (%) 17 25
Maximum dry density(g/cm3) 1.80 1.73
Sample preparation
Prepared the clay and silt of corresponding water content according to the test procedure and
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tufts University on 09/27/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

the optimum water content measured by compaction test. The material of the reinforced material
was round of 36mm in diameter, a slightly smaller diameter than the specimen, so as not to
puncture the rubber membrane. For the 1 layer reinforced specimen, the reinforced material was
placed in the middle. 2 layers reinforced specimen, the reinforced materials were placed at the
same distance. The soil surface of the reinforced material was treated by the plane to avoid the
separation between the soil layer, it can also increase the friction between soil and reinforced
material.

Dynamic triaxial test parameters

DDS-70 type microcomputer controlled electromagnetic vibration three axis instrument was
chosen for this test. In the experiment, the dynamic load was simulated by the sine load, and the
vibration frequency was 1.0Hz. According to the "Foundation dynamic characteristics test code"
(GB/ T50269-97), the sum of elastic deformation and plastic deformation is 5%, which is the
failure criterion of the specimen. The test operationed under the condition of consolidation and
undrainage, consolidation stress ratio Kc=1.0. Table 4 shows the test parameters.

Table 4. Dynamic triaxial test parameters

Consoli-
Confining Reinforcement Frequenc
Type of soil dation
pressure（kPa） layer y(Hz)
ratio
Clay 50 100 150 0 1 2 1.0 1.0
Silt 50 100 150 0 1 2 1.0 1.0
As the default load unit of the dynamic triaxial test system is N, the unit need to be convert
firstly. Due to the isotropic consolidation, under three kinds of confining pressure, the maximum
loading it can bear as follows:
a) When the confining pressure was 50kPa :

πd2 3.14 × 39.12

F = 0.8 × 50kPa × = 0.8 × 0.05 × N = 48N
4 4
b) When the confining pressure was 100kPpa :

© ASCE

Geo-China 2016
 Geo-China 2016 GSP 259 213

πd2 3.14 × 39.12

F = 0.8 × 100kPa × = 0.8 × 0.1 × N = 96N
4 4
c) When the confining pressure was100kPa :
π d2 3.14 × 39.12
F = 0.8 × 200kPa × = 0.8 × 0.15 × N = 144 N
4 4
According to the calculation results, Table 5 shows the maximum and minimum values of the
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tufts University on 09/27/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

test load.

Table 5. The maximum and minimum of the dynamic load rating

Confining pressure
50 100 150
(kPa)
Maximum (N) 40 90 140
Minimum(N) 4 9 14
Installed the sample according to the test requirements after the sample preparation was
finished. Carried out the vibration test after the test system was zeroed and the test soil samples
were drained and consolidated. The vibration load of 1Hz was applied to the sample until it was
damaged.

Test result analysis

Effect of different soil on dynamic elastic modulus

160 50kPa Clay 160 50kPa Clay

50kPa Silt 50kPa Silt
140 100kPa Clay 140 100kPa Clay
100kPa Silt 100kPa Silt
120 120
150kPa Clay 150kPa Clay
150kPa Silt 150kPa Silt
100 100
Ed (Mpa)

80 80
E d(Mpa)

60 60

40 40

20 20

0 0

0.00001 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 0.00001 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1
εd εd

（a）Plain soil （d）1 layer

© ASCE

Geo-China 2016
 Geo-China 2016 GSP 259 214

180
50kPa Clay
160 50kPa Silt
100kPa Clay
140
100kPa Silt
120 150kPa Clay
150kPa Silt
100

E d(Mpa)
80

60

40
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tufts University on 09/27/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

20

0.00001 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1

εd

（c）2 layers
Figure 2. Relationship curve of dynamic elastic modulus and dynamic strain under
different soil conditions
From Figure 2, it can be seen that under the same conditions, the influence factors of the
reinforcement layer and the confining pressure were the same, the dynamic elastic modulus and
dynamic strain of silt and clay were decreased with the increase of the dynamic strain. At the
same level of dynamic strain, the dynamic elastic modulus of silty soil was higher than that of
the clay in the small strain period. The Ed~εd curve of two soil samples gradually tended to be
consistent when the dynamic strain was greater than 0.01.
Effect of the number of layers on the dynamic elastic modulus

140 Plain soil 50kPa 180

Plain soil 50kPa
One layer 50kPa One layer 50kPa
160
120 Two layers 50kPa Two layers 50kPa
Plain soil 100kPa 140 Plain soil 100kPa
100 One layer 100kPa One layer 100kPa
Two layers 100kPa 120 Two layers 100kPa
Plain soil 150kPa Plain soil 150kPa
E d(Mpa)

80
One layer 150kPa 100
E d(Mpa)

One layer 150kPa

Two layers 150kPa Two layers 150kPa
60 80

60
40
40
20
20

0 0

0.00001 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 0.00001 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1
εd εd

（a）Clay （b）Silt
Figure 3. Relationship curves of dynamic elastic modulus and dynamic strain under
different reinforcement conditions

From Figure 3, it can be seen that the dynamic elastic modulus of the reinforced soil and the
plain soil all reduced with the increase of the dynamic strain. The reinforcement had little effect
on the relationship between the dynamic elastic modulus and the dynamic strain. The effect of
improving the dynamic elastic modulus of embankment fill was not obvious.

© ASCE

Geo-China 2016
 Geo-China 2016 GSP 259 215

Effect of confining pressure on dynamic elastic modulus

Plain soil 50kPa 180

140 Plain soil 50kPa
One layer 50kPa
160 One layer 50kPa
120 Two layers 50kPa
Two layers 50kPa
Plain soil 100kPa 140 Plain soil 100kPa
One layer 100kPa
100 One layer 100kPa
Two layers 100kPa 120
Two layers 100kPa
Plain soil 150kPa
Plain soil 150kPa
E d(Mpa)

80 100

Ed (Mpa)
One layer 150kPa
One layer 150kPa
Two layers 150kPa
60
80 Two layers 150kPa
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tufts University on 09/27/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

60
40
40
20
20

0 0

0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 0.00001 0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1

0.00001 εd
εd

（a）Clay （b）Silt
Figure 4. Relationship curves between dynamic elastic modulus and dynamic strain
under different confining pressures
From Figure 4, it can be seen that the relationship curves of dynamic elastic modulus and
confining pressure of different kinds of soil samples were similar: The dynamic elastic modulus
of soil samples increased with the increase of confining pressure under the certain condition of
dynamic strain amplitude. In small strain range, within εd ＜10-3, the effect of confining pressure
on soil dynamic elastic modulus was significant. After the dynamic strain of εd >10-3, the effect
of confining pressure on soil dynamic elastic modulus decreased obviously.

CONCLUSIONS

(1) The dynamic elastic modulus of plain soil and reinforced soil decreased with the increase of
the dynamic strain while increased with the increase of confining pressure. The effect of
reinforcement on the dynamic elastic modulus of embankment was small.
(2) Under certain conditions, such as the reinforcement and the confining pressure, the
relationship curves of dynamic elastic modulus and dynamic strain of silt and clay were the same.
Dynamic elastic modulus of silty soil was higher than that of clay in the case of small strain, the
Ed~εd relationship curves of the two kinds of soil samples gradually tended to be consistent
when the dynamic strain was greater than 0.01.

REFERENCES

Sun Jin. and Bai Xiao-hua. and Zeng Guo-hong. (2006). "Dynamic triaxial testing study on
dynamic Elasticity Modulus of reinforced soil". Chinese Hydraulic Engineering. The first
session of China's water resources and hydropower in geotechnical mechanics and engineering
academic conference on (part ii).Chinese Hydraulic Engineering.Vol.2006 (3).905-907.
Yang Yan. and Bo Shu. and Zhang Jun.(2009). "Dynamic triaxial testing study on reinforced
soil." The subgrade engineering, Vol. 2009 (5):178-179.

© ASCE

Geo-China 2016
 Geo-China 2016 GSP 259 216

Xu Zhen-hua. (2014)"The dynamic strength characteristics test and numerical simulation

research of Geosynthetic materials reinforced soil". Qingdao. Dissertation for the Master
Degree of Qingdao Technological University. 2014.45-51.
Chongqing highway science research institute of the ministry of transport. (2012).Technical
Specifications for Application of Geosynthetics in Highway（JTG/T D32-2012）.Beijing. China
Communications Press.
Bao Cheng-gang. "Study on interface behavior of geosynthetics and soil" Chinese Journal of
Rock Mechanics and Engineering. 2006. 25(9).
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Tufts University on 09/27/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Highway science research institute of the ministry of transport. (2007). Soil testing procedures in
Highway（JTG E40-2007）.Beijing. China Communications Press.
Pan Yue. (2013). "The dynamic characteristics research of Geosynthetic materials reinforced soil
under cyclic loading". Qingdao. Dissertation for the Master Degree of Qingdao Technological
University. 2013.19-20.

© ASCE

Geo-China 2016