Results in Physics 16 (2020) 103003

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Results in Physics
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/rinp

Influence of filling properties and culvert structure parameters on the soil T

arching effect of upper-buried-type culverts
Qingdong Taoa,b, , Zhaoyi Hea, Ying Jiaa,c
⁎

a
School of Civil Engineering, Chongqing Jiaotong University, Chongqing 400074, China
b
Department of Architectural Engineering, Mianyang Polytechnic, Mianyang, Sichuan 621000, China
c
Guizhou Transportation Planning Survey & Design Academe Co. Ltd, Guiyang, Guizhou 550000, China

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Keywords: A high fill load may lead to several defects in culvert structures. Therefore, it is necessary to accurately calculate
Slab culvert the earth pressure at the top of a culvert and the coefficient of earth pressure in fillings. In this paper, a numerical
Test modeling model is proposed to accurately calculate the earth pressure at the top of upper-buried culverts and the coef-
Coefficient of earth pressure ficient of earth pressure in the filling. First, indoor model tests were used to determine the earth pressure at the
Numerical simulation
top of a culvert at different filling heights, and the theoretical soil arch coefficient calculation equation derived.
Shear lag effect
Soil-rock mixture (SRM)
Then, the numerical model was calibrated and its accuracy verified by comparing experimental and numerical
simulation results. The effects of filling height, rock block proportion, filling Poisson's ratio, and slab thickness
on the top and sides of the culvert were also analyzed. The results show that all factors will affect the earth
pressure at the top and sides of the culvert. Further, the vertical earth pressure is parabolic on the top of the
culvert, which can be explained by the shear lag effect of a symmetrical cantilever hollow box girder. The results
of this study can be used as a reference for optimum design of culverts with high filling, and to reduce the
occurrence of culvert accidents.

Introduction
High fill culverts are widely used in expressway construction in the
mountainous areas of Western China.
The required height for these culverts is defined in relevant codes
and literature. The Specification for Design of Highway Subgrades [1]
defines a high fill embankment as one where the subgrade has a total
height of more than 20 m. Yang and Zhang [2] considered the height of
fill when the high fill culvert produced soil arching effects. They ex-
amined the influence of the change of fill properties and compactness
on the earth pressure during construction and the structural safety of
the culvert and recommended that culverts with a fill height of more
than 18 m should be defined as high fill culverts. Hao et al. [3] char-
acterized 444 culverts located on the Baotou Maoming expressway in
China. They found that 90.27% of the culverts had a top filling height of
less than 14 m, whereas 9.91% had a top filling height greater than
14 m. Therefore, from the viewpoint of the vertical earth pressure on
the top of culverts and the structural optimization design, a high fill
culvert can be defined as a culvert with a filling height of more than
14 m.
The existing design and calculation theory of culverts under high
embankments in China and other countries are mainly based on the
linear earth pressure theory. This theory is more accurate when con-
sidering backfill heights of less than 14 m and is less accurate when
considering the earth pressure characteristics of the culvert top of the
nonlinear soil-rock mixture (SRM) with backfill height exceeding 14 m.
Because the linear earth pressure calculation theory cannot fully reflect
the stress mechanism of culverts under high embankments, defects in
the culvert structure may result. In this present study, a total of 135
culverts on the Shanghai–Chongqing Expressway in Hubei Province of
China were investigated, and 110 of them were found to have different
degrees of defects. The defects observed in the culvert structures are
listed in Table 1. Among these culverts, the highest and lowest filling
height above a culvert were 19.42 m and 5.4 m, respectively. It is
reasonable to hypothesize that a high filling height leads to defects in
culverts. Therefore, it is necessary to study the earth pressure at the top
of high fill culverts.
Marston and Anderson [4] studied the earth pressure at the top of
the culvert and proposed Marston's earth pressure theory. However, the
earth pressure coefficient of the culvert top calculated using Marston's
earth pressure theory is different from the actual earth pressure coef-
ficient. The main reason is that Marston's earth pressure theory is based

⁎
Corresponding author at: School of Civil Engineering, Chongqing Jiaotong University, Chongqing 400074, China.
E-mail addresses: 290242665@qq.com, tqddll@hotmail.com (Q. Tao).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rinp.2020.103003
Received 3 September 2019; Received in revised form 21 January 2020; Accepted 9 February 2020
Available online 14 February 2020
2211-3797/ © 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/BY-NC-ND/4.0/).
Q. Tao, et al.
Table 1
Culvert defects investigation results.
Culvert types Culvert amount Typical damage characteristics
Arch culvert 12 Longitudinal and transverse cracks in culvert body
Foundation cracking, culvert body dislocation
Water seepage out from bottom
Box culvert 9 Cracks at top and bottom of culvert
Pipe culvert 19 Excessive settlement in the middle of the culvert, silt deposition in the
culvert
Longitudinal cracks in culverts
Cracking of culvert foundation, tension of settlement joint, and dislocation
of culvert body
Slab culvert 95 Structural cracks at the top of the cover plate and cracks at the joint of the
cave body and roadbed
Cracking and Inclination of culvert body
Dislocation of settlement joint of culvert
Broken intake pavement
on the fact that the differential settlement between the top of the cul-
vert structure and the soil outside the culvert structure is needed, re-
sulting in a sliding surface of limit equilibrium. Therefore, if the dif-
ferential settlement between the top of the culvert structure and the soil
outside the culvert structure does not result in the “sliding surface” in
the limit equilibrium state, there will be a large error between the
vertical earth pressure coefficient of the culvert top as calculated by
Marston’s earth pressure theory and the actual earth pressure coeffi-
cient. Subsequently, Spangler [5] defined an equal settlement surface
and established the function equation of earth pressure at the top of the
culvert by considering soil deflection and culvert deflection.
Bennett et al. [6] collected field measurement data and performed a
numerical simulation analysis of a full-scale box culvert. They found
that the height of backfill soil has an important influence on the vertical
earth pressure at the top of a culvert structure. Clarke [7] developed
design formulas and charts for a buried circular culvert and proposed an
earth pressure coefficient calculation method for embankment in-
stallation. Tadros and Benak [8] numerically simulated the earth
pressure of silty sand and silty clay for a height-width ratio of 1.7 at the
top of the culvert. Their results showed that, compared with the silty
sand model, the earth pressures for the silty clay model were higher at
the mid span and lower at the corners. Abuhajar et al. [9] established
design charts of earth pressure and bending moment at the top of a box
culvert, based on the research results of the soil-culvert interaction.
Kang et al. [10] performed a numerical study on side friction be-
tween the sidewalls and filling of box culverts under different filling
heights. Furthermore, they established a function equation for the earth
pressure coefficient and the ratio of height (H) to width (B) for the top
of culverts. Kim and Yoo [11] studied the influence of foundation
properties on the earth pressure coefficient at the top of culverts and
defined the earth pressure coefficient as “effective density DE.” Their
results showed that the earth pressure coefficient DE is sensitive to the
foundation characteristics. Li et al. [12–14] performed detailed ana-
lyses of the variation in the earth pressure coefficient at the top of a
trench-buried circular culvert and arch culvert. Zheng et al. [15] stu-
died the relationship between the stress characteristics of a pre-
fabricated slab culvert and the height of the filling. They pointed out
that the vertical earth pressure at the top edge of the culvert is ap-
proximately 1.5 times that at the center. Li et al. [16] studied the stress
state of a slab culvert with thick filling of 15.8 m. Their results showed
that the measured earth pressure coefficient varies from 1.56 to 3.02 at
the top of the slab culvert. Ma et al. [17] calculated the earth pressure
on a culvert for soft soil foundation and deduced the formula for ver-
tical earth pressure at the culvert top.
Even though the behavior of box culverts, arch culverts, and pipe
culverts has been intensively researched, there is no relevant theory to
guide the design of slab culverts. Therefore, it is necessary to study the
2
Results in Physics 16 (2020) 103003
Amount of disease Disease proportion of different culvert
culverts types (%)
4 33.3%
2 16.7%
1 8.3%
6 66.7%
6 35%
4 31.6%
2 10.53%
50 52.63%
16 16.8%
14 14.7%
5 5.3%
influence of filling height, rock block proportion, thickness of slab
culvert, and Poisson's ratio of fillings on the earth pressure coefficient at
the top of culverts.
This study was conducted to investigate the variation in the earth
pressure coefficient at the top of culverts and the horizontal earth
pressure and bending moment in the sidewalls of culverts under dif-
ferent influencing factors. This is important to ensure that safe and
economically rational culvert structure designs and design parameters
are provided. To calculate the earth pressure coefficient above slab
culverts more accurately, we performed a laboratory physical model
test of filling culverts. The parameters of the FLAC2D numerical model
were calibrated and validated through test results. Further, the effects
of filling height, proportion of rock blocks in the filling, thickness of
slab culvert, and Poisson's ratio of the filling on the mechanical beha-
vior of culverts were analyzed. In addition, large-scale direct shear tests
were conducted to obtain the real material parameters of SRM with
different proportions of rock blocks in the filling.
In addition, a formula for calculating the vertical earth pressure was
derived, and the mechanism of the “soil arching effect” at the top of the
culvert theoretically analyzed. The theoretical results were found to be
close to the numerical values when the filling height of culvert top is
high (H > 12 m), which confirmed the accuracy of our analysis on the
mechanism of the soil arching effect.
Computational model
Problem description
To analyze the influence of different factors on the earth pressure
coefficient at the top of a culvert, an upper-buried type of high fill re-
inforced concrete culvert was used as the basic model (Fig. 1). The
filling height on the west side of the culvert top was 17.185 m, and that
on the east side was 21.728 m. The fillings consisted of shale and shale
soils; a few fillings also consisted of sandstone and limestone. The
natural foundation was divided into two layers. The first layer com-
prised weathered sandstone with a thickness of approximately 1.0 m,
and the second layer consisted of gravel-bearing silty clay with an
average thickness of approximately 2.0 m. Because the strength of the
foundation soil on both layers did not meet requirements, the founda-
tion was replaced by micro-weathered gravel with a thickness of 3.0 m
and a width of 4.1 m. Furthermore, the replacement area was com-
pacted.
The slab culvert was poured with C30 concrete; the net width and
height of the culvert were 4.0 m, the thickness of the top slab and
bottom slab were 0.32 m and 0.9 m, respectively, and the thickness of
the foundation was 1.0 m under the bottom slab. There were three
different culvert segment lengths—6.0 m, 5.0 m, and 4.0 m—and the
Q. Tao, et al.
Fig. 1. Slab culvert structure diagrams (unit: cm). (a) 4.0 × 4.0 elevation drawing of the slab culvert (left half) (b) 4.0 × 4.0 elevation drawing of the slab culvert
(right half) (c) 4.0 × 4.0 elevation drawing of the slab culvert (d) Cross section of the culvert body.
total length of the culvert was 80 m.
Laboratory test model
Packing grading
An SRM is extremely heterogeneous, and the particle size varies
considerably in SRM. A screening test was performed using a standard
vibrating screen machine, and the filling gradation curve was obtained
(Fig. 2a). The standard screening and the results of sample screening
are shown in Fig. 2b and c, respectively.
Experimental environment
The laboratory experiment was performed in a custom-made model
box with length, width, and height of 1.4 m, 1.0 m, and 1.5 m, re-
spectively. The strength and stiffness met test requirements. The culvert
was located at the center of the model box. The distance between the
culvert and template on both sides was 52.5 cm. The foundation of the
laboratory test model was rigid [18].
3
Results in Physics 16 (2020) 103003
A layer of SRM was filled every 10 cm and spread evenly. A total of
80 cm was filled. The weight of each filling layer was calculated using
the “volume method,” which can be obtained using Eqs. (1) and (2):
ds = x · d max (1)
G= ds ·L · B (2)
where x denotes compactness, d max is the maximum dry density of the
filling ( g cm3 ), ds is the dry density of the filling for the test ( g cm3 ), L
is the inside length of the model box, and B is the inside width of the
model box.
In order to monitor the actual stress characteristics of the culvert
structure more accurately, the top of the culvert was filled with the
actual subgrade filling in the laboratory test. At the same time, the
reinforced concrete downscale culvert was poured. The test geometric
similarity constant was β = 20. The cross section and reinforcement
arrangement of the culvert scale model are shown in Fig. 3a. The scale
culvert model and the layout of the reinforcing bars are shown in
Fig. 3b.
Q. Tao, et al.
Fig. 2. (a) Particle size distribution curve of undisturbed packing. (b) Standard
vibrating screen machine. (c) Sample sieving result (unit: mm).
The length of the scale culvert model was 90 cm, and the length of
the longitudinal reinforcement on the side wall and the bottom slab was
80 cm, to ensure that the thickness of the protective layer of the
longitudinal reinforcement was 5 cm. The longitudinal reinforcing bars
4
Results in Physics 16 (2020) 103003
Fig. 3. Specifications of culvert scale model used in laboratory experiments. (a)
Cross section and reinforcement arrangement of the culvert scale model (unit:
mm) (b) Scale culvert model and the layout of reinforcing bars (c) Scale dia-
gram of slab culvert (d) Compactness of fill on both sides of culvert (98%).
on the side wall and the bottom plate were 5.5 cm and 8.25 cm in
diameter, respectively.
The transverse reinforcement was arranged on the periphery of the
longitudinal reinforcement and connected with the longitudinal re-
inforcement on the side wall and the soleplate. The peripheral trans-
verse reinforcement was smooth round reinforcement with a diameter
of 6 mm and the spacing was 20 cm. The scale model adopted the
method of on-site pouring and received 28 days of maintenance (from
June 1, 2018 to September 5, 2018). A compression test on the concrete
specimen showed that its compressive strength reached 32 MPa. The
thickness of the upper plate of the slab culvert was 1.6 cm, which met
the strength requirements. The epoxy resin concrete was poured be-
tween the cover slab and the sidewall to simulate the cover slab culvert
(Fig. 3c).
The compactness of the fillings on both sides of the culvert was 98%,
as shown in Fig. 3d. The similarity parameters used in the test design
are listed in Table 2 [19,20]. The mechanical parameters of the
Q. Tao, et al. Results in Physics 16 (2020) 103003

Table 2
Model similarity parameter design.
Parameter Similarity rule (Model /Actual)

Scale:1/β Scale:1/20

Length 1/β 1/20

Density 1 1
Strain 1/β1/2 0.224
Displacement 1/β3/2 0.368
Stress 1/β 1/20

Table 3
Materials mechanics parameters.
Parameters Unit Culvert filling Gravel

Young’s modulus MPa 30 000 22 35

Poisson’s ratio – 0.2 0.3 0.2
Effective cohesion kPa – 43.5 0
Effective friction angle Degree – 27.19 35
Unit weight kN/m3 25 21.46 20

materials are listed in Table 3.

A total of six strain-type micro-earth pressure gauges (LY-350) were
installed on top of the culverts. The position where each pressure gauge
is buried is shown in Fig. 4.

Numerical model2.3.1. Model establishment

FLAC2D finite difference software is a professional geotechnical Fig. 5. High filling-culvert mesh model.
engineering software developed by Itasca Company, whose interface
can be easily operated for program modeling. It can simulate the in-
displacement was fixed on both sides (left and right sides) of the model.
terfacial characteristics between the culvert and fillings and refine the
The mesh model is shown in Fig. 5.
grid for key research locations. Therefore, a numerical model was es-
To simulate the elastic-plastic behavior of fills and foundation, the
tablished using FLAC2D software. The total height, width, and height of
Mohr–Coulomb failure criterion was selected. The slab culvert was
the numerical model were 40 m, 4 m, and 4 m, respectively.
modeled using liner elements, which are two-dimensional elements that
Meanwhile, the foundation depth of the culvert was 8 m, and the height
have three degrees of freedom at each end node (i.e., x-translation, y-
of the filling was 28 m. The connection between the top and sidewalls of
translation, and rotation). Liner elements can be joined together with
the culvert was articulated to ensure that the top edge of the slab was
one another and/or the grid and can also be used to represent a
not affected by bending moment. The bottom of the model was fixed
structural member in which bending resistance, limited bending mo-
vertically and horizontally; meanwhile, only the horizontal
ments, and yield strengths are important. Therefore, liner elements can
be used for modeling culvert slabs and sidewalls.
The interface conditions between slab culvert and fillings were si-
mulated using interface elements, based on the recommendations of
Itasca Consulting Group [21]. The interface elements were set between
the culvert structure and fillings, which allows only elastic displace-
ment [22]. The interface elements are represented by normal stiffness
kn and shear stiffness kS . The value of kn and kS were determined to be
5.0 × 103 MPa/m by performing trial calculations and adjustments 12
times.

Fig. 4. Pressure gauges buried position.
Analysis of results
Fig. 6 compares the vertical soil stress measured in the experiment
and calculated through numerical simulation on the top of the slab
culvert. The height of the fillings is denoted by H. Fig. 6 shows a
comparison of the results when the height of the fillings is 4 m and 8 m.
The results shown in Fig. 6 indicate that the vertical soil stress ob-
tained using a numerical model is slightly lower than the experimental
results. At the same time, the experimental and numerical simulation
results have the same variation law, which has an approximately
parabolic form.
Fig. 6 shows that the distribution of earth pressure is a parabola on
top of the culvert. This could be explained by the shear lag effect of a
symmetrical single-box single-chamber box girder with cantilever plate
in bridge engineering [23,24]. Compared with the symmetrical box

5
Q. Tao, et al. Results in Physics 16 (2020) 103003

Fig. 6. Vertical soil stress measured and calculated on the top slab culvert. Fig. 8. Culvert top vertical displacement.

girder with a cantilever slab, culvert is a symmetrical box without a radial normal stress, while the normal stress on the outer cylinder
cantilever slab. Hence, the distribution of earth pressure is parabolic should be r + r r· dr . The normal stress along the direction is
over the width of the culvert, low in the middle, and high at both ends, referred to as the circumferential stress . Moreover, denotes the
as shown in Fig. 7. polar angle (°), is the unit weight of filling (kN m3 ), and r is the
Fig. 8 compares the vertical displacement obtained using the nu- distance from the point on the inner cylinder to the origin.
merical model and the measured data obtained through the laboratory According to the equilibrium conditions in the radial direction and
test on the top of the culvert. The numerical simulation results are si- the stress calculation formulas for axisymmetric problems in space,
d d
milar to those obtained in the model experiment. The maximum dif- assume sin 2 and cos 2 approximate to d and one, respectively.
2
ference between the numerical simulation and experimental results is Therefore, the earth pressure on top of the culvert is calculated as fol-
observed at the center of the culvert top. For filling heights of 4 m and lows:
8 m, the numerical simulation results deviate by 10.12% and 4.06%
from the experimental results, respectively. d r
r ·r ·d + 2 dr · r + dr (r + dr ) d ·r ·d ·dr = 0
2 r (3)

Vertical earth pressure theoretical model By omitting the trace amount and reordering, Eqs. (4) and (5) are
obtained:
Theoretical model establishment
r r
+ + =0
It is assumed that the filling above the culvert is in the plastic zone r r (4)
and the filling above the plastic zone is in the elastic zone, as shown in
Fig. 9 (a). The theoretical model hypothesizes that when the height of = kp r (5)
the filling is less than B 2 (B is the width of the culvert top), there is no
complete soil arch in the filling at the culvert top. When the height of where is the filling internal friction angle and kp is the passive earth
the filling is greater than B 2 , a complete soil arch is formed at a certain pressure coefficient, kp=(1 + sin ) (1 sin ) .
height on top of the culvert. The differential unit volume in the plastic Eq. (5) is substituted into Eq. (4) to obtain Eq. (6):
zone is taken as the research object for stress analysis.
A tiny quadrilateral W is separated from the plastic region by using r· r + (1 k p) r r + ·r · r = 0 (6)
two cylindrical surfaces dr apart and two vertical planes with d to
each other, as shown in Fig. 9 (b). On the inner cylinder of the quad- By differentiating Eq. (6), Eq. (7) can be obtained:
rilateral, the radial stress r along the r direction is referred to as the

Fig. 7. Simplified diagram of shear lag effect on the top slab.

6
Q. Tao, et al. Results in Physics 16 (2020) 103003

Fig. 9. Elastic-plastic soil arch theoretical model. (a) Theoretical model. (b) Element force analysis of culvert model.

r ·r A r
r = · e[ln x+ A](kp 2) + = r (kp 1) + ·
kp 2 kp 2 kp 2 kp 2
r
= Ar (kp 1) + ·
kp 2 (7)

where A is a constant. When r = B 2 ,

r = 0 = (H B 2) (8)

According to the boundary condition (8), A can be obtained,

(1 kp) (2 kp) (2 kp)
B B 1 B
A= H
2 2 kp 2 2 (9)

Therefore, Eq. (7) can be solved.

(kp 1)
r 2r B B Fig. 10. Comparison of theoretical and numerical measurements of Fe .
r = H + · 1
(k p 2) H B 2H 2H ( k p 2) (10)

When r = (B 2b) 2, the vertical earth pressure at the center of the the numerical simulation decreases initially, then increases, and finally
culvert top can be obtained, tends to be stable. Meanwhile, in both cases, the earth pressure coef-
ficient is less than one.
vc The results of numerical simulation are consistent with those of the
(kp 1) theoretical analysis (Fig. 10). The difference between the two curves
B 2b B 2b B 2b
= H + + · decreases with increases in filling height. In the case of high fill, the
2(kp 2) H 2H B
difference between the model test results and the theoretical results is
B B within 20%. The theoretical calculation results are always smaller than
1 the model test monitoring results, indicating that the actual soil arching
2H 2H (kp 2) (11) effect has not reached the theoretical assumption of the ultimate stress
where vc is the actual vertical earth pressure at the edge of the top slab state.
and b is the top width of the sidewall.
To account for the effect of the soil arch, the earth pressure coeffi-
cient of the top slab is described byFe . At the same time, the earth Influencing factors of soil arching effect
pressure coefficient at the center or edge of the top slab is described
byFee or Fec , respectively. Fec and Fee are determined according to Eqs. The parameters affecting the mechanical properties of culverts were
(12) and (13): analyzed using the numerical FLAC2D culvert-fillings’ numerical model
verified previously. The parameters included in the analysis were the
vc vc
Fec = = ratio of the filling height to culvert width (H B ), proportion of rock
( v )Theoritical H (12)
blocks in SRM, Poisson's ratio, and slab thickness. In addition, this study
ve ve selected a base case where the proportion of rock blocks in the fillings
Fee = =
( v )Theoritical H (13) was 30% and the thickness of the culvert was 0.32 m (t B =0.08). The
height of the fillings on top of culvert was 28 m in all cases.
where ve is the actual vertical earth pressure at the edge of the top slab,
( v )Theoritical is the theoretical vertical earth pressure, is the unit weight
of the filling (kN m3 ), and H denotes the height of the filling (m). Ratio of filling height to culvert width

Theoretical model verification
Fig. 10 compares Fe between the theoretical and numerical models
at the center of the culvert top. The theoretical earth pressure coeffi-
cient Fe decreases with increases in H B , and the earth pressure coef-
ficient Fe tends to be stable finally. The earth pressure coefficient Fe in
In the FLAC2D numerical model, the filling height was 28 m, a layer
was filled every 2 m, and there was a total of 14 layers. A total of
different H B ratios were obtained. To investigate the effect of the H B
ratio on the coefficient of earth pressure, six different H B ratios were
considered (0.5, 1, 2, 3, 5, and 7).

7
Q. Tao, et al.
Fig. 11. Relationship between vertical earth pressure and ratio of H B on the
top of the culvert.
Soil pressure
Fig. 11 shows that the theoretical and calculated earth pressure
(center and edge) on top of the slab culvert. The results show that the
vertical earth stress on the top slab increases with an increase in the
H B ratio. Meanwhile, the theoretical earth pressure is greater than the
calculated earth pressure at the center of the culvert top. However, the
theoretical earth pressure is lower than the calculated earth pressure at
the top edge of the culvert. The greater the H B ratio, the greater is the
difference between the theoretical earth pressure at the culvert top, the
actual calculation earth pressure at the top edge, and the actual cal-
culation earth pressure at the culvert top center.
In particular, for H B = 7, the theoretical earth pressure in the
column method was 608.88 kPa . The calculated earth pressure value
was 1100 kPa at the edge of the culvert top, and the calculated earth
pressure value was 486.56 kPa at the center of the culvert top, re-
spectively.
The theoretical earth pressure lies between the calculated earth
pressure at the edge of the culvert top and the calculated earth pressure
at the center of the culvert top. The reasons for the above phenomenon
are as follows. Because the cohesion and internal friction angles of SRM
are large relatively, soil arching easily occurs between filling particles.
Meanwhile, as the H B ratio increases, a stable soil arch effect occurs in
the filling on top of the culvert, which results in a decrease in the earth
pressure at the center of the culvert top and an increase at the edge of
the culvert top.
Fig. 12 shows the variation in the lateral wall horizontal earth
Fig. 12. H B ratio effect on soil stress of sidewall.
8
Results in Physics 16 (2020) 103003
pressure with the H B ratio. When the H B ratio increases, the earth
pressure on the sidewall increases nonlinearly. Meanwhile, the earth
pressure near D/2 and 9D/10 of the sidewall (D is the culver height)
increases. For H B 2 , the curve representing the distribution of the
horizontal earth stress is an approximate parabolic form. The horizontal
earth pressure decreases initially, tends to be stable, and then increases.
For 2 < H B 3, the change in the horizontal earth stress with the
increase in sidewall depth D can be divided into five stages: increasing
initially, decreasing, increasing again, stabilizing, and finally de-
creasing. For 3 < H B 7 , the change in the horizontal earth stress
with an increase in depth D can be divided into three stages: increasing
initially, stabilizing, and then decreasing.
This can be explained as follows. Because the lateral wall of the
culvert will be subjected to a horizontal lateral earth pressure, the
sidewall of the culvert will extrude the culvert top and culvert foun-
dation. Similarly, the culvert top and culvert foundation will exert a
horizontal axial load on the sidewall.
(1) When the filling height is low (H B 2 ), the fillings on the top and
bottom of the sidewall are subjected to an axial horizontal load of
the culvert top and culvert foundation, which are opposite to the
lateral earth pressure induced by the fillings. The axial horizontal
load on the culvert top and culvert foundation is dominant at this
time. Thus, the curve showing the distribution of horizontal earth
pressure indicates a decreasing stage first from 0 D to D/4, and an
increasing stage from D/4 to D.
(2) When the filling height continues to increase (2 < H B 3), the
lateral earth pressure generated by fillings on the sidewall and the
horizontal axial force on the culvert top and culvert foundation
increase simultaneously. However, the dominant position of the
lateral earth pressure and horizontal axial force on the culvert top
and culvert foundation change, and the lateral earth pressure is
dominant at this time, so there are five stages of horizontal earth
pressure distribution curve.
(3) For 3 < H B 7 , the lateral earth pressure of fillings is dominant
from 0 D to D/2. Therefore, the distribution curve of the horizontal
earth pressure increases. The lateral earth pressure of fillings and
the axial horizontal load of the culvert top and culvert foundation
are in equilibrium from D/2 to 9D/10. Therefore, the distribution
curve of the horizontal earth pressure does not change. The axial
horizontal load of the culvert foundation affects the lateral hor-
izontal earth pressure of fillings from 9D/10 to D; therefore, the
distribution curve of the horizontal earth pressure decreases.
Bending moment
Fig. 13 shows the relationship between the bending moment and
H B ratio (Fig. 13a), and a comparison of the bending moment results
between numerical simulation and theoretical calculation (Fig. 13b) for
the top slab. It can be seen from Fig. 13 that, the bending moment in the
mid-span of the top slab increases as the H B ratio increases. For
H B 4 , the bending moments obtained in the numerical simulations
are greater than those obtained through theoretical calculation. For
4 < H B 7 , the bending moments obtained in the numerical simula-
tions are lower than those obtained through theoretical calculation.
Fig. 14 shows the relationship between bending moment and H B
ratio in the sidewall. From the figure, it is clear that the curves can be
split into two parts.
The first part denotes the relationship between the two parameters
from the top of the sidewall to 0.65 D. As the depth increases along the
sidewall, the bending moment gradually increases from zero to the
maximum negative bending moment, and then gradually decreases to
zero.
The second part denotes the relationship between the two para-
meters from 0.35D to the bottom of the sidewall. The bending moment
increases gradually from zero to the maximum positive bending mo-
ment.
Q. Tao, et al.
Fig. 13. Relational curve for H B ratio and bending moment in top slab. (a)
Bending moment in top slab. (b) Bending moment comparisons between nu-
merical simulation and theoretical calculation on top slab.
Fig. 14. Bending moment distribution form in sidewall.
The main reason is similar to that described in Section “Soil pres-
sure”. First, the horizontal earth pressure between the sidewall and
sidewall fillings is not static earth pressure. The sidewall will be sub-
jected to an axial horizontal load on the culvert top and culvert foun-
dation, resulting in the existence of negative bending moments within a
certain height range on the sidewall. At this time, the bending moments
generated by the axial horizontal load are greater large than those
generated by the lateral horizontal load of the filling on the sidewall,
9
Results in Physics 16 (2020) 103003
Fig. 15. Ratio of H B effect on sidewall bending moment.
and the maximum negative moment is −202.1 kN ·m m .
Secondly, when the depth is approximately 0.35D, the horizontal
bending moment induced by the lateral earth pressure of filling is equal
to that produced by the horizontal axial force of top slab, and the value
of bending moment is zero. As H continues to increase, the bending
moment generated by the horizontal axial force of the top slab is less
than that generated by the lateral horizontal load, and the value of
horizontal positive bending moment gradually increases. The ultimate
maximum positive bending moment is 781.8 kN ·m m .
Fig. 15 shows that the horizontal positive bending moment in-
creases linearly with an increase in the H B ratio, while the horizontal
negative bending moment on the sidewall decreases linearly with an
increase in the H B ratio.
Earth pressure coefficient
The coefficient of earth pressure obtained using the FLAC numerical
model was compared with the relative specifications and existing re-
search results [25–30]. Fig. 16 shows the culvert buried conditions of
all specifications of possible embankment installations and demon-
strates that the Fec values obtained using the numerical model are less
than those of the Chinese codes at the center of the culvert top; the
values of Fee are greater than those of the Chinese codes at the edge of
the culvert top [25,26]. Further, because the American Association of
State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) [27] and the
Canadian Highway Bridge Design Code (CHBDC) [28] clearly stipulate
the values of Fe , the Fe values obtained using the numerical model were
compared with those of AASHTO and CHBDC. The results show that the
Fe values obtained using the numerical simulation exceed the upper
bounds of AASHTO and CHBDC at the edge of the culvert top edge and
are less than the lower bounds of AASHTO and CHBDC at center of the
culvert top.
Compared with Yang and Zhang‘s regression model [29], the value
of Fee obtained in the numerical simulation is larger at the edge of the
culvert top. At the center of the culvert top, the Fec value obtained in the
numerical simulation is low for H B < 4.5; meanwhile, the numerical
simulation Fec value is larger for H B > 4.5. Compared with Chen et al.'s
regression model [30], with an increase in the filling height, the Fe
value calculated using the regression model lies between the upper and
lower limits of the numerical simulation results for H B < 4.5.
In summary, at the center of the culvert top, the Fec values obtained
through the numerical simulation are less than those above norms and
existing research results (except for the case of H > 18 m in Yang and
Zhang‘s research results). If the existing research results are used to
design the slab culvert, safety can be guaranteed at the center of the
culvert.
However, at the edge of the culvert top, the value of Fee obtained in
the numerical simulation is greater than existing domestic and inter-
national norms and existing research results, indicating that more safe
and reliable design methods or structural measures are required for the
edge of the culvert top.
Q. Tao, et al. Results in Physics 16 (2020) 103003

Fig. 17. Relationship between vertical frictional force and the ratio of H B on
the top of a culvert.

between the center and the edge of the culvert top is obtained by nu-
merical simulation. For 2 < H B 7, when the line shape of the in-
terface vertical frictional force curve is close to the “Z” type, both Fec
and Fee trend toward stability. The results show that the vertical friction
force is closely related to the coefficient of earth pressure on the culvert
top. Meanwhile, the line shape of the vertical friction force curve can be
evaluated with the values of Fec and Fee .

Influence of rock block proportion of fillings

To study the relationship between the proportion of rock blocks in

fillings and the mechanical properties of culverts, five different rock
block proportions (10%, 30%, 50%, 70%, and 90%) were used.
The gradation of the original roadbed filling and the designed rock
block proportion in the filling were combined, and gradation curves of
different rock block proportions obtained, as shown in Fig. 18. Mean-
Fig. 16. Fe comparison of numerical results with foreign standards and existing
results. while, Fig. 19 shows that the gradation curve of the undisturbed filling
was closer to that of filling with a rock block proportion of close to 30%.
Therefore, undisturbed filling was used instead of filling with a rock
Interface friction between sidewall and backfill
block proportion of 30%.
McGuigan et al. [31] showed that the relative movement between
The internal friction angle and the cohesion of SRM fillings with
the sidewall of a culvert and the adjacent backfill produces a vertical
different rock block proportions were obtained using a ZY50-5 direct
frictional force. At the same time, the vertical frictional force and the
shear compression dual-purpose apparatus (Fig. 19(a)) for coarse-
compactness of the backfill has a significant effect on the earth pressure
grained soil in the laboratory of Southwest University of Science and
coefficient. Kang et al. [32] determined the optimal geometric region of
Technology, as listed in Table 4. The state of the specimen and shear
load reduction and compression of a culvert top by examining several
plane after loading with a rock block proportion of 30% is shown in
models that used centrifugal tests of a structural type of a box culvert.
Fig. 19(b).
The results show that an increase of the horizontal earth pressure on the
sidewall will lead to an increase of the vertical frictional force between
the sidewall and adjacent backfill. Meanwhile, when the load reduction
compression zone is set on the top of the culvert, the existence of ver-
tical friction will result in the reduction of the earth pressure on the top
of the culvert. This will not translate into the reduction of the earth
pressure on the base.
Fig. 17 shows the relationship between vertical frictional force and
H B ratio on the sidewall. With the increase in the H B ratio, the line
shape of the vertical frictional force curve changes. Furthermore, H/
B = 2 marks the ratio where the shape of the vertical friction curve
changes. For H/B ≤ 2, from the top of the sidewall to the bottom of the
sidewall, the vertical frictional force curve can be divided into three
stages: a decrease, then an increase, and then a final decrease. For
2 < H B 7 , the vertical frictional force curve can also be divided into
the same three stages. The line shape of the vertical frictional force
curve is close to the “Z.”
Compared with Fig. 16, the curve of the earth pressure coefficient Fig. 18. Grain gradation curves with different rock block proportions.

10
Q. Tao, et al. Results in Physics 16 (2020) 103003

Fig. 21. Relationships between proportion of rock block and earth pressure
coefficient, Fee , at the edge of the culvert top.

The relation curves between rock block proportion and the earth
pressure coefficients are shown in Figs. 20 and 21. Fig. 20 shows that
the Fec values of different rock block proportions have the same law.
With the increase in the H B ratio, the Fec values of the earth pressure
coefficient decrease initially, then increase, and tend to be stable fi-
nally. The Fec values of all fillings with different rock block proportions
are less than one. With the increase in the rock block proportion in
fillings, the Fec values decrease gradually. The corresponding Fec values
for rock block proportion of 10%, 30%, 50%, 70%, and 90% are 0.86,
0.80, 0.80, 0.80, and 0.74, respectively.
Fig. 21 shows that, for H B 2.2 , with the increase in the H B
ratio, the Fee values increases at the edge of the culvert top. For
H B > 2.2 , when the rock block proportion of SRM is 10%, 70%, and
Fig. 19. Direct shear compression test of coarse-grained soil. (a) ZY50-5 direct 90%, the Fee values increase continuously with the increase in the H B
shear compression instrument for coarse-grained soil. (b) State of soil sample ratio, and finally tends to be stable. However, when the rock block
and shear plane after loading. proportion of SRM is 30% and 50%, the Fee values decrease gradually
with the increase in the H B ratio. The Fee values of fillings with dif-
Table 4
ferent rock block proportions are all greater than 1.
Mechanical parameters of fillings with different stone content. When the rock block proportion increases, the Fee value increases
gradually. However, the Fee value of fillings with different rock block
Parameters Rock block proportion (%)
proportions are similar. The corresponding values of Fee for rock block
Unit 10 30 50 70 90 proportions are 1.78, 1.82, 1.82, 1.97, and 1.84 are 10%, 30%, 50%,
70% and 90%, respectively.
Young’s modulus MPa 18 22 26 28 30 The main reasons for the above phenomena may be that when the
Poisson’s ratio – 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3
height of the filling, cohesion, and internal friction angle of the filling
Effective cohesion kPa 45.8 43.5 37.4 32.3 24.6
Effective friction angle Degree 25.03 27.19 30.99 31.48 32.17 reach a certain value, the filling of the culvert top can form a stable soil
Unit weight kN/m3 21.0 21.46 21.9 22.3 20.67 arching effect; meanwhile, the earth pressure coefficient of the culvert
top is relatively stable.

Influence of Poisson's ratio of filling

Fig. 20. Relationships between proportion of rock block and earth pressure
coefficient, Fec , at the center of the culvert top.
Because Poisson's ratio can reflect the value of the elastic modulus
of fillings, the relationship between Poisson's ratio and the earth pres-
sure coefficient can also indirectly reflect the relationship between the
elastic modulus of fillings and the earth pressure coefficients. Even
though Abuhajar et al. [9] studied the influence of Poisson's ratio on the
mechanical behavior of culverts, the filling that they studied consisted
of dry Nevada Sand.
In general, the backfill above the culvert is not a perfectly elastic
material and the Poisson's ratio has a corresponding change range.
Under different filling heights, the lateral and vertical soil stresses of
the fill in a certain range of the culvert top will change, and the cor-
responding ratio of the lateral and vertical deformation will also
change. In this study, the Poisson's ratio of the soil-rock mixture filler
was measured by a large triaxial test, as follows:
v + a
=
r
2 (14)

11
Q. Tao, et al.
Fig. 22. YS30-3B large-scale triaxial shear test equipment.
r Fig. 25. Relationships between Poisson's ratio and the earth pressure coeffi-
v=
a (15)
where v is Poisson's ratio; r is radial strain, %; a is axial strain, %; and
v is volume strain, %. The nonlinear relationship between the radial
strain r and the tangent Poisson's ratio is obtained by a large triaxial
test of the soil-rock mixture at the top of the culvert. The YS30-3B large-
scale triaxial shear test equipment is shown in Fig. 22. Meanwhile,
when the radial strain r = 2%, the corresponding tangent Poisson's
ratio is the Poisson's ratio v of the filling, as shown in Fig. 23. The
interval corresponding to Poisson's ratio v is [0.2,0.47].
To analyze the influence of Poisson's ratio on the soil arching effect
at the top of the culvert, four different Poisson's ratio values (0.2,
Fig. 23. Curve indicating r -v relationship. The proportion of rock blocks in the
fillings was 30%
12
Results in Physics 16 (2020) 103003
Fig. 24. Relationships between Poisson's ratio and the earth pressure coeffi-
cient, Fec , at the center of the culvert top.
cient, Fee , at the edge of the culvert top.
0.25, 0.3, and 0.35) were used.
Figs. 24 and 25 show the relationships between Poisson's ratio and
the earth pressure coefficient of the culvert top. It can be seen from
Fig. 24 that the curve can be roughly divided into two parts (downward
stage and upward stage) with an increase in the H B ratio. For the
downward stage, the smaller the Poisson's ratio is, the greater the de-
crease in the Fec value. For the upward stage, the smaller the Poisson's
ratio, the greater is the increase in the Fec value. When Poisson's ratio
varies between 0.3 and 0.35, at the edge of the culvert top, the earth
pressure coefficient curve can be roughly divided into two parts as the
H B ratio increases. When H B < 1, the Fec values show an upward
trend (upward stage), which is similar to Poisson's ratio v = 0.2, 0.25.
However, for the second part (downward stage), the curve of Fec tends
to be stable (stable section).
Fig. 25 shows that when the Poisson's ratio is equal to 0.2 and 0.25,
the curve of Fee can be roughly divided into two parts at the edge of the
culvert top as the H B ratio increases. When H B < 1, the Fee values
show an upward trend (upward segment), but when 1 H B 7 , the
curve of Fee shows a downward trend (downward segment). During the
upward segment, where the H B ratio ranges from 0.5 to 1, the larger
the Poisson's ratio is, the smaller is the proportion of Fee value growth.
During the downward segment, the Fee value decreases with an increase
in the H B ratio, and the smaller the Poisson's ratio, the greater the
decrease in the Fee value.
The above results show that the Poisson's ratio has an important
influence on the earth pressure coefficient at the top of the culvert. Only
when the Poisson's ratio exceeds 0.3, can a stable “soil arch” be formed
in the culvert top with the increase in H B .
The main reasons for the above phenomenon may be that when the
Q. Tao, et al.
Fig. 26. Relation curves for bending moment and slab thickness on the top slab.
Poisson's ratio is small, the filling will sink under the action of self-
weight load. However, the soil arching effect will occur in the fillings.
When the height of the filling increases, the filling would undergo
settlement and compression. At this time, the soil arching effect cannot
bear the load of the upper filling. Then, the soil arching effect does not
occur. The earth pressure is close to the theoretical value obtained using
the “soil column method.”
Influence of culvert slab thickness
To study the influence of slab thickness on the earth pressure
coefficient, two different slab thicknesses were selected: t = 0.32 m (t/
B = 0.08) and t = 0.64 m (t/B = 0.16).
Fig. 26 presents the relation curves for slab thickness and bending
moment at the top of the culvert. When the width of the culvert is
constant, the bending moment at the culvert top decreases with an
increase in slab thickness.
Figs. 27 and 28 show the relationship between the earth pressure
coefficient and slab thickness. At the center of the culvert top, the Fec of
a thin culvert is larger than that of a thick culvert (Fig. 27).
Fig. 28 shows that at the edge of culvert top, for 0.5 H B 2 , the
corresponding Fee of t/B = 0.08 is greater than that of t/B = 0.16; for
2 < H B 7 , the Fee value of t/B = 0.08 is less than that of t/B = 0.16.
The main reason may be that when the filling load is small, the thinner
the culvert top slab thickness is, the greater the deformation at the
culvert top is, the more significant the soil arching effect, and the
greater the value of Fee . Meanwhile, the deflection displacement of a
thick culvert top is smaller than that of a thin culvert top. Furthermore,
the soil arching effect of a thick culvert top is not as good as that of a
Fig. 27. Relationship between the earth pressure coefficient, Fec, and slab
thickness on the top slab.
13
Results in Physics 16 (2020) 103003
Fig. 28. Relationship between the earth pressure coefficient, Fee, and slab
thickness on the top slab.
thin culvert top. However, for 2 < H B 7 , because the overall stiff-
ness of a thick culvert top is larger, the load on the thick culvert is larger
than that on a thin culvert top at the edge, which shows that the soil
arching effect is more significant at the edge of the top slab.
In summary, for slab culverts with a high fill, increasing the thick-
ness of the top slab may make the slab bear more earth pressure, which
will bring potential safety hazards to culvert structure and cause greater
economic waste.
Discussion
This paper did not discuss the influence of foundation soil char-
acteristics on the vertical earth pressure of culverts in different filling
heights. In fact, unlike general building foundations, the bearing ca-
pacity of culvert foundations will be affected by filling on both sides of
culverts. Therefore, it is necessary to combine filling, culvert, and
foundation together to find a method to reduce the vertical earth
pressure at the top of the culvert and the horizontal earth pressure on
the sidewall.
The concrete method is to increase the compressibility of the
foundation in a certain width range below the culvert foundation, such
that the settlement of the culvert foundation can be controlled within
the allowable range of the code. The upward deformation of the
foundation on both sides of the culvert is reduced by the compression of
the filling load on the foundation on both sides of the culvert, thus
increasing the bearing capacity of the culvert foundation and reducing
the earth pressure on the top of the culvert.
To reduce the vertical earth pressure on the top of culvert, the up-
ward deformation of the foundation on both sides of the culvert is re-
duced by the squeezing of the filling load on both sides of the culvert,
thus increasing the bearing capacity of the culvert foundation, reducing
the displacement difference and shear stress between the top filling and
the side filling of the culvert.
Conclusions
Through a laboratory model experiment and FLAC2D numerical
model simulation, the soil arching effect of the buried slab culvert was
studied. Furthermore, the important factors affecting the soil arching
effect of the culvert top were analyzed. The following conclusions are
drawn:
(1) The vertical earth pressure distribution of the culvert top is
Q. Tao, et al.
parabolic, and the unloading of the vertical earth pressure occurs
near the center of the culvert top. The horizontal earth pressure
between the sidewall and side wall filling was subjected to the axial
horizontal load of the slab culvert and culvert foundation.
Meanwhile, the axial horizontal load of the slab culvert and culvert
foundation affects the moment distribution in the sidewall. When
the position is along the sidewall is approximately 0.65 D, the
horizontal bending moment is zero. This is because of the interac-
tion between lateral horizontal earth pressure of sidewall and top
slab horizontal load.
(2) The earth pressure coefficient Fe decreases initially and then in-
creases with an increase in the filling height, andH B = 2 is the
boundary between the increase and decrease of the earth pressure
coefficient at the culvert top. With an increase in rock block pro-
portion and ratio H B at the edge of the culvert top, the earth
pressure coefficient Fee increases initially, and then tends to stabilize
or decrease. It is the largest when the rock block proportion is 70%.
At the center of the culvert top, with an increase in the rock block
proportion and H B , Fec initially decreases and then increases. It is
largest when the rock block proportion is 10%. Further, with an
increase in the Poisson's ratio and H B , Fee increases initially, and
then tends to stabilize or decrease. At the center of the culvert top,
with an increase in the Poisson's ratio and H B , Fec initially de-
creases, then increases. For the top slab thickness, at the culvert top,
the boundary isH B = 2. When H B is less than two, the lower the
t B , the greater the Fe value. When H B is greater than two, the
smaller t B , and the greater the Fe value. At the center of the culvert
top, Fec corresponding to t B = 0.08 is always greater than that
corresponding to t B = 0.16.
(3) Because the culvert is a symmetrical box girder (single-box and
single-chamber) without the cantilever plate, the shear lag effect of
the box girder (single-box and single-chamber) with a symmetrical
cantilever plate is used to analyze the effect of the vertical earth
pressure distribution on the culvert top. It was verified that the
distribution of earth pressure at the culvert top is parabolic, which
is different from the elementary bending theory.
(4) The laboratory test results and numerical simulation show that, at
the edge of top slab, the earth pressure coefficient is greater than
that calculated by the current domestic and foreign codes and ex-
isting research results. However, at the center of top slab, the earth
pressure coefficient is lesser than that calculated by domestic and
foreign codes and research results.
(5) The horizontal earth pressure of the sidewall is nonlinear; in par-
ticular, the earth pressure near D/2 and 9D/10 (D is the culvert
height) increases rapidly. Therefore, when designing the culvert
structure, at D/2 and 9D/10, the bearing capacity of the side walls
should be considered.
(6) The general design method of culvert earth pressure stipulated in
the current codes at domestic and abroad cannot accurately cal-
culate the actual earth pressure of the culvert top. When designing
the culvert, factors such as filling height, rock block proportion of
fillings, Poisson's ratio of fillings, and thickness of culvert slab
should be considered, to ensure the safety and cost-effectiveness of
the culvert structure.
(7) The numerical simulation results were compared with those of ex-
isting relevant norms, and the research results are complicated.
Therefore, the coefficients of earth pressure obtained by the nu-
merical simulation in this study, coefficients of earth pressure ob-
tained by existing relevant codes, and research results should be
summarized. Then, a graphics program should be used to compile
them in a future work. The program obtains earth pressure coeffi-
cient or the earth pressure value from different codes and research
results when some parameters are given in the design of the culvert
structure. When designing the culvert structure, when H B , t B ,
and the culvert type are provided, the earth pressure corresponding
to different locations at the culvert top can be obtained under
14
Results in Physics 16 (2020) 103003
different specifications, research results, and numerical simulations.
Moreover, it should be emphasized that this study aimed to provide
a rigid foundation for future research. The research results can verify
the effect of the layered filling method of upper-buried slab culvert,
material characteristics of soil-rock mixture fillings, thickness of culvert
slab, establishment of indoor test model, and the numerical FLAC2D
model for the coefficient of earth pressure.
For other burial methods, culverts types, culverts structural char-
acteristics, and filling materials, similar methods can be used to cal-
culate the earth pressure coefficient at the culvert top, and the culvert
structure can be designed.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Qingdong Tao: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis,
Software, Validation. Zhaoyi He: Conceptualization, Formal analysis,
Investigation, Software, Supervision. Ying Jia: Investigation, Writing -
original draft, Writing - review & editing.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influ-
ence the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgments
We sincerely thank the staff at Southwest University of Science and
Technology, Mianyang, Sichuan, China for their help in the large-scale
direct shear test of soil-rock mixtures. We would also like to thank
Editage (www.editage.cn) for English language editing.
Funding
This work was supported by the National Natural Science
Foundation of China [grant number 51278513]; the Education
Department of Sichuan Province of China [grant numbers 18ZB0307,
16ZB0462]; and the High Speed Railway United Foundation of China
[grant number 201412102601]. The funding agencies had no role in
the study design, the collection, analysis, or interpretation of data, the
writing of the report, or the decision to submit the article for publica-
tion.
References
[1] The Second Railway Survey and Design Institute Group Corporation of China.
Specification for Design of Highway Subgrades (JTG D30-2015). Beijing: China
Railway Publishing House; 2015 [in Chinese].
[2] Yang XW, Zhang YX. A study on the earth pressure theory for high fill culverts.
China Civ Eng J 2005;9:119–24. https://doi.org/10.15951/j.tmgcxb.2005.09.021.
[in Chinese].
[3] Hao YM, Feng ZJ, Li SJ, Dong YX, Li J, Pan F. Study of the factor affecting the top
stress concentration of slab culvert on high filled section in mountainous area.
Highway 2019;64(01):31–7. [in Chinese].
[4] Marston A, Anderson AO. The theory of loads on pipes in ditches and tests of cement
and clay drain tile and sewer pipes. Ames, IA: Iowa Engineering Experiment Station;
1913 [Bulletin 31].
[5] Spangler MG. Underground conduits – an appraisal of modern research. Proc Am
Soc Civ Eng 1947;73:855–84.
[6] Bennett RM, Wood SM, Drumm EC, Rainwater NR. Vertical loads on concrete box
culverts under high embankments. J Bridge Eng – ASCE 2005;10(6):643–9. https://
doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1084-0702(2005)10:6(643).
[7] Clarke NWB. The loads imposed on conduits laid under embankments or valley fills.
Proc Inst Civ Eng Struct Build 1967;36:63–98. https://doi.org/10.1680/iicep.1967.
8591.
[8] Tadros MK, Benak JV. Soil pressure on box culverts. ACI Struct J
1989;86(4):439–50.
[9] Abuhajar O, Naggar HE, Newson T. Static soil culvert interaction the effect of box
culvert geometric configurations and soil properties. Comput Geotech
2015;69:219–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2015.05.005.
Q. Tao, et al.
[10] Kang J, Parker F, Kang YJ, Yoo CH. Effects of frictional forces acting on sidewalls of
buried box culverts. Int J Numer Anal Methods 2008;32(3):289–306. https://doi.
org/10.1002/nag.628.
[11] Kim K, Yoo CH. Design loading on deeply buried box culverts. J Geotech
Geoenviron Eng – ASCE 2005;131(1):20–7. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-
0241(2005)131:1(20).
[12] Li YG, Li Z, Zhang SY. Earth pressure on the top of rectangular trench-buried cul-
verts. Eng Mech 2008;25(1):155–60. [in Chinese].
[13] Li YG, Zhang SY. Experimental and theoretical study on earth pressure on top of
rectangular trench-buried culverts. Rock Soil Mech 2008;29(4):1081–6. https://doi.
org/10.16285/j.rsm.2008.04.049.
[14] Lv JJ, Li YG. Effect of culvert top shape on earth pressure. J China Foreign Highway
2013;33(4):27–9. https://doi.org/10.14048/j.issn.1671-2579.2013.04.019.
[15] Zheng JJ, Luo DP, Ma Q, et al. Numerical simulation and analysis of stress char-
acteristics of prefabricated cover culture structures. J China Foreign Highway
2012;32(1):116–20. https://doi.org/10.14048/j.issn.1671-2579.2012.01.035. [in
Chinese].
[16] Li GW, Ou J, Chou HC, et al. Mechanism of stress characteristics on surface of slab-
culverts under high embankments. Chinese. J Geotech Eng 2018;40(6):1152–60.
https://doi.org/10.11779/CJGE201806022. [in Chinese].
[17] Ma Q, Ku Z, Xiao HL, et al. Calculation of earth pressure on culvert underlying
flexible subgrade. Results Phys 2019;12:535–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rinp.
2018.11.100.
[18] Feng JZ, Li SJ, Hao YM, Dong YX, Fang YW, Hu HB, Pan F, Li J. Study on bearing
capacity of foundation under buried culvert foundation buried depth effect. J
Yangtze River Scientific Res Inst 2019;36(11):83–90. https://doi.org/10.11988/
ckyyb.20180316. [in Chinese].
[19] Fan H, Liu B, Fan Z, Wang C. Model test with similar material and numerical si-
mulation of culvert with high fills. J Jilin Univ (Eng Technol Ed) 2008;02:399–403.
[in Chinese].
[20] Sawamura Y, Ishihara H, Otani Y, Kishida K, Kimura M. Deformation behavior and
acting earth pressure of three-hinge precast arch culvert in construction process.
Underground Space 2018:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.undsp.2018.09.005.
[21] Itasca Consulting Group. FLAC, Fast Lagrangian Analysis of Continua. Version 5.0.
15
Results in Physics 16 (2020) 103003
Minneapolis, Minnesota: Itasca Consulting Group; 2005.
[22] Ma F, Hong BN, Liu X. Impact analysis of culverts-soils interfaces' character para-
meters on the earth pressure around the culverts. J Nanjing Tech Univ (Nat Sci Ed)
2018;40(2). https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1671-7627.2018.02.021. pp. 132–136,
144 [in Chinese].
[23] Li LA, Geng WB, Liu XJ, Zhang Q, Zhou C. Board beam segment method for cal-
culating shear lag of thin-walled box girder with variable section. J Railway Sci Eng
2019;16(2):408–18. https://doi.org/10.19713/j.cnki.43-1423/u.2019.02.017. [in
Chinese].
[24] Zhang YY, Zhang YH, Zhang H. A separate solution method for shear lag effects in
box girders and parameter analysis. Appl Math Mech 2018;39(11):1282–91.
https://doi.org/10.21656/1000-0887.380073. [in Chinese].
[25] The Third Railway Survey and Design Institute Group Corporation of China. Code
for Design on Railway Bridge and Culvert (TB 10002-2017). Beijing: China Railway
Publishing House; 2017 [in Chinese].
[26] China Highway Planning and design Institute (CHPDI). General Specification for
Design of Highway Bridge and Culverts (JTG D60-2015). Beijing: China Comm
Press; 2015 [in Chinese].
[27] American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Inc. AASHTO
standard specifications for highway bridges, 17th ed. Washington, DC; 2007.
[28] Canadian Standards Association. CHBDC. CAN/CSA-S6-06, 10th ed. Mississauga,
ON; 2006.
[29] Yang XW, Zhang YX. Study on arch action and earth pressure theory for culverts
under high embankment. Chinese J Rock Mech Eng 2005;24:3887–93. [in Chinese].
[30] Chen BG, Luo RP, Sun JS. Study of stress characteristics and its influencing factors
of embankment installation slab culverts [J]. Rock Soil Mech
2011;32(01):199–206. https://doi.org/10.16285/j.rsm.2011.01.021. [in Chinese].
[31] McGuigan BL, Valsangkar AJ. Centrifuge testing and numerical analysis of Box
culverts installed in induced trenches. Can Geotech J 2010;47:147–63. https://doi.
org/10.1139/T09-085.
[32] Kang J, Parker F, Kang YJ, Yoo CH. Effects of frictional forces acting on sidewalls of
buried box culverts. Int J Numer Anal Meth Geomech 2008;32:289–306. https://
doi.org/10.1002/nag.628.