Skip to main content
Log in

Pullout resistance of geogrid reinforcement with in-plane drainage capacity in cohesive soil

  • Geotechnical Engineering
  • Published:
KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study presents the results of geogrid pullout tests conducted in wet and fine-grained soils. Failures of reinforced soil structures have often involved inadequate drainage due to the use of fine-grained soils, which has led to stringent specifications for backfill material in such structures although there are significant economic reasons for relieving the specifications. One approach to improve the issue is to reinforce fine-grained soils with geosynthetic providing both reinforcement and lateral drainage. Although using reinforcement with in-plane drainage capability is conceptually promising, transmissivity requirements for this application have not been properly evaluated. Pullout tests were conducted on cohesive soils using geogrids with the same tensile strength but with and without in-plane drainage channels. The results indicate that geogrids with in-plane drainage layers show higher pullout resistance than conventional geogrids. The finding contributes to promoting the use of poorly draining soils as backfill material.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Benjamim, C. V. S., Bueno, B. S., and Zornberg J. G. (2007). “Field monitoring evaluation of geotextile-reinforced soil-retaining walls.” Geosynthetics International, Vol. 14, No. 2, pp. 100–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bergado, D. T., Long, P. V., Lee, C. H., Loke, K. H., and Werner, G. (1994). “Performance of reinforced embankment on soft Bangkok clay with highstrength geotextile reinforcement.” Geotextiles and Geomembranes, Vol. 13, Nos. 6–7, pp. 403–420.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bergado, D. T., Long, P. V., and Srinivasa Murthy, B. R. (2002). “A case study of geotextile-reinforced embankment on soft ground.” Geotextiles and Geomembranes, Vol. 20, No. 6, pp. 343–365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christopher, B. R. and Berg, R. R. (1990). “Pullout evaluation of geosynthetics in cohesive soils.” Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Geotextiles, Geomembranes and Related Products, The Hague, Vol. 2, Netherlands, pp. 731–736.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elias, V. and Swanson, P. (1983). “Cautions of reinforced earth with residual soils.” Transportation Research Record, Vol. 919, pp. 21–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Helwany, S. M. B., Reardon, G., and Wu, J. T. H. (1999). “Effects of backfill on the performance of GRS retaining walls.” Geotextiles and Geomembranes, Vol. 17, No. 1, pp. 1–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jewell, R. A. and Jones, C. J. (1981). “Reinforcement of clay soils and waste materials using grids.” Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Balkema, Vol. 2, Stockholm, Sweden, pp. 701–706.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, J. K. (1991). “Conduction phenomena: From theory togeotechnical practice.” Géotechnique, Vol. 41, No. 3, pp. 299–340.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, J. K. and Zornberg, J. G. (1994). “Reinforced soil structures with poorly draining backfills. Part II: Case histories and applications.” Geosynthetic International, Vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 265–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porbaha, A. (1996). “Geotextile reinforced lime treated cohesive soil retaining walls.” Geosynthetics International, Vol. 3, No. 3, pp. 227–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porbaha, A. and Goodings, D. J. (1996). “Centrifuge modeling of geotextilereinforced cohesive soil retaining walls.” Journal of Geotechnical Engineering.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tan, S. A., Chew, S. H, Ng, C. C., Loh, S. L., Karunaratne, G. P., and Loke, K. H. (2001). “Large-scale drainage behavior of composite geotextile and geogrid in residual soil.” Geotextiles and Geomembranes, Vol. 19, Issue 3, pp. 163–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Terram Geosynthetics Ltd. (2001). Paragrid and Paradrain for Soil Reinforcement, www.terram.co.uk

    Google Scholar 

  • Yamauchi, H., Tatsuoka, F., Nakamura, K., and Iwasaki, K. (1987). “Stability of steep clay embankments reinforced with a non-woven geotextile.” Proceedings of the Post Vienna Conference on Geotextiles, Singapore, pp. 370–386.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeynep, D. and Tezcan, S. (1992). “Cost analysis of reinforced soil walls.” Geotextiles and Geomembranes, Vol. 11, No. 1, pp. 29–4382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zornberg, J. G. and Mitchell, J. K. (1994). “Reinforced soil structures with poorly draining backfills. Part I: Reinforcement interactions and functions.” Geosynthetic International, Vol. 1, No. 2, pp. 103–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to BooHyun Nam.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kang, Y., Nam, B., Zornberg, J.G. et al. Pullout resistance of geogrid reinforcement with in-plane drainage capacity in cohesive soil. KSCE J Civ Eng 19, 602–610 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12205-013-0274-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12205-013-0274-4

Keywords

Navigation