A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
Biaxial geogrid in current research is oversimplified, and the three-dimensional orthotropic nature of the biaxial geogrid has not been fully understood in numerical investigations. A comparative study on three modeling approaches for the biaxial geogrid is presented in this paper, including the isotropic membrane model, the orthotropic membrane model, and the truss element model. It shows that the orthotropic membrane model yields practically identical results of the maximum geogrid tension when compared with the truss element model, whereas the isotropic membrane model tends to yield values that are approximately 33% larger. A parametric study shows that the pile spacing has the strongest influence on the maximum geogrid tension. The comparison of four analytical methods with the orthotropic membrane model shows that the British standard (BS) 8006 (published in 2010) and EBGEO (published in 2011) methods greatly overestimate the geogrid tension, while the method presented by Zhuang et al. (published in 2014) results in closer agreement.
Biaxial geogrid in current research is oversimplified, and the three-dimensional orthotropic nature of the biaxial geogrid has not been fully understood in numerical investigations. A comparative study on three modeling approaches for the biaxial geogrid is presented in this paper, including the isotropic membrane model, the orthotropic membrane model, and the truss element model. It shows that the orthotropic membrane model yields practically identical results of the maximum geogrid tension when compared with the truss element model, whereas the isotropic membrane model tends to yield values that are approximately 33% larger. A parametric study shows that the pile spacing has the strongest influence on the maximum geogrid tension. The comparison of four analytical methods with the orthotropic membrane model shows that the British standard (BS) 8006 (published in 2010) and EBGEO (published in 2011) methods greatly overestimate the geogrid tension, while the method presented by Zhuang et al. (published in 2014) results in closer agreement.
Three-dimensional behavior of biaxial geogrid in a piled embankment: numerical investigation
2015
Article (Journal)
English
Three-dimensional behavior of biaxial geogrid in a piled embankment: numerical investigation
| British Library Online Contents | 2015
Geogrid Reinforced Piled Embankment in Plane Strain and Three-Dimensional Conditions
| Springer Verlag | 2025
Numerical Analysis of a Geogrid Reinforced Wall on Piled Embankment
| British Library Conference Proceedings | 2008
Three-Dimensional Numerical Modeling of a Piled Embankment
| Online Contents | 2009