Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Protection of Buried Pipelines and Underground Utilities Using Geocells

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Geocells

  • 423 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter presents the results of the laboratory model tests and the numerical studies conducted on small diameter PVC pipes, buried in geocell reinforced sand beds. The aim of the study was to evaluate the suitability of the geocell reinforcement in protecting the underground utilities and buried pipelines. In addition to geocells, the efficacy of only geogrid and geocell with additional basal geogrid cases was also studied. A PVC (Poly Vinyl Chloride) pipe with external diameter 75 mm and thickness 1.4 mm was used in the experiments. The vehicle tire contact pressure was simulated by applying the pressure on the top of the bed with the help of a steel plate. Results suggest that the use of geocells with additional basal geogrid considerably reduces the deformation of the pipe as compared to other types of reinforcements. Further, the depth of placement of pipe was also varied between 1B and 2B (B is the width of loading plate) below the plate in the presence of geocell with additional basal geogrid. More than 50% reduction in the pressure and more than 40% reduction in the strain values were observed in the presence of reinforcements at different depths as compared to the unreinforced beds. Conversely, the performance of the subgrade soil was also found to be marginally influenced by the position of the pipe, even in the presence of the relatively stiff reinforcement system. Further, experimental results were validated with three-dimensional numerical studies using FLAC3D (Fast Lagrangian Analysis of Continua in 3D). A good agreement in the measured pipe stain values was observed between the experimental and numerical studies. Numerical studies revealed that the geocells distribute the stresses in the lateral direction and thus reduce the pressure on the pipe. In addition, the results of the 1-g model tests were scaled up to the prototype case of the shallow buried pipeline below the pavement using the appropriate scaling laws.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

b :

Width of the geocell mattress (m)

B :

Width of the steel plate (m)

C :

Cohesion (kPa)

C c :

Coefficient of curvature (dimensionless)

c i :

Interface cohesion (kPa)

C u :

Coefficient of uniformity (dimensionless)

d :

Pocket size of geocell (m)

D :

Diameter of the pipe (m)

D 10 :

Effective particle size (mm)

e max :

Maximum void ratio of sand (dimensionless)

e min :

Minimum void ratio sand (dimensionless)

G :

Shear modulus of sand (MPa)

γ :

Unit weight of sand (kN/m3)

h :

Height of the geocell mattress (m)

H :

Depth of placement of pipe (m)

k i :

Interface shear modulus (MPa/m)

K g :

Stiffness of the geocell (kN/m)

K p :

Stiffness of the pipe (kN/m)

L :

Length in general (m)

M :

Mass in general (kg)

N :

Scale factor (dimensionless)

T :

Time in general (s)

F :

Force in general (N)

P u :

Measured stresses on top of the pipe (kPa)

q u :

Applied pressure at the top of the bed (kPa)

q r :

Ultimate bearing capacity of the reinforced bed (kPa)

q s :

Ultimate bearing capacity of the unreinforced bed (kPa)

S :

Settlement of the loading plate (mm)

u :

Depth of placement of the geocell (m)

φ :

Friction angle of the sand (°)

φ i :

Interface friction angle between geocell and sand (°)

References

  • Almeida M, Hosseinpour I, Riccio M, Alexiew D (2014) Behavior of geotextile encased granular columns supporting test embankment on soft deposit. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0001256,04014116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arockiasamy M, Chaallal O, Limpeteeparakarn T (2006) Full-scale field tests on flexible pipes under live load application. J Perform Constructed Facil 20(1):21–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ASTM D638 (2010) Standard test method for tensile properties of plastics. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • ASTM D4885 (2011) Standard test method for determining performance strength of geomembranes by wide strip tensile method. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • ASTM D6637 (2011) Standard test method for determining the tensile properties of geogrid by the single or multi-rib tensile method. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • Bia X-H, Huang X-Z, Zhang W (2013) Bearing capacity of square footing supported by a geobelt-reinforced crushed stone cushion on soft soil. Geotext Geomembr 38:37–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brachman RWI, Moor ID, Rowe RK (2000) The design of a laboratory facility for evaluating the structural response of small diameter buried pipe. Can Geotech J 37(2):281–295

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brachman RWI, Moore ID, Munro SM (2008) Compaction effects on strains within profiled thermoplastic pipes. Geosynthetics Int 15(2):72–85

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buckingham E (1914) On physically similar systems; illustrations of the use of dimensional equations. Phys Rev 4(4):345–376

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butterfield R (1999) Dimensional analysis for geotechnical engineers. Geotechnique 49(3):357–366

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dash SK, Krishnaswamy NR, Rajagopal K (2001) Bearing capacity of strip footings supported on geocell reinforced sand. Geotext Geomembr 19:235–256

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Demir A, Laman M, Yildiz A, Ornek M (2013) Large scale field tests on geogrid reinforced granular fill underlain by soft clay. Geotext Geomembr 38:1–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fakher A, Jones CJFP (1996) Discussion on bearing capacity of rectangular footings on geogrid reinforced sand, by Yetimoglu T, Wu JTH, Saglamer A, 1994. J Geotech Eng 122:326–327

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghazavi M, Lavasan AA (2008) Interference effect of shallow foundations constructed on sand reinforced with geosynthetics. Geotext Geomembr 26(5):404–415

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hegde A, Sitharam TG (2013) Experimental and numerical studies on footings supported on geocell reinforced sand and clay beds. Int J Geotech Eng 7(4):347–354

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hegde A, Sitharam TG (2015a) Joint strength and wall deformation characteristics of a single cell subjected to uniaxial compression. Int J Geomech 15(5):04014080

    Google Scholar 

  • Hegde AM, Sitharam TG (2015b) Effect of infill materials on the performance of geocell reinforced soft clay beds. Geomech Geoengineering 10(3):163–173 

    Google Scholar 

  • Hegde A, Sitharam TG (2015c) Experimental and numerical studies on protection of buried pipelines and underground utilities using geocells. Geotext Geomembr 43:372–381

    Google Scholar 

  • Hegde A, Sitharam TG (2015d) 3-dimensional numerical modeling geocell reinforced sand beds. Geotext Geomembr 43(2):171–181

    Google Scholar 

  • Hegde AM, Sitharam TG (2015e) 3-Dimensional numerical analysis of geocell reinforced soft clay beds by considering the actual geometry of geocell pockets. Can Geotech J 52(9):1396–1407

    Google Scholar 

  • Hegde A, Sitharam TG (2015f) Use of bamboo in soft ground engineering and its performance comparison with geosynthetics: experimental studies. Mater Civil Eng 27(9):04014256

    Google Scholar 

  • Hegde A, Kadabinakatti S, Sitharam TG (2014) Protection of buried pipelines using a combination of geocell and geogrid reinforcement: experimental studies. Ground Improvement and Geosynthetics, Geotechnical Special Publication-238, ASCE, pp 289–298

    Google Scholar 

  • Hegde A, Kadabinakatti S, Sitharam TG (2016) Use of geocells to protect buried pipelines and underground utilities in soft clayey soils. Geotechnical Spaecial Publication 271 ASCE (Geo-Chicago 2016), pp 914–924

    Google Scholar 

  • Indraratna B, Nimbalkar S, Christie D, Rujikiatkamjorn C, Vinod J (2010) Field assessment of the performance of a ballasted rail track with and without geosynthetics. Geotech Geoenviron Eng 136:907–917

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Indraratna B, Biabani M, Nimbalkar S (2014) Behavior of geocell reinforced subballast subjected to cyclic loading in plane strain condition. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0001199

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Itaska (2008) Fast lagrangian analysis of continua (FLAC3D 4.00). Itasca Consulting Group Inc, Minneapolis, USA

    Google Scholar 

  • Lambert S, Nicot F, Gotteland P (2011) Uniaxial Compressive behavior of scrapped tire and sand filled wire netted geocell with a geotextile envelop. Geotext Geomembr 29:483–490

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Madhavi LG, Somwanshi A (2009) Effect of reinforcement form on the bearing capacity of square footing on sand. Geotext Geomembr 27:409–422

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mehdipour I, Ghazavi M, Moayed RZ (2013) Numerical study on stability analysis of geocell reinforced slopes by considering the bending effect. Geotext Geomembr 37:23–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mir Mohammad Hosseini SM, Moghaddas Tafreshi SN (2002) Soil structure interaction of embedded pipes under cyclic loading conditions. Int J Eng 15(2):117–124

    Google Scholar 

  • Moghaddas Tafreshi SN, Dawson AR (2010) Behavior of footings on reinforced sand subjected to repeated loading comparing use of 3D and planar geotextile. Geotext Geomembr 28:434–447

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moghaddas Tafreshi SN, Khalaj O (2008) Laboratory tests of small-diameter HDPE pipes buriedin reinforced sand under repeated-load. Geotext Geomembr 26:145–163

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moghaddas Tafreshi SN, Khalaj O, Dawson AR (2014) Repeated loading of soil containing granulated rubber and multiple geocell layers. Geotext Geomembr 42:25–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palmeira EM, Andrade HKPA (2010) Protection of buried pipes against accidental damage using geosynthetics. Geosynthetics Int 17(4):228–241

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pokharel SK, Han J, Leshchinsky D, Parsons RL, Halahmi I (2010) Investigation of factors influencing behavior of single geocell reinforced bases under static loading. Geotext Geomembr 28(6):570–578

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rowe RK, Taechakumthorn C (2011) Design of reinforced embankments on soft clay deposits considering the viscosity of both foundation and reinforcement. Geotext Geomembr 29:448–461

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saride S, Gowrisetti S, Sitharam TG, Puppala AJ (2009) Numerical simulations of sand and clay. Ground Improv 162(GI4):185–198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sireesh S, Sitharam TG, Dash SK (2009) Bearing capacity of circular footing on geocell sand mattress overlying clay bed with void. Geotext Geomembr 27(2):89–98

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sitharam TG, Hegde A (2013) Design and construction of geocell foundation to support the embankment on settled red mud. Geotext Geomembr 41:55–63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Srinivasa Murthy BR, Sridharan A, Bindumadhava (1993) Evaluation of interfacial frictional resistance. Geotext Geomembr 12:235–253

    Google Scholar 

  • Srivastava A, Goyal CR, Raghuvanshi A (2012) Load settlement response of footing placed over buried flexible pipe through a model plate load test. Int J Geomech 13(4):477–481

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tavakoli Mehrjardi Gh, Moghaddas Tafreshi SN, Dawson AR (2012) Combined use of geocell reinforcement and rubber soil mixtures to improve performance of buried pipes. Geotext Geomembr 34:116–130

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tavakoli Mehrjardi Gh, Moghaddas Tafreshi SN, Dawson AR (2013) Pipe response in a geocell-reinforced trench and compaction considerations. Geosynthetics Int 20(2):105–118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thakur JK, Han J, Pokharel SK, Parsons RL (2012) Performance of geocell-reinforced recycled asphalt pavement (RAP) bases over weak subgrade under cyclic plate loading. Geotext Geomembr 35:14–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang X, Han J, Pokharel SK, Manandhar C, Parsons RL, Leshchinsky D, Halahmi I (2012) Accelerated pavement testing of unpaved roads with geocell reinforced sand bases. Geotext Geomembr 32:95–103

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The first author is thankful to Mr. Sharan Kadabinakatti (graduate research student) for his help in carrying out the laboratory model tests in the initial stage of this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Patna, Patna, 801106, India

    Amarnath M. Hegde

  2. Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati (IITG), Surjyamukhi Road, North, Amingaon, Guwahati, Assam, 781039, India

    Prof. T. G. Sitharam (Director)

Authors
  1. Amarnath M. Hegde
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Prof. T. G. Sitharam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Amarnath M. Hegde .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati (IITG), Guwahati, Assam, India

    T. G. Sitharam

  2. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Patna, Patna, Bihar, India

    Amarnath M. Hegde

  3. Department of Civil Engineering, National Institute of Technology Karnataka, Mangalore, Karnataka, India

    Sreevalsa Kolathayar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Hegde, A.M., Sitharam, T.G. (2020). Protection of Buried Pipelines and Underground Utilities Using Geocells. In: Sitharam, T., Hegde, A., Kolathayar, S. (eds) Geocells. Springer Transactions in Civil and Environmental Engineering. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-6095-8_13

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-6095-8_13

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-15-6094-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-15-6095-8

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation