An Investigation on the Formation of Cracks at the Corner Turns of the Modular Block Earth Walls
- 118 Downloads
The design manuals for Geosynthetic Reinforced Soil Retaining Walls include the methodology for various conditions, except the case where the wall has a curved corner turn. Lately, some problems were reportedly associated with these types of walls. One of the typical problems is cracking/separation of the modular blocks. The most common method for analysing the behaviour of reinforced soil walls is a 2-D plane-strain analysis, which is insufficient for the current problem. Therefore, in this study, a 3-D finite-element (FE) model, that is capable of modelling corner turns, has been established. The main elements of the model are modular blocks, interface elements, soil, and reinforcements. As a first step, the performance of the FE model was evaluated by comparing the stress–strain response of a laboratory-scale wall with its counterpart in the FE program. Later, a large-size modular block wall model was created and run with various input parameters. The modelling results revealed that the reinforcement stiffness and the soil modulus are effective in the separation and cracking of blocks. It is considered that the cracking of blocks is related to an excessive stress build-up. These stresses reduced when the reinforcement stiffness increased. It is foreseen that the crack occurrence is less likely to happen under reduced stress.
KeywordsSegmental modular block walls TNO DIANA Cracks Corner turns Separation
Compliance with ethical standards
There is no special funding source for this study. The funding came from the first author. However, the experiments were conducted in Bogazici University, Istanbul.
- 1.AASHTO (2002) Standard specifications for highway bridges, 17th edn., pp 111–174Google Scholar
- 2.Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) (2010) Design and construction of mechanically stabilized earth walls and reinforced soil slopes. Federal Highway Administration Demonstration Project 82, Washington, DC, USA, 2010Google Scholar
- 3.Adams M, Nicks J, Stabile T, Wu J, Schlatter W, Hartmann J (2011) Geosynthetic reinforced soil integrated bridge system interim implementation guide, Federal Highway Administration, Mclean, VA, 2011Google Scholar
- 4.National Concrete Masonry Association (NCMA) (2010) Seismic design of segmental retaining walls, TEK 15-9A, 2010, http://www.ncma.org. Accessed 2014
- 9.Guler E, Alexiew D, Basbug E (2012) “Behaviour of geogrid reinforced segmental block walls under earthquake loads”, Geoeuro 5, 5th European Geosynthetics Congress, Valencia Spain, 2012, pp 793–811Google Scholar
- 11.Koseki J, Bathurst RJ, Guler E, Kuwano J, Maugeri M (2006) Keynote lecture: Seismic stability of reinforced soil walls, 8th Int. Conf. on Geosynthetics, Yokohama, Japan, Millpress, Rotterdam, Netherlands, vol. 1, pp 51–77Google Scholar
- 23.Fan CC (2006) “Performance of a two-tier geosynthetic reinforced segmental retaining wall under a surcharge load: Full-scale load test and 3-D finite element analysis”. Comput Geotech 33:69–85Google Scholar
- 24.Yoo C, Kim SB (2008) “Performance of a two-tier geosynthetic reinforced segmental retaining wall under a surcharge load: full-scale load test and 3-D finite element analysis”. Geotext Geomembr 26:460–472Google Scholar
- 25.Diana User’s Manual (2014) Release 9.5, TNO DIANA BV, NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
- 26.Duncan JM, Chang CY (1970) “Nonlinear analysis of stress and strains in soils”. J Soil Mech Found Divi ASCE 96 5:1629–1653Google Scholar