A Predictive Model for Pullout Bearing Resistance of Geogrids Embedded in a Granular Soil

  • G. CardileEmail author
  • M. Pisano
  • N. Moraci
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering book series (LNCE, volume 40)


Currently, Geosynthetic-Reinforced Soil (GRS) structures represent one of the most sustainable solutions capable to improve the protection of the territory, guaranteeing high performance (especially in seismic field) with construction costs that are lower than those required for the more traditional Civil and Environmental engineering works. To design such types of structures the knowledge of soil-geosynthetic interface parameters is necessary, and their prediction is very complex due to the elementary interaction mechanisms affecting the pullout resistance of geogrids embedded in soils that are mainly the skin friction between soil and the reinforcement’s solid surface, and the bearing resistance developing on transverse elements. When the spacing between the geogrid’s transverse elements is below a threshold value, the interference mechanism develops and it can affect the bearing resistance, as the passive surfaces cannot be entirely mobilised on bearing members. In order to model the peak pullout resistance of extruded geogrids embedded in a compacted granular soil, the paper deals with a new experimental validation of a theoretical method taking into account the interference mechanism.


Geosynthetics Theoretical model Pullout bearing resistance Interaction mechanisms Interference 


  1. Bergado DT, Shivashankar R, Alfaro MC, Chai J-C, Balasubramaniam AS (1993) Interaction behaviour of steel grid reinforcements in a clayey sand. Geotechnique 43:589–603CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Calvarano LS, Gioffrè D, Cardile G, Moraci N (2014) A stress transfer model to predict the pullout resistance of extruded geogrids embedded in compacted granular soils. In: 10th international conference on geosynthetics, ICG 2014, Berlin, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  3. Carbone L, Gourc JP, Carrubba P, Pavanello P, Moraci N (2015) Dry friction behaviour of a geosynthetic interface using inclined plane and shaking table tests. Geotext Geomembr 43:293–306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cardile G, Gioffrè D, Moraci N, Calvarano LS (2017a) Modelling interference between the geogrid bearing members under pullout loading conditions. Geotext Geomembr 45:169–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cardile G, Moraci N, Calvarano LS (2016a) Geogrid pullout behaviour according to the experimental evaluation of the active length. Geosynth Int 23:194–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cardile G, Moraci N, Pisano M (2016b) In-air tensile load-strain behaviour of HDPE geogrids under cyclic loading. Procedia Eng 158:266–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cardile G, Moraci N, Pisano M (2017b) Tensile behaviour of an HDPE geogrid under cyclic loading: experimental results and empirical modelling. Geosynth Int 24:95–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cardile G, Pisano M, Moraci N (2019) The influence of a cyclic loading history on soil-geogrid interaction under pullout condition. Geotext. Geomembr.
  9. Dyer MR (1985) Observations of the stress distribution in crushed glass with applications to soil reinforcement. PhD thesis, Magdalene College, University of Oxford, Michaelmas Term, p. 220Google Scholar
  10. Ezzein FM, Bathurst RJ (2014) A new approach to evaluate soil-geosynthetic interaction using a novel pullout test apparatus and transparent granular soil. Geotext Geomembr 42:246–255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fannin J, Raju DJ (1993) Large-scale pull-out test results on geosynthetics. In: Geosynthetics ‘93, Vancouver, Canada, pp 633–643Google Scholar
  12. Ferreira J, Zornberg J (2015) A transparent pullout testing device for 3D evaluation of soil-geogrid interaction. Geotech Test J 38:686–707CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Jewell RA (1990) Reinforcement bond capacity. Geotechnique 40:513–518CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Jewell RA (1996) Soil reinforcement with geotextile. CIRIA Thomas Telford, LondonGoogle Scholar
  15. Matsui T, San KC, Nabeshima Y, Amin UN (1996) Bearing mechanism of steel grid reinforcement in pullout test. In: International symposium on earth reinforcement, Fukuoka, Kyushu, Japan, pp 101–105Google Scholar
  16. Milligan GWE, Earl RF, Bush DI (1990) Observations of photo-elastic pullout tests on geotextiles and geogrids. In: 4th international conference on geotextiles, geomembranes and related products, pp 747–751Google Scholar
  17. Moraci N, Cardile G (2008) Pullout behaviour of different geosynthetics embedded in granular soils. In: 4th Asian regional conference on geosynthetics, Shanghai, China, pp 146–150Google Scholar
  18. Moraci N, Cardile G (2009) Influence of cyclic tensile loading on pullout resistance of geogrids embedded in a compacted granular soil. Geotext Geomembr 27:475–487CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Moraci N, Cardile G (2012) Deformative behaviour of different geogrids embedded in a granular soil under monotonic and cyclic pullout loads. Geotext Geomembr 32:104–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Moraci N, Cardile G, Gioffrè D, Mandaglio MC, Calvarano LS, Carbone L (2014) Soil geosynthetic interaction: design parameters from experimental and theoretical analysis. Transp Infrastruct Geotechnol 1:165–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Moraci N, Cardile G, Pisano M (2017) Soil-geosynthetic interface behaviour in the anchorage zone [Comportamento all’interfaccia terre-no-geosintetico nella zona di ancoraggio]. Rivista italiana di geotecnica 51:5–25Google Scholar
  22. Moraci N, Gioffrè D (2006) A simple method to evaluate the pullout resistance of extruded geogrids embedded in a compacted granular soil. Geotext Geomembr 24:198–199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Palmeira EM (2009) Soil–geosynthetic interaction: modelling and analysis. Geotext Geomembr 27:368–390CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Palmeira EM, Milligan GWE (1989) Scale effects in direct shear tests on sand. In: Proceedings of 12th ICSMFE, Rio, Brazil, pp 739–742Google Scholar
  25. Pavanello P, Carrubba P, Moraci N (2018a) The determination of interface friction by means of vibrating table tests. Geotext Geomembr 46:830–835CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Pavanello P, Carrubba P, Moraci N (2018b) Dynamic friction and the seismic performance of geosynthetic interfaces. Geotext Geomembr 46:715–725CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Raju DM (1995) Monotonic and cyclic pullout resistance of geosynthetic. PhD thesis, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, CanadaGoogle Scholar
  28. Zhou J, Chen J-F, Xue J-F, Wang J-Q (2012) Micro-mechanism of the interaction between sand and geogrid transverse ribs. Geosynth Int 19:426–437CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil Engineering, Energy, Environment and Materials (DICEAM)“Mediterranea” University of Reggio CalabriaReggio CalabriaItaly

Personalised recommendations