Performance of two geosynthetic reinforced walls with recycled construction waste backfill and constructed on collapsible ground

Author:

Santos E.C.G.1,Palmeira E.M.2,Bathurst R.J.34

Affiliation:

1. Assistant Professor, Politechnic School of the University of Pernambuco, Department of Civil Engineering, DEC/POLI, 50.720-001 Recife, PE, Brazil, Telephone: +55 81 3184 7556, Telefax: +55 81 3184 7566, E-mail: edersantos@poli.br

2. Professor, University of Brasília, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, ENC/FT, 70.910-900 Brasília, DF, Brazil, Telephone: +55 61 3107 0969, Telefax: +55 61 3273 4644, E-mail: palmeira@unb.br (corresponding author)

3. Professor, GeoEngineering Centre at Queen's-RMC, Department of Civil Engineering, Royal Military College of Canada, Kingston, Ontario, K7K 7B4 Canada, Telephone: +1 613 541 6000 ext. 6479, Telefax: +1 613 541 6218, E-mail: bathurst-r@rmc.ca

4. Peer review of this paper was supervised by C Yoo, Editorial Board Member

Abstract

ABSTRACT: Geosynthetic reinforced soil walls are now an accepted technology for the solution of earth-retaining problems due to cost savings, easy and quick construction, and associated environmental benefits. Additional savings and reduction in environmental impact can be realised by using recycled construction and demolition waste (RCDW) as the backfill material. This paper describes two such structures that were built to full scale and instrumented. One of the walls was reinforced with a woven polyester geogrid (wall 1) and the other (wall 2) with a relatively more extensible nonwoven polypropylene geotextile. Both walls were constructed using RCDW as backfill material and were built on a foundation soil prone to fabric collapse due to increased stress and/or increase in moisture content. During the monitoring period the walls were subjected to a rainy season followed by induced inundation of the foundation to trigger soil fabric collapse. The results showed that foundation soil collapse influenced wall behaviour more than geosynthetic type. The exception to similar performance was local face bulging which was greater for wall 2 (geotextile) with the more extensible reinforcement under unconfined conditions than for wall 1 (geogrid) which was expected in the moving formwork construction method. However, directly behind the wall face where both reinforcement material types were confined the horizontal displacements were similar. In addition, at locations beyond half of the wall base length the strain distributions were low (1% or less) for both walls. A practical conclusion from this study is that if the wrap-face appearance at end of construction is not a concern (i.e. large bulging) then wall performance is unaffected by the choice of reinforcement types used in this investigation.

Publisher

Thomas Telford Ltd.

Subject

Geotechnical Engineering and Engineering Geology,Civil and Structural Engineering

Cited by 64 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3