GSP 141 International Perspectives on Soil Reinforcement Applications

Geosynthetic Reinforcement for Soft Foundations: Brazilian Perspectives

E.M. Palmeira

University of Brasilia, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering – Faculty

of Technology, 70910-900 Brasilia, DF, Brazil; Tel.: 55-61-273 7313; Fax: 55-61-
307 3065 or 55-61-273 4644; E-Mail: palmeira@unb.br
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Kungliga Tekniska Hogskola on 01/28/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Abstract

Brazil has large regions of its territory covered with soft soil deposits. Some of these
deposits can be over 40m deep with very low shear strength. These types of
situations pose important challenges for designers and contractors in civil
engineering works. In this context geosynthetics can be effectively employed as
reinforcement and its use has increased markedly in the last decades in the country.
The same applies to the use of prefabricated vertical drains for the acceleration of
soft soil consolidation. This paper presents the Brazilian perspectives on the use of
geosynthetics in such applications. A case-history is also presented and discussed.

Introduction

Soft soil deposits can be challenging materials to work with in geotechnical

engineering. When not properly designed and constructed, embankments on such
soils can fail prematurely or experience large deformations which may damage or
limit the functionality of structures on it. Geosynthetics has been extensively used in
the last decades as reinforcement or as vertical drainage layers for the reinforcement
and stabilization of soft soil deposits under embankments. The presence of
reinforcement layers speeds up the construction process, saves fill material, allows
the use of steeper embankments and reduces differential settlements. Prefabricated
vertical drains accelerate soft soil consolidation, are quicker and easier to transport
and install than traditional granular drains and can be very cost-effective in regions
were granular materials are scarce or have their exploitation limited by environment
protection regulations.

Large and some times very deep deposits of soft soils are common along the
Brazilian territory. These deposits can bring several technical problems to the design
and construction of geotechnical engineering works which may demand very
expensive solutions.

The application of new technologies for the stabilization of embankments on soft soil
has increased significantly in Brazil during the last decades, in particular with regard
to the use of the soil reinforcement technique. Among these techniques the most
popular are the use of geosynthetic reinforcement to improve short term stability of
embankments on soft soils and prefabricated vertical drains for the acceleration of

Copyright ASCE 2005 Soil Reinforcement Applications

International Perspectives on Soil Reinforcement Applications
 GSP 141 International Perspectives on Soil Reinforcement Applications

consolidation settlements. This paper presents and discusses design practices

commonly used in Brazil for these types of problems.

Stabilizing Solutions and Design Practices in Brazil

Table 1 summarises some methods for the stabilization or construction of

embankments on soft foundations and their applicability in Brazil. The use of a
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Kungliga Tekniska Hogskola on 01/28/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

specific solution, or combinations of solutions, depends on the characteristics of

project, for instance, if large settlements are acceptable or not. Techniques such as
the use of electrosmosis or vacuum to accelerate soft soils consolidation in important
engineering projects are yet inexistent in Brazil to the knowledge of the author, being
restricted to research. Almost the same applies to the use of low weight fill materials,
although some few applications of geofoams have been reported in abutments on soft
soils. The use of stabilising berms is still common when fill material is cheap and
there are no space restrictions to the use of such berms. Piled embankments are
expensive solutions and still restricted to situations where embankment settlements
have to be significantly and immediately reduced, finding applications mainly in
bridge abutments and railways embankments on soft soils (Fahel, 1998, Montez,
2003). Vertical drainage is very common to accelerate consolidation settlements,
with prefabricated vertical drains gaining ground in the last decades in comparison to
the use of traditional sand drains.

The use of geosynthetic as basal reinforcement in Brazil is not yet as wide spread as
in developed countries, but certainly is one of the techniques which has experienced
the most marked increase in usage in the past 15 years. The main limitations for an
even greater increase in its use are associated with the high cost of high strength
reinforcement materials available in the country and the lack of knowledge of old
engineering professionals on the potentials of the solution. The use of geosynthetics
in piled embankments is still very limited compared to the situation in other
countries, although the interest in this type of solution is increasing slowly.

The most common design practices for geosynthetic reinforced embankments on soft
soils in Brazil involve the use of limit equilibrium methods for the determination of
the required tensile strength of the reinforcement for a target overall safety factor for
the embankment. Reduction factors are applied to the reinforcement strength to
account to the effects of creep, mechanical damages, degradation and material
uncertainties. When circular failure surfaces are acceptable, slope stability analysis
methods such as the Modified Bishop and Janbu methods are commonly employed,
particularly the former (Palmeira et al., 1998, Palmeira, 2002). For non circular
failure surfaces, Janbu’s method seems to be the most popular. Solutions based on
design charts such as those by Low et al. (1990) and Milligan and Busbridge (1983)
have also been used. For the analysis of the possibility of soft soil expulsion, limit
equilibrium analysis is also employed. Overall safety factors for the reinforced
embankment range typically from 1.2 to 1.5, depending on the project characteristics.
In general, the use of more sophisticated numerical analyses, based on finite element
or finite difference methods, as design tools is still limited to special situations, and

Copyright ASCE 2005 Soil Reinforcement Applications

International Perspectives on Soil Reinforcement Applications
 GSP 141 International Perspectives on Soil Reinforcement Applications

the utilization of computer codes such as PLAXIS and FLAC are very common for
these analyses.

Table 1. Types of solutions for the construction of embankments on soft soils.

Type of solution Usage Cost
Electrosmosis or vacuum Inexistent Very high
Geosynthetic reinforcement Rather common High
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Kungliga Tekniska Hogskola on 01/28/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Low weight fill materials Very rare High

Piled embankments Only in specific situations, like High
bridge abutments
Stabilising berms Common Usually low
Replacement of soft soil Only for shallow depths (< 3m) Usually low
Vertical drainage Very common Average

Federal Regulations or Guidelines

The Brazilian Department of Transportation Infrastructure (DNIT) has established

standards to be followed for the design and construction of embankments on soft
soils in federal highways, including the use of geosynthetics (PRO 380/98 and PRO
381/98, DNIT 1998a and b). The standards PRO 381/98 also prescribes minimum
numbers of laboratory and field tests to be carried out, applicability of construction
solutions, use of geotechnical instrumentation and classifies highway embankments
on soft soils in three categories. Class I embankments are those constructed close to
important existing structures, such as bridges, pipelines, etc. Class II embankments
are those not so close to existing structures but greater than 3m in height. Class III
embankments are those away from existing structures and lower than 3m. The more
expensive and restrictive solutions regarding soft soil stability and deformations are
associated to the construction of classes I and II embankments.

For geosynthetics reinforced embankments PRO 381/98 (DNIT, 1998b) establishes

that the design tensile strength of the reinforcement must be given by

Tref
Td = (1)
f md f env

where Td is the design reinforcement strength, Tref is the reinforcement reference

tensile strength, ƒmd is the reduction factor for mechanical damages and ƒenv is the
reduction factor for degradation of the reinforcement caused by the environment.

The reference tensile strength of the reinforcement is determined dividing the result
obtained in a index tensile test (wide strip tensile tests) by a reduction factor to
account for creep, taking into account the temperature to which the reinforcement
will be subjected, the life time of the project (or the period along which the
reinforcement function will be required) and uncertainties regarding test results
(scatter, extrapolations, etc). Values of ƒmd ranging from 1.1 to 1.7 are prescribed,

Copyright ASCE 2005 Soil Reinforcement Applications

International Perspectives on Soil Reinforcement Applications
 GSP 141 International Perspectives on Soil Reinforcement Applications

depending on the type of fill material and reinforcement type and characteristics. A
minimum value of ƒenv of 1.1 must be adopted. Minimum values for the product
ƒmdƒenv in equation 1 must be attended depending on the class of the embankment,
which are: for Class I, ƒmdƒenv 2, for Class II, ƒmdƒenv 1.75 and for Class III,
ƒmdƒenv 1.5.

Regarding the use of geodrains for consolidation acceleration, PRO 381/98 (DNIT,
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Kungliga Tekniska Hogskola on 01/28/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

1998b) prescribes the requirements presented in Table 2. The installation of

prefabricated vertical drains must be done with the drain encased to avoid
mechanical damages and the casing must have a cross-section area smaller than 70
cm2 to reduce soft soil disturbance during drain installation. The drains must be
driven through a drainage blanket at the top of the soft soil layer with thickness
greater than 0.3 m which must also allow the traffic of construction vehicles without
compromising its drainage function. Other prescriptions are also presented with
regard to this drainage blanket. For design purposes, depending on the class of the
embankment, the following average percentage of consolidation (U) values are
required before the removal of the surcharge on top of the embankment:
• For Class I embankments: U = 96 %;
• For Class II embankments: U = 90 %;
• For Class III embankments: U = 80%.

Table 2. Requirements for prefabricated drains according PRO-381/98.

Minimum discharge capacity, m3/yr 1000
Minimum tensile strength, kN 2.5
Minimum tensile strain at failure, % 30
Minimum spacing between drains, m 0.9

The standard PRO-380/98 (DNIT, 1998a) deals with minimum required types and
numbers of tests to be performed on geosynthetics for their use in federal highways,
regarding quality control. Tests such as mass per unit area, thickness determination,
wide strip tensile tests, normal permeability and in-plane permeability are required,
depending on the geosynthetic type and function. The tests must be performed by
accredited laboratories and the results may lead to the acceptance or rejection of the
products based on standardised statistical analyses and on the comparison between
test results and products’ data presented in manufacturers’ catalogues.

Case History of Reinforced Embankment on Soft Soil

The BR-101 highway is one of the most important Brazilian highways. During the
last decade works have been taking place for the duplication of this highway, which
is very important for tourist and economical reasons. A large portion of the highway
crosses regions of very soft soil deposits which complicated the construction works,
particularly in river and channel crossings. The case-history presented below shows
the design and performance of reinforced abutments for the crossing of river
Inferninho, in the state of Santa Catarina, south region of Brazil (Fahel, 2003).

Copyright ASCE 2005 Soil Reinforcement Applications

International Perspectives on Soil Reinforcement Applications
 GSP 141 International Perspectives on Soil Reinforcement Applications

The crossing of the river Inferninho involved the construction of two reinforced
abutments, referred hereafter as North and South abutments, with total heights equal
to 6m. During construction a 1.5 m high fill surcharge layer was installed to work in
combination with prefabricated vertical drains to compensate for consolidation
settlements. Figures 1(a) and (b) present the geometric characteristics of the
abutments. The duplication of the highway in this region was made with the
extremity of the new embankment resting on the side of the old one. Because uni-
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Kungliga Tekniska Hogskola on 01/28/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

axial grid reinforcement was used and the strongest grid direction was orientated
parallel to the embankment axis, the designers used 30 m wide berms along the
embankment side slopes (Fig. 1b) to increase the stability of these slopes. The author
does not know why the designers chose uniaxial grids rather than biaxial ones for
that matter. Perhaps, that decision was due to economic reasons. The tensile strengths
of the geogrid used were 200 kN/m and 15 kN/m, depending on the direction
considered (machine and cross-machine, respectively). Figure 2 shows one of the
geogrid layers being placed in the field. For the reinforcement of the abutments 8
geogrid layers were used with a spacing equal to 0.4 m.

At the time of the construction of the abutments, the construction of the bridge was
in its final stages. Because of that, 18 m berms facing the river were also constructed
(Fig. 1a) to minimise horizontal displacements of the soft soil that might damage the
bridge foundations. The presence of the bridge certainly was another reason for the
designers to orient the strongest reinforcement direction parallel to the abutment axis.

The soft soil deposit in the region consisted of a organic clay with layers and lens of
sand and with a total thickness varying between 12 and 17m. The undrained shear
strength (field vane and CPTU tests) varied through depth between 10 kPa and 40
kPa. CPTU tests yielded values of horizontal consolidation coefficient ranging from
334 m2/yr to 1278 m2/yr. The fill material used in the reinforced zone of the
abutments was a coarse sand with dry unit weight of 15.5 kN/m3 and friction angle of
33o. Above the reinforced zone the fill material consisted of a mixture of rock
elements, sand and clay.

Prefabricated vertical drains were installed to accelerate consolidation settlements.

The drains had cross section dimensions of 5 mm by 100 mm, with a rather rigid
plastic core encased by a nonwoven geotextile. The spacing between vertical drains
used was equal to 1.3 m. A drainage blanket 0.4m thick was placed at the base of the
embankments.

Eight layers of a uniaxial geogrid reinforcement were used to reinforce the

abutments. The characteristics of the geogrid are presented in Table 3. The spacing
between reinforcement layers was equal to 0.4m. The strongest reinforcement
direction was oriented along the abutment axis.

Field instrumentation of the embankments consisted of vibrating wire and

Casagrande piezometers, inclinometers, magnetic extensometers, settlement plates, a
full profile settlement gauge (horizontal inclinometer) and vibrating wire strain

Copyright ASCE 2005 Soil Reinforcement Applications

International Perspectives on Soil Reinforcement Applications
 GSP 141 International Perspectives on Soil Reinforcement Applications

meters in the reinforcement layers. Figure 3 shows the location of the instruments
used.

8 layers of geogrid, 30 m long, spacing L

C
equal to 0.4m
bridge
fill 1.5
6.0 m 1 18
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Kungliga Tekniska Hogskola on 01/28/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

0.4 soft clay

17.0
soft clay

prefabricated vertical drains soft clay

(a) Cross-section parallel to the abutment axis

surcharge existing embankment

new embankment
18 3.0 18
reinforcement
1,5
berm 1.5
30 1 1.5
1 6.0
3.0
? ? ? ? ?
0.4
5.0

soft clay
17.0

soft clay
4.0

vertical drains (spacing equal to 1.3 m)

Dimensions in meters

(b) Cross-section normal to the abutment axis.

Figure 1. Geometrical characteristics of the reinforced abutments.

Table 3. Reinforcement characteristics

Mass per unit area (g/m2) 775
Tensile strength (wide strip tests), kN/m 200 / 15(*)
Maximum tensile strain, % 12
Tensile stiffness (wide strip tests), kN/m 1800
(*) Machine and cross-machine directions, respectively.

Copyright ASCE 2005 Soil Reinforcement Applications

International Perspectives on Soil Reinforcement Applications
 GSP 141 International Perspectives on Soil Reinforcement Applications
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Kungliga Tekniska Hogskola on 01/28/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Figure 2. Installation of a geogrid layer in the field.

existing highway

Florianópolis

R12 R9 Tijucas

C3 I3 R6 R3
Inferninho river

I1 R5 R2
P1
R7 R4 R1
P1 a P4 R10
C2 I2 C1
South
I4 15 5 5 15 North
abutment
abutment
berm berm

I2 - inclinometer full profile settlement gauge

P4 - piezometer C1- Casagrande piezometer
R3 - settlement plate

Figure 3. Instrumentation of the case-history.

Figures 4(a) and (b) show the horizontal displacements measured by inclinometers I3
and I4 in the South abutment. Inclinometer I3 was installed in the slope facing the
river, while inclinometer I4 was installed at the lateral slope (Fig. 3). It can be noted
that the horizontal displacements of the soft foundation towards the river (I3) were
considerable smaller than those observed along the direction normal to the abutment
axis (I4). The smaller values of horizontal displacements measured by inclinometer
I3 can be a consequence of the combined effects due to the presence of the 18 m
wide berm facing the river and of the greater reinforcement stiffness along the axis
direction. The greater berm width (30 m) along the lateral slopes was not sufficient to
reduce the horizontal displacements normal to the abutment axis to as much as those
observed along the axis direction. It is believed that the reinforcement layers
influenced little the displacements along the direction normal to the abutment axis
because of their length and stiffness along that direction.

Copyright ASCE 2005 Soil Reinforcement Applications

International Perspectives on Soil Reinforcement Applications
 GSP 141 International Perspectives on Soil Reinforcement Applications

The horizontal movements of the abutments caused cracks along the border of the
existing highway pavement, as shown in Figure 5.

Parametric Study by the Finite Element Method

The results in Figure 4 suggest that the presence of the reinforcement may have
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Kungliga Tekniska Hogskola on 01/28/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

another beneficial effect which is the reduction of the horizontal displacements of the
soft foundation. Indeed, numerical analyses also predict this type of benefit brought
by the use of basal reinforcement in embankments on soft soils. Figure 6 shows the
geometrical characteristics of a numerical analyses on an hypothetical situation using
the computer code PLAXIS (Brinkgreve and Vermeer, 1998) to investigate the
influence of the construction of an embankment on soft soil close to the foundations
of an existing structure (Macedo, 2002). Table 4 summarises the properties of the
soil layers used in the parametric study. The reinforcement layers were modelled
using the “geotextile element” present in the computer code employed.

abutment height (m)

0
4.2 0
4 1.8
2
8
Depth (m)

4
Depth (m)

3.5
12 6 2.4
16 8
abutment height (m)
20 10

24 12
-2 0 2 4 6 0 5 10 15 20 25
Horizontal displacements (cm) Horizontal displacements (cm)

(a) Inclinometer I3 (b) Inclinometer I4

Figure 4. Horizontal displacements along depth measured by inclinometers I3 and I4.

Figure 7 shows the variation of maximum horizontal displacements ( hmax) predicted

in the piles as a function of reinforcement stiffness (J) for varying distances (d) of the
piles to the embankment toe (Fig. 6). It can be observed that the numerical analyses
predicted significantly smaller horizontal displacements of the piles in reinforced
embankments in comparison to the unreinforced case (J = 0 in Figure 7). It can also
be observed that the influence of the reinforcement decreases as d increases, although
the proximity of the piles to the embankment toe also influences the mobilized
horizontal displacements of the soft soil. These results corroborate field observations
such as the one presented in the case history presented above. Additional numerical
analyses showed even greater horizontal displacement reductions when vertical
drains were combined with basal reinforcement of the embankment (Macedo, 2002).

Copyright ASCE 2005 Soil Reinforcement Applications

International Perspectives on Soil Reinforcement Applications
 GSP 141 International Perspectives on Soil Reinforcement Applications
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Kungliga Tekniska Hogskola on 01/28/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Figure 5. Cracks along theborder of the existing pavement.

neighbouring structure
reinforcement

Aterro
fill d
Reforço

soft soilSolo Mole

Figure 6. Geometrical characteristics and finite element mesh used in the

numerical analyses (Macedo, 2002).

Table 4. Soil properties used in the numerical analysis.

Property Material
Soft soil Fill
Soil unit weight, , kN/m3 13 19
Permeability coefficient, k, m/day 0.001 1
Young modulus, E', kPa 1730 15000
Poisson ratio, ' 0.3 0.3
Shear modulus, G', kPa 665 5769
Cohesion, c', kPa 5 1
Friction angle, ', degrees 25 30
Dilatancy angle, , degrees 0 0
Earth pressure coefficient at rest 0.57 0.5

Copyright ASCE 2005 Soil Reinforcement Applications

International Perspectives on Soil Reinforcement Applications
 GSP 141 International Perspectives on Soil Reinforcement Applications

0.8
d

0.6

(m)
0.4

hmax
0.2
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Kungliga Tekniska Hogskola on 01/28/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000
J (kN/m)
d=1m d=3m d=6m

Figure 7. Maximum horizontal displacements in the pile.

Conclusions

This paper presented and discussed the Brazilian perspectives regarding the
geosynthetic reinforcement of embankments on soft soils. A case history describing
the performance of a geogrid reinforced abutment was also presented. An analysis of
the current trends in the design and construction of such works suggest that, in spite
of the still usefulness of limit equilibrium methods for routine works, in the coming
years better design methodologies will be pursued, with emphasis to the application
of more powerful numerical tools. The performance of the case history presented
suggests that geosynthetic reinforcement, particularly when combined with vertical
drains, can promote significant reductions of horizontal deformations in the soft
foundation soil. This is particularly relevant when there are structures close to the
embankment to be built (bridge abutments, for instance). In these cases, the
beneficial effects of the reinforcement in reducing soft soil deformation can only be
predicted with more powerful numerical tools.

An increase in the use of geosynthetics in combination with piles in situations where

low settlements are required it is also expected to occur. The presence of the
reinforcement improves arching mechanisms in the fill, reducing settlements of the
embankment surface and allowing the use of a larger spacing between piles.

It is also believed that in the near future regulatory procedures and guidelines
enforced by state or federal agencies will be implemented on a wider basis for the
design and construction of embankments on soft soils and quality control of
geosynthetic products to be employed in this type of work.

References

Brinkgreve, R.B.J. and Vermeer, P.A. (1998). PLAXIS: a finite element code for soil
and rock analyses – version 7. A.A. Balkema, The Netherlands.

Copyright ASCE 2005 Soil Reinforcement Applications

International Perspectives on Soil Reinforcement Applications
 GSP 141 International Perspectives on Soil Reinforcement Applications

DNIT (1998a). PRO 380/98 – Utilisation of geosynthetics in highways. National

Department of Transportation Infrastructure, Brazil, 9 p.
DNIT (1998b). PRO 381/98 – Design of embankments on soft soils for highways.
National Department of Transportation Infrastructure, Brazil, 37 p.
Fahel, A.R.S. (1998). Instability and construction problems in geosynthetic
reinforced works. MSc. Thesis, University of Brasilia, Brasilia, DF, Brazil (in
Portuguese), 117 p.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Kungliga Tekniska Hogskola on 01/28/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fahel, A.R.S. (2003). The performance of geogrid reinforced bridge abutments on

soft soils. DSc. Thesis, University of Brasilia, Brasilia, DF, Brazil (in
Portuguese), 247 p.
Low, B.K., Wong, H.S. Lim, C. and Broms, B.B. (1990). Slip circle analysis of
reinforced embankments on soft ground. Geotextiles and Geomembranes,
9(2), 165-181.
Macedo, I.L. (2002). Numerical analyses of geosynthetic reinforced abutments on
soft soils. MSc. Thesis, University of Brasilia, Brasilia, DF, Brazil (in
Portuguese), 194 p.
Milligan, V. and Busbridge, J.R. (1983). Guidelines for the use of Tensar in
reinforcement of fills over weak foundations. Golder Associates report to the
Tensar Corp., Ontario.
Montez, F.T. (2003). Personal communication.
Palmeira, E.M. (2002). Embankments. Book on Geosynthetics and Their
Applications, S.K. Shukla Ed., Thomas Telford, UK, p. 95-124.
Palmeira, E.M., Pereira, J.H.F. and Silva, A.R.L. (1998). Backanalyses of
geosynthetic reinforced embankments on soft soils. Geotextiles and
Geomembranes, 16(5), 274-292.

Copyright ASCE 2005 Soil Reinforcement Applications

International Perspectives on Soil Reinforcement Applications