PERFORMANCE OF GEOGRID-

REINFORCED
MECHANICALLY STABILIZED
EARTH RETAINING WALLS UNDER
EARTHQUAKE CONDITIONS

BRAJA M. DAS

XXI CONGRESO NACIONAL Y IX CONGRESO

INTERNACIONAL
DE ESTUDIANTES DE INGENERA CIVIL
HUANCAYO 2013
Mechanically Stabilized Earth MSE

Composite material with compacted fill

strengthened by inclusion of tensile
elements:
Metal rods / strips
Geosynthetics
Geotextiles
Geogrids
 French engineer Vidal (1966) initiated present
concept for systematic analysis and design

Since 1966, MSE structures retaining walls

and embankments over soft soil and steep
slopes built all over the world
 Retaining Walls with Metallic Strip
Reinforcement

Reinforced-earth walls are

flexible walls.
Main components:
Backfill granular soil
Reinforcing strips
thin, wide strips placed
at regular intervals
A skin or cover on the
front of the wall
 Geotextiles

Woven geotextiles made of two sets of parallel

filaments or strands of yarn systematically interlaced
to form planar structure

Knitted geotextiles formed by interlocking a series

of loops to one or more filaments of strands of yarn
to form planar structures
 Nonwoven geotextiles formed from fibers or filaments
arranged in oriented or random pattern in planar
structure
Filaments (or short fibers) arranged in a loose web in the
beginning, then bonded by one or combination of:
Chemical bonding by glue, rubber, latex, a
cellulose derivative, or the like
Thermal bonding by heat for partial melting of
filaments
Mechanical bonding by needle punching
Needle-punched nonwoven geotextiles thick; have
high in-plane permeability
 Geogrids
A polymeric (i.e. geosynthetic) material consisting of
connected parallel sets of tensile ribs with apertures of
sufficient size to allow strike-through of surrounding soil,
stone, or other geotechnical material

Primary Functions:
Reinforcement
Separation
In the 1950s, Dr. Brian Mercer (1927-1998) developed
the Netlon process in which plastics are extruded into
a net-like process in one stage. In 1959, he founded
Netlon Ltd. in the United Kingdom to manufacture the
product.
Based on Dr. Mercers further innovative research and
development work on extruded net technology, some
polymer straps and strips were formed into grid-like
products during the 1970s.
The first integral geogrids were developed in the late
1970s and first employed in various applications in the
early 1980s.
In the early stages of development of geogrid,
several universities in the United Kingdom were
heavily involved in a comprehensive program of
research that examined the polymer technology.
These universities were Leeds, Nottingham,
Oxford, Sheffield and Strathclyde.
Initial Extruded Geogrid
Developed by Netlon

Two types: Biaxial

Uniaxial
 Geogrids

Uniaxial Geogrid
 Geogrids
Biaxial Geogrid
 Commercially Available Geogrids
Extruded
Formed using a thick sheet of polyethylene or
polypropylene that is punched and drawn to create
apertures and to enhance engineering properties of
resulting ribs and nodes
Woven
Made by grouping polymericusually polyester or
polypropyleneand weaving in a mesh pattern that
is then coated with a polymeric lacquer
Welded
Made by fusing junctions of polymeric strips. Have
shown good performance when compared to other
types of pavement reinforcement applications
 Geogrids

Rib thickness0.5 to 1.5 mm

Junction thickness2.5 to 5.0 mm
Aperture size25 to 150 mm
Open area of grids50% or more of grid area
Develop reinforcing strength at low strain levels
(such as 2%)
Triaxial Geogrid
 Use of Geogrids over Last 25 Years

Extensively used in construction of earth-supported

and earth-retaining structuresmechanically
stabilized earth (MSE) retaining walls, steep slopes,
and other structures

Less familiar, but increasingly popularadaptation

of this technology is reinforced soil foundations
(RSF)
How do geogrids reinforce?
Reduction of h Prevention of lateral spreading
of material above geogrid
Increase of lateral confinement
Increase of h and hence increase of stiffness
and modulus

Reduction of v Less deformation of granular

material
Broadening of vertical stress
Reduction of v
distribution
Metallic Strip Reinforcement
(Interstate 10, El Paso, Texas)
Construction of a Geotextile-Reinforced
Retaining Wall
HDPE Geogrid-Reinforced Wall with Precast
Concrete Panel Facing Under Construction
Berg, Bonaparte, Anderson and Chouery (1986)
3rd International Conference on Geotextiles, Vienna, Austria
Bridge Abutment on Piles Backfilled with
Granulated Slag
(after Casagrande, 1973)
Retaining Wall Construction Costs in the U.S.
(Koerner et al., 1998)
Seismic Performance of
Retaining Walls

Kobe, Japan Earthquake

January 17, 1995
Magnitude 7.2
 Fumio Tatsuoka, Masaru Tateyama and
Junichi Koseki (1996). Performance of Soil
Retaining Walls for Railway Embankments,
Soils and Foundations (Japan), January,
311-325.

Special Issue
 Gravity retaining
wall

Overturned
 Gravity retaining
wall

Massive
deformation
 Steel strip reinforced
soil structure

Significant deformation
at the top
 Steel strip
reinforced soil
structure

Significant
deformation
at the top
 Reinforced soil
wall supporting
railway
 Geogridreinforced
wall about 5m high
 Performance of
reinforced soil
structures was so
good that many
walls were rebuilt
after the
earthquake using
reinforced soil
 Performance of
reinforced soil
structures was so
good that many
walls were rebuilt
after the
earthquake using
reinforced soil
 Tatsuoka et al. (1996)

In general, older RWs were damaged more seriously, while

gravity-type RWs shows a very low stability against
strong seismic shaking. In addition, many cantilever-type
reinforced concrete RWs behaved poorly.
A geogrid-reinforced soil retaining wall constructed in 1992
at Tanata performed very well despite the fact that the
site was in one of the most severely shaken areas.
Based on these experiences, many damaged
conventional gravity-type RWs were reconstructed as
GRS-RWs.
The performance of geogrid-reinforced soil retaining wall
will foster future confirmation and development of
aseismic design procedures.
Full-Scale Test on Geogrid-Reinforced
Retaining Wall under
Earthquake Conditions

Full-scale reinforced soil retaining wall

Conducted by SEC-Atom Dinamic near

Vyborg in Russia June 2009
 Full-Scale Test on Geogrid-Reinforced
Retaining Wall under Earthquake Condition

Height 3.5m with sand backfill and TW1 facing blocks

(23 blocks high) giving 86 face inclination
Reinforced with 8 layers of geogrid (3m = 0.86H)
Test wall constructed on large shaking table
Total weight of sand and facing around 100t
Extensive monitoring to measure deformation and soil
pressure
Loads applied in 6 earthquakes (EQ1 to EQ6)
 Monitoring

Instruments
Acceleration
Deflection
Earth pressure
 Sand fill

3.5m
Actuator

Shaking table

Supporting frame
Pneumatic cushions
During Construction
Construction Completed
Construction Completed
--0
4 0T
...5
3
2 5 im
e
,sF
ro
m
:0
sT
024681o
:1
5
.8
9
sS
a
m
p
le
s
:1
-5
9
0 01
21
41
6 Vertical
0.5
A3

m/s 2

1
2
3
4 5 op5: 6/16/2009 14:44:43 1 kHz 15.9 s 15900 samples

acceleration
record
during EQ5
--0
2 5T
....5
1 5
0 im
e
,sF
ro
m
:0
sT
024681o
:1
5
.8
9
sS
a
m
p
le
s
:1
-5
9
0 01
21
41
6
Horizontal
0.5 m/s 2

1
A4

2
3
4
5
6 .00
0 op5: 6/16/2009 14:44:43 1 kHz 15.9 s 15900 samples

acceleration
record
during EQ5
 Device to measure
Sand fill lateral deflection at
each block (1 22)

3.5m
Actuator

Shaking table

Supporting frame
Pneumatic cushions
Instrument to Measure Deflection
Instrument to Measure Deflection
 Blocks 16 to 20
22
P 20
P 19

m2

6Tim
e
,sF
ro
m
:0
sT
o
:1
4
.9
sS
a
m
p
le
s
:1
-5
0 01
P 18

-2 024681 21
4
2

0
P

m
P

2
17

m
16

4
mm

op5: 6/16/2009 15:06:59 1 kHz 15 s 15000 samples

during EQ5

3.4mm
 Blocks 11 to 15
2
P
1
m
5

-0
2
4
3T024681
im
e
,sF
ro
m
:0
sT
o
:1
5
.0
9
sS
a
m
p
le
s
:1
-5
0 01
21
4
4
3

1 op5: 6/16/2009 15:06:59 1 kHz 15.1 s 15100 samples

during EQ5
1.5mm
Start
H=0
V=0
 Test Sequence

Earthquake kh kv
event

1 0.24 0.27
2 0.42 0.62
3 0.50 0.60
4 0.55 0.75
5 0.59 0.25
6 0.63 0.70
Animation of Wall Facing Movement
during Earthquakes

Dark brown line shows wall position on

application of load
Fine orange line shows previous location
Large red arrow shows direction of
movement
Lower graph gives simplified record of the
earthquakes
 EQ1
H = 0.24g
V = 0.27g
After EQ1
H=0
V=0
 EQ2
H = 0.42g
V = 0.62g
After EQ2
H=0
V=0
 EQ3
H = 0.50g
V = 0.60g
After EQ3
H=0
V=0
 EQ4
H = 0.55g
V = 0.75g
After EQ4
H=0
V=0
 EQ5
H = 0.59g
V = 0.25g
After EQ5
H=0
V=0
 EQ6
H = 0.63g
V = 0.70g
After EQ6
H=0
V=0
Facing after Completion
 Facing after Completion

Indication of small
permanent
deformation after
the test
Small gap between
top of fill and facing
blocks
 Conclusions
Considerations for Seismic Design

Minor shaking: Static design adequate

Moderate shaking: Grid layout from static
design adequategrid may
be longer
Strong shaking: Both length and grid layout
likely to be determined by
seismic forces
Thanks to Tensar International
for providing the slides for
retaining wall failure of the
Kobe Earthquake and full-scale
seismic tests on retaining wall
in Russia.