Reinforced Fill Structure with Alternative Fill Materials: An Application of Geogrid Creep Strain Analysis Using Numerical Modeling

For many years, granular fill has been the preferred fill material in reinforced fill structures (RFSs) due to its high strength and drainage properties. However, the global scarcity of granular fill has necessitated the exploration of alternative fill materials. This study aims to evaluate the performance of three different alternative fill materials: (i) weak onsite fill (fill 1), (ii) lime-stabilized onsite fill (fill 2), and (iii) recycled construction and demolition (C & D) waste (fill 3). A finite element analysis (FEA) was conducted to assess the stability and horizontal displacement of an RFS and the long-term creep deformation of geogrid using viscoelastic (time-dependent) model in Plaxis. This RFS comprised a combination of wire mesh and geogrids, serving as primary and secondary reinforcement materials, respectively. The results indicate that fill 1, with low shear strength and stiffness, induces excessive lateral displacement and was unstable, making it unsuitable for RFS applications. In contrast, Fill 2 and Fill 3 achieve Eurocode-based safety factors of 1.12 and 1.19, respectively, while significantly reducing horizontal displacement. The long-term creep deformation analysis of geogrid in the case of fill 1 exceeds the prescribed serviceability strain limit threshold, while in the cases of fill 2 and fill 3, it conforms to the serviceability strain limit, which indicates effective mobilization of tensile resistance without excessive elongation. Finally, an analysis was conducted to optimize the geogrid length and to see its impact on cost and performance. The results revealed up to a 29% cost reduction while ensuring performance criteria. These findings validate lime-stabilized onsite fill and recycled C&D waste as viable, cost-effective alternatives to conventional granular backfill, ensuring not only stability and serviceability but also the long-term performance of geogrids in RFSs.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Materials
Published
2025-03-18
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/ma18061346
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Geotechnical Engineering and Soil Stabilization
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.91
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Reinforced Fill Structure with Alternative Fill Materials: An Application of Geogrid Creep Strain Analysis Using Numerical Modeling

Ahsan Rehman Khan, Gemmina Di Emidio
2 citations
Materials
Geotechnical Engineering and Soil Stabilization
1.91
article

Reinforced Fill Structure with Alternative Fill Materials: An Application of Geogrid Creep Strain Analysis Using Numerical Modeling

Ahsan Rehman Khan, Gemmina Di Emidio
article en
2 citations

Abstract

For many years, granular fill has been the preferred fill material in reinforced fill structures (RFSs) due to its high strength and drainage properties. However, the global scarcity of granular fill has necessitated the exploration of alternative fill materials. This study aims to evaluate the performance of three different alternative fill materials: (i) weak onsite fill (fill 1), (ii) lime-stabilized onsite fill (fill 2), and (iii) recycled construction and demolition (C & D) waste (fill 3). A finite element analysis (FEA) was conducted to assess the stability and horizontal displacement of an RFS and the long-term creep deformation of geogrid using viscoelastic (time-dependent) model in Plaxis. This RFS comprised a combination of wire mesh and geogrids, serving as primary and secondary reinforcement materials, respectively. The results indicate that fill 1, with low shear strength and stiffness, induces excessive lateral displacement and was unstable, making it unsuitable for RFS applications. In contrast, Fill 2 and Fill 3 achieve Eurocode-based safety factors of 1.12 and 1.19, respectively, while significantly reducing horizontal displacement. The long-term creep deformation analysis of geogrid in the case of fill 1 exceeds the prescribed serviceability strain limit threshold, while in the cases of fill 2 and fill 3, it conforms to the serviceability strain limit, which indicates effective mobilization of tensile resistance without excessive elongation. Finally, an analysis was conducted to optimize the geogrid length and to see its impact on cost and performance. The results revealed up to a 29% cost reduction while ensuring performance criteria. These findings validate lime-stabilized onsite fill and recycled C&D waste as viable, cost-effective alternatives to conventional granular backfill, ensuring not only stability and serviceability but also the long-term performance of geogrids in RFSs.

MaterialsVol. 18(6)
Ghent University (BE)
Sustainable cities and communities
Openalex Percentile: Top 17%
Geotechnical Engineering and Soil Stabilization
1.91
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.