期刊
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF GEOMECHANICS
卷 12, 期 4, 页码 399-413出版社
ASCE-AMER SOC CIVIL ENGINEERS
DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)GM.1943-5622.0000219
关键词
Retaining walls; Geogrid; Load and resistance factor design; Calibration; Pullout; Reliability
资金
- Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) of Canada
- Department of National Defence (Canada)
- Ministry of Transportation of Ontario
- U.S. State Department of Transportation: Alaska
- U.S. State Department of Transportation: Arizona
- U.S. State Department of Transportation: California
- U.S. State Department of Transportation: Colorado
- U.S. State Department of Transportation: Idaho
- U.S. State Department of Transportation: Minnesota
- U.S. State Department of Transportation: New York
- U.S. State Department of Transportation: North Dakota
- U.S. State Department of Transportation: Oregon
- U.S. State Department of Transportation: Utah
- U.S. State Department of Transportation: Washington
- U.S. State Department of Transportation: Wyoming
The results of load and resistance factor design (LRFD) calibration are reported for the pullout limit state in geogrid reinforced soil walls under self-weight loading and permanent uniform surcharge. Bias statistics are used to account for the prediction accuracy of the underlying deterministic models for load and pullout capacity and the random variability in the input parameters. The paper shows that the current AASHTO simplified method to calculate reinforcement loads under operational conditions is overly conservative leading to poor prediction accuracy of the underlying deterministic model used in LRFD calibration. Refinements to the load and default pullout capacity models in the AASHTO and Federal Highway Administration guidance documents are proposed. These models generate reasonable resistance factors using a load factor of 1.35 and give a consistent probability of pullout failure of 1%. A comparison with the allowable stress design (ASD) past practice shows that the operational factors of safety using a reliability-based LRFD approach give factors of safety greater than 1.5. Regardless of the design approach (ASD or LRFD), the analysis results demonstrate that the current empirical minimum reinforcement length criteria will likely control the design for pullout. (c) 2012 American Society of Civil Engineers.
作者
我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。
推荐
暂无数据