PSI - Issue 39

8

Author name / Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2019) 000–000

Abdoullah Namdar / Procedia Structural Integrity 39 (2022) 47–56

54

8 (b)

(a)

8

Model-2

Model-1

7

7

6

6

5

5

4

4

3

3

Frequency

Frequency

2

2

1

1

0

0

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

220

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

220

Displacement (mm)

Displacement (mm)

Fig. 8. The displacement from the numerical simulation; (a) model-1 and (b) model-2.

8 (b)

8 (a)

Model-1

Model-2

7

7

6

6

5

5

4

4

3

3

Frequency

Frequency

2

2

1

1

0

0

0.004

0.006

0.008

0.010 Strain

0.012

0.014

0.016

0.004

0.006

0.008

0.010 Strain

0.012

0.014

0.016

Fig. 9. The strain from the numerical simulation; (a) model-1 and (b) model-2.

Figures 8 demonstrates the displacement mechanism of the embankment-subsoil model exhibits with lower differentia displacement from 2.5 sec to the 4.0 sec of the numerical simulation. The geogrid sheet minimizing the impact of applying nonlinear load in the early stage of the model. From the initial of the applying seismic loading to model until 2.5 sec, the displacement for the reinforced and unreinforced subsoil is very close, this phenomenon occurs because the early stage of the applying nonlinear loads the soil is sustaining the nonlinear loading, after that stage the geogrid sheet function is appearing more. After sustaining the nonlinear loading by the soil and starting the soil geogrid sheet, the seismic loading will be controlled by the geogrid sheet. According to table 1, the mechanical properties of the soil have a high level of the internal angle of friction and cohesion. This type of soil is easily not deformed. Figure 9 shows the stain density from 2.5 sec to 4.0 sec of the numerical simulation. According to Table 2, the R 2 is increasing and RMSE is reducing with reinforcing of the subsoil. The statistical model verified the accuracy of the numerical simulation and finding of this study.