Extended Hypolastic Model to Measure Geocell Pullout Behavior in Frozen Soil

Document Type : Regular Paper

Authors

1 Postdoctoral Researcher, Department of Civil Engineering, Imam Khmoeini International University, Qazvin, Iran

2 Associate Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, Imam Khmoeini International University, Qazvin, Iran

Abstract

This study develops an extended hypoplastic constitutive model to investigate the pullout behavior of geocell-reinforced 131 Sand under freeze-thaw (FT) cycles, addressing the complex mechanical response of frozen soils in cold regions. By incorporating temperature-dependent parameters, intergranular strain effects, and ice formation mechanisms, the model captures nonlinear stress–strain behavior and thermal influences on soil–geocell interaction. Validated through drained triaxial compression tests at -10°C and confining pressures of 100 and 200 kPa, the model accurately predicts stress–strain and volumetric responses. Numerical simulations in Plaxis 3D reveal a 78% increase in pullout resistance in frozen conditions (21.2 kN) compared to unfrozen conditions (11.9 kN) under 20 kPa surcharge, attributed to enhanced ice bonding and interface shear strength. However, repeated FT cycles reduce pullout capacity by approximately 15% after three cycles due to microstructural degradation and weakened confinement. These findings highlight the model’s robustness in simulating geocell performance under cyclic thermal loads, offering valuable insights for designing resilient geotechnical infrastructure in frost-susceptible environments.

Graphical Abstract

Extended Hypolastic Model to Measure Geocell Pullout Behavior in Frozen Soil

Highlights

  • Extended the Hypoplastic model to simulate frozen and unfrozen soil behavior.
  • Evaluated freeze–thaw effects on geocell pullout resistance through 3D simulations.
  • Validated the model using drained triaxial tests on frozen 131 Sand.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

[1]     Li, K.Q., Yin, Z.Y., Qi, J.L., & Liu Y. State of the art: Constitutive modeling of frozen soils. Arch Comput Methods Eng 2024;31:3801–42.
[2]     Nishimura, S., Gens, A., Olivella, S., & Jardine R. THM coupled finite element analysis of frozen soil: formulation and application. Geotechnique 2009;59:159–71.
[3]     Yang, Y., Lai, Y., Dong, Y., & Li S. The strength criterion and elastoplastic constitutive model of frozen soil under high confining pressures. Cold Reg Sci Technol 2010;60:154–60.
[4]     Yao, X., Qi, J., Liu, M., & Yu F. A frozen soil creep model with strength attenuationA frozen soil creep model with strength attenuation. Acta Geotech 2017;12:1385–93.
[5]     Hou, F., Lai, Y., Liu, E., Luo, H., & Liu X. A creep constitutive model for frozen soils with different contents of coarse grains. Cold Reg Sci Technol 2018;145:119–26.
[6]     Li, D., Zhang, C., & Ding G. Fractional derivative-based creep constitutive model of deep artificial frozen soil. Cold Reg Sci Technol 2020;170.
[7]     He, J., Niu, F., Jiang, H., & Jiao C. Fractional viscoelastic-plastic constitutive model for frozen soil based on microcosmic damage mechanism. Mech Mater 2023.
[8]     Xu, G., Wu, W., & Qi J. An extended hypoplastic constitutive model for frozen sand. Soils Found 2016;56:704–11.
[9]     Xu, G., Wu, W., & Qi J. Modeling the viscous behavior of frozen soil with hypoplasticity. Int J Numer Anal Methods Geomech 2016;40:2061–73.
[10]   Xu, X., Wang, Y., Yin, Z., & Zhang H. Effect of temperature and strain rate on mechanical characteristics and constitutive model of frozen Helin loess. Cold Reg Sci Technol 2017;136:44–51.
[11]    Mohammadi, B.H., & Ardakani A. Numerical prediction of circular tunnel seismic behavior using hypoplastic soil constitutive model. Int J Geotech Eng 2018:1–14.
[12]   Mohammadi, B.H., & Ardakani A. Calibration of hypoplastic constitutive model with elastic strain range for Firoozkuh sand. Geotech Geol Eng 2020;38:5279–93.
[13]   Latha, G.M., Dash, S.K., and Rajagopal, K. ’ ’Equivalent continuum simulations of geocell reinforced sand beds supporting strip footings. Geotech Geol Eng 2008;26:387–98.
[14]   Khedkar, M., & Mandal J. Pullout response of cellular reinforcement under low normal pressure. Int Jounral Geotech Eng 2013;3:75–87.
[15]   Biabani, M.M., Indraratna, B., and Ngo NT. ’ ’Modeling of geocell reinforced sub ballast subjected to cyclic loading. Geotextile Geomembr 2016;44:489–503.
[16]   Tavakoli, G.T.M, and Motarjemi F. ’ ’Interfacial properties of geocell reinforced granular soils. Geotextile Geomembr 2018;46:384–95.
[17]   Fakharian, K., & Pilban A. Pullout tests on diagonally enhanced geocells embedded in sand to improve load-deformation response subjected to significant planar tensile loads. Geotextile Geomembr 2021;49:1229–44.
[18]   Namaei-kohal, A., Ardakani, A., & Hassanlourad M. Cyclic and post-cyclic geocell pullout behavior in cohesionless soi. Sci Iran 2023:1–36.
[19]   Li, C., Vennapusa, P.K.R., Ashlock, J., & White DJ. Mechanistic-based comparisons for freeze-thaw performance of stabilized unpaved roads. Cold Reg Sci Technol 2017;141:97–108.
[20]   Cui, F., Xiao, C., Han, J., Gao, S., & Tian W. Performance of laboratory geogrid-reinforced retaining walls under freeze-thaw cycles. Geosynth Int 2022;29:81–98.
[21]   Fattah MA and MY. Assessment of two nearby interfering strip footings of different embedment depths in saturated cohesive soils. Mag Civ Eng 2024;14:149.
[22]   Fattah, M. Y., Al-Haddad,, L.A., Mo’men Ayasrah, Jaber, A., and SA-H. Coupled Finite Element and Artificial Neural Network Analysis of Interfering Strip Footings in Saturated Cohesive Soils. Transp Infrastruct Geotechnol 2024;11:2168–85.
[23]   Ayasrah, M., & Fattah MY. 3D numerical response of different pipe pile under combined loadings condition embedded in loose sand. Int J Geotech Eng 2024;18:702–718.
[24]   Fattah MA and MY. Finite Element Analysis of Two Nearby Interfering Strip Footings Embedded in Saturated Cohesive Soils. Civ Eng J 2023;9:1–18.
[25]   Bauer E. Calibration of comprehensive hypoplastiv model for granular materials. Soils Found 1996;36:13–26.
[26]   Niemunis, A., & Herle I. Hypoplastic model for cohesionless soils with elastic strain range. Mech Cohesive-Frictional Mater 1997;2:279–99.
[27]   Yu, F., Guo, P., & Na S. A framework for constructing elastoplastic constitutive models for frozen and unfrozen soils. Int J Numer Anal Methods Geomech 2022;46:436–66.
[28]   Leshchinsky, B., and Ling, H.I. ’ ’Effects of geocell confinement on strength and deformation behavior of gravel. J Geotech Geoenvironmental Eng 2013;139:340–52.
[29]   Namaei-kohal, A. Ardakani, A., and Hassanlourad M. ’ ’Hypolastic Soil Model Parameters calibration For Tehran Silica Sand and Verification with a Monotonic Geocell Pullout Test. Arab J Geosci 2022;15:824-837.
[30]   Ardakani, A., and Namaei A. ’ ’Numerical Investigation of Geocell Reinforced Slopes Behavior by considering Geocell Geometry Effect. Geomech Eng 2021;24:589–97.

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 26 April 2025
  • Revise Date: 29 July 2025
  • Accept Date: 17 August 2025

Share

How to cite

Statistics