Second Pan American Geosynthetics Conference & Exhibition

GeoAmericas 2012
Lima, Per - May 2012
FOUNDATION IMPROVEMENT FOR IMPULSION POLYESTER-
FIBERGLASS PIPES USING MULTIDIRECTIONAL POLYMERIC
GEOGRIDS
Reinaldo Vega-Meyer, Senior Engineer, Tensar International Corporation, Atlanta, USA
Francisco Centeno Pulido, Technical Director, Centeno-Rodrguez y Asociados, Venezuela & Panama

ABSTRACT
This paper presents a case study about soil stabilization/improvement using a new generation of polymeric geogrids, also
known as multidirectional geogrids, to provide a better foundation support to new pipes up to 2.2m in diameter by
improving the foundation soil bearing capacity and mitigating total and differential settlements.

Because of the existing very soft and difficult to handle in-situ soils called Lama, the traditional solution was complicated
and time consuming, so the inclusion of multidirectional geogrids and engineered fill was proposed and tested showing
tremendous stability improvement and economical advantages.

The paper includes a description of this type of reinforcement and the theoretical load transfer mechanism explanation, as
well as in-situ measurements which validate the performance of the mechanically stabilized layer (MSL). The on-site
settlements were measured using electronic surveying equipment with 1mm of reading precision. Other tests were also
performed in order to verify compaction and bearing capacity improvement.

RESUMEN
Este trabajo presenta un caso sobre estabilizacin de suelos usando una nueva generacin de geomallas polimricas
conocidas como multidireccionales, proveyendo un mejor soporte a tubera de fibra de vidrio con dimetros hasta de 2.2m
mejorando la capacidad portante del suelo de fundacin y mitigando los asentamientos totales y diferenciales.

Debido a los suelos blandos existentes compuestos por material llamado Lama, la solucin tradicional era complicada y
consuma mucho tiempo, as que la inclusin de geomalla multidireccional se propuso y se prob en campo mostrando
gran estabilidad y ventajas econmicas.

El trabajo incluye descripcin de este tipo de refuerzo y explicacin terica del mecanismo de transferencia de carga
como tambin mediciones in-situ validando el desempeo de la capa mecanicamente estabilizada (MSL). Los
asentamientos en sitio se midieron usando equipo electrnico de agrimensura con precisin de lectura de 1mm. Otras
pruebas se efectuaron para revisar la compactacin y mejoramiento en capacidad portante.

1. INTRODUCTION

The use of geosynthetics has been more common these days as materials that provide filtration, separation, and
reinforcement in different civil work scenarios. Geotechnical engineers are facing poor soil conditions in most of their
projects having potential standard solutions such as over-excavate and fill material replacement, redesign the structure to
meet the limitations of soil conditions, and use of deep foundations. All of the aforementioned solutions are expensive and
always time consuming, so with the development of new technologies using geogrids there is an option that can be
reliable and cost effective by improving the natural soil conditions with two key ingredients: granular soil and
multidirectional geogrids; this composite mechanically stabilized layer (MSL) creates a composite media with high elastic
modulus and planar stiffness with the ability to absorb and redistribute the imposed loads in such a way that the natural
terrain (subgrade) will feel less stresses therefore improving its bearing capacity. The improvement in bearing capacity is
commonly expressed as the ratio of the ultimate bearing pressure for the reinforced soil to that of the unreinforced soil.
Several modification techniques have been developed for many years now, including chemical stabilization, densification,
consolidation, thermal and biotechnical stabilization (Munfakh, 1996); all methods should be evaluated and the most
appropriate one chosen according to the existing environmental, project and soil conditions.

2. LOAD DISTRIBUTION MECHANISM

The ability of the multidirectional geogrid (known as TriAx ) to confine the granular fill creating a mechanically stabilized
layer (MSL), absorbing the imposed stresses, and redistributing those stresses with less damaging effects on the
subgrade are key features required to provide the expected performance. In order to understand the reinforcement
mechanism it is important to clarify some concepts regarding this new generation of polymeric geogrids, such as Radial
Stiffness and Isotropic Stiffness Ratio. Radial Stiffness, is the shape of a polar plot taking into account the tensile stiffness
of every rib within the geogrid, which in this case is a multidirectional (orthogonal) stiffness at a low strain (0.5%). Figure 1
shows the radial stiffness of a laminar engineered material where a minimum (OB) and maximum (OA) values occur.
Isotropic Stiffness Ratio, is the relation of the minimum and maximum radial values (OB/OA). As such, if the shape of the
polar plot was ideally represented by a circle, the isotropic ratio value would be the unity (OB/OA=1). According to the data
obtained by testing multidirectional geogrids, the characteristic minimum average roll value of isotropic stiffness is
OB/OA=0.6 (see figure 2).

Figure 1. Isotropic Stiffness Figure 2. Radial stiffness of multidirectional geogrid

Testing is conducted in accordance with ASTM D6637 Method B with a two aperture gage length tested at 0, 30, 60, 90,
120, and 150 degrees. The radial stiffness is reported as the modulus at 0.5% strain for each direction.

It is important to determine how much improvement is provided by the reinforcement interacting with the fill material, and
this can be done by performing laboratory models (medium and full scale) and then validating those results using in-situ
testing on real projects and measuring the performance of the reinforced vs. the unreinforced sections. One of the industry
recognized methods of analysis is called the Giroud-Han method (2004), which is now included in the August 2008,
Section 5.5-2, publication of the FHWA (Federal Highway Administration), where more than tensile strength parameters
are included (e.g. aperture stability modulus), therefore lateral restraint in orthogonal form is needed in order to obtain
good performance of the MSL to support the imposed loadings on top (see figure 3). The method also considers different
bearing capacity factor (Nc) values depending on the geosynthetic used, and for unreinforced cases (e.g. for punch and
drawn geogrid a value of Nc=5.71 is recommended).
 Figure 3. Orthogonal load distribution and Multidirectional geogrid

When bearing capacity improvement is needed, the MSL plays an important role since it is a stable layer with increased
modulus due to the geogrid reinforcement that confines the granular material, and this improvement is more evident when
two or more multidirectional geogrids are used within the MSL, optimizing the stress distribution from 1H:2V (unreinforced)
to 1H:1V (reinforced), that is, the stresses are distributed in a wider area due to the lateral restraint mechanism provided
by the multidirectional geogrid. Figure 4 shows how the stresses are distributed without reinforcement (applying a load of
35 kN), and figure 5 shows the behavior of those stresses with multidirectional reinforcement having a bearing capacity
improvement (applying load pf 84 kN). This research demonstrated that this geogrid supported a higher load with less
settlement compared to the unreinforced case (Watts, K. & Jenner, C., 2008).

Figure 4. Unreinforced stress distribution Figure 5. Reinforced stress distribution

By improving the bearing capacity and optimizing the stress distribution through the provided MSL, less stress is going
down to the weak subgrade layer; therefore less settlement is expected to occur. Other studies such as Shin et al., 2001,
show the same effect by reaching a 1H:1V in the stress distribution angle.

The number, length, and spacing of geogrid reinforcement depend on several variables such as width of loaded footing
and thickness of the MSL (Das, B.M. et al., 2004). Other study done by White, D.J. et al. (2011) shows how this
multidirectional geogrid reinforcement provide better performance by measuring the locked-in horizontal stress in the
subgrade and the locked-in horizontal stress in the subbase in order to find a lateral reinforcement ratio (K subbase/Ksubgrade)
as an indication of the performance, and finding a reinforcement ratio of 3.3 when using this type of geogrid.

An additional parameter that is positively affected is the elastic modulus of the reinforced layer or MSL using
multidirectional geogrids, and thanks to the mentioned lateral restraint it is possible to obtain an increase of the bearing
capacity ratio therefore the modulus value by increasing the interface shear resistance of the reinforced fill, as result of
comparative studies (Dong, Y-L. et al., 2010).
3. CASE STUDY
In this project case, a polymeric geogrid with multidirectional orientation is used as a reinforcement material providing
better support and stability to a structure that requires an uniform bed and limited deformation, in a project located in
Panama (Central America) where four main components are considered: (a) construction of a sanitary network, (b)
construction of impulsion lines, (c) construction of an interception system, and, (d) waste water treatment plant. These
components will help to handle and treat the residual waters coming from different parts of Panama city, Panama. In
particular, this paper is related to the second (b) component of the project where the multidirectional geogrid reinforcement
was used in order to provide the required stable support and performance to the fiberglass pipe (polyester reinforced with
fiberglass, GRP) impulsion lines (shown in light red doted lines, figure 6), allowing important savings in time, equipment,
labor, and money.

EAST IMPULSION
LINE

WEST IMPULSION
LINE

PTAR

Figure 6. Overview of the Pamama project showing the Impulsion lines

These impulsion lines will conduct waste water and treated water to and from the new water treatment plant (identified as
PTAR), and consist of pipes up to 2.2m in diameter and weighting 507 Kg (5.0 kN), made out of polyester reinforced with
fiberglass (GRP) and run along a distance of 6,600 m for both lines.

3.1 The Problem

The pipe lines go through swampy zones containing a material called lama (or Pacific Muck) which is a quaternary
deposit close to a mangrove area on the south coast of Panama. These very soft (from very low to no shear strength) and
difficult to handle material was 6m-7m thick, so differential settlement was a critical issue to handle when considering a
pipe line that will have 2 bars (200 kPa) of inside pressure. The characterization of the lama is not well defined, but it is
composed of organics (coral and marine fragments) in a matrix of silt and clay materials, and subsurface water at a
minimum depth of 0.5m from the surface. Because of these particular conditions, it was necessary to shore the excavated
trenches in order to prevent their collapse. Table 1 shows the index properties of the existing soils, and it was determined
by the geotechnical project engineer as non-liquefiable soils.

Table 1. Index properties of in-situ soils at impulsion lines location

For clarification purposes in terms of language, table 1 shows from left to right columns: location; depth; soil clasification;
percent passing (4 columns); percent of gravel; sand and fines (3 columns); and Atterberg indexes (3 columns) values.

3.2 Initial solution

The initial proposed solution was to use stone with particle size greater than 0.8m (figure 7), this material is locally called
3
Matacan and besides its high cost it was difficult to estimate volumes due to variable consumptions greater than 1.0 m
2
of Matacan per m of foundation soil. With this method of support improvement the installation rate was 2.9 linear meters
per month, considered a low rate by the project engineer, and therefore expensive and high uncertainties in terms of the
settlements and future performance since the use of this technique was resulting in more than 80mm of settlements at the
pipe joints and project requirements calls for 60mm as a maximum allowable settlement.

Figure 7. Picture showing stone material called Matacan on top of the Lama

3.3 Proposed solution

3.3.1 The analysis and proposed reinforced section

After taking into consideration all of the above-described issues and by doing a value engineering exercise, it was decided
to consider the alternative of using the multidirectional geogrids as the reinforcement material that would provide a stable
platform to support the pipe lines. Beyond this consideration, a series of analysis were performed taking into account the
parameters shown on table 2 below.

Weight = 20kN
PIPE Diameter = 2.2.m
Applied Pressure = 111kPa
SOILS Foundation Reinforced Fill
(kN/m3) 16.0 19.0
(deg) 4.0 34.0
C (kPa) 0.0 0.0
Modulus (MPa) 20.0
SUBSURFACE
Depth (varies) = 0.5m - 2.0m
WATER

Table 2. Assumed material parameters for analysis

The analysis was performed using an initial approach of estimating the required minimum granular reinforced fill thickness
to support construction traffic based on the subgrade CBR value (Giroud, J.P. and Han, J., 2004), and use of software
developed by Tensar International for analysis of shallow foundations. The analysis was divided in two phases considering
a pipe footprint of 0.3m x 6.0m: (a) bearing capacity, and (b) settlement. The method of analysis considered for (a) is then
sub-divided into two cases, unreinforced and reinforced; for the unreinforced case Meyerhof bearing capacity equations
are adopted to calculate the ultimate bearing capacity (Meyerhof, 1963, and Meyerhof and Hanna, 1978); for the
reinforced case Meyerhof and Hanna (1978) and Mandel and Salecon (1972) solutions are modified to calculate the
ultimate bearing capacity. For settlement (b), the stress distribution method was used to compute stresses at different
depths. Figure 8 shows the theory of a stress distribution angle of 1H:1V reached with the inclusion of punched and drawn
geogrids; and figure 9 shows a representation to calculate settlements in a variable assumed foundation soil. Field and
laboratory research has demonstrated that the inclusion of punch and drawn geogrids can increase the stress distribution
angle; therefore, different stress distribution angles are used within and below the reinforced zone. Elastic modulus is
interpreted from correlation to SPT blow count numbers.

Figure 8. Bearing capacity improvement (Shin et al., 2001) Figure 9. Stress distribution method

In order to establish the number (N), spacing (u, h), width (b), and length (l) of the multidirectional geogrid reinforcement,
the method considers the data from research and development results made on this type of punched and drawn (Wayne,
M.H. et al., 1998) and multidirectional geogrids, as well as general guidelines and recommendations found in the Das,
B.M. et al. (2004) technical paper. Because of bearing capacity improvement, the total settlement and therefore the
differential settlement are greatly reduced as is evident from the latter mentioned paper, see figure 10a,b., by Das et al.,
(2004).

(a) (b)

Figure 10a,b. General representation of foundation geogrid reinforcement and settlement (Das et al., 2004)

After conducting the analyses according to the given parameters, it was found that by using granular fill (3/4 or 19mm
gravel type) and two layers of the multidirectional geogrid in a 50cm thick MSL was enough to meet the project conditions
on bearing capacity improvement reaching a factor of safety (FS) of 8.0 compared to 0.7 for that of the unreinforced case.
Considering this MSL section, the estimated total settlement was reduced by 61% meeting the maximum allowable
settlement of less than or equal to 50 mm in order to prevent potential damage to the pipe lines, especially in the joints
zone which is the weakest link of the continuous pipe line structure.

One of the DCP test readings of the MSL section at the impulsion pipe line is shown in table 2, and the improvement can
be seen from a CBR value of 1.0% to a CBR of 9.0%, having an improved CBR average value of about 7.0% due to the
reinforced MSL, which represents an improvement of seven times the subgrade CBR in this case.

Several other DCP tests showed similar behavior along the granular reinforced platform, this confirm the before mentioned
findings in regards to the lock-in stresses within this reinforced section ending in a better performance.
 Table 3. Table showing one of the DCP test results for a reinforced section

Figure 11a shows the proposed MSL reinforced with the multidirectional geogrid providing the required support and
stabilization to the pipe line by increasing the bearing capacity. The spacing and minimum recommended width of the
geogrid is also shown. Figure 11b shows the technical specifications of the multidirectional geogrid reinforcement used.

Pipe
2.2m Dia.
(Max.) 1.0m (min)
Index Properties Longitudinal Diagonal Transverse General
Rib Pitch, mm (in) 40 (1.60) 40 (1.60) -
Mid-rib depth, mm (in) - 1.8 (0.07) 1.5 (0.06)
20cm TX160 Mid-rib width, mm (in) - 1.1 (0.04) 1.3 (0.05)
Nodal thickness, mm (in) 3.1 (0.12)
Gravel Fill Rib Shape rectangular
30cm Aperture shape triangular
TX160 Structural Integrity
Junction efficiency, % 93
Non-woven geotextile Aperture Stability, kg-cm/deg @ 5.0kg-cm 3.6
Radial stiffness at low strain, kN/m @ 0.5% strain 300
(lb/ft @ 0.5% strain) 20,580
Natural Foundation Soil: LAMA Durability
Resistance to chemical degradation 100%
(a) (b) Resistance to ultra-violet light and weathering 100%

Figure 11. (a) Proposed reinforced section supporting the pipe line; (b) technical specifications-multidirectional geogrid

This reinforced section was then replicated in the field first as a test section in order to validate the findings from the
analyses, and then as a permanent solution for the whole project providing the required support to all pipelines. For the
purpose of bearing capacity measurements and taking into account a subgrade CBR as low as 1.0%, the project crew
took CBR readings using the Dynamic Cone Penetrometer (DCP) according to the ASTM D6951-03 guidelines.

The estimated theoretical settlements were then validated in the field by taking surveying points before and after the
impulsion pipes were placed, using a Leica Sprinter 150 electronic level with 1mm of precision with a bar code system. It
was found that the settlements on the MSL sections at the critical zones, at the pipe joints, were equal or less than 50 mm
with a differential settlement of 10mm which also met the project requirements. Figure 12 shows a settlement comparison
using survey points taken in March, 2011, and related to a couple of pipes founded at the same original elevation. It can
be seen the advantage of using the MSL reinforced with multidirectional geogrid forming a stable uniform reinforced
platform which optimizes the distribution of stresses to the foundation soil, compared to the native Matacn stone
material which has random behavior due to the different stone sizes breaking the foundation soil at different stress levels,
therefore reaching greater deformations. It can be noted from figure 12 that there is a range of 25% to 48% more
settlements for the matacn improvement option. It is important to mention that the Pacific tides in the Panama bay area
change every six hours, as such, the subsurface water level is continuosly changing in a range of approximately 1.0m, in
the same way the effective stresses in the foundation soil are changing. It has been found that this event is also affected
according to the position and state of the moon (http://www.hidromet.com.pa/mareas.php?idioma=ing).

March, 2011
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
0
-10
-20
-30
-40
Asentamiento, mm

-50
-60
-70
-80
-90
-100
-110
-120
-130
-140
Relleno + TX160, mm Relleno + MATACAN, mm

Figure 12. Settlement comparison, MSL with TX160 vs.Matacn

3.3.2 The construction process

Installation during the construction process contained a variety of steps and phases according to the manufacturer of the
geogrid, to the project requirements, and considering the unstable foundation soil conditions. There are areas were over-
excavation in the soft soil was needed to meet the pipe line required elevation, so trenches up to 3.8m deep and 3.6m
wide were dug and the trench walls were shored for safety (figure 13), and figure 14 shows a 2.2m diameter pipe beside a
car for scaling purposes.

Figure 13. Shored trench walls Figure 14. Pipe shown for scaling purposes

Because of the shallow phreatic level, it was necessary to pump the water out of the trench using submerged 4 (102mm)
pumps. A a non-woven geotextile and the first layer of the multidirectional geogrid were placed directly on the open
subgrade. Next, the granular fill (gravel) was placed in lifts of 15cm followed by compaction using a 100Kg vibratory plate.
The same process was repeated until the second layer of the multidirectional geogrid and remaining fill installation was
completed. When the MSL is built in place, the placement of the pipe is next followed by placement of the remaining select
fill meeting project requirements. Figure 15 below shows the construction sequence on a not too deep trench ( 2.5m).
 (a) (b) (c)

Figure 15. Construction process; (a) non-woven geotextile placement, (b) multidirectional geogrid placement,
(c) compaction of first granular fill lift

Installation of pipe and remaining fill is depicted in figure 16. The construction sequence is designated as 16a, 16b, 16c,
16d, after the reinforced MSL is built and the survey crew is taking readings in order to determine potential future
settlements especially at the pipe joints.

(a) (b) (c)

Figure 16. (a) pipe installation in the trench, (b) pipe placed on top of the reinforced MSL, (c) survey measurements on top
of the placed pipe at joints

Figure 16d. Surveying crew taking readings inside the pipe

4. CONCLUSIONS

The implementation of the multidirectional geogrid demonstrated the fact that the MSL structure provided an
increase in bearing capacity seven (7) times the original subgrade strength for this project.
The MSL provides a uniform structural reinforced layer with high modulus, therefore distributing the applied loads
on a wider area, protecting the soft subgrade from shear failures and minimizing the total and differential
settlements; in this case up to 50mm of total settlement and 10mm of differential settlement was found to meet
the project requirements.
 Parties involved in the whole process appreciated the big advantage when using the solution with the
multidirectional geogrid compared with the conventional/original solution using big boulders material called
Matacan. Advantage in time and speed of construction by allowing the contractor to install two (2) times more
linear meters of pipes per month, and positive economic impact by saving about 11.7% per linear meter of pipe.
A comparison between the two foundation improvement options supporting the pipes: MSL reinforced with
multidirectional geogrid and Matacn, shown that the latter presented higher deformation ranging from 25% to
48% more compared with the MSL-Multidirectional geogrid option.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors want to acknowledge the collaboration supplied by the professional and technical team of the Construtora
Norberto Odebrecht S.A. (Panama) such as, Ing. Gerardo Daz (Administrative Manager), Ing. Marcos Rabello (PTAR
Production Manager), Ing. Nstor Ortz (Resident Engineer), Ing. Rafael Acua (Quality Control Manager), Ing. Bernardo
Mayorga (PTAR and Tunnel Project Engineer), technician Jonathan Romero, and all the quality control crew that do
testing and take readings, for all their support and help that contributed to the development of this paper.

REFERENCES

ASTM D6951-03. Standard Test Method for Use of the Dynamic Cone Penetrometer in Shallow Pavement Applications,
American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania, USA.
Das, B.M., Omar, M.T., Shin, E.C. (2004). Developments on the Bearing Capacity of Shallow Foundations on Geogrid-
Reinforced Soil - A Review. Proceedings of the International Conference on Geotechnical Engineering: Soil
Exploration, Testing, and Foundation Design, October 3-6, The University of Sharjah, United Arab Emirates, pp. K20-
K48.
Dong, Y-L. et al.. (2010). Bearing Capacities of Geogrid-reinforced Sand Bases under Static Loading. Bearing Capacities
of Geogrid-reinforced Sand Bases under Static Loading.Proceedings of the Geoshangai Conference.
Giroud, J.P. and Han, J. (2004a). Design Method for Geosynthetic-Reinforced Unpaved Roads: Part IDevelopment of
design Method. Journal of Geotechnical and Environmental Engineering, ASCE, USA.
Giroud, J.P. and Han, J. (2004b). Design Method for Geosynthetic-Reinforced Unpaved Roads: Part II-Development of
Design Method. Journal of Geotechnical and Environmental Engineering, ASCE, USA.
Empresa de Transmisin Elctrica S.A. (2011). Hydrometeoroly in Panama. Available:
http://www.hidromet.com.pa/mareas.php?idioma=ing. Last accessed 11/30/11.
Mandel, J. and Salecon (1972). Force portante dun sol sur une assise rigide. Geotechnique, Vol.22.
Munfakh, G.A. (1996). Ground Improvement Engineering-The State of the Practice. Conexpo-Con/AGG, 30
polypropylene.
Meyerhof, G.G. (1963). Some recent research on the bearing capacity of foundations. Canadian Geotechnical Journal,
Vol.1, No.1, September.
Meyerhof, G.G., and Hanna, A.M. (1978). Ultimate Bearing Capacity of Foundations on Layered Soils under Inclined Load.
Canadian Geotechnical Journal , Vol.15, No.4, pp. 565-572.
Shin, E.C., Kim, D.H., Das, B.M., and Lee, E.S. (2001). Stress distribution in reclaimed land under a geogrid-reinforced
granular pad. Proceedings of the XI International Conference of Offshore and Polar Engineering, Stavanger, Norway,
675-680.
Watts, K. and Jenner, C. (2008). Large-Scale Laboratory Assessment of Geogrids to Reinforce Granular Working
Platforms, Eurogeo4, Paper No. 222.
Wayne, M.H., Han, J., and Akins, K. (1998). The Design of Geosynthetic Reinforced Foundations. ASCE Annual
Convention and Exposition, Boston, Massachusetts, October 18-21, USA.
White, D.J., Nennapusa, P.K.R., Douglas, H.H., Zhang, J., and Wayne, M.H. (2011). In-ground Dynamic Stress
Measurements for Geosynthetic Reinforced Subgrade/Subbase. Geofrontiers Conference, Dallas, Texas, USA.