Geotechnical and Geological Engineering (2006) 24: 903–917
Springer 2006

DOI 10.1007/s10706-005-7722-y

Analysis of geosynthetic reinforced soil structures

with orthogonal anisotropy

M. X. ZHANG1,‹ , A. A. JAVADI2, Y. M. LAI3 and J. SUN4

1
Department of Civil Engineering, Shanghai University, 149, Yanchang Road, Shanghai 200072
PR China
2
Department of Engineering, University of Exeter, Exeter EX4 4QF, UK
3
State Key Laboratory of Frozen Soil, Cold and Arid Regions, Environmental and Engineering
Research Institute, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Lanzhou 730000 PR China
4
Academician of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, Department of Geotechnical Engineering,
Tongji University, 1239, Siping Road, Shanghai 200092, PR China

(Received 6 May 2004; revised 6 January 2005; accepted 20 May 2005)

Abstract. Reinforced soil with geosynthetics as a composite material represents significant

orthogonally anisotropic properties. However, current analytical methods usually treat the
soil and reinforcement separately, which is not true of practical situations. Therefore, it is
difficult to use these methods to study the real effects of the reinforcement. This paper presents
an analytical model based on the theory of elasticity for orthogonally anisotropic materials
that can be used in analyzing reinforced soil structures with geosynthetics. The stresses and
deformations at any point within the reinforced soil structure can be determined by the
proposed model. The capabilities of the model have been illustrated by application to an
example problem involving a physical model test of a geosynthetic reinforced soil structure.
The results of the model prediction are compared with those obtained from the model tests as
well as finite element analysis. It is shown that the results of the analytical solution are in good
agreement with those of the physical model tests and the finite element analysis.
Key words. composite material, geosynthetic, orthogonal anisotropy, reinforced soil, retain-
ing wall.

1. Introduction
Due to its cost-saving, ease of construction and ability to improve the visual
appearance, the geosynthetic reinforced soil, as a composite material and a new
reinforcement technique, has caused a revolution in geotechnical engineering. It has
come to play a rapidly increasing role in a variety of civil and geo-environmental
engineering applications, such as construction of road and railway embankments,
stabilization of slopes, improvement of soft ground, and so on. Meanwhile, theo-
retical and numerical approaches, such as frictional reinforcement theory,

‹
Corresponding author: Department of Civil Engineering, Shanghai University, 149, Yanchang Road,
200072, Shanghai, PR China, (e-mail: mxzhang@staff.shu.edu.cn; phone: +86-21-56331972; fax: +86-21-
56331971)
904 M. X. ZHANG ET AL.

pseudo-cohesion theory and finite element method, have been employed in the
analysis of the behavior of reinforced soil. The frictional reinforcement theory and
finite element method have been used to study the stress state inside backfill soil, the
forces distributed along the reinforcement, as well as the force acting on the wall
facing, while analyzing on the soil and reinforcement separately. The pseudo-cohe-
sion theory, developed by Schlosser and Long (1973) based on the laboratory test
results, does not consider the anisotropy of reinforced soil, though the theory takes it
as an integrated material. These contributions (Chang and Forsyth, 1977; Karpurapu
and Bathurst, 1995; Ling et al., 1995; Haeri et al., 2000; Rowe and Skinner, 2001)
played an active role in understanding the behavior of reinforced soil. However,
reinforced soil, a composite material with distinct orthogonally anisotropic features,
is rarely practically studied as a composite material. The analytical methods, such as
those mentioned above, usually analyze the soil and reinforcement separately, and
therefore, they mainly take into account the interactions between the soil and rein-
forcement. However, they do not consider the effects of the inherent anisotropy of
reinforced soil. As a result, these methods are not suitable for practical situations as
they do not represent a true picture of the real reinforced soil behavior. Therefore, it
will be difficult to use these methods in the study of the behavior of reinforced soils in
most practical applications. Based on the characteristics of reinforced composite
materials, the authors have carried out finite element analysis of reinforced soil
retaining walls considering the effects of anisotropy and strain softening behavior
(Zhang, 1993; Zhang and Sun, 2000). Geosynthetic reinforced soil represents signif-
icant orthogonal anisotropy that varies with type, amount and distribution of rein-
forcement. A typical comparison of anisotropic properties between un-reinforced soil
and reinforced soil is presented in Table 1 (Ouyang, 1991). Experimental results show
that:
(i) anisotropy of reinforced soil increases with increasing the layers of reinforce-
ment;
(ii) anisotropy also increases with increase in stiffness (Young’s modulus) of rein-
forcement;

Table 1. Orthogonally anisotropic properties of reinforced soil

Items lxy lxz lyz Ex/E Ey/E Ez/E Gxy/E Gxz/E Gyz/E

Un-reinforced soil 0.2500 0.2500 0.2500 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.40 0.40 0.40
H.P. reinforceda 0.0127 0.3290 0.3290 21.06 21.06 1.18 0.40 0.40 0.40
H.B. reinforcedb 0.2500 0.2500 0.3312 41.00 1.06 1.06 0.40 0.40 0.40
V.P. reinforcedc 0.3290 0.0127 0.0185 21.06 1.18 21.06 0.40 0.40 0.40
V.B. reinforcedd 0.3312 0.0065 0.0065 1.06 1.06 41.00 0.40 0.40 0.40
Note: 200 MPa of the Young’s modulus for reinforcement; 4000 kPa of the Young’s modulus for backfill
soil; l =0.25, c=20 kN/m3, K0=0.333. aHorizontally pad reinforced; bHorizontally bar reinforced;
c
Vertically pad reinforced; dVertically bar reinforced.
ANALYSIS OF GEOSYNTHETIC REINFORCED SOIL STRUCTURES 905

(iii) anisotropy and strength change with varying the inclination of reinforcements
(Smith and Brigilson, 1979; Sun and Yang, 1991). This is evidenced by fiber
reinforced soil almost representing isotropic behavior due to fibers being ran-
domly distributed in the soil (Michalowski and Čermák, 2003; Yetimoglu and
Salbas, 2003).
Therefore, isotropic analytical models do not appear to be suitable for geosyn-
thetic reinforced soil, which is clearly anisotropic. In this paper, an orthogonally
anisotropic analytical model is presented based on theory of elasticity, which can be
used in the analysis of soil structures reinforced with geosynthetics. The model has
been used to predict stresses and displacements at various points within a soil
structure. Comparison has been made between results of the theoretical solution and
those obtained from a model test and a finite element analysis (Zhang, 1993).

2. Analysis
2.1. GOVERNING EQUATIONS
An anisotropic body that has three orthogonal planes of elastic symmetry at each
point is called orthogonally anisotropic or orthotropic (Lekhnitskii, 1963). By
directing the axes of the coordinates perpendicular to these planes, the equations of
the generalized Hooke’s law can be simplified to:
9
ex ¼ a11 rx þ a12 ry þ a13 rz >
>
ey ¼ a12 rx þ a22 ry þ a23 rz >
>
>
>
ez ¼ a13 rx þ a23 ry þ a33 rz =
(1)
cyz ¼ a44 syz >
>
>
>
czx ¼ a55 szx >
>
;
cxy ¼ a66 sxy

where rx, ry and rz are normal stresses in the directions of the coordinate axes x, y
and z respectively;
sxy ; syz and szx are shear stresses on the orthogonal xy, yz and zx planes;
ex ; ey and ez are normal strains in the directions of the coordinate axes x, y and z;
cxy ,cyz and czx are shear strains on the orthogonal xy, yz and zx planes and a11 ~ a66
are elastic constants:

1 lyx lzx
a11 ¼ ; a12 ¼
; a13 ¼

Ex Ey Ez

lxy 1 lzy
a21 ¼
; a22 ¼ ; a23 ¼

Ex Ey Ez

lxz lyz 1
a31 ¼
; a32 ¼
; a33 ¼
Ex Ey Ez
906 M. X. ZHANG ET AL.

1 1 1
a44 ¼ ; a55 ¼ ; a66 ¼
Gyz Gzx Gxy

where Ex, Ey and Ez are Young’s moduli in the directions of the coordinate axes x, y
and z respectively;
Gxy, Gyz and Gzx are shear moduli on the orthogonal xy, yz and zx planes
respectively;
lxy, lyz and lzx are Poisson’s ratios on the orthogonal xy, yz and zx planes.
Under plane strain conditions, ez=0:
1
rz ¼
ða13 rx þ a23 ry Þ (2a)
a33
and,
cyz ¼ 0 (2b)

czx ¼ 0 (2c)
For a reinforced soil, as a composite material with orthogonal anisotropy, the stress-
strain relationship under plane strain conditions can be obtained by substituting
Equation (2) in Equation (1):


 9
a2
ex ¼ a11 rx þ a12 ry
aa1333 ða13 rx þ a23 ry Þ ¼ a11
a13 r x þ a 12
a13 a23
a33 ry >
>
=

33

2

a23 a23 a13 a
ey ¼ a12 rx þ a22 ry
a33 ða13 rx þ a23 ry Þ ¼ a12
a33 rx þ a22
a33 ry > 23
>
cxy ¼ a66 sxy ;

(3)
Equation (3) can be inverted to express stresses in terms of strains as:

  9
 ex b12  >
  >
>
 ey b22  b22 ex
b12 ey >
>
rx ¼   ¼ ¼ c e þ c e >
>
b b  b b
b b
11 x 12 y >
>
 11 12  11 22 12 21 >
>
 b21 b22  >
=
 
 b11 ex  (4)
  >
>
 b21 ey 
b21 ex þ b11 ey >
>
ry ¼  ¼ ¼ c e þ c e
22 y >
>
b b  b b
b b
21 x >
>
 11 12  11 22 12 21 >
>
 b21 b22  >
>
;
sxy ¼ c66 cxy

where,

b22 b12 b21 b11 1

c11 ¼ ; c12 ¼
; c21 ¼
; c22 ¼ ; c66 ¼
D D D D a66
ANALYSIS OF GEOSYNTHETIC REINFORCED SOIL STRUCTURES 907

a213 a13 a23 a223

b11 ¼ a11
; b12 ¼ b21 ¼ a12
; b22 ¼ a22

a33 a33 a33

 
b b12 
where D ¼  11 ¼ b11 b22
b12 b21
b21 b22 

The governing differential equation describing the equilibrium of a body (with

components of the body force X and Y in the x and y directions) can be written as:

@sxy
)
@rx
@x þ @y þX¼0
@sxy @ry (5)
@x þ @y þY¼0

Cauchy’s equation describes the relationship between the components of displace-

ment in the x and y directions (u and v), and the normal strains and shear strain on
the xy plane as:
9
@u
ex ¼ @x >
=
@v
ey ¼ @y (6)
@v >
;
cxy ¼ @u
@y þ @x

Combination of Equations (4) and (5) results in:

)
@ @
@x ðc11 ex þ c12 ey Þ þ @y ðc66 cxy Þ þX¼0
@ @ (7)
@x ðc66 cxy Þ þ @y ðc21 ex þ c22 ey Þ þY¼0

By substituting Equation (6) into Equation (7), this equation will become:
2 2 2
)
@ u @ u @ v
c11 @x 2 þ c66 @y2 þ ðc12 þ c66 Þ @x@y þ X ¼ 0
2
@ u @ v2
@ v 2 (8)
ðc66 þ c21 Þ @x@y þ c66 @x 2 þ c22 @y2 þ Y ¼ 0

Equation (8) describes the governing partial differential equations of static equilib-
rium for an orthogonally anisotropic body under plane strain conditions.

2.2. DETERMINATION OF DISPLACEMENTS AND STRESSES OF A SOIL STRUCTURE

REINFORCED WITH GEOSYNTHETICS

Here we consider a retaining wall reinforced with geosynthetics as an example (see

Figure 1). The wall has a length of a and height of b. The reinforcements with full-
length have been laid in horizontal direction. A uniform pressure qy acts on the top
surface of the structure. The displacement boundary conditions on the bottom and
right side boundaries are:
908 M. X. ZHANG ET AL.

Figure 1. The orthogonally anisotropic model of geosynthetic reinforced soil retaining wall.

9
u¼0 at y ¼ 0 >
=
v ¼ 0 at y ¼ 0 (9a)
>
;
u ¼ 0 at x ¼ a

The stress boundary conditions on the top and left side boundaries are:
9
rx ¼ 0 at x ¼ 0 >
>
>
sxy ¼ 0 at x ¼ 0 =
(9b)
ry ¼
qy at y ¼ b >
>
>
;
sxy ¼ 0 at y ¼ b

Considering the reinforced soil structure as an orthogonally anisotropic elastic body

under plane strain conditions (Figure 1), the displacements u and v (in the x and y
directions respectively) at any point within the structure can be expressed as (Zhang,
1999):
PP 9
u¼ Amn xm ðxÞ  yn ðyÞ =
P
m P
n
(10)
v¼ Bmn zm ðxÞ  yn ðyÞ ;
m n

where Amn and Bmn are constants;

ANALYSIS OF GEOSYNTHETIC REINFORCED SOIL STRUCTURES 909

In Equation (10), xm (x), yn (y) and zm (x) are characteristic functions of a

vibrating beam, which can be determined, for a given problem, by selecting the
appropriate boundary conditions (Felgar, 1950; Cao, 1989). The boundary condi-
tions for the geosynthetic reinforced soil retaining wall shown in Figure 1 are:
CF (clamped-free) for xm (x) (i.e., u=0 at x=a and free at x=0);
CF (clamped-free) for yn (y) (i.e., clamped at y=0 and free at y=b); and
FF (free-free) for zm (x) (i.e., free in the y direction at x=0 and x=a).
Therefore, for this retaining wall the characteristic functions can be expressed as
(Cao, 1989, p. 445):

xm ðxÞ ¼ ðcosham x
cos am xÞ
Cam ðsinham x
sin am xÞ (11a)

yn ðyÞ ¼ ðcoshbn y
cos bn yÞ
Cbn ðsinhbn y
sin bn yÞ (11b)

zm ðxÞ ¼ ðcoshcm x þ cos cm xÞ
Ccm ðsinhcm x þ sin cm xÞ; m>2 (11c)

For m O 2:

z1 ðxÞ ¼ 1 (11d)
 
pffiffiffi 2x
z2 ðxÞ ¼ 3 1
; (11e)
a
In Equation (11), Cam, Cbn, and Ccm are coefficients of characteristic function of a
vibrating beam and their values for appropriate boundary conditions (FF and CF)
can be determined as (Cao, 1989, p. 445):

9
cosham a þ cos am a >
Cam ¼ ðCF, m ¼ 1; 2; 3; . . .Þ >
>
>
sinham a þ sin am a >
>
coshbn b þ cos bn b =
Cbn ¼ ðCF, n ¼ 1; 2; 3; . . .Þ (12)
sinhbn b þ sin bn b >
>
coshcm a
cos cm a >
>
>
>
Ccm ¼ ðFF, m > 2Þ ;
sinhcm a
sin cm a
where am, bn and cm are coefficients of frequency of the vibrating beam. For different
boundary conditions, the values of am, bn and cm can be determined as (Cao, 1989,
p. 446):

ð2m
1Þp
am ¼ ðCF, m ¼ 1; 2; 3; . . .Þ (13a)
2a
ð2n
1Þp
bn ¼ ðCF, n ¼ 1; 2; 3; . . .Þ (13b)
2b
ð2m
3Þp
cm ¼ ðFF, m ¼ 1; 2; 3; . . .Þ (13c)
2a
910 M. X. ZHANG ET AL.

From Equations (13a) and (13b) it can be seen that:

am a ¼ bn b ðm; n ¼ 1; 2; 3; . . .Þ
Substituting Equation (10) into Equation (8) results in:
PP 00 PP 00 PP 0 0 9
c11 Amn xm yn þ c66 Amn xm yn þ ðc12 þ c66 Þ Bmn zm yn þ X ¼ 0 =
m n PP m n PP mP
P n
0 0 00 00
ðc66 þ c21 Þ Amn xm yn þ c66 Bmn zm yn þ c66 Bmn zm yn þ Y ¼ 0 ;
m n m n m n
(14)
Hence, stresses at any point within the structure may be determined as:

9
@u @v
rx ¼ c11 @x þ c12 @y >
>
=
@u @v
ry ¼ c21 @x þ c22 @y

>
@v > ;
sxy ¼ c66 @u
@y þ @x

or:

PP PP
9
rx ¼ c11 Amn x0 m yn þ c12
Bmn zm y0n >
>
Pm P
n P
m P
n >
>
ry ¼ c21 0 y 0 =
Amn x m n þ c22 Bmn zm yn
m n m n > (15)
PP PP >
>
sxy ¼ c66 Amn xm y0n þ Bmn z0m yn > ;
m n m n

Substituting Equation (15) and the stress boundary conditions (Equation 9b) into
Equation (5) results in linear equations as follows:

PP mnij PP mnij 9
Amn K1 þ Bmn K2 ¼ Kij5 =
m n m n
P P mnij P P mnij (16)
Amn K3 þ Bmn K4 ¼ Kij6 ;
m n m n

where the expressions for Kmnij mnij mnij mnij ij ij

1 , K2 , K3 , K4 , K5 , K6 are shown in the appendix.
The constants Amn and Bmn in Equation (10) and Equations (14) to (15) may be
obtained from solution of Equation (16).

3. Example
To validate the developed analytical model, a geosynthetic reinforced soil retaining
wall was constructed as a physical model, with a length of a=1.2 m and height of
b=0.54 m. Full-length reinforcements were placed with a vertical spacing of 6 cm. A
uniform load of qy=150 kPa was applied on the top surface of the structure, as
shown in Figure 1. The mechanical properties of the geosynthetic reinforced soil are
shown in Table 2, where the Young’s modulus and shear strength parameters were
ANALYSIS OF GEOSYNTHETIC REINFORCED SOIL STRUCTURES 911

determined from triaxial tests. The developed analytical model was used to predict
the behavior of the reinforced soil structure in the model test under the applied load.
The results of the model prediction were compared with those measured in the
physical test (Zhang et al., 1999). Figure 2a, b show respectively the horizontal
displacements of the facing and the vertical settlement on the top of the reinforced
soil structure predicted by the analytical model, finite element analysis together with
those measured in the physical model test. Comparison of the results shows that the
results predicted by the analytical model are in very good agreement with those
measured from the model tests (Zhang et al., 1999) as well as with the finite element
results (Zhang, 1993). The stresses at various points within the structure were ob-
tained from Equation (15). The distributions of rx and ry within the structure,
obtained using the orthogonally anisotropic model and the isotropic model, are
shown in Figures 3 and 4 respectively. Comparison of the results shows that the
assumption of an isotropic model for reinforced soil considerably overestimates the
horizontal stresses and therefore, is not suitable for practical applications. It also
slightly overestimates the vertical stresses. Due to the anisotropic nature of rein-
forced soil, the orthogonal anisotropic model would be more appropriate for the
prediction of stresses and deformations in reinforced soil structures.

4. Conclusions
Reinforced soil with geosynthetics, as a composite material, represents significant
orthogonal anisotropy. However, current analytical methods usually ignore the
anisotropy of reinforced soils. Therefore, it is difficult to use these methods to study
the behavior and real effects of the reinforcements.
This paper presented an orthogonally anisotropic analytical model, based on
the theory of elasticity, which can be used in the analysis of geosynthetic rein-
forced soil structures. The stresses and deformations at any point within the
reinforced soil structure can be determined by the proposed model. The capa-
bilities of the model have been illustrated by application to an example problem
involving a physical model testing of a geosynthetic reinforced soil structure. The
results of the model prediction have been compared with those measured in the
model tests and also with the results obtained from finite element analysis.
Comparison of the results shows that the results obtained by using the proposed
analytical model are in good agreement with those of the physical model tests
and the finite element analysis.

Table 2. Mechanical properties of reinforced soil with geosynthetics

Ex(kPa) Ey(kPa) lxy c(kN/m3) c(kPa) u() qy(kPa)

50,000 18,000 0.25 16.5 98.5 29 150

912 M. X. ZHANG ET AL.

(a) 0.6

0.5

0.4
Heigt (m)

Experimental Results (Zhang et al, 1999)

0.3
Prersent Analysis
FEM Analysis (Zhang,1993)
0.2

0.1

0
0 0.5 1 1.5
Lateral displacement of facing (mm)

Lateral displacement at facing

(b) Distance from facing (m)

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
0
Experimental Results (Zhang et al, 1999)
0.2
Prersent Analysis
Settlement (mm)

0.4 FEM Analysis (Zhang,1993)

0.6

0.8

1.2
Settlement at top surface
Figure 2. Displacement of geosynthetic reinforced soil retaining wall.

Appendix
m „ i, n „ j
n o
mnij 2 CF CF
K1 ¼w2i c11 c66 I20im
CF CF CF CF
L20nj =abþc11 c66 I20mi L20jn =abþðc66 þc21 Þ I16mi L16nj =ab
 
þw2b c266 xm xi LCF 2 y y CF
16ni =bþc21 n j I16mi ða
1Þ
ANALYSIS OF GEOSYNTHETIC REINFORCED SOIL STRUCTURES 913

(a)

sx (KPa)

(b)

sy (KPa)
Figure 3. Stress distributions within geosynthetic reinforced soil retaining structure (orthogonally
anisotropic model).

m=i, n „ j
n
mnij 2
K1 ¼w2I c11 c66 I10i
CF CF CF CF
L20nj =abþc11 ða
2Þc66 I10i L20jn =abþðc66 þc21 Þ I6iCF =a
o n o
þ LCF 2 2 2 CF 2 0 0 2 y y CF
16nj =b þwB c66 xi L16nj =bþc66 y n y j aþc21 n j I6i =a ða
2Þ

m „ i, n=j
n
mnij 2
K1 ¼ w2I c11 c66 I20im
CF
=a LCF CF CF
10j =bþc11 c66 I20mi L10j =abþðc66 þc21 Þ
o n o
CF CF 2 2 2 CF 2 CF
I16mi L6j =b þwB c11 xj0 m x0 aþc66 xm xi L6j =bþc21 y2i I16mi =a
ða
3Þ
914 M. X. ZHANG ET AL.

(a)

sx (KPa)
(b)

sy (KPa)
Figure 4. Stress distributions within geosynthetic reinforced soil retaining structure (isotropic model).
m=i, n=j n o
2 CF CF
Kmnij
1 ¼w2
I c 2 CF
I
11 7i =a 3
bþ2c 11 c 66 I CF
10j =a LCF
10j =bþc 2 CF
a
66 6j =b 3
þðc 66 þc 21 Þ I 6i L6j =ab
n o
2 2 0 0 2 2 CF 2 CF
þwB c11 x i x i bþc66 xi L6j =abþc66 ayj0 y0j þc21 yn yj I6i =a
ða
4Þ
n „ j Z a Z a
mnij
K2 ¼w2I ðc12 þc66 Þc11 zm0 x00i dxLCF
19nj þðc12 þc66 Þc66 zm0 xi dxLCF
22jn =b
2
0 0
Z a Z a

þðc21 þc66 Þc66 zm00 xi0 dxLCF

19jn þðc21 þc66 Þc66 zm xi0 dxLCF
22nj =b
2
0 0
Z a
þw2B c11 c12 z
m x
i0 LCF 2
0

i LCF
19nj þc66 zm x
2 y

0
19jn þc66 n y j zm0 xi dxþc21 c22 y
nj0
0
Z a o
zm x0 i dx ða
5Þ
0
ANALYSIS OF GEOSYNTHETIC REINFORCED SOIL STRUCTURES 915

n=j
Z a Z a
mnij
K2 ¼w2I 2ðc12 þc66 Þc11 zm0 x00i dxþ ðc12 þc66 Þc66 z0 m xi dx LCF
12j =b
2
0 0
Z a Z a

þ 2ðc21 þc66 Þc66 zm00 xi0 dx þ ðc21 þc66 Þc66

zm x 0 CF
i dx L12j =b
2
0 0
Z a
þ w2b 2c11 c12 z
m x
0i þ 2c266 z
m0 x
i þc266 y
j y
0j zm0 xi dx þ c21 c22 y0j yj
0
Z a o
zm x0i dx ða
6Þ
0

n„j
Z a Z a
mnij
K3 ¼w2I c11 ðc12 þc66 Þ x00m z0i dx LCF19jn þc 66 ð c 12 þc 66 Þ xm z0i dx LCF22nj =b
2
0 0
Z a Z a

0 0 CF 0 CF 2
þc66 ðc21 þc66 Þ xm zi dx L19nj þc66 ðc21 þc66 Þ xm zi dx L22jn =b :
0 0
n Z a
þw2B c11 c12 zi x
0 m LCF
19jn þc 2
66 ð x
m

0 i LCF þy
n0 y
j
z 19nj xm zi0 dxÞ
0
Z a o


þc21 22 n yj
c 0 xm0 zi dx ða
7Þ
0

n=j
Z a Z a
Kmnij
3 ¼ w2
I 2 c 11 ð c 12 þ c 66 Þ x00m zi0 dx þ c66 ðc12 þ c66 Þ xm zi0 dx  LCF
12j
0 0
Z a Z a

þ 2 c66 ðc21 þ c66 Þ x0m z00i dx þ c66 ðc21 þ c66 Þ x0m zi dx LCF 12j =b 2
0 0
Z a
þ w2b 2 c11 zi xm0 þ 2 c2 x z0 þ c c y
66 m i
0
21 22
n yj x0m zi dx þ c266 y
n0 y
j
0
Z a

0
xm zi dx ða
8Þ
0

m „ i, n „ j
n
mnij
K4 ¼ w2I ðc12 þ c66 Þ2 I16m:ij
FF
=a  LCF 2 FF CF
6j =b þ c66 I20im =a  L20nj =b
o n o
þ c266 I20mi
FF
=a  LCF
20jn =b þ w 2 2
b 12 z m z i  LCF
6nj =b þ c 2 y y FF
66 n j I 16mi =a ða
9Þ

m=i, n „ j
n o
mnij 2
K4 ¼w2I ðc12 þc66 Þ I6iFF =aLCF
16nj =bþc 2 FF CF
I
66 10i  L20nj =bþc 2 FF
I
66 10i =a
n o
2 2 CF 2 0 0 2 y y FF
þwB c12 zm zi L16nj =bþc22 yn yj aþc66 n j I6i ða
10Þ
916 M. X. ZHANG ET AL.

m „ i, n=j
n o
mnij
K4 ¼ w2I ðc12 þ c66 Þ2 I16mi
FF
=a  LCF
6j þ c 2
I FF
66 20im =a LCF
10j =bþc 2
I FF
66 20mi =a  L CF
10j =b
n o
þ w2B c212 zm zi  LCF 2 0 0 2 y y FF
6j =b þ c66 z m z i  b þ c66 n j  I6i =a ða
11Þ

m=i, n=j
n
mnij
K4 ¼w2I ðc12 þ c66 Þ2 I6iFF =a  LCF 2 FF 3 2 FF CF
6j =b þ c66 I7i =a  b þ 2 c66 I10i =a  L10j =b þ c66 a
2

n o
 LCF
7j =a 3
gþ w 2
b c 2
12 z m z i LCF
6j =bþ c 2
66 z m z i  bþ c 2 0 0
y y
22 n j  aþc 2 y y
66 n i  I FF
6i

ða
12Þ

Z Z Z
ij   a
K5 ¼
wI
2
X c11 x00i yj þc66 xi y00j þYðc21 þc66 Þx0i y0j dxdy
w2B qy x0i dxc21 y0j
0
s
(a
13)
Z Z Z
ij  2   a
K6 ¼ wI Xðc12 þc66 Þz0i y0j þYw2I c66 z00i yj þzi y00j dxdyþw2B qy c22 zi y0j dx
0
s
(a
14)

where WI and WB represent special values of the weight functions in the interior and
at the boundary of the structure, respectively.
x
0m is the value of x¢m (x) at x=a;
Similarly, y
0n is the value of y¢n (y) at y=b; z
0m is the value of z¢m (x) at x=a;
qy is distributed load acted on the top surface of the structure (y=b);
a and b are length and height of the structure, respectively;
X and Y represent body forces in the structure in the x and y directions, respec-
tively;
c11  c66 are elastic constants as shown notes of Equation (4);
Superscript FF denotes boundary conditions free at x=0 or y=0 and free at x=a
or y=b;
Superscript CF denotes boundary conditions clamped at x=0 or y=0 and free at
x=a or y=b;
ICF CF
20im ; L16nj etc. are functions in integral forms of a vibrating beam. (Cao, 1989, pp.
447–452).

Acknowledgement
The financial assistance from the National Natural Science Foundation of China
under Grant No. 59738160 is herein much acknowledged.
ANALYSIS OF GEOSYNTHETIC REINFORCED SOIL STRUCTURES 917

References
Cao, Z. Y. (1989) The Vibration Theory of Plates and Shells, China Railway Press, Beijing
China.
Chang, J. C. and Forsyth, R. A. (1977) Finite element analysis of reinforced soil wall, Journal
of the Geotechnical Engineering Division, 103(7), 711–724.
Felgar, R. P. (1950) Formulas for integrals containing characteristic functions of a vibrating
beam, Unversity of Texas Circular (14).
Haeri, S. M., Noorzad, R. and Oskoorouchi, A. M. (2000) Effect of geotextile reinforcement
on the mechanical behavior of sand, Geotextiles and Geomembranes, 18(6), 385–402.
Karpurapu, R. and Bathurst, R. J. (1995) Behaviour of geosynthetic reinforced soil retaining
walls using the finite element method, Computers and Geotechnics, 17(3), 279–299.
Lekhnitskii, S. G. (1963) Theory of elasticity of an anisotropic elastic body. In Holden-Day
Series in Mathematical Physics (edited by Julius J. Brandstatter) (translated by P. Fern),
San Francisco.
Ling Hoe, I., Tatsuoka, Fumio and Tateyama, Masaru (1995) Simulating performance of
GRS-RW by finite-element procedure, Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 121(4), 330–
340.
Michalowski, R. L. and Čermák, J. (2003) Triaxial compression of sand reinforced with
fibers, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 129(2), 125–136.
Ouyang, Z. C. (1991) Modern Reinforced Soil Technology, People Transportation Press,
Beijing, China.
Rowe, R. K. and Skinner, G. D. (2001) Numerical analysis of geosynthetic reinforced
retaining wall constructed on a layered soil foundation, Geotextiles and Geomembranes,
19(7), 387–412.
Schlosser, F. and Long, N. T. (1973) Etude dn comportement du Materiaux Terre Armée,
Annales de, L’Institut Technique de Batiment et des Travaux Pablic, Supplement No. 304,
Series Matériaux, No. 45.
Smith, G. N. and Brigilson, G. I. (1979) Inclined stripes in reinforced soil walls, Civil
Engineering, 6, 60–61.
Sun, Y. Q. and Yang, Y. H. (1991) Effects of reinforced soil strength on inclined angles of
reinforcements under axial symmetrical loads, China Highway Journal, 5, 34–37.
Yetimoglu, T. and Salbas, O. (2003) A study on shear strength of sands reinforced with
randomly distributed discrete fibers, Geotextiles and Geomembranes, 21(2), 103–110.
Zhang, M. X. (1993) 3-D analysis of reinforced earth retaining walls with anisotropy, Journal
of the China Railway Society, 15(3), 84–89.
Zhang, M. X. (1999) Study on Engineering Properties of Soil Masses due to Construction
Disturbances, PhD. Thesis, Department of Geotechnical Engineering, School of Civil
Engineering, Tongji University, Shanghai, China.
Zhang, M. X., Sun, Y. Q. and Li, G. X. (1999) Experimental study of the fundamental
mechanism of reinforced earth retaining walls, Journal of the China Railway Society, 21(5),
79–82.
Zhang, M. X. and Sun, J. (2000) Strain softening behavior and an elastic-plastic analysis of
reinforced earth with geosynthetics, China Civil Engineering Journal, 33(3), 104–107.