Transportation Geotechnics 28 (2021) 100507

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Transportation Geotechnics
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/trgeo

Dynamic behavior of natural sand soils and fiber reinforced soils in

heavy-haul railway embankment under multistage cyclic loading
Yingying Zhao a, b, c, Yang Yang a, *, Xianzhang Ling c, d, Weiming Gong a, Guoyu Li b, Lei Su d
a
Key Laboratory of Concrete and Prestressed Concrete Structures of Ministry of Education, Southeast University, Nanjing 211189, China
b
State Key Laboratory of Frozen Soil Engineering, Northwest Institute of Eco-Environment and Resources, Lanzhou 730000, China
c
School of Civil Engineering, Harbin Institute of Technology, Harbin 150090, China
d
School of Civil Engineering, Qingdao University of Technology, Qingdao 266033, China

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: In this study, dynamic triaxial tests of natural sand soils and fiber reinforced soils were conducted. The influence
Natural sand soil of loading frequency, water content, and compaction degree on the dynamic shear modulus and damping ratio of
Fiber reinforced soil natural soils were identified. Different fiber length, confining pressure, and fiber content were studied to gain the
Heavy-haul railway embankment
dynamic characteristics of fiber reinforced soils. The results show that the water content and compaction degree
Dynamic shear modulus
Damping ratio
has a significant effect on the dynamic behavior of natural soils, and confining pressure and fiber content has a
visible reinforcement effect on the dynamic characteristic of fiber reinforced soils. The empirical formulas of
maximum dynamic shear modulus (Gd max), ultimate shear stress (τdult), and damping ratio (λ) were generate,
which can provide references for fiber reinforced soil design.

Introduction
Fiber reinforcement is utilized to satisfy the requirement of ground
improvement projects, such as walls [31], slopes [34], earth retaining
structures [15], railway embankment [2,14,31], airfield construction
and other projects. The fibers acted like wheat stalk added to the clay
mud to build earthen structures and walls in ancient times [14]. Fiber
reinforced soils gain the attention of engineers and researchers in the
process of heavy-haul railway embankment designing.
The first documented engineering use of fibers in road construction
dated to 1926 [3]. Since then, numerous laboratory and field tests have
been performed to investigate the characteristic of natural or artificial
fiber reinforced soils [9,43]. Most of the research on fiber reinforced
soils is under static loads. A large number of direct shear tests
[4,12,38,41], triaxial compression tests [6,8,10,11], field tests [39]
have proved the reinforcement effect of fiber. The study of dynamic
characters of fiber reinforced soils started to appear but still has not been
widely studied or reported in the literature in the area of the heavy-haul
railway embankment. Noorany and Uzdavines [28] firstly conducted
researches on the dynamic characters of fiber reinforced soils about the
liquefaction potential. Then, more and more research about fiber rein­
forced soils focused on the liquefaction potential [1,18,29]. Resonant
column tests [21,22,24,23] and dynamic triaxial tests have approved
that fiber content, confining pressure, loading repetition, shear strain,
deviatoric stress ratio, and loading repetition could affect the shear
modulus of reinforced soils [5,26,35]. The characteristic of natural soils
is various all over the world, which means the reinforced soils own
unique dynamic characteristics. Intensely few researchers have inves­
tigated the dynamic characters of natural soils fiber reinforced soils in
northwest China, subjected to heavy-haul train load.
In this study, the dynamic characteristics of natural soils and fiber
reinforced soils are evaluated. Meanwhile, an empirical model was
proposed. Firstly, eleven dynamic triaxial tests of natural soils were
conducted to identify the influences of loading frequency, water content,
and degree of compaction on the dynamic shear modulus and damping
ratio. Secondly, twenty dynamic triaxial tests of fiber reinforced soils
were performed to study the dynamic characteristic of fiber reinforced
soils. Finally, three empirical models were proposed based on experi­
mental data to predict the dynamic characteristic of fiber reinforced
soils. Moreover, the test results could provide references for heavy-haul
railway embankment design and construction in desert regions.

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: 230179093@seu.edu.cn (Y. Yang).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trgeo.2020.100507
Received 17 September 2020; Received in revised form 8 December 2020; Accepted 29 December 2020
Available online 5 January 2021
2214-3912/© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Y. Zhao et al.
Laboratory experiments
Soil properties
The soils were collected from the heavy-haul railway site. In order to
satisfy the requirement of code for soil test of railway engineering in
China (TB 10102–2010, 2010), the soils were dried, crushed and shifted.
The coefficient of uniformity (Cu) and the coefficient of gradation (Cc)
are 10.89 and 1.02, respectively. The optimum water content and the
maximum dry density are 8.5% and 2.06 g/cm3. Fig. 1 illustrates the
curve of particle grade of natural soil. Based on the code for design on
subgrade of railway (TB10001-2005), the soil can be classified as well-
graded coarse sand because the Cu ≥ 5, Cc = 1 ~ 3, and the percent
finer for particle size over 0.5 mm exceeds 50%. Table 1 shows the
properties of fibers. The triaxial tests were conducted before the dy­
namic triaxial tests, and more information about the natural soils can be
generated from the published paper [44].
Specimen preparation
All the specimen preparations were carried out in the Cold and Arid
Regions Environmental and Engineering Research Institute, Chinese
Academy of Sciences (CAREERI, CAS) in Lanzhou, China. The natural
soils and fiber-reinforced soils were adopted to perform dynamic triaxial
tests. After the soils were prepared, the soil samples were compacted
into sample preparation cylinders using a sampling machine by temping
the successive layer to ensure uniform compaction. Black rubber sleeves
were used to cover the specimens. The diameter and height of the soil
samples are 61.8 mm and 125 mm, respectively. The preparation of soils
is in line with triaxial tests (Ying et al., 2020).
Apparatus and testing procedure
Dynamic triaxial tests were conducted in CAREERI, CAS, using MTS-
810, as shown in Fig. 2. More details about MTS-810 could be found in
Ling et al. [27]. Fig. 3 shows the multistage cyclic load utilized in the
test. The failure criterion was defined when the total axial strain reaches
to 15%.
Table 2 shows the test conditions for natural soils. All the specimens
of natural soils were tested under the confining pressure of 0.3 MPa. To
obtain the effect of water content, cases (FSW8-FSW14) were designed
with water contents of 8%, 10%, 12%, and 14%, respectively, under the
same load frequency and compaction degree. FSf1 to FSf5 were per­
formed to identify the effect of load frequency with a load frequency of
1 Hz, 2 Hz, 3 Hz, 4 Hz, and 5 Hz, respectively, under the same water
content and compaction degree condition. FSYS1, FSYS2, and FSf3 were
carried out with different compaction degrees, 85%, 98%, and 100%,
respectively, under the load frequency of 2 Hz and water content of
8.5%.
The test conditions for fiber-reinforced soils were summarized in
Table 3. Sixteen tests on fiber-reinforced soils were designed. All the
specimens were carried out at a compaction degree of 100% and a load
frequency of 2 Hz. FXL1 to FXL5 tests were performed to identify the
Fig. 1. Curve of particle grade of subgrade soil.
2
Transportation Geotechnics 28 (2021) 100507
effect of fiber length with fiber lengths of 0 mm, 9 mm, 12 mm, and 18
mm under the same confining pressure and fiber content. Four different
confining pressures were adopted, which were 0.1 MPa, 0.2 MPa, 0.3
MPa, and 0.4 MPa. Each confining pressure condition included four fiber
content conditions, 0%, 0.1%, 0.2%, and 0.3%. Comparing the test re­
sults of specimens with and without fibers, the effect of fibers on the
dynamic behavior of soil can be generated.
Determination of dynamic shear modulus
In this paper, a hyperbolic model proposed by Hardin and Drnevich
[13] was selected to describe the dynamic properties of soils. Hardin
model agreed well with the experimental data based on the following
test results. Dynamic shear modulus was generated based on the
following steps:
i) The cyclic shear stress τd and cyclic shear strain γ d can be obtained
from:
τd =
σd
(1)
2
γ d = (1 + μ)εd (2)
where μ is the dynamic Poisson’s ratio; σd is the axial cyclic stress; εd is
the axial cyclic strain.
ii) Performing linear regression analysis based on the following
equations:
γd
a + bγd = (3)
τd
where a and b are the material constants.
iii) Calculation of Gdmax, the ultimate cyclic shear stress τdult, and the
amplitude of reference cyclic shear strain γ r use the following equations:
Gdmax = 1/a (4)
τdult = 1/b (5)
γ r = a/b (6)
The normalized dynamic shear modulus Gd/Gdmax was calculated
using the following equation:
Gd 1
= (7)
Gdmax 1 + γγd
r
Experimental results and discussion
Natural soil test results and discussion
Effect of water content
Fig. 4 shows the influence of water content (WC) on the backbone
curves of natural soils. The dash-lines represent the trend obtained based
on the Hardin model, which are in line with the test results. The
amplitude cyclic shear stress is inversely proportional to water content.
For example, for the natural soils with the water contents of 8% and
10%, the τdult results decrease from 0.57 MPa to 0.25 MPa.
The influence of water content on Gd/Gdmax is generated in Fig. 5. All
the test results illustrate that at the low strain region, the dynamic shear
modulus almost equal to the initial dynamic shear modulus. With the
increase o strain, Gd/Gdmax decreases and displays an “S” shape. It means
the dynamic shear modulus is decreasing. Comparing the Gd/Gdmax
curves with each other, the sample with the water content of 14% rea­
ches to plastic deformation firstly.
Fig. 6 shows the relationship of Gdmax and τdult with water contents.
Both Gdmax and τdult are inversely proportional to the water content.
With the increase of water content, the friction force between soil par­
ticles decreases because the thickness of bound water and the amount of
Y. Zhao et al. Transportation Geotechnics 28 (2021) 100507

Table 1
The properties of fibers.
Density / g/cm3 Diameter / μm Melting point / ℃ Fire point / ℃ Percentage elongation after fracture / % Modulus of elasticity / GPa Tensile strength / MPa

0.91 31 165 ~ 170 590 30 ≥3.5 ≥350

ration between compacted dry unit weight and maximum dry unit
weight. This parameter plays a crucial role in transport engineering and
has a significant influence on the dynamic character of soils. Fig. 8 plots
the backbone curves of natural soils at compaction degrees (CDs) of
85%, 98%, and 100% under the confining pressure of 0.3 MPa and load
frequency of 2 Hz. With the increase of compaction degree, the ampli­
tude shear stress increases obviously. As the compaction degree increase
from 85% to 100%, the τdult increases rapidly from 0.16 MPa to 0.57
MPa. The τdult increase is affected by the change of cohesive bond among
the soils. With a higher compaction degree, the cohesive bond becomes
greater.
Fig. 9 shows Gd/Gdmax at compaction degree of 85%, 98%, and
100%. The curves demonstrated an ‘S’ shape. Natural soils with higher
compaction degree own a greater Gd/Gdmax. Gd/Gdmax between
compaction degree of 98% and 100% is close. As the compaction degree
decreases from 98% to 85%, a noticeable decrease of Gd/Gdmax is shown
in Fig. 9. At the beginning of the curves, it has shown a horizontal re­
gion, which means the soils own an elastic deformation. The soils with a
compaction degree of 85% trend to have plastic deformation at the
Fig. 2. Dynamic triaxial testing apparatus.
beginning of the deformation. The results show that the other two soils
have a broader elastic deformation region than the case with a
compaction degree of 85%. The cohesive bond is proportional to the
compaction degree, and the decrease of cohesive bond results in a
decrease of stiffness.
Fig. 10 shows the relationship between amplitude shear stress and
damping ratios. The damping ratios decrease with the increase of
compaction degree. The increase of compaction degree made the density
of the natural soil increase, which lead to an increase of the amplitude of
shear stress, normalized dynamic shear stress modulus, and the decrease
of damping ratios.

Effect of load frequency

Fig. 3. Application of axial multistage cyclic load.
Five load frequencies range from 1 Hz to 5 Hz were performed on the
samples to analyze the influence of load frequency on soil dynamic
Table 2 characteristics. This frequency corresponds with the typical traffic load
Test conditions of natural soils. frequency proposed by Hyde et al. [17]. The confining pressure is 0.3
MPa, and the water content is 8.5%.
Case Degree of Confining Loading Water
compaction (DC) / pressure / MPa frequency / Hz content (WC) Fig. 11 presented the backbone curves under load frequencies of 1
% /% Hz, 2 Hz, 3 Hz, 4 Hz, and 5 Hz. The amplitude of shear stress does not
FSf1 100 0.3 1 8.5
change significantly under load frequency ranging from 1 Hz to 4 Hz.
FSf2 100 0.3 2 8.5 The loading frequency has minimal effect on the dynamic characteristic
FSf3 100 0.3 3 8.5 of soils, which is in line with the test results of other researchers
FSf4 100 0.3 4 8.5 [32,33,42,40]. Under the load frequency of 5 Hz, the amplitude of shear
FSf5 100 0.3 5 8.5
stress decreased slightly compared with load frequency ranging from 1
FSW8 100 0.3 2 8
FSW10 100 0.3 2 10 Hz to 4 Hz. This may be caused by the cumulative plastic strain, for
FSW12 100 0.3 2 12 higher frequency loading the sample barely has time to recover elastic
FSW14 100 0.3 2 14 deformation. With the increase of plastic strain, it needs less energy to
FSYS1 85 0.3 2 8.5 reach the ultimate shear strain.
FSYS2 98 0.3 2 8.5
The Gd/Gdmax is shown in Fig. 12. It could be generated that the Gd/
Gdmax is almost the same. Fig. 13 shows the value of Gdmax and τdult vs.
free water increases. Therefore, the soil particles can move easily under different loading frequencies. Gdmax under loading frequencies of 1 Hz,
small friction force, which lead to the change of dynamic behavior. The 2 Hz, 3 Hz, and 4 Hz are 212.87 MPa, 207.75 MPa, 199.70 MPa, and
relationship between damping ratios and cyclic shear strain for natural 201.93 MPa, respectively. These Gdmax are close to each other, with a
soil with water contents of 8%, 10%, 12%, and 14% are shown in Fig. 7. maximum difference of 5%. The loading frequency has little effect on
With the increase of water content, the damping ratio decreases slightly. Gdmax when the frequency is lower than 4 Hz. Under the loading fre­
quency of 5 Hz, the Gdmax is 158.97 MPa, which is lower than the others.
Effect of compaction degree That is maybe because the specimen had not enough time to reset
In practical engineering project, the embankment filling soils of the transformation under excessive loading frequency of 5 Hz, which result
railway is commonly compacted. The degree of compaction refers to the in the increase of accumulative deformation. The value of τdult demon­
strates an increase at first and own a decrease after the loading

3
Y. Zhao et al. Transportation Geotechnics 28 (2021) 100507

Table 3
Test conditions of fiber-reinforced soils.
Case Degree of compaction / % Confining pressure / MPa Loading frequency / Hz Water content / % Length of fiber (LF) / mm Fiber content (FC) / %

FXL1 100 0.1 2 8.5 0 0

FXL3 100 0.1 2 8.5 9 0.2
FXL4 100 0.1 2 8.5 12 0.2
FXL5 100 0.1 2 8.5 18 0.2
FXM1 100 0.1 2 8.5 0 0
FXM2 100 0.1 2 8.5 12 0.1
FXM3 100 0.1 2 8.5 12 0.2
FXM4 100 0.1 2 8.5 12 0.3
FXM5 100 0.2 2 8.5 0 0
FXM6 100 0.2 2 8.5 12 0.1
FXM7 100 0.2 2 8.5 12 0.2
FXM8 100 0.2 2 8.5 12 0.3
FXM9 100 0.3 2 8.5 0 0
FXM10 100 0.3 2 8.5 12 0.1
FXM11 100 0.3 2 8.5 12 0.2
FXM12 100 0.3 2 8.5 12 0.3
FXM13 100 0.4 2 8.5 0 0
FXM14 100 0.4 2 8.5 12 0.1
FXM15 100 0.4 2 8.5 12 0.2
FXM16 100 0.4 2 8.5 12 0.3

Fig. 6. Maximum dynamic shear modulus and ultimate stress amplitude of

natural soils at various water content.

Fig. 4. Influence of variation in water content on backbone curves of natu­

ral soils.

Fig. 7. Influence of water content on damping ratio of natural soils.

frequency over 3 Hz, as shown in Fig. 13, which means the shear
strength is the optimal under the frequency of 3 Hz. Fig. 14 plots the
Fig. 5. Influence of water content on normalized dynamic shear modulus of relationship between damping ratios with the amplitude of shear stress.
natural soils.
There is little difference under different frequencies.

4
Y. Zhao et al. Transportation Geotechnics 28 (2021) 100507

Fig. 11. Influence of loading frequency on backbone curves of natural soils.

Fig. 8. Influence of compaction degree on backbone curves of natural soils.

Fig. 12. Influence of loading frequency on normalized dynamic shear modulus

of natural soils.
Fig. 9. Influence of compaction degree on normalized dynamic shear modulus
of natural soils.

Fig. 13. The maximum dynamic shear modulus and ultimate stress amplitude
of natural soils at various loading frequency.

Fiber-reinforced soil test results and discussion

Fig. 10. Influence of compaction degree on damping ratio of natural soils.
In order to gain the effect of fiber length, fiber content, and confining
pressure on the dynamic characteristic of fiber reinforced soils, sixteen

5
Y. Zhao et al. Transportation Geotechnics 28 (2021) 100507

Fig. 14. Influence of loading frequency on damping ratio of natural soils.

Fig. 16. Influence of fiber length on normalized dynamic shear modulus of
fiber reinforced soils.
tests on fiber reinforced soils were designed.

Effect of fiber length

As shown in Table 3, FXL3, FXL4, and FXL5 were designed to
determine the effect of fiber length (FL) on the resistance of fiber rein­
forced soils under dynamic cyclic load. Natural soil without fibers was
carried out to identify the influence of fiber. Four samples were placed
under a loading frequency of 2 Hz and a confining pressure of 0.1 MPa.
Fig. 15 shows the influence of fiber length on backbone curves. The
“None” case stands for the natural soils without fibers. The backbone
curves of fiber reinforced soils with fiber lengths of 9 mm, 12 mm, and
18 mm are illustrated in Fig. 15. The fitting curves utilizing the Harden
model show a good agreement with the experience data with an R-
squared over 0.95. After comparing with natural soils, the fiber rein­
forced soils own higher amplitude of shear stress, which means that fi­
bers could enhance the stiffness of soils. However, there is little
difference in the amplitude of shear stress for fiber reinforced soils with
different fiber lengths. This trend may be because the fibers could
Fig. 17. The maximum dynamic shear modulus and ultimate stress amplitude
demonstrate a reinforcement effect when the fibers length is enough to
of fiber reinforced soils at various fiber length.
tie the soil particles. Fig. 16 shows the value of Gd/Gdmax for natural soils
and fiber reinforced soils. The normalized dynamic shear modulus
curves are close to each other, meaning that the fibers have little effect length equal to zero standing for natural soils. Both Gdmax and τdult
on the elastic deformation and plastic deformation. showed growth for fiber length ranging from 0 mm to 12 mm. There is a
Fig. 17 generates Gdmax and τdult vs. fiber length. Note that fiber bit decrease for the Gdmax and τdult for fiber reinforced soils with the fiber
length of 18 mm. The dynamic shear modulus for natural soils is 128.87
MPa and that for fiber reinforced soils with a fiber length of 8 mm is
157.08 MPa. Meanwhile, the τdult for natural soils and fiber reinforced
soils with a fiber length of 8 mm is 0.44 MPa and 0.50 MPa, respectively.
This phenomenon demonstates fiber reinforced soils with a fiber length
of 8 mm have a decrease of 21.89% and 13.63% for dynamic shear
modulus and τdult. Fig. 18 shows the damping ratio for natural soils and
fiber reinforced soils. After comparing with natural soils, fiber rein­
forced soils have an increase of damping ratios slightly. The dynamic
shear modulus of fiber reinforced soils is highly affected by the fiber
lengths, and the fiber length shows little effect on the damping ratios.

Effect of confining pressure and fiber content

Tests, FXM1 to FXM16, are designed to analyze the confining pres­
sure and fiber content (FC) effect on the dynamic characteristic of fiber
reinforced soils, as shown in Table 2. All those tests were performed
under the same loading frequency of 2 Hz and the same water content of
8.5%. Four different confining pressures, 0.1 MPa, 0.2 MPa, 0.3 MPa,
and 0.4 MPa, were selected as the test conditions. At the same time, four
different fiber contents 0, 0.1%, 0.2%, and 0.3% were employed in the
program.
Fig. 15. Influence of fiber length on backbone curves of fiber reinforced soils. Fig. 19 shows the dynamic shear modulus for the tests FXM1 to

6
Y. Zhao et al. Transportation Geotechnics 28 (2021) 100507

Fig. 18. Influence of fiber length on damping ratio of fiber reinforced soils: a)
dynamic shear modulus; b) normalized dynamic shear modulus.
FXM16. Under the confining pressures of 0.1 MPa, 0.2 MPa, 0.3 MPa,
and 0.4 MPa, Gdmax of the natural soils are 127.24 MPa, 178.83 MPa,
214.48 MPa, and 242.17 MPa, and that of fiber reinforced soils with 2%
of fiber content are 156.83 MPa, 194.00 MPa, 224.72 MPa, and 247.86
MPa, respectively. This observed trend is in line with the test results of
other researchers [25,24,37], which might be explained by the changes
in specimen void ratio due to an increase in confining pressure. For fiber
reinforced soils with a fiber content of 0.1% also shows a similar in­
crease character as the increase of confining pressure. The dynamic
shear modulus increase ratio from confining pressure ranging from 0.1
MPa to 0.2 MPa is more significant than that from 0.2 MPa to 0.3 MPa
and from 0.3 MPa to 0.4 MPa. This may be because, under high
confining pressure, the effect of fibers cannot be employed efficiently.
The effect of fiber content on the dynamic shear modulus is discussed as
follows. As shown in Fig. 19, Gdmax for natural soils is 127.62 MPa, and
that for fiber reinforced soils with fiber contents of 0.1%, 2%, and 0.3%
are 144.69 MPa, 155.31 MPa, and 162.90 MPa, respectively. Under the
confining pressure of 0.1 MPa, the higher the fiber content, the greater
the Gdmax. With the increased confining pressure, the fiber content of
0.2% shows a similar character. However, for the fiber content of 0.3%
case, the dynamic shear modulus is slightly lower than fiber reinforced
soils with a fiber content of 0.2% as the confining pressure increase from
0.2 MPa to 0.4 MPa. For example, under confining pressure of 0.3 MPa,
the Gdmax for fiber contents of 0.2% case and 0.3% case are 225.86 MPa
and 212.97 MPa. The optimal fiber content for natural soils is 2%.
Fig. 20 shows the Gd/Gdmax for natural soils and fiber reinforced soils. It
means that the effect of fibers on the elastic regions is slight.
Fig. 20 shows the relationship between amplitude shear stress and
damping ratios for natural soils and fiber reinforced soils under different
confining pressures. The influence of confining pressures on the damp­
ing ratio is discussed below. Both the damping ratio of natural soils and
fiber reinforced soils are decreased with the confining pressure increase
from 0.1 MPa to 0.4 MPa. The decrease ratio is more significant when
the confining pressure under 0.2 MPa than that of over 0.3 MPa. The
comparison of different samples with a fiber content of 0, 0.1%, 0.2%,
and 0.3% are conducted to identify the influence of fiber content on the
damping ratio. It is evident that under confining pressure of 0.1 MPa, the
damping ratio decrease as the increase of fiber content. With a confining
pressure of over 0.2 MPa, the decrease of the damping ratio is extremely
low. High confining pressure decreases the efficiency of fibers.

Empirical formula and validation

As mentioned before, the dynamic characteristic of fiber reinforced

soils is influenced by the confining pressure and fiber content. When the
fiber content is over optimal value, the reinforcement effect will be
weakened. At the same time, the confining pressure has a noticeable
effect on the dynamic strength of fiber reinforced soils. In order to
generate the empirical model of fiber reinforced soils, the following
analysis was conducted.

Empirical formula of maximum dynamic shear modulus

The value of Gdmax could be calculated by different equations [16]. It

is influenced by many factors, including void ratio, soil structure, soil
composition, confining pressure, and effective stress level. For natural
soils, the Gdmax can be expressed by:
( )n
Gdmax σ3
= Af (e) (8)
Pa Pa

where A is a dimensionless coefficient, f(e) is void ratio function, Pa is

reference pressure (equal to atmospheric pressure), σ3 is confining
pressure, n is the impact factor of confining pressure.
Fig. 19. Influence of confining pressure and fiber content on fiber rein­
All the test data were generated under the water content of 8.5% for
forced soils.
fiber reinforced soils. Assuming that under optical water content, the

7
Y. Zhao et al. Transportation Geotechnics 28 (2021) 100507

Fig. 20. Influence of confining pressure and fiber content on damping ratio of fiber reinforced soils.

influence of void ratio is constant, using a dimensionless coefficient A1 pressure when the fiber content is below optical content. At the same
to model. Considering the influence of fibers on the reinforced soils, time, the comparison between different researchers [7,19,20,36] was
Gdmax can be expressed by: shown in Fig. 21. The curves have similar characters, and the Gdmax of
( ) fiber reinforced soil in this paper is closed to Georgia dense saturated
Gdmax ( ) m1 σ 3 n1 ( )
= A1 1 + βf σ3 /Pa βf ⩽βfopt (9) sand and California dense saturated sand.
Pa Pa

where A1 is a dimensionless coefficient, m1 is the impact factor of fibers, Empirical formula of ultimate shear stress
n1 is the impact factor of confining pressure, βf is the fiber content, βfopt
is the optical fiber content. To determine the dynamic shear modulus, τdult is needed based on
After regression analyses of experience data, Eq. (9) becomes: the equation of normalization of dynamic shear modulus. Considering
Gdmax (
( )
) 75.09 σ 3 0.42 ( )( ) the fiber content and confining pressure, the equation for τdult is given
= 1362.7 1 + βf σ3 /Pa βf ⩽βfopt R2 = 0.95 (10) by:
Pa Pa
( )
τdult ( ) m2 σ 3 n2 ( )
Fig. 21 shows a comparison of Gdmax between experience data and = A2 1 + βf σ3 /Pa βf ⩽βfopt (11)
predicted values from Eq. (10). It illustrated that the regression of Eq. Pa Pa
(10) could describe the relationship between Gdmax and confining
where A2 is a dimensionless coefficient, m2 is the impact factor of fibers,
n2 is the impact factor of confining pressure.
After regression analyses of experience data, Eq. (11) becomes:
( )
τdult ( )40.5187 σ 3 0.5062 ( )( )
= 4.6509 1 + βf σ3 /Pa βf ⩽βfopt R2 = 0.96 (12)
Pa Pa
Combining the Eqs. (10) and (12), the dynamic shear modulus of
fiber reinforced soils can be generated. In practice, those equations
provide references for design.

Empirical formula of damping ratio

Fig. 21. Comparison of
level relations.
Based on the model in Hardin and Drnevich [13], the damping ratio λ
for sand can be described below:
λ = f (Gd /Gdmax ) (13)
Okur and Ansal [30] demonstrated that λ had a linear relationship
with Gd/Gdmax. Fig. 22 shows all the damping ratio, including natural
dynamic shear modulus-confining pressure soils and fiber reinforced soils. After regression analysis, the damping
ratio of natural soils can be described by the following equation:

8
Y. Zhao et al. Transportation Geotechnics 28 (2021) 100507

(3) The fiber reinforced soils own a higher amplitude of shear stress
than natural soils, which means that fibers can enhance the
stiffness of soils. However, there is little difference in the ampli­
tude of shear stress for fiber reinforced soils with different fiber
lengths. The dynamic shear modulus owns an increase for both
natural soils and fiber reinforced soils with the increase of
confining pressure. The optimal fiber content for natural soils is
2%. Confining pressure and fiber content has a significant rein­
forcement effect on the dynamic characteristic of fiber reinforced
soils. When the fiber content is over optimal value, the rein­
forcement effect will be weakened.
(4) Three empirical formulas were formulated to estimate the dy­
namic shear modulus and damping ratio, considering the influ­
ence of fiber content and confining pressure.

Declaration of Competing Interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
Fig. 22. The relationship between normalized dynamic shear modulus and the work reported in this paper.
damping ratio of fiber reinforced soils.

( ) CRediT authorship contribution statement

Gd ( )
λ = 0.38 − 0.34 R2 = 0.95
Gdmax
Most of the damping ratio data for fiber reinforced soils under
confining pressure of 0.3 MPa and 0.4 MPa are in line with the confi­
dence interval for natural soils. However, under lower confining pres­
sure, the damping ratio showed a different character. For better analysis
the characteristic of the damping ratio for fiber reinforced soils,
assuming the equation for damping ratio is below:
(14)
Yingying Zhao: Conceptualization, Project administration, Soft­
ware. Yang Yang: Investigation, Writing - original draft, Validation,
Visualization. Xianzhang Ling: Funding acquisition, Methodology,
Supervision. Weiming Gong: Writing - review & editing, Resources.
Guoyu Li: Data curation. Lei Su: Formal analysis.
Declaration of Competing Interest

λspan
λ = λmax − ( ) nλ (15) The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
( )σ m/Pλ σ3 −
1 + 1 + βf 3 a γd interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
Pa γr
the work reported in this paper.

where λmax is the maximum damping ratio, λspan is the difference value
between the maximum and minimum damping ratio, mλ is the impact
factor of fiber content, nλ is the impact factor of confining pressure.
Utilizing the nonlinear least square method, the final equation for the
damping ratio is:
0.39 ( )
λ = 0.39 − ( )− R2 = 0.94
( )σ 176 σ3
0.2
γd
1 + 1 + βf 3/P a
Pa γr
Conclusions
In this study, dynamic triaxial tests of natural soils and fiber rein­
forced soils were conducted. The influence of loading frequency, water
content, and degree of compaction on the dynamic shear modulus and
damping ratio were identified. The dynamic characteristics of fiber
reinforced soils with different fiber length, confining pressure, and fiber
content were studied. Based on the test results, the empirical formula to
estimate Gdmax, τdult, and damping ratio was formed. The following main
conclusions are obtained.
(1) The Hardin hyperbolic model agrees well with the test results of
natural soils and fiber reinforced soils.
(2) Gdmax, τdult, and damping ratio decreases with the increase of
water content from 8% to 15%. The degree of compaction plays a
crucial role in transport engineering and has a significant effect
on the dynamic character of soils. With the increase of compac­
tion degree, the amplitude shear stress increases obviously, and
the damping ratios decrease apparent. The loading frequency (1
Hz to 4 Hz) has minimal effect on the dynamic characteristic of
soils.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by the State Key Laboratory of Frozen Soil
Engineering (SKLFSE201907), the National Major Scientific Instruments
Development Project of China (41627801), the National Key R&D Pro­
gram of China (2018YFC1505300), the Postgraduate Research & Prac­
(16)
tice Innovation Program of Jiangsu Province (KYCX19_0093), and the
National Construction of High-level University Public Graduate Project
(Grant No. CSC201906090102).
References
[1] Amini PF, Noorzad R. Energy-based evaluation of liquefaction of fiber-reinforced
sand using cyclic triaxial testing. Soil Dyn Earthquake Eng 2018;104:45–53.
[2] Arulrajah A, Abdullah A, Bo MW, Bouazza A. Ground improvement techniques for
railway embankments. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers-Ground
Improvement 2009;162(1):3–14.
[3] Beckham WK, Mills WH. Cotton-fabric-reinforced roads. Engineering News Record
1935;114(14):453–5.
[4] Benziane MM, Della N, Denine S, Sert S, Nouri S. Effect of randomly distributed
polypropylene fiber reinforcement on the shear behavior of sandy soil. Studia
Geotechnica et Mechanica 2019;41(3):151–9.
[5] Bozyigit I, Tanrınıan N, Karakan E, Sezer A, Erdoğan D, Altun S. Dynamic behavior
of a clayey sand reinforced with polypropylene fiber. Acta Phys Pol A 2017;132(3):
674–8.
[6] Consoli NC, Vendruscolo MA, Fonini A, Dalla RF. Fiber reinforcement effects on
sand considering a wide cementation range. Geotext Geomembr 2009;27(3):
196–203.
[7] Delfosse-Ribay E, Djeran-Maigre I, Cabrillac R, Gouvenot D. Shear modulus and
damping ratio of grouted sand. Soil Dyn Earthquake Eng 2004;24(6):461–71.
[8] Dos Santos AS, Consoli NC, Baudet BA. The mechanics of fibre-reinforced sand.
Geotechnique 2010;60(10):791–9.
[9] Gao L, Hu GH, Chen JR, Ren KY, Zhou QY, Yu XJ. Dynamic properties of carbon-
fiber-reinforced clay soil. Soil Mech Found Eng 2018;55(5):317–24.
[10] Gao Z, Zhao J. Evaluation on failure of fiber-reinforced sand. J Geotech Geoenviron
Eng 2013;139(1):95–106.
[11] Gray DH, Al-Refeai T. Behavior of fabric-versus fiber-reinforced sand. Journal of
Geotechnical Engineering 1986;112(8):804–20.

9
Y. Zhao et al. Transportation Geotechnics 28 (2021) 100507

[12] Gray DH, Ohashi H. Mechanics of fiber reinforcement in sand. Journal of Yingying Zhao. Dr. Zhao works at Southeast university as a
Geotechnical Engineering 1983;109(3):335–53. Postdoctoral researcher. She got her Doctoral degree in 2017 at
[13] Hardin BO, Drnevich VP. Shear modulus and damping in soils: design equations Harbin Institute of Technology, majoring in Geotechnical en­
and curves. Journal of Soil Mechanics and Foundations Div 1972;98(7):667–92. gineering. Her research mainly focuses on railway subgrade
[14] Hejazi SM, Sheikhzadeh M, Abtahi SM, Zadhoush A. A simple review of soil improvement technology, frozen soil, and frost damage pre­
reinforcement by using natural and synthetic fibers. Constr Build Mater 2012;30: vention and control.
100–16.
[15] Horvath JS. Using geosynthetics to reduce surcharge-induced stresses on rigid
earth-retaining structures. Transp Res Rec 1991;1330.
[16] Kallioglou P, Tika TH, Pitilakis K. Shear modulus and damping ratio of cohesive
soils. J Earthquake Eng 2008;12(6):879–913.
[17] Hyde AF, Yasuhara K, Hirao K. Stability criteria for marine clay under one-way
cyclic loading. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering 1993;119(11):1771–89.
[18] Krishnaswamy NR, Isaac NT. Liquefaction potential of reinforced sand. Geotext
Geomembr 1994;13(1):23–41.
[19] Kokusho T. Cyclic triaxial test of dynamic soil properties for wide strain range.
Soils Found 1980;20(2):45–60. Yang Yang. Yang Yang is a Ph.D. candidate at Southeast Uni­
[20] Laird JP, Stokoe KH. Dynamic properties of remolded and undisturbed soil samples versity, majoring in Geotechnical engineering. Her research
tested at high confining pressures. Geotechnical Engineering Report GR93 1993;6. focuses on soil dynamics, seismic response of pile raft founda­
[21] Li HW, Senetakis K, Coop MR. Medium-strain dynamic behavior of fiber-reinforced tion, and soil pile structure interaction.
sand subjected to stress anisotropy. Soil Dyn Earthquake Eng 2019;126:105764.
[22] Li HW, Senetakis K, Khoshghalb A. On the small-strain stiffness of polypropylene
fibre-sand mixtures. Geosynthetics International 2019;26(1):66–80.
[23] Li HW, Senetakis K. Effects of particle grading and stress state on strain-
nonlinearity of shear modulus and damping ratio of sand evaluated by resonant-
column testing. J Earthquake Eng 2018:1–27.
[24] Li HW, Senetakis K. Modulus reduction and damping increase of two sands
reinforced with polypropylene fibers. J Mater Civ Eng 2018;30(3):04017299.
[25] Li HW, Senetakis K. Dynamic properties of polypropylene fibre-reinforced silica
quarry sand. Soil Dyn Earthquake Eng 2017;100:224–32.
[26] Li J, Ding DW. Nonlinear elastic behavior of fiber-reinforced soil under cyclic
loading. Soil Dyn Earthquake Eng 2002;22(9–12):977–83.
[27] Ling XZ, Zhang F, Li QL, An LS, Wang JH. Dynamic shear modulus and damping Xianzhang Ling. Prof. Ling works at Harbin Institute of Tech­
ratio of frozen compacted sand subjected to freeze-thaw cycle under multi-stage nology. His research interests include vibration response and
cyclic loading. Soil Dyn Earthquake Eng 2015;76:111–21. stability of traffic subgrade in cold region, soil anti-seepage
[28] Noorany I, Uzdavines M. Dynamic behavior of saturated sand reinforced with reinforcement and special soil treatment, subgrade, soil dy­
geosynthetic fabrics. Geosynthetics Conference 1989;2:385–96. namics and geotechnical earthquake engineering, dynamic
[29] Noorzad R, Amini PF. Liquefaction resistance of Babolsar sand reinforced with performance of foundation and seismic response of bridge pile
randomly distributed fibers under cyclic loading. Soil Dyn Earthquake Eng 2014; foundation in liquefiable site, slope engineering and landslide
66:281–92. prevention and control.
[30] Okur DV, Ansal A. Stiffness degradation of natural fine grained soils during cyclic
loading. Soil Dyn Earthquake Eng 2007;27(9):843–54.
[31] Park T, Tan SA. Enhanced performance of reinforced soil walls by the inclusion of
short fiber. Geotext Geomembr 2005;23(4):348–61.
[32] Payan M, Khoshghalb A, Senetakis K, Khalili N. Small-strain stiffness of sand
subjected to stress anisotropy. Soil Dyn Earthquake Eng 2016;88:143–51.
[33] Peacock WH, Seed HB. Sand liquefaction under cyclic loading simple shear
conditions. Journal of Soil Mechanics and Foundations Divisions 1968;94(3):
689–708. Weiming Gong. Prof. Ling works at Southeast University. His
[34] Rajak TK, Yadu L, Pal SK. Analysis of slope stability of fly ash stabilized soil slope. research mainly focuses on the bearing capacity of single pile
Geotechnical Applications 2019;13:119–26. and group pile, foundation settlement, pile-soil interaction, pile
[35] Sadeghi MM, Beigi FH. Dynamic behavior of reinforced clayey sand under cyclic bottom grouting technology, reverse construction technology,
loading. Geotext Geomembr 2014;42(5):564–72. and pile self-balance test technology.
[36] Seed HB, Wong RT, Idriss IM, Tokimatsu K. Moduli and damping factors for
dynamic analyses of cohesionless soils. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering 1986;
112(11):1016–32.
[37] Senetakis K, Madhusudhan BN. Dynamics of potential fill-backfill material at very
small strains. Soils Found 2015;55(5):1196–210.
[38] Shao W, Cetin B, Li YD, Li JP, Li L. Experimental investigation of mechanical
properties of sands reinforced with discrete randomly distributed fiber. Geotech
Geol Eng 2014;32(4):901–10.
[39] Tingle JS, Santoni RL, Webster SL. Full-scale field tests of discrete fiber-reinforced
sand. J Transp Eng 2002;128(1):9–16.
[40] Yasuhara K, Yamanouchi T, Hirao K. Cyclic strength and deformation of normally
consolidated clay. Soils Found 1982;22(3):77–91.
Guoyu Li. Prof. Li works at State Key Laboratory of Frozen Soil
[41] Yetimoglu T, Salbas O. A study on shear strength of sands reinforced with
Engineering, Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), majoring in
randomly distributed discrete fibers. Geotext Geomembr 2003;21(2):103–10.
Geotechnical Engineering in Cold Regions. Doctoral degree in
[42] Yoshimi Y, Oh-oka H. Influence of degree of shear stress reversal on the
2007 at University of CAS. Research interests include 1) ther­
liquefaction potential of saturated sand. Soils Found 1975;15(3):27–40.
mal and mechanical interactions between engineering struc­
[43] Zhang T, Yang YL, Liu SY. Application of biomass by-product lignin stabilized soils
tures and permafrost, 2) impact of freeze-thaw cycling on the
as sustainable Geomaterials: A review. Science of the Total Environment 2020:
geotechnical properties of soils, 3) migration mechanism of
138830.
petroleum pollutants in permafrost regions, 4) cooling mecha­
[44] Zhao YY, Yang Y, Ling XZ, Li GY, Gong WM. Mechanical behaviors of natural sand
nisms of the crushed rock layer and thermosyphon applied to
soils and modified soils in heavy-haul railway embankment. Advances in Civil
permafrost engineering and 5) developing mitigative measures
Engineering 2020.
of frost heave and thaw settlement in the cold engineering.

10
Y. Zhao et al. Transportation Geotechnics 28 (2021) 100507

Lei Su. Dr. Su is an associate professor at Qingdao University of

Technology. He got his Doctoral degree at Harbin Institute of
Technology, majoring in Geotechnical engineering. He visited
University of California, San Diego as a joint Ph.D. student from
Apr. 2014 to Apr. 2016. His research interests include seismic
response analysis of pile foundation and offshore pile founda­
tion in liquefaction/frozen soil site, numerical simulation of
geotechnical engineering, and laboratory test.

11