Skip to main content
Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Geofoam-enhanced soft embankments with a load distribution slab for improved pavement performance: A 3D numerical analysis Cover

Geofoam-enhanced soft embankments with a load distribution slab for improved pavement performance: A 3D numerical analysis

Open Access
|May 2026

Figures & Tables

Figure 1

Flowchart modelling procedures.

Figure 2

Meshing of modelled road embankments with and without LDS.

Figure 3

Laboratory and simulated stress–strain response of EPS geofoam.

Figure 4

3D model of the embankment and layout of DM columns. (a) Dimension and boundary conditions in the 3D numerical model section. (b) Dimension and boundary conditions in the 3D numerical model section A–A.

Figure 5

Analysis of measured and calculated values for settlement–time curves [9].

Figure 6

(a) Without LDS, Case A. (b) With LDS, Case B.

Figure 7

Settlement profile at the base of the embankment with EPS geofoam: (a) Without LDS immediately after the construction, (b) without LDS at the end of consolidation, (c) with LDS immediately after the construction, and (d) with LDS at the end of consolidation.

Figure 8

Horizontal displacements below the embankment with EPS geofoam: (a) Without LDS immediately after the construction, (b) without LDS at the end of consolidation, (c) with LDS immediately after the construction, and (d) with LDS at the end of consolidation.

Figure 9

Transverse gradient change of the embankment with EPS geofoam: (a) Without LDS immediately after the construction, (b) without LDS at the end of consolidation, (c) with LDS immediately after the construction, and (d) with LDS at the end of consolidation.

Figure 10

Vertical stress of the embankment with EPS geofoam below the base: (a) Without LDS immediately after the construction, (b) without LDS at the end of consolidation, (c) with LDS immediately after the construction, and (d) with LDS at the end of consolidation.

Properties of soft clay, silt, fill, DM walls, and geofoam_

ParametersSymbolSoft clayPlatform fillEmbankment fillDM wallsGeofoam EPS15Geotextile
Soil model MC*MC*MC*ElasticPlasticElastic
Bulk modulus (GPa) K 1.119.639.225.0
Shear modulus (GPa) G 0.2575.21511.50.00257
Friction angle (°) ϕ 1232386.3
Cohesion (kPa) c2618144.26
Dry density (kN/m3) γ d 16.1819.1818.540.155
Compression index C c 1.140.010.0280.00032
Coefficient of consolidation (m2/year) C v 0.223.252.583.35
Coefficient of volume compressibility, (m2/kN) m v 1.5 × 10−3 0.05 × 10−3 0.054 × 10−3 0.033 × 10−3
Tensile stiffness of geotextile (kN/m) J 1,700
Coupling stiffness of geotextile (MPa/m3) k 2.3
Coupling friction angle (°) c i 5
Elastic modulus (MPa) E s 12
Viscosity (Pa s)( η v \eta v )1 × 1011

Transverse gradient change (%)_

UnitCase
A (after construction immediately)A (after the end of consolidation)B (after construction immediately)B (after the end of consolidation)
(kPa)123366123366123366123366
(%)0.300.781.50.941.31.50.190.390.650.390.490.53

Summary of the key material properties used in experiments and numerical models_

ComponentMaterial specificationKey properties
Embankment fillAASHTO granular subbase A‑2‑4Max particle size: 37.5 mm; PI < 12; CBR > 15%
Compaction standardMod AASHTOMinimum 95% density
LDSReinforced concrete (Grade 30 MPa)Compressive strength: 30 MPa; Thickness: 250 mm
ReinforcementY12 bars @ 200 mm c/c (both directions)Yield strength: 450 MPa; Cover: 40 mm
Geotextile layerNon-woven polypropylenePermittivity ≥0.8 s⁻1; Tensile strength ≥15 kN/m
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/sgem-2026-0006 | Journal eISSN: 2083-831X | Journal ISSN: 0137-6365
Language: English
Page range: 45 - 62
Submitted on: May 1, 2025
Accepted on: Jan 11, 2026
Published on: May 7, 2026
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services

© 2026 Aneke I. Frank, Walid El Kamash, Mohamed M. H. Mostafa, published by Wroclaw University of Science and Technology
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License.