Laboratory and Field Investigations on Geofoam
Publication: Journal of Pipeline Systems Engineering and Practice
Volume 10, Issue 1
Abstract
Lightweight fill materials are being increasingly used as a construction material for enhanced construction operations featuring construction on soft ground, in cold regions, and in earthen structures and above buried pipes/culverts. Extensive studies were performed in the last decade on a wide variety of lightweight fill materials used in construction practices. One such material is expanded polystyrene (EPS) geofoam, which has been used as a geotechnical material since the 1960s. This research paper presents EPS geofoam characterization through laboratory and field investigations and enhances the understanding of this material to reduce the performance disparity between the laboratory and the field. The laboratory characterization studies involved evaluation of densities, stiffness, and unconfined compressive strength (UCS). The field characterization studies involved evaluating stress distribution by instrumenting the EPS geofoam with pressure cells. It was observed that the stress distribution in the EPS 22 geofoam material was different from that determined by the methods published in the literature. This paper highlights the comprehensive analysis of material characterization and behavior of EPS 22 geofoam under laboratory and field conditions.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Acknowledgments
This research was conducted in cooperation with the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT), Thermafoam, and NSF-IUCRC. The authors would like to acknowledge Richard Williammee and Joe Adams from TxDOT for their assistance with various research activities related to construction, instrumentation, and monitoring, and Mike Powers and John Fuess from Thermafoam for their assistance with materials. The authors would also like to acknowledge former graduate students and colleagues for their assistance in data collection.
References
ASTM. 2000a. Standard test method for compressive properties of rigid cellular plastics. ASTM D1621. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM.
ASTM. 2000b. Standard test method for unconfined compressive strength of cohesive soil. ASTM D2166. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM.
ASTM. 2007. Standard specification for rigid cellular polystyrene geofoam. ASTM D6817. West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM.
Bartlett, S. F., E. C. Lawton, C. B. Farnsworth, and M. P. Newman. 2012. Design and evaluation of expanded polystyrene geofoam embankments for the I-15 reconstruction project, Salt Lake City, Utah. Taylorsville, UT: Utah Dept. of Transportation.
Dusenberry, K., and R. Bygness. 2006. “Geofoam provides lightweight fill for York Bridge in Washington.” Geosynthetics Mag. 24 (4): 2–7.
Elragi, A., D. Negussey, and G. Kyanka. 2001. “Sample size effects on the behavior of EPS geofoam.” In Proc., Soft Ground Technology Conf., 280–291. Reston, VA: ASCE.
EPS. 1993. Expanded polystyrol construction method development organization, 310. Tokyo: EPS.
Eriksson, L., and Trank, R. 1991. “Properties of expanded polystyrene-laboratory experiments.” In Expanded polystyrene as light fill material: Technical visit around Stockholm. Linköping, Sweden: Swedish Geotechnical Institute.
Frydenlund, T. E., and R. Aaboe. 2001. “Long term performance and durability of EPS as a lightweight fill material.” In Proc., 3rd Int. Conf. on EPS Geofoam 2001, Salt Lake City, UT.
Horvath, J. S. 1995. Geofoam geosynthetic. Scarsdale, NY: Horvath Engineering.
Koerner, R. M. 2005. Designing with geosynthetics. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Negussey, D. 1997. Properties and applications of geofoam. Washington, DC: Society of Plastic Engineers.
Puppala, A. J., S. Saride, E. Archeewa, L. R. Hoyos, and S. Nazarian. 2009. Recommendations for design, construction, and maintenance of bridge approach slabs: Synthesis report. Arlington, TX: Univ. of Texas at Arlington.
Puppala, A. J., S. Saride, E. Archeewa, S. Nazarian, and R. Williammee Jr. 2010. “Bridge approach settlements: Lessons learned from present case studies and ground improvement solutions.” In Ground improvement and geosynthetics, 228–238. Reston, VA: ASCE.
Ruttanaporamakul, P., A. J. Puppala, A. Pedarla, T. V. Bheemasetti, and R. S. Williammee. 2016. “Settlement mitigation of a distressed embankment in Texas by utilization of lightweight EPS geofoam material.” In Proc., Transportation Research Board 95th Annual Meeting (No. 16-4179). Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board.
Saride, S., A. J. Puppala, and E. Archeewa. 2009. Bridge approach settlements—An issue due to design or construction practices? Arlington, TX: Univ. of Texas at Arlington.
Shafikhani, A., T. V. Bheemasetti, and A. J. Puppala. 2017. “Effect of seasonal changes on a hybrid soil-geofoam embankment system.” Int. J. Geosynthetics Ground Eng. 3 (4): 39. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40891-017-0116-4.
Stark, T. D., D. Arellano, J. S. Horvath, and D. Leshchinsky. 2004a. Geofoam applications in the design and construction of highway embankments. Washington, DC: National Cooperative Highway Research Program.
Stark, T. D., J. S. Horvath, and D. Leshchinsky. 2004b. Guideline and recommended standard for geofoam applications in highway embankments. Washington, DC: National Cooperative Highway Research Program.
Tsukamoto, H. 2011. “History of R&D and design code for EDO-EPS method in Japan.” In Proc., 4th Int Conf. on EPS 2011, Oslo, Norway.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Pipeline Systems Engineering and Practice
Volume 10 • Issue 1 • February 2019
Copyright
©2018 American Society of Civil Engineers.
History
Received: Mar 15, 2018
Accepted: Aug 10, 2018
Published online: Dec 4, 2018
Published in print: Feb 1, 2019
Discussion open until: May 4, 2019
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.