Open Access
E3S Web Conf.
Volume 318, 2021
Second International Conference on Geotechnical Engineering – Iraq (ICGE 2021)
Article Number 01003
Number of page(s) 12
Section Developments in Geotechnical Engineering
Published online 08 November 2021
  1. Binquet, J. and Lee, K.L., 1975. Bearing capacity tests on reinforced earth slabs. Journal of the geotechnical Engineering Division, 101(12), pp.1241–1255. [Google Scholar]
  2. Fischer, K., 1957. Zur Berechnungdersetzung Von undamenten in derformeiner Kreisformigen Ring flache. Der Bauingenieur, 32, 172–174 (in German). [Google Scholar]
  3. Egorov, K.E., 1965. Calculation of bed for foundation with ring footing. Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Soil Mechanical Foundation of Engineers, 2, 41–45. [Google Scholar]
  4. Bowles, J.E. 1977. Foundation analysis and design. 5th Edition. McGraw-Hill. [Google Scholar]
  5. Rajagopal, K., Krishnaswamy, N.R. and Latha, G.M., 1999. Behaviour of sand confined with single and multiple geocells. Geotextiles and Geomembranes, 17(3), pp.171–184. [Google Scholar]
  6. Hataf, N., and Razavi, M.R., 2003. Behavior of ring footing on sand. Iranian Journal of Science and Technology, Transaction B, 27, 47–56. [Google Scholar]
  7. Sudhakar, A.R. and Sandeep, M.N., 2016. Incremental cyclic loading on ring and circular footing resting on geocell reinforced sandy soil. International Journal of Advance Research, 3, pp.52–56. [Google Scholar]
  8. American Society of Testing and Materials, ASTM, 2006. Standard test method for specific gravity of soil solids by water pycnometer" ASTM D854, West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania, USA. [Google Scholar]
  9. American Society of Testing and Materials, ASTM., 2006. Standard test method for particle size-analysis of soils. ASTM D422-02, West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania, USA. [Google Scholar]
  10. American Society of Testing and Materials, ASTM., 2006. Standard test method for classification of soils for engineering purposes (Unified Soil Classification System). ASTM D2487-06, West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania, USA. [Google Scholar]
  11. American Society of Testing and Materials, ASTM., 2006. Standard test method for maximum index density and unit weight of soils using a vibratory table. ASTM D4253-06, West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania, USA. [Google Scholar]
  12. American Society of Testing and Materials, ASTM., 2006. Standard test method for minimum index density and unit weight of soils and calculation of relative density. ASTM D4254-06, West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania, USA. [Google Scholar]
  13. American Society of Testing and Materials, ASTM., 2006. Standard test method for direct shear test of soils under consolidated drained conditions. ASTM D3080-06, West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania, USA. [Google Scholar]
  14. American Society of Testing and Materials, ASTM., 2008. Standard test method for determining tensile properties of geogrids by the single or multi-rib tensile method. ASTM D6637, West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania, USA. [Google Scholar]
  15. Tawfiq, H.H., 2017. Effect of uncertainties of sandy soil shear strength parameters on the reliability of foundations under cyclic loading. M.Sc. Thesis, Building and Construction Engineering Department, University of Technology, Iraq. [Google Scholar]
  16. Dash, S.K., Biswas, A., and Krishna, A.M., 2012. Parameters influencing the performance of geocell- reinforced foundation system—proceedings of Indian Geotechnical Conference, Delhi. [Google Scholar]
  17. Terzaghi, K., 1943. Theoretical Soil Mechanic, John Wiley and Sons, New York. [Google Scholar]
  18. Hansen, J.B., 1970. A revised and extended formula for bearing capacity. Bulletin of Danish Geotechnical Institutes, 28, 5–11. [Google Scholar]
  19. Tafreshi, S.M. and Dawson, A.R., 2010. Comparison of bearing capacity of a strip footing on sand with geocell and with planar forms of geotextile reinforcement. Geotextiles and Geomembranes, 28(1), pp.72–84. [Google Scholar]
  20. Dixit, M.S. and Patil, K.A., 2010. Study of effect of different parameters on bearing capacity of soil. Indian Geotechnical Society, GEOTID, pp.431–005. [Google Scholar]
  21. Fattah, M.Y., Karim, H.H. and Al-Qazzaz, H.H., 2017. Cyclic behavior of footings on dry sand under different rates of loading. International Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 6(6), pp.240–253. [Google Scholar]
  22. Asakereh, A., Ghazavi, M. and Tafreshi, S.M., 2013. Cyclic response of footing on geogrid-reinforced sand with void. Soils and foundations, 53(3), pp.363–374. [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.