The main focus of this paper is to present a multi-interaction model under a simplified form for calculating load transfer to piles and geosynthetic strain of piled embankments. The multi-interaction model is established by considering the integrated load transfer mechanisms and all the interactions between the elements of a geosynthetic-reinforced and pile-supported embankment, including fill soils, geosynthetic, platform, subsoil, and pile. The proposed method is based on the combination of the tensioned membrane theory for geosynthetics, soil arching theory for fill soils, friction interaction model and, subsoil support. Thereby it allows providing a suitable design approach that enables a realistic and suitable approximation of the bearing behavior of such structures. It represents a useful tool for engineers in designing soil-geosynthetic systems. The proposed method can be applied to both cohesive and non-cohesive fill soils. Using this method, the influence of the subsoil consolidation degree, subsoil ultimate bearing capacity, fill shear strength and, platform, are investigated considering the behavior and deformation of piled embankments. The result of the proposed method is compared to field measurements and to five other design standards to study its validity. The results showed a good agreement between the proposed method with measured data. The provided results are also in better concordance than the EBGEO and BS8006 ones.

中文翻译：

---

多重相互作用拱模型的桩基路堤行为

本文的主要重点是提供一种简化形式的多重相互作用模型，用于计算桩的荷载传递和桩状路堤的土工合成应变。通过考虑综合的荷载传递机制以及土工合成纤维和桩支撑路堤各要素之间的所有相互作用，包括填充土，土工合成材料，平台，地下土和桩，建立了多重相互作用模型。所提出的方法是基于土工合成材料的张紧膜理论，填充土的土拱理论，摩擦相互作用模型以及地下土的支持。因此，它允许提供一种合适的设计方法，该设计方法能够现实地和合适地近似于此类结构的轴承性能。它是工程师设计土壤土工合成系统的有用工具。所提出的方法可以应用于粘性和非粘性填充土。使用该方法，考虑了桩基路堤的性状和变形，研究了地基固结度，地基极限承载力，填充抗剪强度以及平台的影响。将该方法的结果与现场测量结果以及其他五个设计标准进行了比较，以研究其有效性。结果表明，该方法与实测数据吻合良好。提供的结果也比EBGEO和BS8006更好。考虑了桩基路堤的行为和变形，研究了地下土的极限承载力，填充抗剪强度和平台。将该方法的结果与现场测量结果以及其他五个设计标准进行了比较，以研究其有效性。结果表明，该方法与实测数据吻合良好。提供的结果也比EBGEO和BS8006更好。考虑了桩基路堤的行为和变形，研究了地下土的极限承载力，填充抗剪强度和平台。将该方法的结果与现场测量结果以及其他五个设计标准进行了比较，以研究其有效性。结果表明，该方法与实测数据吻合良好。提供的结果也比EBGEO和BS8006更好。