## 2 Materials and Methods
### Testing Procedures
Method B--Tensile shear test (Figure 6d)  
The right upper leg B and the left lower leg C of \"X\" are trimmed close to the junction, and the remaining legs A and D are fixed in the upper and lower clamps. The sample is tested at a constant tensile shear rate by adjusting the clamping distance until a shear failure of the junction occurs. 3. Method C--Peeling test (Figure 7c)  
The lower legs B and D of \"X\" are trimmed close to the junction, and the remaining legs A and C are fixed in the upper and lower clamps. The sample is tested at a constant peel rate by adjusting the clamping distance until a peel failure of the junction occurs. 4. Method D--Splitting test (Figure 8c)  
The legs A and B of the \"X\" are fixed in the upper clamp, and the legs C and D are similarly fixed in the bottom clamp. The sample is tested at a constant splitting rate by adjusting the clamping distance until a tensile split failure of the junction occurs. 3. Result and Discussion  
This section summarizes the results of the various test processes on the geocell junctions. Due to the complexity of the tensile pattern, the results are presented in the form of engineering stress-elongation, and the test strengths are expressed in N/cm. The significance of the discussion outcomes is linked to the geocell's practical applicability. 3.1. Weld Tensile Strength Test  
Table 3 shows the test results for the weld tensile strength of junctions at different clamping distances. The results indicate that the tensile strengths of the 25 mm, 50 mm, and 100 mm clamping distances are lowered by 0.23%, 2.84%, and 4.51% when compared to the test with the 10.5 mm clamping distance. Compared with the 10.5 mm clamping distance, the peak and overall elongation of the 25 mm clamping distance increased by \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Test** & **Junction Width** & **Clamping** & **Gripping** & **Overall Length** \\  & **(mm)** & **Distance (mm)** & **Distance (mm)** & **(mm)** \\ \hline \multirow{4}{*}{Weld tensile strength test} & & 10.5 & & 130.5 \\  & & 25 & & 145 \\  & & 50 & & 170 \\  & & 100 & & 220 \\  & & 10.5 & & 130.5 \\  & & 25 & & 145 \\ Tensile shear test & & 50 & & 170 \\  & & 100 & & 220 \\  & & 25 & & 145 \\ Peeling test & & 50 & & 170 \\  & & 100 & & 220 \\  & & 25 & & 145 \\ Splitting test & & 50 & & 170 \\  & & 100 & & 220 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: Specimen dimensions. 30.68% and 13.91%. The peak and overall elongation of the 50 mm clamping distance increased by 50.23% and 18.69% compared with the 25 mm clamping distance. Compared to the 50 mm clamping distance, the peak and overall elongation of the 100 mm clamping distance increased by 105.00% and 31.14%. On the whole, the weld tensile strength of the junction decreases, and the peak and overall elongation increase with the distance between clamps. The change in peak elongation becomes more apparent. The tensile stress-elongation relationship curves of the junctions under different clamping distances are shown in Figure 9. When the strip appears and lengthens, the curve of the elastic area pre-peak slows down, requiring more elongation to attain peak strength, and the strength diminishes faster when broken post-peak. This can be attributed to the fact that the junction and strip are under common stress during the tensile process, and their mechanical behavior is considerably different. The deformation of the junctions is greatly different from that of the strips, and the tensile forces that the junctions and strips can withstand are different. As a whole, they must work together to coordinate their differences, resulting in reduced tensile strength and increased elongation. The increase in overall elongation was due to an increase in the elongation of the pre-peak elastic area. The failure modes of the junctions under tensile loading at different clamping distances can be observed in Figure 10. The failure modes of all the samples are similar. The fractures