## 4 Conclusions  
The existing research has primarily focused on pile-supported gravel embankments. The ability of solidified soil used as embankment filling materials has been verified, and a clear view on the performance of solidified soil embankments on piled foundation is still  
Figure 12: The effects of pile spacings on solidified soil embankments: (**a**) total settlements along the depth of embankment, (**b**) vertical stress, (**c**) total settlements along AC, (**d**) total settlements along AB, (**e**) axial forces along the depth of pile.  
lacking. Therefore, this study aims to provide an insightful interpretation of solidified soil embankments. Based on the results, the following conclusions are drawn.  
The total settlements and vertical stresses under dynamic loads were larger than those under static loads both in gravel and in solidified soil embankments. Compared with gravel embankments, the total settlements in solidified soil embankment reduced significantly. When the filling height was 6.5 m, the total settlements at the top of the subsoil in the solidified soil embankment was only one-tenth of that at the top of subsoil in the gravel embankment. Compared with gravel embankments, the heights of the outer soil arch plane in solidified soil embankments reduced under static and dynamic loads.  
As the cohesion of solidified soil increased, the total settlements of the solidified soil embankment decreased significantly, and the soil arch height showed a decreasing trend. It is worth noting that there was an optimal and economical cohesion of 25 kPa.  
The friction angels of solidified soil have little effect on the total settlements and vertical stresses of solidified soil embankments. An increase in the filling heights results in an increase in vertical stress, although the settlements only exhibited a slight increase. In addition, the total settlements significantly increased as the pile spacings increased, because more loads were transferred to pile cap from the soil. Therefore, the heights of fill and pile spacings could be appropriately increased in piled solidified soil embankment, as long as the loads on the pile cap are within the bearing capacity of piles.  
Conceptualization, Q.G.; Methodology, Software, Q.G. and B.L.; Writing--original draft preparation, Q.G.; Resources, B.L. and Z.Y.; Writing--review and editing, Q.G., B.L. Z.Y. and J.X. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.  
This research was funded by the Central University Basic Research Fund of China (No. B200203083), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 52178327, No. 52308348), and Graduate Research and Innovation Projects of Jiangsu Province (No. KYCX20_0438).  
Not applicable.  
The input file of the 3D unit cell model is freely available at [[https://github.com/qianqianGuo006/3D_unit_cell_model](https://github.com/qianqianGuo006/3D_unit_cell_model)]([https://github.com/qianqianGuo006/3D_unit_cell_model](https://github.com/qianqianGuo006/3D_unit_cell_model)) (accessed on 5 April 2024).  
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.  
The heights of soil arch at different parameters.  
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline \(\mathbf{c^{\prime}}\) (\(\mathbf{k}\mathbf{Pa}\)) & \(\mathbf{s}\) (\(\mathbf{m}\)) & \(\mathbf{h}\) (\(\mathbf{m}\)) & \(\mathbf{P_{0}}\) (\(\mathbf{k}\mathbf{N}\)) & \(\mathbf{h_{sa}}\) (\(\mathbf{m}\)) & \(\mathbf{h}\)/s \\ \hline
5 & 2.5 & 6.5 & 25 & 2.83 & 2.6 \\