Professional Documents
Culture Documents
.~-
V
"
[I' ,-.
[::
1[1
. ~\
r-. _ .
.J..
,-,WORKS
...111
_.
__
0"
_____ _
CDP 702/0
~.
_"
Feb 1990
Tl,
~Gl::1\7tU
2 1 FEB 1997
.-tOLME~ -':ONSULrtNG
GROuP liMITED
CHRISTCHURCH
RETAINING WALL
_/
DESIGN-NOTES
,.
I:
I )
II
.........
- - ----
'"
.....
.,.
~~
-.
1,
(
]1
.J.
i' )
\ t
... j j
1'[
r';
r" ~'
r'
r~
r~
I~'
J'.
f'
f'
[I
['
i."
1(
r::
[
J-:
I:'
!\
1:
I
j
[
I:
[:
I:
RETAINING WALL
DESIGN NOTES
I:
LI,
:
[
[
I:
FOR
WORKS
I
I
!
[~
I
I
I
Prepared by ;
Consultancy Services - Civil Engineering
Works and Development Services Corporation (NZ) Ltd
WelliIlgton, New Zealand
CDP 702/D
Feb 1990
\1
[-;
)
r
f~
L
[-
r[:
t:
l
L
l~
I:
[,
I.
I.
L
l_.
[t !
1
I .'
i '
J
PREFACE
['
This revised document was prepared by the Special Project Office of Works
Consu ltaney Servi ces, We 11 i ngton, with useful comments from other
divisions of Works Consultancy Services and the Geotechnical Control
Office in Hong Kong.
['
[-~
[~
Ii
\'
,~
l~
"[-~'
r'
l'
[
[~
I,
I~
I:
l :'
l.
l
l.
I
I
)'
I:
['
r-:
CONTENTS
[~
[:
[
Page
CONTENTS
LIST OF FIGURES
LIST OF TABLES
[-~
SYMBOLS
10
SECTION 1 - INTRODUCTION
1.2
Scope
Definitions and Symbols
15
15
1.3
Design Principles
1.3.1
Free Standing Retaining Walls
1.3.2
Other Retaining Structures
15
1.4
Load Cases
1.4.1
Basic Loadings
1.4.2
Other Considerations
16
1.1
[:
1:
I:
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
2.6
2.7
2.8
2.9
2.10
2.11
2.12
Genera 1
Selection and Use of Backfill
Dens ity
Effective Stress and Pore Pressures
Shearing Strength
Base Friction
Wall Friction
Modulus of Elasticity and Poisson1s Ratio
Coefficient of Subgrade Reaction
Swelling and Softening of Clays
Permeability
Liquefaction
18
18
19
19
21
23
24
26
28
29
30
30
\'
,-
Page
1-:
States of Stress
Amount. and Type of Wall Movement
32
32
34
39
3.3.1
3.3.2
3.3.3
3.3.4
3.3.5
3.3.6
3.3.7
3.4
I:
4.5
Background
4.1.1
Wall Categories
4.1.2
Soil - Structure Interaction
4.1.3
Simplifications for Design
4.1.4
Plastic Theory and Failure Modes
4.1. 5
Resonance Effects
42
45
46
46
I:
46
53
I
I
I
I.
t,
I
[',
4.5.1
4.5.2
4.5.3
4.5.4
4.5.5
4.5.6
4.6
I:
I~
4.2
4.3
4.4
[-:
r'
3.4.1
3.4.2
3.4.3
3.4.4
4.1
I-~
I
,I
['
r:
Page
[:
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4
!:
r~
L
L
l~
6.1,
6.2
6.3
6.4
6.5
6.6
6.7
"Uniform Surcharges
Line Loads
Point Loads
Non-uniform S~rcharges
General
Static Water Level
Seepage Pressure
Dynamic Water Pressure
Drainage Provisions
Filter Requirements
Geotextiles
59
59
60
60
61
61
62
62
63
64
64
General
66
7.2
Sliding Stability
7.2.1
Base Without a Key
7.2.2
Base With a Key
67
} .3
Overturning Stability
7.3.1
Gravity and Counterfort Walls
7.3.2
Sheet Walls
68
7.4
69
7.5
74
General
8.1.1
8.1. 2
8.1.3
8.1.4
8.2
l
l
Codes
Limit State Design
Cover to Reinforcement
Selection of Wall Type
Toe Design
75
76
<.
I'
I
[1
Page
r~
8.3
8.4
Stem Design
8.3.1
Stem Loading
8.3.2
Lower Section of Counterfort Wall Stem
8.3.3
Horizontal Moments in Counterfprt Wall Stem
Heel Slab Design
8.4.1
Loading
--8.4.2
Heel Slabs for Counterfort Walls-
8.5
8.6
8.7
Counterfort Design
Key Design
Control of Cracking
76
l"
77
l- :
l:
78
78
79
r='
SECTION 9 - SPECIAL PROVISIONS FOR CRIB WALLS
9.1
9.2
9.3
9.4
9.5
9.6
General
Design Loading
. Foundation Depth
Drainage
Multiple Depth Walls
Walls Curved in Plan
80
80
80
80
81
81
l:
r:
l:
II
General
Strutted Excavations
82
82
10.3
84
l~
10.4
Cantilevered Walls
85
L
l
10.2
References
Figures
86
,l
,[,
l_~
l
l_
LIST OF FIGURES
Rankine active earth pressure coefficients, cohesionless soil, uniform sloping backfill
~--'
lO
1.
[.
~ =
25
II
II
II
II
II
II
~ =
30
II
II
II
II
II
II
~ =
35
II
II
II
II
II
II
~ =
40
10
11
12
13
14
15
(A)
(8)
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
(A)
(B)
$ = 25
20
= 30
(0)
35
= 40
31
32
33
34
(A)
$ = 20
(B)
$=25
$ = 30
(0)
$ = 35
35
$ = 40
L
[~
I
[.
L
I
I
r---
36
37
l_
$ = 20
(B)
= 25
30
(D)
= 35
38
39
40
41
42
(A)
(8)
Rotated wall
(8)
Translated wall
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
r:
l~
53
54
55
56
j'
--f
['
57
shape factors
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
1:
66
t'
67
30, 40
~
30, 40
.~
r:
1_ ,
1:
J'
J:
J,
-1.
J
'T
J'
if
,.~
....
LIST OF TABLES
1.
2.
3.
Typical Friction Angles and Adhesion Values for Bases Without Keys
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Permeabilities of Soils
9.
10.
Allowable Bearing
':
[;
l.
['
[.
L
L
L:
[
Pre~sure
on Jointed Rock
..
"
!'
r-, :
\
,
"
-, ",
,~
, 1:',:::
t' "
r,',
r
~.':
f ,"
r:
L
t'
t,
L '
l,';
L'
[I
['
10
t1-'
SYMBOLS
AI
base width
81
Co
C(T)
C(O)
cb
adhesion at base
cl
foundation depth
D20
l'
dc,dq,dY
Es
~ ~.
Fs
factor of safety
gravitational acceleration
H,H1,etc
vertical height of plane on which earth pressure is calculated (from underside of base or bottom of key to ground
surface)
l:
hc
l.
he
hw
piezometric head
l~
1-'
L
['
['
l~
[~
I:
I.
l~
hydraulic gradient
i c , i q , iy
0)
.'.\.
'.
11
\
,
.,.
. r- .
.
[- ,
coefficient of permeability
length of base
L'
,"
i.:"
[',
L
.,-
L ...
':
'
N-value
I.
t."
r:
[-'
12
\
Po
Pp
PPN
PQ
Ps
J)v
Pw
lIPAE
lIPE
1_,
,['
PA
Pc
consolidation pressure
['
Pw
water pressure
p(z)
I:
IIp(z)
total load
QL
line load
[-~
Qp
point load
[:
qa
qd
qult
qu
r:
R,RA,Rp,Rw,etc
resultant forces
RQD
[ :
Su
undrained shear
r'
,
[-~
l~
_.
[~ .
['
[:
I.:
strengt~
of soil
'J
13
\
Sc,Sq,sY,
Va
Wb
Ww
weight of wall
Wt
total weight of wall, soil above toe and soil above heel
!J.x
displacement of superstructure
zo
zc
AE
0p
r,"
f '
~[','
r',
('
",
r'l '
"
"
l, '
I
I
Yd
Ysat
Yw
Ysat - Yw
!L'," "
['
f'
I
r
r'
l~
['
r:
L
['
[>
L
I>
r:
[
I>
I'
I:
L
[-
l_
14
f1
increment
&
&b
angle
81
8b
Poisson's ratio
settlement
(J
aho
a'
a' v
shear stress
~'
~u
\jJ
= tan~l
C(O)
I'
..
'
1::'"
1
~:
[':
1::
r::'
[',
I"
I' ';:
I,
L
l'
I ".
l',
I. . .
i'
Section 1
f'
'",'
!-'
[;
r'
INTRODUCTION
.
['
[-'
l~
[
[
r-: .
l:
L
L
l
l~
l~
l'
: .
I ..
"
r: .
'':,.":
I""
['
'
!~'.
t'"
[-':
."'
[.<
... .
r[.. pi;
.'. ",
['
IJ~.:
l
[L ':".~,
:;~:~~'J
t ,.
--j'
I: :
I':
I
L ..
'
L'
L.~
L;
L:.
'.
1 "
15
SECTION 1 - INTRODUCTION
['
1.1
SCOPE
These notes are intended as a guide for use in the estimation of
pressure forces and the design and construction of
retaining walls and similar earth retaining structures. These
notes are not intended to be used as a detailed text
encompassing all aspects of retaining wall design.
The
intention is to PCQvide brief notes and recorrmended methods_
covering most aspects of design. If a more detailed knowledge
of a particular subject is required, the references given should
prove he1 pful. Reference is also made to standard texts for
detailed methods such as the construction of flow nets for pore
water pressure determination, and reinforced concrete design
methods.
~earth
f-,
['
1.2
1.3
DESIGN PRINCIPLES
1.3.1
(b)
(c)
16
\
I"
I. . ~
I'.
,
:,
[':
r'~
1.4
LOAD CASES
1.4.1
Bas.i c Load i ng s
t"
[:T
[ ::
(b)
Norma 1 1oadi ng
Earthquake loading
l:
I.-
l~
.'1
L.:
. ',':
I:
I.
I'
1-'
r
['
I.~
1.4.2
Other Considerations
Consideration should also b~ givent5 the possible occurrence of
other design cases or variations within the two design cases
given above, caused by the construction sequence or future
development of surrounding areas.
For instance, additional
. surcharges should be considered in calculating active pressures
and allowance made for any possible future removal of ground in
front of the wall.
Usually the passive resistance of the
material in front of the wall is ignored in the design of
gravity or cantilever retaining walls.
[~:
l'
['
r'
--
[~
[
I:
l:
l.
[
17
I,
I._-
I.
:,
I:" .
.
~.
I~. '.,'
r;'~
l~
"
l: "
l
I
l..
l_,
I>,'
-j'
L.
[,
Section 2
SOIL PROPERTIES
1.
1.
18
2.1
['
For all walls ___ higher than 6 m, especially those with sloIJing
backfill, the soil properties of the natural ground and backfill
should be estimated from tests on samples of the materials
involved. For less important walls, an estimation of the soil
properties may be made from previous tests on similar materials.
However, a careful visual examination of the material, particularly that at the proposed foundation level, should be made with
the help of identification tests to ensure that the assumed
material type is correct.
[
2.2
[:
[
[-,
[
GENERAL
L
I,
19
DENSITY
The density of soil depends on the specific gravity of the solid
particles and the proportions of solids, air and water in the
soil. The typical specific gravity of soil particles is about
2.65 for sand or rock and 2.70 for clays. However this may vary
from area to area. The proportion of the total volume that is
made up of this solid material-is dependent on the degree of
compaction or consolidation.
An estimate of the density of backfi 11 material to be used
behind a retaining structure may be obtained from laboratory
compaction tests on samples of the material. The density chosen
must correspond to the compaction and moisture conditions that
will apply in the actual situation.
The denSity of natural soil should be obtained from undisturbed
samples kept at the field moisture content, and volume.
In
earth pressure calculations, denSity must be in force units, ie,
Unit weight (N/ml or kN/ml). For low, relatively unimportant
walls, the unit weight of the soil behind the wall may be
estimated from the typical values giveri in Table 1. In general
the saturated unit weight should be used in calculations
involving clay.
2.4
.[
r:
=a - u
l~
l.
l_,
l.
l
20
l.
I~'
l.
Unit Weight
Material
[~
-
Dry, Yd
(kN/ml)
16 - 17
18 - 20
20 - 21
19 - 20
20 - 22
14 - 16
17 - 20
19
20
16 - 17
17 - 19
20
21
14 - 17
16 - 18
l.
14 - 16
17 - 19
17 - 20
18 - 20
19 - 21
20 - 21
r'
r'
k'
L
I
[
1_"
L
I.
16 - 19
20 - 21
15 - 16
13 - 14
Pumice
L~
l.
23
10 - 12
r
21
2.5
SHEAR STRENGTH
In all earth pressure probl ems the magni tude of earth pressure
on a particular structure is a function of the shear strength of
the soil. The shear strength is not a unique property of the
material but depends upon the conditions to which the soil is
subjected when it is sheared.
Shear strength is also a function of effective stress and water
content, and is dependent on volume change of the soil. This
gives rise to two separate conditions which determine the type
of analysis to be carried out. These are:
(a)
(b)
,1:
I'
[
I:
22
If analysis is carried out in terms of effective stresses the
effect of any field pore water pressure must be included in the
analysis.
The shear strength of a soil is proportional to the normal or
confining stress acting on the failure plane. The maximum shear
stress that a sample of soil can sustain under different normal
stresses should be obtained from laboratory tests or site
investigation, see WORKS publication on Site Investigation
(WORKS, 1982). Results of laboratory testing may be plotted to
form a relationship between shear stress at failure and normal
stress on the soil. ThisLelationship forms an envelope which
is corrmonly termed the strength envelope.
The envelope is
generally curved, particularly in the low stress range.
But
portions of the curve can be approximated by a straight 1ine
relationship as follows:
s = c + 0 tan $
s = c l + 0 1 tan
$1
23
qu/2)
$1
Material
Sandy gravel or rock fill i ng
Sand loose,
dense,
loose,
dense,
(deg rees)
(degrees)
(saturated)
35=45
28
34
33
45
-.
27-30
30-35
20-22
25-30
Clayey sand
20-25
14-20
22-30
L.
r
,l' :
2.6
BASE FRICTION
Typical values of friction angle (ob) and adhesion (Cb) for
calculating the shearing resistance between a concrete base and
the foundation material are given in Table 3. These values may
be used, for low walls in the absence of specific test data. If
a base key is used the failure plane will generally be through
the foundation soil and therefore the shearing resistance is
that of the soil (ob = $1 and cb = c l ).
\<))
1<:
L
r-
L
I,
L
J
L
t.
J'
24
f'
r-'
rr'
Interface Materials
Adhesion
(kPa)
L
l'
l. '
l.
Friction
Angle (6b)
Degrees
35
29-31
24-29
19-24
17-19
22-26
17-19
l~
2.7
22-26
17-22
17
14
10 to 35
35 to 60
WALL FRICTION
The magnitude and direction of the wall friction developed
depends on the relative movement between the wall and the soil.
In the active case, the maximum value of wall friction develops
only when the soil wedge moves significantly downwards relative
to the rear face of the wall. In some cases, wall friction
cannot develop. These include cases where the wall moves down
with the soil, such as a gravity wall on a yielding foundation
or a sheet pile wall with inclined anchors, and cases where the
-,
I'
25
Smax.
Smax.
= 2<1>'
$'
2
"3
['
I:
26
Proportion of
Maximum Wall
Friction Developed
Structure Type
Loose
Dense
0.5
1.0
1.0
l_.
L.
I~
27
I~
Soil
Very soft clay
Soft clay
Medium clay
Hard cl ay
Sandy clay
Si lty sand
Silt
Loose sand
Dense sand
Loose sand and gravel
Dense sand and gravel
Loess
Sandstone
Limestone
Basalt
Es (MPa)
2
5
15
50
25
7
2
10
50
50
95
15
6,900
13,800
48,200
15
25
50
100
250
20
20 25
80
145
190
60
20,600
41,300
89,500
[:
I'
,L
1
J:
1.
:1
...
J
i
28
"~
Clay, saturated
0.4-0.5
[--~
Clay, unsaturated
0.1-0.3
.-
r:
.,
.... " .
Sandy clay
0.2-0.3
'Si 1t
0.3-0.35
"',"'"\'
"
.'.'
Sand
dense
loose to medium dense
(void ratio 0.4 - 0.7)
coarse
fine
..
1-'
I'
L
f,
l.
I>
l~
L
.L,
'L'
i
L
T
2.9
0.2-0.4
0.15
0.25
Rock
0.1-0.4
Loess
0.1 - 0.3
= gp
['I
29
f--~
Soil Type
Dense gravel and gravelly soil s
(no clay fines)
I
I
Ks
(kPa/rrm)
>SO
I:
55-SO
25-55
15-25
['
2.10
L
I
I:
L:
[:
I:
I.
l
[:
~.
,
I_
...!
'-...:..-,
I
~
30
[-'
2.11
PERMEABILITY
The permeabilities of soils in broad terms are given in Table 8.
The effects of seepage pressures and permeability of the
backfill material is detailed in section 6.
['
['
..
~l''''
Soil Type
Clean gravel
10- 2
10- 5
10- 2
10- 9
10- 5
10- 11
2.12
L,
Coefflcient of Permeability
k(m/s)
10- 9
LIQUEFACTION
Liquefaction is the process which causes saturated cohesionless
soi 1s to lose strength or sti ffness duri ng earthquake ground
motion. The process is associated with densification of soil
grains, with a corresponding build-up in pore water pressure and
hence a reduction in effective stress and shear strength.
Liquefaction of saturated backfill material and/or foundation
soils has been responsible for a large number of documented wall
failures (e.g. Quay wall failure in Puerto Montt during 1960
Chilean earthquake).
The 1iquefaction potential of a wall site and the backfill
material used behind the wall must be considered.
In the
extreme case liquefaction may lead to an increase in lateral
soil pressures acting on the wall or a decrease in those
resisting failure.
31
I'
I,
1
.L
L
I
Section 3
l~
l~
I
1-'
l~-:
rf:
~-
L
I'
1_ :
L
l- :
I
I:
L
l_
l_ .
l
l
32
3.1
STATES OF STRESS
The stresses at any point within a soil mass may be represented
on the Mohr coordinate system in terms of shear stress, 1, and
effective normal stress, 0 ,'see Scott (1963), Lambe and Whitman
(1979) or Henry (1986), for the plotting of stresses and use of
the system). With this system, the shearingsJ;rength of the
soiTat various effective normal stresses gives an envelope of
the possible combinations of shear and normal stress. When the
maximum sheari ng strength is fully mobil i sed along a surface
within a soil mass, a failure condition known as a state of
plastic (or limiting) equilibrium is reached.
1
'
['
3.2
[:
[
I.
33
Soi 1
Cohesionless, dense
Cohesionless, loose
Clay, firm
Clay, soft
Wall Yield
0.,00'1 H
0.001-)0.002 H
0.01 ..: 0.02 H
0.02 - 0.05 H
----
Ko
l'
r~
r>
l'
,[
I
34
(b)
(c)
0.5(Ko+KA)
KA
f-:
I~
[
Where V
3.3
3.3.1
f'
[:
35
presented
Co~lomb
36
3.3.3
L
L
l~~
l~
Zo
(see
37
Zo
~')
2"
3.3.6
38
[
l_,
\'
I,
Limited Backfill
The limiting equlibrium methods given above assume that the soil
is homogeneous for a sufficient distance behind the wall to
enable an inner failure surface to form in the position where
static equilibrium is satisfied. Where an excavation is made to
accommodate the wall, the undisturbed material may have a
different strength from that of the backfill. If the trial
wedge method is used, the position of two failure planes should
be calculated - one using the properties of the backfill
material and one using the properties of the undisturbed
material.
If both fall within the physical limit of the
backfill the critical failure plane is obviously the one
calculated using the backfill properties. Similarly if they
both come within the undisturbed material, the critical one is
that for the undisturbed material properties.
Two other
possible situations may however arise - one where critical
failure planes occur in both materials (the one giving the
maximum earth pressure is used), and the other where the failure
plane calculated with the backfill properties would fall within
the undisturbed material and the failure plane for undisturbed
material would fall within the backfill. In the latter case,
which occurs when the undisturbed materjal has a high strength,
the backfill may be assumed to slide on the physical boundary
between the two materials. The earth pressure equations do not
apply in this case, but the trial wedge method may be used with
the already selected critical failure plane and the backfill
soil properties. The total pressure thus calculated will be
less than the full active value.
However the variation of
pressure with depth is not linear, and should be determined by
the procedure given in Figure 17.
The boundary between the two materials should be constructed so
that there is no inherent loss of friction (or cohesion) on the
failure surface. Benching the undisturbed material will ensure
that the failure surface is almost entirely through solid
backfill material.
39
3.4
3.4.1
At-Rest Pressures
The special state of elastic equilibrium known as the at-rest
state is useful as a reference point for calculation of earth
pressures where only small wall movements occur. For the case
of a vertical wall and a horizontal ground surface the
coeffi ci ent of at-rest earth pressure, Ko,. for normally
consolidated materials, may be taken as:
Ko
= 1 - sin
<1>1
['
Over-Consolidation Pressures
Several factors produce a coefficient greater than that given in
section 3.4.1 above. If a braced excavation is constructed in
over-consolidated clay, the built-in over-consolidation produces
lateral pressures in excess of those that would be obtained by
using the existing depth of material.
This is particularly
marked at shallow depths below present ground surface, and is
dependent on the degree of over-consolidation. If some wall
movement takes place these high pressures drop rapidly.
Compaction of backfill in a confined wedge behind a restrained
wall also tends to increase lateral pressures. This is a form
of over-cons~lidation and is discussed in section 3.4.4.
l.
I:
f.
l.
[
l:
L
!
l
40
3.4.3
['
v
= 1-v
(for plain strain)
"
','[
Ko
"
3.4.4
L
[
l.
L,
Free standing flexible walls on rock foundations, or in situations where structural deformations are limited by compatibility
with other structures or when the risk of structural damage is
unacceptable, may require further consideration. In these cases
wa 11 movement is suffi ci ent to reduce the compaction induced
earth pressure to the active state but a parabolic rather than
triangul ar earth pressure di stributi on may resul t. The centre
of earth pressures of a parabolic distribution may be as high as
H/2 wi th a correspondi ng increase in bendi ng moment of 50%.
Therefore for these cases a reasonably conservative basis for
derivation of bending moments, bearing pressures and overturning
stability may be warranted.
The factor of safety against sliding may be based on active
earth pressure.
41
Restrained rigid walls such as foundation walls or counterfort
and gravity walls on rock or pile foundations need to be
designed for earth pressures from compaction induced earth
pressure theory.
Zc
= KA y'iTY
l'
Section 4
f.-~
rL_,
~-,
L~
I.
[,
l_~
I:
I'
42
4.1
BACKGROUND
4.1.1
Wall Categories
The, behaviour of wall structures during earthquakes can be
broadly classified into three categories related to the maximum
strain condition that develops in the soil near the wall. The
soi 1 may remain essentially elasti<:, respond in a significantly
nonlinear manner or become fully plastic. The rigidity of the
wall and its foundations will have a strong influence on the
type of soil condition that develops.
Flexible structures, such as cantilever walls, displacel
suffi ci ently under gravity backfill loads to produce a fully I
plastic strain condition in most soils.
For rigid walls, such as gravity walls, basement walls, and
other walls on rigid foundations, including piles or rock, thel
soil behaviour may be essentially elastic under combined
earthquake and gravity loads.
4.1.2
Soil-Structure Interaction
Basement walls in buildings and abutment walls that are
monol ithic or rigidly connected to bridge superstructures are
often subjected to displacements relative to the soil mass
because of the dynami c di spl acement response of the structure
during an earthquake. These types of walls may be subjected to
a complex interaction of dynamic soil pressures arising from
both the displacement response of the structure and earthquake
elastic waves in the soil.
l,
L,
I,
l~
u"
43
4.1.3
r'
f'
f'~
r'
I
L
I.
f
1-'
I"
f
Ii
I
I
/.
44
yielding in the structural wall elements. The failure mode will
depend on the wall configuration and the relative capacities
available in each of the potential failure mechanisms.
Although it is corrrnon procedure to design building frames for
inelastic behaviour under earthquake loads, it may be
undesirable to design wall structural components for yielding.
In a wall structure, owing to the presence of lateral gravity
pressures, yielding will tend to occur only in a direction away
from the retained soil. In major earthquakes this may result in
large permanent deflections and cracking with loss of
servic~_~bi 1i ty.
If structural damage is to be avoided, it is necessary to design
either the maximum peak earthquake-induced pressures
consistent with the type of soil behaviour expected, or to
detail the wall to displace outwards, where this is possible, by
movement on failure surfaces in the son (sliding or tilting).
Wh~re soil failure modes are possible, the sliding block analogy
of:Newmark (Elms and Richards, 1979), may be used to determine
,the approximate magnitude of the outward movement as a function
of the peak design acceleration and the acceleration level
required to initiate failure.
Theoretical studies and model!
tests on shaking tables have shown that for many types of wa11s,~
it is possible to design for significantly less than the \
expected peak ground acce 1era t i on wi thout exceedi ng acceptab 1e J
limits of outward movement.
fo~
4.1.5
i [:
J~
i [,
,,
'--
"
Resonance Effects
Most wall/soil systems are relatively rigid and have fundamental
periods of vibration less than 0.5 s. It is usual,to design
walls for earthquake peak ground accelerations (or lower than
peak values) on the assumption of relatively rigid behaviour and
low periods of vibration. However, typical earthquake response
spectra are very steep at low peri ods and any f1 exi bi 1i ty may
lead to ground motion amplification, particularly close to the
top of the wall.
Although amplifications have in fact been
noted in model studies, the results of these investigations have
probably been affected by the presence of rigid boundaries that
reflect and contain the vibrational energy within the model
wall/soil system.
In full scale wall structures, there are
seldom boundary effects and the damping will be higher because
of energy losses by elastic wave radiation. Also, where soil
failures develop, it is likely that the soil damping may be
higher than corrrnonly assumed.
Thus, it is difficult to draw
firm conclusions on whether resonance effects should be
considered or whether it is satisfactory to design to peak
ground acceleration levels.
It is therefore recorrrnended that
resonance effects be neglected in design unless special studies
are undertaken for important walls.
./
I
45
4.2
= Co R Z
~o/
[
[:
[
[
t'
= 1.0
Major
retaining
walls
supporting
important
structures, developed property or services and
where failure would have serious consequences such
as cutting vital communication services and loss of
life.
Walls forming part of the earthquake
resisting structure of bridges, major buildings or
other important structures.
R = 0.8
Wa 11 s other than as descri bed for R = 1. a with
heights greater than 4 m for level- backfills, or
3 m with significant backfill slope.
A risk factor greater than 1.0, as defined in DZ 4203 Table
3.2.1, may be used for walls that form part of the earthquake
resisting structure of buildings classified in Categories I to
III.
I:
L
L
The risk factor for highway bridge abutments should be the sam~
factor used for the design of the bridge.
For important
bridges, risk factors greater than 1.0 may be specified in
design briefs adopted by roading authorities.
[I
'. ,[
46
Walls not included in the above descriptions need not be
specifically designed for earthquake loading.
The DZ 4203 seismic design coefficients are based on a 150 year
return period event. A reduction of the risk factor to 0.8.
effectively reduces the design return period to about 100 years.
4.3
LOAD COMBINATIONS
Under normal circumstances,when live loads, such as traffic,
are of a transient nature, only the combination of earthquake
pressures with static gravity pressures should be considered.
The static gravity pressure should include water pressures and
surcharge loading, see section 1.4.1.
4.4
FACTORS OF SAFETY
Where the design approach, is to pre'vent outward movements that
may develop because of failure in the soil or yielding of the
structure, the following factors of safety for the load
combination of gravity plus earthquake pressures should be used:
Fs
Fs = 1.2
1.5
l:
l_
J'
47
4.5.1
Rigid Wall
The earthquake pressures on a smooth perfectly rigid wall from
horizontal inertia loads in the soil are shown in diagram (A) of
Figure 23 (Wood, 1973).
An approximate linear pressure
distribution suitable for design purposes is given in diagram
(6) ()f Figure 23 (Matthewson et al, 1980).
The increment of
earthquake force is given approximately by:
l'
Stiff Wa 11
(
0.75 C(O) Y H2
~.
!:
.[
'/1
48
~
"iI
r~
"-.
r'
'-'.
l-'
f-'
[
t":
ro,
f ':
I
I
l~
I
I,
I
I'
I
[,
I
I
I
4.5.3
F1 ex 1b1e Wa 11
/~O~
Where the outward movement of the top o~ the wall under gravity
and earthquake pressures exceeds O.5%H, an active pressure
state may be assumed and the pressures obtained from the Coulomb
slid; ng wedge theory or the -Mononobe-Okabe_ fonnulae. In these
methods, an additional force equal to the seismic coefficient
times the weight of the soil wedge is included in the analysis.
The MO equations were originally derived for a cohesionless soil
for both active and passive conditions and for both vertical and
horizontal earthquake forces.
Vertical accelerat10ns do not
produce significant increases in the horizontal pressures and
for most walls vertical earthquake effects may be neglected.
The method has been extended to cohesive frictional soils by
Prakash and Saran (1966). The extended method may be used for
the analysis of saturated clays by carrying out a total stress
analYSis assuming ~ = 0 and c = Suo the undrained shear
strength.
The shape assumed for the MO earthquake pressure increment is
shown ;n diagram (6) of Figure 25. The MO method does not gtve
detailed, information on the shape 'of the increment of earthquake
pressure and there are conflicting results from some of the
model tests carried out on shaking tables and other simplified
plastiCity methods (Athanasiou-Grivas, 1978; Prakash and
Nandakumaran, 1979; Saran and Prakash, 1970). However, finite
element studies (Wood. 1973) and more recent tests on flexible
walls (Stevenson, 1987), have shown that providing the wall is
sufficiently flexible for ~ct1ve conditions to" develop, the
increment of earthquake force acts at approximately O.33H above
the base of the wall.
Thi sis the assumption made in the
original development of the theory by Mononobe-Okabe (Mononobe
and Matsuo, 1929).
.
'.i,
141 009
~010
'--:
I:
r-I
49
l~;
tan ($ -
~)
. [
II [,
Ap(z)
where:
Ap(z)
= AKAE Y Z
= the earthquake pressure increment at depth z below
the top of the wall.
AKAE
= KAE - KA
KAE
KA
0.5 C(O) y HZ
;'
['
I [:
I r:
I.
l:
,[
I [
I /!
I I~
-I I
- l!
iIu
I
I. !
50
4.5.4
l'
['
D1splaceable Wall
When it is acceptab 1e for a wall to undergo permanent outward
displacement during earthquake loading, it may be designed for a
threshold acceleration N g less th.an----the peak ground
acceleration of the design earthquake,(tCO)g.') The threshho1d
.acce1eration is defined as the acce1eratf0fi:=:eVe1 that initiates
permanent movement of the wall. The outward displacement can be
calculated from the Newmark sliding block theory (Elms and
Richards, 1979). The forward displacement of the centre of mass
is given approximate1~-by (Matthewson et a1, 1980):
d
= 3Vo 2
Where Vo
C(O)g
=
[fiQl
N'
C(O)
- 2J
51
For some cases, the weight of the wall may be small in relation
to the weight of the soil wedge and the wall inertia force may
be neglected.
To estimate the threshold acceleration it is usually necessary
to know the passive resistance for any soil in front of the wall
toe. The earthquake increment of passive pressure and the total
passive pressure coefficient for gravity forces plus soil
inertia forces are plotted in charts A and B of Figure 41. Both
plots were evaluated using the MO equations for a cohesionless
soil, vertical wall face and horizontal backfill. The passive
pressure coeffi ci ent-Ts very sens it i ve to the assumpti on made
regarding the wall friction and the passive pressure
coefficients shown are for a conservative assumption of zero
wall friction.
Note that in the passive pressure case, the
earthquake increment reduces the static gravity load passive
resistance when the soil inertia force is assumed to be acting
ina direction away from the wall. (Negative' values are plotted
in Chart A of Figure 41 to indicate this reduction).
4.5.5
Forced Wall
Where the wall is part of a larger structure such as a building
or bridge, it may be forced to vibrate with amplitudes governed
by the inertia loads on the structure. The total earthquake
pressure increment can be estimated by combining the component
of earth pressure due to inertia forces in the soil (usually
based on a rigid wall assumption) with pressures resulting from
the wall displacement amplitudes against the soil.
Figure 42 shows the earth pressure components caused by
rotational and translational displacements of the wall against
th~ backfill soil.
The flexibility of the wall will have an
influence on this component ,of pressure but a reasonable
estimate can be made for most walls by combining the results
from the simple rotational and translational deformations shown
in Figure 42. For more compl~x wall geometries, an acceptable
estimate for the pressure against a forced wall may be made by
modelling the soil as a system of linear Winkler springs.
An upper 1imit to the combined static and forced wall pressure
at any depth is given by the soil passive pressure distribution.
4.5.6
Water Pressures
Increases in pore water pressures resulting from earthquake
inertia effects need to be considered in the analysis of wall
pressures. For some backfill and foundation soils it may also
be necessary to allow for pressure increases due to the effects
of liquefaction of the soil, see section 2.12.
The increase in pressure due to inertia loads on any water can
be taken into account by applying the seismic coefficient to the
total weight of soil and water in the failure wedge.
L
l~
t,
l
:r '
52
['
r
", ,:,
Where
Pw
0.58 C(O) Yw h2
depth of water
53
.[-'
.
4.6
4.6.1
4.6.3
Ti ed Back Wa 11 s
['
,
.1
:I.
,I:
eJ
~I
iJ
.I
t
[
54
r~
f"
['
f"
L
L
,
-.
,.,';,i,':
r:
r:
[~
t
[ -:
L_:
l
l_
~
4.6.4
Basement Walls
55
Bridge Abutments
Pressures on bridge abutments are influenced by the earthquake
forces and displacements transmitted to the abutment by the
bridge superstructure. The bearing detail between the abutment
and
superstructure
will
influence
these
forces
and
displacements. If for ex"ample, the bearing is a sliding type
with a low coefficient of friction, the abutment may act
essentially as a free standing wall. Another limiting case is a
monolithic abutment where the wall is forced with displacements
that may be governed by the response of the total bridge system
to the earthquake inertia forces.
-[
No Significant Interaction
PF
PI
"
r:
_,",1-
"L
f'
56
'~
Ps
PL
~x
.'."'[ ,.
,
","-.
r:
[-'
For movement away from the backfill, ~PE may be estimated from
the details given in sections 4.5.1 to 4.5.3 making due
allowance for wall flexibility.
When the displacement is
against the backfi 11, rigid wall pressures may be assumed for
estimating ~PE.
PF may be estimated from the forced wall solutions given in
section 4.5.5. For translational deformation PF is given by:
Where
PF
0.6 Es a
~x
l.
[~
57
depend on the re 1at i ve magn itude of. the forces and also on
whether the connection is load limiting or rigid. In view of
the complexity, for this case the individual force components
should be combined using the algebraic sum.
(ii)
Significant Interaction
I.
.,
~!
58
~,
[
l~
[
[
[
'. I:
I~
"f'
t
I.-
>
T,
.. -
I:
.[:
...
f.
.[ :
.:
'.
L....;/'
:,1 :
['i[
U
-[
i'
I
(
[~
Section 5
EFFECT OF SURCHARGES
r"
r
f'
r~
L
~
I
['
r~
L~
-
L:
~-
d:
:.
I:
,,[
.,
"
[
(
i4;J :
~~ ~
..
59
5.1
UNIFORM SURCHARGES
Uniform surcharge loads may be converted to an equivalent height
of fill and the earth pressures calculated for the correspondingly greater height. The equivaient height is given by:
--h
- g
cos S
e - y cos(S - w)
1-'
l,
'
l
l
l,
l,
~,
'l ,
LINE LOADS
Where there is a superimposed line load running a considerable
length parallel to the wall, the wedge method of analysis may be
used, and the weight per unit length of this load can be added
to the weight of the particular trial wedge to which it is
applied, see Figure 47. The increased total earth pressure will
be given from the trial wedge procedure but the line load will
also change the point of application of this total pressure.
The method given in Figure 17 may be used to give the
distribution of pressure.
Alternatively, when the line load is small in comparison with
the act; ve earth pressure, the effect of the 1i ne load on its
own can be determi ned by the method gi ven in secti on (A) of
Figure 48.
This is based on stresses in an elastic medium
modified by experiment.
The pressures thus determined are
superimposed on those due to active earth pressure and other
effects.
60
5.4
POINT LOADS
1:
Poi nt loads cannot be taken into account by trial wedge procedures. The method based on Boussinesq1s equations given in
section (B) of Figure 48 should be used. A similar method is
given in the Earth Retaining Structures CP2 (Institution of
Structural Engineers, 1951).
An alternative semi-empirical
method is given by Henry (1986).
NON-UNIFORM SURCHARGES
Non-uniform surcharge pressures can be incorporated using the
Culmann Line method shown on Figure 47.
I.
[
~.
.[
[.
Section 6
f'
r-'
EFFECTS OF WATER
[
f-:
L:
I'
l-'
I'
[~
I.
f'
f_:
I
[
L.
. f.
I,
",
, r-
r-
I'
[-
f[~
~~-
t
I.
l~
[-
I:
I
I:
I
f:
61
6.1
GENERAL
The presence of water behind a wall has a marked effect on the
pressures app 1i ed to the wall.
When the phrea ti c surface
intersects the wall, a hydrostatic pressure is exerted against
the wall, together with uplift pressures along the base of the
wall. Even when there is no water in-d-irect contact with the
wa 11, such as when adequate drainage is provided, there is an
increased pressure on the wall due to the increased earth
pressure (section 6.2). The effect of water behind the wall is
significant; the total force may be more than double that
applied for dry backfill. Many recorded wall failures can be
attributed to the presence of water.
['
The height to which water can rise in the backfill, and the
seepage pressures, are both of prime concern.
To determine
these the ground water conditions must be establ i shed. These
may be best derived from the observation of ground water
conditions prior to construction. However, possible changes to
the existing groundwater regime due to the construction of the
retaining structure should also be considered.
The effect of leakage from services can be Significant. This
leakage contributes substantially to both perched and main
groundwater tables.
Where inadequate drainage is provided behind a retaining
structure, there may be a damming effect which would result in
raising groundwater levels locally and in the general area.
Such a rise may adversely affect the stability of slopes and
retaining walls. Effective drainage measures should always be
provided in such cases.
In the absence of such measures or
where drainage may be impractical such as behind sheet retaining
structures, design should allow for appropriate water pressures.
6.2
f,
I,
f :
:t_
62
6.3
r
r
r
Full water pressure must be allowed for below the weep holes or
other drainage outlets.
SEEPAGE PRESSURE
-L
l.
l
L:
I
['
63
I
I:
I'
6.5
I'
I'
1--
L
10
[-:
I,
[
L
l
I,
l~
L,
l:
'I
DRAINAGE PROVISIONS
Water pressures must be incl uded in the forces acting on the
wall unless adequate drainage is provided. For walls less than
2 m high, drainage material is usually only provided on the back
face of the wall, with weep holes to relieve water pressure, see
Figure 50. In these circumstances it may be desirable or more
economic to design for hydrostatic water pressure.
In general, if a drainage system similar to that shown in Figure
_51 is used, water pressures may be negl ected both on the wall
itself and on the soil failure plane. Adequate drainage reduces
the rate of softening of clay filling and of stiff-fissured
clays and lessens the likelihood of reductions in the strength
of the foundations, and is therefore very desirable for clay
soils.
It is worth noting that in cohesionless soils, the active force
on a wall with static water level at the top of the backfill is
approximately double that for a dry backfill. For walls over
6 m high, particular care should be taken to ensure that the
drainage system will control the effects of water according to
the assumptions made in design. Many recorded wall -failures
seem to be the result of inadequate drainage.
Water should
preferably be prevented from entering the backfi 11 from the
surface, otherwise any resulting seepage pressures must be
allowed for in design.
For a drain to be effective it must be able to carry the design
flow of water without backing up or blocking.
The rate of
seepage into the drainage material and flow rate that the drain
can accorrrnodate depends on the permeabil ity of the dra i nage
material, thickness of the drain and hydraulic gradient in the
drain. Using a flow net sketch the flow into the drain may be
estimated and the required cross sectional area (A) of the drain
found using Darcy's law:
A = qd
q-:i
where
= hydraulic gradient
qd = the flow rate through drain
Cedergren (1977), gives methods for constructing flow nets and
applications to drainage problems which may provide guidance for
situations where drainage is important.
As a very' general guide drainage material should have a
permeability at least 100 times that of the material it is meant
to drain.
If this is achieved, pore water pressures due to
seepage will be minimised at the boundary and the soil mass will
drain as though it had a free boundary.
Permeabilities of
granular (drainage) materials are given in Figure 52.
I'
,f'
64
6.6
FILTER REQUIREMENTS
6.6.1
General
D15C < 5
D85F - ,
Where DISC
['
~[ ~
'f'
f'
For clay soils D15C size should not be less than 0.2 rrm.
The filter material must have sufficient permeability so that
the seepage can pass through to the drainage material or drain.
,The following grading is the finest acceptable for any filter
material regardless of the material that is being protected:
Sieve Size
4.75
2.36
1.18
600
300
150
75
rrm
rrm
rrm
11m
11m
11m
11m
Percent Passing
100
92
74
50
25
8
GEOTEXTILES
In some cases, it may be possible to use man-made fibrous woven
and non-woven fabri cs, known as geotext i 1es, to protect the
drainage facilities.
As yet, there is little experience in New Zealand with the long
term performance of fabric filters for permanent drainage
measures. Consequently, it is recorrmended that they should only
" ;1
:'
1.J
I,
,l
L
,~j
I
,t;!
l
;
i
r'
I.
['
.
65
r-'
l:
l:
f~
[
f~
r
['
l:
t,
1
I:
I:
.!
I..
,I :
0
I
1
~j
r~
,
...
r'
Section 7
['
r'
~~
~-'
f-~
l-:
L
[
l
l:
\.
I:
\,
l,
l,
I
f'
f'
r
r
r:
. r'
L
L
r
l:'
!: :
I:
\#. 4
L
[
...i
'I
iJ
r66
r
r
~.~
[
L:
L
[:
[
[,
T'
f ,
l'
l"
l
7.1
GENERAL
The st.ability of a free standing retaining structure and the
soil contained by it, is determined by computing factors of
safety or 'stability factors' which may be defined in general
terms as:
_ Moments or forces aiding stability
Fs - Moments or forces causing instability
Factors of safety should be calculated for
separate modes of failure:
the
following
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
Slip circle
failur~
in
th~
surrounding soil.
The forces that produce overturning and sliding also produce the
foundation bearing pressures and therefore (a) and (b) above are
interrelated with foundation bearing failure in most soils.
Generally bearing capacity is critical for counterfort walls on
soil foundations. Overturning stability is often critical for
wa 11 s on strong founda t i on rna teri a1s such as rock 0 r when the
base of the wall is small eg, crib walls.
In general, to limit settlement and tilting of walls on soil
materials, the resultant of the loading on the base should be
within the middle third for static loading and within the middle
half for earthquake loading. For rock foundation material, the
resultant should be within the middle half of the base for both
static and earthquake loading.
When calculating overall stability of the wall the lateral earth
pressure is calculated to the bottom of the blinding layer, or
in the case of a base with a key, to the bottom of the key as
shown in Figure 1.
l~
l_"
[;
'L;
free
standing
retaining
walls
are
67
7.2
SLIDING STABILITY
7.2.1
r-'
-f'
=
=
=
=
=
1:
L
L
-[
68
[-'
7.3
OVERTURNING STABILITY
7.3.1
I'
F (overturning)
s
[~
[-
= ~
r~
7.3.2
Sheet Walls
With sheet retaining walls the value of factor of safety ~an be
very sensitive on how the fac:tor of safety is defined.
Two
types of definition are corrmonly used, ILoad Factors I eg, the
method described in section 7.3.1 or Istrength Factorsl which
are determined as follows:
'
Fs
Soil Strength
['
f:
I,
69
7.4
7.4.1
J
I
= ~
BL
l
L-
'r'
= c Nc + Y D Nq + ~ Y B Ny
= (N q -
Ny
f'
[
~/2).eTItan~
1)cot~
1.5 (N q - 1)
tan~
70
r'
I:
[
";,.-",, .
./._,,. .... ,
L
\'
= 1 - ~o/147
bq = by = e- 2~tan $
bc
where ~ is in radians
.['
71
gc
gy
gq
e-213tanlj>
1 - Sin 213
where l3 is in radians
[.
= 5.14 Su [1
Where sc*, dc*, ic*, bc* and gc* are the factors to take account
of the shape of the footing, the depth of the base, the
inclination of the load, the inclination of the base and the
inclination of the ground respectively.
The factors can be
derived as follows:
sc* = 0.2 BIL
dc* = 0.4 D/B
if D
if 0 ) B
0.5 - 0.5/ H
B'L'S u
bc* . = n 114r
(for n = 0, bc* = 0)
gc* = 13/147
(for
a = 0,
t.
''"
gc* = 0)
:[
IC' .
:[
w
.,~I
72
7.4.2
Eccentric loads
If the load on the foundation is eccentric this can substantially reduce the bearing capacity. To allow for this the
base width, B, is reduced to an effective width B' given by:
B' = B - 2e
where e is the load eccentricity
For a footing eccentrically loaded in two directions the
effective dimensions of the base become such that the centre of
an-.-area A' coincides with the vertical component. of the applied
load V.
A'
.[
';
,.
whefe L'
B'
"
<
r:
L'
= L - 2el
= B - 2eb
<
f.
B'
'
Fs (bearing)
where q
V
AT
for a rectangular footing
or q
t,
l,
7.4.3
7.4.4
Foundations on Rock
Foundations on continuous rock seldom present problems since the
rock is stronger than most foundation materials. Structural
defects and discontinuities, or the compressibility of the rock
mass below the foundation, usually control the allowable bearing
pressure.
73
= 100 x
l~
r.~
l~
['
['
Allowable Pressure
(MPa)
30
20
12
6
3
L
.[
Note:
(1)
(2)
~l
[
r-'
r'
I:
r-'
74
7.5
T"
Where N is
<1>' is
c' is
1 is
T is
u is
f :
should be at least 1.5 for static loading and at least 1.3 for
earthquake loading.
An effective stress analysis using
appropriate pore water pressures is recommended.
I,
L,
'l'~-
L~
I,
[,
L
1_:
I,
1
the
the
the
the
the
the
~
r~
r'
~
f:
[:
r-'
L
L
f:
[
r.
r
[:
l
I
[.
[- ..
Section 8
j
\
I~
f'
1--
L
L
f.
[:
r-
I:
I. .
I.
I.
I:
I,
L,
I,
1
STRUCTURAL DESIGN
--
----
---
I
[-,
[~
[-'
I"
r~~
-
L
L
r'
I.
I:
I
L
I
I
I
l
L
I
I
75
I'
"~'
8.1
GENERAL
8.1.1
Codes
Reinforced concrete design shall be in accordance with
NZS 3101:1982 'Code of Practice for the Design of Concrete
Structures' (Standards Associati on of New Zealand, 1982).
f'
8.1.2-
[:
u = 1.35 (DL
+ 1.35 EP + W); or
U = 1.00 (kDL + EQ + 1.35 W
l'
l:
[.
Cover to Reinforcement
Particular attention shall
reinforcement in both the
construction.
'
l,
8.1.4
[,
I.
76
TOE DESIGN
For
Length of toe
.
Effective depth at face of support> 1,
design as a cantilever in accordance with NZS 3101.
be taken at 'd' out from face of support.
Shear may
For
Length of toe
Effective depth at face of support ~ 1,
design as a bracket in accordance with section 7.3.13 of
NZS 3101.
8.3
STEM DESIGN
8.3.1
Stem Loading
For the stem design in cantilever and counterfort walls, the
earth pressure acting on the vertical plane through the rear of
the heel is projected onto the stem.
For stem design of counterfort walls the earth pressures
resulting from backfill compaction shall be included in the
design loadings.
8.3.2
(horizontal steel)
wLs2
+ve M = 22
(horizontal steel)
wLs2
-ve M = 25
(vertical steel)
il
i
77
(bQrizontal steel)
+ve M = 16
(horizontal steel)
l'
Use continuous horizontal steel in both faces. Horizontal BM
variations with height should be catered for by varying the
reinforcement spacing in preference to changing the bar sizes.
When calculating the bending moments for the stem, the span
should be taken as the clear span between counterforts (Ls).
['
t:
8.4.1
loading
The design loading on the heel slab is shown in Figure 60. The
foundation bearing pressures may be calculated by using the
theory of subgrade reaction, see section 2.9. For a rigid base
slab this theory gives bearing pressures which vary linearly
across the base width.
I'
[:
I'
I:
[
8.4
The pressures for use in structural design are not the same as
those used to check the factor of safety against ultimate
bearing failure (section 7.4). They are normally taken as the
bearing pressures at working loads, ie,
(a) If the resultant cuts the base within the middle third the
toe and heel pressures for structural design may be
calculated from:
p
V/BL 6 Ve/B2L
L,
1_
78
(b)
Pmax
['
. r-
= 3 (B72 - e) L
I-8.4.2
I.
, r-t-
r-
l
[:
I~
COUNTERFORT DESIGN
Vertical steel in the counterfort is required to carry the net
tensile load from each strip of the heel slab. The main moment
reinforcement for the wall is usually concentrated at the back
of the counterfort. Where it joins the heel slab, the above
steel should be considered as taking only that load occurring on
the outermost strip incorporating the key, as defined in section
8.4.2 above.
Horizontal steel in the counterfort is required to carry the net
load on each horizontal strip of stem.
Cut-off positions for the matn tensile steel in the counterforts
is shown in Figure 61.
8.6
KEY DESIGN
In general the depth to width ratio of the key should be approximately one. It is difficult to predict the force that will act
on the key. An approximate design horizontal load on the key
is:
l:
L
[
79
r '
,-
= ~
This load acts at 1/3 key height from bottom of key. Design the
key as a bracket - refer to section 8.2 above.
Note some
stresses are carri ed from the key into the bottom of the heel
slab, and will call for some reinforcement in that area.
I~-
i-
8.7
CONTROL OF CRACKING
To minimise cracking in the retaining structure:
I~
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
r,
(e)
[~
( f)
'-'-,,,~.
:[
[,
;
"':'~,.
f'
[,
I:
I:
[
I
[
I:
I'
Section 9
I.
L"
L'
l'
l
80
9.1
GENERAL
A considerable amount of literature is available;from Cribwall
Unit Manufacturers (eg, Hume, rCB, Cement Products) and also
Portland Cement Association on the design of crib walls.
However, care must be exercised in the interpretation of this
data. Cri b wall s must be checked for stabil ity in accordance
with section 7. Figures 6-2-and 63 may be used as an aid in
determining the maximum height for different wall thicknesses.
The crib units and wall construction should be in accordance
with the current WORKS standard specification for this work, see
CD 209:1988 (WORKS, 1988).
9.2
I,
l.
[
lJ
L
l:
DESIGN LOADING
9.3
FOUNDATION DEPTH
The minimum depth of foundation shall be as shown in Figure 64
which includes a continuous concrete foundation slab. A minimum
slab thickness of 150 mm reinforced with one layer of 665 mesh
is recommended to prevent differential settlement of the wall
structure. The consequences of such settlement are described in
Tschebotarioff (1965).
9.4
DRAINAGE
A continuous 150 mm diameter (minimum) subsoil drain should be
provided at the rear of the foundation slab, to ensure a dry
foundation. This should be provided for all heights of crib
wall.
Adequate drainage of the whole crib structure is essential.
Many of the failures in crib walls have occurred because
material of low permeability was used as backfill - thus
developing high static or seepage water pressures.
A free
draining backfill should always be used if possible, otherwise
the effect of water should be allowed for.
Unless effectively drained over the full height, crib walls
should be designed to resist lateral hydrostatic pressures in
addition to earth pressures.
81
9.5
9.6
(a)
(b)
(c)
('
t:
['
'r'
r:
t
.i,
I
[:
1
Section 10
82
10.1
GENERAL
Walls which have uniform cross-section with depth are considered
in this chapter. These include flexible sheet structures, such
as sheet piled and soldier piled walls, and more rigid walls,
including diaphragm and caisson walls.
-[
;:L_, ,
['
[-
t:
10.2
cause
large
water
to be
STRUTTED EXCAVATIONS
Strutted sheet piling is often used to provide temporary support
for the sides of deep excavations. The sheet piles are usually
driven first with support struts being installed as the
excavation proceeds. The final deformations of the wall are
highly dependent on the construction sequence and detailing.
The CIRIA Report 97 on Trenchi ng Practi ce (I rvi ne and Smith,
1983) gives guidance to safe practice in the design and use of
temporary support for trenches not deeper than 6 m.
I:
L
83
L:
be assumed
wall below
be used to
resistance
l,
where the terms are defined in Figure 66. Where Fs is less than
2 substantial deformations may occur with consequent loss of
ground, and the probability of failure exists. Figure 66 also
shoWSCi chart from Janbu et al (1956), from which the Stabi 1ity
Number (Nb) can be obtained.
Where soft clay extends to considerable depth below
excavation, the effect of increased sheeting stiffness, or
the
L
J
l
""0,,,,',
",\1-,
,:'"
'
84
r:
r~
f'
10.3.1
As the stiffness of the system decreases the pressure di stribution alters in such a way as to reduce the bending moment in
the pile. As a consequence, the sheet pile section used may be
reduced as compared with an infinitely stiff wall.
Rowe's
Theory of Moment Reduction (1952, 1955, 1957) takes this effect
into account; it is summarised by Clayton and Milititski (1986),
and Teng (1962).
I'
[:
10.3.2
I:
l,
I:
85
r
I
[:
CANTILEVERED WALLS
Relatively rigid cantilevered caisson walls rely entirely on the
development of passive resistance in front of the wall for their
stab; 1i ty. As a consequence, cons iderabl e movement must occur
before equilibrium is reached, and deep penetration is required.
The deflection at the top of the wall may be the governing
criterion. Such walls should not normally be used as permanent
structures to retain a height of more than 5 m unless cantilevered from rock.
I:
I.
[.
[,
i I,
-I
86
REFERENCES
Agour, M Sand C B Brown (1974). The Prediction of Earth Pressure on
Retaining Walls Due to Compaction. Geotechnique, Vol 24, pp 489-502.
f'
I~
[
\">"
r:
[-'
L.
1~
Third Edition.
John
l,
r
87
Cornfield, G M (1975). Sheet Pile Structures. Foundation Engineering
Handbook.
Edited by Winterkorn, H.F. and Fang, H.Y.
Van Nostrand
Reinhold Company, New York, pp 418-444.
Cullen, R M and I B Donald (1971). Residual Strength Determination in
Direct Shear. Proc 1st Australian-New Zealand Conference on Geomechanics.
Danish Geotechnical Institute (1978). Code of Practice for Foundation
Engineering . Bulletin No. 32. Copenhagen. p 52.
Elms, D G, and Richards, R (1979). Seismic Design of Gravity Retaining
Walls, Bulletin of NZ National Society for Earthquake Engineering, Vol~l~
No.2.
Evans, E P and Hughes, B P (1968). Shrinkage and Thermal Cracking in a
Institution of Civil
Reinforced Concrete Retaining Wall.
Proc.
Engineers, Volume 39.
Ferguson, P M (1958).
John Wiley and Sons.
2nd Edition.
I-
88
I"
f'
['
f'
SI Version.
Wiley.
Seismic Design of
Bull NZ Nat Soc
Foundation
89
Prakash, S and Saran S (1966). Static and Dynamic Earth Pressures Behind
Retaining Walls. Proc 3rd Symposium on Earthquake Engineerlng, University
of Roorkee, India, Vol 1, pp 277-288.
Prakash, Sand Nandakumaran, P (1979).
Earthquakes.
Proc.
second US NatiQnal
Engineering, Stanford University.
Rankilor, P R.
Chichester, 1981.
(1981).
Membranes
in
Engineering,
Wiley,
Principles of Soil
Mechanics.
Addison-Wesley
Terzaghi, K (1943).
pp 129-130.
L
L,
L
l:
1
H
--1"1
90
Vesic, A S (1975).
Bearing Capacity of Shallow Foundations.
Foundation
Engineering Handbook, edited by Winterkorn, H F and Fang, H Y, van
Nostrand Reinhold Co, New York, pp 402-417.
Werner, P Wand Sundquist, K J (1949).
On Hydrodynamic Earthquake
Effects, Transactions, American Geophysical Union, Vol. 30, No.5,
October.
Westergaard, H M (1933).
Water Pressures on Dams During Earthquakes.
Transactions, ASCE, Vol. 98, pp 418-433.
['
~- ,
White, R E (1974).
Anchored Walls Adjacent to Vertical Rock Cuts.
Proceedings of the Confererree on Diaphragm Walls and Anchorages, London~
pp 181-188.
Wood, J H (1973).
Earthquake Induced Soil Pressures on
Report No. EERL 73-05, Earthquake Engineering Research
California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California.
Structures.
Laboratory,
Wood, J H (1985).
Earthquake Pressures on Monol ithic Bridge Abutment
Walls, Report No. M1.85/3, Central Laboratories, Lower Hutt.
WORKS (1982).
Site Investigation (Subsurface).
COP 813/B Works and
Development Services Corporation (NZ) Ltd, Wellington.
84 p (currently
being revised).
WORKS (1988). Specification for the Manufacture and Erection of Concrete
Cribwalling.
CD 209:1988.
Works and Development Services Corporation'
(NZ) Ltd, Wellington. lOp.
Wu, T H (1975). Retaining Walls, Foundation Engineering Handbook, Edited
by Winterkorn and Fang, Van Nostrand, Reinhold Co, New York.
I:
f'
IC-
,1-:
I:
r'
[
I~
L
I, :
~:
l
I
I,
L
I~
I,:
I;
I'
,---
'f!'
IT
1-,--
'.~
'~-':-l
---,-; :---,-
NOTES
1.
2.
Adequate drainage is assumed - otherwise lateral hydrostatic water pressure would have to be included.
3.
Virtual Back..----../
of Wall
~
....'..
'
Earth
Pressure
Distribution
~ ~.~
:.:~:;
:....... ~;i
."
~.
PAY
: :t
:lLt
it-'
PAH
Componenfs
::,00';
of
PA
HI
,~
Pia ne
of
Sliding
i
FIGURE I.
I
I
!'
BACKFILL SLOPE
[~:
[.
I
I
I
r~:
!90~<p
H
3
Q(.A
A
FAILURE PLANES FOR
RANKINE'S ACTIVE STATE
PRESSURE ON
PLANE A-AI
~cts
VERT
at the slope of
ACTIVE PRESSURE
PA
= KA
where sin
KA =
- sin
+ sin
= s~n
sIn
w with 0<
~
<90 0
H2
Pp = Kp Y T
= cos
I,
L!
L
1
J:
cp
PASSIVE PRESSURE
Kp
1.
For w = 0
[-'
L.
H2
"2
.[ :
.[
~
Note the angle between the fai lure planes for the passive pressure case is
90 0 + ~.
For w = 0
Kp
- sin
J-,
.[
+ sin p
~
FIGURE 2.
,
"
1~
il
[.
RANKINE
f '
,:
FOR
ACTI VE
EARTH
COHESIONLESS
SOIL
(c~o)
PRESSURE
WITH
COEFFICIENTS
UNIFORM
SLOPING
BACKFILL.
r.
PRESSURES . ON
A VERTICAL PLANE.
~
1_'
-
.-
.!- -
j-
~- -!- -r--t-t--r-I
['
-~
080
L
[,
070
l.
[
I'
[
t:
040
l~
. 030
L
~:
[-
020
BACKFILL
SLOPE
WO
-+-H-J-I--I-HH-
RANKINE
SOIL
EARTH
WITH
PRESSURE
COHESION
HORIZONTAL
GROUND SURFACE
Tension zone
neglected
AI
I
---------
:A"
<l>
KA 'Y (:z - Z 0
45 _/2 145-<1>/2
PA
-.-!---..IIIIIt--''t---
A
FAILURE PLANES FOR
RANKINEI S ACTIVE STATE
PRESSURE ON VERTICAL
PLANE A-AI
ACTIVE PRESSURE
PA
= t KA
K
A
=1
Y (H - r
0 )
- sin <p
l+sin<p
2c tan (45 0 + L)
'"
Zo = -Y
= KA
Y(Z- 2'0)
PASSIVE PRESSURE
PP
= t Kp
Y H2
+ 2 cH ~
.1 :
K =1 + sin <p
p
1 - sin <p
.l "
.l
NOTE:
The angle between the fai lure planes for: the passive case is 90 + <p.
l_
FIGURE
j.
il'
l
COULOMB EARTH PRESSURE
COHESIONLESS
CONSTANT
SOIL
BACKFILL SLOPE
plane
surface
'[
'I'
[
ACTIVE PRESSURE ON
, BACK OF WALL.
The fol lowing equations give only an 'approximate' solution for the earth
pressure when static equilibrium is not fully satisfied.
The departure
from an 'exact' solution is usually very sma) I for the active pressure case
but passive resistance may be dangerously overestimated.
ACT! VE PRESSURE
KA
cot (aA- w)
cos 2 ( -/3)
cos2 /3 cos (0:r13)(1 +
in(4)+O) sin(cp-w)
cos(o+/3) cos(w-/3)
= -tan (~+o+/3-w)
PASSIVE PRESSURE
Kp
for 0
= cos 2
cos 2 ( +13)
/3 cos (0+/3)[1 _
In 4>-0) sin(p+w)
cos(o+/3) cos(w-/3)
= wand a = 0,
Kp - Rankine's value
FIGURE
.1 '
COULOMB
FOR
ACTIVE
EARTH
COHESIONLESS
SLOPI NG
SOIL
PRESSURE
WITH
COEFFI.C I E NTS
"['
UNIFORM
8ACI(FI LL.
['
t'
f30
~_.-,--+
.'
: r'
(;J0
09
--l
1-'
[C'
08
[
L__
0-7
,[
L.
-!-~H-t-+t-I-H-t-H--H-H-t-
I.
L~
J.
'I'
04
'J _ ,
03
I FIGURE
~.--..------.-
COULOMB
FOR
ACTIVE
EARTH
COHESIONLESS
SLOPI r~G
SOIL
[JriESSURE
WITH
COEFFI.C I E NTS
UNIFORM
8ACI<FI LL.
t- t-
-r-
--l 'r.
-+-l-+-li I .f-~
I-H--H--+-+--il
-RD
H-+-l
::
( S -- 2/3 c/))
t
+-+-, I
1-++-1-1-,
=A
09
H-+-f-HIIJ' r-
f-!1
t=' --
o-~r-ti,1 t=
08
- 1/I
'-.:
....
II
~II--:=
1_
H-f+-t-+-IH-HII-
r~~~~l~++~~~~I
HH++~H++~-H-rr+h~HII-
07"
10
20
30
"
FIGURE
I
COULOMB
FOR
ACTIVE
EARTH
COHESIONLESS
PRESSURE
SOIL
WITH
COEFFI.C IE NTS
UNIFOHM
r~
BACKFILL.
SLOPING
= 35
l~'
0
0'9
I:
-J
0,8
t'
lC~
H
0-7 .
l~'
L
[
l~.
l~:
I
j:
03
r:
L
J
01
-20
-"-10
BACKFI LL
,0
SLOPE
10
U)
20
30
40
FIGURE
l'
i.,I' .
I
['
COULOMB
[~
FOR
['
l~
08
0-7
06
r.
05
r-'
r'
I.
I'
1_:
I'
I~
.L
I_
BACKFILL.
SOIL
PR.ESSURE
WITH
COEFFI.C I E NTS
UNIFORM
~. - ;- --j-
[:
f-'
EARTH
COHESIONLESS
SLOPING
['
ACTIVE
03
t-, _
I
==
:= == ~ i
1-1
_1-r-
:ll-.~
t-_~'-
I-+-+-+--I--H
It--+-I----l- -
-H-++-I--t-t--H- -j-
If
Err -t:
t--
I--
l'
.,[""',
~ ,- - .' '
P
-p-
-+-\
~\
~~------.
A
FORCES ACTING ON
WEDGE FOR ACTI V E
AN D
Pp
;' ~o
--~
~A
~~
Rp
--
--. A
______'
'
FORCE TRIANGLE
ACTIVE (FULL LINES)
PASSIVE (DOTTE D)
PASSIVE STATES
I:
NOTES
l:
1.
The lateral earth pressure is obtained by selecting a 'number of
trial fai lure planes and determining corresponding values of PA (or
Pp ).
For the active pressure case, the maximum value of PA is
required and for the passive case, the minimum Pp is required. These
I imiting values are obtained by interpolating between the values for
the wedges selected.
2.
Culmannls construction (fIgure 12) may be used to determ'ine the
maximum value of PA and critical fai lure plane for cohesionless soi Is.
I .
L
1:
3.
Lateral earth pressure may be calculated on any surface, or plane
th rough the so i I .
The trial wedge method may al'so be used for a level or constantly
6.
sloping ground surface, in which case it should yield the same result
as that given by Rankine's or Coulomb's equations, whichever is
applicable.
Il
l_:
4.
See clauses 3.3.1 to 3.3.5 for the direction of the earth pressure.
5.
FIGURE II.
TRIAL
WEDGE
COHESION LESS
cULMANN'S
METHOD
SOIL
CONSTRUCTION
[
[:
PROCEDURE
1.
2.
Draw trial wedges ABCD1, ABCD2, etc. - a minimum of four wil I usually
suff ice.
3.
Calculate the weights of the wedges - say wI' w , etc., and plot these
to a suitable scale on A-G, each measured from z
A.
4.
Through wI' w2 ' etc., draw I ines at an angle ~, (see text for direction
of PA and hence_~), to intersect A-1, A-2, etc., at H, J, etc.
5.
6.
7.
[:
L
:r:
..t.
-j
:.11
FIGURE 12
I: -,
,
TRIAL
WEDGE
COHESION
IRREGULAR
GROUND SURFACE
surface on which
pressure is
calculated, ~I
........,,.....-....!.-----("
Dept h of
Tension zone
't!-.
z: = 2c tan(45+~)
'Y
--
~
R
NOTES
VcXL
COMBINATION OF
FORCE POLYGONS
TO OBTAIN MAX. PA
1.
The above example shows 'Rankine's conditions but the same principle
appl ies for Coulomb's conditions. (Adhesion on the back of the wall is
ignored) .
2.
l~
3.
4.
; l_,
5.
The trial wedge method may be used for a level or constantly sloping
ground surface.
i
!
J,\
FIGURE 13.
TRIAL
WEDGE
AND
METHOD
POREWATER
LAYERED
,I
SOIL
r'
PRESSURES
r:
TRIAL
-~
WEDGE
Jf
.-
r .
/
/
/
/
/
f:
/
/
/'
TRIAL
FAILURE WEDGES
r:
PRESSURE DISTRIBUTION
ON A-B
,r
.I~
PAl
,'"
\
\
\
\
~
01
WI
,L
\
\
\
.r :
TRIAL WEDGE I
W""
Q Itl
. :' /'"
/:'
Rz
Pw
PAZ
\ R'Z
WII1
\
\
.,.1 .
HI \
U I "'I
/~~',',
U2
~ I /
y.-~
.<~,~
.@
~14 X
~WII:I h
~[
ell
ON LAYER I
I.
~.L ,
ON LAYER 2
TRIAL WEDGE II
~L
J
1
porewater
pressures
FIGURE 14
8
PROCEDURE
1.
HI
~istance
.[
A)
METHOD FOR
APPROXIMATE
OF
RANKINE
EARTH
DIRECTION
PRESSURE
B
f---INNER FAILURE
SURfACE
[~'
i)
RANKIN::
S=uJ
I
I-1OVES WITH WALL---i-t-.A
(I)
i i) COULOMB
s=_
(2)
J
I
,l
l'
w) where 51 n
sin w
.~I
FIGURE
\5
_.-.!rm7:7A\\---7.71T/..X~\'(~IA~"T-I----=--;;;;>
lil\v)A\\
--
-------
F___
------T
~g.
of
ABA'
PROCEDURE
1.
Draw a I ine through the c.g. of wedge AA" CDEF parallel with the
previously obtained fai lure plane, to intersect A-A' at point X.
(For constant backfi II slope, A-X = 1/3 A-A"),
For cohesionless
soi Is the total wedge between the fai lure plane and the ground
surface is used.
2.
3.
OF
OF ACTIVE
/""----- ~
Failure plane
/ - - c.g. of wedge
A All CDEF
surface on
which pressure
is co leu late d
POINT
t:2
/lXWm:-.
APPLICATION
NOTE:
PRESSURE
PRESSURE)
FIGURE 16
~"7:l:
.0,
...
~;.~
~,.:
r=-'..
r'--
.--'----,
_i
_.- _ , ..... r - - - -
.-
~,~,
.
.
.J
--.
- , :-----l '
....--'----,
~."
POINT OF APPLICATION
OF RESULTANT PRESSURE
AND PRESSURE DISTRIBUTION
r:
[~
surcharge
f'
20
/j
yo
/1/
hi
~I
PA
hi
Pressure 'I.
surface 2'
hi
Y
hi
A
TRIAL
A
PRESSURE ON A-8
WEDGES
Use when the ground surface is very i rregu I ar or when a non-un i form
surcharge is carried.
PROCEDURE
l~
L
[
1.
2.
3.
4.
N.E!. WATE.R.
FORCE.~ MU~T.
6E CON~\DcRt:D
(belo~
the depth
~o
SEPAR:.ATELY.
FIGURE 17
~
REDLICTION FACTOR, R,
01: Kp I-:-Ol~ V t\l-{ lOllS
RAIIUS OF-
6/
-(). '1
10
_978
1--'----::---1-=
. - --
15
.%1
-0. (j
-0.5
-0.4
- 0.3 -0.2
.962
.934
.9 l 16
.907
.929 .912
.8811.854
.1:391:3
.830
-(). 1
-0.0
.881
.803
.TiS
.H6/1
20
.93Q .901 .8b2 .A24 .?A? .752 .716 .678
...-------t---:-:- - - ---:-1-'--.--::--+-----1'-----1
~S
I - - - - - - -.91:~
- - - -.8(iO
- r - -.80S
. - _ ...'1St)
_. _ _.711
_ _. '_'.uuG
___ '.620
_ _ 1- .5'74
__
30
.H78
.Bll
.74u
.ti86
.627
.574
.520
_467
I - - - - - - / - - - - - t - - - - t - . - - . - ... ----.
.-. ___
_-----'-35
.8Jb .752 .1l'74 .603 .536 ~~7._5 .417 .Ju2
.783
. 5q~ _') 1L ...llJ()
.. 17S
. J I u . __..2G~
1-'---_. - -.118:2
"' __ '_______
._____
. __
.718 .()no .500 ./114.JYJ .276 .n1
.174
~I---_____
[.
['
I'
I-
UJ
u:
LL
UJ
[:
~/P:-O,9
<:
UJ
a:
:J
V1
V1
UJ
[.
a:
a.
UJ
>
I-
[.
LL
0
I-
UJ
u:
LL
UJ
If,
DEGREES
FIGURE 15
.f
[,
ft /0
0
F~EOUCT
H.
I ON FACTOR.
or; Kp
OF
RAT IDS
t'
1()
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
.978
.901
.939
.912
.878
.836
.783
.718
.962
.934
.901
.860
.811
.752
.682
.GOO
I
-0.2 -0.1
.898 .881
.830 .803
.752 .716
.666 .620
.574 .520
.475 .417
.375 .316
.276 .221
0.0
. 86LI
.775
.678
.574
.467
.362
.262
.174
14~-+~4-+-~~-+-r~+-r-~~V~I~L'l~hlM-~
['
t:
11 I--l--+--+---+-+--t--t--t--t---r--t----r--t-.
~'.f--
10
9 !---
::~
~"'~
~
g:
~
~
ct.
~
w
iJ
itUJ
o
u
~
!:)flr.
:x:
f--
6 ~
f--
l.5-1l/;
..........
I
~,
..........
-,.
o,=KpYH
___
LFAllURE
)<.
~/Q = -11
'R:0.811
3 I--
L~" 0/
~/,/.
:Z
r/
1/
V /
J V
1/ v
P1'=P,sin~ ~~ V /
rI VV
III
41- EXAMPLE:Q:30';j!>=-10;~/Q=-fjIfIVV
t - Kp: R( Kp FOR
~~~
I JV IV
v
V/v I
~~VV
II
1 ~
V If
SURFK.E/-+t--+I/t-I/-Ir-i-ir~l
......---t..OGARITHMIC
I
SPIRAL
I I /
_LL
FORv/~=-1
::
V V
PASSIVE PRESSURE
----\~/
IL
~Q
13 I---=-f-+-+-+-+-+--t--t--t--t--t---t-t-Jf
12 I--l--+-+-+-+-+--t--t--+-::-=f=-+-+--r-~,
1L
V V
t-.--lf-t--t-j-ft-i
y.
I
II
II
'(t
lL
r--t-"'"i't--t-1
I.r
.
I~
V
lL
L9/
..Y--t---H
iLL V VI ~
/V VV /V
l,
l:
l,
l_,
FIG URE 13
q=57kN/m
U11
10
10
20
o~
30
40
50
CRITICAL
DEPTH
Ze Iml
COMPACTING I-4ACHmE
0.5
10.2 t
E
a..
0.5~
20.0
*3.3i
VIBRATORY ROLLER
052
19.0
*'.4 t
VIBRATORY ROLLER
0.35
12.5
400, kg
VIBRATORY PLATE
COMPACTOR
0.45
16.0
120 kg
0.32
11.5
[,
"
1.0
HAXII-IUI-4 HORIZONTAL
EARTH PRESSURE
fS"ho 1-4A~.1 kN I m2 1
1.5
UI
j~hO= KAfS"y
(EARTH PRESSURE
DUE TO WEIGHT OF
\ BACKFILL) .
2.0
<rho MAX = 20 kNlm 2
'I~ ]
HOTE.
*
(A)
I'
..J
UI
cr'hm:
J ~f
..J
..J
..J
..J
,,:!
_ _ cr'h'= 2pKA
U.
u::
7IZ
..J
-._cr'h .. ~AlSZ
i.i:
['
RESUlTANT PRESSURE
DISTRIBUTION
..J
UI
en
Ifhm:
:I:
...0-
:I:
tUI
c
foP
IZ>Zc I
FOR Z>h~CI'"h=KAIZ
W
C
I:
AFTER COI-lPACTION.
UI
..J
..J
i.i:
3:
0
..J
.c:
Ze
"hm= Jt
:g Cl'.~
:I:
~
a..
UI
c
J~
'Jf
C1'h:KAl'h
(8.)
EARTH
COMPACTION PRESSUR ES -
PRESSURE
DUE, TO
COMPACTION
FIGURE 20
It
f'
J'
Slewarl Island
after 02 4203;1989
FIGURE 21
I
1-
r'
I'
[--
t'
[
[
((0) Ww
l'
or NW w----+--+------,
[
[:
l;
where,
N.g
L.
= Threshold
acceleration for
outward movement
L:
[
['
L,
l
l_~:
8T ABILITY ANAL Y818 OF RETAINING WALL
UNDER EARTHQUAKE LOADING
FIGURE 22
I_I
r~
0-0
f'
.-----------~--__,
0'2
r'
......... 04
J'i.J
l~'
t: - depth below
retained ground
surface. (see B
below).
0-6
r'
OS
[
050
r.
075
',00
"25
1-50
L
r:
A.
eq-)
['
f
>
P(t:)
[~
H
r:
L
l
,
L
r
=l5e(0)~H
B.
r,
'
L.
FIGURE 23
"
I~
I':
H
..
[ :'
l
[~
.....
4-
-+-
OJ
.-
d
OJ
::J L.
0- u
OJ
..cxE
OJ
..c
OJ
.~
-+U
..cc
td
OJ
L.
OJ
L.
::J
4-OOJ
4- L.
a.
[
[:
l'
l_
L
l:
[.
l~
l
L
l:
L
1:
EQUIVALENT WALL HEIGHT .FOR ESTIMATING
EARTHQUAKE EARTH PRESSURES FOR WALL WITH
SLOPING BACKFILL
FIGURE 24
~:
~I
:r--
,I
.~
I~
.l.
H
~ .
------
LPE
H
2
["
[
P(~l=0-75C(O)oH
A.
Stiff Wall
[
[
[-'
~
[.
!--:
H
6.PAE
=~ LKAE '6H 2
1_,
I.
B.
[- ~
I,.
[
FIGURE 25
MONONOBE-OKABE EARTHQUAKE
EARTH PRESSURE
COHESIONLESS SOIL
CONSTANT BACKFILL
H
........
'.,
..... !
'.1 .:
: \ : ;
.~ ~;:'~
. : )..
A
FAI LURE
PLAN E FOR
EARTHQUAKE LOADING
ACTIVE EARTHQUAKE
PRESSURE ON A-B
ACTI VE PRESSliRE
= tan- 1 ((0)
cot (aAE-w)
sin(cp+a) sin(iD-w-8)
cos(a+S+8) cos(S-w)
J2-
= -tan
(~+o+S-w)
+ sec
(~+a+S-w)
NOTES
1.
2.
4.
For the determination of the point of appl ication of PAE, the total
active earthquake pressure is divided into two components, PA
(from static loading) and the dynamic increment, 6P AE = PAE - PA.
PA and 6PAE are applied at 1/3H up the wall. This assumes a flexible wall and
sufficient movement to give active pressures.
.3.
ON
FRICTION
MAY
THE.
e,c.
E.ARTH
PRE.~5U~:" I~
J.,
.t_
CALC.Ul...AT~D
WALL
r-~~----------~
J.
~r
I
J'
r~
['
Horizontal Backfill
WALL FRICTION I
['
2.4
['
.l-~
2.2
+----~----_+---_+---_t_~--_+_~
2.1
+-----+----_+----+--+-~--f______j
1.9
+-----+-----+-----+---r-~-_f_-_
1.8
+-------+-----+------+---t--~~{__-~
1. 7 +-----+-----+-------;-----:;------'--f---___/_'
1.6 -t-----+-----i-----+-r------"7'--------:r---i
r-.
2.
1.5
+-----+-----+----~<----T-t--~__j
"
w
1.4
+-----+----_+_--~r__;_-_;>r_r_---r-_r_--T-;
L:
2.3+-----~----+------+--~~--~~
2+-------+----_+------+---.r-~-_7~__j
l'
[~
S =
-,-----~---___.---___r--_.____,--__,__,
1.3-t-----r---_+_-~r-_T-~-~r-~~~
<l
1.2
y:
-t-----+-----i---:?'------;..,...---7"''---7--?'''---7''~
1.1-!------c----~--'7""'----7-___:::~---:..-.---:;~,---'--
1+------+--~-_+_~--=~_=~-=~,-----~
0.9
-+-----=---=----:;>....-=--+--=-""''''--~~-=-~'''------;----
0.8
-+--=----=--==---=---=--~=---~=::;...~--------t---
O. 7
-i-----:==--'O:=--:::;,;.--==----=::>---=:=--:""=------7-------;---~
0.6
-+---====-~~=----+----+---~----
[,
0.5
-+-----+-----+-----+---~----
0.4
+-----+-----'--+----+---~-----j
[,
0.2
0.4
I.
t'
I.
l~
L
1
1__ .
FIGURE 27
Sloping Backfill
[AJ
SOIL FRICTION.
tI
0
.....,
0
"'w
1.5
I
I
-,!
<t:
<l
./
-!.----
'/
2.5
[,.
r..
WALL FRICTION I
20;
3.5
[-
11
__7
0.2
0.4
f_:,
r'
~~
I.
f:
3.5
2.5
r..
0
.....,
0
"'w
<t:
y
<l
1.5
0.5
-+-----+----+-----t-------t------1
o+-----+----+-----t---------t------1
o
0.2
0.4
EARTHQUAKE ACCELERATION COEFF. C(O)
I:
l'
l
SOIL FRICTION,
f:,
ill]
----,,'
0.5
FIGURE 28
/1
,I
Sloping Backfill
f~
SOIL FRICTION.
30
0
;
4~-----~------~~----.-.r--_.-.------.
l~
.[
3.5 + - - - - - + - - + - - - - - I - - _ + _ - - - t - - - - - l - - - - 4 - _ _ t _ - - - _ _ j
3+---~r-__+----+-_+_---.r__j---~-__t_---~
2.5 - l - - - - I - " - - - - - l - - - - . t - - - _ + _ - - - - f - - _ I I _ _ - - - j - - - t - - - - - - - - j
['
2-l--------l~~----_+_~--_I~~--_+_-----_I
['
r~,
1+---~~=----_+_---~~=----_+_----~
0.5
+---------+------_+_-------l------_+_----~
O~I-------+-----,I-------r----~-----~
0.2
0.4
>
l-'
Sloping Backfill
SOIL FRICTION.= 35
0
;
WALL FRICTlON)
8:
4.------,,----r.---~_.---_.-._---_._.
3.5 - j - - - - - t - - I - - - - t - - r - - - - - - I - -__I - - - - - - - i l - - - ; - - - - - - t - -
r:
2.5 +----/--------+----.'----_+_---/------+---f---1---I------1
I>
I.
2T-----~r----~----~~----~-----~
1.5
-+--:7""'--------l--:~--_+_~.,------j__:~--__t_---------j
I:
[~
[-- .
I
L:
1:
0.5 - t - - - - - i - - - - - - t - - - - - - - - l - - - - - - - t - - - - - - i
O-t-----i-----t---------l------t-------i
0.2
0.4
FIGURE 29
f"
r:
r~
Sloping Backfill
SOIL FRICTION,
o=-
4~------~----~~----~1~~--~--~----~-'
I
3.5 -l----------l-------+___+-----+--+-----+----+-----f-----..;
3-l----------+---~+-___+----~--+__--+_--_+_--~--___..;
2.5
+--------+----f-~__+--_f_----i__+_----_+__+_------!
2+-------~------~~--~-ri__----~~----~~
1.5
--L-~----_+___y<C------+~------~----____=_..-'f"o----------I
r:
,"
L
I'
L
t
0.5 - 1 - - - - - - - - - + - - - - - - - - - + - - - - - - + - - - - - - - - + - - - - - - - - - - 1
O+-------~------__+------+__------_+_------~
-l :
0.2
0.4
l.
-[
~[:
FIGURE 30
r'
cr'
r
1.
L
1"
l-'
Horizontal Backfill
WALL FRICTION, & =
Z/o
2.42.3
2.2
2.1
2
1.9
1.8
1.7
1.6
""
a
1.5
"w
1.4
'-'"
()
<{
:,::
1..3
<l
1.2
1.1
[,
O.B
0.9
0.7
I,
[
0.6
0.5
0.4
0
0.2
O.4.
'.'
~,
I:
l~
1_ .
l~
1__.
I.
I:
I
FIGURE 31
,...,c.
Sloping Backfill
[A]
4-
SOIL FRICTION,
!/
"..,
'--'
u
, "'w
<l
1.5
V
I
0.5
2/3 tp
;}
2.5
20;
3.5
I
J
---
J
I
0.2
0.4
Sloping Backfill
[ill
SOIL FRICTION,
4-
I
3.5
"..,
'--'
"'w
<l
25;
2.hP
I
I
7
)
/
r
V V
/
J_~[7
l
2.5
1.5
./
----
I
I
-I
0.5
0.2
0.4
FIGURE 32
[ .
Sloping Backfill
SOIL FRICTION,
I:
30;
WALL FRICTION,
6 ~ ZI3 y{
4~------~------~~----'-1I----'--'--------'
3.5 -I--------I-+-----+--+-----+---+-----t---I"--------I
3+-----~_+----~r-+_----+-_r----~~------~
2.5 -I-----/---__I_-----/----+_---+---+-----I---t---------I
[~
2~~----__I_--~----+_--~-~---/---~-----____l
:[~
1.5
+-------:"...c--+------~+-------:~------~___7_------1
[~
0.5
[,
~
0
0
0,.1
0.2
EARTHQUAKE ACCELERATION COEFF.
ill]
r~
C(O)
Sloping Backfill
SOIL FRICTION,)25= 35;
WALL F;:(ICTION, ~=
2./3 9f
I
I
3.5
r-:
2.5
1_
,......
c
0
'-J
[:
""-w
<l
1.5
r :
I~
[:
0.5
-G;;2E======I~-L-~
o+-------+--------+------~-----~-----~
[~
0.2
0,4
FIGURE 33
rv
[:
l"
t'
t
[]
l'
Sloping Backfill
SOIL Fx~GTION.
.,.
40;
2.13
t-'
3.5
L
l'
2.5
r"\
0
......
""w
4:
::s::
<1
'!
1.5
l'
[:
0+1------~------_4------~------~------~
0.2
0.4
[:
[~
"[
~[:
-L
,1.
MONONOBE-OKABE ACTIVE EARTHQUAKE
EARTH PRESSURE INCREMENTS FOR
VERTICAL WALLS
FIGURE 34
~t,
F\
~~ \
r:
["
r~
f'
f'
-14
WALL FRICTION
2
1.9
1.8
r'
1.7
("".,1;,I,:'r'.
1.6
,[
1.3
1.5
1.4
r,
'-'
[~
u
"w
<{
~
<l
t'
[-'
1.2
1.1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
l_:
0.1
l:
0.2
0.4
l
l.
,t~
l~
l
f.
FIGURE 35
[AJ
SOIL FRICTION,
2.5
r.
'0
v
""w
<
~
<J
1.5
:L/3c;i
;;1'"
"l~
ij
/
~
-14
1
I
~
-
=0
I
I
3.5
='
;
V
r'
I
I
['
r~
0.5
0.2
0.4
,[
[ill
~O/
2.5
r.
""W
<
~
..,
L
I
T
1
I
1
I
1.5
----
0.5
I
I
/
/ V
~~
<l
.I
T
3.5
j/
, ,r :
l:
L
L
l
[
o
o
0.2
0.4
FIGURE 36
L
l
L
:-1
[J
d~
SOIL FRICTION,
= -
'14
.1.
3.5
{:
2.5
[-
,...,
a
'-"
['
"w
.q:
~
<l
1.5
t:
r.
0.5
. 0
0.4
0.2
[--
[ill
1-'
C(O)
0
c;i =
S =2.A,
ri
3.5
1- :
Ii
[-~
2.5
,...,
a
'-"
l~
l'
"w
<l
1.5
[.
1_:
O+I------~------~------~------~------~
I_~
I~
0.2
EARTHQUAKE ACCELERATION COE=-F.
0.4
C(O)
FIGURE 37
Jt~
r-',
l
l~
I~
IT]
)25 =
3.5
l~'
8 = '2/3 p{
l:
2.5
'"
0
'-J
"w
l_,
<{
Y:
<1
1.5
r:
L'
O+-------+-------+-------~------~----~
0.2
0.4
"l'
~l
~~
'
-';
,t,
~J,
.... :1
~L
MONONOBE-OKABE ACTIVE EARTHQUAKE
EARTH PRESSURE INCREMENTS FOR
NON- VERTICAL WALLS
FIGURE 38
,l
:f
if
'f
if'
:I'
SOIL
IRREGULAR
GROUND
:I~
..
SURFACE
7"AW/.
"[
.", .~
.: ....
C(O)W
:, ,0
::'..~
":.
'.
','
'0, ...
"
"
.:;'
;:,
:: :.
~:~. :":
,:' :.
'I:
'[
l:
r'
"FORCES ACTING ON
TRI AL WEDGES FOR
EARTHQUAKE'
LOADING.
FORCE POLYGON
FOR
TYPICAL
W WEDGE
I.
(:
COMBINATION OF
FORCE POLYGONS
TO OBTAIN MAX.
c(O)W
l
NOTES
PAE.
l_,
1.
The above example is drawn for Rankine's conditions but the principle
appl ies also for Coulomb's conditions.
l.
2.
l.
3.
l:
4.
L.
c.l
FIGURE 39
[I
I~
,:
,:
l.
l'
1.7
1.6
1.5
f\
1.4
1\
..
1.2
1.1
'"
0
.....
Q)
(J
~
z
w
J!
0.9
0.7
:5
a.
a
0.6
(J)
0.8
(J
"\'\
1.3
""
1..
I
I
I
\. I
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
I
I
II
['
I
I
"-
I
I
""',
I
..........
L
L
--- ----+- - I
I
0.5
0.4
RESISTANCE FACTOR
'f'
NOTE: N =
"'-
I
I
""-
0.2
I
I
0.5
\1
~
---
-,
0.8
N/CCo)
L
l:
l:
l:
L
l_:
l
DISPLACEABLE WALL - WALL DISPLACEMENTS
FROM SLIDING BLOCK THEORY
FIGURE 40
,f
1\
r:
r
r
l'
HORIZONTAL BACKFILL;
-1.1
-1.2
-1.3
-1.4
~o
-1.5
-1.6
-1,7
r.
u
"w
0..
Y:
<l
c5
~O"
-1.8
-1.9
-2
-2,1
-2:5
40"
..c..c:..,o
-2.7
-2,9
I
['
"""'" ~
~~I
~
~~~
I
I
I
I
I
"
I
I
"I
I
I
0.4
0.2
EARTHQUAKE ACCELERATION COEFF.
lliJ
----r----~
-2~a
-3
-2:6
."'5
-2,2
-2:'4
----- ---------
-t----
-2,3
l:
f-~
WALL FRICTION = 0
-1
'-/
f'
[ill
C(O)
WALL FRICTION = 0
5.5
5
r-'
4.5
['
. 40
4
w
t:
[~
L_.
0..
Y:
3.5
<J
3
2.5
2
1.5
1_,
o
1_.
I,
I
0.2
EARTHQUAKE ACCELERATION COEFF.
0.4
CeO)
FIGURE 41
[A)
ROTATED WALL
0 n c - - - - - =.. - - - - " ' 1
II
/1
8-
II
PFf!
--------<
"
~ -----------~
i:
lliJ
TRANSLATED WALL
H
H
H
-L--_IU_JJ
3
~'"!------..
t P(i:)= 1 2 Es ~
---
-~
FIGURE 42
+-
{1J
A1111]J1
{1J
{1J
U1
U1
{1J
L+-;:J
.!;
{1J
d'4-L
waD.
+-
{1J
E
{1J
L
u
C
.-
{1J
>
+=
U
ClJ
L.
::J
{1J
'4-..c.
'4- +{1J
U1
U1
{1J
O'4-d L
W
O {1JD.
L
{1J
{1J
..0
d
+-
D.
L.
{1J
{1J
4-
::J
3:
[:
l"
I'
I.
...c
.1:
l:
FIGURE 43
.,
r'
~
l~
.r:
['
From
MO
Equotions
-l:
-[
[
C(o)W - + - - - 1
Ir----Tie anchor
L
~
Assumed PQSSlve
fQilure surfQce
,l.
"
From
MO EquQ tions
..
l:
1:
FIGURE 44
il~
I'
I i=~l-
'" ""
PF
M1~
PL
APe
~c
Pr
P.:
>-
Ps
Ps
~'
[
[
[A]
LOAD
TO
UHITING
BRIDGe:
lliJ
CONNECTION
SUF5iSTRUCTURE
_RIG. :. iOO---,-CO,",-NN,--,E:.::..C;..;..IfO::..;.N~T-=-O
;.'
--=B.:..;.:RI.=..;DG=,
C
SUPERSTRUCTURE
f"
[~,
[-.
r'
~A~~~~r-
fl P;::
PsI
t~=----,-,
L
f--~
____________~
"V'//~,""v//~
CD
DYNAMIC
PRESSURES
OUT OF
PHASE
I:
I:
">'//.<"""//A
>W-<''W#'"'''' \
L.
L
L
AP E1
APE2
PI
PSl--1
[QJ DYNAHIC
PF:2.
PS2
~//A"o///A~
PRESSURES IN
PHASE
~:
1_ ;
FIGURE 45
SURCHARGE
STABILITY
AIDS
UNIFORM SURCHARGE
~ VIRTUAL
~ VIRTUAL BACK
I
I
I
OF
OF WALL
I
LOADING 2.
LOADING I.
CRITICAL
UNIFORM
WALL
BACK
FOR
STABILITY.
r-
,
,
...---,
~.::~
--------,
~'1~'
. .,
r-:
--I'
l __
.-.~
II
:-l
.~
___ ~ +
NORMAL
CULMANN
LINE -FOR
NORMAL CASE
SURFACE ON WHICH
PRESSURE IS CALCULATED
~
/~
d'x
~
6'/
/~
9 X
?"~
<;)
(./
Ii';<
~..1
ANALYSIS
SAME
AS
THE
LOAD
ADDED. TO
OF
LINE
FOR
STANDARD
THE
CASE, UNTIL
INDIVIDUAL
TRIAL
TRIAL
PI
EARTH
PRESSURE
WEDGE
WEDGE
= ACTIVE
INCLUDES
WEIGHTS
LINE
LOAD.
INCREASES
THE VALUE
P "
A
TR IAL
WEDGE OF ACTIVE
PRESSURE INCLuDING
LINE
LOAD
FIGURE
47
I
,-,
'~
::>-.
m::0'61~--"
o 2
--
.....
.-."
- - - -..........
,I.........
l~ ~ - -
1- . .-I. . . J
-L
.........
FiJ
m=0'7~
II
0 AT
Vi
l.L..
~I ~m::10'5
3 1---!---+_-l7/~t;-'v-1'-f-'/-t1_-+-I 0 ~4
/ /~I
05
0-8
--
. ';0 H
. 56 H
1
I
~ m ~ (~p) R
"0'4
78 '59H
05
06
60 54H
46 48H
/
/J
02
0'4
06
,-:
l.
tr1/--
0'6', - 52. H
07 48H
~I
~/
;' }
~.
wO' 6
,~
08
'0
'5
VALUE OF Po (J::!...)
"[
QL
X=mH JQL
'1 ~//f:::
IIi.JC
11
--L-
-10.
r-
Po
\
FOG( m
0.4
H
PQ (QL)
0.20n
<O.16+n 2 )2
PQ
.1:
= 0.55QL
" 'II
PRESSURES FROM
LINE
LOAD
QL
P Q(Ji..) -
QL
_~g
For m
1. 28m 2 n
---::2';"=~-:::2
+ n
- (m
0.4
)2
(m 2
1)
1. nm 2 n 2
= (m 2 + n2) 3
x=mH
RESULTANT
Po = KA QL
RESULTANT FORCE
FROM LINE LOAD QL
LOAD Qp
LINE
0.64QL
[AJ
.I~
L
LOAD
[ill
POINT
LOAD
DUE
FIGURE 45
l~
I:
L
,II
~
"
1
~L
,---
:--T'
u--
----
r---'
PA = I<Al' ~
0.8
l
~
PA
PA I (no water)
hw
(AJ STATIC
=I<A-[Y' h +'Y'
-t-
0-4
-~
"~ 0-3
0-2
0
]I" / 0,/
le:!
n:
01
o /'
POREWATER PRESSURE. ON
PLANE AT ANGLE o(A
d. A IS ANGLE
OF ANY
FAILURE PLANE BEING
CONSIDERED
[]] SEEPAGE
'
"(= 98
SUB
kN/m
I~-L
12
14
16 18 20
14
ll.<t
,;::
0.1
+
n.<t
'3
le:!
n:
12
25
VARIATION OF U WITH
ANGLE (f:A
DRAINED
rft3
30
35
40
ANGLE o(A
PRESSURE FOR
//
Z ~ =30
0.2
1-0
90 80 70 60 50 40
IMPERVIOUS
1,./
0'4171IY=19-7 kN/m33
o
tI
/
:r:
06 /
(2 - h)]
WATER PRESSURE
0-5
-;-
"""-"_._"-
0:::.
3"
06
~
'j{
\
. \ PA
IMPERVIOUS
WATER TABLE AT
FOUNDATION LEVEL
I~;~:1I
o
~
hw
IMPERVIOUS
HI
"?;
L
Pw
-'71l:Y7~1
~,"~
,0
INCREASE
OF WALL FORCE
FOR VARIOUS ANGLES ~
WALLS
FIGURE 45
0-5"...
01<.
LAYER OF FILTER
GEOTE..XTILE
MATERIAL
DRAINAGE".,
ME.Me,RAN~
[' ',
00"...
75h"'11"1" MIN. DIA. WEP
HOLES AT 3t'n
CENTRES.
IAI
IMPERVIOUS BACKFILL
BELOW
WEEPHOLE
(EX15TIN6 SOIL)
HESSIAN BAGS
FILLED WITH
O'03 m ?J OF
COARSE AGGREGATE
Li
['
l'
~-
CONSTRUCTION
BATTER
DRAINAGE
MATERIAL
CONCRETE
'CRIBWALL
DRAINAGE
BASE
SLAB
FIGURE 50
r--:
SURFACE WATER
( WIT H FA L L)
l--
COLLECTO~
r:?l
..
'-
.~
GRANULAR BACKFILL
MATERIAL (FREE
DRAINAGE)
."
'.
...
~,
~
It;
:--l
r--'
~ IMPERVIOUS
~
/I
//.lSYJ):2jij
"0 '.,
.. '.
i.' :.::
.... :::
......
.' ':;. " :
'
---
~~
COVER
10'6"",
: 1: '.:
..... !.
CONSTRUCTION
75 ......... Min. Dia. WEEPHOLEC~'i'~
AT 3...... CENTRES TO
SUIT ARCHITECTURAL
FINISH.
HESSIAN BAGS FILLED
WITH O'O~rn~ OF
COARSE AGGRE GATE
BATTER
HOLE THROUGH
COUNTERFORT WHERE
TOP SURFACE OF
HEEL IS LEVEL
ORIGINAL GROUND
DRAINAGE
MATERIAL
Tr_
(WALL DRAIN)
CONCRETE
B,EDDING
50m"", LAYE.R- OF
BLINDING
CONCRETE
DRAINAGE
DETAILS
FOR
BACKFILLED
WALLS
FIGURE 51
100
I:
\.
"
90
r-
(9
1\\'\\\'
.
>CD
70
\I
60
I
I
0:::
w 50
I
I
I
I
Z
l.L
40
1
1
a:: 30
J. l!1
a..
1\
II
1\
~
LJ
10
[.J..
1'-.
\
1\ \ l\l
I
I
1
I
I
I
\\ \
\
\.
.1
I
1
I\.
.1
_1'>
1'\
,,
-'"'\I "
Dol
I '0 I
~ 1 '-~
Illlr
.1
1
I.J.
cx)
<D
.1-,
C\J
<.D
GRAIN
CO
<.0
o 0
SIZE
.1
1
.1
I
1
I
I
I
1
Lli
1
['
I
I
1'-,
r-,
t:::
o co
['
1,\
\.
-"
o;tfQ
1
i
I
.11
III!)
~
1"-
..l
00
1
I
I
1 i"'1.
000
1
;
I
1
I
",I
I
1
I
I
_"I.
1\
1
I
'\
I'
\.1
'\1 , ' I
JI
1.
'\
I\.
'I
I
I
II
_\. I\,
!\
I
..Lt
.\. \.1
"'{
I
I
\j
1\
l',.
.i
.i
1\
I
I
I
I
C'\
\.
I
1
1
1
1
i
, I
20
~'
1
I
I
1
1
l'1l'1.\
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
il'l
'-\
, II
II
IJ
I \,,4
I
!--
\ ,\'
L\ _1
s:
..!
\\\
\\\
\\\\.\
\\\ \'
80
-.l
\I
'1'-
"
.1-.
-"" I~ ......
I ..l
o;t ~
C\J
-
co
69
00 o
MILLIMETERS
<D
00
COEFFICIENT OF PERMEABILITY
FOR CLEAN COARSE- GRAINED
10-4r-----.-----------------------~
DRAINAGE MATERIAL.
EFFECT OF FINES ON PERMEABILITY
o
aJ
CI1
10-5Hr~---+------4_------~----~----_4
.:E
~
>-
!-~
m
w
10-b~~~~~__
----~
FINES
<t
a:::
k, m/sec
CURVE
10-7r---~~--~~-=~--+_----_r----~
0.
~ 10-8r------r~~--~----~------F=--~~
!--
3'7",10- 1
2:~ x 10-1
2
3
4
~xl0--4
1 )(,10- 4
6
7
1I< 10-Z.
52.><.10-;3
~5,.;10-~
11 ... ~0-.3
4x10- 4
1 ><.10-4
10
II
I O-~
r-----t----f'o.---'O"'C---t-----f------i
I..L.
I..L.
W
PERMEABILITY
DRAINAGE
OF
MATERIALS
BY WEIGHT PASSING
SIEVE
(after- U5. Department oHhe. Navy I r~5z.)
I.
l.
2:51<10-2.
FIGURE 52
1_.
TYPE
OF
WALL
,!
LOAD
STABI LI TY
DIAGRAM
f'
CRITERIA
. SLI DING
Fs ( sling
I d. )
GRAVITY
S + Pp_
= __
PH
~ ~ 1.5
or
(static loading)
OVERTURNING
Moments about the toe of the base
W"- a + P/f
v
Fs (overturning) = I
PHb
~
SEMI -:
GRAVITY
or
>
BEARING PRESSURE
I..
VERTICAL
STEM
l'
CANTILEVER
=0
Pp
>
SOIL
PRES SUR E.
~ee
Wt
a + P~f - PHb
Wt + P~
assuming Pp
l
l,
l,
L
.l .
= Wt
COUNTER
- FORT.
= total
p"
=, e.FFE.C.T'V~ ve:.~T'C.AL
OF p" .. p" - VB
C,O ....n:>oNe.M,-
FIGURE 53
[,
Q - Concentrated force
h
H
---~--r-PA
Pp
la
L-~I-.:..._---L
Passive
Pressure
_ _ _ _!....-..J..._
0 --''-----'-
[-
Active
Pressure
Factor of Safety
PPN.lpn
Fs =
l pn
PN
[8J
~,
f'
T'
I~
,[
0;;;;;;;0;::=----'---0 -'--'-
Net resisting
pressure
Net activating
pressure
['
l~
L
~---------~------~~--T
Factor of Safety
Fs =
J'
d
Net resisting
pressure
[ill
l
I~
l"
J~
Net activating
pressure
FIGURE 54
J.
1
f~
I
r
!
200~-~--~~--~~--~~~~7~/
160 f---+---+----f---+---f---I---I---jf--.l~1
120~--+---~-I---+--~--~-I--!~J/~jl
J~
1001----~--~~--+__~--1----_I_-111J_7_J7~
80f--~-~-f--+--+-+---,---~"n-7~
~ 60~ __I--~_ _'~-+___~_f-_ _.~V~1
[
;
f'
~ 30f--~~--+-_f---~~I~~i~/--4--~
'[-~
~
___
40f--~--~-+--+--+--+-_/~~~+f;!~.--~
-~,
L
[~~
Vl
~
E
20f--~--+--+--+-~~--41.~~4--4--~
16~-~~~~~N.~c~d~~~~
12~--+---+-~~-1--4'~~+---~--~-~
g 10~--+---~~/+--+--AV-+/-+---~--~--~
V
/11
ga. 8f--~V~~-+--4/~-~-+--+--4--~
~AI
7'Vj
6/
ro
4f---f---+-~~~-4--4--4--4-~
[:
[,
11/i
o
/V/
~y~--~~---~--~
II
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
[,
L
L
[
[
i
-I
FIGURE 55
v
I Ground surface
D ( not greater
than B )
1-<
I
I
)0-\
Equivalent horizontal
basef-~---
[
Eccentricity with
respect to centroid
of founda tion
ex /
!-O(-~I
Eccentricity applied
V
vertical load
....;r'
Inclined load
,l'
,L
,
B'=B-2e x
~,--------)o--
I~-
B'~
1\\I\\II\\\\III\\IIII\IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII~
\pressure distribution
on equivalent base
1-<
.
Point of application
of resultant vertical --force V
-
Centroid of ~
foundation
I \
\-o(..!.~-+-I ~
~.
\ I ~
-~Y t
= BIX LI
-1'I -dr____
I
-----1
FIGURE 56
l'
l[
2.0~----.-----.------.-----rr----.
1.8
...:-
1. 61----+-----+--"7'--+------+----1
u
o
4-
(l)
0-
.c
1.4 1-------1----;--+------:
(J)
1. 2
1----T-+------:;>-4-----::b--=----b~=----=I
sc
tI)>--
...:o
0+-
O. 8
f------+---""-.:--_+_--_t_~___=_--t
'<(l)
0-
.c
(J)
Q6~----+----+------t-~---t-----~
l_
0.4
0.2
0.8
0.6
1.0
Breadth/length, BIL
Approximate values for the shape factor for centrally-applied vertical loading
Shape of base
L:
Continuous strip
Rectangle
Square
Circle (B = diameter)
Sc
Sq
s..,
1.0
l-OAB/L
1.0
1.0
1 +O.2B/L
1 +0.2B/L
1.3
1.3
1.2
1.2
0.8
0.6
l:
ScL
1 +O. 2icLL'/B',
l,
. l_
I
SqL
1 +sin <plqLL'/B',
S...,B
1-0.4i-YBB'/L',
S...,L
1- O.4i...,LL' / B'.
S...,L
FIGURE 57
[-'I
l~:
['
4.0.------r-----y----r------,
5.67
['
3.5 l - - - - + - - - + - - - - v - - - - - - j
['
. 3.0 l - - - - + - - - - Y - - - - t - - - - - - j
3.59
C)
.51----+---.L---:~--t---__j
,...
'+-
2.56
...c:
n..
2. 0
I'
'+-
en
Q)
-:::J
Q)
['
.........
.'--I--k--~-+--::;_;:;_:;;-t---__j
l:
"'~-+--~-J 2.04
L~::'-+----:~11.
1.5
I'
70
l----jfllh4~~i=.:j=2~0~0*=~ 1.65
=0-10 0
['
II
CO
1.58
l:
5
10
15
I,
20
Depth Jbreadth, DJ B
[,
l:
!:
d-y = 1
l_ ;
!:
BRINCH HANSEN BEARING CAPACITY FORMULA
- DEPTH FACTORS
FIGURE 58
I:
I
i
/.
I.
j~
.~
r~
-o
c
o
o
['
u
c
r:
0.2
l~
0.4
H/B'L'c
0.6
0.8
1.0
+ Vtan cp
~[
0.8t---'&:---t---t----1r-----t---l
L'
.~
~ 0.6
l"
U
o
'+-
r'
2o
O.4f----:+--~--r----_t_-__j
o.2t----:+----t---->rk---_t_-__j
['
O~-~--~~~~~~-~
0.2
0.4
0.6
H/V + B'L'c cot cp
l.~.
1.0 .----,-----,---~-.--___,
I:
o.81-~--l---+--+----t----I
[~
1.0
E
0.6 f---\\\-+---+--t------t---j
u
.....o
c
o
0.4 f----1~--+--t----t---j
c
u
0.21----t---\--'"rl---t----:+----i
[.,
OL---J---~--~----~--~
l
I
J.
I
I
"\
0.2
0.4
0.6
H/V + B'L'c cot
0.8
1.0
cp
(after Tomlinson, 1987)
FIGURE
'59
Id
Pt
= 2.4
MT/a 2
L a
:1
WEIGHT OF BACKFILL
ABOVE
HEEL
Wx d
r=ll ! ! 1! ! ! I
SELF
WEIGHT
OF
HEEL
LOADING
FROM
TOE
MOMENT
ASSUMED
BEARI NG
FOUNDATION
PRESSURES
max
RESULTANT LOADING ON
HEEL (May be fully positive)
+VE
-VE
Note:
Pressure
DESIGN
diagrams
LOADING
not
ON
to
scale.
HEEL
SLAB
FIGURE 60
)
i
I'
['
~
, /y
[
l~
[-.
ASSUMED 45
CRACK LINE
FROM 8.
ANCHORAGE
LENGTH
~VALENT
jd FOR MOMENT
-AT 8.
f'
[,
ASSUMED 45
CRACK LINE FROM
A.
A
f.
L
[
The 'cut off' position for some of the bars of the main tensi Ie reinforcement
is to be the greater of:
[.
crackline from A.
r:
'jd' can be taken as the perpendicular distance from the centroid of the
steel to the midpoint of the stem slab.
l_:
l,
L.
l
L
'CUT OFF'
STEEL
IN
POSITIONS
OF
MAIN
TENSILE
COUNTERFORT
FIGURE cOf
TRIPLE
DOUBLE
'!
SINGLE
WALL
WALL
WALL
,">
J
ASSUMPTIONS
~.
Soil properties : ~~
c=o.
~= 19.5 kN/m 3
slope
e =-11."
Water-table below
12
Fs
base
( 4 in 1 )
0
wall
8
-.J
-.J
<{
~
LL
f-
:c
~
I.
:c
Ii ,'/
)
w
n-
-.J
U)
2
f----t--\---t---r---,
L-~
_ _- J_ _
__
.. -
~_~
__
BACKFILL
CRIBWALL
~_-L_-L_~
10
SLOPE
DESIGN
15
__
J-_~
__
~_~_L-~
20
25
(degrees)
CURVES
FIGURE 62
j[
r"
TRIPLE WALL
J'
DOUBLE WALL
SINGLE WALL
['
e
['
10,------,
Assumptions:
l.
9~------+-------~
t'
8~------~~-----+-------'
~:
F (sliding)=1-Smin.
F (overturning)= 20min.
Seismic Coefficient ((0)= 0'2 _
6~------~~----~~----~r-------.
t:
- - - - '::40
- - - - - - '= 30 0
5
E
'-
...J
...J
[:
<t
LL
f-
:r:
!
['
L:J
lL..J
:r:
l~
lL..J
Cl..
_Hz.?
~--
--
---HI'
-- --
a...J
Vl
l~
~,
l~
l
10
15
20
25
FIGURE 63
/32 (-14
GR~'I
TWo
~-------+\I~~~A~~' .~
81 i ding surface -I!liIJi!ff/
-..
P,
H2
P2
NOTES
HI
1.
/"
2.
P2
./'"
0=2/3 ~
3.
.
base
slab
'* 06
03 m for single
m min. for
and
walls
double
tripl e walls.
PRESSURES
r--
ON TYPICAL
,..----,
CRIBWALL
r--'
:--]
FIGURE f?4
----,
,----,
---'
- y - - ~({""IMfl
-~~~
-...I
I
I
----?'
jPH
r:
DEFLECTED
-9-----i
I
I
~~~~/,;+-I
0'25H
f----~-""1_~_
o.
'No' ,,..~ f /
'\
FAILURE
SURFACE
POSITION
EXCAVATION
IN
SAND
EXCAVATION
IN CLAY
L
[:
[:
['
The above apparent pressure diagrams may be used for determining the strut
loads in braced excavations.
EXCAVATION IN
S~~D
The resultant, PH
= 0.65
KA Y H2
EXCAVATION IN CLAY
[.
[.
I,
PH
5< Ns <10
.75 H PH
87 H PH
5H PH
'YH-4C
"(H-{8-4N s .lC
"(H
~H
04 'YH
'25H
50H
<
2< Ns ~ 5
'50H
0
75H
44H
10<N s
20
0
{I'5- '075 N ~ 1H
'.38 H
20<N s
0
0
33H
1FIGURE 65
l
f~
f'
NbC
F (base) = - -
H.
oH+q
['
a=
a=
I"
r:
L= EXCAVATIOO LENGTH
[
l:
l
10
r----.-----.-----r----.-----.----.-----r----~----~--~
l:
l~
l,
I,
9
SQUARE OR
.0
Z
~
0::
CIRCLE
~ =1
o
~
LL
>.....
:J
en
;:f
(f)
J:
'O~----~----~----L----J2----~----~3-----L----~4----~--~5
l:
L
H
B
l:
[,
FIGURE 66
l:
I
I~
~ 0.1
~
-=.c:;,.,.
:>
..::
rc
x
;.;
:':0
f'
tj
x
:::i
12:
0.1.
r-----
1.0
c: U
C)
E
c;
c.;
(J)
..::
,.,.
'.
L
1.0
2.0
1.5
t"
:'j
3.0
.- .....
:; C
3.0
::;
lone
1.0
:>
'-<l
ZonE.' I I
al
"j)
!..'"J
~
1J
2)
rc
:J
~
.-2
:J.
( b) SETTLEMENT DATA
bi
et aI, 1976 J
Note
ZUII"
oH
simPlifiedT
settlcmp.nt
profi I e
\ ,
I
( c)
t.
whC'("(:' Nt ) "cb
--
--
Struts
lateral
movements
base heave
I II
l'
l:
S(!ttlc'n1('nts dffE-cted by
construction difficulties.
'7T.'~'7'T_; ~ flexible
1--___
side supports
FIGURE 67
I:
1;1
[ :'
"
I:
I';
1:
l'
I':
L
I:'
[:
r:
I,
.I,
.L
J:
J,
.l:
.L
;I I