Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 59

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568

PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement


CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 1 OF 59

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th Terminal Improvement
Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal
1. Obtain Design Criteria
The analysis and design procedures for the retaining wall will be those outlined in the 2012 IDOT Bridge
Manual English, AASHTO 2012 LRFD Bridge Design Specifications (Sixth Edition) through 2013 Interims
.
Seismic Performance Zone (SPZ) = 1
Design Spectral Acceleration at 1.0s (SD1) = 0.086g
Design Spectral Acceleration at 0.2s (SDS) = 0.144g
Soil Site Class = D

1.1 Material Properties


conc 150pcf

Concrete unit weight

f'c 5000psi

Concrete strength at 28 days age

K1 1.0

Correction factor for source of aggregate


(to be taken as 1.0 unless determined by
physical test and as approved by the
authority of jurisdiction)
(AASHTO LRFD Article 5.4.2.4)

ag 0.75in

coarse aggregate size

conc
Ec 33000 K1

1000pcf
1

1.5
3

f'c ksi 4.29 10 ksi

0.85 if f'c 4.0ksi


0.85

0.05
ksi

f'c 4ksi

if 4ksi f'c 8ksi

Concrete elastic modulus


(AASHTO LRFD Eqn. 5.4.2.4-1)
Ratio of the depth of equivalent uniformly
stressed compression zone assumed in
the strength limit state to the depth of the
actual compression zone (LRFD 5.7.2.2)

0.65 otherwise
1 0.8
fy 60000psi
Es 29000ksi

Steel yield stress


Steel elastic modulus (AASHTO LRFD
Article 5.4.3.2)

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 2 OF 59

1.2 Reinforcement Steel Cover Requirements


Covers 2in

Stem back cover

Coverft 2in

Footing top cover

Coverfb 3in

Footing bottom cover

1.3 Soil Properties


Water 62.4pcf

Unit weight of water

Soil 120pcf

Soil unit weight (use average of loose and


compacted gravel)

SoilLS 125pcf

Soil unit weight of Live load surcharge

Ka 0.53

Obtained from geotechnical information


and in accordance with IDOT Bridge
Manual Article 3.11.2.2 for "T-type" walls,
using an angle of internal friction of 30
degrees.

1.4 Footing Bed Properties (Clay)


Su 6ksf

Undrained shear strength

Kp 0

Passive pressure coefficient

q all 10ksf

Allowable bearing capacity

q uall 15ksf

Ultimate bearing capacity

2. Retaining Wall Dimensions


2.1 Retaining Wall Stem Dimensions
Hstem 21.75ft

Stem wall height

Tstem_bot 2.50ft

Stem wall thickness at foundation

Tstem_top 1ft 3in 1.25 ft

Stem wall thickness at top

Tformliner 0in

Formliner thickness

Hkey 0ft

Shear key height

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 3 OF 59

2.2 Footing Dimensions


Wpcap 19.75ft

Footing width

Dpcap 4ft

Footing depth

Wpctoe 2ft

Footing toe width

Wpcheel Wpcap Tstem_bot Wpctoe 15.25 ft

Footing heel width

2.3 Sidewalk, Approach Slab, Parapet and Railing Loads


Tappslab 15in

Approach slab thickness

Lappslab 30ft

Approach slab length

DCappslab Tappslab conc

Lappslab
2

2.81

kip
ft

weight of approach slab transferred to the


wall stem per foot

Tsidewalk 8in

Sidewalk thickness

Lsidewalk 8ft

Sidewalk width

kip
DCsidewalk Tsidewalk conc Lsidewalk 0.8
ft

Weight of sidewalk per foot

kip
DCNJparap 0.413
ft

Weight of New Jersey parapet per foot

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 4 OF 59

Figure 1. Retaining Wall Dimensions

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 5 OF 59

3. Applied Loads Calculations


DC1: Self-weight of sidewalk, moment slab, parapet and
railing
DC2: Self-weight of rectangular portion of wall stem
DC3: Self-weight of triangular portion of wall stem
DC4: Self-weight of base footing
EV1: Vertical earth pressure on the base heel
EV2: Vertical earth pressure above the truncated wall stem
EV3: Vertical earth pressure on the base toe
ESv: Vertical surcharge load due to moment slab at time of

EH: Horizontal earth pressure


ESh : Horizontal surcharge load due to
moment slab at time of construction
(before concrete cures)
LSh : Horizontal live load surcharge

construction (before concrete cures)


LSv: Vertical live load surcharge
LLped : Pedestrian live load

LLped
LSv
ESv

Tstem_top/2
DC1
EV2

(Tstem_bot-Tstem_top)/3

Wpcheel

Tstem_top/2
DC2

EV1

(Tstem_bot-Tstem_top)/3
HRW/2

Wpctoe/2
HRW/3

DC3

EV3

B
Wpcap/2

Toe

EShstem LShstem

EHstem

DC4
Heel

EHfoot

EShfoot

LShfoot

qu_Bearing
Leff
R

R: Resultant of vertical loads


e: eccentricity of resultant

qu_Bearing: equivalent bearing pressure from R


distributed over effective Base Area

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 6 OF 59

3.1 Retaining Wall Dead Loads [DC] (Per 1 Foot Linear Strip of Wall):
3.1.1 Sidewalk, Moment Slab, Parapet and Railing Dead Load [DC1]:
Dead load due to approach slab, sidewalk,
parapet and railing [DC1]

kip
DCtotslab DCappslab DCsidewalk DCNJparap 4.03
ft
3.1.2 Retaining Wall Stem Dead Load
Rectangular Portion of Retaining Wall Stem Dead Load [DC2]:

Rectangular portion of retaining wall stem


vertical [DC2] dead load

kip
DCstemrect Hstem Tstem_top conc 4.08
ft
Triangular Portion of Retaining Wall Stem Dead Load [DC3]:
DCstemtriang Hstem

Tstem_bot Tstem_top
2

conc 2.04

kip
ft

Triangular portion of retaining wall stem


vertical [DC3] dead load

3.1.3 Footing Dead Load [DC4]:


kip
DCpcap Wpcap Dpcap conc 11.85
ft

Footing vertical [DC4] dead load

3.2 Earth Loads


3.2.1 Vertical Earth Loads
3.2.1.1 Soil Pressure above Heel [EV]
Rectangular Portion of Soil Above Heel Dead Load [EV1]
HSoilheel Hstem 21.75 ft

Soil height above footing heel

kip
EVSoilheelrect Wpcheel HSoilheel Soil 39.8
ft

Rectangular portion of soil above heel


vertical dead load [EV]

Triangular Portion of Soil Above Heel Dead Load [EV2]


1
EVSoilheeltriang HSoilheel Tstem_bot
2
T
stem_top

kip

Soil 1.63
ft

Triangular portion of soil above heel vertical


dead load [EV2] due to wall batter

3.2.1.2 Soil Pressure above Toe [EV3]:


HSoiltoe 2.ft

Soil height above footing toe

kip
EVSoiltoe Wpctoe HSoiltoe Soil 0.48
ft

Soil above toe vertical dead load

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 7 OF 59

3.2.2 Horizontal Earth Loads [EH]


3.2.2.1 Horizontal Earth Load at bottom of Stem [EHstem]
Lateral earth pressure at bottom of stem

PStem Ka Soil HSoilheel 1.38 ksf

The lateral load effects due to soil above the wall footing applied to the stem is:
REHstem

kip
1 P
Stem HSoilheel 15.04
ft
2

Lateral load due to earth pressure behind


stem with soil backfill [EH]

3.2.2.2 Horizontal Earth Load at bottom of Footing [EHfoot]


HRW Hstem Dpcap 25.75 ft

Total height of retaining wall

Ppc Ka Soil HRW 1.64 ksf

Lateral earth pressure at bottom of footing

The lateral load effects due to soil above the bott. of wall footing and applied to the wall footing is:
REHpc

kip
1 P H
pc RW 21.09
ft
2

Lateral load due to earth pressure behind


stem and footing with soil backfill [EH] at
HRW /3 from the bottom

3.2.2.3 Horizontal Surcharge Loads due to Sidewalk and Moment Slab [ES]
Uniform surcharge load due to moment
slab

ES conc Tappslab 0.19 ksf

Note: Two load cases will be considered regarding the moment slab effect on the retaining wall.
Case 1: before the concrete cures, includes surcharges for the slab and live loads.
Case 2: after the concrete cures, assumes that dead and live loads are applied from the moment slab to the
top of the wall, so no surcharges are included.
3.2.2.3.1 Uniform Vertical Surcharge at bottom of Stem [ESv]

kip
ESvert ES Tstem_bot Tstem_top Wpcheel 3.09
ft

Vertical load due to uniform surcharge


from moment slab applied per linear foot
of wall [ESv]

3.2.2.3.2 Uniform Horizontal Surcharge at bottom of Stem [EShstem]


pES Ka ES 0.1 ksf

Maximum lateral surcharge load due to


1'-thick RC pavement (AASHTO 3.11.6.1)

kip
RESstem pES HSoilheel 2.16
ft

Lateral load due to uniform surcharge at


bottom of stem [EH]

3.2.2.3.3 Uniform Horizontal Surcharge at bottom of Footing [EShfoot]


kip
RESpc pES HRW 2.56
ft

Lateral load due to uniform surcharge at


bottom of footing [EH]

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 8 OF 59

3.3 Live Loads


3.3.1 Pedestrian Live Load [LLped]
According to Article 3.6.1.6 A pedestrian load of 0.075 ksf shall be applied to all sidewalks wider than 2.0 ft
and considered simultaneously with the vehicular design live load in the vehicle lane. Where vehicles can
mount the sidewalk, sidewalk pedestrian load shall not be considered concurrently. If a sidewalk may be
removed in the future, the vehicular live loads shall be applied at 1 ft from edge-of-deck for design of the
overhang, and 2 ft from edge-of-deck for design of all other components. The pedestrian load shall not be
considered to act concurrently with vehicles. The dynamic load allowance need not be considered for
vehicles.
Bridges intended for only pedestrian, equestrian, light maintenance vehicle, and/or bicycle traffic should be
designed in accordance with AASHTO's LRFD Guide Specifications for the Design of Pedestrian Bridges.
LLped 0.075ksf Wpcheel 1.14

kip

Pedestrian live load (conservative)

ft

3.3.2 Live Load Surcharge [LSv]


h eqLS

4ft if Hstem 5ft


3ft
2ft

10ft Hstem
5

20ft Hstem
10

Equivalent height of soil for vehicular


loading based on AASHTO LRFD Table
3.11.6.4-2

if 5ft Hstem 10ft


if 10ft Hstem 20ft

2ft otherwise

h eqLS 2 ft

According to Article 3.11.6.5 If the vehicular loading is transmitted through a structural slab, which is also
supported by means other than earth, a corresponding reduction in the surcharge loads may be permitted.
3.3.2.1 Vertical Live Load Surcharge [LSv ]

kip
Vertical component of live load
LSvert SoilLS h eqLS Tstem_bot Tstem_top Wpcheel 4.13
ft surcharge [LSv]
3.3.2.1 Horizontal Live Load Surcharge at bottom of Stem [LShstem]
pStem Ka SoilLS h eqLS 0.13 ksf

Horizontal pressure increase due to live


load surcharge at bottom of stem

kip
RLSstem pStem HSoilheel 2.88
ft

Lateral load due to Live Load surcharge at


bottom of stem [LShstem] applied at
Hsoilheel/2

3.3.2.2 Horizontal Live Load Surcharge at bottom of Footing [LShfoot]


ppc Ka SoilLS h eqLS 0.13 ksf
kip
RLSpc ppc HRW 3.41
ft

Horizontal pressure increase due to live


load surcharge at bottom of footing
Lateral load due to Live Load surcharge at
bottom of footing [LShfoot] applied at HRW /2

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 9 OF 59

4. Limit States Design Method


4.1 Resistance and Load Modification Factors
The resistance factors, , for reinforced concrete Retaining walls for the Strength Limit State per
AASHTO LRFD Article 5.5.4.2 are as shown below:
f 0.9

Resistance factor for flexure

v 0.9

Resistance factor for shear

4.2 Load Factors


In accordance with LRFD (Table 3.4.1-1) the following Strength I load factors shall be used for retaining
wall design
DCstrmax 1.25

DCstrmin 0.9

Strength I Load factor for DC load case

LLstrmax 1.75

LLstrmin 1.75

Strength I Load factor for LL + IM load


case

LSstrmax 1.75

LSstrmin 1.75

Strength I Load factor for live load


surcharge

EVstrmax 1.35

EVstrmin 1.0

Strength I Load factor for vertical earth


pressure

EHstrmax 1.50

EHstrmin 0.9

Strength I Load factor for horizontal earth


pressure (active)

ESstrmax 1.50

ESstrmin 0.75

Strength I Load factor for earth surcharge

In accordance with LRFD (Table 3.4.1-2) the following Service I load factors shall be used for retaining wall
design
DCsv 1.0

Service I Load factor for DC load case

LLsv 1.0

Service I Load factor for LL + IM load case

LSsv 1.0

Service I Load factor for live load surcharge

EVsv 1.0

Service I Load factor for vertical earth


pressure

EHsv 1.0

Service I Load factor for horizontal earth


pressure

ESsv 1.0

Service I Load factor for earth surcharge

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 10 OF 59

5. Stability Analysis for Retaining Wall


5.1 Moment Arms Calculations
Note: Moment arms are calculated from the toe at the bottom of the footing
kip
Tstem_top
DCtotslab 4.03
H

2.63 ft
ft
1
pctoe
2
Tstem_top

kip
DCstemrect 4.08
ft

H5 Wpctoe

kip
DCstemtriang 2.04
ft

H6 Wpctoe Tstem_top

kip
DCpcap 11.85
ft

H7

kip
EVSoilheelrect 39.8
ft

H8 Wpctoe Tstem_bot

kip
EVSoilheeltriang 1.63
ft

2
H9 Wpctoe Tstem_top
T
Tstem_top 4.08 ft
3 stem_bot

kip
EVSoiltoe 0.48
ft

H10

LLped 1.14

kip
ft

Wpcap
2

2.63 ft

Tstem_bot Tstem_top 3.67 ft


3

9.88 ft
Wpcheel
2

Wpctoe
2

H11 Wpctoe

Tstem_top
2

2.63 ft

H12 Wpctoe Tstem_bot

kip
ESvert 3.09
ft

H13 Wpctoe Tstem_bot

kip
ft

RESpc 2.56

kip

RLSpc 3.41

kip

ft

ft

d 1

d 2
d 3

HSoilheel Dpcap
3
HRW
2
HRW
2

1 ft

1
LSvert 4.13 kip
ft

REHpc 21.09

12.12 ft

12.88 ft
12.88 ft

Wpcheel
2
Wpcheel

8.58 ft

12.12 ft
12.12 ft

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 11 OF 59

5.3 Stability Checks and Bearing Capacity under Service I Limit State per Article 11.6.2
Four Loads Cases are Considered:
Case 1: Includes vertical and horizontal surcharge due to approach slab and horizontal live load surcharge
Case 2: Includes horizontal surcharge due to live load
Case 3: Includes vertical and horizontal live load surcharge and surcharge due to approach Slab
Case 4: Includes vertical and horizontal live load surcharge and weight of approach slab and sidewalk
Table 1: Load Cases Required for Check for Stability and Bearing Capacity at Service Limit State

Load type

Vert. Horiz.
Loads, Loads,
Kips
Kips

Arm,
ft

Service I Factors
Moment at
the Toe,
Stability
Bearing
Kip-ft
Case 1 Case 2 Case 3 Case 4

DC1

moment slab, sidewalk, parapet


and railing

4.03

2.63

10.57

DC2

Rectangular portion of wall stem

4.08

2.63

10.71

1.0

1.0

1.0

1.0

DC3

Triangular portion of wall stem


DC dead load

2.04

3.67

7.48

1.0

1.0

1.0

1.0

DC4

Footing weight

11.85

9.88

117.02

1.0

1.0

1.0

1.0

39.80

12.13

482.61

1.0

1.0

1.0

1.0

1.63

4.08

6.66

1.0

1.0

1.0

1.0

0.48

1.00

0.48

1.0

1.0

1.0

1.0

1.0

1.0

EV1
EV2
EV3
EHstem
EHf oot
ESv
EShstem
EShf oot
LSv
LShstem
LShf oot
LLped

Rectangular portion of soil


above heel
Triangular portion of soil above
heel
Soil above toe
Horizontal earth pressure at
bottom of stem
Horizontal earth pressure at
bottom of footing
Vertical surcharge due to
moment slab and sidewalk
Horiz. surch. at bot. of stem due
to moment slab & sidewalk
Horiz. surch. at bot. of footing
due to moment slab & sidewalk

3.09

Vertical surcharge live load

4.13

15.04
21.09

Net Moment Capacity, Kip-ft


MaximumVertical Load, Kip

1.0
-8.58

-180.98

1.0

12.13

37.51

1.0

1.0

1.0

-12.88

-32.95

1.0

1.0

12.13

50.02

-12.88

-43.93

1.14

2.63

3.00

1.20
1.20

2.63
2.63

3.15
3.15

2.16
2.56

Horizontal live load surcharge at


bottom of footing
Horizontal live load surcharge at
bottom of stem
Pedestrian Live Load

1.0

1.0

1.0

1.0

1.0

2.88
3.41

1.0

1.0

1.0
404.6 400.0 454.6 463.6
63.0 59.9 67.1 69.2

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 12 OF 59

5.3.1 Stability Checks against Overturning, Sliding, and Eccentricity


ESv

Tstem_top/2

EV2

(Tstem_bot-Tstem_top)/3

Wpcheel

Tstem_top/2
DC2

LSv

EV1

Case 1

(Tstem_bot-Tstem_top)/3

HRW/3

DC3

EV3

Heel
Wpcap/2

Toe

HRW/2

Wpctoe/2

DC3
EHfoot

LShfoot EShfoot

Tstem_top/2

EV2

(Tstem_bot-Tstem_top)/3

Wpcheel

Tstem_top/2

EV1

Case 2

DC2

(Tstem_bot-Tstem_top)/3

Wpctoe/2
HRW/3

DC3

EV3

Toe

Heel
Wpcap/2

DC3
EHfoot

LShfoot

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 13 OF 59

5.3.1.1 Factor of Safety Against Overturning (Service I)


5.3.1.1.1 Case 1: Includes vertical and horizontal surcharge due to approach slab and horizontal live load
surcharge
Resisting Moment arms are calculated
M resist1 DCsv DCstemrect H5

DC

from the toe (Point A) at the bottom of the


stemtriang H6 DCpcap H7

footing.
EVsv EVSoilheelrect H8 EVSoilheeltriang H9

EV
Soiltoe H10

ESsv ESvert H13


kip ft

Resisting Moment due to Vertical Loads


ft
M overt1 EHsv REHpc d 1 ESsv RESpc d 2 LSsv RLSpc d 3 Overturning Moment due to Horizontal
Loads
M resist1 662.46

M overt1 257.86
FS overt1

kip ft
ft

M resist1
Overturning Factor of Safety

M overt1

FS overt1 2.57

CheckFSovert if FS overt1 2 "OK" "N.G."

Check Overturning

CheckFSovert "OK"
5.3.1.1.2 Case 2: Includes horizontal surcharge due to live load
M resist2 DCsv DCstemrect H5

DC

stemtriang H6 DCpcap H7

EVsv EVSoilheelrect H8 EVSoilheeltriang H9

EV
Soiltoe H10

M resist2 624.95

kip ft

Resisting Moment due to Vertical Loads

ft

M overt2 EHsv REHpc d 1 LSsv RLSpc d 3


M overt2 224.91
FS overt2

Resisting Moment arms are calculated


from the toe (Point A) at the bottom of the
footing.

Overturning Moment due to Horizontal


Loads

kip ft
ft

M resist2

Overturning Factor of Safety

M overt2

FS overt2 2.78

CheckFSovert if FS overt2 2 "OK" "N.G."


CheckFSovert "OK"

Check Overturning

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 14 OF 59

5.3.1.2 Factor of Safety Against Sliding (Service I) per Article 10.6.3.4 (Case 2)
As per IDOT Bridge Manual, Article 3.10.3.2 Sliding resistance is determined differently depending on
whether the spread footing is setting on granular soil, cohesive soil, or rock. For granular soils, the sliding
resistance is calculated as the vertical resultant, P, times the tangent of the friction angle for footings cast on
in-place aggregate. Shear keys are not recommended for granular soils due to constructability concerns. For
cohesive soils, sliding resistance is calculated as cohesion times the effective footing width B. Lower strength
clays require special attention to ensure adequate sliding resistance and, in some cases, have successfully
utilized shear keys.
Su 6 ksf

Undrained shear strength

Kp 0

Passive pressure coefficient

Pp Kp Soil Hkey 0 ksf

Passive pressure due to shear key

Rp

1
2

Pp Hkey 0

Lateral Load due to passive pressure on


shear key

kip
ft

5.3.1.2.1 Case 1: Includes vertical and horizontal surcharge due to approach slab and horizontal live load
surcharge
DLvert1 DCsv DCstemrect DCstemtriang DCpcap
EVsv EVSoilheelrect EVSoilheeltriang EVSoiltoe Total Vertical Load
ESsv ESvert

kip
DLvert1 62.97
ft
Assume 50Y for replacing compact soil in front of footing
DLvert1
v1
3.19 ksf
Wpcap

q smin1 min Su 0.5 v1 1.59 ksf


Assume

Vertical effective stress


Shear resistance (LRFD 10.6.3.4)

q s1 Su 6 ksf

kip
Fresist_fric1 q s1 Wpcap Rp 118.5
ft

Friction force resisting sliding

kip
Force causing sliding
Fsliding1 EHsv REHpc ESsv RESpc LSsv RLSpc 27.06
ft
FS sliding1

Fresist_fric1
Fsliding1

4.38

CheckFSsliding1 if FS sliding1 1.5 "OK" "N.G."


CheckFSsliding1 "OK"

Sliding Factor of Safety

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 15 OF 59

5.3.1.2.2 Case 2: Includes horizontal surcharge due to live load

DLvert2 DCsv DCstemrect DCstemtriang DCpcap


EVsv EVSoilheelrect EVSoilheeltriang EVSoiltoe

Total Vertical Load not Including LLped

kip
DLvert2 59.88
ft
DLvert2
v2
3.03 ksf
Wpcap

Vertical effective stress

Shear resistance (LRFD 10.6.3.4)

q smin2 min Su 0.5 v2 1.52 ksf


Assume

q s2 Su 6 ksf

kip
Fresist_fric2 q s2 Wpcap Rp 118.5
ft

Friction force resisting sliding

kip
Fsliding2 EHsv REHpc LSsv RLSpc 24.5
ft

Force causing sliding

FS sliding2

Fresist_fric2
Fsliding2

Sliding Factor of Safety

4.84

CheckFSsliding2 if FS sliding2 1.5 "OK" "N.G."

CheckFSsliding2 "OK"
5.3.1.3 Check Eccentricity
AASHTO LRFD 11.6.3.3-Eccentricity Limits
For foundations on soil, the location of the resultant of the reaction forces shall be within the middle two thirds
of the base width.
kip ft
M net1 M resist1 M overt1 404.6
ft

Net moment at bottom of toe


for Case 1 loading

kip
Vvert1 DLvert1 62.97
ft

Total Vertical Load for Case 1 loading

kip ft
M net2 M resist2 M overt2 400.04
ft

Net moment at bottom of toe


for Case 2 loading

kip
Vvert2 DLvert2 59.88
ft

Total Vertical Load for Case 2 loading

Hence the maximum eccentricity due to either Case 1 or Case 2 load configuration is:
ecc

Wpcap
2

Mnet1 Mnet2

3.45 ft
Vvert1 Vvert2

min

Maximum eccentricity from the centerline


of the base

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 16 OF 59

Checkuplift if ecc

Wpcap
3

"OK" "N.G."

Checkuplift "OK"

Wpcap
3

6.58 ft

5.3.2 Factor of Safety Against Bearing Capacity Failure (Service I)


Tstem_top/2

ESv

EV2

(Tstem_bot-Tstem_top)/3

Wpcheel

Tstem_top/2
DC2

EV1

Case 3

(Tstem_bot-Tstem_top)/3

HRW/3

DC3

EV3

Toe

HRW/2

Wpctoe/2

Heel
Wpcap/2

DC3

C
EHfoot

LShfoot EShfoot

qu_Bearing
Leff
R

R: Resultant of vertical loads


e: eccentricity of resultant

qu_Bearing: equivalent bearing pressure from R


distributed over effective Base Area

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 17 OF 59

LSv

Tstem_top/2
DC1
EV2

(Tstem_bot-Tstem_top)/3

Wpcheel

Tstem_top/2

EV1

Case 4

DC2

(Tstem_bot-Tstem_top)/3

HRW/3

DC3

EV3

Toe

HRW/2

Wpctoe/2

Heel
Wpcap/2

DC3

C
LShfoot

EHfoot
qu_Bearing
Leff

R: Resultant of vertical loads

qu_Bearing: equivalent bearing pressure from R


distributed over effective Base Area

q all 10 ksf

Allowable bearing capacity

5.3.2.1 Case 3: Includes vertical and horizontal live load surcharge and surcharge due
to approach Slab

M resist3 DCsv DCstemrect H5 DCstemtriang H6 DCpcap H7


EVsv EVSoilheelrect H8 EVSoilheeltriang H9 EVSoiltoe H10

ESsv ESvert H13 LSsv LSvert H12


ft
M resist3 712.47 kip
ft

M overt3 EHsv REHpc d 1 ESsv RESpc d 2 LSsv RLSpc d 3


kip ft
M net3 M resist3 M overt3 454.62
ft

Net moment at bottom of toe

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 18 OF 59

Vvert3 DCsv DCstemrect DCstemtriang DCpcap


EVsv EVSoilheelrect EVSoilheeltriang EVSoiltoe

ESsv ESvert LSsv LSvert


kip
Vvert3 67.1
ft

Total Vertical Load

Hence the eccentricity of the resultant, R, may be expressed as:


M net3
Wpcap
Eccentricity from the centerline of the base
ecc3

3.1 ft
Vvert3
2
Find effective stress on the bottom of the base due to the applied vertical loads
Per AASHTO LRFD 11.6.3.2, where the wall is supported by a soil foundation, the vertical stress shall be
calculated assuming a uniformly distributed pressure over an effective base length of (B - 2e) where e =
distance from resultant to center of base
Vvert3
vertical stress on bottom of base per LRFD
q eff3
4.95 ksf
Wpcap 2 ecc3
Eq. 11.6.3.2-1
q toe3

q heel3

Vvert3
Wpcap

Vvert3
Wpcap

6 ecc3

Wpcap

6.6 ksf

6 ecc3

Wpcap

Applied bearing pressure at toe due to


Case 3 loading

0.2 ksf

Applied bearing pressure at heel due to


Case 3 loading

5.3.2.2 Case 4: Includes vertical and horizontal live load surcharge and weight of approach slab and
sidewalk transferred to the wall stem

M resist4 DCsv DCtotslab H1 DCstemrect H5 DCstemtriang H6 DCpcap H7


EVsv EVSoilheelrect H8 EVSoilheeltriang H9 EVSoiltoe H10

LLsv LLped H11 LSsv LSvert H12

M resist4 688.53

kip ft
ft

M overt4 EHsv REHpc d 1 LSsv RLSpc d 3


M net4 M resist4 M overt4 463.62

kip ft

Net moment at bottom of toe

ft

Vvert4 DCsv DCtotslab DCstemrect DCstemtriang DCpcap


EVsv EVSoilheelrect EVSoilheeltriang EVSoiltoe

LLsv LLped LSsv LSvert

kip
Vvert4 69.18
ft

Total Vertical Load

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 19 OF 59

Hence the eccentricity of the resultant, R, may be expressed as:

ecc4

Wpcap

M net4

Vvert4

Eccentricity from the centerline of the base

3.17 ft

Find effective stress on the bottom of the base due to the applied vertical loads
Per AASHTO LRFD 11.6.3.2, where the wall is supported by a soil foundation, the vertical stress shall be
calculated assuming a uniformly distributed pressure over an effective base length of (B - 2e) where e =
distance from resultant to center of base
q eff4

q toe4

q heel4

Vvert4
Wpcap 2 ecc4
Vvert4
Wpcap

Vvert4
Wpcap

6 ecc4

Wpcap

6.88 ksf

6 ecc4

Wpcap

vertical stress on bottom of base per LRFD


Eq. 11.6.3.2-1

5.16 ksf

0.13 ksf

Applied bearing pressure at toe due to


Case 4 loading
Applied bearing pressure at heel due to
Case 4 loading
Maximum applied bearing pressure

q max max q toe4 q heel4 6.88 ksf


5.3.2.3 Check against Bearing Capacity

Maximum vertical stress

q eff max q eff3 q eff4 5.16 ksf

Checkqall if q all q eff "OK" "N.G."

Check bearing capacity

Checkqall "OK"
q toe

q toe3 if q eff3 q eff4

6.88 ksf

Applied bearing pressure at toe

q toe4 otherwise
q heel

q heel3 if q eff3 q eff4


q heel4 otherwise

0.13 ksf

Applied bearing pressure at heel

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 20 OF 59

5.5 Stability Checks under Strength Limit State


Four Loads Cases are Considered:
Case 1: Includes vertical and horizontal surcharge due to approach slab and horizontal live load surcharge
Case 2: Includes horizontal surcharge due to live load
Case 3: Includes vertical and horizontal live load surcharge and surcharge due to approach Slab
Case 4: Includes vertical and horizontal live load surcharge and weight of approach slab and sidewalk
transferred to the wall stem
Table 2: Load Cases Required for Check for Stability and Bearing Capacity at Strength Limit State

Applied Loads

Vert. Horiz.
Loads, Loads,
Kips
Kips

Arm,
ft

Strength I Factors
Moment at
the Toe,
Stability
Bearing
Kip-ft
Case 1 Case 2 Case 3 Case 4

DC1

moment slab, sidewalk, parapet


and railing

4.03

2.63

10.57

DC2

Rectangular portion of wall stem

4.08

2.63

10.71

0.90

0.90

1.25

1.25

DC3

Triangular portion of wall stem


DC dead load

2.04

3.67

7.48

0.90

0.90

1.25

1.25

DC4

Footing weight

11.85

9.88

117.02

0.90

0.90

1.25

1.25

39.80

12.13

482.61

1.00

1.00

1.35

1.35

1.63

4.08

6.66

1.00

1.00

1.35

1.35

0.48

1.00

0.48

1.00

1.00

1.35

1.35

-8.58

-180.98

1.50

1.50

1.50

1.50

12.13

37.51

0.75

1.50

-12.88

-32.95

1.50

1.50

12.13

50.02

-12.88

-43.93

1.14

2.63

3.00

1.75

1.20
1.20

2.63
2.63

3.15
3.15

241.8 263.1 576.2 587.8


60.4 58.1 90.9 93.3

EV1
EV2
EV3
EHstem
EHf oot
ESv
EShstem
EShf oot
LSv
LShstem
LShf oot
LLped

Rectangular portion of soil


above heel
Triangular portion of soil above
heel
Soil above toe
Horizontal earth pressure at
bottom of stem
Horizontal earth pressure at
bottom of footing
Vertical surcharge due to
moment slab and sidewalk
Horiz. surch. at bot. of stem due
to moment slab & sidewalk
Horiz. surch. at bot. of footing
due to moment slab & sidewalk

3.09

Vertical surcharge live load

4.13

15.04
21.09

2.16
2.56

Horizontal live load surcharge at


bottom of footing
Horizontal live load surcharge at
bottom of stem
Pedestrian Live Load

Net Moment Capacity, Kip-ft


MaximumVertical Load, Kips

1.25

1.75

1.75

1.75

1.75

2.88
3.41

1.75

1.75

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 21 OF 59

5.5.1 Check Eccentricity at Strength Limit State per AASHTO LRFD 11.6.3.3

5.5.1.1 Case 1: Includes vertical and horizontal surcharge due to approach slab and horizontal live
load surcharge
Pu_ecc1 DCstrmin DCstemrect DCstemtriang DCpcap
EVstrmin EVSoilheelrect EVSoilheeltriang EVSoiltoe ESstrmin ESvert

kip
Pu_ecc1 60.4
ft

Factored vertical load for eccentricity

M uresist_ecc1 DCstrmin DCstemrect H5 DCstemtriang H6 DCpcap H7


EVstrmin EVSoilheelrect H8 EVSoilheeltriang H9 EVSoiltoe H10

ESstrmin ESvert H13

M uresist_ecc1 639.56

kip ft
ft

M uovert_ecc1 EHstrmax REHpc d 1 ESstrmax RESpc d 2 LSstrmax RLSpc d 2 397.77

kip ft
ft

kip ft

M unet_ecc1 M uresist_ecc1 M uovert_ecc1 241.79


ft

Factored moment for eccentricity

5.5.1.2 Case 2: Includes horizontal surcharge due to live load

Pu_ecc2 DCstrmin DCstemrect DCstemtriang DCpcap


EVstrmin EVSoilheelrect EVSoilheeltriang EVSoiltoe
kip
Pu_ecc2 58.08
ft

Factored vertical load for eccentricity

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 22 OF 59

M uresist_ecc2 DCstrmin DCstemrect H5 DCstemtriang H6 DCpcap H7


EVstrmin EVSoilheelrect H8 EVSoilheeltriang H9 EVSoiltoe H10
M uresist_ecc2 611.43

kip ft
ft

kip ft
M uovert_ecc2 EHstrmax REHpc d 1 LSstrmax RLSpc d 3 348.35
ft
kip ft
M unet_ecc2 M uresist_ecc2 M uovert_ecc2 263.08
ft

Factored moment for eccentricity

5.5.1.3 Check for Eccentricity


eccecc

Wpcap
2

Munet_ecc1 Munet_ecc2

5.87 ft
Pu_ecc2
Pu_ecc1

min

Checkuplift if eccecc

Wpcap
3

Eccentricity

"OK" "N.G."
Check eccentricity per AASHTO LRFD
11.6.3.3

Checkuplift "OK"

5.5.2 Factor of Safety Against Sliding at Strength Limit State per Article 11.6.3.6
Su 6 ksf

Undrained shear strength

Kp 0

Passive pressure coefficient

Pp Kp Soil Hkey 0 ksf

Passive pressure due to shear key

Rp

1
2

Pp Hkey 0

Lateral Load due to passive pressure on


shear key

kip
ft

5.5.2.1 Case 1: Includes vertical and horizontal surcharge due to approach slab and horizontal live
load surcharge
kip
Pu_s1 Pu_ecc1 60.4
ft

Factored vertical load for sliding

Pu_s1
v1
3.06 ksf
Wpcap

Vertical effective stress

q smin1 min Su 0.5 v1 1.53 ksf


Assume

Shear resistance (LRFD 10.6.3.4)

q s1 Su 6 ksf

kip
Fresist_fric1 q s1 Wpcap Rp 118.5
ft

Friction force resisting sliding

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 23 OF 59

kip
Fsliding1 EHstrmax REHpc ESstrmax RESpc LSstrmax RLSpc 41.44 Force causing sliding
ft
FS sliding1

Fresist_fric1

Sliding Factor of Safety

2.86

Fsliding1

CheckFSsliding1 if FS sliding1 1.5 "OK" "N.G."

CheckFSsliding1 "OK"

5.5.2.2 Case 2: Includes horizontal surcharge due to live load


kip
Factored vertical load for sliding
Pu_s2 Pu_ecc2 58.08
ft

Pu_s2
v2
2.94 ksf
Wpcap

Vertical effective stress

Shear resistance (LRFD 10.6.3.4)

q smin2 min Su 0.5 v2 1.47 ksf


Assume

q s2 Su 6 ksf

kip
Fresist_fric2 q s2 Wpcap Rp 118.5
ft

Friction force resisting sliding

kip
Fsliding2 EHstrmax REHpc LSstrmax RLSpc 37.6
ft

Force causing sliding

FS sliding2

Fresist_fric2
Fsliding2

Sliding Factor of Safety

3.15

CheckFSsliding2 if FS sliding2 1.5 "OK" "N.G."

CheckFSsliding2 "OK"

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 24 OF 59

5.5.3 Factor of Safety Against Bearing Capacity Failure at Strength Limit State per AASHTO LRFD
11.6.3.2
q uall 15 ksf

5.5.3.1 Case 3: Includes vertical and horizontal live load surcharge and surcharge due to approach
Slab
Pu_b3 DCstrmax DCstemrect DCstemtriang DCpcap

EVstrmax EVSoilheelrect EVSoilheeltriang EVSoiltoe


ESstrmax ESvert LSstrmax LSvert

kip
Pu_b3 90.9
ft

Factored vertical load for bearing


resistance

M uresist_b3 DCstrmax DCstemrect H5 DCstemtriang H6 DCpcap H7


EVstrmax EVSoilheelrect H8 EVSoilheeltriang H9 EVSoiltoe H10

ESstrmax ESvert H13 LSstrmax LSvert H12

M uresist_b3 973.95

kip ft
ft

kip ft
M uovert_b3 EHstrmax REHpc d 1 ESstrmax RESpc d 2 LSstrmax RLSpc d 3 397.77
ft
kip ft
M unet_b3 M uresist_b3 M uovert_b3 576.19
ft
eccb3

Wpcap
2

M unet_b3
Pu_b3

3.54 ft

Factored net moment for bearing


resistance
Eccentricity

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 25 OF 59

Find effective stress on the bottom of the base due to the applied vertical loads
Per AASHTO LRFD 11.6.3.2, where the wall is supported by a soil foundation, the vertical stress shall be
calculated assuming a uniformly distributed pressure over an effective base length of (B - 2e) where e =
distance from resultant to center of base
q ueff3

Pu_b3

7.17 ksf

Wpcap 2 eccb3
Pu_b3

q utoe3

Wpcap

q uheel3

6 eccb3

Wpcap

Pu_b3
Wpcap

9.55 ksf

6 eccb3

Wpcap

0.34 ksf

vertical stress on bottom of base per LRFD


Eq. 11.6.3.2-1

Maximum factored soil pressure at toe for


Case 2 loading

Minimum factored soil pressure at toe for


Case 2 loading

5.5.3.2 Case 4: Includes vertical and horizontal live load surcharge and weight of approach slab and
sidewalk transferred to the wall stem
Pu_b4 DCstrmax DCtotslab DCstemrect DCstemtriang DCpcap

EVstrmax EVSoilheelrect EVSoilheeltriang EVSoiltoe


LSstrmax LSvert LLstrmax LLped

kip
Pu_b4 93.29
ft

Factored vertical load for bearing


resistance

M uresist_b4 DCstrmax DCtotslab H1 DCstemrect H5 DCstemtriang H6 DCpcap H7


EVstrmax EVSoilheelrect H8 EVSoilheeltriang H9 EVSoiltoe H10

LSstrmax LSvert H12 LLstrmax LLped H11

M uresist_b4 936.15

kip ft
ft

kip ft
M uovert_b4 EHstrmax REHpc d 1 LSstrmax RLSpc d 3 348.35
ft
kip ft
M unet_b4 M uresist_b4 M uovert_b4 587.8
ft
eccb4

Wpcap
2

M unet_b4
Pu_b4

3.57 ft

Factored net moment for bearing


resistance
Eccentricity

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 26 OF 59

Find effective stress on the bottom of the base due to the applied vertical loads
Per AASHTO LRFD 11.6.3.2, where the wall is supported by a soil foundation, the vertical stress shall be
calculated assuming a uniformly distributed pressure over an effective base length of (B - 2e) where e =
distance from resultant to center of base

q ueff4

Pu_b4

7.4 ksf

Wpcap 2 eccb4

q utoe4

q uheel4

Pu_b4
Wpcap

6 eccb4

Wpcap

Pu_b4
Wpcap

vertical stress on bottom of base per LRFD


Eq. 11.6.3.2-1

9.85 ksf

6 eccb4
Wpcap

0.41 ksf

Maximum factored soil pressure at toe for


Case 2 loading

Minimum factored soil pressure at toe for


Case 2 loading

5.5.3.3 Check against Bearing Capacity

q ueff max q ueff3 q ueff4 7.4 ksf

Maximum vertical stress

Checkqall if q all q ueff "OK" "N.G."

Check bearing capacity

Checkqall "OK"
q utoe

q utoe3 if q ueff3 q ueff4

9.85 ksf

Applied bearing pressure at toe

q utoe4 otherwise
q uheel

q uheel3 if q ueff3 q ueff4


q uheel4 otherwise

0.41 ksf

Applied bearing pressure at heel

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 27 OF 59

6. Design of Retaining Wall Stem


The service and ultimate factored moment calculations for the Wall stem are taken at the bottom at point B,
at the center of gravity of the Wall Stem in the horizontal direction

Truncated
Wall Stem

Heel

A
6.1 Combination Factors for Forces applied on the Bottom of Wall Stem
The stem loads that are required include:
Horizontal distances "H" are measured from the c.g. of the stem at the bottom
The c.g. of the stem from its exterior face is:
2

x cstem

Tstem_top Tstem_top Tstem_bot Tstem_bot

3 Tstem_top Tstem_bot

Center of gravity of the truncated wall stem


from the exterior face of the wall

x cstem 0.97 ft
Tstem_top

kip
DCtotslab 4.03
ft

H1 x cstem

kip
DCstemrect 4.08
ft

H5 x cstem

kip
DCstemtriang 2.04
ft

H6 x cstem Tstem_top

LLped 1.14

2
Tstem_top
2

kip
ft

H11 x cstem

Tstem_top

kip
ESvert 3.09
ft

H12 Tstem_top

kip
LSvert 4.13
ft

H13 H12 8.53 ft

0.35 ft
0.35 ft
Tstem_bot Tstem_top
3

0.69 ft

0.35 ft

Tstem_bot Wpcheel Tstem_top


2

x cstem 8.53 ft

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 28 OF 59

REHstem 15.04

kip

d 1

ft

RESstem 2.16

kip

RLSstem 2.88

kip

d 2

ft

d 3

ft

HSoilheel
3
HSoilheel
2
HSoilheel
2

7.25 ft
10.88 ft
10.88 ft

6.1.1 Retaining Wall Stem Strength I Force Effects


The factored longitudinal shear force at the critical section of the stem is:
VustemstrI EHstrmax REHstem ESstrmax RESstem LSstrmax RLSstem
Factored shear at bottom of wall stem
(Strength I)

kip
VustemstrI 30.85
ft
The factored moment at the base of the stem is:

M ustemstrI DCstrmax DCstemrect H5 DCstemtriang H6


EHstrmax REHstem d 1 ESstrmax RESstem d 2 LSstrmax RLSstem d 3
M ustemstrI 253.7

kip ft

Factored Moment at bottom of wall stem


(Strength I)

ft

6.1.2 Retaining Wall Stem Extreme Event II Force Effects


The following load factors will be used to calculate the force effects for Extreme Event II (AASHTO LRFD
Tables 3.4.1-1 and 3.4.1-2):
DCEEII 1.25 EHEEII 1.50 ESEEII 1.50 LSEEII 0.5

CTEEII 1.00

The factored longitudinal shear force at the base of the stem is (maximum of Case 1 and Case 2):
VustemEEII EHEEII REHstem ESEEII RESstem LSEEII RLSstem
kip
VustemEEII 27.25
ft
The factored moment at the base of the stem is (Case 1):

M ustemEEII DCEEII DCstemrect H5 DCstemtriang H6


EHEEII REHstem d 1 ESEEII RESstem d 2 LSEEII RLSstem d 3
M ustemEEII 214.52

kip ft
ft

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 29 OF 59

6.1.3 Retaining Wall Stem Service I Force Effects


The service longitudinal shear force at the base of the stem is:
VustemservI EHsv REHstem ESsv RESstem LSsv RLSstem
kip
VustemservI 20.09
ft
The service moment at the base of the stem is:

M ustem_servI DCsv DCstemrect H5 DCstemtriang H6


EHsv REHstem d 1 ESsv RESstem d 2 LSsv RLSstem d 2
M ustem_servI 163.91

kip ft
ft

6.1.4 Maximum Force Effects


The maximum factored stem shear force and moment are:

Vustem_max max VustemstrI VustemEEII

kip
Vustem_max 30.85
ft

M ustem_max max M ustemstrI M ustemEEII


M ustem_max 253.7

Maximum factored stem shear force

Maximum factored stem moment

kip ft
ft

6.2 Design the Reinforcement for Retaining Wall Stem


6.2.1 Applied Loads:
M ustem_servI M ustem_servI 1 ft 163.91 ft kip

Applied Service limit state factored


moment

M ustem_max M ustem_max 1 ft 253.7 kip ft

Applied maximum Strength limit state


factored moment

Vustem_max Vustem_max 1 ft 30.85 kip

Applied maximum Strength limit state


factored shear

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 30 OF 59

6.2.2 Design for Flexure


6.2.2.1 Primary Flexural Reinforcement
Note: The use of epoxy coated reinforcement is required
According to AASHTO 5.7.3.3.2 unless otherwise specified, at any section of a flexural component, the
amount of flexural reinforcement shall be adequate to develop a factored flexural resistance, Mr, at least equal
to the lesser of:
The cracking moment (Mcr) determined from Equation 5.7.3.3.2-1

1.33 times the factored moment required by the applicable strength load combinations specified in
AASHTO Table 3.4.1-1

M ustem_max 253.7 kip ft

Applied maximum Strength limit state


factored moment at wall stem per foot

b 12in

Width of concrete strip

Ig
y t

b Tstem_bot Tformliner

12
Tstem_bot Tformliner
2
Ig

Ig 27000 in

Moment of inertia

y t 15 in

Depth at mid-section

Sc
1.8 10 in
yt

Section modulus for the extreme fiber of


the composite section where tensile stress
is caused by externally applied loads
(AASHTO 5.7.3.3.2)

1 1.6

Flexural cracking variability factor


(AASHTO 5.7.3.3.2)

fr 0.24 f'c ksi 0.54 ksi

Modulus of rupture for cracking moment


calculations (AASHTO 5.4.2.6)

3 0.75

Ratio of specified minimum yield strength


to ultimate tensile strength for A615 Grade
60 reinforcement (AASHTO 5.7.3.3.2)

M cr 3 1 fr Sc 96.6 kip ft
M ustem_des

Cracking moment (simplified equation neglects prestressing and noncomposite


terms) (AASHTO LRFD Eqn. 5.7.3.3.2-1)

M cr if M ustem_max M cr
M ustem_max otherwise

M ustem_des 253.7 kip ft

Minimum design moment

Depth to tensile steel reinforcement


1
d ws Tstem_bot 1.27in Tformliner Covers d ws 27.37 in measured from extreme compression fiber
2
of structural wall. For the calculation of
effective depth, d, assume #10 bar.
M ustem_des
Coefficient of resistance
Rn
0.38 ksi
2
0.9 b d ws

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 31 OF 59

0.85

fy

f'c

0.0066
0.85f'c

2Rn

Calculated ratio of steel for the ultimate


moment in the wall stem

As b d ws 2.16 in

Calculated amount of steel for the ultimate


moment in the wall stem

1 f'c
87 ksi
bal 0.85

0.0335
fy
87 ksi fy

Balanced ratio of steel reinforcement

max 0.75 bal 0.0252

Maximum ratio of steel

For practical purposes a steel ratio up to


1/2max = 1/2x0.75xbal = 0.375bal can

1
pract max 0.0126
2

also be used
Standard reinforcing bar number provided
from AASHTO Appendix B, Table B.4,
selected for the wall stem

Barws 10

Bar#
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

Dia(in) Area(in )
0.375
0.11
0.5
0.20
0.625
0.31
0.75
0.44
0.875
0.6
1.00
0.79
1.128
1.00
1.27
1.27
1.41
1.56

Diameter of primary reinforcement

d bws d b1 in 1.27 in
2

Abws Ab1 in 1.27 in

Area of primary reinforcement

Abws
Sws 12
in 7.05 in
As

Calculated spacing of moment


reinforcement

Sws 6in

Selected spacing of moment reinforcement

Abws
2
Asws
12in 2.54 in
Sws
Asws fy
aws
2.99 in
0.85 f'c b

Area of primary reinforcement


Approximate depth of compression block
Equivalent rectangular stress block
reduction factor = 0.85 for f`c <= 4000psi
(AASHTO 5.7.2.2)

1 0.8

cws

aws
1

Depth to neutral section in concrete


section (AASHTO 5.5.4.2.1)

3.74 in

d ws Tstem_bot Tformliner

d bws
2

Covers 27.37 in

Depth to tensile steel reinforcement


measured from extreme compression fiber
of concrete section

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 32 OF 59

6.2.2.2 Check Moment Strength


Tensile strain in concrete section at tensile
steel reinforcement where a strain of 0.005
is the limiting strain to ensure the concrete
member in flexure will be tension
controlled (AASHTO Figure C5.5.4.2.1-1)

d ws cws
t 0.003
0.019
cws
checkstrain

"Tension Controlled" if t 0.005

checkstrain "Tension Controlled"

"Not Tension Controlled" otherwise


f

0.90 if t 0.005

dws

0.65 0.15 c 1 if 0.002 t 0.005

ws

LRFD reduction factor for bending for


non-prestressed members (AASHTO Eqn.
5.5.4.2.1-2)

0.75 otherwise
f 0.9
aws

Mnstem f Asws fy d ws
295.7 kip ft
2

Flexural resistance for an equivalent 1ft


width of deck (AASHTO 5.7.3.2)

M ustem_des 253.7 kip ft

Minimum design moment

checkflexure

"O.K." if Mnstem M ustem_des

checkflexure "O.K."

"N.G." otherwise
6.2.2.3 Check for Minimum Reinforcement
M ustem_max 253.7 kip ft

Total Factored moment at Toe per Foot

M cr 96.6 kip ft

Cracking moment (simplified equation neglects prestressing and noncomposite


terms) (AASHTO LRFD Eqn. 5.7.3.3.2-1)

checkminflexure

"O.K." if Mnstem min 1.33M ustem_max M cr


checkminflexure "O.K."
"N.G." otherwise

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 33 OF 59

6.2.2.4 Crack Control


6.2.2.4.1 Stress at Tensile Reinforcement
The control of cracking by distribution of reinforcement must be checked. According to AASHTO
LRFD Article 5.7.3.4, crack control reinforcement is required where tension in the cross-section
exceeds 80% of the modulus of rupture.
Applied Service limit state factored
M ustem_servI 163.91 kip ft
moment
Es
Modular ratio of steel to concrete moduli of
n
6.76
elasticity
Ec
Depth to tension steel measured from
extreme compressive fiber of the concrete
section

d ws 27.37 in

Asneg 0.44in

Barshtempvert 6

Area of steel in compression. Assume #6


at 12 in spacing CTC

1
d' Covers 0.75in 2.38 in
2

Sshtempvert 12in

Depth to compressive reinforcing steel


measured from extreme compressive fiber
of the concrete section

f ( c)

b c
2

n Asws ( n 1 ) Asneg c n Asws d ws ( n 1 ) Asneg d'

c root f ( c) c 0in Tstem_bot Tformliner 7.42 in

Icr

b c
3

n Asneg ( d' c) n Asws d ws c

y ws d ws c 19.95 in

Mustem_servI y ws
31.06 ksi
Icr

s n

Sum of the statical moments


about the neutral axis

Depth to the neutral axis from extreme


compressive fiber of structural slab

2 8.55 103 in4

Moment of inertia of the doubly


reinforced transformed cracked section

Distance from neutral axis to tensile steel


reinforcement
Tensile stress at tensile steel
reinforcement

6.2.2.4.2 Required Spacing for Crack Control


Maximum Spacing per LRFD 5.7.3.4
Note: AASHTO LRFD 5.7.3.4 states that when tension in the cross-section exceeds 80% of the modulus of
rupture, specified in Article 5.4.2.6, at applicable service limit state load combination, the concrete
deck slab main reinforcement must meet the following spacing limitations.
3

Equivalent deck section modulus at


midspan

S Sc 1.8 10 in
fMserv

M ustem_servI
S

1.09 ksi

Tensile stress at extreme deck due to


Service I Load combinations

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 34 OF 59

Checkvalidity

"LRFD 5.7.3.4 is Valid" if fMserv 0.8 0.24 f'c ksi Checkvalidity "LRFD 5.7.3.4 is Valid"
"LRFD 5.7.3.4 is Not Valid" otherwise

d c Covers

d bws
2

Thickness of concrete cover measured


from extreme tension fiber to center of the
flexural reinforcement located closest
thereto (AASHTO 5.7.3.4)

2.64 in

Class 2 exposure factor for decks and


substructures exposed to water (AASHTO
5.7.3.4)

cf 0.75

dc
s 1
1.14
0.7 Tstem_bot Tformliner d c

Smax1

dc
700 cf
2 in 9.59 in
s
in

s ksi

Maximum spacing of tensile reinforcing


bars allowed to control flexural cracking of
concrete for service loads (AASHTO Eq.
5.7.3.4-1)

Maximum Spacing per LRFD 5.10.3.2


Note: AASHTO LRFD 5.10.3.2 states that the spacing of the reinforcement in walls and slabs shall not
exceed 1.5 times the thickness of the member or 18 in.

Smax2 min Tstem_bot Tformliner 18in 18 in

Smax min Smax1 Smax2 9.59 in

Maximum spacing of steel reinforcing bars


allowed per AASHTO LRFD 5.10.3.2
Maximum allowable spacing of steel
reinforcing bars

Check that the provided spacing is less than the maximum allowable spacing:
checklim

"OK" if Sws Smax


"NG" otherwise

checklim "OK"

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 35 OF 59

6.2.3 Shrinkage and Temperature Reinforcement per AASHTO LRFD Article 5.10.8
b Tstem_bot Tformliner 30 in

thickness of stem wall at bottom

h Hstem 261 in

total height of stem wall

1.3 b h
kip
2
2
2Amount of steel reinforcement required for
As_shtemp max0.11in min

0.6in 0.291 in
temperature and shrinkage located at both

2 ( b h ) fy in

sides of the stem

Selected steel bar size for temperature


and shrinkage reinforcement

Barshtempws 5

Bar#
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

Dia(in) Area(in )
0.375
0.11
2
2
Abshtempws Ab1 in 0.31 in Area of single reinforcement
0.5
0.20
0.625
0.31
0.75
0.44
0.875
0.6
1.00
0.79
1.128
1.00
1.27
1.27

Abshtempws

Maximum spacing for


Sshtempws min18in 3 Tstem_top Tformliner 12in
12.76 in temperature and shrinkage
As_shtemp

reinforcement in the stem

Sshtempws 12in

Selected spacing for temperature and


shrinkage reinforcement at both sides of
the stem

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 36 OF 59

6.3 Design for Shear:


The critical section for shear is located at the bottom of the wall stem (top face of footing) but not at distance
dv since the primary flexural reinforcement are located in the face of the stem wall where the load is applied
6.3.1 Simplified procedure for nonprestressed sections according to AASHTO LRFD 5.8.3.4.1
tv Tstem_bot Tformliner

Thickness of the wall stem


2.0

tv 30 in

if tv less than 16 in, then

45deg

b v 12in

value for sections less than 16" in


thickness LRFD [5.8.3.4.1]
value for sections less than 16" in
thickness LRFD [5.8.3.4.1]
width of concrete strip

d vstem max d ws

aws
2

0.9d ws 0.72 tv 25.87 in

Vn1 0.0316 f'c ksi b v d vstem


Vn2 0.25 f'c b v d vstem

Vn1 43.87 kip


Vn2 388.06 kip

Effective shear depth (AASHTO LRFD


Article 5.8.2.9)
Nominal shear resistance (1) (AASHTO
LRFD Eqns. 5.8.3.3-3 and 5.8.3.3-1)
Nominal shear resistance (2) (AASHTO
LRFD Eqn. 5.8.3.3-2)

The nominal shear resistance is the lesser of:

Vn min Vn1 Vn2

Vn 43.87 kip

Resistance factor for shear (AASHTO


LRFD Article 5.5.4.2.1)

v 0.9
Vr v Vn

Vr 39.49 kip

kip
Vustem_max 30.85 ft
ft
checklim

Nominal shear resistance (AASHTO LRFD


Article 5.8.3.3)

"OK" if Vr Vustem_max
"N.G." otherwise

Factored shear resistance (AASHTO


LRFD Eqn. 5.8.2.1-2)
Factored shear at critical section of wall
stem (Strength I)

checklim "OK"

Note:
If the Nominal shear resistance is not adequate using =2 and =45 deg, or the concrete section does not
meet the requirements for simplified procedure, use the General procedure of AASHTO LRFD Article 5.8.3.4.2

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 37 OF 59

6.3.2 General Procedure according to AASHTO LRFD 5.8.3.4.2


2

Area of nonprestressed steel on the


flexural tension side of the member
Factored axial load taken as positive if
tensile and negative if compressive (kip)

As Asws 2.54 in
Nu 0

Vu Vustem_max 30.85 kip

Factored shear at critical section of wall


stem (kip)

sx d vstem 25.87 in

See LRFD Figure 5.8.3.4.2-3: Definition of


crack spacing parameter

M ucs M ustem_max
Absolute value of factored moment at
critical section for shear

M ucs 253.7 kip ft

M u max M ucs Vu d vstem 253.7 kip ft


Mu
ss

d vstem

0.5Nu Vu

2.02 10

Es As

Net longitudinal tensile strain in the


section at the centroid of tension
reinforcement per LRFD Eq. 5.8.3.4.2-4
If the value of s calculated from Eq.

5.8.3.4.2-4 is negative, it should be taken


as zero or the value should be recalculated
with the denominator of Eq. 5.8.3.4.2-4
replaced by (EAs + EpAps + EoAc,).
However, s should not be taken as less

0 if ss 0

2.02 10

ss otherwise

than -0.40 x 10-3 .


sxe max 12in min sx

a
g

in

1.38

80in 25.87 in

0.63

crack spacing parameter per LRFD Eq.


5.8.3.4.2-5

29 3500 s 36.06

4.8

1 750 s

51
sxe

39

in

1.5

Vn1 0.0316 f'c ksi b v d vstem 32.95 kip


Vn2 0.25 f'c b v d vstem 388.06 kip

for sections not containing at least the


minimum amount of transverse
reinforcement (LRFD Eq. 5.8.3.4.2-2)
Nominal shear resistance of a concrete
member LRFD [5.8.3.3]

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 38 OF 59

The nominal shear resistance is the lesser of:

Vn min Vn1 Vn2

Vr v Vn

Vn 32.95 kip
Vr 29.66 kip

Vustem_max 30.85 kip


checklim

Factored shear resistance


Factored shear resistance (AASHTO
LRFD Eqn. 5.8.2.1-2)

"OK" if Vr Vustem_max

checklim "N.G."

"N.G." otherwise
Designer note: V of 29.66 is approximately equal to V of 30.85 kip. By inspection, it is OK.

7. Design of Retaining Wall Footing


The flexural reinforcement must be designed at two critical sections for retaining wall footing. The two
sections include the back and front faces of the stem (AASHTO LRFD Article 5.13.3.4).
The service and ultimate factored shear and moment of the Heel and Toe are calculated at the rear and front
face of the Wall Stem, respectively.

Neglect above
soil pressure
Heel

Toe

qmax
wtoe1

qmin
q toe 6.88 ksf

q heel 0.13 ksf


q uheel 0.41 ksf

q utoe 9.85 ksf

7.1 Heel Design for Flexure:


7.1.1 Applied Moment at Heel
The applied vertical loads on the heel of the footing are::
kip
EVSoilheelrect 39.8
ft

Rectangular portion of soil above heel


vertical dead load [EV]

kip
ESvert 3.09
ft

Vertical load due to uniform surcharge


from moment slab applied per linear foot of
wall [ESv]

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 39 OF 59

kip
LSvert 4.13
ft

Vertical component of live load surcharge


[LSv]

The bearing pressure at the back face of the stem is calculated as:
q bfwall q heel

q toe q heel
Wpcap

Wpcheel

Bearing pressure in the heel at the face of


the wall stem (Service I)

q bfwall 5.34 ksf


q ubfwall q uheel

q utoe q uheel
Wpcap

Wpcheel

Factored Bearing pressure in the heel t the


face of the wall stem (Strength I)

q ubfwall 7.52 ksf


The maximum factored moment applied due to Strength I Limit State on the Heel Footing is:

M uheel_strI DCstrmax conc Dpcap Wpcheel



EVstrmax EVSoilheelrect

Wpcheel

ft

ESstrmax ESvert LSstrmax LSvert


q ubfwall q uheel Wpcheel

1
q uheel Wpcheel

Wpcheel ft
3
2
2

M uheel_strI 327.5 kip ft


The maximum service moment applied due to Service I Limit State on the Heel Footing is:
Wpcheel
M uheel_servI DCsv conc Dpcap Wpcheel
ft
2

EVsv EVSoilheelrect

ESsv ESvert LSsv LSvert


q bfwall q heel Wpcheel

1
q heel Wpcheel

Wpcheel ft
3
2
2

M uheel_servI 211.52 kip ft


7.1.2 Design for Flexure
M uheel_strI 327.505 kip ft

Total Factored Moment at Heel per Foot

M uheel_servI 211.519 kip ft

Total Service Moment at Heel per Foot

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 40 OF 59

7.1.2.1 Primary Flexural Reinforcement (Top of Heel Footing)


Note: The use of epoxy coated reinforcement is required
According to AASHTO 5.7.3.3.2 unless otherwise specified, at any section of a flexural component, the
amount of flexural reinforcement shall be adequate to develop a factored flexural resistance, Mr, at least equal
to the lesser of:
The cracking moment (Mcr) determined from Equation 5.7.3.3.2-1

1.33 times the factored moment required by the applicable strength load combinations specified in
AASHTO Table 3.4.1-1

M uheel_strI 327.5 kip ft

Total Factored Moment at Heel per Foot

b 12in

Width of concrete strip

tft Dpcap 48 in
Ig
y t

b tft

3
4

12
tft
2
Ig

Ig 110592 in

Moment of inertia

y t 24 in

Depth at mid-section

Sc
4.61 10 in
yt

Section modulus for the extreme fiber of


the composite section where tensile stress
is caused by externally applied loads
(AASHTO 5.7.3.3.2)

1 1.6

Flexural cracking variability factor


(AASHTO 5.7.3.3.2)

fr 0.24 f'c ksi 0.54 ksi

Modulus of rupture for cracking moment


calculations (AASHTO 5.4.2.6)

3 0.75

Ratio of specified minimum yield strength


to ultimate tensile strength for A615 Grade
60 reinforcement (AASHTO 5.7.3.3.2)

M cr 3 1 fr Sc 247.29 kip ft

Cracking moment (simplified equation neglects prestressing and noncomposite


terms) (AASHTO LRFD Eqn. 5.7.3.3.2-1)

M uheel_des

M cr if M uheel_strI M cr
M uheel_strI otherwise

M uheel_des 327.5 kip ft


1

d heel tft 1.27in Coverft 45.37 in


2

Minimum design moment


Depth to tensile steel reinforcement
measured from extreme compression fiber
of concrete section. For the calculation of
effective depth, d, assume #10 bar.

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 41 OF 59

Rn

M uheel_strI
0.9 b d heel

0.003
0.85f'c

Calculated ratio of steel for the ultimate


moment in the heel footing

As b d heel 1.64 in

Calculated amount of steel for the ultimate


moment in the heel footing

bal 0.0335

Balanced ratio of steel reinforcement

max 0.75 bal 0.0252

Maximum ratio of steel

0.85

fy

Coefficient of resistance

0.18 ksi

f'c

2Rn

For practical purposes a steel ratio up to


1/2max = 1/2x0.75xbal = 0.375bal can

1
pract max 0.0126
2

also be used
Standard reinforcing bar number provided
from AASHTO Appendix B, Table B.4,
selected for the wall stem

Barheel 10
2

Bar#
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

Dia(in) Area(in )
0.375
0.11
0.5
0.20
0.625
0.31
0.75
0.44
0.875
0.6
1.00
0.79
1.128
1.00
1.27
1.27
1.41
1.56

Sheel 12

Abheel
As

in 9.3 in

Diameter of primary reinforcement in the


heel

d bheel d b1 in 1.27 in
2

Abheel Ab1 in 1.27 in

Area of single primary reinforcement in the


heel

Calculated spacing of moment


reinforcement

Sheel 6in

Selected Spacing of moment


reinforcement

Abheel
2
Asheel
12in 2.54 in
Sheel

Area of primary reinforcement in the heel

aheel

1 0.8

Asheel fy
0.85 f'c b

2.99 in

Approximate depth of compression block

Equivalent rectangular stress block


reduction factor = 0.85 for f`c <= 4000psi
(AASHTO 5.7.2.2)

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 42 OF 59

aheel

cheel

d heel tft

Depth to neutral section in concrete


section (AASHTO 5.5.4.2.1)

3.74 in
d bheel
2

Depth to tensile steel reinforcement


measured from extreme compression fiber
of concrete section

Coverft 45.37 in

7.1.2.2 Check Moment Strength


Tensile strain in concrete section at tensile
steel reinforcement where a strain of 0.005
is the limiting strain to ensure the concrete
member in flexure will be tension
controlled (AASHTO Figure C5.5.4.2.1-1)

d heel cheel
t 0.003
0.0334
cheel

checkstrain

"Tension Controlled" if t 0.005

checkstrain "Tension Controlled"

"Not Tension Controlled" otherwise

0.90 if t 0.005

dheel

1 if 0.002 t 0.005
0.65 0.15 c

heel

LRFD reduction factor for bending for


non-prestressed members (AASHTO Eqn.
5.5.4.2.1-2)

0.75 otherwise
f 0.9

Mnheel f Asheel fy d heel

aheel

501.44 kip ft
2

M uheel_des 327.5 kip ft


checkflexure

Flexural resistance for an equivalent 1ft


width of deck (AASHTO 5.7.3.2)
Minimum design moment

"O.K." if Mnheel M uheel_des

checkflexure "O.K."

"N.G." otherwise
7.1.2.3 Check for Minimum Reinforcement per AASHTO 5.7.3.3.2
M uheel_strI 327.5 kip ft

Total Factored moment at Toe per Foot

M cr 247.29 kip ft

Cracking moment (simplified equation neglects prestressing and noncomposite


terms) (AASHTO LRFD Eqn. 5.7.3.3.2-1)

checkminflexure

"O.K." if Mnheel min 1.33M uheel_strI M cr


"N.G." otherwise

checkminflexure "O.K."

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 43 OF 59

7.1.2.4 Crack Control


7.1.2.4.1 Stress at Tensile Reinforcement
The control of cracking by distribution of reinforcement must be checked. According to AASHTO LRFD
Article 5.7.3.4, crack control reinforcement is required where tension in the cross-section exceeds 80% of the
modulus of rupture.
Applied Service limit state factored
M uheel_servI 211.52 kip ft
moment
n

Es
Ec

Modular ratio of steel to concrete moduli of


elasticity

6.76

d heel 45.37 in

Depth to tension steel measured from


extreme compressive fiber of concrete
section

Asneg 0

Area of steel in compression. Not


considered in the calculations.

1
d' Coverfb 1.27in
2

Depth to compressive reinforcing steel


measured from extreme compressive fiber
of the concrete section

f ( c)

b c
2

n Asheel ( n 1 ) Asneg c n Asheel d heel ( n 1 ) Asneg d'

Depth to the neutral axis from extreme


compressive fiber of structural slab

c root f ( c) c 0in tft 10.06 in

Icr

b c
3

Muheel_servI y heel
23.79 ksi
Icr

s n

n Asneg ( d' c) n Asheel d heel c

y heel d heel c 35.31 in

Sum of the statical moments


about the neutral axis

2 2.55 104 in4

Moment of inertia of the doubly


reinforced transformed cracked
section

Distance from neutral axis to tensile steel


reinforcement

Tensile stress at tensile steel


reinforcement

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 44 OF 59

7.1.2.4.2 Required Spacing for Crack Control


Maximum Spacing per LRFD 5.7.3.4
Note: AASHTO LRFD 5.7.3.4 states that when tension in the cross-section exceeds 80% of the modulus of
rupture, specified in Article 5.4.2.6, at applicable service limit state load combination, the concrete
deck slab main reinforcement must meet the following spacing limitations.
3

Equivalent deck section modulus at


midspan

S Sc 4.61 10 in

fMserv

M uheel_servI
S

Checkvalidity

d c Coverft

d bheel
2

2.64 in

dc
s 1
1.08
0.7 tft d c
Smax1

"LRFD 5.7.3.4 is Valid" if fMserv 0.8 0.24 f'c ksi


Checkvalidity "LRFD 5.7.3.4 is Valid"
"LRFD 5.7.3.4 is Not Valid" otherwise

cf 0.75

Tensile stress at extreme deck due to


Service I Load combinations

0.55 ksi

Thickness of concrete cover measured


from extreme tension fiber to center of the
flexural reinforcement located closest
thereto (AASHTO 5.7.3.4)
Class 2 exposure factor for decks and
substructures exposed to water (AASHTO
5.7.3.4)

dc
700 cf
2 in 15.11 in
s
in

s ksi

Maximum spacing of tensile reinforcing


bars allowed to control flexural cracking of
concrete for service loads (AASHTO Eq.
5.7.3.4-1)

Maximum Spacing per LRFD 5.10.3.2


Note: AASHTO LRFD 5.10.3.2 states that the spacing of the reinforcement in walls and slabs shall not
exceed 1.5 times the thickness of the member or 18 in.

Smax2 min tft 18in 18 in

Smax min Smax1 Smax2 15.11 in

Maximum spacing of steel reinforcing bars


allowed per AASHTO LRFD 5.10.3.2
Maximum allowable spacing of steel
reinforcing bars

Check that the provided spacing is less than the maximum allowable spacing:
checklim

"OK" if Sheel Smax


"N.G." otherwise

checklim "OK"

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 45 OF 59

7.2 Toe Design for Flexure


7.2.1 Applied Moment at Toe
The bearing pressure at the front face of the stem is:
q ffwall

q uffwall

q heel q toe
Wpcap

Wpctoe q toe 6.19 ksf

q uheel q utoe
Wpcap

Wpctoe q utoe 8.81 ksf

Bearing pressure in the toe at the face of


the wall stem (Service I)
Factored Bearing pressure in the toe t the
face of the wall stem (Strength I)

The loads that are required include:


kip
DLpcap_toe conc Dpcap Wpctoe 1.2
ft

self-weight of toe footing

The maximum factored moment applied due to Strength I Limit State on the Toe Footing is:
Wpctoe

q utoe q uffwall 2Wpctoe



1
q

Wpctoe
uffwall pctoe 2
3
2

M utoe_strI 1ftDCstrmin DLpcap_toe

M utoe_strI 17.93 kip ft


The maximum service moment applied due to Service I Limit State on the Toe Footing is:
Wpctoe

q toe q ffwall 2Wpctoe



1

Wpctoe
q ffwall Wpctoe 2
3
2

M utoe_servI 1ft DCsv DLpcap_toe

M utoe_servI 12.1 kip ft


Once the maximum moment at the critical section is known, the same procedure that was used for the stem
to calculate the flexural reinforcement must be followed. The footing toe flexural reinforcement is located
longitudinally in the bottom of the footing since the bottom of footing is in tension at the critical section.
These bars will extend from the back of the heel to the front of the toe taking into account the clear cover.
7.2.2 Design for Flexure
M utoe_strI 17.934 kip ft

Total Factored Moment at Toe per Foot

M utoe_servI 12.102 kip ft

Total Service Moment at Toe per Foot

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 46 OF 59

7.2.2.1 Primary Flexural Reinforcement (Bottom of Toe Footing)


Note: The use of epoxy coated reinforcement is required
According to AASHTO 5.7.3.3.2 unless otherwise specified, at any section of a flexural component, the
amount of flexural reinforcement shall be adequate to develop a factored flexural resistance, Mr, at least equal
to the lesser of:
The cracking moment (Mcr) determined from Equation 5.7.3.3.2-1

1.33 times the factored moment required by the applicable strength load combinations specified in
AASHTO Table 3.4.1-1

M utoe_strI 17.934 kip ft

Total Factored Moment at Toe per Foot

b 12in

Width of concrete strip

tft Dpcap 48 in
Ig
y t

b tft

Thickness of the footing

3
4

12
tft
2
Ig

Ig 110592 in

Moment of inertia

y t 24 in

Depth at mid-section
Section modulus for the extreme fiber of
the composite section where tensile stress
is caused by externally applied loads
(AASHTO 5.7.3.3.2)

Sc
in
yt
1 1.6

Flexural cracking variability factor


(AASHTO 5.7.3.3.2)

fr 0.24 f'c ksi 0.54 ksi

Modulus of rupture for cracking moment


calculations (AASHTO 5.4.2.6)

3 0.75

Ratio of specified minimum yield strength


to ultimate tensile strength for A615 Grade
60 reinforcement (AASHTO 5.7.3.3.2)

M cr 3 1 fr Sc 247.29 kip ft

M utoe_des

Cracking moment (simplified equation neglects prestressing and noncomposite


terms) (AASHTO LRFD Eqn. 5.7.3.3.2-1)

M cr if M utoe_strI M cr
M utoe_strI otherwise

M utoe_des 247.29 kip ft

Minimum design moment

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 47 OF 59

Depth to tensile steel reinforcement


measured from extreme compression fiber
of concrete section. For the calculation of
effective depth, d, assume #10 bar.

1
d toe tft 1.27in Coverfb 3.7 ft
2

Rn

M utoe_des
0.9 b d toe

0.85

fy

f'c

Coefficient of resistance

0.14 ksi

0.00237
0.85f'c

2Rn

Calculated ratio of steel for the ultimate


moment in the toe footing

As b d toe 1.26 in

Calculated amount of steel for the ultimate


moment in the toe footing

bal 0.0335

Balanced ratio of steel reinforcement

max 0.75 bal 0.0252

Maximum ratio of steel

For practical purposes a steel ratio up to


1/2max = 1/2x0.75xbal = 0.375bal can

1
pract max 0.0126
2

also be used
Standard reinforcing bar number provided
from AASHTO Appendix B, Table B.4,
selected for the wall stem

Bartoe 10

Bar#
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

Dia(in) Area(in )
0.375
0.11
0.5
0.20
0.625
0.31
0.75
0.44
0.875
0.6
1.00
0.79
1.128
1.00
1.27
1.27
1.41
1.56

Diameter of primary reinforcement in the


toe footing

d btoe d b1 in 1.27 in
2

Abtoe Ab1 in 1.27 in

Area of single primary reinforcement

Abtoe
Stoe 12
in 12.1 in
As

Calculated spacing of moment


reinforcement

Stoe 6in

Selected Spacing of moment


reinforcement

Abtoe
2
Astoe
12in 2.54 in
Stoe

Area of primary reinforcement in the toe


footing

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 48 OF 59

atoe

Astoe fy

2.99 in

0.85 f'c b

Approximate depth of compression block


Equivalent rectangular stress block
reduction factor = 0.85 for f`c <= 4000psi
(AASHTO 5.7.2.2)

1 0.8

ctoe

atoe
1

d toe tft

Depth to neutral section in concrete


section (AASHTO 5.5.4.2.1)

3.74 in
d btoe
2

Coverfb 44.37 in

Depth to tensile steel reinforcement


measured from extreme compression fiber
of concrete section

7.2.2.2 Check Moment Strength

d toe ctoe
t 0.003
0.0326
ctoe
checkstrain

"Tension Controlled" if t 0.005

Tensile strain in concrete section at tensile


steel reinforcement where a strain of 0.005
is the limiting strain to ensure the concrete
member in flexure will be tension
controlled (AASHTO Figure C5.5.4.2.1-1)
checkstrain "Tension Controlled"

"Not Tension Controlled" otherwise


f

0.90 if t 0.005

dtoe

0.65 0.15 c 1 if 0.002 t 0.005

toe

LRFD reduction factor for bending for


non-prestressed members (AASHTO Eqn.
5.5.4.2.1-2)

0.75 otherwise
f 0.9

Mntoe f Astoe fy d toe

atoe

490.01 kip ft
2

M utoe_des 247.29 kip ft


checkflexure

"O.K." if Mntoe M utoe_strI


"N.G." otherwise

Flexural resistance for an equivalent 1ft


width of deck (AASHTO 5.7.3.2)
Minimum design moment

checkflexure "O.K."

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 49 OF 59

7.2.2.3 Check for Minimum Reinforcement per AASHTO 5.7.3.3.2


M utoe_strI 17.93 kip ft

Total Factored moment at Toe per Foot

M cr 247.29 kip ft

Cracking moment (simplified equation neglects prestressing and noncomposite


terms) (AASHTO LRFD Eqn. 5.7.3.3.2-1)

checkminflexure

"O.K." if Mntoe min 1.33M utoe_strI M cr

checkminflexure "O.K."

"N.G." otherwise
7.2.2.4 Crack Control
7.2.2.4.1 Stress at Tensile Reinforcement
The control of cracking by distribution of reinforcement must be checked. According to AASHTO LRFD
Article 5.7.3.4, crack control reinforcement is required where tension in the cross-section exceeds 80% of the
modulus of rupture.
Applied Service limit state factored
moment

M utoe_servI 12.1 kip ft


n

Es
Ec

Modular ratio of steel to concrete moduli of


elasticity

6.76

d toe 44.37 in

Depth to tension steel measured from


extreme compressive fiber of concrete
section

Asneg 0

Area of steel in compression. Not


considered in the calculation

1
d' Coverft 1.27in 2.64 in
2

Depth to compressive reinforcing steel


measured from extreme compressive fiber
of the concrete section

f ( c)

b c
2

n Astoe ( n 1 ) Asneg c n Astoe d toe ( n 1 ) Asneg d'

Depth to the neutral axis from extreme


compressive fiber of structural slab

c root f ( c) c 0in tft 9.93 in


Icr

b c
3

Mutoe_servI y toe
1.39 ksi
Icr

s n

n Asneg ( d' c) n Astoe d toe c

y toe d toe c 34.43 in

Sum of the statical moments


about the neutral axis

2 2.43 104 in4

Moment of inertia of the doubly


reinforced transformed cracked section

Distance from neutral axis to tensile steel


reinforcement
Tensile stress at tensile steel
reinforcement

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 50 OF 59

7.2.2.4.2 Required Spacing for Crack Control


Maximum Spacing per LRFD 5.7.3.4
Note: AASHTO LRFD 5.7.3.4 states that when tension in the cross-section exceeds 80% of the modulus of
rupture, specified in Article 5.4.2.6, at applicable service limit state load combination, the concrete
deck slab main reinforcement must meet the following spacing limitations.
3

Equivalent deck section modulus at


midspan

S Sc 4.61 10 in
fMserv

M utoe_servI
S

Checkvalidity

"LRFD 5.7.3.4 is Valid" if fMserv 0.8 0.24 f'c ksi


"LRFD 5.7.3.4 is Not Valid" otherwise

d c Coverfb

Tensile stress at extreme deck due to


Service I Load combinations

0.03 ksi

d btoe

3.63 in

Checkvalidity "LRFD 5.7.3.4 is Not Valid"


Thickness of concrete cover measured
from extreme tension fiber to center of the
flexural reinforcement located closest
thereto (AASHTO 5.7.3.4)
Class 2 exposure factor for decks and
substructures exposed to water (AASHTO
5.7.3.4)

cf 0.75
dc
s 1
1.12
0.7 tft d c

dc
700 cf
Smax1
2 in 330.22 in
s
in

s ksi

Maximum spacing of tensile reinforcing


bars allowed to control flexural cracking of
concrete for service loads (AASHTO Eq.
5.7.3.4-1)

Maximum Spacing per LRFD 5.10.3.2


Note: AASHTO LRFD 5.10.3.2 states that the spacing of the reinforcement in walls and slabs shall not
exceed 1.5 times the thickness of the member or 18 in.

Smax2 min tft 18in 18 in

Smax min Smax1 Smax2 18 in

Maximum spacing of steel reinforcing bars


allowed per AASHTO LRFD 5.10.3.2
Maximum allowable spacing of steel
reinforcing bars

Check that the provided spacing is less than the maximum allowable spacing:
checklim

"OK" if Stoe Smax


"N.G." otherwise

checklim "OK"

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 51 OF 59

7.3 Shrinkage and Temperature Reinforcement per AASHTO LRFD Article 5.10.8
b Wpcap 237 in

total width of footing from outside to


outside

h tft 48 in

thickness of footing

1.3 b h
kip
2
2
2Amount of steel reinforcement required for
As_shtemp max0.11in min

0.6in 0.432 in
temperature and shrinkage
2 ( b h ) fy in

Selected steel bar size for temperature


and shrinkage reinforcement located in the
transverse top and bottom of footing

Barshtempft 7

Bar#
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

Dia(in) Area(in )
0.375
0.11
2
2
Abshtemp Ab1 in 0.6 in
0.5
0.20
0.625
0.31
0.75
0.44
0.875
0.6
1.00
0.79
1.128
1.00
1.27
1.27

Area of single reinforcement

Abshtemp

Sshtempft min 18in 3 tft 12in


16.65 in
As_shtemp

Maximum spacing for temperature and


shrinkage reinforcement

Sshtempft 12in

Selected spacing for temperature and


shrinkage reinforcement

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 52 OF 59

7.4 Design for Shear


Shear design in retaining wall footings consists of having adequate resistance against one-way and
two-way actions. (Two-way shear does not apply for the spread footing). The design shear is taken at a
critical section. For retaining walls, one-way action is checked in the toe and heel. The factored shear
force at the critical section is computed by cutting the footing at the critical section and summing the
loads that are outside the critical section.
7.4.1 One-Way Shear Force at Footing Heel
For one-way action in the retaining wall footing heel the critical section is taken as follows:
d bheel
Assumed effective depth
d heel tft Coverft
d heel 45.37 in
2
aheel 2.99 in

Depth of equivalent stress block at heel

b v 12in

Effective web width per 1ft strip

d vheel max d heel

aheel
2

0.9d heel 0.72 tft

Effective shear depth (AASHTO LRFD


Article 5.8.2.9)

The bearing pressure at distance dv from the back face of the stem is calculated as:
q bfwall 5.34 ksf

Bearing stress in the heel at the face of the


wall stem (Service I)

q ubfwall 7.52 ksf

Bearing stress in the heel at the face of


the wall stem (Strength I)

The factored one-way shear force and Moment at the retaining wall footing heel critical section on a per foot
basis is:

Vuheel DCstrmax conc Dpcap Wpcheel

EVstrmax EVSoilheelrect

1ft

ESstrmax ESvert LSstrmax LSvert


qubfwall q uheel

Wpcheel

Vuheel 22.82 kip


M uheel_strI 327.5 kip ft

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 53 OF 59

7.4.2 One-Way Shear Force at Footing Toe


For one-way action in the retaining wall footing toe, the critical section is taken as follows:
d btoe
Assumed effective depth
d toe tft Coverfb
d toe 44.37 in
2
Depth of equivalent stress block at toe

atoe 2.99 in

d vtoe max d toe

atoe
2

0.9d toe 0.72 tft

Effective shear depth (AASHTO LRFD


Article 5.8.2.9)

d vtoe 42.87 in

Effective web width per 1ft strip

b v 12in

The factored one-way shear force at the retaining wall footing toe critical section on a per foot basis is:

Vutoe 1ft DCstrmin DLpcap_toe

q utoe q uffwall
2

Wpctoe

Vutoe 17.59 kip


7.4.3 Check for Shear in Footing Heel
The critical section for shear in the heel is located at the interior face of the wall stem but not at distance dv
since the primary flexural reinforcement are located in the top face of the heel where the load is applied
7.4.3.1 Simplified procedure for nonprestressed sections according to AASHTO LRFD 5.8.3.4.1
d v d vheel
2.0
tv tft 48 in if tv less than 16 in, then

45deg

value for sections less than 16" in


thickness LRFD [5.8.3.4.1]
value for sections less than 16" in
thickness LRFD [5.8.3.4.1]

Vn1 0.0316 f'c ksi b v d v

Vn1 74.4 kip

Nominal shear resistance (1) (AASHTO


LRFD Eqns. 5.8.3.3-3 and 5.8.3.3-1)

Vn2 0.25 f'c b v d v

Vn2 658.06 kip

Nominal shear resistance (2) (AASHTO


LRFD Eqn. 5.8.3.3-2)

The nominal shear resistance is the lesser of:

Vn min Vn1 Vn2

Vn 74.4 kip

Resistance factor for shear (AASHTO


LRFD Article 5.5.4.2.1)

v 0.9
Vr v Vn

Nominal shear resistance (AASHTO LRFD


Article 5.8.3.3)

Vr 66.96 kip

Factored shear resistance (AASHTO


LRFD Eqn. 5.8.2.1-2)

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 54 OF 59

Vuheel 22.82 kip


checklim

Factored shear at critical section of heel


(AASHTO LRFD Eqn. 5.8.2.1-2)

"OK" if Vr Vuheel

checklim "OK"

"N.G." otherwise
Note:
If the Nominal shear resistance is not adequate using =2 and =45 deg, or the concrete section does not
meet the requirements for simplified procedure, use the General procedure of AASHTO LRFD Article 5.8.3.4.2
7.4.3.2 General Procedure according to AASHTO LRFD 5.8.3.4.2
As Astoe 2.54 in

Area of nonprestressed steel on the


flexural tension side of the member

Nu 0

Factored axial load taken as positive if


tensile and negative if compressive (kip)

Vu Vuheel 22.82 kip

Factored shear force (kip)

sx d v 43.87 in

See LRFD Figure 5.8.3.4.2-3: Definition of


crack spacing parameter

M ucs M uheel_strI
Absolute value of factored moment at
critical section for shear

M ucs 327.5 kip ft

M u max M ucs Vu d v 327.5 kip ft


Mu
ss

dv

0.5Nu Vu
1.53 10

Es As

Net longitudinal tensile strain in the


section at the centroid of tension
reinforcement per LRFD Eq. 5.8.3.4.2-4
If the value of s calculated from Eq.

5.8.3.4.2-4 is negative, it should be taken


as zero or the value should be recalculated
with the denominator of Eq. 5.8.3.4.2-4
replaced by (EAs + EpAps + EoAc,).
However, s should not be taken as less

0 if ss 0

1.53 10

ss otherwise

than -0.40 x 10-3 .


sxe max 12in min sx

a
g

in

1.38
0.63

80in 43.87 in

crack spacing parameter per LRFD Eq.


5.8.3.4.2-5

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 55 OF 59

29 3500 s 34.34

4.8

1 750 s

51
sxe

39

in

for sections not containing at least the


minimum amount of transverse
reinforcement (LRFD Eq. 5.8.3.4.2-2)

1.38

Nominal shear resistance of a concrete


member LRFD [5.8.3.3]

Vn1 0.0316 f'c ksi b v d v 51.24 kip


Vn2 0.25 f'c b v d v 658.06 kip
The nominal shear resistance is the lesser of:

Vn min Vn1 Vn2

Vr v Vn

Vn 51.24 kip
Factored shear resistance

Vr 46.12 kip

Factored shear at critical section of heel


(AASHTO LRFD Eqn. 5.8.2.1-2)

Vuheel 22.82 kip


checklim

"OK" if Vr Vuheel

checklim "OK"

"N.G." otherwise

7.4.4 Check for Shear in Footing Toe:


7.4.4.1 Simplified procedure for nonprestressed sections according to AASHTO LRFD 5.8.3.4.1
d v d vtoe
2.0
tv tft 48 in if tv less than 16 in, then

45deg

value for sections less than 16" in


thickness LRFD [5.8.3.4.1]
value for sections less than 16" in
thickness LRFD [5.8.3.4.1]

Vn1 0.0316 f'c ksi b v d v

Vn1 72.7 kip

Nominal shear resistance (1) (AASHTO


LRFD Eqns. 5.8.3.3-3 and 5.8.3.3-1)

Vn2 0.25 f'c b v d v

Vn2 643.06 kip

Nominal shear resistance (2) (AASHTO


LRFD Eqn. 5.8.3.3-2)

The nominal shear resistance is the lesser of:

Vn min Vn1 Vn2

Vn 72.7 kip

Nominal shear resistance (AASHTO LRFD


Article 5.8.3.3)

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 56 OF 59

Resistance factor for shear (AASHTO


LRFD Article 5.5.4.2.1)

v 0.9
Vr v Vn

Vr 65.43 kip

Vutoe 17.59 kip


checklim

Factored shear resistance (AASHTO


LRFD Eqn. 5.8.2.1-2)
Factored shear resistance (AASHTO
LRFD Eqn. 5.8.2.1-2)

"OK" if Vr Vutoe

checklim "OK"

"N.G." otherwise
Note:
If the Nominal shear resistance is not adequate using =2 and =45 deg, or the concrete section does not
meet the requirements for simplified procedure, use the General procedure of AASHTO LRFD Article 5.8.3.4.2
7.4.4.2 General Procedure according to AASHTO LRFD 5.8.3.4.2
2

As Astoe 2.54 in

Area of nonprestressed steel on the


flexural tension side of the member

Nu 0

Factored axial load taken as positive if


tensile and negative if compressive (kip)

Vu Vutoe 17.59 kip

Factored shear force (kip)

sx d v 42.87 in

See LRFD Figure 5.8.3.4.2-3: Definition of


crack spacing parameter

M ucs M utoe_strI
Absolute value of factored moment at
critical section for shear

M ucs 17.93 kip ft

M u max M ucs Vu d v 62.83 kip ft


Mu
ss

dv

0.5Nu Vu
Es As

4.78 10

Net longitudinal tensile strain in the


section at the centroid of tension
reinforcement per LRFD Eq. 5.8.3.4.2-4

If the value of s calculated from Eq.


s

0 if ss 0
ss otherwise

4.78 10

5.8.3.4.2-4 is negative, it should be taken


as zero or the value should be recalculated
with the denominator of Eq. 5.8.3.4.2-4
replaced by (EAs + EpAps + EoAc,).
However, s should not be taken as less
than -0.40 x 10-3 .

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 57 OF 59

sxe max 12in min sx

a
g

in

1.38

80in 42.87 in

0.63

crack spacing parameter per LRFD Eq.


5.8.3.4.2-5

29 3500 s 30.67

4.8

1 750 s

51
sxe

39

in

2.2

Vn1 0.0316 f'c ksi b v d v 80.03 kip

for sections not containing at least the


minimum amount of transverse
reinforcement (LRFD Eq. 5.8.3.4.2-2)
Nominal shear resistance of a concrete
member LRFD [5.8.3.3]

Vn2 0.25 f'c b v d v 643.06 kip


The nominal shear resistance is the lesser of:

Vn min Vn1 Vn2


Vr v Vn

Vn 80.03 kip
Vr 72.03 kip

Vutoe 17.59 kip


checklim

"OK" if Vr Vutoe
"N.G." otherwise

Factored shear resistance


Factored shear resistance (AASHTO
LRFD Eqn. 5.8.2.1-2)
checklim "OK"

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 58 OF 59

8. Summary of Retaining Wall Reinforcement


Summary of Wall Geometry:
Stem Cross section:
Tstem_bot 2.5 ft

Stem wall thickness at foundation

Tstem_top 1.25 ft

Stem wall thickness at top

Footing Cross section:


Wpcap 19.75 ft

Width of the footing base

Dpcap 4 ft

Depth of the footing

Wpctoe 2 ft

Width of the footing toe

Wpcheel 15.25 ft

width of the footing heel

Summary of Wall Reinforcement:


Wall Stem Reinforcement:
For VERTICAL-BACK FACE Reinforcement Provide the following reinforcement bar size at
the following spacing:
Barws 10

Steel reinforcement bar size

Sws 6 in

Spacing between steel reinforcements CTC

For Shrinkage and Temperature Reinforcement provide reinforcement on the FRONT


FACE in the VERTICAL DIRECTION as follows:
Barshtempvert 6

Steel reinforcement bar size

Sshtempvert 12 in Spacing between steel reinforcements CTC

For Shrinkage and Temperature Reinforcement provide reinforcement on BOTH FACES in


the HORIZONTAL DIRECTION as follows:
Barshtempws 5

Steel reinforcement bar size

Sshtempws 12 in

Spacing between steel reinforcements CTC

PROJECT NUMBER: HBM1301-568


PROJECT NAME: CTA-95th St Terminal Improvement
CALC BY: MA, LAB DATE: 03/21/2014
CHECK BY: MI, MAI DATE: 03/28/2014
Title: Proposed Retaining Wall (Typical SE Wall Without Canopy Column Pedestal)
SHEET: 59 OF 59

Footing Reinforcement:
For HEEL reinforcement on the TOP along the width of the FOOTING Provide the following
reinforcement bar size at the following spacing:
Barheel 10

Steel reinforcement bar size

Sheel 6 in

Spacing between steel reinforcements CTC

For TOE reinforcement on the BOTTOM along the width of the FOOTING Provide the
following reinforcement bar size at the following spacing:
Bartoe 10

Steel reinforcement bar size

Stoe 6 in

Spacing between steel reinforcements CTC

For Shrinkage and Temperature Reinforcement on TOP and BOT TOM along the length of
the FOOTING Provide the following reinforcement bar size at the following spacing:
Barshtempft 7

Steel reinforcement bar size

Sshtempft 12 in Spacing between steel reinforcements CTC

Оценить