You are on page 1of 76

REPORT ON

DESIGN OF RCC RETAINING WALL BETWEEN CH. KM 54.342 AND 54.504


(OLD CH. KM 53.625 AND 53.787)
PROJECT
AGARTALA SABROOM NEW BG RAIL LINK PROJECT

REPORT NO.: GCPL/CS/304-NFR-AS/SS-01 12th SEPT, 2017

REPORT ISSUE STATUS


<01> 12/09/2017 First Submission GE NSS PJN
Issue Date Description Prepared Checked Approved

Report Submitted to:

NORTHEAST FRONTIER RAILWAY


REPORT ON
DESIGN OF RETAINING WALL BETWEEN CH. KM 54.342 AND 54.504
(OLD CH. KM 53.625 AND 53.787)

PROJECT
AGARTALA SABROOM NEW BG RAIL LINK PROJECT

CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................. 3
2 TOPOGRAPHICAL FEATURES .......................................................................................................... 3
3 GEOMETRY OF CUT PROFILE AND RETAINING STRUCTURES .......................................................... 3
4 GEOTECHNICAL PARAMETERS & SUBSURFACE PROFILE ................................................................ 4
5 DESIGN APPROACH ........................................................................................................................ 5
5.1 EARTH PRESSURE CALCULATION AND RCC RETAINING WALL ..........................................................................5
5.2 GLOBAL STABILITY ANALYSIS ...................................................................................................................7
6 ANALYSIS AND RESULTS................................................................................................................. 8
6.1 STABILITY ANALYSIS FOR TEMPORARY CUT SLOPE .........................................................................................8
6.2 SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS OF CUT SLOPE ABOVE RETAINING WALL ................................................................8
6.3 RCC RETAINING WALL WITH PILE FOUNDATION ..........................................................................................9
6.4 RCC RETAINING WALL WITH RAFT FOUNDATION.......................................................................................11
7 SURFACE AND SUBSURFACE DRAINAGE ...................................................................................... 11
ANNEXURE I BOREHOLE LOG AND LABORATORY TEST RESULTS FOR BH NO. 16 .....................................
ANNEXURE II CALCULATION OF SEISMIC COEFFICIENT ............................................................................
ANNEXURE III STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OF RCC RETAINING WALL & PILE FOUNDATION .....
ANNEXURE IV PILE CAPACITY CALCULATION ...........................................................................................
ANNEXURE V BEARING CAPACITY ANALYSIS ...........................................................................................
ANNEXURE VI STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS FOR RCC RETAINING WALL & RAFT FOUNDAITON ......................
ANNEXURE VII SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS..............................................................................................
ANNEXURE VIII SOLUTION DRAWINGS ....................................................................................................
ANNEXURE IX REFERENCES .....................................................................................................................

2
1 Introduction
Northeast Frontier Railway are constructing new broad gauge rail linking Agartala and Sabroom. The
alignment between Chainage 54.342 and 54.504 km passes through a natural mount. Thus there is a need
to cut the mount to reach formation level. Considering the height of cut and ROW, there is a need to
provide retaining structure. Genstru Consultants Pvt. Ltd. has been awarded the consultancy work for
design of retaining structure between Chainage 54.342 and 54.504 km for construction of railway line.

The objective of the present report is to provide the design of retaining structures for cut slopes on LHS &
RHS.

2 Topographical features
Between Ch. Km. 54.342 and 54.504 the ground level at ROW along the proposed alignment varies from
47.031m to 55.552m on LHS and from 48.437m to 55.547m on RHS. The formation level varies from
37.278 to 37.915m on both LHS and RHS. Thus the height of cut slope varies from 0.90m to 18.0m on LHS
and 1.0m to 18m on RHS respectively. The ROW available is 30m on either side of the centre line of
alignment.

3 Geometry of Cut profile and retaining structures


As can be seen from geotechnical investigation report no. 3300-07, BH no. 16, the strata mainly
comprises of silty sand. The maximum height of cutting at ROW is 18.0m above formation level. Giving
due consideration to subsurface stratification, ROW of 30m and maximum height of cutting 18m, the
combination of stable cut slope and retaining structure has been proposed as mentioned below.
The RCC retaining wall shall be constructed at the toe of cut slope. The height of RCC retaining
wall above formation level shall be 6.0m (Overall height 8.0m) on section RS-1, 4.50m (Overall
height 6.5m) on section RS-2 and 3.0m (Overall height 5.0m) on section RS-3 on LHS and RHS.
A berm of about 3.0m shall be provided above the retaining wall. The details of sections
mentioned above based on height of retaining wall has been defined in longitudinal profile
drawing.
Due to higher height of cut slope, the earth pressure shall be much higher as compared to RCC
retaining wall with flat backfill above the crust. Giving due consideration to higher earth pressure
and ground conditions at founding level, RCC retaining wall in section RS-1 and RS-2 has to be
founded on pile foundation.
The RCC retaining wall in section RS-3 of maximum height 3.0m above formation level (Overall
height 5.0m) shall be founded on raft foundation.
The existing ground above retaining wall shall be cut at 1.5(H):1(V) slope with 3m berm at every
6m rise as shown in the layout drawings.

3
A typical sketch of geometry of retaining structures and cut slope is shown in figure 1.

?
RoW = 30.00m

1.5
1
Varies

3.00
1.5 Varies
1
6.00
Varies
3.00

Backfill soil
Temporary Cut
Slope Varies
FORMATION
in-situ LEVEL
Soil

Pile P1 P2 P3

All dimensions are in meter.

Figure 1 Geometry of retaining structures and cut slope - RS-1

4 Geotechnical Parameters & Subsurface profile


As per geotechnical investigation report prepared by CE Testing in 2014 having report number 3300-07,
borehole no 16 has been conducted within the design stretch along the proposed railway line and the
same has been considered for deriving the subsoil profile and geotechnical parameters. As per the
geotechnical investigation report, the sub surface profile in general consists of Silty clay as the top
stratum followed by clayey silty sand. Below clayey silty sand stratum, silty sand stratum has been
encountered at greater depth. Ground water table had not been encountered up to explored depth,
during the course of investigation as per borehole data. The subsurface profile considered in analysis has
been shown in figure 2 below. The backfill soil has been considered to be sandy soil. The geotechnical
parameters used for analysis and design are presented in Table 1. The bore log and summary of
laboratory test results for borehole no 16 from the geotechnical investigation report prepared by CE
Testing in 2014 has been attached as Annexure I.
Table 1: Geotechnical Parameters for Design

Strata Parameters Unit Values

Saturated Unit Weight [kN/m3] 20

Silty Clay/Clayey Silt Friction Angle [phi] 0

Cohesion [kPa] 60

Saturated Unit Weight [kN/m3] 20

Clayey Silty sand Friction Angle [phi] 30

Cohesion [kPa] 10

4
Strata Parameters Unit Values

Saturated Unit Weight [kN/m3] 20

Clayey Silty sand Friction Angle [phi] 30

Cohesion [kPa] 15

Saturated Unit Weight [kN/m3] 20

Silty Sand Friction Angle [phi] 33

Cohesion [kPa] 0

Concrete
Concrete strength = 30 MPa
Modulus of Elasticity = 29.5 GPa
Steel Reinforcement Fe 500
The subsurface profile considered for analysis shall be as shown in figure 2 below.

Figure 2 Subsurface Profile

5 Design Approach

5.1 Earth pressure calculation and RCC retaining wall


The analysis of earth pressure has been carried out in accordance with Cl. 5.7 and Cl. 5.12.6 of IRS Code
of practice for the design of Sub-Structures and Foundations of Bridges for static and seismic conditions
respectively. As per mitigation measures proposed in section 3, there shall be an RCC retaining wall of
height 6.0m, 4.5m and 3.0m above formation level in sections RS-1, RS-2 and RS-3 respectively. The

5
existing ground above the RCC retaining wall shall be cut at 1.5H: 1V slope with 3m berm at every 6m
rise. The active earth pressure acting on RCC retaining wall has been worked out by considering the
inclined backfill. The earth pressure has been evaluated on a vertical plane passing through the heel of
the RCC wall. The coefficient of active earth pressure has been calculated by considering wall friction
angle as 2/3 times angle of internal friction. The horizontal thrust and vertical component of earth
pressure evaluated for all sections in static and seismic condition has been included in Table 2. The earth
pressure distribution and point of application of earth pressure are as shown in Figure 3.
Table 2 Summary of forces due to earth pressure on retaining wall
Height of retaining wall
S. Vertical Component
above formation level Case Horizontal Thrust (kN/m)
No. (kN/m)
(m)
1 Static 251 109
6.00 (Section RS-1)
2 Seismic 610 264

3 Static 144 62
4.50 (Section RS-2)
4 Seismic 350 151

5 Static 85 37
3.00 (Section RS-3)
6 Seismic 207 90

(a) Earth Pressure distribution for 6.0m height retaining wall

6
(b) Earth Pressure distribution for 4.50m height retaining wall

(c) Earth Pressure distribution for 3.0m height retaining wall


Figure 3 (a) to (c) Earth Pressure distribution for Static and Seismic conditions

The design of RCC retaining wall has been carried out in accordance with IS: 456-2000.

5.2 Global Stability Analysis


The slope stability analysis has been carried out by limit equilibrium method (Bishop Simplified Method).
The method considers circular slip surfaces for stability analysis. The mass of soil/rock above the slip
surface is divided into vertical slices. The requirements of equilibrium are applied to the slices. The factor
of safety is defined as the ratio of actual shear strength(s) possessed by the soil on trial surface to that
required to maintain limiting equilibrium. The stability analysis has been carried out using software
Slide of Rocscience Inc., USA.

7
Slide offers not less than 17 different material strength models for rock and soil including Mohr-Columb,
Anisotropic and Generalized Hoek-Brown. Advanced search algorithms simplify the task of finding the
critical slip surface with the lowest safety factor.

6 Analysis and results

6.1 Stability analysis for temporary cut slope


Slope stability analysis has been carried out for temporary excavation to enable construction of RCC
retaining wall. The analysis is carried out for static case. The FOS achieved from analysis is 1.061 which is
greater than 1.

6.2 Slope Stability Analysis of Cut Slope above retaining wall


The slope stability analysis has been carried out for cut slope 1.5(H):1(V) above RCC retaining wall. The
maximum height RCC retaining wall of 6.0m above formation level has been considered for analysis. The
cut slope of total height 12m with berm of 3m at every 6m rise has been considered for analysis. The
stability analysis is carried out with profile as shown in Figure 4. The results of slope stability analyses are
enclosed as Annexure VII.
Water table has not been encountered during the course of investigation. However for accounting the
pore pressure developed due to seepage, pore pressure coefficient (ru) value of 0.1 has been considered
for analysis.
Seismic Details:
As per IS 1893 part-1 (2002), the area falls under seismic zone V. Seismic coefficients for zone V calculated
as per IS-1893 are as below: The seismic coefficient calculation has been attached as Annexure III.
Horizontal Co-efficient Ah= 0.15
Vertical Co-efficient Av = 0.075

8
Figure 4 Profile Considered for Analysis

The summary of stability analysis has been shown in table 3.


Table 3: Summary of stability analysis

FoS
Slope Considered Case Codal
Achieved
Recommendation

Static 1.3 1.629


Ch. 54.342 54.504
km
Seismic 1.0 1.112

The recommended factor of safety in static and seismic conditions are 1.30 (IRC HRB SP-15) and 1.00
respectively. The target factor of safety is considered as per U.S. Department of Transportation Federal
Highway Administration, Publication No. FHWA-NHI-00-043 Mechanically stabilized earth walls and
reinforced soil slopes design & construction guidelines. Also as per the report IITK-GSDMA Guidelines
for Seismic Design of Earth Dams and Embankments Provisions with Commentary and Explanatory
Examples (August 2005; Revised May 2007), a limit equilibrium factor of safety of 1.0 shall be considered
acceptable in the equivalent-static seismic slope stability assessment.

6.3 RCC Retaining wall with Pile foundation


The maximum horizontal thrust on pile for 6.0m height retaining wall work out to be 251 kN in static and
610 kN in seismic condition. For 4.50m height retaining wall, the maximum horizontal thrust on pile
works out to be 216 kN and 525 kN in static and seismic conditions respectively. Giving due consideration
to the lateral thrust expected, the subsurface profile, it is proposed to found the RCC retaining wall in
sections RS-1 and RS-2 on bored cast in-situ piles. The lateral capacity of single pile of 1000mm diameter
9
has been worked out based on IS 2911 (Part 1/Sec2):2010 and the same is 706kN and 808kN for an
allowable deflection of 12mm in static and seismic conditions respectively. Hence, to resist the lateral
loads in sections RS-1 and RS-2, it is required to provide 1000 mm diameter piles below retaining wall
with c/c spacing as mentioned below Table 4.
Table 4: Summary of Pile spacing
Longitudinal Spacing
Sr. No. Section Lateral Spacing (m)
(m)

1 RS-1 2.50 3.00

2 RS-2 3.00 3.00

The structural analysis has been carried out to calculate the vertical forces transferred to the piles. The
structural analysis report for section RS-1 and RS-2 has been attached as Annexure III to this report. As
per the structural analysis the piles are subjected to vertical forces as mentioned in table 5 below.
Table 5: Vertical forces in pile

Sr. Force in pile in static Force in pile in


Section Description
No. condition (kN) seismic condition (kN)

1 Pile P1 704.59 43.87


2 RS-1 Pile P2 1777.54 2213.71
3 Pile P3 616.61 1305.11
4 Pile P1 882.44 605.74
RS-2
5 Pile P2 960.64 1720.34
Note: Please refer to figure 1 for pile identification
The pile capacity has been evaluated as per the guidelines given in IS 2911 (Part 1/Sec2):2010. As can be
seen from the subsurface profile, the piles have been considered to be terminated in the dense sandy
stratum encountered at a depth of about 5.72m m below the bottom of base slab of RCC retaining wall.
Though, the ground water table was not encountered during course of geotechnical investigation, it is
considered to be at ground level for analysis. The pile capacity calculation has been enclosed as annexure
IV to this report. Due to the lateral load, the depth of fixity is at 6.494m and 6.210m below the cutoff
level in static and seismic condition respectively. The length of pile required to resist the moment
developed by these lateral loads works out to 7.92m and 8.17m below the depth of fixity in static and
seismic condition respectively. Thus, the total depth of pile required to resist the lateral loads works out
to 14.42m and 14.38m below the cut-off level in static and seismic condition respectively. Hence, the
recommended depth of pile foundation is 15.0m below cut-off level. The pile capacity for 1000mm dia
pile in vertical compression and tension works out to 3490kN and 1720kN in static and 4363kN and

10
2150kN in seismic conditions respectively. The structural analysis and design of retaining wall has been
attached as Annexure III.

6.4 RCC Retaining wall with Raft foundation


The RCC retaining wall in section RS-3 i.e., with overall height 5.0m (3.0m above formation level) shall be
founded with raft foundation. The base pressure at foundation depth (2.0m below formation level) is less
than safe bearing capacity worked out with shear parameters of founding stratum. The SBC analysis has
been enclosed as Annexure V to this report. The structural analysis and design of retaining wall and raft
foundation has been enclosed as Annexure VI.
7 Surface and subsurface drainage
The concerned area under contemplation receives very high and prolonged annual rainfall. Hence a
proper surface and subsurface drainage system are proposed.
Improper drainage may result in saturation with consequent loss of strength. Ponding of water at the top
of the slope at any time during or after construction must be prevented. The finished grades of berm shall
be provided with a slope gradient to prevent any stagnation and allow surface water to drain out.
Longitudinal drains shall be provided on berms. Longitudinal drains shall also be provided at the toe of
RCC retaining wall and at the crest of the cut slope.
Gravel filter of thickness 600mm shall be provided at backfill face of retaining wall. At the interface of
gravel filter and backfill, a non-woven geotextile shall be provided. Weep holes of 100mm diameter shall
be provided in retaining wall at 1.0m c/c spacing vertically and longitudinally.
The seeds of the selected plant species can be sources locally or can be imported, as per the seed
availability. It is important that mitigation measures and drainage system is periodically inspected and
maintained over its life span. As the area gets heavy rainfall and due to dense vegetation the drains are
expected to get clogged due to situation and continuous falling of leaves. The drains need to be regularly
cleaned and promptly repaired of any noted issues to ensure that the system is always in good working
condition and prevent any detrimental effect.

For, Genstru Consultants Pvt. Ltd,

Prashant Navalakha
(Principal Consultant)

11
ANNEXURE I BOREHOLE LOG AND LABORATORY TEST RESULTS FOR BH NO. 16

12
13
14
15
ANNEXURE II CALCULATION OF SEISMIC COEFFICIENT

16
17
ANNEXURE III STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS AND DESIGN OF RCC RETAINING WALL &
PILE FOUNDATION

18
STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS & DESIGN OF RCC RETAINING WALL OF
6.0m HEIGHT ABOVE FORMATION LEVEL (OVERALL HEIGHT 8.0m)

EARTH PRESSURE DISTRIBUTION


Design of Retaining Wall Stem

Data:
Clear Height of the earth to be retained above
1 ground = 6.75 m
2 Unit weight of the earth retained () = 20 kN/m
3 Angle of repose () = 35 Degrees
4 Materials
Grade of Concrete M 30 mPa
Grade of Steel Fe 500 mPa
5 Modulus of elasticity of steel Es = 200000 N/mm
6 Unit weight of concrete = 25 kN/m
7 Depth of water table from Top = 6.75 m
8 Depth of foundation = 1.25 m

Approximate proportioning of the wall:


1 Depth of foundation = (SBC)*ka^2 / = 0.45 m
=
2 Total height of wall including depth of foundation
H = 8.00 m
3 Total length of the base slab 'B' = 6.4 m
4 Thickness of base slab = 1.25 m
5 Height of stem h = 8 - 1.25
h = 6.75 m
6 Projection of Toe = 1/4 x B = 1.625 m
7 Thickness of stem at bottom
Maximum Bending Mmt. for stem (Static Case) = = 406.65 kNm
(Seismic Case) = 1279.5 kNm

Design Moment 'Mu' (Static Case) = = 1.5 x 406.65


(Seismic Case) = = 1.5 x 1279.5
= 1919.25 kNm
Mu = Ru x b x d d = Mu / (Ru x b)

Mu
drequired
Ru . b
drequired = 680.87 mm
Provide dprovided = 940 mm
Overall thickness 'D' = 1000 mm
Thickness of stem at top 'D1' = 300 mm
Design of Stem of Retaining wall

Main steel

0.5. f ck. b . d . 4.6 . Mu


As t 1 1
f ck. b . d
fy 2
1128
Ast; required = 5169.94 mm
Use Tor 32 mm bars 150 mm c/c Provided Steel is Ok
Ast; provided = 5361.65 mm

Curtailment of Main steel

50 % of the main steel can be curtailed at 0.75 h = 5.06 m


Actual length of cutoff = 4.12 m
= 4.1 m Say
Check for Shear
Total Shear at top of pile cap V ( Satic case) = 180.7 kN
Total Shear at top of pile cap V ( Seismic case) = 439.4 kN

Design shear force Vu = 1.5 x V Vu = 659.03 kN

Shear stress tv = Vu / (b x d) tv = 0.70 N/mm

100As / (b x d) =100 x 5361.65 /(1000 x 940) = 0.57

Design shear strength 'tc' is obtained from Table 19 page 73 IS 456 : 2000

For 0.57 tc = 0.53 N/mm


Section unsafe, Design shear stress is less than Nominal shear stress
Stirrups for Rectangular Beams as per IS 456

Vu= 659.3 KN
V Working = 54.94 t

b= 1000 mm Provide 6 Legged Stirrups at 450 mm c/c.


D= 1000 mm
Ast = 53.61 cm2

dt = 75 mm

fck = 30 N/mm2 pt = 0.58 %

fy = 415 N/mm2 toc = 0.53 N/mm


2

Stirrup Dia. = 10 mm 2
tocmax = 3.50 N/mm
No. of Stirrup Leg = 6
Vu = 82.41 t Vus/d = 3.460 kN/cm

Vuc = 49.78 t

Hence Provide Shear links in wall bottom T10 @ 300 C/C Vertically to each bars.
Design of Pile Cap

STATIC CASE
SEISMIC CASE
Design moments

RT-Static = Raft Top Static Case Moment, Mu1 = 1.5x 1351 = 2026.5 KNm

RT-Seismic = Raft Top Seismic Case Moment, Mu2 = 1.5x 4021 = 6031.5 KNm

RB-Static = Raft Bottom Static Case Moment, Mu3 = 1.5x 528 = 792 KNm

RB-Seismic = Raft Bottom Seismic Case Moment, Mu4 = 1.5x 2200 = 3300.0 KNm

Assumed width of raft acting as beam section = 1000 + 500 + 500 = 2000mm

Depth of pile cap = 1250 mm

Calculates Safe Ultimate Bending Moments for Beam Sections with given Concrete Grade and
Reinforcement, and calculates Stirrup spacing for given Shear and NOTES FOR USERS:
1. Figures and Texts in white cells only are to be filled as inputs. Up to
Torsion (if any) loads. 10 no. Beams can be designed. For any beam nor requiring design,
Concrete Grade = M 4 all inputs for that beam are to be left blank by using 'Delete' key.
2. Concrete grade can be any grade as per IS:456-2000.
Yield Strength of Main Steel, fy = 4 N/mm2 3. Yield strength of steel, fy = 415 N/mm2 or 500 N/mm2 for HYSD bars.
= 240 N/mm2 or 250 N/mm2 for M.S. bars.
Clear cover to Main Reinforcement = 75 mm 4. Effective width of compression flange, bf shall be calculated as per
clause 23.1.2 of IS:456-2000.
Compression Steel not considered in
T and L Sections (Typ) 5. For notes on input preparation, refer to worksheet on 'Notes'.
Compression Steel
Asc (if required) bf bf
Max. 2 Rows df df
Mu Mu Mu
d'
d d d
D D D

Tensile Steel Ast b Tensile Steel Ast bw Tensile Steel Ast bw


Max. 3 Rows Max. 3 Rows Max. 3 Rows

RECTANGULAR T SECTION L SECTION


SECTION (Numbers of steel bars shown in Sections are indicative only)

Note: Effective depth d is distance between the centroid of tension steel and the extreme compression face.
d ' = distance between the centroid of compression steel and the extreme compression face.
Where tensile steel is required at the top section of the beam, T & L Beam sections shall be designed as
a Rectangular Beam only.

Beam Beam Type Beam Size (mm) Design Moment Min.


Mk. (Rect. / T / L shape) b or bw bf df D Mu (kNm) A st (mm2 )
RT-Static 1 2000 0 0 1250 2026.50 3974.60
RT-Seismic 1 2000 0 0 1250 6031.50 3974.60
RB-Static 1 2000 0 0 1250 792.00 3974.60
RB-Seismic 1 2000 0 0 1250 3300.00 3974.60
-
-
-
-
-
-
Singly Reinforced Section
Beam Tensile Steel provided Total Eff. Mu-limit Ast Resisting Status
Mk. 1st Row 2nd Row 3r Row Ast Depth xu / d (kNm) limit Mom. Mur of singly
Nos. (mm) Nos. (mm) Nos. (mm) 2
(mm ) d (mm) (mm ) 2 (kNm) reinf'd
RT-Static 10 32 0 0 0 0 8042 1159.0 0.140 10721.4 26244 3820.27 O.K.
RT-Seismic 10 32 10 32 0 0 16085 1127.0 0.287 10137.6 25520 6947.69 O.K.
RB-Static 10 32 0 0 0 0 8042 1159.0 0.140 10721.4 26244 3820.27 O.K.
RB-Seismic 10 32 0 0 0 0 8042 1159.0 0.140 10721.4 26244 3820.27 O.K.
0 - - - - - - -
0 - - - - - - -
0 - - - - - - -
0 - - - - - - -
0 - - - - - - -
0 - - - - - - -

NOTE: 'Total Ast' is to be less than or equal to 'Ast limit'. For Rectangular beams, if Status ='Rev Ast', reduce tensile steel area, for
status = 'Asc Reqd' provide compression steel Asc as required in the next Table or change the Beam section. For T and L beams, if
status = 'Revise Ast' check with Ast or revise the Beam section. The Status in the above table also depends on the additional moments
due to Torsion (if any)
Compression Reinforcement (if required) for Rectangular Beams
Compression Steel Asc Total
Beam Des.M u -M u-lim 1st Row 2nd Row Asc Strain Stress Mu (kNm) for
d' 2
Mk. (kNm) Nos. (mm) Nos. (mm) (mm ) 2
in Asc fsc N/mm Compn. Reinf't.
RT-Static N/A 0 0 0.0000 0.0 0.00
RT-Seismic N/A 0 0 0.0000 0.0 0.00
RB-Static N/A 0 0 0.0000 0.0 0.00
RB-Seismic N/A 0 0 0.0000 0.0 0.00
0 - - - 0.0000 0.0 -
0 - - - 0.0000 0.0 -
0 - - - 0.0000 0.0 -
0 - - - 0.0000 0.0 -
0 - - - 0.0000 0.0 -
0 - - - 0.0000 0.0 -
Note: 'Des Mu - Mu-lim' in the above Table includes the additional moment due to Torsion Moment (if any).
Compression steel provided in the Beam, if any, shall be enclosed by stirrups as per
Clauses 26.5.1.2 and 26.5.3.2 of IS:456-2000.
Final Moment of Resistance & Status:
Beam Ast2 Provide extra bars for Ast2 (mm 2 ) T otal Steel (mm 2 ) M om.of Resist M uR(kNm) Total MuR Final
Mk. (mm2) Layer No . Nos. (mm) Ast2 Ast Asc With Ast Asc (kNm) Status
RT-Static 0 0 8042 0 3820.27 0.0 3820.27 Section O.K.
RT-Seismic 0 0 16085 0 6947.69 0.0 6947.69 Section O.K.
RB-Static 0 0 8042 0 3820.27 0.0 3820.27 Section O.K.
RB-Seismic 0 0 8042 0 3820.27 0.0 3820.27 Section O.K.
0 - - - - - - - -
0 - - - - - - - -
0 - - - - - - - -
0 - - - - - - - -
0 - - - - - - - -
0 - - - - - - - -
Design of Pile Section

Description Static Case Lever arm Seismic Case Lever arm


Hori. Thrust due to
250.61 2.87 250.61 4.3
backfill soil (kN)
Hori. Thrust due to
Dynamic increment in 0 - 358.58 4.3
Seismic case (kN)
Total Horizontal thrust =(250.61+358.58)
250.61 - -
(kN) = 609.20
Depth of fixity below
6.494 - 6.210 -
cutoff level (m)
Max. Moment in pile
due to lateral thrust 668.27 - 1553.19 -
(kN.m)

Column Diameter = 1000 mm


Concrete Grade = M 4
2
Yield Strength of Steel, fy = 4 N/mm
Concrete Cover to main bars = 75 mm Y
Muy
Mux
dmax = 909 mm
D x x
C.L.

Provide 20 nos 32 mm dia. bars


Pu
(Bars are uniformly spaced)

Y
COLUMN
2
Total Ast = 16085 mm SECTION
Percentage of Reinforcement = 2.0480 < 4% O.K. (Nos. of bar shown in the
section are indicative only)
Applied Ultimate Loads (See figures on next page) Effective Length Unsupported Column Type
Col. Axial Load Initial Moment Muix(kNm) Initial Moment Muiy(kNm) Length l (m) Braced or
* *
lex (m) ley (m)
Mk. Pu (kN) M uix1(+ or -) Muix2 (+ only) M uiy1(+ or -) Muiy2 (+ only) Unbraced
Static Case 2666.31 1002.405 1002.405 0 0 6.494 6.494 6.494 1
Seismic Case 2656.452 2329.785 2329.785 0 0 6.162 6.162 6.162 1
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
1
Note: * at Muix1 and Muiy1 indicates moment is +ve for single curvature bending, and -ve for double curvature bending.
Pu
Muix2 or Initial Moments Muix & Muiy
Muiy2 Muix2 >Muix1
Muiy2 >Muiy1
+ +
+ Addn. Moments Max & May
Deflected due to slenderness
shape
- -
Muix1 or
Muiy1
Unbraced Slender Column
Single Curvature Double curvature (Column with side sway)
Braced Slender Column

For calculations of Final Design Moments, see worksheet on 'Slenderness eff.'.

Summary of Results:

Applied Ultimate Loads Permissible Max. Tensile Stress


Case 2 Status
Axial Load, Pu (kN) Final Moment, Mu (kNm) Mu (kNm) in steel, N/mm
Static Case 2666.31 1009.985 2542.42 426.01 Section O.K.
Seismic Case 2656.452 2332.940 2541.83 426.08 Section O.K.
0 - - - - -
0 - - - - -
0 - - - - -
0 - - - - -
0 - - - - -
0 - - - - -
0 - - - - -
0 - - - - -

See worksheet on 'Pu&Mu Chart' for range of permissible Values of Pu and Mu.
CIRCULAR COLUMN SUBJECTED TO
AXIAL COMPRESSIVE LOAD + BENDING MOMENT

fck=M30, fy=500, Dia.'D'=1000mm,


p=2.048%
Applied Loads Pu & Mu (Any value to the right of Pu & Mu Chart
red line requires revision of section

17500
17250
17000
16750
16500
16250
16000
15750
15500
15250
15000
14750
14500
14250
14000
13750
13500
13250
13000
12750
12500
12250
12000
11750
11500
11250
11000
10750
10500
10250
10000
9750
9500
9250
Pu (kN)

9000
8750
8500
8250
8000
7750
7500
7250
7000
6750
6500
6250
6000
5750
5500
5250
5000
4750
4500
4250
4000
3750
3500
3250
3000
2750 1009.985,
2332.940, 2666
2656
2500
2250
2000
1750
1500
1250
1000
750
500
250
0
50

150

250

500

600

700

800

900
0

100

200

300
350
400
450

550

650

750

850

950

1150

1250

1350

1450

1550

1800

1900

2000

2100

2450

2550

2650

2750
1000
1050
1100

1200

1300

1400

1500

1600
1650
1700
1750

1850

1950

2050

2150
2200
2250
2300
2350
2400

2500

2600

2700

Mu (kNm)
STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS & DESIGN OF RETAINING WALL OF 4.50m
HEIGHT ABOVE FORMATION LEVEL (OVERALL HEIGHT 6.5m)
Design of Retaining Wall Stem

Data:
Clear Height of the earth to be retained above
1 ground = 6 m
2 Unit weight of the earth retained () = 20 kN/m
3 Angle of repose () = 35 Degrees
4 = 2 * / 3 = 23.3 Degrees
5 Safe bearing capacity of soil (SBC) = 238 kN/m
6 Coefficient of friction () = 0.5
7 Materials
Grade of Concrete M 30 mPa
Grade of Steel Fe 500 mPa
8 Modulus of elasticity of steel Es = 200000 N/mm
9 Angle of backfill () = 23 Degrees
10 Angle of inclination of wall () = 88 Degrees
11 Unit weight of concrete = 25 kN/m
12 Depth of water table from Top = 6 m
13 Depth of foundation = 0.50 m

Approximate proportioning of the wall:


1 Depth of foundation = (SBC)*ka^2 / = 0.45 m
=
2 Total height of wall including depth of foundation
H = 8.00 m
3 Total length of the base slab 'B' = 4.4 m
4 Thickness of base slab = 1.25 m
5 Height of stem h = 8 - 1.25
h = 6.75 m
6 Projection of Toe = 1/4 x B = 1.625 m
7 Thickness of stem at bottom
Maximum Bending Mmt. for stem (Static Case) = = 204.59 kNm
(Seismic Case) = 497.96 kNm

Design Moment 'Mu' (Static Case) = = 1.5 x 204.59 = 306.89


(Seismic Case) = = 1.5 x 497.96
= 746.95 kNm
Mu = Ru x b x d d = Mu / (Ru x b)

Mu
drequired
Ru . b
drequired = 424.76 mm
Provide dprovided = 540 mm
Overall thickness 'D' = 600 mm
Thickness of stem at top 'D1' = 200 mm

Design of Stem of Retaining wall

Main steel

0.5. f ck. b . d . 4.6 . Mu


As t 1 1
f ck. b . d
fy 2

Ast; required = 3576.18 mm


Use Tor 25 mm bars 130 mm c/c
Ast; provided = 3775.95 mm

Curtailment of Main steel

50 % of the main steel can be curtailed at 0.75 h = 4.13 m


Actual length of cutoff = 3.59 m
= 3.5 m Say
Check for Shear

V = 1/2 x (ka x x H) x H + 1/2(w x H2) = 227.45 kN

Design shear force Vu = 1.5 x V Vu = 341.17 kN

Shear stress tv = Vu / (b x d) tv = 0.63 N/mm

100As / (b x d) =100 x 3775.95 /(1000 x 540) = 0.70

Design shear strength 'tc' is obtained from Table 19 page 73 IS 456 : 2000

For 0.70 tc = 0.57 N/mm


Section unsafe, Design shear stress is less than Nominal shear stress
Stirrups for Rectangular Beams as per IS 456

Vu= 746.95 KN
V Working = 49.80 t

b= 1000 mm Provide 8 Legged Stirrups at 393 mm c/c.


D= 600 mm
Ast = 34.6 cm2
dt = 75 mm
fck = 35 N/mm2 pt = 0.66 %
fy = 415 N/mm 2 2
toc = 0.56 N/mm
Stirrup Dia. = 12 mm 2
tocmax = 3.70 N/mm
No. of Stirrup Leg = 8
Vu = 74.70 t Vus/d = 8.31 kN/cm
Vuc = 30.20 t

Hence Provide Shear links in wall bottom T12 @ 300 C/C Vertically to each bars.
Design of Pile Cap

STATIC CASE
SEISMIC CASE
Design moments

RT-Static = Raft Top Static Case Moment, Mu1 = 1.5x 49.1 = 73.65 KNm

RT-Seismic = Raft Top Seismic Case Moment, Mu2 = 1.5x 719 = 1078.5 KNm

RB-Static = Raft Bottom Static Case Moment, Mu3 = 1.5x 956 = 1434 KNm

RB-Seismic = Raft Bottom Seismic Case Moment, Mu4 = 1.5x 1905 = 2857.5 KNm

Assumed width of raft acting as beam section = 1000 + 500 + 500 = 2000mm

Depth of pile cap = 1250 mm

Calculates Safe Ultimate Bending Moments for Beam Sections with given Concrete Grade and
Reinforcement, and calculates Stirrup spacing for given Shear and NOTES FOR USERS:
1. Figures and Texts in white cells only are to be filled as inputs. Up to
Torsion (if any) loads. 10 no. Beams can be designed. For any beam nor requiring design,
Concrete Grade = M 4 all inputs for that beam are to be left blank by using 'Delete' key.
2. Concrete grade can be any grade as per IS:456-2000.
Yield Strength of Main Steel, fy = 4 N/mm2 3. Yield strength of steel, fy = 415 N/mm2 or 500 N/mm2 for HYSD bars.
= 240 N/mm2 or 250 N/mm2 for M.S. bars.
Clear cover to Main Reinforcement = 75 mm 4. Effective width of compression flange, bf shall be calculated as per
clause 23.1.2 of IS:456-2000.
Compression Steel not considered in
Compression Steel T and L Sections (Typ) 5. For notes on input preparation, refer to worksheet on 'Notes'.
Asc (if required) bf bf
Max. 2 Rows df df
Mu Mu Mu
d'
d d d
D D D

Tensile Steel Ast b Tensile Steel Ast bw Tensile Steel Ast bw


Max. 3 Rows Max. 3 Rows Max. 3 Rows

RECTANGULAR T SECTION L SECTION


SECTION (Numbers of steel bars shown in Sections are indicative only)

Note: Effective depth d is distance between the centroid of tension steel and the extreme compression face.
d ' = distance between the centroid of compression steel and the extreme compression face.
Where tensile steel is required at the top section of the beam, T & L Beam sections shall be designed as
a Rectangular Beam only.

Beam Beam Type Beam Size (mm) Design Moment Min.


Mk. (Rect. / T / L shape) b or bw bf df D Mu (kNm) A st (mm2 )
RT-Static 1 2000 0 0 1250 73.65 3974.60
RT-Seismic 1 2000 0 0 1250 1078.50 3974.60
RB-Static 1 2000 0 0 1250 1434.00 3974.60
RB-Seismic 1 2000 0 0 1250 2857.50 3974.60
-
-
-
-
-
-
Singly Reinforced Section
Beam Tensile Steel provided Total Eff. Mu-limit Ast Resisting Status
Mk. 1st Row 2nd Row 3r Row Ast Depth xu / d (kNm) limit Mom. Mur of singly
Nos. (mm) Nos. (mm) Nos. (mm) 2
(mm ) d (mm) (mm )
2 (kNm) reinf'd
RT-Static 10 25 0 0 0 0 4909 1162.5 0.085 10786.3 26324 2394.94 O.K.
RT-Seismic 10 25 0 0 0 0 4909 1162.5 0.085 10786.3 26324 2394.94 O.K.
RB-Static 10 32 0 0 0 0 8042 1159.0 0.140 10721.4 26244 3820.27 O.K.
RB-Seismic 10 32 0 0 0 0 8042 1159.0 0.140 10721.4 26244 3820.27 O.K.
0 - - - - - - -
0 - - - - - - -
0 - - - - - - -
0 - - - - - - -
0 - - - - - - -
0 - - - - - - -

NOTE: 'Total Ast' is to be less than or equal to 'Ast limit'. For Rectangular beams, if Status ='Rev Ast', reduce tensile steel area, for
status = 'Asc Reqd' provide compression steel Asc as required in the next Table or change the Beam section. For T and L beams, if
status = 'Revise Ast' check with Ast or revise the Beam section. The Status in the above table also depends on the additional moments
due to Torsion (if any)
Compression Reinforcement (if required) for Rectangular Beams
Compression Steel Asc Total
Beam Des.M u -M u-lim 1st Row 2nd Row Asc Strain Stress Mu (kNm) for
d' 2
Mk. (kNm) Nos. (mm) Nos. (mm) (mm ) 2
in Asc fsc N/mm Compn. Reinf't.
RT-Static N/A 0 0 0.0000 0.0 0.00
RT-Seismic N/A 0 0 0.0000 0.0 0.00
RB-Static N/A 0 0 0.0000 0.0 0.00
RB-Seismic N/A 0 0 0.0000 0.0 0.00
0 - - - 0.0000 0.0 -
0 - - - 0.0000 0.0 -
0 - - - 0.0000 0.0 -
0 - - - 0.0000 0.0 -
0 - - - 0.0000 0.0 -
0 - - - 0.0000 0.0 -
Note: 'Des Mu - Mu-lim' in the above Table includes the additional moment due to Torsion Moment (if any).
Compression steel provided in the Beam, if any, shall be enclosed by stirrups as per
Clauses 26.5.1.2 and 26.5.3.2 of IS:456-2000.

Final Moment of Resistance & Status:


Beam Ast2 Provide extra bars for Ast2 (mm 2 ) T otal Steel (mm 2 ) M om.of Resist M uR(kNm) Total MuR Final
Mk. (mm2) Layer No . Nos. (mm) Ast2 Ast Asc With Ast Asc (kNm) Status
RT-Static 0 0 4909 0 2394.94 0.0 2394.94 Section O.K.
RT-Seismic 0 0 4909 0 2394.94 0.0 2394.94 Section O.K.
RB-Static 0 0 8042 0 3820.27 0.0 3820.27 Section O.K.
RB-Seismic 0 0 8042 0 3820.27 0.0 3820.27 Section O.K.
0 - - - - - - - -
0 - - - - - - - -
0 - - - - - - - -
0 - - - - - - - -
0 - - - - - - - -
0 - - - - - - - -
Design of Pile Section

Description Static Case Lever arm Seismic Case Lever arm


Hori. Thrust due to
144 2.17 144 2.17
backfill soil (kN)
Hori. Thrust due to
Dynamic increment in 0 0 206 3.25
Seismic case (kN)
Total Horizontal thrust =(144+206)
144 kN/m - -
(kN) = 350 kN/m
Depth of fixity below
6.494 - 6.210 -
cutoff level (m)
Max. Moment in pile
due to lateral thrust 575.10/pile - 1336.70 /pile -
(kN.m)

Column Diameter = 1000 mm


Concrete Grade = M 4
2
Yield Strength of Steel, fy = 4 N/mm
Concrete Cover to main bars = 75 mm Y
Muy
Mux
dmax = 909 mm
D x x
C.L.

Provide 16 nos 32 mm dia. bars


Pu
(Bars are uniformly spaced)

Y
COLUMN
2
Total Ast = 12868 mm SECTION
Percentage of Reinforcement = 1.6384 < 4% O.K. (Nos. of bar shown in the
section are indicative only)
Applied Ultimate Loads (See figures on next page) Effective Length Unsupported Column Type
Col. Axial Load Initial Moment Muix(kNm) Initial Moment Muiy(kNm) Length l (m) Braced or
* *
lex (m) ley (m)
Mk. Pu (kN) M uix1(+ or -) Muix2 (+ only) M uiy1(+ or -) Muiy2 (+ only) Unbraced
Static Case 1440.96 862.65 862.65 0 0 6.494 6.494 6.494 1
Seismic Case 2064.408 2005.05 2005.05 0 0 6.210 6.210 6.210 1
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
1
Note: * at Muix1 and Muiy1 indicates moment is +ve for single curvature bending, and -ve for double curvature bending.
Pu
Muix2 or Initial Moments Muix & Muiy
Muiy2 Muix2 >Muix1
+ Muiy2 >Muiy1 +
+ Addn. Moments Max & May
Deflected due to slenderness
shape
- -
Muix1 or
Muiy1
Unbraced Slender Column
Single Curvature Double curvature (Column with side sway)
Braced Slender Column

For calculations of Final Design Moments, see worksheet on 'Slenderness eff.'.

Summary of Results:

Applied Ultimate Loads Permissible Max. Tensile Stress


Case 2 Status
Axial Load, Pu (kN) Final Moment, Mu (kNm) Mu (kNm) in steel, N/mm
Static Case 1440.96 865.228 2087.84 434.78 Section O.K.
Seismic Case 2064.408 2007.274 2163.62 432.12 Section O.K.
0 - - - - -
0 - - - - -
0 - - - - -
0 - - - - -
0 - - - - -
0 - - - - -
0 - - - - -
0 - - - - -

See worksheet on 'Pu&Mu Chart' for range of permissible Values of Pu and Mu.
CIRCULAR COLUMN SUBJECTED TO
AXIAL COMPRESSIVE LOAD + BENDING MOMENT

fck=M30, fy=500, Dia.'D'=1000mm,


p=1.6384%
Applied Loads Pu & Mu (Any value to the right of Pu & Mu Chart
red line requires revision of section

16250
16000
15750
15500
15250
15000
14750
14500
14250
14000
13750
13500
13250
13000
12750
12500
12250
12000
11750
11500
11250
11000
10750
10500
10250
10000
9750
9500
9250
9000
8750
Pu (kN)

8500
8250
8000
7750
7500
7250
7000
6750
6500
6250
6000
5750
5500
5250
5000
4750
4500
4250
4000
3750
3500
3250
3000
2750
2500
2250
2000 2007.274, 2064
1750
1500 865.228, 1441
1250
1000
750
500
250
0
1200
1250
1300
1350
1400
1450
1500
1550
1600
1650
0

1000
1050
1100
1150

1700
1750
1800
1850
1900
1950
2000
2050
2100
2150
2200
2250
2300
2350
2400
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
550
600
650
700
750
800
850
900
950

Mu (kNm)
ANNEXURE IV PILE CAPACITY CALCULATION

19
PILE CAPACITY CALCULATION FOR PILE FOUNDATION
Project: AGARTALA SABROOM NEW BG RAIL LINK PROJECT

Inputs
Type of pile = Bored Cast-in-situ
Diameter of pile D= 1000 mm Grade of Concrete M 30
Location/ Ref. Bore Holes = Generalised Allowable Lateral Deflection Y= 12.0 mm
Ground Water Level = 0.00 m (below FGL/EGL)

RL (m) Depth below FGL/EGL(m)


46.301 0.0 Ground Level

37.52 8.778 Formation Level p= 0.00kPa

35.523 10.778 PCOL p= 107.78kPa


Saturated
Layer-1 Avg. SPT value,
Angle of internal friction,phi Unit
N"
sand Weight,
30 (degrees) (kN/cu.m)
34.301 12.0 30.0 20.0 p= 120.00kPa
Saturated
Layer-2 Avg. SPT value,
Angle of internal friction,phi Unit
N"
sand Weight,
43 (degrees) (kN/cu.m)
29.801 16.5 30.0 20.0 p= 165.00kPa
Saturated
Layer-3 Avg. SPT value,
Angle of internal friction,phi Unit
N"
sand Weight,
89 (degrees) (kN/cu.m)
20.521 25.8 Pile Toe Level 33.0 20.0 p= 257.80kPa
Saturated
Layer-4 Avg. SPT value,
Angle of internal friction,phi Unit
N"
sand Weight,
Refusal (degrees) (kN/cu.m)
35.0 0.0 18.0 p= 328.00kPa

I) VERTICAL AND LATERAL LOAD CARRYING CAPACITY AND UPLIFT CAPACITY OF PILE - STATIC CONDITION
a)Determination of Skin Friction Resistance

Surface Area, Af
Layer Li(m) (Sq.m) Factors
x D x Li Skin Friction Resistance, qf (kN)
=3.14x(1)x1.222= k= p'= Avg(107.78,120)= 113.89 kPa qf =k x p'actxTan(pi)xAf=
Layer-1 1.2 p' limit= 15x1x10= 150.00 kPa 1x113.89xtan(30)x3.84=
3.839 1.00 p'act= 113.89 kPa 252.433
=3.14x(1)x4.5= k= p'= Avg(120,165)= 142.50 kPa qf =k x p'actxTan(pi)xAf=
Layer-2 4.5 p' limit= 15x1x10= 150.00 kPa 1x142.5xtan(30)x14.14=
14.137 1.00 p'act= 142.50 kPa 1163.099
=3.14x(1)x9.28= k= p'= Avg(165,257.8)= 211.40 kPa qf =k x p'actxTan(pi)xAf=
Layer-3 9.3 p' limit= 16.5x1x10= 165.00 kPa 1.15x165xtan(33)x29.15=
29.154 1.15 p'act= 165.00 kPa 3592.502
Total= 15.00 m Qf = 5008.03 kN
PILE CAPACITY CALCULATION FOR PILE FOUNDATION
Project: AGARTALA SABROOM NEW BG RAIL LINK PROJECT

b)Determination of End Bearing Resistance


Layer-6 sand Angle of internal friction,phi (degrees)= 33.0
Saturated Unit Weight, (kN/cu.m)= 20.0
Cross-sectonal Area,
Ap (Sq.m) Ny= 35.2
End Bearing Resistance, qp (kN)
x D2/4 Nq= 34
=3.14x(1)^2/4= p'= p' at pile tip= 240.00 kPa qp=Ap x (p'act x Nq + 0.5 x D x r' x Nr)=
p' limit= 15x1x10= 150.00 kPa (0.79x150x34)+(0.5x1x10x35.19)=
0.785 p'act= 150.00 kPa Qp = 4181.47 kN
Ultimate capacity of pile Qult = Qp + Qf
Qult = 5008.04+4181.47= 9189.50 kN

c) Self weight of pile


Length of pile, Lp(m)= 15.00 m
Self weight of Pile, Wp= Ap x Lp x 'c
Wp= =1x15.002x(25-10)= 176.74 kN

Factor of Safety (compression) = 2.50


Factor of Safety (tension) = 3.00 Recommended Capacities:
Safe vertical load capacity of pile Qsafe = (Qult - Qnf)/(F.S)) - Wp Safe vertical load capacity of pile,
Qsafe = 3499.00 kN Qsafe = 3490 kN
Safe uplift Capacity of pile Qup-safe = (Qf+ Wp)/F.S Safe uplift Capacity of pile
Qup-safe = 1728.00 kN Qup-safe = 1720 kN

d) LATERAL LOAD CARRYING CAPACITY OF PILE

Characteristic compressive strength of concrete, Fck= 30.00 N/sq.mm


SPT N - Value at point of load application= 40
Type of soil= sand
Modulus of Subgrade Reaction h= 6000 kN/cu.m (Refer Table:3,
IS: 2911:2010, part 1/Sec 2)
Young's Modulus of Concrete E= 5000x1000 x sqrt(Fck) kN/Sq.m
= 27386127.9 kN/Sq..m
Moment of Inertia of Circular Pile I= . D4/64
= 0.04908739 m4
Relative Stiffness Factor T= (EI/h)^(1/5)
= 2.952 m
Free Standing Length, e or L1= 0.00 m
PILE CAPACITY CALCULATION FOR PILE FOUNDATION
Project: AGARTALA SABROOM NEW BG RAIL LINK PROJECT

Item Fixed Head Condition Free Head Condition


For L1/T= 0.00 0.00
From Figure:4 of IS: 2911
(Part- 1/Sec-2) - 2010, n= 2.2 1.9
Length of Fixity, zf or Lf (m)= n x T= 2.2x2.96= n x T= 1.9x2.96=
6.494 5.608
Safe Lateral Capacity of Qg= Y x 12 x E x I Qg= Y x 3 x E x I
Pile (L1 + Lf )3 (L1 + Lf )3
= (0.012x12x27386127.8752583x0.05) = (0.012x12x27386127.8752583x0.05)
((0+6.5)^3) ((0+5.61)^3)
Qg = 706.94 kN = 274.37 kN
Recommended Safe
Lateral Capacity of Pile Qg = 706 kN = 274 kN
Fixed End Moment Mf (kN.m)= = Qg (L1 + Lf )/2 = Qg (L1 + Lf )
= (706x(0+6.5))/2 = (274x(0+5.61))
= 2292.28 kN.m = 1536.65 kN.m
Reduction Factor
For L1/T= 0.00 0.00
From Figure:5 of IS: 2911
(Part- 1/Sec-2) - 2010, m= 0.82 0.4
Actual Maxi. Moment , M(kN.m)= = m. Mf = m. Mf
= 0.82x2292.28 = 0.4x1536.65
M = 1879.67 kN.m = 614.66 kN.m

As per clause 3.13.6 of "Foundation Design Manual by Dr.N.V.Nayak", the socketing depth is determined from
following formula.

Where, M = Maximum Moment=1.746x0.65+1.7 = 1879.67 kN.m


lc = Length of socket
kp = (1+sin )/(1-sin) = 3.4
c = Permissible Passive resistance = (kp x x H)/3 Where, 3.0 is FoS.
= 73.60kPa

Hence, lc = 7.92 m

The maximum moment developed at the point of fixity is 1879.67 kN-m. To counter this moment, pile shall be
embeded for 7.92 m beyond the point of fixity.
Hence, the total depth of pile shall be 6.49 + 7.92 = 14.42 m below cutoff level.
Hence, recommended total depth of pile is 15.0 m below cutoff level.

II) VERTICAL AND LATERAL LOAD CARRYING CAPACITY AND UPLIFT CAPACITY OF PILE - SEISMIC CONDITION

a) As per Clause. 6.3.5.2 of IS 1893 (Part I) : 2002, the vertical load carrying capacity of pile can be increased by 25 percent
in seismic condition.
Hence, the safe vertical pile capacity in seismic condition is as mentioned below.
PILE CAPACITY CALCULATION FOR PILE FOUNDATION
Project: AGARTALA SABROOM NEW BG RAIL LINK PROJECT

Recommended Capacities:
Safe vertical load capacity of pile,
Qsafe = 4363 kN
Safe uplift Capacity of pile
Qup-safe = 2150 kN

b) LATERAL LOAD CARRYING CAPACITY OF PILE

As per Clause. 6.3.5.2 of IS 1893 (Part I) : 2002, the permissible stresses in material can be increased by 25 percent in
seismic condition. Hence modulus of subgrade reaction has been increased by 25 percent.

Characteristic compressive strength of concrete, Fck= 30.00 N/sq.mm


SPT N - Value at point of load application= 40
Type of soil= sand
Modulus of Subgrade Reaction h= 7500 kN/cu.m (Refer Table:3,
IS: 2911:2010, part 1/Sec 2)
Young's Modulus of Concrete E= 5000x1000 x sqrt(Fck) kN/Sq.m
= 27386127.9 kN/Sq..m
Moment of Inertia of Circular Pile I= . D4/64
= 0.04908739 m4
Relative Stiffness Factor T= (EI/h)^(1/5)
= 2.823 m
Free Standing Length, e or L1= 0.00 m

Item Fixed Head Condition Free Head Condition


For L1/T= 0.00 0.00
From Figure:4 of IS: 2911
(Part- 1/Sec-2) - 2010, n= 2.2 1.9
Length of Fixity, zf or Lf (m)= n x T= 2.2x2.83= n x T= 1.9x2.83=
6.210 5.363
Safe Lateral Capacity of Qg= Y x 12 x E x I Qg= Y x 3 x E x I
Pile (L1 + Lf )3 (L1 + Lf )3
= (0x12x27386127.8752583x0.05) = (0x12x27386127.8752583x0.05)
((0+6.22)^3) ((0+5.37)^3)
Qg = 808.22 kN = 0.00 kN
Recommended Safe
Lateral Capacity of Pile Qg = 808 kN = 0 kN
Fixed End Moment Mf (kN.m)= = Qg (L1 + Lf )/2 = Qg (L1 + Lf )
= (808x(0+6.22))/2 = (0x(0+5.37))
= 2508.95 kN.m = 0.00 kN.m
Reduction Factor
For L1/T= 0.00 0.00
From Figure:5 of IS: 2911
(Part- 1/Sec-2) - 2010, m= 0.82 0.4
Actual Maxi. Moment , M(kN.m)= = m. Mf = m. Mf
= 0.82x2508.95 = 0.4x0
M = 2057.34 kN.m = 0.00 kN.m
PILE CAPACITY CALCULATION FOR PILE FOUNDATION
Project: AGARTALA SABROOM NEW BG RAIL LINK PROJECT

As per clause 3.13.6 of "Foundation Design Manual by Dr.N.V.Nayak", the socketing depth is determined from
following formula.

Where, M = Maximum Moment=1.746x0.65+1.7 = 2057.34 kN.m


lc = Length of socket
kp = (1+sin )/(1-sin) = 3.4
c = Permissible Passive resistance = (kp x x H)/3 Where, 3.0 is FoS.
= 70.38kPa

Hence, lc = 8.17 m

The maximum moment developed at the point of fixity is 2057.34 kN-m. To counter this moment, pile shall be
embeded for 8.17 m beyond the point of fixity.
Hence, the total depth of pile shall be 6.21 + 8.17 = 14.38 m below cut off level.
Hence, recommended total depth of pile is 15.0 m below cutoff level.

Reference
IS 2911-2010-Code of Practice for design and construction of Pile Foundations
Text Book- Foundation Design and Construction- Michael Tomlinson and John Woodward, 5th edition.

Notations
L Length of the pile
K Earth pressure co-efficient
a Adhesion Factor
p' effective overburden pressure
p'limit effective overburden pressure (limited)
p'act actual effective overburden pressure
ANNEXURE V BEARING CAPACITY ANALYSIS

20
Foundation Details

B : Width of footing (or least dimension) in (m) = 4.00 m


D : Depth of footing below ground level in (m) = 2.00 m
: Inclination of load to the vertical (Deg) = 0.00 deg
Design Ground Water Table = 0.00 m BEGL

Friction angle of Founding strata = 30 28 - 36 Intermediate Shear Failure


Type of Shear Failure to consider = Intermediate Shear Failure

Shear Parameters of Founding strata Cohesion, C (kPa) Friction Angle, (deg) Density
General Shear Failure 10.0 30.00 20.00
Local Shear Failure 6.7 21.05 20.00

Considering General Shear Failure


Soil Type C-Phi Soil C= 10.0 = 30.00 deg Footing Type Strip

N Nc Nq N Sc Sq S dc dq d ic iq i

3.0 30.14 18.4 22.40 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.17 1.09 1.09 1.00 1.00 1.0

cNc sc dc ic q = 'D q (Nq-1) sq dq iq Rw B N s d i Rw qnult FOS qns


(T/m) (T/m)
35.36 2.00 37.82 0.50 48.69 121.86 2.50 48.74

Considering Local Shear Failure


Soil Type C-Phi Soil C= 6.7 = 21.05 deg Footing Type Strip

N Nc Nq N Sc Sq S dc dq d ic iq i

2.1 15.87 7.1 6.24 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.15 1.07 1.07 1.00 1.00 1.0

cNc sc dc ic q = 'D q (Nq-1) sq dq iq Rw B N s d i Rw qnult FOS qns


(T/m) (T/m)
12.12 2.00 13.10 0.50 13.39 38.62 2.50 15.45

Interpolation Factor, I = ( 36.00 - 30.00 ) / ( 36.00 - 28.00 ) = 0.750


SBC for General Shear Failure, GSF = 48.74 T/m
SBC for Local Shear Failure, LSF = 15.45 T/m

Hence, SBC = GSF - I *( GSF - LSF )


Hence, SBC = 48.74 - 0.75*( 48.74 - 15.45 )
SBC = 23.77 T/m
Hence, SBC = 238 kN/m
ANNEXURE VI STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS FOR RCC RETAINING WALL & RAFT
FOUNDAITON

21
STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS & DESIGN OF RETAINING WALL OF 3.0m
ABOVE FORMATION LEVEL (OVERALL HEIGHT 5.0m)
Design of Wall

Data:
1 Clear Height of the earth to be retained above ground = 4.5 m
2 Unit weight of the earth retained (g) = 20 kN/m
3 Angle of repose (f) = 35 Degrees
4 d=2*f /3 = 23.3 Degrees
5 Safe bearing capacity of soil (SBC) = 238 kN/m
6 Coefficient of friction (m) = 0.5
7 Materials
Grade of Concrete M 30 mPa
Grade of Steel Fe 500 mPa
8 Modulus of elasticity of steel Es = 200000 N/mm
9 Angle of backfill (b) = 23 Degrees
10 Angle of inclination of wall (a) = 88 Degrees
11 Unit weight of concrete = 25 kN/m
12 Depth of water table from Top = 4 m
13 Depth of foundation = 0.50 m

Design Constants:
1 fck = 30 mPa
2 fy = 500 mPa
.
0.0035Es
3 ku = 0.46
.
0.0055Es 0.87. f y
4 Ru = 0.138*fck = 4.14
5 Coefficient of active earth pressure (Coloumb's formula)
2
( sin ( a f ))
ka
2
sin ( f b)
( sin ( a ) ) . sin ( a d ). 1 d ).
2
sin ( f
sin ( a d ) . sin ( a b)
ka = 0.369
6 Coefficient of passive earth pressure
2
( sin ( a f ))
kp
2
sin ( f b)
( sin ( a ) ) . sin ( a d ). 1 d ).
2
sin ( f
sin ( a d ) . sin ( a b)
kp = 91.54
7 Development Length
Ld = (0.87*fy)*D / (4*tbd ) = 68 D
8 Clear cover = 50 mm
9 Assumed bar diameter for main steel = 16 mm
10 Total cover = 60 mm
Approximate proportioning of the wall:
1 Depth of foundation = (SBC)*ka^2 / g = 0.50 m
=
2 Total height of wall including depth of foundation
H = 5.00 m
3 Total length of the base slab 'B' = 3.5 m
4 Thickness of base slab = 0.5 m
5 Height of stem h = 5 - 0.5
h = 4.50 m
6 Projection of Toe = 1/4 x B = 0.75 m
7 Thickness of stem at bottom
Maximum Bending Mmt. for stem = ka * g * h / 6 = 0.369 x 20 x 4.5 / 6 + 10 x 4.5 / 6
= 264.02 kNm
Design Moment 'Mu' = 1.5 x 264.02
= 396.03 kNm
Mu = Ru x b x d d = Mu / (Ru x b)

Mu
drequired
Ru . b
drequired = 309.29 mm
Provide dprovided = 440 mm
Overall thickness 'D' = 500 mm
Thickness of stem at top 'D1' = 200 mm

Net width of the heel slab = 2.25 m

0.2

W4

W2 W5 Fhs
5.00

4.50

W1 Fh

0.50 W3

0.75 0.5 2.25 ka x g x H


3.50 36.92 52.91
Figure showing dimensions and forces for retaining wall
Stability analysis of Retaining wall
Force and Moment table

Sr. Force in (kN) Lever arm (m) Moment at toe in kNm


1 Lateral force due to earth pressure
Fh = 1/2 x (ka x g x H) x H + 1/2(gw x H2) 5 / 3 = 1.667
Fh = 1/2 x 36.92 x 5 92.30 1/3 = 0.333 155.50 Anticlockwise
+ 1/2 x 10 x 1 x 1 = 5.00
Lateral force due to Dynamic earth pressure 5 / 2 = 2.500 303.72 Anticlockwise
Fh = 1/2 x 52.91 x 5 cos 23.3 121.49
2 Self weight of wall
a W1 = Rect. Portion of stem 0.75 + 0.2 / 2
W1 = 0.2 x 4.5 x 1 x 25 = 22.50 = 0.85 19.13 Clockwise

b W2 = Triangular Portion of stem


W2 = 1/2 x (0.5-0.2) x 4.5 x 1 x 25 0.75+0.2+1/3x(0.5-0.2)
W2 = 16.875 = 1.050 17.72 Clockwise

c W3 = Rect. Portion of base slab


W3 = 0.5 x 3.5 x 1 x 25 3.5 / 2
W3 = 43.75 = 1.750 76.56 Clockwise

3 Self weight of soil over base slab


a W4 = Triangular portion of soil
W4 = 1/2 x (0.5-0.2) x 4.5 x 1 x 20 0.75+0.2+2/3x(0.5-0.2)
W4 = 13.50 = 1.150 15.53 Clockwise

b W5 = Rect. Portion of soil


W5 = 4.5 x 2.25 x 1 x 20 3.5 - 2.25 / 2
W5 = 315.00 = 2.375 748.13 Clockwise

Vertical force due to Dynamic earth pressure = 2.250 117.72 Clockwise


Fh = 1/2 x 52.91 x 5 sin 23.3 52.32
Sum of vertical loads Sum of Moments SM =
SW = 411.63 535.56 Clockwise

Check against Overturning


Overturning moment 'Mo' = 459.22 kNm
Stabilising moment 'Ms' = 877.06 kNm

Factor of safety 'fo' = Ms / Mo = 1.91 > 1.55 Hence safe

Check for sliding


Sliding force 'Fh' = 218.79 kN
Resistance available 'm x SW' = 0.5 x 411.63
= 205.81 kN
Passive Resistance = = 228.8 KN
Factor of safety 'fs' = (m x SW) / Fh = 1.99 > 1.55 Hence safe
Calculation of eccentricity and check for no tension

X = SM / SW = 535.561 / 411.625
X = 1.30 m

Eccentricity 'e' = (B / 2) - X = 3.5 / 2 -1.3


e = 0.45 m

B / 6 = 3.5 / 6 = 0.58 m
e < B / 6 No Tension hence safe

Check for Pressures for base slab

SW. e = 411.63 / 3.5 x ( 1 + 6 x 0.45 / 3.5)


smax 1 6.
B B
smax = 208.11 kN/m
Maximum stress < SBC hence safe
SW. e = 411.63 / 3.5 x ( 1 - 6 x 0.45 / 3.5)
smin 1 6.
B B
smin = 27.10 kN/m
No tension condition hence safe
Interpolation
Value of pressure for 0.75 m from toe
0 208.11
3.5 27.10
0.75 169.32
Value of pressure for 1.25 m from toe
0 208.11
3.5 27.10
1.25 143.47

208.11 27.10

169.32 143.47
Figure showing pressures in kN/m for retaining wall
Design of Stem of Retaining wall

Main steel

0.5. f ck. b . d . 4.6 . Mu


As t 1 1
f ck. b . d
fy 2

Ast; required = 2264.36 mm


Use Tor 20 mm bars 130 mm c/c
Ast; provided = 2416.61 mm

Curtailment of Main steel

50 % of the main steel can be curtailed at 0.75 h = 3.38 m


Actual length of cutoff = 2.94 m
= 2.9 m Say
Check for Shear

Shear at bottom of wall = 84.3 + 109.3 = 193.66 kN

Design shear force Vu = 1.5 x V Vu = 290.49 kN

Shear stress tv = Vu / (b x d) tv = 0.66 N/mm

100As / (b x d) =100 x 2416.61 /(1000 x 440) = 0.55

Design shear strength 't c' is obtained from Table 19 page 73 IS 456 : 2000

For 0.55 tc = 0.52 N/mm


Section unsafe, Design shear stress is less than Nominal shear stress

Development length
Development length = Ld = f x ss/(4 x tbd ) = 1068.2 mm
Development length = 1100 mm Say
Development length will be provided from bottom face of the stem in the heel slab

Design of toe slab

0.5

0.75

208.1 169.3 Figure showing pressures


for toe slab

38.79
Force and Moment table

Sr. Force in (kN) Lever arm (m) Moment at toe in kNm


1 Self weight of the toe slab
= 0.75 x 1 x 0.5 x 25 = 9.4 0.75 / 2 = 0.38 3.5 Hogging

2 Uniform pressure
= 0.75 x 1 x 169.325 = 127.0 0.75 / 2 = 0.38 47.6 Sagging

3 Triangular Pressure
= 1 / 2 x 0.75 x 1 x 38.79 = 14.5 0.67 x 0.75 = 0.50 7.3 Sagging

Sum of vertical loads Sum of Moments SM =


SW = 132.16 51.380 Sagging

Design vertical force 'Vu' = 1.5 x SW = 198.2 kN

Design Moment 'Mu' = 1.5 x SM = 77.1 kNm

Check for depth


Mu = Ru x b x d d = Mu / (Ru x b)

Mu
drequired
Ru . b
drequired = 136.4399 mm

dprovided = 440 mm Hence Safe

Main steel of toe slab

0.5. f ck. b . d . 4.6 . Mu


As t 1 1
f ck. b . d
fy 2

Ast; required = 409.2 mm


Ast; provided = 2416.6 mm

Check for Shear


Shear stress tv = Vu / (b x d) tv = 0.45 N/mm
100As / (b x d) = 100 x 2416.6 / (1000 x 440) = 0.55

Design shear strength 't c' is obtained from Table 19 page 73 IS 456 : 2000
For 0.55 tc = 0.52 N/mm
Section safe in shear, Design Shear stress Greater than Nominal shear stress
Design of heel slab

0.5

2.25

27.10
143.466 Figure showing pressures
for heel slab
116.36
Force and Moment table

Sr. Force in (kN) Lever arm (m) Moment at toe in kNm


1 Self weight of the heel slab
= 2.25 x 1 x 0.5 x 25 = 28.13 2.25 / 2 = 1.125 31.6 Hogging

2 Self weight of soil


= 2.25 x 1 x 4.5 x 20 = 202.50 2.25 / 2 = 1.125 227.8 Hogging

3 Uniform pressure
= 2.25 x 1 x 27.101 = 60.98 2.25 / 2 = 1.125 68.6 Sagging

4 Triangular Pressure
= 1 / 2 x 2.25 x 1 x 116.365 = 130.91 2.25 / 3 = 0.750 98.2 Sagging

Sum of vertical loads Sum of Moments SM =


SW = 38.74 161.3 Hogging

Design vertical force 'Vu' = 1.5 x SW = 58.11 kN


Design Moment 'Mu' = 1.5 x SM = 241.91 kNm

Check for depth


Mu = Ru x b x d d = Mu / (Ru x b)

Mu
drequired
Ru . b
drequired = 241.73 mm

dprovided = 442 mm Hence Safe

Main steel

0.5. f ck. b . d . 4.6 . Mu


As t 1 1
f ck. b . d
fy 2

Ast; required = 1324.98 mm


Use Tor 16 mm bars 140 mm c/c
Ast; provided = 1436.16 mm
Check for Shear
Shear stress tv = Vu / (b x d) tv = 0.131 N/mm
100As / (b x d) = 100 x 1436.2 / (1000 x 442) = 0.325

Design shear strength 'tc' is obtained from Table 19 page 73 IS 456 : 2000
For 0.32 tc = 0.53 N/mm
Section safe in shear, Design Shear stress Greater than Nominal shear stress

Minimum steel
Stem Ast;min = 0.12% x b x d = 600 mm on both faces
= 300 mm on each face
Use Tor 10 mm bars 240 mm c/c
Ast; provided = 327.2492 mm
Base slab Ast;min = 0.12% x b x d = 600 mm on both faces
= 300 mm on each face
Use Tor 10 mm bars 240 mm c/c
Ast; provided = 327.2492 mm

0.2 GL

20Tor @260c/c

2.9 Note:
Provide minimum steel as given
above in both directions and on
4.5 20Tor @130c/c both faces for stem and base slab

GL
16Tor @140c/c

0.50
0.5

0.75 0.5 2.25


3.5
Figure showing dimensions and Main steel of Retaining wall
ANNEXURE VII SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS

22
Stability Analysis of temporary cut slope in static condition

Minimum Factor of Safety =1.061

Slide Analysis Information

Document Name

File Name: 1.5h 1v slope with 6m retaining wall static final - temporary cut slope

Project Settings

Project Title: SLIDE - An Interactive Slope Stability Program


Failure Direction: Left to Right
Units of Measurement: SI Units
Pore Fluid Unit Weight: 9.81 kN/m3
Groundwater Method: Ru Coefficient
Data Output: Standard
Calculate Excess Pore Pressure: Off
Allow Ru with Water Surfaces or Grids: Off
Random Numbers: Pseudo-random Seed
Random Number Seed: 10116
Random Number Generation Method: Park and Miller v.3

Analysis Methods

Analysis Methods used:


Bishop simplified

Number of slices: 25
Tolerance: 0.005
Maximum number of iterations: 50

Surface Options

Surface Type: Circular


Radius increment: 10
Minimum Elevation: Not Defined
Composite Surfaces: Disabled
Reverse Curvature: Create Tension Crack

Material Properties

Material: Silty Clay


Strength Type: Mohr-Coulomb
Unit Weight: 20 kN/m3
Cohesion: 60 kPa
Friction Angle: 0 degrees
Ru value: 0.1

Material: Clayey Silty sand 1


Strength Type: Mohr-Coulomb
Unit Weight: 20 kN/m3
Cohesion: 10 kPa
Friction Angle: 30 degrees
Ru value: 0.1

Material: Clayey Silty Sand 2


Strength Type: Mohr-Coulomb
Unit Weight: 20 kN/m3
Cohesion: 15 kPa
Friction Angle: 30 degrees
Ru value: 0.1

Material: Silty Sand


Strength Type: Mohr-Coulomb
Unit Weight: 20 kN/m3
Cohesion: 0 kPa
Friction Angle: 33 degrees
Ru value: 0.1

Global Minimums

Method: bishop simplified


FS: 1.061240
Center: 34.474, 56.653
Radius: 38.980
Left Slip Surface Endpoint: 0.436, 37.656
Right Slip Surface Endpoint: 27.516, 18.299
Left Slope Intercept: 0.436 37.656
Right Slope Intercept: 27.516 19.478
Resisting Moment=91381.9 kN-m
Driving Moment=86108.8 kN-m

Stability Analysis of Cut slope Static Condition


Minimum Factor of Safety =1.629

Slide Analysis Information

Document Name

File Name: 1.5h 1v slope with 6m retaining wall static final

Project Settings

Project Title: SLIDE - An Interactive Slope Stability Program


Failure Direction: Left to Right
Units of Measurement: SI Units
Pore Fluid Unit Weight: 9.81 kN/m3
Groundwater Method: Ru Coefficient
Data Output: Standard
Calculate Excess Pore Pressure: Off
Allow Ru with Water Surfaces or Grids: Off
Random Numbers: Pseudo-random Seed
Random Number Seed: 10116
Random Number Generation Method: Park and Miller v.3

Analysis Methods

Analysis Methods used:


Bishop simplified

Number of slices: 25
Tolerance: 0.005
Maximum number of iterations: 50
Surface Options

Surface Type: Circular


Radius increment: 10
Minimum Elevation: Not Defined
Composite Surfaces: Disabled
Reverse Curvature: Create Tension Crack

Material Properties

Material: Silty Clay


Strength Type: Mohr-Coulomb
Unit Weight: 20 kN/m3
Cohesion: 60 kPa
Friction Angle: 0 degrees
Ru value: 0.1

Material: Clayey Silty sand 1


Strength Type: Mohr-Coulomb
Unit Weight: 20 kN/m3
Cohesion: 10 kPa
Friction Angle: 30 degrees
Ru value: 0.1

Material: Clayey Silty Sand 2


Strength Type: Mohr-Coulomb
Unit Weight: 20 kN/m3
Cohesion: 15 kPa
Friction Angle: 30 degrees
Ru value: 0.1

Material: Silty Sand


Strength Type: Mohr-Coulomb
Unit Weight: 20 kN/m3
Cohesion: 0 kPa
Friction Angle: 33 degrees
Ru value: 0.1

Material: Concrete
Strength Type: Mohr-Coulomb
Unit Weight: 24 kN/m3
Cohesion: 100 kPa
Friction Angle: 40 degrees
Ru value: 0.1

Material: Backfill
Strength Type: Mohr-Coulomb
Unit Weight: 20 kN/m3
Cohesion: 5 kPa
Friction Angle: 35 degrees
Ru value: 0.1

Global Minimums

Method: bishop simplified


FS: 1.629170
Center: 18.306, 50.974
Radius: 27.272
Left Slip Surface Endpoint: -5.212, 37.165
Right Slip Surface Endpoint: 29.768, 26.227
Resisting Moment=61384.9 kN-m
Driving Moment=37678.7 kN-m

Stability Analysis of Cut slope Seismic Condition

Minimum Factor of Safety =1.112

Slide Analysis Information

Document Name

File Name: 1.5h 1v slope with 6m retaining wall seismic final

Project Settings

Project Title: SLIDE - An Interactive Slope Stability Program


Failure Direction: Left to Right
Units of Measurement: SI Units
Pore Fluid Unit Weight: 9.81 kN/m3
Groundwater Method: Ru Coefficient
Data Output: Standard
Calculate Excess Pore Pressure: Off
Allow Ru with Water Surfaces or Grids: Off
Random Numbers: Pseudo-random Seed
Random Number Seed: 10116
Random Number Generation Method: Park and Miller v.3

Analysis Methods
Analysis Methods used:
Bishop simplified
Number of slices: 25
Tolerance: 0.005
Maximum number of iterations: 50

Surface Options
Surface Type: Circular
Radius increment: 10
Minimum Elevation: Not Defined
Composite Surfaces: Disabled
Reverse Curvature: Create Tension Crack

Loading
Seismic Load Coefficient (Horizontal): 0.15
Seismic Load Coefficient (Vertical): 0.075

Material Properties

Material: Silty Clay


Strength Type: Mohr-Coulomb
Unit Weight: 20 kN/m3
Cohesion: 60 kPa
Friction Angle: 0 degrees
Ru value: 0.1

Material: Clayey Silty sand 1


Strength Type: Mohr-Coulomb
Unit Weight: 20 kN/m3
Cohesion: 10 kPa
Friction Angle: 30 degrees
Ru value: 0.1

Material: Clayey Silty Sand 2


Strength Type: Mohr-Coulomb
Unit Weight: 20 kN/m3
Cohesion: 15 kPa
Friction Angle: 30 degrees
Ru value: 0.1

Material: Silty Sand


Strength Type: Mohr-Coulomb
Unit Weight: 20 kN/m3
Cohesion: 0 kPa
Friction Angle: 33 degrees
Ru value: 0.1

Material: Concrete
Strength Type: Mohr-Coulomb
Unit Weight: 24 kN/m3
Cohesion: 100 kPa
Friction Angle: 40 degrees
Ru value: 0.1

Material: Backfill
Strength Type: Mohr-Coulomb
Unit Weight: 20 kN/m3
Cohesion: 5 kPa
Friction Angle: 35 degrees
Ru value: 0.1

Global Minimums
Method: bishop simplified
FS: 1.111590
Center: 18.229, 49.047
Radius: 25.473
Left Slip Surface Endpoint: -4.343, 37.240
Right Slip Surface Endpoint: 29.549, 26.227
Resisting Moment=57230.8 kN-m
Driving Moment=51485.4 kN-m
ANNEXURE VIII SOLUTION DRAWINGS

23
ANNEXURE IX REFERENCES

24
C. E. Testing Company Pvt. Limited. Report on Geotechnical Investigation Work for the Proposed
Railway Formation from Ch. Km. 10.00 To 114.00 in Connection with Agartala Sabroom New Bg
Line Project, Tripura, - STABILITY OF CUTTING AND FILLING SLOPES FROM CH. KM. 53.015 TO
56.017, September 2014
IRS, Code of practice for the design of sub-structures and foundations of bridges.
IS 1893 (Part 1) : 2002, Criteria for earthquake resistant design of structures, Part 1 General
provisions and buildings.
IS 456-2000, Code of practice for plain and reinforced cement concrete.
IS 2911 (Part 1/Sec 2): 2010, Design and construction of pile foundations Code of practice, Part
1 Concrete piles, Section 2 Bored cast in-situ concrete piles.
Narayan V. Nayak, 1996, Foundation Design Manual, Fourth Edition, Dhanpat Rai Publications
(P) Ltd.
Design Aids in Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering by S.R.Kaniraj

25