Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 34

Seminar

Design Of Cantilever Retaining Walls With


Seismic Analysis

Retaining Wall

To hold back the masses of earth or loose


soil where conditions make it impossible
to let those masses assume their natural
slopes.

To retain earth or such materials to


maintain unequal levels on its two faces.

Types of Retaining Wall

Types of Retaining Wall

Parts of Cantilever Retaining


Wall

Application

Basement

Wing walls and abutments of bridge

Retain slopes in hilly terrain roads

Side walls in bridge approach roads

Lateral Support to embankment

Forces acting on Retaining Wall

Lateral earth pressure


Self Weight of Retaining Wall
Weight of Soil above the base slab
Surcharge
Soil reaction below base slab
Frictional force at the bottom of base slab

Earth Pressure

Earth Pressure
Active and Passive Earth Pressure
Coefficients :
1). Rankine Theory:

2). Coulomb Theory:

Earth Pressure

Total earth pressure force acting along the


back of the wall is

The total force acts along the back of the wall


at a height of H/3 from the base of the wall.

Stability requirements of RW

Following conditions must be satisfied for


stability of wall (IS:456-2000).
It should not overturn
It should not slide
It should not subside, i.e Max. pressure
at the toe should not exceed the safe
bearing capacity of the soil under working
condition

Check against overturning


Factor of safety against overturning
= MR / MO 1.55 (=1.4/0.9)
Where,
MR =Stabilizing moment or restoring moment
MO =overturning moment
As per IS:456-2000,
0.9 MR 1.4 MO

Check against overturning

Check against overturning

Check against Sliding

FOS against sliding


=Resisting force to sliding/Horizontal

force causing sliding

= W/Pa 1.55 (=1.4/0.9)

As per IS:456:2000

1.4 = ( 0.9W)/Pa

Friction W
SLIDING OF
WALL

Maximum pressure at the toe

x1

x2

W4

W1

W2

Pa
R
W3

T
x

b/6
b

Pmax

H/3

b/2
Pmin. Pressure

below the
Retaining Wall

Maximum pressure at the toe

Let the resultant R due to W and Pa


distance x from the toe.
X = M/W,
M = sum of all moments about toe.
Eccentricity of the load = e = (b/2-x) b/6
Minimum pressure at heel=
Pm in

W
b

6e
1 b

lie at a

>Zero.

For zero pressure, e=b/6, resultant should cut the


base within the middle third.
Maximum pressure at toe
W
= Pm ax
b

6e
1 b SBC of soil.

Depth of foundation

Df

Behaviour or structural action

Behaviour or structural
action and design of
stem, heel and toe slabs
are same as that of any
cantilever slab.

Design of Cantilever RW

Stem, toe and heel acts as cantilever slabs


Stem design: Mu= (ka H3/6)
Determine the depth d from Mu = Mu, lim=Qbd2
Design as balanced section or URS and find
steel
Mu=0.87 fy Ast[d-fyAst/(fckb)]

Design of Heel and Toe


1.

2.
3.
4.
5.

Heel slab and toe slab should also be


designed as cantilever. For this stability
analysis should be performed as explained
and determine the maximum bending
moments at the junction.
Determine the reinforcement.
Also check for shear at the junction.
Provide enough development length.
Provide the distribution steel

Design of Stem

Design of Slab

Dynamic Response of Retaining


Walls

The dynamic response of even simplest type


of retaining wall is quite complex.
Wall movement and pressure depends on
the response of the soil underlying the wall,
the response of the backfill, the inertial and
flexural response of the wall itself, and the
nature of the input motions.
Most of the current understanding of the
dynamic response of retaining wall has come
from the model test and numerical analyses.

Provision of IS 1893:1984 for Calculation


of Dynamic Lateral Pressure

As per the provision of IS: 1893:1984 the general


conditions encountered for the design of retaining wall.
The active earth pressure exerted against the wall is
given by

where,
Pa = active earth pressure
w = unit weight of soil
h = height of wall

Provision of IS 1893:1984 for Calculation of


Dynamic Lateral Pressure

Two values shall be calculated from above


equation, one for 1+v and the other for 1-v and
maximum of the two shall be the design values.
The values of the notations shall be taken as:
v= vertical seismic coefficient its direction being taken consistently

throughout

the stability analysis of wall and equal to 2/3 h


= angle of internal friction of soil
=h/(+-v)
=angle which earth face of the wall makes with the vertical
i=slope of earth fill
=angle of friction between the wall and earth fill
h= horizontal seismic coefficient

Calculation of Horizontal and Vertical


Seismic Coefficient

Since the relevant code dealing with the provision of


seismic design of retaining wall is still under revision
the data provided in the IS: 1893:2002 Part I is
referred for relevant seismic data.

Where,
Z= Zone factor
I= Importance factor
R= Response reduction factor
Sa/g= average response acceleration coefficient

Problem Definition
Height

6m

SBC

180 kN/m2

18 kN/m3

0.55

30

20

90

Zone

Result Comparison
RCC Volume Comparision

Reinforcement Comparision
700

6.40
6.20

600

6.00
500
RW
5.60
RW+Seismic+Coulo
mb

5.40

Steel (kg)

RCC Vol (m3)

5.80
400
RW
RW+Seismic+Coulomb

300

RW+Seismic

RW+ Seiesmic
5.20

200

5.00
100
4.80
0

4.60
Retaining Wall

Retaining Wall

Result Comparison
Cost Comparision
80000

70000

60000

Cost (Rs.)

50000
RW
40000

RW+Seismic+Coulomb
RW+Seiesmic

30000

20000

10000

0
Reataining Wall

Conclusion

Historically,
underground
facilities
have
experienced a lower rate of damage than surface
structures.

Some underground structures have experienced


significant damage in large earthquakes, that is
why its important to do seismic analysis in
underground structure.

But, Inclusion of seismic analysis in design results


in increased dimensions & results in costlier
structure.

Conclusion

Rankines design approach is simpler and


gives a more conservative design.
But Coulombs design is more practical one
since it involves real life scenario the friction
between the wall and the backfill.

The Coulombs design approach gives a costeffective design as compared to Rankines


design approach.

References

Dr.H.J.shah Reinforced Concrete Vol.II By IS 456:2000 Plain And


Reinforced Concrete Code Of Practice By Charotar Publication

Deepankar Choudhury1,*, T. G. Sitharam2 And K. S. Subba Rao2


Seismic Design Of Earth-retaining Structures And Foundations

Shravya Donkada and Devdas Menon Optimal Design Of Reinforced


Concrete Retaining Walls The Indian Concrete Journal April 2012

S.N.Sinha Second Edition Reinforced Concrete Design Mc Grawhill Co.


New Delhi.

References

N.Krishna Raju & R.N. Pranesh Reinforced Concrete Design By New


Age International Publisher

IS 1893(Part 1):2002 Criteria For Earthquake Resistant Design Of


Structures

IS 1893:1984 Criteria for earthquake resistant design of Structures (Fourth


Revision)

IS 1893(Part 3) Criteria For Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures


(Part 3) Bridges And Retaining Walls