Ch5 Retaining Walls (1-37)
Ch5 Retaining Walls (1-37)
Ch5 Retaining Walls (1-37)
5.1 INTRODUCTION
Retaining walls are structures used to provide stability for earth or other materials at their
natural slopes. In general, they are used to hold back or support soil banks and water or to
maintain difference in the elevation of the ground surface on each of wall sides. Also, retaining
walls are often used; in the construction of buildings having basements, roads, or bridges when it
is necessary to retain embankments or earth in a relatively vertical position. Retaining walls are
commonly supported by soil (or rock) underlying the base slab, or supported on piles; as in case
of bridge abutments and where water may erode or undercut the base soil as in water front
structures.
(a) Gravity retaining walls are constructed of plain concrete or stone masonry. They depend
mostly on their own weight and any soil resting on the wall for stability. This type of
construction is not economical for walls higher than 3m.
(b) Semi-gravity retaining walls are modification of gravity wall in which small amounts of
reinforcing steel are introduced for minimizing the wall section.
(c) Cantilever retaining walls are the most common type of retaining walls and are generally
used for wall high up to 8m. It derives its name from the fact that its individual parts behave
as, and are designed as, cantilever beams. Its stability is a function of strength of its
individual parts.
(d) Counterfort retaining walls are similar to cantilever retaining walls, at regular intervals,
however, they have thin vertical concrete slabs behind the wall known as counterforts that tie
the wall and base slab together and reduce the shear and bending moment. They are
Foundation Engineering Chapter 5: Design and Analysis of Retaining Walls
economical when the wall height exceeds 8m. Whereas, if bracing is in front of the wall and
is in compression instead of tension, the wall is called Buttress retaining wall.
(e) Bridge abutments are special type of retaining walls, not only containing the approach fill,
but serving as a support for the bridge superstructure.
Ws
A A
2
Foundation Engineering Chapter 5: Design and Analysis of Retaining Walls
(f) Crib walls or coffer dams are cells or units to be filled with soil or built-up members of pieces
of precast concrete or metal and are supported by anchor pieces embedded in the soil for
stability.
(g) Sheet pile walls are classified as; anchored and cantilevered sheet pile walls; each kind of
them may be used in single or double sheet walls. Of these walls, only the cantilever
retaining walls and the bridge abutments are mostly used at present due to their great
economics.
Backfill
Front face
Back face
Toe
Heel
Key
Foundation Engineering
4 Design and Analysis of Retaining Walls
Asistant Prof./ Dr. Rafi’ M.s.
Foundation Engineering Chapter 5: Design and Analysis of Retaining Walls
The active and passive pressures are assumed to increase linearly with depth as a function
of the weight of soil. The magnitude and direction of these pressures as well as their distribution
depend upon many variables; such as height of the wall, the slope of the ground surface ( ), type
of backfill used, draining of the backfill, level of the water table, added loads applied on the
backfill (surcharges either live or dead loads), degree of soil compaction, and movement of the
wall caused by the action of the backfill. The forces acting on a retaining wall with level or
inclined backfill are shown Fig.(5.4).
1
Pa .H2 .K a .………….………………..………………………..(5.1)
2
1
Pp .H 2p .K p …………………….….…..…………………….…..(5.2)
2
where, the coefficients of active and passive lateral earth pressures are computed as:
For a level backfill:
1 sin
Ka or K a tan 2 (45 / 2) …..….………....…….….(5.3)
1 sin
For an inclined backfill:
NOTE: A surcharge load has a same effect as an additional (equivalent) height of earth ( H su )
above the ground surface obtained as: H su Wsu / backfill where Wsu is the
surcharge load per square unit and backfill is the unit weight of backfill soil. This
additional height due to surcharge, adds a rectangle of pressure behind the wall with a
total lateral force assumed acting at its mid-height
5
Foundation Engineering Chapter 5: Design and Analysis of Retaining Walls
Surcharge
G.S. qs
w c1 w s1 w c1 w s1
This soil may This soil may
Ps K a qs.H
be removed w s 2w c 2 be removed w s 2w c 2
1 1
Pa H 2 K a Pa H 2 K a
1 2
w c3 2
1
w c3 2
PP H p K P PP H 2p K P H/2
2 H/3 2 H/3
B B
(a) level backfill without surcharge. (b) level backfill with surcharge
w s2
G.S. Surcharge
w s2 qs
Ps K a qs.H
w c1 w s1 w c1 w s1
1 Pav
This soil may H Pa H 2 K a This soil may 1
Pa H2K a
be removed w w c2 2 be removed w s3 w c2 2
s3 H /2 Pah
w c3 w c3
1
PP H 2p K P
H /3 1 H /3
PP H 2p K P
2 2
B B
V w s w c Pv V w s w c Pv
(c) Sloped backfill without surcharge. (d) Sloped backfill with surcharge
6
Foundation Engineering Chapter 5: Design and Analysis of Retaining Walls
k a
c
Ps Ka qs.H
w c1 w s1 Pav
1
This soil may w s3 Pa H2K a
w c2 2
be removed
H /2 Pah
m L w c3
H /3
Df 1 2
PP H p K P n j i h
d
2
B
O E
FR c.B V. tan
G
R q heel
q Toe e
V w s w c Pv
where, Pah Pa cos , Pav Pa sin , H H bc. tan ,
ws ws1 ws 2 ws3 , wc wc1 wc 2 wc3 FR ca B V tan PP
7
Foundation Engineering Chapter 5: Design and Analysis of Retaining Walls
V MR
1
Pa H 2 K a ……………...for level ground surface,
2
1
Pah H 2 K a cos ……..for inclined ground surface,
2
Resisting force = FR C a .B V. tan
8
Foundation Engineering Chapter 5: Design and Analysis of Retaining Walls
Net.Moment M R M o
Location of resultant of V from Toe ( x )
V V
2 3 2 3
Ca c..to.. c and ..to..
3 4 3 4
NOTE: If SFSliding is unsafe: Increase the base dimension B, or Use a key beneath the base
near the stem or at the heel, as shown in Fig.(5.6) until SFSliding 1.5 2.0
(a) key near the stem. (b) Key at the heel (more effective).
2.5−3.0
by:
Calculate the eccentricity
B B M R M o
eB x
2 2 V
Check e B with B / 6 : to see whether the resultant of V (all the vertical forces, including
the vertical component of Pa ) is within the middle third or not, and falls to the
right or to the left of the wall centerline.
If e B / 6 , the maximum bearing pressure is calculated by:
V 6.e B
q actual q max . q Toe (1 )
min . Heel B.(1) B
9
Foundation Engineering Chapter 5: Design and Analysis of Retaining Walls
NOTE: In this case, it is better to change the dimension (B) until the eccentricity be e B / 6 .
The net ultimate bearing capacity of the base soil can be calculated from Hansen's equation,
considering the wall as a strip footing with width B at a depth D f using c 2 and 2 shear
strength parameters for the base soil.
where,
c = cohesion of the base soil,
q surcharge load or overburden pressure for shallow side,
= unit weight of the base soil,
B B 2e B ; B is the retaining wall effective base width,
N c , N q ,.N = Hansen's bearing capacity factors obtained from:-
S c , S q ,.S ; d c , d q ,.d ; and i c , i q ,.i = Shape, depth, and inclination factors obtained from
Table (5.1).
Table (5.1): Shape, depth, and inclination factors for Hansen's equation.
Shape factors Depth factors Inclination factors
1 iq
d c 1 0.4k * ic iq
N q 1
S c S q S 1.0
5
0.5H
since the retaining wall d q 1 2. tan (1 sin ) 2 k * i q 1
is a continuous footing V A C
f a cot
(L/B >10) 5
0.7H
d 1.0 for all values i 1
V A f C a cot
* NOTE:
Df D
k for f 1
B B
D D
k tan 1 f for f 1 (in radians), D f is the depth of footing from the shallow side.
B B
10
Foundation Engineering Chapter 5: Design and Analysis of Retaining Walls
Calculate the total settlement components as mentioned in chapter four to know whether it
will be acceptable or not in comparison of the permissible or tolerable or allowable settlement.
The rotational stability can be investigated using the Swedish circle method as follows:
(1) Draw the wall-soil system and soil layers to convenient and large scale.
(2) Draw a circle with radius sufficient to penetrate into any soft underlying layers.
(3) Compute all the forces acting against the vertical plane through the heel point and
moment arm with respect to the trial circle center.
(4) Divide the trial circle into a convenient number of slices and compute the slice weight and
the friction and cohesion (tangential) components acting on the base of each slice.
(5) Conduct a moment summation about the circle center to obtain the safety factor as:
MR
SFRotational..Stability .. 1.5 …………………………………...…....……..(5.9)
Mo
(6) Make several trials so that the minimum factor of safety is found. If this is too small, a
revision may be made to wall dimensions, or the base is placed at a greater depth. The
safety factor should not be less than 1.5.
NOTE: when the slip surface passes through several soil layers, c.L will be equal to
c1.L1 c 2 .L 2 c 3 .L 3 ……
11
Foundation Engineering Chapter 5: Design and Analysis of Retaining Walls
h
Shear: Vy q y .dh
0
1
Vy K a ..y 2 K a .q s .y …………..….for a level backfill with surcharge,
2
1
Vy K a cos ..y 2 K a cos .qs.y ...... for inclined backfill with surcharge.
2
h
Moment: M y Vy .dh
0
1 1
My K a ..y 3 K a .q s .y 2 …………...for a level backfill with surcharge,
6 2
1 1
My K a cos ..y 3 K a cos .q s .y 2 . for inclined backfill with surcharge.
6 2
Divide the stem into (4) sections that is at; y = 0, 0.25H, 0.5H, 0.75H, and H. Then,
determine (d) from wide beam shear and moments as shown below and compare the obtained (d)
values with those available and use the larger (d) value.
G.S.
G.S. y
y h h
q y .y.Ka q y .y.Ka cos Vy q ydh M y Vy.dh
H 0 0
H
12
Foundation Engineering Chapter 5: Design and Analysis of Retaining Walls
6 𝑀𝑦 (𝐿.𝐹.)
d= where, 𝑓𝑡 𝑎𝑙𝑙 . = 0.42(0.60) 𝑓′𝑐 ……...….…(ACI 318−14 section 22.2)
𝑓 𝑡 𝑎𝑙𝑙 .
Stem thickness:
t Bottom t Top S.x
where, S is the slope of the stem calculated as: S (t Bottom t Top ) / H
𝑑𝑎𝑣𝑎𝑖𝑙𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 = 𝑡 − 7.5 cm (concrete cover).
13
Foundation Engineering Chapter 5: Design and Analysis of Retaining Walls
q 2 s .H avg. c .D c
Omit soil q1 c .D c (weight of
Overlying toe V
M V
Dc Dc
d M d q heel q min.
B
q toe q max . 1
S q (qmin. q2 ) S.x
A
Xt
q (qmax. q1) S.x Xh
q q min .
Slope of the pressure diagram: S max.
B
Toe Heel
Find V at (d) from the face of the stem; at point (A) Find V at (d) from the face of the stem; at point (B)
where: ( x x T d ), and d t base 7.5cm d b / 2 . where: ( x x H d ), and d t base 7.5cm d b / 2 .
V( x H d).L.F.
V( x T d).L.F. call. (0.17)(0.75) f c ; c act.
call. (0.17)(0.75) f c ; c act. b..d
b..d
Put 𝑣𝑐 𝑎𝑙𝑙 . = 𝑣𝑐 𝑎𝑐𝑡 . and solve for (d) = ?
Put 𝑣𝑐 𝑎𝑙𝑙 . = 𝑣𝑐 𝑎𝑐𝑡 . and solve for (d) = ?
Compare 𝐴𝑠 with 𝐴𝑠𝑚𝑖𝑛 . and take the larger value. Compare 𝐴𝑠 with 𝐴𝑠𝑚𝑖𝑛 . and take the larger value.
14
Foundation Engineering Chapter 5: Design and Analysis of Retaining Walls
DESIGN PROBLEMS
10
0.08
Backfill Soil
1
c1 0.kPa.,.1 32,.1 17.3.kN / m3
6.7m
1.2m
Base Soil
c2 0.kPa.,.2 36,. 2 18.85.kN / m3
Solution:
Starting with tentative dimensions using H = 6.7 m:
Base width (B) = (0.5 - 0.7)H or 3.35m to 4.69m; Use B = 3.5m
Base depth (D) = (H/8 – H/6) or 8.37m to 1.117m; Use D = 0.9m
Top width (Tt) = (0.3m minimum – H/12) or 0.3m to 0.56m; Use Tt = 0.45m
Toe length = (D/2 – D) or 0.45m to 0.90m; Use Toe length = 0.45m
0.45m G.S.
10
0.08
6.7m
0.15m
0.45m
1.2m
0.9m
3.5m
15
Foundation Engineering Chapter 5: Design and Analysis of Retaining Walls
Additional height due inclined ground surface: h = 3.5 (0.45 0.464 0.45) tan 10 0.38m
H 6.7 + 0.38 = 7.08m
1
Pa (17.3)(7.08) 2 (0.321) 139.183 kN/m
2
Pah Pa . cos 139.183(cos 10) 137.068 kN/m ……….(Sliding Force)
Pav Pa . sin 139.183(sin 10) 24.169 kN/m
G.S.
0.45m
6 0.38m
0.08
7
5 Pv
1 Pa
2
6.7m Ph 7.08m
3
1 0.15m
0.45m 71 2.36m
0.464m 1.986m 0.9m
4
O
3.5m
16
Foundation Engineering Chapter 5: Design and Analysis of Retaining Walls
7.08
Overturning moment: M o Pah .(H / 3) 137.068 323.480 kN/m
3
MR 932.69
SFoverturning 2.88 > 2.0 (O.K.)
M o 323.480
(b) Safety factor against sliding:
In sliding stability analysis, it is a common practice to omit the soil in front of the wall.
If the fill material in front of the wall (shallow side) is considered, then:
1
PP H 2 K P ……………...for level ground surface,
2 P
1 sin 1 sin 32 1
Ka 0.307 and KP 3.255
1 sin 1 sin 32 Ka
1
PP (17.3)(1.2) 2 (3.255) 40.54. kN/m
2
Resisting force = FR C a .B V. tan
2 3
Ca c..to.. c ; C a 0 (Due to cohesionless soil)
3 4
2 3 2
..to.. ; (36) 24 ; V = 454.64 kN/m
3 4 3
FR V. tan 454.64 tan 24 202.42 kN/m
FR V. tan PP 202.42 40.54
SFSliding 1.77 > 1.5 (O.K.)
FS Pah 137.068
If the fill material in front of the wall (shallow side) is removed, then:
FR V. tan 202.42
SFSliding 1.5 (O.K.)
FS Pah 137.068
(c) Safety factor against Bearing Capacity Failure of the Base Soil:
17
Foundation Engineering Chapter 5: Design and Analysis of Retaining Walls
454.64 6.(0.41)
q max . q Toe 1 221.20.kPa
3.5(1) 3.5
454.64 6.(0.41)
q min . q Heel 1 38.60.kPa > 0 kPa (O.K.)
3.5(1) 3.5
The net ultimate bearing capacity of the base soil is evaluated using Hansen's equation (with c = 0):
0.5(2.68)(18.85)(40)(1.0)(1.0)(0.306)(0.939) 655.kPa
q ult. (net ) 655
SFBearing.Capacity 2.96 2.5 (O.K.)
q actual .(max .) 221.20
18
Foundation Engineering Chapter 5: Design and Analysis of Retaining Walls
SFRotational..Stability
N. tan c.L.R
910.24 tan 36 07.150 1.67
R ( T) Pah .y Pav .x 7.150(332.86) 346.371 110.887
SFRotational..Stability
N. tan c.L.R
1784.09 tan 36 012.408 2.07
R ( T) Pah .y Pav .x 12.408(539.09) 929.458 131.600
19
Foundation Engineering Chapter 5: Design and Analysis of Retaining Walls
20
Foundation Engineering Chapter 5: Design and Analysis of Retaining Walls
where, y y 0.38m and (y) is measured from the top of the stem.
h
Shear: V q.dh
0
1 1
Vy .y 2 .K a . cos (17.3)( y 2 )(0.321) cos 10 2.734.y 2
2 2
h
Moment: M V.dh
0
1 1
M y .y 3 .K a . cos (17.3)( y 3 )(0.321) cos 10 0.911.y 3
6 6
G.S.
y q y .y .K a
0.45m
h h
q y .y.Ka cos Vy q y .dh M y Vy .dh 0.08
0.87m
1.29m
H 0 0 1
5.8m 1.72m
2.14m
2.56m
71 2.90m
V qH .H.Ka cos
Thickness of stem.
M q V M
Fig.(5.12): Shear and moment along stem of Problem (5.1).
(d) (d)
y y 0.38 (d) or (t)
Sec. Vy 2.734.y2 M y 0.911.y3 from from
Available
No. from top (m) (kN) (kN.m/m) shear moment
(m)
(m) (m)
1 0 0 0 0 0 0.45
2 1.38 5.207 2.394 0.022 0.174 0.87
3 2.38 15.486 12.281 0.065 0.395 1.29
4 3.38 31.234 35.178 0.131 0.669 1.72
5 4.38 52.450 76.549 0.220 0.987 2.14
6 5.38 79.134 141.862 0.332 1.344 2.56
7 6.18 104.418 215.022 0.438 1.654 2.90
21
Foundation Engineering Chapter 5: Design and Analysis of Retaining Walls
The table of calculations shows that the proposed dimensions of the stem are adequate for
resisting both wide-beam shear and moment.
1 Pa
Ph =137.068 kN/m
1.6m
0.15m 1.46m
CL 71 2.36m
2.90m 0.9m
3.5m
2.9
M 137.068(2.36 0.90) 24.169(0.15 ) 200.119 kN−m/m
2
6.M 6(200.119)
f 142.77.kPa... ...f tall. (O.K.)
b.t 2 (1.0m)(2.9 2 )
22
Foundation Engineering Chapter 5: Design and Analysis of Retaining Walls
454.64 6.(0.41)
q max . q Toe 1 221.20.kPa
(3.5)(1.0) 3.5
454.64 6.(0.41)
q min. q Heel 1 38.60.kPa
(3.5)(1.0) 3.5
Pav = 24.169 kN/m
3.5m
0.45m 0.15m
M q min. 38.60.kPa
q max . 221.20.kPa B
52.171 q (q min. q 2 ) S.x
A 1
q (q max . q1 ) S.x
Xt Xh
Toe Heel
2 3
2 3
M = 99.8( x t ) 8.695( x t ) M = 44.957( x h ) 8.695( x h ) 24.169( x h )
𝑣𝑐 𝑎𝑙𝑙 . (0.17)(0.75) 14 (1000) 477 kPa 𝑣𝑐 𝑎𝑙𝑙 . (0.17)(0.75) 14 (1000) 477 kPa
23
Foundation Engineering Chapter 5: Design and Analysis of Retaining Walls
V( x T ).L.F. V( x H ).L.F.
𝑣𝑐 𝑎𝑐𝑡 . 𝑣𝑐 𝑎𝑐𝑡 .
b..d b..d
84.537.(2.0) 37.069(2)
187.8.kPa call. (O.K.) 82.4.kPa c all. (O.K.)
(1.0m)(0.9) (1)( 0.9)
M( x T ) 19.417kN.m / m M( x H ) 4.607kN.m / m
𝑓𝑡 𝑎𝑙𝑙 . (0.42)(0.60) 14 (1000) 943 kPa 𝑓𝑡 𝑎𝑙𝑙 . (0.42)(0.60) 14 (1000) 943 kPa
h
Mu
𝑓𝑡 𝑎𝑐𝑡 .
M.C
2 6M u 6.M ( x T ).L.F. 𝑓𝑡 𝑎𝑐𝑡 .
6.M( x H ).L.F.
3
I b.h b.h 2 b.h 2 b.h 2
12 6(4.607)( 2)
68.252.kPa ft all. (O.K.)
6(19.417)( 2)
287.659.kPa ft all. (O.K.) (1m)( 0.92 )
(1m)(0.92 )
0.45m G.S.
10
0.08
6.7m
0.15m
0.45m
71
1.2m
0.9m
3.5m
Foundation Engineering
Design and Analysis of Retaining Walls
Asistant Prof./ Dr. Rafi’ M.s.
24
Foundation Engineering Chapter 5: Design and Analysis of Retaining Walls
G.S.
10
0.02
Backfill Soil
1
c1 0.kPa.,.1 34,.1 18.kN / m3
8.6m
1.5m
0.60m
Base Soil
c2 0.kPa., 2 34,. 2 17.3.kN / m3
166.77
Thickness of stem at bottom: Tbottom(min .) 0.29 m ; try 0.5 m
(1.0m)(584)
25
Foundation Engineering Chapter 5: Design and Analysis of Retaining Walls
10
0.02
Backfill Soil
1
c1 0.kPa.,.1 34,.1 18.kN / m3
8.6m
1.5m
0.66m 0.6m
1.2m 2.14m
4.0m
Base Soil
c2 0.kPa., 2 34,. 2 17.3.kN / m3
G.S.
0.5m
10 5 0.38m
Backfill Soil
0.02 c1 0.kPa
1 2 Pv 1 34
4 8.98m 1 18.kN / m3
8.6m Pa
Ph
3
1.5m 2.99m
0.6m 1
O
1.2m 2.14m
0.66m
4.0m
26
Foundation Engineering Chapter 5: Design and Analysis of Retaining Walls
To determine the resisting forces and moments, the following table is prepared:
Weight Arm from O Moment
Part
(kN/m) (m) (kN-m/m)
1 4(0.6)(24)= 57.6 2.00 115.2
2 0.5(8)(24)= 96 1.61 154.56
3 1/2(0.16)(8)(24) = 15.36 1.31 20.12
4 2.14(8)(18) = 308.16 2.93 902.91
5 1/2(2.14)(0.38)(18) = 7.32 3.29 24.08
Pav 37.05 4.00 148.20
8.98
Overturning moment: M o Pah .(H / 3) 210.13 628.99 kN/m
3
M R 1365.07
SFoverturning 2.17 > 2.0 (O.K.)
Mo 628.99
Neglecting PP at Toe:
2
C a 0 (cohesionless soil); (34) 22.67
3
FR 0 V. tan 521.49 tan 22.67 217.82 kN/m
FR V. tan 217.82
SFSliding 1.04 < 1.5 (Not safe)
FS Pah 210.13
Therefore, use a shear key near the stem or heel to increase the sliding resistance.
27
Foundation Engineering Chapter 5: Design and Analysis of Retaining Walls
0.6m
PP
1.2m
(c) Safety factor against Bearing Capacity Failure of the Base Soil:
For B = 4.0 m:
The eccentricity is calculated by:
B M R M o 4 1365.07 628.99
eB 0.589m < B / 6 (4/6 = 0.667m)
2 V 2 521.49
Therefore, the resultant falls in the middle third; to the left of the centerline of footing, and
for ( e B / 6 ) the actual bearing pressures are calculated by:
V 6.e B
q actual q T oe 1 B
Heel B(1)
521.49 6.(0.589)
q max. q T oe 1 245.556.kPa
4(1) 4
521.49 6.(0.589)
q min. q Heel 1 15.188.kPa > 0 kPa (O.K.)
4(1) 4
28
Foundation Engineering Chapter 5: Design and Analysis of Retaining Walls
The net ultimate bearing capacity of the base soil is evaluated using Hansen's equation:
(with c = 0) q ult.(net ) q( N q 1)Sq d q i q 0.5.B.N S d i .r
Shape factors:
S c S q S 1.0 ; since the retaining wall is a continuous footing (L/B >10)
Inclination factors:
5 5
0.5H 0.5(210.13)
i q 1 1 0.325
V A f C a cot 521.49 0
5 5
0.7H 0.7(210.13)
i 1 1 0.191
V A f C a cot 521.49 0
B B 2e B 4 2(0.589) 2.822m
B 4
For b = 4.0 m > 2.0 m: r 1 0.25 log 10 1 0.25 log 10 0.925
2 2
q ult.(net ) (1.5)(18)(29.4 1)(1.0)(1.1)(0.325)
0.5(2.822)(17.3)(28.8)(1.0)(1.0)(0.191)(0.925) 398.336.kPa
q ult. (net ) 398.336
SFBearing.Capacity 1.62 < 2.5 (Not safe)
q actual .(max .) 245.556
9.21
Overturning moment: M o Pah .(H / 3) 221.034 678.574 kN/m
3
M R 3107.899
SFoverturning 4.6 > 2.0 (O.K.)
Mo 678.574
FR 314.883
SFSliding 1.42 < 1.5 (Not safe)
FS 221.034
∴ a shear key is needed to increase the sliding resistance. Try a heel key of 0.9m deep:
1 1
PP H 2 K P (18)(0.6 0.9) 2 (3.537) 71.62 kN/m
2 2
FR 314.883 71.62
SFSliding 1.75 > 1.5 (O.K.)
FS 221.034
30
Foundation Engineering Chapter 5: Design and Analysis of Retaining Walls
Therefore, the resultant falls in the middle third; but, to the right of the centerline of footing,
and for ( e B / 6 ) the actual bearing pressures are calculated by:
753.86 6.(0.12)
q max . q Heel 1 135.71.kPa
6.2.x.1 6.2
753.86 6.(0.12)
q min. q Toe 1 107.47.kPa > 0 kPa (O.K.)
6.2.x.1 6.2
Net ultimate bearing capacity of the base soil is evaluated using Hansen's equation:
(with c = 0) q ult.(net ) q( N q 1)S q d q i q 0.5.B.N S d i .r
Depending on the soil profile beneath the wall, calculate the total settlement components as
mentioned in Chapter Four to know whether it will be acceptable or not in comparison of
the allowable settlement.
31
Foundation Engineering Chapter 5: Design and Analysis of Retaining Walls
As previously explained the safety factor against rotational failure is graphically obtained
using the Swedish circle method, the procedure is shown in the following two trials.
SFRotational..Stability
N. tan c.LR
R ( T) Pah .y Pav .x
1966.678 tan 34 0.(12.5) 1.65
12.5.(668.564) 1370.411 319.587
Circle (2) Trial:
SFRotational..Stability
N. tan c.LR
R ( T) Ph .y Pv .x
2816.230 tan 34 0.(16.1) 1.59
16.1.(1059.084) 1834.582 358.561
Hence, the safety factor against rotation or deep seated failure is (1.59).
32
Foundation Engineering Chapter 5: Design and Analysis of Retaining Walls
8.2m
0.5m
Backfill Soil
10 Pv c1 0.kPa
6.2m 1 34
R = 12.5m 1
Ph 1 18.kN / m3
8.6m 2
260.174
1.5m 2.1m 3.44m
0.6m
6.2m 371.567
6 5 4 3
110.301
543.257 Base Soil
c 2 0.kPa
2 34
-82.516 410.509 339.465
438.205 204.172 2 17.3.kN / m3
117.729
-95.544 17.863
9.2m
0.5m
Backfill Soil
10 Pv c1 0.kPa
8.3m
1 1 34
R = 16.1m
Ph 1 18.kN / m3
8.6m 2
595.177
152.797
-52.659 33.706
Foundation Engineering
Design and Analysis of Retaining Walls
33 Asistant Prof./ Dr. Rafi’ M.s.
Foundation Engineering Chapter 5: Design and Analysis of Retaining Walls
Divide the stem into a number of sections, and determine the required (d) at each section
from wide-beam shear and moments, then compare the obtained (d) values with that available
and use the larger (d) value.
For inclined backfill, the load, shear and moment at any section are obtained by:
Load: q y .y .K a . cos
G.S.
y q y .y.Ka
h h
q y .y.Ka cos Vy q y.dh M y Vy.dh
H 0 0
M
V qH .H.Ka cos
q V M
(d) (d)
t (d)
Sec. y y 0.61 Vy 2.605.y2 M y 0.868.y3 from from
available available
no. from top (m) (kN) (kN.m/m) shear moment
(m) (m)
(m) (m)
1 0 0 0 0 0 0.50 0.41
2 2.61 17.745 15.433 0.061 0.400 0.54 0.45
3 4.61 55.362 85.040 0.189 0.940 0.58 0.49
4 6.61 113.818 250.682 0.389 1.614 0.62 0.53
5 8.61 193.114 554.025 0.661 2.400 0.66 0.57
34
Foundation Engineering Chapter 5: Design and Analysis of Retaining Walls
The table of calculations shows that the available thickness for sections 3, 4, and 5 near
the base is not sufficient to satisfy the bending moment requirement. Therefore, increase the
thickness at these sections 3, 4, and 5 to be: 0.9m, 1.6m, and 2.4m, respectively.
d 𝐴𝑆𝑚𝑖𝑛 . 𝐴𝑆𝑇𝑒𝑚𝑝 .
Sec. As Spacing Reinforcement details
required
no. (cm /m)
2
2 (cm) c/c
(m) (cm /m)
1 0.41 0 16.4 10 30
For section 1-2: use .25mm @ 28 cm c/c.
2 0.45 2.419 18 10.8 27
For section 2-3: use .25mm @ 20 cm c/c.
3 0.90 6.666 36 19.8 14
For section 3-4: use .25mm @ 11 cm c/c.
4 1.60 11.053 64 33.8 8
For section 4-5: use .25mm @ 7 cm c/c.
5 2.40 16.285 96 49.8 5
𝐴𝑠𝑚𝑖𝑛 . = 𝜌𝑚𝑖𝑛 . 𝑏. 𝑑 where, 𝜌𝑚𝑖𝑛 . is the larger of: 1.4/𝑓𝑦 or 0.25 𝑓 ′ 𝑐 /𝑓𝑦
𝐴𝑆𝑚𝑖𝑛 . = 0.0040 (1.0)(0.45)(100)2 = 18 cm2/m
𝐴𝑆𝑚𝑖𝑛 . 𝑇𝑒𝑚𝑝 . & 𝑠𝑟𝑖𝑛𝑘𝑎𝑔𝑒 = 0.0020 b t = 0.0020(1.0)(0.45 + 0.09)(100)2 = 10.8 cm2/m
35
Foundation Engineering Chapter 5: Design and Analysis of Retaining Walls
135.71 107.47
S 4.55
6.2 Pav = 38.974 kN/m
6.2m
2.1m 3.44m
Omit soil
Overlying the
q 1 = 24 (0.6) =14.4 kPa q2 (17.3)(8 8.61) / 2 24(0.6) 157.99.kPa
toe side
V V
M
0.60m 0.60m
d M
d
q min. 107.47.kPa
A 4.55
1
q (q min . q1) S.x B
q max. 135.71.kPa
q (q max. q 2 ) S.x
Xt Toe Heel Xh
Find V at (d) from the face of the stem; at point (A). Find V at (d) from the face of the stem; at point (B).
Using .25mm reinforcement bars: Using .25mm reinforcement bars:
d = 0.6 – 0.075 – 0.025/2 = 0.51m d = 0.6 – 0.075 – 0.025/2 = 0.51m
x x T d = 2.1 – 0.51 = 1.59m x x H d = 3.44 – 0.51 = 2.93m
V( x T d).L.F. V( x H d).L.F.
cact. cact.
b..d b..d
153.733.(2.0) 123.785.(2.0)
602.874kPa call (O.K.) 485.431.kPa c all. (O.K.)
(1.0m)(0.51) (1.0m)(0.51)
36
Foundation Engineering Chapter 5: Design and Analysis of Retaining Walls
Find M at face of stem; at x x T : [i.e., M(x T ) ] Find M at face of stem; at x x H : [i.e., M(x H ) ]
M(x T 2.1m) 212.242 kN−m/m M(x H 3.44m) 296.767 kN−m/m
M( x T ).L.F. 212.242.(2) M( x H ).L.F. 296.767.(2)
As 29.36.cm 2 / m As 41.05.cm 2 / m
0.9.fy .0.9.d 0.9(350)(0.9)(0.51) 0.9.fy .0.9.d 0.9(350)(0.9)( 0.51)
1.4 1.4
As min. (1m)(0.51)(100) 2 20.40.cm 2 / m As min. (1m)(0.51)(100) 2 20.40.cm 2 / m
350 350
Use As 29.36.cm 2 / m Use As 41.05.cm 2 / m
Using .25mm bars @ spacing: Using .25mm bars @ spacing:
Ab 4.91 A 4.91
S.(c / c) x100 x100 17 cm S.(c / c) b x100 x100 12 cm
As 29.36 As 41.05
Use .25mm bars @ 17 cm c/c, placed perpendicular Use .25mm bars @ 12cm c/c placed perpendicular
to the stem, at the bottom of the footing. to the stem, along the top of footing.
Astemp..and..shrinkage 0.002.b.t Astemp..and..shrinkage 0.002.b.t
0.002(1m)(0.60)(100) 2 12.cm 2 / m 0.002(1m)(0.60)(100) 2 12.cm 2 / m
Use .25mm bars @ 40 cm c/c for shrinkage placed Use .25mm bars @ 40 cm c/c for shrinkage placed
parallel to the stem, at the bottom of the footing. parallel to the stem, along the top of the footing.
0.5m
6.0m
Use several additional dowels 80 cm /m
2
2.10m 3.44m
Run some bars all the way.
0.6m
Use 25 mm @ 40 cm c/c
for shrinkage.
Use 25 mm 1.2m
Bend some bars into key.
Use 25 mm @ 12 cm c/c.
Concrete: f c 21.MPa @ 17 cm c/c.
0.66m
6.2m
Notes: (1) Use 7.5cm concrete cover on all steel where the concrete is in contact with soil.
(2) Extend steel beyond cutoff points to satisfy ACI Code requirements for bond.
Fig.(5.24): Final design sketch of Problem (5.2).
Foundation Engineering
37
Design and Analysis of Retaining Walls
Asistant Prof./ Dr. Rafi’ M.s.