Case Study of Reinforced Earth Wall Failure during Extreme

Title Rainfall

Author(s) Shin, E. C.; Cho, S. D.; Lee, K. W.

Proceeding of TC302 Symposium Osaka 2011 : International

Symposium on Backwards Problem in Geotechnical
Citation Engineering and Monitoring of Geo-Construction (2011): 146-
153

Issue Date 2011

URL http://hdl.handle.net/2433/173835

Right

Type Article

Textversion publisher

Kyoto University
 International Symposium on Backward Problems in Geotechnical Engineering TC302-Osaka 2011

Case Study of Reinforced Earth Wall Failure during Extreme Rainfall

E. C. Shin
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Incheon, Republic of Korea

S. D. Cho
Geotechnical Engineering Lab., Korea Institute of Construction Technology, Republic of Korea

K. W. Lee
Geotechnical Engineering Lab., Korea Institute of Construction Technology, Republic of Korea

ABSTRACT: Recently number of reinforced earth walls had problems such as cracking on the facing wall,
breakage of connection pins in the modular block, differential settlement on the foundation and collapsing fac-
ing wall. This paper describes the recent application and design for both panel type and modular block type
faced reinforced walls. The failure case histories of reinforced earth wall during the extreme rainfall are also
presented.

1 INTRODUCTON The first part of this paper describes the design cri-
teria of reinforced earth walls incorporation with
The reinforced earth technology was introduced in the quality control of reinforced wall components,
the construction of earth embankment, castles, and that is, facing block, reinforcement material, back-
traditional houses with utilizing chopped rice straw filling soils. The comparison of design criteria of
or tree branch mixed with mud in the wooden wall reinforced earth wall between the design methods
frame(Lee, 1998; Kim, 2003). used in USA(NCMA, FHWA) and the design
The modern reinforced earth technology in Korea methods used in several Korean Agencies has been
was first introduced in the year 1980 for the con- made in the categories of external stability, internal
struction of No.3 Highway in Gyeonggi Province. stability, local stability, and design of reinforce-
The reinforcing material used in this project is a ment in its length and spacing.
flat type galvanized steel strip. The reinforced The second part of this paper is introduced the
earth technology has been getting widely accepted construction procedure of panel type and modular
since then and reached approximately 559 thou- block faced reinforced earth walls. Finally several
sand m2 construction work in the year April 2010 case histories of reinforced earth wall failure dur-
by the government agency and private industry. ing extreme rainfall are presented with the typical
Many different types of reinforcing materials like types of the failures, the total collapsing of the wall,
other countries are being used for the reinforced facing block collapse, differential settlement of
wall. The reinforcing materials for the reinforced foundation soil, facing wall cracking, and large
wall are mainly stiff geogrid(PP) and flexible ge- distortion of facing wall.
ogrid (PET), geosynthetic strip type, galvanized Lee and Cho(2010) presented the design and con-
steel strip, and soil nailing. The wire mesh type rein- struction data of reinforced earth walls for each re-
forced steel bar and steel bar with a cross-reinforcing gional district where is tabulated in Table 1.
angle are also used for the reinforced wall.

146
 International Symposium on Backward Problems in Geotechnical Engineering TC302-Osaka 2011

Table1. Construction data of reinforced walls in Korea Table 3. Quality control of reinforced wall components
(Lee and Cho, 2010) Korea Korea Korea
No. of Reinforced wall Highway Slope Structu
constru Construc Actual Corp.(2009) Constr r al Fo
Regional
ction Design tion cost construct Wall component uction undatio
district
site (mଶ ) (million ion(mଶ ) Panel B lo ck D e s i g n Desi
US＄) type type n ( 2 0 0 gn(200
Seoul 43 41,279 8.8 99,817 6) 9)
Daejeon 55 375,141 10.0 183,246 Unconf
Wonju 23 121,726 3.3 33,638 ined co Panel:
Iksan 61 318,818 8.8 113,603 mpressi 30MPa
21
Busan 67 309,539 8.5 128,519 ve stre block
Total 249 1,544,504 39.4 558,823 ngth (-)
(MPa)
Facing
Absorp Average less than 7,
block
2 DESIGN CRITERIA OF REINFORCED tion(%) Maximum less than 10
EARTH WALLS Manufa
cturing
The design and construction criteria of reinforced Deviati ±3 ±5 - -
earth wall are fundamental guideline and important on
parameters in terms of stability and integrity of re- (mm)
inforced earth wall. The quality control guidelines Geosyn
of reinforced earth wall components such as facing Reinfo -
thetics
blocks (panel type and modular block type), rein- rcemen
t mate Galvani
forcement material (geosynthetics and galvanized 5.88N/
zed met 610g/mଶ -
metal strip), and backfilling soil are provided by rial mଶ
al strip
the Korea Highway Corporation(2009), Korea
Slope Construction Design Code(2006), and Korea Internal KSF 2343 Direct shear Greater
Structure Foundation Design Code(2009). The de- frictio result, greater than than
tail limit and values for each component are de- n angle design value 25°
scribed in Tables 2 and 3. Maxim
Most of reinforced earth walls in urban area are be- um siz 100 53 100
ing constructed in the hilly area to obtain the mar- e(mm)
ginal land for the parking space or play ground for % of p
children in the large scale apartment construction assing
site. In this kind of construction site, it is rather dif- NO.20
15 35 15
ficult to have a good backfill soil in the reinforced 0 sieve
earth wall. Because the Korean Peninsula is moun- (75m
tainous and 70% of the land is covered with moun- Backfil m)
tains. ling so PI 6 ≥ 6 ≥ - 6 ≥
So, the decomposed weathered granite soil is the il
major sources of backfill soil around the construc- PH 5~10 5~10 - -
tion site. The most of construction site use this Degree
kind of soil with the removal of large size of boul- of
der. 95%(D, E Types
Compa -
compaction)
ction
Table 2. Design criteria of backfill soil for reinforced (%)
earth wall in Korea(Lee and Cho, 2010) Lift thi
Grain size % of passing ckness
Galvanized metal strip of com 20 20 -
100
(102mm) paction
Geosynthetics reinforement (cm)
100
(19mm)
0.425mm(No. 40) 0~60 With consideration of the availability of soil, Ta-
0.075mm(No. 200) 0~15 bles 2 and 3 give the quality control limit for the
backfill soil in the reinforced earth wall.
PI ≤ 6

147
 International Symposium on Backward Problems in Geotechnical Engineering TC302-Osaka 2011

Table 4. Comparison of design criteria of reinforced earth wall, (earthquake situation) (Lee and Cho, 2010)
Korea Korea Korea Slope
Korea
NCMA FHWA Road Structural Construc-
Design criteria Railway
(1998) (2001) Design( ) Foundation tion Design
(2001)
(2000) Design (2006)

1.5(75%) 1.5(75%)
Basal
1.5(1.1) 1.5(1.2) 1.5(-) 1.5(1.1)
sliding Earth quake:
F.S(st) 0.75%
L/6 F.S≤2.0
in Soil (F.S≤1.5)
External Over- (75%) e≤L/6(e≤L/4)
stability 2.0(1.1) 2.0(75%) 1.5(-) 1.5(1.1)
turning L/4 in (soil)
Rock e≤L/6(e≤L/4)
(75%) (rock)
Bearing
2.0(1.5) 2.5(75%) 2.5(75%) 2.5(2.0) 2.5(-) 2.5(2.0)
capacity
Overall
1.3(1.0)
sliding
Factor
Metal
of 1.0(75%)
strip
Safety
(F.S) Geogrid 1.5(75%)
Geosyn- 1.0(1.0) 1.0(-)
Internal thetic re-
stability 1.5(75%)
inforce-
ment
Pullout
re- 1.5(1.1) 1.5(75%) 2.0(75%) 2.0(-) 1.5(-) 2.0(-)
sistance
Connec-
tion with
1.5(1.1) 1.5(75%) -(-) 1.5(-) - -
facing
Local block
stability Block
shearing
1.5(1.1) -(-) -(-) 1.5(-) - -
re-
sistance
0.5~0.7H(with
slope and
L/H 0.6H 0.7H heavy concen- - 0.7H
trated load:
0.7H)

Rein- Minimum length 0.3m 2.5m 2.5m - -

force- Effec-
ment tive resistance Length( 0.3m 1.0m - - 1.0m
Le)

Less than 0.8~1.0m

Less than
Max. vertical spacing 2X Less than 2X 1.0m 1.0m
2X height
height block height

The typical design methods are proposed by the 1996, 2001), NCMA method(National Concrete Ma-
USA, FHWA (Fedral Highway Administration, sonry Association), France MOT method(1980)

148
 International Symposium on Backward Problems in Geotechnical Engineering TC302-Osaka 2011

England method(British Standard, 1995), and Japan struction sequences are shown in Figure 3.2. The re-
Civil Engineering Research Center method(2000). inforcement belt strip is stretched and anchored on
The most of these methods are based on the concept the facing panel by using a loop attachment and car-
of the limit equilibrium analysis. The first two meth- bon rod(L=17.5cm, D=25mm or 32mm). The rein-
ods are compared with the three Korean design forced earth wall shown in Figure 3.3 is for Sadang
methods in Table 4. The design method of stability Dealim apartment complex in southwest part of
analysis for reinforced earth wall is categorized into Seoul Metropolitan area on July, 1988. The height of
three parts (1) external stability; basal sliding, over- this reinforced wall is about 16m and consists of
turning, bearing capacity, and overall sliding, (2) in-
levels with a small beam in-between the 1st staged
ternal stability; tensile strength of reinforcement el-
wall and the 2nd staged wall(E & S Eng., 1997).
ement in breakage, pull-out resistance of
reinforcement element, (3) facing wall stability;
connector between facing wall and reinforcement,
block shearing resistance.
The design parameters of reinforcement element are
compared in term of reinforcement length, effective
resistance length(Le), and the maximum vertical
spacing of reinforcement. The most of Korea design
methods are based on the FHWA metohd.

3 PANEL TYPE REINFORCED EARTH WALL Fig 3.1 Reinforced earth wall for apartment complex
in Youngin, Gyeonggi Province.
The advanced reinforced earth wall technology in
Korea has been used in the past thirty one years. The
most of reinforced walls were applied along the
highway construction for retaining natural soil
slopes, embankment, and approach embankment of
bridge flyovers.
The wall facing of reinforced earth wall are general-
ly categorized into two types, either hard concrete
facing or geosynthetic soft facing. The most of rein-
forced earth wall are currently utilizing hard con-
crete discrete panels, either flat panel type like using
in Reinforced Earth Wall(REW) or modular block
type. These are usually made of precast concrete
with overlapping joints with compressive filler and Fig 3.2 Construction of reinforced earth wall with PET
are made of various sizes and shapes to fit the design belt type reinforcement.
requirement.
A flexible soft facing is formed by wrapping each
layer of reinforcement around individual compacted
soil. The reinforcement is anchored back into the
backfill soil by pinning or partially buried. This type
of wall facing is usually applied in the temporary re-
taining wall structures.
Figure 3.1 shows the construction of the reinforced
earth wall to gain the extra land for the apartment
complex in Youngin, Kyeonggi Province on No-
vember, 1996. This marginal land can be used for
the parking space and play ground for resident.
Many of these kinds of construction techniques are Fig 3.3 Two stages of reinforced wall in Sadangdong,
practiced in Korea due to the dwindling of available Daelim apartment complex.
land in the urban area.
The reinforcing material in this particular project is a
belt type continuous strip which made of polyes-
ter(PET) with polyethylene(PE) coating. The con-

149
 International Symposium on Backward Problems in Geotechnical Engineering TC302-Osaka 2011

The maximum wall height constructed is 18.3m in struction area for the residential & office buildings,
Namyangju, Kyeonggi Province for the apartment construction of apartment complex and industrial
complex on August, 1994. Figure 3.4 shows the con- factory complex in the hilly area to obtain the build-
struction of an approach embankment for overpass ing site with cutting off the hillside as shown in Fig-
bridge on Kyeongchung Highway in Seongnam, ure 4.2.
Kyeonggi Province on November, 1992. These rein-
forced earth techniques are mostly used in the high-
way cut to secure the earth slope against sliding fail-
ure. The galvanized metal strip which manufactured
in Korea is being used as a reinforcement(Figure
3.5). However, the quality is a little bit low as com-
paring with REW's in terms of mobilizing friction
angle and coating along the strip.

Fig 4.1 Modular block faced reinforced wall in an ap-

proach embankment of bridge flyover.

Fig 3.4 Reinforced approach embankment for overpass

bridge, Kyeongchung Highway.

Fig 4.2 Modular block faced geogrid reinforced wall

which developed in Korea.

The total amount of construction of both panel type

facing reinforced walls and block type facing rein-
forced walls are presented in Figure 4.3.
The reinforcing materials for modular block faced
reinforced walls are mostly polyester geogrid and
polypropylene geogrid. Two types of geogrid are
Fig 3.5 Reinforced earth wall construction with galva- used in practice, uniaxial geogrid and biaxial geogrid,
nized metal strip. depending on the application purpose. Fasteners and
connections are necessary in reinforced modular
block wall where geogrids are connected to the fac-
4 MODULAR BLOCK FACED GEOSYNTHETIC ing block.
REINFORCED WALLS

The modular block faced geosynthetic reinforced

segmental retaining walls are extensively used in
Korea. The trend of using this type of reinforced
wall is very optimistic and very comparative in
comparison with the conventional concrete retaining
walls. It can be applied in the side wing of an ap-
proach embankment of bridge flyovers as shown in
Figure 4.1
The applications of modular block faced geosynthet-
ic reinforced wall can be categorized into the con- (a) Concrete panel faced reinforced wall.

150
 International Symposium on Backward Problems in Geotechnical Engineering TC302-Osaka 2011

The most of troubled reinforced earth walls are be-

ing constructed in the hilly area of the mountain val-
ley. Because the large amount of water flow is ex-
pected during the extreme rainfall in the rainy season.
The level of foundation soil is not uniformed both in
the horizontal direction and the longitudinal direc-
tion. In the month of August 2010 in Korea, the ex-
tremely heavy monsoon rainfall was occurred. The
precipitation in a single day was about 671.5mm.
(b) Modular block type faced reinforced wall Therefore, the proper design of drainage system and
the appropriate treatment of foundation soil are the
Fig 4.3 Construction amount of geosynthetic reinforced important element to maintain the stability of the re-
earth walls in Korea. inforced earth wall.
Facing wall cracking can be occurred due to non suf-
ficient unconfined compressive strength of facing
5 CASE HISTORY OF REINFORCED EARTH wall and non proper connection between facing wall
WALL FAILURE and reinforcement element, excessive tensile
strength induced in the curved part of REW, and dif-
The typical failure mode of reinforce earth walls can ferential settlement of foundation soil. Figure 5.2
be classified as facing wall cracking, total wall col- show the case of wall failure by cracking. The pore
lapse, facing block collapse, excessive differential water pressure was built up at the right bottom cor-
settlement, and distortion of facing wall. ner of the first staged reinforced wall. This problem
The external and internal stabilities failure of rein- was also caused by the improper treatment of foun-
forced earth walls are schematically drawn in Figure dation soil. The place where the pore water pressure
5.1. builds up was not treated foundation soil with con-
crete cement like other front part of the wall. Thus,
the differential settlement was occurred at the corner
of the wall and the earth pressure was concentrated
in that area. The ground water was seeping into the
corner of the way to create a stability problem of the
wall. The remediation for this problem was imple-
mented with monitoring the field instruments such
(a) (b) as inclinometer and tilt meters. There were two types
of remedial treatments, base reinforcement and
drainage control. The cement mortar grouting at the
base of reinforced wall around the corner and side
part of the wall was injected completely.

(c) (d)

(e) (f) (g)

Figure 5.2 Facing wall crack of reinforced earth wall

(h) (i) (j)
Total collapse of reinforce earth wall could be
Figure 5.1 Failure modes of reinforced earth
caused by the lack of stability of overall sliding in
wall(External failure (a)basal sliding, (b)overturning,
(c)bearing capacity failure, (d)overall sliding; Internal design, not sufficient drainage system and bearing
failure (e)Pull-out failure, (f)breakage of reinforcement, capacity of foundation soil, and usage of a lot of fine
(g)internal sliding, (h)breakage of connector, (i)shear fail- grained soil as a backfill material and poor soil com-
ure of facing wall, (j)failure of upper facing block) paction as shown by Figure 5.3

151
 International Symposium on Backward Problems in Geotechnical Engineering TC302-Osaka 2011

Figure 5.5 Excessive settlement and deformation of

REW((a) cracking of facing wall, (b) differential settle-
ment of facing wall, (c) settlement of REW, (d) excessive
settlement of facing wall, (e) differential settlement of
REW, (f)deformation of wall)(Lee & Cho, 2011)

(a) (b)
Figure 5.3 Total failure of entire reinforced earth wall ((a)
Highway construction site - Overall sliding failure; (b)
High school construction site - Overall sliding failure and
facing block sliding)(Lee and Cho, 2011)
(a) (b)
The facing block collapse can be occurred due to the
poor design of drainage layer in the behind of rein-
force earth wall and broken connector by freezing
during winter season. Figure 5.4 shows the failure of
facing wall in local road construction site.
(c) (d)
Figure 5.6 Failure case history of other reinforced earth
wall((a) loss of bottom front banking soil of REW due to
poor drainage system in the backfilling area, (b) loss of
backfilled soil due to improper construction of backfill ar-
ea and lack of drainage system, (c) collapse boundary area
between cutting area and banking area due to not suffi-
(a) (b) cient drainage system and lack of soil compaction, (d)
pull-out failure of reinforcement due to improper soil
Figure 5.4 Facing wall failure case history (Local road compaction and lack of pull-out capacity)(Lee et. al.,
construction area : (a) Deformed of middle part of REW 2011)
and collapse of facing wall, (b) Facing block sliding)(Lee
and Cho, 2011) 6 CONCLUDING REMARK

The excessive differential settlement of reinforce This paper describes the application of reinforced
earth wall foundation soil and the other failure is earth wall, design criteria, and construction problems.
caused by lacking of compaction for foundation soil The technological level of design and quantity con-
for REW where soil banking was implemented, and trol for reinforced earth wall in Korea is not suffi-
not sufficient bearing capacity due to improper ciently supported to cope with the growth quantity of
treatment of foundation soil as shown by Figures 5.5 reinforced earth wall construction market and the in-
and 5.6. creasing number of construction companies. If this
problem is being continued, the overall reinforce
earth market would be seriously damaged. Based on
the statement made above and throughout this study,
the following suggestions are made.
(1) The unified standard design and construction
(a) (b) criteria of reinforced earth wall should be estab-
lished with the detail consideration of overall per-
formance and stability.
(2) The development and providing of design soft
ware(program) needs to have a reliable design which
takes into account the domestic situation of rein-
(c) (d)
forced earth technology in Korea.
(3) The establishment of design review system
through the prominent institution to evaluate the de-
sign software, design manual, and construction
methodology of reinforced earth wall.
(4) The quality control of design and construction,
and cost of construction must be seriously executed
(e) (f)
to construct a high quality of reinforced earth wall.

152
 International Symposium on Backward Problems in Geotechnical Engineering TC302-Osaka 2011

REFERENCE
Collin, J. (1997). Design Manual for Segmental Retaining Lee, K. W., Cho, S. D. (2010). “Case of application and damage
Walls, 2nd Edition National Concrete Masonry Associa- for reinforced earth wall in the country I ; Design and con-
tion(NCMA), Virginia, USA. struction of reinforced earth wall.” Journal of the Korean
Geosynthetics Society, Vol 9. No. 3. 8-12.
E & S Engineering Co., LTD. (1997). Reinforced earth retaining
wall, Seoul Korea. Lee, K. W., Cho, S. D. (2010). “Case of application and damage
for reinforced earth wall in the country II ; Problems on ap-
Elias, V., Christopher, B. R. & Berg, R. R. (2001). Mechanically plication of reinforced earth wall.” Journal of the Korean
Stabilized Earth Walls and Reinforced Soil Slopes, Design Geosynthetics Society, Vol 9. No. 4. 8-12.
and Construction Guidelines, FHWA, Washington, DC,
FHWA-NHI-00-043. Lee, K. W., Cho, S. D. (2011). “Case of damage and practice of
reinforced earth wall in the country III ; Damage cases of re-
inforced earth wall.” Journal of the Korean Geosynthetics
Kim, H. B. (2003). “Reinforced earth techniques traditonal Society, Vol 10. No. 1. pp. 8-13.
wooden house.” 2, Journal of the Korean Geosynthetics So-
ciety., Vol. 2, No. 2 Lee, K. T., Park, J. K., Lee, K. W. (2011). “Case of application
and damage for reinforced earth wall in the country IV ; The
Kwon, O. H., Lee, K. W., Cho, S. D. (2007). “Practices and present condition for design, construction, and management
Problems of Reinforced Earth Wall in the Country.” Pro- in local highway construction with reinforced earth wall.”
ceedings of Geosynthetics Conference Fall 2007, 29-38. Journal of the Korean Geosynthetics Society, Vol 10. No. 2.
8-14.
Lee, E. S. (1998). “Historical review of reinforced earth struc-
ture.” Journal of the Korean Society of Civil engineers.
46(2): 40-43.

153