2017
DOI: 10.15554/pcij62.3-03
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Full-Scale Experimental Testing and Finite Element Analysis of a Totally Prefabricated Counterfort Retaining Wall System

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The commonly used RWs include the gravity RWs [1,2], which rely on the balance between the self-weight of the RW and the earth pressure to maintain the stability of the wall and have disadvantages including long construction periods and poor greening function; gabion RWs [3,4], which are flexible gravity retaining structures formed by stacking gabion cages containing various grades of stone in an orderly manner; reinforced earth RWs [5,6], which are formed by adding steel bars in the soil to stabilize the soil by the friction between the steel bars and the soil, but their construction quality is greatly affected by the construction site factors and slope surfaces are required to be gentle; cantilever/counterfort RWs [7,8], which maintain stability by the weight of the fill on the bottom plate but have the disadvantages of complex construction technology, long construction periods, and excessive corrosion of drain pipes; and sheet pile walls [9][10][11], which uses baffles to block the soil between the deeply buried piles and they have similar disadvantages to those of the cantilever/counterfort RWs.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The commonly used RWs include the gravity RWs [1,2], which rely on the balance between the self-weight of the RW and the earth pressure to maintain the stability of the wall and have disadvantages including long construction periods and poor greening function; gabion RWs [3,4], which are flexible gravity retaining structures formed by stacking gabion cages containing various grades of stone in an orderly manner; reinforced earth RWs [5,6], which are formed by adding steel bars in the soil to stabilize the soil by the friction between the steel bars and the soil, but their construction quality is greatly affected by the construction site factors and slope surfaces are required to be gentle; cantilever/counterfort RWs [7,8], which maintain stability by the weight of the fill on the bottom plate but have the disadvantages of complex construction technology, long construction periods, and excessive corrosion of drain pipes; and sheet pile walls [9][10][11], which uses baffles to block the soil between the deeply buried piles and they have similar disadvantages to those of the cantilever/counterfort RWs.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…With regard to the related research on filling sections, Day et al [10] simplified the numerical model of the pile-slab retaining wall, and obtained the distribution of pile, slab, and soil stresses. Farhat et al [11] utilized beam theory and finite element analysis to optimize a fully prefabricated buttress retaining wall. Based on full-scale tests and finite element analysis, the bearing capacity characteristics of each structure of the system were obtained.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%