Limit equilibrium computation of dynamic passive earth pressure

Abstract

Few solution techniques exist for the determination of pseudostatic dynamic passive earth pressures for cohesionless soils. The widely accepted Mononobe–Okabe equation can result in the computing of unconservative values if the wall interface friction angle is greater than half the soil internal friction angle. As an alternate solution, equilibrium equations were formulated assuming a log spiral failure surface, and a research computer program was written to calculate the dynamic passive earth pressure coefficient. The primary purpose of this paper is to present a comparison of results obtained using the Mononobe–Okabe equation with those obtained using the log spiral formulation. Key words : pseudostatic, dynamic, passive earth pressure.

Seismic active earth pressure of cohesive-frictional soil on retaining wall based on a slice analysis method

“…(21). When the failure angle α changes from 01 to 901, there exists a critical failure angle α cr which leads to the maximum value of total active earth pressure.…”

“…Yazdani et al [20] deduced the equations of the seismic active earth pressure on retaining wall supporting the backfill with different geometries. Morrison and Ebeling [21] formulated an alternate solution to the M-O equation by assuming a log spiral failure surface.…”

Evaluation of Unsaturated Layer Effect on Seismic Analysis of Unbraced Sheet Pile Wall

“…In recent past, Morrison and Ebeling [7], Soubra [8], Kumar [9], Choudhury and Subba Rao [10], Choudhury et al [11], Subba Rao and Choudhury [12] and few others had proposed the seismic design of a retaining wall under the lateral earth pressure condition. These theories consider the static method of analysis, i.e.…”

Evaluation of active and passive seismic earth pressures considering internal friction and cohesion

“…The models in the second category [10,11,13,15,23,26] mend this drawback either explicitly by adopting a curvilinear sliding surface, or implicitly, by introducing multiple stress fields in the backfill soil. They significantly improve the prediction on the passive earth force.…”