Seismic Behaviour of Excavations Reinforced with Soil–Nailing Method

Farrokhzad, F.; MotahariTabari, SeyedArmin; Abdolghafoorkashani, Hamid; Tavakoli, Hamidreza

doi:10.1007/s10706-020-01625-7

Cited by 8 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The lowest anchor, located at the one-sixth of the bottom of wall height, undergoes a much higher dynamic load than the anchor elements above that. Farrokhzad et al (2021) [13] also reported the same pattern in soil nails, but the percentage of the mobilized dynamic force at the lowest soil nail is considerably less than what was observed in this study. The reason for that could be the higher capacity of ground anchors compared to soil nail elements as well as higher PGAs implemented in this study compared to Tabas earthquake time history applied to the FEM soil nail model.…”

Section: Figure 8 Anchor Element Axial Force Time History Under Load H-2supporting

confidence: 72%

“…Beam elements, which are capable of resisting axial forces and bending moments, were implemented in order to model reinforced concrete for the excavation facing flexural strength for a 30 cm reinforced concrete wall facing (EI) was suggested to be 29.9 MPa [13,15,23]. Cable elements were used to simulate high resistance steel strands with ultimate tensile strength (fu) of 1860 MPa used by Gazetas et al 2016 [2].…”

Section: Structural Elementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The findings from this study revealed that compressible tire shreds could decrease the permanent displacement of the retaining walls down to half. A recently-published FEM numerical study by Farrokhzad et al (2021) on the seismic behavior of nailed excavation walls revealed the importance of nail elements' spacing and length excavation wall seismic deformation. Moreover, their analyses revealed steeper nail elements could reduce the permanent seismic wall deformation more effectively [13].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A recently-published FEM numerical study by Farrokhzad et al (2021) on the seismic behavior of nailed excavation walls revealed the importance of nail elements' spacing and length excavation wall seismic deformation. Moreover, their analyses revealed steeper nail elements could reduce the permanent seismic wall deformation more effectively [13]. Tiwari et al (2014) reported the outcomes of pseudo-static analyses are critically dependent on the value of kh, which is usually recommended to be adopted roughly between 0.1 to 0.2 [14].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Performance of Ground Anchored Walls Subjected to Dynamic and Pseudo-Static Loading

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigates the response of pre-stressed anchored excavation walls under dynamic and pseudo-static loadings. A finite difference numerical model was developed using FLAC2D, and the results were successfully validated against full-scale experimental data. Analyses were performed on 10, and 20-m-height stabilized excavated slopes with 60° to 90° of inclination angle with the horizon to represent an applicable variety of wall geometries. In dynamic analysis, the statically stabilized models were subjected to 0.2 to 0.6g of the dynamic peak acceleration to evaluate the effect of ground acceleration on their performance. Furthermore, pseudo-static analyses were performed on the statically stabilized models with pseudo-static coefficients ranging from 0.06 to 0.22. The results revealed that ground anchored slopes generally showed acceptable performances under dynamic loading, while higher axial forces were induced to ground anchors in higher and steeper models. Furthermore, comparing the results of dynamic and pseudo-static analyses showed a good agreement between the two methods' predictions in the mobilized axial force along the ground anchors. Pseudo-static coefficients were then proposed to replicate dynamic results, considering the slope geometry and dynamic load peak acceleration. The results revealed that higher and steeper stabilized slopes required higher values of pseudo-static coefficients to match the dynamic predictions successfully. The results indicate that pseudo-static coefficient tend to increase with the increase in dynamic load peak acceleration in any given model. Doi: 10.28991/cej-2021-03091703 Full Text: PDF

show abstract

Section: Figure 8 Anchor Element Axial Force Time History Under Load H-2supporting

confidence: 72%