2005
DOI: 10.1016/j.soildyn.2004.11.035
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Seismic soil pressure for building walls: An updated approach

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
36
0
6

Year Published

2009
2009
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
8
1
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 56 publications
(43 citation statements)
references
References 4 publications
1
36
0
6
Order By: Relevance
“…This approach has been adopted by other researchers and similarly high seismically induced earth pressures were computed, e.g. Matsuo and Ohara [19], Prakash [20], Sherif et al [15], Ostadan and White [21] and Ostadan [22]. However, very few structures are perfectly rigid and FEMA 750 [2] explicitly points out that this solution applies to non-yielding walls "founded on rock or very stiff soil".…”
Section: "Non-yielding" Stiff Retaining Structuresmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This approach has been adopted by other researchers and similarly high seismically induced earth pressures were computed, e.g. Matsuo and Ohara [19], Prakash [20], Sherif et al [15], Ostadan and White [21] and Ostadan [22]. However, very few structures are perfectly rigid and FEMA 750 [2] explicitly points out that this solution applies to non-yielding walls "founded on rock or very stiff soil".…”
Section: "Non-yielding" Stiff Retaining Structuresmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In order to validate the present model, pressure distribution values on the soil standing behind the quay wall are compared against the theoretical formulas of Ostadan [16]. The results of this comparison are shown on Figure 4 which show favorable agreement between the obtained results and that of [16]. …”
Section: Analysis Assumptionsmentioning
confidence: 77%
“…Recent experimental studies have challenged the M-O method as being overly conservative for cantilever U-shaped walls [10] and free-standing retaining walls [11], and as providing a reasonable upper-bound for braced walls [12]. By contrast, analytical elasto-dynamic solutions [13], [14] and numerical modeling studies [15] have challenged M-O as being unconservative. This has led to confusion among practicing engineers and researchers regarding appropriate methods of analysis.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%