Seismically Induced Lateral Earth Pressures on Retaining Structures and Basement Walls

Sitar, Nicholas; Mikola, Roozbeh Geraili; Candia, Gabriel

doi:10.1061/9780784412138.0013

Cited by 45 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…More recently, Al Atik and Sitar [20] and Sitar et al [21] modeled the seismic behavior of fixed-base U-shaped walls, basement walls and free-standing cantilever walls supported in medium-dense sand. The experiments used a flexible shear beam container that deforms horizontally with the soil.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Recent experimental evidence [20][21][22][23] and the observed field performance [24][25][26] show that M-O theory yields very conservative designs in areas where the peak ground acceleration (PGA) exceeds 0.4g. Among other reasons, classic methods of analysis overestimate the seismic earth pressures on retaining walls because the cohesive strength of the soil is typically ignored and the models assume an infinitely rigid backfill [27].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Seismic response of retaining walls with cohesive backfill: Centrifuge model studies

Candia

Mikola

Sitar

2016

Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tObservations from recent earthquakes show that retaining structures with non-liquefiable backfills perform extremely well; in fact, damage or failures related to seismic earth pressures are rare. The seismic response of a 6-m-high braced basement and a 6-m free-standing cantilever wall retaining a compacted low plasticity clay was studied in a series of centrifuge tests. The models were built at a 1/36 scale and instrumented with accelerometers, strain gages and pressure sensors to monitor their response. The experimental data show that the seismic earth pressure on walls increases linearly with the free-field PGA and that the earth pressures increase approximately linearly with depth, where the resultant acts near 0.33 H above the footing as opposed to 0.5-0.6 H, which is suggested by most current design methods. The current data suggest that traditional limit equilibrium methods yield overly conservative earth pressures in areas with ground accelerations up to 0.4g.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Seismic response of retaining walls with cohesive backfill: Centrifuge model studies

Candia

Mikola

Sitar

2016

Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, most natural deposits have some fines content that exhibits some degree of cohesion (Sitar et al, 2012). Anderson et al (2008) found that the contribution of cohesion to a reduction in seismic earth pressure on retaining walls could be in the order of approximately 50%.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Active static and seismic earth pressure for c–φ soils

Iskander

Chen

Omidvar

et al. 2013

Soils and Foundations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Rankine classic earth pressure solution has been expanded to predict the seismic active earth pressure behind rigid walls supporting c-φ backfill considering both wall inclination and backfill slope. The proposed formulation is based on Rankine's conjugate stress concept, without employing any additional assumptions. The developed expressions can be used for the static and pseudo-static seismic analyses of c-φ backfill. The results based on the proposed formulations are found to be identical to those computed with the Mononobe-Okabe method for cohesionless soils, provided the same wall friction angle is employed. For c-φ soils, the formulation yields comparable results to available solutions for cases where a comparison is feasible. Design charts are presented for calculating the net active horizontal thrust behind a rigid wall for a variety of horizontal pseudo-static accelerations, values of cohesion, soil internal friction angles, wall inclinations, and backfill slope combinations. The effects of the vertical pseudo-static acceleration on the active earth pressure and the depth of tension cracks have also been explored. In addition, examples are provided to illustrate the application of the proposed method.

show abstract

“…Sitar et al (2012) have challenged these design methods using careful modelling in the centrifuge. They conclude (a) the M-O method, simplified according to Seed and Whitman (1970), is appropriate for retaining structures of depth, H, up to 7 m, with the resultant force applied H/3 from the base (b) the Wood (1973) solution is not representative of conditions commonly encountered in practice and its continued use is not recommended (c) caution is needed when applying the M-O method to retained depths greater than 7 m, recognising that at some depth the structure will move in a complex manner with the soil.…”

Section: Basement Tunnel Pilementioning

confidence: 99%

Seismic stability of braced excavations next to tall buildings

O‘Riordan

Almufti

2015

Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers - Geotechnica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It can take many years to complete the construction of deep, wide and long excavations in urban environments. In seismically active areas, there is a finite probability that a significant earthquake could take place during the construction period. The designer and builder are confronted with the need not only to maintain control of ground and retaining wall movements during the normal construction conditions but also to protect surrounding buildings during a seismic event. It follows that the seismic loads from adjacent structures and their foundations must be considered together with the available load pathways through the propping system. The paper considers the available methods of design and proposes a performance-based design philosophy in which the temporary shoring system and permanent installation are designed for static loading conditions and for the seismic condition only in as much as the performance objectives of adjacent buildings are achieved for various levels of earthquake shaking. An example of the use of performance-based design is presented for the effects of a 130 m tall building of 30 m square plan upon the temporary shoring system for a long and wide excavation. The results obtained are compared with code-based calculations and general conclusions are drawn.

show abstract

Seismically Induced Lateral Earth Pressures on Retaining Structures and Basement Walls

Cited by 45 publications

References 19 publications

Seismic response of retaining walls with cohesive backfill: Centrifuge model studies

Seismic response of retaining walls with cohesive backfill: Centrifuge model studies

Active static and seismic earth pressure for c–φ soils

Seismic stability of braced excavations next to tall buildings

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About