Shake table lateral earth pressure testing with dense c-ϕ backfill

Wilson, Patrick; Elgamal, Ahmed

doi:10.1016/j.soildyn.2014.12.009

Cited by 42 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In this method, the effect of the earthquake is simulated by introducing additional forces called as the seismic inertia forces on to a soil wedge which exert lateral earth pressure on the retaining wall, called as the seismic earth pressure. Over the past many years, many researchers like [14][15][16][17][18][19][20] have modified and extended the MO method to propose new analytical solutions like the pseudo-dynamic method to compute the seismic earth pressure while other researchers like [21][22][23][24] developed experimental and numerical methods to compute the seismic earth pressure by using the MO method. Further, [25,26] have developed numerical methods for studying the phasing issues for the seismic response of yielding and non-yielding gravity retaining walls.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A finite element performance-based approach to correlate movement of a rigid retaining wall with seismic earth pressure

Bakr

Ahmad

2018

Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The paper presents a unique finite element model-based investigation and development of a relationship between the seismic active and passive earth pressure and the movement of a rigid retaining wall. A hardening soil with small strain model with consideration of the Rayleigh damping has been adopted for modelling soil. Validation of the finite element model has been carried out by using centrifuge test results already available in the literature. Unique design charts have been proposed highlighting the relationship between the seismic earth pressure and the wall movement. It is observed that the seismic active earth pressure is independent of the seismic input motion and hence does not depend upon the wall movement during an earthquake, while on the contrary the seismic passive earth pressure is significantly affected by it. Comparison of the results of the present study with the Mononobe-Okabe and pseudo-dynamic methods clearly highlights that the latter overestimates the seismic earth pressure. The proposed design charts and other results provide an important cue to the design engineers.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A finite element performance-based approach to correlate movement of a rigid retaining wall with seismic earth pressure

Bakr

Ahmad

2018

Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Similar results were reported by Refs. 28,32,34,38,40,41,52 After the 𝑃𝐺𝐴 values exceeded plastic critical acceleration values, the gravity retaining wall provided sufficient lateral displacement values to reach an active state and sudden increases in horizontal incremental dynamic active earth pressures or horizontal dynamic active force were observed.…”

Section: Horizontal Dynamic Earth Pressurementioning

confidence: 99%

Seismic performance of gravity retaining walls

Yünkül

Gürbüz

2023

Earthq Engng Struct Dyn

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the present study, the seismic performances of gravity retaining walls having both inclined back side and inclined backfill were investigated under sinusoidal acceleration excitations using series of shaking table tests on 750 mm height physical model. The effects of input peak ground acceleration (𝑃𝐺𝐴), inclination angle of backfill material (𝛼) and inclination angle of back of the gravity retaining wall (𝛽) on acceleration amplification factor (𝑅𝑀𝑆𝐴), maximum peak lateral relative (𝑆 maxpeak(𝑟𝑒𝑙) ) and maximum residual lateral displacement (𝑆 max(𝑟𝑒𝑠) ) of the wall, surface settlement (𝑆 𝑠𝑒𝑡 ) of the backfill material, inertial force (𝑃 𝐼 ) and horizontal dynamic active force (𝑃 𝑑𝑦𝑛ℎ ) were assessed. It was observed that higher values of the 𝑅𝑀𝑆𝐴 were obtained from the experimental results as compared the ones from current seismic design codes. Moreover, the six results of shaking table tests revealed that the phase difference was appeared between the inertial force and dynamic earth pressures. Pseudo-static limit equilibrium methods resulted in over conservative 𝑃 𝑑𝑦𝑛ℎ results and could not truly reflect the seismic behavior of gravity wall due to the inertial forces and phase difference not taken into consideration.

show abstract

“…Dynamic studies using shaking table tests are common in geotechnical engineering: numerous studies of slope stability (Sugimoto et al, 1994;Bathurst et al, 2002;Lo Grasso et al, 2004;Huang et al, 2010;Srilatha et al, 2013) and of unreinforced (or reinforced) retaining walls (Ishibashi & Fang, 1987;Fairless, 1989;Iai, 1989;Koseki et al, 1998;Bathurst et al, 2002;Bathurst, 2002;Huang et al, 2009;Wilson & Elgamal, 2015) have been carried out in the past thirty years. However, none of them dealt with the specificity of DSRWs, where blocks can move during the base motion and hence can dissipate energy before collapsing.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dynamic behaviour of drystone retaining walls: shaking table scaled-down tests

Savalle

Blanc-Gonnet

Vincens

et al. 2020

European Journal of Environmental and Civil Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, an experimental study aiming at understanding the seismic behaviour of dry stone retaining walls is presented. Harmonic shaking table tests have been carried out on scaled-down dry-joint retaining walls involving parallelepiped bricks. It is found that a thicker wall is more resistant and that a given retaining wall is less sensitive to higher frequencies. For those higher frequencies, the walls accept larger displacements before collapsing. The displacements start to occur from a given threshold, which depends on the wall geometry but not on the frequency of the base motion. The typical toppling failure is observed for slender wall and/or low frequency inputs. For less slender walls or higher frequency inputs, walls experience local sliding failures until the complete collapse of the system. The acceleration at failure reported during the dynamic tests have been compared to the corresponding pseudo-static resistance, enabling a conservative estimate of the seismic behaviour coefficient for pseudo-static analysis of this class of retaining walls. This novel experimental dataset is aimed to serve as a validating framework for future numerical or analytical tools in the field.

show abstract

Shake table lateral earth pressure testing with dense c-ϕ backfill

Cited by 42 publications

References 23 publications

A finite element performance-based approach to correlate movement of a rigid retaining wall with seismic earth pressure

A finite element performance-based approach to correlate movement of a rigid retaining wall with seismic earth pressure

Seismic performance of gravity retaining walls

Dynamic behaviour of drystone retaining walls: shaking table scaled-down tests

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About