Stability of waterfront retaining wall subjected to pseudo-static earthquake forces

Choudhury, Deepankar; Ahmad, Syed Mohd

doi:10.1016/j.oceaneng.2007.03.005

Cited by 56 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The retaining wall is considered to be rigid and the backfill soil is considered to be cohesive. A planer failure surface is considered in accordance with previous studies (Choudhury & Ahmad [7,8]). The analysis of lateral active earth pressure in cohesive soils is carried out using the horizontal flat element method.…”

Section: Effect Of Soil Arching On the Stability Of Retaining Structuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Ghosh [28] proposed the seismic active thrust on an inclined retaining wall using the pseudo-dynamic approach. Choudhury and Ahmad [7,8] extended the work of Choudhury and Nimbalkar [27] and proposed closed-form solutions for the seismic stability of waterfront retaining walls. Kolathayar and Ghosh [29] studied the seismic active thrust behind a rigid cantilever retaining wall with bilinear backface using the same approach.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Stability Assessment of Earth Retaining Structures under Static and Seismic Conditions

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An accurate estimation of static and seismic earth pressures is extremely important in geotechnical design. The conventional Coulomb’s approach and Mononobe-Okabe’s approach have been widely used in engineering practice. However, the latter approach provides the linear distribution of seismic earth pressure behind a retaining wall in an approximate way. Therefore, the pseudo-dynamic method can be used to compute the distribution of seismic active earth pressure in a more realistic manner. The effect of wall and soil inertia must be considered for the design of a retaining wall under seismic conditions. The method proposed considers the propagation of shear and primary waves through the backfill soil and the retaining wall due to seismic excitation. The crude estimate of finding the approximate seismic acceleration makes the pseudo-static approach often unreliable to adopt in the stability assessment of retaining walls. The predictions of the active earth pressure using Coulomb theory are not consistent with the laboratory results to the development of arching in the backfill soil. A new method is proposed to compute the active earth pressure acting on the backface of a rigid retaining wall undergoing horizontal translation. The predictions of the proposed method are verified against results of laboratory tests as well as the results from other methods proposed in the past.

show abstract

Section: Effect Of Soil Arching On the Stability Of Retaining Structuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Stability Assessment of Earth Retaining Structures under Static and Seismic Conditions

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Choudhury and Nimbalkar (2007) and Nimbalkar and Choudhury (2007) used the pseudo-dynamic method to compute the seismic inertial forces acting on both the backfill and the wall, and then predicted the seismic rotational displacement and the sliding stability of rigid retaining walls. With the presence of the hydrostatic and hydrodynamic pressure, the stability problem of waterfront retaining walls subjected to pseudo-static earthquake forces was also studied by Choudhury and Ahmad (2007a;2007b).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Seismic Stability of Gravity Retaining Structures by Pseudo-Dynamic Method

Huang

Xia

2014

Marine Georesources & Geotechnology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An analytical expression of gravity retaining wall's seismic stability against sliding and overturning is proposed in this paper. The derivation, aiming at the cohesionless soil with inclined backfill surface and nonvertical wall back, is based on the limit equilibrium analysis and the pseudo-dynamic method. The variations of the sliding and overturning stability safe factors with the horizontal seismic acceleration are investigated for different seismic amplification factors, soil friction angles, wall friction angles, vertical seismic acceleration coefficients, wall back inclination angles and backfill surface inclination angles. The results indicate that the soil friction and the horizontal seismic action impact the seismic stability significantly. The increase of vertical earthquake action changes the curvature of stability factor curves. The wall friction and the back inclination strengthen the gravity retaining wall's resistance to sliding and overturning failure while the backfill surface inclination plays a negative role in the seismic stability. It is also found that the seismic stability safe factors calculated by the proposed method are larger but more reasonable than that by the Mononobe-Okabe method.2

show abstract

“…In this case, flow deformation due to seismic liquefaction is induced within the quay wall backfill ground. During recent decades, numerical and experimental investigations of seismic responses of these coastal structures have been noticeably considered (Towhata et al 1996;Woodward and Griffiths 1996;Ghalandarzadeh et al 1998;Zeng 1998;Madabhushi and Zeng 1998;Yang et al 2001;Kim 2004Kim , 2005Lee 2005;Choudhury and Ahmad 2007;Sadrekarimi et al 2008;Na et al 2008;Alyami et al 2009 andEbrahimian et al 2009). Historically most failures of gravity quay walls have been in the form of intensive deformations other than tragic collapses.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Displacement reducer fuses for improving seismic performance of caisson quay walls

Moghadam

Ghalandarzadeh

Moradi

et al. 2011

Bull Earthquake Eng

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research is to study the efficiency of displacement reducer fuses, installed behind the caisson quay walls for controlling the dynamic backfill thrust and minimizing the displacement, settlement and tilting of the walls. For this purpose, two types of fuses, Displacement Reducer Panels (DRP) and Displacement Reducer Elements (DRE), were constructed and installed behind the wall. The DRPs were constructed by hollow Polypropylene sheets to reproduce elastoplastic and plastic mechanical behaviors. The DREs were cylindrical stainless-steel dampers, working upon friction mechanism that can reproduce perfect plastic behavior. Here, two series of shaking table 1-g tests were performed with DRP and DRE applications. In this regard, different mechanical behaviors and capacities were considered for fuses against demand thrusts of backfill in order to compare the mitigation tests with no-mitigation cases. Harmonic base motions with constant amplitude and constant frequency were used in the model test. The foundation soil and the backfill soil were constructed with the relative densities of 85 and 25%, respectively, to reproduce non-liquefiable base layer and loose backfill situations in the model, respectively. The results showed remarkable reduction in kinetic energy, dynamic backfill thrust and consequently seaward movement, settlement and inclination of the caisson quay wall in case of using fuses with plastic behaviors behind the wall.

show abstract

Stability of waterfront retaining wall subjected to pseudo-static earthquake forces

Cited by 56 publications

References 19 publications

Stability Assessment of Earth Retaining Structures under Static and Seismic Conditions

Stability Assessment of Earth Retaining Structures under Static and Seismic Conditions

Seismic Stability of Gravity Retaining Structures by Pseudo-Dynamic Method

Displacement reducer fuses for improving seismic performance of caisson quay walls

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About