Geot Earthquake Eng Ch9B WALLS SH ADERS 10

9.
Seismic Design of
RETAINING STRUCTURES
RIGID WALLS
9. Seismic Design of
RETAINING STRUCTURES
RIGID WALLS
October 2009
Part B:
G. BOUCKOVALAS & G. KOURETZIS
GEORGE BOUCKOVALAS, National Technical University of Athes, Greece, 2011 9B.1
Solutions for
perfectly rigid or
semi-rigid walls
Problem outline ..
The Mononobe-Okabe method requires that the retaining wall
can move freely (slide or rotate) so that active earth pressures
develop behind the wall.
Nevertheless, there are cases where the free movement of the
wall is totally or partially restrained (e.g. basement walls, braced
walls, massive walls embeded in rock like formations) .
CONTENTS
CONTENTS
9.6 PERFECTLY RIGID WALLS (Wood, 1973)
9.7 WALLS WITH LIMITED DISPLACEMENT
(Veletsos & Yunan, 1996)
9.8 SEISMIC CODES
Sggested Reading
Sggested Reading
Steven Kramer: Chapter 11
Assumptions
1. Pseudo static conditions (
>>4/V
s
) quite usual case (why?)
2. plain strain
3. Elastic soil
4. Smooth & rigid walls
wall
>>E
soil
Elastic soil between two rigid walls
9.6 PERFECTLY RIGID WALLS (Wood 1973)
Analytical Solutions for ..
dynamic earth pressures
h

g
= 1
h
eq P
F F
g
=
2
=
F
p
h
g
= 1
Overturning moment and base shear
h
eq P
F F
g
=
2
h
eq m
M F
g
=
3
=
F
p
=
F
m
h
g
= 1
h
g
= 1
Overturning moment and base shear
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
L/H
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
h
/
H
Application point of the resultant seismic thrust
h L
.
H H

>

0 55 4
eq
eq
h
P

Smooth vs. bonded (rough) wall side
Extension to harmonic base excitation Base shear
""

excit soil
soil excit
T
.
T
= = <<
1 0
Static Resonance High frequency excitation
excit soil
soil excit
T
.
T
= = <<
1 0
Extension to harmonic base excitation Overturning Moment
H

,
=0.3
This is the main reason why the elastic
solutions of Wood (1973) were put aside
for more than 30 yaers (in connection
with the fact that very limited wall failures
were observed during strong earthquakes)
x3!!
28 32 36 40 44
(deg)
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
F
e
q
/
[
2
(
a
h
/
g
)
]
Wood
Mononobe-Okabe
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5
a
h
(g)
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
F
e
q
/
[
2
(
a
h
/
g
)
]
Wood
Mononobe-Okabe
(a
h
=0.15g)
(=36
Seed & Whitman (k

v
=0)
Seed & Whitman (k

v
=0)
Comparison with Mononobe - Okabe
Dry sand
w
w
GH
d
D
=
3
GH
d
R
=
2
( )
w w
w
w
E t
D
v

=

3
2
12 1
bonded wall-soil
mass-less wall
5% soil damping
2% wall damping
Relative translational rigidity of
the wall-fill system
9.7 WALLS WITH LIMITED DISPLACEMENT
(displacement & rotation, Veletsos & Yunan, 1996)
Relative rotational rigidity of the
wall-fill system
Assumptions
Pseudo-static earth pressures
h
H
=
(normal. height)
Analytical solutions for .
h
H
=
Pseudo-static shear forces & bending moments
Pseudo static
base shear base shear & & overturning moment overturning moment
Wood Wood
Seed & Whitman
-O
Pseudo static (?) displacements
For a flexible (compared to the fill) concrete wall (d
w
=20) and a seismic
excitation with a
max
=0.3g, the resulting displacement is U/H=0.03%...
[ U= U=0.1% 0.1% 0.4% 0.4% H H for active for active failure failure -]
""

soil
soil
V
H

= =
1
2
2
the effect of harmonic excitation frequency on base shear
( (AF coefficient AF coefficient) )
High frequency
excitation
Static
Resonance
resonance (Max AF)
the effect of harmonic excitation frequency on displacements
Variation of amplification factor AF for base shear versus the f Variation of amplification factor AF for base shear versus the fundamental soil period undamental soil period) )
(does this remind something to you?)
Numerical solution - El Centro (1940) earthquake
Average values of the amplification factor AF for base shear and Average values of the amplification factor AF for base shear and relative relative
displacement displacement
Numerical solution - El Centro (1940) earthquake
1. Tensile cracks, at the top of the wal, are not taken into account
(shear forces and bending moments are over-estimated)
2. Uniform soil is assumed
(e.g. a parabolic distribution of G with depth yields zero earth pressures at the top of the wall)
Note: (1) and (2) above have a counteracting effect for walls with rotational
flexibility
Limitations . . . .
Earth press.
at rest
Dynamic
earth press.
H
K
o
H 0.5
h
H
1.5
h
H
h
eq
M .
g
=
3
0 58
h
eq
g
=
3
Wood
E
A
K
Wood
9.8 SEISMIC CODES
EAK 2002 Rigid walls
Rigid walls
0.05% > U/H
-.39/99 Guidelines for the design of bridges
Walls with limited displacement
0.1%>U/H>0.05%
h
eq
M .
g
=
3
0 58
H
0.58
.
H
E
=0.5
.
P
E
=
.
.
H
2
E
=1.5
.
H
H/2
E
=0.7
.
P
E
=0.75
.
.
H
2
h
eq
M .
g
=
3
0 375
reminder:
M-O
(U/H>0.1%)
H
0.60H
P
E
@0.375
.
.
H
2
h
eq
M .
g
=
3
0 225
COMPARISON OF DIFFERENT METHODS .
DIFFERENCES CAN BECOME SIGNIFICANT !
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
F
e
q
/
[
2
(
a
h
/
g
)
]
Wood
M-O
Veletsos & Younan
EAK 2002-.39/99
U/H
HWK 9.1:
Compute the total base shear force and overturning moment which develops at
the base of a 5m high retaining wall during seismic excitation with
max
=0.15g.
The wall is vertical and smooth, while the fill consists of sandy gravel with c=0,
=36
=17kN/m
3
and V
S
=100m/s. The computations will be performed:
() for rigid wall,
() for a wall with limited deformation (d
w
=10, d
=1), using the V&Y methodology,

() for a wall with limited deformation (d
w
=10, d
=1), using the seismic code

provisions,
Note: assume pseudo static conditions and neglect the wall mass.
HWK 9.2
Repeat HWK 9.1 for the extreme case of resonance between soil and excitation.

Geot Earthquake Eng Ch9B WALLS SH ADERS 10

Încărcat de

Informații document

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Geot Earthquake Eng Ch9B WALLS SH ADERS 10

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

9.

Analytical Solutions for ..

Seed & Whitman (k

Seed & Whitman (k

=1), using the V&Y methodology,

=1), using the seismic code

S-ar putea să vă placă și