Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Submitted by
M. SRI HARI PRASAD 15121A0150
RAVI TEJA N 15121A0162
External Supervisor
Dr. NEELIMA SATYAM
Discipline of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Indore
i
SREE VIDYANIKETHAN ENGINEERING COLLEGE
(AUTONOMOUS)
(Affiliated To JNTUA, Ananthapuramu, Approved by AICTE, New Delhi, Accredited by NBA andNAAC 'A')
Sree Sainath Nagar, A. Rangampet, Tirupati, Andhra Pradesh – 517102
Certificate
This is to certify that the internship report entitled
ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Successful completion of any project work during internship cannot be done without proper
guidance and encouragement of many people, this acknowledgement transcends the reality.
Hence, we express our deep sense of gratitude to all those who have directly or indirectly helped
Literally, it gives us an immense pleasure to express our gratitude to our external supervisor
Dr. Neelima Satyam, Professor of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Indore,
Indore for her esteemed guidance and able supervision during internship.
We are deeply indebted to our internal supervisor Dr. O. ESWARA REDDY, Professor and BOS
Chairman, Department of Civil Engineering for his valuable guidance, constant encouragement
and constructive criticism throughout the course of internship. We are really fortunate to
associate ourselves with such an advising and helping guide in every possible way, at all stages.
We would like to express our sincere thanks to Dr. M. V. SUBBA REDDY, Assistant Professor
and Head, Department of Civil Engineering for his support during the internship.
support and encouragement. We are pleased to express heartfelt thanks to our Faculty of Civil
We would like to express our sincere thanks to all the research scholars and staff of Civil
Engineering Discipline of Indian Institute of Technology Indore for their cooperation and support
iii
Material that will fill in between retained earth and retaining wall is termed as “Back Fill”.
Backfill material may be coarse grained soil, fine grained soil, rock, shale, marginal materials or
any other commercial by-products. It is very important to know that the impact of backfill on
stability of retaining walls. Backfill material plays major role in the stability of retaining wall.
The material that will be used as backfill should posses sufficient permeability, shear strength,
unit weight and other engineering properties to stabilize the retaining wall. In this study, effect of
different backfill materials on stability of retaining wall was studied. Current theories,
experimental investigations and numerical findings for the stability of retaining walls subject to
dynamic excitations are reviewed. Brief description of different backfill materials, experimental
and numerical methods of stability analyses are introduced and compared from the literature
review.
iv
CONTENTS
Certificate i
Acknowledgement ii
Abstract iii
Contents iv
Introduction 1-4
1.1 Results 6
Behaviour 8
2.2 Assumptions 10
v
ANALYSIS FOR ALTERNATIVE MATERIALS AS BACKFILL OF
Introduction 14
3. Use of Shredded Tyres as Light Weight Backfill Material for Earth Retaining
Structures
3.4 Results 18
3.5 Design 19
3.7 Observations 20
4.4 PLAXIS – 2D 23
vi
5. Use of Fly Ash as Backfill Material
6.3.2 Modification 27
6.3.3 Stabilization 28
Reinforced
vii
9. Seismic Earth Pressures on Flexible Cantilever Retaining Walls
9.2 Results 37
Gaps in Literature 40
Conclusions 41
Reference 42
viii
Chapter 1
RETAINING WALLS
Introduction
An earth structure has to be constructed whenever there is an abrupt change in the elevation of
the ground surface. Such structures can be either rigid or flexible. An example of a rigid earth-
retaining structure is a retaining wall. On the other hand, sheet pile walls are considered to be
flexible structures. They are quite light weight and derive their stability primarily from the active
and passive earth pressures that develop on opposite sides. Bulkheads like Sheet piles are mostly
used in temporary constructions such as braced cuts, coffer dams or shore protection works.
Whereas retaining walls are permanent structures. Retaining wall systems, consisting mainly of a
retaining wall and backfill soil, is a prevalent structure used in our built environment including
basement wall, bridge abutments, residential elevations, highway walls and so on. The
engineering essence of retaining wall is to keep the retained soil in certain shape and prevent it
from falling (stability), or to restrain the deformation of the wall and the backfill to maintain its
service function (serviceability). Lateral earth pressure generated by retained backfill on the wall
and relevant soil / wall deformations are two main facets of engineering design and analysis of
retaining walls. Dynamic/seismic response of such system is one of the major areas due to the
influence of dynamic force on the lateral pressure, soil / wall deformation. There are quite a
number of analytical solutions, experimental investigations and numerical studies that have been
conducted in this area due to different soils, wall structures, dynamic and structural conditions
1
etc. In the meanwhile, it is widely accepted that traditional methods have insufficiencies
Gravity Retaining Wall: These are used for moderate heights and generally they have
trapezoidal shape as shown in fig a. These derive their stability primarily from their substantial
weight. These are designed in such a way that tension should not be developed anywhere in the
structure.(fig 1)
Semi-gravity Retaining Wall: semi-gravity retaining walls are provided with slightly longer
base projections as compared to the gravity retaining walls. A few reinforcing bars are placed in
Cantilever Retaining Wall: These are RCC walls having much lighter sections. They consist of
three cantilever slabs – the stem, toe and heel as shown in fig b. They derive their stability
mainly from the weight of backfill supported by the base slab. They are generally economical up
Counterfort Retaining Wall: In this type of retaining wall, counter forts (cantilevers) are
provided on the earth side between wall and footing to support the wall, which essentially spans
as a continuous one-way slab horizontally as shown in fig c. Counter fort walls seldom find
2
application in building construction. A temporary condition in which basement walls may be
required to behave as counter fort retaining walls occurs though, if outside fill is placed before
Buttressed retaining wall: It is similar to a counter fort retaining wall, except that the transverse
support walls are located on the side of the stem opposite the retaining material and act as
compression struts.
Before the actual design, the soil parameters that influence the earth pressure and the bearing
capacity of the soil must be evaluated. These include the unit weight of the soil, the angle of
shearing resistance, the cohesion intercept and the angle of wall friction. Knowing these
parameters, the lateral earth pressures and the bearing capacity of the soil can be determined.
After the earth pressures are determined, the retaining walls as whole are checked for stability
In addition to the three types of failures i.e. sliding, overturning and bearing failure, a retaining
wall may fail in the following two modes if the soil underneath is weak.
Shallow Shear Failure: This type of failure occurs along a cylindrical passing through the heel
of the retaining wall. The failure takes place because of the excessive shear stresses along the
cylindrical surface within the soil mass. However, it has generally been found that the factor of
safety against horizontal sliding is lower than that for the shallow shear failure. Consequently, if
the factor of safety against sliding is greater about 1.5, shallow shear failure is not likely to occur.
Deep shear failure: This type of shear failure occurs along a cylindrical surface, when there is a
weak layer of soil underneath the wall a depth of about 1.5 times the height of the wall. The
3
Fig. 2 Modes of Failure of Retaining Walls
4
1. Effect of Clayey Soils as Backfill on Stability of Retaining
Walls
Clayey soils are one of the major fine-grained soils that show anomalous behavior with water
under the action of load. Various studies have been undertaken by the experts to know the soil
Exploration of major clay minerals like montomorillonite, kaolinite, illite, and other
elements.
Vertical deformation of soil and total suction.
Effect on wall and its movement towards and away from backfill soil due to magnitude of
In order predict behavior of clayey soils one of the tests was conducted by the authors at The
1. Experimental setup was designed as a steel structure mainly consists of o box with two
sides made of mild steel, third side of fiber glass and fourth side was kept for retaining
wall.
2. Circular holes were made on the central line of the retaining wall to introduce pressure
cell transducers.
3. It was designed to enable lateral swelling pressure, at rest lateral pressure, active and
4. At bottom a thin layer of gravel overlain by geogrid was placed in order to permit
5
5. Soil was placed and compacted in layers in such a way that compaction pressure is
6. Holes were made into soil to install transducers to identify variation of suction at
7. Arrangement of a steel plate with three transducers at soil surface and other set of three
transducers on steel mesh which was placed at front part of wall were made.
9. Initially soil was saturated and load was applied then wall remained stable (because it
10. Then was subjected to various horizontal movements away from soil using transducers.
11. After that unloading of soil was done and various predictions were made during
unloading.
It indicates active case i.e. wall moves away from the backfill
i. Lateral stresses decrease with increase in wall’s movement and in order to reduce effects
due to elapsed time wall was allowed to left for many hours until lateral stresses
reached to equilibrium.
ii. Settlement of soil was determined using LVDT and it was observed that settlement
iii. Settlement was more behind the wall rather than away from the wall. From this it was
6
iv. Total suction was measured by water mark monitor for every wall’s movement and it was
v. Thus it is observed that total suction has limited effect on wall’s movement.
ii. This is due to; in lower part soil movement away from wall takes place and the upper part
of wall moves towards soil as soil rebound (passive earth pressure case).
iii. Vertical stresses were left for hours until equilibrium was attained and it was observed
that these get reduced to values less than initial values with elapsed time.
v. Suction increases due to reduction in vertical stresses and suction rate increases from
bottom to top.
7
2. Effect Of Soil And Bedrock Conditions Below Retaining Walls On
Wall Behaviour
(gabar, 2012)
In general clean granular coarse grain soils are usually recommended as backfill material
Predictable behavior
Frost action.
It enables the analysis of wall behavior when coarse grain soils are used as backfill for retaining
walls. This also shows the effect of bedrock and it’s characteristics on retaining wall. The main
analysis includes wall movement, drainage and backfill characteristics. The analysis has to be
done with proper care because it includes wall failure and its stability.
Weakening of soil will cause damage to retaining wall and it takes place in three different types
Active wedge weakening can occur when the soil and soil pressure on the wall increases.
This will cause structural failure and the backfill soil also weakened during static loads. Then the
soil is susceptible to strain softening during static loads and it get weakens, as a result back force
on wall increases.
8
The main parameters involved in analysis are Bending Moment, Anchor forces,
deformations in wall. Deformations are due to unloading of an excavated area where as bending
moment is due to lateral earth pressure behind the wall and coefficient of earth pressure, wall
stiffness majorly influences bending moment in the walls. PLAXIS, 2-D finite element analysis
software package, was used for the parametric study in this study. Soiland rock behavior is non
linear
Among those Mohr Coulomb’s model was used as a first approximation of soil behavior for this
study. This mainly includes five parameters like Young’s Modulus, Poisson’s Ratio, cohesion,
Poisson’s Ratio(ν)
Cohesion (c)
Permeability
9
2.2 Conditions assumed for modeling analysis:
Bed rock slope: 1:1, 2:1, 3:1, 4:1 (both upwards and downwards).
Soil: dense sandy soil (ϕ=38 °) & loose sandy soil (ϕ=32°).
Ground water table was assumed to be at a depth of 1m from rigid ground surface.
Wall is considered as a plate with material properties like wall Stiffness, Flexural
Boundary conditions:
*Node: Every model is sub-divided into finite elements, their junction points are called as node.
Soil elements were modeled using 15 node triangular elements which was
accurate element that can produce high quality stress results for difficult problems. But it will
consume relatively more memory and it will show relatively slow calculation and operation
performance. So four 6 node elements are used instead of 15 node elements (as number of stress
Interface Elements were soil wall interfaces, when using 15 node elements corresponding
elements were defined by five pairs whereas when using 6 node elements those are defined by
three pairs.
10
Wall elements were such that PLAXIS uses 3 (or) 5 node line elements as plate
elements. Elastic (or) elastoplastic behavior with degrees of freedom 3.Total 150 models were
analyzed out of which 65 for effect of depth of bed rock and bed slope, 65 for effect of type of
It was shown that both fixed and friction boundaries have same behavior and variation of test
It was also revealed that factors such as depth of bed rock, bed rock slope, soil type, wall
height etc., will effect stability which were explained as in table 1.
PARAMETER DIFFERS BY
BENDING MOMENT 1% - 7%
ANCHOR FORCES 1% - 7%
DISPLACEMENT 1% - 4%
11
2.4.1 Effect of bedrock depth (below the wall):
Total displacement vectors were analyzed for various depths and it was shown thatWall
Maximum horizontal, vertical and total displacements increase with the depth of bed
rock, and it was similar for both upward and downward slopes.
Bending moment also shows the same behavior as displacement as it increases with
bedrock depth. It has lesser effect on wall’s bending moment and it will be more
Analysis for various slope ratios i.e., upward, downward, horizontal were done and variations
Maximum wall displacement increases by 33% for 25m bedrock depth and decreases by
Anchor forces increases significantly and the drop when slope is +3:1.
At deeper depths
Vertical displacements may slightly fluctuate for downward slopes and decreases for
upward slopes.
Bending moments are high when bed rock is horizontal and decreases as bedrock slope
12
2.4.3 Effect of soil type:
It is observed that
Walls in dense and loose sand have similar behavior under varying bedrock conditions and
All the results of maximum wall displacements, bending moment, and maximum anchored force
shows that wall is relatively stronger when dense soils are used as backfill material.
Finite element analysis was performed on both 6m and 9m walls and was observed that
Higher wall yields high bending moment, and negative moments at anchor level for 9m wall
13
ANALYSIS FOR ALTERNATIVE MATERIALS AS BACKFILL OF
Introduction
In order to increase stability of earth retaining walls dense soils are used, otherwise changes in
stability conditions may occur but it is always not possible to have desirable properties of
backfill .In such cases use of other alternatives materials that increases stability has to be
1. Shredded tires
3. Soil stabilization
5. Clinker ash
6. Fly ash
The analysis of various elements is carried out efficiently and the properties of these
It should be tough and durable i.e. it should not include additional cost like operational
It should be light weight and should be capable of resisting various loads like live loads
The materials have to be tested under various conditions in order to obtain various
14
In case of soils, they should have high shear strength and identical properties under
The alternate material used should not cause any additional problems on retaining walls.
The materials used for this purpose should increase additional stability of the
retaining and at the same time it should resist failure of soil, overturning, sliding of the
structure. The material should be such that it should be easy to handle and to work with.
At the same time, it should not cause any harm to Environment and should be eco-
friendly.
Care should be taken while handling these materials in such a way that right
material should be used at right place for suitable atmospheric as well as drainage
conditions. It can be done through various technical skills, proper knowledge about the
15
3. USE OF SHREDDED TYRES AS LIGHT WEIGHT BACKFILL
Life of the various vehicle decreases from they began to run and this may be due to wear and tear
of vehicle tires, gear parts, engines etc., out of which it has become a complicated problem that
we are facing today is disposal of the worn tires. This review deals with the use of shredded tires
as a backfill for earth retaining structures. This was first adopted in United States. This technique
was a result of an alternative method for disposal of shredded tires as these create various
Design of several of height of retaining walls with sand and shredded tires as backfill, its
comparison.
Economic analysis.
A typical tire casing is composed of carbon (83%), hydrogen (7%), sulfur (1.2%), and ash (6%).
Primary constituents include polymer, black carbon and softerners. Hydro carbon oils in
combination with polymers give the tire a very high heating value.
16
Compaction test using modified proctor method to determine unit weight.
After shredding a whole tire is reduced into strips of size ranges from 2in x 8in to 2in x 2in and
Sieve analysis was performed twice, using two samples of shredded tires, one before compaction
and the other after compaction in a modified proctor mould. It was done to verify the effects of
compaction on the gradation of shredded tires. Then the gradation curve is compared with the
Modified proctor compaction test was performed to obtain maximum unit weight.
In this test 4.5kg hammer as dropped through a vertical distance of 45cm to produce adequate
compaction energy.
17
3.5 Constant head permeability test
Ideal backfill should have high hydraulic conductivity. Constant head permeability
test was adopted in order to determine the permeability of shredded tires in the same manner as
It was conducted as it defines an ideal property of material called drainage of free water.
Direct shear tests were conducted using three different normal stresses. Horizontal
Shear stress Vs horizontal deformation – to obtain max shear stress that can be sustained
by shredded tires.
3.8 Results
And the sample was considered as uniform graded. The gradation is compared with the gradation
The unit weight of the shredded tires was obtained in the range of 562.3 Kg/m3 to 597.5 Kg/m3.
18
The hydraulic conductivity, cohesion, angle of internal friction was found as 0.034cm/s, 7.18
3.9 Design
This was done by comparing a retaining wall using a conventional backfill, sand with the
Retaining wall was designed for 10ft, 20ft, 30ft for thorough comparison and it was
Cost estimates were done for 10ft, 20ft, and 30ft high retaining walls with sand Vs shredded tires
as backfill.
Cost estimates were based on prevailing labor costs and including all major costs such as
It was found that 52% - 67% cost savings can be done by using shredded tires.
Materials cost reduced can be up to81% - 85% and the savings increases as wall’s height
increases.
19
3.11 OBSERAVATIONS
It is observed that factor of safety for sliding; overturning is significantly greater and more stable
And the further studies are to be conducted on following concerns for actual field feasibility
20
4. Design and Analysis of Retaining wall Backfill with Shredded
In India every year millions of waste tires are generating annually and most of tires are disposed
of in landfills or dumped unlawfully which creates serious health and environmental problems.
Using those waste tires in form of shreds in civil engineering projects is a good practice of
recycling this waste material. Various civil engineering applications including shredded tires are -
surfacing playgrounds
Cohesion = 0 to 81 kappa
21
Poisson ratio = 0.2 to 0.33
These properties indicate that the shredded tire can be used as retaining wall backfill
In this study by designing the retaining wall for dynamic loading found that with
shredded tire as backfill, length of the will be more than the length of heel.
When height of retaining wall is high, shredded tires are more suitable.
With shredded tire as backfill there will be reduction of 40% of volume of backfill and
Using finite element method dynamic analysis of retaining wall in situ soil backfill
In "PLAXIS-2D" retaining wall model with shredded tire as backfill was constructed and
friction angle, variation of stiffness, variation in input motion etc. And found that
shredded tire is most suitable backfill material in case of dynamic loading conditions.
In this study only 2D model are used for the investigation. If 3D models we're used then
Also in this study only, suitability of shredded tires in dynamic loading cases only
22
4.3Finite element method:
partial differential equation or boundary value problem. The finite element method converts the
elliptical partial differential equation into a set of algebraic equations which are easy to solve.
4.4PLAXIS - 2D:
PLAXIS - 2D is a powerful and user-friendly finite element package intended for two
applications range from excavations, embankment and foundation to tunneling, mining and
reservoir aeromechanics.
23
5.Use of Fly AAsh as Backfill Material
In India every year on an average 112 million tons of flash is producing among which
only approximately 59% get utilized and remaining going as waste. Hence, it can be
Fly ash can be classified as ML (low plastic silt) according to Unified Classification.
Abundantly available
Superior Quality
Ease of installation
Multi-tiered retaining walls with different backfills and with or without reinforcement can be
1. Numerical method
24
2. Laboratory model tests
3. Field monitoring
Among these, laboratory model tests are much more reliable as by constructing models in lab
With laboratory model tests conducted, it was found that fly ash can be applicable as
Fly ash can be applied in tiered retaining walls with or without reinforcement.
To use as a backfill fly ash should be added by water content at which it attains maximum
Horizontal displacement will be more at top portion of upper tier in unreinforced wall.
In reinforced wall with flash backfill horizontal facia displacement will be relatively less.
In unreinforced multi-tiered retaining walls critical offset distance is 0.4 times the length
of lower tier.
In reinforced multi-tiered retaining walls critical offset distance is 0.6 times the length of
lower tier.
25
6.Mechanically Stabilized Earth Retaining Structures
Soil can be stabilized by using a wide range of materials such as cement, lime and fly ash.
Mechanically stabilized earth comprises of horizontal reinforcement into the soil. In the soils
such as clay the soil has to be stabilized to get adequate strength various methods are available
for stabilizing clayey soils. One of those methods is stabilization using lime. When lime and
water are mixed with clay at pH>12 this will cause corrosion to the steel elements in MSE earth
walls. In order to overcome this LLDPE (Linear Low DensityPolyethylene) coated, planar, high
tenacity polyester strips are used in reinforcement of concrete facing panels of MSE walls.
It requires analysis of soil properties, lime percent in backfill and durability of LLDPE coated
reinforcement. Interaction between soil and reinforcement plays a major role in stability of MSE
walls.
This requires analysis of properties like gradation, plasticity index, climate, availability and cost
of the stabilizer.
Lime treatment can chemically transform unstable soils into exploitable materials by increasing
both workability and strength. Optimum utilization of lime has to be needed because high
26
6.3 Following reactions can occur when lime and water are added to clay
Quicklime immediately chemically combines with water and starts releasing heat. The
water present in the soil reacts, and the generated heat evaporates some additional moisture
leading to soil drying. The resulting hydrated lime will then react with clay particles reducing the
soil capacity to hold water (additional drying). Drying occurs quickly, within a matter of hours,
enabling the contractor to compact the soil much more rapidly than by waiting for the soil to dry
through natural evaporation. In case of hydrated lime or hydrated lime slurry, only drying due to
Ca CO3 Ca O + CO2.
Ca O + H2O Ca (OH)2.
6.3.2 Modification:
After the initial phase, the calcium ions (Ca++) from hydrated lime move onto the
clay particles displacing water and other ions. The PI of the soil dramatically decreases as a
hours, and so does its tendency to swell and shrink. The soil becomes easier to work and
compact.
27
6.3.3 Stabilization
Long-term strengthening is due to pozzolanic reactions that occurs in the highly alkaline
environment (pH >12 for a short period of time), which leads to the breaking down of the clay
particles, and allows the formation of calcium silicates and aluminates that form the matrix that
28
7. Applicability of soil rock mixture as backfill material for multi-
tieredretaining walls
(Gaung-Quing, Liu, Zhou, & Xiong, 2014)
It is the retaining wall system in which a series of two or more stacked walls each higher wall set
1. Aesthetic appearance - multi-tiered retaining walls give a very good aesthetic appearance
2. Economy - construction of these walls will be cost effective because of less excavation and
reinforcement etc.
3. Safety - in retaining of high elevations (more than 12m) these walls are safe.
There are only few studies on effect of soil-rock mixture as backfill material.
In soil-rock mixture, if rock content is less (<30%) then it is more applicable as backfill.
For maintaining stability soil-rock mixture requires an additional support which may be
geosynthetic reinforcement.
The soil-rock mixture can be classified as either well or poorly graded gravel with sand.
29
Lateral Earth pressure will decreases after construction and completely ceases after
certain duration.
Lateral displacement at top of the wall will be much more than bottom and ceased to
If geosynthetic reinforcement used then reinforcement strain will be lesser than the
rock mixture.
mixture as backfill is investigated and finally found that the soil-rock mixture can be
applicable as a backfill.
Geo synthetics are the synthetic products generally polymeric in nature used in many
Geosynthetics include 8 products: Geo textiles, Geo grids, geo nets, geo membrane,
stability of wall.
retaining wall.
These studies can be done by using some displacement sensors, surveying equipment,
30
By installing these in retaining wall which was already constructed different parameters
But special care should be taken that these studies should not affect the stability of wall in
any way.
31
8. Applicability of Clinker Ash as a Backfill Material in Steel Strip
Reinforced
(Suzuki, Nakashita, Tsukuda, & Wakatsuki, 2017)
Clinker ash is a type of bottom ash produced from ash melting at 1500°c in boiler and then
falling into water tank at bottom of boiler, where it gets cooled and lumps of accumulated ash are
high permeability
compaction properties - relatively high Optimum moisture content and Low maximum
dry density
uniformity coefficient = 12 to 24
Applicability of clinker ash as backfill material was investigated by use of laboratory pull out
tests.
In this test behaviour of clinker ash under overburden pressure, maximum pull out resistance at
32
In this study three series of pullout tests were implemented -
Physical properties of clinker ash are Superior than Sandy soils in terms of pull out
resistance.
Friction coefficient of clinker ash was found to be sufficiently greater than Sandy soils.
In clinker ash with increase in overburden pressure - maximum pull out resistance
increases.
Maximum pull out resistance is directly proportional to the sands or gravel content in the
clinker ash with increase in fine content, pull out resistance decreases.
To use clinker ash as a backfill material in retaining walls steel strip reinforcement has to
There was no change in grain size distribution before and after pullout test.it indicates
As it is a byproduct from coal fired thermal power plants, its availability will be more.
The geotechnical properties of clinker ash are almost comparable or Superior to the
Sandy soils.
With all these clinker ashes can be applicable as a back fill in retaining walls.
33
Clinker ash has already been used in several projects as an embankment material, road sub
grade or sub base course material or back fill material for Earth pressure resistant structures, such
as bridge piers and retaining walls. No post construction problems have yet been encountered
and it is believed that clinker ash meets long term material requirements.
34
9. Seismic earth pressures on flexible cantilever retaining walls
Seismic response of retaining walls is analyzed using 1-g shaking test with composite backfill
made of a deformable geo foam inclusions and granular cohesion less material. Comparisons are
made with the one without geo foams. It is observed reduction in earth pressures are up to 50%.
Flexible ratio
The test was performed on cantilever retaining wall with EPS & XPS geofoam inclusions.
EPS means Expanded Poly Styrene which is blocks of various sizes and shapes. It minimizes
settlement on underground utilities, thermal insulation, and drainage and also used as
compressible inclusions.
XPS stands for Extruded Poly Styrene which is available in the form of sheets.
It uses laminar container was used to reduce disturbance of model response from wave
35
A thin membrane made of rubber to prevent material leakage when laminar frames are
moving.
The instrumented retaining wall models were placed on the 20-cm thick compacted
layer of sand. During the backfilling process, the wall model was kept fixed against horizontal
movements by means of lateral supports. Backfill was constituted of 10-cm lifts by dry
initial state. To make use of dry eluviation technique, a steel shutter and diffuser screen having
the same dimensions with the laminar container were manufactured. Based on the test results
presented by hole spacing of the shutter and diffuser screen were selected as 60 mm and
2.36mm, respectively, in order to obtain relative densities between 70% and 75% by raining
procedure. At the end of the backfilling process, the data acquisition equipment was used to
monitor wall pressures on the non-yielding wall (lateral restraints were presented). The data
36
acquisition continued during the removal of the restraints accomplished by the slow unloading of
the mechanical jack located between the wall model and the sides of the container. Lateral earth
Pressures and wall movements were monitored until no further wall movements and pressure
redistribution occurred. The tests involving compressible geofoam inclusions were carried out
following the same procedure. However, EPS and XPS geofoam panels were installed between
The interface friction between the geofoam and the granular material.
The friction coefficient of the contact plane between the geofoam and the granular backfill was
found as 0.13 since the surfaces of the geofoam panels used in the current study were covered
And the geofoam. With decreasing frictional force at the geofoam backfill interface, the loading
9.2 Results
Thus, the inclusion of geofoam reduced lateral earth pressure and can withstand various seismic
pressures.
37
Results and Discussions
Current theories, experimental findings and numerical studies for retaining walls subject to
dynamic excitation and static conditions have been briefly revised in a generally chronological
order. Numerical analyses are an accurate way to solve relevant problems, while experiments are
It is observed that when lateral swelling pressure is more than wall is subjected to active
earth pressure. If stability or self weight of wall is incapable to carry these pressures then
Wall is relatively stronger when dense soils are used as backfill material. The alternate
material used should not cause any additional problems on retaining walls.
Alternate materials of various types are analyzed, compared with soil as backfill, and are
In order to reduce the impact of earthquakes on earth retaining structures a layer or a strip
These inclusions offer high flexibility and reduces load transfer to the wall. It will take
But this will result in uneconomical construction as it may cost around Rs. 4500 per cubic
It is observed that the use of GEOSTRIP REINFORCEMENT in MSE earth walls will
38
If the backfill is clay then it has to be stabilized in order to reduce shrinkage and swelling
For this clay is treated with lime which will treat the soil and reduces its swelling
potential.
But this will lead to corrosion of earth reinforcement; in order to avoid this reinforcement
The use of LLDPE also reduces the disposal problems. Since it is non-bio degradable the
It is better to reduce the height of wall in order to reduce displacement, bending moment,
anchor forces.
If height of the wall to be constructed is high then make sure that wall is laid at hard strata
and also if height of soil to be retained is more then use of cutting and filling method may be
Stability may also be effected by anchor angle and it no case it should not exceed 30degrees.
It is better to use dense soil as backfill and if it is no possible to get dense soils best
alternatives may be
39
Gaps in Literature
The use of various types of Retaining structures had been increasing from past. It laid the main
purpose to analyse and predict the wall behaviour and its effects on stability of the retaining wall.
In present study effect of backfill such as plastic soil, Shredded Tires, Clinker Ash, Fly Ash, Soil
Rock mixture on stability of retaining walls are studied. In all these studies index properties of
backfill, model studies, strength parameters, micro-scale studies are commonly investigated.
Many Engineers, Researchers had been working in order to improve various aspects regarding
retaining walls. Various problems faced in design, construction and analysis of retaining walls
are considered and no proper solution has not yet found. In the analysis of these alternate
materials various properties were analysed but their capacity to withstand dynamic action had
not been found out properly. This is because most of the work had been done by considering the
wall under static loading condition but in our India various areas like Tamil Nadu, Kerala,
Jammu& Kashmir. This had analysed using 1g Shaking Test but it is limited to certain extent.
this is due to variation in intensity and magnitude of Seismic action. This can be further analysed
40
CONCLUSIONS
Analysis of various backfill materials and its effect on wall behaviour has studied. Various
alternate solutions such as Geo foams which are light weight, shredded tires that are capable to
withstand seismic action, Fly Ash which is a by-product etc., had been checked for its feasibility
and economy. These alternate materials are checked against various types of soils that are
naturally available. The stability of Retaining Wall depends not only on backfill material but also
on other parameters such as depth of foundation, bedrock conditions, quality of materials used in
construction, type of retaining wall based on site situations, and various components of the wall
that can increase passive earth pressure on the wall (Shear Key, Sheet piles etc.,). In case of
plastic soils total suction, soil shrinkage and swelling under various exposures eventually effects
wall’s movement, for coarse grained soils the wall moves relatively away from backfill results in
failure of wall. Alternate materials are analysed and 1g shaking table test has performed to
determine displacement of wall under seismic action. This had obtained by using transducers at
various positions of a model wall, further use various materials like shredded tires, Geo Foams,
41
REFERENCES
Al-Juari, K., Khattab, S., & Al-Shamam, M. (2016). "Effect of Plastic soil on Retaining Wall Subjected to
Surcharge loading."., 9, pp. 163-169. Retrieved from http://doi:10.1051/e3sconf/20160905006
Cecich, V., Gonzales, L., Hoisaeter, A., & Reddy, K. (1996, july 19). "Use of Shredded Tires as Lightweight
Backfill Material for Retaining Structures.". Waste Management & Research, 14(1), 433-451.
Retrieved from https://wmr.sagepub.com
Ertugrul, O., & Trandafir, A. (2014, july 15). "Seismicearth pressure on flexible cantilever retaining walls
with deformable inclusions.". Rock Mechanice & Geotechnical Engineering, 6(1), 417-427.
Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jrmge.2014.07.004
Gabar, m. (2012, may 14). "Effect of Soil and Bedrock Conditions Below Retaining Walls on Wall
Behaviour.". soil mechanics, 16(1), 423-431. Retrieved from
http://do.doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2012.05.007
Gaung-Quing, Liu, Zhou, & Xiong. (2014, january 27). "Post-Construction performance of a two-tiered
geogrid reinforced soil wall backfille with soil-rock mixture.". Geotextiles and Geo membranes,
42(1), 91-97. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geotexmem.2014.01.007
Kumar, A., & Mandal. (2017, may 19). "Effect of Reinforcement on Multi-Tiered Fly Ash Wall.".
Transportation Geotechnics and Geology, 189(1), 446-453. Retrieved from
https://doi:10.1016/j.proeng.2017.05.072
Shrestha, Ravichandran, Raveendra, & Attenhofer. (2016, august 24). "Design and analysis of retaining
wall backfilled with shredded tire.". Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 90(1), 227-239.
Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2016.08.034
Suzuki, M., Nakashita, A., Tsukuda, K., & Wakatsuki, Y. (2017, october 2). "Applicability of clinker ash as
fill material in steel strip-reinforced soil walls.". Soils and Foundations, 58(1), 16-33. Retrieved
from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sandf.2017.11.001
42