Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Allan Block
TM
Mortarless Technology
Roadway Application
Water Application
FORWARD
This manual presents the techniques that we use in our engineering practice to design retaining walls. It is not intended as a textbook of soil mechanics or geotechnical engineering. The methods we use have evolved over the course of nine years and continue to evolve as our knowledge and experience grows. If any of the users of this manual want to offer suggestions about ways to improve our design, we would be very glad to hear them. The intended users of this manual are practicing engineers. When writing it, we assumed that the reader would already be familiar with the basic principles of statics and soil mechanics. We encourage others to contact a qualified engineer for help with the design of geogrid reinforced retaining walls. The example problems in this manual are based on walls constructed with Allan Block Retaining Wall Systems AB Stones. AB Stones provide a setback of twelve degrees from vertical. We believe that a twelve degree setback maximizes the leverage achieved by a battered wall, while providing a finished retaining wall that fulfills the goal of more useable flat land. Allan Block also has developed products with three and six degree setbacks. The equations that follow can be used for each product by selecting the appropriate angle. ( = 90 - Wall Batter)
AB Stones
AB Three
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter One - Concepts & Definitions
Soil Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Retaining Wall Failure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sliding Failure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Overturning Failure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Effects of Water on Wall Stability . . . . . . . . . . . Types of Retaining Walls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Forces Acting on Retaining Walls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Soil States . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Active and Passive Zones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pressure Coefficients . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Active Force on the Wall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Two-Dimensional Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Calculating the Effective Unit Weight of the Wall Facing Safety Factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 .2 .2 .2 .2 .3 .4 .4 .5 .5 .6 .7 .7 .8 .9 .9 .9 .11 .12 .14 .16 .17 .17 .18 .19 .22 .25 .25 .30 .31 .33 .35 .35 .39 .42 43 43 44 47 47 49
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter Five - Seismic Analysis
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Pressure Coefficients . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Dynamic Earth Force on the Wall . . . . . . . . . . . Safety Factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Simple Gravity Wall with Seismic Influence . . . . Safety Factor Against Sliding . . . . . . . . . . Safety Factor Against Overturning . . . . . . Coherent Gravity Wall with Seismic Influence. . . Safety Factor Against Sliding . . . . . . . . . . Safety Factor Against Overturning . . . . . . Factor of Safety Geogrid Tensile Overstress Geogrid / Block Connection Capacity . . . Geogrid Pullout from the Soil . . . . . . . . . . Top of the Wall Stability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 51 54 55 55 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 63 63
LIST OF FIGURES
CHAPTER ONE
Concepts & Definitions
Soil Characteristics
Soil can be described in many different ways. One way to describe it is by the average size of the particles that make up a soil sample. Sandy soil consists of relatively large particles, while clay soil consists mainly of smaller particles. Another way to describe soil is by the tendency of the particles to stick together -- a property called cohesion. Sand, such as is found at the beach, has very low cohesion. Even when it is wet, you can pick up a handful of sand and it will pour out of your hand as individual particles. Clay, on the other hand, is much more cohesive than sand. A wet clay soil can be molded into a ball or rolled into a thread that resists being pulled apart. SAND Large, spherical, angular surfaces CLAY Small, flat, smooth surfaces Still another way to describe a soil is by its natural tendency to resist movement. This property can be expressed by a number known as the coefficient of internal friction, or simply, the friction angle (PHI ). If you take a dry soil sample and pour it out onto a flat surface, it will form a cone-shaped pile. The angle formed by the base of the cone and its sides is known as the angle of repose. The angle of repose of a soil is always smaller than the friction angle for the same soil. However, the difference between the two angles is small and for the design of retaining walls the angle of repose can be used to approximate the friction angle. The larger the friction angle the steeper the stable slope that can be formed using that soil.
Soil that consists mainly of sand has a larger friction angle than soil composed mainly of clay. This is due to the fact that sand particles are roughly spherical with irregular surfaces, while clay particles are flat and smooth. When subjected to external pressure, the clay particles tend to slide past one another. The surface irregularities of the sand particles tend to interlock and resist movement. Clay soil has some characteristics that make it undesirable for use as backfill for a retaining wall. First of all, clay soil is not readily permeable and retains the water that filters into it. The added weight of the retained water increases the force on the retaining wall. Secondly, once the clay becomes saturated, its cohesion decreases almost to zero. The shear strength of the soil is the sum of the frictional resistance to movement and the cohesion of the soil. Once the cohesion is lost due to soil saturation, the full force of the weight of water and most of the weight of the soil is applied to the wall. For these reasons, clay soil is not a good choice for retaining wall backfill. The preferred soil for backfill behind retaining walls is soil that contains a high percentage of sand and gravel. Such a soil is referred to as a granular soil and has a friction angle of approximately 32 to 36, depending on the degree of compaction of the soil. The main reason for Typical Soil Properties preferring a granular soil for backfill is that it allows water Soil Cohesion Cohesion Soil Friction to pass through it more Groups Compacted Saturated Angle readily than a nongranular, or clayey soil does. Also, the 0 0 36 Clean Gravel-Sand Mix shear strength of a granular soil doesn't vary with 1050 PSF 300 PSF Sand-Silt Clay Mix moisture content and 32 (50 KPA) (14 KPA) therefore its shear strength is more predictable. Inorganic Clays 1800 PSF 270 PSF 27 (86 KPA) (13 KPA)
Sliding Failure
Sliding failure is evident when the wall moves forward, and occurs when the horizontal forces tending to cause sliding are greater than the horizontal forces resisting sliding. Generally, this will occur when either the driving force is underestimated or the resisting force is overestimated. Underestimating the driving force is the most common mistake and usually results from: 1) neglecting surcharge forces from other walls, 2) designing for level backfill when the backfill is in fact sloped, 3) using cohesive soils for backfill.
Sliding
Overturning Failure
Overturning
Overturning failure is evident when the wall rotates about its bottom front edge (also called the toe of the wall). This occurs when the sum of the moments tending to cause overturning is greater than the sum of the moments resisting overturning. As with sliding failures, overturning failures usually result from underestimating the driving forces.
Some clay soils exhibit the characteristic of expanding when wet. This expansion, coupled with contraction when the soil dries, can work to weaken the wall and cause failure. Another way in which water contributes to wall failure is by the action of the freezethaw cycle. Water trapped in the soil expands when it freezes causing increased pressure on the wall. Water in contact with the wall itself can cause failure of the structural materials. The freeze-thaw cycle is the basic mechanism by which rocks are turned into soil. The same thing can happen to a wall in contact with water during the winter months. Several things can be done to reduce the likelihood of wall failure due to water. First, use a free-draining granular material for the back fill. Second, create a drain field in and around the block cores and 6-12 inches (15-30 cm) deep behind the wall using a material with large individual particles, such crushed limestone. Third, install a drain pipe at the bottom rear of the base and provide outlets as needed. Finally, direct water away from the top and bottom of the wall using swales as required. All these measures will ensure that excess water is removed from behind the wall before it can build up or freeze and cause damage.
AB Gravity Wall Typical Section AB Geogrid Wall Typical Section AB Earth Anchor Typical Section
Geogrid
Studies have shown that retaining walls reinforced with several layers of geogrid act as giant gravity walls. Geogrid reinforced soil masses create the same effect as having an extremely thick wall with the center of gravity located well back from the toe of the wall. For this reason, reinforced soil walls are more likely to fail by sliding than by overturning.
Anchor
Tieback walls rely on mechanical devices embedded in the backfill to provide the force necessary to resist sliding and overturning. Battering a tieback wall will shift its center of gravity and enhance its stability.
Soil States
The soil behind a retaining wall exists in one of three states: 1) the active state, 2) the passive state, 3) the at-rest state. Figure 1-1. Forces Acting on the Retaining Walls
When a wall is built and soil is placed behind it and compacted, the soil is in the at-rest state. If the pressure on the wall due to the soil is too great, the wall will move forward. As the wall moves forward, the soil settles into a new equilibrium condition called the active state. The pressure on the wall due to the soil is lower in the active state than it is in the at-rest state (see Figure 1-2). The passive state is achieved when a wall is pushed back into the soil. This could occur by building the retaining wall, placing and compacting the soil, and then somehow forcing the retaining wall to move into the backfill. Usually, the passive state occurs at the toe of the wall when the wall moves forward. The movement of the wall causes a horizontal pressure on the soil in front of the wall. This passive resistance of the soil in front of the wall helps keep the wall from sliding. However, the magnitude of the passive resistance at the toe of the wall is so low that it is usually neglected in determining the stability of the wall. The occurrence of the passive state behind a retaining wall is extremely rare and it will most likely never be encountered behind an Allan Block wall. The at-rest condition occurs whenever a retaining wall is built. Some designers may prefer to take a conservative approach and design for the higher at-rest pressure rather than the active pressure. However, this is not necessary since the amount of wall movement required to cause the pressure to decrease from the atrest level to the active level is very small. Studies of soil pressure on retaining walls have shown that the top of a retaining wall needs to move only 0.001 times the height of the wall in order for the pressure to drop to the active value.
There are some applications where the wall cannot be allowed to move. These include bridge abutments and walls that are rigidly connected to buildings. In cases such as these, the design should be based on the higher at-rest pressure; otherwise, the lower active pressure can be used. Designing on the basis of the active pressure will reduce the cost of the wall and give a more accurate model of the actual behavior of most retaining walls.
Pressure Coefficients
The horizontal stress ( h) on a retaining wall due to the retained soil is directly proportional to the vertical stress ( v) on the soil at the same depth. The ratio of the two stresses is a constant called the pressure coefficient:
= ( h) ( v)
The pressure coefficient for the at-rest state can be calculated using the formula:
Ko = 1 sin ( )
where: is the friction angle of the soil. The active pressure coefficient can be calculated using an equation that was derived by Coulomb in 1776. This equation takes into account the slope of the backfill, the batter of the retaining wall, and the effects of friction between the retained soil and the surface of the retaining wall. Figure 1-3 illustrates the various terms of Coulomb's equation.
The Coulomb equation for the active force on a retaining wall is:
where:
Fa H Ka
Ka =
) + w) sin ( sin ( i)
sin (
i)
= angle between the horizontal and the sloped back face of the wall
i
w
= slope of the top of the retained soil = angle between a line perpendicular to the wall face and the line of action of the active force
As the wall moves forward slightly, the soil enters the active state by moving forward and downward. At the interface of the soil and the wall, this downward movement of the wall is resisted by the friction between the soil and the wall. Figure 1-4 shows the resultant active force on a retaining wall and the effect of wall friction on the direction of the force. The magnitude of w varies depending on the unit weight of the backfill. For a loose backfill, w is approximately equal to . For a dense back-fill, however, w < . Since retaining wall backfill is thoroughly compacted, the design method in this manual assumes that w = (0.66) .
Pv
Where:
= ( ) (d) = the unit weight of the soil = the depth from the top of the retained soil mass. (Ph) is related to the vertical pressure (Pv) by the active pressure
Ka Ph
= (Ph) (Pv)
= (Ka) (Pv) = (Ka) ( ) (d) Since Ka and are constants, the horizontal pressure increases linearly as the depth increases and the resulting pressure
distribution is triangular. The magnitude of the resultant force of a triangular pressure distribution is equal to the area of the triangle. The pressure at the base of the triangle is given by:
= (Ka) ( ) (H) The magnitude of the active force is: Ph Fa = (area of the triangle) = (0.5) (base) (height) = (0.5) ( ) (Ka) (H) (H) = (0.5) ( ) (Ka) (H)2
The resultant force acts at a point above the base equal to one-third of the height of the triangle. Adding a surcharge or slope above the wall has the effect of developing a rectangular pressure distribution. The resultant force of a rectangular pressure distribution acts at a point above the base equal to one-half of the height of the rectangle.
Two-Dimensional Analysis
A retaining wall is a three-dimensional object. It has height, length, and depth. In order to simplify the analysis, the length of the wall is taken to be one foot (or one meter) and the wall is analyzed as a two-dimensional system. Because of this, the units for forces will always be pounds per foot (lb/ft) (kilograms per meter (kg/m)), and the units for moments will be foot-pounds per foot (ft-lb/ft) (newton-meters per meter (N-m/m)).
Vc
= 0.53 ft3
0.015 m3
The total volume occupied by each standard Allan Block unit, including the voids, is:
Vt
= (1.5 ft) (0.635 ft) (0.97 ft) = 0.92 ft3 = Vt Vc 3 = 0.92 ft 0.53 ft3 = 0.39 ft3
Vv
= 0.026 m3 0.015 m3
= 0.011 m3
The unit weight of the wall facing can now be calculated. Assuming that the voids are filled with soil with a unit weight of 120 lb/ft3 (1,923 kg/m3), the unit weight of the wall facing is:
= (0.53 ft3) (135 lb/ft3) + (0.39 ft3) (120 lb/ ft3) (0.92 ft3)
0.026 m3
= 130 lb/ft3
= 2,061 kg/m3
Once the unit weight of the wall facing is known, it is a simple matter to calculate the weight per linear foot of wall:
Ww
= (unit weight of wall) (volume of wall) = (unit weight of wall) (wall height) (facing depth) = (130 lb/ft3) (6 ft) (0.97 ft) = 757 lb/ft = (125 lb/ft2) (wall height)
= (2,061 kg/m3) (1.83 m) (0.3 m) = 1,119 kg/m3 = (610 kg/m2) (wall height)
For a wall 6 feet (1.83 m) tall with a facing depth of 0.97 foot (0.3 m), the weight of the facing would be:
Ww
Ww
Safety Factors
The safety factors used in this design manual conform to the guidelines of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). In the draft version of Guidelines for the Design of Mechanically Stabilized Earth Walls, they recommend using the following safety factors:
CHAPTER TWO
Basic Wall Design Techniques
Gravity Wall
Tieback Wall
Introduction
One way to classify retaining walls is by the type of reinforcement the walls require. If a wall is stable without reinforcement, it is referred to as a simple gravity wall. When the forces behind a wall are greater than a simple gravity system can provide, a tieback wall can often be built using a single layer of geogrid or anchors to tie the wall to the soil. When the forces behind a wall are greater than a tieback system can provide, a coherent gravity wall can be built by using two or more layers of geogrid to stabilize the soil mass.
Sliding Failure
A simple gravity wall will not fail in sliding if the force resisting sliding, Fr, is greater than or equal to the force causing sliding, Fh. The force resisting sliding is the frictional resistance at the wall base. The minimum safety factor for sliding failure is 1.5. Therefore, Fr, must be greater than or equal to (1.5) Fh. The following example illustrates the procedure for analyzing stability in sliding. Example 2-1: Given: Free body Ex. 2-1
= 30 Ka = 0.2197 (1.05 m) i = 0 H = 3.44 ft 3 = 78 = 120 lb/ft (1,923 kg/m3) w = (0.666) ( ) = 20 Unit weight of wall = 130 lb/ft3 (2,061 kg/m3)
Find: The safety factor against sliding, SFS. The first step is to determine the total active force exerted by the soil on the wall:
Fa
= 156 lb/ft
= 2,295 N/m
Sliding
As explained in Chapter One, because of the effects of friction between the soil and the wall, the active force acts at an angle to a line perpendicular to the face of the wall. The active force can be resolved into a component perpendicular to the wall and a component parallel to the wall. The degree of the angle between the active force and a line perpendicular to the face of the wall is w. w varies according to the unit weight of the soil. For very loose soil, w approaches ; for compacted soil, w can be as low as (0.666) . Since our wall designs involve compacting the backfill soil, we use the more conservative value of w = (0.666) . Thus, the horizontal component of the active force is:
Fh
= (Fa) cos ( w) = (Fa) cos [ (0.666) ( ) ] = (2,295 N/m) cos (20) = (156 lb/ft) cos (20) = 147 lb/ft = 2,157 N/m = = = = (Fa) sin ( w) (Fa) sin [ (0.666) ( ) ] (156 lb/ft) sin (20) 53 lb/ft
Fv
The weight of the wall facing must be determined before the frictional resistance to sliding can be calculated:
= ( w) (H) (d) = (2061 kg/m3) (1.05 m) (0.3 m) = (130 lb/ft3) (3.44 ft) (0.97 ft) = 434 lb/ft = 6,369 N/m The maximum frictional resistance to sliding, Fr is calculated by multiplying the total vertical force, Vt , by the coefficient Wf
of friction. The total vertical force is the sum of the weight of the wall and the vertical component of the active force. The coefficient of friction, Cf , is assumed to be equal to tan ( ). Thus, the maximum frictional resistance is:
Fr
= = = = =
(Vt) (Cf) (Vt) tan ( ) (Wf + Fv) tan ( ) (434 lb/ft + 53 lb/ft) tan (30) 281 lb/ft
SFS
= (Force resisting sliding) = Fr (Force causing sliding) Fh = (281 lb/ft) = 1.9 > 1.5 OK (147 lb/ft)
= (4,130 N/m) = 1.9 > 1.5 OK (2,157 N/m)
Free body Ex. 2-1
The safety factor against sliding is greater than 1.5. Therefore, the wall is stable and doesn't require reinforcement to prevent sliding failure. However, the wall must still be analyzed for overturning failure.
10
Overturning Failure
Overturning failure occurs when the forces acting on the wall cause it to rotate about the bottom front corner of the wall (Point A in Figure 2-1). For stability, the moments resisting overturning, Mr, must be greater than or equal to the moments causing overturning, Mo. The minimum safety factor for overturning is 2.0. Therefore, Mr must be greater than or equal to (2.0) Mo. Find the safety factor against overturning, SFO, for Example 2-1. Two forces contribute to the moment resisting overturning of the wall. These are the weight of the wall and the vertical component of the active force on the wall. Summing these moments about Point A:
Mr
= (Wf) [ (X1) + (0.5) (H) tan (90 ) ] + (Fv) [ (X2) + (0.333) (H) tan (90 ) ] = (434 lb/ft) [ (0.49 ft) + (0.5) (3.44 ft) tan (9078) ] + (53 lb/ft) [ (0.97 ft) + (0.333) (3. 44 ft) tan (9078) ] = 436 ft-lb/ft
= (6,369 N/m) [ (0.149 m) + (0.5) (1.05 m) tan (9078) ] + (785 N/m) [ (0.3 m) + (0.333) (1.05 m) tan (9078) ] = 1,954 N-m/m
(NOTE: The quantities (0. 5) (H) tan (90 ) and (0.333) (H) tan (90 ) account for the distance added to the moment arms because the wall is not vertical.) The horizontal component of the active force is the only force that contributes to the overturning moment. The active force is the resultant of the active pressure distribution, which is triangular. For triangular pressure distributions, the vertical centroid is located at one-third the height of the triangle. Therefore, the horizontal component of the active force acts on the wall (0.333) H from the bottom of the wall. The moment causing overturning is given by:
Mo
= (Fh) ( 1) = (Fh) (0.333) (H) = (147 lb/ft) (0.333) (3.44 ft) = 168 ft-lb/ft
= (2,157 N/m) (0.333) (1.05 m) = 754 N-m/m
SFO
= (Moment resisting overturning) = Mr (Moment causing overturning) Mo = (436 ft-lb/ft) = 2.6 > 2.0 OK (168 ft-lb/ft)
= (1,954 N-m/m) = 2.6 > 2.0 OK (754 N-m/m)
The safety factor against overturning is greater than 2.0. Therefore, the wall is stable and doesn't require geogrid reinforcement to prevent overturning. As calculated previously, the safety factor against sliding is also greater than 1.5 for this wall. This wall is adequate in both sliding and overturning and no geogrid reinforcement is required.
Overturning 11
Tieback Walls
A simple gravity wall may be analyzed and found to be unstable in either sliding or overturning. When this occurs, the next logical step is to analyze the wall with a single layer of geogrid or earth anchors behind it. The single layer of grid or earth anchor is treated as a restraining device or anchor. The force on the wall due to the weight of the retained soil is calculated exactly as it was in the simple gravity wall analysis. However, the forces resisting failure in this instance are the frictional resistance due to the weight of the wall plus the friction force due to the weight of the soil on the grid or restraining force of the anchor. Figure 2-2 is a schematic diagram of a tieback wall and Figure 2-3 is a freebody diagram of the forces on the wall. Example 2-2: Given:
= 30 = 20 w H = 5.16 ft (1.57 m) Ka = 0.2197 = 78 = 120 lb/ft3 (1,923 kg/m3) i = 0 Unit weight of wall facing = 130 lb/ft3 (2,061 kg/m3)
Find: The safety factors against sliding, SFS, and overturning, SFO. The first step in the analysis is to determine the weight of the wall facing:
Wf
= (5.16 ft) (0.97 ft) (130 lb/ft3) = (1.57 m) (0.3 m) (2,061 kg/m3)
651 lb/ft
= 9,523 N/m
Fa
Fh Fv
= 1,747 N/m
The total vertical force due to the weight of the wall and the vertical component of the active force is:
Vt
= Wf + = 651 = 771
12
The force that resists sliding of the wall because of friction between the wall and the soil is:
Fr
= (Vt) (Cf) = (771 lb/ft) tan (30) = 445 lb/ft = (11,270 N/m) tan (30)
= 6,507 N/m
SFS
Mr
= = + =
(Wf) [ (X1) + (0.5) (H) tan (90 ) ] + (Fv) [ (X2) + (0.333) (H) tan (90 ) ] (651 lb/ft) [ (0.49 ft) + (0.5) (5.16 ft) tan (9078) ] (120 lb/ ft) [ (0.97 ft) + (0.333) (5.16 ft) tan (9078) ] 836 ft-lb/ft
= (9,523 N/m) [ (0.149 m) + (0.5) (1.57 m) tan (9078) ] + (1,747 N/m) [ (0.3 m) + (0.333) (1.57 m) tan (9078) ] = 3,726 N-m/m
Mo
SFO
Without reinforcement, this wall is not adequate with respect to either sliding failure or overturning failure. Therefore, a tieback wall will be required. A good rule of thumb is to place the reinforcement as close as possible to halfway between the top and bottom of the wall.
13
Geogrid as a Tieback
A single layer of geogrid reinforcement acts as an anchor to keep the retaining wall from moving forward. The geogrid extends into the backfill soil and the frictional resistance due to the weight of the soil on top of the geogrid provides the restraining force. The relationship can be expressed as follows:
Fg
= (Unit weight of soil) x (Depth to grid) x (2) x (Area of the grid in the passive zone) x (Coefficient of friction)
The following equation can be used to calculate the maximum potential restraining force:
Fg
where:
= (2) (dg) ( ) (Le) (Ci) tan ( ) = the maximum potential restraining force.
Fg
The factor 2 is used since both the top and the bottom of the geogrid interact with the soil.
dg
= the depth from the top of the backfill to the layer of geogrid. = the unit weight of the backfill soil.
Le Ci
= the length of geogrid embedded in the passive zone of the soil. = the coefficient of interaction between the soil and the geogrid, a
measure of the ability of the soil to hold the geogrid when a force is applied to it. Typical values of Ci are 0.9 for gravelly soil, 0.85 for sand or silty sands, and 0.75 for silts and clays. of soil. Diagram Ex. 2-2
Fg Le
= (2) (dg) ( ) (Le) (Ci) tan ( ) = Fg (2) (dg ) ( ) Ci) tan ( ) = (833 lb/ft) (2) (2.3 ft) (120 lb/ft3) (0.85) tan (30)
(1,240 kg/m) (2) (0.7 m) (1,923 kg/m3) (0.85) tan (30)
= 3.08 ft
=
= 0.94 m
14
The total length of geogrid required per linear foot of wall is:
Lt
where:
= Lw + La + Le = = = = =
total length of geogrid length of geogrid inside the Allan Block wall = 0.84 ft (0.26 m) length of geogrid in the active zone
Lt Lw La Le Lt
The estimated total length of geogrid required for the wall in Example 2-2 is:
= (0.84 ft) + (5.16 ft 2.3 ft) [ tan (30 ) tan (12 ) ] + 3.08 ft = 4.96 ft
= (0.26 m) + (1.57 m 0.7 m) [ tan (30) tan (12) ] + 0.94 m = 1.52 m
For the convenience of the workers installing the retaining wall, we round off the geogrid length to the nearest 0.5 ft (0.15 m). For this example, Lt = 5.0 ft (1.52 m). With a total geogrid length of 5.0 ft (1.52 m) the actual embedment length is:
Le
= Lt (0.84 ft) (H dg) [ tan (45 /2) tan (90 ) ] = 5.0 ft (0.84 ft) (5.16 ft 2.3 ft) [ tan (30 ) tan (12 ) ] = 3.12 ft
= Lt (0.26 m) (H dg) [tan (45 /2) tan (90 )] = 1.52 m (0.26 m) (1.57 m 0.7m) [ tan (30) tan (12) ] = 0.94 m
The maximum potential restraining force on the geogrid for an embedment length of 3.12 feet (0.95 m) is:
Fg
= (2) (2.3 ft) (120 lb/ft3) (3.12 ft) (0.85) tan (30 )
= (2) (0.7 m) (1,923 kg/m3) (0.95 m) (0.85 m) tan (30)
= 845 lb/ft
= 1,255 kg/m
However, the long-term allowable design load (LTADL) of the grid specified is only 833 lb/ft (12,161 N/m). The maximum restraining force must be less than or equal to the LTADL. Therefore, let Fg = 833 lb/ft (12,161 N/m). Finally, the safety factors against sliding and overturning can be recalculated:
SFS
Fr + LTAD = (445 lb/ft + 833 lb/ft) Fh (330 lb/ft) = (6,507 N/m + 12,161 N/m)
4,800 N/m
SFO
Since SFS > 1.5 and SFO > 2.0, this retaining wall is stable with one layer of geogrid, 5.0 ft (1.52 m) long. At this point, you may want to go back, shorten the geogrid to optimize the design, and reanalyze the wall. However, we recommend using a geogrid length that is sufficient to develop the full long-term allowable design strength of the geogrid, 833 lb/ft (12,161 N/m), even if it is not required for wall stability.
15
Fe
Fe
This is the preloaded value of the anchor for correction for design purposes we will use a weighted value and correction for horizontal anchor spacing. For this example we will specify spacing of anchors on 8 foot (2.44 m) centers and Huesker 35/-20-20 geogrid (Diagram Ex.2-2). Therefore the additional force resisting sliding is:
Fr Fr Fwe Fga
= (Wf + Fv) tan (30) = (651 lb/ft + 120 lb/ft) tan (30) = 445 lb/ft = (0.67) Fe 8 ft = 879 lb/ft
= (0.67) Fe (2.44 m) = 12,830 N/m = 833 lb/ft (12,161 N/m)
Fr
Fwe = Weighted design value of anchor. Fga = The maximum potential restraining force.
Fp = 888 lb/ft + 0.130 x N Fp = Grid pullout from block. = 888 lb/ft + [0.130 x 1.9 (125 lb/ft)] = 919 lb/ft Diagram Ex. 2-2 = 12,964 N/m + 0.130 x N
= 12,964 N/m + [0.130 x 1.9 (1,825 N/m)] = 13,415 N/m
The resulting factor of safety with one row of earth anchors is:
SFS
= Fr + * Fga = (445 lb/ft + 833 lb/ft) Fh 330 lb/ft = 3.87 > 1.5 OK = = + =
Mr
(Wf) [ (X1) + (0.5) (H) tan (90 ) ] + (Fv) [(X2) + (0.333) (H) tan (90 ) ] + *Fga (H/2) (651 lb/ft) [ (0.49 ft) + (0.5) (5.16 ft) tan (90 78) ] (120 lb/ft) [ (0.97 ft) + (0.333) (5.16 ft) tan (90 78) ] + (833 lb/ft) (2.58 ft) 2,985 ft-lb/ft
= (9,523 N/m) [ (0.149 m) + (0.5) (1.57 m) tan (90 78) ] + (1,747 N/m) [ (0.296 m) + (0.333) (1.57 m) tan (90 78) ] + (12,161 N/m) (0.786 m) = 13,278 N-m/m
* Use the least of Fwe, Fga, or Fp. SFO = Mr = (2,985 ft-lb/ft) = 5.3 > 2.0 OK Mo (567 ft-lb/ft) = La + 3 ft = (5.16 ft 2.3 ft) [tan (30) tan (12) ] + 3.0 ft = 4 ft
= (1.57 m 0.7 m) [ tan (30) tan (12) ] + 0.9 m = 1.22 m
Check to determine if the Fwe or the grid pullout from the block or rupture is the determining factor. Note: The pullout from the block can be eliminated as the governing factor by bonding the block to grid interface with a construction grade adhesive. Reference Table 2-1 Page 50
The anchor length requires a 3 foot (0.9 m) embedment into the passive zone. (Past the theoretical failure plane)
Lt
16
Retained Soil
i
wr r
wo o
= 18 = 27 = 78
Kar H
o r
Kao = 0.2561
(1,923 kg/m3) (2,002 kg/m3)
Figure 2-4. Coherent Gravity Wall for Example 2-3
Find: The safety factors against sliding, SFS, and overturning, SFO.
Length of Geogrid
The first step in analyzing the stability of the wall is to estimate the length of geogrid required. A rule of thumb is that the minimum reinforcement length is 50% of the wall height for the 12 block systems and 60% of the wall height for 3 and 6 block systems.
2.13 FT (0.65m) 5.13FT(1.56m)
1.1FT(0.34m)
6.13FT(1.87m)
0.53FT(0.16m)
6.13FT(1.87m)
6.0FT(1.83m)OfGeogrid
5.0FT(1.52m) OfGeogrid 10.0 FT (3.05m)
6.0FT(1.83m)OfGeogrid
10.0 FT (3.05m)
10.0 FT (3.05m)
17
External Stability
Once the length of the geogrid is known, the weight of the coherent gravity wall can be calculated. The weight of the structure is the sum of the weights of the wall facing and the reinforced soil mass. The weight of the wall facing is equal to the unit weight of the wall facing times the height times the depth:
Wf
The weight of the reinforced soil mass is equal to the unit weight of the backfill soil, times the height of the reinforced soil mass, times the depth (measured from back face of wall to the end of the geogrid):
Ws
Ww
(NOTE: Using a value of 125 lb/ft3 (2,002 kg/m3) for the unit weight of the wall facing would simplify the calculations and result in a conservative design.) The next step is to calculate the active force on the gravity wall. The properties of the retained soil are used to calculated the active force since it acts at the back of the reinforced soil zone. The active force is given by the equation:
Fa
= (0.5) ( o) (Kao) (H)2 = (0.5) (120 lb/ft3) (0.2561) (9.17 ft)2 = 1,292 lb/ft
= (0.5) (1,923 kg/m3) (0.2561) (2.8 m)2 = 18,938 N/m
Fh
Fv
= = = = = =
(Fa) cos ( wo) (1,292 lb/ft) cos (18) 1,229 lb/ft (Fa) sin ( wo) (1,292 lb/ft) sin (18) 399 lb/ft
= (18,938 N/m) cos (18) = 18,011 N/m = (18,938 N/m) sin (18) = 5,852 N/m
Vt
The force resisting sliding is calculated by multiplying the total vertical force by the coefficient of friction between the reinforced soil mass and the underlying soil:
Fr
18
SFS
The safety factor against overturning is: (NOTE: All moments are taken about Point A in Figure 2-8.)
Mr
= (Wf) [ (0.5) (X1) + (0.5) (H) tan (90 ) ] + (Ws) [ (0.5) (X2 X1) + (X1) + (0.5) (H) tan (90 ) ] + (Fv) [ (X2) + (0.333) (H) tan (90 ) ] = + + =
= + + =
(1,156 lb/ft) [ (0.5) (0.97 ft) + (0.5) (9.17 ft) tan (90 78) ] (5,915 lb/ft) [ (0.5) (6.13 ft 0.97 ft) + (0.97 ft) + (0.5) (9.17 ft) tan (90 78) ] (399 lb/ft) [ (6.13 ft) + (0.333) (9.17 ft) tan (90 78) ] 31,155 ft-lb/ft
(16,983 N/m) [ (0.5) (0.3 m) + (0.5) (2.8 m) tan (90 78) ] (86,556 N/m) [ (0.5) (1.87 m 0.3 m) + (0.3 m) + (0.5) (2.8 m) tan (90 78)] (5,852 N/m) [ (1.87 m) + (0.333) (2.8 m) tan (90 78) ] 139,375 N-m/m
Mo
= (Fh) (0.333) (H) = (1,229 lb/ft) (0.333) (9.17 ft) = 3,753 ft-lb/ft
= (18,011 N/m) (0.333) (2.8 m) = 16,793 N-m/m
SFO
=
=
The minimum recommended safety factors for geogrid reinforced retaining walls are 1.5 for sliding failure and 2.0 for overturning failure. Since both safety factors for this wall exceed the minimum values, the wall is adequate with respect to sliding and overturning. In cases where either of the safety factors is lower than required, the length of geogrid is increased and the analysis is repeated. The process ends when both safety factors exceed the minimum recommended values.
Internal Stability
This part of the design consists of spacing the geogrid layers so that each layer is subjected to a force less than or equal to the long-term allowable design load of the geogrid. Geogrid for this example has the long-term allowable design load of 1,250 lb/ft (18,249 N/m). Applying a safety factor of 1.5 results in an allowable load of 833 lb/ft (12,161 N/m) per layer of grid. The first step is to determine the minimum number of layers of geogrid required. (We recommend no more than 4-course spacing between each layer of geogrid reinforcement for a 12 system and no more than 3-course spacing for 3 and 6 systems.) This is done by dividing the total horizontal force at the back of the wall facing by the load each layer of grid can handle:
19
Fh = (0.5) ( r) (Kar) (H)2 cos ( wr) (833 lb/ft) (833 lb/ft) 3 = (0.5) (125 lb/ft ) (0.2197) (9.17 ft)2 cos (20) (833 lb/ft) = 1.30 layers
= = = (0.5) ( r) (Kar) (H)2 cos ( wr) (12,161 N/m) (12,161 N/m) Fh (0.5) (2002 kg/m3) (0.2197) (2.8 m)2 cos (20) (12,161 N/m)
= 1.30 layers
Since it is impossible to put in a fraction of a layer, the number of layers must always be rounded up to the nearest whole number or use a higher strength grid. For this example, N, = 2 layers. As the number of layers of geogrid increases, it may become necessary to put in more than the minimum number of layers. This is because the spacing of the layers is limited by the height of the individual Allan Block units.
The load on each layer of geogrid is equal to the average pressure on the wall section, Pavg, multiplied by the height of the section, dh, (Figure 2-9). The pressure at any depth is given by:
Pi Fg
where:
= ( r) (di) (Kar) cos ( wr) = (Pavg) (dh) = = + = (0.5) (P1 + P2) (0.5) [ ( r) (d1) (Kar) cos ( wr) ( r) (d2) (Kar) cos ( wr) ] (0.5) ( r) (Kar) cos ( wr) (d1 + d2)
dh = d1
d2
Pavg
Internal Stability
Internal stability is the ability of the reinforcement combined with the internal strength of the soil to hold the soil mass together and work as a single unit.
Grid Rupture
Rupture occurs when excessive forces from the retained soil mass exceed the ultimate tensile strength of the geogrid. Increase grid strength
Pullout
Pullout results when grid layers are not embedded a sufficient distance beyond the failure plane.
Bulging
Bulging occurs when horizontal forces between the geogrid layers causes localized rotation of the wall. Increase embedment length Increase number of grid layers
20
C
then:
= (0.5) ( r) (Kar) cos ( wr) = [ C (d1) + C (d2) ] (d1 d2) = C (d1)2 C (d2)2 Fg < 833 lb/ft (12,161 N/m) (12,161 N/m)
Fg
= 9.17 ft (2.8 m) Solving for d2: d2 = [ (d1)2 ( (833 lb/ft)/C) ]0.5 d1 = [ (9.17 ft)2 ( (833 lb/ft)/(12.9 lb/ft3) ) ]0.5 = 4.42 ft
= [ (d1)2 ( (1,240 kg/m)/C) ]0.5 = [ (2.8 m)2 ( (1,240 kg/m)/(207 kg/m3) ) ]0.5 = 1.36 m
Solving for dh: dh = (d1
Place the first layer of geogrid within dh so that the force above the geogrid is equal to the force below the geogrid. For a triangular pressure distribution, place the geogrid up one-third of the distance from the bottom of dh to the top of dh. For a rectangular pressure distribution, place the geogrid up one-half of the distance from bottom to top of dh. In general, the geogrid should be placed between one-third and one-half of the distance from the bottom of dh to the top of dh. Geogrid can only be placed between the blocks forming the wall facing. For AB Stones standard units, normally that means that the geogrid can only be placed at heights evenly divisible by 7.62 inches or 0.635 ft (194 mm). Therefore, the first layer should be placed 1.905 ft (0.58 m), 3 blocks, up from the bottom. This wall only requires two layers of geogrid. The second layer should be placed at one-third to one-half the distance between the location of d2 and the top of the wall. In this case, the second layer of geogrid should be placed 5.73 ft (1.75 m), 10 blocks, from the bottom of the wall.
21
R,
Fy = W + Fv
The next step is to locate the point of application of the resultant force. This is done by summing moments around Point A, setting the result equal to zero, and solving for X.
MA = (7,470 lb/ft) (X) + (1,229 lb/ft) (3.06 ft) (7,071 lb/ft) (4.04 ft) (399 lb/ft) (6.78 ft) X = (28,567 ft-lb/ft) + (2,705 ft-lb/ft) (3,761 ft-lb/ft) = 3.68 ft (7,470 lb/ft)
= (109,391 N/m) (X) + (18,011 N/m) (0.933 m) (103,539 N/m) (1.23 m) (5,852 N/m) (2.07 m) = (127,353 N-m/m) + (12,144 N-m/m) (16,804 N-m/m) = 1.12 m (109,391 N/m)
The eccentricity, e, of the resultant vertical force, is the distance from the centerline of bearing of the gravity wall to the point of application of the resultant force, R. In this case:
Assuming a linear bearing pressure distribution, the average bearing pressure occurs at the centerline of the wall. Its magnitude is: avg
22
Next, the bearing pressure due to the moment about the centerline of bearing is calculated. This is done by finding the moment due to the resultant vertical force about the centerline of bearing (Point B) and dividing it by the section modulus of a horizontal section through gravity wall. The moment due to the eccentricity of the resultant force is:
MB
= (R) (e) = (7,470 lb/ft) (0.62 ft) = 4,631 ft-lb/ft = (b) (d)2 6
The section modulus of a 1-foot wide section of the wall is given by:
S
Where:
b d S
= the width of the section = 1.0 ft (0.305 m) = the depth of the section = L = 6.13 ft (1.87 m) = (1 ft/6) (L)2 = (1 ft/6) (6.13 ft)2 = 6.26 ft3 = MB S = (4,631 ft-lb/ft) (6.26 ft3) = 740 lb/ft2 =
= (0.305 m/6) (L)2 = (0.305 m/6) (1.87 m)2 = 0.177 m3
Finally, the maximum and minimum bearing pressures are calculated: avg mom
= avg + mom = (1,219 lb/sq ft) + (740 lb/sq ft) = 479 lb/sq ft = avg mom = (1,219 lb/sq ft) (740 lb/sq ft) = 1,959 lb/sq ft
= (58 kPa) + (116 kPa) = 58 kPa = 5,914 kg/m2 = (58 kPa) (116 kPa) = 174 kPa = 17,743 kg/m2
The maximum bearing pressure is greater than the allowable bearing pressure of 2,500 lb/sq ft (120 kPa). Therefore, the wall is unstable with respect to the allowable bearing capacity of the underlying soil. The procedure outlined above can be simplified by rearranging the equations as follows:
avg
mom
= R L
M = R S L
(6)M = R L L2
Note that the eccentricity can be negative as well as positive. A conservative assumption is that the maximum bearing pressure occurs at the toe of the wall. When the maximum bearing pressure is greater than the allowable bearing pressure the underlying soil is not stable. Stabilizing the soil under the wall is accomplished by spreading the forces of the wall over a larger area. Engineers use this concept in designing spread footings.
23
qf
Where:
Nq Nc N = C D
f
= = =
/2)
= Cf = Cohesion of foundation soils = di = Depth of wall embedment = Buried block + Footing thickness (di).
FSbearing
qf
max
< 2.0,
The material in the base will always be a select crushed stone. Therefore, = 36.
tan (45 /2) = 0.5 ft/W W = 0.5 ft / tan (45 36/2) W = 1.0 ft
tan (45 /2) = 0.15 m/W W = 0.15 m / tan (45 36/2) W = 0.3 m
Therefore, the incremental base size is:
di Bi
=
=
= =
=
24
Mechanical Connection
A grouted / mechanical connection may be desirable in special circumstances such as for geogrid layers under high seismic loading or when barriers are attached. The hollow cores of the Allan Block provide for a cell to encapsulate the geogrid placed between block courses. When a grouted connection is specified, a minimum of 3 inches (7.6 cm) of grout above and below the grid layers is required. Factors of safety for this connection are determined by comparing the long-term allowable design strength (LTADS) of the geogrid to the applied load at the face.
(3.1 m)
LTADS = 1322 lb/ft (19,300 N/m) Fis = Fa = 45 lb/ft (657 N/m) Fid = Fa + DFdyn + Pir = 1240 lb/ft (18,103 N/m) Geogrid Length = 5.1 ft (1.6 m) Geogrid Courses = 3, 7, 11, 15 = 130 lb/ft3 (2,061 kg/m3) w 25
Find the factors of safety for: 1. Static geogrid/block connection capacity 2. Dynamic geogrid/block connection capacity 3. Mechanical (grout) geogrid/block connection capacity 1. The static geogrid/block connection capacity factor of safety is determined by comparing the peak connection strength, which is a function of the normal load, to the applied load on each layer of geogrid.
FSconn =
Fcs (Fis)(0.667)
1.5
The peak connection strength (Fcs) is an equation of a line generated by comparing the maximum pullout force under various normal loads. The numbers in this example are based on testing done with Allan Block and Fortrac 35/20-20 geogrid. The resulting equation for Fcs is:
Fcs
= (H grid elev) ( w) (d) = (10.2 ft 9.525 ft) (130 lb/ft3) (0.97 ft)
= (3.1 m 2.9 m) (2,061 kg/m3) (0.30 m) =
85 lb/ft
(1,213 N/m)
Fcs
The applied load (Fis) is equal to the active force acting on the wall:
Fis
= Fa
= 45 lb/ft
(657 N/m)
FSconn =
=
29.9
1.5 , ok
29.9
1.5, ok
2. In a seismic condition, the applied load on each grid will increase due to the presence of the dynamic increment force (DFdyn) and the seismic inertial force (Pir).
Fcs (Fid)(0.667)
1.1
(13,122 N/m)
= 899 lb/ft
= Fa + DFdyn + Pir = 1,240 lb/ft (18,103 N/m) (899 lb/ft) (1,240 lb/ft)(0.667)
1.1 1.1, ok
Therefore:
FSconn =
=
= =
In comparing the dynamic factor of safety with the static, we see a dramatic decrease. In such circumstances, a mechanical connection is desirable.
26
3. For a mechanical connection in a seismic condition, the factor of safety for geogrid/block connection is a comparison of the long term allowable design strength of the geogrid (with no creep reduction factor taken due to the temporary nature of a seismic event) to the dynamic applied load on each grid.
FSconn
LTADS (Fid)(0.67)
= (19,300 N/m) (1.67) (18,103 N/m) (0.67)
2.6
1.1, ok
Example 2-5
Let's analyze the wall of Example 2-3 for pullout of the geogrid. Figure 2-11 shows the wall and some of the dimensions that will be needed in the calculations. Calculate the horizontal force on the bottom layer of geogrid:
P1
P2
Pavg
F1
The force on the geogrid at the back face of the wall will be approximately two-thirds of F1:
Fw
The force resisting pullout, caused by the weight of the aggregate-filled blocks above the bottom geogrid layer, is:
27
= Fr = 888 lb/ft + 0.130 (867 lb/ft) = 1,000.71 lb/ft = (1,000 lb/ft) = 2.0 (500 lb/ft)
= 12,964 N/m + 0.130 (12,847 N/m) = 14,634 N/m = (14,634 N/m) = 2.0 = (7,300 N/m)
The safety factor against pullout for the bottom layer of geogrid is:
SFP
P2 P3 Pavg F2
The force on the geogrid at the back face of the wall will be approximately two-thirds of
F2:
Fw
The force resisting pullout, caused by the weight of the aggregate filled blocks above the top geogrid layer, is:
N2 P
The safety factor against pullout for the top layer of geogrid is:
SFP
= 3.45
At a certain depth, the force holding the geogrid between the blocks will be equal to or greater than the long-term allowable design load of the geogrid. Any layer of geogrid located below this critical depth can be assumed to be safe from pullout failure. The critical depth will be different for each wall depending on the type of soil, the slope of the backfill, and the presence of surcharges, if any. The long-term allowable design load for Huesker geogrid is 1100 lb/ft (16,059 N/m). In a properly designed wall, the maximum tensile force in any layer of geogrid will be less than or equal to 1100 lb/ft (16,059 N/m). The tensile force on the geogrid at the back face of the concrete blocks is approximately two-thirds of the maximum tensile force:
Fw
The required pullout resistance for a single layer of geogrid is equal to the tensile force at the back face of the concrete blocks times a safety factor of 1.5. Therefore, the maximum required pullout resistance for any one layer of geogrid is:
Fr
= 1100 lb/ft
= 16,059 N/m
28
The following equation can be used to calculate the critical depth at which the pullout resistance equals the long-term allowable design load of geogrid:
Fr
where:
SFP Wf Wb dc
The critical depth for the wall in Example 2-3 can be determined by rearranging and solving the equation given above:
dc
F (Wf) (Wb) (SFP) = (1,100 lb/ft) (120 lb/ft3) (0.97 ft) (1.5)
(16,059 N/m) (1,923 kg/m3) (0.3 m) (1.5) (9.81)
= 6.3 ft
= 1.89 m
For the wall in Example 2-3, any geogrid layer placed 6.3 ft (1.89 m) or more below the level of the backfill need not be checked for pullout failure.
29
Chapter Three
Surcharges
Introduction
A surcharge is an external load applied to the retained soil. Typical surcharges include: sidewalks, driveways, roads, buildings, and other retaining walls. Retaining walls as surcharges will be dealt with in a separate section entitled "Tiered Walls." In this chapter, we will show how to apply the force due to surcharges to each of the three types of retaining walls -- simple gravity walls, tieback walls, and coherent gravity walls. The effect a surcharge has on a wall depends on the magnitude of the surcharge and the location of the surcharge relative to the wall. A surcharge located directly behind a wall will have a much greater effect than one located ten or twenty feet behind the wall. Generally, in good soil if the distance from the back of the wall to the surcharge is greater than the height of the wall, the effect of the surcharge will be insignificant. Keep in mind that the back of a coherent gravity wall is located at the end of the geogrid furthest from the wall facing. In order to properly determine the effects of a surcharge load, it is necessary to determine how the stress within the soil varies with vertical and horizontal distance from the surcharge. There are several theories about how to calculate the stress at some point within the soil and they range from relatively simple to extremely complex. The one that we have chosen to use is illustrated in Figure 3-1. We assume that the force due to a surcharge load on the retained soil is transmitted downward through the soil at an angle of 45 + /2 to the horizontal. ( is the friction angle of the soil.) The plane of influence can be approximated by drawing a line up from the bottom rear edge of the wall at an angle of 45 + /2 until it intersects the top of the backfill. Any surcharge located between the Figure 3-1 front of the wall and the point of intersection will have a measurable effect on the wall. Surcharges located beyond the point of intersection will have a minimal effect on the wall and will be neglected. The nature of a surcharge can be defined as a live load or a dead load. Essentially, a live load is that which is transient in its influence on the wall structure and a dead load is that which is taken as a permanent influence on the wall structure. In our calculations for stability, a conservative approach is followed that does not assume the presence of the live load weight and vertical forces. The location of the live or dead load surcharge, be it the retained soil or the infill soil affects individual forces on the wall resulting in increased or decreased stability factors of safety. For example, a coherent gravity wall with a live load surcharge on the infill soil will act to decrease FOS overstress and also decrease FOS for sliding and overturning. If the live load surcharge is acting on the retained soil, we see decreases in FOS sliding and overturning. As for a coherent gravity wall with a dead load surcharge on the infill soils, we see a decrease in FOS overstress and an increase in FOS sliding and overturning. If the dead load is on the retained soil, we see an increase in FOS sliding and overturning. Another assumption we make in analyzing a surcharge load is that the stress within the soil due to the surcharge is constant with depth. This assumption is fairly accurate for surcharges covering a large area and will result in an error on the conservative side while greatly simplifying the analysis. More exact methods of analysis are available and can be used if desired.
30
Assumptions: 1. Stress in Soil Due to Surcharge Does Not Vary with Depth. 2. Wall Friction is Neglected in this Example.
CASE 1 X = 0 Pq = (q) (Ka) Sliding Force: Fs = (Pq) (H2) COS ( w) Overturning Moment: Mq = (0.5) (H2) (Fs)
CASE 2 0 < X < L2 Pq = (q) (Ka) Sliding Force: Fs = (Pq) (H1) COS ( w) Overturning Moment: Mq = (0.5) (H1) (Fs)
Pq
Again, because of the effects of friction between the wall and the soil, the pressure due to the surcharge has both a horizontal component and a vertical component. Therefore, the next step in the analysis is to calculate the horizontal and vertical components of the pressure:
Pqh
Pqv
= = = = = = = = = = = =
(Pq) cos ( w) (26 lb/ft2) cos (20) 24 lb/ft2 (Pq) sin ( w) (26 lb/ft2) sin (20) 9 lb/ft2 (Pqh) (H) (24 lb/ft2) (3.44 ft) 83 lb/ft (Pqv) (H) (9 lb/ft2) (3.44 ft) 31 lb/ft
= (129 kg/m2) cos (20) = 121 kg/m2 = 1,189 Pa = (129 kg/m2) sin (20) = 44 kg/m2 = 433 Pa
Fqh
= (121 kg/m2) (1.05 m) = 127 kg/m = 1,246 N/m = (44 kg/m2) (1.05 m) = 46.2 kg/m = 453 N/m
Fqv
Figure 3-3 is a freebody diagram showing the active forces on the wall. Now that the force and pressure distribution due to the surcharge are known, the wall can be analyzed as described in Chapter Two. (The rest of the forces have already been calculated in Example 2-1.) For a simple gravity wall, the horizontal force due to the surcharge is a force that tends to cause both sliding and overturning. Therefore, it must be added to those forces when the safety factors are calculated.
31
SFS
= Fr + (Fqv) (Cf) Fh + Fqh = (281 lb/ft) + (31 lb/ft) tan (30) = 1.29 (147 lb/ft) + (83 lb/ft)
= (4,130 N/m) + (453 N/m) tan (30) = 1.29 (2,157 N/m) + (1,246 N/m)
(NOTE: Fr and Fh were calculated in Example 2-1). The safety factor against overturning is: Figure 3-3. Freebody Diagram of a Simple Gravity Wall with Surcharge
Mr
= (Wf) [ (X1) + (0.5) (H) tan (90 ) ] + (Fv) [ (X2) + (0.333) (H) tan (90 ) ]
+ (Fqv) [ (X2) + (0.5) (H) tan (90 ) ] = (434 lb/ft) [ (0.49 ft) + (0.5) (3.44 ft) tan (90 78) ] + (53 lb/ft) [ (0.97 ft) + (0.333) (3.44 ft) tan (90 78) ] + (31 lb/ft) [ (0.97 ft) + (0.5) (3.44 ft) tan (90 78) ] = 477 ft-lb/ft
= + + = (6,369 N/m) [ (0.149 m) + (0.5) (1.05 m) tan (90 78) ] (785 N/m) [ (0.3 m) + (0.333) (1.05 m) tan (90 78) ] (453 N/m) [ (0.3 m) + (0.5) (1.05 m) tan (90 78) ] 2,140 N-m/m
Mo = (Fh) (0.333) (H) + (Fqh) (0.5) (H) = (147 lb/ft) (0.333) (3.44 ft) + (83 lb/ft) (0.5) (3.44 ft) = 311 ft-lb/ft
= (2,157 N/m) (0.333) (1.05 m) + (1,246 N/m) (0.5) (1.05 m) = 1,408 N-m/m
SFO
= 1.53
= 1.53
Notice that, with the surcharge on the backfill, the safety factors are much lower than the recommended minimum values of 1.5 for sliding and 2.0 for overturning. This illustrates that a surcharge can make the difference between a stable wall and an unstable one.
32
Fg
where:
= (2) (Ci) [ (dg) ( ) (Le) + (q) (Lq) ] tan ( ) = the surcharge, in lb/ft2 (Pa) = the length of the geogrid in the passive zone that is underneath the surcharge. = (2) (0.85) [ (2.30 ft) (120 lb/ft3) (3.12 ft) + (120 lb/ft2) (2.62 ft) ] tan (30) = 1,154 lb/ft
= (2) (0.85) [ (0.70 m) (1,923 kg/m3) (0.95 m) + (586 kg/m2) (0.80 m) ] tan (30) = 16,827 N/m
q Lq Fg
This is the maximum potential restraining force that can be developed by the geogrid due to the weight of the soil and the surcharge. The actual restraining force will vary to balance the force on the wall due to the weight of the soil and the surcharge force. If the actual force is less than both the maximum potential restraining force and the long-term allowable design load (including safety factor), then the design is acceptable. Since the maximum potential restraining force is over twice the long-term allowable design load (LTADL) of the geogrid selected, check to see if a restraining force equal to the LTADL will provide acceptable factors of safety. If so, the design is adequate. For this example, let Fg = 833 lb/ft (12,161 N/m), the LTADL of the selected geogrid, and calculate the factors of safety. The first step is to calculate the magnitude of the pressure on the wall due to the surcharge:
Pq
= (q) (Ka) = (120 lb/ft2) (0.2197) = 26 lb/ft2 = = = = = = (Pq) cos ( w) (26 lb/ft2) cos (20) 24 lb/ft2 (P) sin ( w) (26 lb/ft2) sin (20) 9 lb/ft2
Next, calculate the horizontal and vertical components of the pressure on the wall due to the surcharge:
Pqh
= (1,150 Pa) cos (20) = 1,081 Pa = (1,245 Pa) sin (20) = 426 Pa
Pqv
33
Fqh
Fqv
SFS
= Fr + Fg + (Fqv) (Cf) Fh + Fqh = (445 lb/ft) + (833 lb/ft) + (21 lb/ft) tan (30 ) = 3.34 (330 lb/ft) + (56 lb/ft)
= (6,507 N/m) + (12,161 N/m) + (302 N/m) tan (30) = 3.34 (4,800 N/m) + (768 N/m)
Mr
= (Wf) [ (X1) + (0.5) (H) tan (90 ) ] + (Fv) [(X2 + (0.333) (H) tan (90 )] + (Fqv) [ (X2) + (0. 5) (Hq) tan (90 ) ] + (Fg) (H dg) = + + +
= + + +
[ (0.49 ft) + (0.5) (5.16 ft) tan (90 78) ] [ (0.97 ft) + (0.333) (5.16 ft) tan (90 78) ] (0.97 ft) + (0.5) (2.33 ft) tan (90 78) ] (5.16 ft 2.30 ft) = 3,244 ft-lb/ft
(9,523 N/m) [ (0.149 m) + (0.5) (1.57 m) tan (90 78) ] (1,747 N/m) [ (0.296 m) + (0.333) (1.57 m) tan (90 78) ] (302 N/m) [ (0.296 m) + (0.5) (0.71 m) tan (90 78) ] (12,161 N/m) (1.57 m 0.701 m) = 14,399 N-m/m
Mo = (Fh) (0.333) (H) + (Fqh) (Hq) = (330 lb/ft) (0.333) (5.16 ft) + (56 lb/ft) (0.5) (2.33 ft) = 632 ft-lb/ft
= (4,800 N/m) (0.333) (1.57 m) + (768 N/m) (0.5) (0.71 m) = 2,782 N-m/m
SFO
=
=
Since SFS > 1.5 and SFO > 2.0, the stability of this retaining wall is acceptable. Note that in some cases the surcharge actually increases the stability of the wall. Therefore, it is important to check the stability of the wall without the surcharge if it is possible that the surcharge may be removed. Also check the stability without the surcharge if it is a live-load surcharge, such as a parking lot or driveway.
34
External Stability
The effect of a surcharge on the external stability of a coherent gravity retaining wall is nearly identical to the effect on a simple gravity wall and depends on the location of the surcharge. Recall that the back of a coherent gravity wall is located at the end of the geogrid farthest from the wall facing. Figure 3-5 shows three possible locations of a surcharge. The surcharge in Location A contributes to the forces resisting both sliding and overturning. Surcharges at location B contribute to the forces causing sliding and overturning. In Location C, the surcharge contributes partly to the forces causing sliding and partly to the forces resisting sliding. In the same manner, it also contributes both to the forces causing overturning and the forces resisting overturning.
Figure 3-5. Locations of Surcharge on Coherent Gravity Walls Example 3-3: Consider the coherent gravity wall analyzed in Example 2-3, but with a three-foot-wide surcharge of 120 lb/ft2 (5,748 Pa) on the backfill. Analyze the external stability of the wall with the surcharge in the three locations shown in Figure 3-5. Location A: The surcharge can be resolved into an equivalent vertical force, Q, of 360 lb/ft (5,256 N/m) that is located 2.5 ft (0.762 m) from the front face of the wall and acts at the center of the uniform surcharge. This force can be added to the forces resisting sliding when calculating Fr:
Fr
= (Ww + Fv + Q) (Cf) = [ (7,071 lb/ft) + (399 lb/ft) + (360 lb/ft) ] tan (30 ) = 4,521 lb/ft
= [ (103,539 N/m) + (5,825 N/m) + (5,256 N/m) ] tan (30) = 66,176 N/m
35
SFS
= 3.68
Q can also be added to the moments of the forces resisting overturning: Mr = (Ww) [ (X1) + (0.5) (H) tan (90 )] + (Fv) [ (X2) + (0.333) (H) tan (90 ) ] + (Q) [ (X3) + (H) tan (90 ) ] = + + =
= + + =
(7,071 lb/ft) [ (3.0 ft) + (0.5) (9.17 ft) tan (90 78) ] (399 lb/ft) [ (6. 13 ft) + (0. 333) (9.17 ft) tan (90 78) ] (360 lb/ft) [ (2.5 ft) + (9.17 ft) tan (90 78) ] 32,411 ft-lb/ft
(103,539 N/m) [ (0.91 m) + (0.5) (2.8 m) tan (90 78) ] (5,852 N/m) [ (1.87 m) + (0. 333) (2.8 m) tan (90 78) ] (5,256 N/m) [ (0.762 m) + (2.8 m) tan (90 78) ] 144,212 N-m/m
Mo = (Fh) (0.333) (H) = (1,229 lb/ft) (0.333) (9.17 ft) = 3,753 ft-lb/ft
= (18,011 N/m) (0.333) (2.8 m) = 16,793 N-m/m
The new safety factor against overturning is:
SFO
Mr = Mo
Thus, the effect of a surcharge in Location A is to make the wall slightly more stable with respect to sliding and overturning. However, such a surcharge can have a detrimental effect on the internal stability of the wall. Also, the added force due to the surcharge must be taken into account when calculating the bearing pressure on the underlying soil. Location B: A surcharge in this location has the same effect on the external stability of a coherent gravity wall as on a simple gravity wall. In this case, the surcharge results in a horizontal force with its point of application located at H/2 on the back of the reinforced soil mass. The magnitude of the force is:
Fq
= (q) (Kao) (H) = (120 lb/ft2) (0.2561) (9.17 ft) = 282 lb/ft
= (5,748 Pa) (0.2561) (2.8 m) = 4,122 N/m
The horizontal and vertical components of the force on the reinforced soil mass due to the surcharge are:
Fqh
Fqv
Notice that the pressure coefficient for the onsite soil is used. This is because the surcharge is located entirely outside the reinforced soil zone and the surcharge force is transmitted through the onsite soil. For Location B, the safety factors against sliding and overturning are:
36
SFS
= Fr + (Fqv) (Cf) Fh + Fqh = (4,313 lb/ft) + (87 lb/ft) tan (27) = 2.91 (1,229 lb/ft) + (268 lb/ft)
= (63,157 N/m) + (1,274 N/m) tan (27) = 2.91 (18,011 N/m) + (3,920 N/m)
SFO
Mr + (Fqv) [ (X2) + (0.5) (H) tan (90 ) ] Mo + (Fqh) (0.5) (H) = (31,155 ft-lb/ft) + (87 lb/ft) [ (6.13 ft) + (0.5) (9.17 ft) tan (90 78) ] (3,753 ft-lb/ft) + (268 lb/ft) (0.5) (9.17 ft) = 6.38
= (139,375 N/m) + (1,274 N/m) [ (1.87 m) + (0.5) (2.8 m) tan (90 78) ] (16,793 N-m/m) + (3,920 N/m) (0.5) (2.8 m) = 6.38
Location C: With the surcharge at Location C, half of the surcharge is over the reinforced soil zone and half is not. Therefore, the effects on the coherent gravity wall are a combination of the effects of a surcharge at Location A and a surcharge at Location B. The part of the surcharge over the geogrid will contribute to the stability of the wall with respect to sliding and overturning. The horizontal and vertical components of the force on the reinforced soil mass due to the surcharge are:
Fq
= (q) (H) (Kao) = (120 lb/ft2) (9.17 ft) (0.2561) = 282 lb/ft
= (5,748 Pa) (2.8 m) (0.2561) = 4,122 N/m
Fqh
Fqv
Fr
= [Ww + Fv + 0.5 (Q) + Fqv] (Cf) = [ (7,071 lb/ft) + (399 lb/ft) + (180 lb/ft) + (87 lb/ft) ] tan (30 ) = 4,467 lb/ft
= [ (103,539 N/m) + (5,852 N/m) + (2,628 N/m) + (1,274 N/m) ] tan (30) = 65,410 N/m
Fs
37
SFS
Mr
= (Ww) [ (X1) + (0.5) (H) tan (90 ) ] + (Fv) [ (X2) + (0.333) (H) tan (90 ) ] + (Fqv) [ (X2) + (0.5) (H) tan (90 ) ] + (0.5) (Q) [ (X3) + (H) tan (90 ) ] = (7,071 lb/ft) [ (3.0 ft) + (0.5) (9.17 ft) tan (90 78) ] + (399 lb/ft) [ (6.13 ft) + (0.333) (9.17 ft) tan (90 78) ] + (87 lb/ft) [ (6.13 ft) + (0.5) (9.17 ft) tan (90 78) ] + (0.5) (360 lb/ft) [ (5.25 ft) + (9.17 ft) tan (90 78) ] = 32,723 ft-lb/ft
= + + + = (103,539 N/m) [ (0.91 m) + (0.5) (2.8 m) tan (90 78) ] (5,852 N/m) [ (1.87 m) + (0.333) (2.8 m) tan (90 78) ] (1,274 N/m) [ (1.87 m) + (0.5) (2.8 m) tan (90 78) ] (0.5) (5,256 N/m) [ (1.6 m) + (2.8 m) tan (90 78) ] 145,609 N-m/m
Mo = (Fh) (0.333) (H) + (Fqh) (0.5) (H) = (1,229 lb/ft) (0.333) (9.17 ft) + (268 lb/ft) (0.5) (9.17 ft) = 4, 982 ft-lb/ft
= (18,011 N/m) (0.333) (2.8 m) + (3,920 N/m) (0.5) (2.8 m) = 22,281 N-m/m
The safety factor against overturning is:
SFO
38
Internal Stability
In addition to its effects on sliding and overturning failure, a surcharge can also have an impact on the spacing of the geogrid layers. It does so by putting an additional load on some or all of the layers of geogrid. The first step in analyzing the effects of a surcharge on internal stability is to determine the horizontal soil stress within the reinforced soil zone. Once again, we will use the wall of Example 2-3 with a surcharge of 120 lb/sq ft (5,747 Pa), located as shown in Figure 36. The surcharge is 2 ft (0.61 m) wide. Notice the diagonal lines connected to the beginning and end of the surcharge pressure diagram. These lines are drawn at an angle of 45 + /2 to the horizontal and mark the limits of the zone of influence of the surcharge within the soil. The horizontal stress due to the surcharge will act only on the portion of the retaining wall located in the area labeled ZONE OF INFLUENCE. The magnitude of the horizontal surcharge stress is:
Pqh
= (q) (Kar) cos ( wr) = (120 lb/ft2) (0.2197) cos (20) = 25 lb/ft2
= (5,747 Pa) (0.2197) cos (20) = 1,186 Pa
Figure 3-7 shows the wall facing with the two pressure distributions that affect it - one due to the soil weight and one due to the surcharge. The rectangular pressure distribution represents the effect of the surcharge on the wall facing. The addition of the surcharge stress makes calculating the grid spacing more complicated. Instead of solving a linear equation to find the maximum allowable distance between two layers, the designer must either solve a quadratic equation or use a trial and error method. The quadratic equation is:
0
where:
= [ ( r) (Kar) cos ( wr) ] (dh)2 + ( 2) [ (d1) ( r) (Kar) cos ( wr) + (q) (Kar) cos ( wr) ] (dh) + 2 (Fga) = depth from the top of the wall to the bottom of the area reinforced by this layer of geogrid
= the long-term allowable design strength of the geogrid.
Fga
= ax2 + bx + c x = dh, let: b = ( 2) [ (d1) (a) + (q) (z) ] c = (2) (Fga) 39 z = (Kar) cos ( wr) a = ( r) (z)
Example 3-4: Given the wall depicted in Figure 3-6, and using the data of Example 2-3, determine the geogrid spacing for the wall. Use the quadratic formula to determine dh for the first layer of geogrid:
= (2) [ (d1) ( r) (Kar) cos ( wr) + (q) (Kar) cos ( wr) ] = (2) [ (9.17 ft) (125 lb/ft3) (0.2197) cos (20 ) + (120 lb/ft2) (0.2197) cos (20 ) ] = 523 lb/ft2
= (2) [ (2.8 m) (2,002 kg/m3) (0.2197) cos (20 ) + (586 kg/m2) (0.2197) cos (20 ) ] = 2,557 kg/m2 = 25.07 kPa
dh
b2 4ac 2a (523 lb/ft2)2 (4) (26 lb/ft3) (1,666 lb/ft) = (523 lb/ft2) (2) (26 lb/sq ft3) = 16.15 or 3.97
= (2,557 kg/m) = 5.0 or 1.2 (2,557 kg/m2)2 (4) (413 kg/m3) (2,479 kg/m) (2) (413 kg/m3)
= b
Since the wall is only 9.17 ft (2.8 m) tall, the first root, 16.15 (4.9 m), cannot be valid. Therefore,
dh d2
The first layer of geogrid should be placed at a height equal to one half of dh:
hg
However, for Allan Block standard units, the geogrid can only be placed at heights that are even multiples of 7.62 inches (19.4 cm). In this case, the geogrid should be placed 3 blocks up, at a height of 1.905 ft (0.58 m). The next step in the analysis is to determine if more than one additional layer of geogrid is required. This is done by calculating the total horizontal force on the wall above height d2 and comparing it to the allowable design strength of the geogrid. The horizontal component of the active force above d2 is:
Fh
= (0.5) ( r) (Kar) (d2)2 cos ( wr) = (0.5) (125 lb/ft3) (0.2197) (5.2 ft)2 cos (20) = 349 lb/ft
= (0.5) (2,002 kg/m3) (0.2197) (1.6 m)2 cos (20) = 5,190 N/m
40
The horizontal component of the surcharge force is calculated based on the height from d2 to the top of the zone of influence depicted in Figure 3-7:
Qh
= (q) (Kar) (d2 hz) cos ( wr) = (120 lb/sq ft) (0.2197) (5.2 ft 1.905 ft) cos (20) = 82 lb/ft
= (5,748 Pa) (0.2197) (1.6 m 0.58 m) cos (20) = 1,210 N/m
next layer of geogrid.) The geogrid should be placed at a height equal to:
= Fh + Q h = (349 lb/ft) + (82 lb/ft) = 431 lb/ft = (5,190 N/m) + (1,210 N/m) = 6,400 N/m Since the total horizontal force above height d2 is less than the allowable design strength of the geogrid, 833 lb/ft (12,161 N/m), then only one more layer of geogrid is required. In that case, the new dh is equal to the height of the wall above d2 (If more than one layer is required, set d1 = d2 and use the quadratic formula to determine dh for the Ft hg = (H d2) + (0.5) dh = (9.17 ft 5.2 ft) + (0.5) (5.2 ft) = 6.57 ft
= (2.8 m 1.6 m) + (0.5) (1.6 m) = 2 m
Rounding down to the nearest 7.62 inches (19.4 cm):
Another way to tell that you are working on the last layer of geogrid is to go ahead and do the analysis using 4ac], you are working on the the quadratic formula. If you calculate a negative number for the quantity [b2 last layer of geogrid. To check the number of layers of geogrid required, calculate the total horizontal force on the wall facing and divide it by the allowable design strength of the geogrid. The horizontal component of the active force on the wall facing is:
Fh
= (0.5) (125 lb/ft3) (0.2197) (9.17 ft)2 cos (20 ) = 1,085 lb/ft
= (0.5) (2,002 kg/m3) (0.2197) (2.8 m)2 cos (20) = 15,894 N/m
The horizontal component of the surcharge force on the wall facing is:
Qh
= (120 lb/sq ft) (0.2197) (9.17 ft 1.905 ft) cos (20) = 180 lb/ft
= (5,748 Pa) (0.2197) (2.8 m 0.58 m) cos (20) = 2,634 N/m
Ft
41
Tiered Walls
Sometimes it is desirable to build two or more smaller walls at different elevations rather than one very tall wall. Such an arrangement is called a tiered wall and an example is pictured in Figure 3-8. The analysis of tiered walls can become very complicated. We have decided upon a design method that we feel comfortable with and will briefly describe it below. However, you as an engineer must use your own judgement. If you are not comfortable with this design method, use your best engineering judgement or seek advice from a local expert. You should also be aware that, as the number and walls increase, the threat of global instability increases also. A tiered wall consisting of three 5 ft (1.52 m) walls can have as great an impact on the underlying soil as a single 15 ft (4.6 m) wall. Again, if you are concerned about the global stability, you should do a global stability analysis or have someone do one for you. The first step in the design of a tiered wall is to decide how many tiers there will be and the height of each tier. Then, using the design procedures presented earlier, design the top retaining wall. Next, find the average bearing stress of the top wall on the underlying soil. This average bearing stress is then applied as a uniform surcharge to the retained soil mass of the second wall from the top. (See Figure 3-9.) The second wall is then analyzed using the procedures described earlier in this chapter. The process is repeated until all of the tiers have been analyzed. As a final step, check the maximum soil bearing pressure of the bottom wall to make sure it doesn't exceed the allowable bearing pressure of the onsite soil.
Figure 3-9. Average Bearing Stress of Top Wall Applied as Surcharge to Second Wall
42
CHAPTER FOUR
Sloped Backfill
Introduction
Sometimes it is not feasible or desirable to build a retaining wall that is tall enough to allow for a flat backfill. In that case, the backfill must be sloped. Sloped backfill is one of the most significant factors contributing to the active force on the wall. The slope of the backfill must be taken into account when designing a geogrid-reinforced retaining wall. Also, it should be noted that the slope of the backfill cannot exceed the friction angle of the soil. (This is not true if the cohesion of the soil is taken into account. However, the design procedures in this manual are based on the assumption that only noncohesive soils will be used as backfill.)
i)
Let's look at the wall in Example 2-1 and see what effect changing the backfill slope has on the active force. Example 4-1: Given: w
= 20 = 30 = 78
H = 3.44 ft (1.05 m) = 120 lb/ft3 (1,923 kg/m3) Unit weight of wall facing = 130 lb/ft3 (2,061 kg/m3) i (degrees) 0 18 26 0.2197 0.2847 0.3662 Ka Fa 1 lb/ft (1 N/m) 156 (2,277) 202 (2,949) 260 (3,796)
The table below shows the effect increasing the backfill slope has on the active pressure coefficient and the active force.
Changing the slope of the backfill from 0 to 26 increased the active force by 67%. The wall in Example 2-1 would not be stable if the back-fill had a slope of 26. For simple gravity walls, the effect of the sloping backfill is automatically taken into account by using Coulomb's equation to calculate the active force.
43
i
w
= 18 = 20 = 30 = 78
Ka dg Hg
H Lg
Fg
where: davg = (0.5) (d1 + d2) d1 = depth from surface of backfill to the geogrid at the point where the failure plane intersects the geogrid d2 = depth from surface of backfill to the geogrid at the back end of the geogrid layer. Assuming that the backfill slope begins at the front of the wall facing, then L1 is given by: L1 = 0.97 ft + Xa Xh = (0.97 ft) + (Hg) tan (45 /2) (H) tan (90 ) = (0.97 ft) + (2.86 ft) tan (45 15) (5.16 ft) tan (90 78) = 1.52 ft
= 0.3 m + Xa Xh = (0.3 m) + (Hg) tan (45
Once
= (0.3 m) + (0.87 m) tan (45 15) (1.57 m) tan (90 78) = 0.47 m
L1 is known, d2 can be calculated: = dg + (L1) tan (i) = (2.3 ft) + (1.52 ft) tan (18) = 2.79 ft
= (0.7 m) + (0.46 m) tan (18) = 0.85 m
d1
L2 is given by: L2 = Lg (dg) tan (90 ) = (5.0 ft) (2.3 ft ) tan (90 78) = 4.51 ft
= (1.52 m) (0.7 m) tan (90 78) = 1.37 m
44
Once
L2 is known, d2 can be calculated: = dg + (L2) tan (i) = (2.3 ft) + (4.51 ft) tan (18) = 3.77 ft
= (0.7 m) + (1.37 m) tan (18) = 1.15 m
d2
The length of geogrid embedded in the passive zone of the soil is:
Le
Now, davg can be calculated and the maximum potential restraining force on the geogrid can be determined:
davg
Fg
= (2) (0.85) (120 lb/ft3) (3.26 ft) (3.12 ft) tan (30 ) = 1,198 lb/ft
= (2) (0.85) (1,923 kg/m3) (0.99 m) (0.9 m) tan (30) = 16,497 N/m
The maximum potential restraining force on the geogrid for a flat back fill was 845 lb/ft (12,336 N/m). Increasing the slope of the backfill from 0 to 18 increased the magnitude of Fg by 42%. However, as pointed out in Chapter Two, the long-term allowable design strength of AB-260 geogrid is 833 lb/ft (12,161 N/m). Therefore, Fg should be set equal to 833 lb/ft (12,161 N/m) before calculating the safety factors for sliding and overturning. If the safety factors are too low, add one or more layers of geogrid and analyze the wall as a coherent gravity wall. Let's complete the example and see what effect the sloping backfill has on the safety factors. First, the active force on the wall must be calculated using the new active pressure coefficient:
Fa
Fh Fv
Fr
SFS
45
Mr
= (Wf) [ (X1) + (0.5) (H) tan (90 ) ] + (Fv) [ (X2) + (0.333) (H) tan (90 ) ] + (Fg) (Hg) = (651 lb/ft) [ (0.49 ft) + (0.5) (5.16) tan (90 78) ] + (156 lb/ft) [ (0.97 ft) + (0.333) (5.16 ft) tan (90 78) ] + (833 lb/ft) (2.86 ft) = 3,267 ft-lb/ft
= + + = (9,523 N/m) [ (0.15 m) + (0.5) (1.57 m) tan (90 78) ] (2,264 N/m) [ (0.3 m) + (0.333) (1.57 m) tan (90 78) ] (12,161 N/m) (0.87 m) 14,528 N-m/m
Mo
= (Fh) (0.333) (H) = (428 lb/ft) (0.333) (5.16 ft) = 735 ft-lb/ft
= (6,220 N/m) (0.333) (1.57 m) = 3,252 N-m/m
SFO
With the backfill sloped at 18, the wall is still stable although the safety factors have been reduced by about 20%.
46
Wr
= (130 lb/ft3) (9.17 ft) (0.97 ft) + (125 lb/ft3) (9.17 ft) (6.0 ft 0.84 ft) = 7,071 lb/ft
= (2,061 kg/m3) (2.8 m) (0.3 m) + (2,002 kg/m3) (2.8 m) (1.83 m 0.26 m) = 103,319 N/m
Wt
= (0.5) (6.0 ft) [ (6.0 ft) tan (18) ] (125 lb/ft3) = 731 lb/ft
= (0.5) (1.83 m) [ (1.83 m) tan (18) ] (2,002 kg/m3) = 10,685 N/m
Ww
External Stability
The external stability of the wall can be calculated as it was in Example 2-3, with three differences. First, the weight of the wall is greater, as shown above. Second, the height of the retaining wall is taken to be the height at the back of the reinforced soil mass, He. Third, the active force on the retained soil mass is greater because of the sloping backfill. The increase in the active force is automatically accounted for by using Coulomb's equation to calculate the active force. Calculate the safety factors for sliding and overturning of the wall in Figure 4-2. Compare these values to the safety factors in Example 2-3. Example 4-3: Given:
i
wo wr o
= = = =
18 18 20 27 '
Kao Kar
= = = =
30 78 0.3440 0.2847
H
o r
= 9.17 ft (2.8 m) 3 = 120 lb/ft (1,923 kg/m3) = 125 lb/ft3 (2,002 kg/m3)
He
= (H) + (Lg) tan (i) = (9.17 ft) + (6.0 ft) tan (18 ) = 11.12 ft
= (2.8 m) + (1.83 m) tan (18) = 3.39 m
47
Fa
= (0.5) ( o) (Kao) (He)2 = (0.5) (120 lb/ft3) (0.3440) (11.12 ft)2 = 2,552 lb/ft
= (0.5) (1,923 kg/m3) (0.3440) (3.39 m)2 = 37,289 N/m
Fh
Fv
Fr
= (Ww + Fv) (Cf) = (7,802 lb/ft + 789 lb/ft) tan (30 ) = 4,960 lb/ft
= (114,004 N/m + 11,523 N/m) tan (30) = 72,473 N/m
SFS
= 2.04
Mr
= (Wf) [ (X1) + (0.5) (H) tan (90 ) ] + (Wr) [ (X2) + (0.5) (H) tan (90 ) ] + (Wt) [ (X3) + (H) tan (90 ) ] + (Fv) [ (X4) + (0.333) (He) tan (90 ) ] = + + + =
= + + + =
(1,156 lb/ft) [ (0.49 ft) (7,071 lb/ft) [ (3.55 ft) (731 lb/ft) [ (4.08 ft) + (789 lb/ft) [ (6.13 ft) + 43,551 ft-lb/ft
+ (0.5) (9.17 ft) tan (90 78) ] + (0.5) (9.17 ft) tan (90 78) ] (9.17 ft) tan (90 78) ] (0.333) (11.12 ft) tan (90 78) ]
(16,983 N/m) [ (0.149 m) + (0.5) (2.8 m) tan (90 78) ] (103,319 N/m) [ (1.08 m) + (0.5) (2.8 m) tan (90 78) ] (10,685 N/m) [ (1.24 m) + (2.8 m) tan (90 78) ] (11,523 N/m) [ (1.87 m) + (0.333) (3.39 m) tan (90 78) ] 193,836 N-m/m
Mo
= (Fh) (0.333) (He) = (2,427 lb/ft) (0.333) (11.12 ft) = 8,987 ft-lb/ft
= (35,464 N/m) (0.333) (3.39 m) = 40,034 N-m/m
SFO
=
=
48
As calculated in Example 2-3, the same wall with a flat backfill had a safety factor against sliding of 3.5 and a safety factor against overturning of 8.3. Sloping the backfill cut the safety factors by 42% for sliding and 48% for overturning.
Internal Stability
Studies have shown that the failure plane for the soil inside the reinforced soil mass is not well represented by a straight line at an angle of 45 + /2 to the horizontal. Instead, the failure surface looks more like the one depicted in Figure 4-3. It begins at the bottom rear edge of the wall facing and extends upward at an angle of 45 + /2 to the horizontal. The failure surface continues upward at that angle until it intersects a vertical line located behind the wall facing a distance equal to one-third the height of the wall. When analyzing the loads on the individual layers of geogrid, the depth should be measured from the point where the failure plane intersects the geogrid layer to the top of the backfill. However, to simplify the analysis, the depth can be measured from the point where the vertical portion of the assumed failure surface intersects the top of the back- fill. That point is shown as Point A in Figure 4-3. Doing so will result in a slightly conservative design. Let's examine the effect of sloping backfill on the bottom layer of geogrid in the wall shown in Figure 4-4. The load on a layer of geogrid is given by:
= (Pavg) (dh)
Suppose the wall in Figure 4-4 had a flat backfill, the load on the bottom layer of geogrid would be:
F1
= (Pavg) (dh) = (0.5) (P1 + P2) (d1 d2) = (0.5) [ ( r) (Kar) (d1) cos ( wr) + ( r) (Kar) (d2) cos ( wr) ] (d1 d2) = (0.5) [ (125 lb/ft3) (0.2197) (9.17 ft) cos (20) + (125 lb/ft3) (0.2197) (4.42 ft) cos (20) ] (9.17 ft 4.42 ft) = 833 lb/ft
= (0.5) [ (2002 kg/m3) (0.2197) (2.8 m) cos (20) + (2,002 kg/m3) (0.2197) (1.35 m) cos (20) ] (2.8 m 1.35 m) = 12,199 N/m
49
Kar = 0.3662 and the load on the bottom layer of geogrid is:
F1
= (Pavg) (dh) = (0.5) (P3 + P4) (d3 d4) = (0.5) [ ( r) (Kar) (d3) cos ( wr) + ( r) (Kar) (d4) cos ( wr) ] (d3 d4) = (0.5) [ (125 lb/ft3) (0.3662) (10.85 ft) cos (20 ) + (125 lb/ft3) (0.3662) (6.1 ft) cos (20 ) ] (10.85 ft 6.1 ft) = 1,732 lb/ft
= (0.5) [ (2,002 kg/m3) (0.3662) (3.31 m) cos (20) + (2,002 kg/m3) (0.3662) (1.86 m) cos (20) ] (3.31 m 1.86 m) = 25,332 N/m
Increasing the slope of the backfill from 0 to 26 increased the load on the bottom layer of geogrid by more than 100%. Since the allowable design load on Huesker 35/20-20 is only 833 lb/ft (12,161 N/m), the load on the bottom layer of geogrid will have to be reduced. This can be done by adding another layer of geogrid between the existing layers and moving the top layer up. In some cases, it may be possible to reduce the load on the individual layers of geogrid merely by repositioning the layers of geogrid. When designing a wall with a sloping backfill, start from the bottom of the wall and calculate the maximum dh as in Example 2-3. But this time, use the depth from Point A rather than the depth from the top of the wall facing.
GEOGRID REINFORCEMENT PRODUCT MIRIFI 3XT MIRIFI 5XT MIRIFI 7XT FORTRAC 35/20-20 FORTRAC 55/20-20 FORTRAC 80/30-20 SYNTEEN (SYMPAFORCE) 35/30-25 SYNTEEN (SYMPAFORCE) 55/30-25 SYNTEEN (SYMPAFORCE) 80/30-20 RAUGRID (LUCKENHAUS) 2/3-30 RAUGRID (LUCKENHAUS) 4/2-15 RAUGRID (LUCKENHAUS) 6/3-15 TERRAGRID (WEBTEC) 35 X 30-25 TERRAGRID (WEBTEC) 55 X 30-25 TERRAGRID (WEBTEC) 80/30-20 STRATTA 300 STRATTA 500
P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
PULLOUT RESISTANCE EQUATIONS 551 lb/ft (8.04 kN/m) + 0.554 x N 988 lb/ft (14.41 kN/m) + 0.141 x N 933 lb/ft (13.61 kN/m) + 0.287 x N 1091 lb/ft (15.92 kN/m) + 0.325 x N 888 lb/ft (12.96 kN/m) + 0.130 x N 431 lb/ft (6.29 kN/m) + 0.601 x N 1214 lb/ft (17.71 kN/m) + 0.450 x N 496 lb/ft (7.24 kN/m) + 0.625 x N 1054 lb/ft (15.38 kN/m) + 0.105 x N 395 lb/ft (5.76 kN/m) + 0.625 x N 777 lb/ft (11.34 kN/m) + 0.231 x N 989 lb/ft (14.43 kN/m) + 0.488 x N 340 lb/ft (4.96 kN/m) + 0.445 x N 830 lb/ft (12.11 kN/m) + 0.554 x N 1709 lb/ft (24.93 kN/m) + 0.194 x N 496 lb/ft (7.24 kN/m) + 0.625 x N 1054 lb/ft (15.38 kN/m) + 0.105 x N 395 lb/ft (5.76 kN/m) + 0.625 x N 777 lb/ft (11.34 kN/m) + 0.231 x N 989 lb/ft (14.43 kN/m) + 0.488 x N 827 lb/ft (12.07 kN/m) + 0.463 x N 1500 lb/ft (21.89 kN/m) + 0.241 x N
for N < 1073.70 lbs for N > 1073.70 lbs for N < 969.54 lbs for N > 969.54 lbs
for N < 1073.70 lbs for N > 1073.70 lbs for N < 969.54 lbs for N > 969.54 lbs
50
CHAPTER FIVE
Seismic Analysis
Introduction
In seismic design we take a dynamic force and analyze it as a temporary static load. The forces from seismic activity yield both a vertical and a horizontal acceleration. For our calculations, the vertical acceleration is assumed to be zero (Bathurst, 1998, NCMA Segmental Retaining Walls - Seismic Design Manual, 1998). Due to the temporary nature of the loading, the minimum recommended factors of safety for design in seismic conditions are 75% of the values recommended for static design. The lack of wall failure during the Northridge earthquake in Los Angeles, California and the Kobe earthquake in Japan proves that a soil mass reinforced with geogrid, which is flexible in nature, performs better than rigid structures in real life seismic situations (Sandri, Dean, 1994, "Retaining Walls Stand Up to the Northridge Earthquake"). The following design uses the earth pressure coefficient method derived by Mononobe-Okabe (M-O) to quantify the loads placed on the reinforced mass and the internal components of the structure. Since the nature of segmental retaining walls is flexible, an allowable deflection can be accepted resulting in a more efficient design while remaining within accepted factors of safety.
PRESSURE COEFFICIENTS
The calculation of the dynamic earth pressure coefficient is similar to the static earth pressure coefficient derived by Coulomb, with the addition by Mononobe-Okabe of a seismic inertia angle ( ).
Kae
[ [
1+
cos (
)2
+ )
sin (
i )
cos ( w
+ ) cos (
+ i)
] ]
Where:
= peak soil friction angle i = back slope angle = block setback = seismic inertia angle = angle between the horizontal and the sloped back face of the wall
The seismic inertia angle ( ) is a function of the vertical and horizontal acceleration coefficients:
= atan
Where:
Kh 1 + Kv
Kv Kh
51
The vertical acceleration coefficient (Kv) is taken to be zero based on the assumption that a vertical and horizontal peak acceleration will not occur simultaneously during a seismic event (Bathhurst et al.). The horizontal acceleration coefficient (Kh) is based on the acceleration coefficient (Ao) and the allowable deflection (d) of the wall system. (See equations below) The acceleration coefficient (Ao) varies from 0 to 0.4 in our calculations and is defined as the fraction of the gravitational constant g experienced during a seismic event. AASHTO provides recommendations for the acceleration coefficient based on the seismic zone that the retaining wall is being designed for. The allowable deflection (d) represents the lateral deflection that the retaining wall can be designed to withstand during a seismic event. The amount of deflection allowed in design is based on engineering judgement. A good approximation is the acceleration coefficient (Ao) multiplied by the wall height (H). The equation used to determine the horizontal acceleration coefficient (Kh) varies depending on the amount of deflection allowed and whether it is calculated for the infill soils or the retained soils. For Infill soils:
If
d = 0, then:
Kh = (1.45 Ao) Ao
This equation, proposed by Segrestin and Bastic, is used in AASHTO / FHWA guidelines. It is assumed to be constant at all locations in the wall.
If
d > 0, then:
( (
0.25
0.25
This is a standard equation for the horizontal acceleration coefficient based on the Mononobe-Okabe methodology (Mononobe, 1929; Okabe, 1926). For Retained soils:
If If
1, then: Kh = Ao
( (
) )
0.25
0.25
The following example illustrates the calculation of the dynamic earth pressure coefficient for the infill and retained soils with a typical allowable deflection of 3 inches (7.6 cm).
52
d i
Find:
= = = =
r wr
Ao
= = = =
28 2/3(28) = 19 12 0.4
The dynamic earth pressure coefficients (Kaei, Kaer) for the infill and retained soils.
Kae
[ [
(
cos (
)2 + )
1+
sin (
i )
cos ( w
+ ) cos (
+ i)
] ]
The first step is to calculate the acceleration coefficents. Kv = 0, based on the assumption that a vertical and horizontal peak acceleration will not occur simultaneously during a seismic event. To determine Kh, we must look at the allowable deflection (d). Since the allowable deflection is greater than zero, the following equation is used:
Kh
0.25
Kh
0.25
= 0.162
Kh = 0.67 (0.4)
( (
) )
0.25
0.25
= 0.162
= atan
Kh 1 + Kv
= atan
0.162 1+0
= 9.2
Finally, the dynamic earth pressure coefficient for the infill is:
Kaei
[ [
1+
] ]
= 0.276
The same process is followed in determining the dynamic earth pressure coefficient for the retained soil. Here again, the vertical acceleration coefficient (Kv) is equal to zero. With the allowable deflection greater than 1 inch (2.5 cm), the horizontal acceleration coefficient is the following:
Kh
0.25
Kh
= 0.162
( (
0.25
0.25
= 0.162
= atan
Kh 1 + Kv
= atan
0.162 1+0
= 9.2
The dynamic earth pressure coefficient for the retained soil is:
Kae
[ [
1+
cos (9.2) cos (12)2 cos (19 12 + 9.2) sin (28 + 19) sin (28 0 9.2)
] ]
0.361
Fae = Fa + DFdyn
Where:
Fa = Fae = DFdyn =
(0.5) (Ka) ( ) (H)2 (0.5) (1 + Kv) (Kae)( ) (H)2 (0.5) (Kae - Ka) ( ) (H)2
The magnitude of the resultant force (Fa) acts at 1/3 of the height of the wall and DFdyn acts at 6/10 of the height of the wall. The magnitude of the resultant force (Fae) acts at a ratio of the dynamic active earth force moment to the wall height (m), multiplied by the height of the wall.
54
Figure 5-2. Dynamic Increment Component of the Active Pressure Distribution Safety Factors
The minimum accepted factors of safety for seismic design are taken to be 75% of the values recommended for static design. Sliding > 1.1 Overturning > 1.5 Note: The values 1.1 and 1.5 are based on 75% of the recommended minimum factors of safety for design of conventional segmental retaining walls. (Collin, 1996, P. 68, Design Manual for Segmental Retaining Walls).
= = = = = = =
= 30 i d Ao
= = = =
78
0 2 in. (5.1 cm) 0.4 3 3 wall facing = 130 lb/ft (2,061 kg/m ) 3 3 soil = 120 lb/ft (1,923 kg/m ) Kaer = 0.5260
Find: The safety factor against sliding (SFS) and overturning (SFO). Note: The dynamic earth pressure coefficients Kaei and Kaer were determined by following the allowable deflection criteria established at the beginning of the section.
55
The first step is to determine the driving forces exerted by the soil on the wall:
Active earth force: Fa = (0.5) (Ka) ( ) (H)2 = (0.5) (0.2197) (120 lb/ft3) (2.20 ft)2 = 64 lb/ft
= (0.5) (0.2197) (1,923 kg/m3) (0.67 m)2 = (95 kg/m) (9.81) = 930 N/m
Dynamic earth force: Fae = (0.5) (1 + Kv) (Kae) ( ) (H) = (0.5) (1 + 0) (0.5260) (120 lb/ft3) (2.20)2 = 153 lb/ft
2
Figure 5-4. Free Body Diagram of Simple Gravity Wall Under Seismic Influence
Dynamic earth force increment: DFdyn = Fae Fa = 153 lb/ft 64 lb/ft = 89 lb/ft
= 2227 N/m 930 N/m = 1,297 N/m
Resolving the active earth force and the dynamic earth force increment into horizontal and vertical components:
DFdynh
Fah
= (Fa) cos ( w) = (64 lb/ft) cos (20) = 60 lb/ft = (930 N/m) cos (20) = 874 N/m = (Fa) sin ( w) = (64 lb/ft) sin (20) = 22 lb/ft
= (930 N/m) sin (20) = 318 N/m
DFdynv
Fav
Weight of the wall facing: Wf = ( wall facing)(H)(d) = (130 lb/ft3) (2.20 ft )(0.97 ft) = 277 lb/ft
= (2,061 kg/m3) (0.67 m) (0.296m) = 4,010 N/m
Maximum frictional resistance to sliding: Fr = (Wf + Fav + DFdynv) tan ( ) = (277 lb/ft + 22 lb/ft + 30 lb/ft) tan (30) = 190 lb/ft
= (4,010 N/m + 318 N/m + 444 N/m) tan (30) = 2,755 N/m
56
Safety factor against sliding (SFS): SFSseismic = (Force resisting sliding) (Force driving sliding) =
=
Fr Fh + DFdynh 1.1 ok
1.1 ok
= 1.3
= 1.3
The factor of safety of 1.3 shows that an AB gravity wall during an earthquake in a seismic zone 4 is stable and does not require reinforcement to prevent sliding. As a comparison, the factor of safety in a static condition is the following:
SFSstatic = =
=
Fr Fh
= 2.9
= 2.9
Overturning Failure
In seismic analysis, the moments resisting overturning (Mr) must be greater than or equal to 1.5 times the moments causing overturning (Mo).
Mr
= (Wf ) (Wfarm) + (Fav) (Faarmv) + (DFdynv) (DFdynarmv) = (Wf ) [(X1) + (0.5)(H) tan ( )] + Fav [(L + s) + (0.333) (H) tan ( )] + DFdynv [(L + s) + (0.6)(H) tan ( )] = (277 lb/ft) [(0.49 ft) + (0.5) (2.20) tan (12)] + (22 lb/ft) [(0) + (0.171 ft) + (0.333) (2.20) tan (12)] + (30 lb/ft) [(0) + (0.171 ft) + (0.6) (2.20) tan (12)] = 221 ft-lb/ft
= (4,010 N/m) [(0.149 m) +(0.5) (0.67 m) tan (12)] + (318 N/m) [(0) + (0.053 m) + (0.333) (0.67 m) tan (12)] + (444 N/m) [(0) + (0.053 m) + (0.6) (0.67 m) tan (12)] = 976 N-m/m
Note :
57
Mo
= (Fah) (Faarmh) + (DFdynh) (DFdynarmh) = (Fah) (0.333)(H) + (DFdynh) (0.6)(H) = (60 lb/ft) (0.333) (2.2 ft) + (84 lb/ft) (0.6) (2.2 ft) = 155 ft-lb/ft
= (874 N/m) (0.333) (0.67 m) + (1219 N/m) (0.6) (0.67 m) = 685 N-m/m
Safety Factor Against Overturning (SFO): SFOseismic = (Moments resisting overturning) (Moments driving overturning) =
=
Mr Mo Not ok
Not ok
1.5
This shows that the gravity wall is not adequate with respect to overturning failure. Geogrid reinforcement for this wall is needed to achieve proper factor of safety. Evaluating the wall under static conditions we see that the required factors of safety are met.
Mr
= (Wf) (Wfarm) + (Fav) (Faarmv) = (Wf) [(X1) + (0.5) (H) tan ( )] + (Fav) [(L + s + (0.333) (H) tan ( )] = (277 lb/ft) [(0.49 ft) + (0.5) (2.20) tan (12)] + (22 lb/ft) [(0) + (0.171 ft) + (0.333) (2.20) tan (12)] = 208 ft-lb/ft
= (4010 N/m) [(0.149 m) + (0.5) (0.67 m) tan (12)] + (318 N/m) [(0) + (0.053 m) + (0.333) (0.67 m) tan (12)] = 915 N-m/m
Mo
= = = = = =
(Fah) (Faarmh) (Fah) (0.333) (H) (60 lb/ft) (0.333) (2.2 ft) 44 ft-lb/ft (Moments resisting overturning) (Moments driving overturning) (208 ft-lb/ft) (44 ft-lb/ft) = 4.7
58
Pir
This force along with the dynamic earth increment force combine with the static earth forces from the retained soil and the weight forces from the wall structure to create the conditions during an earthquake.
Figure 5-5. Free Body Diagram of a Coherent Gravity Wall Under Seismic Influence
Where:
SFOseismic Mr Mo = (Wf) (Wfarm) + (Ws) (Wsarm) + (Fav) (Faarmv) + (DFdynv) (DFdynarmv) (Fah) (Faarmh) + (DFdynh) (DFdynarmh) + (Pir) (Hir) 1.5
59
Fa Wf Ws
= 1,360 lb/ft (19,855 N/m) 716 lb/ft (10,453 N/m) = 1,292 lb/ft (18,862 N/m)
= (90 ) = 12 DFdyn =
i d Ao H Wi
= 6,425 lb/ft (93,799 N/m) = 130 lb/ft3 (2,061 kg/m3) wall facing 3 3 soil = 120 lb/ft (1,923 kg/m )
Fr
= (Fav + DFdynv + Wf + Ws) tan ( ) = [(1,360 lb/ft) sin (20) + (716 lb/ft) sin (20) + 1,292 lb/ft + 6,425 lb/ft ] tan (30) = 4,865 lb/ft
= [(19,855 N/m) sin (20) + (10,453 N/m) sin (20) + 18,862 N/m + 93,799 N/m ] tan (30) = 71,030 N/m
Pir
Since,
( (
) )
0.25
( (
) )
0.25
0.25
Fr Fh + DFdynh + Pir =
=
1.1 1.5
1.5
(4,865 lb/ft) (1,360 lb/ft) cos 20 + (716 lb/ft) cos 20 + 1,381 lb/ft
(71,030 N/m) (19,855 N/m) cos 20 + (10,453 N/m) cos 20 + 20,166 N/m
1.1 ok
1.1 ok
60
Comparing the seismic SFS to the static SFS below, we again see much higher safety values for static.
SFSstatic = =
=
(Forces resisting sliding) (Forces driving sliding) (4,865 lb/ft) (1,360 lb/ft) cos 20
(71,030 N/m) (19,855 N/m) cos 20
= =
=
Fr Fh 3.8
3.8
Mr
Where:
= (Wt) (Wtarm) + (Fav) (Faarmv) + (DFdynv) (DFdynarmv) Wt = Ws + Wf = (Wt) [0.5 (L + s) + (0.5) (H) tan ( )] + Fav [(L + s) + (0.333) (H) tan ( )] + DFdynv [(L + s) + (0.6) (H) tan ( )] = + + = (7,717 lb/ft) [0.5 (6.1 ft + 0.171 ft) + (0.5) (10 ft) tan (12)] [(1,360 lb/ft) sin 20] [6.1 ft + 0.171 ft + (0.333) (10 ft) tan (12)] [(716 lb/ft) sin (20)] [6.1 ft + 0.171 ft + (0.6) (10 ft) tan (12)] 37,492 ft-lb/ft
= (112,661 N/m) [0.5 (1.86 m + 0.053 m) + (0.5) (3.05 m) tan (12)] + [(19,855 N/m) sin 20] [1.86 m + 0.053 m + (0.333) (3.05 m) tan (12)] + [(10,453 N/m) sin (20)] [1.86 m + 0.053 m + (0.6) (3.05 m) tan (12)] = 166,966 N-m/m
The moments driving overturning (Mo):
Mo
= = = =
(Fah) (Faarmh) + (DFdynh) (DFdynarmh) (Fah) (0.333) (H) + (DFdynh) (0.6)(H) [(1,360 lb/ft) cos (20)] (0.333) (10 ft) + [(716 lb/ft) cos (20)] (0.6) (10 ft) 8,293 ft-lb/ft
= [(19,855 N/m) cos (20)] (0.333) (3.05 m) + [(10,453 N/m) cos (20)] (0.6) (3.05 m) = 36,925 N-m/m
Safety Factor Against Overturning (SFO):
SFOseismic
Mr Mo
1.5
1.5 ok
1.5 ok 61
Mr
Where:
= (Wt) (Wtarm) + Fav Wt = Ws + Wf = (Wt) [0.5 (L + s) + (0.5) (H) tan ( )] + (Fav) [(L + s) + (0.333) (H) tan ( )] = (7,717 lb/ft) [0.5 (6.1 ft + 0.171 ft) + (0.5) (10 ft) tan (12)] + [(1,360 lb/ft) sin 20] [(6.1 ft + 0.171 ft) + (0.333) (10 ft) tan (12)] = 35,644 ft-lb/ft
= (112,661 N/m) [0.5 (1.86 m + 0.053 m) + (0.5) (3.05 m) tan (12)] + [(19,855 N/m) sin 20] [(1.86 m + 0.053 m) + (0.333) (3.05 m) tan (12)] = 158,736 N-m/m
Mo
= (Fah) (Faarmh) = (Fah) (0.333) (H) = [(1,360 lb/ft) cos (20)] (0.333) (10 ft) = 4,256 ft-lb/ft
= [(19,855 N/m) cos (20)] (0.333) (3.05 m) = 18,950 N-m/m
1.5 ok
The factor of safety checks for the internal stability of a geogrid reinforced retaining wall under seismic conditions include the geogrid overstress, geogrid / block connection strength, geogrid pullout from the soil, and localized or top of the wall stability. These calculations are identical to those for a static stability analysis with the exception of the seismic forces introduced which affect the tensile loading on the geogrid.
Fid
Where:
= Fa + DFdyn + Pir = (Ka) cos ( w) ( ) (Ac) (0.5) = 0.8 - 0.6 (He) (grid) (H) (He)
Fa DFdyn and,
)]
The variable Ac in the above equations represents the amount of area influencing each geogrid layer. The (grid) (H) term in the dynamic earth force increment equation refers to the elevation of the geogrid. Once the tensile force is determined for each grid, we calculate the factor of safety against geogrid tensile overstress, which is equal to the long term allowable design strength of the geogrid divided by the tensile force acting on that grid.
In the calculation of the factor of safety geogrid tensile overstress for a seismic event, we do not take a reduction of the geogrid ultimate strength for long-term creep. This is due to the short-term loading during a seismic event.
FSconn =
1.1
FSpullout
where,
= Fp Fid
1.1
Fp
The above pullout capacity equation takes into account the geogrid interaction coefficient (Ci) and is calculated based on the length of geogrid embedded beyond the line of maximum tension (Le).
Wf
The local sliding resistance (Fr) is an equation based on the Allan Block shear strength, which was developed through empirical test data and is a function of the normal load acting at that point and is the following:
Fr
63
The soil and surcharge forces are as follows: Active Force: Dynamic Force:
Fa Fae Pir
= =
SFOlocalstatic = Wf [(Ht/2) tan SFOlocalseismic = Wf [(Ht/2) tan + t/2] + (Fa) sin ( w) [(Ht/3) tan + t] + (DFdyn) sin ( w) (0.6 Ht + t) (Fa) cos ( w) (Ht/3) + (DFdyn) cos ( w) (0.6 Ht) + Pir (Ht/2) 1.1 + t/2] + (Fa) sin ( w) [(Ht/3) tan (Fa) cos ( w) (Ht/3) + t] 1.5
64
REFERENCES
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials -- Task Force 27. "Guidelines for the Design of Mechanically Stabilized Earth Walls." Draft version. Washington: 1987. Kliethermes, J., K. Buttry, E. McCullough, and R. Wetzel. "Modular Concrete Retaining Wall and Geogrid Performance and Laboratory Modeling." University of Wisconsin-Platteville, 1990. Leshchinsky, D. and E.B. Perry. "A Design Procedure for Geotextile Reinforced Walls." Geotechnical Fabrics Report. St. Paul: July/August, 1987. McKittrick, D.P. "Reinforced Earth: Application of Theory and Research to Practice." Reinforced Earth Technical Services, Report 79-1. Arlington, VA: The Reinforced Earth Company, 1978. Minnesota Department of Transportation. "Walls." Section 9-4.0 in Road Design Manual -- Part II. St. Paul: 1985. Peck, Ralph. "Earth Retaining Structures and Slopes." Chapter 13 in Soil Science, edited by T.W. Lambe and R.V. Whitman. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1969. Sowers, G.B., and G.F. Sowers. "Problems in Earth Pressure." Chapter 8 in Introductory Soil mechanics and Foundations. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1970. R. F. Craig, Chapman & Hall, Soil Mechanics Fifth Edition, 1992 Braja M. Das Principles of Geotechnical Engineering Third Edition, Chapter 10, 1994
65
Sample Calculations
Example S-1: Given:
= 0 = 36 = 90 3 = 87 w = (0.666) (36) = 24
= 3.0 ft (0.91 m) 3 = 120 lb/ft (1,923 kg/m3) 3 3 w = 130 lb/ft (2,061 kg/m )
a =
a =
[ [ [
sin (
i)
i)
a =
0.7782124
0.966219657 + 0.713957656
= 0.2145
Find: The safety factor against sliding, SFS. The first step is to determine the total active force exerted by the soil on the wall:
Fa Fh Fv Wf Fr SFS
= (0. 5) ( ) (Ka) (H)2 = (0.5) (120 lb/ft3) (0.2145) (3.0 ft)2 = 116 lb/ft
= (0.5) ( ) (Ka) (H)2 = (0.5) (1,923 kg/m3) (0.2145) (0.91 m)2 = 1,675 N/m
= ( w) (H) (d) = (130 lb/ft3) (3.0 ft) (0.97 ft) = 378 lb/ft
= ( w) (H) ( d) = (2,061 kg/m3) (0.91 m) (0.3 m) = 5,520 N/m
= (Vt) (Cf) = (Wf + Fv) tan ( ) = (378 lb/ft + 47 lb/ft) tan (36) = 309 lb/ft
= (Vt) (Cf) = (Wf + Fv) tan ( ) = (5,520 N/m + 689 N/m) tan (36) = 4,511 N/m
OK
OK
66
Mr
= (Wf) [ (x1) + (0.5) (H) tan (90 ) ] + (FV) [ (x2) + (0.333) (H) tan (90 ) ] = (378 lb/ft) [ (0.49 ft) + (0.5) (3.0 ft) tan (90 87) ] + (47 lb/ft) [ (0.97 ft) + (0.333) (3.0 ft) tan (90 87) ] = 263 ft-lb/ft
= (5,520 N/m) [ (0.15 m) + (0.5) (0.9 m) tan (90 87) ] + (689 N/m) [ (0.3 m) + (0.333) (0.9 m) tan (90 87) ] = 1,176 N-m/m
Mo
= (Fh) (0.333) (H) = (106 lb/ft) (0.333) (3.0 ft) = 106 ft-lb/ft = (1,547 N/m) (0.333) (0.9 m) = 464 N-m/m =
=
SFO
Mr = (263 ft-lb/ft) Mo
Mr Mo
OK
(106 ft-lb/ft)
= (1,176 N-m/m)
(464 N-m/m)
= 36 H = 3.0 ft (0.9 m) = 90 - 12 = 78 i = 0
= 120 lb/ft3 (1,923 kg/m3) 3 (2,061 kg/m3) w = 130 lb/ft q = 250 lb/ft2 (11,974 Pa) = (.666) (36) = 24 w
Ka =
Ka =
Ka =
[ [ [
i)
csc (78) sin (78 36) 2 sin (78 + 24) + sin (36 + 24) sin (36 0) sin (78 0) 0.684079382 0.989013448 + 0.72139389
0.1599
67
Find: The safety factor against sliding, SFS. The first step is to determine the total active force exerted by the soil on the wall:
Fa Fh Fv Wf Fr
= (0.5) ( ) (Ka) (H)2 = (0.5) (120 lb/ft3) (0.1599) (3.0 ft)2 = 86 lb/ft
= (0.5) ( ) (Ka) (H)2 = (0.5) (1,923 kg/m3) (0.1599) (0.9 m)2 = 1,222 N/m
= ( w) (H) (d) = (130 lb/ft3) (3.0 ft) (0.97 ft) = 378 lb/ft
= ( w) (H) (d) = (2,061 kg/m3) (0.9 m) (0.3 m) = 5,459 N/m
= (Vt) (Cf) = (Wf + Fv) tan ( ) = (378 lb/ft + 35 lb/ft) tan (36) = 300 lb/ft
= (Vt) (Cf) = (Wf + Fv) tan ( ) = (5,459 N/m + 497 N/m) tan (36) = 4,327 N/m
Pq Pqh Pqv
Fqh Fqv
SFS
= Fr + (Fqv) (Cf) = 300 lb/ft + (48 lb/ft) tan (36) = 1.76 > 1.5 Fh + Fqh 79 lb/ft + 111 lb/ft
= Fr + (Fqv) (Cf) Fh + Fqh = 4,327 N/m + (690 N/m) tan (36) = 1.76 > 1.5 1,116 N/m + 1,595 N/m
OK
OK
68
Mr
= (Wf) [ (X1) + (0.5) (H) tan (90 ) ] + (Fv) [ (X2) + (0.333) (H) tan (90 ) ] + (Fqv) [ (X2) + (0.5) (H) tan (90 ) ] = + + =
= + + =
Mr
(378 lb/ft) [ (0.49 ft) + (0.5) (3.0 ft) tan (90 78) ] (35 lb/ft) [ (0.97 ft) + (0.333) (3.0 ft) tan (90 78) ] (48 lb/ft) [ (0.97 ft) + (0.5) (3.0 ft) tan (90 78) ] 409 ft-lb/ft
(5,459 N/m) [ (0.15 m) + (0.5) (0.9 m) tan (90 78) ] (497 N/m) [ (0.3 m) + (0.333) (0.9 m) tan (90 78) ] (690 N/m) [ (0.3 m) + (0.5) (0.9 m) tan (90 78) ] 1,795 N-m/m
Mo
= (Fh) (0.333) (H) + (Fqh) (0.5) (H) = (79 lb/ft) (0.333) (3.0 ft) + (111 lb/ft) (0.5) (3.0 ft) = 245 ft-lb/ft
= (1,116 N/m) (0.333) (0.9 m) + (1,595 N/m) (0.5) (0.9 m) = 1,052 N-m/m
SFO
=
=
NOT OK
NOT OK
= 27 H = 9.0 ft (2.74 m) = 90 - 12 = 78
i Ci
w
= =
0 0.75 q
w
Ka =
Ka =
Ka =
[ [ [
w)
sin (
i)
i)
]
=
csc (78) sin (78 27) 2 sin (78 + 18) + sin (27 + 18) sin (27 0) sin (78 0)
0.256
69
Find: The safety factor against sliding, SFS. The first step is to determine the total active force exerted by the soil on the wall:
Fa Fh Fv Wf Fr SFS
= (0.5) ( ) (Ka) (H)2 = (0.5) (120 lb/ft3) (0.256) (9.0 ft)2 = 1,244 lb/ft
= (0.5) ( ) (Ka) (H)2 = (0.5) (1,923 kg/m3) (0.256) (2.74 m)2 = 18,128 N/m
= ( w) (H) (d) = (130 lb/ft3) (9.0 ft) (0.97 ft) = 1,135 lb/ft
= ( w) (H) (d) = (2,061 kg/m3) (2.74 m) (0.3 m) = 16,620 N/m
= (Vt) (Cf) = (Wf + Fv) tan ( ) = (1,135 lb/ft + 384 lb/ft) tan (27) = 774 lb/ft
= (Vt) (Cf) = (Wf + Fv) tan ( ) = (16,620 N/m + 5,602 N/m) tan (27) = 11,323 N/m
Fg
Find
Le
= 2.05 ft
= 0.648 m
Lt
= Lw + La + Le = 0.85 + (H dg) [ tan (45 ( 2)) tan (90 ) ] + 2.05 ft = 0.85 ft + (9 ft 4.44 ft) [ tan (45 13.5) tan (90 78)] + 2.05 ft = 4.72 ft
= Lw + La + Le = 0.85 + (H dg) [ tan (45 ( 2)) tan (90 ) ] + 0.624 m = 0.259 m + (2.74 m 1.35 m) [ tan (45 13.5) tan (90 78) ] + 0.624 m = 1.439 m
Le
Le = 2.33.
70
Fg SFS
= 2 (4.44 ft) (120 lb/ft3) (2.33 ft) (0.75) tan (27) = 949 lb/ft
= 2 (1.35 m) (1,923 kg/m ) (0.71 m) (0.75) tan (27) = 13,820 N/m
3
Lmin = 0.3 (H) + 0.85 ft + 2.4 ft = 0.3 (9 ft) + 0.85 ft + 2.4 ft = 5.94 ft Round up to Lg = 6 ft
= 0.3 (H) + 0.256 m + 0.732 m = 0.3 (2.74 m) + 0.256 m + 0.732 m = 1.82 m
Ws Ww
= ( r) (H) (Lg 0.85 ft) = (125 lb/ft3) (9.0 ft) (6 ft 0.85 ft) = 5,794 lb/ft
= ( r) (H) (Lg 0.256 m) = (2,002 kg/m3) (2.74 m) (1.82 m 0.256 m) = 84,163 N/m
Vt Fr
= 3,726 lb/ft
= 54,206 N/m
Pq
Pqh Pqv
Fqh Fqv
= (Pqv) (H)
= (Pqv) (H)
SFS
= 3,726 lb/ft + 180 lb/ft (tan 27) 1,183 lb/ft + 549 lb/ft
= 54,206 N/m + 2,598 N/m (tan 27) 17,241 N/m + 7,987 N/m
71
Mr
= (Wf) [ (0.5) (X1) + (0.5) (H) tan (90 ) ] + (Ws) [ (0.5) (X2 X1) + (X1) + (0.5) (H) tan (90 ) ] + (Fv) [ (X2) + (0.333) (H) tan (90 ) ] + (Fqv) [ (X2) + (0.5) (H) tan (90 ) ]
Mr
= + + + =
= + + + =
(1,135 lb/ft) [ (0.5) (0.97 ft) + (0.5) (9.0 ft) tan (90 78) ] (5,794 lb/ft) [ (0.5) (6.13 ft 0.97 ft) + (0.97 ft) + (0.5) (9.0 ft) tan (90 78) ] (384 lb/ft) [ (6.13 ft) + (0.333) (9.0 ft) tan (90 78) ] (180 lb/ft) [ (6.13 ft) + (0.5) (9.0 ft) tan (90 78) ] 31,621 ft-lb/ft
(16,620 N/m) [ (0.5) (0.297 m) + (0.5) (2.74 m) tan (90 78) ] (84,163 N/m) [ (0.5) (1.87 m 0.297 m) + (0.297 m) + (0.5) (2.74 m) tan (90 78) ] (5,602 N/m) [ (1.87 m) + (0.333) (2.74 m) tan (90 78) ] (2,598 N/m) [ (1.87 m) + (0.5) (2.74 m) tan (90 78) ] 140,184 N-m/m
Mo
= (Fh) (0.333) (H) + (Fqh) (0.5) (H) = (1,183 lb/ft) (0.333) (9.0 ft) + (549 lb/ft) (0.5) (9.0 ft) = 6,016 ft-lb/ft
= (17,241 N/m) (0.333) (2.74 m) + (7,987 N/m) (0.5) (2.74 m) = 26,665 N-m/m
SFO
= = =
Mr = (31,621 ft-lb/ft) Mo
Mo
OK
OK
(6,016 ft-lb/ft)
(26,665 N/m)
Mr = (140,184 N/m)
Internal Stability:
r r wr
Kar =
Kar =
[ [
csc (78) sin (78 30) 2 sin (78 + 19.98) + sin (30 + 19.98) sin (30 0) sin (78 0)
2 0.759747 0.995147 + 0.625671
0.2197
72
Pqh
Quadratic equation = b z a b
b2 4ac 2a
= (Kar) cos ( wr ) = (0.2197) cos (20) = 0.2065 = ( r) (z) = (125 lb/ft3) (0.2065) = 26 lb/ft3
= ( r) (z) = (2,002 kg/m3) (0.2065) = 413 kg/m3
= =
= =
(q) (z) ] =
(q) (z) ] =
dh
= =
= =
( 571 lb/ft2)2 4 (26 lb/ft3) (1,666 lb/ft) 2 (26 lb/ft3) (571 lb/ft2) (391 lb/ft2) = 18.5 or 3.5 The wall is only 9 ft (2.74 m) tall 3 52 lb/ft so 18.51 (5.64 m) is not valid.
( 2,767 kg/m2)2 4 (413 kg/m3) (2,479 kg/m) 2 (413 kg/m3) 2 (2,767 kg/m ) (1,887 kg/m2) = 5.6 or 1.1 3 826 kg/m ( 2,767 kg/m2)
( 571 lb/ft2)
d2
= d1
= d1
hg
Fh
= 0.5 ( r) (Kar) (d2)2 cos ( wr ) = 0.5 (125 lb/ft3) (0.2197) (5.5 ft)2 cos (30) = 360 lb/ft
= 0.5 ( r) (Kar) (d2)2 cos ( wr) = 0.5 (2,002 kg/m3) (0.2197) (1.67 m)2 cos (30) = 5,211 N/m
Qh
hg) cos ( wr) = (11,974 Pa) (0.2197) (1.67 m 0.53 m) cos (20)
73
Ft Ft hg
= Fh
= Fh
= 554 lb/ft < 833 lb/ft Only one more layer of geogrid is required.
= 8,029 N/m < 12,161 N/m Only one more layer of geogrid is required.
= (H
= (H
d2)
d2)
Fh
= 0.5 ( r) (Kar) (H)2 cos ( wr ) = 0.5 (125 lb/ft3) (0.2197) (9.0 ft)2 cos (20) = 1,045 lb/ft
= 0.5 ( r) (Kar) (H)2 cos ( wr) = 0.5 (2002 kg/m3) (0.2197) (2.74 m)2 cos (20) = 15,220 N/m
Qh
= (q) (Kar) (H hg) cos ( wr) = (11,974 N/m2) (0.2197) (2.74 m = 5,463 N/m
Ft
= Fh
= Fh
= 1.7 = 2 Layers
= 1.7 = 2 Layers
Because the maximum spacing of geogrid is 3 ft (0.91 m), the total number of grid will need to be three.
Layer 1 = 1.905 ft (0.58 m) = 3 blocks from bottom. Layer 2 = 5.08 ft (1.55 m) = 8 blocks from bottom. Layer 3 = 8.255 ft (2.52 m) = 13 blocks from bottom.
74
Roadway Application
Roadway Surcharge