Numerical Investigation of Seismic Behaviour for a Flexible Cantilever Retaining Wall with Cohesive Backfill

Abstract:

In the seismic design of flexible cantilever walls retaining cohesive backfill soil, the common practice is to neglect the cohesion effect. Dynamic lateral earth pressure is typically evaluated based on approaches primarily intended for cohesionless soils or through analytical pseudo-static methods. Nevertheless, both experimental and theoretical evidence has demonstrated significant effects due to soil cohesion that are not accounted for by these methods. This study involved finite element modeling (FE) of a flexible cantilever wall with a height of 5.4m, supporting homogeneous cohesive backfill under initial static and seismic loadings. The calculated active earth thrust was then compared with values obtained experimentally and through conventional analytical methods. The obtained results indicate that the presence of soil cohesion significantly reduces seismic demands on flexible cantilever retaining walls, resulting in a substantial reduction of seismic active earth pressures and total seismic thrust by up to 50% and 52%, respectively. It enhances also the overall stability of the system by shifting the point of application of seismic thrust toward the base of the wall, thereby increasing the safety margin. In addition, it significantly decreases the wall displacement at the stem top, with reductions of up to 104% compared with the case involving cohesionless backfill. It was observed that the conventional methods recommended by some seismic regulations largely underestimate seismic active pressure.

• Periodical: International Journal of Engineering Research in Africa (Volume 69)
• Pages: 125-142
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/p-Z3wyLG
• Online since: May 2024
• Authors: Bouraida El Yamouni*, Fadoua El Khannoussi, Abdellatif Khamlichi
• Keywords: Analytical Methods, Cohesive Soil, Dynamic Earth Pressure, Finite Element Method, Flexible Retaining Wall, Seismic Response

References

[1] T. Cakir, K.F. Ozturk, An overview to the dynamic behaviour of the inverted T type cantilever retaining wall taking into account soil structure interaction phenomenon, Sigma Journal of Engineering and Natural Sciences 11(1) (2020) 37-50.

[2] L.K. Riches, Observed earthquake damage to Christchurch city council owned retaining walls and the repair solutions developed, Proc. of the 6th Int. Conf. in Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering, Christchurch (2015).

[3] P. Kloukinas, A. S. di Santolo, A. Penna, M. Dietz, A. Evangelista, A. L. Simonelli, C. Taylor, G. Mylonakis, Investigation of seismic response of cantilever retaining walls: Limit analysis vs shaking table testing, Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng. 77 (2015) 432–445.

DOI: 10.1016/j.soildyn.2015.05.018

[4] R. Tiwari, N. Lam, Modelling of seismic actions in earth retaining walls and comparison with shaker table experiment, Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng. 150 (2021) 106939.

DOI: 10.1016/j.soildyn.2021.106939

[5] C. Vrettos, D. E. Beskos, T. Triantafyllidis, Seismic pressures on rigid cantilever walls retaining elastic continuously non-homogeneous soil: An exact solution, Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng. 82 (2016) 142–153.

DOI: 10.1016/j.soildyn.2017.03.026

[6] S. Okabe, General theory on earth pressure and seismic stability of retaining wall, J. of Japan Soci. of Civil Engineers 10(6) (1924) 1277-1323.

[7] N. Mononobe, H. Matsuo, On the Determination of Earth Pressure during Earthquake, Proceedings of the World Engineering Conference 9 (1929) 177–85.

[8] I. Dejan, K. Edip, J. Bojadjieva, V. Sheshov, T. Kitanovski, Influence of the seismic action on the stability of retaining cantilever walls and comparison between ex-yu regulations and Eurocodes, Proceedings of the 2nd Croatian Conference on Earthquake Engineering (2023).

DOI: 10.5592/co/2crocee.2023.50

[9] P. Singh, P. Bhartiya, T. Chakraborty, D. Basu, Numerical investigation and estimation of active earth thrust on gravity retaining walls under seismic excitation, Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng. 167(10779) (2023) 8.

DOI: 10.1016/j.soildyn.2023.107798

[10] S. A., Khan, M. Karray, P. Paultre, Seismic Behaviour of Retaining Walls: A Critical Review of Analytical and Field Performance Studies, Geotechnics 4(1) (2023) 54-77.

DOI: 10.3390/geotechnics4010004

[11] G. Candia, R. G. Mikola, N. Sitar, Seismic response of retaining walls with cohesive backfill: Centrifuge model studies, Soil Dynamics and Earth. Eng. 90 (2016) 411-419.

DOI: 10.1016/j.soildyn.2016.09.013

[12] P. Wilson, A. Elgamal, Shake table lateral earth pressure testing with dense c-ϕ backfill, Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng. 71 (2015) 13–26.

DOI: 10.1016/j.soildyn.2014.12.009

[13] S. Prakash, S. Saran, Static and dynamic earth pressures behind retaining walls, Proceedings of the Third Symposium on Earthquake Engineering (1966) 277–88.

[14] S. Prakash, Analysis of rigid retaining walls during earthquakes, Proc. int. conf. on recent advances in geotech. earthquake eng. and soil dyn. 3 (1981) 1–28.

[15] V.K. Puri, S. Prakash, R. Widanarti, Retaining Walls Under Seismic Loading, Proceedings of Fifth International Conference on Case Histories in Geotechnical Engineering (2004) 0–7.

[16] SK. Shukla, Generalized analytical expression for dynamic active thrust from c-φ soil backfills, Journal Geotech. Eng. 9(4) (2015) 416–421.

[17] VSR. Annapareddy, A. Pain, Finite Element Modelling (FEM) vs. Simplified Force-Based Methods for Rigid Retaining Walls under Earthquake Excitation, J. Earthq. Tsunami. 15(4) (2021) 2150020.

DOI: 10.1142/s1793431121500202

[18] J. Bakr, MA. Syed, Risk Assessment for a Cantilever Retaining Wall under the Seismic Loading Assumptions of the Finite Element Model, Proc. of the MACE PGR Conference (2018) 29–31.

[19] A. Osouli, S. Zamiran, The effect of backfill cohesion on seismic response of cantilever retaining walls using fully dynamic analysis, Comput. Geotech. 89 (2017) 143–52.

DOI: 10.1016/j.compgeo.2017.04.007

[20] VG. Kitsis, GA. Athanasopoulos, A. Athanasopoulos – Zekkos, Earth retaining walls with backfill possesing cohesion – Numerical analyses of seismic behaviour, Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng. 160(10736) (2022) 8.

DOI: 10.1016/j.soildyn.2022.107368

[21] G. Candia, RG. Mikola, N. Sitar, Seismic response of retaining walls with cohesive backfill: Centrifuge model studies, Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng. 90 (2016) 411–9.

DOI: 10.1016/j.soildyn.2016.09.013

[22] DG. Anderson, GR. Martin, IP. Lam, JNJ. Wang, NCHRP report 611: Seismic analysis and design of retaining walls, buried structures, slopes, and embankments, Transportation Research Board (2008).

DOI: 10.17226/14189

[23] M. Lew, N. Sitar, L.A. Atik, Seismic Earth Pressures: Fact or Fiction?, Proceedings of Earth Retention Conference 3 (2010).

DOI: 10.1061/41128(384)66

[24] R. Brinkgreve, Vermeer PA. PLAXIS 2D reference manual CONNECT edition V20, Delft University (2019).

[25] SB. Jo, JG. Ha, M. Yoo, YW. Choo, DS. Kim, Seismic behaviour of an inverted T-shape flexible retaining wall via dynamic centrifuge tests, Bull. Earthq. Eng. 12(2) (2014) 961–80.

DOI: 10.1007/s10518-013-9558-9

[26] J. Bakr, SM. Ahmad, D. Lombardi, Finite-Element Study for Seismic Structural and Global Stability of Cantilever-Type Retaining Walls. Int. Journal Geomech. 19(10) (2019) 10.

DOI: 10.1061/(asce)gm.1943-5622.0001505

[27] T.D. Ancheta, R.B. Darragh, J.P. Stewart, E. Seyhan, W.J. Silva, BS-J. Chiou, K.E. Wooddell ,R.W. Graves, A.R. Kottk , D.M. Boore, T. Kishida, J.L. Donahue, NGA-West2 database, Earthq. Spectra 30(3) (2014) 989–1005.

DOI: 10.1193/070913eqs197m

[28] N. Wagner, N. Sitar, On seismic response of stiff and flexible retaining structures. Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng. 91 (2016) 284–93.

DOI: 10.1016/j.soildyn.2016.09.025

[29] S. Nakajima, T. Ozaki, T. Sanagawa, 1 g Shaking table model tests on seismic active earth pressure acting on retaining wall with cohesive backfill soil, Soils Found. 61(5) (2021) 1251–72.

DOI: 10.1016/j.sandf.2021.06.014

[30] A.Prashant, PR. Jadhav, Charts for Permanent Displacement-Based Seismic Design of Cantilever Retaining Walls. J. Earthq. Eng. 27(12) (2022) 1–21.

DOI: 10.1080/13632469.2022.2134943