Allan Block Engineering Manual

Allan Block

TM

Mortarless Technology

Roadway Application

Slope Below Wall

Water Application

Earth Anchor Application: 2 Terraces, Slope Above Wall Roadway Application

The information and product applications illustrated in this manual have been carefully compiled by the ALLAN BLOCK CORPORATION and to the best of our knowledge accurately represent ALLAN BLOCK product use. Final determination of the suitability of any information or material for the use contemplated and its manner of use is the sole responsibility of the user.

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

AB Lite Stones AB Classic 3 6 12 AB Lite Rocks AB Rocks

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

Chapter Two - Basic Wall Design

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Simple Gravity Walls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sliding Failure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Overturning Failure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Tieback Walls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Geogrid as a Tieback . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Earth Anchors as a Tieback . . . . . . . . . . . . . Coherent Gravity Walls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Length of Geogrid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . External Stability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Internal Stability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Bearing Pressure on the Underlying Soil . . . . Attachment of the Geogrid to the Wall Facing Mechanical Connection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Chapter Three - Surcharges

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Surcharges on Simple Gravity Walls . . Surcharges on Tieback Walls . . . . . . . Surcharges on Coherent Gravity Walls External Stability . . . . . . . . . . . Internal Stability . . . . . . . . . . . Tiered Walls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Chapter Four - Sloped Backfill

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Simple Gravity Walls with Sloped Backfill . . Tieback Walls with Sloped Backfill . . . . . . . Coherent Gravity Walls with Sloped Backfill. External Stability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Internal Stability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

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

Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure Figure 1-1 1-2 1-3 1-4 1-5 2-1 2-2 2-3 2-4 2-5 2-6 2-7 2-8 2-9 2-10 2-11 3-1 3-2 3-3 3-4a 3-4b 3-5 3-6 3-7 3-8 3-9 4-1 4-2 4-3 4-4 5-1 5-2 5-3 5-4 5-5 Forces Acting on Retaining Walls ..............................................................................4 Relative Pressures for the Three Soil States..................................................................4 Definition of Terms for Coulomb's Equation ................................................................5 Effect of Wall Friction on Active Force .......................................................................6 Active Pressure Distribution on a Retaining Wall .........................................................6 Schematic Diagram of Simple Gravity Retaining Wall..................................................10 Diagram of Retaining Wall for Tieback Analysis .........................................................12 Freebody Diagram of Retaining Wall for Tieback Analysis ...........................................13 Coherent Gravity Wall for Example 2-3 .....................................................................17 Typical Geogrid Reinforcement Embedment for 12 Degree AB System...........................17 Typical Geogrid Reinforcement Embedment for 6 Degree AB System.............................17 Typical Geogrid Reinforcement Embedment for 3 Degree AB System.............................17 Freebody Diagram of a Coherent Gravity Wall ..........................................................19 Calculating the Spacing of Geogrid Layers ................................................................20 Freebody Diagram for Bearing Pressure Analysis ........................................................22 Friction Attachment of Geogrid to Blocks....................................................................27 Effect of uniform Surcharge on a Retaining Wall .........................................................30 Simple Gravity Retaining Wall with Surcharge............................................................31 Freebody Diagram of a Simple Gravity Retaining Wall with Surcharge .........................32 Tieback Retaining Wall with Surcharge ......................................................................33 Freebody Diagram of Tieback Wall with Surcharge.....................................................34 Locations of Surcharge on Coherent Gravity Walls......................................................35 Coherent Gravity Wall with Surcharge.......................................................................39 Pressure Distributions Due to the Soil Weight and Surcharge ........................................39 Retaining Wall with Three Tiers .................................................................................42 Average Bearing Stress of Top Wall Applied as Surcharge to Second Wall ...................42 Tieback Wall with Sloped Backfill..............................................................................44 Coherent Gravity Wall with Sloped Backfill ................................................................47 Failure Surface in a Coherent Gravity Wall ................................................................49 Effect of Sloped Backfill on Spacing of Geogrid..........................................................49 Static Component of Active Pressure Distribution .........................................................54 Dynamic Increment Component of the Active Pressure Distribution.................................55 Dynamic Earth Force Pressure Distribution ..................................................................55 Free Body Diagram of Simple Gravity Wall Under Seimic Influence ..............................56 Free Body Diagram of Coherent Gravity Wall Under Seismic Influence..........................59

Chapter Two - Basic Wall Design

Chapter Three - Surcharges

Chapter Four - Sloped Backfill

Chapter Five - Seismic Analysis

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)

Retaining Wall Failure

There are two primary modes of retaining wall failure. The wall can fail by sliding too far forward and encroaching on the space it was designed to protect. It can also fail by overturning -- by rotating forward onto its face.

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.

Effects of Water on Wall Stability

Perhaps the single most important factor in wall failure is water. Water contributes to wall failure in several different ways. If the soil used for backfill is not a free-draining granular soil, it will retain most of the water that filters into it. The force on a wall due to water can be greater than the force due to soil. As the moisture content of the soil increases, the unit weight of the soil increases also, resulting in greater force on the wall. When the soil becomes saturated, the unit weight of the soil is reduced because of the buoyant force of the water on the soil particles. However, the water exerts hydrostatic pressure on the wall. Therefore, the total force on the wall is greater Drainage than it is for unsaturated soil, because the force on the wall is the sum of the force exerted by the soil and the force exerted by the water. The problem is even greater if the soil contains a high percentage of clay. Saturated, high-clay-content soil loses its cohesion and the force on the wall increases. Good drainage is an essential for proper wall design.
AB Geogrid Wall Below Grade Section

AB Geogrid Wall Above Grade Section

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

Types of Retaining Walls

Gravity
A wall that relies solely on its weight to prevent failure is called a gravity wall. For a gravity wall, the primary factor affecting the wall's resistance to overturning is the horizontal distance from the toe of the wall to the center of gravity of the wall. The greater this distance is, the less likely it is that the wall will overturn. For example, a wall four feet high and two feet thick will have a lower resistance to overturning than a wall two feet high and four feet thick, even if the weights are equal. Battering the retaining wall (sloping it into the backfill) also enhances stability by moving the center of gravity back from the toe of the wall.

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.

Forces Acting on Retaining Walls

The forces that act on a retaining wall can be divided into two groups: Those forces that tend to cause the wall to move Those forces that oppose movement of the wall (see Figure 1-1) Included in the first group are the weight of the soil behind the retaining wall and any surcharge on the backfill. Typical surcharges include driveways, roads, buildings, and other retaining walls. Forces that oppose movement of the wall include the frictional resistance to sliding due to the weight of the wall, the passive resistance of the soil in front of the wall, and the force provided by mechanical restraining devices. When the forces that tend to cause the wall to move become greater than the forces resisting movement, the wall will move.

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.

Figure 1-2. Relative Pressures for the Three Soil States

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.

Active and Passive Zones

When the wall moves forward, a certain portion of the soil behind the wall moves forward also. The area containing the soil that moves with the wall is referred to as the active zone. The area behind the active zone is called the passive zone. The line that divides the two zones is called the failure plane. The failure plane can be estimated by drawing a line that begins at the bottom rear edge of the wall and extends into the backfill at an angle of 45 plus one-half the friction angle of the soil (45 /2) and intersects a vertical line three 0.3 the height of the wall. (H x 0.3) The active zone for a geogrid reinforced soil mass includes the entire reinforcement zone and the area included in the theoretical failure surface. The origin of the theoretical failure surface is located at the back bottom of the reinforced zone.

Theoretical Failure Plan

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 = (0.5) ( ) (Ka) (H)2

= the active force on the retaining wall; it is the resultant force of the active pressure on the retaining wall = distance from the bottom of the wall to the top of the wall = the active pressure coefficient Figure 1-3. Definition for Active Force for Coulombs Equation

Fa H Ka

Ka =

csc ( ) sin ( sin ( +

w)

) + 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) .

Figure 1-4. Effect of Wall Friction on Active Force

Active Force on the Wall

Once the active pressure coefficient has been determined, the active force on the wall can be determined. Figure 1-5 shows the active pressure distribution on a retaining wall. The active pressure distribution is triangular, which reflects the fact that soil pressure increases linearly with soil depth. The vertical pressure at any depth is given by:

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

As discussed previously, the horizontal pressure coefficient:

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.

Figure 1-5. Active Pressure Distribution on a Retaining Wall

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)).

Calculating the Effective Unit Weight of the Wall Facing

The effective unit weight of the wall facing is often needed for wall design. Allan Blocks unit weight is the sum of the blocks plus the granular in fill material and is calculated below. Concrete usually weighs more than soil. A typical unit weight for concrete is 135 lb/ft3 (2,163 kg/m3) while a typical unit weight for soil is 120 lb/ft3 (1,923 kg/m3). Depending on the size of the wall, this difference may be significant, and the design engineer should know how to calculate the weight of the wall facing. The weight of a AB Stone unit is approximately 72 lb (33 kg). The unit weight of the concrete is 135 lb/ft3 (2,163 kg/m3). From these values, the volume of concrete for each Allan Block unit can be calculated:

Vc

(72 lb) (135 lb/ft3)

= 0.53 ft3

(33 kg) (2,163 kg/m3)

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

= (0.46 m) (0.19 m) (0.3 m)

= 0.026 m3

Therefore, the volume of the voids is:

Vv

= 0.026 m3 0.015 m3
= 0.011 m3

Total Unit Weight

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:

= (weight of concrete) + (weight of soil) (volume of block)

w

= (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

= (0.015 m3) (2,163 kg/m3) + (0.011 m3) (1,923 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

In general, the weight of the facing is:

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:

Sliding > 1.5 Overturning > 2.0

These are the same values recommended by most governmental agencies. However, you should check your state and local building codes to make sure these safety factors are sufficient.

CHAPTER TWO
Basic Wall Design Techniques

Gravity Wall

Tieback Wall

Coherent Gravity 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.

Simple Gravity Walls

Simple gravity walls rely on the weight of the wall to counteract the force of the retained soil. Figure 2-1 is a diagram showing the forces acting on a simple gravity wall. Two modes of failure must be analyzed, sliding and overturning.

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

= (0. 5) ( ) (Ka) (H)2 = (0.5) (120 lb/ft3) (0.2197) (3.44 ft)2

= 156 lb/ft
= 2,295 N/m

Sliding

= (0.5) (1,923 kg/m3) (9.81) (0.2197) (1.05m)2

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

Similarly, the vertical component of the active force is:

Fv

= (2,295 N/m) sin (20) = 785 N/m

The weight of the wall facing must be determined before the frictional resistance to sliding can be calculated:

Figure 2-1. Schematic Diagram of Simple Gravity Retaining Wall

= ( 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

= (6,369 N/m + 785 N/m) tan (30) = 4,130 N/m

Finally, the safety factor against sliding can be calculated:

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:

Free body Ex. 2-1

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:

Free body Ex. 2-1

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

The safety factor against overturning is:

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

Next, the active force of the soil on the wall is calculated:

Fa

= (0.5) (120 lb/ft3) (0.2197) (5.16 ft)2 = 351 lb/ft

= (0.5) (1,923 kg/m3) (0.2197) (1.57 m)2 = 5,108 N/m

The horizontal and vertical components of the active force are:

Fh Fv

= (351 lb/ft) cos (20) = = (351 lb/ft) sin (20)

= (5,108 N/m) sin (20)

330 lb/ft 120 lb/ft

= (5,108 N/m) cos (20) = 4,800 N/m

= 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

Fv lb/ft + 120 lb/ft lb/ft

Figure 2-2. Diagram of retaining Wall for Tieback Analysis

= 9,523 N/m + 1,747 N/m = 11,270 N/m

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

The safety factor against sliding is:

SFS

= Fr = (445 lb/ft) = 1.35 Fh (330 lb/ft)

= Fr = (6,507 N/m) Fh (4,800 N/m) = 1.35

Figure 2-3. Freebody Diagram of Retaining Wall for tieback Analysis

The safety factor against overturning is:

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

= (Fh) ( 1) = (330 lb/ft) (0.333) (5.16 ft) = 567 ft-lb/ft

= (4,800 N/m) (0.333) (1.57m) = 2,510 N-m/m

SFO

= Mr = (836 ft-lb/ft) = 1.47 Mo (567 ft-lb/ft)

= Mr = (3,726 N-m/m) = 1.47 Mo (2,510 N-m/m)

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

tan( ) = the coefficient of friction (shear strength) between adjacent layers

The next step in the design process is to estimate the length of geogrid required. First, the depth to the geogrid, dg, must be specified. To complete Example 2-2, let dg = 2.30 ft (0.7 m). Another important assumption is that the geogrid will extend far enough into the passive zone to develop the full allowable design strength of the geogrid. In this case an average strength geogrid will be used, the full long-term allowable load is 1,250 lb/ft (18,249 N/m). A safety factor of 1.5 is applied to this value and the design strength is 833 lb/ft (12,161 N/m). The embedment length required to generate that force can be calculated as follows:

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

(H dg) [ tan (45 /2) tan (90 ) ]

length of geogrid embedded in the passive zone.

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

= 3.87 > 1.5 OK

= 3.87 > 1.5 OK

SFO

= Mr = (836 ft-lb/ft) + (833 lb/ft) (5.16 ft 2.30 ft) Mo (567 ft-lb/ft)

= (3,726 N-m/m) + (12,161 N/m) (1.57 m 0.7m) 2,510 N-m/m

= 5.7 > 2.0 OK

= 5.7 > 2.0 OK

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

Earth Anchors as a Tieback

A single row of earth anchors can be utilized to provide the additional tieback resistance. The earth anchors extend beyond the failure plane and provide additional resistance to overturning and sliding. This additional force can be utilized in our calculations as follows: Preloaded value of anchor.

Fe

= 10,500 lbs. (4,763 kg)

Fe

= Preloaded value of installed anchor.

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

= The maximum frictional resistance to sliding.

= (9,523 N/m + 1,747 N/m) tan (30) = 6,507 N/m

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 = = + =

= (6,507 N/m + 12,161 N/m) 4,800 N/m = 3.87 > 1.5 OK

The safety factor against overturning is:

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

= (13,278 N-m/m) = 5.3 > 2.0 OK

(2,510 N-m/m)

The anchor length requires a 3 foot (0.9 m) embedment into the passive zone. (Past the theoretical failure plane)

Lt

16

Coherent Gravity Walls

The theory behind coherent gravity walls is that two or more layers of geogrid make the reinforced soil mass behave as a single unit. The wall facing and reinforced soil mass are then treated as a unit and analyzed as a large simple gravity wall. The wall must be analyzed for stability in sliding and overturning. In addition, the number of layers of geogrid required, and their spacing, must be determined. Finally, the bearing pressure of such a large gravity wall must be checked to ensure that it doesn't exceed the allowable bearing capacity of the soil. Example 2-3: Figure 2-4 is a schematic diagram of a coherent gravity wall with two layers of geogrid. Figure 2-8 is a freebody diagram of the same wall. The subscripts r and o refer to the reinforced soil and the onsite soil, respectively. The values shown in the figure will be used to analyze the stability of the wall. Given:

Retained Soil

i
wr r

= 0 (Slope above wall) = 20 = 30 = = = = 0.2197 9.17 ft 120 lb/ft3 125 lb/ft3

(2.8 m)

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)

Figure 2-5. Typical Geogrid Reinforcement Embedment for 12 degree AB System

Figure 2-6. Typical Geogrid Reinforcement Embedment for 6 degree AB System

Figure 2-7. Typical Geogrid Reinforcement Embedment for 3 degree AB System

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

= (130 lb/ft3) (9.17 ft) (0.97 ft) = 1,156 lb/ft

= (2,061 kg/m3) (2.8 m) (0.3 m) = 16,983 N/m

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

= (125 lb/ft3) (9.17 ft) (6.0 ft

3

0.84 ft) = 5,915 lb/ft

= (2,002 kg/m ) (2.8 m) (1.83 m 0.256 m) = 86,556 N/m

The total weight of the coherent gravity wall is:

Ww

= Wf + Ws = (1,156 lb/ft) + (5,915 lb/ft) = 7,071 lb/ft

= (16,983 N/m) + (86,556 N/m) = 103,539 N/m

(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

The horizontal and vertical components of the active force are:

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

Diagram Ex. 2-2

Next, the total vertical force is calculated:

Vt

= Ww + Fv = (7,071 lb/ft) + (399 lb/ft) = 7,470 lb/ft

= (103,539 N/m) + (5,852 N/m) = 109,391 N/m

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

= (Vt) (Cf) = (7,470 lb/ft) tan (30) = 4,313 lb/ft

= (109,391 N/m) tan (30) = 63,157 N/m

18

The safety factor against sliding is:

SFS

= Fr = (4,313 lb/ft) = 3.5 > 1.5 OK Fh (1,229 lb/ft)

= Fr Fh = (63,157 N/m) = 3.5 > 1.5 OK (18,011 N/m)

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

=
=

Mr = (31,155 ft-lb/ft) = 8.3 > 2.0 OK Mo

Mo

(3,753 ft-lb/ft) (16,793 N-m/m)

Figure 2-8. Freebody Diagram of a Coherent Wall

Mr = (139,375 N-m/m) = 8.3> 2.0 OK

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.

Figure 2-9. Calculating the Spacing of Geogrid Layers

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)

The load on each layer of grid is given by:

dh = d1

d2

Pavg

d1 = distance from the top of the backfill to the

bottom of the zone supported by the layer of geogrid.

d2 = distance from the top of the backfill to the

top of the zone supported by the layer of geogrid.

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

To simplify the analysis, let:

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

The condition for internal stability is that: or where:

C (d1)2 C (d2)2 < 833 lb/ft

= (0.5) (125 lb/ft3) (0.2197) (cos 20) = 12.9 lb/ft3

= (0.5) (2,002 kg/m3) (0.2197) (cos 20) = 207 kg/m3

= 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

d2) = 9.17 ft 4.42 ft = 4.75 ft

= 2.8 m 1.36 m = 1.44 m

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

Bearing Pressure on the Underlying Soil

Another consideration in the design of a coherent gravity wall is the ability of the underlying soil to support the weight of a giant gravity wall. Most undisturbed soils can withstand pressures between 2,500 (120 kPa) and 4,000 (192 kPa) pounds per square foot. Figure 2-10 is a freebody diagram of the coherent gravity wall in Example 2-3. It shows the forces acting on the wall. With this information, the maximum bearing pressure can be calculated and compared to the allowable bearing pressure. The first step is to calculate the resultant vertical resisting force, exerted on the gravity wall by the soil:

R,

Fy = W + Fv

= (7,071 lb/ft + 399 lb/ft) = 7,470 lb/ft

= 103,539 N/m + 5,852 N/m = 109,391 N/m
Figure 2-10. Freebody Diagram for Bearing Pressure Analysis

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:

= (0.5) (6.13 ft) X = (0.5) (6.13 ft) 3.68 ft = 0.62 ft

= (0.5) (1.87 m) X = (0.5) (1.87 m) 1.12 m = 0.185 m

Assuming a linear bearing pressure distribution, the average bearing pressure occurs at the centerline of the wall. Its magnitude is: avg

= R = (7,470 lb/ft) = 1,219 lb/sq ft L (6.13 ft)

= R = 109,391 N/m = 58 kPa L 1.87 m

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

= (109,391 N/m) (0.188 m) = 20,566 N-m/m

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

The difference in stress due to the eccentricity is: mom

= (20,566 N-m/m) (0.177 m3) = 116 kPa

Diagram Ex. 2-3

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

(6) (R) (e) 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

Once the max is determined, compare it to ultimate bearing (qf):

qf
Where:

= () ( ) (B) (N ) + (c) (Nc) + (D) (Nq)

(Craig, p. 303, Soil Mechanics, Fifth Edition)

Nq Nc N = C D
f

= = =

exp ( tan ) tan2 (45 + (Nc 1) cot (Nq 1) tan (1.4 )

/2)

= Unit weight of foundation soils

Original Base Size:

= Cf = Cohesion of foundation soils = di = Depth of wall embedment = Buried block + Footing thickness (di).

The ultimate bearing (qf) should be designed to a factor of safety of 2.0 If

FSbearing

qf
max

< 2.0,

then increase the size of the base.

Increment to next size:

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:

Increase Width by:

di Bi

=
=

(di 1) + 0.5 ft.

(di 1) + 0.15 m

= =
=

(Bi 1) + (2) (W) (Bi 1) + (2) (1 ft)

(Bi 1) + (2) (0.3 m)
Base Footing Location:

The toe extension will be equal to the footing depth.

24

Attachment of the Geogrid to the Wall Facing

A logical question to ask is: What keeps the geogrid from slipping out from between the courses of Allan Block? The answer is that the weight of the Allan Blocks sitting on top of the geogrid creates friction between the blocks and the geogrid. In addition, some of the material used to fill the voids in the Allan Blocks becomes wedged in the apertures of the geogrid. This is called interlocking and results in additional resistance to sliding. Pullout tests were conducted at the University of Wisconsin-Platteville by Kliethermes, et al. Two sets of tests were run. In the first set, the voids of the Allan Blocks were filled with crushed limestone. In the second set, the voids were left empty. When the voids were filled with crushed limestone, there was an apparent coefficient of friction (ACF) of about 3.0 between the geogrid and the Allan Blocks. When the voids were left empty, the ACF was about 0.88. The surprising magnitude of the ACF for crushed limestone is due to a significant amount of interlocking between the crushed rock and the geogrid. The hollow core, pinless design of Allan Block raises questions on how the geogrid is attached to the wall facing. Allan Blocks gravel filled hollow core provides a multi-point interlock with the grid. As wall heights increase, our exclusive "rock lock" connection, combined with the weight of the Allan Block units, provides a more uniform block-to-grid interlock than any system on the market. Pullout tests were conducted at the University of Washington. A total of ten geogrids and two geofabrics were tested. Each product was tested three times under four loading conditions; 500 lbs. (226.8 kg), 1000 lbs. (453.6 kg), 1500 lbs. (680.4 kg), and 2000 lbs. (907.18 kg) vertical load per lineal foot of wall. The data compiled was consistent. From a total of 144 pullout tests, the results exhibited a uniform behavior based on grid strengths and normal loads applied. The test values increased with added vertical loads. A typical pullout equation for service and ultimate loads takes the form X + Y * N. The variables X and Y are constant values as determined by testing. The normal (vertical) load N, is load applied to the block. The location of the block to grid connection will be the determining factor for the amount of normal (vertical) load applied. Table 2-1 on page 50, shows the equations derived from the testing for each type of grid and fabric tested. The maximum force in the geogrid occurs at the intersection of the failure plane - the boundary between the active and passive zones of the retained soil. The force on the geogrid decreases as the horizontal distance from the failure plane increases. At the back of the wall, the force on the geogrid is reduced to about two-thirds of the maximum force (McKittrick, 1979).

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.

FSmech = Example 2-4 Given: H = 10.2 ft Ao d = = = = =

LTADS (Applied Load) (0.667)

(3.1 m)

0.4 2 in. (5.1 cm) 12 30 120 lb/ft3 (1,923 kg/m3)

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

= 888 lb/ft + 0.130(N)

= 12,964 N/m + 0.130(N)

Where the normal load (N) is:

= (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)

Therefore, the peak connection strength (Fcs) is:

Fcs

= 888 lb/ft + 0.130 (85 lb/ft) = 899 lb/ft

= 12,964 N/m + 0.130 (1,213 N/m) = 13,122 N/m

The applied load (Fis) is equal to the active force acting on the wall:

Fis

= Fa

= 45 lb/ft

(657 N/m)

FSconn =
=

(899 lb/ft) (45 lb/ft)(0.667)

(13,122 N/m) (657 N/m)(0.667)

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).

FSconn = Fcs Fid

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 =
=

= =

(13,122 N/m) (18,103 N/m)(0.667) 1.1 1.1, ok

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)

= (1,322 lb/ft) (1.67) (1,240 lb/ft) (0.67) = 2.6 1.1, ok

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

= ( ) (Ka) (d1) = (125 lb/ft3) (0.2197) (9.17 ft) = 252 lb/ft2

= (2,002 kg/m3) (0.2197) (2.8 m) = 1,232 kg/m2
Figure 2-11. Friction Attachment of Geogrid to Blocks

P2

= ( ) (Ka) (d2) = (125 lb/ft3) (0.2197) (5.44 ft) = 149 lb/ft2

= (2,002 kg/m3) (0.2197) (1.66 m) = 730 kg/m2

Pavg

= (0.5) (252 lb/ft2 + 149 lb/ft2) = 201 lb/ft2

= (0.5) (1,232 kg/m2 + 730 kg/m2) = 981 kg/m2

F1

= Pavg (dh) = (201 lb/ft2) (3.73 ft) = 750 lb/ft

= (981 kg/m2) (1.14 m) = 10,971 N/m
Diagram Ex. 2-3

The force on the geogrid at the back face of the wall will be approximately two-thirds of F1:

Fw

= (0.666) (F1) = (0.666) (750 lb/ft) = 500 lb/ft

= (0.666) (F1) = (0.666) (10,971 N/m) = 7,307 N/m

The force resisting pullout, caused by the weight of the aggregate-filled blocks above the bottom geogrid layer, is:

= (120 lb/ft3) (0.97 ft) (7.45 ft) = 867 lb/ft

= (1,923 kg/m3) (0.3 m) (2.27 m) = 12,847 N/m

27

Using Huesker 35/20-20 equation from Table 2-1:

= 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

The horizontal force on the top layer of geogrid is:

P2 P3 Pavg F2

= ( ) (Ka) (d2) = (125 lb/ft3) (0.2197) (5.44 ft) = 149 lb/ft2

= ( ) (Ka) (d2) = (2,002 kg/m3) (0.2197) (1.67 m) = 730 kg/m2

= ( ) (Ka) (d3) = (125 lb/ft3) (0.2197) (0 ft) = 0 lb/ft2

= ( ) (Ka) (d3) = (2,002 kg/m3) (0.2197) (0 m) = 0 kg/m2

= (0.5) (149 lb/ft2 + 0 lb/ft2) = 75 lb/ft2

= (0.5) (730 kg/m2 + 0 kg/m2) = 365 kg/m2

= (Pavg) (dh) = (75 lb/ft2) (5.44 ft) = 408 lb/ft

= (Pavg) (dh) = (365 kg/m2) (1.67 m) = 6,012 N/m

The force on the geogrid at the back face of the wall will be approximately two-thirds of

F2:

Fw

= (0.666) (F2) = (0.666) (408 lb/ft) = 272 lb/ft

= (0.666) (F2) = (0.666) (6,012 N/m) = 4,004 N/m

The force resisting pullout, caused by the weight of the aggregate filled blocks above the top geogrid layer, is:

N2 P

W2 = (120 lb/ft3) (0.97 ft) (3.44 ft) = 400 lb/ft

= W2 = (1,923 kg/m3) (0.3 m) (1.05 m) = 5,942 N/m

= Fr = 888 lb/ft + 0.130 (400 lb/ft) = 940 lb/ft

= Fr = 12,964 N/m + 0.130 (5,942 N/m) = 13,736 N/m

The safety factor against pullout for the top layer of geogrid is:

SFP

= (940 lb/ft) = 3.45 (272 lb/ft)

= (13,736 N/m) (4,004 N/m)

= 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

= (0.666) (1100 lb/ft) = 732 lb/ft

= (0.666) (16,059 N/m) = 10,695 N/m

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 safety factor against pullout the unit weight of the wall facing the width of the wall facing (from front to back) the depth at which the pullout resistance equals the long-term allowable design load of the geogrid.

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.

Diagram Ex. 2-3

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)

CASE 3 X > L2 Pq = 0 Sliding Force: Fs = 0 Overturning Moment: Mq = 0

Figure 3-1. Effect of Uniform Surcharge on a Retaining Wall

Surcharges on Simple Gravity Walls

Example 3-1: Figure 3-2 shows the simple gravity wall of Example 2-1 with a uniform surcharge of 120 lb/ft (586 kg/m2) behind it. Assume that the surcharge is a sidewalk running parallel to the face of the wall. The sidewalk is 4 feet wide (1.22 m) and is located right next to the back of the wall. The first step in the analysis is to calculate the pressure on the retaining wall due to the surcharge:

Pq

= (q) (Ka) = (120 lb/ft2) (0.2197) = 26 lb/ft2

= (586 kg/m2) (0.2197) = 129 kg/m2

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

Figure 3-2. Simple Gravity Retaining Wall with Surcharge

= (129 kg/m2) cos (20) = 121 kg/m2 = 1,189 Pa = (129 kg/m2) sin (20) = 44 kg/m2 = 433 Pa

Finally, the total surcharge forces on the wall are calculated:

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

The safety factor against sliding is:

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

Mr = (477 ft-lb/ft) Mo (311 ft-lb/ft)

= 1.53

= (2,140 N-m/m) (1,408 N-m/m)

= 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

Surcharges on Tieback Walls

Just as in the case of simple gravity walls, a surcharge on a tieback wall adds a horizontal force that contributes to wall failure. However, the surcharge also adds to the vertical force on the geogrid and this helps resist wall failure. The vertical force due to the surcharge is transmitted down through the soil and the full force of the surcharge is felt on the geogrid. To be conservative and to simplify the analysis, we will assume that the surcharge is felt only by the portion of the geogrid lying directly beneath the surcharge. Example 3-2: Figure 3-4a. Tieback Retaining Wall Analyze the tieback wall of Example 2-2 with a surcharge of 120 lb/sq ft (586 kg/m2) beginning 2.0 ft (0.61 m) behind the front wall face and ending 6.0 ft (1.83 m) behind the front wall face. Figure 3-4a is a schematic diagram of the wall and Figure 3-4b is a freebody diagram showing the forces on the wall. The first step in the analysis is to calculate the maximum potential restraining force on the geogrid. This force has two components -- the force due to the weight of the soil on top of the geogrid and the force due to the surcharge. These two components are represented by the terms in the square brackets:

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

The maximum potential restraining force on the geogrid is:

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

= (5,747 Pa) (0.2197) = 1,263 Pa

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

Finally, the total surcharge forces on the wall are calculated:

Fqh

= (Pqh) (Hq) = (24 lb/ft2) (2.33 ft) = 56 lb/ft

= (1,081 Pa) (0.71 m) = 768 N/m

Fqv

= (Pqv) (Hq) = (9 lb/ft2) (2.33 ft) = 21 lb/ft

= (426 Pa) (0.71 m) = 302 N/m

Next, the safety factors can be calculated:

Figure 3-4b. Tieback Retaining Wall

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) = + + +
= + + +

(651 lb/ft) (120 lb/ft) (21 lb/ft) [ (833 lb/ft)

[ (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

=
=

Mr = (3,244 ft-lb/ft) = 5.13 Mo (632 ft-lb/ft)

Mr = Mo (14,399 N-m/m) = 5.13 (2,782 N-m/m)

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

Surcharges on Coherent Gravity Walls

Analyzing the effects of a surcharge on a coherent gravity wall is a two-part problem. First, the effect on the entire reinforced soil mass (external stability) must be analyzed. The surcharge will have an effect on both sliding failure and overturning failure. Second, the effect of the surcharge on the individual layers of geogrid (internal stability) must be analyzed. The surcharge will affect the stress in each layer of geogrid and will influence the spacing of the layers.

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

The new safety factor against sliding is:

SFS

= Fr = (4,521 lb/ft) Fh (1,229 lb/ft)

= 3.68

= (66,176 N/m) = 3.68 (18,011 N/m)

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

(32,411 ft-lb/ft) = 8.64 (3,753 ft-lb/ft)

= (144,212 N-m/m) = 8.64 (16,793 N-m/m)

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

= (Fq) cos ( wo) = (282 lb/ft) cos (18) = 268 lb/ft

= (4,122 N/m) cos (18) = 3,920 N/m

Fqv

= (Fq) sin ( wo) = (282 lb/ft) sin (18) = 87 lb/ft

= (4,122 N/m) sin (18) = 1,274 N/m

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

= (Fq) cos ( wo) = (282 lb/ft) cos (18 ) = 268 lb/ft

= (4,122 N/m) cos (18) = 3,920 N/m

Fqv

= (Fq) sin ( wo) = (282 lb/ft) sin (18 ) = 87 lb/ft

= (4,122 N/m) sin (18) = 1,274 N/m

The force resisting sliding is:

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

The force causing sliding is:

Fs

= Fh + Fqh = (1,229 lb/ft) + (268 lb/ft) = 1,497 lb/ft

= (18,011 N/m) + (3,920 N/m) = 21,931 N/m

37

The safety factor against sliding is:

SFS

= (4,467 lb/ft) = 2.98 (1,497 lb/ft)

= (65,410 N/m) (21,931 N/m) = 2.98

The sum of the moments resisting overturning is:

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

The sum of the moments causing overturning is:

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

= (32,723 ft-lb/ft) = 6.57 (4,982 ft-lb/ft)

= (145,609 N-m/m) = 6.57 (22,281 N-m/m)

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:

Figure 3-6. Coherent Gravity Wall with Surcharge

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:

Figure 3-7. Pressure Distributions Due to the Weight and Surcharge

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

The quadratic formula is:

= ax2 + bx + c x = dh, let: b = ( 2) [ (d1) (a) + (q) (z) ] c = (2) (Fga) 39 z = (Kar) cos ( wr) a = ( r) (z)

To use the quadratic formula to solve for

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:

= ( r) (Kar) cos ( wr) = (125 lb/ft3) (0.2197) cos (20 ) = 26 lb/ft3

= (2,002 kg/m3) (0.2197) cos (20) = 413 kg/m3

= (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

= (2) (Fga) = (2) (833 lb/ft) = 1,666 lb/ft

= (2) (12,161 N/m) = 2,479 kg/m = 24,322 N/m

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

= 3.97 ft (1.2 m) = d1 dh = 9.17 ft 3.97 ft = 5.2 ft

= 2.8 m 1.2 m = 1.6 m = (0.5) (1.2 m) = 0.6 m

The first layer of geogrid should be placed at a height equal to one half of dh:

hg

= (0.5) (3.97 ft) = 1.99 ft

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

The total horizontal force on the wall above height d2 is:

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):

hg = 6.35 ft (1.9 m).

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

The total horizontal force on the wall facing is:

Ft

= (1,085 lb/ft) + (180 lb/ft) = 1,265 lb/ft

= (15,894 N/m) + (2,634 N/m) = 18,528 N/m

The number of layers of geogrid required is:

= (1,265 lb/ft) = 1.52 (833 lb/ft)

= (18,528 N/m) (12,161 N/m) = 1.52

Therefore, 2 layers of geogrid are required.

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 3-8. Retaining Wall with Three Tiers

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.)

Simple Gravity Walls With Sloped Backfill

As discussed in Chapter One, Coulomb's equation for the active force on the wall includes a term that changes the magnitude of the pressure coefficient as the slope of the backfill changes. The active pressure coefficient of Coulomb's equation is given by: where:

i = the slope of the backfill. Ka =

csc ( ) sin ( ) sin ( + w) + sin ( + w) sin ( sin ( i)

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

Tieback Walls with Sloped Backfill

Just as in the case of simple gravity walls, the effect of the sloping backfill is automatically taken into account when calculating the active force using Coulomb's equation. However, the sloped backfill also has an effect on the maximum potential restraining force on the geogrid that should be taken into account. Figure 4-1 shows the tieback wall of Example 2-2, but with the backfill sloped at 18 . In Example 2-2, the maximum potential restraining force on the geogrid was calculated to be 845 lb/ft (12,336 N/m) (see page 2-12). Calculate the maximum potential restraining force on the geogrid for the wall in Figure 4-1 and compare it to the value calculated in Example 2-2. Example 4-2: Given: Figure 4-1. Tieback Wall with Sloped Backfill

i
w

= 18 = 20 = 30 = 78

Ka dg Hg

= 0.2847 = 2.3 ft (0.7 m) = 2.86 ft (0.87 m)

H Lg

= 5.16 ft (1.57 m) = 5.0 ft (1.52 m) 3 = 120 lb/ft (1,923 kg/m3)

Unit weight of wall facing

= 130 lb/ft3 (2,061 kg/m3)

The maximum potential restraining force on the geogrid is given by:

Fg

= (2) (Ci) ( ) (davg) (Le) tan ( )

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

/2) (H) tan (90 )

= (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

= L2 L1 = 4.51 ft 1.52 ft = 2.99 ft

= 1.37 m 0.47 m = 0.9 m

Now, davg can be calculated and the maximum potential restraining force on the geogrid can be determined:

davg

= (0.5) (d1 + d2) = (0.5) (2.79 ft + 3.77 ft) = 3.28 ft

= (0.5) (0.85 m + 1.15 m) = 1.0 m

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

= (0.5) (120 lb/ft3) (0.2847) (5.16 ft)2 = 455 lb/ft

= (0.5) (1,923 kg/m3) (0.2847) (1.57 m)2 = 6,619 N/m

The horizontal and vertical components of the active force are:

Fh Fv

= (455 lb/ft) cos (20) = 428 lb/ft

= (6,619 N/m) cos (20) = 6,220 N/m

= (455 lb/ft) sin (20 ) = 156 lb/ft

= (6,619 N/m) sin (20) = 2,264 N/m

The force resisting sliding is:

Fr

= (651 lb/ft + 156 lb/ft) tan (30) = 466 lb/ft

= (9,523 N/m + 2,264 N/m) tan (30) = 6,805 N/m

The safety factor against sliding is:

SFS

= (466 lb/ft + 833 lb/ft) = 3.04 (428 lb/ft)

= (6,805 N/m + 12,161 N/m) = 3.04 (6,220 N/m)

45

The safety factor against overturning is:

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

= (3,267 ft-lb/ft) = 4.44 (735 ft-lb/ft)

= (14,528 N-m/m) = 4.44 (3,252 N-m/m)

With the backfill sloped at 18, the wall is still stable although the safety factors have been reduced by about 20%.

46

Coherent Gravity Walls With Sloped Backfill

One effect of a sloped backfill on a coherent gravity wall is to increase the weight of the wall and consequently, the resistance to sliding. The increased weight is due to the backfill soil that is located above the wall facing and over the reinforced soil mass. In Figure 4-2, the area designated Wt contains the soil that contributes the extra weight. The total weight of the wall can be calculated by adding the weight of the rectangular section, Wr to the weight of the triangular section, Wt:

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

Figure 4-2. Coherent Gravity Wall with Sloped Backfill

Ww

= (Wr) + (Wt) = (7,071 lb/ft) + (731 lb/ft) = 7,802 lb/ft

= (103,319 N/m) + (10,685 N/m) = 114,004 N/m

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)

The first step is to calculate the effective height,

He at the rear of the coherent gravity wall:

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

Next, the active force on the coherent gravity wall is calculated:

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

The horizontal component of the active force is:

Fh

= (Fa) cos ( wo) = (2,552 lb/ft) cos (18) = 2,427 lb/ft

= (37,289 N/m) cos (18) = 35,464 N/m

The vertical component of the active force is:

Fv

= (Fa) sin ( wo) = (2,552 lb/ft) sin (18) = 789 lb/ft

= (37,289 N/m) sin (18) = 11,523 N/m

The force resisting sliding is:

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

The safety factor against sliding is:

SFS

= Fr = (4, 960 lb/ft) = 2.04 Fh (2,427 lb/ft)

= (72,473 N/m) (35,464 N/m)

= 2.04

The moment resisting overturning is:

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

The moment causing overturning is:

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

The safety factor against overturning is:

SFO

=
=

Mr = (43,551 ft-lb/ft) = 4.85 Mo (8,987 ft-lb/ft)

Mr Mo = (193,836 N-m/m) (40,034 N-m/m) = 4.85

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

Figure 4-3. Failure Surface in a Coherent Gravity Wall

Figure 4-4. Effect of Sloped Backfill on Spacing of Geogrid Layers.

49

For the wall in Figure 4-4 with a backfill slope of 26,

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 < 1056.20 lbs for N > 1056.20 lbs

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

Table 2-1 Pullout Resistance Equations

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

cos ( ) cos ( )2 cos ( w sin ( +

w)

+ )

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

= vertical acceleration coefficient = horizontal acceleration coefficient

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:

Kh = 0.67 Ao (Ao) (1 in) d

Kh

= 0.67 Ao (Ao) (2.5 cm) d

( (

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

d > 1, then: Kh = 0.67 Ao (Ao) (1 in) d

Kh = 0.67 Ao (Ao) (2.5cm) d

( (

) )

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

EXAMPLE 5-1 Given: i wi

d i
Find:

= = = =

34 2/3(34) = 23 3 in (7.6 cm) 0

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 + )

cos ( ) cos( )2 cos ( w sin ( +

w)

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

= 0.67 Ao (Ao)(1 in) d

0.25

Kh = 0.67 Ao (Ao)(2.5 cm)

d

Kh

= 0.67 (0.4) (0.4)(1 in) 3 in

0.25

= 0.162

Kh = 0.67 (0.4)

( (

(0.4)(2.5 cm) 7.5 cm

) )

0.25

0.25

= 0.162

The seismic inertia angle ( ) is:

= atan

Kh 1 + Kv

= atan

0.162 1+0

= 9.2

Finally, the dynamic earth pressure coefficient for the infill is:

Kaei

[ [

cos (34 + 12 9.2)2

cos (9.2) cos (12)2 cos (23 12 + 9.2)

1+

sin (34 + 23) sin (34 0 9.2)

cos (23 12 + 9.2) cos (12 + 0) 53

] ]

= 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

= 0.67 Ao (Ao) (1 in) d

0.25

Kh = 0.67 Ao (Ao) (2.5 cm) d

0.25

Kh

(0.4) (1 in) = 0.67 (0.4) 3 in

= 0.162

(0.4) (2.5 cm) Kh = 0.67 (0.4) 7.5 cm

( (

0.25

0.25

= 0.162

Next, the seismic inertia angle ( ) can be calculated:

= atan

Kh 1 + Kv

= atan

0.162 1+0

= 9.2

The dynamic earth pressure coefficient for the retained soil is:

Kae

[ [
1+

cos (28 + 12 9.2)2

cos (9.2) cos (12)2 cos (19 12 + 9.2) sin (28 + 19) sin (28 0 9.2)

cos (19 12 + 9.2) cos (12 + 0)

] ]

0.361

DYNAMIC EARTH FORCE ON THE WALL

The dynamic earth force is based on a pseudo-static approach using the Mononobe-Okabe (M-O) method. Figures 5-1, 5-2, and 5-3 illustrate the pressure distributions for the active force, dynamic earth increment, and the dynamic earth force. The magnitude of the dynamic earth force is:

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

Figure 5-1. Static Component of Active Pressure Distribution

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

Figure 5-3. Dynamic Earth Force Pressure Distribution

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).

SIMPLE GRAVITY WALL WITH SEISMIC INFLUENCE

In seismic analysis, the weight of a simple gravity wall must counteract the static and temporary dynamic forces of the retained soil. Figure 5-4 illustrates the forces on a simple gravity wall during a seismic event. In the following example, the same equilibrium principles apply as in a static gravity wall analysis with additional consideration for the seismic earth force and the allowed reductions in required factors of safety for sliding and overturning. Example 5-2: Given: i w

= = = = = = =

= 30 i d Ao

= = = =

78

Kai Kar H Kaei

2/3( ) = 20 (90 - ) = 12 0.2197 0.2197 2.20 ft (0.67 m) 0.5260

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

= (0.5) (1 + 0) (0.5260) (1,923 kg/m3) (0.67)2 = 2,227 N/m

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

= (DFdyn) cos ( w) = (89 lb/ft) cos (20) = 84 lb/ft

= (1,297 N/m) cos (20) = 1219 N/m

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

= (DFdyn) sin ( w) = (89 lb/ft) sin (20) = 30 lb/ft

= (1,297 N/m) sin (20) = 444 N/m

Fav

The next step is to determine the resisting forces:

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

(190 lb/ft) (60 lb/ft + 84 lb/ft)

(2,755 N/m) (874 N/m + 1,219 N/m)

= 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 = =
=

(Force resisting sliding) (Force driving sliding)

Fr Fh

(Wf + Fav) tan Fh 1.5 ok

1.5 ok

(277 lb/ft + 22 lb/ft) tan (30) (60 lb)

(4,010 + N/m + 318 N/m) tan (30) (874 N/m)

= 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).

The moments resisting overturning (Mr):

The weight of the wall, the vertical component of the active force, and the vertical component of the dynamic earth increment force contribute to the moment resisting overturning failure of the wall.

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 :

(s = setback per block, L = length of geogrid)

57

The moments causing overturning (Mo):

The horizontal components of the active and dynamic forces contribute to the moment causing overturning failure of the wall.

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

(221 ft-lb/ft) (155 ft-lb/ft)

(976 N-m/m) (685 N-m/m)

= 1.4 < 1.5,

= 1.4 < 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

= (874 N/m) (0.333) (0.67 m) = 195 N-m/m

SFOstatic = Mr Mo 2.0 ok 2.0

= (915 N-m/m) (195 N-m/m) = 4.7 2.0 ok

58

COHERENT GRAVITY WALL WITH SEISMIC INFLUENCE

Seismic inertial force (Pir)
In the external stability analysis of a geogrid reinforced retaining wall during a seismic event, a seismic inertial force (Pir) is introduced. The seismic inertial force is the sum of the weight components that exert a horizontal inertial force within a reinforced soil mass during a seismic event. The three components exerting this inertial force are the block facing, the reinforced soil mass, and the backslope angle.

Pir

= Khr (Wf + Ws + Wi)

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.

Factor of safety against sliding

Calculating the factor of safety against sliding for a coherent gravity wall follows the same stability criteria as a simple gravity wall. The principle being that the forces resisting sliding must be 1.1 times the forces causing sliding. As can be seen below, the formula for calculating the factor of safety sliding is the same as the gravity wall analysis with the addition of the seismic inertial force (Pir) and the weight of the reinforced soil (Ws).

SFSseismic = Frseismic Fah + DFdynh + Pir 1.1

Figure 5-5. Free Body Diagram of a Coherent Gravity Wall Under Seismic Influence

Where:

Frseismic = (Fav + DFdynv + Wf + Ws) tan ( i) Factor of safety against overturning

The factor of safety against overturning is computed in the same way as a simple gravity wall with the addition of the seismic inertial force (Pir) and the weight of the reinforced soil (Ws).

SFOseismic Mr Mo = (Wf) (Wfarm) + (Ws) (Wsarm) + (Fav) (Faarmv) + (DFdynv) (DFdynarmv) (Fah) (Faarmh) + (DFdynh) (DFdynarmh) + (Pir) (Hir) 1.5

59

Example 5-3: Given: i w

= 30 Kai Kar Kaei Kaer

= 78 = 0.2197 = 0.2197 = 0.3870 = 0.3870

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)

= 2/3( ) = 20 = 0 = = = = 2 in (5.1 cm) 0.4 10.0 ft (3.05 m) 0 lb/ft

= (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 )

Find: The safety factor against sliding and overturning.

Safety Factor Against Sliding

Based on the given information, we must first determine the frictional resistance to sliding (Fr).

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

Next, the seismic inertial force is calculated:

Pir
Since,

= Khr (Wf + Ws + Wi)

d = 2 in (5.1 cm) Khr

(Ao) (1 in) = (0.67) (Ao) d

(0.4) (1 in) = (0.67) (0.4) 2 in = 0.179 Pir

( (

) )

0.25

= (0.67) (Ao) (Ao) (2.5cm) d

0.25

= (0.67) (0.4) (0.4) (2.5cm) 5.1 cm = 0.179

( (

) )

0.25

0.25

= 0.179 (1,292 lb/ft + 6,425 lb/ft + 0 ) = 1,381 lb/ft

= 0.179 (18,862 N/m + 93,799 N/m + 0 ) = 20,166 N/m

Finally, the safety factor against sliding can be calculated:

SFSseismic = (Forces resisting sliding) (Forces driving sliding) =

=

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

Fr (Fa) cos ( w) 1.5 ok

1.5 ok

Safety Factor Against Overturning

The safety factor against overturning is equal to the moments resisting overturning divided by the moments driving overturning (Mr / Mo) and must be greater than or equal to 1.5. The moments resisting overturning (Mr):

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

(Moments resisting overturning) (Moments driving overturning)

Mr Mo

1.5
1.5 ok

= (37,492 ft-lb /ft) = 4.5 (8,293 ft-lb/ft)

1.5 ok 61

= (166,966 N-m/m) = 4.5 (36,925 N-m/m)

Comparing the seismic (SFO) to the below static (SFO):

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

SFOstatic = (Moments resisting overturning) (Moments driving overturning) = 8.4 = Mr Mo

= (158,736 N-m/m) (18,950 N-m/m) = 8.4 1.5 ok

= (35,644 ft-lb /ft) (4,256 ft-lb/ft)

Internal Stability

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.

Factor of Safety Geogrid Tensile Overstress

In order to calculate the factor of safety for geogrid tensile overstress, the tensile force on each grid must first be determined. In a seismic event, the sum of the active force (Fa), the dynamic earth force increment (DFdyn), and the seismic inertial force (Pir) represent the tensile force on each layer of geogrid.

Fid
Where:

= Fa + DFdyn + Pir = (Ka) cos ( w) ( ) (Ac) (0.5) = 0.8 - 0.6 (He) (grid) (H) (He)

Fa DFdyn and,

)]

(Kae) cos ( w) ( ) (Ac)

Pir = (Kh) ( ) (Ac) 62

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.

FSoverstressed = LTDS Fid 1.0

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.

Geogrid / Block Connection Capacity

The factor of safety for connection strength is equal to the peak connection strength divided by the tensile force on that layer of grid multiplied by 2/3. We take the additional 2/3rds reduction on the tensile force due to the reality that some of the tensile force is absorbed by the soil in the influence area.

FSconn =

Fcs Fid (0.667)

1.1

Geogrid Pullout from the Soil

The factor of safety for geogrid pullout from the soil is equal to the pullout capacity of the geogrid divided by the tensile force on each geogrid.

FSpullout
where,

= Fp Fid

1.1

Fp

= 2 (Ci) tan ( ) [(He) (grid) ( ) (Le)]

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).

Localized Stability, Top of the Wall Stability

To determine local or top of the wall stability (SFS and SFO), the wall parameters and soils forces in the unreinforced portion of the retaining wall are focused on. The unreinforced height of the wall (Ht) is simply the total height of the wall minus the elevation at which the last grid layer is placed. The local weight of the facing is:

Wf

= (Ht) (t) ( wall)

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

= 805 lb/ft + (Wf) tan (56)

= 11,752 N/m + (Wf) tan (56)

63

The soil and surcharge forces are as follows: Active Force: Dynamic Force:

Fa Fae Pir

= =

(0.5) (Ka) ( ) (Ht)2 (0.5) (1 + Kv) (Kae) ( ) (Ht)2 Fae - Fa

Dynamic Earth Force Infrement: Seismic Inertial Force:

DFdyn = = (Kh) (Wf)

Finally, the safety factor equations are:

SFSlocalstatic = Fr (Fa) cos ( w) 1.5

SFSlocalseismic = Fr (Fa + DFdyn + Pir) cos ( w) 1.1

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 =

[ [ [

csc ( ) sin ( ) sin ( + w) + sin ( + sin (

w)

sin (

i)

i)

csc (87) sin (87 36) sin (87 + 24) +

sin (36 + 24) sin (36 0) sin (87 0)

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

= (Fa) cos ( w) = (116 ft/lb) cos (24) = 106 lb/ft

= (Fa) cos ( w) = (1,693 N/m) cos (24) = 1,547 N/m

= (Fa) sin ( w) = (116 ft/lb) sin (24) = 47 lb/ft

= (Fa) sin ( w) = (1,693 N/m) sin (24) = 689 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

= Fr = 309 lb/ft = 2.92 > 1.5 Fh 106 lb/ft = Fr = 4,511 N/m

Fh 1,547 N/m = 2.92 > 1.5

OK
OK

66

Find: The safety factor against overturning, SFO.

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

= 2.48 > 2.0

OK

(106 ft-lb/ft)
= (1,176 N-m/m)
(464 N-m/m)

= 2.48 > 2.0 OK

Example S-2: Given:

= 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 =

[ [ [

csc ( ) sin ( ) sin ( + w) + sin ( + w) sin ( sin ( i)

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

= (Fa) cos ( w) = (86 lb/ft) cos (24) = 79 lb/ft

= (Fa) cos ( w) = (1,222 N/m) cos (24) = 1,116 N/m

= (Fa) sin ( w) = (86 lb/ft) sin (24) = 35 lb/ft

= (Fa) sin ( w) = (1,222 N/m) sin (24) = 497 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

= (q) (Ka) = (250 lb/ft2) (0.1599) = 40 lb/ft2

= (q) (Ka) = (11,974 N/m2) (0.1599) = 1,916 Pa

= (Pq) cos ( w) = (40 lb/ft2) cos (24) = 37 lb/ft2

= (Pq) cos ( w) = (1,916 Pa) cos (24) = 1,750 Pa

= (Pq) sin ( w) = (40 lb/ft2) sin (24) = 16 lb/ft2

= (Pq) sin ( w) = (1,916 Pa) sin (24) = 779 Pa

Fqh Fqv

= (Pqh) (H) = (37 lb/ft2) (3.0 ft) = 111 lb/ft

= (Pqh) (H) = (1,772 Pa) (0.9 m) = 1,595 N/m

= (Pqv) (H) = (16 lb/ft2) (3.0 ft) = 48 lb/ft

= (Pqv) (H) = (766 Pa) (0.9 m) = 690 N/m

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

Find: The safety factor against overturning, SFO.

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

=
=

Mr = (409 ft-lb/ft) Mo (245 ft-lb/ft)

Mr = (1,795 N-m/m) Mo (1,052 N-m/m)

= 1.7 > 2.0

= 1.7 > 2.0

NOT OK
NOT OK

Example S-3: Given:

= 27 H = 9.0 ft (2.74 m) = 90 - 12 = 78

i Ci
w

= =

0 0.75 q
w

= 120 lb/ft3 = 130 lb/ft3

(1,923 kg/m3) (2,061 kg/m3)

= (.666) (27) = 18 csc ( ) sin ( ) sin ( + w) + sin ( + sin (

= 250 lb/ft2 (11,974 Pa)

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)

0.794507864 2 0.997257186 + 0.572880034

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

= (Fa) cos ( w) = (1,244 lb/ft) cos (18) = 1,183 lb/ft

= (Fa) cos ( w) = (18,128 N/m) cos (18) = 17,241 N/m

= (Fa) sin ( w) = (1,244 lb/ft) sin (18) = 384 lb/ft

= (Fa) sin ( w) = (18,128 N/m) sin (18) = 5,602 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

= Fr = 774 lb/ft Fh 1,183 lb/ft

= Fr = 11,323 N/m Fh 17,241 N/m

= 0.65 > 1.5

= 0.65 > 1.5

NOT OK (Need Geogrid)

NOT OK (Need Geogrid)

Analyze with single layer of grid.

Fg
Find

= 2 (dg) ( ) (Le) (Ci) tan ( ) Le. =

=

Le

833 lb/ft 2 (4.44 ft) (120 lb/ft3) (0.75) tan (27)

12,161 N/m 2 (1.35 m) (18,865 N/m) (0.75) tan (27)

= 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

Actual Embedment Length.

Le

= (Lt Lw La) = 5 ft 0.85 ft (9 ft 4.44 ft) (0.4) = 2.33 ft

= 1.524 m 0.259 m (2.74 m 1.35 m) (0.4) = 0.71 m

Maximum potential restraining force with

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

but max is 833 lb/ft

but max is 12,161 N/m

= Fr + Fg = 774 lb/ft + 833 lb/ft Fh 1,183 lb/ft

= 1.36 > 1.5

NOT OK (Needs More Geogrid)

NOT OK (Needs More Geogrid)

= Fr + Fg = 11,323 N/m + 12,161 N/m Fh 17,241 N/m

= 1.36 > 1.5

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

= Wf + Ws = 1,135 lb/ft + 5,794 lb/ft = 6,929 lb/ft

= Wf + Ws = 16,620 N/m + 84,163 N/m = 100,783 N/m

Vertical Force; Solve using onsite soil

Vt Fr

= Ww + Fv = 6,929 lb/ft + 384 lb/ft = 7,313 lb/ft

= Ww + Fv = 100,783 N/m + 5,602 N/m = 106,385 N/m

= (Vt) (Cf) = (7,313 lb/ft) tan (27)

= (Vt) (Cf) = (106,385 N/m) tan (27)

= 3,726 lb/ft
= 54,206 N/m

Pressure on the retaining wall due to the surcharge

Pq

= (q) (Ka) = (250 lb/ft2) (0.256) = 64 lb/ft2

= (q) (Ka) = (11,974 Pa) (0.256) = 3,065 Pa

Find the horizontal and vertical components of the pressure.

Pqh Pqv

= (Pq) cos ( wo) = (64 lb/ft2) cos (18) = 61 lb/ft2

= (Pq) cos ( wo) = (3,065 Pa) cos (18) = 2,915 Pa

= (Pq) sin ( wo)

= (Pq) sin ( wo)

= (64 lb/ft2) sin (18) = 20 lb/ft2

= (3,065 Pa) sin (18) = 947 Pa

Finally, the total surcharge forces on the wall are calculated:

Fqh Fqv

= (Pqh) (H) = (61 lb/ft2) (9.0 ft) = 549 lb/ft

= (Pqh) (H) = (2,915 Pa) (2.74 m) = 7,987 N/m

= (Pqv) (H)
= (Pqv) (H)

= (20 lb/ft2) (9.0 ft) = 180 lb/ft

= (947 Pa) (2.74 m) = 2,598 N/m

Find the safety factor against sliding:

SFS

= Fr + (Fqv) tan Fh + Fqh

= Fr + (Fqv) (Fqv) Fh + Fqh

= 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

= 2.2 > 1.5 OK

= 2.208 > 1.5 OK

71

Find the safety factor against overturning:

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

= 5.3 > 2.0

= 5.3 > 2.0

OK
OK

(6,016 ft-lb/ft)
(26,665 N/m)

Mr = (140,184 N/m)

Internal Stability:
r r wr

= 30 = 125 lb/ft3 (2,002 kg/m3) = 0.666 (30) = 20

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

= (q) (Kar) cos ( wr ) = (250 lb/ft2) (0.2197) cos (20) = 52 lb/ft2

= (q) (Kar) cos ( wr) = (11,974 Pa) (0.2197) cos (20) = 2,472 Pa

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

= =
= =

2 [ (d1) (a) 571 lb/ft2

2 [ (d1) (a) 27,148 Pa

(q) (z) ] =
(q) (z) ] =

2 [ (9.0 ft) (26 lb/ft3)

(250 lb/ft2) (0.2065) ]

(11,974 Pa) (0.2065) ]

2 [ (2.74 m) (413 kg/m3)

= (2) (Fga) = (2) (833 lb/ft) = 1,666 lb/ft

= (2) (Fga) = (2) (12,161 N/m) = 24,322 N/m

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

dh = 9.0 ft 3.5 ft = 5.5 ft

dh = 2.74 m 1.07 m = 1.67 m

The first layer of geogrid is placed at 1/2 dh.

hg

= 1/2 dh = 1/2 (3.5 ft) = 1.75 ft

= 1/2 dh = 1/2 (1.07 m) = 0.53 m

Analysis to determine if more than one additional layer of geogrid is required;

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

= (q) (Kar) (d2 = 194 lb/ft

= (q) (Kar) (d2 = 2,818 N/m

hg) cos ( wr ) = (250 lb/ft2) (0.2197) (5.5 ft

1.75 ft) cos (20)

hg) cos ( wr) = (11,974 Pa) (0.2197) (1.67 m 0.53 m) cos (20)

73

Ft Ft hg

= Fh
= Fh

Qh = 360 lb/ft + 194 lb/ft = 554 lb/ft

Qh = 5,211 N/m + 2,818 N/m = 8,029 N/m

= 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)

0.5 (dh) = (9.0 ft 5.5 ft) + 0.5 (5.5) = 6.25 ft

0.5 (dh) = (2.74 m 1.67 m) + 0.5 (1.67 m) = 1.9 m

Check number of layers of geogrid required.

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 = 374 lb/ft

hg) cos ( wr ) = (250 lb/ft2) (0.2197) (9.0 ft

1.75 ft) cos (20)

0.53 m) cos (20)

= (q) (Kar) (H hg) cos ( wr) = (11,974 N/m2) (0.2197) (2.74 m = 5,463 N/m

Ft

= Fh
= Fh

Qh = 1,045 lb/ft + 374 lb/ft = 1,419 lb/ft

Qh = 15,220 N/m + 5,463 N/m = 20,683 N/m

Ft = N = 1,419 lb/ft LTADS 833 lb/ft

= N = 20,683 N/m 12,161 N/m

= 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

Surcharge Above Wall, Slope Below Wall Slope Surcharge

Roadway Application

Roadway Surcharge

Live Surcharge On Wall Multi Terraces

Allan Block Retaining Wall Systems

Visit our web site allanblock.com

Allan Block Corporation 7400 Metro Blvd., #185, Edina, MN 952-835-5309 952-835-0013 - Fax US Patents #4,909,010 & 5,484,236 Canadian Patent #2,012,286 & 2,133,675 Taiwan Patent #NI-090824 Australian Patent #133,306 & 682,394 Intl. & Other Patents Pending ICBO #5087 Copyright 1999 engman1099