You are on page 1of 12

Engineering manual No.


Updated: 02/2016

Design of a cantilever wall
Program: Cantilever wall

File: Demo_manual_02.guz

In this chapter, the design of a cantilever wall and its overall analysis are described.

Design a cantilever wall with a height of 4,0 m and analyze it according to EN 1997-1 (EC 7-1,
Design approach 1). The terrain behind the structure is horizontal. The ground water table is 2,0
meters deep. Behind the wall acts a strip surcharge with a length of 5,0 meters and with a magnitude
of 10 kN/m2. The foundation soil consists of MS – Sandy silt, stiff consistency, S r  0,8 , allowable
bearing capacity is 175 kPa. The soil behind the wall will consist of S-F – Sand with trace of fines,
medium dense soil. The cantilever wall will be made of reinforced concrete of class C 20/25.

Scheme of the cantilever wall - Assignment

To solve this problem, we will use the GEO5 “Cantilever wall” program. In this text, we will
explain solving this example step by step.

In the frame “Settings” click on “Select” and then choose analysis setting No. 3 – “Standard –
EN 1997 – DA1”.


Frame “Geometry” 2 . Dialog window “Settings list” In the frame “Geometry” choose the wall shape and enter its dimensions.

define the parameters of soil by clicking “Add” in the frame “Soils”. For pressure at rest analysis. In the frame “Material” enter the material of the wall. Wall stem is normally analyzed for pressure at rest. select “Cohesionless”. Dialog window “Add new soils” 3 . Frame “Material” – Input of material characteristics of the structure Then.

S r  0.0 17.5 fines.0 26.0 0.5 28. Note: The magnitude of the active pressure also depends on the friction between the structure and the soil. The friction angle depends on the material of the structure and the angle of internal soil 3 friction – normally entered in the interval   1  2 3   ef Table with the soil parameters Angle of Cohesion Soil Profile Unit weight Angle of friction internal of soil structure – soil m  kN m 3  friction (Soil classification)  ef  c ef kPa    S-F – Sand with trace of 0.8 In the frame “Terrain” choose the horizontal terrain shape. medium dense soil MS – Sandy silt. 4 .0 – 4.0 18.5 30. Frame “Terrain” The ground water table is in a depth of 2.5 consistency.0 meters.0 17. stiff from 4.0 18. In the frame “Water” select the type of water close to the structure and its parameters.

Frame “Water” In the next frame define the “Surcharge”. Dialog window “New surcharge” In the frame “FF resistance” select the terrain shape in front of the wall and then define other parameters of the resistance on the front face. select the permanent strip surcharge on the terrain acting as a dead load. Here. 5 .

In this case. (for more information. We can consider the pressure at rest for the original soil. we will choose active pressure.e. we do not consider the resistance on the front face. Frame “Stage settings” Note: A wall stem is always dimensioned on earth pressure at rest. i. It is possible to consider the passive pressure if displacement of the structure is allowed. The FF resistance depends on the quality of soil and the allowable displacement of the structure. In our case. the wall can´t be moved. 6 . so the results will be conservative. Also choose the pressure acting on the wall. as the wall can move. The possibility of evaluating the stem and the wall for active pressure is considered only in exceptional cases . it will be permanent.. in the frame “Stage settings” choose the type of the design situation. or well compacted soil.such as the effects of an earthquake (seismic design situation with partial coefficient equals 1. Now.0). see HELP – F1) Then. open up the frame “Verification”. where you analyze the results of overturning and slip of the cantilever wall. Frame “FF resistance” Note: In this case.

75 [kNm/m] SATISFACTORY  Slip: 124.17  M ovr  109. Analysis results: The verification of the slip is not satisfactory. we can:  Use better soil behind the wall  Anchor the base  Increase the friction by bowing the footing bottom  Anchor the stem 7 .74  H act  81.5 % H res  65.83 [kN/m] NOT OK Now we have several possibilities how to improve the design.7 % M res  208. For example. The utilization of the structure is:  Overturning: 52. Frame “Verification” Note: The “In detail” button in the right section of the screen opens a dialog window with detailed information about the analysis results.

the program analyzes it with a straight footing bottom. The most efficient way is to change the shape of the wall and introduce a wall jump. but FF resistance of the construction is analyzed to the depth of the bottom part of the base jump (More info in HELP – F1) Then analyze the newly designed structure for overturning and slip. Change of the design: change of the geometry of the wall Return to the frame “Geometry” and change the shape of the cantilever wall. If the influence of the base jump is evaluated as front face resistance. so choose the easiest alternative. Frame “Geometry” (Changing the dimensions of a cantilever wall) Note: A base jump is usually analyzed as an inclined footing bottom. For increasing the resistance against a slip we introduce a base jump. 8 . These changes would be economically and technologically complicated.

the overturning and slip of the wall are both satisfactory (Utilization: 49.4 % and 64. Frame “Verification” Now.9%) 9 .

perform an analysis for the design bearing capacity of the foundation soil . the depth of the foundation etc. Frame “Bearing capacity” Note: In this case. into account. which takes other influences such as the inclination of the load. or from some standards. These values are normally highly conservative. in the frame “Bearing capacity”. which we can get from a geological survey.175 kPa. Then. we analyze the bearing capacity of the foundation soil as an input value. so it is generally better to analyze the bearing capacity of the foundation soil in the “Spread footing” program. 10 .

which satisfies in point of bearing capacity and all the design principles. Design the main reinforcement into the stem – 10 pcs. in the frame “Dimensioning” choose wall stem check. Ø 12 mm. Frame “Dimensioning” 11 . Next.

35  M ovr  107.31 [kPa] SATISFACTORY  Wall stem check: 80.2 % Rd  175    140.26  H act  64.25 [kN·m] SATISFACTORY  Overall stability: 39.9 % H res  99. we will use the “Bishop” method.4 % M Rd  169.92  M Ed  145. “Slope stability” program – frame “Analysis” Conclusion/ Result of analysis – bearing capacity:  Overturning: 49. 12 .2 % Method – Bishop (optimization) SATISFACTORY This cantilever wall is SATISFACTORY. Then. Results or pictures will be shown in the analysis report in the “Cantilever wall” program. open up the frame “Stability” and analyze the overall stability of the wall.94 [kNm/m] SATISFACTORY  Slip: 64.4 % M res  218. which has conservative results. In our case.38 [kN/m] SATISFACTORY  Bearing capacity: 80. Perform the analysis with optimization of circular slip surface and then leave the program by clicking “OK”.