‘The GawacWin program was developed to provide engineers with a rapid and efficient tool to conduct the stability analysis of gabion retaining walls. ‘The program allows to check a large number of different situations (geometry, surcharge loads, etc...) _ which may occur during the design procedures. To facilitate and improve the comprehension of the program, it has been provided with a graphic interface integrated with a pull-down menu so to allow the user to controll the data input process and to check the results in a simple and direct way. “Thanks to the graphic interface it is always possible to check the problem by visualizing the cross- ‘section of the wall, the uphill soil geometry, the foundation and the external surcharge loads. The first part of the manual illustrates the program calculation procedures as well as the assumed ‘hypothesis and their actual limits, whereas the second part describes, step by step, how to use this program. The program's main hypothesis of calculation considers the problem's geometry as bi- imensional, extending the analyzed cross-section indefinitely in the orthogonal direction. In such a hypothesis the effects caused by variations in the loads or in the soil geometry in the direction perpendicular to the plane (either on the gabions or on the soils) are neglected. in the other hand, an analysis of the problem which takes into account the above effects would be more complete, but it would also make the calculation, and the data required to describe the problem, more complex. Experience proves that, except in particular cases, the analysis of plane surfaces, with respect to the idimensional ones, provides results in favour of safety. The program uses the Limit Equilibrium method, Rankine's, Coulomb's, Meyerhof 's and Bishop's ‘theories (known also as Simplex method) to check the overall stability of the structure. It also takes into consideration the mechanical characteristics of the gabions ‘Manufactured by the NTT)-1_Retaining walls ravity retaining walls are structures frequently used in different fields of application (road _construction, river bank protections, soil conservation works, bridge abutments, etc.). A gravity taining wall consists of a relatively massive and rigid structure which, thanks to its weight , supports the backfill soil. | Gabion retaining walls follow this principle: they are wire mesh boxes, filled with stones, placed side by side, superimposed and laced together so to form a single monolithic structure (fig. 1.1). Figure 1.1 - Gabion gravity retaining wall. he backfill soil behind the wall can be placed simultaneously with the erection of the gabion layers. he backfill soil, together with the external surcharge loads applied uphill, form the forces acting on ‘the wall. The retaining wall must be designed in such a way to counteract these forces, preventing the structure itself from intemal failures or relevant deformations and the soil (foundation and : nali ,| 1.2 Determination of the soil thrust ‘Econtiniel ‘The soil thrust is the resulting force of lateral stresses exerted on the structure, Such stresses are due to the soil unit weight and to the external surcharge loads, ‘The structure's deformation depends on the magnitude of the soil thrust acting on the structure itself, a vertical mobile bulkhead is placed to support a soil layer, as shown in figure 1.2, the stresses exerted by the soil on the all will vary accordingly by moving the wall itself. . Figure 1.2 - Soil thrust acting on a vertical wall, _By moving the bulkhead away from the supported sol, the soil thrust decreases to such an extent fo induce the total -_ mobilization of the soil internal shear resistance. Such a condition which takes place for small movements of the bulkhead leflwards, is called active state and, therefore, the acting force is called active thrust (P,). 4 on the contrary, the bulkhead is pushed up against the soil, the reacting soil thrust will increase up to a maximum value, _ beyond which a movement takes place. "When the thrust exceeds this vaiue, the total mobilization of the soil shear resistance will occur. Such a value is referred to ss passive thrust (P,), and the deriving deformation state is called the passive state. nlike the active state, the passive state will be generated by a relevant movement of the bulkhead. if the bulkhead is kept i tionalnece erat ups at aoe meee a41.2 Determination of the soil thrust 1, By assuming an hypothetical relationship between stress and strains, their value can be determined in each point of }e soil Mass, as can the movement of the retaining structure. The equilibrium and compatibility conditions form a system ‘of differential equations, which can be solved resorting to numerical methods such as finite element analysis. These lethods, even though efficient, require a complete understanding of the soil behaviour to establish the stress-strain _relationship. “This knowledge is not always readily available to the designer, and furthermore the necessary numerical instruments are often also quite complex. . The plasticity theory may be applied to determine the stresses in the soil mass assuming that the plasticity condition is Satisfied in the entire soil mass along specific surfaces, such as sliding and failure surfaces. The most widely used method takes into consideration the soil mass equilibrium. The equilibrium and the surrounding il conditions provide the equations to the unknown variables. Another widely used method is the limit equilibrium method which randomly selects the sliding surfaces and letermines the forces acting on the edges of the soil mass. The surface selected will be the one which will increase the ‘thrust up to its maximum. _The last three methods use failure surfaces under certain conditions. Besides the satisfying failure conditions, the static 'state must satisfy the equilibrium as well.s=ct+o,tanp here c is the normal stress which acts on the failure surface and c and g are the soil constant roperties, known as cohesion and internal angle of friction. initary slices. This approximation greatly simplifies the analysis and furthermore it is more onservative than a three-dimensional analysis.O,=7-z the soil towards the active state, the stress is determined by the resistance of the material as case the horizontal stress Gy, is given by: o, Hk yz 2.6 _l=sing 1+sing If the wall is kept stil, the horizontal stress acting on the soil layer is indeterminate but as the wall is moved away from shown in fig. 1.3. In this ul | Fotum autoce ane Posie active’,a1) 72 Pat Hk, 20H. ere H is the total height of the soil layer. _If the wall is moved against the soil towards the passive state, then: Sp aky 72-20. [k k =ton?{= +2) -1+sine P 4 2 1-sing is called passive thrust coefficient and the resulting passive thrust Pp will be given by: 1 2 P =~ yH?k +20H. [ke pg hy teenince the soil cannot resist tensile stress, its surface will crack to depth Zp. Therefore, this stress scan not be taken into account as it would decrease the value of the resulting active thrust. This sults in a stress distribution in the soil mass, as shown in fig.1.4. As suggested by Bowles and shown in the same figure, an approximate distribution may be adopted for calculation purposes.‘Water pressure oR iy =. Treas Theo cagen Degen ‘Baga Active stote Passive state /As shown in fig.1.4, in the passive state, the soil mass is not subject to tensile stress, therefore tension cracks do not appear. The direction of the failure surfaces both in the active and passive states are shown in fig. 1.2 and in fig. 1.5.will be given by (fig. 1.6): 2.10) Py = ¥-Z.cos & the soil surface is not horizontal, but presents an inclination &, the value of the vertical stress py ‘split into a normal stress © and a shear stress * : = = 2 41) O= Py .COSé=7.2.008" & T= p, sin E=Y.Z.8iN €.COSE and ince the vertical stress py presents an inclination © with respect to the surface of the soil layer in question, it can be comet)” Py, OM cos e+ ycos2e—cos” 9 Pip _ OP _ Cos E+ \ COs é-cos"9 2 Py OM cos €-\\ cos” e—cos"p Pla OA cos é-\cos?e-cos?p =k in the aotive state, and in the passive state. =y.Hk .cose>E = ~y.H.k Ss Py y-f.k.cos y- ik .cOoSE 1, 42 =y.H.k_.cose aE ==y.H*.k_.cose Pp rep p 2? D“both having a direction parallel to the soil surface. In the case of cohesive soils one can resort to an analytical equation only when the soil surface is horizontal, since it is necessary to determine graphically the lateral stress by using Mohr circles corresponding to the active and passive states. ven in this case, tension cracks appear in the active state to a depth 29 given by: e effect on the wall of a uniform surcharge load q acting on the soil mass, is given by the ‘constant increase of the lateral stress which, in this way, becomes: 1) Pla =(7.2+q)-k,.coseE, ayn Kk 008 6+4.1.K, .cos ; 1 4 =(1.Z+g).k. 00s 6 == 7k cos e+qHk. é (1.19) Pp (y. q powe D 3” po gq. po respectively for the active and passive states. In all these cases, the application point of the thrust is located in the center of gravity of the lateralCoulomb's theory is another method used to calculate the active and passive thrust acting on a retaining structure. It assumes that the soil total shear resistance is mobilized along the sliding and failure surfaces located within the soil ese surfaces are the boundary limits of the soil portion which will move in the same direction of the structure (fig. 2.7). “If this portion of soil is considered as a rigid body, the thrust can be determined by using the equilibrium of the forces .cting on this rigid body. ‘Coulomb's method assumes that such surfaces are plane and that the thrust acts on the most oritical failure surface. Besides making it possible to analyze structures with a non vertical internal front face, this method allows consideration of a possible friction between retaining structure and soil. figure 1.7 - Sliding surface located behind the structure the case of non-cohesive soils , the forces acting upon the soil wedge formed by the active state, are indicated in fig.he unit weight is equal to: 2 . 20) watt {sn + panera) 2 2sin*a sin(p-) ‘The active thrust may be determined starting from the force equilibrium: Ww_In the active state, the most critical surface is the one which would increase Pg, which is obtained yy the derivative of the previous equation with respect to the angle of the failure surface p: 23) herefore the maximum value of Pa is: a!) 2 Papi k, sin2(cr +9) sina sin(a -6)| 1+1.4 Coulomb's theory the passive state there is an invertion of inclination of the forces R and Pp , due to a change in irection of the structure's sliding and the most critical surface is the one which brings Pp toa jinumum value (fig. 1.9). herefore the value of the thrust is given by: p =4y Hk P 0.26 p 2 sin? (a - 6) sin(g + 6).sin(g + é) in?a.sin(a + 6).,1- J —P sm @-sin(a ) sin(a + d).sin(a + «)4 Coulomb's theory Figure 1.9- Forces acting on the thrust wedge in the passive state The equations obtained clearly demonstrate that the thrust is the resultant of a triangular stress istribution both in the active or passive states. Therefore the thrust's application point is located, also i in this case, at a height H/3 starting from the base of the structure. a surcharge load q uniformly distributed acts on the soil mass it will increase the thrust's value which can be determined considering the surcharge load as acting on the soil wedge delimited by ‘the failure surface (fig. 1.10). This quantity Q , added to the weight of the soil wedge W, will proportionally increase the other forces acting upon the soil wedge.Figure 1.10- Thrust due to a uniform surcharge load Therefore the thrust Pg is given b) sin @ @ sin(a + ¢) ui 2 GTO ky gH his equation proves that the effect of the surcharge is uniformly distributed on the front face, and ‘om this it is possible to determine the application point of the thrust acting on the retaining structure. The first factor of the above equation refers only to the soil and, therefore, the thrust will e applied to height H/3 starting from the structure base, whereas the second factor of the equation fers to the surcharge load and its thrust will be applied to height H/2. ‘Therefore, the application point the total thrust may be determined by the center of gravity of the ing sanaLimit Equilibrium method {f the soil is cohesive or the surface of the soil mass is not plane, it is not possible to apply the Coulomb theory. In these “oases a similar method, but for specific problems, can be used. “Consider, for example, the case illustrated in fig. 1.11. Since the surface of the soil mass does not present a constant inclination , the previous equations cannot be used to determine the thrust. in this case a trial analysis can be conducted, ‘considering different failure surfaces and determining for each one the value of the effective thrust, using the force equilibrium. These values must be applied in function of the failure surface that has generated them, in order to evaluate ae ptreir corresponding variation. ‘The application point of the thrust acting on the retaining structure is determined by plotting a line parallel to the most critical surface, passing through the center of gravity of the critical wedge. This method allows to analyze a great numberIn the case of cohesive soil (c # 0), in the active state, the upper portion of the soil mass may be ubject fo shear stress, as already detailed in paragraph 1.3. Due to the tensile stress the soil will ck reducing the resisting area of the failure surface, thus increasing the final thrust acting on the ructure. If tension cracks appear, the most critical point will be located at the end of the failure ‘surface (fig. 1.12). ‘Furthermore, as already mentioned the tension cracks may be filled with rain water and this will cause an additional increase of the thrust due to the hydrostatic pressure which develops inside the cracks. “Therefore the forces acting on the soil wedge formed by the failure surface, beside the resistant force _C due to the soil cohesion, will also include force F,, , due to the hydrostatic pressure inside the tension cracks. Figure 1.12 - Active thrust in cohesive soils crassa CRY sone‘These forces are given by: 1 2 — Fy 57w? QO and ax C=cAC letermined by the force equilibrium. The search for the most critical surface terminates when the surface corresponding to the maximum thrust is found. he application point of the active thrust Pg acting on the retaining structure may be assumed at H/3 starting from the base of the structure. his is justified by the fact that this thrust takes into account the effect of the water pressure along the cracked surface and the approximate lateral stress distribution, as described in paragraph 1.3.7 Partially submerged retaining wall _River training work may consist of partially submerged retaining walls (river bank protection) as shown in fig. 1.13. Figure 1.13 - Partially submerged retaining structure these cases, the soil effects must be distinguished from the effect induced by the water in the voids, because the soil shear resistance is due to the stress which develops between the single soil "particles (real stress) whereas no shear stress resistance develops between the water particles. This analysis is known as effective stress analysis. So, in order to use the limit equilibrium method in ‘this kind of situation one must determine the force equilibrium using the weight (y') of the “sumberged soil wedge. The active thrust P, thus obtained, is due only to the weight of the soil particles, which must be added to the hydrostatic pressure acting on the structure. The application int of the active thrust P, is determined by plotting a line paral to the critical failure surface f rged welSoil mass subject to water percolation ‘The percolation of water through the retained soil mass is another common phenomenon which may occur. The soil is | subject to water percolation if the underground water table, which is usually slightly below the structure's foundation, || rises due to rainfall or, in the case of bank protection, when the level of the watercourse decreases rapidly. In these cases, the water percolates through the soil mass moving towards the retaining structure, which may increase the value of the active thrust. ‘To analyze this problem, at first one must determine the percolation bed flow, as indicated in fig. 1.14. “figure 1.14 Flow network of water through the retaining structure | Even in this case the limit equilibrium method can be used. The forces which act on the soil wedge formed by the jlure surface, include the unit weight of the soil wedge itself (in this case saturated specific weight Y,.¢ ) and force U iue to the neutral pressure acting upon the sliding surface. This last surface is determined using the diagram of the ait.9 Surcharge load: different external surcharge loads (additional soil layers, road traffic etc...) act on the embankment, ‘the thrust on the retaining wall will increase. he simplest case of surcharge load acting on a retaining structure is represented by the uniform distributed surcharge load (fig. 1.15). By applying the limit equilibrium method, the weight of the soil wedge must be added to the thrust's ontribution due to the surcharge load acting on the wedge itself: Figure 1.15 - Uniform sucharge load acting on the structure “The application point of the resulting thrust may be obtained by conducting a line paralllel to the ilure surface passing through the center of gravity of the soilsurcharge load block. i | the load eee and to deterThe point load Q is another common surcharge load which runs parallel to the retaining structure, as ‘shown in fig. 1.16. Figure 1.16 - Point load parallel to the structure By using the limit equilibrium method, in this case the weight of the soil's wedge must be added to value Q, only if the failure surface ends in a point passed the point of application of the load. Therefore the thrust varying with the sliding surface will be segmented in the point corresponding to The soil and the point load effects, respectively P,, and P,, must be dissociated from the maximum | thrust P, and considered separately. ‘The point of application of the point load is determined as indicated in fig. 1.16 . Another way of determining the effects of the point loads on the thrust consists in using the equation “found in Boussinesg elasticity theory [6].1.9 Surcharge loads » Woe jap 21 ota GF m 6, 04 0.2030 OW Bion? () Point load =2acgesinacste) (4) Font ood fe) Giretuted surenarge ase Figure 1.17 - Effects of the surcharge loads according to the elasticity theory ‘The previous equation is valid only for homogeneous soil masses. Since a retaining wall is much ‘stiffer than the soil, this value doubles with respect to the equations in fig. 1.17. This figure shows1.9 Surcharge loads ‘However, according to this method the presence of the surcharge load does not affect the thrust exerted by the soil, furthermore the influence of the surcharge load with respect to the position of the failure surface is not taken into account. In reality, it is not correct to add the soil's effect to the surcharge load effect since the former is letermined evaluating its plasticization, whereas the latter is determined assuming an elastic linear model. e results obtained by this analysis comply satisfactorily with the tests conducted on experimental|with respect to the horizontal, to the boundary line dividing the first and the second layer. ‘The second plane starts from this point and, moving in a direction parallel to the internal face of the retaining structure, it reaches the external soil surface. The third plane departs from the same point and, with an inclination p, with respect to the horizontal, it extends to the “uphill soil profile. "So, the soil wedges are generated. The effect of the smaller wedge upon the larger one can be equalled to thrust Py, which can also be calculated with the limit equilibrium method, considering an angle of friction, located between the two _ wedges, equal to 5,, wiich acts between the soil upper layer and the retaining structure. Once value Par is known, the thrust applied to the lower layer can be determined through the equilibrium of the forces acting on the larger soil wedge. Then, inclination pz must be searched in order to find the most critical failure surface. If there are two or more layers, this process must be repeated for each layer. ‘If the surface of the soil mass is plane and not affected by surcharge loads, the application point of P,y is determined ‘utilizing the method already described in the preceeding paragraph, that is, at H./3 starting from the bottom of the soil layer, where H, Is the thickness of this layer touching the retaining structure. To locate the application point of Pzz, one must assume that the lateral stress distribution on the retaining structure, is linear and that the variation factor of the ‘above stress in relation to the height of the structure, corresponds to: _where kaa is the active thrust coefficient determined by using Coulomb's theory. Therefore, one can determine the the, Jayenand, then: A rsucenie of gravity) of the stress. he i i1.10 Non - homogeneus soil mass| 1.11 Irregular internal face This last deduction can also be used to determine the thrust acting on retaining structures with an irregular internal face, as shown in fig. 1.20. Figure 1.20 - Retaining wall with an irregular internal face | In this case the internal face is divided into plane surfaces and the portion of the thrust acting on each one is determined. ‘or the upper section the thrust is determined assuming the height of this section only. For the lower sections, one must analyze the equilibrium of the wedges formed by the deeper failure surfaces by summing up the thrust's contributions calculated for the upper sections of the internal12 Seismic effect During an earthquake, the active thrust can increase due to the horizontal and vertical acceleration of the ground. ‘These accelerations induce inertia forces to appear in the vertical and horizontal direction. These forces as well must be ‘considered in the force equilibrium (fig. 1.21). figure 1.21 - Inertia forces acting on the thrust soil wedge “These accelerations are usually expressed as a function of the gravity acceleration g and of the local seismic risks .erefore the inertia forces will be calculated as components of the weight of the soll wedge W.‘The active thrust, calculated in this way may be divided into two-components. The first one is equal to the static thrust P, which has its application point on the retaining structure, as determined in the ‘previous paragraphs. The second component P,, is the earthquake effect and its point of ‘application is located at height 0.6 H starting from the base of the structure. the soil mass is submerged, during the calculation of the soil wedge weight, one must use the unit weight y’ of the submerged soil mass, as seen in paragraph 1.7. Furthermore, it is necessary to consider the seismic effect due to the water pressure in the soil, which will induce an additional stress U4, given by: where yy and H,, are respectively the unit weight and depth of the water level. This thrust is applied at height H,/3 starting from the base of the structure.If the retaining structure should move away from the retained soil, the front of the retaining structure may encounter the resistance of the soil downhill. So a passive state which hinders the structure's sliding is generated (fig. 1.22). This resisting force can be calculated with the methods atready described, which may also apply to the passive state. Figure 1.22 - Determination of the passive thrust However, it is not proper to consider this as a resisting force. Infact, should erosion at the toe occur, this force may even disappear. if it is taken into consideration, it can be determined by1.14 Theories reliability. The theories previously described are those most widely used in calculating the thrust acting on the retaining structures. They are based on models which approximate, more or less, the behaviour of the ‘soil mass. The reliability of the results obtained, is greater when the models are closer to a realistic ituation. irst of all, the active state forms when the structure is subject to a slight downhill sliding. A retaining structure is usually subject to such a sliding; in this case the soil shear resistance is completely mobilized. in the other hand, Coulomb's and the limit equilibrium methods assume that the failure surface is plane, even though, in reality, the most critical failure surface has a curved shape due to the friction between the soil and the structure. However, by comparing the results provided by such theories and those obtained by resorting to methods of calculation which refer to curved surfaces, it is found that both procedures provide equivalent active thrusts. This fully justifies the use of plane surfaces. On the contrary, in the case of the passive thrust, there are substantial differences, therefore, when friction between the structure and the soil occurs, the methods which use plane surfaces, to calculate the passive thrust, are to be | considered less accurate. ‘or this reason, it is best to use Rankine's theory to calculate the passive thrust, since it does not ke into consideration the friction between structure and soil.1.15 Stabili ‘The retaining structure must be checked against different types of failure. In the case of gravity - ‘retaining walls the main types of failure which may occur, are shown in fig. 1.23. vera faltare Fatture of the foundation bearing oopacly — 4 Figure 1.23 - Possible types of failure which may occur in gabion retaining walls 1. Sliding of the base i ~ "4. | Overall stabilly of the s : 2. Overturning 2a 5. Structure's internal stebilty : Failure of the foundation bearing capacity’ | i ee ae eatstructure figure 1.25 - Uplift pressures and inertia forces figure 1.24 - Forces acting on a retaining structure. ‘oth thrusts P, and P,, the structure specific weight W, and the foundation pressure R are the forces acting on the structure. The foundation pressure R may be divided into forces N and T spectively normal and tangential to the base of the retaining structure. Beside these forces, one must consider other forces depending on external conditions. For example, the structure is submerged either partially or totally, the uplift pressures V (fig. 1.25) must be taken to account, whereas in the seismic analysis one must consider the horizontal and vertical forces of inertia respectively equal to I, = Gi Me and I, = C, W,. The surcharge loads are additional forces which may act directly up1 Limit equilibrium metho if || The limit equilibrium method is based on principles which Coulomb's theory refers to also, since it examines the equilibrium of the forces acting on the soil wedge which determine a failure surface within the soil mass (fig. 2.1). This surface occurs, if the retaining structure is subject to a slight movement, which mobilizes the soil shear resistance. Figure 2.1 - Limit equilibrium method At first, the location of the failure surface AB is not known and it is determined by trial attempts | which consist in changing the location of point C and verifying the value of the active thrust P, . Therefore, the failure surface will be the one which combines to increase P, to a maximum value. © This method allows the analysis of a great variety of situations, since it is sufficient to include in the | equilibrium the forces acting on the soil wedge and the effects of every particular situation.+ The wedge self weight W + The soil mass reactionR + Active thrust Pg figure 2.2 - Forces acting on the thrust wedge he direction of R and Pz are given by the angle of friction of the soil ®, and by the angle of friction between the soil and the wall. This last angle is assumed to be 5 = 9 unless a geotextile filter is pl ‘the user. Since, at first, the direction of the failure surface is not known, it must be searched by -varying its inclination p with respect to the horizontal. Therefore, the most critical failure surface is ‘the one which has the effect of increasing Pa (fig. 2.3) up to its maximum value and this will be theFigure 2.3- Variation of Pq with respect 0p 2 Determination of the thrust surface The thrust surface approximates a plane which passes through the right lower angle of the base of the wall and the right upper angle of the last gabion layer (fig 2.4).2 Determination of the thrust surface ‘When the first gabion layer of the foundation extends into the soil, with respect to. the upper layer, ‘besides its projection at a 45° angle, the outer section of the gabion layer is considered as an anchorage and P, will pass through this point rather than the right lower angle of the base of the wall (fig. 2.5). Figure 2.5 - Extended foundation2.3 Backfill in layers ‘Since the backfill can consist of more than one soil layer, it is necessary to resort to a modified version of the limit equilibrium method. First of all, rather than considering the failure surface as one plane, it is assumed as consisting of various failure planes, thus forming more than one soil wedge (fig. 2.6). Figure 2 .6 - Backfill with more soil layers t first, by using the original limit equilibrium method, one must calculate the thrust Pa, due to the il upper layer. Afterwards, one must consider the failure surface starting from point 2, with an \clination P2 and meeting the interface between the layers in point 4. The surface of thrust E4, parallel to plane 1-2, is assumed to pass through point 4 and to determine E7, one must apply ‘again the original limit equilibrium method. \erefore, in order to determine Paz one must analyze the equilibrium of the forces acting on the dge formed by planes 1-2, 2-4, 4-3 and 3-1. This process must be repeated for each value of the rd ind,In order to determine the application point of the total active thrust, the soil parameters acting on the wall are assumed to | vary linearly in each layer crossed by the active thrust (fig. 2.7). Figure 2.7 - Application point of the thrust in the soil layers The term of variation between lateral stress and the depth of the soil layer is given by: (2.1) aa wa yy dha where 7 is the unit weight of the soil layer and kg is the thrust coefficient. This coefficient is determined by Coulomb's equation: sin2(c +B) 2, E Sine te sntg = 6)2.3 Backfill layers ‘Therefore, the lateral stresses acting on the top and on the bottom of the lower layer, will be: Fy Why, A, 2 Po ov-k + =a2,/ “a “2 Py 6 2 ‘Therefore, the center of gravity of this diagram of pressures will be: H wk, (25) Hea => 2 12 P, process is applied to determine the application point of the thrust in each layer crossed by the thrust surface. So the ‘application point of the total thrust is determined by the moment equllibrium. It is clear that this process may be extended theoretically to an indefinite number of soil layers. Anyway one must not “forget that for every additional layer the number of forces equilibrium, required for the calculation of the total active thrust, will increase, since the program must search for each surface, the best combination between the values of ‘which ‘leads to the total maximum active thrust,4 Effects of the soil cohesion ‘When the backfill soil is cohesive, an additional force ¢ due to the soil shear resistance, and acting on the failure surface jis generated. This force is determined by multiplying the soil cohesion by the length of the failure surface. Furthermore, it is well known that in the active state also tensile stresses acting on the upper portion of the cohesive backfill occur. Since the soll has a poor shear resistance, it consequently cracks (fig. 2.8). Tension crack2.4 Effects of the soil cohesion 2 =2% tn (Z42) 4 Y 4 2) 7 Since these cracks may fill with rain water, a horizontal force due to the water pressure will generate. The forces acting ‘on the soil wedge formed from the failure surface and the cracks are indicated in fig. 2.9. ‘The most critical position of the tension cracks is found at the end of the failure surface, as shown in the above figure. ‘Therefore in searching for the critical surface the program assumes the presence of cracks on each trial surface.5 Effect of the phreatic surface f f Phreatia eye / + ff Figure 2.10 - Pressures due to the phreatic surface | TTo determine U one must calculate the water pressure acting along the entire failure surface. Such pressure is assumed | as the difference in height between each point of the feilure surface and the phreatic one. ‘Since this last surface is approximated with a poligonal, it is sufficient to determine the pressure acting on the intersection between the phreatic and failure surfaces and then to find their intersection. The water pressure will vary linearly between ‘this two points. Force U is calculated as the integral of these pressures acting along the entire failure surface. "The presence of the phreatic surface will also influence the weight of the soil wedge. The soil below the phreatic surface © is saturated and therefore with a greater unit weight. The program will assess this increase by a 20%. If the wall is partially submerged as shown in fig. 2.10, one must consider the force U; induced by the hydrostatic2.6 Effects of the external surcharge loads 6.1. Distributed surcharge loads ''The distributed surcharge loads acting on the backfill are simply added to the weight of the soil wedge, considering the loads acting directly upon the wedge itself, as shown in fig. 2.11 Figure 2.11 - Forces due to the distributed surcharge loads 2.6.2. Concentrated point loads ‘s well as the distributed surcharge loads, the point loads are added to the weight of the soil wedge. Since the program, in order to search for the most crtical surface, takes into consideration only the point loads acting upon it, the thrust will increase unexpectedly when the surface meets the point load. Fig. 2. ie shows an example of two point loads Q, and Q,. in order to analyze the failure| 2.6 of the external surchar: Figure 2.12 - Forces induced by the point loads2.7 Seismic effect ‘The effect of an earthquake is considered as the sum of the equilibrium inertia forces. Such forces, horizontal H and vertical V respectively, are calculated by multiplying the weight of the soil wedge by ‘the horizontal k, and vertical k, coefficients of acceleration (figure 2.13). If the backfill is subject to surcharge loads, their effect on the structure must be added to the inertia forces. e values of the seimic coefficients vary, depending on the territory and the grade of seismic risk and they are usually provided by the specifications of each country. The common values used to design a retaining walll are: for areas subject to low seismicity for areas subject to medium seismicity for areas subject to high seismicity k,= 0,04 k= 007 | k= 010 | ae wn ooo2.8 Application point of the active thrust The total active thrust is divided into 3 components: The effects of both soil and distributed surcharge loads P,,, The effects of the point loads P,q The effect of the inertia forces P,,. The program determines the point of application of each component. The point of application of the effects of both soil and distributed surcharge loads are calculated by Coulomb's theory, as explained in paragraph 2.3. The point of application of the effects induced by the point loads acting on the backfill are determined as shown in fig. 2.14. Points M and N on the thrust surface are determined resorting to two segment lines which start from the point of application of the point load. One of these lines runs parallel to the critical failure surface, whilst the other one is inclined with respect to the horizontal and equals to the internal friction angle of the soil.If more than one point load is applied to the backfill, at first one must calculate an equivalent load using the moment equilibrium with respect to the upper edge of the thurst surface. The point of application of P,g is found in the upper third of the segment MN. he point of application of the effect induced by the inertia forces P,, is found in the upper third ‘segment of the total height of the retaining structure. Once the point of application of each ‘component has been found, one may determine the point of application of the total thrust, by using the moment equilibrium with respect to the lower edge of the thurst surface.‘igehtinue’| e passive thrust which acts on the front face of the gabion wall, when the external surface of the foundation has an ial height greater than zero, as in fig. 3.1, in this case is calculated by using Rankine's theory which considers the presence of cohesive soils and non horizontal external surfaces. figure 3.1 - Passive thrust To carry out this calculation, the passive thrust P, available must be determined considering the soil surface extending from point (A) to point (0). if the foundation layers are included between these two points, one must calculate the passive thrust of each layer. ‘The vertical stress p, which acts on these points is used to calculate P, :If the level of water is above this , one must take into account the value of the unit weight of the submerged soil ' which is calculated considering the saturated unit Thus, as shown in fig. 3.2, point Min Mohr's graph, is determined and Mohr's circle passing ‘through point M and tangent to the resistance line of the foundation soil is generated. The center of ‘the circle is located in point , of the axis of the abscissae, given by:“and the radius of the circle is given by: 3.6) T=O SM +C-COSD 2 2 2,2 Oty % -(1+tan #3) (2 -T ) i+ tan? &A structure is subject to sliding when its resistance along the base combined with the passive thrust is not sufficient to counteract the destabilizing forces induced by the upper soil surface. The check against sliding is conducted by comparing the resistance force available at the base of 'the wall and the force which induces the structure's instability. This last force is determined considering the equilibrium of the forces acting on the retaining wall (fig. 4.1). Figure 4.1 - Forces acting ona retaining structure The forces acting on the wall are: Active thrust induced by the backfill P,, Passive thrust P,, Wall unit weight W,,Distributed surcharge loads acting on the wall, Point loads acting on the wall, Inertia forces induced by the seismic effect, Uplift pressures. ‘The first two forces are directly determined by the program and are added to the wall unit weight. The inertia forces are calculated multiplying the structure's height by the acceleration coefficients respectively vertical k, "and horizontal k, , provided by the user. Uplift pressures affect the structure when it is partially submerged and during the calculation of the wall unit weight it will be automatically taken into consideration by using the unit weight , of the submerged section of the wall. This unit weight is utilized only for the wall section located below the water level and is equal to: 1) arp (i-ntmyy 5 1g -(r,-74)-0-9) "e°Te is the unit weight of the stone fill and nis the stone porosity (voids index). The available resisting force is given by: T=N.- tang” +¢-B where: gy" is the angle of friction between the foundation and the base of the wall, and 8 is the length of the wall base. If a geotextile filter is not placed under the base of the wall, @* is assumed to be equal to the angle of friction of‘When the base of the wall extends to the right into the soil mass, as shown in fig. 2.4, paragraph 2.2, Tq increases due to the anchoring effect of this extension. To calculate this increase in value, one must determine the vertical stress gy acting on the base extension and its length L: * (43) qT, = (c, -tang + ¢} “L this case, the value B corresponding to the length of the wall base used in the equation 4.2, is “reduced by a value L. | Ta is limited by the tensile strength of the gabion mesh: (44) Tq 2.Tmax 2 ere T max is the maximum allowable tensile strength of the mesh (4.3 Um) (for type 8/2.70 mm).Stal ‘The structure's stability check against overtuming is conducted by comparing the moments of the restoring active forces M, and the moments of the overtuming active forces M,. These moments are calculated with respect to the lower left angle of the base of the wall which represents the overturning point (fig. 4.2). figure 4.2 - Restoring and overturning moment The forces which contribute to the wall stability are: he structure unit weight, Passive thrust, ads acting on the wall. i” Vertical component of the active thrust.4.2 Stability against overturning Therefore, the safety coefficient against overturning is equal to: Fo=—4 o M oO In some cases the active thrust generates a moment having a direction opposite to the structure's overturning. In this case the safety coefficient against overturning is obsolete, since an overtuning moment is not generated. In this case the user is informed by the program.4.3 Foundation pressures “leontiniie}| To calculate the pressures acting on the foundation of the structure, at first one must determine both the point of application of the normal force N, calculated during the check against sliding and the moment equilibrium with respect to the lower left angle of the base, which is given by: | : M_.-M (4.7) d=—*1__2 where M,and M, are inferred by the check against overturning and d is the distance between the point of application of N and the lower left angle of the base (fig. 4.3).fig. 4.4. nere e is the eccentricity of the normal force N with e< xX If e > BY6, one may use only part of the base in consideration of the distribution of pressures as in ‘This section is equal to 3d and therefore the value of the maximum pressure gmax is equal to: _2-N ‘The program will inform the user when it does take ibe ft ss Uiedoh masFoundation pressures 11) Plim=©° Nod, 9'Ng-dy i, + Voy BN, od i, "where ¢ is the soil cohesion, g = y «zis the vertical pressure with respect to the foundation, y is the soil unit weight, B the length of the gabion base whereas the other parameters are given by: Tr 2 12) i =1-— (4.13) i, =i ‘aN yg z . d =d_ =140,35— . d,=1 14) C q B (4.15) Y ts) N -1 16) N = oN? tan? 9/49 ain NW =—4— c tang q 8) N= us(w ~1),tan Y q ? ‘he admissible maximum pressure acting on the foundation is given by: —P lim m3 }.19) oBesides the analyses previously described, the retaining structure must also be checked against the possibilty of internal failure, since itis subject to internal stresses due to the thrust and to the surcharge loads directly applied on the wall ‘The mechanism of internal failure can be divided according to the type of structure. In the case of gabion walls, one must check each layer against sliding with respect to the layer above and below it. For this analysis, one must determine the active thrust which acts on the wall portion above the analyzed section, using | the same procedures described in chapter 2 (fig. 5.1). Figure 5.1 - Analysis of the intermediate layers . Then the shear and the maximum normal stresses acting on this section, are calculated by using the force and moment equilibrium, as explained in paragraph 4.1 and 4.3. The shear stress will be:moment equilibrium. The allowable values of both shear and normal stress are: adm = 59°7 30 (expressed in tim2) (5.3) Tad = Nutang” + Sg (5.4) o 257 .-10° (5.6) 6, =0,3.F —0,5 (expressed in tim2) In these equations yg is the gabion unit weight, given by 7, =, -(I—n) ¥Pu and Py is the mesh weight expressed in kgim®. This last value is determined as a function of the mesh admissible tensile strength Tix , according to the following table: Tmax vm) | 30] 34] 35] 40] 421 43] 45] 47] 53 Pa kgm) | 85 | 142] 11.0[ 110] 123] 118] 143] 15.2] 150 P,(b) (kgim>) | 5.55] 7.85| 7.25| 82] 82] 84] 105] 103] 105 In this table, which has been drawn up according to the average gabion production, Py(a) refers to gabions 0.50 m high and Py{b) refers to gabions 1.00 m high.continue!) Besides the types of failure described in the previous chapters, the soil mass may be subject to global failure along a failure surface external to the retaining structure. This type of failure may occur when the foundation consists of soil “ Jayers with different characteristics, some less resistant than others or, in the case of walls protecting road | embankments when the downhill slope is inclined below the horizontal. |The stability analysis most commonly used assume the behaviour of the soil mass as a rigid block subject to sliding either along an inclined plane (fig. 6.1), or along a curved surface, In this case the soil mass is divided into vertical slices (Fellenius, Bishop, etc.). ‘1 Check against jilure Figure 6.1 - Soil mass global failure (plane surfaces) ‘The wedge method takes into account the failure surface formed by a series of planes surrounding the rigid wedges. ‘Their equilibrium involves the mobilization of the resistance along these planes. The relationship between the available resistance along the failure surface and the mobilized resistance is equal to the‘Therefore the most critical surface is determined by trial attempts, trying to identify among all failure surfaces the one with the smallest safety coefficient. The analysis just described, is very similar to the check against the structure sliding along the base paragraph 4.1). The main difference consists in the fact that the equilibrium of the active wedge involves the total mobilization of the shear stress along surfaces and , which means taking into account a value of the safety coefficient against sliding along such unitary surfaces. In this way, the safety coefficient against sliding F, is limited to the surface of the base of the wall and to the surface of the passive wedge. Since the available resistance is mobilized along the active wedge, the resistance required for the overall stability along the surfaces, where F,, is calculated, is inferior and ‘this results in a value numerically superior with respect to the safety coefficient against overall6. eck a lobal failure Therefore, for this reason, the minimum values required for an analysis against global failure may also turn out to be lower than those required for the checks against sliding along the base. ‘The methods which refer to circular surfaces, determine the safety coefficient similarly to the ‘wedges method, since they take into account the partial mobilization of the resistance along the "whole failure surface. | These methods allow consideration of a large number of situations i.e. additional soil layers, neutral pressures, phreatic surface, underground waters, surcharge loads etc. Furthermore they consider the most realistic failure surfaces, that is those which best approximate the different failure conditions previously described. Of all these methods, Bishop's method is the most widely used and will be described shortly in the following paragraph (fig. 6.3).To analyze the global stability of the soll-mass as a whole, the program utilizes Bishop's method which refers to circular failure surfaces. In this way failure circles which cross the backfill slope and the foundation are considered. ited by these circles is divided into slices (fig. 6.3) and the safety coefficient against failure along ‘such a surface is calculated. ig. 6.4, are: the unit weight W of the slice the width b of the slice the inclination of the failure surface @ of each slice the normal force N_ which acts on the failure surface the tangential force T which acts on the failure surface"By applying the force equilibrium in the vertical direction, we have: 4 | (6.1) N-cosa=P-T-sina -(¥, - V3) a 2 "The tangential force Tis given by: e-b e:b +N-tanp ——+N-tan 0 ? _ cosa ? F F s s where Fe is the safety coefficient against failure (assumed to be equal forall slices). By a small approximation of the result, V4 - V2 is assumed to be equal to 0. Therefore, (6.2) T=“since sum of the moments of the interslice forces is equal to zero, by considering the moment global equilibrium with _fresnect to the center of the failure arch, we have: =( if the water level passes through the slice, its weight will be calculated using the saturated unit weight of the portion of the slice below the water level. The pore pressure, acting on the failure surface is thus determined. ff unt, pees the yer Gistance. L between the. center of sina)So, the safety coefficient is determined by the equation: 3 +(P+O pb)-tang cosa+ tang-sing F. F= s [2t+0-Vsince+ EE] 72 where Uis the value of the horizontal force induced by the water on the structure, when it is parially submerged and y is the vertical distance between the point of application of this force and the center of the failure arch (fig. 6.5). Since the safety coefficent F, appears in both sides of the above equation, this turns out to be an iterative operation. ‘The most critical surface (which corresponds to the minimum F,) must be searched among various failure surfaces. ‘Since, in order to search for a failure surface, 3 parameters (horizontal and vertical position of the center O and the value of the radius R, are required, this search turns out to be quite difficult and therefore various search aigorithms can be employed. The most used algorithm is based on a modified version of the Simplex method which is normally used in the operative search.The search for the most crtical failure surface with the lower safety coefficient, is conducted using a process of ‘optimization based on the simplex method. This process considers an initial failure surface which can be provided by the user or directly by the program. -To search for the most critical surface the program considers different failure surfaces varying the horizontal distance L, from the application point of the failure circle located on the left side of the foundation, the horizontal distance L, between ‘he failure circle and the right lower edge of the wall base and the horizontal distance L between the termination point of | the failure arch located between the external profile and the internal face of the wall (fig. 6.6) Figure 6.6 - Coordinates of the sliding circles C-(L, Ly Ls) is formed by the coordinates identifying each circle. Starting from the coordinates of the first circle G,, the ‘other three circles C, C,, C,are determinedC= (43-4444 Ly, = Ly + Ph Ly, = 15, +4} Cy =(h4 H Ly tah Loy = Lay tabs oq =15,+pi) p=0.943 14 g =0.236 1s) 1=5h | and _h the height of the base of the wall. These four circles form a system called Simplex which is used to search the most critical failure ‘surface. At this point the safety coefficient for each circle of the simplex must be determined and the surface with the highest safety coefficient will be selected. The location of this circle is thus modified as follows: Ed c-(e Ee =1,+0(T, -1,)) py ai? “where 7; {8 the average of the coordinates of the remaining circle and »=2 the case of anon admissible failure circle either because it passes through the retaining structureV4.2) "where C’jis a stationary circumference. he calculation proceeds until —2 4 x (xs ,-73) <107 jar! here FS; are the safety coefficients of the 4 Simplex circles and Fis the average of their value. he program always conducts a second search starting from a different failure circle to check the _ Presence of maximum local safety coefficients. Furthermore if the foundation or the backfill slope consists of more than one type of soil layer or if point loads act on the backfill slope, the program peats this process to check again if all conditions have been analyzed.