4.

Coulomb's Method

The method is based on estimating a mechanism of failure. The Mohr-Coulomb failure criterion
is then assumed to be satisfied on the assumed failure planes.

Assumed failure plane

This approach, known as the limit equilibrium method, is widely used in geotechnical
engineering. Experience has shown that it gives solutions that agree reasonably well with
observations of collapse of real soil structures.

The method has advantages over Rankine's method because:

 It can cope with any geometry

 It can cope with line loads (In plane problems)
 Friction between retaining walls and soil can be taken into account

Its main disadvantage is that the common layered soil profile cannot be simply accounted for.

For any point on the failure surface we have

 = c +  tan 

Whenever the soil is at failure a Mohr-Coulomb locus of this general form can be used,
however, the appropriate values for c and  will depend on the type of analysis. In a total stress
(undrained) analysis c = cu,  = u, whereas in an effective stress analysis c = c,  = .

We next need to consider the Forces acting on the failure plane

direction of soil Shear Force T =   ds

movement Assumed
failure
Normal Force N =   ds
 plane

Cohesive Force C =  c ds

If the soil properties are constant we can write the failure criterion in terms of Forces as

T = C + N tan 

to facilitate the analysis we split the unknown forces T, N into two forces C, which is generally
known acting parallel to the failure surface, and a resultant R, acting at a known angle  to the
normal to the failure surface.

C
T


N
R
R cos  = N

R sin  = T - C = N tan 

Failure does not always occur within the soil mass. For the failure of the soil structure a
mechanism is required, and for the case of a retaining wall this means slip must also occur
between the wall and the soil. We assume that the failure conditions can be described by a
Mohr-Coulomb criterion, that is

 = c +  tan 

but the parameters c,  become:

cw, the adhesion between the wall and the soil

w, the friction angle between the wall and the soil

This can also be expressed in terms of Forces as

Tw  C w  N w tan  w

4.1 Total Stress Analysis

As for Rankine's method a total stress analysis is only appropriate if the soil remains undrained,
and in practice this is only true if the stability of clayey soils is being investigated.

Use undrained parameters cu, u, and total stresses.

Consider the undrained active failure of a wall of height H in a saturated clayey soil with
undrained parameters cu, u, and between the wall and the soil undrained parameters cw, w.
 H tan 

dirn of soil C2
movement
W C1
H
w
H sec 
R2 u
 
R1

The directions of the Forces on the soil wedge

where C1 = cu H sec  must be consistent with the assumed failure
C2 = cw H mechanism.
W = ½ H2 tan  

Now we can draw the polygon of forces as the only unknowns are the magnitudes of R1 and R2.

w
R2

R1

u

C2
W

C1


A solution can be obtained either analytically or graphically

Resolving horizontally and vertically gives

R1 cos ( +  u) = C1 sin  + R 2 cos  w

R1 sin ( +  u) = W - C2 - R 2 sin  w - C1 cos 

By eliminating R1 we can obtain an expression for the unknown force on the wall R 2 in terms of
.

In drawing a polygon of forces the forces must be drawn so that the arrows indicating their
directions all point the same way as you move around the polygon. It is possible that a polygon
of forces cannot be constructed, and if this happens it indicates that the assumed failure
mechanism is incorrect.
The force R2 determined from the polygon may not be the only force acting on the wall. In the
example above the forces acting on the wall are:
H
w
R2

Ftotal Ftotal
C2 V

We are often interested in the horizontal force, that is R 2 cos w. For the active case we need to
find the maximum value of this quantity. This requires different failure mechanisms to be
investigated to find the value of  that gives Hmax. This can be easily determined by graphical
methods.

In the design of retaining walls it is necessary to also check that the vertical component of the
load can be resisted by the soil.

During total stress analyses it is necessary to allow for the presence of tension cracks, and if
water is present the possibility that these cracks will fill with water.
2 cu N
Tension crack depth is determined from Rankine's method giving z =


The problem geometry and the forces acting on the soil wedge then become:

z W1

C2*
H W2 C1*
w
 
R2* u
R1*

If the tension cracks fill with water this has no influence on the polygon of forces, but the water
provides an additional horizontal force U on the wall as shown below.
U
*
R2

C2* Ftotal
Example Total Stress Analysis

Consider the retaining wall shown below with the soil properties as indicated. Determine the
minimum force required for stability assuming that the failure involves a plane at an angle 30 o
to the vertical passing through the toe of the wall. Ignore the possibility of tension cracks.

V 10o

W
Soil Properties
dirn of soil
movement cu = 10 kPa
u = 10o
5m 6.4 m cw = 2 kPa
w = 20o
 = 20 kN/m3
30o

From the figure geometry we can determine that

V
uv = 6.4 m W
uw = 5 m
Wedge area = 8 m2 Cuw
W Cuv
Hence
20o
Cuv = 6.4  10 = 64 kN/m
Cuw = 5  2 = 10 kN/m 10o
Ruw
W = 8  20 = 160 kN/m 30o
Ruv
Now the polygon of forces can be drawn U

20o

50o

160
10

30o 64

Measuring from the polygon of forces we obtain Ruw = 60 kN/m

4.2 Effective stress analysis

Effective stress analysis is always appropriate but pore water pressures must be known.

The failure criterion must now be written in terms of effective stress so that
 = c  +   tan  

and in terms of forces this becomes

T = C  + N  tan  

where N = N - U, and U is the force due to the pore water pressure acting on the failure plane.

The forces acting on the failure plane are now as shown

T C´


N´ U
´
R´
U

where C´ =  c  ds , U =  u ds , N´ =    ds

 When performing effective stress stability calculations the critical state parameters c =
0,  = ult should be used.

 When the soil is dry the pore pressures everywhere will be zero, and the effective
stresses will equal the total stresses. However, only an effective stress analysis is
appropriate.

 If sliding occurs between the soil and a wall appropriate effective stress failure
parameters must be used. The effective parameters between any interface (eg. a wall)
and the soil should be based on the ultimate conditions so that c´w = 0, ´w= ´wult

 In using Coulomb’s method you have to assume a failure mechanism. However, this
may not be the most critical (least safe) mechanism. Therefore, you need to investigate
a number of mechanisms (values of ) to determine which will be the most critical.

For Active failure the mechanism giving the greatest force is needed

For Passive failure the mechanism giving the least force is needed

The most critical mechanism is unlikely to give an accurate estimate of the failure load,
because observation of real soil shows failure rarely occurs on planar surfaces.

 To assist in selecting the appropriate values of  to use for the assumed failure planes in
the soil it is helpful to remember that the failure plane is inclined at an angle (/4 - /2)
to the direction of the minor principal stress 3.
  F

 2
3


If the wall is vertical and frictionless then 3 will be horizontal, and the angle of the
failure plane will be at (/4 - /2) to the vertical. If the wall is rough then 3 will not be
horizontal and the angle of the failure plane will change.

 In the presence of steady state seepage it may be necessary to draw a flow net to
determine the pore water Forces U acting on the soil wedge.

All the possible forces acting on a failing soil wedge have now been determined for an effective
stress analysis. These are:

4.2.1 Active failure

W V

C´uw Direction of
C´uv movement of soil
W
Uuw wedge
´w
Uuv
R´uw ´

R´uv

4.2.2 Passive failure

W V
Direction of
movement of soil
R´uw wedge
W
´w
Uuw Uuv R´uv
C´uw U C´uv ´

Example Effective Stress Analysis

Considering the same wall and geometry as in Example 1, but now using the effective strength
parameters for the soil as given below.

V 10o

W W.T.
X Soil Properties

Water Soil c´ = 10 kPa

´ = 10o
5m 6.4 m c´w = 2 kPa
´w = 20o
dry = 20 kN/m3
30o sat = 22 kN/m3

U
uv = 6.4 m
uw = 5 m
ux = 5.77 m
wx = 2.89 m

C´uv = 5  6.4 = 32 kN/m

C´uw = 2  5 = 10 kN/m

W = 0.5  5  2.89  22 + (8 - 0.5  5  2.89)  20 = 174.5 kN/m

Water pressures on the soil wedge due to groundwater table are as follows

W
X
 Uuv = 0.5  (0 + 5  9.8)  5.77 = 141.5 kN/m

Uuw = 0.5  5  5  9.8 = 122.5 kN/m

Now the Polygon of Forces can be drawn

20o

Uuw 60o

Uuv

60o

W C´uw

30o C´uv

From the Polygon of forces we obtain R´uw = 17 kN/m. The forces acting on the wall are
R´uw
Uuw

C´uw

The vertical force, Tuw = R´uw sin ´w + C´uw = 5.8 + 10 = 15.8 kN/m

The horizontal force, Nuw = R´uw cos ´w + Uuw = 15.97 + 122.5 = 138.5 kN/m

Note that Nuw is largely due to water pressure. However, due to water on the other side of the
wall the net resistance required for stability is only 15.97 kN/m
Example

The figure below shows an example where there is steady state seepage towards a wall which
has a vertical drain behind it, and the water level to the right of the wall is maintained at a height
Hw. The wall supports soil whose saturated unit weight is , whose ultimate friction angle is
cs, and which has a sloping soil surface. The wall is rough and has an angle of friction w.

Calculate the limiting horizontal force which is required to prevent failure by the wall moving
away from the soil.

The only difference between this and the previous example is that the flow net must be used to
determine the force due to the pore water along the assumed failure plane AB.

The pore water pressures can be determined in the normal way. However, in this situation the
pore pressure can be determined simply by noting that the top flow line is the phreatic surface
where u = 0. As the head is constant on any equipotential the head at D is equal to the head at E,
and the difference in pore pressure is simply w times the vertical distance between E and D.

The forces on the soil wedge are:

´cs Uw = 0.5 w Hw2

U ´w
From R´
flow net R´w
4.3 Multiple wedge mechanisms

In many real situations the failure mechanisms are complex and cannot be modeled by single
wedges with plane surfaces. These mechanisms can be difficult to analyse, but it is usually
possible to approximate the failure by one of two types of mechanism which are relatively
straightforward, namely:

• Multiple wedge failures, or

• Circular failures (see notes on slope stability)

The multiple wedge type of mechanism is often appropriate when the soil stratigraphy
contains weak layers (usually clay). Weak layers can occur due to:

• the presence of thin clay layers in otherwise stronger soils. This is common in many
sedimentary deposits.

• pre-existing slip surfaces in clayey soils. These are rare and are the result of previous
landslides.

• fissures and joints in stiff clays, and other cemented materials (rocks)

For example, consider the retaining wall shown below

2
1
Sandy Fill
(c´, ´)

x 
Weak Clay layer
( cu ,  u )

First the mode of failure must be considered. Generally we are interested in the active failure
of retaining walls; we want to ensure that the wall can provide sufficient support to retain the
soil. The directions of the forces acting on the base of the wedges are simple to determine,
but often the direction of the forces between the wedges is less clear. One way to work this
out is to determine the relative velocity along the sliding surface from a velocity diagram
(hodograph).
 v1 v1

 
v2 - v1 v1 - v2
v2 v2

v2 - v1 is the velocity of v1 - v2 is the velocity of

block 2 relative to block 1 block 1 relative to block 2

The forces acting on the wedges can then be determined and the force polygons constructed

C12
X C2
W2
P ´
W1 ´
X
C12 ´

R2
C1
u
R1

To simplify the polygons assume that c´ = 0, and hence C12 = C2 = 0

P

R1

R2
W1
L + W2

u

X
X
´
C1
The purpose of the limit equilibrium method is generally to find the force required to
maintain the stability of the wall. This requires a range of values for  and x to be used to
determine the most critical combination. Clearly this becomes very tedious by hand and
computer programs need to be used to obtain practical solutions. This is especially the case
if mechanisms involving more than two wedges need to be considered.

4.4 Factor of Safety

When performing stability analyses we generally are not interested in failure as such, failure
is a final limiting state that we do not want the soil to reach. We are usually more interested
in the stability of the unfailed soil, and in determining a factor of safety, F, for the unfailed
soil. Factors of safety need to be considered carefully in soils. For example, in the design of
retaining walls for active conditions, as the factor of safety increases so will the force that
needs to be provided.

To determine the factor of safety we assume that only some part of the frictional and
cohesive forces have been mobilised, so that on the assumed failure plane the soil is not at a
state of failure.

At failure the stresses are given by the Mohr-Coulomb criterion as

 = c +  tan 

At stress states remote from failure the mobilised shear stress, mob, is assumed to be given by

c  tan  
 mob    
F  F 
or
 mob  c m   tan  m

c
where cm (= ) is known as the mobilised cohesion
F
1  tan  
m (= tan   ) is known as the mobilised friction angle
 F 

Note that it is assumed that both components of strength are divided by the same factor F.

In the example given above the procedure would be to assume a factor of safety. (A factor of
safety is used to both reduce the likelihood of failure and to limit the ground deformations).
Then calculate the mobilized cohesion and friction angles (both and u will be reduced)
and then redraw the polygon using these factored angles and cohesion forces. The forces on
the wall are related to the factor of safety as would be expected.

An example of a multiple wedge analysis is given in the section of the notes on slope
stability. The analysis is simpler for retaining walls because the factor of safety is known.
 TUTORIAL SHEET 4

1. A 10 m high wall retains dry gravel with a dry unit weight d = 22 kN/m3. Show that
for a trial wedge with a failure plane, passing through the toe of the wall, at 20 o to the
vertical the minimum force that the wall must provide is 212 kN/m if for the gravel c
= 0,  = 38o and between the gravel and the wall cw = 0, w = 32o.

2. A vertical gravity retaining wall, 12 m high, is to retain a clayey soil for which c u =
25 kN/m2, u = 15o and the bulk unit weight b = 19 kN/m3. The soil surface is
horizontal and level with the top of the wall. The water table is horizontal and level
with the bottom of the wall. Determine the magnitude and direction of the minimum
force on the wall for a trial wedge whose slip surface rises from the bottom of the
wall at 70o to the horizontal. Assume that the angle of wall friction is 10 o and the wall
adhesion is 15 kN/m2.

Hint: You need to consider the possibility of tension cracks.

3. Figure 1 shows a bulldozer pushing soil in front of it. Assuming that we can idealise
this situation by the plane problem of an infinitely long vertical wall 3 m high moving
into the soil, use Coulomb’s method to determine the horizontal thrust that must be
provided by the bulldozer. Use a trial wedge which rises from the bottom of the wall
at 10o to the horizontal. In front of the bulldozer blade the soil is sloping down at an
angle of 5o to the horizontal, and the blade is 5 m long.

The soil is dry and has the following properties:

Angle of friction  = 35o, cohesion c = 0, Dry unit weight = 20 kN/m3.

Between the soil and the bulldozer blade:

Angle of friction w = 20o, cohesion c = 0

4. Using a trial wedge, with a failure plane at 25 o to the vertical, determine the active
force on the wall shown in Figure 2. The sand is uniform with sat = 19 kN/m3, cs =
35o, and the friction angle between the wall and the sand, w = 27o. The wall itself
and the shale underlying the sand are impermeable, and behind the wall the ground
water is maintained at the surface of the sand.

Is this the limiting force on the wall, and if not how could you determine it?

5. For the two wedge mechanism shown in Figure 3 calculate the minimum horizontal
force that must be provided by the wall for stability in both the short term and the long
term. It may be assumed that the water table is below the base of the wall.

If you were responsible for the design of this retaining wall what other mechanisms
would you need to consider?

The properties of the materials are as follows:

Sandy fill: bulk = 18 kN/m3, c = 0,  = 26o

Clay seam: c = 0,  = 18o, cu = 15 kN/m2, u = 0