From Research to Design in European Practice, Bratislava, Slovak Republic, June 2 - 4, 2010

DESIGN OF RETAINING WALLS AT CHANGING OF TERRITORY

VERTICAL PLANNING
N. Kosheleva
State Research Institute of Building Constructions, 5/2, I. Klimenko str., 03680 Kiev, Ukraine
adm-inst@ndibk.kiev.ua

ABSTRACT: There are results of numeral researches of retaining walls with shallow foundation
and on piles. Rational choice of retaining walls of monolithic reinforced concrete is realized for
two variants of territory planning. The results of calculations include distribution of stiffness to
load-bearing structures in lateral and longitudinal directions and at the angles of the retaining
wall. It is necessary to realize similar numerical research for the selection of reliable and
economical structural design of retaining walls in other engineer-geological conditions of the
construction site.

The necessity of retaining structure arrangement appears during preparation of territory

for construction, especially in conditions of complex rolling ground.
Retaining walls of monolithic reinforced concrete are used for organization of vertical
planning drops, alternatively. Rational choice of retaining wall consists in economy of concrete
and reinforcement and decreasing of man-hours at work execution.
Numeral researches of different variants of retaining walls are realized for two variants of
engineer-geological conditions. Calculations are carried out on stage of designing with using of
software system “LIRA-WINDOWS”, version 9.4, elaborated by finite element method.
The first variant was researched for substitution of deformation place of retaining wall
and the second variant – for change of territory vertical planning.
Soil ground is taken on with deformation modulus E = 19 MPa for retaining wall with
height of 3,4 – 4,96 m, with fill-up soil volume density of 18 kN/m3 for the first variant and with
E = 15 MPa for retaining wall with height of 2,5 m, with fill-up soil volume density of 19 kN/m3 for
the second variant.
At fig. 1 there is view of the researched site according to variant 1.

Fig. 1. View of wall after reconstruction.

 Building loads are not taken into account during calculations because building
foundations are partitioned off retaining wall by sheet piling.
According to the first variant two spatial design models “foundation – retaining wall” with
shallow foundation (variants 1.1 and 1.2) are elaborated.
As variant 1.1 retaining wall was chosen. It is given at fig. 2, where h – height of wall, b –
width, hф – thickness and directions of X, Y, Z axes, taken for a design model.

Fig. 2. General view of wall design model (variant 1. 1)

.The wall is taken with inclined foundation along X axis, for variable height of 3,4…4,0 m
– b = 3,05 m, hф = 0,4; 0,45 m; along Y axis, for variable height of 4,0…5,0 m – b = 3,75 m,
hф = 0,45 m.

Variant 1.2 is taken similarly to variant 1.1, only with steps of foundation. For wall along
X axis for variable height of 3,2 m, 3,7 m and 4, 65 m width of 2,25 m, 2,26 m and 3,3 m,
thickness of 0,4 m, 0,4 m and 0,45 m correspondingly are taken. For wall along Y axis for
variable height of 4,65 m and 5,15 m width of 3,3 m and 3,6 m, thickness of 0,45 m are taken.
Design models are collected of unique finite elements of spatially bar, triangular and
quadrangular types of coat. For retaining wall of variant 1.1 – of 2988 finite elements on 2045
units, for decision of variant 1.2 – of 3046 finite elements on 2052 units.
At fig. 3 there is sitting of retaining wall (variant 1.2) on engineer-geological section
according to variant 1.
Engineer-geological section is characterized by cured soil stratification: 1 – filling layer –
clay sand, sand with construction waste (concrete, brick, metal, wood and others), 2 – yellow-
brown, yellow-grey, powdery, slightly wet and wet, compact sand with shallow loam layers; 3 –
yellow-brown loam of wet consistency; 4 – red-brown, heavy loam of low-plasticity consistency
(moraine) with rare gravel spots, soil lens; 5 – brown, grey-brown, heavy clay of hard
consistency.
 Fig. 3. View of literal long side of the wall (variant 1.2) with sitting on engineer-geological
section.

Deformation concrete characteristics of retaining wall and soil ground, gravity loads of
reinforced concrete structure and soil are taken in accordance with normative documents [1...3].
Calculations are performed at elastic stage of concrete work, concrete is taken as B25.
At fig. 4 there is a design model of retaining wall of variant 1.2 at initial and deformation stages.

Fig. 4. General view of initial and deformation stages of wall design model (variant 1.2).
 Analysis of isofield displacements of retaining wall design model finite elements along X,
Y and Z axes is performed according to results of design load combinations. Values for vertical
and horizontal displacements are presented in table 1.

Table 1. Value of displacements.

Displacements, mm
Variants vertical along axis horizontal along axes
Z Х Y
1.1 14,66…15,38 13,16…15,04 2,81…3,96
1.2 9,06…11,45 12,60…14,89 4,93…5,70

The most value of vertical displacement is 15,4 mm.

The most value of horizontal displacement is 15,0 mm.
The reinforcement was chosen according to results of design force combination with
using of software system “Lirarm” and normative document [4].
At table 2 there are results of main reinforcement consumption for every wall.

Table 2. List of main reinforcement consumption.

Reinforcement of class, kgf
Total,
Variants Ukrainian national standardization system 3760:2006
kgf
Ø 12 Ø 14 Ø 18 Ø 20 Ø 25 Ø 28 Ø 32 Ø 36
1.1 3037,0 – 30,0 – 40,0 45,9 528,1 – 3681,0
1.2 1820,4 654,7 362,6 2465,1 76,6 239,3 347,2 347,2 5965,9

According to the results of calculation, consumption of reinforcement and concrete B25

for retaining wall for variant 1.1 is 368,0 kgf and 70,08 m3, for variant 1.2 – 596,9 kgf and
68,25 m3 correspondingly.
Comparing two variants, we can come to the conclusion: variant 1.1 (retaining wall of
angle form) is more rational during consumption of concrete and reinforcement and variant 1.2
(retaining wall with steps) is more processable and reliable in operation.
Fragments of spatial design models “foundation – retaining wall” with three variants of
reinforcement concrete wall on pile foundation (variants 2.1…2.3) are elaborated according to
variant 2 for engineer-geological conditions.
Pile variant is taken for cutting of fill-up soil, soil-vegetable layer and semisolid
subsidence loam (fig. 5).
Engineer-geological section is characterized by cured soil stratification: 1 – fill-up soils; 2
- soil-vegetable layer; 3 – semisolid subsidence loams; 5 – semisolid loams; 6 - semisolid
loams; 7 - semisolid loams; 9 – semisolid loams.
Every model is considered as consisting of wall, ground beam and pile.
Variant 2.1 of the retaining wall consists of wall with thickness of 200 m, height of 2,8 m;
ground beam with thickness of 600 m, width of 2,7 m; pile with diameter of 700 m, length of 10
m with spacing of 1 m in clear.
Variant 2.2 of the retaining wall consists of wall with thickness of 200 m, height of 2,8 m;
ground beam with thickness of 600 m, width of 0,7 m; piles with diameter of 700 m and 500 m,
length of 10 m, locating side by side.
Variant 2.3 of the retaining wall consists of wall with thickness of 200 m, height of 2,8 m;
ground beam with thickness of 600 m, width of 0,8 m; pile with diameter of 800 m, length of 10
m with spacing of 1 m in clear.
The general view of design models is given at fig. 6.
Deformation concrete characteristics of retaining wall and load are taken similarly to the
first variant. Deformation soil characteristics are taken according to the normative document [5].
Calculations are performed and analysis is carried out similarly to the first variant.
The results of calculations are given in table.
Fig. 5. View of wall (variant 2.3) with subsidence on engineer-geological section.

а b c

Fig. 6. The general view of design models of retaining wall

a – variant 2.1, b – variant 2.2, c – variant 2.3
 Values of vertical and horizontal displacements of finite elements are given at fig. 7 and
8 in form of diagrams and the most values of forces (Q – lateral force, M – moment), influencing
on piles – in table 3.

Fig. 7. Diagrams of vertical displacements of design models.

Fig. 8. Diagrams of horizontal displacements of design models.

Table 3. Values of forces.

Variants Q, ton- М, tfm LIMIT Q, ton-
force force
2.1 3,90 12,26 3,91
2.2 5,28 7,40 5,35
2.3 7,27 10,79 7,28

The most value of vertical displacement is 0,9 mm.

The most value of horizontal displacement is 15,4 mm.
 The most value of lateral force does not exceed limit force in every variant.
The results of chosen main reinforcement in piles and analysis of reinforcement of
monolithic concrete ground beams and walls of the retaining wall with reinforcement spacing of
200 x 200 mm are given in table 4.

Table 4. Minimal diameter of the main reinforcement, which is recommended to be taken for
design of monolithic reinforcement concrete piles, ground beams and walls.
Reinforcement diameter А400С with spacing of
Va Reinforcement А400С pile 200 mm along axes
ri of ground beams of walls
ants number, square, at lower at upper at lower at upper
diameter сm2/pile edge edge edge edge
Х У Х У Х У Х У
2.1 12d28 73,92 8 6 8 8 6 6 6 16
2.2 24d25 117,84 6 6 6 6 6 6 8 16
2.3 24d28 147,84 6 6 6 6 6 6 10 18

In table 5 there are results of consumption of main reinforcement and concrete for every
variant of the retaining wall.

Table 5. List of consumptions of main reinforcement and concrete.

Consumption Piles Ground beam Wall Total
variant 2.1
of concrete, ton-
force/running
meter 718,36 13,205 37,159 768,7
of reinforcement, 10,871 3,888 1,368 16,1
kgf/running
meter
variant 2.2
of concrete, ton-
force/running
meter 811,195 3,619 39,844 854,7
of reinforcement, 11,620 1,008 1,368 14,0
kgf/running
meter
variant 2.3
of concrete, ton-
force/running
meter 678,454 3,841 50,192 732,5
of reinforcement, 6,707 1,152 1,368 9,2
kgf/running
meter

Analysis shows that pile variant 2.3 (retaining wall with piles in one row) is the most
adapted to engineer-geological conditions according to variant 2.
Spatial design model “foundation-retaining wall” gives the most precise illustration of
stress and strain state of wall structure.
Loads, which influence on all load-bearing elements of the retaining wall, are considered
by means of spatial design model.
The results of calculations include distribution of stiffness to load-bearing structures in
lateral and longitudinal directions and at angles of the retaining wall.
It is defined that retaining wall with steps is the most processable and reliable in
operation for engineer-geological conditions according to variant 1 for retaining wall with
variable height of 3,4…4,96 m and pile variant with piles in one row – for engineer-geological
conditions according to variant 2 (fill-up soil, soil-vegetable layer, semisolid, subsidence loams
are located within the limits of pile length) for retaining wall with height of 2,5 m.
It is necessary to realize similar numeral researches for choice of reliable and
economical structural decisions of retaining walls during designing of retaining walls in other
engineer-geological conditions of the construction site.

REFERENCES

1. DBN B. 2.1-10-2009. Building bases and foundations. – K.: Ministry of regional

development of Ukraine, 2009.
2. SNiP 2.03.01-84*. Concrete and reinforcement concrete structures/ the State committee
for construction, architecture and housing policy of the USSR. – M.: Stroyizdat, 1989.
SNiP 2.01.07-85.
3. DBN -- В.1.2-2:2006. Loads and forces. – K.: Ministry of Construction of Ukraine, 2006.
4. Recommendations for using of reinforcing bar according to Ukrainian national
standardization system 3760-98 during designing and manufacture of reinforcement
concrete structures without preliminary reinforcement strain, Kiev, 2002.
5. SNiP 2.02.03-85. Pile foundations. – M.: Central institute of standard designing of the
State committee for construction, architecture and housing policy of the USSR, 1986.