1 INTRODUCTION 1.

0 General The LRFD design procedure for conventional gravity and cantilever retaining walls, abutments and MSE walls, with a few exceptions, is identical to the ASD design procedure utilized in the past. Generally, ultimate bearing capacity, resistance to sliding, overall stability, wall foundation settlement, and lateral deflection limits are checked. Total as well as differential settlements are major criteria for determining wall type. See excerpts in Appendix C taken from FDOT’s Plans Preparation Manual – Volume I showing wall type selection criteria based on anticipated settlement and the environmental classification of the site. Therefore, the first step of a retaining wall design is to calculate the settlements based on the fill heights. 1.1 Design Summary In ASD design, all the uncertainties in the applied loads and ultimate geotechnical or structural capacity are factored in safety factors or allowable stresses. Whereas, LRFD separates the variability of these design components and resistance factors to the load and material capacity, respectively. The key issues in the design of retaining walls and abutments by LRFD is the application of maximum and minimum load factors for dead , earth and surcharge loads. See Table 1 and Figures 1 through 3 below. 1.1.1 Dead or Permanent Loads DC = dead load of structural component and nonstructural attachments (for conventional retaining walls not for MSE Walls) DW = dead load for wearing surfaces and utilities EH = horizontal earth pressure load ES = earth surcharge load EV = vertical pressure from dead load of earth fill 1.1.2 Live or Transient Loads LS = live load surcharge WA = water load and stream pressure

1

Table 3.4.1-1 Load Combinations and Load Factors. Load Combination DC DD DW EH EV ES EL γp γp γp γp γp γp γp 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 — LL IM CE BR PL LS 1.75 1.35 — — 1.35 γEQ 0.50 1.00 1.30 0.80 — 0.75 Use One of These at a Time

Limit State STRENGTH I (unless noted) STRENGTH II STRENGTH III STRENGTH IV STRENGTH V EXTREME EVENT I EXTREME EVENT II SERVICE I SERVICE II SERVICE III SERVICE IV FATIGUE—LL, IM & CE ONLY

WA 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 —

WS — — 1.40 — 0.40 — — 0.30 — — 0.70 —

WL — — — — 1.0 — — 1.0 — — — —

FR 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 —

TU CR SH 0.50/1.20 0.50/1.20 0.50/1.20 0.50/1.20 0.50/1.20 — — 1.00/1.20 1.00/1.20 1.00/1.20 1.00/1.20 —

TG γTG γTG γTG — γTG — — γTG — γTG — —

SE γSE γSE γSE — γSE — — γSE — γSE 1.0 —

EQ — — — — — 1.00 — — — — — —

IC — — — — — — 1.00 — — — — —

CT — — — — — — 1.00 — — — — —

CV — — — — — — 1.00 — — — — —

Table 3.4.1-2 Load Factors for Permanent Loads, γp. Type of Load, Foundation Type, and Method Used to Calculate Downdrag DC: Component and Attachments DC: Strength IV only DD: Downdrag Piles, α Τοmlinson Method Piles, λ Method Drilled shafts, O’Neil and Reese (1999) Method DW: Wearing Surfaces and Utilities EH: Horizontal Earth Pressure • Active • At-Rest EL: Locked-in Erection Stresses EV: Vertical Earth Pressure • Overall Stability • Retaining Walls and Abutments • Rigid Buried Structure • Rigid Frames • Flexible Buried Structures other than Metal Box Culverts • Flexible Metal Box Culverts ES: Earth Surcharge Load Factor Maximum Minimum 1.25 1.50 1.40 1.05 1.25 1.50 1.50 1.35 1.00 1.00 1.35 1.30 1.35 1.95 1.50 1.50 0.90 0.90 0.25 0.30 0.35 0.65 0.90 0.90 1.00 N/A 1.00 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.75

2

1.1.3 Typical Application of Load Factors a. Dead or permanent load

Figure 1 - Bearing resistance for both conventional and MSE walls

Figure 2 - Sliding and Eccentricity for conventional and MSE walls

Figure 3 - Live or transient loads 3

2.0 Conventional Retaining Walls
2.1 Overall Stability Investigate Service 1 load combination using an appropriate resistance factor. In general, the resistance factor, φ, may be taken as; • 0.75 - where the geotechnical parameters are well defined, and slope does not support or contain a structural element. • 0.65 – where the geotechnical parameters are based on limited information or the slope contains or supports a structural element. 2.2 Bearing Resistance Investigate bearing resistance at the strength limit state using appropriate factored loads and resistances as described below. 2.2.1 Wall Supported on Soils The vertical stress shall be calculated assuming a uniformly distributed pressure over an effective base area.

σv =

ΣV B − 2e

(11.6.3.2-1)

Figure 4

4

2.2.2 Wall Supported on Rocks If the resultant force is within the middle third of the base;
σ V max =
ΣV e (1 + 6 ) B B

(11.6.3.2-2) (11.6.3.2-3)

σV min =

ΣV e (1 − 6 ) B B

If the resultant force is outside of the middle third of the base;
σ V max =
2ΣV B ) − e] 3[( 2

(11.6.3.2-4) (11.6.3.2-5) Figure 5 Figure 5

σV min = 0

2.2.3 Soil Bearing Resistance
qR = φb qn

(10.6.3.1.1-1) (10.6.3.1.2a-1)

qn = cN cm + gγD f N qm C wq + 0.5gγBN γm C wγ

Where: g c

= gravitational acceleration (ft/sec2) = cohesion

Ncm = Ncscic, bearing capacity factor for cohesion Nqm = Nqsqdqiq , surcharge bearing capacity factor Nγm = Nγsγiγ, unit weight bearing capacity factor γ = total (moist) unit weight of soil above or below the bearing depth of the footing. Df = footing embedment depth (ft) B = footing width (ft) Cwq,Cwγ= correction factors for water table sc,sγ,sq = footing shape correction factors dq = correction factor for shear resistance along the failure surface passing through cohesionless materials above the bearing elevation. ic,iγ,iq = load inclination factors 5

⎡ ⎤ H iq = ⎢1 − ⎥ ⎢ V + cBL cot φ f ⎥ ⎣ ⎦ ⎡ H iγ = ⎢1 − ⎢ V + cBL cot φ f ⎣ ⎤ ⎥ ⎥ ⎦

n

(10.6.3.1.2a-7)
n +1

(10.6.3.1.2a-8)

⎡2 + L ⎤ ⎡2 + B ⎤ B ⎥ cos 2 θ + ⎢ L ⎥ sin 2 θ n=⎢ L ⎥ B ⎥ ⎢1 + ⎢1 + B⎦ L⎦ ⎣ ⎣ Specifications. 2.3 Overturning or Eccentricity (Article 11.6.3.3)

(10.6.3.1.2a-9)

All these factors can be found in Article 10.6.3.1.2 of the Interim AASHTO 2006 LRFD

For foundations on soil, the resultant of the reaction pressure distribution shall be located within the middle one-half of the base width. For foundations on rock, the resultant of the reaction pressure distribution shall be located within the middle three-fourths of the base width. 2.4 Sliding Check spread footing against sliding in accordance with the provisions of Article 10.6.3.4. Passive resistance of soil in front of walls used in stability computation shall be carefully evaluated accounting for possible future excavations, either temporary or permanent, and/or long term erosion, etc. For clayey soils beneath the footing, QR, against failure by sliding is: RR = φτR τ + φep Rep where: φτ = Rτ= Rep= Resistant factor for shear resistance between soil and foundation specified in Table 10.5.5.2.2-1 Nominal shear resistance between footing and foundation material (ton); and Nominal passive resistance of foundation material available throughout the design life of the footing (ton). [ Pp = ½ γ H 2 K p + 2 c H K p ] φep = 0.5, Table 10.5.5.2.2-1 (11.6.3.4-1)

If the soil beneath the footing is cohesionless, then:
6

Rτ= V*tan δ

(11.6.3.4-2)

in which:

tan δ = tan φf for concrete cast against soil,

= 0.8 tan φf for precast concrete footing (φ = 0.8 from Table 3, page 26)
V = total vertical force (tons) φf = the internal friction angle of soil (o)
Example Problem 1:

Foundation soil properties:

γ2 = 110 pcf γ2’= 58 pcf
φ2 = 33o LS = 250 psf

Figure 6 The cantilever retaining wall is being considered for a grade separation between roadway lanes in a non-seismic area. The wall will be backfilled with a free draining granular fill such that the seasonal high water table will be below the bottom of the footing. The vehicular live load surcharge, LS, on the backfill will be applied as shown in the figure.

Approach:

To perform the evaluation, the following steps are taken:

The loads and resulting moments due to structure components, earth pressures and live load surcharge are calculated; and The appropriate load factors and combinations are determined and multiplied by the unfactored loads and moments to determine the factored loading conditions.
Step 1: Calculate the Unfactored Loads

(A) Dead Load of Structural Components and Nonstructural Attachments (DC)

7

Assuming a unit weight of concrete, γc, equal to 150 pcf, W1 = B1 H1 γc =1’x15’x0.150 =2.25 kips/ft W2 = 0.5 B2 H1 γc=0.5x0.5’x15’x0.150=0.562 kips/ft W3 = B H2 γc = 9.5’x1.5’x0.150=2.14 kips/ft

(B) Vertical Earth Pressure (EV)

Unit Weight of Soil γ1 = 105 pcf Weight of Soil on Footing PEV = W4 = B3H1γ1 = 6.5’ x 15’ x 105= 10.24 kips/ft
(C ) Live Load Surcharge (LS)
Figure 7

A live load surcharge is applied when vehicle loads will be supported on the backfill within a distance equal to H. The unit vertical component of LS is: For a heel width B3 of 6.5’:
P LSV = p LSV B3 = ( 250 psf)( 6.5' ) = 1.625kips / ft of wall length

The active earth pressure coefficient ka for a wall friction angle, δ = 0 and a horizontal back slope is: k = ka = 0.33

Δp = k LS = 0.33 × 250 = 82.5 psf / ft
Using a rectangular distribution, the live load horizontal earth pressure acting on the wall is:
P LSH = Δp H = ( 82.5 psf)( 16.5' ) = 1.36kips / ft of wall length (D) Horizontal Earth Pressure (EH) The lateral earth pressure is assumed to vary linearly with the depth of soil backfill as given by: p = kγ'z where k = 0.33 At the base of the footing (i.e., @ z = H): p = (0.333) (105) (16.5’) = 577 psf The horizontal earth pressure (triangular distribution) acting on the wall is: PEH = ½ pH = (0.5) (577) (16.5’) = 4.76 kips/ft length of wall

8

(E) Summary of Unfactored Loads
Unfactored Vertical Loads and Resisting Moments

Item

V (kips/ft) 2.25 0.56 2.14 10.24 1.63 16.82

Moment Arm About Toe (ft) 2.5 1.83 4.75 6.25 6.25

Moment About Toe (kip-ft/ft) 5.625 1.03 10.165 64.00 10.188

W1 W2 W3 PEV PLSV TOTAL

Unfactored Horizontal Loads and Overturning Moments

Item

H (kip/ft) 1.36 4.76

Moment Arm About Toe (ft) 8.25 5.5

Moment About Toe (kip-ft/ft) 11.22 26.18

PLSH PEH

Step 2: Determine the Appropriate Load Factors

In theory, structures could be evaluated for each of the limit states. However, depending on the particular loading conditions and performance characteristics of a structure, only certain controlling limit states need to be evaluated. For the example problem, each limit state will be qualitatively assessed below relative to that limit state is applicable for the design problem: • • Strength I - Basic load combination related to the normal vehicular use of the bridge without wind. (Applicable as a standard load case). Strength II - Load combination relating to the use of the bridge by Owner specified special design vehicles and/or evaluation permit vehicles, without wind. (Not 9

applicable because special vehicle loading is not specified).

Strength III - Load combination relating to the bridge exposed to wind velocity exceeding 55 mph without live loads. (Not applicable because wall is not subjected to
other than standard wind loading).

Strength IV - Load combination relating to very high dead load to live load force effect ratios exceeding about 7.0 (e.g., for spans greater than 250 feet). (Applicable
because dead loads predominate).

Strength V - Load combination relating to normal vehicular use of the bridge with wind velocity of 55 mph (Not applicable because wind load not a design
consideration).

• • • •

Extreme Event I - Load combination including earthquake. (Not applicable because
problem does not include earthquake loading).

Extreme Event II - Load combination relating to ice load or collision by vessels and vehicles. (Not applicable because problem does not include ice or collision loading). Service I - Load combination relating to the normal operational use of the bridge with 55 mph wind. (Applicable for design loading). Service II - Load Combination intended to control yielding of steel structures and slip of slip-critical connections due to vehicular live load. (Not applicable due to structure
type).

• •

Service III - Load combination relating only to tension in prestressed concrete structures with the objective of crack control. (Not applicable due to structure type). Fatigue - Fatigue and fracture load combination relating to repetitive gravitational vehicular live load and dynamic responses under a single design truck. (Not applicable
due to structure type).

Consequently, the applicable load factors and combinations the example problem are summarized in the following tables. From the descriptions above, it is apparent that only the Strength I, Strength IV and Service I Limit States apply to the retaining wall design. Strength I-a and I-b represent the Strength I Limit State using maximum and minimum load factors, respectively,

Load Factors

10

Group

DC

EV

LSv

LSH

EH (active)

Probable USE

Strength I-a Strength I-b Strength IV

0.90 1.25 1.50

1.00 1.35 1.35

1.75 1.75 -

1.75 1.75 -

1.50 BC/EC/SL 1.50 BC (max. value) 1.50 BC (max. value) 1.00 Settlement

Service I 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Notes: BC - Bearing Capacity; EC - Eccentricity; SL - Sliding By inspection:

Strength I-a (minimum vertical loads and maximum horizontal loads) will govern for the case of sliding and eccentricity (overturning); and For the case of bearing capacity, maximum vertical loads will govern, and the factored loads must be compared for Strength I-b and Strength IV.

Step 3: Calculate the Factored Loads and Factored Moments Factored Vertical Loads

Group/ Item Units V (Unf.) Strength I-a Strength I-b Strength IV Service I

W1 Kips/ft 2.25 2.03 2.81 3.38 2.25

W2 Kips/ft 0.56 0.50 0.70 0.84 0.56

W3 Kips/ft 2.14 1.93 2.68 3.21 2.14

PEV Kips/ft 10.24 10.24 13.82 13.82 10.24

PLSV Kips/ft 1.63 2.85 2.85 1.63

Total Kips/ft 16.82 17.55 22.86 21.25 16.82

Factored Horizontal Loads

11

Group/Item Units H (Unf.) Strength I-a Strength I-b Strength IV

PLSH Kips/ft 1.36 2.38 2.38 -

PEH Kips/ft 4.76 7.14 7.14 7.14

Total Kips/ft 6.12 9.52 9.52 7.14

1.36 4.76 6.12 Service I Factored Moments from Vertical Forces (Mv) Group/Item Units Mv (Unf.) Strength I-a Strength I-b Strength IV Service I W1 Kip-ft/ft 5.63 5.06 7.04 8.45 5.63 W2 Kip-ft/ft 1.03 0.93 1.29 1.55 1.03 W3 Kip-ft/ft 10.17 9.15 12.71 15.25 10.17 PEV Kip-ft/ft 64 64 86.40 86.40 64 PLSV Kip-ft/ft 10.19 17.83 17.83 --10.19 Total Kip-ft/ft 91.01 96.97 125.25 111.63 91.01

Factored Moments from Horizontal Forces (Mh)

Group/Item Units Mh (Unf.) Strength I-a Strength I-b Strength IV Service I Step 4 Stability Analyses

PLSH Kip-ft/ft 11.23 19.65 19.65 11.23

PEH Kip-ft/ft 26.18 39.27 39.27 39.27 26.18

Total Kip-ft/ft 37.41 58.92 58.92 39.27 37.41

12

a. Overturning or Eccentricity e = B/2 -Xo B/2 =9.5 / 2 = 4.75’ Xo = (MVdl - MHtotal) / Vdl emax = B/4 = 9.5 / 4 = 2.375’

Group/Item Units Strength I-a

Vdl. Kip /ft 14.70 20.01

Htotal Kip /ft 9.52 9.52 7.14 6.12

MVdl Kip-ft/ft 79.14 107.43 111.63 80.82

MHtotal Kip-ft/ft 58.92 58.92 39.27 37.41

Xo Ft 1.38 2.42 3.41 2.86

e ft 3.37 2.33 1.34 1.89

emax Ft 2.375 2.375 2.375 2.375

Strength I-b 21.25 Strength IV 15.19 Service I For load case Strength 1-a, e is greater than emax , therefore, the design revised regard to eccentricity. b. Bearing Resistance

The adequacy for bearing resistance is based on a rectangular distribution of soil pressure over the reduced effective area. For a rectangular distribution: L’ = 1 foot (unit length of wall) B’ = B – 2e
ΣV B − 2e

σV =

(11.6.3.2-1)

MVtotal

MHtotal

X0

CDR

13

Group/Item Units Strength I-a Strength I-b Strength IV Service I

ΣV Kip /ft 17.55 22.86 21.25 16.82

Kips-ft/ft 96.97 125.25 111.63 91.01

Kips-ft/ft 58.92 58.92 39.27 37.41 2.17 2.90 3.41 3.19

e ft 2.58 1.85 1.34 1.56

B’ ft 4.34 5.80 6.81 6.31

σ ksf 4.05 3.94 3.12 2.64 1.58 1.62 2.05 2.42

Bearing resistance of soil qR = φb qn (10.6.3.1.1-1)

qn = cN cm + gγD f N qm C wq + 0.5gγBN γm C wγ c = 0, φ = 33o, γ2 = 110 pcf, and γ2’ = 58 pcf Nq = 26.1, N γ = 35.2 Cwq= 1 Cw γ = 0.5 sq = 1 + (B/L)tanφf =1 (L>>B) sγ = 1 - 0.4(B/L) =1 dq = 1 Nqm = Nqsqdqiq=26.1x1x1x1=26.1 N γm = N γsγiγ=35.2x1x1=35.2 (Dw = Df)

(10.6.3.1.2a-1)

[Table 10.6.3.1.2a-1] [Table 10.6.3.1.2a-2] [Table 10.6.3.1.2a-3] [Table 10.6.3.1.2a-3] [Table 10.6.3.1.2a-4]

For modest embedment of footing, it is usually to omission of the inclination factors.

qn = 0.110 × 3 × 26.1 × 1 + 0.5 × 0.110 × 4.34 × 35.2 × 0.5 = 12.8 ksf/ft qR = Фqn, use Ф= 0.5

qR = 0.5x12.8=6.4 ksf/ft qR > σ in all loading cases , therefore, the footing design is adequate. c. Check sliding Rτ = φτ × V × tan δ V = (0.9 × DC + EV ) where: tan δ = tan φ f

φτ = 0.8
Rτ = 0.8 (17.55-2.85) (tan 33o) = 7.63 kips/ft < Htotal in load cases strength Ia & Ib.
14

The design has to be modified by either adding a key or lengthening the footing width. 3.0 Mechanically Stabilized Earth

(MSE) Walls
Mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) walls are composed of a reinforced soil mass/volume, and a discrete modular precast concrete facing which is vertical or near vertical. The reinforced soil mass consists of selected backfill. The tensile reinforcements may be proprietary, and may employ either metallic (i.e., strip or mesh/grid-typed) or polymeric grid. Figure 8 shows the typical MSE wall configuration, which is reproduced from the AASHTO Specifications Figure 11.10.2-1. Figure 8

MSE walls may be used where conventional gravity, cantilever, or counterfort retaining walls are considered. They can accommodate larger total and differential settlements than conventional gravity, cantilever, or counterfort retaining walls. However there are some design limitations related to the rigid facing elements related to very high total and differential settlement applications resulting in the need for two-phased construction solutions. MSE walls shall not be used in the following site conditions: (1) where utilities are to be constructed within the reinforced soil mass; (2) where floodplain erosion or scour may undermine the foundation support; and (3) in the case of steel reinforcements , where exposed to surface or groundwater contaminated by acid mine drainage, industrial pollutants, fertilizers or other aggressive environment that will cost long-term corrosions, (4) constructed over existing storm sewer systems unless attention is given to including possible joint leakage countermeasures. 15

The size of the reinforced soil mass is based on consideration of external stability of the system, geotechnical resistance, the structural resistance within the reinforced soil mass and panel units. The minimum soil reinforcement length required for external stability should be in accord with the FDOT’s Structures Design Guidelines Section 3.13.2 in lieu of AASHTO Specifications 11.10.2.1. The minimum required reinforcement length for various conditions is as follows; Walls in front of abutment on piling L ≥ 8 feet and L ≥ 0.7H1 Walls supporting abutment on spread footings L ≥ 22 feet and L ≥ 0.6(H1 + d) + 6.5 feet and L ≥ 0.7H1 Where: H1 = mechanical height of wall and measured to the point where potential failure plan intersects slope backfill face, in feet. L = reinforcement length required for external stability, in feet. d =fill height above wall Reinforcement length shall be increased as required for surcharges and other external loads, or for soft/weak foundation soils. Regardless of wall height, the minimum reinforcement length shall be eight (8) feet. 3.1 Minimum Front Face Embedment The AASHTO requirements for the minimum front face embedment are outlined in Article 11.10.2.2. In addition to this FDOT’s Structures Design Guidelines also have the following requirements; 16 Figure 9

1. Consider scour and bearing capacity when determining front face embedment depth; 2. Consult the District Drainage and Geotechnical Engineers to determine the elevation of the top of leveling pad; and 3. The minimum front face embedment at a slope should comply with Figure 9. 3.2 Other MSE Wall Design Issues Requirements according to the FDOT Structures Design Guideline (Section 3.13.2) A. Concrete Class and Cover Table 2 (SDG Table 3.13.2.A) Distance (D) from wall to a body of water with high chloride content (≥ 2000 ppm) or any coal burning industrial facility, pulpwood plant, fertilizer plant or similar industries D > 2,500 feet (low air contaminants) 2,500 feet ≥ D ≥ 300 feet (moderate air contaminants) D < 300 feet (extreme air contaminants) B. Service Life a. Permanent wall – 75 years b. Abutment walls on spread footings – 100 years c. Temporary walls – for the length of contract or three (3) years, whichever is greater. C. Acute Corner Walls (see Figure 10) a. Define as two wall intersect at an angle less than 70o ; b. Design the acute nose wall as at-rest bin; c. The bin should design with slip joints to tolerate differential settlements from the remainder of the structures; d. The nose bin wall should be considered 17 Figure 10 Concrete Type Class II Class IV Class IV Concrete Cover, inches 2 2 3

as a facing element restrained by proper soil reinforcements; and e. Design of facing connections, pullout and strength of reinforcing elements and obstructions must conform to the general requirements of MSE wall design. 3.3 Stability Analyses In LRFD analyses, it separates the variability of the design components by applying load and resistance factors to the load and material capacity, respectively, similar to the conventional retaining wall analyses. 3.3.1 Overall Stability (Article 11.10.4.3) The provision of Article 11.6.2.3 shall apply. Overall and compound stability of complex MSE wall system shall also be investigated, especially where the wall is located on sloping or soft ground where overall Figure 11

stability may be inadequate. The long term strength of each backfill reinforcement layer intersected by the failure surface should be considered as restoring forces in the limit equilibrium slope stability analysis.

3.3.2 External Stability Analyses The engineering properties of the retained soil mass used for MSE wall design according to the FDOT’s Structures Design Guidelines, Section 3.13.12.G shall be (1) Sand Backfill - friction angle, φ , of 30o, and unit weight, γ, of 105 pcf; (2) Limerock backfill (in Dade and Monroe Counties), friction angle, φ , of 34o, and unit weight, γ, of 115 pcf. (3) Traffic surcharge present and locate within 0.5H1 of the back of the reinforced soil volume should be included in the analysis. (4) The Geotechnical Engineer of Record for the project is responsible for the external stability analyses and design of the soil reinforcement length based on the analysis. In performing the external stability analyses, engineers should assume the reinforced fill 18

volume as a rigid body similar to that of a gravity wall, which shall satisfy eccentricity, sliding and bearing resistance criteria. 3.3.2.1 Overturning or Eccentricity The provisions of Article 11.6.3.3 shall apply. 3.3.2.2 Sliding The provisions of Article 10.6.3.3 shall apply. The coefficient of friction angle shall be determined as; • • For discontinuous reinforcements, such as strips – the lesser of friction angle of either reinforced backfill, φr, or foundation soil, φf; For continuous reinforcements, such as grids and sheets – the lesser of φr, φf, and ρ, where ρ is the soil-reinforcement interface friction angle and a value of 2/3 φf may be used. Other FDOT Structures Design Guideline Issues (Section 3.13.2) 3.3.2.3 Bearing Resistance Effective width will be used to account for the effects of eccentricity as well as inclination, B’=L-2e. Uniform bearing pressure shall be computed over the effective width. qR = φb qn (10.6.3.1.1-1)

qn = cN cm + gγD f N qm C wq + 0.5gγBN γm C wγ Where: Ncm = Ncscdcic Nqm = Nqsqdqiq N γm = N γsγiγ

(10.6.3.1.2a-1)

Nc, Nq , N γ = bearing capacity factors Cwq, Cw γ = correction factors to account for the location of the water table g = gravitational acceleration (ft/sec2) γ = total (moist) unit weight of soil above or below the bearing depth Df = footing embedment depth (ft) sq = 1 + (B/L)tanφf =1 (L>>B) sγ = 1 - 0.4(B/L) =1 [Table 10.6.3.1.2a-3] [Table 10.6.3.1.2a-3]

dq = correction factor to account for the shearing resistance along the failure surface passing through cohesionless material above the bearing elevation [Table 10.6.3.1.2a-4] 19

Design Example 2a – MSE Wall External Stability Wall height H = 20 feet, D = 2 Reinforced soil mass: φr = 30o γr = 105 pcf Retained fill: φf = 30o γf = 105 pcf Foundation soils: φF = 30o γF = 105 pcf (total/moist) Traffic/live loads: q = 250 psf/ft ka = tan2(45 – φ/2) = 0.333 L = 14 feet (if the wall facing panels are thick, L will used and weight of panels should calculated as dead load, W) be Figure 12 - MSE Example
D

Step 1 Calculate the unfactored loads

Vertical earth load of reinforced soil mass: PEV = V1 = γr HL = 105 x 20 x 14 = 29,400 #/ft or 29.4 kips/ft PLSV = q L = 250 x 14 = 3,500 #/ft or 3.5 kips/ft PEH = F1 = 0.5 γf H2 ka = 0.5 x 105 x (20)2 x 0.3333 = 6,999 #/ft or 7 kips/ft PLSH = F2 = qH ka = 250 x 20 x 0.3333 = 1,667 #/ft or 1.67 kips/ft

20

Unfactored Vertical Loads and Resisting Moments

Item

V (kips/ft) 29.4 3.5

Moment Arm About Toe (ft) 7.0 7.0

Moment About Toe (kip-ft/ft) 205.8 24.5

PEV PLSV

32.9 TOTAL Unfactored Horizontal Loads and Overturning Moments Item H (kip/ft) 1.67 7 Moment Arm About Toe (ft) 10.0 6.7 Moment About Toe (kip-ft/ft) 16.7 46.7

PLSH PEH

Step 2 Determine the appropriate load factors Load Factors

Group

DC

EV

LSv

LSH

EH (active)

Probable USE

Strength I-a Strength I-b

0.90 1.25

1.00 1.35

1.75 1.75

1.75 1.75

1.50 BC/EC/SL 1.50 BC (max. value) 1.00 Settlement

Service I 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Notes: BC - Bearing Capacity; EC - Eccentricity; SL - Sliding
Step 3: Calculate the Factored Loads and Factored Moments

21

Factored Vertical Loads

Group/ Item Units V (Unf.) Strength I-a Strength I-b Service I

PEV Kips/ft 29.4 29.4 39.7 29.4

PLSV Kips/ft 3.5 6.13 6.13 3.5

Total Kips/ft 32.9 35.5 45.8 32.9

Factored Horizontal Loads

Group/Item Units H (Unf.) Strength I-a Strength I-b

PLSH Kips/ft 1.67 2.98 2.98

PEH Kips/ft 7 10.49 10.49

Total Kips/ft 8.7 13.5 13.5

1.67 7 8.7 Service I Factored Moments from Vertical Forces (Mv) Group/Item Units Mv (Unf.) 205.8 Strength I-a 277.8 Strength I-b 205.8 Service I 24.5 230.3 42.9 320.7 42.9 248.7 PEV Kip-ft/ft 205.8 PLSV Kip-ft/ft 24.5 Total Kip-ft/ft 230.3

22

Factored Moments from Horizontal Forces (Mh)

Group/Item Units Mh (Unf.)

PLSH Kip-ft/ft 16.7 29.23

PEH Kip-ft/ft 46.7 69.93 69.93 46.7

Total Kip-ft/ft 63.4 99.16 99.16 63.4

Strength I-a 29.23 Strength I-b 16.7 Service I
Step 4 Stability Analyses

a. Overturning or Eccentricity e = B/2 -Xo emax = B/4 = 14 / 4 = 3.5’ Group/Item Units Strength I-a Strength I-b VD.L. Kip /ft 29.4 39.7 Htotal Kip /ft 13.5 13.5 MV.D.L. Kip-ft/ft 205.8 277.8 MHtotal Kip-ft/ft 99.16 99.16 Xo ft 3.63 4.49 e ft 3.37 2.51 emax ft 3.5 3.5 CDR 0.96 0.72 0.62 B/2 =14 / 2 = 7’ Xo = (MV. Dead Load - MHtotal) / VDead Load

29.4 8.7 205.8 63.4 4.84 2.16 3.5 Service I In all loading cases, e < emax (or CDR < 1), thus the design is adequate with regard to eccentricity. b. Bearing resistance B’ = B – 2e ΣV B − 2e B/2 =14 / 2 = 7’ Xo = (MV total - MHtotal) / Vtotal 23

σV =

Eccentricity to calculate reduced footing area: e2 = B/2 -Xo

emax = B/4 = 14 / 4 = 3.5’
Group/Item Units Vtotal Kip /ft 35.5 45.8 32.9 Htotal Kip /ft 13.5 13.5 8.7 MVtotal Kip-ft/ft 248.7 320.7 230.3 MHtotal Kip-ft/ft 99.16 99.16 63.4 Xo ft 4.21 4.83 5.07 e2 ft 2.78 2.16 1.92 ema ft Strength I-a Strength I-b Service I 3.5 3.5 3.5
x

B’ ft 8.44 9.68 10.1 6

qR 4.85 5.25 5.41

σv Ksf/ft 4.21 4.73 3.24

CDR

1.15 1.11 1.67

CDR is > 1.0 in all cases; therefore design is adequate with regards to bearing resistance. qR = φb qn qn = cN cm + gγD f N qm C wq + 0.5gγBN γm C wγ c = 0, φ = 30o, γ2 = 105 pcf, and γ2’ = 50 pcf Nq = 18.4, N γ = 22.4 Cwq= 1 Cw γ = 0.5 sq = 1 + (B/L)tanφf =1 (L>>B) sγ = 1 - 0.4(B/L) =1 dq = 1 Nqm = Nqsqdqiq=18.4x1x1x1=18.4 N γm = N γsγiγ=22.4 x1x1=22.4 q n = 0.105 × 2 × 18.4 × 1 + 0.5 × 0.105 × (14 − (2)(2.18)) × 22.4 × 0.5 = 9.55 ksf/ft qR = Фqn, use Ф= 0.55 (FDOT recommended) [Table 10.6.3.1.2a-3] [Table 10.6.3.1.2a-3] [Table 10.6.3.1.2a-4] (Dw = Df) [Table 10.6.3.1.2a-1] [Table 10.6.3.1.2a-2] (10.6.3.1.1-1) (10.6.3.1.2a-1)

For modest embedment of footing, it is usually to omission of the inclination factors.

qR = 0.55x12.1=5.25 ksf/ft qR > σv in all loading cases , therefore, the footing design is adequate. c. Check sliding Rτ = φτ × V × tan δ where: tan δ = tan φ f , andφτ = 0.9

Rτ = 0.9x29.4x tan 30o = 15.3 kips/ft > Htotal in all load cases OK (CDR = 15.3/13.5) = 1.13 Table 3
[Table 11.5.6-1 Resistance Factors for Permanent Retaining Walls.]

24

WALL-TYPE AND CONDITION Nongravity Cantilevered and Anchored Walls Bearing resistance of vertical elements Passive resistance of vertical elements Pullout resistance of anchors(1) • Cohesionless (granular) soils • Cohesive soils • Rock Pullout resistance of anchors(2) • Where proof test are conducted Tensile resistance of anchor • Mild steel (e.g., ASTM A 615 bars) tendon • High strength steel (e.g., ASTM A 722 bars) Flexural capacity of vertical elements Mechanically Stabilized Earth Walls Bearing resistance Sliding Tensile resistance of metallic Strip reinforcements(4) reinforcement and connectors • Static loading • Combined static/earthquake loading Grid reinforcements(4) (5) • Static loading • Combined static/earthquake loading Tensile resistance of geosynthetic • Static loading reinforcement and connectors • Combined static/earthquake loading Pullout resistance of tensile • Static loading reinforcement • Combined static/earthquake loading Prefabricated Modular Walls Bearing Sliding Passive resistance
(1) (2) (3)

RESISTANCE FACTOR Article 10.5 applies 1.00 0.65 (1) 0.70 (1) 0.50 (1) 1.0(2) 0.90(3) 0.80(3) 0.90 Article 10.5 applies Article 10.5 applies 0.75 1.00 0.65 0.85 0.90 1.20 0.90 1.20

Article 10.5 Applies Article 10.5 Applies Article 10.5 Applies

Apply to presumptive ultimate unit bond stresses for preliminary design only in Article C11.9.4.2. Apply where proof test are conducted to a load of 1.0 or greater times the factored design load on the anchor.

Apply to maximum proof test load for the anchor. For mild steel apply resistance factor to Fy. For highstrength steel apply the resistance factor to guaranteed ultimate tensile strength. Apply to gross cross-section less sacrificial area. For sections with holes, reduce gross area in accordance with Article 6.8.3 and apply to net section less sacrificial area. Applies to grid reinforcements connected to a rigid facing element, e.g., a concrete panel or block. For grid reinforcements connected to a flexible facing mat or which are continuous with the facing mat, use the resistance factor for strip reinforcements.
(5) (4)

Table 4 25

Resistance Factors for Geotechnical Resistance of Shallow Foundations at the Strength Limit State. (Table 10.5.5.2.2-1, AASHTO 2006) Method/Soil/Condition Theoretical method (Munfakh et al., 2001) in clay Theoretical method (Munfakh et al., 2001) in sand, CPT Bearing Resistance φb Theoretical method (Munfakh et al., 2001) in sand, SPT Semi-emperical methods (Meyerhof,1957), all soils Footing on rock Plate load test Precast concrete placed on sand Sliding φτ Cast-in-place concrete on sand Cast-in-place or Precast concrete on clay Soil on soil φep Passive earth pressure component of sliding resistance 3.3 Internal Stability It is titled as ‘Safety against Structural Failure’ in AASHTO Section 11.10.6. In this section, it requires engineers to evaluate the pullout resistance and rupture of soil reinforcements. 3.4.1 Maximum reinforcement loads Simplified Method approach should be used to calculate the maximum reinforcement loads. Resistance Factor 0.5 0.5 0.45 0.45 0.45 0.55 0.90 0.80 0.85 0.90 0.50

σ H = γ P (σ V k r + Δσ H )
where: γP = load factor for EV kr = horizontal pressure coefficient

(11.10.6.2.1-1)

σv = vertical pressure due the reinforced soil mass and any surcharge loads above it.
ΔσH= horizontal stress at reinforcement level resulting from any applicable concentrated horizontal surcharge loads.

26

Figure 13 – Live Load and Dead Load Surcharges for Internal Stability Analysis for Horizontal Backfill

Figure 14 – Live Load and Dead Load Surcharges for Internal Stability Analysis for Slope Backfill

Figure 15 – Variation of Coefficient of Active Lateral Earth Pressure Multiplier Factors with Depth

3.4.2 Maximum tension force The maximum tension force applied to the reinforcements per unit width of the wall will be; Tmax = σ H SV Where: (11.10.6.2.1-2)

σH = factored horizontal soil stress at the reinforcement
27

Sv = vertical spacing between reinforcements (< 2.7 ft.)

Figure 16 Potential Failure Surface for Internal Stability Design of MSE Walls 3.4.3 Pullout Resistance Length The potential failure surface for inextensible and extensible wall system and the active and resistant zones are shown in Figure 16. The pullout resistance length shall be determined using the following equation;
Le ≥ Tmax

φF ασ v CRc
*

(11.10.6.32-1)

Where: Le = length of reinforcement in resistant zone (ft.) >= 3’ 28

Tamx = factored tension load in reinforcement (kips/ft)
ø

= resistance factor for reinforcement pullout = pullout friction factor, need not be reduced for properly placed and compacted, saturated backfill (per FDOT Structures Design Guidelines section 3.13).

F*

α σv C

= scale effect correction factor = unfactored vertical stress at reinforcement level = overall reinforcement surface area geometry factor based on the gross perimeter of the reinforcement, equal to 2 for strip, grid and sheet, i.e., two sides

Rc

= reinforcement coverage ratio

Figure 17 Default Values for Pullout Friction Factor, F*

Soil reinforcements, in general, should be designed laying perpendicular to the back of the wall facing panels. If this not feasible because of obstructions, such as piles or other miscellaneous structures, the clearance between the wall panels and obstructions shall be increased such that the soil reinforcement is skewed no more than 15 degree off the perpendicular as per SDG. The pullout resistance should be separately with the consideration of the skewed angles.

29

3.3.4 Reinforcement Strength The reinforcement strength shall be checked at every level within the wall, both at the boundary between the active and resistance zones (i.e., zone of maximum stress), and at the connection of the reinforcement to the wall face.

Zone of maximum stress

Tmax = φTal Rc

Where: Tmax = factor load to the reinforcement (kips/ft) Ø = resistance factor for reinforcement tension
Tal = nominal long term reinforcement design strength (kips/ft) For steel reinforcement; Tal = Ac Fy b , and Tmax RF RF=RFID x RFCR x RFD

For geosynthetic reinforcement; Tal = Rc = reinforcement coverage ratio. •

Stress at the connection with the wall face

To = φTac Rc

Where: To = factor load at the reinforcement/facing connection (kips/ft) Ø = resistance factor for reinforcement tension in connectors
Tac = nominal long term reinforcement/facing connection design strength (kips/ft) Rc = reinforcement coverage ratio.

3.3.4 Design Life Consideration for Soil Reinforcement In SDG section 3.13, Corrosion Rate for non-corrosive environments (low and moderate air contaminants): (A) Zinc (first 2 years) (B) Zinc (subsequent years to depletion) (C) Carbon Steel (after depletion of zinc) (D) Carbon Steel (75 to 100 years) Example 3 – MSE Wall Internal Stability Wall height 30 0.59mils/year 0.16mils/year 0.48mils/year 0.28mils/year

0.3

H = 20 feet, Df = 2 Reinforced soil mass: Assume 40mm x 5 mm ribbed steel strips will be used φr = 30o γr = 105 pcf Traffic/live loads: q = 250 psf/ft ka = tan2(45 – φ/2) = 0.333

05

D

Step 1 – Calculate the factored horizontal force acting on the reinforcement

For this example assume steel strips reinforcements are used, at vertical spacing of Sv = 2.5’ beginning at 1.25’ below the top of the wall. The vertical pressure at the reinforcement is the vertical earth pressure uniformly distributed over an adjusted reinforcement length of L’=L – e. The load case that produces the largest uniform stress is Strength Ib, i.e. γEV = 1.35 and γEH = 1.5. Live load surcharge is not considered in the internal stability calculations for vertical pressure. The factored vertical pressure as well as horizontal earth pressure is calculated at each layer or reinforcement strip determines the 1.25 eccentricity of each layer.
PEVi = γ EV Z iγ r
PEV1

PaH

γp σv=quniform PVT

e

= 1.35*Zi*0.105 = 0.1418Zi Zi= depth from the top of the wall to the i reinforcement. At level 1 reinforcement, where L=14’
PET 1 = γ EV × L × (γ r × Zi ) = 1.35*14* 0.105*1.25= 2.48 kips/ft M V = PET 1 × L =2.48*7 = 17.36 kips-ft/ft 2
L PLS

1 1 1 M H = (γ EH × K a × × Z i × × Z i2 × γ r ) + (γlsh × K a × × Z i2 × q LS ) 3 2 2 = (1.5*0.333*0.333*1.25*0.5*1.252*0.105) +(1.75*0.333*0.5*1.252*0.25] = 0.131 K-ft/ft 31

e=

17.36 − 0.131 L MV − M H − =7= 0.05’ 2 PEV 2.48
PV T = 0.178 L − 2e

γ Pσ V = quniform =
Layer,i 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Zi (ft) 1.25 3.75 6.25 8.75 11.25 13.75 16.25 18.75

PVT, (kip/ft) 2.48 7.44 12.4 17.35 22.31 27.26 32.25 37.21

MV(kips-ft/ft) 17.36 52.08 86.8 121.55 156.28 191.01 225.74 260.47

Mh (kip-ft/ft) 0.13 1.49 4.98 11.43 21.66 36.49 56.74 83.22

e, ft 0.05 0.20 0.4 0.66 0.97 1.34 1.76 2.24

quniform, (ksf) 0.178 0.547 0.940 1.369 1.851 2.409 3.077 3.906

Since the wall is only 20 feet height, the multipliers of lateral coefficient of earth pressure vary linearly from 1.7 at the top of the wall to 1.2 at 20 feet below the top of the wall. Therefore, Kr = [1.7 - Zi * (1.7 – 1.2)/20]*Ka = (1.7 - 0.025Zi)*Ka σH=γp σvKr , and Tmax = σHsvi Summary of Factored Horizontal Load at Reinforcements Layer Zi (ft) γp σv (ksf) Kr 0.556 0.535 0.514 0.493 0.472 0.452 0.431 0.410 σH, (ksf) 0.099 0.293 0.483 0.675 0.875 1.088 1.326 1.601 svi, ft 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 Tmax (kips) 0.25 0.73 1.21 1.69 2.19 2.72 3.31 4.00

1 1.25 0.178 2 3.75 0.547 3 6.25 0.940 4 8.75 1.369 5 11.25 1.851 6 13.75 2.409 7 16.25 3.077 8 18.75 3.906 Step 2 Check pullout resistances Le ≥

φF ασ v CRc
*

Tmax

=

Tmax = length of reinforcement in resistant zone (ft.) >= 3’ A

Tmax = factored tension load in reinforcement (kips/ft)
ø

= 0.9 from Table 2 [AASHTO Table 11.5.6-1] = varies from 1.2 + log Cu (assume Cu = 4) at the top to tan φr= tan 30 = 0.577 at 20 feet below the top for ribbed steel strip, i.e. 1.8 to 0.577 or at each reinforcement level F*i = 1.8 –

F

*

32

0.06*Zi α σv C Rc = 1 for steel reinforcements = unfactored vertical stress at reinforcement level = 2 (for strip) = b/Sh = (40/25.4)/ 40 = 0.03937 [ Sh = 40” is predetermined] F* 1.724 1.575 1.425 1.275 1.125 0.975 0.825 0.675 A 0.016 0.045 0.07 0.091 0.108 0.121 0.13 0.134 Tmax /ft(kips) 0.25 0.73 1.21 1.69 2.19 2.72 3.31 4.00 Le, ft 15.4 16.2 17.3 18.6 20.3 22.4 25.4 29.9

Layer Zi (ft) σv (ksf)/ft 1 1.25 0.131 2 3.75 0.394 3 6.25 0. 656 4 8.75 0.919 5 11.25 1.181 6 13.75 1.444 7 16.25 1.706 8 18.75 1.969 * A = ø F α σv C Rc L = La + Le Active zone, La Z =0 - 0.5 H or 0’ - 10’ Z = 0.5H – H or 10’ – 20’ Layer 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 The longest L is at Z8, Zi (ft) 1.25 3.75 6.25 8.75 11.25 13.75 16.25 18.75

La= 0.3 H = 6’ La varies from 6’ - 0’ Le, ft 15.4 16.2 17.3 18.6 20.3 22.4 25.4 29.9 La, ft 6 6 6 6 5.25 3.75 2.25 0.75 L, ft 21.4 22.2 23.3 24.6 25.6 26.2 27.7 30.7

L = 29.9 + .75 = 30.7’ say 31’ Thus internal stability controls the design of reinforcement length at all layers. Adjust the lengths to whole number (rounding up), which resulting in longer Le .

33

Actual Resistance*, (kips)/ft 1 1.25 0.016 16.00 0.26 2 3.75 0.045 17.00 0.77 3 6.25 0.07 18.00 1.26 4 8.75 0.091 19.00 1.73 5 11.25 0.108 20.75 2.24 6 13.75 0.121 23.25 2.81 7 16.25 0.13 25.75 3.35 8 18.75 0.134 30.25 4.05 * * Resistance = (Actual Le, ft) x A, where A= φF ασ v CRc Layer Zi (ft) A Actual Le, ft

Tmax (kips)/ft 0.25 0.73 1.21 1.69 2.19 2.72 3.31 4.00

Since the actual resistance at each reinforcement level is larger than that of the maximum tensile stress required for pullout, therefore the design is adequate. Step 3 – Check Reinforcement Strength The engineer should also check the tensile stress at the connection and the design life based on the corrosion rate. Assume they are OK.

4.0 Nongravity Cantilever Walls (AASHTO 3.11.5.6).
4.1 Granular Soils or Rock For permanent walls the simplified lateral earth pressure distributions as shown in Figures 17 through 19 may be used. For temporary walls with discrete vertical elements, Figures 17 & 18 may be used to determine passive resistance and Figures 20 & 21 may be used to determine the active earth pressure due to the retained soil.

34

Figure 17

Figure 18

Figure 19

Figure 20

35

Figure 21

Figure 22

Figure 23

36

4.2 Cohesive Soils If walls will support or are supported by cohesive soils for temporary applications, wall must be designed based on total stress methods of analysis and undrained shear strength parameters. Figures 20 – 23 may be used with the restrictions of; • Ratio of total overburden pressure to undrained shear strength, Ns ( N s =

γ sH
Su

; γs =

total unit weight; H = total excavation depth, and Su = average undrained shear strength of soil. AASHTO 3.11.5.7.2) • The active earth pressure shall not be less than 0.25 times the effective overburden pressure at any depth, or 0.035 ksf/ft of wall height, whichever is greater. A portion of negative loading at top of wall due to cohesion is ignored and hydrostatic pressure in a tension crack should be considered. 4.3 Nongravity Cantilevered Walls Design Article 11.8 outlines the design and analysis. In C11.8.4.1 particularly it states the procedures to determine the value x using factored loads as well as resistance factor. However, at the end, the design embedment length shall also be extended by 20%, which is the same as the design method of the old. With the combination of maximum load factor, the reduced resistance factor and the 20% increase, we found that too much conservatism is built into the design. Thus, we think the old method should be used because there aren’t many case histories of failure. Appendix Changes in FDOT’s Structures Design Guidelines and Plans Preparation Manual are in the Appendix. i. Attachment A - Structural Manual Vol. 1; Structures Design Guidelines – Section 3.13 ii. Attachment C – Plans Preparation Manual – Vol. 1; Section 30.2.3, 30.2.4 and Flowchart and Table of FDOT Wall Types

37