NUMERICAL MODEL OF AN INNOVATIVE GABION

RETAINING WALL AND POSSIBLE APPLICATION IN

CAMEROON

A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master in Engineering (Meng) in Civil
Engineering
Curriculum: Geotechnical Engineering
Presented by:
KENFACK Paul

Jury:

President: Pr. NKENG George ELAMBO

Examiner: Dr. BWEMBA Charles Supervisor: Pr. Simonetta COLA
Reporter : University of Padova
 Results and
Content Introduction Generalities Methodology Conclusion
interpretations

2
Introduction

Generalities

Methodology

Results and interpretations

Conclusion and perspectives

 Results and
Content Introduction Generalities Methodology Conclusion
interpretations

3
Context
Stability of gabion retaining wall

Problem
Internal instability at gabion-gabion interface.

Objective
• Establish the formulas allowing the numerical modelling of the Sirive®
Supergabion cage

• Perform a numerical modelling of the Sirive® Supergabion retaining wall

• Application of the Sirive® Supergabion in Cameroon

 Results and
Content Introduction Generalities Methodology Conclusion
interpretations

4
1 Definition
A gabion is a cage filled with draining materials.

2 Types of gabion

Classic gabion

1.6.a. Rectangular classic gabion cage

 Results and
Content Introduction Generalities Methodology Conclusion
applications

5
Sirive® Supergabion
It is an innovative gabion because the supergabion wall is a continue wall without
joints in contrary to the classic gabion wall

1.10.a 1.10.b
 Results and
Content Introduction Generalities Methodology Conclusion
interpretations

6
 location
1 Site recognition :  Relief
 Climate

 Hydrography

2 Data collection :  Geotechnical data

 Geometrical data

3 Software: Plaxis 8.2

PLAXIS 8 v2 is a 2D finite element program specially designed to perform
deformation and stability analyses of Geotechnical structures.
 Results
Resultsand
and
Content
Content Introduction
Introduction Generalities
Generalities Methodology
Methodology Conclusion
Conclusion
interpretations
applications

7
4 Formulation of Sirive® Supergabion numerical modeling parameters

4.1 Numbering and name of supergabion cage element and panel

Figure 1.10.a Section of Supergabion

 Results and
Content Introduction Generalities Methodology Conclusion
interpretations

8 4.2 Formulation of the numerical prameters per unit length of Supergabion cage

For each panel of Supergabion, rigidity of the longitudinal wires is neglected.

4.2.1 Lateral or vertical panel (number 2)
(3.26)
Axial rigidity
(3.27)
Flexural stiffness
(3.31)
Area unit weight
 Results and
Content Introduction Generalities Methodology Conclusion
interpretations

9 4.2.2 Top and bottom panel

Table 3.6. Plaxis 2D parameters of bottom and top panel for Supergabion

Parameters Bottom panel (3) Top panel (6)

Diameter of wire
Distance between 2 transverse wires
Distance between 2 longitudinal wires

Axial stiffness EA[kN/m]

Flexural or bending stiffness EI[kN.m²/m]

[kN/m/m]
 Results and
Content Introduction Generalities Methodology Conclusion
interpretations

10
4.2.3 Structural chain, stiffener, horizontal panel between 2 cell

Table 3.7. Plaxis 2D parameters for structural chain, stiffener and horizontal panel between 2 cells of
supergabion
  Horizontal panel between 2 cells Bracing or structural chain Stiffener (5)
of supergabion (7) (4)

Diameter

Axial stiffness,
EA[kN]

20 to 50 cm
 Results and
Content Introduction Generalities Methodology Conclusion
interpretations

11
1 Site recognition :
 Location

Bafoussam, capital of the Mifi division and also the West

Region of Cameroon.

Geographically, it is 1325 m a.s.m.l., latitude 05 ° 32′12 ″ N

and longitude 010 ° 21′16 ″ E.

The area covered by our study is located within the confines

of Bafoussam airport, near the threshold area of ​the airstrip.

Figure 3.1. Localization of Mifi division

 Results and
Content Introduction Generalities Methodology Conclusion
interpretations

12  Climate
Table 3.1. Bafoussam weather by month Climate features for 1982-2012
 

January

February

March

April

May

June

July

August

September

October

November

December
Minimum temperature (°C) 14.5 14.7 16.3 16 15.5 15.1 15 14.9 14.3 14.3 14.8 14.5
Maximum temperature (°C) 27 27.6 26.9 26.1 25.2 23.8 23 23.2 23.8 24.1 24.9 25.9
Average temperature (°C) 21.7 21.1 21.6 21 20.3 19.4 19 19 19 19.2 19.8 20.2
Precipitations (mm) 11 34 106 170 184 197 255 258 321 270 58 10

Annual rainfall 1871 mm

Dry season extends from mid-November to mid-March (four months)

2 seasons
Rainy season lasts eight months, from mid-March to mid-November
 Results and
Content Introduction Generalities Methodology Conclusion
interpretations

13 2 Presentation of the project

• The case study is the quagmire supporting the access road to Bafoussam airport
• The quagmire has the shape of an arc of a circle about 120 m long. Landslides with circular failure line occur in the
area.
• The slope is practically vertical, with heights of up to 7m.

Figure 3.3. Topographic view of the project site Figure 3.4.b Topographic view of the project site
 Results and
Content Introduction Generalities Methodology Conclusion
interpretations

14
2 Data collection

 Length of the quagmire: 120 m

 Height: 7 m
 Slope angle: practically vertical
 Width of the road: 6 m
 Load: q = 20 kN/m²
 Geotechnical data: cohesion, friction angle, peak resistance, soil density, ground water level, soil
profile
 Results and
Content Introduction Generalities Methodology Conclusion
interpretations

15 3 Modeling in Plaxis 2D

Figure 4.1

Figure 4.2. Input of supergabion retaining wall

Figure 4.3.a.Water profile after excavation
 Results and
Content Introduction Generalities Methodology Conclusion
interpretations

16 Parameters of Supergabion cage

From Eq3.24 to 3.31 and table 3.6 and Table 3.7, compute supergabion basket parameters and sumarise results
in table 4.1
Table 4.1. Numerical parameters per unit length (L=1m) of Sirive® supergabion
Steel wire Supergabion basket 50/250
Material model Linear elastic Linear elastic
Material type Plate Node to node anchor

Diameter (mm) A (mm²) I (mm4) dt (m) dL (m) EA (kN/m) EI (kN.m²/m) w (kN/m/m) EA (kN) Lspacing (m)

(2) vertical or lateral ϕ2h 8 50 201 0,25

0,0526
panel ϕ2v 5,5 24 45 0,05 96000 0,18
(6) Top closure ϕ6 5,5 24 45 0,05 0,25 96000 0,18 0,0006
(3) Bottom panel ϕ3 8 50 201 0,05 0,25 200000 0,804 0,0012

Horizontal panel
ϕ7 8 50 201 10000 0,5
between two cell

(4 and 5) Bracing and

ϕ4 = ϕ5 8 50 201 10000 0,5
structural chain
 Results and
Content Introduction Generalities Methodology Conclusion
interpretations

17 4 Calculations and output

Supergabion retaining wall 4.2 Supergabion retaining wall with self drilling anchors
4.1
(From fig 4.2)
Supergabion
Short term Long term
FS 2.11 1.43

H = 8m
B=7 m very large
But
FS=1.43<1.5 always insufficient
while
the foundation soil already has a strong
Anchorage Supergabion
accumulation of points in plastic failure.
Short term Long term
FS 2.12 1.61

Figure 4.8. Geometry of anchorage surpergabion wall with load q = 20 kPa

 Results and
Content Introduction Generalities Methodology Conclusion
interpretations

18 4 Calculations and output

4.4 FS comparison between supergabion and classic gabion wall

𝐹𝑆(𝑠𝑢𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑔𝑎𝑏𝑖𝑜𝑛)>𝐹𝑆(𝑐𝑙𝑎𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑐𝑔𝑎𝑏𝑖𝑜𝑛)

Figure 4.13. Safety factor for long term sirive® supergabion and classic gabion for the same section of the wall and same anchors
 Results and
Content Introduction Generalities Methodology Conclusion
interpretations

19 5 Adopted gabion retaining wall

5.1 Walls section and FS

FS = 1.61 > 1.5

FS = 1.59 > 1.5
Figure 4.8. Geometry of anchorage surpergabion wall with loador Figure 4.14. Classic gabion retaining wall with self-drilling
anchor
 Results and
Content Introduction Generalities Methodology Conclusion
interpretations

20 5 Adopted gabion retaining wall

5.2 Cost analysis

Table 4.10. Cost of Supergabion and classic gabion retaining walls with self-drilling anchors

Anchorage Supergabion Anchorage classic gabion wall

Unit
Quantity Unit price (CFA F) Cost (CFA) Quantity Unit price (CFA F) Cost (CFA)

Gabion
m3 960 111 350 106 896 000 960 72 050 69 168 000
basket

Filling
m3 960 13100 12 576 000 960 13100 12 576 000
material

Anchor m 1 620 26 200 42 444 000 4 380 26200 114 756 000

Total cost 161 916 000 Total cost 196 500 000
 Results and
Content Introduction Generalities Methodology Conclusion
interpretations

21 Conclusion and perspectives

 Objective: Numerical model of Sirive Supergabion and application Cameroon.

 Results:
• FS(Sugergabion wall) > FS(classic gabion wall)
• The cost of the Supergabion cages is 1.5 time higher than that of the classic gabion, but the designed
anchorage Supergabion retaining wall is 0.82 time less expensive than anchorage classic gabion
 Perspectives
• Make a comparative study of the experimental results of the Supergabion and the numerical results;
• Carry out solicitations of each wire of the Supergabion retaining wall in order to avoid the failure.
 Results and Conclusion
Content Introduction Generalities Methodology
applications

22

THANK YOU FOR your kIND

ATTENTION

MERCI POUR VOTRE

AIMABLE ATTENTION