SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Sigma Mühendislik ve Fen Bilimleri Dergisi / 2015 / Cilt: 33 - Sayı: 4

DYNAMIC DISPLACEMENT AND STRESS ANALYSES OF CANTILEVER RETAINING WALLS CONSIDERING SOIL-STRUCTURE INTERACTION AND WALL FLEXIBILITY

Tufan ÇAKIR
Serhat DAĞ
Pages
577–589
Publication Date
2015-09-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

It was observed that these responses may vary significantly due to soil-structure interaction and wall flexibility effects.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The Mononobe-Okabe (M-O) method based on limit equilibrium principle is widely used in the design of retaining structures against earthquake loads.
📊
Key Findings & Data:However, this method does not consider the soil-structure interaction and wave propagation effects.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:It was observed that these responses may vary significantly due to soil-structure interaction and wall flexibility effects.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Soil-structure interaction · wall flexibility · cantilever retaining wall

Abstract

The Mononobe-Okabe (M-O) method based on limit equilibrium principle is widely used in the design of retaining structures against earthquake loads. However, this method does not consider the soil-structure interaction and wave propagation effects. On the other hand, it is known that the interactions of retaining structures with backfill and foundation soils transform the seismic behavior of these structures to a rather complex problem. The main purpose of this study is to evaluate the soil-structure interaction and wall flexibility effects on the seismic behavior of backfill-cantilever retaining wall-foundation/soil systems. In line with this target, three dimensional finite element models were utilized for analyzing the aforementioned systems. Seismic analyses were carried out in the time domain by considering five different foundation soil conditions and two different wall thicknesses. The results were comparatively interpreted in terms of lateral wall displacements and the stresses occurring at critical sections of the wall. It was observed that these responses may vary significantly due to soil-structure interaction and wall flexibility effects.

🔖

Cite This Article

ÇAKIR, T., DAĞ, S. (2015). DYNAMIC DISPLACEMENT AND STRESS ANALYSES OF CANTILEVER RETAINING WALLS CONSIDERING SOIL-STRUCTURE INTERACTION AND WALL FLEXIBILITY. Sigma Mühendislik ve Fen Bilimleri Dergisi, Cilt: 33 - Sayı: 4, 577–589. https://ajindex.com/articles/415105

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (13)

  1. U. Akyüz. Alternatif Tasarım Yöntemi: Sismik Temel İzolasyonu. Erdem Canbay, Uğur Ersoy, Güney Özcebe, Haluk Sucuoğlu, S. Tanvir Wasti (Edt.), Binalar için Deprem Mühendisliği Temel İlkeler. (s. 337-364). Ankara, Türkiye, 2008
  2. H.N. Nazarian, A.H. Hadjian. Earthquake-induced lateral soil pressures on structures. Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division, ASCE, 105: 1049-1066, 1979
  3. A.S. Veletsos, A.H. Younan. Dynamic soil pressures on rigid vertical walls. Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics, 23: 275-301, 1994
  4. D.D. Theodorakopoulos, A.P. Chassiakos, D.E. Beskos. Dynamic pressures on rigid cantilever walls retaining poroelastic soil media. Part I. First method of solution. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 21: 315-338, 2001
  5. G. Gazetas, P.N. Psarropoulos, I. Anastasopoulos, N. Gerolymos. Seismic behaviour of flexible retaining systems subjected to short-duration moderately strong excitation. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 24: 537-550, 2004
  6. P.N. Psarropoulos, G. Klonaris, G. Gazetas. Seismic earth pressures on rigid and flexible retaining walls. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 25: 795-809, 2005
  7. S.P.G. Madabhushi, X. Zeng. Simulating seismic response of cantilever retaining walls. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, ASCE, 133: 539-549, 2007
  8. C. Giarlelis, G. Mylonakis. Interpretation of dynamic retaining wall model tests in light of elastic and plastic solutions, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 31: 16-24, 2011
  9. P. Kloukinas, A. Penna, A.S. di Santolo, S. Bhattacharya, M. Dietz, L. Dihoru, A. Evangelista, A.L. Simonelli, C. Taylor, G. Mylonakis. Experimental investigation of dynamic behavior of cantilever retaining walls, Second International Conference on Performance-Based Design in Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering, (Taormina, May 2012), paper no. 13.08
  10. T. Çakır. Evaluation of the effect of earthquake frequency content on seismic behavior of cantilever retaining wall including soil-structure interaction. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 45: 96-111, 2013
  11. T. Çakır. Influence of wall flexibility on dynamic response of cantilever retaining walls. Structural Engineering and Mechanics, 49: 1-22, 2014
  12. Q. Liu, Y. Tian, F. Deng. Dynamic analysis of flexible cantilever wall retaining elastic soil by a modified Vlasov–Leontiev model. Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 63: 217-225, 2014
  13. P. Wilson, A. Elgamal. Sha