Journals / Sigma Journal of Engineering and Natural Sciences / 2020 / Cilt: 11 Sayı: 1

AN OVERVIEW TO THE DYNAMIC BEHAVIOUR OF THE INVERTED T TYPE CANTILEVER RETAINING WALL TAKING INTO ACCOUNT SOIL STRUCTURE INTERACTION PHENOMENON

Pages
37–50
Publication Date
2020-03-01
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)

The findings have revealed that the dynamic response of the T shaped cantilever retaining walls is considerably affected by the soil structure interaction.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The dynamic response of the cantilever retaining walls is affected by many factors such as the geometry of the wall, the earthquake frequency content, the wall flexibility, the backfill characteristics, and the soil structure interaction.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The seismic analyses are performed in time domain using C-OLC360 component of 1983 Coalinga earthquake, and four different foundation soil systems are used in these analyses.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The findings have revealed that the dynamic response of the T shaped cantilever retaining walls is considerably affected by the soil structure interaction.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Cantilever retaining wall · soil structure interaction · geotechnical engineering

Abstract

The dynamic response of the cantilever retaining walls is affected by many factors such as the geometry of the wall, the earthquake frequency content, the wall flexibility, the backfill characteristics, and the soil structure interaction. Therefore, it may not be possible to analyse all aspects of the dynamic response of the cantilever retaining walls in spite of their simplicity. It is also well known that some unfavourable effects on the behaviour of the walls may impair the balance of the wall. In this context, the study aims to investigate the dynamic response of the T type cantilever retaining wall considering soil structure interaction. In line with this purpose, the soil structure interaction system is produced with a three dimensional finite element model. The seismic analyses are performed in time domain using C-OLC360 component of 1983 Coalinga earthquake, and four different foundation soil systems are used in these analyses. The elasto-plastic behaviour of the backfill and the foundation soil are represented with Drucker-Prager material model. In order to reflect the material damping of the system, Rayleigh damping is utilized considering mass and stiffness proportional dampings. In addition, the viscous boundary dashpot elements which consider the criteria of Lysmer and Kuhlemeyer for wave propagation, are placed around the boundaries of the numerical model. The results are examined in terms of both the stresses and displacements. The findings have revealed that the dynamic response of the T shaped cantilever retaining walls is considerably affected by the soil structure interaction.

🔖

Cite This Article

CAKIR, T., OZTURK, K. F. (2020). AN OVERVIEW TO THE DYNAMIC BEHAVIOUR OF THE INVERTED T TYPE CANTILEVER RETAINING WALL TAKING INTO ACCOUNT SOIL STRUCTURE INTERACTION PHENOMENON. Sigma Journal of Engineering and Natural Sciences, Cilt: 11 Sayı: 1, 37–50. https://ajindex.com/articles/897537

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Huang C.C., (2000) Investigations of soil retaining structures damaged during the Chi‐Chi (Taiwan) earthquake, Journal of the Chinese Institute of Engineers, 23 (4), 417-428
  2. Koseki J., Hayano K. (2000) Preliminary report on damage to retaining walls caused by the 1999 Chi-Chi earthquake, Bulletin of ERS, 33, 23-34
  3. Fang Y.S., Yang Y.C. and Chen T.J., (2003) Retaining walls damaged in the Chi-Chi earthquake”, Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 40 (6), 1142-1153
  4. Dismuke J.N., (2011) Retaining wall performance during the February 2011 Christchurch Earthquake, Australian Earthquake Engineering Society 2011 Conference, 18-20 November 2011, Barossa Valley, South Australia
  5. Zhang J., Qu H., Liao Y., Ma Y., (2012) Seismic damage of earth structures of road engineering in the 2008 Wenchuan earthquake, Environmental Earth Sciences, 65 (4), 987-993
  6. Wu Y., He S., Li X., (2012) Failure mechanism and seismic design of retaining wall in earthquake, Environmental Earth Sciences, 65 (4), 1013-1019
  7. Riches L.K., (2015) Observed earthquake damage to Christchurch city council owned retaining walls and the repair solutions developed, In Proc. of the 6th Int. Conf. in Earthquake Geotechnical Engineering, 1–4 November 2015, Christchurch, New Zealand
  8. Okabe S., (1924) General theory of earth pressure and seismic stability of retaining wall and dam, Journal of Japanese Society of Civil Engineering, 10 (6), 1277-1323
  9. Mononobe N., Matsuo H., (1929) On the determination of earth pressures during earthquakes, Proceedings of World Engineering Congress, 1929, 179-187
  10. Seed H.B., Whitman R.V., (1970) Design of earth retaining structures for dynamic loads, Proceedings of the Specialty Conference on Lateral Stresses in the Ground and Design of Earth Retaining Structures, 1970, 103-147, Ithaca, New York
  11. Nadim F., Whitman R.V., (1983) Seismically induced movement of retaining walls, Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division, 109 (7), 915-931
  12. Ghosh S., (2010) Pseudo-dynamic active force and pressure behind battered retaining wall supporting inclined backfill, Soil Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, 30 (11), 1226-1232
  13. Santhoshkumar, G., Ghosh, P., Murakami, A., (2019) Seismic Active Resistance of a Tilted Cantilever Retaining Wall considering Adaptive Failure Mechanism. International Journal of Geomechanics, 19 (8), 04019086
  14. Jadhav, P. R., Prashant, A., (2019). Double wedge model for computing seismic sliding displacemen