Chapter 14 Lateral Earth Pressure

Similar documents
Downloaded from Downloaded from /1

Chapter 13: Retaining Walls

PE Exam Review - Geotechnical

Analysis of the stability of sheet pile walls using Discontinuity Layout Optimization


Preview of LEAME Computer Software

Numerical Analysis of a Novel Piling Framed Retaining Wall System

BEARING CAPACITY OF SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS

Lecture Retaining Wall Week 12

Stability of a Mechanically Stabilized Earth Wall

PD - 6 THRUST RESTRAINT DESIGN EQUATIONS AND SOIL PARAMETERS FOR DUCTILE IRON AND PVC PIPE

COMPARISONS OF PREDICTED AND OBSERVED FAILURE MECHANISMS IN MODEL REINFORCED SOIL WALLS

Design of Semi gravity Retaining Walls

Internal Design of Mechanically Stabilized Earth (MSE) Retaining Walls Using Crimped Bars

Soil Nail Design: A Malaysian Perspective

FE Review-Geotechnical 1. An undisturbed sample of clay has a wet mass of 100 kg. a dry mass of 93 kg, and a total volume of m'\ The solids

Industry-Academia collaboration produces geotechnical case studies for undergraduate instruction: an example, a proposal

NPTEL Course GROUND IMPROVEMENT USING MICROPILES

ANCHORED WALL DESIGN: COMPARING THE GLOBAL AND PARTIAL FACTORS OF SAFETY INCORPORATING THE AUSTRALIAN STANDARDS

Grain Silo Strengthening South Dakota. Prepared for Vector Construction Group

vulcanhammer.net Visit our companion site

Retaining Wall Design

CHALLENGES OF NEW REACTOR SITING EVALUATION IN THE GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING FIELD Weijun Wang 1 and Zuhan Xi 2

Geoguide 6 The New Guide to Reinforced Fill Structure and Slope Design in Hong Kong

Design Example 2 Reinforced Concrete Wall with Coupling Beams

Comparison of geotechnic softwares - Geo FEM, Plaxis, Z-Soil

Case Studies on Soil Nailed Retaining Systems for Deep Excavations

1. limit equilibrium bearing capacity failure modes

Developing a Numerical Model for the Design of Sheet Pile Walls

Design Data 6. Loads and Supporting Strengths Elliptical and Arch Pipe. Values of B d

SEMI-EMPIRICAL METHOD FOR DESIGNING EXCAVATION SUPPORT SYSTEMS BASED ON DEFORMATION CONTROL

Evaluation on Bearing Capacity of Ring Foundations on two-layered Soil

Bearing Capacity of Geosynthetic Reinforced Foundation Beds on Compressible Clay

RETAINING WALL SYSTEM. ViaWall. ViaWall A. ViaWall B. ViaBlock

EN REINFORCED MASONRY DESIGN EXAMPLE 1 (NOTE: THIS USES THE UK NATIONAL ANNEX NDP VALUES)

COMPARISON OF EC7 DESIGN APPROACHES FOR NUMERICAL ANALYSIS OF DEEP EXCAVATIONS

ICC-ES Evaluation Report Issued July 1, 2011 This report is subject to renewal in one year.

Modern Post-Frame Structural Design Practices: An Introduction

STRENGTHENING OF INFILL MASONRY WALLS USING BONDO GRIDS WITH POLYUREA

Design Illustrations on the Use of Soil Nails to Upgrade Loose Fill Slopes

Analysis of Newmark method on type 1 semi-gravity reinforsced. concrete cantilever retaining walls with and without sound wall.

5.4 Analysis for Torsion

Using EPS Buffers for Diaphragm Walls

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CIVIL AND STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING Volume 1, No 3, 2010

2. SAFETY VERIFICATIONS OF SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS Bearing capacity failure

APPENDIX A - SIZING OF BRIDGE AND SUPPORT SYSTEM

Temporary Structures. Excavations and Excavation Supports

[Kouravand Bardpareh* et al., 5(6): July, 2016] ISSN: IC Value: 3.00 Impact Factor: 4.116

Failure of Geotextile-Reinforced Walls in Centrifuge Model Tests

EN Eurocode 7. Section 8 Anchorages Section 9 Retaining structures. Brian Simpson Arup Geotechnics

Dead man sheet pile wall (SI units)

Development of the Combi-Gyro Method, a New Steel Wall Construction Method Combining Steel Sheet Piles and Pipe Piles

Numerical Analysis of Piling Framed Tie-Down Concrete Retaining Wall

Analysis of Redi Rock wall Input data

Interference between Two Adjacent Footings Located in Seismic Region

AVOIDING EXCESSIVE DISPLACEMENTS: A NEW DESIGN APPROACH FOR RETAINING WALLS

Dissipative Behaviour of Reinforced-earth Retaining Structures Under Severe Ground Motion

Special Reinforced Concrete Structural Walls

INTRINSIC SEISMIC PROTECTION OF CANTILEVERED AND ANCHORED RETAINING STRUCTURES

Prof. Dipl.-Ing. H. Quick Ingenieure und Geologen GmbH provides geotechnical engineering services e. g. for high-rise buildings in Germany and abroad.

A SIMPLIFIED METHOD FOR THE ESTIMATION OF THE SEISMIC RESISTANCE OF RC FRAMES WITH WEAK INFILL PANELS

PILE SETTLEMENT ZONES ABOVE AND AROUND TUNNELLING OPERATIONS

Advanced measurements on cantilever retaining wall models during earthquake simulations

SPECIFICATIONS FOR PRECAST MODULAR BLOCK RETAINING WALL SYSTEM (revised 5/8/7)

Optimum Static Analysis of Retaining Wall with & without shelf /Shelve at different level using finite Element analysis

LIGHTWEIGHT FILL DESIGN GUIDANCE

Chapter 10, Phase Transformations

NUMERICAL STUDY OF OFFSHORE SKIRTED FOUNDATIONS SUBJECTED TO COMBINED LOADING

CHAPTER 11: PRESTRESSED CONCRETE

Testing of ground anchorages for a deep excavation retaining system in Bucharest

Final Report FHWA/IN/JTRP-2002/20 EFFECTS OF HEAVIER TRUCK LOADINGS AND SUPER-SINGLE TIRES ON SUBGRADES

Soil Mechanics Lateral Earth Pressures page Lateral Earth Pressures in case of inclined ground surface or friction at wall-ground interface

On Seismic Response of Stiff and Flexible Retaining Structures

Determining radius of influence of the face in EPB shield tunneling by finite difference method.

A Simplified Load Rating Method for Masonry and Reinforced Concrete Arch Bridges

Modelling of a pile row in a 2D plane strain FE-analysis

CHAPTER SHEET-PILE WALLS: CANTILEVERED AND ANCHORED 13-1 INTRODUCTION

Final PT Draft (Stage 34) Page 1. EUROPEAN STANDARD pren NORME EUROPÉENNE EUROPÄISCHE NORM. English version

ANALYSIS & DESIGN OF 44 METER M.S.E. (MECHANICALLY STABILIZED EARTH) WALL BY USING PLAXIS 8.2

Design Data 4M. Jacking Concrete Pipe

Finite Element Analyses for Centrifuge Modelling of Narrow MSE Walls

Experimental Evaluation of Bearing Capacity of Skirted Footings

Non- dimensional design charts for unbonded, posttensioned, split precast concrete walls. Elias I. Saqan and Rami A. Hawileh. Editor s quick points

António Morais. University of Lisbon, Lisbon, Portugal

ENVIROMESH DESIGN GUIDE SERIES VOLUME 1

BEHAVIOR OF INFILL MASONRY WALLS STRENGTHENED WITH FRP MATERIALS

Reinforced Concrete Tilt-Up Wall Panel Analysis and Design (ACI 551)

Innovative Soft Soil Improvement Method through Intelligent Use of Vacuum De-Watering and Dynamic Compaction Techniques

CHRISTIAN WHEELER E N G I N E E R I N G

Behavior of Lateral Resistance of Flexible Piles in Layered Soils

CANTILEVER RETAINING WALLS - KOPPERS ROUNDWOOD POSTS FOR WALL HEIGHTS 0.3m to 1.8m

Construction of MSE Wall Using Tire Shred-sand Mixture as Backfill (SPR-3470)

Design and Performance of Deep Excavations in Soft Clays

Structural Resistance of Earthbag Housing Subject to Horizontal Loading

Chapter 11 Compressibility of Soil

Monitoring a Drilled Shaft Retaining Wall in Expansive Clay: Long-Term Performance in Response to Moisture Fluctuations

GROUND IMPROVEMENT SITE INVESTIGATON

DS/EN DK NA:2013

Standard Test Method for Torsional Ring Shear Test to Determine Drained Residual Shear Strength of Cohesive Soils 1

Field monitoring evaluation of geotextile-reinforced soil-retaining walls

Transcription:

Page 14 1 Chapter 14 Lateral Earth Pressure 1. Which of the following is not a retaining structure? (a) Retaining wall (b) Basement wall (c) Raft (d) Bulkhead 2. When a retaining structure does not move either to the right or to the left of its initial position, the ratio of the effective horizontal stress to the effective vertical stress is generally represented by (a) K. (b) K 0. (c) K a. (d) K p. 3. For coarse grained-grained soils, the coefficient of earth pressure at rest can be estimated by using the Jaky s equation, which is given as (a) 1 sinφ (b) 1 sinφ (c) 1 sinφ φ (d) 0.44 0.42 % 4. The total force per unit length of the retaining wall of height H when it does not move either to the right or to the left of its initial position is given as (b) γ. 5. The magnitude of coefficient of earth pressure at rest in most soils ranges between (a) 0.0 and 0.5. (b) 0.0 and 1.0. (c) 0.5 and 1.0. (d) 0.5 and 2.0. 6. The condition in which every point in a soil mass is on the verge of failure refers to (a) elastic equilibrium. (b) plastic equilibrium. (c) both (a) and (b) (d) none of the above

Page 14 2 7. When a retaining structure moves towards the soil backfill, the stress condition within the soil backfill is called (a) at rest state. (b) active state. (c) passive state. (d) both (b) and (c) 8. The Rankine s theory of earth pressure assumes that (a) the back face of the wall in contact with the soil backfill is smooth. (b) the wall extends to an infinite depth. (c) both (a) and (b) (d) the soil is massless. 9. The coefficient of Rankine s active earth pressure (a) tan 45 φ (b) tan 45 φ (c) tan 45 φ (d) tan 45 φ 10. The coefficient of Rankine s passive earth pressure (a) tan 45 φ (b) tan 45 φ (c) tan 45 φ (d) tan 45 φ 11. In the Rankine s active state, the failure plane within the soil backfill makes an angle with the horizontal given as (a) 45. (b) φ (c) 45 φ (d) 45 φ 12. In the Rankine s passive state, the failure plane within the soil backfill makes an angle with the horizontal given as (a) 45. (b) φ (c) 45 φ (d) 45 φ

Page 14 3 13. For the Rankine s active state, the active earth pressure from the cohesionless soil backfill at the bottom of a retaining wall of height H is (a) γ. (b) γ. 14. For the Rankine s passive state, the passive earth pressure from the cohesionless soil backfill at the bottom of a retaining wall of height H is (a) γ. (b) γ. 15. The total active force per unit length of the retaining wall of height H from the cohesionless soil backfill is given as (b) γ. 16. The total passive force per unit length of the retaining wall of height H from the cohesionless soil backfill is given as (b) γ. 17. The total active force on the retaining wall of height H from the cohesionless soil backfill acts above the base of the wall at a height of (a) /4. (b) /3. (c) /2. (d) 3 /4. 18. The total passive force on the retaining wall of height H from the cohesionless soil backfill acts above the base of the wall at a height of (a) /4. (b) /3. (c) /2. (d) 3 /4.

Page 14 4 19. For the Rankine s active state, the active earth pressure from the cohesive soil backfill at the bottom of a retaining wall of height H is (b) γ (c) γ 2 γ 2 20. The typical value of wall tilt (the ratio of horizontal displacement of the wall top to its height when the wall rotates about its bottom) required for achieving Rankine s passive state in dense sand is (a) 0.005. (b) 0.01. (c) 0.02. (d) 0.04. 21. An application of surcharge at the top of the soil backfill (a) causes no change in the earth pressure along the depth of the wall. (b) decreases the earth pressure along the depth of the wall. (c) increases the earth pressure along the depth of the wall. (d) increases the earth pressure near the top of the wall only. 22. The presence of cohesion in the soil backfill (a) causes no effect on the earth pressure along the depth of the wall. (b) decreases the active earth pressure along the depth of the wall. (c) increases the passive earth pressure along the depth of the wall. (d) both (b) and (c) 23. The depth of tension cracks in the cohesive soil backfill under undrained condition is (a). (b). (c) (d). 24. The development of tensile cracks in the upper part of the cohesive soil backfills (a) causes no effect on the earth pressure along the depth of the wall. (b) decreases the active earth pressure along the depth of the wall. (c) increases the active earth pressure along the depth of the wall. (d) both (b) and (c) 25. For a retaining wall with a rough vertical back, the total active earth pressure acts (a) horizontally. (b) in a direction making an angle greater than 90 with the vertically upward direction. (c) in a direction making an angle smaller than 90 with the vertically upward direction. (d) in any direction.

Page 14 5 26. For a retaining wall with a rough vertical back, the total passive earth pressure acts (a) horizontally. (b) in a direction making an angle greater than 90 with the vertically upward direction. (c) in a direction making an angle smaller than 90 with the vertically upward direction. (d) in any direction. 27. Which of the following earth pressure theories consider the roughness of the back of the wall? (a) Rankine s active earth pressure theory (b) Rankine s passive earth pressure theory (c) Coulomb s earth pressure theory (d) all of the above 28. The Coulomb s active earth pressure coefficient becomes equal to the Rankine s active earth pressure for (a) α = 0 and θ = 0. (b) α = 0 and δ = 0. (c) θ = 0 and δ = 0. (d) α = 0, θ = 0 and δ = 0. where α is the angle made by the top surface of the soil backfill with the horizontal, θ is the inclination of the back face of the wall to the vertical, and δ is the angle of friction between the soil backfill and the wall. 29. The wall friction results in (a) reduction in the total active earth pressure. (b) increase in the total passive earth pressure. (c) both (a) and (b) (d) increase in the total earth pressure. 30. When the soil-wall interface friction angle becomes greater than about half of the soil backfill frictional angle, the Coulombs earth pressure theory overestimates the passive force, which is on (a) the unsafe side of the design. (b) the safe side of the design. (c) both (a) and (b) governed by the site conditions. (d) none of the above

Page 14 6 Answers, Hints and Discussion 1. (c) 2. (b) Discussion: K 0, K a and K p are called coefficient of earth pressure at rest, coefficient of active earth pressure, and coefficient of passive earth pressure, respectively. 3. (b) Hint and Discussion: See Eq. (14.3). (c) is correct for overconsolidated coarse-grained soils, see Eq. (14.4), and (d) is correct for fine-grained, normally consolidated soils. 4. (d) Hint: See Eq. (14.8). 5. (c) 6. (b) 7. (c) 8. (c) 9. (c) 10. (d) 11. (d) 12. (c) 13. (b) 14. (b) 15. (d) 16. (d) 17. (b) 18. (b) 19. (c) Hint: See Fig. 14.10(d). 20. (a) Hint: See Table 14.1.

Page 14 7 21. (c) Hint: See Eq. (14.32). 22. (d) Hint: See Eqs. (14.36) and (14.42). 23. (b) Hint: See Eq. (14.35). 24. (c) 25. (b) Hint: See Fig. 14.16. 26. (c) Hint: See Fig. 14.17. 27. (c) 28. (d) Hint: Compare Eqs. (14.18) and (14.51). 29. (c) 30. (a)