A counterfort versus a cantilever retaining wall—a seismic equivalence

Abstract

SUMMARYA procedure is presented to develop geometric dimensions and material property values for a model cantilever wall from those of a prototype counterfort wall such that the model wall will simulate the response of the prototype wall for seismic loads. The equivalency criteria are given. A sample problem is included to illustrate the use of the proposed procedure. Accuracy of results is discussed. Published in 2005 by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Soil Structure Interactions of Retaining Walls

“…Computed results shown in Figure 16(b) to (e) are in terms of horizontal and vertical displacements of the crest structure and the normal and shear forces on the hillside and embankment side walls 5 . Numerical representation of the counterfort wall by an equivalent cantilever wall for seismic analysis is described in Chugh (2005b). A practical implication from the analysis of the spillway structure is to simulate staged construction in preference to the gravity turn-on procedure for static analysis because static stresses can have a significant effect on the computed dynamic response of the retaining structure.…”

Natural vibration characteristics of gravity structures

“…The procedure presented in Reference [1] and referred to as an alternate procedure in the paper is based on the premise that the static deflected shape due to the structure's own weight is an appropriate representation of the fundamental mode shape. In this alternate procedure, a problem is solved for static deformation under its own weight by assigning the direction to gravity vector, and then vibratory response is created by setting the gravity vector to zero.…”

“…Table III problem; other methods used include Rayleigh's, and Ritz's}see References [4,5,8] for details. The alternate procedure in Reference [1] follows the rationale of laboratory demonstration in which the free end of a cantilever is pulled in a direction normal to its axis and then suddenly released; the cantilever oscillates back-and-forth, and the record of free vibrations and elapsed time is used to estimate its fundamental frequency. The procedure presented in this paper follows the rationale of field tests to determine dynamic properties of full-scale structures.…”

“…(b) An equivalent 2-D model of the prototype spillway panel included in (a). In the 2-D equivalent model, the counterforted walls are replaced by equivalent cantilever walls using the procedure presented in Reference [1]. The equivalent cantilever wall is 1:26 m wide at the base and tapers to 0:28 m at the top; the elastic constants (G and K) are w times the corresponding values for reinforced concrete shown in Table II}the multiplier w ¼ 16:2 at the base of the wall and varies linearly to a value of w ¼ 1 at the top of the wall.…”

“…For objective (b), results from numerical analyses of the test problems using the proposed procedure are compared with those reported by others. For objective (c), results from the numerical analyses using the proposed procedure are compared with those obtained using an alternative procedure in which static deflections due to structure's own weight are used as the starting point for free vibrations by setting the gravity vector to zero [1]. Also, results from the use of the alternative procedure for all problems considered are included in Appendix A.…”