Dynamic Numerical Analysis of Displacement Restraining Effect of Inclined Earth-Retaining Structure during Embankment Construction

Abstract

Retaining walls are generally used for temporary installations during the excavation process of a construction project. They are also utilized to construct embankments in order to extend a railway facility. In this case, a retaining wall is installed during the construction process and contributes to the resistance of large amounts of stress, including the railway load. However, it is generally difficult to retain walls to maintain their stability. Therefore, alternative construction methods, such as the use of an inclined earth-retaining wall, have been utilized to suppress the lateral displacement. The stability is verified in advance through field tests; however, the maximum stress acting on the railway is thought to be the concentrated railway load. In this study, a two-dimensional numerical analysis was conducted by changing the railway load to a dynamic load. The analysis was applied according to the number of H-piles of the same length (10 m) when only the front wall was installed and when a back support was also applied. It was determined that the lateral displacement of the latter case is smaller than that of the former, whereas the resistance to dynamic loading of the former case is greater.

Editorial for Special Issue “Energy Dissipation and Vibration Control: Materials, Modeling, Algorithm, and Devices”

“…Furthermore, also reported in this issue are structural elements with innovative designs to dissipate energy [38][39][40]. In addition, this special issue also reports two research studies on the dynamic responses of a structural foundation [41] and an earth-retaining structure [42]. Though most papers in this special issue are related to passive methods, one paper reports a semi-active vibration control via magnetorheological dampers (MRDs) [43], and another two papers report active vibration controls using piezoelectric transducers [44] and inertial actuators [45], respectively.…”