Comparison of dynamic characteristics between netted and packaged reinforced soil retaining walls and recommendations for seismic design
ZHU Hong-wei
1. School of Civil Engineering, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu 610031, China; 2. Sichuan College of Architectural Technology, Deyang 618000, China
Abstract：In order to compare the seismic responses of netted and packaged reinforced soil retaining walls, large-scale shaking table tests are performed. Based on the earthquake damage investigation, it is found that the failure modes of the reinforced wall are mainly characterized by loose deformation of local blocks under earthquake, and that the overall collapse is rare. Compared with the netted reinforced soil retaining wall, the packaged one has smaller deformation. Under the same magnitude of earthquake, the acceleration amplificatory coefficient of the packaged reinforced soil retaining wall is smaller than that of the netted one, while the value of horizontal peak dynamic earth pressures of the former is substantially larger than that of the latter. It is because the soil is constrained effectively by the wall plate of the packaged reinforced soil retaining wall. Therefore, for the selection of the reinforced soil retaining wall in earthquake-resistance protection zone, especially the buildings in high earthquake intensity regions, the packaged reinforced soil retaining wall will be an optimal choice. Through analysis, for the aseismic design of flexible walls, while maintaining the integral stability of the reinforced soil retaining wall, local-deformation control should be paid attention to, and its the maximal displacement should be less than the allow able displacement under earthquake. In order to maintain the normal use of the road, the deformation exponent of the reinforced soil retaining wall should be smaller than 4%. If the deformation exceeds the allowable value, measures will be taken including increasing the compaction of filling materials and geogrid length as well as the thickness of the wall, and reducing its wall slope can reduce the displacement.
朱宏伟. 两种加筋土挡墙的动力特性比较及抗震设计建议[J]. 岩土工程学报, 2012, 34(11): 2072-2080.
ZHU Hong-wei. Comparison of dynamic characteristics between netted and packaged reinforced soil retaining walls and recommendations for seismic design. Chinese J. Geot. Eng., 2012, 34(11): 2072-2080.
[1] CAI Z, BATHURST R J. Seismic-induced permanent displacement of geosynthetic-reinforced segmental retaining walls[J]. Canadian Geotechnical Journal, 1996, 33(4): 937-955 [2] MATSUO O, TSUTSUMI T, YOKOYAMA K,,et al. Shaking table tests and analyses of geosythetic-reinforced soil retaining walls[J]. Geosynthetics International, 1998, 5(1/2): 97-126 [3] SAKAGUCHI M A. Study of the seismic behavior of geosynthetic reinforced walls in Japan[J]. Geosynthetics International,1996, 3(1): 13-30 [4] KOSEKI J, MUNAF Y, TATSUOKA F,,et al. Shaking and tilt table tests of geosynthetic-reinforced soil and conventional-type retaining walls[J]. Geosynthetics International, 1998, 5(1/2): 73-96 [5] EL-EMAM M M, BATHURST R J. Experimental design, instrumentation and interpretation of reinforced soil wall response using a shaking table[J]. International Journal of Physical Modelling in Geotechnics, 2004, 4(4): 13-32 [6] GB 50011—#2006铁路工程抗震设计规范[S]. 2006. GB 50011—2006 Code for seismic design of railway engineering[S]. 2006. (in Chinese)) [7] JTG/T B02—#01—#2008 公路桥梁抗震设计细则[S]. 2008 (JTG /T B02—01—2008 Guidelines for seismic design of highway bridges[S]. Beijing: China Communications Press, 2008. [8] EUROPEAN STANDARD 1998 Eurocode 8: Design of structures for earthquake resistance part 5: foundations, retaining structures and geotechnical aspects[S]. 1998. [9] 日本鉄道構造物の設計基準[S]. 1998. Japanese railway installations design standards[S]. 1998. (in Japanese)) [10] Transit New Zealand. Bridge manual plus amendment No. 1[S]. Wellington: Transit New Zealand, 1995. [11] KOSEKI J, HAYANO K. Preliminary report on dam age to retaining walls caused by the 1999 Chi-Chi earthquake, Bulletin of ERS[R]. Tokyo: Institute of Industrial Science, Univ of Tokyo, 2000, 33: 23-34 [12] NEWMARK N M. Effects of earthquakes on dams and embankments[J]. Géotechnique, 1965, 15(2): 139-160 [13] CAI Z, BATHURST R J. Seismic response analysis of geosynthetic reinforced soil segmental retaining walls by finite element method[J]. Computers and Geotechnics, 1995, 17(4): 523-546 [14] BATHURST R J, EL-EMAM M M. Facing contribution to seismic response of reduced scale reinforced soil walls[J]. Geosynthetics International, 2005, 12(5): 215-238 [15] HUANG C C, CHOU L H, TATSUOKA F. Seismic displacement of geosythetic-reinforced soil modular block walls[J]. Geosynthetics International, 2003, 10(1): 2-23 [16] WHITMAN R V, LIAO S. Seismic design of gravity retaining walls[C]// Proceedings of the 8th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, San Francisco, Calif, 1984: 533-540. [17] 张建经, 冯 君, 肖世国. 支挡结构抗震设计中的2个关键技术问题[J]. 西南交通大学学报, 2009, 44(6): 321-325 ZHANG Jian-jing, FENG Jun, XIAO Shi-guo. Discussions on two key technical problems for seismic design of retaining wall[J]. Journal of Southwest Jiaotong University, 2009, 44(6): 321-325. (in Chinese))
