CHAPTER 3

Retaining Structures
 Retaining walls are structures used to provide
stability of earth or other material where conditions
disallow the mass to assume its natural slope.

 They commonly support vertical or nearly vertical

slopes of soil.
 Cont’d
 Various types of retaining walls are shown in
Figure below and are widely employed in civil
engineering works ranging from their use in
road and rail construction to support cuts and
fills where space is limited to prevent the
formation of appropriate side slopes, to the
construction of marine structures such as
docks, harbours and jetties.
 Rigid Retaining Walls
 A rigid wall would be concrete or reinforced
masonry where deflection of the wall is
minimal as opposed to steel sheeting where
there is more allowable deflection in the
material.
 They create immovable structures
 These include: Gravity & cantilever walls
 Flexible Retaining Walls
 Made with structures and materials that are
less rigid; able to yield a little to the load to
which they are subjected without breaking.
 Flexible retaining walls, in contrast to more-or
less rigid, gravity walls, usually mean a single
row of sheet piles that may be of timber,
reinforced concrete, or steel that are driven by
hammers and have their lower ends
embedded in soil.
 Classification based on stability

 Based on the method of achieving

stability, retaining walls may be
categorized into the following common
types:
 Gravity walls

 Walls of stone or plain or reinforced concrete

having a base footing with or without a heel,
ledge or buttress. The weight of the wall itself,
sometimes including stabilizing masses of soil,
rock or backfill, plays a significant role in the
support of the retained material.
 Cont’d

 Examples of such walls include concrete

gravity walls having constant or variable
thickness, spread footing reinforced concrete
walls and buttress walls.
 Embedded walls
 Relatively thin walls of steel, reinforced concrete or
timber, supported by anchorages, struts and/or
passive earth pressure.

 The bending capacity of such walls plays a

significant role in the support of the retained
material while the role of the weight of the wall is
insignificant.

 Examples of such walls include cantilever steel

 Cont’d

 sheet pile walls, anchored or strutted

steel or concrete sheet pile walls and
diaphragm walls.
Composite retaining structures

 Walls composed of elements from the above

two types of wall. A large variety of such walls
exists and examples include double sheet pile
wall cofferdams, earth structures reinforced by
tendons, geotextiles or grouting and structures
with multiple rows of ground anchorages or soil
nails.
 In Brief

 Gravity walls:-

 Made of plain concrete or stone masonry

 Depends upon its weight for stability

 Trapezoidal in section with the base projecting

beyond the face and back of the wall.

 No tensile stress in any portion of the wall

 Economically used for walls less than 6m high

Cont’d
Cont’d
Cont’d
 Cantilever walls

 Made of reinforced concrete material

 Inverted T-shaped in section with each

projecting acts as a cantilever and use
cantilever action to retain the mass of earth
or any other material behind them

 Economically used for walls 6 to 7.5m high

 Cont’d

Toe Vertical stem

Heal

(a) Cantilever wall

Cont’d
 Cont’d

 Semi-Gravity walls: these are walls that are

intermediate between gravity and cantilever
walls. Here a small amount of reinforcement
is added to reduce the mass of concrete.
 Cont’d

 Counter fort walls

 Made of reinforced concrete materials

 Consists of cantilever wall with vertical

brackets known as counter fort placed behind
face of wall

 High walls similar to cantilever walls with the

difference that vertical bracing is provided to
tie the walls and the base together
 Cont’d

 Ordinarily used for walls height greater

than 6.0m
Cont’d

Counterfort
Cont’d
 Cont’d

 Buttress walls

 Same as counter fort except that the

vertical brackets are on the opposite side
of the backfill and is subjected to
compressive force instead of a tension
force.
 Cont’d

Vertical stem

Toe

Heal
Cont’d
 Cont’d

 Crib walls: the walls are built up members of

pieces of timber, metal or pre-cast concrete
and filled with granular material.
 Cont’d

 Sheet pile walls: Sheet pile walls are sheet like

retaining structures that are commonly used in
place of conventional retaining walls. They are
commonly used in: water front constructions,
temporary constructions, places where
massive excavation is not possible due to
limited space.
Cont’d
Common Proportions of Retaining
walls

 The usual practice in the design of retaining

walls is to assign tentative dimensions and
then check for the overall stability of the
structure.

 The common proportions based on experience

are indicated for the three types of retaining
walls.
 i) Gravity Wall

30cm to H/2

50
lh = 10 to 15cm H
lt = Df/2 to Df

Df = H/8 to H/6

B = H/2 to ⅔ H
 ii) Cantilever wall

Min. 30cm

1
50

bs = H/12 to H/10 H
lt = B/3

Df = H/12 to H/10
B = 0.4 to 0.7H
 iii) Counterfort wall

Min. 30cm

50
H

bs = H/14 to H/12
Df = H/14 to H/12 Min. 30cm
B = 0.4 to 0.7H
 Or use the following relations

Initial Sizing of the Wall

Before a retaining wall can be designed, it is
necessary to assume initial dimensions whose
accuracy can be checked by detailed calculations.
Often designers assume initial dimensions based on
previous experience. However, initial dimensions of
the wall can be determined from the following
approximate equations.
 Cont’d

Ignoring the difference in unit weight between soil

and concrete and the weight of the toe slab of
width b1, for a unit length of wall the total gravity
load W is approximately given by
Model for initial sizing
(i) Resistance to sliding
(ii) Zero tension in the base pressure
Forces on Retaining Walls
 The forces that should be considered in the
design of retaining walls include:

 Active and passive earth pressures

 Dead weight including the weight of the wall and

portion of soil mass that is considered to act on
the retaining structure
 Cont’d

 Surcharge including live loads, if any

 Water pressure, if any

 Contact pressure under the base of the

structure

 Earth quake, etc

 Cont’d
 The active and the passive earth pressures are
calculated using the classical theories of Rankine
and Coulomb. The distribution of the contact
pressure under the base of the retaining wall is
assumed to be planar and hence the usual flexural
formula is used.

 The stability of the retaining wall is checked for

sliding and overturning and deep foundation failure.
The factor of safety against sliding, overturning and
 Cont’d

 deep foundation failure is normally fixed

in accordance with prevailing Building
Codes.

 However, in all cases a minimum factor

of safety of 1.5 should be maintained.
 Failure modes of retaining
structures
 Retaining structures are designed such that when
constructed they will remain stable and support the
ground that they are retaining.

 To enable the design to proceed, an understanding

of the potential failure modes of the structure must
be known. Common modes of failure, and how
they are assessed using Eurocode 7, have been
illustrated in Figure below.
Cont’d
 Cont’d

 Additional examples of how different retaining

structures might fail when considering: (i) their
overall stability, (ii) failure of their foundation and
(iii) their failure by rotation (embedded walls) are
illustrated in Figures 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3.
 Cont’d

Figure 4.1 Examples of limit modes for overall

stability of retaining structure (based on Fig 9.1,
EN 1997-1:2004).
 Cont’d

Figure 4.2 Examples of limit modes for

foundation failures of gravity walls (based on
Fig 9.2, EN 1997-1:2004).
 Cont’d

Figure 4.3 Examples of limit modes for rotational

failures of embedded walls (based on Fig 9.3,
 Cont’d
 The traditional approach for the design of retaining
structures involved establishing the ratio of the
restoring moment (or force) to the disturbing moment
(or force) and declaring this ratio as a factor of safety,
for any of the situations illustrated in Figures 4.1, 4.2
and 4.3. This factor had to be high enough to allow for
any uncertainties in the soil parameters used in the
analysis, and the approach was generally referred to
as the factor of safety or gross pressure approach.
 Procedures for the Design of Retaining
Walls (gross pressure method)
 For the complete analysis of retaining walls it is
common to follow the following steps:

1) Select height, shape and type of retaining wall

according to field requirements and tentative
dimensions

2) Compute all the vertical and horizontal loads acting

on the wall (like weight of the wall, weight of soil above
the wall, active and passive earth pressures, water
pressures, etc)
 Cont’d

3) Check stability of the wall (like sliding, overturning,

bearing capacity, deep foundation failure,
settlement etc)

4) Structural design: for gravity walls the above steps

are sufficient but for cantilever retaining wall, in
addition to stability check, the stem, the heel and
the toe should be designed structurally for shear
and flexure.
 Stability Check

 Overturning Stability:
 Cont’d

 Sliding Stability:
 Cont’d

 In some cases factor of safety of 1.5 may not be

found. To increase the sliding resistance, either
the base slab width may be increased or key may
be provided which ever is economical.

 There are different opinions on the location of the

base key. However, it is possible to mobilize more
sliding resistance when the base key is on the
back fill side.
Cont’d
 Cont’d
 Bearing Capacity:
 The vertical pressure as transmitted to the soil
by the base slab should be checked against
the bearing capacity of the soil.
qt Rv  6e 
  1 
qh B  B
Where e= eccentricity of Rv

qt  qall , qall = qult/F.S

F. S = Factor of safety = 2 and 3 for granular and
cohesive soils, respectively
Cont’d
 Cont’d

 Deep Foundation Failure:

 In addition to the three types of possible failures
for retaining walls discussed previously, deep
shear failure could also occur if there is weak
soil deposit within a depth of 1.5h below the
base of the foundation. Therefore, it is
necessary to check deep foundations failure
(over all stability) as slope stability analysis.
 E.g. using Swedish circle method
Cont’d
Behaviour or structural action
 Cont’d
 Note:

a) Wall joints: To take care of both shrinkage effects

and possible differential settlements, retaining walls–
depending upon their length-should have contraction
joints. The intervals of the joints may be about 20m.

b) Drainage: Retaining walls should be provided with a

drainage system to avoid large lateral hydrostatic
pressure. This may be accomplished by providing
weep holes or longitudinal drains (See Figure below).
 Cont’d
 As far as possible the backfill material should be well
graded and well-compacted cohesion less soil. The
weep holes and the drain pipes should be protected
with proper filter materials in order to avoid closing of
the drains.

 Weep holes should be about 10cm in diameter or

larger. If they are used in counter fort wall, at least
one weep hole should be located between counter
forts.
Cont’d
 Retaining wall design based on
Eurocode

 The Eurocode governing the geotechnical

aspects of retaining wall design is section 9
and Annex C of BS EN 1997-1:2004:
Eurocode 7: Geotechnical Design —Part 1:
General Rules.
 Limit States
As a minimum the following limit states shall be
considered for all types of retaining structure:

 Loss of overall stability;

 Failure of a structural element such as a wall,

anchorage, wale or strut or failure of the connection
between such elements;

 combined failure in the ground and in the structural

element;

 failure by hydraulic heave and piping;

 Cont’d

 Movement of the retaining structure, which may

cause collapse or affect the appearance or efficient
use of the structure or nearby structures or services,
which rely on it;

 Unacceptable leakage through or beneath the wall;

 Unacceptable transport of soil particles through or

beneath the wall;

 Unacceptable change in the ground-water regime.

 Cont’d
The following limit states shall be considered for gravity
walls and for composite retaining structures:

 Bearing resistance failure of the soil below the base;

 Failure by sliding at the base;

 Failure by toppling; and for embedded walls:

 failure by rotation or translation of the wall or parts

thereof;

 Failure by lack of vertical equilibrium.

Cont’d
 a) Design Procedure for a
Gravity Retaining Wall

 The following limit states should be

considered:
1. Overturning. For a wall to be stable the
resultant thrust must be within the base.
 Most walls are so designed that the thrust is
within the middle third of the base.
2. Bearing failure of the soil beneath the
structure.
 Cont’d

 The overturning moment from the earth’s

thrust causes high bearing pressures at the
toe of the wall. These values must be kept
within safe limits – usually not more than
one-third of the supporting soil’s ultimate
bearing capacity.
 Cont’d

3. Forward sliding. Caused by insufficient

base friction or lack of passive resistance in
front of the wall.
 Cont’d

4. Slip of the surrounding soil. This effect

can occur in cohesive soils and can be
analyzed as for a slope stability problem.

5. Structural failure caused by faulty

design, poor workmanship, deterioration
of materials, etc.
 Cont’d

6. Excessive deformation of the wall or

ground such that, adjacent structures or
services reach their ultimate limit state.

7. Unfavorable seepage effects and the

adequacy of any drainage system
provided.
 b) Design Procedure for a Cantilever
Retaining Wall
 For a given height of earth to be retained,
the steps in the design of a cantilever
retaining wall are as follows:

1. Assume Initial dimensions based previous

experience

 The accuracy can be checked by detailed

calculations.
 Cont’d

2. Calculate the horizontal earth pressure

on the wall based on available classical
earth pressure theory.
 Earth pressure coefficients

 During the design of retaining walls it is

often appropriate to use Rankine’s Ka and
Kp, such as in the case of cantilever gravity
walls. However, when Rankine’s conditions
do not apply (e.g. where friction exists
between wall and soil), Annex C of EN1997-
1:2004 provides guidance and a set of
 Cont’d

charts that may be used to determine the

horizontal components of Ka and Kp for
a given δ/ϕ′ ratio as shown below.
 Cont’d

Figure: Coefficients Ka (horizontal component) for

horizontal retained surface.
 Cont’d

 Considering all forces, check stability

against overturning and the vertical
pressure under the base of the wall.
Calculate the resistance to sliding and
check that this is satisfactory.
 Cont’d

Sliding Check:

Eh ≤ R h

Where Eh is the design effect of actions

and Rh is the resistance.
 Cont’d
 Eh = Pah = (Pahq + Pahg)
Pah is the horizontal action on virtual back
of the wall.

 Rh = Pph = ( Gb + GS + Pv) tan β is the

horizontal resistance of the wall base
against sliding. Then over design factor is
the ratio of Rh and Pah
 Cont’d
 Overturning Check:
 Taking moment about the toe, one can
determine stabilizing and destabilizing
moment and compute over design factor.

 Stabilizing moments are the results of

weights and destabilizing are the results of
fill and surcharge depending on design
situations.
 Cont’d

 Bearing failure (failure of foundation)

Check :
Ev ≤ Rv
Ev = Gb + GS + Pv
 Where Ev is the vertical actions on the
foundation and Rv is the ultimate bearing
resistance of foundation.
 Cont’d

 A load factor γQ = 1.5 is applied to the

horizontal loads for the overturning and
sliding check. The maximum vertical
pressure is calculated using service
loads and this should not exceed the safe
bearing pressure.
 Cont’d

3. Reinforced concrete design for the wall

is made for ultimate loads using
appropriate load factors. Surcharge if
present may be classed as either dead or
imposed load depending on its nature.
 Cont’d
 The structural design consists of the
following:
a) Cantilever wall
 Calculate shear forces and moments caused
by the horizontal earth pressure. Design the
vertical moment steel for the inner (earth
side) face and check the shear stresses.
Minimum secondary steel is provided in the
 Cont’d
horizontal direction for the inner face and both
vertically and horizontally for the outer face.

b) Inner footing (heel slab)

 The net moment due to vertical loads on the

top and earth pressure on the bottom face

 Cont’d

causes tension in the top and

reinforcement is designed for this
position.
 Cont’d
c) outer footing (toe slab)
 The net moment due to vertical loads on
the top and earth pressure on the bottom
face causes tension in the bottom and
reinforcement is designed for this
position. Look the reinforcement
provision in the figure below.
 Cont’d

Figure: Three parts of the cantilever

retaining wall
ENJOY WITH EXAMPLES