URET: International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology ¢ESSN; 2319-1163] pk 21-7308 OPTIMIZATION AND IMPROVEMENT IN STABILITY OF COUNTERFORT RETAINING WALL WITH RELIEF SHELF Tonne V. R', Mohite P.M? 'M. Tech Schalar, Civil Engineering Department, R. I. T., Sangli, Maharashtra, India "Assoc iate Professor of Civil Engineering Department, R. LT, Sangli, Maharashtra, India Abstract Reinforced concrete retaining walls are meant to support more height of eamh mass. Cantilever retaining wall is constructed yp io height of6 m and above that ithecomes uneconomical To support more heightofearthmaxs advancement is done in cantilever retaining wall by adding relief shelf ie i. Due 10 provision of reef shelf the soil pressure on the retaining wall is reduced resulting in improvement in stabitity of retaining wal. Cantilever retaining wall with one relief shelf ix economical ep tobe it of 10.m above that cownterfort retaining wall with relief shelf is useful. fn this paper anatssis and design of coumerfort retaining wall with one relief shelf is done for various positions of relief shelf These results are stulied to get minimum earth pressure, more stabiliy and mininum memert in cade component of retaining wall. The optimization of counterfort retaining wall is dane 1 get minima sce of retaining wall. Due to dis optimization extra formation width is available in lilly areas aind excessive ‘uting is avoided thereby constraction cost reduces Keywords: Counterfort Retaining wall, relief shelf, earth pressure, Factor of safety, ove murning, sliding, optimization 1 INTRODUCTION Retaining stnactures are the walls meant to support carth or other materials. In onder to design retaining wall it is necessary to determine active and passive earth pressures on Wall. In hills it is not possible t0 construct roads without retuining stuctures. Retaining stucures are encountered and constructed in various fields of engineering such as rats, harbors, dams, subways, railroads, tunnels mines and nilitary for’ fication, Aveording to Kiural RL °! to achieve required formation width and to stabilize disturbed hill slopes number of retaining structures. ase constructed in billy train, Hs constraction cost is near about 20% to 30 ‘eof hill roads project cost, Gravity staining walls are designol by considering its shape and size. lis stability is depeadting on its dimensions. Design of gravity retaining wall is not based ‘on type of material wed for construction. Ray Chowthari fad concluded that when height of earth mass to be retained is less than 6 m cantilever retaining wall is generally refered. Abowe 6 m height counterfor retaining wall is wed to achieve economy in construction. Cantilever retaining wall with relief shelf is alternative to counterfort retaining walk which is found ont easy to constmict and rare cconomic, As total active earth pressure on retaining wall with relief shelf is lower in magnitude than thot of conventional type. keying a the base may not be necessary to prevent sliding in certain cases. Patil S. "says that by roviding relief shelf in cantilever retaining wall it is found that factor of safety against overturning and sliding is improved. Duc to provision of relict shelf earth pressure reduces which results in reductian in section. As section of retaining wall is less, requirement of construction material is also less which results redvetion in cost. He had found that Volume: (4 Issue: 04 | Apr-201 eduction in volume of concrete and steel is 35 S and 18% respectively. For height in the vicinity of 10 m cantilever retaining wall with single relief shelf is economical than conventional counterfort retaining wall but further economy is achieved by providing relief shelf in counterfort, 2. COULOMB THEORY “The Coulomb's theory is conveniently adopted when the plane of failure extending diagonally upward and backward ‘Mhrough the backfill. The sliding wedge is a tiangular mass ‘of soil between this plane of failure and the hack fice of retining wall, The soil within the sliding wedge would slump down when the taining wall is suddenly removed. If 44 plane of failure makes an angle @ with the horizontal, the ‘farces acting on the sliding wedge are as shown in figure 1. Fores acting on failure plane these forces consist of weight fof the soil within the wedge W which acts through the centroid of the triangle, a thrust normal to the plane of failure N which exerted by the soil the right ofthe failure ppline. N = N tan will be at the limit of equilibrium. These forces must be balanced by the thrust P which is assumed t0 act horizontally and to be concurrent with W, N and S. The ‘equal and opposite reaction to P is the lateral lowe to “withstand which the wall is to be designed, The fowes N land S may be replaced by the resultant R to derive the value ‘of P. acts along a line making the angle = with the pomaal to the failure plane. Since W. P and R are thee concuent forces which are in equilibrium, when the failure is about to tke place along the failure plane, they may he represented thy the triangle of forces in figure 1. In this triangle P=W sanp-2=1/2*Ka*y" Available @ hitps/wowdjretorg aanWRET: International Journal of Research in Engineering und Technology eS 319-1163] pISSN: 2321-7308 Forces on wedge Fig.l Forces acting on failure plane Fig, 2 shows the ative and pasive ste of plastic equilibrium in a nom-cobesive soil with the horizontal ‘round surface. In an active state the major principal stress 9; is vertical and minor principal stress «7 is horizontal Chwle I represents such a stite in which the pole PI comesponds to minor principal stress while point A 3. LOFT THEORY For nomcohesive soils the active cath prose on a setaining wall an be compuied by considering the stabilities of different wedges of soil mass. I attains a maximum value ‘when the rupture plane makes an angle of 45° + s/2 with the horizontal, where © is the angle of intemal friction of the non-cobesive soil. Fig 3 shows cross section of retaining ‘wall with one horizontal shelf of width “b" and thickness ‘1° sat a height “H-h’ ffom the hase. When bs H-T- tan [45° + 2/2], the rupture plane originating atthe intersection of ase and stem on the backiill side mects the borizontd shel, ‘According to Jumikies the carh pressure distribution diagram below the shelf would be as shown in the fig3, as if 4 free surface existed at the shelf level. If b is greater than ‘W-T-h tan [45 + 2/2}, the mupuure plane which gives the ‘maximum value of lateral cath pressure, ic. the plane inclinod at 45° o/2 with the horizontal, cunnot develop, 3s ‘thas to go through the shelf. The total active earth pressure at any level can be obtained by stability analysis of wedge, assuming that by providing a horizontal shelf, the weight of the eurth over the shelf is bom by the shelf and the weight of this soil mass isnot elfective to cause sting comespooss to ioforpriapalstcas The deve tomes the Rani failure envelopes at FI and F2° benoe PIF and PIFE show (fe gone roface the dicctons of Failure plans or slip lines these slip lines also shown in fig. 2. Similarly direction of the major . principal stress and minor principal stresses wre vice versa. : part * rh tars i CRU | QYXKOOOQ AXON OOO MARY » XXII He YYXXXXXOX he Kegs Lif” a Bacar Wil Wes Rae She Fig.3 Crass section of retaining wall with one relief shelf and sll presse on wall Fig2 Active and Passive sites of plastic equilibeium Volume: (4 Issue: 04 | Apr-201 4. ANALYSIS OF COUNTERFORT RETAINING WALL WITH ONE RELIEF SHELF ‘From literature it i clear that cantilever retaining wall wit ‘one relief shell is economical up to 10 m hight, above that hheight counterfon retaining wall with relief shelf is economical. Analysts of counterfort retaining wall is done to find best suid position considering different heights of ‘walls too, Properties taken for analysis are, Cohesiveness of soil (¢) = 0 Nimnr, Angle of intemal friction (=) = 37. Inclination of soil = ¢?, Unit Weight of soil (yo) = 19 kN/m’, Unit Weight of concrete (y,, = 25 kNm'. Bearing eapacity of sail (czy, = 270 Nima", Concrete M20, Steet Fe 415, Available @ hitps/wowdjretorg aaaSS WRET: International Journal of Research in Engineering und Technology 319-1163] pISSN: 2321-7308 ‘Here check for tension at the base slab and safe bearing ‘capacity is also taken and best suited position is found out ‘From above results when relief shelf position is at hy/2 gets ‘minimum earth pressure, minimum overturning moment and better subility Following graphs shows moment in cach component of ‘sounterfort retaining wall for different positions of shelf. 1800 100 +} B00 % 1200 1000 E00 2 wo Following tuble shows dimensions of three different heights 400 of wall. 00 i I o ‘Table -1: Dimensions of countedort retaining wall 2 Height of retaining wall 292 438 584 73S Description ‘10m 2m Position of relief shelf from top (m) ici aa pias © Moment in (kN m) Stem above relief shelf © Moment in (kN m) Stem below relief shelf Width of counterfort | 300 mm _ | 300 mm © Moment in (kN m) Toe Thickness of base slab [125m [15m © Moment in (kV m) Shelf Fig.4 Counterion retaining wall with one reliel shelf Width of base slab 3.7m ‘© Moment in (kN m) Heel ‘Toe projection [6m ism © Moment in (kN m) Counterfort above relief shelf Heel projection 38m [47m © Moment in. (Nm) Coumerfort below relief shelf ‘Thickness of shelf 400 mm_ | $00 min ‘Ghart «1: Moment in componcats of 10 m high coumterfort [Spacing of counterfort | m 33m ‘etaining wall for different pastions of reli shelf ‘Aftor fixing dimensions of walls, analysis is done for different positions of relief shel and effect on earth pressure ad stability of wall is studied ‘Table -2: Results of analysis of counterfon retaining wall ‘with different positions of sbetf Wi, Rif | Earth | Overtur | FOS | FOS wf | Sha | pressure | ning | overt | stdin wall | Fosition | (kNim) | moment | rning | bn | (Nm) om | Ba i373 [so20s | 31 | 236 hz i748 | 489 | 2.73, 24a 7552 [4127 ‘S36 342 [23 HZ 4.58 _| 2.78 35° 525 7 875 6 am | WS S068 | 2.379 Pasition of relief shalf fram top ( wz Tx61_| 2756 Moment in (kN m) Siem above rebel sbel his izes [ion 273 ‘Moment in (kN m) Stem below relief sbelf i 3 earl ‘Morent in (kN m3) Toe ss wat [aor fae ieeey nas : © Moment in (N’m) Heel 15m [ns sopss, | 4nrs 12273 © Moment in (KN m) Countertort above feiel shelf owe 3087 79 [466 [203 2H/3 O13 [391F [2596 ‘Ghart 2; Moment in components of 12 m high coumterfort, SW 3003.16 _| 3.258 _| 2.201 retaining wall for different positions of relief shelf HZ 236.56 _| 4372 | 2.67 Volume: 04 Issue: G4 | Apr-2018, Available @ http://www iret org 443