Summary
This paper considers the safety of geotechnical structures using various design philosophies which include the global safety method and a number of limit state design methods. The methods are considered individually and their treatment of uncertainties of design briefly discussed in terms of parameter and system uncertainty. Each method is not designed to produce a definitive measure of safety, but should be viewed as an aid in the process of controlling or managing safety. Crucial to all design methods is the idea of a design parameter. However, in certain instances it is often not clear whether a design parameter should be an upper or lower bound on its possible value. A proposed limit state design method for overcoming this problem is outlined, based on putting bounds on parameters. An example of a reinforced concrete cantilever retaining wall is used to demonstrate its advantages over current methods. The proposed method offers a more rational approach to the design of retaining structures.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Blockley, D.I. (1980)The nature of structural design and safety, Ellis Horwood, Chichester.
Bolton, M. (1981) Limit state design in geotechnical engineering,Ground Engineering,14(6), 39–46.
Bolton, M. (1986) In discussion of Smith (1985),Geotechnique,36(4), 619–20.
BS5950 (1985)Code of Practice for Design in Simple and Continuous Construction: hot rolled sections, BSI.
BS8002 (1987)Draft Code of Practice for Earth Retaining Structures, 87/14383 DC, British Standards Institution, London.
BS8110 (1985)The Structural use of Concrete, Code of Practice for Design and Construction, Part 1, BSI.
CIRIA Report 63 (1977)Rationalisation of Safety & Serviceability Factors in Structural Codes, July, Construction Industry Research and Information Association, London.
Cole, K. W. (1979) Is it safe?,Ground Engineering,12(4), 2 and 6.
CP2 (1951) Earth retaining structures, Institution of Structural Engineers
Danish Code of Practice for Foundation Engineering (1985) Danish Geotechnical Institute, Bulletin No. 36, Copenhagen.
Eurocode EC 7 (1989) Eurocode 7: Geotechnics, Incomplete Draft, November.
Haurylkiewicz, J. (1979) Critical analysis of the method of safety factors in geotechnics, inProceedings of Third International Conference on Applications of Statistics and Probability in Soil and Structural Engineering, ICASP-3,2, pp. 672–9.
Heuckel, S.M. (1964) A practical method of determining safety factors in purposes of stability of foundations, inProceedings of the Seminar on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, June, University of Gdansk, Lodz.
Ingold, T.S. (1991) Partial factor design of polymer reinforced soil walls,Ground Engineering, June, 34–38.
International Standards Organisation (1973)General Principles for the Verification of the Safety of Structures, ISO 2394, February.
Meyerhof, G.G. (1955) Influence of roughness of base and groundwater conditions on the ultimate bearing capacity of foundations,Geotechnique,5(3), 227–42.
Naylor, D. (1981) Quantifying safety,Ground Engineering,14(7) 2 and 6.
Oliphant, J. (1988) Controlling Safety and Capturing Engineering Judgement in Geotechnical Design, PhD Thesis, University of Bristol.
Oliphant, J., Blockley, D.I. and Larnach, W.J. (1988) Controlling safety in geotechnical design, inProceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers, Part 2,85, 67–88.
Simpson, B., Pappin, J.W. and Croft, D.D. (1981) An approach to limit state calculations in geotechnics,Ground Engineering,14(6), 21–8.
Smith, G.N. (1985) The use of probability theory to assess the safety of propped embedded cantilever retaining walls,Geotechnique,35(4), 45.
Terzaghi, K. and Peck, R.B. (1967)Soil mechanics in engineering practice, John Wiley.
Thorburn, S. (1977) Structure-Soil Interaction: a state of the art report, The Institution of Structural Engineers, November.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Oliphant, J. Controlling the safety of geotechnical structures: a proposed approach. Geotech Geol Eng 10, 273–289 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00880705
Received:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00880705