Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Assessment of the Pseudo-static seismic behavior in the soil nail walls using numerical analysis

  • Technical Paper
  • Published:
Innovative Infrastructure Solutions Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The suitable performance of nail walls during strong ground movements as well as flexibility than to other guard structures such as retaining walls makes it more evident that this system should be examined under earthquake effects. Therefore, it is essential to study the factors affecting the stability and deformation of the reinforced walls by the nailing method under seismic conditions. In the present research, using the finite element method, the performance of the restrained wall by nailing method and with a height of 10 m, using Pseudo-static seismic analysis has been investigated. Then the influence of the factors such as length, angle, the distance between the nails, the horizontal seismic coefficient (Kh), and the construction stages progress on the maximum wall lateral deformation, the safety factor and the maximum force in nails have been investigated. According to the most important results, placing nails with an angle between 10 and 15 degrees has the lowest displacement, and the maximum safety factor in static and the Pseudo-static numerical analysis, and the nails will have the best performance. In addition, by increasing nails' length, the maximum wall lateral deformation and the maximum force in nails decrease, and the safety factor will increase. As well as by increasing the nails' horizontal and vertical distance from each other, the maximum wall lateral deformation and the maximum force in nails increase, and the safety factor will reduce. Also, the results revealed that by increasing the nails' normal stiffness (EA) located on the trench wall, the share of the resistant tensile force created in the nails from the total active force acting on the wall increase as a result, the maximum wall lateral deformation in the soil nail wall will decrease, and the maximum force created in the nails and the safety factor will increase. Also, the results show that by increasing the construction stages progress and horizontal seismic coefficient (Kh), the safety factor reduce, and the maximum force in nails and the maximum wall lateral deformation will increase. Also, based on the findings from this research, the results obtained from the Pseudo-static seismic analysis (such as the maximum lateral deformation of the wall and the maximum force in the nails) are more than the static analysis. Conversely, the safety factor obtained from the Pseudo-static seismic analysis is less than the static analysis.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Jian YSS (1990) Analysis using boundary elements. Springer-Verlang Publisher, New York

    Google Scholar 

  2. Griffiths DV, Lane PA (1999) Slope stability analysis by finite elements. Geotechnique 49:387–403. https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.1999.49.3.387

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Leong EC, Rahardjo H (2012) Two and three-dimensional slope stability reanalyses of Bukit Batok slope. Comput Geotech 42:81–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2012.01.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Li LC, Tang CA, Zhu WC, Liang ZZ (2009) Numerical analysis of slope stability based on the gravity increase method. Comput Geotech 36:1246–1258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2009.06.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Ji J, Liao HJ, Low BK (2012) Modeling 2-D spatial variation in slope reliability analysis using interpolated autocorrelations. Comput Geotech 40:135–146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2011.11.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Abramson LW, Lee TS, Sharma S, Boyce GM (2002) Slope stability and stabilization methods. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  7. Eberhardt E (2003) Rock slope stability analysis-Utilization of advanced numerical techniques. Earth and Ocean sciences, UBC, Vancouver

    Google Scholar 

  8. Griffiths D, Marquez RJG (2007) Three-dimensional slope stability analysis by elasto-plastic finite elements. Science 57:537–546. https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.2007.57.6.537

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Aryal KP (2006) Slope stability evaluations by limit equilibrium and finite element methods. Ph.D., thesis, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Norway

  10. Huang M, Jia C-Q (2009) Strength reduction FEM in stability analysis of soil slopes subjected to transient unsaturated seepage. Comput Geotech 36:93–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2008.03.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Ugai K, Leshchinsky D (1995) Three-dimensional limit equilibrium and finite element analyses: a comparison of results. Soils Foundation 35:1–7. https://doi.org/10.3208/sandf.35.4_1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Liu S, Shao L, Li H (2015) Slope stability analysis using the limit equilibrium method and two finite element methods. Comput Geotech 63:291–298. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2014.10.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Griffiths DV, Fenton GA (2004) Probabilistic slope stability analysis by finite elements. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 130:507–518. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2004)130:5(507)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Jaritngam S, Chuchom S, Limsakul C, Jaritngam R (2001) Slope stability analysis using neural networks. The 6th Mining, Metallurgical and Petroleum Engineering Conference on Resources Exploration and Utilization for Sustainable Environment (REUSE), Bangkok, Thailand, 24–26 October 2001

  15. Foong LK, Moayedi H (2021) Slope stability evaluation using neural network optimized by equilibrium optimization and vortex search algorithm. Eng Comput. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00366-021-01282-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Moniuddin MK, Manjularani P, Govindaraju L (2016) Seismic analysis of soil nail performance in deep excavation. Geo-Eng 7:16. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40703-016-0030-y

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Siva Kumar Babu GL et al (2008) Numerical analysis of performance of soil nail walls in seismic conditions. ISET J Earthq Technol 45:31–40

    Google Scholar 

  18. Yazdandous M (2017) Seismic performance of soil-nailed walls using a 1g shaking table. Can Geotech J 55(1):1–18. https://doi.org/10.1139/cgj-2016-0358

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Maleki M, Nabizadeh A (2021) Seismic performance of deep excavation restrained by guardian truss structures system using quasi-static approach. SN Appl Sci 3:417. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-021-04415-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Maleki M, Majdeddin MMHS (2020) Seismic performance of deep excavations restrained by anchorage system using quasi static approach. J Seismolog Earthq Eng 1(2):11–21. http://www.jsee.ir/article_240810.html

  21. Giri D, Sengupta A (2009) Dynamic Behavior of Small Scale Nailed Soil Slopes. Geotech Geol Eng 27(6):687–698. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10706-009-9268-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. El-Emam M, Bathurst RJ (2007) Influence of reinforcement parameters on the seismic response of reduced-scale reinforced soil retaining walls. Geotext Geomembr 25(1):33–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geotexmem.2006.09.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Hatami K, Bathurst RJ (2006) A numerical model for reinforced soil segmental walls under surcharge loading. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 132(6):673–684. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(2006)132:6(673)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Hatami K, Bathurst RJ, Di Pietro P (2001) Static response of reinforced soil retaining walls with non uniform reinforcement. Int J Geomech 1(4):477–506. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1532-3641(2001)1:4(477)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Farrokhzad F, MotahariTabari S, Abdolghafoorkashani H et al (2021) Seismic behaviour of excavations reinforced with soil-nailing method. Geotech Geol Eng 39:4071–4091. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10706-020-01625-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Fan CC, Luo JH (2008) Numerical study on the optimum layout of soil-nailed slopes. Comput Geotech 35(4):585–599. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2007.09.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Plaxis 2D (2017) Reference manual, Delft, Netherlands

  28. Schanz T, Vermeer PA, Bonnier PG (1999) The hardening soil model: formulation and verification, Beyond 2000 in Computational Geotechnics. Balkema, Rotterdam

    Google Scholar 

  29. Duncan JM, Chang CY (1970) Nonlinear analysis of stress and strain in soils. J Soil Mech Found Div ASCE 96:1629–1653

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Jaky J (1944) The coefficient of earth pressure at rest. J Soc Hung Archit Eng 8(22):355–358

    Google Scholar 

  31. Peng FL et al (2011) Field measurements and finite-element method simulation of a tunnel shaf constructed by pneumatic caisson method in shanghai soft ground. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 137:516–524. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0000460

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Singh VP, Sivakumar Babu GL (2010) 2D numerical simulations of soil nail walls. Geotech Geol Eng 28(4):299–309

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. ACI Committee 318 (1995) Building code requirements for structure concrete and commentary, American Concrete Institute, Farmington Hills, Mich

  34. Lees A (2016) Geotechnical Finite Element Analysis. ICE Publishing, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

  35. Maleki M, Imani M (2022) Active lateral pressure to rigid retaining walls in the presence of an adjacent rock mass. Arab J Geosci 15:152. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12517-022-09454-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Maleki M, Shamloo S, Majdeddin MMHS (2020) Evaluation of factors affecting deformation and stability of anchored deep excavations, (case study; a deep trench in Tehran). https://civilica.com/doc/1042943/

  37. Maleki M, Nabizadeh A (2019) Investigation of seismic behaviour in restrained deep excavation by the nailling system by finite element method. https://civilica.com/doc/917450/

  38. FHWA0-IF-03-017 (2017) Federal Highway Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington DC, USA

  39. Maleki M, Majdeddin MMHS (2021) Seismic behavior of soil nailing walls using pseudo-static analysis. 8th National Conference on Applied Research in Civil Engineering, Architecture and Urban Management-khajeh nasir toosi university of technology At: Tehran-Iran. https://civilica.com/doc/1331904/

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors are very grateful to anonymous reviewers for their thorough reading and constructive remarks that have contributed to the improvement of the last version of the paper.

Funding

The author received no financial support for the research and/or authorship of this article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Amirkabir University of Technology, Tehran, Iran

    Mahdi Maleki & Seyed Majdeddin Mir Mohammad Hosseini

Authors
  1. Mahdi Maleki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Seyed Majdeddin Mir Mohammad Hosseini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mahdi Maleki.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Maleki, M., Mir Mohammad Hosseini, S.M. Assessment of the Pseudo-static seismic behavior in the soil nail walls using numerical analysis. Innov. Infrastruct. Solut. 7, 262 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41062-022-00861-5

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41062-022-00861-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation