Effect of Offset Distance on Tiered Reinforced Soil Retaining Wall Subjected to Dynamic Excitation

  • Sudipta Sikha SaikiaEmail author
  • Arup Bhattacharjee
Conference paper
Part of the Sustainable Civil Infrastructures book series (SUCI)


The rapid growth in urbanization and demand for effective space lead to increase in application of geosynthetic reinforced soil (GRS) retaining walls in major infrastructure project like flyover etc. The researchers have conducted physical, analytical and numerical studies on performance of single tiered and multi-tiered reinforced soil wall and compared the responses. The study of multi-tiered GRS wall has not achieved the growth as the single tiered GRS wall due to its limited application. The objective of this paper is to understand the response of tiered reinforced soil retaining wall subjected to dynamic excitation. This paper emphasizes on comparative study of response of multi-tiered reinforced soil walls with single- tiered reinforced soil wall subjected to seismic excitations. A 2.8 m high finite element model of modular block facing reinforced soil wall is simulated using finite element software PLAXIS 2D. The numerical model is subjected to dynamic excitations of 0.4 g Kobe earthquake and results of the response of the numerical model are validated with shake table tests results of Ling et al. (2005). The two and three tiered walls of 9 m height with different offset distances of 0.75 m, 1.5 m and 3.0 m are simulated with validated model parameters. The construction sequence is followed in numerical model simulation and model is brought to equilibrium condition after each stage of construction. The acceleration histories of Kobe earthquake (1995) having PGA 0.4 g is applied at the base of all models. The variation of horizontal displacements, lateral pressures, maximum reinforcement loads and acceleration amplification factors of single tiered and multi-tiered walls with various offset distances are compared. It is found from the analyses that the horizontal deformation, acceleration amplification factor and maximum reinforcement load decreases with the increasing tier offset.


  1. AASHTO. Standard specifications for highway bridges, American Association of state highway Bridges, American Association of State highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, DC (1998)Google Scholar
  2. Cakir, T.: Evaluation of the effect of earthquake frequency content on seismic behaviour of cantilever retaining wall including soil structure interaction. Dyn. Earthq. Eng. 45, 96–111 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. FHWA. Mechanically Stabilized Earth Walls and Reinforced Soil Slopes Design and Construction Guidelines, vol. I &II. Publication no. FHWA-NHI--024, US, Department of Federal Highway Administration (2010)Google Scholar
  4. Hatami, K., Bathurst, R.J.: Numerical model for reinforced soil segmental walls under surcharge loading. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 132(6), 673–684 (2006). Scholar
  5. Karpurapu, R., Bathurst, R.J.: Behaviour of geosynthetic reinforced soil retaining walls using the finite element method. Comput. Geotech. 17, 279–299 (1995). Scholar
  6. Leshchinsky, D., Han, J.: Geosynthetic reinforced multitiered walls. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 130(12) (2004).
  7. Ling, H.I., Cardany, C.P., Sun, L.-X., Hashimoto, H.: Finite element study of a geosynthetic-reinforced soil retaining wall with concrete-block facing. Geosynthetics Int. 7(3), 163–188 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ling, H.I., Leshchinsky, D.: Parametric studies of the behavior of segmental block reinforced soil retaining walls. Geosynthetics Int. 10(3), 77–94 (2003). Scholar
  9. Liu, H.: Long-term lateral displacement of geosynthetic-reinforced soil segmental retaining walls. Geotext. Geomembr. 32(2012), 18–27 (2011)Google Scholar
  10. NCMA. Segmental Retaining Walls Seismic Design Manual. National Concrete Masonry Association. Bathurst, R.J. (ed.) 1st edn. Herndon, Virginia, USA (1998)Google Scholar
  11. Reference Manual: PLAXIS 2D-Version8; Brinkgreve, R.B.J. (ed.) Delft University of Technology & PLAXIS; The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  12. Richards, R., Elms, D.G.: Seismic behavior of gravity retaining walls. J. Geotech. Eng. Div. ASCE 105(GT4), 449–464 (1979)Google Scholar
  13. Rowe, R.K., Ho, S.K.: Continuous panel reinforced soil walls on rigid foundations. J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 123(10), 912–920 (1997). Scholar
  14. Scientific Manual: PLAXIS 2D-Version8; Brinkgreve, R.B.J. (ed.) Delft University of Technology & PLAXIS; The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  15. Seed, H.B., Whitman, R.V.: Design of earth retaining structures for dynamic loads. In: ASCE Specialty Conference: Lateral Stresses in the Ground and Design of Earth Retaining Structures, pp. 103–147 (1970)Google Scholar
  16. Tatsuoka, F.: Geosynthetic-reinforced soil retaining walls as permanent structures. In: Proceedings of Indian Geotechnical Conference 2002, Allahabad, India, pp. 681–699 (2002)Google Scholar
  17. Tutorial Manual: PLAXIS 2D-Version8; Brinkgreve, R.B.J. (ed.) Delft University of Technology & PLAXIS; The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Jorhat Engineering CollegeJorhatIndia

Personalised recommendations