Advertisement

Recent Developments in Earth Pressure Reduction Techniques

  • S. M. DasakaEmail author
  • V. K. Gade
Chapter
Part of the Developments in Geotechnical Engineering book series (DGE)

Abstract

Rigid earth retaining structures are common civil engineering structures and they are constructed to retain the backfill soil. The evaluation of lateral earth pressure on retaining walls under due to retaining soil and external loads during the service life is vital as it significantly influences the cost of the project. Lateral earth thrust on rigid retaining walls from the backfill can be minimized by a suitable technique, notably using lightweight backfill, placing a compressible inclusion between the backfill and the retaining wall, or by providing one or more relief shelves along the height of the wall. This paper discusses recent studies carried out at IIT Bombay to reduce long-term lateral thrust on rigid retaining walls retaining cohesionless backfill using compressible geo-inclusion. The laboratory studies on geofoam samples reveal that Young’s modulus, yield stress, and compressible strength of the geofoam reduces with time. Also, the estimated creep strains obtained from Time–Temperature–Stress Superposition (TTSS) accelerated creep testing method at the end of 100 years was in the range of 2.1–2.4%. The isolation efficiency of the geofoam, which is defined as the ratio of reduction of lateral thrust due to the provision of geofoam at the soil–wall interface and the lateral thrust without geofoam, obtained from pseudo-long-term studies was more compared to that of short-term studies by 2.4–8.1%. The studies, for the first time, reveal that geofoam inclusion considerably reduces the lateral thrust on the wall not only in short-term but in long-term as well.

Keywords

Retaining walls Non-yielding Lateral thrust Earth pressure reduction Geofoam Creep 

References

  1. 1.
    Ching, F.D.K.: Building Construction Illustrated, 5th edn. Wiley (2014)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Saran, S., Garg, K.G., Bhandari, R.K.: Retaining wall with reinforced cohesionless backfill. J. Geotech. Eng. 118(12), 1869–1888 (1992).  https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9410(1992)118:12(1869)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Garg, K.G.: Retaining wall with reinforced backfill—a case study. Geotext. Geomembr. 16, 135–149 (1998).  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0266-1144(98)00003-XCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lee, H.J., Roh, H.S.: The use of recycled tire chips to minimize dynamic earth pressure during compaction of backfill. Constr. Build. Mater. 21, 1016–1026 (2007).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2006.02.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lee, J.H., Salgado, R., Bernal, A., Lovell, C.W.: Shredded tires and rubbersand as lightweight material. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 125(2), 132–141 (1999).  https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1090-0241(1999)125:2(132)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Partos, A.M., Kazaniwsky, P.M.: Geoboard reduces lateral earth pressures. In: Proceedings of the Geosynthetics’87, pp. 628–639. Industrial Fabrics Association International. New Orleans, LA, USA (1987)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Karpurapu, R., Bathurst, R.J.: Numerical investigation of controlled yielding of soil-retaining wall structures. Geotext. Geomembr. 11, 115–131 (1992).  https://doi.org/10.1016/0266-1144(92)90040-HCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Horvath, J.S.: Geofoam Geosynthetics. Horvath Engineering, Scarsdale, NY (1995)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Horvath, J.S.: An overview of the functions and applications of cellular geosynthetics. In: International e-Conference on Modern Trends in Foundation Engineering: Geotechnical Challenges and Solutions (2003)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Inglis, D., Macleod, Naesgaard, E., Zergoun, M.: Basement wall with seismic earth pressure and novel expanded polystyrene foam buffer layer. In: Proceedings of the 10th Annual Symposium on Earth Retention System, pp. 1–10. Canadian Geotechnical Society, Vancouver, Canada (1996)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bathurst, R., Zarnani, S., Gaskin, A.: Shaking table testing of geofoam seismic buffers. Soil Dyn. Earthq. Eng. 27, 324–332 (2007).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2006.08.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hazarika, H., Okuzono, S., Matsuo, Y.: Compressible geo-inclusion as seismic earth pressure reduction technique. In: Proceedings of the 38th (2003) Japan National Conference on Geotechnical Engineering, Japanese Geotechnical Society (JGS), 2–4 July 2003, Akita, Japan, pp. 1625–1626 (2003).  https://doi.org/10.11512/jiban.jgs38.0.1625.0
  13. 13.
    Yeo, S.S.: Evaluation of creep behavior of geosythetics using accelerated and conventional methods. Ph.D. thesis, Drexel University, PA, 2007Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    ASTM D2487-11: Classification of Soils for Engineering Purposes (Unified Soil Classification System), West Conshohocken, PA (2011).  https://doi.org/10.1520/d2487-11
  15. 15.
    Gade, V.K., Dasaka, S.M.: Short-term and long-term behavior of EPS geofoam. J. Test. Eval. (ASTM) (2018).  https://doi.org/10.1520/jte20170207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gade, V.K., Dasaka, S.M.: Development of a mechanized traveling pluviator to prepare reconstituted uniform sand specimens. J. Mater. Civ. Eng. (ASCE) 28(2), 1–9 (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0001396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gade, V.K.: Reduction of earth pressure on rigid non-yielding retaining walls subjected to traffic loading using EPS Geofoam. Ph.D. thesis, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Mumbai, India, 2017Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gade, V.K., Dasaka, S.M.: Calibration of earth pressure sensors. Indian Geotech. J. 48(1), 142–152 (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1007/s40098-017-0223-0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ertugrul, O.L., Trandafir, A.C.: Reduction of lateral earth forces acting on rigid non-yielding retaining walls by EPS geofoam inclusions. J. Mater. Civ. Eng. 23(12), 1711–1718 (2011).  https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)MT.1943-5533.0000348CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Zarnani, S., Bathurst, R.: Experimental investigation of EPS geofoam seismic buffers using a shaking table tests. Geosynth. Int. 14(3), 165–177 (2007).  https://doi.org/10.1680/gein.2007.14.3.165CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil EngineeringIIT BombayMumbaiIndia
  2. 2.Department of Civil EngineeringVRSECVijayawadaIndia

Personalised recommendations