Advertisement

Design of Waterfront-Retaining Walls Subjected to Waves and Earthquakes: A Review

  • D. ChoudhuryEmail author
  • B. G. Rajesh
Chapter
  • 136 Downloads
Part of the Developments in Geotechnical Engineering book series (DGE)

Abstract

This article discussed the various possible forces that can act on the waterfront-retaining wall during the earthquake and the available methodologies to compute them. The wave forces acting on the waterfront-retaining structures can be branched into non-breaking waves, breaking waves and broken waves. Hydrodynamic pressure due to seismic shaking plays a vital role in the stability and must be considered from both seaward and landward sides if the backfill is permeable. Various guidelines available for the design of waterfront-retaining wall and their limitations are discussed. The recent modified pseudo-dynamic method overcomes limitations of the pseudo-static method and considers the effect of time, amplification and damping properties in the analysis. Consideration of excess pore pressure variation with time in the analysis is challenging and needs further research.

Keywords

Waterfront-retaining wall Wave forces Tsunami Earthquake 

References

  1. 1.
    Ahmad, S.M., Choudhury, D.: Stability of waterfront retaining wall subjected to pseudo-dynamic earthquake forces and tsunami. J. Earthq. Tsunami 2(2), 107–131 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ahmad, S.M., Choudhury, D.: Seismic design factor for sliding of waterfront retaining wall. Proc. Inst. Civ. Eng., Geotech. Eng. 162(5), 269–276 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ahmad, S.M., Choudhury, D.: Seismic rotational stability of waterfront retaining wall using pseudodynamic method. Int. J. Geomech. 10(1), 45–52 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bellezza, I.: Seismic active earth pressure on walls using a new pseudo-dynamic approach. Geotech. Geol. Eng. 33(4), 795–812 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    CEM: Coastal Engineering Manual, EM-1110-2-1100. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Washington, DC (2005)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    CRATER: Coastal Risk Analysis of Tsunamis and Environmental Remediation. Italian Ministry for the Environment and the Territory (IMET), Italy (2006)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Choudhury, D., Ahmad, S.M.: Stability of waterfront retaining wall subjected to pseudodynamic earthquake forces. J. Waterw. Port, Coastal. Ocean Eng. 134(4):252–260 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Choudhury, D., Rajesh, B.G.: Recent developments in design of waterfront retaining structures to withstand earthquake and tsunami. In: Proceedings of Indian Geotechnical Conference (IGC-2014) on Geotechnics for Inclusive Development of India (GEOIND), JNTU Kakinada, India, pp. 2434–2448 (2014)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dames and Moore: Design and construction standards for re-sidential construction in tsunami prone areas in Hawaii. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC (1980)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ebeling, R.M., Morrison Jr., E.E.: The seismic design of waterfront retaining structures. U.S. Army Technical Report No. ITL-92-11, Washington, DC (1992)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fukui, Y., Hidehiko, M.N., Sasaki, Y.: Study on tsunami. Annu. J. Coast. Eng. 9, 50–54 (1962)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Goda, Y.: New wave pressure formulae for composite breakwater.In: Proceedings of 14th International Conference on Coastal Engineering, Copenhagen, Denmark, ASCE, New York, pp. 1702–1720 (1974)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    OCDI: Technical Standards and Commentaries for Port and Harbor Facilities in Japan. Overseas Coastal Area Development Institute, Tokyo, Japan (2002)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Pain, A., Choudhury, D., Bhattacharyya, S.K.: Seismic stability of retaining wall—soil sliding interaction using modified pseudo-dynamic method. Géotechnique Lett. 5(1), 56–61 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rajesh, B.G., Choudhury, D.: Influence of non-breaking wave force on seismic stability of seawall for passive condition. Ocean Eng. 114, 47–57 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rajesh, B.G., Choudhury, D.: Generalized seismic active thrust on retaining wall with submerged backfill using modified pseudo-dynamic method. Int. J. Geomechechanics 17(3), 06016023 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rajesh, B.G., Choudhury, D.: Stability of seawalls using modified pseudo-dynamic method under earthquake conditions. Appl. Ocean Res. 65, 154–165 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rajesh, B.G., Choudhury, D.: Seismic passive earth resistance in submerged soils using modified pseudo-dynamic method with curved rupture surface. Mar. Georesources & Geotechnol. 35(7), 930–938 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Rajesh, B.G., Choudhury, D.: Seismic stability of seawalls under earthquake and tsunami forces using a modified pseudodynamic method. Nat. Hazards Review. 19(3), 04018005 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Rajesh, B.G.: Seismic Stability of Seawalls Considering Wave Forces. Ph.D. thesis, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, India (2017)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sainflou, G.: Essai sur les digues maritimes verticals. Annales des Ponts et Chausse’es 98(1), 5–48 (1928)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Westergaard, H.M.: Water pressures on dams during earthquakes. Trans. ASCE 98, 418–433 (1933)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Civil EngineeringIndian Institute of Technology BombayMumbaiIndia
  2. 2.Academy of Scientific and Innovative Research (AcSIR)ChennaiIndia
  3. 3.Department of Civil EngineeringNational Institute of TechnologyTadepalligudemIndia

Personalised recommendations