Geo5 Engineering Manuals

Eng
i
ne
e
r
i
ngma
nua
l
s
Engineering manuals for GEO5 programs

Chapter 1. Analysis settings and settings administrator ........................... 3
Chapter 2. Design of Cantilever wall ........................................................ 11
Chapter 3. Verification of gravity wall ..................................................... 22
Chapter 4. Design of non-anchored restraint retaining wall .................. 31
Chapter 5. Design of anchored retaining wall .......................................... 38
Chapter 6. Verification of retaining wall with one anchor row .............. 41
Chapter 7. Verification of multi-anchored wall ....................................... 51
Chapter 8. Analysis of slope stability ........................................................ 62
Chapter 9. Stability of slope with retaining wall ...................................... 71
Chapter 10. Design of geometry of spread footing ................................... 80
Chapter 11. Settlement of spread footing ................................................. 85
Chapter 12. Analysis of consolidation under embankment .................... 90
Introduction
Engineering manuals are new teaching material for GEO5 software. They were developed as a reaction
to hotline and frequently asked questions of users. The objective of each chapter is to explain how to solve the
concrete engineering problems using GEO5 software.
Each chapter is divided to a few sections:
Introduction theoretical introduction to the problem
Assignment here the problem is described with all input data needed for solving the problem in selected the
program
Solution in this section, the problem is solved step by step
Conclusion has the conclusion of the problem and the final verification of the construction. It tells if the
structure is satisfactory or not and if there are any modifications needed.
In each chapter there are also notes, which explain the problem in general as well as links to other materials.
The basic educational materials of GEO5 software suite (from FINE s r.o.) are:
Context help explains the functions of the program in detail
Video tutorials show the basic work with the software and its effective use
Engineering manuals explain how concrete engineering problems are solved
Verification manuals verify the satisfaction of the results, by comparing the results from programs
with hand calculation or other programs
The first chapter explains how to set standards and chose an analysis method, which is the same for all GEO5
programs. In further chapters one standard is selected, by which the construction is verified.
2
www.finesoftware.eu
Chapter 1. Analysis settings and settings administrator

This chapter explains the correct use of Settings administrator that serves to choose standards, partial
factors and verification methodology. It is the basic step needed for all GEO5 programs.
Introduction
GEO5 software is used in 90 countries worldwide. Engineering tasks are the same everywhere to
prove that the construction is safe and well designed.
The basic characteristic of structures (eg. geometry of wall, terrain, localization of anchors etc.) are the
same all over the world; the way of proving that the construction is safe and the theory of analysis used are
different. Large quantities of new theories and mainly partial factors of analysis lead to input of large amounts
of data and complicated programs. The Settings administrator was created in GEO5 for version 15 to simplify
this process.
In the Settings administrator are defined all input parameters, including standards, methods and
coefficients for the current country. The idea is that each user will understand the Settings defined in the
program (or will define a new Setting of analysis), which the user then uses in their work. To the Settings
administrator and Settings editor the user then goes only occasionally.
Assignment:
Perform an analysis of a gravity wall per the picture below for overturning and slip according to these
standards and procedures:
1) CSN 73 0037
2) EN 1997 DA1
3) EN 1997 DA2
4) EN 1997 DA3
5) Safety factor on SF=1.6
3
www.finesoftware.eu
Scheme of the gravity wall for analysis
Solution
Firstly, input the data about the construction and geological conditions in the frames: Geometry,
Assign and Soils. Skip the other frames because they are not important for this example.
Frame Geometry input of dimensions of the gravity wal

4
www.finesoftware.eu
Table with the soil parameters
Soil
Unit weight
(Soil classification)
kN m
MG Gravelly silt,
firm consistency
19,0
of Cohesion
internal friction of soil
Angle
Angle of friction
structure
ef
cef kPa
30,0
15,0
soil
In the frame Assign, the first soil will be assigned automatically to the layer or layers. This can be
changed when necessary.
When the basic input of construction is done, we can choose standards, and then finally run the analysis
of the gravity wall.
In the frame Settings click the button Select and choose number 8 Czech Republic old
standards CSN (73 1001, 73 1002, 73 0037).
Dialog window Settings list
Note: The look of this window depends on standards that are currently active in the Settings administrator
more information in the help of the program (press F1). If the setting you want to use isn`t on the list in the
dialog window Settings list, you can activate it in the Settings administrator.
Now, open up the frame Verification and after analyzing the example record the utilization of
construction (in the frame Verification) - 53,1% resp. 66,5%.
5
www.finesoftware.eu
Frame Verification results of the analysis using CSN 73 0037 standard

Then return to the frame Settings and choose number 3 Standard EN 1997 DA1.
6
www.finesoftware.eu
Again, open the frame Verification and record the result (55,6% and 74,7%) for EN 1997, DA1.
Frame Verification results of analysis for EN 1997, DA1

Repeat this procedure for settings number 4 Standard EN 1997 DA2 and number 5 Standard
EN 1997 DA3.
The analyzed utilization of constructions is (77,8% and 69,7%) for EN 1997, DA2 or (53,5% and
74,7%) for EN 1997, DA3.
7
www.finesoftware.eu
Variant 5 (analysis using Safety factors) is not as simple. In the frame Settings click on Edit. This
will show you the current analysis settings. Change the verification methodology to Safety factors (ASD) and
then input safety factor for overturning and sliding resistance as 1.6.
Dialog window Edit current settings: Gravity wall

Press OK and run the analysis. (69,0% and 77,1%).
Frame Verification analysis results for SF = 1.6

8
www.finesoftware.eu
If you would like to use this setting more often, it is good to save this setting by clicking on Add to
administrator, rename is as shown below, and next time use it as a standard setting.
Dialog window Add current settings to the Administrator
Dialog window Settings list then looks like this

9
www.finesoftware.eu
Verification
Utilization in percentage using each standard is:
Overturning
Slip
1) CSN 73 0037
53,1
66,5
2) EN 1997 DA1
55,6
74,7
3) EN 1997 DA2
77,8
69,7
4) EN 1997 DA3
53,3
74,7
5) Safety factor on SF=1.6
69,0
77,1
The analysis is satisfactory using the selected analysis standards.

Note: This simple method can be used to compare retaining structures or stability analyses. When analyzing
foundations, the load (basic input data) must be computed according to relevant standards. That is the reason
why it doesnt make sense, to compare foundation design by various standards with the same values of load
(nominal values).
10
www.finesoftware.eu
Chapter 2. Design of Cantilever wall

In this chapter, the design of cantilever wall and its overall analysis is described.
Assignment
Design a cantilever wall with a height of 4,0 m and analyze it by EN 1997-1 (EC 7-1, Design approach
1). The terrain behind the structure is horizontal. The ground water table is 2,0 meters deep. Behind the wall acts
a strip surcharge with a length of 5,0 meters and with a magnitude of 10 kN/m2. The foundation soil consists of
MS Sandy silt, stiff consistency, S r 0,8 , allowable bearing capacity is 175 kPa. The soil behind the wall will
consist of S-F Sand with trace of fines, medium dense soil. The cantilever wall will be made of reinforced
concrete of class C 20/25.
Scheme of the cantilever wall - Assignment

Solution:
For solving this problem, we will use the GEO5 program, Cantilever wall. In this text, we will explain
solving this example step by step.
In the frame Settings click on Select and then choose analysis setting Nr. 3 Standard EN 1997
DA1.
11
www.finesoftware.eu

In the frame Geometry choose the wall shape and enter its dimensions.
Frame Geometry
12
www.finesoftware.eu
In the frame Material enter the material of the wall.
Frame Material Input of material characteristics of the structure
Then, define the parameters of soil by clicking Add in the frame Soils. Wall stem is normally
analyzed for pressure at rest. For pressure at rest analysis, select Cohesionless.
Dialog window Add new soils
13
www.finesoftware.eu
Note: The magnitude of active pressure depends also on the friction between the structure and soil. The friction
angle depends on the material of construction and the angle of internal soil friction normally entered in the
interval 1 2
ef
Angle of
Cohesion
Angle of
of soil
friction
Soil
Profile
Unit weight
internal
kN m 3
friction
ef
cef kPa
0,0 4,0
17,5
28,0
0,0
18,5
from 4,0
18,0
26,5
30,0
17,5
S-F Sand with trace of

fines, medium dense soil
structure soil
MS Sandy silt, stiff

consistency, S r 0,8
In the frame Terrain choose the horizontal terrain shape.
Frame Terrain
The ground water table is at a depth of 2,0 meters. In the frame Water select the type of water close to
the structure and its parameters.
14
www.finesoftware.eu
Frame Water
In the next frame define Surcharge. Here, select permanent and strip surcharge on the terrain acting as
a dead load.
Dialog window New surcharge

In the frame FF resistance select the terrain shape in front of the wall and then define other parameters
of resistance on the front face.
15
www.finesoftware.eu
Frame FF resistance
Note: In this case, we do not consider the resistance on the front face, so the results will be conservative. The
FF resistance depends on the quality of soil and allowable displacement of the structure. We can consider
pressure at rest for the original soil, or well compacted soil. It is possible to consider the passive pressure if
displacement of structure is allowed. (for more information, see HELP F1)
Then, in the frame Stage settings choose the type of design situation. In this case,
it will be permanent. Also choose the pressure acting on the wall. In our case, we will choose active pressure,
as the wall can move.
Frame Stage settings
Note: Wall stem is dimensioned always on earth pressure at rest, i.e., the wall cant be moved. The possibility of
evaluating the stem and the wall of the active pressure is considered only in exceptional cases - such as the
effects of the earthquake (seismic design situation with partial coefficient equals 1.0).
16
www.finesoftware.eu
Now, open up the frame Verification, where you analyze the results of overturning and slip of the cantilever
wall.
Frame Verification
Note: The button In detail in the right section of the screen opens a dialog window with detailed information
about the analysis results.
Analysis results:
The verification of slip is not satisfactory, utilization of structure is
Overturning: 52,8 %
M vzd 208,33 M kl 109,97 [kNm/m]
SATISFACTORY.
Slip: 124,6 %
H vzd 65,78 H pos 81,94
NOT OK.
[kN/m]
Now we have several possibilities how to improve the design. For example, we can:
-
Use better soil behind the wall
Anchor the base
Increase the friction by bowing the footing bottom
Anchor the stem
These changes would be economically and technologically complicated, so choose the easiest alternative. The
most efficient way is to change the shape of the wall and introduce a wall jump.
17
www.finesoftware.eu
Change of the design: change of the geometry of the wall

Return to the frame Geometry and change the shape of the cantilever wall. For increasing
the resistance against slip we introduce a base jump.
Frame Geometry (Changing dimensions of cantilever wall)
Note: A base jump is usually analyzed as an inclined footing bottom. If the influence of the base jump
is considered as front face resistance, then the program analyses it with a straight footing bottom, but FF
resistance of the construction is analyzed to the depth of the down part of the base jump (More info in HELP
F1)
Then analyze the newly designed construction for overturning and slip.
18
www.finesoftware.eu
Frame Verification
Now, the overturning and slip of the wall are both satisfactory.
Then, in the frame Bearing capacity, perform an analysis for design bearing capacity
of the foundation soil 175 kPa.
Frame Bearing capacity
Note: In this case, we analyze the bearing capacity of the foundation soil on an input value, which we can get
from geological survey, resp. from some standards. These values are normally highly conservative, so it is
generally better to analyze the bearing capacity of the foundation soil in the program Spread footing that takes
into account other influences like inclination of load, depth of foundation etc.
19
www.finesoftware.eu
Next, in the frame Dimensioning chose wall stem check. Design the main reinforcement into the stem
10 pcs. 12 mm, which satisfies in point of bearing capacity and all design principles.
Frame Dimensioning
Then, open up the frame Stability and analyze the overall stability of the wall. In our case, we will use
the method Bishop, which result in conservative results. Perform the analysis with optimization of circular
slip surface and then leave the program by clicking OK. Results or pictures will be shown in the report of
analysis in the program Cantilever wall.
20
www.finesoftware.eu
Slope stability program
Conclusion/ Result of analysis bearing capacity:
M vzd 218,52 M kl 108,16 [kNm/m]
Overturning: 49,5 %
Slip: 64,9 %
Bearing capacity: 86,3
Rd 151,06 175,00
Wall stem check: 78,7 %
M Rd 169,92 M Ed 133,71 [kNm]
SATISFACTORY
Overall stability: 40,8 %
Method Bishop (optimization)
SATISFACTORY
H vzd 99,27 H pos 64,47
[kN/m]
[kPa]
SATISFACTORY
SATISFACTORY
SATISFACTORY
This cantilever wall is SATISFACTORY.
21
www.finesoftware.eu
Chapter 3. Verification of gravity wall

In this chapter an analysis of an existing gravity wall for permanent and accidental design situations is
performed. Construction stages are also explained.
Assignment
Using EN 1997-1 (EC 7-1, DA2) standard, analyze an existing gravity wall for stability, overturning, and slip .
Road traffic acts on the wall with magnitude of 10 kPa. Check the possibility to install the barrier on the top of
the wall. An accidental load from a car crash is considered as 50 kN/m and it acts horizontally at 1,0 m.
Dimensions and shape of the concrete wall can be seen in the picture below. Inclination of the terrain behind the
construction is 10 , the foundation soil consists of silty sand. The friction angle between the soil and wall
is 18 .
Determination of bearing capacity and dimensioning of the wall is not part of this task. In this analysis, consider
effective parameters of soil.
Scheme of the gravity wall assignment

Solution:
For analyzing this task, use the GEO5 program Gravity wall. In this text, we will describe the steps of
analyzing this example in two construction stages.
1st construction stage analyzing the existing wall for road traffic.
2nd construction stage analyzing impact of vehicle to the barrier on the top of the wall.
Basic input: Stage 1

22
www.finesoftware.eu
In the frame Settings click on Select and choose Nr. 4 Standard EN 1997 DA2.

Then, in the frame Geometry, select the shape of the gravity wall and define its parameters.
Frame Geometry
23
www.finesoftware.eu
In the next step, input the material of the wall and geological profile. Unit weight of wall is
24 kN m 3 . Wall is made from concrete C 12/15 and steel B500. Then define parameters of soil and assign
them to the profile.
Soil
Unit weight
kN m 3
MS Sandy silt,
firm consistency
Angle of
internal friction
Cohesion
of soil
Angle of friction
structure soil
ef
cef kPa
26,5
12,0
18,0
18,0

Note: The magnitude of active pressure depends also on friction between the structure and soil in the angle
1 2
ef
. In this case we consider the influence of friction between the structure and soil with
value of 2 ef ( d =18 ), when analyzing earth pressure. (More info in HELP F1).
In the frame Terrain select the shape of terrain behind the wall. Define its parameters, in terms of
embankment length and slope angle as shown below.
Frame Terrain
In the next frame, define Surcharge. Input the surcharge from road traffic as Strip, with its location on
terrain, and as a type of action select Variable.
24
www.finesoftware.eu
Dialog window Edit surcharge

In the frame FF resistance choose the shape of the terrain in front of the wall and define the other
parameters of front face resistance.
Frame Front face resistance

Note: In this case, we do not consider resistance on the front face, so the results will be conservative. The FF
resistance depends on the quality of soil and allowable displacement of the structure. We consider pressure at
25
www.finesoftware.eu
rest for the original soil or well compacted soil. It is possible to consider passive pressure only if displacement
of structure is allowed. (More info in HELP F1).
In the frame Stage settings select the type of design situation. In the first construction stage,
consider the permanent design situation.

Now open up the frame Verification, where we analyse the gravity wall for overturning and slip.
Frame Verification stage 1

Note: The button In detail in the right section of the screen opens a dialog window with detailed information
about the results of the analysis.
26
www.finesoftware.eu
Dialog window Verification (in detail)

Note: For analyses based on EN-1997, the program determines if the force acts favorably or unfavorably. Next
each force is multiplied by the corresponding partial factor which is them on the report.
Then, open up the frame Stability and analyze the overall stability of the wall. In our case, we will use
the method Bishop, which results in conservative results. Perform an analysis with optimization of circular
slip surface and then validate everything by clicking OK. Results or pictures will be shown in the report of
analysis in the program Gravity wall.
Program Slope stability stage 1
Analysis results: Stage 1

27
www.finesoftware.eu
When analyzing bearing capacity, we are looking for values of overturning and slip of the wall on the
footing bottom. Then we need to know its overall stability. In our case, the utilization of the wall is:
Overturning: 70,0 %
M vzd 376,91 M kl 263,73 [kNm/m]
SATISFACTORY.
Slip: 90,6 %
H vzd 152,53 H pos 138,17 [kN/m]
SATISFACTORY.
Overall stability: 72,3 % Method Bishop (optimization)
SATISFACTORY.
28
www.finesoftware.eu
Basic input: Stage 2

Now, add construction stage 2 using tool bar in the upper left corner of the screen.
Toolbar Stage of construction

In this stage, define the load from the impact of the vehicle to the barrier, using the frame
Input forces. The load is accidental and considers the impact of a vehicle with a weight of 5 tons.
Dialog window Edit force construction stage 2 (accidental design situation)
Then open the frame Stage settings change the design situation on accidental.

The data in the other frames that we entered in stage 1 has not changed, so we dont have to open these
frames again. Select the frame Verification to perform the verification on overturning and slip again.
29
www.finesoftware.eu
Frame Verification stage 2
Analysis results: Stage 2

From the results, we see, that the existing wall is not satisfactory for impact of a vehicle to the barrier.
In this case, utilization of the wall is:
Overturning: 116,3 %
M vzd 488,62 M kl 568,13 [kNm/m]
NOT OK.
Slip: 102,9 %
H vzd 138,39 H pos 142,35 [kN/m]
NOT OK.
Conclusion
The existing gravity wall in case of bearing capacity satisfies only for the first construction stage, where
road traffic acts. For the second construction stage, which is represented as impact to the barrier on the top of
the wall by a vehicle of 5 tons, the wall is not satisfactory.
As a solution to increase bearing capacity for overturning and slip it is possible to introduce soil
anchors. alternatively it is possible to place a barrier on the edge of the road, so the wall is not loaded by a force
from the crashing car.
30
www.finesoftware.eu
Chapter 4. Design of non-anchored restraint retaining wall

In this chapter is the design of non-anchored retaining wall for permanent and accidental loads (flooding).
Assignment
Design non-anchored retaining wall from pile sheeting using the EN 1997-1 (EC 7-1, DA3) standard in
non-homogenous geologic layers. The depth of excavation is 2,5 m. The ground water table is at a depth of 1,0
m. Analyze the construction also for flooding; when the water is 1,0 m above the top of the wall (mobile antiflood barriers should be installed).
Scheme of non-anchored wall from pile sheeting assignment

Solution:
For solving this problem, we will use the GEO5 program, Sheeting design. In this text, we will explain
each step to solve this example:
1st construction stage: permanent design situation
2nd construction stage: accidental design situation
Design of geometry of the pile sheeting
Analysis result (conclusion).
31
www.finesoftware.eu
Basic input: Construction stage 1

In the frame Settings click on Select and then choose Nr. 5 Standard EN 1997 DA3.

Then, input the geological profile, parameters of soil and assign them to the profile.
32
www.finesoftware.eu

Angle of
internal
friction
Cohesion
of soil
ef
cef kPa
17,5
29,5
0,0
14,0
1,5 2,5
18,5
27,0
8,0
14,0
from 2,5
21,0
19,0
12,0
14,0
Soil
Profile
Unit weight
kN m 3
S-F Sand with trace

of fines, medium
dense soil
0,0 1,5
SC Clayey sand,
medium dense soil
CL, CI Clay with
low or medium
plasticity,
firm consistency
Angle of friction
structure soil
In the frame Geometry, select the shape of bottom of the excavation and input its depth.
Frame Geometry
Note: coefficient of reduction of earth pressure below the ditch is considered while analyzing braced sheeting
(retaining wall with soldier beams) only; for a standard sheeting pile wall it equals 1,0 For more information,
see HELP (F1).
In this case, we do not use the frames Anchors, Props, Supports, Pressure determination,
Surcharge and Applied forces. The frame Earthquake also has no influence for this analysis, because the
construction is not located in seismic-active area. In the frame Terrain, it remains horizontal.
33
www.finesoftware.eu
In the frame Water input the GWT value 1,0 m.
Frame Water 1st construction stage

Then, in the frame Stage settings, select the design situation as permanent.

Now, open up the frame Analysis and click on the button Analyze. This will perform the analysis of
the retaining wall.
Frame Analysis
Note: For cohesive soils is recommended by many standards to use minimal dimensioning pressure acting on
the retaining wall. The standard value for the coefficient of minimal dimensioning pressure is Ka = 0,2.
It means that minimum pressure on the structure is 0,2 of geostatic stress never less.
34
www.finesoftware.eu
Within the design of pile sheeting retaining wall, we are interested in the depth of construction in the
soil and internal forces on the structure. For the 1st construction stage, the results of analysis are:
Length of structure:
4,83 m
Needed depth in the soil:
2,33 m
Maximum bending moment:
M 1,max 28,21 kNm m
Maximum shear force:
Q1,max 56,98 kN m
In the next stage, we are going to show you how to analyse the minimum depth in soil and internal
forces in the soil for the accidental design situation floods.
Basic input Construction stage 2
Now, select stage 2 on the toolbar Stage of construction on the upper left corner of your screen. (If
needed, add a new one)
Toolbar: Stage of construction

In the frame Water, change the GWT behind the structure to a value -1,0 m. We will not consider
water in front of the structure.
Frame Water
35
www.finesoftware.eu
Then, in the frame Stage settings, select the design situation Accidental.

All other values are the same as in the 1st construction stage, so we dont have to change data in other
frames, so we go on to the frame Analysis and click again on the button Analyze.
Frame Analysis
In the 2nd construction stage the analysis results are:
Length of structure:
6,56 m
Needed depth in the soil:
4,06 m
M 2,max 142,00 kNm m
Q2,max 185,17 kN m
Using the maximum bending moment, we will design pile sheeting.

The minimum length of pile sheeting is set as the maximum of necessary length from construction stage 1
and construction stage 2.
36
www.finesoftware.eu
Design of pile sheeting:

We design the pile sheeting based on the maximum bending moment using the table of pile sheeting with
allowable bearing capacities shown below.
Design of pile sheeting according to CSN EN 10 248-1 standards.

Based on the chart, we will select the pile sheeting VL 503 (500 340 9,7 mm), the steel grade S 270
GP, of which the maximum bending moment is M max 224,0 kN m .
Safe design of structure is verified by equation:
M dov 224 kN m M max 142 kNm m
Analysis result:
In the design of non-anchored restraint retaining wall, we are verifying values of minimum depth of the
structure in the soil, and the internal forces in the structure:
Minimum depth of the structure in first stage:
2,33 m
Minimum depth of the structure in second stage:
4,06 m
So, we will design a pile sheeting with depth in the soil of 4,1 m and overall length of 6,6 meters.
Conclusion:
The designed pile sheeting retaining wall VL 503 from S 270 steel with length of 6,6 meters satisfies.
37
www.finesoftware.eu
Chapter 5. Design of anchored retaining wall

In this chapter, we will show you how to design a retaining wall with one row of anchors.
Assignment:
Design a retaining wall with one anchor row made from pile sheeting using EN 1997-1 (EC 7-1, DA3)
standard. The depth of ditch is 5,0 m. The anchor row is 1,5 m below the surface. The soils, geological profile,
ground water table and shape of terrain are the same as in the last task. Remove construction stage two so as to
not consider flooding.
Scheme of the anchored wall from pile sheeting assignment

Solution:
For solving this problem, we will use a GEO5 program, Sheeting design. In this text, we will explain
each step of this example:
Analysis 1: permanent design situation - wall fixed at heel
Analysis 2: permanent design situation - wall hinged at heel
Analysis result (conclusion)
38
www.finesoftware.eu
Basic input: Analysis 1

Leave the frames Settings, Profile, Soils, Terrain, Water and Stage settings from the
previous problem without changes. Also, delete construction stage 2 if you are reusing the file from problem 4.
In the frame Geometry, input the depth of the ditch as 5,0 m.
Open up the frame Anchors and click on the button Add. For this case, add one anchor row in the
depth of 1,5 m below the top of the wall with anchor spacing at 2,5 m. Also define the length of the anchors
(which has no effect in the Sheeting design program, it is only for visualization) and slope of the anchors (15
degrees).
In frame Stage Settings choose permanent.
Frame Anchors
In the frame Analysis select support at heel. For now, select Wall fixed at heel. Now perform the
analysis.
Frame Analysis Stage of construction 1 (Wall fixed at heel)
39
www.finesoftware.eu
In our case, we need to know the sheet pile embedment depth and also the anchor force. For the wall fixed at
heel, the values are:
Length of construction:
Depth in soil:
5,72 m
Anchor force:
165,77 kN
Maximum moment:
89,16 kNm/ m
128,27 kN / m
10,72 m
Now, perform an analysis for wall hinged at heel (construction stage 2). Then, compare the results
and, depending on comparison, design the embedment depth.
Basic input: Analysis 2
Now, add a new verification in the upper left corner of the frame.
Toolbar: Verification
Select the option Wall hinged at heel and perform the analysis.
Frame Analysis Stage of construction 2 (Wall hinged at heel)
40
www.finesoftware.eu
For the wall hinged at heel, the values are:
Length of construction:
Depth in soil:
2,85 m
Anchor force:
201,68 kN
Maximum moment:
119,35 kNm/ m
69,84 kN / m
7,85 m
The results of analysis

The overall length of the structure should be in the interval of Hfixed Hhinged. For wall fixed at heel is
the length of the structure is longer, but the anchor force is smaller. For wall hinged at heel, it is the opposite, so
larger anchor force and shorter length of the construction. It is the users task to design the dimensions of the
structure.
Conclusion
In our design, we will use pile sheeting VL 503 from steel S 270 with an overall length of 9,0 m,
anchors with size of force 240 kN with anchor spacing of 2,5 m. In the next chapter, we will check this
structure in the program Sheeting check.
Note: The design cannot be taken as the final and it needs to be checked in the Sheeting check program, because
on the real structure there is redistribution of earth pressure due to anchoring.
41
www.finesoftware.eu
Chapter 6. Verification of retaining wall with one anchor row

In this chapter, we will show you how to verify a designed retaining wall with verification of inner stability of
the anchors and overall stability of the structure.
Assignment
Verify the retaining wall that you designed in task 5.
Solution:
For solving this problem, we will use the GEO5 program, Sheeting check. In this text, we will explain
each step to solve this task:
Construction stage 1: excavation of ditch to a depth of 2,0 m + geometry of the wall
Construction stage 2: anchoring of the wall + excavation of ditch to a depth of 5,0 m.

To make our work easier, we can copy the data from the last task, when we designed the wall in the
Sheeting design program by clicking in this program on Edit on the upper toolbar and selecting Copy
data. In Sheeting check program click on Edit and then Paste data. Now we have most of the important
data from the last task copied in to this program, so we dont have to input much of the needed data.
Dialog window Insert data
42
www.finesoftware.eu
In the frame Settings, select again the number 5 Standard EN 1997, DA3. Select the analysis of
depending pressures as Reduce according to analysis settings. Leave the coefficient for minimum
dimensioning pressure as 0,20.
Frame Settings (Analysis of pressures)

Note: the selection Analysis of depending pressures do not reduce allows the analysis of limit pressures
(active and passive) without the reduction of input parameters by partial factors. This is better for estimation of
real behavior of construction. On the other hand, it does not follow EN 1997-1 Standard. (More info in HELP
F1)
Then, open up the frame Modulus k h , and choose the selection analyze Schmitt. This method for
the determination of modulus of subsoil reaction depends on the oedometric modulus and stiffness of the
structure. (More info in HELP F1)
Frame Modulus k h
Note: the modulus of subsoil reaction is an important input when analyzing a structure by the method
of dependent pressures (elasto-plastic nonlinear model). The modulus k h affects the deformation, which is
needed to reach active or passive pressures. (More info in HELP F1)
In the frame Soils enter the following values for each soil type. Poissons ratio and the oedometric modulus
were not entered in the previous program, so they must be entered here.
43
www.finesoftware.eu
Soil Type
Poissons ratio
Oedometric Modulus
Eoed MPa
0,30
21,0
0,35
12,5
0,40
9,5
SF - Sand with trace of fines,

medium dense
SC - Clayey sand, medium dense
CL - Clay with low or medium
plasticity, firm consistency
In the frame Geometry define the parameters of the sheet pile type of wall, section length,
coefficient of pressure reduction below ditch bottom, geometry and material of the construction. From the sheet
pile database, select the VL 503 (500 340 9,7 mm).
Dialog window Edit section
44
www.finesoftware.eu
Now, in the frame Excavation define the first ditch depth 2,50 m for the first construction stage.
Frame Excavation Stage of construction 1

Now, go to frame Analysis. In the left part of the frame, you can see the modulus of subsoil reaction,
in the right section earth pressures and displacement. (For more information, see HELP F1)
Frame Analysis Stage of construction 1
45
www.finesoftware.eu

Add another construction stage as indicated below.
Here we define the anchoring of the wall and
overall excavation. We cannot change the frames Settings, Profile, Modulus Kh, Soils and Geometry,
because these data are the same for all construction stages. We will only change data in the frames Excavation
and Anchors.
In the frame Excavation, change the depth of the ditch to the final depth 5,0 m.
Frame Excavation Stage of construction 2

Then, go to the frame Anchors and click on the button Add. For this structure, we will add a row of
anchors to a depth 1,5 m below the top of the wall (below the surface). Also define other important parameters:
overall length of the Anchor input as 10 m, slope angle as 15 and anchor spacing as 2,5 m. Enter a pre-stress
force equal to 240 kN and the diameter of the anchor.
Frame Anchors Stage of construction 2

46
www.finesoftware.eu
Note: The stiffness of the anchors is taken into account in next stages of construction. Due to the deformation of
construction the forces in anchors are changing. (More info in HELP F1).
We dont change any other input data. Now, perform the analysis to view the maximums of internal
forces and maximum displacement of the anchored structure.
Frame Analysis Stage of construction 2
Frame Analysis (Internal forces) Stage of construction 2
47
www.finesoftware.eu
Frame Analysis construction stage 2 (Deformation and pressure on the structure)
Verification of material and cross section:

Maximum moment behind the construction is 116,03 kN/m
Sheet pile VL 503 (500 340 9,7 mm), quality of steel S 270 GP satisfies.
(Allowable moment = M u 224,0 kN m M max 116,0 kNm m )
Maximum displacement of structure 30,1 mm is also satisfactory.
48
www.finesoftware.eu
Verification of anchor stability

Now, open the frame Internal stability. You can see, that the internal stability of anchors is not satisfactory.
This means, that the anchor could tear from the soil.
Frame Internal stability not satisfactory result (anchor length 7,0 m, k = 0,2)
The reason for this is that the anchor is too short, so in the frame Anchors, change its length to 9,0
meters. This newly designed anchor then satisfies the internal stability requirements.
Frame Internal stability satisfactory result (anchor length 9,0 m, k = 0,2)

49
www.finesoftware.eu
The last needed check is overall stability of the structure. Click on the button External stability. This
will open the Slope stability program. In the frame Analysis click on Analyze. We can now see, that the
slope stability is acceptable. For external stability we consider length of anchor 7,0 m.
Frame External stability
Analysis results - conclusion:

Analysis done:
Bearing capacity of cross section:

51.8 % M u 224,0 kN m M max 116,0 kNm m
SATISFACTORY.
Internal stability: 81,0 %
Fvzd 296,24kN F 240kN
SATISFACTORY.
Overall stability: 84.8 %
Method Bishop (optimization)
SATISFACTORY.
In this case, the designed construction satisfies in all checked parameters.
50
www.finesoftware.eu
Chapter 7. Verification of multi-anchored wall

In this chapter, we are showing how to design and verify a multi-anchored wall.
Assignment
Verify a multi-anchored wall made from steel soldier piles I 400 with a length of 21,0 m. Depth
of the ditch is 15,0 m. The terrain is horizontal. The surcharge acts at the surface and is permanent with
size of 25,0 kN m 2 . The GWT behind the construction is 10,0 m below the surface.
Scheme of the wall anchored in multiple layers

Table with the soil and rock parameters
Soil, rock
(classification)
Profile
m
CL, CI Clay
with low or
medium
0,0 2,0
plasticity,
firm consistency
CS Sandy
clay,
2,0 4,5
firm consistency
R4 (good rock),
4,5 12,0
low strength
R3 (good rock),
12,0
Unit
Weight
kN m 3
Poissons
Ratio

Angle of
internal
friction
ef
Cohesion
of soil
cef kPa
Deformation
modulus
Edef MPa
19,5
20
16
6,0
0,4
19,5
22
14
7,0
0,35
21
27,5
30
40,0
0,3
22
40
100
50,0
0,25
51
www.finesoftware.eu
medium
strength
R5 (poor rock),
very low
strength
R5 (poor rock),
very low
strength
R5 (poor rock),
very low
strength
16,6
16,6
17,4
19
24
20
40,0
0,3
17,4
25,0
21
30
35
55,0
0,25
from 25,0
21
40
100
400,0
0,2
Angle of friction between structure and soil is 7,5 for all layers. Also, the saturated Unit
weight equals the Unit Weight above. Note that the Modulus of deformation is being used for soil
materials.
Table with position and geometry of the anchors

Anchor
no.
Depth
z m
Length
l m
Root
l k m
Slope

Spacing
b m
Anchor force
F kN
1
2
3
4
5
2,5
5,5
8,5
11,0
13,0
19,0
16,5
13,0
10,0
8,0
0,01
0,01
0,01
0,01
0,01
15,0
17,5
20,0
22,5
25,0
4,0
4,0
4,0
4,0
4,0
300,0
350,0
400,0
400,0
400,0
All anchors have a diameter d 32,0 mm , modulus of elasticity E 210,0 GPa . Anchor
spacing is b 4,0 m .
Solution
For solving this task, use the GEO5 program Sheeting Check. The analysis will be performed
in the classical way without reduction of input data so the real behavior of the structure will be
grasped. Internal stability of the anchor system and overall stability will be checked with a safety
factor of 1,5. This solution assumes you have entered the soil types and profiles, and permanent load as
listed above.
52
www.finesoftware.eu
In the frame Settings select option no. 1 Standard safety factors. Then, go to frame
Geometry and input the basic dimensions of the section, and also the coefficient of pressure
reduction below the ditch bottom, which is in this case 0,4.
Dialog window New section
Note. The coefficient of reduction of earth pressures below the excavation reduces the pressures in the
soil. For classical retaining walls this is equal 1,0. For braced sheeting it is less than or equal to one.
It depends on size and spacing of braces (More info in help F1).
Now, we will describe the building of the wall stage by stage. It is necessary to model the task
in stages, to reflect how it will be constructed in reality. In each stage it is necessary to look at values
of internal forces and deformation. If the braced sheeting is not stable in some stage of construction or
if the analyzed deformation is too large, then we need to change structure for example to make the
wall embedment longer, make the ditch shallower, increase the anchor forces etc.
In construction stage 1, the ditch is made to depth of 3,0 m. In the stage 2, anchor is placed at a
depth of 2,5 m. The GWT behind the structure is at a depth of 10,0 m beneath the surface.
53
www.finesoftware.eu
Frame Anchors Construction stage 2

In the 3rd construction stage, the ditch is excavated to a depth of 6,5 m. In the 4th stage, anchor
is placed at a depth of 5,5 m. The GWT is not changed so far.

In the 5th construction stage, the ditch is excavated to a depth of 9,0 m. In the 6th stage, anchor
is placed at the depth of 8,5 m. The depth of GWT is not changed.
54
www.finesoftware.eu

In 7th construction stage, the ditch is excavated to a depth of 11,5 m. In 8th construction stage,
an anchor is placed at the depth of 11,0 m. The GWT in front of the wall is now at a depth of 12,0 m
below the surface. The GWT behind the structure is not changed.

In the 9th construction stage, the ditch is excavated to a depth of 13,5 m. In the 10th stage, an
anchor is placed at the depth of 13 m. The GWT in front of the structure is 15,5 m below the surface.
55
www.finesoftware.eu
In the 11th, and last, construction stage, the ditch is excavated to a depth of 15,0 m. We will not
add new anchors. The GWT in front of the wall is at a depth of 15,5 m. Behind the wall it is at a depth
of 10,0 m.

Note: Due to deformation of the structure the forces in anchors are changing. These changes depend
on the stiffness of the anchors and the deformation of the anchors head. The force can decrease (due
to loss of pre-stress force) or increase. The forces can be pre-stressed in any stage of construction
again to the required force.
56
www.finesoftware.eu
Results of analysis
On the pictures below are the analysis results of the last, 11th construction stage.
Frame Analysis (Kh + pressures) Stage of construction 11
Frame Analysis (Internal forces) Stage of construction 11
57
www.finesoftware.eu
Frame Analysis (Deformation + stresses) Stage of construction 11

All the stages are satisfactorily analyzed that means that the structure is stable and functional
in all stages of the construction. The deformation must also be checked that it is not too large, as well
as that the anchor force does not exceed the bearing capacity of the anchor (The user must check this
as this is not checked by the program Sheeting check).
Maximum displacement of the wall is 28,8 mm, which is satisfactory.
Note: If the program does not find a solution in some of the construction stages, then the data must be
revised e.g. to make the structure longer, make the forces in anchors larger, change the number or
position of anchors, etc.
58
www.finesoftware.eu
Verification of cross-section of the structure

Open the frame Envelopes in the 1st construction stage, where you see the maximum and
minimum values of variables.
237,24 kN m
220,80 kNm m
Frame Envelopes
The bending moment is calculated per one meter (foot) of structure, so we have to calculate the
moment acting on the soldier beam. The spacing of soldier beams in our example is 2,0 m, so the
resulting moment is 220,80 * 2,0 = 441,6 KNm.
Users can perform the verification of cross-section I 400 manually or using another program
such as FIN EC STEEL.
Verification (cross-sections I 400) output from FIN EC STEEL program

59
www.finesoftware.eu
Overall utilization of cross-section: 72,8 %

Verification of bearing capacity:
M y , R 606,582 kNm M max 441,6 kNm
This designed cross-section satisfies analysis criteria.
Note: Dimensioning and verification of concrete and steel walls is not part of the program Sheeting
Check, but is planned for a future version.
Analysis of internal stability

Go to the frame Internal stability in the last construction stage and look at maximum allowable force
in each anchor and the specified safety factor. The minimum safety factor is 1.5.
Frame Internal stability
Note : The verification is done this way. At first we iterate the force in the anchor, resulting in
equilibrium of all forces acting on the earth wedge. This earth wedge is bordered by construction,
terrain, the middle of the roots of anchors and the theoretical heel of structure. If an anchor is not
satisfactory the best way to resolve the issue is to make it longer or decrease the pre-stressed force.
60
www.finesoftware.eu
Verification of external stability

The last required analysis is external stability. The button will automatically open the
program Slope stability, where you perform overall stability analysis.
Program Slope stability
Conclusion
The structure was successfully designed with a maximum deformation of 28,8 mm. This is
satisfactory for this type of construction. Additionally, the limits of forces in anchors were not
exceeded.
Verification of bearing capacity of cross-section SATISFACTORY
Internal stability SATISFACTORY
Anchor nr. 4 (analyzed safety factor):
SFmin 5,31 > SFa 1,50 .
External stability SATISFACORY

Safety factors (Bishop optimization):
SF 2,92 > SFs 1,50 .
The designed sheeting satisfies evaluation criteria.

61
www.finesoftware.eu
Chapter 8. Analysis of slope stability

In this chapter, we are going to show you how to verify the slope stability for critical circular
and polygonal slip surfaces (using its optimization), and the differences between methods of analysis
of slope stability.
Assignment
Perform a slope stability analysis for a designed slope with a gravity wall. This is a permanent
design situation. The required safety factor is SF = 1,50. There is no water in the slope.
Scheme of the assignment

Solution
For solving this problem, we will use the GEO5 program, Slope stability. In this text, we will
explain each step to solve this problem:
Analysis nr. 1: optimization of circular slip surface (Bishop)

Analysis nr. 2: verification of slope stability for all methods
Analysis nr. 3: optimization of polygonal slip surface (Spencer)
Analysis result (conclusion)
62
www.finesoftware.eu
Basic input Analysis 1:

In the frame Settings click on Select and choose option nr. 1 Standard safety factors.

Then model the interface layers, resp. terrain using these coordinates:
Adding interface points

Firstly, in the frame Interface input the coordinate range of the assignment. Depth of deepest
interface point is only for visualization of the example it has no influence on the analysis.
63
www.finesoftware.eu
Then, input the geological profile, define the parameters of soil, and assign them to the profile.

Note: In this analysis, we are verifying the long-term slope stability. Therefore we are solving this task
with effective parameters of slip strength of soils ( ef , cef ). Foliation of soils worse or different
parameters of soil in one direction - are not considered in the assigned soils.
64
www.finesoftware.eu

Soil
MG Gravelly silt,
firm consistency
S-F Sand with trace
of fines, dense soil
MS Sandy silt, stiff
Unit weight
kN m 3
Angle of internal
friction ef
Cohesion of soil
cef kPa
19,0
29,0
8,0
17,5
31,5
0,0
18,0
26,5
16,0
Assigned Soil
Region
1
3
4
Model the gravity wall as a Rigid Body with a unit weight of 23,0 kN m 3 . The slip surface
does not pass through this object because it is an area with large strength. (More info in HELP F1)
In the next step, define a surcharge, which we consider as permanent and strip with its location
on the terrain surface.
Dialog window New surcharges

Note: A surcharge is entered on 1 m of width of the slope. The only exception is concentrated
surcharge, where the program calculates the effect of the load to the analyzed profile. For more
information, see HELP (F1).
65
www.finesoftware.eu
Skip the frames Embankment, Earth cut, Anchors, Reinforcements and Water. The
frame Earthquake has no influence on this analysis, because the slope is not located in seismically
active area.
Then, in the frame Stage settings, select the design situation. In this case, we consider it as
Permanent design situation.

Analysis 1 circular slip surface
Now open up the frame Analysis, where the user enters the initial slip surface using
coordinates of the center ( x, y ) and its radius or using the mouse directly on the desktop by clicking
on the interface to enter three points through which the slip surface passes.
Note: In cohesive soils rotational slip surfaces occur most often. These are modeled using circular slip
surfaces. This surface is used to find critical areas of an analyzed slope. For non-cohesive soils, an
analysis using an polygonal slip surface should be also performed for slope stability verification (see
HELP F1).
Now, select Bishop as the analysis method, and then set type of analysis as Optimization. Then
perform the actual verification by clicking on Analyze.
66
www.finesoftware.eu
Frame Analysis Bishop optimization of circular slip surface

Note: optimization consists in finding the circular slip surface with the smallest stability the critical
slip surface. The optimization of circular slip surfaces in the program Slope stability evaluates the
entire slope, and is very reliable. For different initial slip surfaces, we get the same result for a critical
slip surface
The level of stability defined for critical slip surface when using the Bishop evaluation method is
satisfactory :
SF 1,82 SFs 1,50
SATISFACTORY.
Analysis 2:
Now select another analysis on the toolbar in upper right corner of your Analysis frame in
GEO5.
Toolbar Analysis
In the frame Analysis, change the analysis type to Standard and as method select All
methods. Then click on Analyze.
67
www.finesoftware.eu
Frame Analysis All methods standard type of analysis
Note: Using this procedure, the slip surface made for all methods corresponds to critical slip surface
from the previous analysis scenario using the Bishop method. For better results the user should choose
the method and then perform an optimization of slip surfaces.
The values of the level of slope stability are:
Bishop:
SF 1,82 SFs 1,50
SATISFACTORY.
Fellenius / Petterson:
SF 1,61 SFs 1,50
SATISFACTORY.
Spencer:
SF 1,79 SFs 1,50
SATISFACTORY.
Janbu:
SF 1,80 SFs 1,50
SATISFACTORY.
Morgenstern-Price:
SF 1,80 SFs 1,50
SATISFACTORY.
achuanc:
SF 1,63 SFs 1,50
SATISFACTORY.
Note: the selection of method of analysis depends on experience of the user. The most popular methods
are the method of slices, from which the most used, is the Bishop method. The Bishop method does
yield conservative results.
For reinforced or anchored slopes other rigorous methods (Janbu, Spencer and Morgenstern-Price)
are preferable. These more rigorous methods meet all conditions of balance, and they better describe
real slope behavior.
It is not needed (or correct) to analyze a slope with all methods of analysis. For example, the Swedish
method Fellenius Petterson yields very conservative results, so the safety factors could be
unrealistically low in the result. Because this method is famous and in some countries required for
slope stability analysis, it is a part of GEO5 software.
68
www.finesoftware.eu
Analysis 3 polygonal slip surface

In the last step of analysis, input the polygonal slip surface. As a method of analysis, select
Spencer, as analysis type select optimization, enter a polygonal slip surface and perform the
analysis.
Frame Analysis Spencer optimization of polygonal slip surface

The values of the level of slope stability are:
SF 1,58 SFs 1,50
SATISFACTORY.
Note: Optimization of a polygonal slip surface is gradual and depends on the location of the initial slip
surface. This means that it is good to make several analyses with different initial slip surfaces and with
different numbers of sections. Optimization of polygonal slip surfaces can be also affected by local
minimums of factor of safety. This means the real critical surface does need to be found. Sometimes it
is more efficient for the user to enter the starting polygonal slip surface in a similar shape and place
as an optimized circular slip surface.
69
www.finesoftware.eu
Local minimums
Note: We often get complaints from users that the slip surface after the optimization disappeared.
For non-cohesive soils, where cef 0 kPa the critical slip surface is the same as the most inclined line
of slope surface. In this case, the user should change parameters of the soil or enter restrictions in
which the slip surface cant pass.
Conclusion
The slope stability after optimization is:
Bishop (circular - optimization):
SF 1,82 SFs 1,50
SATISFACTORY.
Spencer (polygonal - optimization):
SF 1,58 SFs 1,50
SATISFACTORY.
This designed slope with a gravity wall satisfies stability requirements.
70
www.finesoftware.eu
Chapter 9. Stability of slope with retaining wall

In this chapter, we are going to describe the stability analysis of an existing slope, then how to model a
sheeting wall being built, and how to check its internal and external stability.
Assignment:
Perform an analysis of an existing slope and then verify the design of an underground wall for
construction of parking areas. When performing the analysis, consider the permanent design situation
in all construction stages. Verify the stability using safety factors. The safety factor needed is
SFs 1,50 . All stability analyses are performed using the Bishop method with optimization of circular
slip surface.
Scheme of assignment
The wall is made from concrete class C 30/37, the thickness of the wall is h 0,5 m . The
calculated shear resistance of the wall is VRd 325 kN m .
Solution:
For solving this task, use the GEO5 program Slope Stability. In this text, we will describe the
solution of this task step by step.
Construction stage 1: slope modeling, determination of safety factor of the existing slope;
Construction stage 2: making the earth cut for the parking (only as a working stage)
Construction stage 3: construction of the wall, analysis of internal and external stability;
71
www.finesoftware.eu
Analysis results (Conclusion).
Construction stage 1: slope modeling

In the frame Settings, click on Select and then choose analysis settings nr. 1 Standard
safety factors.
Then, model the interface of layers, resp. terrain using these coordinates.
Interface coordinates
Note: If data is entered incorrectly, it can be undone using the button UNDO (shortcut Ctrl-Z). In the
same manner, we can use the opposite function REDO (Shortcut Ctrl-Y).
Buttons Undo and Redo
72
www.finesoftware.eu
Then define the soil parameters and assign them to the profile.
Soil
SM Silty sand,
medium dense soil
ML, MI Silt with low or
medium plasticity, stiff
MS Sandy silt,
firm consistency
Unit weight
kN m 3
Angle of internal
friction ef
Cohesion of soil
cef kPa
18,0
29,0
5,0
20,0
21,0
30,0
18,0
26,5
12,0
In the frame Stage settings choose permanent design situation.

Analysis 1 stability of existing slope
Now open up the frame Analysis and run the verification of stability of the original slope. As
a verification method select Bishop and then perform the optimization of circular slip surface. How
to input slip surface and optimization principle is described in more detail in the previous chapter and
in HELP (F1).
73
www.finesoftware.eu
Analysis 1 stability of the original slope

The factor of safety of the original slope as analyzed by Bishop is:
SF 2,26 SFs 1,50
Satisfactory.
Construction stage 2: earth cut modeling

Now add the second construction stage using the button in the upper left corner of the window.
Toolbar Construction stages
Add the earth cut to the interface by adding individual points of the considered earth cut (similar to
adding points to the current interface) in the frame Earth cut. The excavation for the sheeting wall is
0,5 m wide. After you are done with adding the points click on OK.
74
www.finesoftware.eu
Coordinates of the earth cut
Note: If you define two points with same x coordinate (see picture), the program asks if you want to
add the new point to the left or right. The scheme of resulting input of the point is highlighted with red
and green color in the dialog window.
Frame Earth cut
Construction stage 3: construction of the retaining wall

Now design the sheeting wall. In the frame Embankment add the points of the interface of
the embankment. With these we actually model the face of the structure of the wall (see picture).
75
www.finesoftware.eu
The points of embankment
Frame Embankment
Analysis 2 internal stability of retaining wall
To verify the internal stability on the circular slip surface it is necessary to model the
structure as a stiff soil with fictitious cohesion, and not as rigid body. If it is modeled as a rigid body,
the slip surface cannot intersect the structure.
Note: shear resistance of the RC retaining wall is modeled with help of fictitious cohesion, which we
can determine as:
c fict
where: h m
VRd 325,0
650 kPa
h
0,5
width of the wall,

76
www.finesoftware.eu
VRd kN m
shear resistance of the wall.
Now return to the 1st construction stage and add a new soil with name Material of the retaining
wall. Define the value of the fictitious cohesion as cef 650 kPa , the angle of internal friction as a
small value (for example ef 1 ) since the program doesnt allow to input 0. Define the unit weight
as 25 kN m 3 , which corresponds to structure from reinforced concrete.
Analysis 3 slope stability behind the earth cut and retaining wall (internal stability)
The analysis results of internal stability show that the slope with the earth cut and the retaining
wall is stable:
SF 1,60 SFs 1,50
Satisfactory.
Analysis 3 external stability of retaining wall

Now add another analysis using toolbar in the left downward corner of the program.
Toolbar More Analyses
77
www.finesoftware.eu
Before running the analysis of the external slope stability, add restrictions on the optimization
procedure using lines that the slip surface cant intersect when it executes the optimization procedure
(More info in HELP F1). In our example the restriction lines are the same as the borders of the pile
sheeting.
Analysis 4 - restrictions on the optimization procedure

Note: for analysis of external slope stability it is appropriate to input the retaining wall as a solid
body. When the wall is modeled as a solid body, the slip surface doesnt intersect it during the
optimization evaluation.
78
www.finesoftware.eu
Analysis 4 slope stability with earth cut and retaining wall (external stability)
From the results of external stability we can see, that the slope with the earth cut and retaining
wall is stable:
Conclusion
The objective of this chapter was to verify the slope stability and design of earth cut with
retaining wall for the construction of a car park with analysis of internal and external stability. The
results of analyses are:
This slope with earth cut and retaining wall from concrete (with width of 0,5 m) in terms of long-term
stability satisfies evaluation criteria.
Note: this designed retaining wall would need to be checked for stress from the bending moment of
loading from active earth pressure. This bending moment can be analyzed in the GEO5 programs
Sheeting design and Sheeting Check.
For the same bending moment it is also necessary to design and check reinforcements for example in
program FIN EC Concrete 2D.
79
www.finesoftware.eu
Chapter 10. Design of geometry of spread footing

In this chapter, we are going to show you how to design spread footing easily and effectively.
Assignment:
Using EN 1997-1 (EC 7-1, DA1) standards, design the dimensions of a concentric spread footing.
Forces from columns act on the top of foundation. Input forces are: N , H x , H y , M x , M y . The terrain behind
the structure is horizontal; foundation soil consists of S-F Sand with trace of fines, medium dense soil. At 6,0
m is Slightly weathered slate. The GWT is also at a depth of 6,0 m. The depth of foundation is 2,5 m below the
original terrain.
Scheme of the assignment analysis of bearing capacity of spread footing

Solution
For solving this problem, we will use the GEO5 program Spread footing. Firstly, we input all the data
in each frame, except Geometry. In the Geometry frame, we will then design the spread footing.
Basic input
In the frame Settings, click on Select and then choose nr. 3 Standard EN 1997 DA1.
80
www.finesoftware.eu
Frame Settings list

Also select an analysis method in this case Analysis for drained conditions. We will not analyze
settlement.
Frame Settings
Note: Usually, spread footings are analyzed for drained conditions= using the effective parameters of soil
( ef , cef ). Analysis for undrained conditions is performed for cohesive soils and short-term performance using
total parameters of soil ( u , cu ). According to EN 1997 total friction considered is always u 0 .
In the next step enter the geological profile, soil parameters and assign them to the profile.
Table with the soil parameter

Cohesion
of soil
Soil, rock
Profile
Unit weight
(classification)
kN m 3
S-F Sand with trace of

fines, medium dense soil
0,0 6,0
17,5
29,5
0,0
Slightly weathered slate
from 6,0
22,5
23,0
50,0
Angle of internal
friction ef
cef kPa
81
www.finesoftware.eu
In the next step, open up the frame Foundation. As a type of foundation, choose Centric spread footing and
fill in the dimensions such as depth from the original grade, depth of footing bottom, thickness of foundation
and inclination of finished grade. Also, input the weight of overburden, which is the backfill of spread footing
after construction.
Frame Foundation
Note: The depth of the footing bottom depends on many different factors such as natural and climatic factors,
hydrogeology of the construction site and geological conditions. In the Czech Republic the depth of footing
bottom is recommended to be at least 0,8 meters beneath the surface due to freezing. For clays it is
recommended that the depth be greater, such as 1,6 meters. When analyzing the bearing capacity of a
foundation, the depth of the foundation is considered as the minimal vertical distance between the footing
bottom and the finished grade.
In the frame Load enter the forces and moments acting on the upper part of foundation: N , H x , H y , M x , M y .
These values we obtained from a structural analysis program and we can import them to our analysis by clicking
on Import.
Frame Load
Note: For design of dimensions of spread footing, generally the design load is the deciding load. , However, in
this case we are using the analysis settings EN 1997-1 - DA1, and you must enter the value of service load too,
because the analysis requires two design combinations.
82
www.finesoftware.eu
Dialog window Edit load

In the frame Material, input the material characteristics of the foundation.
Skip the frame Surcharge, as there is no surcharge near the foundation.
Note: Surcharge around the foundation influences the analysis for settlement and rotation of the foundation,
but not bearing capacity. In the case of vertical bearing capacity it always acts favorably and no theoretical
knowledge leads us to analyze this influence.
In the frame Water enter the ground water depth as 6,0 meters.
We are not going to enter a sand gravel bed because we are considering permeable cohesionless soil at
the of footing bottom.
Then open up the frame Stage settings and select permanent as the design situation.
Design of dimensions of the foundation
Now, open the frame Geometry and apply the function Dimensions design; with which the program
determines the minimum required dimensions of the foundation. These dimensions can be edited later.
In the dialog window it is possible to input the bearing capacity of foundation soil Rd or select
Analyze. We will choose Analyze for now. The program automatically analyzes the foundation weight and
weight of soil below foundation and determines the minimum dimensions of the foundation.
83
www.finesoftware.eu
Dialog window Foundation dimensions design

Note: Design of centric and eccentric spread footing is always performed such that that the dimensions of
foundation are as small as they can be and still maintain an adequate vertical bearing capacity. The option
Input designs the dimensions of a spread footing based on the entered bearing capacity of the foundation
soil.
We can verify the design in the frame Bearing cap..
Frame Bearing capacity
Vertical bearing capacity: 97,7 %
Rd 545.22 532.59 [kPa] SATISFACTORY.
Conclusion:
The bearing capacity of designed foundation (2,0x2,0 m) is satisfactory.
84
www.finesoftware.eu
Chapter 11. Settlement of spread footing

In this chapter, we describe how analysis of settlement and rotation of a spread footing is performed.
Assignment:
Analyze the settlement of centric spread footing designed in last chapter (10. Design of
dimensions of spread footing). The geometry of the structure, load, geological profile and soils are the
same as in the last chapter. Perform the settlement analysis using the oedometric modulus, and
consider the structural strength of soil. Analyze the foundation in terms of limit states of
serviceability. For a structurally indeterminate concrete structure, of which the spread footing is a part,
the limiting settlement is: sm,lim 60,0 mm.
Scheme of the assignment analysis of settlement of spread footing

Solution:
For solving this task, we will use the GEO5 program Spread footing. We will use the data
from the last chapter, where almost all required data is already entered.
85
www.finesoftware.eu
Basic Input:
The design of spread footing in the last task was performed using the standard EN 1997, DA1.
Eurocodes do not order any theory for the analysis of settlement, so any common settlement theory can
be used. Check the setting in the frame Settings by clicking on Edit. In the tab Settlement select
the method Analysis using oedometric modulus and set Restriction of influence zone to based on
structural strength.
Dialog window Edit current settings
Note: The structural strength represents the resistance of a soil against deformation from a load. It is
only used in Czech and Slovak Republic. In other countries, the restriction of the influence zone is
described by percentage of Initial in-situ stress. Recommended values of structural strength are from
CSN 73 1001 standards (Foundation soil below the foundation)
In the next step, define the parameters of soils for settlement analysis. We need to edit each soil
and add values for Poissons ratio, coefficient of structural strength and oedometric modulus, resp.
deformation modulus.
86
www.finesoftware.eu

Soil, rock
(classification)
Unit
weight
kN m 3
S-F Sand with

trace of fines,
medium dense soil
Slightly weathered
slate
Angle of Coeff. of
Deformation Poissons
internal structural
modulus
ratio
friction Strength
Edef MPa

ef
m
17,5
29,5
0,3
15,5
0,3
22,5
23,0
0,3
500,0
0,25
Analysis:
Now, run the analysis in the frame Settlement. Settlement is always analyzed for service
load.
87
www.finesoftware.eu
Frame Settlement
In the frame Settlement it is also needed to input other parameters:

-
Initial in-situ stress in the footing bottom is considered from the finished grade
Note: the value of in-situ stress in the footing bottom has influence on the amount of settlement and the
depth of influence zone a larger initial in-situ stress means less settlement. The option of in-situ
stress acting on the footing bottom depends on the time the footing bottom is open. If the footing
bottom is open for a longer period of time, the soil compaction will be less and it is not possible to
consider the original stress conditions of the soil.
-
In Reduction coefficient to compute settlement, select the option Consider foundation thickness
effect (1).
Note: the coefficient 1 reflects the influence of the depth of the foundation and gives more realistic
results of the settlement
Results of analysis
The final settlement of the structure is 16,9 mm. Within an analysis of limit states of
serviceability we compare the values of the analyzed settlement with limit values, which are
permissible for the structure.
Note: The stiffness of structure (soil-foundation) has a major influence on the settlement. This stiffness
is described by the coefficient k if k is greater then 1, the foundation is considered to be stiff and
settlement is calculated under a characteristic point (located in 0,37l or 0,37b from the center of the
foundation, where l and b are dimensions of foundation). If coefficient k is lower then 1, the settlement
is calculated under the center of foundation.
-
Analyzed stiffness of foundation in direction is k 137,10 . The settlement is computed under

the characteristic point of foundation.
Note : Informative values of allowable settlement for different kinds of structures can be found in
various standards for example CSN EN 1997-1 (2006) Design of geotechnical structures.
88
www.finesoftware.eu
The Spread footing program also provides results for the rotation of the foundation, which is analyzed
from the difference of settlement of centers of each edge.
Rotation of the foundation principle of the analysis

Rotation in direction x : 0,75 (tan1000)
Rotation in direction y : 1,776 (tan1000)
Conclusion
This spread footing in terms of settlement satisfies evaluation criteria.
Settlement: s m,lim 60,0 s 16,9 [mm].
It is not necessary to verify rotation of this foundation.
89
www.finesoftware.eu
Chapter 12. Analysis of consolidation under embankment

In this chapter, we are going to explain how to analyze consolidation under a constructed
embankment.
Introduction:
Soil consolidation takes into account the settlement time (calculation of earth deformation)
under the effect of external (constant or variable) loads. The surcharge leads to an increase in earth
formation stress and the gradual extrusion of water from pores, i.e. soil consolidation. Primary
consolidation corresponds to the situation in which there is a complete dissipation of pore pressures in
soil, secondary consolidation affects rheological processes in the soil skeleton (the so called "creep
effect"). This is a time-dependent process influenced by a number of factors (e.g. soil permeability
and compressibility, length of drainage paths, etc.). With regards to the degree of consolidation we
distinguish the following cases of ground settlement:
final settlement corresponding to 100% consolidation from the respective surcharge
partial settlement corresponding to a particular degree of consolidation from the respective
surcharge
Assignment:
Determine the settlement value under the centre of an embankment constructed
on impermeable clay one year and ten years after its construction. Make the analysis using CSN 73
1001 standards (using oedometric modulus), limit of influence zone consider using coefficient of
structure strength.
Scheme of the assignment consolidation
90
www.finesoftware.eu
Solution:
The GEO 5 Settlement program will be used to solve this task. We are going to model this
example step by step:
1st construction stage interface modeling, calculation of the initial geostatic stress.
2nd construction stage adding a surcharge by means of an embankment.
3rd up to 5th construction stages calculation of embankment consolidation at various time
intervals (according to the assignment).
Evaluation of results (conclusion).
Basic assignment (procedure): Stage 1
Check the "Perform consolidation analysis" field in the "Settings" frame. Then select specific
settings for calculation of the settlement from "Settings list". This setting describes the analysis method
for calculation of the settlement and restriction of influence zone.
Frame "Settings"
Note: This calculation considers the so called primary consolidation (dissipation of pore pressure).
Secondary settlement (creep), which may occur mainly with non-consolidated and organic soils, is not
solved within this example.
Then we enter the layer interface. The objective is to select two layers between which
the consolidation takes place.
91
www.finesoftware.eu
Frame "Interface"
Note: If there is a homogeneous soil, then in order to calculate the consolidation, it is necessary to
enter a fictitious layer (use the same parameters for the two soil layers that are separated by the
original interface), preferably at the depth of the deformation zone.
Then we define the "Incompressible subsoil" (IS) (at a depth of 10 m) by means of entering
coordinates similarly to interface modeling. No settlement takes place under the IS.
The soil parameters are entered in the next step. For soils being consolidated, it is required to
specify either the coefficient of permeability " k " or the coefficient of consolidation " c v ".
Approximate values can be found in HELP (F1).
Dialog window "Modification of soil parameters"

92
www.finesoftware.eu

Unit weight
kN m 3
Poissons
Ratio

Clayey soil
18,5
Embankment
Sandy silt
Soil
Oedometric
modulus
Eoed MPa
Coeff. of
structural
strength
m
Coeff. of
permeability
k m day
0,3
1,0
0,1
1,0 10 5
20,0
0,30
30,0
0,3
1,0 10 2
19,5
0,30
30,0
0,3
1,0 10 2
Then we assign the soils to the profile. The frame surcharge in the 1st construction stage
is not taken into consideration, since in this example it will be represented by the actual embankment
body (in stages 2 to 5). In the next step, we shall enter the ground water table (hereinafter the "GWT")
using the interface points, in our case at ground level.
In the frame Stage settings, you can only modify layout and refinement of holes, so leave the
standard settings.
The first "Calculation" stage represents the initial geostatic stress at the initial construction
time. However, it is necessary to specify the basic boundary conditions for the consolidation
calculation in further stages. The top and bottom interface of the consolidating soil is entered, as well
as the direction of water flow from this layer i.e. the drainage path.
93
www.finesoftware.eu
"Analysis" Construction stage 1

Note: If you enter "Incompressible subsoil", you shall then consider the direction of flow of water from
the consolidating soil only upwards
Basic assignment (procedure): Stages 2 to 5
Let's now move to the 2nd construction stage by tool bar at the top left of the desktop.
Toolbar Construction stage

We define the embankment itself by entering coordinates. A specific soil type is assigned to the
embankment.
"Stage 2 Embankment interface points"
94
www.finesoftware.eu
"Stage 2 Embankment + Assignment"
Note: The embankment acts as a surcharge to the original ground surface. It is assumed that a wellexecuted (optimally compacted) embankment theoretically does not settle. In a practice, settlement
may occur (poor compaction, soil creep effect), but the program Settlement does not address this.
In the "Analysis" frame enter the time duration of the 2nd stage corresponding to the actual
embankment construction time. The actual calculation of the settlement cannot be performed yet
because, when determining consolidation, it is first necessary to know the whole history of the
earthwork structure loading, i.e. all construction stages.
Frame "Analysis Construction Stage 2"

95
www.finesoftware.eu
Since the embankment is built gradually, we are considering the linear load growth in the 2nd
construction stage. In subsequent stages, the duration of the stage is entered (1 year i.e. 365 days 3rd
stage, 10 years i.e. 3,650 days 4th stage and the overall settlement 5th stage) and the whole
loading is introduced at the beginning of the stage.
The calculations are performed after enter the last construction stage, which is on the "Overall
settlement", is turned on (you can check it at any stage apart from the first one).
Frame "Calculation Construction Stage 5"
Analysis results
Upon the calculation of the overall settlement, we can observe partial consolidation values
below the centre of the embankment. We have obtained the following maximum settlement values in
individual construction stages:
Stage 1: only geostatic stress settlement not calculated.

Stage 2 (surcharge by embankment): for 30 days 29.2 mm
Stage 3 (unchanged): for 365 days 113.7 mm
Stage 4 (unchanged): for 3,650 days 311.7 mm
Stage 5: the overall settlement 351.2 mm
96
www.finesoftware.eu
"Analysis Construction stage 5 (Overall settlement)"
As we are interested in the embankment settlement after its construction, we will switch to the
results view in the 3rd and 4th stages (the button "Values") to "compared to stage 2" which subtracts
the respective settlement value.
97
www.finesoftware.eu
"Analysis Settlement (differences compared to previous stages)"
Conclusion:
The embankment settlement (under its centre) within one year from its construction is 84.5 mm
(= 113.7 29.2) and after ten years 282.5 mm (= 311.7 29.2).
98
www.finesoftware.eu

Geo5 Engineering Manuals

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Geo5 Engineering Manuals

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Eng

Engineering manuals for GEO5 programs

Context help explains the functions of the program in detail

Engineering manuals explain how concrete engineering problems are solved

Chapter 1. Analysis settings and settings administrator

Scheme of the gravity wall for analysis

Frame Geometry input of dimensions of the gravity wal

Table with the soil parameters

Dialog window Settings list

Frame Verification results of the analysis using CSN 73 0037 standard

Dialog window Settings list

Frame Verification results of analysis for EN 1997, DA1

Dialog window Edit current settings: Gravity wall

Frame Verification analysis results for SF = 1.6

Dialog window Add current settings to the Administrator

Dialog window Settings list then looks like this

Dialog window Settings list

5) Safety factor on SF=1.6

The analysis is satisfactory using the selected analysis standards.

Chapter 2. Design of Cantilever wall

Scheme of the cantilever wall - Assignment

Dialog window Settings list

In the frame Material enter the material of the wall.

Frame Material Input of material characteristics of the structure

Dialog window Add new soils

Table with the soil parameters

S-F Sand with trace of

MS Sandy silt, stiff

In the frame Terrain choose the horizontal terrain shape.

Dialog window New surcharge

Frame Stage settings

M vzd 208,33 M kl 109,97 [kNm/m]

H vzd 65,78 H pos 81,94

Use better soil behind the wall

Anchor the base

Increase the friction by bowing the footing bottom

Anchor the stem

Change of the design: change of the geometry of the wall

Frame Geometry (Changing dimensions of cantilever wall)

Frame Bearing capacity

Slope stability program

Conclusion/ Result of analysis bearing capacity:

M vzd 218,52 M kl 108,16 [kNm/m]

Bearing capacity: 86,3

Wall stem check: 78,7 %

M Rd 169,92 M Ed 133,71 [kNm]

Overall stability: 40,8 %

Method Bishop (optimization)

H vzd 99,27 H pos 64,47

This cantilever wall is SATISFACTORY.

Chapter 3. Verification of gravity wall

Scheme of the gravity wall assignment

Basic input: Stage 1

Dialog window Settings list

Dialog window Add new soils

Dialog window Edit surcharge

Frame Front face resistance

Frame Stage settings

Frame Verification stage 1

Dialog window Verification (in detail)

Program Slope stability stage 1

Analysis results: Stage 1

Engineering manuals for GEO5 programs

M vzd 376,91 M kl 263,73 [kNm/m]