Professional Documents
Culture Documents
F. Tatsuoka; Department of Civil Engineering, University of Tokyo M. Tateyama; Railway Technical Research Institute Y. Tamura ; Integrated Geotechnology Institute Ltd & H. Yamauchi; Penta-Ocean Construction Co.
ABSTRACT
1) Geosynthetic-reinforced soil RWs having a full-height rigid facing have been constructed; - for a total wall length of more than 35 km in Japan; and - as permanent important railway and highway soil retaining structures.
Geogrid
2) Staged construction;
- the wall is first constructed with a help of gabions filled with crushed gravel; and
ORAINAGE
SANDBAG GEOTEXTILE
1) BASE CONCRETE
5) LAYING COMPLETED
Sand backfill
2) Staged construction;
- the wall is first constructed with a help of gabions filled with crushed gravel; and - then full-height rigid facing is cast-in-place on the wrappedaround wall.
ORAINAGE SANDBAG GEOTEXTILE
1) BASE CONCRETE
5) LAYING COMPLETED
GRS-RWs having a full-height rigid facing constructed by the staged construction procedure
- now supporting railway and highway embankments for a length more than 35 km;
- have become one of the standard wall construction procedures for railways, replacing the conventional procedures; and -no problematic case reported since its introduction.
Locations of major GRS-RWs with a full-height rigid facing constructed by the staged construction procedure (as of April 2000).
BACKGROUND
History of elevated railway and highway structures in Japan;
Gentle slope
could be unstable; could be too deformable; and occupies too large space.
Some cases
(no piles)
2) Full-height rigid facing makes GRSRWs; -stable & rigid (in particular, against load applied on the top of facing or the crest of wall); -durable; and -aesthetically acceptable. equivalent to RC cantilever retaining structures. (to continue)
1) BASE CONCRET E
5) LAYING COMPLET ED
Reinforced-soil RWs with a full height rigid facing: continuous beams with a number of supports
Wall height: H
Shear load S proportional to H2 Moment : proportional to H3 Conventional type RWs become less cost-effective as H becomes larger, exceeding about 5 m. This is the particular the case in RWs on slopes in mountain areas.
Load equilibrium along the potential failure plane that develops in the unreinforced backfill.
Active earth pressure is resisted by the tensile force developed in the reinforcement at each height of backfill. The role of reinforcement is the same with the conventional wall structure in resisting the earth pressure. but, no large shear load and moment activated at the base of wall structure, because the reinforced soil RW is not a cantilever structure . Then, facing is not necessary ?
Reinforced-soil RWs
The active zone may fail without adequate facing.
Load equilibrium at the facing: The earth pressure acting the back face of the facing confines the backfill, making the backfill stable. The earth pressure is resisted by the connection force of the reinforcement As a continuous beam with many supports, a) Very small shear force and moment working inside the facing structure, making the facing structure much simpler than the wall structure of conventional type RWs. b) Very small shear load and moment at the bas of the facing structure: The shear load and moment does not increase proportionally to the wall height (H). a pile file foundation becomes unnecessary.
Role of facing structure in stabilising the active zone and in developing high tensile force in the reinforcement
Tensile force in case with facing Development of tensile force in the reinforcement connected to facing. Tensile force in case without facing
Damaged conventional type RWs (1995): Gravity type and cantilever RC without a pile foundation
Tie rod
6.4m
3.2m
5m
2500
Applied load (Tie rod tension), P (kN)
1 1a
11 8 5 4 76
11a 12 14
17 15
3 2 16a 10 16 18
500 0
13
(There is no data on broken lines)
Compression Compression Tie rod of abutment of pier tension (mm) (mm) (kN)
The first train in service. The traffic load is about 400kN (40tf).
0 -5
0 -2 Preloading PLPS Pier -4 0.25mm/year -6 -8 -10 Abutment -12 (without PLPS) -14 0 10 20 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
Increasing the seismic stability by preloading and prestressing: with and without a ratchet system
(continued)
3) Full-height rigid facing makes 5. cantilever RC retaining wall GRS-RWs; (a) stable and rigid enough even with relatively short reinforcement; advantageous when reconstructing an existing gentle slope to a vertical wall.
(b)
6.backfilling 3.excavation
2. anchor
4.wall construction
3.excavation
GRS-RWs
Abutment
Chuo-Lines
Abutment
11k390m(B-B) 75,000
- One of the most critical and challenging case histories, started 1995 and completed in the beginning of 2000.
Section A-A (11k300m) 11k300m 11k300m
2750 5420 3910
3940
5850
Chuo-Lines
Radish Anchor
4770 5050
N-value
(continued)
3) Full-height rigid facing makes 5. cantilever RC retaining wall GRS-RWs; (a) stable and rigid enough even with relatively short reinforcement; advantageous when reconstructing an existing gentle slope to a vertical wall.
6.backfilling 3.excavation
2. anchor
4.wall construction
The use of inferior on-site soil, such as sand including a large amount of fines and even a nearly saturated clay, becomes possible with a help of, for example, a composite geosynthetic having a drainage function of non-woven geotextile component and a high tensile stiffness of woven geotextile component.
3.excavation
- started early 1980's by; small-scale static loading and shaking table tests in the laboratory; numerical analysis by LEM & FEM; and full-scale failure tests in the field, since 1982.
-Large deformation already during construction and also for a long period after construction, particularly by heavy rainfalls.
b) The wrapping geotextile could not effectively restrain the deformation of flat wall face.
c) Compressive failure behind the wall face proceeded towards deeper places.
The reinforced soil zone above the bottom soil layer settled down and displaced outward as a monolith, creating a shear zone between the reinforced and unreinforced zones.
- Despite its low stiffness of the non-woven geotextile reinforcement, the reinforced clay walls performed very well for the first year.
- To bring the walls to failure, 70 m3 of water (= 900 mm precipitation) was supplied from a pond on the crest for eight days in October 1985.
Pond made on the crest of Chiba No. 2 embankment and cracks developed by water supply from the pond.
Lessons from the failure: 1) Although gabions were filled with the clay backfill (i.e., Kanto loam), their use at the shoulder of each soil layer was very effective for; - a good compaction of backfill; and - confining the soil near the wall face, maintaining a high soil strength. In the later actual construction projects, gabions are filled with gravel for a much better functioning, not losing costeffectiveness.
2) Major cause for the wall deformation by the artificial rainfall test; - the decrease in the suction; and - the increase in the positive pore water pressure. Effects of pore water pressure should be considered in the stability analysis.
Cross-section exposed at its demolishing; - lines 1 & 2; critical failure surfaces by the limit equilibrium stability analysis without and with taking into account the pore pressure in cracks.
- R & L: total deformation by the rainfall test. - Ra; deformation only in the last day of the rainfall test. - K; similar data for Kami-Onda embankment.
The safety factors for all these three failure modes should be examined in design.
4) Despite the use of so-called very extensible reinforcement (i.e., a non-woven geotextile), no failure plane and tension cracks in the reinforced zones, as with Chiba No. 1 test embankment.
5)
Practically no creep deformation of the walls after the rainfall test in the second year (1985) : - due to effects of rainfall as preloading.
6.1m
2) Facing of relatively small discrete panels; - not rigid enough; and - very difficult to compact soil immediately behind the facing and to achieve a good wall face alignment.
12.2m
3) Wall constructed by staged construction; - behaved well; and - much better construction efficiency than with discrete panel facing. Even nearly saturated clay can be used as the backfill when reinforced having a proper drainage function and a tensile rigidity, together with a proper rigid facing. But, 1) a 8 cm-thick shotcrete layer was not rigid enough to keep the wall face deformation small, and 2) shotcrete facing may not be aesthetically acceptable.
-Clay backfill (Kanto loam); wi= 120 - 130 %; Sr= 90 %; and d= 0.55 - 0.60 g/cm3. Three types of reinforcement; section a): a non-woven geotextile, as used for the other embankments; section b): a grid sandwiched between two gravel drainage layers; and section c): a composite consisting of non-woven/woven geotextiles.
36.0 7.5 1 3 2 3 2 3 1 13.5
a (C) (T)
6.9
UNIT:m
- A very good and similar performance of the three sections for a long duration, reconfirming thatthe facing type could be much more important than the stiffness of reinforcement for the stability of reinforced soil retaining wall.
7.5 1 3 2 3 36.0 2 3 1 13.5
a (C) (T)
UNIT:m
6.9
ORAINAGE
1) BASE CONCRET E
5) LAYING COMPLET ED
d (T) c (C)
f (T) e
Loading test of No. 1 to failure after very stable behaviour for about two years:
1) Segment h, having a discrete panel facing; - most deformable and weakest, not relevant to permanent important structures.
- The current design method; the minimum allowable reinforcement length is equal to or longer than the smaller value of; a) 1.5 m; and b) 35 % of the wall height, on the premise that the wall stability is examined by a proper stability analysis.
3) Failure at the construction joint in the unreinforced facing controlled the yielding of the test wall segments f and d (No. 1 embankment).
The facing used for prototype GRS-RWs is lightly steelreinforced to withstand the design earth pressure, which is equal to the active earth pressure when the backfill soil is not reinforced.
4) Two-wedge failure mode in wall segment h Even with so-called extensible reinforcement, the development of failure plane in a reinforced zone is very difficult !
rigid facing discrete panel facing footing toe
wall height=5m
Loading test to failure of JR No. 2 clay wall after very stable behaviour for about two years:
1) Stronger when loaded on the crest close to the wall face due to the effects of reinforcement.
2) When properly reinforced, a clay wall is not very weak, compararable with a sand wall !
3) Gabions as a buffer for the relative settlement between the rigid facing and the backfill soil; - preventing damage to the connection between the facing and the reinforcement.
facing
b)
a)
CONCLUDING REMARK-1 Wrapped-around walls are generally too deformable, particularly when the wall face is finished flat, to be used as permanent important structures allowing a limited amount of deformation.
CONCLUDING REMARK-1 Wrapped-around walls are generally too deformable, particularly when the wall face is finished flat, to be used as permanent important structures allowing a limited amount of deformation.
A rigid facing, in particular a full-height continuous rigid facing to which reinforcements are fixed, helps in increasing the stability of wall and in decreasing the deformation of wall.
CONCLUDING REMARK-2
The construction of sufficiently stable and rigid clay walls as permanent important structures is quite feasible by reinforcing the backfill with a proper composite geotextile having a sufficiently high drainage function and a tensile rigidity and by using a fullheight rigid facing.
CONCLUDING REMARK-2
The construction of sufficiently stable and rigid clay walls as permanent important structures is quite feasible by reinforcing the backfill with a proper composite geotextile having a sufficiently high drainage function and a tensile rigidity and by using a fullheight rigid facing. In the design of GRS-RWs having clay backfill, due consideration of drainage and consolidation of clay soil layers between geosynthetic reinforcement layers is essential.
CONCLUDING REMARK-3 A number of prototype GRS-RWs have been constructed for a total wall length being about 35 km by the staged procedure for the last decade in Japan.
ORAINAGE SANDBAG GEOT EXT ILE
1) BASE CONCRET E
5) LAYING COMPLET ED