ANALYSIS OF

RETAINING WALL
ON SAP2000
SUBMITTED TO- S U B M I T T E D BY-
D R. S H I L PA PA L SHUBHAM SINGH 13/ICE/046
P R O B I R M A N DA L S I R S A N J E E V G A U TA M 1 3 / I C E / 0 3 7
S I D D H A RT H D E V 1 3 / I C E / 0 5 0
RA N JA N RA J 1 3 / I C E / 0 3 2
M O H I T T R I PAT H I 1 3 / I C E / 0 2 3
CONTENTS
1. WHAT IS RETAINING WALL ITS PARTS AND ITS TYPES.
2. MODES CONSIDERED IN DESIGN OF RETAINING WALL.
3. VARIOUS FAILURES AND HENCE DESIGN CONSIDERATION FOR THEM.
4. RESEARCH PAPER.
5. DESIGN RETAINING WALL USING CONVENTIONAL METHOD.
6. RESULTS COMPARISON BETWEEN RESEARCH PAPER AND OUR VALUES.
7. DESIGN PICS OF RETAINING WALL ON SAP2000
8. FUTURE WORK
 What is a Retaining wall?
A retaining wall is a structure that holds or
retains soil behind it and is used for
maintaining the ground surfaces at different
elevations on either side of it.
There are many types of materials that can be
used to create retaining walls like concrete
blocks, poured concrete, treated timbers, rocks
or boulders
Retaining walls provide lateral support to
vertical slopes of soil. They retain soil which
would otherwise collapse into a more natural
shape. The retained soil is referred to as
backfill.
Parts of Retaining walls
 Types of Retaining walls
On the basis of shape & mode of resisting pressure due to
backfill.
1. Gravity retaining wall
2. Semi-Gravity retaining wall
3. Cantilever retaining wall
4. Counter Fort Retaining wall
 3. CANTILEVERED RETAINING
1. GRAVITY RETAINING
WALLS
WALL
The Cantilever wall is the
The gravity wall most common type of
resists the earths retaining structure and is
pressure exerted by generally economical for
backfill by its own self heights up to about 8m
weight (dead load).
It is usually built in The structure consists of
stone masonry, and vertical stem , and a base
occasionally in plain slab, made up of two distinct
concrete regions, viz., a heel slab and a
toe slab.

2. SEMI GRAVITY RETAINING 4. COUNTERFORT RETAINING WALLS

WALLS
Semi-gravity walls resist
The bending moments
external forces by the
combined action of self can be considerably
weight, weight of soil above reduced by introducing
footing and the flexural transverse supports,
resistance of the wall called counter-forts.
components
Reinforcements are
provided to resist moments
generated by backfill
materials.
Modes Considered in Design of
Retaining walls

Sliding Failure
There are Overturning Failure
3 types Bearing capacity Failure
of mode
1. SLIDING FAILURE
2. OVERTURNING FAILURE
3. BEARING CAPACITY FAILURE
RESEARCH PAPER
Stability Enhancement of Cantilever Earth Retaining Wall with and without Pressure
Relief Shelf by Soft Computing Technique. (17 December 2016) by KEERTHI GOWDA

ABSTRACT
In the present study a cantilever earth retaining wall of 4m height is considered to
analysis for its optimum parameters.
Many limitations are there while designing a cantilever earth retaining wall for its
optimum characteristics by manual approach. Such as, iterative process during
analysis and usage of complex equations in design step.
Hence, here an attempt is made to analyse cantilever earth retaining wall with and
without pressure relief shelf by using commercially available finite element
packages (SAP-2000).
Results are much adoptable than manual analysis.
 By providing shelf Quantity of construction material such as concrete and steel
is reduced by 35% and 18 %.
Deciding the optimum position of pressure relief shelf by manual approach is
highly complicated and tedious job, here it is achieved by using finite element
software package effectively.

Here,
Ka = co-efficient of active earth pressure,
= angle of internal friction of the backfill,
= unit weight of soil (backfill),
H = height of the retaining wall,
b = width of pressure relief shelf and
t= thickness of pressure relief shelf.
UTILIZATION OF SAP-2000 FOR THE ANALYSIS
TABLE-1 Geometry of Retaining wall
Structural Elements Dimensions
Height of retaining wall 4.0 m
Width of toe slab 0.9m
Width of heel slab 1.2m
Width of wall at top 0.2m
Width of wall at bottom 0.3m
Thickness of footing slab 0.3m
Depth of the structure below the 1.0 m
ground

PREPAIRED MODEL ON SAP2000-

Table 2- Soil parameters
Parameters Units
Unit weight of soil 18 kN/m3
Angle of internal friction 30
Safe bearing capacity 100 kN/m2
Coefficient of friction between soil and 0.5
concrete

Case study
1. Design of a T-shaped cantilever retaining wall for an earth embankment of 3 m height
(above ground level) is considered as a case study to perform the comparative analysis of
stability of cantilever earth retaining wall.

2. M25 concrete and Fe 415 reinforcing bars are used during the analysis and design task.
 DESIGN CONSIDERATION FOR SLIDING FAILURE
Sliding failure is nothing but sliding of wall away from backfill when there is shearing failure at the base
of wall.

The Factor of safety against sliding is,

< 1.5

where,
= coefficient of friction = tan

= vertical & horizontal components of

resultant R of weight of wall & earth pressure
DESIGN CONSIDERATION FOR OVERTURNING FAILURE
Overturning failure is rotation of wall about its toe due to exceeding of
moment caused due to overturning forces to resisting forces.
The Factor of safety against overturning is given by,

< 2.0 3.0

where,
= sum of resisting moment about toe

= sum of overturning moment about toe

DESIGN CONSIDERATION FOR BEARING CAPACITY FAILURE
The pressure exerted by resultant vertical force at toe of wall must no exceed
the allowable bearing capacity of the soil.

The pressure distribution is assumed to be linear.

The maximum pressure is given by,

The Factor of safety against bearing failure is,

< 3.0
where,
= allowable bearing pressure
RESULTS
S.NO DESCRIPTION CONVENTIONAL OUR CONVENTIONAL
METHOD METHOD
1 MOMENT IN WALL 53.31 KN-M 64 KN-M
2 FACTOR OF SAFETY AGAINST 1.26 1.166
SLIDING
3 FACTOR OF SAFETY AGAINST 2.97 2.945
OVERTURNING
4 FACTOR OF SAFETY AGAINST - 1.23
BEARING FAILURE
5 ECCENTRICITY 0.16m 0.2m
6 Pmax 70.61 KN/m2 80.87 KN/m2
7 Pmin 30.26 KN/m2 27 KN/m2
DESIGN OF RETAINING WALL ON SAP2000
RETAINING WALL DEVIDED INTO ELEMENTS
 FUTURE WORK
Design and Analysis of Retaining wall with and without
Shelf using SAP 2000
Analysis of Shelf at different height of stem wall and
their effect on design moments.
Comparison of manual and software calculation
Deviation of manual calculation with respect to software
calculation.
Conclusion of the above results.
THANK YOU..