Cover Image

Not for Sale



View/Hide Left Panel
Click for next page ( R2


The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page R1
NATIONAL NCHRP REPORT 611 COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM Seismic Analysis and Design of Retaining Walls, Buried Structures, Slopes, and Embankments

OCR for page R1
TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD 2008 EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE* OFFICERS CHAIR: Debra L. Miller, Secretary, Kansas DOT, Topeka VICE CHAIR: Adib K. Kanafani, Cahill Professor of Civil Engineering, University of California, Berkeley EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: Robert E. Skinner, Jr., Transportation Research Board MEMBERS J. Barry Barker, Executive Director, Transit Authority of River City, Louisville, KY Allen D. Biehler, Secretary, Pennsylvania DOT, Harrisburg John D. Bowe, President, Americas Region, APL Limited, Oakland, CA Larry L. Brown, Sr., Executive Director, Mississippi DOT, Jackson Deborah H. Butler, Executive Vice President, Planning, and CIO, Norfolk Southern Corporation, Norfolk, VA William A.V. Clark, Professor, Department of Geography, University of California, Los Angeles David S. Ekern, Commissioner, Virginia DOT, Richmond Nicholas J. Garber, Henry L. Kinnier Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Virginia, Charlottesville Jeffrey W. Hamiel, Executive Director, Metropolitan Airports Commission, Minneapolis, MN Edward A. (Ned) Helme, President, Center for Clean Air Policy, Washington, DC Will Kempton, Director, California DOT, Sacramento Susan Martinovich, Director, Nevada DOT, Carson City Michael D. Meyer, Professor, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta Michael R. Morris, Director of Transportation, North Central Texas Council of Governments, Arlington Neil J. Pedersen, Administrator, Maryland State Highway Administration, Baltimore Pete K. Rahn, Director, Missouri DOT, Jefferson City Sandra Rosenbloom, Professor of Planning, University of Arizona, Tucson Tracy L. Rosser, Vice President, Corporate Traffic, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Bentonville, AR Rosa Clausell Rountree, Executive Director, Georgia State Road and Tollway Authority, Atlanta Henry G. (Gerry) Schwartz, Jr., Chairman (retired), Jacobs/Sverdrup Civil, Inc., St. Louis, MO C. Michael Walton, Ernest H. Cockrell Centennial Chair in Engineering, University of Texas, Austin Linda S. Watson, CEO, LYNXCentral Florida Regional Transportation Authority, Orlando Steve Williams, Chairman and CEO, Maverick Transportation, Inc., Little Rock, AR EX OFFICIO MEMBERS Thad Allen (Adm., U.S. Coast Guard), Commandant, U.S. Coast Guard, Washington, DC Joseph H. Boardman, Federal Railroad Administrator, U.S.DOT Rebecca M. Brewster, President and COO, American Transportation Research Institute, Smyrna, GA Paul R. Brubaker, Research and Innovative Technology Administrator, U.S.DOT George Bugliarello, President Emeritus and University Professor, Polytechnic Institute of New York University, Brooklyn; Foreign Secretary, National Academy of Engineering, Washington, DC Sean T. Connaughton, Maritime Administrator, U.S.DOT LeRoy Gishi, Chief, Division of Transportation, Bureau of Indian Affairs, U.S. Department of the Interior, Washington, DC Edward R. Hamberger, President and CEO, Association of American Railroads, Washington, DC John H. Hill, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administrator, U.S.DOT John C. Horsley, Executive Director, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, DC Carl T. Johnson, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administrator, U.S.DOT J. Edward Johnson, Director, Applied Science Directorate, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, John C. Stennis Space Center, MS David Kelly, Acting Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, U.S.DOT Thomas J. Madison, Jr., Administrator, Federal Highway Administration, U.S.DOT William W. Millar, President, American Public Transportation Association, Washington, DC James S. Simpson, Federal Transit Administrator, U.S.DOT Robert A. Sturgell, Acting Administrator, Federal Aviation Administration, U.S.DOT Robert L. Van Antwerp (Lt. Gen., U.S. Army), Chief of Engineers and Commanding General, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Washington, DC *Membership as of November 2008.

OCR for page R1
NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM NCHRP REPORT 611 Seismic Analysis and Design of Retaining Walls, Buried Structures, Slopes, and Embankments Donald G. Anderson CH2M HILL Bellevue, WA Geoffrey R. Martin UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA Los Angeles, CA Ignatius (Po) Lam EARTH MECHANICS, INC. Fountain Valley, CA J. N. (Joe) Wang PARSONS BRINCKERHOFF INC. New York, NY Subject Areas Bridges, Other Structures, and Hydraulics and Hydrology Research sponsored by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials in cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD WASHINGTON, D.C. 2008 www.TRB.org

OCR for page R1
NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY NCHRP REPORT 611 RESEARCH PROGRAM Systematic, well-designed research provides the most effective Project 12-70 approach to the solution of many problems facing highway ISSN 0077-5614 administrators and engineers. Often, highway problems are of local ISBN: 978-0-309-11765-4 interest and can best be studied by highway departments individually Library of Congress Control Number 2008911003 or in cooperation with their state universities and others. However, the 2008 Transportation Research Board accelerating growth of highway transportation develops increasingly complex problems of wide interest to highway authorities. These problems are best studied through a coordinated program of COPYRIGHT PERMISSION cooperative research. Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and for obtaining In recognition of these needs, the highway administrators of the written permissions from publishers or persons who own the copyright to any previously American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials published or copyrighted material used herein. initiated in 1962 an objective national highway research program Cooperative Research Programs (CRP) grants permission to reproduce material in this employing modern scientific techniques. This program is supported on publication for classroom and not-for-profit purposes. Permission is given with the understanding that none of the material will be used to imply TRB, AASHTO, FAA, FHWA, a continuing basis by funds from participating member states of the FMCSA, FTA, or Transit Development Corporation endorsement of a particular product, Association and it receives the full cooperation and support of the method, or practice. It is expected that those reproducing the material in this document for Federal Highway Administration, United States Department of educational and not-for-profit uses will give appropriate acknowledgment of the source of any reprinted or reproduced material. For other uses of the material, request permission Transportation. from CRP. The Transportation Research Board of the National Academies was requested by the Association to administer the research program because of the Board's recognized objectivity and understanding of NOTICE modern research practices. The Board is uniquely suited for this purpose as it maintains an extensive committee structure from which The project that is the subject of this report was a part of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program conducted by the Transportation Research Board with the approval of authorities on any highway transportation subject may be drawn; it the Governing Board of the National Research Council. Such approval reflects the possesses avenues of communications and cooperation with federal, Governing Board's judgment that the program concerned is of national importance and state and local governmental agencies, universities, and industry; its appropriate with respect to both the purposes and resources of the National Research Council. relationship to the National Research Council is an insurance of The members of the technical committee selected to monitor this project and to review this objectivity; it maintains a full-time research correlation staff of report were chosen for recognized scholarly competence and with due consideration for the specialists in highway transportation matters to bring the findings of balance of disciplines appropriate to the project. The opinions and conclusions expressed research directly to those who are in a position to use them. or implied are those of the research agency that performed the research, and, while they have been accepted as appropriate by the technical committee, they are not necessarily those of The program is developed on the basis of research needs identified the Transportation Research Board, the National Research Council, the American by chief administrators of the highway and transportation departments Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, or the Federal Highway and by committees of AASHTO. Each year, specific areas of research Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation. needs to be included in the program are proposed to the National Each report is reviewed and accepted for publication by the technical committee according Research Council and the Board by the American Association of State to procedures established and monitored by the Transportation Research Board Executive Committee and the Governing Board of the National Research Council. Highway and Transportation Officials. Research projects to fulfill these needs are defined by the Board, and qualified research agencies are The Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, the National Research Council, the Federal Highway Administration, the American Association of State Highway selected from those that have submitted proposals. Administration and and Transportation Officials, and the individual states participating in the National surveillance of research contracts are the responsibilities of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade Research Council and the Transportation Research Board. or manufacturers' names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of this report. The needs for highway research are many, and the National Cooperative Highway Research Program can make significant contributions to the solution of highway transportation problems of mutual concern to many responsible groups. The program, however, is intended to complement rather than to substitute for or duplicate other highway research programs. Published reports of the NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM are available from: Transportation Research Board Business Office 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 and can be ordered through the Internet at: http://www.national-academies.org/trb/bookstore Printed in the United States of America

OCR for page R1

OCR for page R1
COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAMS CRP STAFF FOR NCHRP REPORT 611 Christopher W. Jenks, Director, Cooperative Research Programs Crawford F. Jencks, Deputy Director, Cooperative Research Programs David B. Beal, Senior Program Officer Eileen P. Delaney, Director of Publications Margaret B. Hagood, Editor NCHRP PROJECT 12-70 PANEL Field of Design--Area of Bridges Harry A. Capers, Jr., Arora and Associates, P.C., Lawrenceville, NJ (Chair) Darrin Beckett, Kentucky Transportation Cabinet, Frankfort, KY Donald Dwyer, New York State DOT, Albany, NY Ian M. Friedland, Federal Highway Administration, McLean, VA Michael G. Katona, Gig Harbor, WA Scott M. Olson, University of IllinoisUrbana-Champaign, Urbana, IL M. "Saiid" Saiidi, University of NevadaReno, Reno, NV Anoosh Shamsabadi, California DOT, Irvine, CA Munindra Talukdar, Washington State DOT, Tumwater, WA Jerry A. DiMaggio, FHWA Liaison G. P. Jayaprakash, TRB Liaison AUTHOR ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Work for the NCHRP 12-70 Project was carried out by a Project Team led by CH2M HILL of Bellevue, Washington, with major support from Earth Mechanics, Inc. of Fountain Valley, California and Parsons Brinckerhoff Inc. of New York City, New York. Leadership for the Project Team was provided by the fol- lowing individuals: Dr. Donald Anderson, P.E. from CH2M HILL in Bellevue, Washington, who was the project manager for the work; Professor Geoffrey R. Martin, P.E. from the University of Southern Cali- fornia, who served as a Principal Investigator; Mr. Ignatius (Po) Lam, P.E. from Earth Mechanics, who served as another Principal Investigator; and Dr. J.N. (Joe) Wang, P.E. from Parsons Brinckerhoff, who also served as a principal investigator. The Project included a Technical Advisory Panel that provided technical input to the Project at various points during the project duration. The panel members included: Professor Robert Holtz, P.E. from the University of Washington; Dr. Lee Marsh, P.E. from Berger ABAM in Federal Way, Washington; Profes- sor Edward Kavazanjian, P.E. from Arizona State University; and Professor Tom O'Rourke, P.E. from Cor- nell University A number of other individuals provided important input to the project, including Mr. Tony Allen, P.E., Chief Geotechnical Engineer with the Washington State Department of Transportation, and Dr. Anoosh Shamsabadi, P.E, structural research engineer with the California Department of Transportation (Cal- trans). The practical feedback from both individuals was particularly helpful. Mr. Amir Zand and Dr. Hubert Law from Earth Mechanics also provided major support by conducting analyses and assisting with the development of example problems.

OCR for page R1
FOREWORD By David B. Beal Staff Officer Transportation Research Board This report provides analytical and design methods for the seismic design of retaining walls, buried structures, slopes, and embankments. The report details the development of the design procedures. Recommended LRFD specifications and design examples illustrat- ing the application of the design methods and specifications are included in an Appendix. The material in this report will be of immediate interest to roadway and bridge designers. A comprehensive load and resistance factor design (LRFD) specification for the seismic design of highway bridges has been developed by AASHTO. Those specifications reflect the latest bridge design philosophies for achieving high levels of seismic performance. Because these specifications are limited to highway bridges and components that are directly at- tached to them, such as abutments and wing walls, they do not address new or improved analytical methods or seismic design provisions for retaining walls, buried structures, slopes, or embankments. The objective of NCHRP Project 12-70 was to remove the limitations of the current spec- ifications through the development of analytical and design methods for the seismic design of retaining walls, buried structures, slopes, and embankments. This research was managed by Donald Anderson, CH2M HILL, Bellevue, Washington, with the assistance of Geoffrey Martin, University of Southern California; Po Lam, Earth Mechanics; and Joe Wang, Parson Brinckerhoff, New York. The report fully documents the program used to develop the design procedures. The Final Report is organized into two volumes. Volume 1 is published here as NCHRP Report 611. Volume 2 is available at the TRB website at http://trb.org/news/blurb_detail. asp?id=9631.

OCR for page R1
CONTENTS VOLUME 1 Final Report 1 Chapter 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Overall Project Objectives, Approach, and Schedule 2 1.2 Project Background 2 1.2.1 Plans for Implementing the LRFD Design Methodology 4 1.2.2 Overview of Conclusions from Initial Phase of Work 5 1.2.3 Overview of Conclusions from Second Phase of Work 7 1.2.4 Overview of Conclusions from Third Phase of Work 8 1.3 Organization of Final Report 8 1.3.1 Volume 1--Final Project Report 9 1.3.2 Volume 2--Recommended Specifications, Commentaries, and Example Problems 10 Chapter 2 Data Collection and Review 10 2.1 Earthquake Design Basis 11 2.2 Literature Search 12 2.2.1 Key References 14 2.2.2 General Observations 15 2.3 DOT, Vendor, and Consultant Contacts 17 2.4 Conclusions 18 Chapter 3 Problems and Knowledge Gaps 18 3.1 Retaining Walls 18 3.1.1 Gravity and Semi-Gravity Walls 21 3.1.2 MSE Retaining Walls 22 3.1.3 Soil Nail Walls 22 3.2 Slopes and Embankments 22 3.2.1 Seismic Considerations for Soil Slopes 23 3.2.2 Seismic Considerations for Rock Slopes 24 3.3 Buried Structures 25 3.4 Conclusions 26 Chapter 4 Work Plan: Analytical Methodologies 26 4.1 Developments for Seismic Ground Motions 28 4.2 Developments for Retaining Walls 28 4.2.1 Generalized Limit Equilibrium Analyses 29 4.2.2 Wall Height-Dependent Seismic Coefficient 30 4.2.3 Deformation Analyses 30 4.3 Developments for Slopes and Embankments 31 4.4 Developments for Buried Structures 31 4.4.1 Analysis Procedures for TGD 33 4.4.2 Analysis Procedures for Permanent Ground Deformations (PGD) 33 4.5 Summary

OCR for page R1
35 Chapter 5 Seismic Ground Motions 35 5.1 Seismic Loading Criteria 35 5.1.1 Update to AASHTO Seismic Ground Motion Criteria 38 5.1.2 Range of Ground Shaking Levels in the United States for Referenced Soft Rock 39 5.1.3 Variation in Spectral Shapes for Soil and Rock Sites in WUS versus CEUS 41 5.2 Newmark Displacement Correlations 41 5.2.1 Approach for Updating Newmark Charts 41 5.2.2 Description of Ground Motion Database 42 5.2.3 Permanent Displacement Data 42 5.2.4 Microsoft Access Database 43 5.2.5 Spectral Acceleration Characteristics 43 5.2.6 Correlation between PGV and S1, PGA and M 43 5.2.7 Newmark Sliding Block Displacement Correlations 46 5.2.8 Comparison Between Correlations 48 5.2.9 Confidence Level 49 5.2.10 Design Recommendations 49 5.3 Correlation of PGV with S1 54 5.4 Conclusions 55 Chapter 6 Height-Dependent Seismic Coefficients 55 6.1 Wave Scattering Evaluations 55 6.1.1 Scattering Analyses for a Slope 63 6.1.2 Scattering Analyses for Retaining Walls 66 6.2 Conclusions 68 Chapter 7 Retaining Walls 68 7.1 Current Design Practice 71 7.2 The M-O Method and Limitations 71 7.2.1 Seismic Active Earth Pressures 73 7.2.2 Seismic Passive Earth Pressures 74 7.3 M-O Earth Pressures for Cohesive Soils 74 7.3.1 Evaluation of the Contribution from Cohesion 74 7.3.2 Results of M-O Analyses for Soils with Cohesion 75 7.3.3 Implication to Design 76 7.4 GLE Approach for Determining Seismic Active Pressures 76 7.5 Height-Dependent Seismic Design Coefficients 77 7.5.1 Evaluation of Impedance Contrasts and Soil Behavior 79 7.5.2 Results of Impedance Contrast and Nonlinearity Evaluations 81 7.6 Displacement-Based Design for Gravity, Semi Gravity, and MSE Walls 82 7.7 Conventional Gravity and Semi-Gravity Walls--Recommended Design Method for External Stability 84 7.8 MSE Walls--Recommended Design Methods 84 7.8.1 Current Design Methodology 84 7.8.2 MSE Walls--Design Method for External Stability 87 7.8.3 MSE Walls--Design Method for Internal Stability 88 7.9 Other Wall Types 88 7.9.1 Nongravity Cantilevered Walls 91 7.9.2 Anchored Walls 93 7.9.3 Soil Nail Walls 94 7.10 Conclusions

OCR for page R1
96 Chapter 8 Slopes and Embankments 96 8.1 Types and Performance of Slopes 96 8.1.1 Engineered Slopes and Embankments 97 8.1.2 Natural Slopes 97 8.2 Current Practice 97 8.2.1 Limit Equilibrium Approach 99 8.2.2 Displacement-Based Approach 100 8.3 Proposed Design Methodology 101 8.3.1 Limit Equilibrium Approach 101 8.3.2 Displacement-Based Approach 101 8.4 Example Application 101 8.4.1 Problem Description 102 8.4.2 Results 102 8.5 Other Considerations 102 8.5.1 Limit Equilibrium Design Methods 103 8.5.2 No Analysis Cut-off 103 8.5.3 Liquefaction Potential 104 8.6 Conclusions 105 Chapter 9 Buried Structures 105 9.1 Seismic Performance of Culverts and Pipelines 105 9.2 Culvert/Pipe Characteristics 106 9.2.1 Flexible Culverts and Pipes 106 9.2.2 Rigid Culverts and Pipes 106 9.3 General Effects of Earthquakes and Potential Failure Modes 107 9.3.1 Ground Shaking 108 9.3.2 Ground Failure 108 9.4 Current Seismic Design Practice for Culverts or Other Buried Structures 109 9.5 General Methodology and Recommended Procedures 109 9.5.1 Ovaling of Circular Conduits 113 9.5.2 Racking of Rectangular Conduits 115 9.6 Parametric and Verification Analysis 115 9.6.1 Types of Structures and Other Parameters Used in Evaluation 115 9.6.2 Model Assumptions and Results 129 9.7 Conclusions and Recommendations 131 Chapter 10 Recommendations for Future Work 131 10.1 Ground Motions and Displacements 131 10.2 Retaining Walls 132 10.3 Slopes and Embankments 133 10.4 Buried Structures 133 10.5 Need for Confirming Methods 134 References 137 Appendices