Review of seismic performance of geosynthetic reinforced soil retaining wallS

• Type: Article in International Conference Proceedings Book
• Date: 2017

Authors

Castorina Silva Vieira (Author) FEUP

Conference proceedings International

Title: COMPDYN 2017 - Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Computational Methods in Structural Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering

Pages: 1058-1070

6th International Conference on Computational Methods in Structural Dynamics and Earthquake Engineering, COMPDYN 2017

15 June 2017 through 17 June 2017

Indexing

Scopus - 1 Citation

Other information

Authenticus ID: P-00N-PBC

DOI: 10.7712/120117.5476.18026

Abstract (EN): Geosynthetic reinforced soil (GRS) retaining walls have been increasingly used as alternative to concrete gravity retaining walls. In GRS retaining walls, the concrete mass, that resist to the destabilizing forces, is replaced by a mass of soil reinforced with geogrids or other polymeric material. One of the main advantages of GRS retaining walls is their lower cost when compared to concrete retaining walls. Furthermore, GRS retaining walls built in seismically active area have performed well during major earthquakes. The seismic design of GRS retaining structures is traditionally based on Mononobe-Okabe earth pressure theory with distinct approaches for the distribution of the dynamic lateral earth pressures. The lack of improvement in seismic design of GRS retaining walls has led in recent years to some physical and numerical studies, involving large or reduced scale model shaking table tests and powerful numerical tools. This paper presents a review of selected published work, including physical and numerical models, trying to identify the main parameters with greatest influence on the seismic performance of GRS retaining walls. The paper is focused on numerical simulations verified against results physical model tests. Post-earthquake investigations are also summarized. The main conclusions are highlighted and common trends are identified.

Language: English

Type (Professor's evaluation): Scientific

No. of pages: 13