Embedded Walls - Passive Increase for Close Spacing
Embedded Walls - Passive Increase for Close Spacing
(OP)
Can you / would you / should you increase the passive pressure to account for the "surcharge" soil load when you have embedded walls which are facing eachother with a close spacing (i.e. 2 cantilever walls bracing opposite sides of an excavation)?
See here:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/65240332/Eng-T...
See here:
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/65240332/Eng-T...





RE: Embedded Walls - Passive Increase for Close Spacing
Also look at DM 7.02 manual for checks on piping, basal heave and rotational failure.
http://www.soilstructure.com/
RE: Embedded Walls - Passive Increase for Close Spacing
I was think of a situation where this is temporary shoring and either a case where there are no braces or before braces are installed and you have 2 cantilevered walls. Lets also assume that the soil on one side is not going to be removed (maybe its a case where the shoring will be left in place. It seems that the closer the walls are together, the greater the contribution of the soil being retained on the opposite side will have. I mean it seems that there has to be some benefit to this soil as it would add weight to the passive soil wedge (assuming that it is on top of the passive soil wedge). However maybe there is no good way to quantify it.
Thanks again.
EIT
www.HowToEngineer.com
RE: Embedded Walls - Passive Increase for Close Spacing
RE: Embedded Walls - Passive Increase for Close Spacing
EIT
www.HowToEngineer.com
RE: Embedded Walls - Passive Increase for Close Spacing
www.PeirceEngineering.com