Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here


seismic active pressure or At rest pressure?

seismic active pressure or At rest pressure?

seismic active pressure or At rest pressure?

I request a discussion on analysis of retaining walls and box kind of RC structures embedded in soil for seismic loading. Here are some points I ponder.

1) Some friends suggest Mononabe Okabe seismic active pressures while others say simply use Ko

2)If Mononabe Okabes active seismic pressures can be used in box type underground structures, is it correct to apply same pressures on two walls on opposite faces.

Merry Xmas and A Prosperous 2002 to all pals here. Its been a great year with you friends.

RE: seismic active pressure or At rest pressure?

This has been discussed a little in a previous thread.  You may want to use the search option for "underground structures" and "seismic".  However, for you IJR, I will repeat part of my response to that inquiry and hopefully address yours as well.

At rest lateral earth pressure will be larger than the rankine or coulomb active pressure however it is a "rule of thumb" treatment of the actual exercise.  Of course, for dynamic considerations the inertia of the wall and soil mass must be included in the analysis.

Mononobe-Okabe (MO) is a psuedostatic method based largely on coulomb's active earth pressure theory.  Therefore it is not technically accurate for non-yielding walls but is a good approximation of typical free-standing retaining walls.  Another distinction here is the application of the equilvalent lateral force, which is is applied at mid-height of a rectangular shaped pressure diagram rather than at the third point of a triangular shaped pressure diagram.

For walls that are non-yeilding or as in the case of a box culvert or similar structure it can be assumed that coulomb's and rankine's active earth pressures cannot be developed and the wall pressures may be obtained from the elastic solution for the case of a uniform, constant, horizontal acceleration applied throughout the soil.  Thus your coefficient is really a(h)/g as opposed to Ka.  Where a(h) is the horizontal acceleration coefficient.  And the 1/2 quantity which arises from triangular distribution is now 1.0 for rectangular distribution.

However, there are other concerns with these underground applications that must be discussed for a complete analysis.  More focus needs to be placed on displacement based concerns rather than force based concerns as above.  Of course, this goes beyond whether the wall yields but what really happens when one section of the box displaces out-of-phase with another section etc.

For a more complete discussion I refer you to Soil Dynamics by Shamsher Prakash.

RE: seismic active pressure or At rest pressure?

A very good discussion by Qshake. I will add a star and priny out this post for reference.  It is also a very good question, requiring more thought than is usually given to the subject.

The use of Active, Passive and At Rest forces are usually 'overused' and more rigorous methods should be used. In the old days (slide rules, original PC), the computations were restricted but, with the new PC, use the best you can.  

Please note that Active, Passive and At Rest forces are not seismic forces. Also the concept of displacement (as noted by Qshake) presents a very different picture.

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members! Already a Member? Login


eBook - Rethink Your PLM
A lot has changed since the 90s. You don't surf the Web using dial-up anymore, so why are you still using a legacy PLM solution that's blocking your ability to innovate? To develop and launch products today, you need a flexible, cloud-based PLM, not a solution that's stuck in the past. Download Now
White Paper - Using Virtualization for IVI and AUTOSAR Consolidation on an ECU
Current approaches used to tackle the complexities of a vehicle’s electrical and electronics (E/E) architecture are both cost prohibitive and lacking in performance. Utilizing virtualization in automotive software architecture provides a better approach. This can be achieved by encapsulating different heterogeneous automotive platforms inside virtual machines running on the same hardware. Download Now

Close Box

Join Eng-Tips® Today!

Join your peers on the Internet's largest technical engineering professional community.
It's easy to join and it's free.

Here's Why Members Love Eng-Tips Forums:

Register now while it's still free!

Already a member? Close this window and log in.

Join Us             Close