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 loads on retaining & basement walls using IBC

Seismic loads on retaining & basement walls using IBC

Seismic loads on retaining & basement walls using IBC

The International Building Code (IBC) requires a seismic loading on all retaining walls. A common method of calculating the lateral soil pressure created by seismic activity against “yielding walls”, is the Mononobe-Okabe Method, and the Wood (1973) method, as presented in "Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering" by Steven L. Kramer, for the non-yielding walls.  Within this method, there is a coefficient “kh” that modifies the force generated by the weight of the soil failure wedge behind the wall.  "kh" is equivalent to the design spectral response acceleration, which ranges from the 0.2 sec period (SDS) to the 1.0 sec period (SD1). The value of “kh” makes a huge difference in the magnitude of the lateral force on the wall. Does anyone know if previous Seismic codes addressed whether to use the SDS or SD1 factor?

RE: Seismic loads on retaining & basement walls using IBC

I've been trying to figure out the same thing, and the only thing I have found is that many people have ignored seismic loads on retaining walls for many years. I certainly don't agree.

RE: Seismic loads on retaining & basement walls using IBC

IBC is not adopted in my area currently; however, I believe there is a code provision which states that a seismic force due to soil be considered if the basement wall is retaining more than 12 feet.  this implied that seismic force due to soil may be ignored for retained soil less than 12 feet.  i do not know the reasons why.

typically, the seismic force due to retained soil are available in a geotechnical report for a given site.

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


White Paper - PLM and ERP: Their Respective Roles in Modern Manufacturing
Leading manufacturers are aligning their people, processes, and tools from initial product ideation through to field service. They do so by providing access to product and enterprise data in the context of each person’s domain expertise. However, it can be complicated and costly to unite engineering with the factory and supply chain. 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