DESIGN OF RETAINING WALL ( THAPAR, DERABASSI )

Design Data 1 Height of Earth to be Retained 2 Angle of Repose, 3 Coeff. Of Friction b/w Soil & Concrete, 4 Gross Safe Bearing Capacityof Soil 5 Unit Weight of soil, s 6 Depth of Foundation 7 P.C.C Below Footing 8 Surcharge Angle, 9 Earth Pressure Coeff., Active 10 Earth Pressure Coeff., Passive 11 Total Height of Retaining Wall Material Used Concrete Grade Steel Grade Unit Weight of R.C.C Section of Retaining Wall Thickness of Base Slab Length of Base Slab, B Length of Heel Slab Stem Thickness Height of Wall Above Base Slab, h Stability Checks S.No 1 2 3 4 Designation Force,KN Weight of Soil above Heal (W1) Weight of Stem (W2) Weight of Base Slab (W3) Pa 1.65 30 0.52 0.45 UNITS m DEGREE RADIANS REF. TABLE 1
2

Table-1 Soil Coarse Grained (no silt) Coarse Grained (silt) Silt Sound Rock 0.55 0.45 0.35 0.6

170 kN/m 3 18 kN/m 0.90 m 0.075 m 0 DEGREE 0.33 3.0 2.48 m M 25 Fe 500
3 25 kN/m

0.275 1.5 1.27 0.23

m m m m

2.20 m Table-2 Dis. from Heel,m Moment,KNm 0.64 31.94 1.39 17.52 0.75 7.73 0.83 15.16

50.292 12.650 10.313 18.377

Total (W) 73.25 * Note Passive Earth Pressure Not Consireded. 0.99 m Dis. Of Point of Application of Resultant Force from Heel end, Z Eccentricity e=Z-B/2 0.24 < B/6 = 0.250 Eccentricity less then B/6, so there is no uplifting, Hence Safe Extreme Earth Pressure at the Base, W/B(16e/B) Minimum Pressure Maximum Pressure Maximum Pressure less than SBC hence safe Check for Overturn Resisting Moment about Toe, Mr Overturning Moment about Toe, Mo Factor of Safety against Overturning, 0.9*Mr/Mo Factor of Safety greater than 1.4 hence safe Check for Sliding Resisting Force Due to Overlying Weight, W Sliding Force, Pa (Active Pressure Force) Coefficient of Sliding Friction, Fs Factor of Safety greater then 1.4 hence safe
2 2.41 kN/m 2 95.26 kN/m

72.351

37.53 KNm 15.161 KNm 2.227945

32.96453 KN 18.38 KN 1.61 KN

Design of Vertical Stem Height of Cantilever above Base, h B.M at Base Bending Moment (Factored), Mu Clear Cover Effective Depth, deff 1 Chech for Depth Depth Required from B.M Depth Required is less than Depth Provided hence OK 2 Calculation of Steel Mu/bd2 Required Percentage of Steel Ast Required Diameter of Bar Area of Bar Required Spacing of Provide 3 10 Dia Bars mm Dia Bars @ 60.615 mm 2.200 8.451 12.676 50 180 m KNm/m KNm/m mm mm

0.391 0.094% 169.2 mm /m 10 mm

2 78.54 mm 464 mm 300 mm 2 276 mm /m 8 mm 2 50.27 mm 182 mm 250 mm 2

(FROM SP-16 )

10

C/C C/C

Required Distribution Steel: Diameter of Bar Area of Bar Required Spacing of Provide 8 Dia Bars mm Dia Bars @

C/C C/C near each face

Calculation of Steel at Outer Face Provide min. % of Steel at Outer Face Required Percentage of Steel Ast Required Diameter of Bar Area of Bar Required Spacing of Provide 10 Dia Bars mm Dia Bars @

0.12%
2 216 mm /m 10 mm 2 78.54 mm 364 mm 300 mm

10

C/C C/C

Design of Base Slab

Pressure at outer face of Stem Pressure at the junction of Heel and Stem B.M Calculations per meter width: Crictical Section : Stem Heel junction Load Due to Upward Pressure Positive iii) Positive iv) Downward Weight Negative DL Heel Slab Soil Net Moment Magnitude, N Distance from c, m 0.635 0.42 0.635 0.635 Moment About c, KNm 1.94 21.13 -5.54 -31.94 -14.40 14.40 21.60 0.05 0.225 0.427 0.11%
2 252 mm 10 mm 2 78.54 mm 311.7 mm 150 mm 2 330 mm /m 10 mm 2 78.54 mm 238.00 mm 200 mm 2 95.263245 kN/m 2 81.03 kN/m

3.060 49.92 -8.731 -50.292

Net Moment Bending Moment (Factored), Mu Clear Cover Effective Depth, deff Mu/bd
2

KNm KNm m m

HOGGING

Required Percentage of Steel, p Ast Required Diameter of Bar Required Spacing of Provide DISTRIBUTION STEEL: Diameter of Bar Required Spacing of Provide Area of Bar 10 Dia Bars 10 Dia Bars @ Area of Bar 10 Dia Bars 10 Dia Bars @

C/C C/C

C/C C/C

(AT BOT.)

PROVISION OF PILES UNDER RETAINING BASE Site Condition at the Location of Boundary Wall is such that the Adjoining Land is lowlying and Regular Erosion of Soil Takes place specifically during rains. In an earlier event the same retaining wall had fallen as the soil below the retaining foundation had eroded thereby leading to overturning of the wall. So it is proposed to provided piles under the base so that in an event of erosion of soil under the footing shall not render the retaining unsafe and leading to failure Design Basis for selection of pile configuration Minimum Pressure under Base = Maximum Pressure under Base = Average Pressure under Base = Width of Base Footing Force / Metre under Retaining Wall 2.41 kN/m2 95.26 kN/m2 49 kN/m2 1.5 m 73.2545 kN/m

Adopt a Pile Footing of Dia 300 mm ( Single Underreamed) and length of 4 m Capacity of Pile ( Table 1 : IS 2911, Part 3 ) ( Compression ) Capacity of Pile ( Table 1 : IS 2911, Part 3 ) ( Uplift ) 18.3 Ton

9.75 Ton

Pile Arrangement suggested is Alternate Pile Under Stem and Heel so as to achieve minimum pile distance of 3 times the dia for fully effective pile capacity in group within given footing width Since Settlement under Stem Side can lead to Uplifting on Heel Side, Average Pile Value of Compession and Uplift has been used for Design to be on Conservative Side Average Capacity of Pile Required Spacing of Pile 14.025 Ton 1.91 m

Provide Piles at a spacing of 1.625 m alternatively on Heel & Stem Side

Regular ad fallen

e footing