33 vues

Transféré par Bouraida El Yamouni

w

- Tugas Mk Prinsip & Desain Penelitian Dalam Geoteknik
- Open Pit Stabiliti-report
- Evaluation of Slope Stability by Numerical Methods
- Geotechnical or Geomechanical
- mine_engineering_rock_mechanics_wp.ppt
- Numerical Modeling of an l – Shaped Very Stiff Concrete Retaining Wall
- Chapter 7
- Study on Dam Slope Stability Under the Condition of Rainfall
- UFC 3-220-10N Soil Mechanics (06-08-2005)
- EM 1110-2-1902 - Slope Stability
- Micro Piles
- Sohail
- Artificial Neural Networks and Grey Systems for the Prediction of Slope Stability
- ch1
- Bridge-Design of Shallow Foundations (1)
- Foundation Lab
- 28_1_santucci
- 470 Umesh Bachu
- ep1_2007.pdf
- 115 Sample Chapter

Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 12

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/258389922

Seismic Design of Retaining Walls

DOI: 10.1155/2013/136132

CITATIONS READS

3 769

4 authors, including:

Tarbiat Modares University University of Tabriz

24 PUBLICATIONS 42 CITATIONS 102 PUBLICATIONS 3,895 CITATIONS

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

All content following this page was uploaded by Mahmoud Yazdani on 24 November 2015.

Hindawi Publishing Corporation

Journal of Applied Mathematics

Volume 2013, Article ID 136132, 10 pages

http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/136132

Research Article

Extended Mononobe-Okabe Method for Seismic Design of

Retaining Walls

Mahmoud Yazdani,1 Ali Azad,1 Abol hasan Farshi,1,2 and Siamak Talatahari3

1

Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran 1411713116, Iran

2

Civil Engineering Faculty, Islamic Azad University, Central Tehran Branch, Tehran, Iran

3

Department of Civil Engineering, University of Tabriz, Tabriz, Iran

Copyright 2013 Mahmoud Yazdani et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution

License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly

cited.

Mononobe-Okabe (M-O) method is still employed as the first option to estimate lateral earth pressures during earthquakes by

geotechnical engineers. Considering some simple assumptions and using a closed form method, M-O solves the equations of

equilibrium and suggests seismic active and passive lateral earth pressures. Therefore, the results are true in its assumption range

only, and in many other practical cases, M-O method is not applicable. Noncontinues backfill slopes, cohesive soils, and rising water

behind the wall are some well-known examples in which the M-O theory is irrelevant. Using the fundamental framework of M-O

method, this study proposes an iterative method to overcome the limits of the M-O method. Based on trial and error process, the

proposed method is able to cover many of the defects which regularly occur in civil engineering when M-O has no direct answer.

to the simplifier assumptions in M-O method to solve the

Retaining walls are those structures which are usually con- equations in a closed form fashion. The contribution of

structed to form roads, stabilize trenches and soil slopes, and this paper is primarily to remove these limits and to cover

support unstable structures. Figure 1 shows one of the com- other problems that M-O has no answer for them. On the

mon configurations of retaining structures, schematically. other hand, reports on retaining wall failures during major

Lateral earth pressure model is belonging to the first or minor earthquakes confirm the necessity of immune

group of theories in classical soil mechanics. Coulomb [1] design of retaining structures. Since the stability of retaining

and Rankine [2] proposed their theories to estimate active walls plays an important role during and right after an

and passive lateral earth pressures. These kinds of theories earthquake, this study strives to provide a reliable tool for

propose a coefficient which is a ratio between horizontal quick engineering designs. The methodology given in this

and vertical stress behind retaining walls. Using the ratio, paper can also be used as a model to study the effect of

lateral pressure is simply calculated by the horizontal stress earthquake parameters on retaining structures with a specific

integration. geometry or can be reshaped for any other unusual retaining

Mononobe-Okabe method (M-O), a seismic version structures.

of coulomb theory, was proposed based on pseudostatic

earthquake loading for granular soils. This method applies

earthquake force components using two coefficients called 2. Mononobe-Okabe Method

seismic horizontal and vertical coefficients. Beside other

complex theoretical models and numerical methods, M-O Mononobe and Matsuo [3] and Okabe [4] proposed a method

theory is one of the best initial estimates. to determine lateral earth pressure of granular cohesionless

Although M-O is the first choice for engineers to design soils during earthquake [5]. The method was a modified

retaining walls, some limitations make it incapable to model version of Coulomb theory [1] in which earthquake forces are

2 Journal of Applied Mathematics

Retaining

structure

Lateral displacement

a K W

p a

h

KW

K W

Pa

p

a

Kh W

p

Passive zone Pp Active zone

p a

applied to the failure mass by pseudostatic method. To get a Active and passive forces, and , are then calculated using

final simple formulation like other closed form solutions in the following equations:

geotechnical engineering, M-O uses exact form solution with 1

simple assumption such as simplicity in geometry, material { } = 2 (1 V ) { } ,

2

behavior, or dynamic loading to make the equations solvable.

Because of the old age of M-O method, tens of studies

{ }

have been focused on this area (e.g., [68]). An important

study on M-O was carried out by Seed and Whitman [9]. They

= (cos2 ( ))

confirmed M-O active pressure after long laboratory runs.

However, they recommended more studies on passive theory

of M-O. They also proposed a method to find the location of ( cos cos2 cos ( + )

resultant force which acts on 1/3 of height in M-O method.

M-O had been studied by others such as Fang and Chen [10] 1

1/2 2

on the direction of seismic force components on the failure sin ( + ) sin ( )

[1 ( ) ]) ,

mass. cos ( + ) cos ( )

Figure 2 shows the parameters and characteristics of M-

O method. In M-O, static force equilibrium is satisfied for a = tan1 ( ).

rigid wedge placed on a failure plane with elastic-perfectly 1 V

plastic behavior based on Mohr-Coulomb failure criteria. (1)

Journal of Applied Mathematics 3

B A

Z0

K W

Kh W

H

c L

W

cL

h Pp

F

(a)

A B

Z0

K W

Kh W

c L

H W cL

h

F

Pa

(b)

Figure 3: Proposed model for passive (a) and active (b) pressure.

It should be noticed that the above formulations were 4. Overcome Mononobe-Okabe Method Limits

derived assuming planar failure surfaces. This assumption

has significantly simplified the resultant equations that can To overcome M-O limits, the fundamental basis of limit

practically capture the contrast between different design equilibrium analysis can be used. The difference is the

scenarios and parameters. However, in general, planar failure solution type which is carried out using an iterative process

surfaces usually overestimate passive pressures and might for various values of and to find the minimum and

underestimate active pressure. Moreover, in reality curved maximum values of the function instead of using closed form

surfaces are more often useable. Therefore, the results of the solutions of differential equations.

current study can be used as upper limits while it should

be considered with caution for active pressure. The works 4.1. Problem Framework. According to Figure 3, wall dis-

by Morrison and Ebeling [11], Kumar [12], Subba Rao and placement and also its direction produce effective forces

Choudhury [13] and Yazdani and Azad [14] explain how the on failure mass in both sides of a retaining wall. Variable

planar models can be extended. parameters have been listed in Table 1. It can be seen that the

main differences between current method and M-O method

are as follows.

3. Mononobe-Okabe Method

Defects and Limitations (a) Geometry of backfill soil has been modeled in an

engineering configuration. Two real cases with the

Some of the limits of M-O method that cause the method same geometry have been illustrated in Figures 4 and

not to cover many of the usual engineering problems are as 5. Both examples are in north side of Tehran, Iran,

follows. which are located in a high seismic risk zone. Another

similar geometry has been plotted in Figure 6. The

(a) M-O method is applicable for cohesionless soils only. figure also shows the failure mechanism of the wall

(b) Effect of water table behind the wall has not been in Chi-Chi Earthquake, Taiwan [15].

considered directly in the formula. (b) In addition to soil cohesion, virtual cohesion between

(c) M-O method has no answer when 0. soil and wall material (adhesion) is included in the

model.

(d) The conventional problems in civil engineering are Seismic active earth pressure considering backfill

not always wall with continues backfill. Sometimes, has been already evaluated by Prakash and Saran [16]

one has to use equivalent forms of M-O method to as well as Saran and Prakash [17]. In their methods,

model a real problem. adhesion was considered identical to cohesion. Das

4 Journal of Applied Mathematics

Parameter Symbol

Wall height H

Water depth h

Wall angle

Soil-wall friction angle

Backfill angle

Soil special weight

Saturated soil special weight sat

Ref. to Figure 3 A

Ref. to Figure 3 B Figure 4: Geometry of natural slope behind a retaining wall, Tehran,

Iran.

Soil internal friction angle

Soil cohesion c

Soil-wall cohesion c

Horizontal earthquake coefficient

Vertical earthquake coefficient V

different value of cohesion and adhesion. Shukla et

al. [19] presented an idea to extend Mononobe-Okabe

concept for backfill in such a way to get single

critical wedge surface. Ghosh and Sengupta [20] pre-

sented a formulation to evaluate seismic active earth

pressure including the influence of both adhesion and

cohesion for a nonvertical retaining wall.

(c) Static water table is included in the model to affect the

earth pressure, directly.

(d) The effect of tension crack has been considered. This

effect is quite important in active earth pressure on

retaining wall for cohesive soil backfill [21]. Shukla

et al. [19] showed that for soil backfill with tension

cracks, the total active earth pressure in static con-

dition will increase up to 20%40% over the case Figure 5: Geometry of backfill behind a retaining wall, Tehran, Iran.

without tension cracks. Therefore, the effect of tension

cracks in cohesive soil backfill should not be neglected

in the calculation of active earth pressure. Ghosh

and Sharma [22] used the following equation in their

analysis to compute the depth of tension cracked zone Taiwan cinema culture town

in seismic condition:

2 1 sin

0 = ; (Rankine) = . (2) Overturning

1 + sin

1:0

.35

crack is neglected in that analysis. Given that the inclination Heaving

Parking lot

of the stress characteristics depends on acceleration level, a Heel

Rankine condition is valid for the vast majority of cantilever

0.5 m Hanging wall

wall configurations under strong seismic action [23]. This is Toe

2.63 m rupAssum

applicable even to short heel walls, with an error of about 5% ture ed

Foot wall zon

[24, 25]. e

Shao-jun et al. [21] made an effort to determine the depth

Chelungpu Fault

of tension cracked zone under seismic loading and used the

pseudodynamic approach to compute seismic active force on Figure 6: Geometry and failure mechanism of a retaining wall in

retaining wall with cohesive backfills. Chi-Chi Earthquake, Taiwan (after [15]).

Journal of Applied Mathematics 5

c L

c L

+

90 +

cL cL

90

F

F +

Pa

+ W (1 K )2 + Kh2

+ W (1 K )2 + Kh2 ++

Pp

(a) (b)

the effect of tension crack. By this way, the shape of active Typical passive condition curve

wedge in original M-O method is changed from triangular

(Pa ) or (Pp )

computed more realistically. However, in passive condition,

the failure wedge was considered triangular similar to the

conventional M-O method, though this assumption causes Typical active condition curve

the passive earth pressure to be overestimated.

failure surface which is bilinear in this study, shear stresses are 0 20 40 60 80 100

developed based on Mohr-Coulomb theory. A 2D static set of Failure angle (deg),

equilibriums can simply connect stresses in a force (or stress)

Figure 8: Typical active and passive condition curves.

diagram. The diagrams for active and passive conditions have

been shown in Figure 7.

4.3. Solution Methodology. As mentioned, using a closed useless. Therefore, this section just reflects results of a para-

form solution is not applicable herein according to the metric study on a 10-meter high wall. Backfill soil has specific

large number of parameters and nonlinearity of equations. weight of 2 g/cm3 . Other variables have been explained in

Therefore, semianalytical iterative calculations for searching the following subsections. Other undefined parameters like

the favorite conditions (, , and ) have been chosen in parameter have been assumed to be zero.

this study.

The continuity of the equations is plotted in Figure 8,

where the active pressure is the maximum while the passive 5.1. Effects of Backfill Soil Geometry. To assess the effects of

pressure is the minimum points in relevant curves. Since the backfill soil geometry, a backfill soil with various values of

equations have one unique global maximum or minimum and / (the ratio of slope width to wall height as shown

value, no sophisticated search algorithm is needed. A simple in Figure 3) and internal friction of soil equal to 30 was

scanning search method was coded to pick the critical considered. Horizontal component of earthquake was set to

(extremum) conditions. = 0.2. This problem was solved with the standard M-O

and the proposed method. It should be noted that the values

5. Parametric Study of slope angle in M-O were chosen equal to .

Figure 9 shows the results of this analysis. It is clear

Because of the large number of parameters in each analysis, that for 20 , M-O method has no result. Diagrams

deriving complete series of calculation and results seems explain that when increases, the difference between the

6 Journal of Applied Mathematics

0.52 3.2

0.51

3

0.5

Ka

Kp

0.49

2.8

0.48 = 5

= 5

0.47 2.6

0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2 0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2

B/H B/H

This study This study

Mononobe-Okabe Mononobe-Okabe

(a) (b)

0.58 4

0.56

0.54 3.5

0.52

Kp

Ka

0.5 3

= 10 = 10

0.48

0.46 2.5

0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2 0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2

B/H B/H

This study This study

Mononobe-Okabe Mononobe-Okabe

(c) (d)

0.68 4.9

0.64

0.6 4.1

Ka

0.56

Kp

0.52 3.3

= 15 = 15

0.48

0.44 2.5

0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2 0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2

B/H B/H

This study This study

Mononobe-Okabe Mononobe-Okabe

(e) (f)

Figure 9: Continued.

Journal of Applied Mathematics 7

0.85 5.5

0.77

4.5

0.69

Ka

Kp

0.61

3.5

= 20

0.53

= 20

0.45 2.5

0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2 0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2

B/H B/H

This study This study

Note: no results for M-O method are available Note: no results for M-O method are available

(g) (h)

1.05 7

0.95

0.85 5.5

Kp

Ka

0.75

0.65 4

= 25 = 25

0.55

0.45 2.5

0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2 0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2

B/H B/H

This study This study

Note: no results for M-O method are available Note: no results for M-O method are available

(i) (j)

proposed method and M-O results is significant. However, lateral earth pressure ratio in each dry or saturated region is

this difference decreases when / decreases. It means that imposed on the relevant unit weight:

if variation of (0 ) occurs near the wall (approximately

for / < 1), between the results of these methods a large Total earth pressure (M-O)

difference appears. However, the proposed method is more (3)

1 1

accurate. As a result, when is near the wall, M-O method is = { ( )2 + ( ) + 2 } .

not economical for active conditions and is not accurate for 2 2

passive cases.

However, in the proposed method, the total earth pres-

sure can be simply obtained by the following equation:

5.2. Effects of Water Table behind Wall. In the original M-

O method, water table is not considered directly in the 1

model, and the earth pressure is given only for the dry Total earth pressure (this study) = 2 . (4)

2

condition. To overcome this deficiency, either a correctness

factor recommended by some design codes should be utilized It should be noted that in the above equations has

or the following relationship must be applied in which the no similar value. The reason is hidden in the philosophy

8 Journal of Applied Mathematics

4.5 0.7

0.65

4

0.6

Kp

Ka

3.5

0.55

3

0.5

2.5 0.45

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

Level of water/height of wall Level of water/height of wall

(a) (b)

450 70

400

Total passive pressure (ton/m)

60

350

50

300

40

250

200 30

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1

Level of water/height of wall Level of water/height of wall

This study This study

Mononobe-Okabe Mononobe-Okabe

(a) (b)

Figure 11: Effects of water table on total lateral earth pressure compared to M-O.

of calculations. In fact, in (4) the weight of the submerged used with water table varying and sat = = 2 g/cm3 .

part of the sliding wedge is considered through the effective The sensitivity analysis results are illustrated in Figure 10.

unit weight of soil which is reflected in the force equilibrium This figure shows that increasing water depth will decrease

diagram, and then is calculated. The two equations (3) and lateral pressure in both active and passive conditions. The

(4) can be regenerated in the same way for passive condition comparison between M-O based on (3) and this study based

as well. on (4) for passive case is illustrated in Figure 11. These

To investigate the ability of the proposed method in diagrams reveal that the M-O method outputs are not in the

accounting for water effect on lateral earth pressures, a simple safe side of design. Since the proposed model honors the

case has first been solved with the following parameters with physics of the problem with more details, it offers a better tool

no water table: = 15 , / = 2, = 30 , and = for design purposes.

0.2. The results are plotted in Figure 9 that shows perfect

agreement between M-O and the proposed model for the 5.3. Effects of Cohesion and Surface Tension Crack. Almost all

given geometry. In the second step, the same model was soils have naturally a very small amount of cohesion. Also, in

Journal of Applied Mathematics 9

5 0.4

4 0.3

Kp

Ka

3 0.2

2 0.1

1 0

0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5

Cohesion (ton/m2 ) Cohesion (ton/m2 )

Kh = 0 Kh = 0

Z=0 Z=0

Z0 Z0

(a) (b)

4.5 0.5

0.4

3.5

0.3

Ka

Kp

2.5

0.2

1.5

0.1

0.5 0

0 1 2 3 4 5 0 1 2 3 4 5

2 2

Cohesion (ton/m ) Cohesion (ton/m )

Kh = 0.2 Kh = 0.2

Z=0 Z=0

Z0 Z0

(c) (d)

or it is not economical to use such soils. Therefore, usage of

cohesive soil is inevitable. In this paper, the Mononobe-Okabe (M-O) method was

To better evaluate the effects of cohesion factor on lateral revised, and a new approach with more general picture of

earth pressure, a wall with horizontal backfill and = 30 problems in civil engineering was proposed. Based on the

was analyzed. Analyses have been repeated in the cases of limit equilibrium analysis and a semianalytical procedure,

with and without considering tension cracks for two different the proposed model can go over the limitations of closed

categories of = 0 and = 0.2. Results are reported form solutions of M-O method. The modified version is also

in Figure 12 which shows the significant difference in active capable of considering different backfill geometry, cohesion

coefficient between cohesionless ( = 0) and cohesive ( > of backfill soil, soil-wall interaction, and water table behind

0) soils. Where = 0.2, for minimum 2 t/m2 of cohesion, the the wall. Using the method explained in this paper, seismic

active pressure changes 50% and the passive pressure changes active and passive earth pressure could be calculated in many

27%. These two values for = 0 are 70% for the active usual engineering problems without any approximation.

pressure and 23% for the passive pressure. Also, it seems that The parametric study on a 10 m wall was also performed

tension cracks have small effects on the passive pressure while in the paper to explain the methodology more clearly. The

they are more appropriate for the active conditions. results reveal this fact that the standard M-O method, in

10 Journal of Applied Mathematics

some cases, is incapable of offering an answer. Because of its [18] B. M. Das and V. K. Puri, Static and dynamic active earth

simple assumptions, M-O sometimes stands in an unsafe side pressure, Geotechnical and Geological Engineering, vol. 14, no.

of design or it overestimates and directs the problem into an 4, pp. 353366, 1996.

uneconomical design. However, the proposed methodology [19] S. K. Shukla, S. K. Gupta, and N. Sivakugan, Active earth

relives engineers from some approximations and equivalent pressure on retaining wall for c- soil backfill under seismic

methods. This methodology can be easily rederived to any loading condition, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmen-

other simple or sophisticated problems. tal Engineering, vol. 135, no. 5, pp. 690696, 2009.

[20] S. Ghosh and S. Sengupta, Extension of Mononobe-Okabe

theory to evaluate seismic active earth pressure supporting c-

References backfill, Electronic Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, vol.

17, pp. 495504, 2012.

[1] C. A. Coulomb, Essai sur une application des maximis et minimis

a quelques problems de statique relatifs a larchitecture, vol. [21] M. Shao-jun, W. Kui-hua, and W. Wen-bing, Pseudo-dynamic

7, Memoires de lAcademie Royal Pres Divers Savants, Paris, active earth pressure behind retaining wall for cohesive soil

France, 1776. backfill, Journal of Central South University of Technology, vol.

19, pp. 32983304, 2012.

[2] W. Rankine, On the stability of loose earth, Philosophical

Transactions of the Royal Society of London, vol. 147, pp. 927, [22] S. Ghosh and R. P. Sharma, Pseudo-dynamic active response of

1857. non-vertical retaining wall supporting c- backfill, Geotechni-

[3] N. Mononobe and H. Matsuo, On the determination of earth cal and Geological Engineering, vol. 28, no. 5, pp. 633641, 2010.

pressures during earthquakes, in Proceedings of the World [23] D. S. Scotto, A. Penna, A. Evangelista et al., Experimental inves-

Engineering Congress, p. 9, Tokyo, Japan, 1929. tigation of dynamic behaviour of cantilever retaining walls,

[4] S. Okabe, General theory of earth pressures, Journal of the in Proceedings of the 15th World Conference on Earthquake

Japan Society of Civil Engineering, vol. 12, no. 1, 1926. Engineering, Lisbon, Portugal, 2012.

[5] S. L. Kramer, Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering, Prentice- [24] W. Huntington, Earth Pressures and Retaining Walls, John

Hall, New York, NY, USA, 1996. Wiley, New York, NY, USA, 1957.

[6] R. Richards Jr. and X. Shi, Seismic lateral pressures in soils with [25] V. R. Greco, Active earth thrust on cantilever walls with short

cohesion, Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, vol. 120, no. 7, pp. heel, Canadian Geotechnical Journal, vol. 38, no. 2, pp. 401409,

12301251, 1994. 2001.

[7] H. Matsuzawa, I. Ishibashi, and M. Kawamura, Dynamic soil

and water pressures of submerged soils, Journal of Geotechnical

Engineering, vol. 111, no. 10, pp. 11611176, 1985.

[8] A. S. Veletsos and A. H. Younan, Dynamic modeling and

response of soil-wall systems, Journal of Geotechnical Engineer-

ing, vol. 120, no. 12, pp. 21552179, 1994.

[9] H. B. Seed and R. V. Whitman, Design of Earth retaining

structures for dynamic loads, in Proceedings of the ASCE

Specialty Conference: Lateral Stresses in the Ground and Design

of Earth Retaining Structures, pp. 103147, June1970.

[10] Y.-S. Fang and T.-J. Chen, Modification of Mononobe-Okabe

theory, Geotechnique, vol. 45, no. 1, pp. 165167, 1995.

[11] E. E. Morrison and R. M. Ebeling, Limit equilibrium computa-

tion of dynamic passive earth pressure, Canadian Geotechnical

Journal, vol. 32, pp. 481487, 1995.

[12] J. Kumar, Seismic passive earth pressure coefficients for sands,

Canadian Geotechnical Journal, vol. 38, pp. 876881, 2001.

[13] K. S. Subba Rao and D. Choudhury, Seismic passive earth pres-

sures in soils, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental

Engineering, vol. 131, no. 1, pp. 131135, 2005.

[14] M. Yazdani and A. Azad, Evaluation of Mononobe-Okabe

method and introducing an improved approach to design of

retaining walls, Transportation Journal, no. 2, pp. 157171, 2007

(Persian).

[15] Y. S. Fang, Y. C. Yang, and T. J. Chen, Retaining walls damaged

in the Chi-Chi earthquake, Canadian Geotechnical Journal, vol.

40, no. 6, pp. 11421153, 2003.

[16] S. Prakash and S. Saran, Static and dynamic earth pressures

behind retaining walls, in Proceedings of the 3rd Symposium

on Earthquake Engineering, vol. 1, pp. 277288, University of

Roorkee, Roorkee, India, November 1966.

[17] S. Saran and S. Prakash, Dimensionless parameters for static

and dynamic Earth pressure behind retaining walls, Indian

Geotechnical Journal, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 295310, 1968.

Advances in

Decision

Sciences

International Journal of

Mathematical Physics

World Journal in Engineering Combinatorics

Hindawi Publishing Corporation

Hindawi Publishing Corporation Volume 2013 Hindawi Publishing Corporation Hindawi Publishing Corporation http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2013 Hindawi Publishing Corporation Volume 2013

http://www.hindawi.com http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2013 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2013 http://www.hindawi.com

Applied Mathematics Applied Analysis

http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2013 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2013

Discrete Dynamics

in Nature and Society

http://www.hindawi.com

Hindawi Publishing Corporation

and Applications

Hindawi Publishing Corporation

http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2013 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2013

Journal of Operations Probability

Mathematics and Research and

Mathematical Statistics

Sciences

International Journal of

Equations

Hindawi Publishing Corporation Hindawi Publishing Corporation

Stochastic Analysis

Hindawi Publishing Corporation

http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2013 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2013 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2013 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2013 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2013

Mathematical Discrete ISRN Applied ISRN

Analysis Mathematics Algebra Mathematics Geometry

Hindawi Publishing Corporation Hindawi Publishing Corporation Hindawi Publishing Corporation Hindawi Publishing Corporation Hindawi Publishing Corporation

http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2013 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2013 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2013 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2013 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2013

- Tugas Mk Prinsip & Desain Penelitian Dalam GeoteknikTransféré parLion Azza
- Open Pit Stabiliti-reportTransféré parMilena Gojković
- Evaluation of Slope Stability by Numerical MethodsTransféré parYoseph Birru
- Geotechnical or GeomechanicalTransféré parAlex
- mine_engineering_rock_mechanics_wp.pptTransféré parJOsé Lüis Hîlârión
- Numerical Modeling of an l – Shaped Very Stiff Concrete Retaining WallTransféré parBouraida El Yamouni
- Chapter 7Transféré parMadhu Kumar
- Study on Dam Slope Stability Under the Condition of RainfallTransféré parIJSTR Research Publication
- UFC 3-220-10N Soil Mechanics (06-08-2005)Transféré parBob Vines
- EM 1110-2-1902 - Slope StabilityTransféré parPDHLibrary
- Micro PilesTransféré parAndrew Winner
- SohailTransféré parHari Ram
- Artificial Neural Networks and Grey Systems for the Prediction of Slope StabilityTransféré parPrashant Kumar Nayak
- ch1Transféré parCele Adu-wusu
- Bridge-Design of Shallow Foundations (1)Transféré parAbdul Kabasy
- Foundation LabTransféré parDane Ly
- 28_1_santucciTransféré parboyzes
- 470 Umesh BachuTransféré parwinarnob
- ep1_2007.pdfTransféré parJoe Tang
- 115 Sample ChapterTransféré parFar Farhaan
- wmc2013Paper159Transféré parDiego Huangal Laguna
- Chapter 8 sprijinireTransféré parSima Viorel
- Failure of the Omai Tailings DamTransféré parAnonymous oKnkKXjYTN
- 2018 U.S. Society on Dams. All Rights ReservedTransféré parMarcelo Protz
- GI-V3-N2-Paper5Transféré parIncarca
- Dr Abd Hamid_HCTransféré parRio Rimbanu
- Indice de Ingenieria Geotecnica en InglesTransféré parfredy
- A4-structural calculations.pdfTransféré parsoleb
- 8. New Developments for the Design and Construction of Tunnels in Complex Rock MassesTransféré parpawitra
- Tutorial Letter 101 2017 0 bTransféré parVho-Ren Takalani

- NF EN 10027Transféré parBouraida El Yamouni
- rpa99 version 2003Transféré parMars76
- CimentTransféré parBouraida El Yamouni
- Mur de soutènement GABIONSTransféré parasma011981
- 8542012 c 206Transféré parBouraida El Yamouni
- Trafic Routier 2014 MarocTransféré parIsmail ouahi
- Saber Mahan i 2009Transféré parBouraida El Yamouni
- Route-Instants Études SuiteTransféré parBouraida El Yamouni
- Dynamic Passive Pressure From C- Soil Backfills - Shukla, Habibi - 2011-AnnotatedTransféré parBouraida El Yamouni
- Route Trafics 2013Transféré parBouraida El Yamouni
- manuel de degradation des chaussees_interessant.pdfTransféré parAbdlghafour Laamarti
- Dictionnaire Routier2Transféré parBouraida El Yamouni
- Seismic Lateral Movement Prediction for Gravity Retaining Walls on Granular SoilsTransféré parBouraida El Yamouni
- Pundit PL-200(PE) 201701Transféré parBouraida El Yamouni
- Route Trafics BisTransféré parBouraida El Yamouni
- A New Limit Equilibrium Method for the Pseudostatic Design of Embedded Cantilevered Retaining Walls - Conti, Viggiani - 2Transféré parBouraida El Yamouni
- woc_2colTransféré parBouraida El Yamouni
- Comportement d’Un Mur de Soutenement Sous Chargement SismiqueTransféré parmathematicos
- NUMERICAL MODELLING OF SEISMIC BEHAVIOUR OF EARTH-RETAINING WALLS.pdfTransféré parMuhanad Salem
- CC BETONTransféré parBouraida El Yamouni
- 10.0000@Www.jstage.jst.Go.jp@Article@Jgssp@2@24@2KOR 24@ArticleTransféré parBouraida El Yamouni
- Numerical Modeling of an l – Shaped Very Stiff Concrete Retaining WallTransféré parBouraida El Yamouni
- Numerical Modeling of an l – Shaped Very Stiff Concrete Retaining WallTransféré parBouraida El Yamouni
- Seismic Earth Pressure, Retaining Wall, Earthquake, Seismic Load, Cohesionless Soil, SandTransféré parBouraida El Yamouni
- 12-Ferraillage Des CuléesTransféré parBouraida El Yamouni
- BimTransféré parBouraida El Yamouni
- A Critical Study on Seismic Design of Retaining StructuresTransféré parJPachas
- Le-MetreTransféré parlekouf43
- 1000009213648Transféré parBouraida El Yamouni

- Userguide EPLAN Cabinet EnTransféré parAdérito Aguiar
- fatiguehandbook-small.pdfTransféré parmanishpali
- Fisika PPTTransféré parJarisa Alfi Yuliyanti
- Peterson Site Inspection Summary July 20 2017Transféré parCPR Digital
- Learn Go in Y MinutesTransféré parAbhishek Kumar
- Wireless ChargingTransféré parhiphop
- MILLER 32''LCD Multi-language Garage 3d Wheel Alignment Machine Price,Transféré parWks Engenharia
- DBM.pdfTransféré pareguren_91
- et210 1ssy2014-15 estrada panotes sabaecoTransféré parapi-272584741
- Lecture 1-Introduction.pptTransféré parFaruq Basri
- FAQ-3Transféré parapi-3748960
- Source CodeTransféré parHollyfat
- Gaining KnowledgeTransféré parive14_
- Übergabeprotokoll English1Transféré parMohamed Rashed
- 1helTransféré parhillyoung
- Dicktator Software GuidesTransféré parnikonair_tongaat
- Published PAS77Transféré parjgomez_ni
- Marketing research (scope of e retail portal of footwear mbo online).docxTransféré parRahul Raj
- MIMO RADAR chap 2.pptxTransféré parSaurabh Shukla
- KnitRTransféré parCarlos Eduardo Melo Martínez
- EK 99-00 Wire Harness Instructions 4.0Transféré parHybrid Racing
- Making Traditional Bows LightTransféré pardalmatino16
- A Study on Cyber Crimes in Digital WorldTransféré parEditor IJRITCC
- Brain Drain of PakistanTransféré parCh Arslan Bashir
- b 099 CastrolTransféré parPratyush 'Hank Moody'
- Converting Paved Roads to Unpaved (2015)Transféré parprmrao
- Lvl 0_practical_2 Contouring Cut and Fill for EarthworksTransféré parnuraina aqilah
- ASSI_PacMan_Pol07_v4-0.pdfTransféré parRadu Patzelt
- Webmail.shiva-Engineering.com Horde Imp Message.php ActionID=Print Message&Mailbox=INBOX&Index=993&Uniq=1308835823226Transféré parhimansu_panchal
- Jenis Jenis SensorTransféré parbahris