Abstract

Seismically induced active earth pressure is one of the prime causes of the failure of retaining walls. As an alternative to the conventional ductility-based seismic design of an elastic retaining wall, this work explored the potential of a compliant tuned liquid damper (CTLD) for seismic vibration control of a cantilever retaining wall. The liquid (water) in CTLD sloshes with a certain phase difference to the motion of the wall to reduce vibration and dissipate the vibrational energy through wave breaking. A typical retaining wall geometry was adopted to ensure its static stability and safety against buckling under the weight of the CTLD. A single-degree-of-freedom (SDOF) reduced-order model of the retaining wall was derived from the finite-element-based modal analysis of the combined soil–wall system. Sun's model was adopted for the sloshing of liquid in the CTLD. The response time histories of interest were obtained by numerical integration of the equations of motion for the combined SDOF-CTLD system, solved iteratively for nonlinear sloshing. Selecting optimal parameters ensured the best efficiency (of response reduction) of the CTLD through a parametric study. A suite of input ground motions pertaining to varying hazard levels was employed to verify the effectiveness of vibration control. The average displacement and acceleration control efficiency varied from 13.95% to 50.04% and 13.51% to 53.21%, respectively, with the backfill soil type and damping. Considerable response reduction demonstrated the efficiency of the CTLD. The performance robustness was demonstrated through a parametric study.

Practical Applications

Traditionally, retaining walls are designed to be safe from seismic activities incorporating the lateral earth pressure under earthquake conditions. In contrast, the present study recommends a vibration reduction technique using a compliant-tuned liquid damper (CTLD), in which the seismic demand of a cantilever retaining wall is reduced directly by reducing the shaking of the wall. The CTLD, which is made up of a long channel-like tank mounted along the top of the wall, reduces the vibration of the soil–wall system by controlling its acceleration and displacement. The seismic force transmission is reduced by applying the CTLD, leading to a more economical wall design. The robustness of the CTLD system is checked in terms of its efficiency by varying soil properties and tuning parameters, which are presented graphically and in tabular form. The use of CTLD for vibration control of cantilever retaining walls or other geotechnical structures in different settings can be decided based on these results. The CTLD tank that holds water can also serve additional water storage/supply purposes.

Get full access to this article

View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.

Data Availability Statement

All data, models, or codes that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. All data used in this study and the ABAQUS/MATLAB code employed to determine the response of the system are available.

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge the funding received by the first author (PMRF ID: 2302245) through the Prime Minister's Research Fellows (PMRF) scheme from the Ministry of Education, Government of India.

Notation

The following symbols are used in this paper:
a
half of the width of the tank of the compliant TLD;
B
width of the base of the retaining wall;
b
length of the tank of the complaint TLD;
Cfr, Cda
coefficients related to wave breaking defined in Eqs. (10a) and (10b), respectively;
c
cohesion of the soil;
cs, ct
viscous damping coefficient of the structure and the elastomeric pad, respectively;
e
eccentricity;
FSL
sloshing force;
F^SL
maximum sloshing force;
FSs, FS0
factor of safety in sliding and overturning, respectively;
g
acceleration due to gravity;
H
height of soil retained by the retaining wall;
h
undisturbed depth of liquid in the tank of the compliant TLD;
Ka
active earth pressure coefficient;
k
wave number;
ks, kt
stiffness of the structure and the elastomeric pad (combined assembly), respectively;
kh
horizontal stiffness of a single elastomeric pad;
L
width of the tank of the compliant TLD;
M
sum of moments;
ml
mass of liquid;
m0
mass of the CTLD;
ms
mass of the structure;
mt
mass of the tank;
N
standard penetration test value;
np
number of elastomeric pads;
Pa
active earth pressure;
P0
amplitude of excitation force used in sine sweep analysis;
qmax, qmin
maximum and minimum base pressures, respectively;
S
factor defining the surface contamination of the liquid in the compliant TLD;
Th
term defined by Eq. (6c);
u
particle velocity at the free surface of the liquid in the compliant TLD;
V
sum of vertical load;
x, z
axes in the two-dimensional Cartesian coordinate system;
xs, xt
displacement of the structure and the tank, respectively;
xtmax
maximum displacement of the tank;
x˙s,x˙t
velocity of the structure and the tank, respectively;
x¨s, x¨t
acceleration of the structure and the tank, respectively;
x¨sc, x¨suc
response (displacement or acceleration) of the controlled and uncontrolled structure, respectively;
x¨g
acceleration obtained from the earthquake ground motion database;
β
frequency tuning ratio;
γ
unit weight of the soil;
Δ
depth ratio;
δ
angle of friction between retaining wall and backfill soil;
ζ, ζb
damping ratio of the structure and elastomeric pad, respectively;
η
free surface elevation above the liquid surface;
ηn, η0
free surface elevations in the right and left wall of the tank, respectively;
λ
term that accounts for the damping caused by boundary layer effects in the tank, as well as free surface contamination;
ν
kinematic viscosity of the liquid in the tank;
ρ
density of the liquid in the tank;
σ
term defined in Eq. (6a);
ϕ
angle of internal frictional of soil;
ϕ~
mode shapes (eigenvector);
φ
term defined in Eq. (6b);
ω
frequency of the excitation force used in sine sweep analysis;
ωs
fundamental frequency (or angular frequency) of vibration of the structure; and
ωt
frequency of vibration of the tank of the compliant TLD.

References

ABAQUS. 2020. Abaqus analysis user’s manual, version 2020. Providence, RI: Simulia Corp.
Ahmad, S. M., and D. Choudhury. 2010. “Seismic rotational stability of waterfront retaining wall using pseudodynamic method.” Int. J. Geomech. 10 (1): 45–52. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1532-3641(2010)10:1(45).
Banerji, P., M. Murudi, A. H. Shah, and N. Popplewell. 2000. “Tuned liquid dampers for controlling earthquake response of structures.” Earthquake Eng. Struct. Dyn. 29 (5): 587–602. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1096-9845(200005)29:5%26lt;587::AID-EQE926%3E3.0.CO;2-I.
Bellezza, I. 2015. “Seismic active earth pressure on walls using a new pseudo-dynamic approach.” Geotech. Geol. Eng. 33 (4): 795–812. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10706-015-9860-1.
BIS (Bureau of Indian Standards). 1981. Code of practice for determination of bearing capacity of shallow foundations. IS 6403. New Delhi, India: BIS.
BIS (Bureau of Indian Standards). 2016. Criteria for earthquake resistant design of structures. Part 1: General provisions and buildings. IS 1893. New Delhi, India: BIS.
Bowles, J. E. 1988. Foundation analysis and design. 5th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill Education.
Brandenberg, S. J., M. G. Durante, G. Mylonakis, and J. P. Stewart. 2020. “Winkler solution for seismic earth pressures exerted on flexible walls by vertically in homogeneous soil.” J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 146 (11): 04020127. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0002374.
Callisto, L., and F. M. Soccodato. 2010. “Seismic design of flexible cantilevered retaining walls.” J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 136 (2): 344–354. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GT.1943-5606.0000216.
Cao, W., T. Liu, and Z. Xu. 2019. “Calculation of passive earth pressure using the simplified principal stress trajectory method on rigid retaining walls.” Comput. Geotech. 109: 108–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2019.01.021.
CEN (European Committee for Standardization). 2005. Design of structures for earthquake resistance—Part 5: Foundations, retaining structures and geotechnical aspects. EN 1998-5: Eurocode 8. Brussels, Belgium: CEN.
Chaiseri, P., Y. Fujino, B. M. Pacheco, and L. M. Sun. 1989. “Interaction of tuned liquid damper (TLD) and structure theory, experimental verification and application.” Doboku Gakkai Ronbunshu 410: 103–112. https://doi.org/10.2208/jscej.1989.410_103.
Chen, W.-F. 1975. Limit analysis and soil plasticity. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier.
Choudhury, D., and S. Nimbalkar. 2005. “Seismic passive resistance by pseudo-dynamic method.” Géotechnique 55 (9): 699–702. https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.2005.55.9.699.
Coulomb, C. A. 1773. “Essai sur une application des regles de maximis et minimis a quelques problemes de statique relatifs a 1'architecture.” Mémoires de Mathématique et de physique préfenté à l'Acádemie Royale des Sciences, par divers Savans, lûs dans fes Affemblées 7: 343–382.
Crandall, S. H., and W. D. Mark. 1963. Random vibration in mechanical systems. Cambridge, MA: Academic Press.
Fajfar, P. 2000. “A nonlinear analysis method for performance-based seismic design.” Earthquake Spectra 16 (3): 573–592. https://doi.org/10.1193/1.1586128.
Fujino, Y., L. Sun, B. M. Pacheco, and P. Chaiseri. 1992. “Tuned liquid damper (TLD) for suppressing horizontal motion of structures.” J. Eng. Mech. 118 (10): 2017–2030. https://doi.org/10.1061/(asce)0733-9399(1992)118:10(2017).
Garcia-Suarez, J., and D. Asimaki. 2020. “Exact seismic response of smooth rigid retaining walls resting on stiff soil.” Int. J. Numer. Anal. Methods Geomech. 44 (13): 1750–1769. https://doi.org/10.1002/nag.3082.
Ghobarah, A. 2001. “Performance-based design in earthquake engineering: State of development.” Eng. Struct. 23 (8): 878–884. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(01)00036-0.
Ghosh, P. 2007. “Seismic passive earth pressure behind non-vertical retaining wall using pseudo-dynamic analysis.” Geotech. Geol. Eng. 25 (1): 117–123. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10706-007-9141-8.
Ghosh, S., and R. Prasad Sharma. 2012. “Seismic active earth pressure on the back of battered retaining wall supporting inclined backfill.” Int. J. Geomech. 12 (1): 54–63. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GM.1943-5622.0000112.
Jurado, C. 2014. “Performance-based seismic design of a retaining wall.” In Life-cycle of structural systems: Design, assessment, maintenance and management, edited by H. Furuta, M. Akiyama, and D. M. Frangopol, 3754–3762. London: CRC Press.
Kulhawy, F. H., and P. W. Mayne. 1990. Manual on estimating soil properties for foundation design (no. EPRI-EL-6800). Palo Alto, CA: Electric Power Research Inst.
Li, S., and L.-l. Xie. 2007. “Progress and trend on near-field problems in civil engineering.” Acta Seismol. Sin. 20: 105–114. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11589-007-0105-0.
Machairas, N. P., M. G. Iskander, and M. Omidvar. 2018. “Interactive web application for computing seismic earth pressure.” In Proc., Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics V, Geotechnical Special Publications (GSP) GSP 292, edited by S. J. Brandenberg and M. T. Manzari. Reston, VA: ASCE.
McNamara, R. J. 1977. “Tuned mass dampers for buildings.” J. Struct. Div. 103 (9): 1785–1798. https://doi.org/10.1061/JSDEAG.0004721.
Mononobe, N., and H. Matsuo. 1929. “On the determination of earth pressure during earthquake.” In Proc., of the World Engineering Conf., 177–185. Tokyo, Japan: Kogakkai.
Mylonakis, G., P. Kloukinas, and C. Papantonopoulos. 2007. “An alternative to the Mononobe–Okabe equations for seismic earth pressures.” Soil Dyn. Earthquake Eng. 27 (10): 957–969. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2007.01.004.
Nimbalkar, S., and D. Choudhury. 2007. “Sliding stability and seismic design of retaining wall by pseudo-dynamic method for passive case.” Soil Dyn. Earthquake Eng. 27 (6): 497–505. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2006.11.006.
Nimbalkar, S., and D. Choudhury. 2008. “Seismic design of retaining wall by considering wall–soil inertia for active case.” Int. J. Geotech. Eng. 2 (4): 319–328. https://doi.org/10.3328/IJGE.2008.02.04.319-328.
Obrzud, R., and A. Truty. 2013. The hardening soil model—A practical guidebook. Technical Report Z Soil, PC 100701. Lausanne, Switzerland: Zace Services.
Okabe, S. 1926. “General theory of earth pressure.” J. Jpn. Soc. Civ. Eng. 12 (6): 1277–1323.
Pain, A., D. Choudhury, and S. K. Bhattacharyya. 2015. “Seismic stability of retaining wall–soil sliding interaction using modified pseudo-dynamic method.” Géotechnique Lett. 5 (1): 56–61. https://doi.org/10.1680/geolett.14.00116.
Pain, A., V. S. Ramakrishna Annapareddy, and S. Nimbalkar. 2018. “Seismic active thrust on rigid retaining wall using strain dependent dynamic properties.” Int. J. Geomech. 18 (12): 06018034. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GM.1943-5622.0001331.
Pandey, D. K., M. K. Sharma, and S. K. Mishra. 2019. “A compliant tuned liquid damper for controlling seismic vibration of short period structures.” Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 132: 405–428. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymssp.2019.07.002.
Priestley, M. J. N. 2000. “Performance based seismic design.” Bull. N. Z. Soc. Earthquake Eng. 33 (3): 325–346. https://doi.org/10.5459/bnzsee.33.3.325-346.
Rajesh, B. G., and D. Choudhury. 2017. “Generalized seismic active thrust on a retaining wall with submerged backfill using a modified pseudodynamic method.” Int. J. Geomech. 17 (3): 06016023. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GM.1943-5622.0000750.
Ranjan, G., and A. S. R. Rao. 2016. Basic and applied soil mechanics. 3rd ed. New Delhi, India: New Age International.
Rankine, W. J. M. 1857. “II. On the stability of loose earth.” Philos. Trans. R. Soc. London 147: 9–27. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstl.1857.0003.
Rao, P., Q. Chen, Y. Zhou, S. Nimbalkar, and G. Chiaro. 2016. “Determination of active earth pressure on rigid retaining wall considering arching effect in cohesive backfill soil.” Int. J. Geomech. 16 (3): 04015082. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GM.1943-5622.0000589.
Santhoshkumar, G., P. Ghosh, and A. Murakami. 2019. “Seismic active resistance of a tilted cantilever retaining wall considering adaptive failure mechanism.” Int. J. Geomech. 19 (8): 04019086. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GM.1943-5622.0001470.
Sivakumar Babu, G. L., and B. M. Basha. 2008. “Optimum design of cantilever retaining walls using target reliability approach.” Int. J. Geomech. 8 (4): 240–252. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1532-3641(2008)8:4(240).
Sofronie, R. A., C. A. Taylor, and P. G. Greening. 2000. “Seismic resistant retaining walls of reinforced soil.” In Proc., of the 12th World Conf. on Earthquake Engineering. Auckland, New Zealand: New Zealand Society for Earthquake Engineering.
Somerville, P. G., N. Smith, S. Punyamurthula, and J. Sun. 1997. Development of ground motion time histories for phase 2 of the FEMA/SAC steel project. SAC Joint Venture Project Rep. No. SAC/BD-97/04. Washington, DC: FEMA.
Srikar, G., and S. Mittal. 2020. “Seismic analysis of retaining wall subjected to surcharge: A modified pseudodynamic approach.” Int. J. Geomech. 20 (9): 06020022. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GM.1943-5622.0001780.
Steedman, R. S., and X. Zeng. 1990. “The influence of phase on the calculation of pseudo-static earth pressure on a retaining wall.” Géotechnique 40 (1): 103–112. https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.1990.40.1.103.
Sun, L. M., Y. Fujino, B. M. Pacheco, and P. Chaiseri. 1992. “Modelling of tuned liquid damper (TLD).” J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 43 (1–3): 1883–1894. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-6105(92)90609-e.
Sun, Y.-J., and E.-X. Song. 2016. “Active earth pressure analysis based on normal stress distribution function along failure surface in soil obeying nonlinear failure criterion.” Acta Geotech. 11: 255–268. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11440-015-0390-z.
Veletsos, A. S., and A. H. Younan. 1994. “Dynamic modeling and response of soil–wall systems.” J. Geotech. Eng. 120 (12): 2155–2179. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9410(1994)120:12(2155).
Vrettos, C., D. E. Beskos, and T. Triantafyllidis. 2016. “Seismic pressures on rigid cantilever walls retaining elastic continuously non-homogeneous soil: An exact solution.” Soil Dyn. Earthquake Eng. 82 (3): 142–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soildyn.2015.12.006.
Westergaard, H. M. 1933. “Water pressures on dams during earthquakes.” Trans. Am. Soc. Civ. Eng. 98 (2): 418–433. https://doi.org/10.1061/TACEAT.0004496.
Xu, S.-Y., A. I. Lawal, A. Shamsabadi, and E. Taciroglu. 2019. “Estimation of static earth pressures for a sloping cohesive backfill using extended Rankine theory with a composite log-spiral failure surface.” Acta Geotech. 14: 579–594. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11440-018-0673-2.
Yang, X. L., and S. Zhang. 2019. “Seismic active earth pressure for soils with tension cracks.” Int. J. Geomech. 19 (6): 06019009. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)GM.1943-5622.0001414.

Information & Authors

Information

Published In

Go to International Journal of Geomechanics
International Journal of Geomechanics
Volume 24Issue 11November 2024

History

Received: Dec 21, 2023
Accepted: Jun 4, 2024
Published online: Sep 13, 2024
Published in print: Nov 1, 2024
Discussion open until: Feb 13, 2025

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

ASCE Technical Topics:

Authors

Affiliations

Ashesh Choudhury, S.M.ASCE https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3330-7853
Research Scholar, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh 208016, India. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3330-7853.
Professor, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh 208016, India (corresponding author). ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9990-0468. Email: [email protected]
Sudib Kumar Mishra
Professor, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh 208016, India.
Assistant Professor, Dept. of Civil Engineering, National Institute of Technology, Agartala, Tripura 799046, India. ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9427-0639.

Metrics & Citations

Metrics

Citations

Download citation

If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.

View Options

Get Access

Access content

Please select your options to get access

Log in/Register Log in via your institution (Shibboleth)
ASCE Members: Please log in to see member pricing

Purchase

Save for later Information on ASCE Library Cards
ASCE Library Cards let you download journal articles, proceedings papers, and available book chapters across the entire ASCE Library platform. ASCE Library Cards remain active for 24 months or until all downloads are used. Note: This content will be debited as one download at time of checkout.

Terms of Use: ASCE Library Cards are for individual, personal use only. Reselling, republishing, or forwarding the materials to libraries or reading rooms is prohibited.
ASCE Library Card (5 downloads)
$105.00
Add to cart
ASCE Library Card (20 downloads)
$280.00
Add to cart
Buy Single Article
$35.00
Add to cart

Get Access

Access content

Please select your options to get access

Log in/Register Log in via your institution (Shibboleth)
ASCE Members: Please log in to see member pricing

Purchase

Save for later Information on ASCE Library Cards
ASCE Library Cards let you download journal articles, proceedings papers, and available book chapters across the entire ASCE Library platform. ASCE Library Cards remain active for 24 months or until all downloads are used. Note: This content will be debited as one download at time of checkout.

Terms of Use: ASCE Library Cards are for individual, personal use only. Reselling, republishing, or forwarding the materials to libraries or reading rooms is prohibited.
ASCE Library Card (5 downloads)
$105.00
Add to cart
ASCE Library Card (20 downloads)
$280.00
Add to cart
Buy Single Article
$35.00
Add to cart

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Copy the content Link

Share with email

Email a colleague

Share