Location

San Diego, California

Session Start Date

3-26-2001

Session End Date

3-31-2001

Abstract

The seismic active and passive earth pressure problems are investigated by means of the kinematical method of the limit analysis theory. Two rotational kinematically admissible failure mechanisms M1 and M2 are proposed. Quasi-static representation of earthquake effects using the seismic coefficient concept is adopted. The solutions obtained are rigorous upper-bound ones in the framework of the limit analysis theory. The numerical results of the seismic active and passive earth pressure coefficients are presented and compared with other authors’ results. These results improve the best available upper-bound solutions given by Chen and Liu (1990) in the active case and Soubra (2000) in the passive case. The best upper-bound solutions as given by the different upper-bound approaches are presented for practical use in geotechnical engineering.

Department(s)

Civil, Architectural and Environmental Engineering

Appears In

International Conferences on Recent Advances in Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics

Meeting Name

Fourth Conference

Publisher

University of Missouri--Rolla

Publication Date

3-26-2001

Document Version

Final Version

Rights

© 2001 University of Missouri--Rolla, All rights reserved.

Document Type

Article - Conference proceedings

File Type

text

Language

English

Share

COinS
 
Mar 26th, 12:00 AM Mar 31st, 12:00 AM

Seismic Active and Passive Earth Pressures on Rigid Retaining Structures by a Kinematical Approach

San Diego, California

The seismic active and passive earth pressure problems are investigated by means of the kinematical method of the limit analysis theory. Two rotational kinematically admissible failure mechanisms M1 and M2 are proposed. Quasi-static representation of earthquake effects using the seismic coefficient concept is adopted. The solutions obtained are rigorous upper-bound ones in the framework of the limit analysis theory. The numerical results of the seismic active and passive earth pressure coefficients are presented and compared with other authors’ results. These results improve the best available upper-bound solutions given by Chen and Liu (1990) in the active case and Soubra (2000) in the passive case. The best upper-bound solutions as given by the different upper-bound approaches are presented for practical use in geotechnical engineering.