Seismic Hazard Levels

91 Pages·2010·4.54 MB·English

TRB Webinar:
Load and Resistance Factor Design
Analysis for Seismic Design of
Slopes and Retaining Walls
TRB Announcements:
 We have emailed you the presenters’ slides in today’s webinar
reminder email.
 Upcoming webinars:
Practices for Roadway Tunnel Design, Construction, Safety
and Inspection, and Rehabilitation: March 4, 2 PM EST
Nighttime Seat Belt Enforcement: Background and Recent
Findings: March 9, 2 PM EST
More: http://bit.ly/TRBwebinar
 Follow TRB on Twitter @TRBofNA
http://twitter.com/TRBofNA
Today’s Presenters and Moderator
Mike Keever, California Department of
Transportation, [email protected]
Edward Kavazanjian, Arizona State University,
[email protected]
Donald Anderson, CH2MHill,
[email protected]
Geoffrey Martin, University of Southern
California, [email protected]
TRB Webinar
Load and Resistance Factor Design
for
Seismic Design of Slopes and Retaining
Walls
sponsored by
TRB Committee AFF50
Seismic Design of Bridges
February 17, 2010
11
Overview of Presentation
Presenters
Facilitator

Mike Keever/Caltrans
Speakers

Ed Kavazanjian/ASU
Don Anderson/CH2M HILL
Geoff Martin/USC
Reference documents
NCHRP Report 611 (Volumes 1 and 2)

Seismic Analysis and Design of Retaining Walls,
Slopes & Embankments, and Buried Structures
NHI Course 130094 (in preparation)

LRFD Seismic Design of Geotechnical Transportation
Structures and Foundations
22
Overview
NCHRP 12-70 Project
http://www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/Seismic_Analysis_and_Design_of_Retaining_Walls_Bur_160387.aspx
or type “NCHRP 611” into Google or Bing
33
Overview
Objectives of NCHRP 12-70 Project
Develop methods for LRFD seismic
design of retaining walls, buried
structures, slopes, and embankments
Develop recommended specifications
compatible and consistent with
AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design
Specifications
Ref: NCHRP Research Project Statement
Project 12-70, FY 2004
44
Overview
Need for NCHRP 12-70 Project
Difficulties with retaining wall seismic design
M-O method “blows up” with high back slopes,

high PGA’s, not appropriate for passive
Appropriate seismic coefficient

Soldier pile, tieback, soil nail, and MSE walls

Lack of guidance for slope stability
Pseudo-static versus deformation approach

Appropriate seismic coefficient

Ground motion amplification

Liquefaction effects

55
Outline of Presentation
Background for methodology - Kavazanjian
Seismic slope stability - Anderson
Retaining wall design - Martin
66
Outline of Presentation
Background for methodology
AASHTO seismic damage philosophy

Load and resistance factor design principles

Design ground motions

Seismic slope stability
Factor of safety (C/D) approach

Displacement-based approach

Liquefaction issues

Mitigation

Retaining wall design
Earth pressure determination

External, internal, and global stability

Guidance on AASHTO wall design

77