Phasing issues in the seismic response of yielding, gravity-type earth retaining walls – Overview and results from a FEM study

An overview of past and recent developments on the subject of seismic earth pressures on yielding, gravity-type walls, retaining cohesionless backfill, is first presented, focusing on available data on the issue of phase difference that develops between the peak values of wall inertia and seismic earth thrust increment. The results of a FEM parametric study are next presented regarding the dependence on the resulting dynamic earth thrust reduction – acting on the time of peak wall inertia – on backfill rigidity, wall height, and shaking characteristics. The reliability of the numerical analyses was verified by modeling centrifuge tests reported by Nakamura [24] and successfully comparing measured vs. computed behavior. The results of the parametric analyses indicate that the seismic active earth thrust, acting on the wall at the time of maximum wall inertia, is significantly reduced (compared to its peak value) with increasing shaking intensity of backfill, increasing wall displacements, increasing wall height, and decreasing backfill rigidity. No systematic dependence on the ratio of input motion frequency to the natural frequency of the backfill (f/f1) was observed. The above findings: (1) verify earlier experimental and numerical results, (2) explain the reported lack of damage to retaining walls under strong ground shaking, and (3) indicate the need for revising the pertinent provisions of current seismic codes. Graphs summarizing the results of the numerical analyses are presented which may be used as a guide for selecting the magnitude of seismic active earth thrust that needs to be taken into account in the design of the examined type of earth retaining walls. •FE numerical analyses were successfully validated by modeling centrifuge tests.•Phase difference between wall inertia and dynamic thrust increment was studied.•The phase difference depends on wall height, backfill rigidity and shaking intensity.•Phase difference results in reduction of seismic thrust increment for high intensity.•A revision of the current conservative code provisions may be warranted.