LOGO International Journal of Research and Technology

REVIEW ON BEHAVIOUR AND DESIGN OF RETAINING WALLS

Nikita Raheja
PG Student (Structural Engineering), JUIT, Waknaghat Solan, 173234, Himachal Pradesh, India
Chandra Pal Gautam
Assistant Professor, Department of civil engineering, JUIT, Waknaghat Solan, 173234, Himachal Pradesh, India

Abstract— Retaining wall is the structure which Earthquakes have caused permanent deformations in retaining
withstands the lateral earth pressure exerted by water wall in many historical earthquake. In some cases, retaining
pressure, surcharge load and self-weight of the wall. Due walls have collapsed during earthquake with disastrous
to advancement in the technologies of highway physical and economic consequences. During earthquake,
construction, instability of the retaining wall to cause however, inertial forces and changes in soil strength may
embankment land slide has become common. In violate equilibrium and cause permanent deformation of wall.
conventional approach of constructing the retaining walls, There are several theories, experimental investigations &
there are several disadvantages like more construction numerical studies done to evaluate dynamic response of the
time, cost, manpower and environmental impacts makes retaining wall system In some cases, there is a lack of land
these conventional methods ineffective and uneconomic. available besides the travel way then retaining walls become
For the precise analysis, ETABS and GEO5 which is finite necessary to allow acceptable slope conditions and for safer
element-based software, is used in this work. By the construction. In those cases where slopes are quite steep, soils
Conventional and software approach (the r/wall are are unstable or heavy runoff occurs these walls help to stem
modelled and analyzed for stability in ETABS and GEO5 erosion. Failure, whether by sliding, tilting, bending or some
software), comparison shows whether a software analysis other mechanism, occurs when permanent deformations
is best for a convention approach is good or not. Also by becomes excessive (not in permissible limit).
software analysis stability check to be done at different
heights of retaining wall.
Types of retaining walls
In this present time, there are different kinds of retaining walls
Keywords: Retaining wall, Overturning, Stability,
used which are classified on the basis of their shape, material
Deflection, Displacement.
used, resisting action or casting methods etc. Some of these
conventional retaining walls are:
I. INTRODUCTION
a) Cantilever type retaining wall: Cantilevered retaining
General walls are made from an internal stem of steel-reinforced,
cast-in-place concrete or mortared masonry (often in the
Structure which holds the soil, water or any other materials in shape of an inverted T). These walls cantilever loads (like
their actual position so that erosion of these materials does not a beam) to a large, structural footing, converting
occur is known as retaining wall. Some places where slope is horizontal pressures from behind the wall to vertical
so high, geographical conditions do not the mass to remain in pressures on the ground below. Cantilever retaining wall
its natural slopes. These materials which are hold by retaining is economical up to height of 3-8m.
walls is called backfill. Stabilizing hillsides and control b) Gravity type retaining wall: Gravity retaining wall
erosion are the main functions of retaining walls. The heavy depends on its self-weight only to resist lateral earth
soil mass is supported by retaining walls in various fields of pressure. Commonly, gravity retaining wall is massive
civil engineering such as hydraulics, irrigation structures, because it requires significant gravity load to counter act
highways, railways, tunnels, mining etc. During the roadway soil pressure. Sliding, overturning, and bearing forces
construction sometimes, it is necessary to construct these shall be taken into consideration while this type of
structures where there is over rugged terrain with steep slopes. retaining wall structure is designed. It is economical for a
These walls decrease the grades and land requirement height up to 3m. Material used concrete, stone etc.
alongside the roads. c) Buttress/Counterfort retaining wall: It is a cantilever
retaining wall but strengthened with counter forts

ISSN: 2321–7529(Online) || ISSN: 2321–7510 (Print)

 LOGO International Journal of Research and Technology
monolithic with the back of the wall slab and base slab. are used to stabilize the sloping landscapes and provides
Counter fort spacing is equal or slightly larger than half of level surfaces on slopes.
the counter-fort height. Counter-fort wall height ranges e) If your property is not prevented from infiltrating, then
from 8-12m. rainwater runoff can completely damage your land. This
d) Anchored retaining wall: This type of retaining wall is can protect your landscape design, also prevent floods
employed when the space is limited or thin retaining wall from inflowing the area.
is required. Anchored retaining wall is suitable for loose f) Retaining walls additionally give your landscape an
soil over rocks. Considerably high retaining wall can be aesthetically pleasing design.
constructed using this type of retaining wall structure
Applications of Retaining wall
system. Deep cable rods or wires are driven deep
sideways into the earth, then the ends are filled with a) Construction of basement below ground level in
concrete to provide anchor. Anchors (tiebacks) acts buildings.
against overturning and sliding pressure. b) In the bridge, work consists of the wing walls and
e) Piled retaining wall: Pile retaining wall are constructed by abutment.
driving reinforced concrete piles adjacent to each other. c) To maintain slopes in hilly areas.
Piles are forced into a depth that is sufficient to counter d) As side walls of bridge approach roads.
the force which tries to push over the wall. It is employed e) Providing lateral support to the embankment.
in both temporary and permanent works f) Protect soil from erosion
f) Crib retaining wall: Crib retaining walls are a form of
gravity wall. They are constructed of interlocking Objective
individual boxes made from timber or pre-cast concrete.
They are constructed of interlocking individual boxes The objective of the paper review is as follows:
made from timber or pre-cast concrete. It is suited to
a) To model a retaining wall structure with a software
support planter areas, but it is not recommended for
program i.e. GEO 5 and check out the software results.
support of slopes or structures.
b) To find bearing capacity of the soil.
g) Gabion retaining wall: Gabion retaining wall walls are
c) To check the retaining wall against overturning, sliding,
multi-celled, rectangular wire mesh boxes, which are
slip.
filled with rocks or other suitable materials. It is
d) To find out the factor of safety and overall stability for the
employed for construction of erosion control structures. It
desired condition.
is also used to stabilize steep slopes.
h) Soil nailing R/wall: Soil nailing may be a technique that
will not reinforce and strengthen existing ground. It II. LITERATURE REVIEW
consists of putting in closely spaced bars into a slope or
excavation as construction income from the highest down. Su Yang, Amin Chegnizadeh, Hamid Nikraz (2013) (1) In
Soil nailing is an efficient and economical methodology this they conclude how the retaining walls behave under the
of constructing a wall for excavation support, support of seismic conditions. They elaborate the actual condition of the
hill cuts, bridge abutments, and high ways in which. This retaining wall under earthquake they mainly focus two
method is effective in cohesive soil, broken rock, analytical theories one of coulombs wedge failure theory and
sedimentary rock or fixed face conditions. one sub-method of this is elasticity analysis method. Also
analyse MO (Mononobe and okabe) method. And describe the
Purpose of Retaining wall limitation of MO method. According to them Current theories,
experimental findings and numerical studies for retaining
a) This wall prevents the soil or other material at places with
walls subject to dynamic excitation have been briefly listed in
sudden elevation changes.
a generally chronological order. Numerical analyses are an
b) Earth retaining structures are used to hold back the earth
accurate way to solve relevant problems, while experiments
and maintain the difference in the ground surface height.
are good but incur big cost to conduct an accurate one. In spite
c) Retaining structures are designed to withstand the
of these, the MO method is still a current main approach for
grounds or backfill; other externally exerted loads
practical use due to its simplicity. But the MO method
transmit these forces safely to a foundation.
becomes impractically complex when more factors like the
d) Retaining walls serve as a functional product to prevent
influence of pseudo– dynamic, logarithmic failure plane etc. is
sinkholes from destroying your landscape structure. They

ISSN: 2321–7529(Online) || ISSN: 2321–7510 (Print)

 LOGO International Journal of Research and Technology
being considered, not to mention the widely known relieve wall and make comparative that which one is good In
assumptions that are inherent with the MO method. It is found the present study comparison of conventional counterfort earth
that the results from the elasticity method are from 2.5 to over retaining wall with pressure relief shelf attached counterfort
3 times higher earth retaining wall is studied. Positions of pressure relief
shelves are varied H/3, H/2, 2H/3 positions to analyze the
K. Jagadeesh, K. Suresh and Dr. K. Uday (2015) (2) In this
behavior of retaining wall. The moments developed by the
they analyse the multitier retaining wall. In this they analyse
retaining earth in the counterfort earth retaining wall with
the stability of retaining wall external as well as internal. They
pressure relief shelf are always less compared to conventional
took well graded as well as poorly graded soil for the study
retaining wall. During the absence of relief shelves, 12 %
and the same study is carried out by GEO5 Software and form
reduced moment are recorded by SAP-2000 analysis in
the finding it has been conclude that intensity of surcharge of
comparison with manual (conventional) method of analysis of
the upper tier to the lower tier has been calculated by using
counterfort earth retaining wall. 33%, 50.5% and 61.53% of
GEO5 Software, according to the results it is observed that to
reduction of moments are recorded when there is adoption of
increase in the pull out resistance there would be minimum
relief shelves at H/3, H/2 and 2H/3 positions of the stem in
length of reinforcement. The stability of the retaining wall
comparison to the moments of counterfort earth retaining wall
depends upon shape or geometry of retaining wall.
without the pressure relief shelf. Due to the reduction
HuaWen, Jiu-jiang Wu, Jiao-li Zou, Xin Luo, Min Zhang, moments, stability of the counterfort earth retaining wall is
and Chengzhuang Gu (2016) (3) In their research they use increased against sliding and overturning. Computation of
GEOBAGS filled with construction waste (demolished displacement of stem at top of the wall can be effortlessly
concrete waste) and prepare a model in proportion of a done by using SAP-2000. This cannot be possible by manual
prototype. There retaining walls constructed from geo bags approach. About 122, 99 and 86.7 mm displacement of stem at
filled with construction waste are a new flexible supporting top were recorded at (H/3, H/2, 2H/3 positions) respectively.
structure characterized by easy construction, low costs, and Hence counterfort earth retaining wall with pressure relief
good supporting effects and facilitate the recycling of shelf at 2H/3 positions is very well suited to design the
construction waste. They took this concept from ancient Egypt counterfort earth retaining wall. Performing analysis of
time. They conduct this model test on different slopes and counterfort earth retaining wall by using SAP-2000 is very
length of the Geo bags (Q1, Q2, Q3, Q4 and Q5). Accordingly much advantageous compared to manual techniques. It saves
they find mode of failure of retaining wall, load carrying time; repeated iterative analysis could be done with
capacity, mode of failure of the slopes. By their study provides effortlessly. A less experienced (new) design engineers can be
helps to use waste construction material effectively, basic end successfully use SAP-2000 for analysis of counterfort earth
conclusion of the model was the ultimate loads that the slope retaining wall Hence counterfort earth retaining wall with
tops in cases Q2 andQ3 could bear were 87.5%125% higher pressure relief shelf at 2h/3 positions is very well suited to
than that of the slope top in case Q1. The greatest horizontal design the counterfort earth retaining wall. Performing
wall displacements in cases Q2 and Q3 were 75.2%- analysis of counterfort earth retaining wall by using SAP-2000
79.4%lower than that in case Q1 under the same load of 24 is very much advantageous compared to manual techniques. It
kPa, and the retaining walls constructed from geo bags filled saves time; repeated iterative analysis could be done.
with construction waste were found to provide significant
Han Shang Yu, Li Kai Ren and Qiu Fang (2018) (5) Their
supporting effects to the slopes. The ultimate loads that the
study is on Construction Technique about The Reinforced
slope tops in cases Q2 and Q5 could bear were 25%125%
Concrete Retaining Wall’s Lateral Displacement Repairing.
higher than that of the slope top in case Q4. The greatest
This repairing technique is very useful and their study is also
horizontal wall displacements in cases Q2 and Q5 were
very help full in construction world because it describe the
45.3%-49.7% lower than that in case Q4 under the same load
method that how to repair r/wall when got laterally displaced.
of 36 kPa.
In this they describe all material required for this repairing and
Karthik Babu C and Keerthi Gowda B S (2016) (4) In the work procedure for the repairing as well. They also ensure and
study is basically on counter fort retaining walls with and mentioned Construction Quality Control Points and Quality
without pressure relief self using soft computing techniques Assurance Measures taken before during and after the
(SAP200). They gives a brief about this SAP200 software. repairing. This conclude Due to the influence of many
They conclude a design of counter fort wall with conventional uncertain factors, the retaining wall has a certain degree of
method as well as SAP200 software with and without pressure lateral displacement during the process of using. Based on the

ISSN: 2321–7529(Online) || ISSN: 2321–7510 (Print)

 LOGO International Journal of Research and Technology
force characteristics and lateral deformation of retaining wall,  Maximum steel required for L shape retaining wall than
a kind of lateral displacement repairing technology of the cantilever retaining wall. Due to The thickness of
reinforced concrete retaining wall was proposed in this paper. steam in L shape retaining wall is more than the cantilever
In view of the stability of retaining wall lateral displacement retaining wall.
repairing and the improvement of construction efficiency, a  Difference in concrete increases with increase in height.
kind of lateral displacement repairing technology of reinforced The reason behind that the L shape retaining wall having
concrete retaining wall was proposed. Meanwhile, the greater wall thickness than the cantilever retaining wall.
construction process and quality control points of the  L Shape retaining wall consumes more concrete than the
technology are systematically analyzed to demonstrate the cantilever retaining wall.
rationality and engineering practical. Based on the need of the Ganesh C. Chikute, Ishwar P. Sonar (2019) (8) The main
retaining wall lateral displacement repairing, the construction aim of their case study was how best the gobin wall among the
process and application effect of the technology were other as the suggest itself Techno-Economical Analysis of
analyzed, and the research engineering application value of the Gabion Retaining Wall against Conventional Retaining Walls.
technology was illustrated. They describe the material needed and work methodology for
the gobin walls while taking actual case study of Bank erosion
Dr. Dhamdhere, Dr. V. R. Rathi and Dr. P. K. Kolase (2018)
at Ordinance factory, Kirki, Pune. They make a proper
(6) In this study about the design criteria of the cantilever and
comparative of gobin wall with other conventional retaining
counter fort retaining wall with pressure relieving wall. Also
wall in term of cost of construction, speed of construction,
study the results of stability of retaining walls, cost
material quantity needed which is very helpful in future.
optimization and their behaviour of bending moments at
According to them The construction cost of Gabion Wall as
different heights so it is helpful in designing the cantilever and
compare to Rubble Masonry, RCC Cantilever, RCC
counter fort at adequate heights accordingly all the data has
Counterfort, Graviloft retaining wall are 0.3%, 54.12%,
been described by help of graphs which is very helpful for
10.72% , 9.56% less respectively. Gabion Wall is ideally
construction and selection purposes. The conclude The
suited for remote area where skill Labour, advance machinery,
bending moment in toe and heel is less for retaining wall with
material is difficult to arrange.
relieving platform than cantilever retaining wall. The area of
steel for toe and heel is less for retaining wall with relieving Jyoti P. Bhusari, Rajashri S. Ghodke (2019) (9) In this they
platform than cantilever retaining wall. By providing platform, study the structural behaviour of cantilever retaining wall with
the stability against sliding in increases much more. And the pressure relieving shelves. By this we knew about how these
FOS against sliding and overturning is almost double in pressure relieving wall helps in decreasing the net effect of
retaining wall with relieving platform than cantilever retaining lateral earth pressure and Bending moment as well. But in this
wall. And measure conclusion is we also get interrelationship they also try to find the ideal location of the pressure relieving
between height of wall and various parameters of retaining walls in the cantilever r/wall so that maximum amount of net
wall like dimensions, area of main steel, bending moments for forces can be reduces. The deflection also gets reduced about
different part of retaining wall and cost of construction. 95 percent if we provide shelf of 3.5m at height of 0.5h.
Overall they conclude that, retaining wall with shelves can be
Ankit C. Mahure and Prof. M. N. Umare (2019) (7) In their
considered as an effective solution of the high retaining walls
research they conclude dynamic behaviour of the r/wall at
according to the study.
their different heights. The major problem of instability of
walls is mainly depends on earth pressure distribution on the Anjali Diwalkar (2020) (10) In this they design and study the
wall and the response of wall against the earth pressure, outcomes of retaining wall and conclude that various systems
especially, under dynamic/seismic loading condition. So they are implemented to support laterally the soil. Retaining walls
take a problem and analysis the behaviour, stability and might face failure because of sliding, overturning, and
strength as well on the different height of the retaining wall bending. Gross pressure and its point of application plays vital
structure. The study basically helps that what kind of retaining role in its failure. Coulomb’s method and Rankine’s method
wall is suitable at what height. The main conclusions they got used to evaluate the lateral earth pressure on retaining wall for
by their research, static condition. The retaining wall with relieving platform is
safer against overturning and sliding as compared to cantilever
 Difference in steel increases with increase in heights, the
retaining wall. In the gravity type of walls the sequence of
reason behind that the required Ast will increases with
construction is also important factor to be considered in the
increase in height.
design.

ISSN: 2321–7529(Online) || ISSN: 2321–7510 (Print)

 LOGO International Journal of Research and Technology
Suk -Min Kong, Dong-Wook Oh, So-Yeon Lee, Hyuk-Sang Applications, ISSN: 2248-9622, Vol.3, Issue 6, pp. 1012-
Jung and Yong-Joo Lee (2021) (11) In their study they 1021.
analyse reinforced retaining wall failure based on reinforced
[2] Jagadeesh, K., & Suresh, K., et.al. (2015). “Analysis of
length. They did numerical 3D analysis i.e. modelling by
Multi-Tier Retaining Wall”. International Journal of
using PLAXIS 3D (It widely utilised finite element analysis
Innovative Research in Science, Engineering and Technology,
programed for 3D geotechnical engineering). In this they
Vol. 4, Issue 7, pp. 6001-6007.
plotted a graph b/w height of retaining wall vs horizontal
displacement for straight retaining wall vs. curved retaining [3] Wen, Hua & Wu, Jiu-Jiang, et.al. (2016). “Model Test on
wall and this way the find out the role of r/f (length wise) in the Retaining Walls Constructed from Geobags Filled with
budging and settlement. The overall failure of the reinforced Construction Waste”. Hindawi Publishing Corporation,
retaining wall appears in the form of wall bulging, which Volume 2016, Article ID 4971312.
decreases as the reinforcement length increases. In the
numerical analysis, different reinforcement lengths, i.e., 1 and [4] C., Karthik Babu, & B.S., Keerthi Gowda, (2016).
3 m, were used in the straight and curved sections, “Analysis of Counterfort Retaining Wall with and without
respectively. In the curved sections, the reinforcement effect Pressure Relief Shelf using Soft Computing Technique”.
in terms of the vertical displacements was the same. However, Science Insights: An International Journal, ISSN 2277–3835.
the horizontal displacements in the straight sections decreased
[5] Yu, HAN Shang, & Ren, LI Kai, et.al. (2018). “The Study
by 9.72% at the top of the wall (4m point) as a result of the
on Construction Technique about the Reinforced Concrete
reinforcements applied to the curved sections. Therefore,
Retaining Wall’s Lateral Displacement Repairing”. MATEC
instead of using the same reinforcement length, it is
Web of Conferences 175, 02006.
economical to employ different lengths into straight and
curved sections. In the future, the authors intend to conduct [6] Dhamdhere, D.R., Rathi, V. R., et.al. (2018). “Design and
research on the optimal stiffener length and its details through Analysis of Retaining Wall”. International Journal of
model tests. Management, Technology and Engineering, ISSN NO: 2249-
7455, Vol. 8, Issue IX, pp. 1246-1263.
III. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION [7] Mahure, C., & Umare, M.N., (2019). “Investigation on
This paper review work was a small effort towards perceiving Dynamic Behaviour of different types of Retaining Walls with
that how retaining wall will behave in several conditions and Different Heights”. International Journal for Research in
study about the design of retaining wall. Hence through this Applied Science & Engineering Technology (IJRASET),
project it was tried to appreciate the effectiveness and role of ISSN: 2321-9653, Volume 7, Issue V.
the retaining wall that can help real life in several ways.
[8] C. Chikute, Ganesh, & P. Sonar, Ishwar, (2019). “Techno-
The following conclusions were drawn at the end of the study: Economical Analysis of Gabion Retaining Wall against
Conventional Retaining Walls”. IRJET, e-ISSN: 2395-0056,
a) Behaviour of retaining wall at different heights is helpful
Volume: 06, Issue: 08, pp. 1161-1167.
for the selection of suitable retaining wall and also we
know about the behaviour of retaining wall under seismic [9] P. Bhusari, Jyoti, (2019). “Structural Behaviour of
condition. Cantilever Retaining Wall with Pressure Relieving Shelves”.
b) Effect use of waste construction material using them. In International Journal of Engineering Research & Technology,
the geobags for the retaining wall stability. Vol. 8, Issue 12, pp. 240-245.
c) Effectiveness of the GOBIN retaining wall with respect of
convention retaining wall structure [10] Diwalkar, Anjali, (2020). “Analysis and Design of
d) Come to know about the uses of the pressure relieving Retaining Wall: A Review”. International Conference on
walls and work of it in construction of retaining wall. Communication and Information Processing (ICCIP-2020).
e) Effect of reinforcement on the retaining wall stability. [11] Kong, Suk-Min, & Oh, Dong-Wook, et.al. (2021).
“Analysis of reinforced retaining wall failure based on
REFERENCES
reinforcement length”. International Journal of Geo-
[1] Yang, Su, & Chegnizadeh, Amin, (2013). “Review of Engineering.
studies on Retaining Wall’s Behaviour on Dynamics/ Seismic
Condition”. Journal of Engineering Research and

ISSN: 2321–7529(Online) || ISSN: 2321–7510 (Print)