05/08/2015geo1.0 LimitState:GEO Case Study Colin Smith MA(Cantab) PhD Director & LimitState:GEO Product Manager, LimitState Ltd

05/08/2015 geo1.0 Introduction

20/05/2008 LimitState:GEO launch & technology briefing - ICE London Problem specification An existing embankment is to be widened A stem wall is to be constructed and backfilled with granular material The widened embankment is to take additional loading. How wide (B) should the stem wall be? 5m B Φ = 27º, γ = 18kN/m 3 Φ = 34º, γ = 18kN/m 3 10kN/m 2 45kN/m 2

20/05/2008 LimitState:GEO launch & technology briefing - ICE London Analysis Rankine analysis using a virtual back is difficult due to the varied surface loads and the inclined soil interface

20/05/2008 LimitState:GEO launch & technology briefing - ICE London Analysis Coulomb analysis more appropriate using a virtual back and a range of wedge angles

20/05/2008 LimitState:GEO launch & technology briefing - ICE London Analysis Initial design might conservatively assume a frictionless virtual back to keep calculations simple S N W W R P P

20/05/2008 LimitState:GEO launch & technology briefing - ICE London LimitState:GEO Analysis Start with a DXF import of initial design

05/08/2015 geo1.0 geo1.0: Analysis

Analysis 20/05/2008 LimitState:GEO launch & technology briefing - ICE London Analysis At this stage, LimitState:GEO was used to analyse the problem as described in the previous slides (Hands on demo of software)

20/05/2008 LimitState:GEO launch & technology briefing - ICE London Conclusions LimitState:GEO provides flexibility to rapidly consider a range of design scenarios It automatically selects the critical mechanism eliminating the need to separately consider e.g. sliding, bearing failure, global stability etc. Specific failure modes can be ‘forced’ if required Handles complex boundary conditions that would otherwise require simplifications and assumptions by conventional methods