Geosynthetic reinforced soil (GRS) walls involve the use of geosynthetic reinforcement (polymer material) within the retained backfill, forming a reinforced soil block where transmission of overturning and sliding forces on the wall to the backfill occurs. Key advantages of GRS systems include the reduced need for large foundations, cost reduction (up to 50%), lower environmental costs, faster construction and significantly improved seismic performance as observed in previous earthquakes. Design methods in New Zealand have not been well established and as a result, GRS structures do not have a uniform level of seismic and static resistance; hence involve different risks of failure. Further research is required to better understand the seismic behaviour of GRS structures to advance design practices. The experimental study of this research involved a series of twelve 1-g shake table tests on reduced-scale (1:5) GRS wall models using the University of Canterbury shake-table. The seismic excitation of the models was unidirectional sinusoidal input motion with a predominant frequency of 5Hz and 10s duration. Seismic excitation of the model commenced at an acceleration amplitude level of 0.1g and was incrementally increased by 0.1g in subsequent excitation levels up to failure (excessive displacement of the wall panel). The wall models were 900mm high with a full-height rigid facing panel and five layers of Microgird reinforcement (reinforcement spacing of 150mm). The wall panel toe was founded on a rigid foundation and was free to slide. The backfill deposit was constructed from dry Albany sand to a backfill relative density, Dr = 85% or 50% through model vibration. The influence of GRS wall parameters such as reinforcement length and layout, backfill density and application of a 3kPa surcharge on the backfill surface was investigated in the testing sequence. Through extensive instrumentation of the wall models, the wall facing displacements, backfill accelerations, earth pressures and reinforcement loads were recorded at the varying levels of model excitation. Additionally, backfill deformation was also measured through high-speed imaging and Geotechnical Particle Image Velocimetry (GeoPIV) analysis. The GeoPIV analysis enabled the identification of the evolution of shear strains and volumetric strains within the backfill at low strain levels before failure of the wall thus allowing interpretations to be made regarding the strain development and shear band progression within the retained backfill. Rotation about the wall toe was the predominant failure mechanism in all excitation level with sliding only significant in the last two excitation levels, resulting in a bi-linear displacement acceleration curve. An increase in acceleration amplification with increasing excitation was observed with amplification factors of up to 1.5 recorded. Maximum seismic and static horizontal earth pressures were recorded at failure and were recorded at the wall toe. The highest reinforcement load was recorded at the lowest (deepest in the backfill) reinforcement layer with a decrease in peak load observed at failure, possibly due to pullout failure of the reinforcement layer. Conversely, peak reinforcement load was recorded at failure for the top reinforcement layer. The staggered reinforcement models exhibited greater wall stability than the uniform reinforcement models of L/H=0.75. However, similar critical accelerations were determined for the two wall models due to the coarseness of excitation level increments of 0.1g. The extended top reinforcements were found to restrict the rotational component of displacement and prevented the development of a preliminary shear band at the middle reinforcement layer, contributing positively to wall stability. Lower acceleration amplification factors were determined for the longer uniform reinforcement length models due to reduced model deformation. A greater distribution of reinforcement load towards the top two extended reinforcement layers was also observed in the staggered wall models. An increase in model backfill density was observed to result in greater wall stability than an increase in uniform reinforcement length. Greater acceleration amplification was observed in looser backfill models due to their lower model stiffness. Due to greater confinement of the reinforcement layers, greater reinforcement loads were developed in higher density wall models with less wall movement required to engage the reinforcement layers and mobilise their resistance. The application of surcharge on the backfill was observed to initially increase the wall stability due to greater normal stresses within the backfill but at greater excitation levels, the surcharge contribution to wall destabilising inertial forces outweighs its contribution to wall stability. As a result, no clear influence of surcharge on the critical acceleration of the wall models was observed. Lower acceleration amplification factors were observed for the surcharged models as the surcharge acts as a damper during excitation. The application of the surcharge also increases the magnitude of reinforcement load developed due to greater confinement and increased wall destabilising forces. The rotation of the wall panel resulted in the progressive development of shears surface with depth that extended from the backfill surface to the ends of the reinforcement (edge of the reinforced soil block). The resultant failure plane would have extended from the backfill surface to the lowest reinforcement layer before developing at the toe of the wall, forming a two-wedge failure mechanism. This is confirmed by development of failure planes at the lowest reinforcement layer (deepest with the backfill) and at the wall toe observed at the critical acceleration level. Key observations of the effect of different wall parameters from the GeoPIV results are found to be in good agreement with conclusions developed from the other forms of instrumentation. Further research is required to achieve the goal of developing seismic guidelines for GRS walls in geotechnical structures in New Zealand. This includes developing and testing wall models with a different facing type (segmental or wrap-around facing), load cell instrumentation of all reinforcement layers, dynamic loading on the wall panel and the use of local soils as the backfill material. Lastly, the limitations of the experimental procedure and wall models should be understood.

Use of soil retaining walls for roads, embankments and bridges is increasing with time and reinforced soil retaining walls are found to be very efficient even under critical conditions compared to unreinforced walls. They offer competitive solutions to earth retaining problems associated with less space and more loads posed by tremendous growth in infrastructure, in addition to the advantages in ease and cost of construction compared to conventional retaining wall systems. The study of seismic performance of reinforced soil retaining walls is receiving much attention in the light of lessons learned from past failures of conventional retaining walls. Laboratory model studies on these walls under controlled seismic loading conditions help to understand better how these walls actually behave during earthquakes. The objective of the present study is to investigate the seismic response of geosynthetic reinforced soil wall models through shaking table tests. To achieve this, wrap faced and rigid faced reinforced soil retaining walls of size 750 × 500 mm in plan and 600 mm height are built in rigid and flexible containers and tested under controlled dynamic conditions using a uni-axial shaking table. The effects of frequency and acceleration of the base motion, surcharge pressure on the crest, number of reinforcing layers, container boundary, wall structure and reinforcement layout on the seismic performance of the retaining walls are studied through systematic series of shaking table tests. Results are analyzed to understand the effect of each of the considered parameters on the face displacements, acceleration amplifications and soil pressures on facing at different elevations of the walls. A numerical model is developed to simulate the shaking table tests on wrap faced reinforced soil walls using a computer program FLAC (Fast Lagrangian Analysis of Continua). The experimental data are used to validate the numerical model and parametric studies are carried out on 6 m height full-scale wall using this model. Thus, the study deals with the shaking table tests, dynamic response of reinforced walls and their numerical simulation. The thesis presents detailed description of various features and various parts of the shaking table facility along with the instrumentation and model containers. Methodology adopted for the construction of reinforced soil model walls and testing procedures are briefly described. Scaling and stability issues related to the model wall size and reinforcement strength are also discussed. From the study, it is observed that the displacements are decreasing with the increase in relative density of backfill, increase in surcharge pressure and increase in number of reinforcing layers; In general, accelerations are amplified to the most at the top of the wall; Behaviour of model walls is sensitive to model container boundary. The frequency content is very important parameter affecting the model response. Further, it is noticed that the face displacements are significantly affected by all of the above parameters, while the accelerations are less sensitive to reinforcement parameters. Even very low strength geonet and geotextile are able to reduce the displacements by 75% compared to unreinforced wall. The strain levels in the reinforcing elements are observed to be very low, in the order of ±150 micro strains. A random dynamic event is also used in one of the model tests and the resulted accelerations and displacements are presented. Numerical parametric studies provided important insight into the behaviour of wrap faced walls under various seismic loading conditions and variation in physical parameters.

Design of retaining structures depends upon the load which is transferred from backfill soil as well as external loads and also the resisting capacity of the structure. The traditional safety factor approach of the design of retaining structures does not address the variability of soils and loads. The properties of backfill soil are inherently variable and influence the design decisions considerably. A rational procedure for the design of retaining structures needs to explicitly consider variability, as they may cause significant changes in the performance and stability assessment. Reliability based design enables identification and separation of different variabilities in loading and resistance and recommends reliability indices to ensure the margin of safety based on probability theory. Detailed studies in this area are limited and the work presented in the dissertation on the Optimum design of retaining structures under static and seismic conditions: A reliability based approach is an attempt in this direction. This thesis contains ten chapters including Chapter 1 which provides a general introduction regarding the contents of the thesis and Chapter 2 presents a detailed review of literature regarding static and seismic design of retaining structures and highlights the importance of consideration of variability in the optimum design and leads to scope of the investigation. Targeted stability is formulated as optimization problem in the framework of target reliability based design optimization (TRBDO) and presented in Chapter 3. In Chapter 4, TRBDO approach for cantilever sheet pile walls and anchored cantilever sheet pile walls penetrating sandy and clayey soils is developed. Design penetration depth and section modulus for the various anchor pulls are obtained considering the failure criteria (rotational, sliding, and flexural failure modes) as well as variability in the back fill soil properties, soil-steel pile interface friction angle, depth of the water table, total depth of embedment, yield strength of steel, section modulus of sheet pile and anchor pull. The stability of reinforced concrete gravity, cantilever and L-shaped retaining walls in static conditions is examined in the context of reliability based design optimization and results are presented in Chapter 5 considering failure modes viz. overturning, sliding, eccentricity, bearing, shear and moment failures in the base slab and stem of wall. Optimum wall proportions are proposed for different coefficients of variation of friction angle of the backfill soil and cohesion of the foundation soil corresponding to different values of component as well as lower bounds of system reliability indices. Chapter 6 presents an approach to obtain seismic passive resistance behind gravity walls using composite curved rupture surface considering limit equilibrium method of analysis with the pseudo-dynamic approach. The study is extended to obtain the rotational and sliding displacements of gravity retaining walls under passive condition when subjected to sinusoidal nature of earthquake loading. Chapter 7 focuses on the reliability based design of gravity retaining wall when subjected to passive condition during earthquakes. Reliability analysis is performed for two modes of failure namely rotation of the wall about its heel and sliding of the wall on its base are considering variabilities associated with characteristics of earthquake ground motions, geometric proportions of wall, backfill soil and foundation soil properties. The studies reported in Chapter 8 and Chapter 9 present a method to evaluate reliability for external as well as internal stability of reinforced soil structures (RSS) using reliability based design optimization in the framework of pseudo static and pseudo dynamic methods respectively. The optimum length of reinforcement needed to maintain the stability against four modes of failure (sliding, overturning, eccentricity and bearing) by taking into account the variabilities associated with the properties of reinforced backfill, retained backfill, foundation soil, tensile strength and length of the geosynthetic reinforcement by targeting various component and system reliability indices is computed. Finally, Chapter 10 contains the important conclusions, along with scope for further work in the area. It is hoped that the methodology and conclusions presented in this study will be beneficial to the geotechnical engineering community in particular and society as a whole.