We use analytics cookies to understand how you use this site and improve our content. See our privacy policy and cookie policy for details.

Calcs.com
United States

Retaining wall design considerations to IBC 2018 and ASCE 7-16

21 June 2022

Watch recording
Eva Wu

Eva Wu

Structural Design Consultant

Connor Conzelman

Connor Conzelman

Director of Customer Success

About this event

How to design a concrete cantilevered retaining wall to IBC 2018 and ASCE 7-16 using Calcs.com. This session covers the full design workflow: determining lateral earth pressure, checking sliding and overturning stability, sizing the stem and base in concrete to ACI 318-19, and completing the design within Calcs.com.

In this webinar we covered

  • Lateral earth pressure calculation using Rankine and Coulomb theory
  • Hydrostatic and surcharge load contributions
  • Sliding and overturning stability checks per ASCE 7-16
  • Stem and base slab design to ACI 318-19
  • Soil bearing capacity checks under combined loading
  • Completing a retaining wall design in Calcs.com

What a retaining wall does

A retaining wall acts like a dam for soil: it holds back earth to allow height differentials across a site. Without one, soil at a higher elevation naturally disperses over time. Retaining walls make it possible to create stepped terrain, landscaping features, patios, and other civil site features.

Of all the components in a retaining wall design, the retained soil is arguably the most important element. Its properties govern the lateral pressures that drive every subsequent design decision.

How lateral soil pressure is calculated

Three methods are available for calculating lateral soil pressure: equivalent fluid pressure, Rankine, and Coulomb. The equivalent fluid pressure method is the most prescriptive and the most straightforward to apply, and it is the approach codified in IBC 2018.

The forces acting on the wall extend beyond lateral earth pressure alone. Surcharge loads at grade add a horizontal pressure component over the retained height. Where drainage is not positively controlled, the design must also account for high water table conditions.

Common wall types and failure modes

Cantilevered retaining walls come in three common configurations: standard cantilever (with both toe and heel), cantilever without toe, and cantilever without heel. The geometry chosen affects which failure modes are most critical to the design.

Five failure modes must be checked: wall fracture, footing bending, overturning, soil bearing, and sliding. Each has a corresponding design lever. Wall fracture and footing bending are addressed by adding or resizing reinforcement, or by increasing wall thickness. Overturning and soil bearing failures are handled by increasing the footing size or adjusting the lever arm. Sliding resistance can be improved through footing geometry or soil improvement measures.

Worked example: a 4-foot retaining wall in Calcs.com

The session walked through a complete design example: a wall retaining a 4-foot height differential, designed for a factor of safety of 1.5 against both sliding and overturning. The design used the equivalent fluid pressure method with poorly graded soil.

The Calcs.com calculator returned the required reinforcement directly: #5 bars at specified spacings in the stem, heel, and toe, plus temperature reinforcement across the section. Those results were then carried through to a construction detail, showing exactly where each bar sits in the wall section.

Q&A

Which lateral soil pressure method does IBC 2018 prescribe?
The equivalent fluid pressure method is the most prescriptive and easiest-to-apply approach, and it is the one codified in IBC 2018. Rankine and Coulomb methods are also available when more detailed soil property data is on hand.
What failure modes does a retaining wall need to be designed against?
Five failure modes govern: wall fracture, footing bending, overturning, soil bearing, and sliding. Each has a corresponding remedy. Wall fracture and footing bending are addressed by adding or resizing reinforcement or increasing wall thickness. Overturning and soil bearing are handled by increasing the footing size or adjusting the lever arm. Sliding can be improved through footing geometry or soil improvement measures.
What factor of safety was used in the worked example, and what were the design assumptions?
The worked example used a factor of safety of 1.5 for both sliding and overturning. The wall retained a 4-foot height differential and the design assumed equivalent fluid pressure with poorly graded soil.
What reinforcement did the worked example produce?
The example specified #5 bars at defined spacings in the stem, heel, and toe, plus temperature reinforcement across the section. Those output values were then carried through into a construction detail showing the bar placement in the wall.

Speakers

Eva Wu, Structural Design Consultant at Calcs.com

Eva Wu

Structural Design Consultant · Calcs.com

Eva is a Structural Design Expert with five years of experience in building design. Before joining Calcs.com, she specialized in mass timber and structural steel design in recreational and institutional buildings. She has also designed a fair share of bespoke houses.

Connor Conzelman, Director of Customer Success at Calcs.com

Connor Conzelman

Director of Customer Success · Calcs.com

Connor is an experienced Mechanical Engineer who found his passion in connecting his people and technical skills to help engineers in every step of their design process. Before joining Calcs.com, Connor worked as a Mechanical Design Engineer focusing on energy-efficient designs at Elara Engineering in Chicago and completed his MBA from Western Illinois University.

Standards referenced

IBC 2018ASCE 7-16ACI 318-19

Make decisions you can defend at review time

Share a calculation with the basis of design attached - inputs, formulas, and code references alongside the result.