Users Forum
ADONIS Category => ADONIS Users => Topic started by: bzahawi on December 22, 2021, 09:20:51 pm
-
Dr Roozbeh
1. For thick retaining walls/secant walls/diaphragm walls ( thickness greater than 3 ft ) , modeling the wall as a linear soil element seems more logical than a beam element.
2. I modeled a secant pile wall with an equivalent X-section of 1 ft x 3.5 ft. once as a beam element with interface and once as a elastic soil element.
3. The results were significantly different.
Trying to figure out why and the interface comes to mind first. Using the linear elastic model, I cannot find a way of modeling the interface.
Any thoughts ?
Thank you
-
I'm not sure why you need to use prefer to solid elements. I have never done it myself so I really can't give you a clear answer. I always use beam element because figuring out the proper properties and also applying the spacing in solid element is not easy.
-
Dr Roozbeh
The main reason is the thickness of the walls and its effect on the soils and adjacent footings behind it during lateral deflection. I am currently studying a problem where there is a property wall around 3 ft behind the wall ( 3.5 ft thick). If I model the beam at the center of the wall, the distance between it and the other wall will be 4.75 ft as opposed to 3 which could make a difference.
Not sure if it will make much of a difference but knowing the soil behind the wall will settle for a distance behind the wall under lateral deflection, thought of checking if the results differ.
Thank you