Table 5. Comparison of theoretical and... | Emerald Publishing

Table 5.

Comparison of theoretical and experimental results

Case No.	Method	Critical depth of embedment: m
1	Assuming rotation at toe point of wall and using Mayniel (1808) and Caquot & Kerisel (1948) earth pressure coefficients for active and passive earth pressures, as shown in Fig. 16.	0·30
2	Rotation at toe point but using Coulomb's earth pressure coefficients for active and passive earth pressures, as shown in Fig. 16.	0·27
3	Point of rotation above the toe of the wall and employing Mayniel and Caquot–Kerisel earth pressure coefficients for active and passive earth pressures, as shown in Fig. 17.	0·30
4	Bica & Clayton (1991, 1998) by using experimental data; see Fig. 17.	0·35

Case No.	Method	Critical depth of embedment: m
1	Assuming rotation at toe point of wall and using Mayniel (1808) and Caquot & Kerisel (1948) earth pressure coefficients for active and passive earth pressures, as shown in Fig. 16.	0·30
2	Rotation at toe point but using Coulomb's earth pressure coefficients for active and passive earth pressures, as shown in Fig. 16.	0·27
3	Point of rotation above the toe of the wall and employing Mayniel and Caquot–Kerisel earth pressure coefficients for active and passive earth pressures, as shown in Fig. 17.	0·30
4	Bica & Clayton (1991, 1998) by using experimental data; see Fig. 17.	0·35