1. The document discusses asset management plans for earth retaining structures like concrete retaining walls and criteria for assessing their condition over their lifecycle. 2. Early asset management plans from the 1990s in Cincinnati aimed to inventory retaining walls and develop management software. By the 2010s, most transportation agencies had not implemented management plans for these structures. 3. The document outlines key elements of asset management plans including inspections, decision criteria for maintenance/repair options, and non-destructive testing methods for assessing concrete retaining wall condition like GPR, lidar, and ground-based optical sensors.

1. EARTH RETAINING STRUCTURES (ERS) ASSET
MANAGEMENT AND CONCRETE RETAINING
WALLS CONDITION ASSESSMENT
STUDENT: VINCENZO ROBERTI
COURSE: CCE 6510 STRUCTURAL SYSTEMS ASSESSMENT
PROESSOR: DR. UPUL ATTANAYAKE

2. OBJECTIVE
Literature review of the existing Asset Management plans for
Earth Retaining Structures and criteria to support decision
making over the lifecycle of concrete retaining walls
Overview of concrete retaining walls and the procedure to
assess its condition
1
2

3. 1. ASSET MANAGEMENT PLANS
FOR EARTH RETAINING
STRUCTURES

4. ERS: WHAT IS IT? Concrete and Masonry Gravity Walls
(Reinforced Concrete Retaining Walls)
Sheet Pile and Soldier Pile Walls
(Anchored Sheet Pile and Soldier Pile Walls)
Crib Walls and Cellular Walls Mechanically Stabilized Earth Walls
1. Asset Management plans for Earth Retaining Structures

5. AM: WHAT IS IT?
1. Asset Management plans for Earth Retaining Structures

6. ERS ASSET MANAGEMENT PLAN:
TIME LAPSE
1990 – City of Cincinnati:
Assessment of retaining walls and implementation of a software based
management system
2000 - Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT):
Study on Feasibility of a Management System for Retaining Walls
and Sound Barriers
2004 - FHWA and Federal Lands Highway (FLH), National Park Service (NPS)
Develop and implement for U.S. Parks a retaining wall inventory and condition
assessment program supporting roadway asset management
2010:
From a survey at which transportation agencies and the 50 US DOT agencies participated, only 13
have implemented or are going to implement a ERS management plan
1999 – New York City:
Feasibility study on ERS assessment and management
1. Asset Management plans for Earth Retaining Structures

7. ERS ASSET MANAGEMENT PLAN:
WHY SO LATE?
New York city Total = n.d., 3500 (maintained, “right of way”)
Cincinnati Total = 6827 , 1800 maintained
National Park Total = n.d. , 3500 assessed (at 2012)
ERS failures:
- Davis County, Tennessee
- 75’ wall collapsed on river drive, New
York City 2005
- Blue Ridge Parkway at Mile Post 364.6
ACCESS
NUMBER
FUNDS
1. Asset Management plans for Earth Retaining Structures

8. ERS ASSET MANAGEMENT PLAN:
TODAY
Survey conducted by USOT and MichTech
1. Asset Management plans for Earth Retaining Structures

9. ERS AM: CRITERIA
Inventory
Review of Existing Records
Preliminary Mapping
Prioritizing and Staging
ID Numbering System
Survey Form
Field and Office Procedure Checklist
1. Asset Management plans for Earth Retaining Structures
Attributes
Qualifying Roads
Relation to Roadway Asset
Wall Height
Wall Embedment
Wall Face Angle
General Acceptance

10. ERS AM: INSPECTION
1. Asset Management plans for Earth Retaining Structures
Mobile apps
Inspection programs
Field Forms

11. ERS AM: POLICY MAKING
1. Asset Management plans for Earth Retaining Structures
Useful life
Performance measures
Risk Management

12. ERS: DECISION MAKING
1. Asset Management plans for Earth Retaining Structures
Performance?
General Asset
Geotechnical Asset??

13. ERS: DECISION MAKING
1. Asset Management plans for Earth Retaining Structures
INSPECTION RATING
+
USEFUL LIFE

14. ERS: DECISION MAKING
1. Asset Management plans for Earth Retaining Structures

15. ERS: DECISION MAKING
1. Asset Management plans for Earth Retaining Structures
Option 0: Do Nothing
If the element is found to be in a good, fair, poor or severe condition state and there are no
recommendations for maintenance.
Option 1: Protect
If the element is found to be good, fair, poor or severe condition state and requires protections
such as paint, coating or sealant
Option 2: Repair
If the element is found to be in a poor or severe condition state and repairs are necessary
Option 3: Rehabilitate
If the element is found to be in a poor or severe condition state and rehabilitation is necessary
Option 4: Replace
If an element is found to be in a severe condition state, replacement may be necessary.

16. 2. CONCRETE RETAINING WALLS
ASSESSMENT

17. TYPOLOGIES
2. Concrete retaining wall assessment
Loads configuration
• Overall stability
• Bearing capacity
• Overturning
• Sliding
• Safety against structural
• failure (anchors)
Failure Modes

18. CONDITION RATING
2. Concrete retaining wall assessment
•Any defects are minor and within the range for newely
constructed or abricted elements
•Defects may include those due to fabrication or construction
9-10 Excellent
•Low to moderate extent of low severity distress
•Distress presnt does not significantly compromise element
function
7-8
Good
•High extent of low severity distress
•Distress present does not compromise element function but
lack of treatment may lead to elevated risk of failure
5-6 Fair
•Medium to high extent of medium high severity distress
•Distress present threatens element function3-4 Poor
•Medium to high extent of high severity distress
•Element is no longer serving intended function1-2 Critical
(Federal Higway Administration (FHWA), 2010)

19. DISTRESSES
2. Concrete retaining wall assessment
Lost Bearing/Missing ElementsCorrosion/Weathering
Cracking/Breaking
Distortion/Deflection

20. NDT METHODS
2. Concrete retaining wall assessment
Test Type Scope
Field observations (Visual Inspection) Various
Traditional survey Various
GPS Wall Movement
Inclinometer Wall movement
CLASSICAL CONCRETE NDT TESTING
STANDARD PRACTICE RETAINING WALL TESTING

21. VISUAL INSPECTION
2. Concrete retaining wall assessment
“Checklist”

22. NDT ALTERNATIVE METHODS
2. Concrete retaining wall assessment
NDT Method Typology Main Objective
GPR/Tomography Acoustic
Reinforcement Geometry
Void detection
Lidar Optical Wall Movement
Elasto-Magnetic Sensor EM Anchor Stresses
Inclinometer/Extensometer Sensors Wall Movement/Soil Pressure
Optical remote sensing Optical Wall Movement
Thermal Scanning Optical
Drainage/Concrete Distress
Cracking
Corrosion Monitoring EM Reinforcement Corrosion

23. GPR/TOMOGRAPHY
2. Concrete retaining wall assessment
Ground penetrating radar

24. GPR/TOMOGRAPHY
2. Concrete retaining wall assessment

25. LIDAR
2. Concrete retaining wall assessment
light detection and ranging (LiDAR) systems

26. OPTICAL REMOTE SENSING
2. Concrete retaining wall assessment
AERIAL
GROUND

27. OPTICAL REMOTE SENSING
2. Concrete retaining wall assessment
CASE STUDY M-10 DETROIT, MI

28. OPTICAL REMOTE SENSING
2. Concrete retaining wall assessment

29. OPTICAL REMOTE SENSING
2. Concrete retaining wall assessment

30. TUNNEL DISTRESS TESTING
2. Concrete retaining wall assessment
Test method Objective
Impact Echo Delamination, distress in concrete
GPR Rebar location, sizes, delamination,
cracks,
concrete thickness
PSPA Multiple
Spectral Analysis Surface Waves Concrete liner assessment
Rebar location EM Rebar pattern and sizes
Impulse response Voids
Manual acoustic methods Delamination
Infrared Delamination/cracking
Diagnostic train multiple

31. GPR
2. Concrete retaining wall assessment

32. PSPA
2. Concrete retaining wall assessment

33. PSPA CASE STUDY
2. Concrete retaining wall assessment

34. PSPA CASE STUDY
2. Concrete retaining wall assessment

35. THANKS!