Link points to Internet Archive / others. Not hosted by InfraLens. Details
IS 15382:2002 is the Indian Standard (BIS) for design of retaining walls. This code of practice outlines the design principles for various types of retaining walls, including gravity, cantilever, and counterfort walls. It details the methods for calculating earth pressures (Rankine and Coulomb theories), checking stability against overturning, sliding, and bearing capacity failure, and provides specific guidance on drainage and seismic design considerations.
Provides guidelines for the design and construction of various types of retaining walls, including gravity, cantilever, and counterfort walls.
BIM-relevant code. See the BIM Hub for ISO 19650, IFC, and LOD/LOIN frameworks used alongside it.
Practical Notes
! The majority of retaining wall failures are caused by inadequate drainage leading to hydrostatic pressure build-up. Ensure drainage provisions like weep holes and a granular backfill zone are properly designed and implemented.
! The assumptions of earth pressure theories (e.g., wall movement, backfill condition) must be understood. Actual site conditions may require modifications to theoretical pressures.
! Proper compaction of the backfill material in layers is as critical to the wall's performance as the structural design of the wall itself.
EN 1997-1:2004European Committee for Standardization (CEN), Europe
HighCurrent
Eurocode 7: Geotechnical design - Part 1: General rules
Covers fundamental principles of geotechnical design for retaining structures and other foundations.
BS 8002:2015British Standards Institution (BSI), United Kingdom
HighCurrent
Code of practice for earth retaining structures
Provides specific guidance on the design and analysis of earth retaining structures in the UK.
AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications, 9th EditionAmerican Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), USA
MediumCurrent
AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications
Section 11 covers the LRFD design of retaining walls, primarily for transportation infrastructure.
AS 4678-2002Standards Australia, Australia
HighCurrent
Earth-retaining structures
Dedicated Australian standard for the design and construction of earth-retaining structures.
Key Differences
≠Design Philosophy: IS 15382 uses a Working Stress Design (WSD) approach with global factors of safety, whereas Eurocode 7 and AASHTO LRFD use a Limit State Design (LSD) / Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) approach with partial safety factors on loads, materials, and resistances.
≠Bearing Pressure Criteria: IS 15382 recommends the 'middle third rule' (eccentricity e ≤ B/6) to avoid any tension under the foundation. Eurocode 7 is less conservative, permitting the resultant to lie within the middle two-thirds (e ≤ B/3), allowing for some loss of contact pressure.
≠Material Strength Factoring: Eurocode 7 (in certain Design Approaches) applies partial factors directly to material properties like the angle of shearing resistance (φ') and cohesion (c'). IS 15382 uses unfactored characteristic material properties in its calculations.
≠Seismic Design Approach: While all use a pseudo-static method (Mononobe-Okabe), the specific seismic coefficients, the point of application of the seismic thrust, and the allowable reduction in safety factors during a seismic event can differ significantly between the codes.
Key Similarities
≈Fundamental Stability Analysis: All standards require the verification of the same fundamental failure modes: stability against sliding, overturning, bearing capacity failure, and overall global instability.
≈Earth Pressure Theories: The calculation of active and passive earth pressures in all codes is based on the classical soil mechanics principles of Rankine and Coulomb theories.
≈Importance of Drainage: All codes unanimously emphasize the critical importance of providing effective drainage behind the retaining wall to prevent the buildup of hydrostatic pressure, providing guidance on weep holes and granular backfills.
≈Geotechnical Investigation Requirement: All standards mandate that a thorough geotechnical investigation is a prerequisite for design to accurately determine the soil parameters (unit weight, shear strength, etc.) used in the analysis.
Parameter Comparison
Parameter
IS Value
International
Source
Factor of Safety against Sliding (Static)
≥ 1.5
No direct FoS. Uses a resistance factor for sliding (e.g., φτ = 0.80) in a LRFD format.
AASHTO LRFD
Factor of Safety against Overturning (Static)
≥ 1.5 (cohesionless) / ≥ 2.0 (cohesive)
Not specified as a global factor. Stability is ensured by satisfying moment equilibrium at the Ultimate Limit State (ULS) using factored loads.
EN 1997-1
Allowable Eccentricity (Bearing Pressure)
e ≤ B/6 (Resultant must be in the middle third)
e ≤ B/3 (Resultant can be in the middle two-thirds)
EN 1997-1
Application Point of Seismic Thrust Increment
The total dynamic thrust may be applied at H/2 from the base for vertical backfill.
The seismic active earth pressure increment (ΔPae) is applied at 0.6H from the base.
AASHTO LRFD
Minimum Recommended Foundation Depth
0.9 m below ground level
0.75 m in the UK (for frost protection), but generally based on local frost depth and soil conditions.
BS 8002:2015
⚠ Verify details from original standards before use
Key Values7
Quick Reference Values
Minimum Factor of Safety against Overturning (Static)1.5
Minimum Factor of Safety against Sliding (Static)1.5
Minimum Factor of Safety against Overturning (Seismic)1.2
Minimum Factor of Safety against Sliding (Seismic)1.2
Minimum Factor of Safety against Bearing Capacity Failure2.5
Minimum diameter of weep holes75 mm
Maximum spacing of weep holes2 m c/c horizontally and vertically
Key Formulas
Ka = (1 - sin φ) / (1 + sin φ) — Rankine's active earth pressure coefficient
Kp = (1 + sin φ) / (1 - sin φ) — Rankine's passive earth pressure coefficient
What is the minimum factor of safety against overturning for a retaining wall?+
1.5 for static conditions and 1.2 for seismic conditions (Table 1).
What is the minimum factor of safety against sliding?+
1.5 for static conditions and 1.2 for seismic conditions. This should be checked for the wall base on foundation soil (Table 1).
When should Coulomb's theory be used over Rankine's theory?+
Coulomb's theory is more general and can account for wall friction and sloping backfill, whereas Rankine's theory is simpler but assumes a smooth vertical wall and horizontal backfill (Clause 6.2 & 6.3).
What are the requirements for weep holes?+
Weep holes should have a minimum diameter of 75 mm and be spaced at a maximum of 2m centre-to-centre, both horizontally and vertically (Clause 9.3).