Retaining Wall Type Selection: cantilever
Retaining wall type selection decision matrix — 14 wall types across 7 structural categories (gravity, cantilever, MSE, sheet pile, soldier pile, in-situ soil nail, in-situ secant/diaphragm). Each record gives: practical height range, foundation requirements, backfill requirements, typical batter, relative cost index (1=lowest to 6=highest), construction speed, right-of-way requirements, aesthetics rating, seismic performance, drainage requirements, and typical applications. Sources: FHWA-NHI-07-071, AASHTO LRFD 9th Ed Sec 11, NAVFAC DM-7.2, Coduto Foundation Design 3rd Ed Ch.17, USACE EM 1110-2-2504.
| wall category | wall type | aesthetics rating | backfill requirement | batter typical | construction speed | drainage requirement | foundation requirement | height max ft (ft) | height max m (m) | height min ft (ft) | height min m (m) | notes | relative cost index (dimensionless) | row requirement | seismic performance | typical applications |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| cantilever | cantilever_concrete | good — smooth finish optional | granular compacted fill preferred; cohesive acceptable with drainage | 0.00 to 0.01 | moderate | weep holes plus filter fabric required | competent bearing soil; min bearing 2–3 ksf | 30 | 9.1 | 4 | 1.2 | Inverted T or L cross-section; stem transfers lateral load to footing; base width = 0.5H; reinforced concrete per ACI 318-19; LRFD design per AASHTO 9th Ed Sec 11.6; standard wall for heights 10–25 ft | 3 | moderate — base width ~0.5–0.7H needed | good — stiff monolithic structure with proper seismic detailing | highway retaining walls; bridge abutments; building below-grade walls; industrial facilities |
| cantilever | counterfort_concrete | good | granular compacted fill preferred | 0.00 | slow | weep holes plus chimney drain required | competent soil or rock; min bearing 3–5 ksf | 50 | 15.2 | 20 | 6.1 | Transverse counterforts at 1/3–1/2H spacing tie stem to base; more economical than cantilever above ~20 ft; slower to form; design per ACI 318-19 and AASHTO LRFD | 4 | large — counterfort spacing + base extends far | good — stiff monolithic with counterforts; similar to cantilever with higher redundancy | very tall highway cuts; bridge wing walls; dam overflow walls; tall building retaining |
This is a sample. Search the full retaining wall type selection dataset and 300+ more by creating a free account and accessing the database.
Get started for FREE