Deep Excavation in Hong Kong

Design and Construction Control

Jack Pappin, John Endicott & John Clark
(James Sze)

Content of the Presentation

Part I Design Considerations
Part II Numerical Modelling
Part III Observational Method

Part I DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS

Design Codes and Guides

CIRIA 104
BS 8002
DD ENV
BD 42/00
Piling handbook
CIRIA R185
CIRIA C517
CIRIA SP95
GEOGUIDE 1 2nd Ed.
GCO Publication No. 1/90

Conventional Retaining System Design Approach

Figure 29, GCO 1/90 (Navfac, 1982b)

CIRIA Report C580 Design

Aim - holistic, consistently reliable &
economic ELS design
Limit states design
Maintain simplicity over different
uncertainties adopt partial factor of
safety on soil strength only

Use of C580 in Hong Kong

Review Group set up by Geotechnical
Engineering Office in 2004
Recommendation concluded in Notes on
Design of Excavation and Lateral Support
Works Using the Limited State Partial
Factor Method in the CIRIA Report No.
C580
Promulgated by BD/GEO in early 2005
alternative to global factor of safety
approach in GCO Publication No. 1/90
review in 2 years before long-term
implementation

Simplified Flowchart of C580 Design Approach (SSI)

ULS Analysis

Moderately conservative parameters

Apply partial factors
Unplanned excavation(0.5m or 0.1H)
Unfactored surcharge load
Worst credible groundwater level

BM, SF & prop loads (ULS)

Toe-in requirement

SLS Analysis

Most probable parameters

Unfactored
Unfactored surcharge load
Most unfavorable groundwater
level under normal circumstances

BM, SF & prop loads (SLS) LF

Lateral wall deflection

BM, SF & prop loads envelope (structural design)

Conventional vs C580 Design Approach - Example

-6mPD
FSP-VL steel
sheetpile wall
Existing
Diaphragm wall

-16mPD

Sze & Lo (2005)

Sensitivity analyses Wall Bending Moment

Max. bending moment (kNm/m)
-2000

-1000

1000

Ultimate Bending moment (kNm/m)

-600
5

2000

0
1

Soil side

200

400

600

Excavation side

3
4
Level (mPD)

Depth of embedment (m)

-200

Soil side

Excavation side
Mu = 788kNm/m

-400

5
6

-5

-6.0mPD Dig Level

C580 toe level

-10

7
8
Conventional toe level

-15

9
10
ULS (+ve)

ULS (-ve)

SLS x 1.4 (+ve)

SLS x 1.4 (-ve)

-20
Conventional (Max.)

Conventional (Min.)

C580 (Max.)

C580 (Min.)

Sensitivity analyses Wall Shear Force

Ultimate Shear force (kN/m)

Max. shear force (kN/m)

0

500

1000

1500

-600
5

2000

-400

-200

200

Soil side

Excavation
side

1
Vu = 669kN/m

3
4

Level (mPD)

Depth of embedment (m)

400

5
6

-5

-6.0mPD Dig Level

C580 toe level

-10

7
8

Conventional toe level

-15

9
10
-20

ULS

SLS x 1.4

Conventional (Max.)

Conventional (Min.)

C580 (Max.)

C580 (Min.)

Sensitivity analyses Strut Force & Wall Deflection

Max. strut force (kN/m)
0

500

1000

1500

Horizontal Wall deflection (mm)

2000

20

40

60

80

100

S1

1
0

S2

3
4

Level (mPD)

Depth of embedment (m)

5
6

-5

-6.0mPD Dig Level

C580 toe level

-10

7
Conventional toe level

-15

9
10

-20

ULS - S1

ULS - S2

SLS - S1 x 1.4

SLS - S2 x 1.4

Conventional

C580 - SLS

Control of Groundwater at Passive Zone

Fill

Pump well
Alluvium

CDV

Rock

E.g. KCRC Spurline Kwu Tung Station

Buildability
Difficult in constructing
Unrealistic movement criteria

Buildable Design
Easy and fast
construction
Less risks
Safer working
environment
Could be more
cost effective

E.g. KCRC Tsuen Wan West Station

Over-excavation

Unworkable sequence vs Opportunistic contractor

Optimization of ELS Design at Kowloon Bay

vert. 2m c/c

Fill

MD

ALL

CDG/MDG
Original Design

Optimized

Development at Sheung Shing Street, KLN

Bottom-up with Raking Strut Option

Unrealistic Movement Criteria - Diaphragm Wall

Settlement measured at Chater Station in mid 70s

10

How about Sheetpile Wall Installation ?

0
5

2005-03-08

2005-03-14

Settlement (mm)

10
15
20
25

6mm

30
35
40

40
42
44
46
48
50
52
54
56
58
60
62
64
66
68
70
72
74
76
78
80
82

45
Chainage (m)

Installation may attribute a substantial part of induced movements

Sheet piling Giken (Silent) piling

E.g. East Rail TSTE Mody Road Subway, CLP Cable Tunnel TWS access shaft

11

Conclusions of Part I
C580 design approach would result in consistently
reliable design.
Shortest Toe-in might not be most economic.
Buildability - one of key factors for successful
execution of ELS works.
Get Contractors involvement at earlier stage if
possible.

Part II NUMERICAL MODELLING

12

Numerical Modelling
Earth pressure

Coulomb

1776Sub-title

Coulomb

1776

Terzaghi & Peck

1948

Numerical Modelling
Earth pressure
Applied Pressure Diagram

13

Numerical Modelling
Earth pressure
Applied Pressure Diagram

Coulomb

1776

Terzaghi & Peck

1948

Beam on Springs

1976

Numerical Modelling
Earth pressure
Applied Pressure Diagram

Coulomb

1776

Terzaghi & Peck

1948

Beam on Springs

1976

Finite Elements/Differences

1986

14

Numerical Modelling
Earth pressure
Applied Pressure Diagram

Coulomb

1776

Terzaghi & Peck

1948

Beam on Springs

1976

Finite Elements/Differences

1986

Bricks on Strings

Simpson

1992

Coulomb

1776

Terzaghi & Peck

1948

Numerical Modelling
Earth pressure
Applied Pressure Diagram
Beam on Springs

1976

Finite Elements/Differences

1986

Bricks on Strings
3D Applications in practice

Simpson

1992
2002 - 2005

15

Layout Plan of Extension to the Tsim Sha Tsui

Station Concourse

Typical Cross Section showing Ground

Conditions and the Proposed Works

16

View of the 3D FLAC Model Developed

showing the Lateral Wall Deflections along
the length of the Excavation

Plan view from FLAC 3D Model Showing the

Displacement of the Tunnel Linings along the
length of the Excavation

17

Wall Deflections and Tunnel Deformations

from FLAC 3D at a Section about 40 m from
the southern end

18

Monitoring of Tunnel Convergence Downtrack Tunnel

4
5
3
6
2
7

1
Convergence in mm

20
16
12
8
4
0
-4
-8
-12
-16
-20
10 Dec 02 09 J an 03 08 Feb 03 10 Mar 03

09 Apr 03 09 May 03 08 J un 03
1- 4

1- 4

1- 5

1- 5

1- 6

08 J ul 03
1- 7

1- 6

1- 7

07 Aug 03 06 Sep 03
7 -2

2- 7

06 Oct 03 05 No v 03 05 Dec 03 04 J an 04

7 -3

3- 7

7 -4

4- 7

Measured Deformation of Excavation Lateral

Support Wall
Displacement (mm)
-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

10

15

20

25

30

0.00

5.00

Depth (m)

10.00

15.00

20.00

INC01
INC02
25.00

INC03

30.00

19

 3-D modelling can be useful for complex geometries

3-D modelling can be useful for complex geometries

Often variations in ground conditions or
construction procedure render sophisticated
constitutive models redundant

20

 3-D modelling can be useful for complex geometries

Often variations in ground conditions or
construction procedure render sophisticated
constitutive models redundant
KIS = Keep It Simple

3-D modelling can be useful for complex geometries

Often variations in ground conditions or
construction procedure render sophisticated
constitutive models redundant
KIS = Keep It Simple

Less likely to get a plausible result based on wrong reasons

Easy to check for approval
Easy to compare with monitoring results
Easy to back analyse

21

Part III - USE OF OBSERVATIONS MADE

DURING EXCAVATION

What Constitutes a Well Performing

Excavation?
Common Objectives of Client and Contractor

22

What Constitutes a Well Performing

Excavation?
Common Objectives of Client and Contractor
totally safe against collapse

What Constitutes a Well Performing

Excavation?
Common Objectives of Client and Contractor
totally safe against collapse
adequate protection to nearby structures and roads etc.

23

What Constitutes a Well Performing

Excavation?
Common Objectives of Client and Contractor
totally safe against collapse
adequate protection to nearby structures and roads etc.
makes provisions for a safe working environment

What Constitutes a Well Performing

Excavation?
Common Objectives of Client and Contractor
Protective Factors
totally safe against collapse
adequate protection to nearby structures and roads etc.
makes provisions for a safe working environment

24

What Constitutes a Well Performing

Excavation?
Common Objectives of Client and Contractor
Protective Factors
totally safe against collapse
adequate protection to nearby structures and roads etc.
makes provisions for a safe working environment
permits reasonably rapid progress of work

What Constitutes a Well Performing

Excavation?
Common Objectives of Client and Contractor
Protective Factors
totally safe against collapse
adequate protection to nearby structures and roads etc.
makes provisions for a safe working environment
permits reasonably rapid progress of work
cost as low as possible after considering the above

25

What Constitutes a Well Performing

Excavation?
Common Objectives of Client and Contractor
Protective Factors
totally safe against collapse
adequate protection to nearby structures and roads etc.
makes provisions for a safe working environment

Commercial Factors
permits reasonably rapid progress of work
cost as low as possible after considering the above

Dominating Factor...
Ground Conditions Uncertainty
The state-of-the-art in modern geotechnics gives
us...
increasingly powerful design tools
easy access to information on the outcome of many past
projects

26

 But still views diverge on the correct balance

between protective and commercial aspects.

variance between analytical tools

significance of disturbance to field samples
use of average values or more conservative
whether soil properties may change during the excavation
process

The Only Sure Way is the Observational Way

The Observational Method in ground engineering is

the continuous review and refinement of a design
based on observations of field behaviour

27

Examples
Tseung Kwan O Station
observational method was used to justify omission of a layer of
props and a buried prop at later stages of the project
otherwise it seems that use of observational design is the
exception in Hong Kong

Example of Observational Method

Typical Section of Excavation

Diaphragm Wall
Ex. Ground Level

Strutting

S1
S2
Sandy Fill

Ex. Ground Level

Sandy Fill

S3
Stiff Silty Sand

S4
S5
Stiff Silty Sand

Formation Level

Marine Clay

Jet Grout Raft

Marine Clay

Clayed Sand

Hard Boundary Clay

MD Silty Sand

Strut S5 deleted by
Observation Approach

Hard Boundary Clay

28

Why Use Observational Design?

Direct Alteration of Soil Properties

Heating / Dessication due to Jet Grout Hydration

Why isn't OM used for every excavation?

time lag between measurement and reporting and
interpretation
reliability of reported measurements
authority approval for change in sequence of work

29

Web Based Real Time

Reporting

dataloggers
with solar panel

Instruments
(eg.strain
gauges on
struts)

Users
connected
over the
Internet

Server

Instrument Reliability

30

Authority Approvals Strategy

Submit two designs for approval
Design A Adopts "moderately conservative" parameters
agreeable to the authority (i.e. normal practice)
Design B Targets more favourable parameters
Proponent (probably the contractor) decides how much
better performance is expected to be... could be "most
probable" or even more optimistic

Identify a Test Stage in the Excavation

Up to the test stage, A and B follow the same path, but diverge
thereafter
Identify test conditions to verify that more favourable parameters
are safe
At design approval stage, the authority approves only the test
conditions, not the target parameters

1, C1
Moderately
Conservative
Parameters

S1

S1

S1

S2

S2

S2

S3

S3

S4

S5

e
f

Design A

Test Stage

2, C2
Most
Probable
Parameters

S3

S4

d
f

Design B

Test Condition
Strut load, deflection

31

Issues to Address in adopting the

Observational Method
Most critical is to avoid a delay of say one month
waiting for consent after submission of a report on
reaching the test stage, therefore...
make consistently up-to-date archive of observations available
to the authority and the supervising engineer
build a simple control framework into the web based real time
reporting system so that compliance with test stage conditions
can be instantly verified
adopt a "self-regulation" process whereby the Supervising
Engineer (RSE) certifies the compliance with the test stage
conditions

Summary
Limit State Design
for consistency and economy

Buildability
most problems are the result of buildability not being properly
considered in the design, the leanest solution may not be the
best

Sophisticated 3D modeling
invaluable for unusual, complex analysis, esp. for effects on
existing sensitive structures, but requires specialist expertise
in its application

Observational Method
viable tool for reducing cost and improving safety that can and
should be integrated into existing procedures for authority
control

32

Thank you

33