Wong Design Analysis Deep Excavations Session02

November2009
ULSDesign&StrutForces
Session 2
Design (Part 1)
Time
Session Topic
p
09:00 10:30
1
Overview
Coffee Break
10:30 11:00
11:00 12:30
2
Design (Part 1)
Lunch
12:30 - 01:30
01:30 03:00
3
Mohr-Coulomb Soil Model &
Design (Part 2)
Coffee Break
03:00 03:30
03:30 05:00
4
How to reduce wall deflection
MajorDesignConsiderationsinDeepExcavations
Totalcollapse
Overallstabilityy
Wall deflections
Walldeflections
Upliftorblowoutfailure
Groundsettlement
Piping&quickcondition
Basalheave
Effectonadjacent
structures
Toestability
Struttingsystemfailure
WongKaiSin
Excessivemovements
November2009
Overall
Stability
UpliftInstabilityorBlowoutFailure
Fill
E
UMC
F2
LMC
E/F2
Sand
1. Whatisthepermeabilityofthesand?
WongKaiSin
2. Isthereafreesupplyofwater?
November2009
BlowoutFailure
Forverylongexcavation:
B
T Bd+2cu d
Fs=
w hB
hB
T
R
Forrectangularshape:
T dBL +2d cu(B+L)
Fs =
Fs=
w hBL
PipinginSand
Pipingisaphenomenonofwaterrushingupthroughpipe
Piping
is a phenomenon of water rushing up through pipeshaped
shaped
channelsduetoupwardseepageunderhighgradient.Itcanlead
tototalcollapseofthesystem.Sufficientpenetrationofsheetpile
mustbeusedtolengthentheseepagepathandtoreducethe
hydraulicgradient.
WongKaiSin
November2009
PenetrationDepth
againstPiping
(Teng,1962)
Fs=1.5
BasalHeaveStability
qo
qult
Whenqo >qult,failureinimminent.
WongKaiSin
November2009
Whichmethodshould
weuse?
Terzaghi
Bjerrum&Eide
Eideetal.
Tschebotarioff
Goh
Chang
WongandGoh
O'Rourke
Suetal.
Ukritchonetal.
Plaxis
DoesFOS1meanfailure?
MethodsofAnalysis
WongKaiSin
10
November2009
TerzaghisMethod
(Terzaghi,1943)
11
Terzaghis
Method
HardStratum
5.7
5
7 cub B1
FS = ---------------------g H B1 - cuhH
WongKaiSin
If T 0.7B, B1 = 0.7B
If T < 0.7B, B1 = T
12
November2009
ModificationtoTerzaghisMethod
13
BjerrumandEidesmethod(1956)
cu Nc
FS = -------------H+q
WongKaiSin
14
November2009
15
Eideetal.sMethod(1972)
WongKaiSin
16
November2009
17
ComparisonofMethods Case1 SheetpileWall
WongKaiSin
18
November2009
19
WongKaiSin
20
10
November2009
EffectofDepthtoHardStratum(T)
WhenT0.7B,failuresurfacecanbedevelopedfreely.
,
p
y
WhenT<0.7B,thedevelopmentoffailuresurfaceisrestrained.Itisnolongerthe
planeoflowestresistance.Therefore,therewillbeanincreaseinfactorofsafety.
Thecorrectionfactor accountsfortheeffectofdepthtohardstratum,T.
21
0.97
WongKaiSin
22
11
November2009
Sheetpiles are very

flexible. They tend
to move along with
the soil.
23
ComparisonofMethods Case5 DiaphragmWall
WongKaiSin
24
12
November2009
ComparisonofMethods Case6 DiaphragmWall
25
EffectofWallPenetration
(ZhangandZhang,1994)
WongKaiSin
26
13
November2009
ModifiedTerzaghis
MethodforDiaphragm
Wall
(Wong and Goh, 2001)
(WongandGoh,2001)
Method1:
Method2:
27
ModifiedTerzaghis MethodforDiaphragmWall
(WongandGoh,2001)
WongKaiSin
28
14
November2009
ModifiedTerzaghis MethodforDiaphragmWall
(WongandGoh,2001)
29
Terzaghi (1943):
Fs = 0.82
Modified Terzaghi:
Fs = 1.13 (Method 1)
Fs = 1.06 (Method 2)
WongKaiSin
30
15
November2009
Narrow Excavation for all Wall Types

Modified Eide et al.s Method
31
WideExcavationwithSheetpileWall
cuh
cub
T
HardStratum
WongKaiSin
32
16
November2009
Wide Excavation with Diaphragm Wall
cuh
cud
cud
cub
HardStratum
33
Howimportantistheshapefactor?
WongKaiSin
34
17
November2009
BasalHeaveFailureinTaipei(1998)
35
BasalHeaveFailureinTaipei(1998)
Factor of Safety
WongKaiSin
Method
AA
A-A
BB
B-B
Terzaghi
0.67
0.66
Bjerrum & Eide
0.58/0.69
0.61/0.69
Wong & Goh
0.94
0.99
36
18
November2009
Whatfactorofsafetyshouldweuse?
37
HowreliableisthecomputedF.S.?
WongKaiSin
38
19
November2009
Whattypeoftestshouldweconducttodeterminecu?
Which strength envelope should we use ?

1.
Mostconservative:
"worstscenario"
2.
BestEstimate:
"mostprobablescenario"
3.
Mostoptimistic:
"mostfavourable scenario"
cu
Depth
39
Basal Heave of Wall with Full Penetration to Hard Stratum
Case7 SheetpileWall
WongKaiSin
40
20
November2009
Case8 DiaphragmWall
41
Case9 SheetpileWall
WongKaiSin
42
21
November2009
ExcavationwithFullPenetrationofWallintoHardStratum
Basalheavestability
isnotanissueforthis
case. Buttoekickout
failuremayoccur.
WongKaiSin
43
44
22
November2009
ToeKickinStability
Pa
Pp
Scenario2
Scenario1
v1
v1
5.29cu v1
5.29cu v1
45
ToeKickinStability
MA =?
A
WongKaiSin
46
23
November2009
Howtoovercomethenegativenetpressure?
Option1
Option2
A
AddJGPslab
A
MA =?
negativenetpressure
Penetrateintohardstratum
47
Howtoovercomenegativenetpressure?
Option3
Useshorterwall
negativenetpressure
WongKaiSin
48
24
November2009
49
ADeepExcavationin
Oslo
(Aas,1985)
30kPa
1.13
WongKaiSin
50
25
November2009
51
ToeStability
BasalHeave
Pp
Pa
IfthereisadequateF.S.againstbasalheave,
If
there is adequate F.S. against basal heave,
toestabilityisnotanissue.
WongKaiSin
52
26
November2009
ToeKickoutStability
Pa &Pf arebasedon
unfactoredstrength:
Method1:
Pp L p
Fs=
Fs
=
Pa La
Lp
Pa
Pp
Method2:
Pp Lp +Mall
Fs=
Pa La
La
Ppff &P
& Paff arebasedonfactoredstrength:
are based on factored strength:
Method3:
Method4:
Method5:
Pp Lp +Mult
Fs=
Pa La
Ppf Lp >PafLa
Ppf Lp +Mall>PafLa
53
ToeKickoutStability
M
Lp
Pp
Pa
La
1. Howdoyoudeterminetheactiveand
passiveearthpressures?
2. AssumingPa andPp areknown,whichofthe
fivemethodswouldyouuse?
WongKaiSin
54
27
November2009
EarthPressure
accordingtoRankines
Theory
FS=1.29(Terzaghi)
55
EffectofPenetration
Depthon
Bending Moment
BendingMoment
D=0,8&17m
WongKaiSin
56
28
November2009
Shouldtheoreticalearthpressuresbeusedintheanalysis?
57
SoilArching&RowesMomentReduction
WongKaiSin
58
29
November2009
Net
59
EarthPressure(kPa)
Passive Pressure (kPa)
-300
-200
-100
100
200
300
H=8m
D=8m
o
=18kN/m3
cu =25kPa
Depth (m)
10
12
14
Theory
Sheetpile
Diaphragm Wall
16
WongKaiSin
60
30
November2009
NetEarthPressure(kPa)
-100
-50
50
100
150
200
H=8m
D=8m
=18kN/m3
cu =25kPa
Depth (m)
Mo(kNm/m)
10
Theory
838
Sheetpile
304
Diaphragm
1120
12
Theory
Sheetpile
14
Diaphragm Wall
16
61
EarthPressure(kPa)
Passive
Pressure (kPa)
-400
-300
-200
-100
100
200
300
400
0
2
H=8m
4
6
8
D=15m
=18kN/m3
cu =25kPa
Depth (m)
10
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
Theory
Sheetpile
Diaphragm Wall
26
WongKaiSin
62
31
November2009
-100
-50
50
100
150
200
H=8m
4
6
D=15m
=18kN/m
/ 3
cu =25kPa
Depth (m)
10
12
14
16
Mo(kNm/m)
18
Theory
20
Theory
22
Sheetpile
24
Diaphragm Wall
2121
Sheetpile
Diaphragm
Wall
298
601
(Mmax=1010)
26
63
Soilstructureinteractionaffects
PA &PP
B&DcanaffectPA &PP
B
-100
-50
50
100
150
200
0
2
4
6
8
Depth (m)
10
12
14
16
18
20
Theory
22
Sheetpile
24
Diaphragm Wall
26
Analysisbasedonearthpressuretheoriescanleadto
unrealisticresults!
WongKaiSin
64
32
November2009
Methods1to3are
basedonunfactored
strength:
Method1:
Pp L p
Fs=
Fs
=
Pa La
ToeKickoutStability
1. Methods1,2andyieldaboutthesameFS
becauseMall andMult arenegligiblewhen
comparedtotheotherterms.
2 Methods
2.
Methods4&5yieldaboutthesameFSforthe
4 & 5 yield about the same FS for the
samereasongivenin(1).
Method2:
3. Ifearthpressuretheoryistobeusedtocompute
Pa andPp,all5methodscanbeused.
Pp Lp +Mall
Fs=
Pa La
4. IfPa istobedeterminedfromFEA,onlyMethods
1or3shouldbeused.
Method3:
Pp Lp +Mult
Fs=
Pa La
Methods4&5arebasedonfactoredstrength:
Method4:
Method5:
Ppf Lp >PafLa
Ppf Lp +Mall>PafLa
65
ToeKickinStability
Pp Lp +Mult
Fs=
Pa La
Pp
Pa
La
1.
Iffactorofsafetyagainstbasalheaveisadequate,toestabilityisnot
anissue.Noanalysisisnecessary.
2.
ComputePa andPp fromearthpressurestheory.IfthecomputedFS

isadequatewithoutrequiringexcesspenetrationdepth,nofurther
is
adequate without requiring excess penetration depth no further
analysisisneeded.
3.
Iftherequiredpenetrationdepthfrom(1)isexcessive,tryusingPa
fromFEA.
WongKaiSin
Lp
66
33
November2009
67
LateralEarthPressureinBracedExcavations
Redistributionofearthpressureduetoarching
R di t ib ti
f
th
d t
hi
Preloading
Incrementalexcavationandstrutinstallation
WongKaiSin
68
34
November2009
CIRIAsCharacteristicPressureDiagramforSand
(CIRIA,1996)
P=0.2H
69
StrutForcesinStifftoVery
StiffClay
(CIRIA,1996)
WongKaiSin
70
35
November2009
CIRIAsCharacteristic
PressureDiagramforSoft
Clay
(CIRIA,1996)
71
CIRIAsCharacteristicPressureDiagramforSoftClay
(CIRIA,1996)
SoftClay
(Unstablebase)
WongKaiSin
72
36
November2009
(CIRIA,1996)
FirmClay
(stable)
SoftClay
(stable)
73
(CIRIA,1996)
SoftClay
(unstable
base)
WongKaiSin
74
37
November2009
StrutForcesbyTributaryareamethod
PA
PB
PC
a
b
b
c
c
d
d
AreaA
AreaB
AreaC
e.g.PB =(b+c )pinkN/mrun

75
ComparisonofAPD SheetpileWall
WongKaiSin
76
38
November2009
ComparisonofAPD DiaphragmWall
AreFEresults
reliable?
77
StrutForcesonDiaphragm
WallinSand
(Kastner &Lareal,1974)
WongKaiSin
78
39
November2009
EffectofWallStiffnessonStrutForces
(Chang&Wong,1996)
x107
79
EffectofWallStiffnesson
StrutForces
(Chang&Wong,1996)
(m=1)
WongKaiSin
80
40
November2009
Effect of
Temperature
on Strut
Forces
81
DegreeofRestraint
(CIRIA,1996)
B=StiffClayC=GranularSoilsD=MixedSoils
WongKaiSin
82
41
November2009
DegreeofRestraint
(CIRIA,1996)
83
TemperatureEffecton
StrutForces
(Battenetal.,1996)
WongKaiSin
84
42
November2009
TemperatureEffecton
StrutForces
(Battenetal.,1996)
Tubularsteelprops
85
OtherFactors
AffectingStrut
Forces
WongKaiSin
86
43
November2009
FiniteElementAnalysis
MajorDesignConsiderationsinDeepExcavations
Totalcollapse
Excessivemovements
Overallstability
U lift bl
Upliftorblowoutfailure
t f il
Wall deflections
Walldeflections
Piping&quickcondition
Groundsettlement
Basalheave
Toestability
Effectonadjacent
structures
Struttingsystemfailure
NeedFiniteElementAnalysis!
WhatdoyougetfromFiniteElementAnalysis?
Strutforces
Wallbendingmoment&shearforces
Walldeflections
Groundsettlement
Tunneldisplacements
Factorofsafety
WongKaiSin
November2009
DeformationAnalysisusingFiniteElementPrograms
1-D Programs
2-D Programs
3-D Programs
Rido
Plaxis
Plaxis 3D
Wallap
Sage Crisp
Flac 3D
FREW
Sigma/W
ZSOIL
Flac
GEOFEA
ABAQUS
MidasGTS-3D
MidasGTS 3D
Which program should we use?

MethodofAnalysis
Plaxisoffersthefollowingchoicesforanalysisofshortterm
performanceofTERSinclay:
A. MohrCoulomb:effectivestress,c ,undrained
B.
B
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
H.
I.
J.
K.
MohrCoulomb:effectivestress,c
MohrCoulomb:
effective stress cu u,undrained
undrained
MohrCoulomb:totalstress,cu u,nonporous,undrained
MohrCoulomb:effectivestress,c ,consolidation
MohrCoulomb:effectivestress,cu u,consolidation
SoftClay:effectivestress,c ,undrained
SoftClay:effectivestress,c ,consolidation
Mod.CamClay:effectivestress,c
y
,
,undrained
,
Mod.CamClay:effectivestress,c ,consolidation
AdvancedHardening:effectivestress,c ,undrained
AdvancedHardening:effectivestress,c ,consolidation
Whichoneshouldweuse?
WongKaiSin
November2009
Blessings&cursesofcommercialsoftware
Blessings:
Userfriendly
User friendly
Generatesoutputwithbeautifulplots
Givesuserasenseofaccomplishment
Curses:
Sometimesitabortswithoutsuggestingthe
nextcourseofaction
t
f ti
Sometimesitproducespuzzlingresults
Geotechnical
problem
User
Mustdefinetheproblem
thewaytheprogramwill
understand
Faithfulbutnottoo
intelligent
WongKaiSin
November2009
Advice to Users
1. Attendtrainingcourse!
y
p
2. Studythemanualanddothetutorialproblems.
3. Donotassumeitwillworkthewayyouthink.
4. Whenindoubt,deviseasimpleproblemandtestout
howtheprogramworks.
5. Checkinput mesh,designparameters
6. Studyoutput:
Isthemodeofdeformationcorrect?
Arethemagnitudesreasonable?
2DFiniteElementMethod
WongKaiSin
November2009
FEModelingofanExcavation
Useofhalfmeshbecauseofsymmetry
HalfmeshorFullmesh?
HalfMesh
WongKaiSin
FullMesh
10
November2009
NotesonMeshGenerationforFEA
1.Setleftandrightboundariesfarawayfromareaofinterest.
2.Useafinemesh.
3.Includeonlythekeyelements.Excludethedetails.
4.Simplifythesoilprofile.
5 S
5.Setproperdrainageboundariesinconsolidationanalysis.
d i
b
d i i
lid i
l i
6.Includepilesonlywhereappropriate.
11
EffectofMeshFinenessonWallDeflection
WongKaiSin
12
November2009
Whattypeofanalysisshouldweconduct?
TotalStress
EffectiveStress
ff
Undrained
Drained
Consolidation
Itdependsonthepermeabilityofsoiland
durationofconstruction.
13
Effectofpermeabilityonwalldeflection
WongKaiSin
14
November2009
Effectofpermeabilityongroundsettlement
15
Isitimportanttoconductconsolidationanalysisfordeep
excavationinclay?
WongKaiSin
16
November2009
CoefficientofPermeabilityk
k (m/s)
Clean
gravels
Clean sands
Drained
Very fine
sands
Silts &
clayey
sand
Clays
Transition
Undrained
17
1D(BeamnSpring)AnalysisbyFiniteElementMethod
WALLAP
RIDO
FREW
REWARD
WongKaiSin
18
November2009
ParametersfortheBeamandSpringModel
Kh =???c
= ??? cu
19
Ka &Kp
WongKaiSin
20
10
November2009
CalibrationofSoilModulususing1Dand2DPrograms
RIDO:1D
BeamandSpring
Ks /cu =???
EXCAV97 2Dcontinuum
HyperbolicModel
Ei /cu =???
21
ComparisonofResults
Rochor Complex
WongKaiSin
22
11
November2009
ComparisonofResults
LavenderStation
23
ComparisonofResults
SyedAlwiCondo
WongKaiSin
24
12
November2009
25
LimitationsofBeamandSpringMethod
1. Itignoredtheeffectofwidthonwall
deflection.
WongKaiSin
2.Itignoredtheeffectofclay
thicknessonwalldeflection.
26
13
November2009
LimitationsofBeamandSpringMethod
2.Itignoredtheeffectofclay
thicknessonstrutforce.
1. Itignoredtheeffectofwidthon
strutforce.
27
IsEu/cu=200applicabletoallsoilmodelsandprograms?
Rochor
Complex
Syed Alwi
Project
Lavender
Station
WALLAP, Mohr Coulomb, Eu/ cu
250
250
300
300
SAGE CRISP,
CRISP Mohr Coulomb,
Co lomb Eu/cu
100
150
300
500
SAGE CRISP, Hyperbolic, Ei/cu
300
300
300
300
EXCAV97, Hyperbolic, Ei/cu
200
200
200
200
WongKaiSin
MOE
Building
28
14
November2009
MajorShortcomingsof2DAnalysis
Is2Danalysis
y
appropriate?
Isappropriateto
modelthepilesas
plates?
29
I1
Is2DAnalysisappropriateat
I1,I2andI3?
I5
(AfterOuetal.,1996)
I4
I2
I3
WongKaiSin
30
15
November2009
I1
3DEffectinBraced
Excavation
(AfterOuetal.,1996)
I5
I4
I2
I3
(I4&I5)
31
Whichsectionisclosertoplanestraincondition?
A
L=100m
L=40m
B=100m
B=20m
PSR=0.91
PSR=0.90
H,max (3D)
PlaneStrainRatio,PSR=
H,max(2D)
WongKaiSin
32
16
November2009
PSR=0.91
PSR=0.83
PSR=0.60
B=L=40m
B=L=60m
B=L=100m
PSR=0.42
PSR=0.50
PSR =0.60
PSR
0.60
B=40m
B=40m
B=40m
L=100m
L=60m
L=40m
33
ReductionFactorforH,max dueto3DEffect
(DevelopedbasedondatafromOuetal.,1996)
1
0. 9
B=20m
0 8
0.
PSR
0. 7
B=40m
0. 6
B=60m
0. 5
B=80m
0. 4
B=100m
0. 3
0. 2
0. 1
0
0
WongKaiSin
20
40
60
L (m)
80
100
120
34
17
November2009
ReductionFactorforH,max dueto3DEffect
(DevelopedbasedondatafromOuetal.,1996)
1. 2
B=80m
B=20m
B=40m
B=60m
B=100m
PSR
0. 8
0. 6
B
0. 4
0. 2
0
0
0. 5
1. 5
2. 5
3. 5
L/B
WongKaiSin
35
36
18

Wong Design Analysis Deep Excavations Session02

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Wong Design Analysis Deep Excavations Session02

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

November2009

ComparisonofMethods Case1 SheetpileWall

ComparisonofMethods Case2 SheetpileWall

ComparisonofMethods Case3 SheetpileWall

ComparisonofMethods Case4 SheetpileWall

Sheetpiles are very

ComparisonofMethods Case5 DiaphragmWall

ComparisonofMethods Case6 DiaphragmWall

Narrow Excavation for all Wall Types

Wide Excavation with Diaphragm Wall

Bjerrum & Eide

Wong & Goh

Which strength envelope should we use ?

Basal Heave of Wall with Full Penetration to Hard Stratum

Basal Heave of Wall with Full Penetration to Hard Stratum

Basal Heave of Wall with Full Penetration to Hard Stratum

ComputePa andPp fromearthpressurestheory.IfthecomputedFS

e.g.PB =(b+c )pinkN/mrun

Which program should we use?

WALLAP, Mohr Coulomb, Eu/ cu

SAGE CRISP, Hyperbolic, Ei/cu

EXCAV97, Hyperbolic, Ei/cu

You might also like