LDC opinion on Monopile option

HCC-HDC have proposed monopile option for bridges & arms. Our opinion on this proposal
are as follows-

1. While there is no provision in IRC codes for use of monopiles for Bridges located
within the coastal waters and also there is no precedence of its use in India in such
locations so far, we feel that this cannot be a reason for not considering this option.
HCC has cited many examples of bridge projects in other countries where monopile
option is used successfully and as such there is no reason why it cannot be used in
India also.

2. The basic feature of this option is neither adoption of any new method of analysis nor
any new technology for its implementation. The multi-pile system gets replaced by a
single pile of larger diameter which should cater to all the loads and moments with
specified FOS. The monopile is a standard cast-in-situ bored pile.

3. In a monopile, bending moments are predominant unlike in a multi-pile system, where

they get converted in to vertical reactions. Thus the horizontal force becomes critical
and needs to be catered in pile design, which we are sure the designer will take care of
in the definitive design.

4. In a monopile, the verticality of the pile is of importance since any deviation not
accounted for in design/analysis may cause eccentricity resulting in additional
moment. As such, it is important to pre-define the verticality tolerances of mono-piles
and analyse them for this maximum allowed tolerance and also enforce a strict quality
control for limiting the same within the prescribed limits with adequate FOS.

5. As far as the issue of differential settlement is concerned, monopiles are better suited
as compared to the system of multi-pile system where due to far wider areas involved
in the foundation of pile system, the chances of one pile undergoing differential
settlement from the other piles cannot be ruled out. A larger diameter monopile is
therefore better than a group of 2/4 piles overlain by a pile cap from the point of view
of differential settlement.

6. For the monopiles, the bridge piers are supported directly on large monopiles, which
eliminate the need for a pilecap. The piers act as cantilever structures supporting static
and seismic inertia loads as well as resisting lateral ground movement loads under
extreme seismic loads. The absence of a pilecap reduces the lateral loads applied to
the piles from the laterally spreading ground in the liquefaction design case.

In view of the above, we feel while the monopile option can certainly be considered for this
project, However due care needs to be taken during piling operation to ensure that the vertical
tolerance is well within the limits for which it is designed. Proper instrumentation should also
be adopted to regularly measure and monitor these parameters.