IRCON INTERNATIONAL LIMITED

RVNL BHUBANESWAR

CONTINUAL IMPROVEMENT

1. Well Foundations

Well foundations are a robust and preferred foundation in India for river
bridges. An important aspect of well foundations is that the tilt should be
less than 1% as far as possible. However the wells do get tilted much
beyond the desired value even after all care has been taken while sinking
the well. The methods normally adopted for correction of tilt and shift in
the well are:

1. Eccentric Dredging
2. Eccentric Loading
3. Applying Pull to the Well
4. Applying Push to the Well

In addition to the above mentioned methods certain indigenous methods

have also been devised for tilt correction by many a specialists based on
their experience. The indigenous methods are also used routinely by the
sinkers and engineers.

2. RVNL Bhubaneswar Project

The main work at RVNL Bhubaneswar project is construction of well

foundations for the bridges across rivers Kuakhai and Mahanadi. It is
well known that the sinking of wells through clay is a nightmare for the
engineers. Majority of the wells in this project have to be sunk through
layers of clay. The task is daunting in view of the fact that the thickness
of stiff clay layer is as much as 25m. There have been many instances of
quick sand condition resulting in tilt and shift going awry all of a
sudden. Tilt went upto 4% at times in some wells.

3. Tilt Correction at Kuakhai and Mahanadi (near Naraj) Bridges

All the known methods were adopted one after the other and at times in
combination to rectify and control the tilt and shift of the wells. The
methods worked with a varying degree of success. Some of the wells did
not show any signs of improvement with the known methods. The
agencies were content with the reduced payment as per conditions of
contract in case a well do not get rectified in spite of sincere efforts in
view of typical strata. In a case of unacceptable tilt (e.g. P8 of Mahanadi )
of more than 3%, there was yet another suggestion from the agency (M/s
Gammon India Ltd) to rectify the well after providing heavy reinforcement

1
and anchorage blocks in the steining at various stages and then pulling
the well with heavy force using HTS (high tensile steel) cables. The
downside of the method suggested was that it was to take a lot of time
and that the desired correction was not doubtless. The lack of confidence
was not unfounded in light of the agency’s expectation as per which the
well was likely to get rectified by the time it reaches the founding level.
Keeping in view the fact that the agency had earlier too vouched for the
efficacy of several other methods tried that far but the same had not
fructified as expected. The risk of depending upon the agency’s
confidence level was too high. The agency was however ready to spend an
estimated Rs. 15-20 lakhs on correction of the tilt by the latest method
suggested by them. Regardless of the fact that there was no hesitation on
part of the agency to spend huge amount of money, the question was
that of confidence and ultimate safety of the well.

While the situation was frustrating on one hand, it was taken as a

challenge by the engineers in this project.

4. New Method of Tilt Correction Devised at RVNL, Bhubaneswar Project

After careful study of the dynamics involved in the process of sinking

and correction of tilt, a novel way of correcting the tilt was thought of.
During the process of frustrating trials, the design of a reinforced kicker
block was evolved so as to provide a subtle but effective push to the well
using a strut made of RSJ. The method was therefore designated as
Kicker Block and Strut for pushing the well

4.1 Salient Features of Kicker Block and Strut Assembly

The main components are

a. Kicker Block

b. Steel Strut

The length of strut can vary from 1-3 m depending on the site conditions.
Even a 1m strut will be enough where a blow is not expected to happen
in the well. The shape and design of the kicker block is such that the
Kicker Block and Strut assembly provides a subtle and positive push to
the well while being semi rigid. Kicker Block and Strut tends to change
the path of the tilted well by way of providing gradually increasing
resistance to the well. It does not interfere with the downward movement
of the well as in the case of many other methods.

2
4.2 Some of the pictures showing the Kicker Block and Strut assembly
used at this project sites are shown below:

Kuakhai Bridge P12

Mahanadi Bridge P8

4.3 Tremendous correction of tilt and shift was experienced in the wells
after the use of Kicker Block and Strut. The results of tilt and shift
correction as achieved by this novel method are tabulated below:
Well Tilt with use of Tilt after using Kicker Improvement w.r.t.
Location other methods Block and Strut recommended max tilt (1%)
Kuakhai P1 2.13 % 0.86 % 127 %
Kuakhai P8 1.85 % 0.78 % 107 %
Kuakhai P12 2.60 % 0.65 % 195 %
Kuakhai P14 1.25 % 0.19 % 106 %
Mahanadi P8 3.45 % 2.19 % 126 %
The well wise correction of tilt as achieved on some wells using this
arrangement is brought out at Annexure.

3
4.4 The schematic sketch of Kicker Block and Strut assembly is shown
below.

Kicker Block & Strut Assembly

9.0 M
2.25 M 2.25 M

Kicker
Block

Steining Steining

16Ø Tor rods

150X150X12 ms Angle Welded to Plate

A 20th Hard Wood Plank

100
B 12 th ms Cap

100
ISMB 300
300
20th Hard Wood Plank 12th ms Bearing Plate
600X400X20 400x400x12
ms Bearing Plate

Kicker Block for Strut

300 1200
100
450

100 HOOK
60
Ms 0 x
B e 400
ar
in g x 2 0
P l th
at e
600

0
40

RCC M35
600

12
00

2400
All Dimensions are in Milimetres

Reinforcement:

Bottom Longitudinal : 20Ø @150 c/c

Botom Lateral : 16Ø @150 c/c
Cage Bothways :12Ø 150c/c
Hook center (32Ø) : 1100 mm from LHS face.

4
 4.5 Financial Implications

a. Tilt correction by Eccentric Loading/Kentledge:

150-200 MT eccentric loading on a cantilevered platform

Effect on
Cost Involved normal Remarks
Cycle Time
I Basic Cost:
a. Precast concrete blocks 75Cum The system though works
@ Rs. 2500 i.e. 75x2500 = Rs. 187500 upto some stage, the
effectiveness has been
b. ISMB400 about 50m long found to be limited.
@ Rs. 40000 i.e. 50x.075x40000 = Rs. 150000
Moreover the 4 day’s
c. Wire ropes, tools and tackles etc., LS = Rs. 10000 addition to the cycle time
4 days extra has an effect of delaying
Sub Total = Rs. 347500 the whole project.

II Loading/Unloading charges per cycle:

2 days each for loading and unloading
a. 4 days crane hire charges i.e. 4x10000 = Rs. 40000

b. 4 days sinker charges i.e. 4x5x200 = Rs. 4000

Sub Total = Rs. 44000

III Transportation charges from one well

to other well
(including loading and unloading)
i.e. (75x2.4+50x.075)MTxRs. 200 per MT= Rs. 36750

Cost per Well

Assuming kentledge to be used in 4 cycles
per well i.e. 347500+4x44000 = Rs. 523500

say Rs. 5.2 Lakhs

Cost per Bridge

Assuming 15 wells on a bridge needing kentledge and
30 to and fro shifting of two such sets of kentledge is
involved i.e. 2x523500+30x36750 = Rs. 2149500

say Rs. 21.5 Lakhs

5
 b. Tilt correction with Kicker Block and Strut assembly :

To withstand about 200 MT of compressive load.

Effect on
Cost Involved normal Remarks
Cycle Time
I Basic Cost:
a. 2 special kicker blocks of RCC (about 4Cum) The system is very
i.e. 4x4000 = Rs. 16000 effective and quick.
Moreover it can be
b. ISMB400 about 7m long adopted at any stage of
@ Rs. 40000 i.e. 7x.075x40000 = Rs. 21000 the work. The
interference with the
c. Bearing plates, wedges etc. LS = Rs. 2000 ½ day extra cycle time of the work is
insignificant.
Sub Total = Rs. 39000

II Fixing charges per cycle:

½ day for handling the strut and block
a. ½ day crane hire charges i.e. ½ x10000 = Rs. 5000

b. ½ day sinker charges i.e. ½ x5x200 = Rs. 500

Sub Total = Rs. 5500

III Transportation charges from one well

to other well
(including loading and unloading)
i.e. (4x2.4+7x.075)MTxRs. 200 per MT= Rs. 2025

Cost per Well

Assuming the assembly is to be used in 4 cycles
per well i.e. 39000+4x5500 = Rs. 61000

say Rs. 0.6 Lakhs

Cost per Bridge

Assuming 15 wells on a bridge needing this assembly
and 30 to and fro shifting of 2 such sets is involved i.e.
2x61000+30x2025 = Rs. 182750

say Rs. 1.8 Lakhs

6
4.6 Savings Achieved in Cost of Work

a. Direct Savings

Savings per well : 523500-61000 = Rs. 462500 say Rs. 4.5 Lakhs

Savings per Bridge: 2149500-182750 = Rs. 1966750 say Rs. 19.5 Lakhs

Apart from this a huge sum of Rs. 15-20 lakhs which might have to be
spent on a single well (P8 of Mahanadi) even without a foolproof result,
can be considered as a saving on this account.

b. Indirect Savings

There is tremendous reduction in cycle time by using kicker block and

strut assembly. It can safely be said that the saving on completion time is
to the tune of 3 ½ months keeping in view 30 such cycles with 3 ½ days
saving per cycle. In a project with Rs. 5 Lakhs overhead expenses per
month the saving could be to the tune of Rs. 17.5 Lakhs.

The total savings can therefore be termed in the region of Rs. 35-
40 lakhs (19.5+17.5=38) per river bridge of about 1 km linear water way.

5. Conclusion

Tilt and shift do occur while constructing well foundations even after all
possible care has been taken by the engineers in sinking the wells.
There are numerous methods of correcting the tilt. Often the expenditure
involved in tilt correction in huge. The reduction in tilt do not seem to
happen beyond a stage under certain site conditions. The situation can
come to a stage that the tilt in a well is unacceptable and that the well
may have to be rejected altogether. The financial implications can
therefore be imagined. The novel method of tilt and shift correction as
devised by RVNL Bhubaneswar project has worked wonders in correcting
tilt and shift of wells under situations where no known method seemed
to work beyond a stage. The new method called Kicker Block and Strut
involves little expenditure when compared to other methods. The savings
are to the tune of Rs. 35-40 lakhs in a river bridge. The savings could in
fact be much more if the severity of problem is more as noted for P8 well
of Mahanadi bridge.

7
 Annexure

Results of Tilt Correction using Kicker Block and Strut Assembly

Tremendous correction of tilt and shift was experienced in the wells after
the use of Strut and Kicker Block. The results of tilt and shift correction
as achieved by this novel method are tabulated below:

Kuakhai Bridge - P1

Date Height of Sinking during Tilt ( % ) Remarks

well (m) the period (m) A1 – A2 US - DS Resultant
21.8.05 27.5 6.04 1.56 A2 1.45 US 2.13 A2-US Various methods
Pushing the well by elaborate Strutting arrangement started on 24.8.05 including
8.9.05 33.8 2.305 1.22 A2 1.40 US 1.86 A2-US conventional
strutting were tried
16.9.05 35.9 4.016 1.06 A2 0.63 US 1.23 A2-US
before 24.8.05
27.9.05 35.9 3.301 0.77 A2 0.37 US 0.86 A2-US

Kuakhai Bridge - P8

Date Height of Sinking during Tilt ( % ) Remarks

well (m) the period (m) A1 – A2 US - DS Resultant
3.6.05 33.8 .749 .66 A1 1.73 US 1.85 A1-US Various methods
Pushing the well by elaborate Strutting arrangement started on 14.10.05 including, pulling,
15.10.05 35.9 2.056 .37 A1 1.25 US 1.31 A1-US eccentric loading,
conventional
17.10.05 35.9 0.986 .387 A1 1.12 US 1.19 A1-US
strutting etc. were
18.10.05 35.9 0.410 .31 A1 0.96 US 1.01 A1-US tried till 13.9.05
21.10.05 35.9 2.967 .31 A1 0.69 US 0.75 A1-US
31.10.05 40.2 4.838 .62 A1 0.47 US 0.78 A1-US

Kuakhai Bridge - P12

Date Height of Sinking during Tilt ( % ) Remarks

well (m) the period (m) A1 – A2 US - DS Resultant
3.7.05 33.8 2.487 2.31 A1 1.19 DS 2.6 A1-DS Various methods
Pushing the well by elaborate Strutting arrangement started on 26.10.05 including, pulling,
27.10.05 35.9 2.754 1.81 A1 0.87 DS 2.01 A1-DS eccentric loading,
conventional
2.11.05 35.9 1.967 1.45 A1 0.75 DS 1.63 A1-DS
strutting etc. were
5.11.05 35.9 1.067 1.41 A1 0.75 DS 1.60 A1-DS tried till 25.10.05
11.11.05 40.31 2.065 0.90 A1 0.37 DS 0.97 A1-DS
13.11.05 40.31 2.14 0.64 A1 0.11 DS 0.65 A1-DS

8
Kuakhai Bridge - P14

Date Height of Sinking during Tilt ( % ) Remarks

well (m) the period (m) A1 – A2 US - DS Resultant
13.6.05 21.2 3.042 .06 A1 1.25 DS 1.25 A1-DS Various methods
15.10.05 31.7 2.058 0 1.35 DS 1.35 A1-DS including, pulling,
Pushing the well by elaborate Strutting arrangement started on 15.10.05 eccentric loading,
conventional
27.11.05 31.7 7.783 .23 A2 0.62 DS 0.66 A2-DS
strutting etc. were
13.12.05 35.9 0.257 .49 A2 0.15 US 0.51 A2-US tried till 15.10.05
31.12.05 38.0 2.051 .18 A2 0.06 US 0.19 A2-US

Mahanadi Bridge - P8

Date Height of Sinking during Tilt ( % ) Remarks

well (m) the period (m) A1 – A2 US - DS Resultant
18.12.05 33.55 1.43 3.33 A1 0.92 US 3.45 A1-US Various methods
3.1.06 33.55 1.4 3.0 A1 0.38 US 3.03 A1-US including, pulling,
Pushing the well by elaborate Strutting arrangement started on 15.10.05 eccentric loading,
conventional
3.1.06 33.55 1.4 3.0 A1 0.38 US 3.03 A1-US
strutting etc. were
4.1.06 33.55 1.0 2.94 A1 0.44 US 2.97 A1-US tried till 15.10.05.
7.1.06 35.7 0.8 2.55 A1 0.61 DS 2.62 A1-DS The work is in
progress but the
8.1.06 35.7 1.0 1.89 A1 0.78 DS 2.04 A1-DS trend of tilt
correction is highly
9.1.06 35.7 0.1 1.83 A1 0.78 DS 1.99 A1-DS encouraging
11.1.06 35.7 0.8 2.03 A1 0.83 DS 2.19 A1-DS Strut displaced
from position