Sheet Pile Tensions in Cellular Structures

Kord J. Wissmann, M.ASCE1; George M. Filz, M.ASCE2; Reed L. Mosher, M.ASCE3;

and James R. Martin II, M.ASCE4

Abstract: Cellular structures constructed of interlocking steel sheet piles are used in marine environments as cofferdams, bulkheads,
mooring dolphins, and lock guide walls. In addition to providing safety against sliding, bearing failure, overturning, and tilting, cellular
structures must also be designed to prevent sheet pile interlock rupture, which can lead to catastrophic failure if the cell fill is lost.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Leeds on 05/17/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Methods commonly used to estimate sheet pile interlock tensions were developed in the 1940’s, 1950’s, and 1970’s. These methods are
based on empirical observations, and they do not explicitly account for soil–structure interactions. This paper presents the results of finite
element analyses and instrumentation measurements performed to examine soil–structure interaction effects on sheet pile tensions. The
finite-element analyses were used to compute sheet pile tensions at five instrumented cells, and the results are compared with measure-
ments. The calibrated finite-element model was then used to investigate the effects of varying cell geometry, interlock behavior, sheet pile
penetration depth, and foundation stiffness on sheet pile tensions. The instrumentation measurements provide data for estimating changes
in sheet pile tensions due to cell fill densification, cofferdam unwatering, and bulkhead backfilling.
DOI: 10.1061/共ASCE兲1090-0241共2003兲129:3共224兲
CE Database keywords: Sheet piles; Tensions; Cofferdams; Bulkheads; Instrumentation; Finite-element method.

Introduction nessee Valley Authority 共TVA兲 共1957兲. Refinements were sug-

Cellular structures are constructed in marine environments to
serve as cofferdams, bulkheads, mooring dolphins, and lock guide
walls. Individual cells are built by driving interlocking steel sheet
piles into foundation soils and filling the sheet pile cylinders with
granular material. Cofferdams and bulkheads are built by con-
necting the individual main cells with arc cells to form continuous
retaining structures 共Fig. 1兲.
During lateral loading, cellular cofferdams and bulkheads are
subject to sliding, bearing failure, overturning, and tilting, any
one of which could lead to serviceability difficulties and/or ulti-
mate failure. In addition, the structures must also be designed to
avoid sheet pile interlock rupture, which can lead to catastrophic
failure. During cell filling, the sheet pile interlocks are loaded by
hoop tensions as the cell fill pushes radially against the sheet
piles. If tensions become large enough, the interlocks fail and the
cells burst. The focus of this paper is on sheet pile tensions.
Design methods for estimating sheet pile tensions within cel-
lular structures were developed by Terzaghi 共1945兲 and the Ten-
1
President and Chief Engineer, Geopier Foundation Company, Inc.,
Blacksburg, VA 24060.
2
Associate Professor, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State Univ.,
Blacksburg, VA 24061. E-mail: filz@vt.edu
3
Technical Director, Survivability and Protective Structures, Geotech-
nical and Structures Laboratory, U.S. Army Engineer Research and De-
velopment Center, Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS 39180.
4
Associate Professor, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State Univ.,
Blacksburg, VA 24061.
Note. Discussion open until September 1, 2003. Separate discussions
must be submitted for individual papers. To extend the closing date by
one month, a written request must be filed with the ASCE Managing
Editor. The manuscript for this paper was submitted for review and pos-
sible publication on June 6, 2000; approved on February 15, 2002. This
paper is part of the Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental
Engineering, Vol. 129, No. 3, March 1, 2003. ©ASCE, ISSN 1090-0241/
2003/3-224 –233/$18.00.
gested by Schroeder and Maitland 共1979兲 and Swatek 共1970兲 for
estimating main cell and common wall sheet pile tensions, respec-
tively. Because these methods are based on empirical observa-
tions and do not explicitly account for soil–structure interactions,
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and other organizations instru-
mented full-size cells and performed research with the aim of
developing new design methods for cofferdams. These efforts in-
cluded collecting instrumentation data at five structures during
cell filling, performing finite-element studies for cofferdams con-
structed at the Willow Island and Melvin Price locks and dams
共Stevens 1980; Hansen and Clough 1984; Shannon & Wilson
1984; Clough and Kuppusamy 1985; Clough et al. 1987; Singh
1987; Hardin 1990; Mosher 1991兲, and instrumenting cells con-
taining fill materials densified with vibratory probes 共Sorota et al.
1981兲.
This paper presents the results of a comprehensive study to
examine the effects of soil–structure interactions on sheet pile
tensions, including such factors as cell geometry, interlock stiff-
ness, sheet pile penetration depth, foundation stiffness, cell fill
densification, cofferdam unwatering, and bulkhead backfilling.
Recommendations for estimating maximum tensions are pre-
sented for use in designing main cell and common wall sheet
piles.
Cell Construction and Generalized Behavior
Main cells are constructed by driving interlocking sheet piles
around a circular template and filling the sheet pile cylinders with
granular fill. The main cells are connected to each other with
sheet piles that form arc cells, and the arc cells are filled with
granular material. Then, the interiors of cellular cofferdams are
unwatered, or cellular bulkheads are backfilled 共Fig. 2兲. Prior to
cell filling, the sheet pile assemblage would be unstable if sub-
jected to unbalanced loading conditions. To stabilize the assem-
blage quickly, main cells are usually filled before their adjacent

224 / JOURNAL OF GEOTECHNICAL AND GEOENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / MARCH 2003

J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 2003.129:224-233.


Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Leeds on 05/17/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Fig. 1. Cellular cofferdam for lock construction
arc cells. Cells are filled using hydraulic dredges, conveyors,
and/or clamshell buckets. During hydraulic filling, the dredge
slurry quickly reaches the top of the cell, resulting in temporary
elevated water pressures inside the cell. With time, soil particles
settle out of the slurry, and the interior water level within the cell
reaches the same level as that outside the cell. Hydraulic filling
thus prestresses the sheet pile interlocks. Filling via conveyor
belts and clamshell buckets does not significantly raise cell water
levels and, consequently, generates less radial pressure.
The cell fill pushes radially outward against the sheet piles and
causes the cells to bulge and the interlocks to tighten. Radial
deflections and sheet pile tensions generally increase with depth
toward the mudline because cell fill pressures increase with depth.
Maximum radial deflections and sheet pile tensions occur above
the mudline, due to the constraining influence of the foundation
soils. Further, as the cells are filled, a portion of the fill weight is
transferred by arching to the sheet pile walls. Arching reduces the
vertical and horizontal cell fill stresses.
Radial earth pressures also depend on cell fill characteristics
and on interlock slack 共gap within the interlocks兲 after driving. If
a large amount of interlock slack exists, the sheet piles can deflect
Fig. 2. Typical cellular structure configuration
JOURNAL OF GEOTECHNICAL AND GEOENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / MARCH 2003 / 225
J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 2003.129:224-233.
Table 1. Existing Methods for Estimating Main Cell Sheet Pile
Tensions
Method k z
Terzaghi 共1945兲 0.4 0
a b
TVA 共1957兲 k a H/4
Schroeder and Maitland 共1979兲 1.2 k a to 1.6 k a H ⬘ /3 c
a
k a is Rankine active earth pressure coefficient⫽tan (45⫺␾/2), where ␾
2
is the friction angle of the cell fill.
b
H is the distance from the top of the cell to the mudline.
c
H ⬘ is the distance from the top of the cell to the location of sheet pile
fixity in the foundation soils. For this method only, z is measured from the
location of sheet pile fixity.
radially outward with little restraint offered in interlock tighten-
ing. If the interlocks are tight, only small radial deflections can
occur during filling. Because lateral earth pressures reduce with
increasing radial deflection, loose sheet pile assemblages attract
smaller lateral pressures than tight sheet pile assemblages.
Common wall sheet piles 共Fig. 2兲 react to several loadings.
During main cell filling, common wall piles bulge radially out-
ward like the other main cell piles. During arc cell filling, the arc
cell fill pushes the common wall back toward the center of the
main cell. This reduces the net radial deflections relative to the
center of the main cell and thereby reduces common wall ten-
sions. At the same time, however, tensions that develop in the arc
cell piles are transmitted through the wye pile and increase com-
mon wall tensions. Instrumentation data show that the effect of
these two loadings generally results in a net increase in cofferdam
common wall tension following arc cell filling.
Existing Design Methods
Main Cell Sheet Pile Tensions
Existing methods for estimating main cell sheet pile tensions, T m ,
rely on the hoop stress equation
T m ⫽pR (1)
where p⫽effective lateral earth pressure acting against the sheet
pile wall; and R⫽cell radius. The cell fill pressure is estimated by
multiplying the geostatic vertical effective stress, ␴ ⬘v , in the cell
fill by an apparent coefficient of lateral earth pressure, k
p⫽␴ ⬘v k (2)
Maximum main cell tensions are assumed to occur at the dis-
tance above the mudline, z, that corresponds to the location of
maximum cell bulging. Recommendations by others for values of
k and z are presented in Table 1. The recommendations by
Schroeder and Maitland 共1979兲 in Table 1 require that the engi-
neer estimate the depth to the location of sheet pile fixity using
expressions developed for estimating the response of piles to lat-
eral loads. In an attempt to simplify the Schroeder and Maitland
design calculations, Rossow et al. 共1987兲 suggest that the location
of fixity be found at the depth below the mudline where passive
earth pressures acting outside the sheet pile walls equal the active
earth pressures acting on the inside of the cell. The two methods
often produce similar results.
Common Wall Sheet Pile Tensions
Two existing methods address common wall tensions. The TVA
共1957兲 method for estimating common wall tensions, T cw , uses
the expression
 Table 2. Cellular Structures Instrumented with Strain Gages During Cell Filling
Cell Cell height, H,
diameter above mudline Sheet pile Cell filling
Structure name and location 共m兲 共m兲 Foundation material embedment 共m兲 method
Melvin Price lock and dam-stage 1a, Alton, Illinois 19.2 18.3 Medium-dense sand 10.7 Clamshell
Melvin Price lock and dam-stage 2, Alton, Illinois 19.2 25.6 Medium-dense sand 3.4 Clamshell
Trident drydocka, Bremerton, Washington 23.2 24.4 Hard glacial till 0 to 1.2 Clamshell
Terminal 4 bulkhead Portland, Oregon 20.1 18.3 Loose to medium-dense sand 4.6 to 8.5 Conveyer
Long Beach bulkhead, Long Beach, California 18.9 16.2 Soft clay and silt over loose sand 7.0 Hydraulic dredge
a
Both main and common wall sheet piles instrumented with strain gauges.

T cw⫽pLsecant共 ␪ 兲 (3) the densification of the sand was confirmed by penetration testing,
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Leeds on 05/17/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

the strain gauge data indicate that densification by vibratory prob-

where L⫽the distance between the centers of the main and arc
cells, and ␪⫽the angle between the structure axis and the main
cell radius extending through the wye pile, as shown in Fig. 2.
This expression is derived from a free body diagram drawn
through the wye pile. The Swatek method, as described by Lac-
roix et al. 共1970兲, for estimating common wall tensions uses the
expression
T cw⫽pL (4)
which is derived from a free body diagram drawn through the
centerline of the cofferdam. Both methods rely on main cell fill-
ing analyses to find the maximum values of p that occur at the
location of maximum main cell bulging, and both methods as-
sume that the earth pressures in the arc cells are the same as the
earth pressures in the main cells. The Swatek method can be as
much as 30% less conservative than the TVA method, depending
on the value of ␪.
Limitations of Existing Design Methods
Existing design methods do not explicitly account for soil–
structure interactions, and they make the assumption that maxi-
mum tensions occur during cell filling. Existing design methods
for common wall sheet piles are based on simplified free body
diagrams that do not account for the separate effects of the reduc-
tion in tension that occurs during placement of arc cell fill against
the common wall and the increase in tension caused by arc cell
tensions transmitted through the wye piles.
ing did not result in significant long-term enlargement of the cell
diameter.
The response of the sheet piles to unbalanced lateral loading
was observed with measurements taken at the Trident and Long
Beach cells. In general, tensions were observed to decrease on the
loaded side, increase on the unloaded side, and remain about the
same over the common walls. Increases in the unloaded side sheet
pile tensions are shown in Table 4.
Finite-Element Models
An axisymmetric version of the finite-element program SOIL-
STRUCT 共Clough and Duncan 1969; Clough and Kuppusamy
1985兲 was used to simulate filling of the instrumented cells listed
in Table 2. SOILSTRUCT employs an incremental linear method
to model soil nonlinear stress–strain behavior 共Duncan and
Chang 1970; Duncan et al. 1980; Ebeling et al. 1990兲. The pro-
gram incorporates provisions for incremental loading, interface
elements to account for potentially large relative displacements
between soil and structural materials, and orthotropic shell ele-
ments to account for differences in sheet pile stiffness in the cir-
cumferential and axial directions.
Main Cell Sheet Pile Tensions
The simulation used to calculate the main cell sheet pile tensions
established initial foundation soil stresses with a ‘‘gravity turn-

Table 3. Main Cell Sheet Pile Tensions Measured During Main Cell
Recent Instrumentation Data
Filling
In recent years, several full-scale cellular structures have been Location of Normalized
instrumented with piezometers, settlement plates, inclinometers, Maximum Maximum maximum heightc of
and strain gages. The writers have compiled data for 11 instru- measured of average of average maximum
mented structures, five of which were instrumented for main cell tension tensionsa tensionsb of average
Structure 共kN/mm兲 共kN/mm兲 共m兲 tensions
sheet pile tensions. Two of these five were instrumented for com-
mon wall sheet pile tensions 共Table 2兲. Detailed descriptions of Melvin Price-stage 1 0.93 0.63 4.6 0.25
the cellular structures and measurements are described elsewhere Melvin Price-stage 2 1.05 0.88 5.8 0.23
共Wissmann et al. 1995兲. The measured sheet pile tensions at the Trident drydock 1.23d 1.19d 2.7 0.11
end of main cell filling are presented in Table 3. Terminal 4 bulkhead 0.68 0.46 ⭐3.0 ⭐0.18
The fill at the Trident cells was densified with vibratory probes Long Beach bulkhead 1.03 0.82 0 0.00
a
prior to unwatering. During densification, tensions increased by Maximum of the averages of the tensions measured at each strain gauge
an average of 1.33 kN/mm 共7.6 kips/in.兲 near the location of elevation.
b
maximum sheet pile bulge. The approximate doubling of the Distance above the mudline, z.
sheet pile tensions during densification is thought to be due to the c
Distance from the mudline to the point of maximum tension, z, divided
development of excess pore water pressures generated during by the cell free height above the mudline, H.
densification. After the densification activities, tensions returned d
Maximum tensions are for ‘‘long’’ sheet piles with dredgeline elevation
to values near those measured at the end of cell filling. Although at ⫺21 m.

226 / JOURNAL OF GEOTECHNICAL AND GEOENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / MARCH 2003

J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 2003.129:224-233.

 Table 4. Increase in Unloaded Side Sheet Pile Tension During
Lateral Loading
Maximum Average incremental Increase relative
tension increase tension increasea to end of
Structure 共kN/mm兲 共kN/mm兲 filling 共%兲
Trident 0.32 0.18 27
Long Beach 0.56 0.33 54
a
Average increase in tension for strain gauges installed at one elevation.

on’’ procedure and then incrementally activated each row of cell

fill elements, allowing for different fill weights above and below
the water table. Sheet piles were modeled with shell elements.
Hydraulic filling was modeled by applying boundary pressures
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Leeds on 05/17/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

representing differences in the interior and exterior water levels,

activating rows of buoyant cell fill elements, and then removing
boundary water pressures and simultaneously applying cell fill
gravity forces associated with the increase in cell fill effective
stress that occurs during the lowering of the internal water level
below the top of the fill.
The simulation incorporates sheet pile interlock effects by re-
ducing the elastic modulus of the shell elements in the circumfer-
ential direction. The ratio of the circumferential to axial sheet pile
stiffness is the sheet pile ‘‘E-ratio’’ 共Stevens 1980兲. E-ratio values
can be obtained from sheet pile interlock pull tests performed in Fig. 3. Sheet pile interlock behavior
the laboratory or from back calculations performed for full-size
cells instrumented for both sheet pile deflection and tension. The
results of laboratory tests performed by three investigators 共Fig. these effects, finite-element analyses were performed with two
3兲 indicate that the interlock load–displacement response is ap- sets of E-ratios corresponding to the solid lines shown in Fig. 3:
proximately bilinear in the load range of interest. The low- One with the bilinear orthotropic sheet pile parameter values rep-
stiffness leg corresponds to the removal of slack within the inter- resenting laboratory 共tight兲 response and one with the bilinear
lock. The high-stiffness leg corresponds to the elastic response of orthotropic parameter values developed from the results of the
the interlock. Field measurements obtained from comparisons of field 共loose兲 measurements.
sheet pile deflections 共measured with inclinometers兲 and sheet Soil property values used for the finite-element analyses are
pile tensions 共measured with strain gauges兲 at three cells indicate, listed in Tables 5 and 6. A complete summary of the site-specific
however, that interlock response for some cells may be softer than field and laboratory data that forms the basis for these property
disclosed by laboratory tests 共Fig. 3兲. The authors believe this is a values is presented elsewhere 共Wissmann et al. 1995兲. The values
result of the sheet piles being driven within the theoretical perfect of unit weight, friction angle, cohesion, and coefficient of at-rest
circle of the assemblage, and the corresponding occurrence of lateral earth pressure were selected based on results of geotech-
additional slack in the assemblage. To evaluate the significance of nical explorations at each site. Values of modulus number, modu-

Table 5. Soil and Interface Element Parameter Values Selected for Cell Filling Analysis of Instrumented Cells
Melvin Price lock and dam
Parameter stages 1 and 2a Trident drydocka Terminal 4 bulkheada Long Beach bulkheada
Total unit weight 共kN/m3兲 19.3, 20.9 20.3, 21.2 18.8, 19.2 19.3, 18.4
Friction angle, ␾ 共degrees兲 35, 41 35, 0 35, 35 35, 0
Cohesion 共kPa兲 0, 0 0, 10,335 0, 0 0, 14.4
Coefficient of at-rest earth pressure, k o 0.45, 0.5 0.45, 0.5 0.45, 0.5 0.45, 0.8
Modulus exponent, n 0.5, 0.5 0.5, 0 0.5, 0.5 0.5, 0.2
Modulus number, Km 414, 1,050 414, 204,000 340, 340 414, 50
Unload–reload modulus number, Kur 828, 2,100 828, 204,000 680, 680 828, 100
Reduction factor, R f 0.8, 0.8 0.8, 0 0.8, 0.8 0.8, 0.9
Bulk modulus exponent, m 0.2, 0.2 0.2, 0 0.2, 0.2 0.2, 0.2
Bulk modulus number, Kb 107, 400 107, 48,600 155, 155 107, 50
Soil/sheet pile interface friction angle, ␦ 共degrees兲 17, 20 17, 30 17, 17 17, 10
Soil/sheet pile interface cohesion 共kPa兲 0, 0 0, 0 0, 0 0, 11.5
Sheet pile initial E-ratio, E r1 0.02 0.011 0.02 0.02
Sheet pile stiffened E-ratio, E r2 0.096 0.14 0.096 0.096
Sheet pile tension for stiffened response 共kN/mm兲 0.56 0.16 0.56 0.56
Sheet pile web thickness 共mm兲 12.8 11.6 12.8 12.8
a
Pairs of values correspond to parameters used for cell fill 共first兲 and foundation material 共second兲.

JOURNAL OF GEOTECHNICAL AND GEOENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / MARCH 2003 / 227

J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 2003.129:224-233.

 Table 6. Values Used for Parametric Study of Cell Filling
Parameter Cell fill Foundation
Buoyant unit weight 共kN/m 兲 3
10.2 11.1
Moist unit weight 共kN/m3兲 19.6 —
Friction angle, ␾ 共degrees兲 35 41
Cohesion 共kPa兲 0 0
Coefficient of at-rest earth pressure, k o 0.43 0.34
Modulus number, Km 400 20 to 5,000
Modulus exponent, n 0.5 0.5
Bulk modulus number, Kb 107 8 to 1,900
Bulk modulus exponent, m 0.2 0.2
Reduction factor, R f 0.8 0.85
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Leeds on 05/17/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

lus exponent, unload–reload modulus number, reduction factor,

bulk modulus exponent, bulk modulus number, and interface
strength were selected based on the results of field and laboratory
tests performed on soils from each site and from correlations with
index properties 关Duncan et al. 1980; Naval Facilities Engineer-
ing Command 共NAVFAC兲 1982兴. Values of sheet pile E-ratio
were selected based on the measured responses presented in Fig.
3.

Common Wall Sheet Pile Tensions

Finite-element analyses were applied to the common wall prob-
lem by Clough and Kuppusamy 共Clough and Kuppusamy 1985;
Kuppusamy et al. 1985兲 using a generalized plane strain formu-
lation applied to horizontal slices through the cells. Results of
these analyses indicate that, although main, arc, and common wall
tension magnitudes are different from each other, only small ten-
sion variations were calculated within each wall section. The re-
sults of three-dimensional 共3D兲 studies by Mosher 共1991兲 are in
substantial agreement with the generalized plane strain model, but
the 3D mesh used was too coarse to completely confirm all of the
details of the horizontal slice simulation.
To provide a framework for investigating the mechanics of
common wall loading, a new double-axisymmetric superposition
共DAS兲 procedure was formulated. The procedure was developed
with the understanding that the common wall response is like that
of a thin-walled pressure vessel that is also tensioned externally.
The procedure is shown schematically in Fig. 4, and the steps are
outlined as follows:
1. The response of the common wall piles to main cell filling is
determined from axisymmetric analyses of main cell filling.
2. The reduction in tension caused by the placement of arc cell
fill is calculated by continuing the main cell axisymmetric
analyses to activate elements outside the sheet pile wall. This
procedure assumes that the absence of arc cell fill pressure
on the inboard and outboard sides of the cofferdam or bulk-
head has relatively little effect on the common wall response.
3. The increase in common wall tension caused by the transfer
of arc cell tension through the wye pile is determined by
adding the component of arc cell tension in the direction of
the common wall to the common wall tensions determined
from steps 1 and 2. Arc cell sheet pile tensions are calculated
from axisymmetric analyses performed for small-diameter
cells. In this step, it is assumed that the wye pile does not
deform significantly during cell filling.
The DAS procedure has the advantages that the separate ef-
fects of independent main and arc cell filling are incorporated,
and foundation influences are explicitly accounted for. More im-
Fig. 4. Double-axisymmetric superposition procedure
portantly, the effects of vertical arching within the main and arc
cells are included because the simulations allow for fill load trans-
fer to the relatively stiff sheet pile walls. It is recognized that the
DAS procedure does not account for all of the 3D effects that
influence common wall tensions.
Results of Finite-Element Analyses
Finite-Element Analyses of Five Instrumented Main
Cells
Comparisons between observed and computed main cell sheet
pile tensions for the five instrumented cells are presented in Fig.
5. The measured and computed patterns of sheet pile tensions for
the five cells clearly show that tensions increase with depth from
the top of the cell to a location above the mudline and then de-
crease toward the mudline. Considerable scatter is noted in the
instrumentation readings, however. This scatter is attributed to 共1兲
installation difficulties and poor performance of geotechnical in-
strumentation subjected to rugged construction conditions and
harsh marine environments; and 共2兲 the nonuniform tightness of
sheet pile assemblies prior to cell filling. Nevertheless, the domi-
nant trend of the instrumentation data, especially as reflected by
the average values, is clear.
The sheet pile parameter values in Table 5 for the Melvin
Price, Terminal 4, and Long Beach cells correspond to the loose

228 / JOURNAL OF GEOTECHNICAL AND GEOENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / MARCH 2003

J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 2003.129:224-233.

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Leeds on 05/17/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Fig. 5. Sheet pile tensions at end of cell filling
sheet pile model developed based on the results of field measure-
ments. When these parameters were used for the Trident analysis,
however, computed sheet pile tensions were lower than the mea-
sured tensions. Subsequently, the tight sheet pile model, which is
based on the results of laboratory pull tests, was used for the
Trident computations reported here.
The results of the analyses are in good agreement with the
averages of the instrumentation data for the Melvin Price stage 1,
Trident, Terminal 4, and Long Beach cells. For the Melvin Price
stage 2 cells, the sheet pile tensions computed by the analysis are
somewhat larger than the average of the strain gauge data but
generally within the upper bound of the instrumentation measure-
ments. The analysis for the Long Beach cells included the hydrau-
lic filling simulation described above. When the clamshell bucket
filling simulation was implemented for the analysis of these cells,
computed tensions were smaller than those measured. This obser-
vation supports the concept of interlock prestressing during hy-
draulic filling.
Parametric Studies of Main Cell Filling
Once an understanding of the model performance was obtained
by the analyses of the five instrumented cells, additional studies
were performed to investigate the effects of cell geometry, foun-
dation conditions, and sheet pile load–displacement behavior on
the locations and magnitudes of maximum sheet pile tensions.
Analyses were performed for 49 combinations of cell diameter
JOURNAL OF GEOTECHNICAL AND GEOENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / MARCH 2003 / 229
J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 2003.129:224-233.
and height, with diameters, D, of 9.1, 12.2, 15.2, 18.3, 21.3, 24.4,
and 27.4 m and height, H, to diameter ratios, H/D, of 0.5, 0.75,
0.9, 1.0, 1.1, 1.25, and 1.5. These analyses were performed for
cells on rocklike foundations using the cell fill parameter values
presented in Table 6. The effects of foundation stiffness on main
cell sheet pile tensions were studied by performing eight analyses
for an average-sized cell 关18.3 m 共60 ft兲 diameter, 18.3 m 共60 ft兲
tall兴 on sand foundations characterized by the variable foundation
modulus numbers listed in Table 6. The influences of sheet pile
embedment depth for an average-sized cell founded on medium-
dense sand were investigated with five analyses in which the
sheet pile penetration depths ranged between 0.9 m 共3 ft兲 and 15.2
m 共50 ft兲. Both the laboratory and field bilinear sheet pile load–
displacement parameter values representing tight and loose sheet
pile responses were implemented in the analyses. The results of
the analyses are presented in Figs. 6, 7, and 8.
The normalized location of maximum sheet pile tension is
shown in Fig. 6 for the analyses of cells on the rocklike founda-
tion. This foundation provides restraint to cell expansion because
shear stresses at the contact between the cell fill and the founda-
tion serve to inhibit lateral expansion of the cell fill, which in turn
inhibits expansion of the sheet pile cell. If there were no restraint
provided by the foundation, the location of maximum sheet pile
tension would be at the bottom of the cells. Because the founda-
tion does provide such restraint, the location of maximum sheet
pile tension is above the bottom of the cell. As the cell becomes
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Leeds on 05/17/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Fig. 7. Influence of foundation stiffness on location of maximum

sheet pile tension

Fig. 6. Influence of cell geometry on location of maximum sheet pile

tension
model than it does for the loose sheet pile model. For small cells,
especially with the loose sheet pile model, the response moves up
trend line A as the cell height increases. This occurs because
arching produces smaller values of k as the cell height increases.
more slender, the relative significance of foundation restraint de- At some height depending on aspect ratio and whether the sheet
creases, so the value of z/H decreases as the value of H/D in- pile model is loose or tight, the transition to trend line B begins.
creases, as shown in Fig. 6. Besides foundation restraint, other During the transition to trend line B, the value of k increases as
factors influence the shape of the curves in Fig. 6. These factors the effect of the high-stiffness leg of interface response is felt.
include nonlinearities in cell fill and sheet pile response, as well Once on trend line B, arching produces a reduction in k values as
as the increased significance of arching in the cell fill as the value the cell height continues to increase.
of H/D increases. The result is that changes in cell height and cell In applying the results shown in Fig. 8, it would be conserva-
diameter have somewhat different impacts on z/H, and separate tive to always apply trend line B and obtain a value of k from the
curves are drawn in Fig. 6 for three selected cell diameters.
For cells on sand foundations, the influence of foundation stiff-
ness on the location of maximum sheet pile tension is shown in
Fig. 7. The normalized location (z/H) of maximum sheet pile
tension decreases as the modulus number, Km, of the foundation
soil decreases. This is because ‘‘soft’’ foundation conditions offer
less resistance than ‘‘hard’’ foundation conditions to outward
sheet pile deflections. According to the analysis results, the trend
shown in Fig. 7 is valid as long as the sheet piles are embedded at
least 1.6 times the depth to pile fixity, as determined according to
the procedures of Schroeder and Maitland 共1979兲 or Rossow et al.
共1987兲.
Fig. 8 presents apparent coefficients of lateral earth pressure, k,
computed at the locations of maximum sheet pile tension. The
values shown are the ratio of effective horizontal pressure from
the finite-element analyses to geostatic vertical effective stress.
The apparent k values depend on cell height, cell aspect ratio, and
interlock stiffness. Two trend lines are shown in Fig. 8. Trend line
A corresponds to the low-stiffness leg of interlock response, and
trend line B corresponds to the high-stiffness leg of interlock
response. The transitions from trend line A to trend line B are
shown by the dashed lines in Fig. 8, and they occur as the cell
Fig. 8. Coefficient of lateral earth pressure at location of maximum
size increases and slack is taken out of the sheet pile assemblage.
sheet pile tension
The transition occurs at smaller cell sizes for the tight sheet pile

230 / JOURNAL OF GEOTECHNICAL AND GEOENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / MARCH 2003

J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 2003.129:224-233.


Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Leeds on 05/17/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Fig. 9. Results of double-axisymmetric superposition analysis for
two instrumented cells
cell height. This would be an appropriate approach for the tight
sheet pile model and cells above about 12 m high. However, it
should be recalled that only the Trident cell data matched analy-
ses using the tight sheet pile model. The other four cases matched
analyses using the loose model. For the loose model, trend line A
can be used for cell heights below about 16 m high.
Finite-Element Analysis of Two Instrumented Common
Walls
DAS analyses of the common wall were performed for the
Melvin Price stage 1 and Trident drydock cells using the param-
eter values listed in Table 5. A comparison of computed tensions
and measured tensions 共Fig. 9兲 indicates that the computed values
are very close to the average of the measurements.
Recommendations for Design
Main Cell Sheet Pile Tensions
For cells on hard foundations, the effects of cell geometry on the
location of maximum sheet pile tension can be estimated from
Fig. 6. For cells founded on sand, the effects of reduced founda-
tion restraint can be included by multiplying the location of maxi-
mum tension obtained from Fig. 6 by the ratio obtained from Fig.
7. For cells founded on soft silts and clays, the location of maxi-
mum sheet pile interlock tension can be estimated to occur at the
mudline.
The results presented in Figs. 6 and 7 can be used as long as
the sheet piles are embedded at least 1.6 times as deep as the
location of pile fixity, as determined by the Schroeder and Mait-
land 共1979兲 method or the Rossow et al. 共1987兲 method. Penetra-
JOURNAL OF GEOTECHNICAL AND GEOENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / MARCH 2003 / 231
J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 2003.129:224-233.
tion depths greater than 1.6 times the depth to fixity may be
required for other reasons, such as the reduction of seepage flow
or increase in cell sliding resistance.
The apparent coefficient of the lateral earth pressure at the
location of maximum sheet pile tension can be estimated from the
charts presented in Fig. 8, which was developed for a cell fill
friction angle of 35°. Apparent k values for fills with friction
angles other than 35° can be obtained from Fig. 8 and the follow-
ing expression:
k ␾ ⫽k 35共共 1⫺sin ␾ 兲 /0.43兲 (5)
where k ␾ ⫽the apparent k value recommended for use, k 35⫽the
apparent k value for soils with a friction angle of 35° 共obtained
from Fig. 8兲, and ␾⫽the friction angle of the cell fill.
The results in Figs. 6, 7, and 8 are for clamshell bucket filling.
Based on the results of readings and analyses performed for the
Long Beach cells, hydraulically filled cell tensions can be esti-
mated as the sum of 共1兲 the maximum tension computed for clam-
shell bucket filling; and 共2兲 the tension obtained from the hoop
stress equation due to a hydrostatic pressure difference produced
by the water level inside the cell being at the top of the cell and
the water level outside the cell being at the river level.
Strain gauge readings taken at the Trident cells indicate that a
maximum additional average tension of 1.33 kN/mm 共7.6 kips/
in.兲 developed during cell fill densification with vibratory probes.
Based on these data, it is recommended that this additional ten-
sion be included in the design of cells densified by vibratory
probes. The temporary densification-induced tensions need not be
added to the temporary increased tensions for hydraulically filled
cells because these tensions occur at different times during the life
of the structure.
For cofferdam and bulkhead cells subject to lateral loading, the
strain gauge readings taken at the Trident and Long Beach cells
suggest that unloaded side sheet piles be designed to withstand an
additional average tension of 0.56 kN/mm 共3.2 kips/in.兲 during
lateral loading. The lateral loading-induced tensions need not be
added to the tensions for hydraulically filled cells or to the ten-
sions for compaction probing because these temporary increases
in tension occur at different times during the life of the structure.
The appropriate design value for maximum tension in the main
cell sheet piles is the maximum of 共1兲 the clamshell-filled tension
adjusted for hydraulic filling, if applicable; 共2兲 the clamshell-filled
tension adjusted for compaction probing, if applicable; and 共3兲 the
clamshell-filled tension adjusted for lateral loading, which is al-
most always applicable.
Common Wall Sheet Pile Tensions
The results of the DAS analyses performed for two cofferdams
suggest that common wall tensions can be computed by sepa-
rately considering the reduction in tension due to arc space filling
and the increase in tension due to the transfer of arc cell tension
through the wye pile. The analyses show that there is a reduction
in the main cell apparent earth pressure coefficient of at least 0.03
at the end of arc space filling. The analyses also showed that, due
to arching in the small radius arc cells, the apparent coefficient of
lateral earth pressure within the arc cells does not exceed the
value of the Rankine active earth pressure coefficient.
Based on this, it is recommended that common wall sheet pile
tensions should be estimated by separately considering the reduc-
tion in tension due to arc space filling and the increase in tension
due to the transfer of arc cell tension through the wye pile. Com-
mon wall sheet pile tensions resulting from main and arc cell fill
 pressures only T arc fill , can be estimated using a modified form of
Eq. 共1兲 to include a reduction in the net lateral earth pressure
coefficient
T arc fill⫽R m 共 ␴ v ⬘ 兲共 k ␾ ⫺0.03 兲
where R m ⫽the main cell radius, ␴ v ⬘ ⫽the geostatic vertical stress
at the location of maximum main cell interlock tension, and k ␾
⫽the apparent k value for main cell filling from Eq. 共5兲.
The magnitude of arc cell tension that is transferred through
the wye pile, T wye , can be estimated from the hoop stress equa-
tion with radius equal to that of the arc cell, R a , using the Rank-
ine earth pressure coefficient, k a , and taking into account the wye
pile angle, ␺
T wye⫽R a 共 ␴ v ⬘ 兲共 k a 兲 cos共 ␺ 兲
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Leeds on 05/17/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Common wall sheet pile tensions that occur in response to
main and arc cell filling, T cw , can be estimated by summing the
tensions expressed in Eqs. 6 and 7
T cw⫽T arc
fill⫹T wye
Factor of Safety
The finite-element analyses that form the basis of these recom-
mendations for estimating sheet pile tensions were calibrated
using average values of measured tensions, and appropriate fac-
tors of safety should be applied to prevent interlock rupture. It can
be seen in Figs. 5 and 9 that the maximum value of the ratio of
the maximum measured tension to the maximum calculated ten-
sion is about 1.48, which occurs for the Terminal 4 bulkhead.
Selection of an appropriate value of the factor of safety also in-
volves consideration of uncertainties in loads and capacities, as
well as consequences of failure.
Conclusions
This paper presents recommendations for estimating sheet pile
tensions in cellular structures. These recommendations are based
on instrumentation data collected at five full-size structures and
on finite-element analyses. Parametric studies have been per-
formed to develop design charts for estimating the effects of cell
geometry, foundation conditions, cell filling method, and sheet
pile behavior on the location of maximum main cell tension and
on apparent coefficients of lateral earth pressure. These charts can
be used in conjunction with the hoop stress equation to incorpo-
rate soil–structure interactions in calculating main cell tensions.
Estimates for the change in tension during lateral loading and
during cell fill densification are formulated based on strain gauge
measurements collected at two instrumented cells. In addition, a
new method has been formulated for analyzing common wall
loading. This method has been used to develop a simplified ap-
proach for estimating common wall tension that incorporates the
separate effects of main cell filling, arc space filling, and the
transfer of arc cell tensions to the common wall.
Acknowledgments
The research presented herein was sponsored by the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers Waterways Experiment Station. The writers
are grateful for the support of Dr. W. L. Schroeder of Oregon
State University, Dr. E. B. Kinner of Haley and Aldrich, Inc., R.
H. Frueh and L. Jones of Shannon and Wilson, Inc., and E. Dem-
232 / JOURNAL OF GEOTECHNICAL AND GEOENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / MARCH 2003
J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 2003.129:224-233.
sky and P. Conroy of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for their
assistance with obtaining and interpreting instrumentation data.
The writers acknowledge the assistance of Dr. G. W. Clough of
Georgia Tech for his guidance during the course of the research.
(6)
Notation
The following symbols are used in this paper:
D ⫽ main cell diameter;
E-ratio ⫽ ratio of sheet pile stiffness in circumferential
direction to sheet pile stiffness in axial direction;
H ⫽ cell free height above mudline;
H ⬘ ⫽ distance from location of sheet pile fixity to top of
(7)
cell;
Kb ⫽ bulk modulus number;
Km ⫽ tangent modulus number;
k ⫽ coefficient of lateral earth pressure;
k a ⫽ Rankine active earth pressure coefficient;
(8)
k ␾ ⫽ recommended apparent coefficient of lateral earth
pressure for cell fill with friction angle ␾;
k 35 ⫽ apparent coefficient of lateral earth pressure for
cell fill with friction angle of 35°;
L ⫽ distance between centers of main and arc cells;
m ⫽ bulk modulus exponent;
n ⫽ tangent modulus exponent;
p ⫽ cell fill radial pressure;
p max ⫽ main cell fill radial pressure at location of
maximum sheet pile tension;
R ⫽ cell radius;
R a ⫽ arc cell radius;
R f ⫽ tangent modulus reduction factor;
R m ⫽ main cell radius;
T arc fill ⫽ component of common wall sheet pile tension that
results in response to placement of main and arc
cell fill;
T cw ⫽ common wall sheet pile tension;
T m ⫽ main cell sheet pile tension;
T wye ⫽ component of common wall sheet pile tension that
results in response to transfer of arc cell sheet pile
tension through wye pile;
z ⫽ distance from mudline to location of maximum
sheet pile tension;
␪ ⫽ angle between axis of cellular structure and main
cell radius that extends through wye pile;
␴ ⬘v ⫽ vertical effective stress; and
␺ ⫽ wye pile angle.
References
Barker, R., Lewis, C., Oliver, W., and Mould, K. 共1985兲. ‘‘Sheetpile in-
terlock connection testing program, final report—Tasks 1.1 through
1.3.’’ Rep. No. VPI/CE-ST-85/01, Dept. of Civil Engineering, Struc-
tural Engineering, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State Univ.,
Blacksburg, Va.
Clough, G. W., and Duncan, J. M. 共1969兲. ‘‘Finite-element analysis of
Port Allen and Old River locks.’’ College of Engineering, Office of
Research Services, Univ. of California, Berkeley, Calif.
Clough, G. W., and Kuppusamy, T. 共1985兲. ‘‘Finite-element analyses of
lock and dam 26 cofferdam.’’ J. Geotech. Eng., 111共4兲, 521–541.
Clough, G. W., Mosher, R., Singh, Y., and Kuppusamy, T. 共1987兲. ‘‘Two-
and three-dimension finite-element analyses of cellular cofferdams.’’
Proc., Conf. Soil–Structure Interaction, Paris.
 Duncan, J. M., and Chang, C. Y. 共1970兲. ‘‘Nonlinear analysis of stress and
strain in soils.’’ J. Soil Mech. Found. Div., Am. Soc. Civ. Eng., 96共5兲,
1629–1653.
Duncan, J. M., Byrne, P., Mabry, P., and Wong, K. S. 共1980兲. ‘‘Strength,
stress–strain, and bulk modulus parameters for finite-element analyses
of stresses and movements in soil masses.’’ Rep. No. UCB/GT/80-01,
University of California, Berkeley, Calif.
Ebeling, R. M., Peters, J. F., and Clough, G. W. 共1990兲. ‘‘User’s guide for
the incremental construction soil–structure interaction program SOIL-
STRUCT.’’ Technical Rep. No. ITL-90-6, US Army Corps of Engineers
Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Miss.
Hansen, L. A., and Clough, G. W. 共1982兲. ‘‘Finite-element analyses of
cofferdam behavior.’’ Proc., 4th Int. Conf., Numerical Methods in
Geomechanics, Edmonton, Alberta, Vol. 2, 899–906.
Hardin, K. O. 共1990兲. ‘‘Finite-element analysis of cellular steel sheet pile
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of Leeds on 05/17/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
cofferdams.’’ PhD thesis, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State Uni-
versity, Va.
Khuayjarenpanishk, T. 共1975兲. ‘‘Behavior of circular cell bulkhead during
construction.’’ PhD thesis, Oregon State University, Ore.
Kuppusamy, T., Clough, G. W., and Finno, R. J. 共1985兲. ‘‘Finite-element
analyses of cofferdams with cell interaction.’’ Proc., 11th Int. Conf.,
Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Vol. 4, 1993–1996.
Lacroix, Y., Esrig, M. I., and Luscher, U. 共1970兲. ‘‘Design, construction,
and performance of cellular cofferdams.’’ Proc., ASCE Specialty
Conf., Lateral Stresses in the Ground and Design of Earth Retaining
Structures, 271–328.
Mosher, R. L. 共1991兲. ‘‘Three-dimensional finite-element analysis of
sheet-pile cellular cofferdams.’’ PhD thesis, Virginia Polytechnic In-
stitute and State University, Va.
Naval Facilities Engineering Command 共NAVFAC兲. 共1982兲. ‘‘Founda-
tions and earth structures, design manual 7.’’ Department of the Navy,
Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Alexandria, Va.
Rossow, M., Demsky, E., and Mosher, R. 共1987兲. ‘‘Theoretical manual
for design of cellular sheet pile structures 共cofferdams and retaining
structures兲.’’ U.S. Army Engineers Waterways Experiment Station, In-
JOURNAL OF GEOTECHNICAL AND GEOENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING © ASCE / MARCH 2003 / 233
J. Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 2003.129:224-233.
formation Technology Laboratory, Vicksburg, Miss.
Schroeder, W. L., and Maitland, J. K. 共1979兲. ‘‘Cellular bulkheads and
cofferdams.’’ J. Geotech. Eng., 105共7兲, 823– 837.
Shannon and Wilson, Inc. 共1983兲. ‘‘Sheetpile interlock testing, lock and
dam no. 26 共replacement兲, Mississippi River, Alton, Illinois, final re-
port, tasks 6.1 through 6.7.’’ A report prepared for the Department of
the Army, St. Louis District, Corps of Engineers, Contract No.
DACW43-82-C-0054.
Shannon and Wilson, Inc. 共1984兲. ‘‘Final report, axisymmetric finite-
element analyses, parametric study of sheetpile penetration of coffer-
dam cells, lock and dam no. 26 共replacement兲, Mississippi River,
Alton, Illinois.’’ A report prepared for the Department of the Army, St.
Louis District, Corps of Engineers, Contract No. DACW43-82-C-
0054.
Singh, Y. P. 共1987兲. ‘‘Finite-element analyses of cellular cofferdams.’’
PhD thesis, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Va.
Sorota, M. D., Kinner, E. B., and Haley, M. X. 共1981兲. ‘‘Cellular coffer-
dam for Trident drydock: performance.’’ J. Geotech. Eng., 107共12兲,
1657–1676.
Stevens, R. F. 共1980兲. ‘‘Study of the behavior of a cellular cofferdam.’’
PhD thesis, Duke University, N.C.
Swatek, E. B. 共1970兲. ‘‘Summary cellular structure design and installa-
tion.’’ Conference on design and installation of pile foundations and
cellular structures, H. Y. Fang, and T. Dismuke, eds., Envo Publishing
Co., Inc. Lehigh Valley, Pa., 413– 424.
Tennessee Valley Authority. 共1957兲. ‘‘Steel sheet cellular cofferdams on
rock.’’ TVA Technical Monograph No. 75.
Terzaghi, K. 共1945兲. ‘‘Stability and stiffness of cellular cofferdams.’’
Trans. Am. Soc. Civ. Eng., 110, 1083–1119.
Wissmann, K. J., Filz, G. M., and Martin, J. R. II. 共1995兲. ‘‘New design
methods for sheet pile cellular structures.’’ A report prepared for the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Waterways Experiment Station, De-
partment of Civil Engineering, Geotechnical Engineering, Virginia
Tech, Blacksburg, Va.