ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

i
អត្ថបទសង្ខេប

ii
RESUME

iii
ABSTRACT

iv
ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS

v
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .............................................................................................. i

អត្ថបទសង្ខេប ............................................................................................................ii

RESUME ..................................................................................................................... iii

ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................. iv

ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS .......................................................................... v

LIST OF FIGURES .....................................................................................................vii

LIST OF TABLES ..................................................................................................... viii

1. INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................... 1

2. LITERATURE REVIEW .......................................................................................... 2

3. METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................... 3

4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ................................................................................ 4

5. CONCLUSION .......................................................................................................... 5

REFERENCES ............................................................ Error! Bookmark not defined.

vi
LIST OF FIGURES

vii
LIST OF TABLES

viii
1. INTRODUCTION

1
2. LITERATURE REVIEW

2
3. METHODOLOGY

3
4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

4
5. CONCLUSION

5
REFERENCES

There are no sources in the current document.

6
APPENDIX A: define the apparent earth pressure

As shown in Figure, there are five layers of soil along the excavation depth. The average
unit weight of the layers may be expressed as Eq.2.7

1
𝛾𝑎𝑣 = (𝛾1 𝐻1 + 𝛾2 𝐻2 + 𝛾3 𝐻3 + 𝛾4 𝐻4 + 𝛾5 𝐻5 )
𝐻𝑒

1
𝛾𝑎𝑣 = (18.4 × 3.2 + 18 × 0.8 + 19 × 1 + 19 × 4 + 20 × 2) = 18.935 𝑘𝑁/𝑚³
11

The average cohesion will be Eq.2.6.

1
𝑐𝑎𝑣 = (𝑛′ 𝑐𝑢1 𝐻1 + 0.5𝛾2 𝐻2 2 𝑘𝑠 𝑡𝑎𝑛𝜙2′ + 0.5𝛾3 𝐻3 2 𝑘𝑠 𝑡𝑎𝑛𝜙3′ + 0.5𝛾4 𝐻4 2 𝑘𝑠 𝑡𝑎𝑛𝜙4′ +
𝐻𝑒

0.5𝛾5 𝐻5 2 𝑘𝑠 𝑡𝑎𝑛𝜙5′ )

1
𝑐𝑎𝑣 = (0.75 × 18 × 3.2 + 0.5 × 18 × 0.82 × 𝑡𝑎𝑛28 + 0.5 × 19 × 12 × 𝑡𝑎𝑛35 + 0.5 ×
11

19 × 42 × 𝑡𝑎𝑛34 + 0.5 × 20 × 22 × 𝑡𝑎𝑛45) = 17.767 𝑘𝑁/𝑚²

A rectangular pressure diagram with a triangular top as shown in Figure is used in case where
stability factor

𝛾𝑎𝑣 𝐻𝑒 18.935𝑘𝑁/𝑚³×11𝑚
𝑁𝑐 = = = 11.723 ≥ 4 - soft to medium clay
𝑐𝑎𝑣 17.767𝑘𝑁/𝑚²

Figure 5.0.1 Distribution of earth pressure and locations of struts

Hence, based on Peck, 1969 as Eq.2.2. the apparent earth pressure in soft to medium clay is
given:

7
𝜎𝑎 = 0.3𝛾𝑎𝑣 𝐻𝑎𝑣 = 0.3 × 18.935𝑘𝑁/𝑚³ × 11𝑚 = 62.485𝑘𝑁/𝑚²

APPEMDIX B: define the strut loads during excavation stages

Figure 5.0.2 Analysis strut load during the excavation stage

The Table 5.1 is summarizing the result of struts load during excavation stage from hand
calculation:

8
 Table 0.1 Summarize the result of struts loads during excavation stages

APPENDIX C: Design struts section required at level A and B

In order to defined strut section to resist axial load from lateral earth pressure, we can
use trial errors method by select section properties of HP section from AISC Steel Construction
Manual, 2005 as shown in Table.

Table 0.2 Properties of HP 400×180 (of Steel Construction, 2005)

Check the slenderness ratio of HP column by Eq.

𝑟 = 𝑚𝑖𝑛(𝑟𝑥 , 𝑟𝑦 ) = 95𝑚𝑚

𝐾𝐿
Slenderness ratio = = 116 ≤ 200 OK!
𝑟

Check the slenderness criteria for compression elements:

ℎ = 𝑑 − 2𝐾𝑑𝑒𝑠 = 302𝑚𝑚

𝑏𝑓 𝐸
= 11 ≤ 0.56√ = 16 OK!
2𝑡𝑓 𝐹𝑦

ℎ 𝐸
= 16 ≤ 1.49√ = 42 OK!
𝑡𝑤 𝐹𝑦

Determine the flexural buckling stress by Eq.

𝐾𝐿 𝐸
Since = 116 ≤ 4.71√ = 133
𝑟 𝐹𝑦

9
 𝐹𝑦
⇒ 𝐹𝑐𝑟 = 0.658 𝐹𝑒 𝐹𝑦 = 123𝑀𝑃𝑎

The design strength of the column is determined by Eq.

𝜙𝑐 𝑃𝑛 = 𝜙𝑐 𝐹𝑐𝑟 𝐴𝑔 = 2553 𝑘𝑁

⇒ 2𝜙𝑐 𝑃𝑛 = 2 × 2553𝑘𝑁 = 5106𝑘𝑁

As shown in Table 5.1, the point load on the strut can be expressed by

Strut A: 𝑃𝑢 = 𝐴 × 𝑠 = 1812𝑘𝑁 ≤ 𝜙𝑐 𝑃𝑛 = 2553𝑘𝑁

Strut B: 𝑃𝑢 = 𝐵 × 𝑠 = 4497.68𝑘𝑁 ≤ 2𝜙𝑐 𝑃𝑛 = 5106𝑘𝑁

Strut C: 𝑃𝑢 = 𝐶 × 𝑠 = 1939.52𝑘𝑁 ≤ 𝜙𝑐 𝑃𝑛 = 2553𝑘𝑁

The section HP 400×180 is adequate to support lateral load at level A and C

The double strut HP 400×180 is adequate to support lateral load at level B.

APPENDIX D: Design the wale section required at level A, B and C

Here are the following steps in designing wales section:

𝑆𝑡𝑒𝑝 1. Determine the maximum bending moment when the horizontal spacing of struts s =
8m

𝐴𝑠 2 226.5𝑘𝑁/𝑚×(8𝑚)²
Maximum moment at level A: 𝑀𝑚𝑎𝑥 = = = 1812𝑘𝑁. 𝑚
8 8

𝐵𝑠 2 562.21𝑘𝑁/𝑚×(8𝑚)²
Maximum moment at level B: 𝑀𝑚𝑎𝑥 = = = 4497.68𝑘𝑁. 𝑚
8 8

𝐶𝑠 2 242.44𝑘𝑁/𝑚×(8𝑚)²
Maximum moment at level C: 𝑀𝑚𝑎𝑥 = = = 1939.52𝑘𝑁. 𝑚
8 8

𝑆𝑡𝑒𝑝 2. Obtain the section modulus required of the wale by following Eq. when 𝐹𝑦 = 345𝑀𝑃𝑎
(High-strength, low-alloy A572 Grade 50)

Allowable bending stress of wale: 𝜎𝑎𝑙𝑙 = 0.6𝐹𝑦 = 207𝑀𝑃𝑎

𝑀𝐴𝑚𝑎𝑥 1812𝑘𝑁.𝑚
The section modulus required of strut A: 𝑠𝐴(𝑟𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑟𝑒𝑑) = = = 0.00875𝑚³
𝜎𝑎𝑙𝑙 207𝑀𝑁/𝑚²

10
 𝑀𝐵𝑚𝑎𝑥 4497.68𝑘𝑁.𝑚
The section modulus required of strut B: 𝑠𝐵(𝑟𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑟𝑒𝑑) = = = 0.0217𝑚³
𝜎𝑎𝑙𝑙 207𝑀𝑁/𝑚²

𝑀𝐶𝑚𝑎𝑥 1939.52𝑘𝑁.𝑚
The section modulus required of strut C: 𝑠𝐶(𝑟𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑟𝑒𝑑) = = = 0.00936𝑚³
𝜎𝑎𝑙𝑙 207𝑀𝑁/𝑚²

𝑆𝑡𝑒𝑝 3. Choose a wale having a section modulus greater than or equal to the required section
modulus from AISC Steel Construction Manual, 2005

From AISC data base table, section modulus of 𝑊 1000 × 400 × 539 is

𝑠𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑣𝑖𝑑𝑒 = 0.02335𝑚³ and the section of 𝑊 920 × 310 × 253 is 𝑠𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑣𝑖𝑑𝑒 = 0.00952𝑚³

The section is adequate for maximum bending moment at level A: 𝑊 920 × 310 × 253

The section is adequate for maximum bending moment at level B: 𝑊 920 × 420 × 342

The section is adequate for maximum bending moment at level C: 𝑊 920 × 310 × 253

𝑆𝑡𝑒𝑝 4. Check flexural deflection of wale at level A, B and C

Table 0.3 Summarize wale properties and linear loads at level

From hypothesis in Table 0.3, we can estimate the deflection of wale Eq.

𝐴𝐿4 226.5𝑘𝑁/𝑚×(6𝑚)4
∆𝐴 = = = 5.73𝑚𝑚
185𝐸𝐼𝐴 185×200000𝑀𝑃𝑎×0.004375𝑚4

𝐵𝐿4 562.21𝑘𝑁/𝑚×(6𝑚)4
∆𝐵 = = = 5.17𝑚𝑚
185𝐸𝐼𝐵 185×200000𝑀𝑃𝑎×0.01203𝑚4

𝐶𝐿4 242.44𝑘𝑁/𝑚×(6𝑚)4
∆𝐶 = = = 6.13𝑚𝑚
185𝐸𝐼𝐶 185×200000𝑀𝑃𝑎×0.004375𝑚4

APPENDIX E: design embedment length of CPW

𝑆𝑡𝑒𝑝 1. Calculate the active and passive coefficients

11
 Table 0.4 Active and passive coefficient

𝑆𝑡𝑒𝑝 2. Calculate the effective active and passive lateral earth pressure

Surcharge load on ground surface is 𝑞 = 15𝑘𝑁/𝑚² and excavation surface 𝑞 = 10𝑘𝑁/𝑚²

From active and passive coefficient in Table, we can determine lateral earth pressure at active
and passive side by follow Eq. and as shown in Table and Table.

12
 Table 0.5 Lateral earth pressure at active side

Table 0.6 Lateral earth pressure at passive side

According to lateral earth pressure diagram in Figure, the driving and resistant moment about
point O are determined as shown in Table and Table.

13
 Table 0.7 Driving moment at active side

Table 0.8 Driving moment at passive side

Factor of safety against push-in as follows gross pressure method expressed as Eq.

∑ 𝑀𝑟
𝐹𝑝 = ∑ ≥ 1.2 ⇒ 𝐷 = 0.8𝑚
𝑀𝑟

Hence, the total length of pile is 𝐿 𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 = 15.5 + 0.8 = 16.3𝑚 ⟶ 17𝑚

APPENDIX F: Design Section Properties of CPW

APPENDIX G: Define the factor of safety against Bottom Heave

Based on the soil profile in Figure, the average of cohesion along length of pile wall depth
17m is determined by Eq.

1
𝑐𝑎𝑣 = (𝑛′ 𝑐𝑢1 𝐻1 + 0.5𝛾2 𝐻2 2 𝑘𝑠 𝑡𝑎𝑛𝜙2′ + 0.5𝛾3 𝐻3 2 𝑘𝑠 𝑡𝑎𝑛𝜙3′ + 0.5𝛾4 𝐻4 2 𝑘𝑠 𝑡𝑎𝑛𝜙4′ +
𝐻𝑒

0.5𝛾5 𝐻5 2 𝑘𝑠 𝑡𝑎𝑛𝜙5′ )

1
𝑐𝑎𝑣 = (0.75 × 18 × 3.2 + 0.5 × 18 × 0.82 × 𝑡𝑎𝑛28 + 0.5 × 19 × 12 × 𝑡𝑎𝑛35 + 0.5 ×
11

19 × 42 × 𝑡𝑎𝑛34 + 0.5 × 20 × 22 × 𝑡𝑎𝑛45) = 17.767 𝑘𝑁/𝑚²

The undrained cohesion of clay at the end of CPW is 𝑐𝑢 = 320𝑘𝑁/𝑚² and from Eq.

14
The total stress at the toe of CPW

𝛾𝐻𝑒 = 𝛾1 𝐻1 + 𝛾2 𝐻2 + 𝛾3 𝐻3 + 𝛾4 𝐻4 + 𝛾5 𝐻5

𝛾𝐻𝑒 = 18.4 × 3.2 + 18 × 0.8 + 19 × 1 + 19 × 4 + 20 × 2 = 208.285 𝑘𝑁/𝑚²

5.14𝑐𝑢 (1+0.2𝐵" /𝐿)+𝑐𝑎𝑣 (𝐻𝑒 /𝐵′ )

𝐹𝑆 =
𝛾𝐻𝑒 +𝑞𝑠

Where 𝑇 ≥ 23𝑚, 𝐵 = 29𝑚,

𝐵 29 𝐵
= = 20.5𝑚 < 𝑇, ⇒ 𝐵′ = = 20.5𝑚 and 𝐵" = 𝐵 = 29𝑚, 𝐿 = 36𝑚
√2 √2 √2

𝑐𝑢 = 320𝑘𝑁/𝑚², 𝑐𝑎𝑣 = 17.767𝑘𝑁/𝑚², 𝐻𝑒 = 11𝑚, 𝑞𝑠 = 15𝑘𝑁/𝑚²

29 11
5.14×320×(1+0.2×36)+17.767×(20.5)
𝐹𝑆 = = 8.6 > 1.5 𝑂𝐾!
208.285+15

APPENDIX H: Define the Factor of Safety against Upheaval

Below the excavation surface there exists a permeable layer (sandy soils) underlying an
impermeable layer, the impermeable layer has a tendency to be lifted by the water pressure
from the permeable layer has a tendency to be lifted by the water pressure from the permeable
layer. The safety, against upheaval, of the impermeable layer should be examined. The factor
of safety against upheaval is

∑𝑖 𝛾𝑡𝑖 ℎ𝑖
𝐹𝑢𝑝 =
𝐻𝑤 𝛾𝑤

Where

∑𝑖 𝛾𝑡𝑖 ℎ𝑖 = 20 × 0.7 + 20 × 1.8 + 20 × 2 + 20 × 1.5 = 120𝑘𝑁/𝑚²

𝐻𝑤 𝛾𝑤 = 8.5 × 10 = 85𝑘𝑁/𝑚²

120
𝐹𝑢𝑝 = = 1.41 > 1.2 𝑂𝐾!
85

APPENDIX I: Define the Factor of Safety against Sand Boiling

The soils layers from top of excavation to toe of CPW are the alternated layers of sand and
clay. The short-term behaviors can be ignored while long-term behaviors may need
consideration. The analysis methods are the same as those for sand, so the factor of safety is

15
 𝑖𝑐𝑟
𝐹𝑆 =
𝑖max(𝑒𝑥𝑖𝑡)

where

𝐺𝑠 = 2.68

𝑒 = 0.5

𝐺𝑠 −1 2.68−1
⇒ 𝑖𝑐𝑟 = = = 1.12
𝑒+1 0.5+1

According to Figure the parameter for estimate the modulus m are defined:

𝐿1 = 11𝑚, depth of excavation

𝐿2 = 6𝑚, embedded length of CPW

ℎ = 8.5𝑚, distance of water level between water level behind and in front of CPW

2𝐿1 2×11𝑚
= = 0.758
𝐵 29𝑚

2𝐿2 2×6𝑚
= = 0.41
𝐵 29𝑚

Figure 0.3 (a) Variation of modulus and (b) variation of maximum exit gradient with modulus

From Figure 03a, the modulus in 𝑚 = 0.3 and from Figure 03b, the relationship of the
maximum hydraulic gradient at the exit of seepage

0.37ℎ 0.37×8.5𝑚
𝑖max(𝑒𝑥𝑖𝑡) = = = 0.52
𝐿2 6𝑚

The factor safety against sand boiling is

16
 𝑖𝑐𝑟 1.12
𝐹𝑆 = = = 2.15 ≥ 2 𝑂𝐾!
𝑖max(𝑒𝑥𝑖𝑡) 0.52

APPENDIX J: Estimate Maximum Lateral Deflection of CPW

𝐻 = 11𝑚 wall’s retained height

ℎ𝑎𝑣𝑔 = 3𝑚 the average of vertical strut spacing

𝑓𝑐′ = 35𝑀𝑃𝑎 compressive strength of concrete at 28 days

𝛾𝑤 = 10𝑘𝑁/𝑚³ water unit weight

Figure 0.4 Maximum lateral wall movement and system stiffness

𝐸 = 4700√𝑓𝑐′ = 4700√35 = 27806𝑀𝑃𝑎, modulus of elasticity

𝜋𝐷4
𝐼= = 0.02𝑚4 , moment inertia of pile section
64

𝐸𝐼
𝜌𝑠 = 4 = 686.5, the system stiffness
𝛾𝑤 ℎ𝑎𝑣𝑔

From Figure 04, the maximum lateral deflection is difficult to fine with the factor of safety
against heave 𝐹𝑏 = 8.6, so other method is need to use

8.5
+0.4
𝛿𝑚𝑎𝑥 √𝜌𝑠
(%) = , 𝑐𝑙𝑜𝑢𝑔ℎ 𝑚𝑒𝑡ℎ𝑜𝑑
𝐻𝑒 (𝐹𝑆 𝑏𝑎𝑠𝑎𝑙)1.7

8.5
𝛿𝑚𝑎𝑥 +0.4
√686.5
= = 0.0187%
𝐻𝑒 (8.6)1.7

17
𝛿ℎ,𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 0.000187 × 𝐻𝑒 = 0.000187 × 11𝑚 = 2.05𝑚𝑚

APPENDIX J: Estimate Maximum surface settlement

Figure 0.5 Relationship between the ground settlement and lateral displacement of CPWs. (a) by Zhang et al., 2014
and (b) by Ou et al., 1993.

The maximum surface settlement 𝛿𝑣𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 0.75 × 𝛿ℎ,𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 0.75 × 2.05 = 1.54𝑚𝑚

18