Underground Singapore 2014

Deep Excavation Works Close to the Existing MRT

Tunnel in Soft Marine Clay
H. Kumagai , E. Asaba, H. Shiosaka & T.Kono
Takenaka Corporation, Japan

R.R. Setiaji
Tritech Consultants Pte Ltd, Singapore

T. Takeda & Y. Yamane

Onoda Chemico Co., Ltd Japan

ABSTRACT: The construction of the proposed Market Street Tower Project requires a basement
excavation that is adjacent to two MRT lines i.e. the existing Downtown Line and the EW Line. This
paper outlines a case study of the excavation works in soft marine clay within the MRT railway
protection zone RPZ. Excavation was carried out for the three basement car park of the 40-storey
office building construction project. The ground condition consists of thick sensitive soft marine clay
and being close to the two MRT lines; a challenging aspect was the wide and deep excavation, where
the retaining wall system had to ensure movements to the MRT structure satisfy the requirements for
railway protection. Top-Down excavation and pre-strutting beam type soil improvement were being
carried out as adequate support to the retaining wall to ensure that the movements can satisfy the RPZ
requirements.
This paper also describes the design of excavation work, applied soil improvement method and
monitoring results during excavation works.

1 INTRODUCTION

It is essential to stabilize an earth retaining structure for foundation works with open cut and in ground
where the layers of soft marine clay are thick. There are many cases of neighboring construction
especially in urban areas, which makes it necessary to deploy countermeasures for reducing influence
on nearby structures by deformation of an earth retaining wall during excavation (Tan et al., 2001).
The pre-strutting beam type soil improvement method had been well-adopted in building construction
works with large-scale excavation. The execution of tightly overlapping adjacent soil improvement
columns and producing columns in contact with an earth retaining wall is crucial.
This paper describes results of monitoring and predictions about suppression effect on deformation of
an earth retaining structure of the top-down construction system using ground improvement method.
The main aim of the ground improvement method is to prevent any adverse influence on nearby
railway by deformation of an earth retaining structure during excavation in the construction of the new
commercial building having forty stories above ground and three stories below ground on trapezoid
plane of 60m×80m. The construction site is located within the urban area where soft marine clay
layer is thick and railway runs in two directions along its side faces.
In addition, the ground improvement method was required to shorten construction period and to
reduce influence on surrounding structure during execution. Therefore, high speed and low
displacement soil improvement method was used in this project. This paper also explains the summary
of the hybrid type ground improvement method that combines mechanical mixing method with high
pressure jet grouting method and finally reports on the construction result.
2 BUILDING AND BASEMENT WORKS

The new commercial building is 245m in height and it has forty stories above ground and three below
with a surface area of 92,385m2. The building frame body is reinforced concrete, RC structure and
some parts of it are SRC structure (Basement is S structure). The construction site is located on the
weak ground of soft marine clay and in close proximity to the MRT structure. Accordingly, the
construction works need to be conducted with careful attention, high technique and management skill
to prevent influence on the railways and tunnels. Both the secant bored pile, SBP and large diameter
foundation bored pile have to be installed concurrently because the working area is narrow and the
construction period is short. Therefore, the ground improvements of the post construction need to
secure improvement effects without any influence on these piles. Around 800 RC piles (size 300 x
300mm, length 40m) of the former seven stories building which did not interfere with the foundation
piles were retained and it was anticipated that this will adversely affect the ground improvement
works.

To shorten the construction period, the ground improvement had to be finished in two months. The
clearance between the MRT tunnels and railways earth retaining wall is around 10 to 12.2 meters,
there were three reserve lines encroaching half of the construction site. Accordingly, the stiffness of
the earth retaining wall is determined asφ1500 SBP and top-down method was executed in order to
prevent influence on MRT structure during the excavation. Also, pre-strutting beam by stabilized soil
below the excavated level in each basement floor such as B1F, B2F and B3F were applied to reduce
the displacement during excavation.

3. SITE AND GROUND CONDITIONS

As shown in Figure 1, the new building is located in the place surrounded by Market Street, Cross
Street and Cecil Street. The MRT DTL line and EW line lie in close proximity of the construction
site. The minimum clearance between DTL tunnel and the earth retaining wall is 10 meters.

SITE

Site

Figure 1 Site Location

(Retrieved May 12, 2014, from http://www.streetdiretory.com)

Figure 2 shows the ground plan of the under ground works for this building. The cross sectional view
of the soil layer in the north and south direction in this area is shown in Figure 3. For the soil
constitution in this area, the top six meter is fill and the soil below the six meter to the twenty six
meter is a very soft marine clay layer. The marine clay layer shows a very soft property with high
sensitivity ratio, N-value = 0, cohesion cu = 20 to 30kPa and natural water content wn = 60% to 70%.

SBP piles were adopted as the earth retaining wall in the under ground works, and the depth of
excavation was 14.5m. The pre-strutting beam type soil improvement execution of 1.5m and the
bottom soil improvement of 4m were carried out in order to reduce the displacement of the earth
retaining wall during excavation as shown in Figure 3.
 existing RC pile
（□300×300）
BH4
80

CW11 SBP piles

CW２ CW１ CW12

No.12
CW３ No.11
No.3 No.9
CW10
12.2m
No.2
No.13

CW４ No.8
No.5

60 cast-in concrete pile

CW5 CW9
No.7
No.10
● existing RC pile（□300×300）
○ cast-in concrete pile
CW8
No.6 No.1
No.4 △ inclinometer（CW1～CW12）

MRT BH 1 CW７
rd
3 Reserve Line ■ Check Boring
（Bor.No.1～No.13）
DT Line 10 CW6
th
9
（EW Line） th
8
th 6
2nd Reserve Line rd
th 3
7
th 5
（DT Line） nd
1st Reserve Line 4
th 2
st
2nd Reserve Line 3rd Reserve Line 1
Inclinometer（CW7）

MRT EW Line Trial Execution Area

Figure 2 Ground Plan

Figure 3 Soil Profile and Ground Improvement

4 DESCRIPTION OF THE GROUND IMPROVEMENT

The JMM method (Jet and Mechanical Mixing

Method) is the hybrid type ground improvement
method that combines mechanical mixing method
with high pressure jet grouting method. The double
shafts machine of this method is shown in
Photo-1.This method uses three-point-supported type
Pile Driving Rig as a base machine. It is able to create
stabilized and larger diameter soil columns using
ultra–high pressure jetting (cement slurry) from each
tip of mixing blades. Therefore it is able to carry out
approximately double the volume of work in
comparison with the conventional method and
substantially shorten the construction time. It is also
possible to reduce the displacement of surrounding
ground by removing soil equivalent to the amount of
injecting cement slurry using special auger screw
attached to mixing shaft. In addition, because of
forced stirring by ultra–high pressure jet grout, it is
possible to unify stabilized soil with existing
stabilized soil columns and an earth retaining wall,
due to the overlapping improvement. And it is able to
stabilize in contact with an earth retaining wall, too Photo 1 Double shafts JMM machine
(Takeda et al., 2000).

4.1 Mechanism of mixing and soil discharge control

Figure 4 is a schematic view of stirring and mixing mechanism in this method. In this method,
ultra-high pressure cement slurry jet (P = 40MPa) injected from tip of mechanical mixing blades cuts
the soil and mixes the binder with soil. The mixed soil by high pressure jet at the periphery of a
stabilized soil moves to the center of it instantly and is subjected to mixing by mechanical mixing
blades, which is beneficial for the homogeneity of strength of a stabilized soil column and makes the
diameter of the stabilized soil column larger. Also soil equivalent to the amount of injected cement
slurry can be removed during the execution. It is possible to control discharged soil by combination of
clockwise rotation and anticlockwise rotation on auger screw. Figure 5 is an example of the
measurement result of the ground movement during execution. The ground movement is 1/5 to 1/10 of
non-discharging conventional method’s one. In addition, during the penetration stage ultra–high
pressure jet (cement slurry) will not be injected and the soil will be discharged during withdrawal.
Therefore the discharged soil contain minimum cement slurry, hence making it easier to treat and is
environmentally friendly.

Removed Soil

High-
Pressure Jet

Figure 4 Mixing Mechanism and Soil Discharge System

 NN値
value Displacement (cm)
変位量　(cm)
0 10 20 30 40 50 10 8 6 4 2 0
0 0
GL-2m
-2 -2
2.0m 1.5m
-4 -4

-6 JMM -6
改良体

Depth (m)
Column 深
度
-8 -8 ｍ

-10 -10

GL-12m JMM
SDM工法
-12 -12
Non
非排土式
discharge
-14 -14

-16 -16

Figure 5 Example of the displacement measurement result

5 CONSTRUCTION ACCURACY AND STRENGTH OF THE STABILIZED SOIL COLUMN

5.1 Trial execution

The trial execution was conducted outside the MRT railway Displacement (mm)
protection zone in order to confirm the soil discharging
-15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15
condition and to monitor displacement of the earth retaining 0
wall. As shown in Figure-2, the nine sets of the trial
executions of JMM method were carried out in front of the
inclinometer, CW7, installed in the earth retaining wall and 10
Towards Site
displacement of the earth retaining wall was measured during
the trial execution. The trial execution was conducted in turn
from No.1. In the penetration and the withdrawal stage, the 20
direction of the mixing blade rotation was clockwise direction. After
Figure 6 shows the measurement result by inclinometer. At
Depth (m)

1st JMM

the initial stage of the trial execution, the earth retaining wall 30
After
2nd JMM
was displaced to outward direction. But at the end of the trial After
3rd JMM
execution, the earth retaining wall was displaced to inward After
4th JMM
direction due to achievement of sufficient discharge of soil. 40 After
The final displacement of earth retaining wall was 4mm. It 5th JMM
After
shows the displacement of earth retaining wall can be very 6th JMM
After
small. 50 7th JMM
Figure 7 shows the data on the relationship between the After
8th JMM
horizontal distances X from the inclinometer to the stabilized After
soil column and the horizontal displacement of the earth 60
9th JMM

retaining wall. It also shows the tendency that displacement

becomes small if distance becomes far and that the horizontal Figure 6 Measurement result
displacements caused by the JMM method are less than (Inclinometer CW7)
10mm.
Based on this measurement result, it was able to judge the displacement of earth retaining wall was
within 12.5mm that is the management value of displacement of the earth retaining wall on the
analysis about rail way protection. Consequently, the execution started according to the trial execution
specifications. The execution process which employs clockwise direction of the mixing blade rotation
during both penetration and withdrawal stages was conducted.
 -20
（－） （＋） 1st
Towards Site
2nd
-15 X 3rd
Displacement (mm) 4th
Inclinometer JMM
-10 5th
improvement pile
6th
7th
-5
8th
9th
0

10
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Horizontal distance , X (m)
Figure 7 Displacement / Horizontal distance

5.2 JMM execution

The execution was conducted from the nearest side to the far side of the rail way so that the influence
on the railway can be reduced. The measurement of displacement by inclinometer installed in the earth
retaining wall on a daily basis during the execution in order to check influence on the railway was
carried out. Figure 8 shows the maximum horizontal displacement of the earth retaining wall after the
improvement operation. It is considered that the maximum displacement of the earth retaining wall,
-35mm, at the inclinometer CW9 around B-B section in east side was influenced by the excavation
behind the earth retaining wall. The displacement at the other inclinometers is less than 20mm and the
displacement at CW4 in DT line side is -12mm. Figure 9 shows the displacement of the earth retaining
wall at CW4.

A
Displacement (mm)
CW12 CW11 -40 -20 0 20 40
CW2 CW1 No Measure
-16.5mm -13mm -3mm 0
CW3
CW10
-14mm A’ -7.5mm MRT Site Towards Site
▽B1F
CW4
▽B2F
-12mm 10
CW9 ▽B3F
-35mm Ground
Improvement
CW5
-9mm B 20
CW8
-34mm
Depth (m)

CW7
-15mm 30
B’
CW6
-12mm
40

A－A’ section B－B’ section

(-) (-) 50
(+) (+)
Excavation

Towards site Towards site 60

SBP Pile SBP Pile
Figure 9 Earth retaining wall displacement
（Inclinometer CW4）
Figure 8 Earth retaining wall displacement after JMM execution

Though the displacement of the earth retaining wall exceeded the alert value of 12.5mm during the
execution, the displacement of the railway was within allowable value and there was almost no
influence on the rail way. Accordingly, the execution was conducted based on the same specifications.
Finally, the maximum displacement of the earth retaining wall of 12mm occurred but the displacement
of the MRT was within the allowable value and the maximum displacement was +2.2 mm. As shown
in Photo 2, the appropriate discharging status of soil was confirmed during the execution and the
discharged soil volume was calculated over 100% of volume compared to the design amount of
injected cement slurry.
The large diameter stabilized soil column having 8m2 in area was created using double shafts
machine in this project. Accordingly, this project was able to be constructed at more than twice the
speed of conventional method. Under the tight site conditions where the foundation works was carried
out at the same time, JMM method with this high treating ability was able to finish this execution
having approximately 26,000m3 of volume of stabilized soil in two months that was design
construction term. Also the removal soil volume was about 40% of volume compared to the volume
treated by the conventional jet grouting method.

Photo 2 Soil discharging status

5.3 Quality of ground improvement work

After the first stage excavation and when the second stage excavation started, the construction
accuracy of the stabilized soil column was confirmed by investigating diameter of the exposed column
head. The investigation situation of the construction accuracy of it is shown in Photo 3. The
investigation result was able to confirm improved diameter 2.4m for design diameter 2.3m. Photo-4
shows that this method can achieve firm contact the earth retaining wall with the stabilized soil.

Photo 3 Improved soil column Photo 4 Overlapping status of improved

soil column and earth retaining wall

Figure 10 shows the result in laboratory mix proportion test. This result is similar to that of close
construction site (Hong Kong Street) along with it. It was assumed that target strength was one and
half times strength of design strength and cement mixing dosage was 200kg/m3 in this construction. In
addition, Figure 11 shows the data on the relationship between the unconfined compressive strength
(quf28) of cores sampled on site and the laboratory unconfined compressive strength (qul28). It was
considered that the in-situ unconfined compressive strength was higher than the laboratory unconfined
compressive strength affected by difference of curing conditions and massive effects.
Thirteen full depth core samplings and unconfined compression test on the core samples were
conducted before the excavation for verification of ground improvement. The unconfined compressive
strength on the core samples was qu=1,473~3,046kPa and the average unconfined compressive
strength on it was qu=2,391kPa, which satisfied the required design strength enough and as a result
high uniformity of JMM method was confirmed.
The design improved soil parameters on this project were as follows, elastic modulus E=150MPa,
unconfined compressive strength qu=600kPa. The relationship between the unconfined compressive
strength and elastic modulus was estimated as E=250qu .
Figure 12 shows the data on the relationship between the elastic modulus and the unconfined
compressive strength. Though discrepancies exist in the data, on the average this data is in accordance
with that on the relationship between estimated elastic modulus in design and the unconfined
compressive strength.
The relationship between E50 and qu of JMM is shown in Figure 13. It is within E50 (100~300) qu and
has a wide scattering. Approximate expression based on the first regression analysis for the
investigation result is E50214qu(r=0.527) , which is a little smaller than E=250qu estimated in
design.

2,000 4,000
Unconfined compressive strength , qu (kPa)

quf 28＝3.5qul 28
1,500
3,000

q uf 28 (kPa)
quf 28＝qul 28
1,000
1.5×600= 900kPa 2,000
Data from HongKong Street
Market Street （7day）
500
Market Street （28day）
HongKong Street (7day)
1,000
HongKong Street (28day)
Target Strength

0
100 150 200 250 300 350 400
0
Mix ratio (kg/m3) 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000
q ul 28 (kPa)
Figure10 Trial mixing test results
Figure11 Relation of qul28 and quf28

1,000 2,000
Coeffieient of Deformation，E50 （MPa）

E50=400qu
Coeffieient of Deformation，E50 （MPa）

E50=400qu
800
1,500

600 E50=250qu
y = 0.2504x
R² = 0.494 y = 0.2112x
1,000 R² = 0.4155

400

500
E50=100qu E50=100qu
200

0 0
0 1,000 2,000 3,000 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000

Unconfined Compressive Strength，qu (kPa) Unconfined Compressive Strength，qu（kPa）

Figure12 Relation of qu and E50 on trial mixing Figure13 Relation of qu and E50 of JMM column
6 DISPLACEMENT DURING BASEMENT EXCAVATION

Figure 14 shows the displacement of DT Line tunnel in close proximity of the construction site during
excavation (B1F~B3F). The displacement of 4.3mm when B1F excavation, 2.2mm when B2F
excavation, and 2.5mm when B3F excavation occurred respectively. Total displacement was 9mm
inside, which matched the calculated displacement value (9.9mm) in advance. Finally, the
displacement was approximately 2mm because the displacement occurring to outside direction during
the foundation works was taken into account. Consequently, the excavation works was finished
without any problems for the rail way. Figure 15 shows the displacement of the earth retaining wall in
side of DT Line (Inclinometer, CW5). The head displacement may be caused by the factors such as
movement of the deep part of the wall and warping of the wall. On the other hand, the displacement of
excavation level increased to the inside of the construction site. In the measured value of the
displacement of the earth retaining wall by inclinometer the tendency of behavior of excavation level
matches analysis result as shown in Figure 16, but the tendency of displacement of the retaining wall
head did not match and the largest displacement occurred at the excavation side below excavation
level.

WSL(Working Suspected Level) = Calculated value

Excavate to B3F Review Level (WSL:+9.9mm) 27/Aug 12/Oct 28/Dec
10.0

Excavate to B2F Review Level (WSL:+7.6mm)

MRT Displacement (mm)

8.0

6.0 Excavate to B1F Review Level (WSL:+5.4mm)

4.0
Δ2.5mm
2.0
Δ2.2mm
0.0

-2.0
Δ4.3mm
-4.0

-6.0
Excavation to B1F Excavation to B2F Excavation to B3F
-8.0
6/4
13/4
20/4
27/4
4/5
11/5
18/5
25/5
1/6
8/6
15/6
22/6
29/6
6/7
13/7
20/7
27/7
3/8
10/8
17/8
24/8
31/8
7/9
14/9
21/9
28/9
5/10
12/10
19/10
26/10
2/11
9/11
16/11
23/11
30/11
7/12
14/12
21/12
28/12
4/1
Date

Figure 14 Displacement of DT Line tunnel

SBP Displacement （mm） 30mm

-50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 11mm
0

Towards Site
5
▽B1F
MRT displacements SBP displacements
▽B2F
10
▽B1F
14500

▽B3F
15 Ground MRT DT Line ▽B2F
Improvement
20 ▽B3F

25
Ground Improvement （JMM）
Depth(m)

67mm
30

35

8/22
40 B1F Excavation

10/12
B2F Excavation
45
10/26
B3F Excavation
50
11/23
B3F Excavation
55
: Calculated by PLAXIS
60

65
Figure-16 SBP&MRT Movement Analysis
Figure 15 Displacement of the earth retaining wall
(Inclinometer CW5)
7 CONCLUSION

The excavation works were carried out using pre-strutting beam by stabilized soil under excavation
level by top- down method in order to reduce influence on MRT tunnel. The deformation of MRT
tunnel was about 9mm to excavation side and it almost matched the estimated value based on FEM
analysis. Accordingly, the excavation works were able to be finished without any harmful influence on
MRT tunnel. Finally, the displacement was approximately 2mm because the MRT tunnel was
displaced to the opposite side by around 7mm during the foundation works, which counterbalanced the
displacement of MRT tunnel during excavation. In the application of ground improvement techniques
in urban areas, displacement during ground improvement is one of the serious consequences. In the
ground improvement method in this project, soil equivalent to the amount of cement slurry was
removed during execution to substantially reduce the displacement. The displacement during ground
improvement work was approximately 2mm. Consequently, it was able to reduce harmful influence
due to the execution because the removal soil volume was over 100% compared to the amount of
cement slurry. JMM method is the hybrid type ground improvement method that combines mechanical
mixing method with high pressure jet grouting method, which can achieve firm contact with the earth
retaining wall or existing structure and obtain the earth retaining wall linked firmly with stabilized
columns. Lastly, we wish to express our gratitude for cooperation from the owner and each person in
charge all of this project.

REFFERENCES

Tan,T.S.,Ng,T.G.,French,D.,Wong,F.K.,Takeda,T.2001.use of an improved soil berm for stabilization in a deep

excavation. Proceedings of underground Singapore 2001, Singapore,367-377

Singapore Street Map. Retrieved May 12,2014, from http://www.streetdiretory.com

Takeda,T.,Yamane,Y.,Ong,T.S.,Yong,K,Y.2000.Chemical ground improvement techniques. Proceedings of

Symposium on Ground Improvement and Geosynthetics, Bangkok,69-94.

Tritech Consultants Pte Ltd.2011.Market Street Development –UBW Design (ST01), Singapore

GeoEng Consultants.2012.Impact assessment report for downtown line MRT tunnel due to Jet & Mechanical
mixing ground improvement works, Singapore