A Review of Ground Anchors-Design and Construction

Shweta Sah1, and Umashankar Balunaini1*

1
Department of Civil Engineering, IIT Hyderabad, Kandi, India-502285
ce23mtech14009@iith.ac.in; buma@ce.iith.ac.in

Abstract: This paper presents a comprehensive discussion on the design, construction, and
testing of active and passive geotechnical ground anchors. The insights shared in this report are
derived from a webinar conducted by the Deep Foundation Institute International (DFII),
featuring Dr Sebastin Lobo-Guerrero of AGES, who shared two decades of his invaluable
experience in the field and imparted key lessons learned from various projects.

Ground anchors are versatile tools employed to secure, constrain, and provide support to a wide
range of structures, including buildings and engineered slopes, whether on a temporary or
permanent basis. These anchors typically consist of a steel tendon, in the form of bars or
strands, which is grouted into a pre-drilled hole within rock or soil. Upon the hardening of the
grout, the tendon is tensioned against a plate or block, effectively anchoring the structure, and
preventing undesired movement. Remarkably, even in challenging ground conditions, soil and
rock anchors exhibit the ability to support substantial loads by extending their bond length.

This report encapsulates the knowledge shared during the webinar, offering a wealth of
information on the practical aspects of geotechnical ground anchor design, construction, and
testing. Dr Lobo-Guerrero's extensive experience and project-based insights serve as valuable
lessons for professionals and researchers in the field of geotechnical engineering.

Keywords: Ground anchors, Soil anchors, Rock anchors, Bond Length

INTRODUCTION

Ground anchor has been widely used in engineering practice as a type of in-situ soil
reinforcement. It is well known that the effectiveness of reinforcement provided by an anchor
is mainly through the interaction between the anchor and soil (Byrne, 1992; Elias et al., 1991;
Schlosser, 1991; Vitton, 1991). The behaviour of anchors can be categorized into two types:
active ground anchors and passive ground anchors. The active ground anchor means that
loading is applied to the anchor throughout the serviceable life actively, and the soil mass
remains relatively stationary. Thus, the interaction between anchor and soil is mobilized by the

1
stretching and movement of the anchor. A particular example is the anchors used to support
superstructure loads and support wall-facing landslides. The passive ground anchor, on the
other hand, indicates that the anchor, after being installed in the soil mass, resists the potential
movement of the soil mass. Therefore, the interaction between anchor and soil is mainly
initiated through the soil movement. Examples of such applications include soil movement
control in tunnelling support structures and retaining wall structures, and soil slope
stabilization.

DESIGN

In the realm of ground anchor design, we have access to a wealth of valuable resources for both
active and passive systems. These resources include manuals from the Federal Highway
Administration, industry standards like Post Tensioning Manuals, the LRFD bridge design
guidelines from AASHTO, the Pendot Design Manual (widely used in the United States), and
the Colombian CCP14, which serves as a translation of AASHTO with similar provisions.

Active ground anchor design involves a

trapezoidal distribution of earth
pressure, as depicted in figure 1.
Typically, a design load of 200 kips is
considered, and high-strength steel
strands, ranging from 0.5 to 0.6 inches in
diameter and boasting a strength of 270
ksi, are employed. These strands consist
of smaller filaments. Generally, there are
fewer than 8 strands per anchor. The
calculation of pressure using the Figure 1: Recommended apparent earth pressure
diagrams, FWHA.
trapezoidal diagram guides the
determination of how much load each anchor can withstand, with an assumption of active
failure.

Global stability considerations focus on the bond part of the anchor, where contact with the
surrounding material takes place, typically situated behind the circle.

2
 Figure 2: Contribution of ground anchors to wall stability, FWHA

Elements of active system

Active ground anchor systems can be in the form of discrete or continuous systems. Discrete
systems use walers and piles. Walers are beams that connect those piles. Wood lagging is used
if it's temporary. For permanent application, concrete would be used. The anchor system
consists of a bond zone, which must be in contact with the rock, and an unbond zone. Strands
used in the anchor have a plastic film around them on the unbond zone. Bond zone’s connection
with grout and the rock is crucial to provide a permanent tensile force, which prevents creep.

Facing elements: concrete cast in place-lagging,

shotcrete, steel-sheet pile walls, walers sometimes.

If the bond zone exceeds this limit, we cannot mobilize

peak strength at the front of the bond zone. This is
called residual condition. So, the bond zone needs to be
controlled.
Figure 3: elements of active system

3
Elements of passive system

Passive ground anchor design follows similar

design concepts but involves marginal tensioning
without permanent loads, unlike active anchors.
The applied loads are typically less than 60 kips,
significantly lower compared to active systems.
The trapezoidal pressure distribution isn't
considered, with the primary focus being global
stability rather than face stability. Strands are not
utilized; instead, 8 to 11 steel bars with strengths of Figure 4: elements of a passive system
up to 75 ksi (and in some cases 150 ksi) are
employed. There's no concept of a bond zone and an unbond zone. Whatever passes behind the
circle is designated as the bond zone.

Facing elements: High-strength steel wire mesh, shotcrete.

CONSTRUCTION

➢ For active ground anchors, the general construction sequence is as follows:

1. Drill hole: typically 6”
2. Place anchor
3. Grout (4ksi)
4. Test anchor: design load
5. Lock-off anchor; 80% unfactored load

➢ For passive ground anchors, the construction sequence is as follows:

1. Drilling 6” hole (typical). Casing if necessary. The rig car reaches about 15 feet up
and down.
2. Place the bar with centralisers.
3. Tremie grout
4. Test if necessary (after concrete strength is ok)
5. Install facing.

4
When we close the nail after installation, it’s very different from the active anchor. In active
ground anchor, we must put wedges on strands, and then a load of 200 kips over that. In passive
ground anchors, we are not putting load, just put the knot, with a wrench, do a couple of turns,
and thus construction goes faster.

TESTING

For active anchors, each anchor needs to undergo rigorous testing to ensure their reliability
under factored design loads, which include performance, proof, and special creep
considerations.

On the other hand, passive anchors have a somewhat different testing approach. Typically, one
"verification" nail is used per row, and about 5% of the production nails serve as "proof tests."
Verification involves subjecting the anchors to cycles of loading and unloading, taking them to
2.0 times the Design Load. Proof tests require maintaining a constant load of 1.5 times the
Design Load.

Both active and passive anchors must meet specific acceptance criteria, which include:

1) Maximum deformation, limited to a plastic displacement of 0.5 inches.

2) Limited creep during a one-hour test, not exceeding 0.08 inches.

3) No "pull-out" failures should be observed during the testing process, ensuring the anchors'
robustness and reliability in various conditions.

CONCLUSIONS

While it's often a common practice to use active ground anchors for vertical walls and passive
anchors for slopes, there's an essential lesson to be drawn from a compelling case study
presented in this webinar. This study demonstrated that for a nearly vertical wall with an angle
of inclination of 85 degrees, the deployment of soil nailing turned out to be a more cost-
effective solution, offering a remarkable 50% reduction in expenses.

Soil nailing was seamlessly integrated with vegetation using turf reinforcement mats. This
combination not only provided structural stability but also transformed passive anchors into a
"greener" and more sustainable option, contributing to ecological balance.

5
The valuable takeaway from this case study is that, when designing anchor systems, we should
remain open to both active and passive concepts. The decision should be driven by a
comprehensive assessment that considers factors such as time efficiency, economic feasibility,
and environmental impact. By prioritising these considerations, we can make choices that not
only fulfil structural requirements but also promote sustainability and cost-effectiveness. It
underscores the importance of adaptability and a holistic approach to anchor system design,
considering the specific needs and conditions of each project.

REFERENCES

1) Byrne, R. J. (1992): "Soil nailing: a simplified kinematical analysis," Geotechnical Special

Publication No. 30, Vol. 2, ASCE, New York, N.Y., pp. 751-765.

2) Elias, V. and Juran, I. (1991): "Soil nailing for stabilization of highway slopes and
excavations," FHWA-RD-89-198, U.S. Dept. of Transp., Federal Highway Administration,
Washington D.C.

3) Schlosser, F. (1991): "Recommendations Clouterre," FHWA-SA93-026, U.S. Dept. of

Transp., Federal Highway Administration, Washington D.C.

4) Vitton, S. J. (1991): "Local transfer mechanisms in anchored geosynthetic system," Ph.D.

thesis, Univ. of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich.