FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSES OF LOCK

AND D A M 26 COFFERDAM
By G, Wayne Clough 1 and Thangavelu Kuppusamy, 2
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Technische Universitat Munchen on 07/13/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Members, ASCE

ABSTRACT: Replacement of the old Lock and Dam 26 on the Mississippi River
involves construction of one of the largest systems of cellular cofferdams ever
built. Preliminary analyses using conventional theories led to sometimes con-
tradictory recommendations about the cofferdam design. To help resolve out-
standing issues, instrumentation was placed on the first-stage cofferdam, and
finite element procedures were developed for analysis of the cofferdam. Three
different two-dimensional finite element procedures were generated, including
axisymmetric, vertical slice, and generalized plane-strain models. The alterna-
tive approaches allowed prediction of cofferdam response for the most impor-
tant design conditions and at the critical locations. In all models, allowances
were made for nonlinear soil response, slippage on the sheet-pile-soil inter-
faces, staged construction simulation and seepage effects where appropriate.
Further, a means was provided to accommodate the effect of sheet-pile inter-
lock yielding, which led to an orthotropic response of the cellular cofferdam.
Predicted behavior from the finite element models was found to be consistent
with observed trends. The models appear to have considerable potential for
use in future designs.

INTRODUCTION

In 1981, the St. Louis District of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
began construction of a $900,000,000 replacement for the old Lock and
Dam 26, located near Alton, Illinois, on the Mississippi River. The plans
called for the use of a three-stage cellular cofferdam to allow construc-
tion of the new lock and dam in the dry. The first stage of the cofferdam
was designed following conventional approaches and, by January, 1984,
was in place and dewatered with dam construction under way. The cof-
ferdam consists of 45 circular cells of 63 ft (19 m) diam and 60 ft (18.2
m) height above the dredgeline, joined by 43 connector cells (see Fig.
1). Design of the cells called for 35 ft (10.6 m) of sheet-pile embedment
into the sandy river bottom, and use of high-strength steel sheet piles
along the common wall between the connector and circular cells. Be-
cause it was concerned by contradictions between existing design tech-
niques for cofferdams and wanted to reduce embedments and eliminate
the need for costly high-strength sheet piles along the common wall, the
Corps of Engineers instituted a large-scale instrumentation program for
the first-stage cofferdam (1,3).
The instrumentation program was designed to monitor key aspects of
the soil-structure interaction process; namely, strains in the exterior and
'Prof, a n d Head, Dept. of Civ. Engrg., Virginia Polytechnic Inst, a n d State
Univ., Blacksburg, Va.
2
Assoc. Prof., Dept. of Civ. Engrg., Virginia Polytechnic Inst, a n d State Univ.,
Blacksburg, Va.
Note.—Discussion open until September 1, 1985. To extend the closing date
one m o n t h , a written request m u s t be filed with t h e ASCE M a n a g e r of Journals.
The manuscript for this p a p e r w a s submitted for review a n d possible publication
on February 6, 1984. This p a p e r is p a r t of t h e Journal of Geotechnical Engineer-
ing, Vol. I l l , N o . 4, April, 1985. ©ASCE, ISSN 0733-9410/85/0004-0521/$01.00.
Paper N o . 19648.

521

J. Geotech. Engrg. 1985.111:521-541.

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Technische Universitat Munchen on 07/13/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

FIG. 1.—Aerial View of Stage 1 Lock and Dam No. 26 Replacement Cofferdam and
Mississippi River

interior cell walls, earth pressures acting on the cells, and cell-wall de-
flections. Many of the parameters that were to be measured could not
be predicted by conventional cofferdam analysis procedures. This led to
a program to develop finite element procedures that could be applied to
the Lock and Dam 26 replacement (R) stage-one cofferdam before the
construction was complete. This paper describes the results of that ef-
fort, as well as subsequent studies done to refine the initial methodol-
ogy.
Although the cellular cofferdam is a three-dimensional problem, lim-
itations in time and funding dictated that some form of two-dimensional
finite element approach be taken. Following discussions with the Corps
of Engineers and its consultants, it was decided to use three different
two-dimensional models, each of which could best treat a particular as-
pect of cofferdam behavior. Utilization of the results from the various
analyses would allow an insight to be developed into the three-dimen-
sional response of the system. A consistent philosophy was used to de-
velop all the finite element codes, in that a capability was provided to
handle the sequential nature of the cofferdam loading, nonlinear soil
behavior, and imperfections in the sheet-pile system response as a result
of interlock yielding and possible initial out-of-round sheet-pile aline-
ment.
The bases for the finite element models are described, and the results
522

J. Geotech. Engrg. 1985.111:521-541.

 are compared to those observed for the actual cofferdam. Initial predic-
tions of behavior were made as some of the early instrumentation data
were being obtained. Predictions for the effects of high water were in
report form before an event occurred that could be used to corroborate
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Technische Universitat Munchen on 07/13/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

them. While the methods presented in the paper were generated spe-
cifically for the Lock and Dam 26 (R) first-stage cofferdam, they are gen-
eral, and can be used to advantage in the design or analysis of any cof-
ferdam problem. Presently analyses are being made for the second stage
of the Lock and Dam 26 problem, scheduled for construction in 1985.

BACKGROUND

Conventional design methods for cellular cofferdams typically treat the

questions of interlock tension, vertical shear and overall stability inde-
pendently. Most of the design techniques were developed more than 30
yr ago, although Schroeder and his collegues (10,12) recently provided
updated procedures. As pointed out in the literature, the different ac-
ceptable methods can lead to considerable differences in design rec-
ommendations (5,9,12).
In the past 7 to 8 yr, a number of investigators have attempted to use
the finite element method to analyze cofferdams. Two basic approaches
were taken: (1) Plane-strain analysis of a vertical slice cut through the
cofferdam; and (2) axisymmetric analysis of an isolated cell. Clough and
Hansen (2) and Hansen and Clough (7) first proposed the vertical slice
type analysis to approximately model the effects of cell filling, dewater-
ing and interior excavation at the Willow Island cofferdam. They used
internal springs to connect the front and rear walls of the cofferdam,
where the spring stiffnesses were designed to represent the connecting
effect exerted by the circular cell shape. Stevens (15) later extended this
idea, and suggested that the internal spring stiffnesses be reduced to
allow for possible interlock yielding. The axisymmetric model was pro-
posed by Kittisatra (8); it applies only to the behavior during uniform
cell filling. The predicted results were informative but not realistic, in
that the cell was assumed to be a perfect pressure vessel, and no allow-
ance was made for nonlinear soil behavior, staged construction loading
or relative movement between the fill and the sheet piles.
In all previous work, the finite element method was used as an "after-
the-fact" or theoretical analysis tool for cofferdams. Nor was there means
of accounting for any form of three-dimensional interaction between the
cells. This ruled out the analysis of interactions at common walls be-
tween cells and at critical connection points, locations where failures are
most likely to occur. Nor was much done to realistically account for the
behavior of the sheet-pile system and the relative contributions of the
web versus interlock components.

LOCK AND DAM 26 (R) COFFERDAM

The foundation for the Lock and Dam 26 (R) cofferdam consists of a
series of dense-to-medium dense sand layers approximately 70 ft (21.2
m) thick, overlying rock. Although minor distinctions can be made be-
tween the sand layers, for practical purposes they have very similar
523

J. Geotech. Engrg. 1985.111:521-541.

 properties. The circular main cofferdam cells are made up of 154 sheet
piles, while an additional 78 are used for the connector or arc cells. Ex-
cept for the common wall between the main and arc cells, U.S. Steel PS-
32 sheet piles are used. High strength PSX-32 sheet piles were required
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Technische Universitat Munchen on 07/13/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

to accommodate the anticipated higher loads to be carried by the com-

mon wall.
Sand from the riverbed was used for the cell fill. This material was
relatively free draining, and had a uniformly coefficient of 2.6 and a me-
dium grain diameter of 0.5 mm. The sand was first brought up and stored
on a barge and allowed to drain. Subsequently it was placed by clam-
shell inside the cells; a bulldozer was used to smooth the fill as it reached
the top of the cell. Weep holes were included in the sheet piles to pro-
vide drainage for any excess water. An extensive in-situ and laboratory
testing program was begun to determine the condition of the fill. Stan-
dard penetration, cone penetration, pressuremeter and dilatometer test-
ing techniques were used. The results indicated that the fills had a rea-
sonably uniform relative density of about 60%, with a friction angle of
35° (5).
Cell filling, closure and berm placement were completed in early 1982.
Dewatering of the 30 ft (9.1 m) of water head was accomplished in a
series of stages which involved alternatively lowering interior water lev-
els and installing subsoil well-point systems. Final dewatering was
achieved in July, 1982, after installation of a three-stage well-point sys-
tem. The well-point system lowered the water levels to 25 ft (7.6 m)
below the top of the riverbed soils to accommodate a 20 ft (6.1 m) ex-
cavation for construction of the foundation for the dam.
The instrumentation program was generally successful, although the
earth pressure cells yielded a less-than-satisfactory performance (1). Thus,
the earth pressure results are not referred to in this paper.

FINITE ELEMENT MODELS

In this study, three different finite element models were used, two of
which were developed specifically for this effort. The models are re-
ferred to as axisymmetric, vertical slice and generalized plane strain, and
they are described briefly in Table 1, where the advantages and disad-
vantages of each are given. Details are provided in Ref. 5. The finite
element meshes for the axisymmetric, vertical slice and generalized plane-
strain models are given in Figs. 2, 3 and 4, respectively. These are useful
in visualizing the respective differences between the models.
The axisymmetric model provides a complete description of the pro-
cess of filling an isolated cell. In contrast to the previous work of Kit-
tisatra (8), allowances were made in this effort for sequential staging of
the fill load, nonlinear soil behavior, slip on the interface between the
soil and sheet piles, and yielding in the interlocks of the sheet piles.
Although only clamshell filling techniques were used at Lock and Dam
26, analyses were performed for both chamshell and dredge-filling cases.
Dredge filling differs from clamshell filling in that the soil is loaded into
the cell full of water, and only after a period of time is the water drained
out of the fill. In the dredge-fill simulation, it was assumed that the fill
is placed, entirely saturated, to the top elevation, followed by a draining
524

J. Geotech. Engrg. 1985.111:521-541.

 TABLE 1.—Two-Dimensional Finite Element Models

Model Purpose Advantages Disadvantages

(1) (2) (3) (4)
Axisymmetric Provide data on • Simple to perform •Does not consider
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Technische Universitat Munchen on 07/13/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

effects filling•Accounts for effects effects of stage

isolated cell cell embedment other than filling
•Provides data on lo- •No cell interaction
cation of maximum
deflection and inter-
lock tension upon
filling
Vertical Provide data on •Can consider effects •Time consuming to
slice loading stages of all stages of perform if loading
other than loading is complex
filling •Provides data on •Does not consider
history of behavior 3D loading effects
from filling to flood
stages
Generalized Provide data on •Simple to perform •Does not consider
plane interaction •Accounts for inter- influence of
strain between cells action of cells dredgeline support
during filling •Provides data on • Considers only ef-
common wall and fects of cell filling
connection behavior

of the water level back to the river elevation.

The vertical slice model used is very similar to that first proposed by
Clough and Hansen (2), although allowances were made for interlock
yielding in this case, as shown later. The model consists of a two-wall
structure connected by springs and filled with soil. The springs serve to
hold the cell together since the entire linked sheet-pile system cannot
be accommodated in the vertical slice model. To keep the model realistic,
the stiffnesses of the springs are selected via simple structural concepts
to reproduce as closely as possible the influence of the out-of-plane
sheetpiles (2,5). The mesh for the vertical slice model depicts most of
the principal aspects of the cofferdam (Fig. 3). It allows for the sequential
simulation of cell filling, underwater berm placement, dewatering with
seepage development, excavation and differential flood loads.
Interface elements are provided between the soil and the sheet piles
in both the vertical slice and axisymmetric models. These are one-
dimensional slip elements specially designed to allow for relative move-
ments along the boundaries of two different materials (5).
Dr. M. P. Rossow, Structural Consultant to the St. Louis District ofthe
Corps of Engineers, suggested of the generalized plane-strain model.
The basic idea is to analyze a horizontal section cut through the coffer-
dam at a series of different elevations using a generalized plane-strain
technique. This approach assumes that a constant strain exists in the
out-of-plane direction, generated by the vertical gravity loads above the
plane (6,11). Horizontal load effects are generated automatically as a part
of the analysis. It allows consideration of the interaction of multiple sets
525

J. Geotech. Engrg. 1985.111:521-541.

 q_ CIRCULAR
CELL „ , 130 ft
- $ - E I 430
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Technische Universitat Munchen on 07/13/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

-Interface Elements
- $ - E I 370

A S A /ft iXyA&M S A -<j>-EI 300

FIG. 2.—Finite Element Mesh for Axisymmetric Analysis (1 ft = 0.305 m)

FIG. 3.—Finite Element Mesh for Vertical Slice Analysis (1 ft = 0.305 m)

FIG. 4.—Finite Eiement Mesh for Generalized Plane-Strain Analysis (1 ft

0.305 m)
526

J. Geotech. Engrg. 1985.111:521-541.

 TABLE 2.—Soli Parameters for Finite Element Analyses
7r, in pounds 4>, in
Material per cubic foot degrees n Km V Rf K0
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8)
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Technische Universitat Munchen on 07/13/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Cell fill and berm above

phreatic surface 123 35 0.65 800 0.45 0.82 —
Cell fill and berm below
phreatic surface 133 35 0.65 800 0.45 0.82 —
Alluvial outwash (found) 133 41 0.50 1,600 0.45 0.85 0.5
Wisconsin outwash (found) 133 41 0.50 1,700 0.45 0.85 0.6
Illinoisan ice contact (found) 133 41 0.50 1,700 0.45 0.85 0.6
Note: E, = Kmpa(a'3/pn)" (1 - RfSLf; SL = ratio of shear stress to shear stress at failure
(1.0 = failure).

of main and arc cells under a uniform filling condition. As shown in the
mesh for this case (Fig. 3), only a quarter of the main cell and arc cell
need be represented, since there is symmetry around both center lines.
The generalized plane-strain model provides data on interlock tensions
and cell deformations for the main and arc cells, the common wall, and
the critical wye section where the two cells are joined. The model is
unable to account for the lateral support of the foundation soils, and
thus is applicable only for the upper two-thirds or so of the cells where
the dredgeline effects have little influence. However, this is not a major
drawback in terms of predicting maximum interlock tensions, since these
are usually observed at about the level of the lower one-third point (9).
Also, if anything, the generalized plane-strain model provides a con-
servative answer, and the degree of conservatism can be closely checked
by the results of the axisymmetric analysis where dredgeline effects are
accommodated.
The program used for the analyses is SOIL-STRUCT, a code developed
by the senior writer and his co-workers over the past decade. For the
vertical slice model, no modifications were required. Special adaptations
were needed for the axisymmetric and generalized plane-strain models.
Verification studies were performed and are presented in Ref. (5).
SOIL RESPONSE MODEL
The soil model used in all cases was a nonlinear elastic version along
the lines of that described by Duncan, et al. (4). In this approach, the
shear and bulk modulus values of the soil are varied to accommodate
the changes in shear and confining stresses, which occur during the step-
by-step simulation of the construction loading process. The modulus of
each element in the mesh is modified after each step of loading, and the
entire stiffness matric reformulated. Parameters required for the soil model
were obtained based on the substantial database provided by the Corps
of Engineers (5), and interpreted using the procedures described by
Duncan, et al. (4). Table 2 presents the values used for each of the foun-
dation layers and the cell fill.

STRUCTURAL RESPONSE MODELS

In many soil-structure interaction analyses, it is a usual practice to as-

527

J. Geotech. Engrg. 1985.111:521-541.

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Technische Universitat Munchen on 07/13/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

PS X-32./

PS-32
r

0 0.04 0.08 0.12 0.16 0.20 0.24

INTERLOCK LOAD DEFLECTION DATA, (in.)

FIG. 5.—Interlock Pull Test Results From Ref. 13 (1 in. = 2.54 cm; 1 kip/in. =
17.5 kN/m)

sume the structure to behave as an isotropic, linear-elastic material.

However, such an assumption in the case of a cofferdam would result
in a serious misinterpretation of the response. In fact, the stiffness of
an assemblege of sheet piles in the horizontal direction is considerably
lower than in the vertical direction under the action of internal pressure
loading. This is due to the fact that, as the sheet-pile interlocks are loaded
in the horizontal direction, they exhibit a nonlinear load deformation
response due to early slack take-up and gradual seating of the bearing
surfaces. In Fig. 5, results are given for interlock pull tests performed
on the PS-32 and PSX-32 sheet piles in the working stress range. These
data include only the effects of the interlock; elastic deformations by the
web of the sheet pile are excluded. Characteristically, the load defor-
mation response shows an increasing stiffness until a final seating is
obtained; thereafter, a linear behavior occurs. In contrast, a uniform load
test in the vertical direction on a sheet pile would yield a linear response
with a slope equal to that of the steel.
The challenge in the analyses was to incorporate the differences in the
response of the sheet pile system in the vertical and horizontal direc-
tions. Note that additional deflection in the horizontal direction can also
528

J. Geotech. Engrg. 1985.111:521-541.

 be generated over web and interlock contributions if there is misaline-
ment of the sheets during driving. During filling, the internal pressures
will work to correct the alinement to that of a circle.
E-Ratio Concept.—Stevens (15) correctly assessed the problem of the
increased flexibility due to the interlocks, and made allowances by ar-
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Technische Universitat Munchen on 07/13/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

bitrarily reducing the stiffness of the cell connector springs in a vertical

slice analysis. In this paper, two new approaches were taken. The first
is termed the E-ratio concept, and it was evolved initially for the axi-
symmetric model. In this case, the sheet-pile system is treated as an
orthotropic shell with a reduced modulus in the horizontal direction. In
the vertical direction the modulus is taken as that of steel; the ratio of
the reduced horizontal modulus to that of steel is termed the E-ratio.
With the mobilization of the orthotropic shell scheme in the finite ele-
ment program, the next obvious question is what value to assign for E-
ratio. A definitive answer to this question can only be reached by ex-
perience in the back-analyses of case histories. Fortunately, a starting
point can be obtained using the load-deflection relationships for the in-
terlocks (Fig. 5), and a simple pressure vessel model loaded by an as-
sumed earth pressure. Assuming that active earth pressures are oper-
able, an applicable value of E-ratio of about 0.1 is calculated for the
pressure vessel to yield the right amount of deformation. This means
that, if the orthotropic model is to produce the right behavior for these
circumstances, the horizontal modulus would have to be one-tenth that
of steel. While this value was considered a useful initial estimate, there
are many uncertainties about the simplified concepts used in the cal-
culations. Thus it was considered wise to perform analyses with a range
of E-ratios so as to bound the actual answer; values of 1.0, 0.1 and 0.03
were used.
In the generalized plane-strain model, the E-ratio concept is easily in-
corporated since the horizontal modulus is the only one used. To ac-
count for an E-ratio below one, the modulus is simply taken as that of
steel multiplied by the E-ratio. For the vertical slice model, the stiff-
nesses of the cross-cell connecting springs were reduced by amounts
based on the E-ratio concept for the case of cell filling. However, it was
judged that after filling, much of the interlock deformation and sheet-
pile realinement would have occurred and, thus, an E-ratio of one was
assumed applicable for loading after filling.
Interlock Model.—A second approach to treating the horizontal de-
formation response was adopted for the generalized plane-strain case
only. This technique involves assigning a spring to each node between
the sheet-pile segments, (see Fig. 3) which will serve to increase the
flexibility of the system as dictated by the interlock load-deformation
data (Fig. 5). The spring behavior is described by a four-segment linear
function whose actual values vary depending upon load levels and
whether the node represents an interlock between PS-32 and PSX-32 sheet
piles. This interlock model allows for a very precise accounting of be-
havior, although any possible extra-lateral stiffness reduction due to sheet-
pile misalinement is not accommodated.
The interlock model may also be used in the axisymmetric approach,
but this feature has not yet been incorporated. Further studies incor-
porating this are anticipated.
529

J. Geotech. Engrg. 1985.111:521-541.

 CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE SIMULATION

In all of the analyses it was attempted to simulate the construction

sequence as closely as possible. For the axisymmetric model, this in-
volved first establishing the presence of sheet piles, and then placing
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Technische Universitat Munchen on 07/13/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

the fill in a series of 10 layers, with allowance for differences in fill unit
weight above and below water level.
Construction loading in the generalized plane-strain model involves
applying the vertical load above the assumed elevation of the plane in
a series of steps, the number of which vary depending upon the amount
of load to be applied. The actual number of steps is chosen to insure
convergence for the nonlinear soil model.
The vertical slice model presents the largest problems in construction
sequence simulation because it allows a reasonable representation of the
entire process of construction. This involves cell filling, berm placement,
staged removal of the interior water, staged institution of the dewatering
system and mobilization of seepage patterns, opening of the excavation
for the dam foundation and, finally, application of flood stage loadings.
Details are given in Ref. (5).

AXISYMMETRIC ANALYSES OF CELL FILLING

Effect of £-Ratio.—It may be remembered that as the E-ratio becomes

smaller, the horizontal modulus also becomes smaller and the sheet-pile
system in essence becomes more flexible. A more flexible sheet-pile sys-
tem allows the soil to mobilize its shear resistance and, thus, should lead
to lower earth pressures inside the cell and higher soil pressures acting
in the passive zone in the foundation soils outside the cell.
In Fig. 6, the results of the axisymmetric analyses are given for the

Earth Pressure Against Radial Deflection of

Interlock Force, kip/in Sheeting, lbs/ft 2 Sheeting, in.
20 4.0 6.0 3000 2000 1000 1000 2000 1.0 2.0 3.0
430

Cell //n
420
Fill -s //i

410 •At-Rest M l / It
Pressure// / *

z
I "00 - ill
Active Earth
Pressure/"""-— ^
$ 390
c
J 380
>
' ^7 -
UJ 370

360

350

340

FIG. 6.—Results of Axisymmetric Analysis—Completion of Cell Filling (1 ft = 0.305

m; 1 kip/in. = 17.5 kN/m; 1 psf = 47.9 kN/m2; 1 in. = 2.54 cm)

530

J. Geotech. Engrg. 1985.111:521-541.

 - ^ El 4 3 0

.55 .53 .47 . «

a

• 50 ."is .*:
«
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Technische Universitat Munchen on 07/13/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

.1,6 •." 5
1*3 v ? :
« .1)2 .iiO . 3 !
• e

.1.2 .40
* — 4- El 402
•^ -^8 i " J!
Note-
8 6 1
Lateral earth pressure coefficient
;39 •J *> bS " •;:
is predicted lateral stress divided
by effective overburden pressure
.38 •F -.35 -.32 -.«

.38 -.3* ^ -.3

-^•El 370
.29 .29 .29 . 2 9 . 2 ! 7.^0 it.to 2.58 1.56 - J I
a « «
• « « •
.30 JO ..30 .,32 J i 2..70 2,37 I ..63
II
^30 JO ..31 ..32 j : 1..72 ...57 1J6

31 .31 .31 . 3 : ! . ! ( 1.18 1.10 o

.32 .32 . 3 2 .31

i12 *9°
• • • «
.33 •33 -.32 J 3 .33 1.03 .99 .95 .87
^

FIG. 7.—Lateral Earth Pressure Coefficients—E-Ratio 0.10, Axisymmetric Analy-

sis (1 ft = 0.305 m)

completion of cell filling in the form of interlock forces, lateral effective

pressures acting on the inside and outside of the sheet piles, and radial
deflections of the sheet piles outward from the center line. As expected,
the lower the E-ratio, the lower the internal lateral earth pressures, the
higher the external lateral earth pressures, the larger the radial defor-
mations, and the lower the interlock forces in the sheet piles. In other
words, the more flexible sheet-pile cells allow the soil to do more while
minimizing the load the cell must carry. Interestingly, the imperfections
in the sheet-pile system that lead to an increased real flexibility have a
very positive influence on reducing loads in the sheet piles.
The case of the E-ratio of 0.03 leads to internal lateral soil pressures
consistent with Rankine active pressures. On the other hand, use of the
E-ratio of 1 yields lateral earth pressures only slightly lower than at-rest.
As a result of this contrast in pressure loading, the interlock forces for
an E-ratio of 0.03 are very much below those of the E-ratio of 1.
Lateral earth pressure coefficients at points in the soils, cri/oz, are given
531

J. Geotech. Engrg. 1985.111:521-541.

 Radial Deflection, in
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 &0
1 i I 1 1 1

1 v
420 "* /
\ h
410 L \ / ^PileJJ
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Technische Universitat Munchen on 07/13/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

^
i U \ V \ V
400

1 l Pile KK--^ ^ v
390 \
ki ^^?E-Ratio=I.O
. < \1x
\ i ^^^"^•*0 Js
380
~E-Ratio=0.03
A,
370
r' ..
^-E-Ratio=O.IO
intfa/Ji,

¥
360
INBOARD K K

350
1
&
CSV) - J-J
340
OUTBOARD

I '

FIG. 8.—Observed and Predicted Sheet Pile Deflections, Axisymmetric Analysis,

Cell Filling Complete (1 ft = 0.305 m; 1 in. = 2.54 in.)

Interlock Force, kips/in.

2 3 4 5 6 7

Legend
o Strain Gage Data
from November I3.I98I
• Predicted Value
COD
Strain Gage Locations

FIG. 9.—Measured and Predicted Interlock Forces, Axisymmetric Analysis, Cell

Filling Complete (1 ft = 0.305 m; 1 kip/in. = 17.5 kN/m)

532

J. Geotech. Engrg. 1985.111:521-541.

 in Fig. 7 for the case of E-ratio = 0.1 (where a'x = lateral effective earth
pressure from the finite element analysis and u[ = vertical effective stress
due to simple gravity loading). In the fill, the coefficients are higher in
the central and upper portions, and lower near the edges and lower
portions due to arching. In the foundation, very high coefficients are
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Technische Universitat Munchen on 07/13/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

generated in the upper passive zone nearest the sheet piles. The coef-
ficients in the foundation are all higher outside the sheeting than inside
the sheeting. All these trends are consistent with the relative movements
induced between the sheeting and the soil in the fill and foundation.
Predicted versus Observed Behavior.—From the large differences in
the predicted results shown in Fig. 6 as a result of the E-ratio, it is ob-
viously important to know which best represents the actual behavior.
Simply on the basis of past experience, it is possible to rule out the case
of an E-ratio of 1. Observations of a number of cofferdams have shown
that much larger sheeting deformations occur than those predicted with
an E-ratio of 1 (9,15).
Observed sheeting deflections and measured interlock forces for the
Stage 1 Lock and Dam 26 (R) cofferdam at the end of filling confirm this
(Figs. 8 and 9). [Note that in Fig. 8, data for piles / - / and K-K were
obtained November 17, 1981, with cell 33 filled, a neutral water head,
and the connecting are not in. Also note that the predicted deflection is
based on results of axisymmetric analysis.] While there is scatter in the
field data, it is clear that the E-ratio of 1 leads to prediction of displace-
ments that are too small and interlock forces that are too large. The data
observed seem to further suggest that the case of an E-ratio of 0.03 yields
results more consistent with the average behavior.
Clamshell Filling versus Dredge Filling.—The Lock and Dam 26 (R)
Stage 1 cofferdam was filled by clamshell procedures. However, many
cofferdams are filled by dredging. Axisymmetric analyses were per-
formed to compare the effects of those two options. Dredge filling differs
from clamshell filling in that the soil is loaded into the cell full of water,
and only after a period of time is the water drained out of the fill. In
the dredge-fill simulation, it was assumed that the fill is entirely satu-
rated and placed to the top elevation, that then the water level is drained
back to the river elevation. The results of the analysis showed dredge
filling to produce a more severe loading on the cell than clamshell filling,
with the most critical condition existing after topping out of the cell fill.
With dredged fill, the water pressure before draining exists in full mea-
sure from top to bottom of the cell, along with effective earth pressures.

GENERALIZED PLANE-STRAIN ANALYSIS OF CELL FILLING

Effect of E-Ratio.—The effect of reducing the E-ratio from 1 to 0.03

in the generalized plane-strain analyses has much the same effect this
reduction exhibited in the axisymmetric analyses; namely, the horizontal
bulging deformations are increased while the interlock tension forces are
decreased. Predicted interlock forces at selected locations around the sheet-
pile system at Elevation 390 are shown in Fig. 10. The values for the
case of E-ratio = 1 are considerably greater than those for an E-ratio of
0.1 or 0.03, particularly in the vicinity of the wye.
For all E-ratios, the trends in predicted interlock force variations around
533

J. Geotech. Engrg. 1985.111:521-541.

 0
^f©lr> @@
B ©^
""© @
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Technische Universitat Munchen on 07/13/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

0 © I 1 «-'° ^0
9
©il
LEGEND- 0W '•8(i3)l
Z.9 - E-Ratio = 0.03

(43) - E-Ratio = 0.10

0 -E-Ratio = 1.0
NOTES- s@4'
1. Interlock force expressed
in kips per inch
2. Computed at El 390 @©"-2
§3@4-

FIG. 10.—Effect of E-Ratio on Interlock Forces in Generalized Plane-Strain Anal-

ysis (1 kip/in. = 17.5 kN/m)

Interlock Force, kips/in.

2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
430

420

4I0

400 t-*-r+

390 o* —9—&

380 +t H-
E-Ratio=I.O
-E-Ratio=O.IO
370
-E-Ratio=0.03
oo o
360 XEtO

350

340

330

Legend
o Strain Gage Data
from November 23,198I
H Range of Predicted
QD
Strain Gage Locations
Interlock Force

FIG. 11.—Measured and Predicted Interlock Forces In Common Wall, Generalized

Plane-Strain Analysis (1 ft = 0.305 m; 1 kip/In. = 17.5 kN/m)
534

J. Geotech. Engrg. 1985.111:521-541.

 the cells are the same. The forces vary from highest to lowest, from the
wye to the common wall to the main cell to the arc cell, respectively.
These trends are consistent with those predicted by conventional anal-
ysis techniques. Note also that the interlock forces in the main cell ele-
ments are closest to those predicted by the axisymmetric model, as they
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Technische Universitat Munchen on 07/13/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

should be (compare Fig. 6 to Fig. 10 at elevation 390), because the con-

ditions in the two models are similar only in this location.
Effect of Approach—E-Ratio versus Interlock Model.—The general-
ized plane-strain analyses using the interlock method to model the ef-
fects of interlock yielding in the horizontal plane were found to give
results very similar to those obtained by the analysis using an E-ratio of
0.1. This may not be surprising, given that it was known beforehand
that the end result of the lateral deformations in the two cases should
be similar. However, note that the interlock model allows for a precise
simulation of the stiffness changes that occur during loading, while the
E-ratio concept represents more of an averaging procedure. Fortunately,
the results suggest that use of the more complex procedure is not nec-
essary if a rational means of choosing the E-ratio exists.
Predicted versus Observed Behavior.—Fig. 11 presents the observed
values of interlock forces for the common wall, as well as the average
predicted interlock forces for the common wall at the three elevations
where the generalized plane-strain model was applied (elevations 380,
390 and 400). The predicted results increase linearly with decreasing el-
evation, since, in this approach, load increases linearly with decreasing
elevation and no dredgeline effects are accommodated. The observed
results also show an increase, with depth of an elevation of about 380;
below this, the interlock forces decrease due to the dredgeline support.
Predicted interlock forces using an E-ratio of 0.03 agree reasonably with
those observed, as in the axisymmetric analyses.
In addition to interlock forces, deflections of the cells were also pre-
dicted by the generalized plane-strain model. These agreed closely with
the main cell behavior found in the axisymmetric model, and thus lead
to the conclusions drawn previously.

VERTICAL SLICE ANALYSES OF ENTIRE CONSTRUCTION AND LOADING

SEQUENCE

The predicted behavior from the vertical slice model for the case of
cell filling agreed remarkably well with that found for the axisymmetric
model when comparable E-ratios were considered. Of course, since only
the vertical slice model could simulate stages beyond the filling of the
cells, no other comparisons between models could be made.
Figs. 12 and 13 present predicted sheeting movements and interlock
forces from the vertical slice analysis for various key stages of loading.
It is apparent that the major sheeting deflections are caused by cell filling
and flood-stage loadings. The flood condition causes the entire cell unit
to tilt inwards towards the dewatered area. The interlock forces shown
in Fig. 13 represent average values between those for the extreme in-
board and outboard sheets. The radial forces in this type of analysis can
only be calculated from the results predicted for the springs that connect
the inboard and outboard sheets, and the springs average the behavior
535

J. Geotech. Engrg. 1985.111:521-541.

 Cell Filling Placing'Berm I
E-Ratio = I.O hereafter
E-Ratio=0.03
Dewatering I
Excavation
--„? Flood
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Technische Universitat Munchen on 07/13/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Inboard

FIG. 12.—Deflection of Sheet Piles for Filling, Berm Placement, Dewatering and
Flood Stage, Vertical Slice Analysis (1 in. = 2.54 cm)

Interlock Force,kips/in.
I 2 3 4
430

420

4I0 -

400

390

.£ 380

370

360

350 -

340

FIG. 13.—-Interlock Forces for Filling, Berm Placement, Dewatering, and Flood Stage,
Vertical Slice Analysis (1 ft = 0.305 m; 1 kip/in. = 17.5 kN/m)
536

J. Geotech. Engrg. 1985.111:521-541.

 TABLE 3.—Maximum Changes in Deflections and Interlock Forces Due to Various
Loading Stages from Vertical Slice Analysis and Observed Data
Due to Placement
of Berm Due to Devvatering Due to Flooding
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Technische Universitat Munchen on 07/13/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Parameter Predicted Observed Predicted Observed Predicted Observed

(D (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
Change in deflection, Inboard piles -0.4 -0.9 +0.5 +0.8 +1.4 + 1.1
in inches Outboard piles -0.4 -0.6 -0.5 -0.4 +1.5 +0.8
Change in interlock
force at elevation
390, in kips per inch Average -0.4 -0.1 -0.1 -1.5 -2.3 -0.6
Note: Negative deflection change indicates outboard movements; positive deflection change indicates inboard
movements; negative interlock force change indicates reduction; and positive interlock force change indicates in-
crease.

of the two extreme positions: The stage which produces the maximum
predicted interlock forces in cell filling, while other construction stages
prior to flooding have relatively minor effects. Flooding causes a strong
reduction in predicted interlock forces above the dredgeline, but a small
increase below dredge line. In the end, however, the maximum pre-
dicted interlock forces are still those generated during filling.
In Table 3, the induced changes in cell deflections and interlock forces
in differing key load stages after cell filling, as predicted and observed,
are presented. The trends of the results are identical, i.e., where the
vertical slice analysis predicts a decrease or increase, a decrease or in-
crease is observed in the field data. The magnitudes of interlock forces
and the increments in deflection are less well-predicted. However, the
agreement between predicted and observed values is reasonably good,
and could be refined by adjusting the value of the E-ratio. Also, the
flood-stage modeling procedures can be improved in future work.

COMPARISON OF CONVENTIONAL DESIGN TO FINITE ELEMENT APPROACH

Two questions concern future utility of the finite element method in

the design of cofferdams: (1) Is the method suitably accurate? and (2)
can it be used with relative ease? The first question is partially answered
through the results comparing finite element and observed behavior. The
comparisons with the field data generally demonstrated that the finite
element method can predict the behavior with a good degree of accu-
racy, providing proper allowances are made for sheet-pile system flex-
ibility. Note that the finite element approaches predict not only struc-
tural member stresses but also system deformations and stress conditions
in the cell and foundation soils. Further studies, of course, are needed
to develop confidence in the methodology, particularly in the form of
more sophisticated load tests of sheet-pile systems and documentation
and analysis of additional case histories. Also, additional work should
be directed towards general stability conditions and behavior when a
cofferdam serves as a retaining structure and is subjected to unbalanced
earth pressure and water loadings.
In Fig. 14, a comparison is made between the predicted main cell in-
terlock forces from the finite element method and five conventional ap-
537

J. Geotech. Engrg. 1985.111:521-541.

 Interlock Force, kips/in
2 3 4 5 6
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Technische Universitat Munchen on 07/13/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Legend:

Schroeder "—•— Axisymm and Vertical Slice F.E.

Terzaghi I—| Generalized Plane Strain F.E.
TVA
Corps of Engineers
DM-7

FIG. 14.—Comparison of Interlock Forces Predicted by Various Methods, Cell Fill-

ing (1 ft = 0.305 m; 1 kip/in. = 17.5 kN/m)

proaches for the end of cell filling for Lock and Dam 26 (R) conditions.
The methods of Schroeder and Maitland (12) and the Corps of Engineers
yield distributions consistent with the trends of the finite element re-
sults, although the former tends to give magnitudes similar to the case
of E-ratio = 0.1, while the latter yields magnitudes similar to that of E-
ratio = 0.03. Other design methods provide very conservative estimates
of interlock forces, particularly below elevation 380.
The second question, concerning ease of use, may be answered af-
firmatively for the axisymmetric and horizontal slice models. The meshes
for these models can be developed relatively easily by automated com-
puter routines, and the loading sequence data can also be generated au-
tomatically. The user should be primarily concerned with selecting the
proper soil and structure parameters. The vertical slice analysis is much
more of a problem for the user, since the mesh is complex and the data
preparation is challenging. However, recent developments in computer
graphics technology may ultimately reduce user problems associated with
this model to an acceptable level.
538

J. Geotech. Engrg. 1985.111:521-541.

 CONCLUSIONS

The results of the finite element model development and analyses lead
to the following conclusions:
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Technische Universitat Munchen on 07/13/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

1. A key element in properly modeling the response of a cellular cof-

ferdam m finite element analyses is accounting for the additional flexi-
bility generated in the horizontal plane by imperfections in the sheet-
pile system.
2. Effects of the yielding of interlocks in the horizontal direction can
be evaluated using pull tests. This behavior can be modeled directly us-
ing variable stiffness springs between adjacent sheet-pile elements.
3. The E-ratio concept provides a useful alternative approach to al-
lowing increased horizontal flexibilities in the sheet-pile system. By
choosing a suitable value of the E-ratio, interlock yielding and other ef-
fects can be accommodated.
4. Data from all three two-dimensional models suggests that the ap-
propriate E-ratio for a typical cofferdam lies between 0.1 and 0.03. In
other words, the horizontal modulus of the sheet-pile system should lie
between 1/10 and 1/30 of the vertical modulus.
5. When comparisons can be made, the predictions of the three two-
dimensional models are consistent.
6. Using an E-ratio of 0.03, predicted results are generated by the models
that appear to reasonably model the average observed behavior for the
Lock and Dam 26 (R) stage 1 cofferdam.
7. The combination of the three two-dimensional models provides a
means of predicting a number of the important aspects of cofferdam
behavior, with cause to resort to a three-dimensional analysis.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The studies described in this paper were sponsored by the St. Louis
District of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and work was done under
the auspices of Shannon and Wilson, Inc., Geotechnical Consultants.
Mr. Richard Freuh of Shannon and Wilson was a significant contributor
to discussions of the methods and interpretation of the results. Edward
Demsky and Thomas Mudd of the Corps of Engineers provided valuable
comments and criticisms. Dr. Mark P. Rossow, a structural consultant
to the Corps of Engineers, proposed the generalized plane-strain model
and aided in its technical implementation. Dr. Lee Schoreder, an instru-
mentation consultant on the project, also made contributions through
discussions with the writers. Dr. Richard J. Finno and Dr. Paul R. John-
ston worked with the senior writer in the first phases of the studies at
Stanford University. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University
students who aided in the latter phases include T. Shirasuna, S. An-
navarapu, R. Mosher and S. Campbell. To all these individuals, the writ-
ers express appreciation and thanks.

APPENDIX I.—REFERENCES

1. "Analysis of Instrumentation Data," Interim Report Task 3.1, Lock and Dam
539

J. Geotech. Engrg. 1985.111:521-541.

 No. 26 (Replacement), Mississippi River, Shannon and Wilson, Inc., Con-
tract No. DACW 43-82-C-0054, Department of the Army, St. Louis District,
Corps of Engineers, Sept., 1982.
2. Clough, G. W., and Hansen, L. A., "A Finite Element Study of the Behavior
of the Willow Island Cofferdam," Technical Report No. CE-218, Department
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Technische Universitat Munchen on 07/13/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

of Civil Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, Calif., 1977.

3. "Cofferdam Response to April 1983 Flood," Final Report, Lock and Dam No.
26 (Replacement), Mississippi River, Shannon and Wilson, Inc., Contract No.
DACW 43-83-M-1972, Department of the Army, St. Louis District, June, 1983.
4. Duncan, J. M., Bryne, P., Wong, K. S., and Mabry, P., "Strength, Stress-
Strain, and Bulk Modulus Parameters for Finite Element Analyses of Stresses
and Movements in Soil Masses," Report No. UCB/GT/80-01, University of
California, Berkeley, Calif., Aug., 1980.
5. "Finite Element Models," Final Report Tasks 3.2, 3.3, and 3.4, Lock and Dam
No. 26 (Replacement), Mississippi River, Shannon and Wilson, Inc., Con-
tract No. DACW 43-82-C-0054, Department of the Army, St. Louis District,
Corps of Engineers, Sept., 1982.
6. Gallagher, R. H., Finite Element Analysis Fundamentals, Prentice-Hall, Inc., En-
glewood Cliffs, N.J., 1975.
7. Hansen, L. A., and Clough, G. W., "Finite Element Analyses of Cofferdam
Behavior," Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Numerical Methods
in Geomechanics, Vol. 2, Edmonton, Canada, 1982, pp. 899-906.
8. Kittisatra, L., "Finite Element Analysis of Circular Cell Bulkheads," thesis
presented to Oregon State University, at Corvallis, Oreg., in 1976, in partial
fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
9. Lacroix, Y., Esrig, M. I., and Luscher, U., "Design, Construction and Per-
formance of Cellular Cofferdams," Proceedings of the ASCE Specialty Conference
on Lateral Stresses in the Ground and Design of Earth Retaining Structures, June,
1970, pp. 271-328.
10. Maitland, J. K., and Schroeder, W. L., "Model Study of Circular Sheetpile
Cells," Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division, ASCE, Vol. 105, No.
GT7, July, 1979, pp. 805-822.
11. Rossow, M. P., "Finite Elements for Generalized Plane Strain," American In-
stitute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Journal, Vol. 19, No. 4, Apr., 1980.
12. Schroeder, W. L., and Maitland, J. K., "Cellular Bulkheads and Coffer-
dams," Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division, ASCE, Vol. 105, No.
GT7, July, 1979, pp. 823-838.
13. "Sheet Pile Interlock Testing," Final Report Tasks 6.1 Through 6.7, Lock and
Dam No. 26 (Replacement), Mississippi River, Shannon and Wilson, Inc.,
Contract No. DACW 43-82-C-0054, Department of the Army, St. Louis Dis-
trict, Mar., 1983.
14. Sorota, M. D., Kinner, E. B., and Haley, M. X., "Cellular Cofferdam for
Trident Drydock: Performance," Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Divi-
sion, ASCE, Vol. 107, No. GT12, Dec, 1981, pp. 1657-1676.
15. Stevens, R. F., "Study of the Behavior of a Cellular Cofferdam," thesis pre-
sented to Duke University, at Durham, N.C., in 1980, in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.

APPENDIX II.—NOTATION

The following symbols are used in this paper:

E, = tangent modulus;
K0 = lateral earth pressure coefficient;
Km = modulus constant;
n = modulus exponent;
=
pa atmospheric pressure;

540

J. Geotech. Engrg. 1985.111:521-541.

 Rf = failure ratio;
sL = stress level;
7r = total unit weight;
V = Poisson's ratio;
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by Technische Universitat Munchen on 07/13/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

<r£ = effective confining stress;

< = effective horizontal stress;
< = effective vertical stress; and
-e-

= friction angle.

541

J. Geotech. Engrg. 1985.111:521-541.