Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 1995 Ortigao Et Al On Soill Nailing in Brazil Proc Civils

    Uploaded by

    Rsiggy
    5 views20 pages

    Original Title

    1995 Ortigao et al on Soill nailing in Brazil Proc Civils

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    5 views20 pages

    1995 Ortigao Et Al On Soill Nailing in Brazil Proc Civils

    Uploaded by

    Rsiggy

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 20
    free ea Engineering APRIL 1995 RCS EWN a OO [aK Geotechnical Engineering APRIL 1995 CONTENTS ‘The Stava tilings dams failure, Italy, July 1985, RJ. Chandlerand G. Tosatti Paper 10682 67 ‘Underwater construction of an emfankment to extend the lite ofa tilings impoundment. G. E. Blight, J-E.S. Boswelland A. Zenon, Paper 10561 Rational determination of the engineering properties of soft rocks. J. W. Johnston, Paper 10533 86 Experience with soil naiingin Brazil: 1970-1994. J.A.R. Ontigao, E. M. Palmeira and. C. Zins, Paper 10584 93. Critical depth: how it came into beingand why it does not exist. BH. Felleniusand. A, Altaee. Paper 10659 107 First application of electro-osmosis toimprove friction pile Milligan. Paper 1072 2 Rainfal-tandslide relationship for Hong Kong. J. N. Kay and T. Chen, Paper 10729 7 Discussion ‘The waterproofness of structural diaphragm walls M, Puller, Paper 10421 9 128 Bookreview Fronteover: TheStava rtings dams shorty after the faire. With dcknovledgements to Publis, Trent, aly Experience with soil nailing in Brazi 1970-1994 J.A. R. Ortigao, DSc, E. M. Palmeira, DPhil, and A. C. Zirlis, EngCivit ‘This Paper addresses soil reinforcement techniques employing semi-rigid inclu- sions called nail ce the term soil nailing. It was rely applied for the first time in Brazil in 1970 by tunnel con- tractors in Sio Paulo. Since then, several soil nailed structures have been con- structed successfully. The development of methods of analysis in Europe and North America is reviewed; the application of those methods in Brazil has led to more economical and safer structures. This Paper briefly presents the historical devel- opment and the use of soil nailing in Brazil. Differences and traditional techi some examples are given. Notation cross sectional area of reinforcement tensile ultimate stress of reinforcement normal stress exerted by soil soil-reinforcement unit frition shear strength of reinforcement shear force at failure surface tension force at failure surface Introduction Soil nailing is a practical and cost-effective technique to stabilize slopes and excavations through the introduction of reinforcement into the soil mass. It was used in Brazil for the first time in 1970 by tunnelling contractors, This ‘experience, however, was not properly reported. In 1972 the technique was used in France and ‘named sol cloué.' Since then, it has been applied in Canada,*-* France,** Germany, the UK!" and the USA," among other countries, 2. Soil nailing has its origins in the New ‘Austrian Tunnelling Method (NATM) devel: oped in the late 1960s (Fig. 1),"* comprising the use of a flexible lining that enables soil defor. mation around the excavation which has been reinforced by means of bolting or nailing, An active zone is formed around the excavation and the lining is consequently subjected to reduced loading. This technique contrasts with, the traditional (pre 1960) tunnelling technique where a rigid lining was employed to prevent soil deformation and was subjected to full loading from ground pressures. 3. Soil nailing consists of reinforcing the soil mass by the introduction of a series of thin elements called nails to resist tension, bending and shear forces. ‘The reinforcing elements can be nade of steel or plastic bars of a round cross-section or Ior L shaped bars, micropiles and, in special cases, ples, Nails are installed sub-horizontally into the soil mass ether by driving or ina pre-bored hole, which is grouted. Typical applications in slopes and excavations are shown in Fig. 2 Inthe first case (Fig. 2a), the use of root of micropiles' isa sol naling application in which the reinforcement is tmainly due to bending and shear forces inthe nails. In the second (Fig. 200), as in the stabil ization of excavations, thin nails are mainly subjected to tension 4. Engineers in Brasil quickly adopted soil railing. This was due to the wide experience in Brazil of tieback walls, since their introduction in 1957 (Nunes and Velloso, 1963)."* The soil naling construction sequence is similar to the Brazilian practice using tieback walls. These are constructed from the top (Hunt and ‘Nunes)*” with excavation stages ranging {rom 121m, Thousands of such structures have been constructed throughout the country to stabilize slopes in residual soils 5, Another contribution to the use of soil nailing was made by the NATM introduced to Brazil in 1970 during the construction of the Cantareira water supply system forthe city of Sio Paulo, The tunnel crown and face was rein forced by bolting or nailing. The same tec nique was then applied forthe first time in Brazil to stabilize the slope of the tunnel portal in the same project, It was then named ‘solo enraizado” in Portuguese, which is equivalent to soil rooting. These structures were designed only on the basis of previous experience and their behaviour was reported to be successful (Zirlis et a1,"* Ortigao etal"). Unfortunately, this information only became available toa few engineers involved in this work 6. The widespread adoption of soit nailing in several countries, the development of methods of analysis and the low cost of such structures compared to other designs have led to an increasing interest in soil nailing in Brazil, This Paper presents a review of this experience. A selection of soil nailing walls in Brazil is presented in Table 1 and discussed below. Construction method and soil nailing application 7._ Soil nailing walls have been employed to stabilize natural slopes or excavations, In a Proe. Instn Civ. Engrs Geotech. Engng, 1995, 113, Ape 93-106 Ground Board Geotechnical Frgincert Advisory Panel Paper 10584 Written discussion closes 15 June 1995 JAR. Ortigao, ‘Associate Professor, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Brasit EM, Palmeira, Associate Professor, Department nf iva! Engineering University of Brasiia, Brazil A.C.Zinls, Director, Genco Geotechnical Engineering Ltd, ‘So Paulo, Brazil ORTIGAO, PALMEIRA "AND ZIRLIS ——— Lining ypes Floxoio NATAL Bois oF nails ig. 1. Comparison Active zone. between NATM tunnelling method and rigid lining support method Shoteote Fig. 2. Soil nailing ‘applications: (a) slope stabilization; (6) ‘excavation support ® typical stabilization project the reinforcement is installed in stages as the excavation prog. resses, {ypically in 1 to 2m deep excavation stages (Fig. 3). The maximum excavation depth in each stage depends on the soil type and the inclination of the slope, which must be kept stable during the stage of excavation, until the reinforcement js in place and starts to exert its influence. 8, Most residual and sedimentary soils are adequate for soil nailing. There are a few ‘exceptions: those materials that cannot be excavated vertically to a depth of at least 1 m without failing, This failure occurs in uncemented loose sands, such as Copacabana Beach sand, where an unsuccessful attempt to construct a soil nailing wall for the excavation of a building recently took place. In this case, the contractor attempted to excavate a I m ver- tical bench without any success. Wetting and spraying concrete were tried but the facing still failed. Eventually, the soil nailing wall had to be replaced by another type of structure. 9. Soil nailing can be used in finer sands that can be cut vertically and remain stable for a few hours due to capillary effects, as the Fig. 3. Construction stages Excavation Authors have observed in fine Santos Beach sand, 450 km south of Rio de Janeiro. 10. In very soft clays with undrained strength less than 15 kPa this method cannot be applied for the same reason, Installation of nails 11. Nails should be installed soon after excavation by driving or drilling. Nail driving hhas been in use for years for stabilizing the faces of tunnels in soils. Short nails, usually up to 3 m in length, are driven by percussion, employing hand operated pneumatic hammers. ‘This technique has been applied in temporary walls in the the Sao Paulo porous clay as well as in other sites. Two recent applications of nail driving are reported in Table 1 (sites 16 and 20) 12. Nail driving is inadequate in soils con- taining boulders, in most hard residual soils and in all permanent structures because the steel bar is unprotected against corrosion. Another disadvantage is the resulting low soil nail friction, which ranges from 30-40 kPa in sands and lower values in clays. 13. The most common technique is similar to the installation of soil anchors, ie. by drill ing a 50-100 mm dia. hole, introducing a 13. 32 mm dia, steel bar, followed by low pressure grouting. This process leads to reasonably high unit soil-nail friction in which values greater than 100 kPa can easily be obtained in most sails, 14. Figure 4 presents details of the nai heads used in Brazil. The head shown in Fig. 4(a) is adopted in the case of nearly vertical walls and for nails greater than 20 mm in diam. eter. A small loading of the order of 5 kN is applied to each nail in order to maintain the contact of the facing against the soil. 15, In the stabilization of inclined slopes in which small diameter nails (less than 15 mm in diameter) are used, a second type of head shown in Fig, 4(b) is frequently preferred. The steel bar is bent laterally at right angles to anchor the mesh and shoterete. 16. Other installation methods employing high pressure grouting, such as the French Hurpinoise®? and the German Titan” are used in other countries. Firing has been attempted in the UK, ? These methods have not been used in Brazil to date. Table 1, Soil nailing walls in Brasil No. Site Area: | Year Soil Height] Nail Nat | Steetbars [Borehole ] — Spacing Facing m ‘Hom | inclination i | length L:m Diem No. | g:mm | Woriz.: | Vert: | Thickness: | Mesh | “Type [kelm? 1 | Slope in Tatodo da Serra, So Paulo | 700 | 1983 | Residual clay | 25 5 4 fata | a [20 [as [7 tree for 2 | Paulista Railway bridge, Sie Paulo. | 250 | 1983 | Fat i ws ji} | om | is }as | oo fiau loss 3 | Paulista Railway bridge, SEo Paulo | 1400 | 1984 | Phytlte 26 % 2 1] 25 | % | 20 | 40 | 100 lige |aas 4 | Iearai Beach, Rio de leneiro 1500 | 1984 | Gneiss saprotites | 17 8 9 1/25 | 9% | 15 | 15 | 150 |2q283} 306 5 | Slope a BR-324 Road, Simses Ftho, | 800 | 1986 | Shate 4 50 2 1/25 | % | is 1s | 6 |iau for Bahia 6 | Slope in Salvador, Bahia 850 | 1986 | Residual 185 50 5 1} 2% | m | 20} 20] 5 frau Jor 7 | Slope in Salvador, Bahia 400 | 1986 | Residual m4 0 5 1} 2% | m | 20 | 20] > rae Joss 8 | Mutiformas building, SioPavlo | 1800 | 1986 | Gneisssaprotites | 12 60 8 fifa | % | 25 | 20} 7m igs for 8 | Cometa Express Building, Salvador, | 1350 |1987 | Residual sandy” | 1 6 7 1] 2% | m | 25 | 25] 5 trae lov Bahia clay 10 | Pico doCouto Road, Petropois, |} 500 [1988 |Residuat clay | 9 5 5 1] | wo fas ]1s | 100 frau for Rio de laneiro 11 ] Paulo Berga Building, Séo Paulo | 450 | 1988 |Residuat clay | 107 70 4 1) | om | as | 1s | 100 frau for 12 | Copene lant, Camagar, Bahia 300 } 1980 | Sandy sit 39 %0 4 1} 2 | % | 1 | os | 100 oars Joae 13 | Beneficigncia Portuguesa Hospital, | 250 jee Sandy fil 8 0 ms j1fa | mw [is |as | “eo figus|res Sio Paulo 14 | Slope a Grana Saito, Sio Paulo, | 750 | 1990 | Sandy ft sa %0 @ file | om tia sae} we foaer [iso 15 | Slope in Salvador, Babia 2100 } 1991 | Residual clay | 115, 70 6 fila | a5 | 20 | 20] ‘tm liad lors 16 | Shetl pant, Cubatdo, Sio Pesto | 1800 | 1992 | Residual sand | 10 8 3 1] 2 | iv | 15 | 15 ] 70 rae for 1 | Shell Petrol Staton, Salvador, Bahia | 00 | 1992 | Residual clay | 10 8 4 Ja fas | os | 20 | 20] 6 fige fore 18 | Votocel factory, Sto Paulo® 1300 | 1999 | sitite 6 %0 4, |i] 128 | a | to J 10 | soo |iqee |Sa8 19 | Rua dos Crtioe,Séo Paulot 800 | 1993 | site 1-16 60 sto |i] | a | 15 | 21 | 100 {ae lees 20 | Pecten Sto Paulot 350 | 1999 | Residual 10 % sft} | piven | as | a5 70 {rad {ors * Contractor: GENCO Engenharia, Sto Paul; all others ESTE Engentaria, fo Paulo ae ORTIGAO, PALMEIRA ‘AND ZIRLIS. Steo! meshes Stos! bar @ Steel mesh— Spacor Stee! bar Fig. 4. Nail details (a) steel bar 20 mm or greater in diameter; (b) steel bar less than 20 mm in diameter © Shoteste Fionn 17, The Brazilian experience with thou: sands of tieback walls since 1957 demonstrated that corrosion was responsible for the few fail- tures in which the corrosion protection was inadequate at the anchor head. There is no record of problems along the grouted length. 18. The use of double protection, in which the nail bar is inserted into a corrugated plastic sheath and the space in between is grouted, is common practice in some countries,*? In the absence of a specific code for nailing in Brazil, the Brazilian code of practice for tieback walls. ABNT NBR 5629? (Table 2) has been used. It recommends double protection for class 1 or 2 protections in aggressive environments, and has been used by Brazilian contractors.**?° Shoterete facing 19, Shoterete is the standard type of facing in soil nailed structures, as opposed to the pro- cedure followed with most tieback walls in Brazil where standard concrete is utilized. ‘Shoterete can be applied through dry or wet ‘mix, the latter being preferred only for major jobs due to the sizeof the equipment needed. Indeed, in most soil nailed structures, and in all ccases in Table 1, the dry mix was employed. The thickness of the facing varies between 50 and 150 mm with one or two steel meshes embedded in the shoterete. Thinner facings are generally used on inclined slopes; thicker, for vertical permanent excavations. 20. Steel or synthetic fibres mixed with the shotcrete can be used to replace the steel mesh, ‘The advantages are savings in time, labour and volume of concrete. Fibre-shotcrete has been successfully applied to stabilize slopes in the area of Xingé Dam, Brazil Comparison with tieback walls 21. Although there are some similarities in the construction technique between a soil nailed structure and a tieback wall, significant concep: Table 2. Brazilian code of practice for corrosion protection in soil anchors or “Anchored fength Free length nails’ Protection Application Class 1 | Permanent anchors in aggressive environments, or temporary anchors in very aggressive environments Class. 2 | Permanent anchors in non: aggressive environments or temporary anchors in medium aggressive ‘Temporary anchors in aon aggressive environment Double protection employing corrugated metal or plastic ‘routed sheath Double protection employing corrugated metal or plastic ‘grouted sheath Single protection by means of a plastic sheath Double protection employing corrugated metal or plastic ‘routed sheath Single protection by grouting; centralizing devices and spacers should be employed Single protection by grouting: ‘centralizing devices and spacers should be employed tual differences exist, as shown in Fig. 5.4° Anchors are pre-stressed with high loads that may vary from 150-1000 kN, while only a very small pre-tension of the order of 5-10 KN is. applied to nails to ensure contact of the facing against the soil behind. 22. Anchors have a free length, in contrast to nails which transfer load by friction against the soil along their entire length. 23, The concrete facing of a tieback wall is in general 200-300 mm thick, being designed to support high anchor loads. On the other hand, toads on the facing applied by nails are much ‘smaller, leading to a much reduced facing thickness, 24, Most of the tieback walls in Brazil are designed with a vertical facing to avoid prob: Jems that may occur when pouring concrete in inclined formwork. Shotcreting, on the other hhand, can be accomplished in any direction. It is, therefore, possible to take advantage of the existing slope and to design inclined soil nailed walls, This may reduce excavations. 25. The length of nails is 60-120% of the depth of a vertical excavation, Soil anchors tend to be longer. 26. Most failures in residual soils take place in shallow depths, and soil nailing together with deep and surface drainage can be a very economical solution. However, there are a few ceases in which the failure surface is so deep that it may be more appropriate to employ long. soil anchors. Comparison with reinforced walls 27. Soil nailing is conceptually very similar to geosynthetic reinforced walls or the rein: forced soil technique.?” The main difference is in the construction process, Soil nailed walls are constructed from the top down, whereas geosynthetic or reinforced soil walls are con- structed upwards. This leads to a different pattern of soil displacements, as shown in Fig, 6 Advantages of soil nailing 28. Soil nailing presents the following advantages**® which have contributed to the widespread use of this technique in several countries, (a) Economy: limited economical evaluation of a few projects both in Brazil* and overseas!" has led to the conclusion, that soil nailing is definitely a cost- effective technique. A comparison of costs is presented in Fig. 7. (0) Rate of construction: fast rates of construc: tion can be achieved if adequate drilling equipment is employed. Shotcrete is also a rapid technique for placement of the facing. Reinforced conerete oon d RASS SAAN AAAS OAAAMASN SSAA SX ASAS BRR SA [AQAA » Fig. 5. Load transfer mechanisms: (a) tiedack wall; (b) soil nailing wall Fig. 6. Horizontal displacements: (a) in earth reinforced wall, (0) in soil nailed wall ORTIGAO, PALMEIRA AND ZIRLIS. 7 é ‘soil nallod wall 7 Fig 7. Relative cost ot natedwaily, 9 20m Fig. 8. Slope stabilization at tunnel No. 5 of the Ci supply system Fig. 9. Soil nailed wail employing pre-cast wall elements, Rimobloco, Sao Paulo Dimensions iam Pro-cast walt laments (©) Pacing inclination: as mentioned before, the use of shotcrete easily accommodates an inclined facing, with benefits to overall stability. Backwards inclination of the facing also reduces shotcrete losses due to rebound, (d) Deformation behaviour: observation of actual nailed structures has shown that ‘maximum horizontal deformation at the top of the wall is of the order of 0.3% of the wall height.” (e) Design flexibility: a flexible soil nailed wall can be provided with soil anchors in order to limit deformation in the vicinity of exist: ing structures or foundations. Limitations of soil nailing 29, The soil nailing technique mobilizes soil strength and the soil mass deforms, leading to displacements in the surroundings of the wall. This can bring unacceptable deformation to a sensitive stucture in the vicinity ofthe wall 30, Placement of the shoterete requires that the excavated face be free-standing for a period of time. Corrosion protection requires careful | attention, but only in aggressive environments, Examples of soil nailing in Brazil 31, The use of soil nailing in Brazil can be separated into two phases. The first began in 1970 when this technique was empirically applied, based on NATM experience, well before design methods available today were developed. The second phase began in the 1980s taking advantage of limit equilibrium design procedures and enabling high structures | to be designed and built. 32, The first soil nailing application took place in 1970 in a tunnel portal (Fig. 8) of the Cantareira water supply project in Sao Paulo irlis et al,"* Ortigao et al."®) constructed by Este Engenharia. Shortly afterwards, the pro- cedure was applied to several tunnel portals and in the stabilization of slopes atthe Imig rantes motorway in Sao Paulo. 33. Since 1976 a company in Sao Paulo has designed and built a variation on the technique of reinforced soil named Rimobloco, shown in Fig. 9." It has been constructed either from the top, as a soil nailed wall, or from the bottom, as | the reinforced soil method. The face is made with pre-cast concrete elements 150 mm thick and the nails are inserted in 100 mm dia, bore holes and filled with concrete. Excavations up to 12 m high have been supported by this tech- nique. 34, Several examples of soil nailing applica: tions, carried out by Este Engenharia, Sao Paulo, are summarized in Table 1 and in Figs 10-15, Two outstanding projects are described below. Thirty-five metre high wall at Icarai Beach, Niteroi 35, In 198, in an attractive area of Iearai Beach, near Rio de Janeiro (site 4 in Table 1), a 35 m high vertical cut in gneiss saprolites (Fig. 10) was constructed for the development of a high apartment building. The lower 18 m of the cut was supported by a tieback wall with soit anchors. The upper wall consisted of a soil nailed structure inclined 75° backwards with 6-9 m long, 25 mm dia, steel bar nails in 90 mm dia. boreholes. The spacing was 1'5 m in both vertical and horizontal directions. The shot- crete facing was 150 mm thick, reinforced with two steel meshes. 36. At the end of the construction a few cracks were observed at the crest of the slope. ‘They were filled with cement grout and no additional signs of displacement were observed. S - Qa NQO \ fa Ray Cross secton Fig. 11. Slope stabilization in phyllite under the foundation of Paulista Railway lines (site 3, Table 1) Slope stabilization in phyllite at a railway bridge abutment 37. The 26 m high abutment of a bridge of the Paulista Railway Company (site 3 in Table 1) was stabilized by nailing (Fig. 11). Local soil consisted of structural residual soil of phyllite with bedding and shear planes dipping in the direction of the slope. Soil wedge failures ‘occurred and led to the decision to stabilize the slope by 25 mm dia. steel bar nails in 75 mm dia. boreholes. Vertical spacing was 2 m and horizontal spacing was 26 m. Nail length varied from 10-25 m. The shoterete facing was inclined backwards at an angle of 75° and its thickness was 50 mm, Analysis of soil nailed structures ‘38. A comparison between several limit equilibrium methods for the analysis of soit nailed walls is presented in Table 3. These ‘methods have also been compared else: where.22"2-% Computer programs have been written to allow fast and more complex. Fig. 10. Support of excavation in residual gneissic soils for high rise building on Iearat Beach (site 4, Table y) Fig. 12. Slope stabilization in residual soil, Taboao dda Serra (site 1, Table 1) Fig. 13. Support of excavation fora Paulista Railway bridge abutment (site 2, Table 1) Fig. 14. Excavation in fine clayey residual sand, Salvador (site 9, Table 1) Fig. 15. Slope rotection in gneissie saprolitic soils near an existing building, Tabowo da Serra (site 8, Table 1) analyses,#98-2? These methods divide the soil ‘mass behind the face into an active and a passive zone, separated by a slip surface. The global stability analysis considers the stabil zing effect of nails acting on the slip surface. However, they differ with respect to the shape of the slip surface, the forces assumed to act on a nail and the method of calculation of stability. 39. The German method considers a bi linear failure surface, a shape that differs from Table 3. Methods of analysis of soil nailed structures observations on actual failures where curved surfaces were observed.** However, recent studies carried out at the University of Brasilia (Lana, 1992) in reinforced soil model walls have shown a reasonable agreement between observed and theoretical bi-linear slip surfaces. 40, ‘The Davis, German and Yield methods consider only tension in the nails, computed as shown in Fig. 16. The soil-nail transfer mecha- nism assumes a constant shear stress g,at the soit-nail interface. Its value can be estimated from past experience in similar soils, and has to be proof tested by means of pull-out tests, before and during construction, 41, The Kinematical, Multicriteria and Cardiff methods take into account tension, bending and shear as indicated in Fig. 17. Values of the tension 7, and shear T, forces at the failure surface are calculated from a Winkler type analysis, considering the nails as beams on an elastic foundation supported by non-linear springs representing soil pressure 42. The Kinematical method considers inter nal stresses in the soil mass, which lead to cal culation of local factors of safety. Its application is simplified by means of design charts detailed elsewhere.?*2%49 43, The Multicriteria method, also called the French method,?” is based on the limit equi librium of slices: the contribution of each nail is applied at the base of the slice that intercepts the nail (Fig. 18). Therefore, the stabilizing effect of nails in terms of tension and shear forces is transferred to the soil mass. Addi tional assumptions in this method are listed in Tabled 44. The first criterion refers to the strength of the reinforcement that has to be verified against failure under tensile and shear forces. ‘The second criterion assumes constant soil-nail Characteristics Methods German [Davis Multiriteria | Kinematial Caraitt Yield Reference Stocker etal, | Shen etal, Schlosser, Juran etal, | Bridle Anthoine 179" 1981? 1985" 1988" 19899 1960"" Analysis Limit Limit Limit Internal Limit Yield theory ‘cuilibrium | “equilirium | equilibrium | stresses equilibrium Division of soil mass | 2 wedges 2 blocks Slices = Slices Rigid block Factor of safety Global Global Global and Local Global Global local Failure surface Bistinear Parabolic Circular or Log spiral |Log spiral Log spiral polygonal Nails resist to shear x x x bending x x x Wall geometry Vertical or Vertical Any Vertical or | Vertical or Vertical or inclined inclined inclined inclined No. of sil layers 1 1 Any v 1 1 friction equal to q,. The third assumes that the normal stress p exerted by the soil on the nail should not exceed a limit value Pg, (Fig. 17) that corresponds to the yielding of soil around the nail, This assumption is similar to the common model used to represent the soil support during lateral loading of piles. Finally, the fourth criterion assumes the soil shear strength governed by the Mohr-Coulomb equa tion, 45. The significance of bending stiffness in soil nailing design, and hence the fundamentals of the the Multicriteria and, generally speaking, the Kinematical and the Cardiff methods have been severely challenged by Jewell and Pedley.*! *? They state that nail shear has a negligible effect and should not be taken into account due to the unnecessary additional eom- putational effort. An interesting, and ‘occasionally passionate, discussion has resulted." ** 46. In his discussion, Schlosser*® agrees that the influence of bending stiffness and shear on the global safety factor is small, less than 15%, However, the local safety factor in the nail may not be adequately represented if only tensile forces are considered. Another important feature of the Multicriteria method is that it is a more general method that can be applied to small diameter nails and to micro: piles, which definitely contribute to bending strength. Introduction of the nail effect in the analysis 47. The effect of the nail can be introduced asa stabilizing force applied at the slip surface (Fig. 18) and can be incorporated in the slope stability method as a resisting moment and force. The use of the limit equilibrium method of slices and a computer program enables inter nal, external or mixed stability analysis to be carried out, as indicated in Fig. 19. 48. The way in which the nail effect is incorporated in the method may severely affect the results. As an example, consider the methods of Bishop and Fellenius, which define the safety factor as a ratio of moments in the direction of failure and against it. The effect of the reinforcement may be included as an addi tional resisting moment or, alternatively, as a resisting force. These alternative approaches lead to different values of the safety factor. 49, The methods that define the safety factor as ratio of moments may yield unrealistic theoretical slip surfaces, that isa result of the influence of the moments due to the reinforce: ‘ment. The best approach seems to be a rigorous ‘method of slices that take into account all three equations of equilibrium. ‘50. Limit equilibrium methods have been used with success in the analysis of field struc: tures (e.g, Clouterre)* and laboratory models of Sip sutace Passive Fig. 16. Tension in nails Fig. 17. Bending and shear in nails at the slip surface Table 4. Assumptions in Multicriteria®™ Criterion 1 Strength of the reinforcement 2. Soil nal friction [Normal stress on the nail Soil shear strength ‘Mathematical model ‘Tensile strength T,

    You might also like