Wong Design Analysis Deep Excavations Session03

November2009
MohrCoulombModel
Session 3
Mohr-Coulomb Soil Model &
Design (Part 2)
Time
Session Topic
09:00 10:30
1
Overview
Coffee Break
10:30 11:00
11:00 12:30
2
Design (Part 1)
Lunch
12:30 - 01:30
01:30 03:00
3
Mohr-Coulomb Soil Model &
Design (Part 2)
Coffee Break
03:00 03:30
03:30 05:00
How to reduce wall deflection
MohrCoulombModel
Thingsyoushouldknowaboutthe
MohrCoulombSoilModel
Plastic
Elastic
plastic
ast c
Elastic
MohrCoulombModel
WongKaiSin
November2009
MohrCoulombModel
CanMohrCoulombModelsimulateRealSoilBehaviour?
UUTeston
Clay
cu >0
>0
u =0
Plastic
El i
Elastic
Elastic
plastic
CDTeston
Clayor
Sand
Plastic
c' 0
'>0
Elastic
RealSoil
MohrCoulombSoil
MohrCoulombModel
CanaElasticModelsimulateRealSoil Behaviour?
ElasticModel
Shearstressproduces
Shear
stress produces
shearstrain:
no v
MohrCoulombModel
WongKaiSin
Normalstressproduces
Normal
stress produces
volumetricstrain:
v
November2009
MohrCoulombModel
Can a elastic soil simulate undrained behaviour of clay?

Plastic
Elastic
l i
plastic
Elastic
ElasticModel(=0.5)
no v
nov(undrained)
Stressindependent
RealSoilBehaviour
no v
nov(undrained)
Stressindependent
MohrCoulombModel
Can a elastic soil simulate undrained behaviour of clay?

Plastic
Elastic
l i
plastic
Elastic
Yes!Ifweusecu andEu.
Canweusec' 'andE'?
MohrCoulombModel
WongKaiSin
November2009
MohrCoulombModel
CUTest
100
ESP
TSP
porp(kPa)
MohrCoulombModel
CUTest
ConsolidatedUndrained
TriaxialCompressionTest
curve
MohrCoulomb
RealSoil
13
Kf
=100kPa
Kf
2cu
cu fromc' '
2cu
cu measured
ESP
TSP
porp
ESP
TSP
porp
c' 'overpredictedcu !!!

MohrCoulombModel
WongKaiSin
November2009
MohrCoulombModel
Istheporepressureresponsecorrect?
LetslookatCUtestonanormallyconsolidatedclay.
ElasticSoil
RealSoil
Kf
q
Kf
q
Uf
Uf
ESP
TSP
ESP
TSP
porp
porp
Thepredictedporepressureismuchsmallerthanthemeasured!
MohrCoulombModel
MethodA
EffectivestressMohrCoulombMethodusingcand
Itoverestimatestheundrainedshearstrengthandunderestimatesthe
excessporepressure ofanormallyconsolidatedclay.
ElasticSoil
RealSoil
Kf
q
Kf
2cu
Uf
Uf
2cu
ESP
TSP
porp
MohrCoulombModel
WongKaiSin
ESP
TSP
porp
10
November2009
MohrCoulombModel
Overestimationofcu ataReclaimedSite
Undrained Shear Strength (kPa)
0
20
40
60
80
100 120 140 160
0
(qt-po)/Nkt
5
0.22*p'o
10
corr. FVT
Depth (m)
15
Consol tests
20
Cu based on
phi=22 & p'o
25
Method
A
30
35
40
45
50
MohrCoulombModel
11
NicollHighway ResultsofUndrainedAnalysisusingMethodA
Measured
Computedusing MethodA
105
100
95
ReducedLevel(m)
ReducedLevel(m)
90
85
80
75
70
Level10
325 mm
325mm
65
60
55
50
Formation=118mm
Final=145mm
MohrCoulombModel
WongKaiSin
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
WallDeflection(mm)
12
November2009
MohrCoulombModel
DoesMethodA alwaysoverestimatecu forNCclay?
(13)f
'
u=0
cu
Thissitehasa
constantcu.
'
ForNCClay,itunderestimates cu atlowstressand
overestimates itathighstress.
MohrCoulombModel
13
MethodB
EffectivestressMohrCoulombMethodusingcu andu=0
Itforcesthesoiltofailataspecifiedundrainedshearstrength.
RealSoil
ElasticSoil
Kf
ESP
TSP
porp
MohrCoulombModel
WongKaiSin
Kf
2cu
2cu
ESP
TSP
porp
14
November2009
MohrCoulombModel
NicollHighway ResultsofUndrainedAnalysisusingMethodB
Measured
Computedusing MethodB
MohrCoulombModel
15
CanMethodA beusedforOverconsolidatedClay?
(13)f
'
u=0
cu
Thissitehasa
constantcu.
CU
c'
A B C
UU
'
ForagivenlayerofOCClay,itunderestimates cu atlow
stressandoverestimates itathighstress.
MohrCoulombModel
WongKaiSin
16
November2009
MohrCoulombModel
UsingMethodAforUndrainedAnalysisinOCClay
ElasticSoil
RealSoil
q
Kf
2cu
Kf
2 u
2c
Uf
ESP
Uf
TSP
ESP
TSP
porp
porp
1.MakesurethemeasuredstresspathissimilartothatofElasticSoil.
2.Dividethestratumintosublayerswithdifferentcandforeachlayer.
3.Computecu fromcandforeachlayer.Makesurethevaluesarereasonable.
MohrCoulombModel
17
UsingMohrCoulombmodelforUndrainedAnalysis
MethodA c' and' produceswrong cu forNCclay,
butitmayproducecorrectcu forOCclay
Method B orC
MethodB
or C ForcesPlaxis
Forces Plaxis tousespecifiedc
to use specified cu
Method A
Method B
Method C
Stress Type
Effective
Effective
Total
Strength
cand
cu and u
cu and u
M d l
Modulus
Eu
Poissons Ratio
= 0.35
u = 0.495
Ko or Kot
Ko
Ko
Kot
MohrCoulombModel
WongKaiSin
18
November2009
MohrCoulombModel
CanMCmodelsimulateundrainedbehaviour ofclay?
Plastic
Elasticplastic
Elastic
Inelastic
1. Itproducesthecorrectstrengthwithcu specified.
2. Itcannotsimulatenonlinearandinelasticbehaviour.
3. Itmaynotgeneratereliableporepressureresponse.
MohrCoulombModel
19
CanMCmodelgenerate
accuratedeflectionprofilesat
everystageofexcavation?
ConstantE
Wall Deflection (mm)

0
40
60
80
100
0
5
Depth (m )
1
2
3
4
20
10
15
20
25
30
MohrCoulombModel
WongKaiSin
20
10
November2009
MohrCoulombModel
Atearlystageofexcavation,
MohrCoulomb, LinearE larger
Hyperbolic, NonlinearE smaller
Et
MohrCoulombModel
21
Atfinalstageofexcavation,
MohrCoulomb,LinearE smaller
Hyperbolic,NonlinearE larger
Linear
Et
Nonlinear
MohrCoulombModel
WongKaiSin
22
11
November2009
MohrCoulombModel
MohrCoulomb
Eu/cu ~100to500
ConstantE
Conclusion
M C model may not
MCmodelmaynot
producegoodmatchat
everystageofexcavation.
AdvancedSoilModel
MohrCoulombModel
23
HowreliablearetheresultsgeneratedbytheMCmodel?
Fill
Soft Marine Clay

SoftMarineClay
50
100
150
V,MAX=33mm
H,MAX =28mm
35
Isthemodeofdeformationreasonable?
MohrCoulombModel
WongKaiSin
24
12
November2009
MohrCoulombModel
ResultsusingHyperoblicModel
Fill
Soft Marine Clay

SoftMarineClay
V,MAX=72mm
50
100
150
H,MAX =59mm
= 59 mm
35
Isthemodeofdeformationreasonable?
MohrCoulombModel
25
Linear
vs
NonLinear
0
50
SoftMarineClay
100
150
35
35
MohrCoulombModel
WongKaiSin
Fill
50
100
150
26
13
November2009
MohrCoulombModel
Checkplasticpointsandrelativeshearstress!
Fill
SoftMarineClay
Lessonlearned:
Correctanalysismaynotproducecorrectresults.
MohrCoulombModel
27
LinearvsNonLinearModel
Mohr CoulombModel
RealSoilBehaviour
E3
E4
E2
E1
ConstantE
Youmustunderstandtheshortcomingsofthesoilmodelused!
MohrCoulombModel
WongKaiSin
28
14
November2009
MohrCoulombModel
UsingMethodBatReclaimedSite
Fill
Soft
Marine
Clay
SandySilt
y
MethodBisaneffective
stress method.
stressmethod.
Ko =1 sin'
Ifclayisstillconsolidating,
thecomputedrelativeshear
stresswillbe>1,i.e.theclay
is in failure state prior to
isinfailurestatepriorto
excavation.
MohrCoulombModel
29
UsingeffectiveKo atasitestillundergoingconsolidation
Plastic
points
MohrCoulombModel
WongKaiSin
30
15
November2009
MohrCoulombModel
MethodB(cu u)andKo (1sin)

105
100
Effectiveoverburdenpressure
R educed L
Level (m)
95
Fill
90
85
80
75
S ft
Soft
Marine
Clay
Current
effective
stress
70
65
60
SandySilt
55
50
0
100
200
300
400
500
Current Effective Stress (kPa)
AtA,('V 'H)='V (1 Ko)=74 kPa

AtB,('V 'H)='V (1 Ko)=37 kPa
Currentcu =22kPa
(1 3)f =2cu =44 kPa
MohrCoulombModel
31
Needtosetthecorrectinitialstresses!
Fill
Soft
Marine
Clay
SandySilt
Checkplasticpointsaftergeneratingtheinitialstresses!
MohrCoulombModel
WongKaiSin
32
16
November2009
WongKaiSin
MohrCoulombModel
MohrCoulombModel
33
MohrCoulombModel
34
17
November2009
MohrCoulombModel
StressDependentBehaviour ofSoilunderDrainedCondition
MohrCoulombModel
35
StressPathsinanElasticMedium
Ko
1 3
F
A
E QuestionableZone
E
Questionable Zone
F DangerZone
3
MohrCoulombModel
WongKaiSin
36
18
November2009
MohrCoulombModel
TypicalStressPathsinExcavation
A
B
B
A
MohrCoulombModel
37
StressPathinZoneFunder DrainedCondition
rubber
soil
1(%)
v(%)
MohrCoulombModel
WongKaiSin
38
19
November2009
MohrCoulombModel
StressPathinZoneEunderDrainedCondition
1=300
3=300
MohrCoulombModel
39
Adrainedanalysiscanproduceincorrectresultsunder
certainstresspath.
Whichoneiscorrect?
A
B
Measured
Computed
Lessonlearned:
Correctanalysismaynotproducecorrectresults!
MohrCoulombModel
WongKaiSin
40
20
November2009
MohrCoulombModel
SomeproblemsmaybesensitivetoPoissonsRatio
c=5kPa
-20
20
40
60
80
100
=35o
5
E=8000kPa
H=9m
=0.4
Mmax ,kNm/m
298
477
Strut 1, kN/m
77
114
Strut 2,
2 kN/m
226
335
Strut 3, kN/m
163
178
D e p th (m )
=0.2
10
=0.4
Pois. Ratio = 0.4

Pois. Ratio = 0.2
=0.2
15
20
25
30
Lessonlearned:
Drainedanalysiscanproducemanysurprises.
MohrCoulombModel
41
CanMCmodelsimulatedrainedbehaviour ofsoil?
1. Itgivescorrectstrength f =c+tan
2. Modulusisnotstressdependent.
3. Itcannotsimulatenonlinearandinelasticbehaviour.
4. Itmayproducewrongresponseincertainstresspath.
5. ResultsmaybesensitivetoPoissonsratio.
MohrCoulombModel
WongKaiSin
42
21
November2009
MohrCoulombModel
CanMCmodelsimulatedrainedbehaviour ofsoil?
Plastic
6. Itmaynotproducecorrect
porepressureresponse.
Elastic
WongKaiSin
7. Whenusingc'' in
consolidationanalysis,it
maygeneratethewrong
undrainedstrengthat
endofconstruction.
8 There
8.
Thereisnodilationuntil
is no dilation until
afterthesoilreachesfailure.
MohrCoulombModel
43
MohrCoulombModel
44
22
November 2009
Excavation Design
Designing Temporary Work

Design &
Analysis
Instrumentation
Monitoring
Construction
Control
Designing Temporary Work is a Continuous Process

Final Design
Initial Design
g
(Working Drawings)
Excavation
Start
(As-Built)
Finish
Excavation Design
Types of Analysis in TERS Design

1. Analysis for preliminary design
2 Analysis for working design to be
2.
adopted in construction
3. Back-analysis
4. Re-analysis
Prelim.
Design
Working
Design
Start
Excavation Design
Wong Kai Sin
Back-Analysis & Re-analysis
Excavation
Final Design
(As-Built)
Finish
2
November 2009
Excavation Design
Analysis for preliminary design

To assess feasibility of proposed
TERS configuration and construction
sequence.
To assess effect of excavation on
surrounding structures
To conduct analysis using moderately
conservative design parameters
Excavation Design
Analysis for working or Final design

to be adopted in construction
To conduct sensitivity studies assessing
the effect of variable uncertainties
To finalise the strut forces and wall
bending moments for structural design
To assess the risk of damage to adjacent
structures
Excavation Design
Wong Kai Sin
November 2009
Excavation Design
Back-Analysis during Construction

To be carried out when the field
performance is much better or worse
than anticipated.
anticipated
To calibrate the design parameters
against field measurements
Wall Deflection (m m )
0
20
40
60
80
100
0
5
Computed
Depth (m)
10
15
Measured
20
25
30
Excavation Design
Re-Analysis during Construction

To be carried out after back-analysis
To assess potential final outcome using
calibrate design
g parameters
p
To revise the design where appropriate
Wall Deflection (m m )
Wall Deflection (m m)
0
20
40
60
80
100
Measured
100
120
15
20
Back-Analyzed
Wong Kai Sin
80
10
Depth (m)
Depth (m )
Computed
Design
20
Excavation Design
60
15
40
10
20
25
25
30
30
November 2009
Excavation Design
Overview of Design Process

1. Site investigation
2. Pre
Pre-construction
construction survey
3. Evaluation of soil conditions
4. Selection of TERS configuration
5. Assessment of system stability
6. Preparation for FEA
7 Assessment of computed output
7.
Excavation Design
Design Step 1: Site Investigation
Plan View
1.
Site investigation
2.
Pre-construction
survey
3.
Evaluation of soil
conditions
4.
Selection of TERS
configuration
5
5.
Assessment of
system stability
6.
Preparation for FEA
7.
Assessment of
computed output
Sectional View
Designer must be actively involved in the site investigation.

Get the best S.I. company to do the job!
Do enough borings and CPTs.
Excavation Design
Wong Kai Sin
November 2009
Excavation Design
2. Pre-Construction Survey
1.
Site investigation
To check pre-existing conditions

of surrounding structures
2.
Pre-construction
survey
3.
Evaluation of soil
conditions
Things you can see ..
4.
Selection of TERS
configuration
Cracks
5.
Assessment of
system stability
Patches under new paint
6.
Preparation for FEA
7.
Assessment of
computed output
Settlement of aprons & driveway

Constructions in the vicinity
A comprehensive pre-con survey provides the designer

with a proper perspective of the surrounding and issues
that must be considered in the design.
Wong Kai Sin
Excavation Design
Excavation Design
10
November 2009
Excavation Design
Pre-Construction Survey Pre-existing Conditions

Things you cant see ..
Ongoing movements
Seasonal fluctuations
Ground settlement profile
Invest in
Instrumentation
Settlement marks
Paper
P
prisms
i
Water standpipes
Inclinometers
Excavation Design
11
1.
Site investigation
2.
Things to check ..
Pre-construction
survey
3.
Fill thickness and variations
Evaluation of soil
conditions
4.
Selection of TERS
configuration
Soft clay thickness and variations
5.
Assessment of
system stability
State of consolidation of soft clay
6.
Preparation for FEA
7.
Assessment of
computed output
3. Evaluation of Soil Conditions
Depth to hard stratum & variations

Ground water table
Fill
Soft
Marine
Clay
Stiff
Silty
Clay
Dense Silt
Sand
Excavation Design
Wong Kai Sin
12
November 2009
Excavation Design
Design Soil Profile & Parameters

Fill
Upper Marine Clay
Intermediate Stiff Clay
Lower Marine Clay
Old Alluvium
Extract only the reliable facts from Factual Report.

Is the soil condition uniform? Can we use half mesh?
Excavation Design
13
Example on Idealised Soil Profile
Worst soil
condition
ABH-32
ABH-30 Instrumented
section
M3010
AC 3
AC-3
ABH-84
ABH-31
Soil Profile at ABH-32 adopted in Original Design

Excavation Design
Wong Kai Sin
14
November 2009
Excavation Design
Example on Soil Profile -- Half-mesh based on ABH-32
Fill
E upper
RL (m)
102.
9
98.2
96.4
UM
C
F2 upper
85.6
83.4
LMC
JGP1
68.3
JGP2
E lower
F2 lower
OA N = 35
OA N =
72
Excavation Design
63.2
61.
6
57.
5
53.
8 15
Example on Soil Profile

Full-mesh at Instrumented Section
ABH-84
M3010
Fill
Fill
UMC
UMC
F2 upper
F2 upper
RL (m)
85.4
LMC
LMC
JGP1
LMC
69 4
69.4
JGP2
F2 lower
63.7
61.2
59.2
72.1
F2
JGP3
F2 lower
OA N = 20
OA N = 30
66.8
64.7
OA N = 20
OA N = 30
OA N = 70
60.0
OA N = 100
OA N = 70
55.0
Excavation Design
Wong Kai Sin
16
November 2009
Excavation Design
Example -- Results can be very sensitive to variations in soil profile

C
Cross-Over at
Newton MRT Station
B
A
Excavation Design
C
17
Results can be very sensitive to minor variations in soil profile

Cross-Over at Newton MRT Station
B
A
Excavation Design
Wong Kai Sin
18
November 2009
Excavation Design
Results can be very sensitive to minor variations in soil profile

Cross-Over at Newton MRT Station
Excavation Design
Design Step 4:
Selection of TERS
19
1.
Site investigation
2.
Pre-construction
survey
3.
Evaluation of soil
conditions
4.
Selection of TERS
configuration
Site constraints
5
5.
Assessment of
system stability
Dimensions
6.
Preparation for FEA
7.
Assessment of
computed output
We need to know
Adjacent buildings
MRT & CST tunnels
h,max allowable?
Slab elevations
Ramp locations
Excavation Design
Wong Kai Sin
20
10
November 2009
Excavation Design
Preliminary Design Configuration
Wall type & size

Penetration depth
Strut size and spacing
This is where
experience
comes in!
JGP/DCM slab thickness

Preloading
Excavation Design
21
Need to Establish the Excavation Sequence
Excavation Design
Wong Kai Sin
22
11
November 2009
Excavation Design
Design Step 5:
Basic Stability Checks
1.
Site investigation
2.
Pre-construction
survey
3.
Evaluation of soil
conditions
4.
Selection of TERS
configuration
5
5.
Assessment of
system stability
Before conducting FEA, check

Basal Heave Stability
Uplift or Blowout Stability
6.
Preparation for FEA
7.
Assessment of
computed output
Toe Kick-in Stability
Excavation Design
Basal Heave Stabillity
23
Which method should

we use?
Terzaghi
Bjerrum & Eide
Eide et al.
Tschebotarioff
Goh
Chang
Wong and Goh
O'Rourke
Su et al.
Ukritchon et al.
Plaxis
Does FOS1 mean

failure?
Excavation Design
Wong Kai Sin
24
12
November 2009
Excavation Design
Uplift Stability
B
Fill
E
UMC
F2
Hw
LMC
W=dB
R=cud
E / F2
U = w Hw B
Sand
W + 2R
Fs = ---------------U
Check permeability &

connectivity of sand layer!
Excavation Design
25
Toe Kick-in Stability
La
Lp
Pp
Pa
How do we check toe stability?

Excavation Design
Wong Kai Sin
26
13
November 2009
Excavation Design
1.
Site investigation
2.
Pre-construction
survey
3.
Evaluation of soil
conditions
1. Selection of software
4.
Selection of TERS
configuration
2 Selection of soil models

2.
5
5.
3. Selection of type of analysis
Assessment of
system stability
6.
Preparation for FEA
7.
Assessment of
computed output
Design Step 6:
Preparation for FEA
4. Evaluation of soil parameters

5. Generation of FE mesh
6. Preparation of data input
Plaxis?
Mohr-Coulomb?
Undrained?
Total stress?
Excavation Design
Design Step 7:
Assessment of
Computed Output
Tons of data can be generated
with a few clicks.
But what are the relevant ones?
27
1.
Site investigation
2.
Pre-construction
survey
3.
Evaluation of soil
conditions
4.
Selection of TERS
configuration
5
5.
Assessment of
system stability
6.
Preparation for FEA
7.
Assessment of
computed output
Generating thick reports with not-soimportant graphs reflects badly on the

engineer. It is a reflection of he/she
not knowing whats important!
Excavation Design
Wong Kai Sin
28
14
November 2009
Excavation Design
What are the relevant results?

Relevant Results
Wall deflections
Ground settlement
Pore pressure
Strut forces
Wall moment and shear
Plastic points
Displacement vector plots
Excavation Design
29
Interpretation of Computed Output

Check Mode of Deformation
Expected
Unexpected
Is the mode of deformation reasonable?

Excavation Design
Wong Kai Sin
30
15
November 2009
Excavation Design
Interpretation of Computed Output

Check extend of soil yielding
Plastic point plot

Excavation Design
Plastic Points
Excavation Design
Wong Kai Sin
31
Relative Shear
32
16
November 2009
Excavation Design
Plastic points in JGP/DCM layer
Residual
stress
Lesson learned:
Plastic point and relative shear plots provide insight to
the extend of soil yield and overall stability of the system.
Excavation Design
33
Plot wall deflections for construction control

Deflection Profiles
Max. Wall Deflection
computed
measured
Excavation Design
Wong Kai Sin
34
17
November 2009
Excavation Design
Change in Pore Pressure with Excavation Depth
Excavation Design
35
Ground Settlement at
End of Excavation
Groun
nd Settlement (mm)
50
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
-50
-100
-150
-200
Distance (m)
Excavation Design
Wong Kai Sin
36
18
November 2009
Excavation Design
Plot ground settlement vs excavation depth at selected locations
50.0
Settlement (mm)
0.0
5/24/02
9/1/02
12/10/02
3/20/03
6/28/03
10/6/03
1/14/04
4/23/04
-50.0
-100.0
-150.0
-200.0
-250.0
-300.0
Excavation Design
37
Plot maximum strut forces with depth
RL (m)
Fill
Fill
MC
MC
F2
F2
Computed
85.4
Measured
MC
MC
JGP
LMC
69 4
69.4
JGP
F2
63.7
61.2
59.2
72.1
F2
F2
OA (20)
OA (30)
66.8
64.7
OA (20)
OA (30)
OA (70)
60.0
OA (100)
OA (70)
55.
Excavation Design
Wong Kai Sin
38
19
November 2009
Excavation Design
Plot development of strut forces during excavation

Strut Force (kN)
S1
De
epth below ground (m)
S1
S1
Excavation Design
39
Bending Moment at Different Stages of Excavation

1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
Excavation Design
Wong Kai Sin
40
20
November 2009
Excavation Design
Displacement Vectors Showing Movements at End of Excavation
Excavation Design
41
Displacement Vector Plot after Strength (-c) Reduction Analysis

FOS=1.30
False alarm?
Excavation Design
Wong Kai Sin
42
21
November 2009
Excavation Design
Are the computed wall deflections acceptable?
Excavation Design
43
Comparison of Strut Forces with

Published Apparent Pressure Diagrams
Pecks Apparent Earth Pressure Diagrams (1969)
CIRIA
CIRIAss Characteristic Pressure Diagrams (1996)
Local Experiences on Apparent Pressure Diagrams
Excavation Design
Wong Kai Sin
44
22
November 2009
Excavation Design
Mohr-Coulomb model Cant match all stages of excavation!
E3
E
1
Constant E

0
20
40
60
80
100
1
2
3
4
Depth (m )
5
10
15
20
25
30
Excavation Design
45
Sand
Sensitivity Study to
Finalise Design
Marine
Clay
JGP
Old
Alluvium
Surcharge
10 and 20 kPa
Soil Modulus (Eu/cu)
300 and 200
Over-excavation
0.5 and 1 m
JGP Thickness
1.5 and 1.0 m
JGP modulus
150 and 100 MPa
Wall stiffness
1.0EI and 0.7EI
Modelling of bored piles
Included and excluded
Preload
100, 50 and 0%
Excavation Design
Wong Kai Sin
46
23
Wong Kai Sin
Excavation Design
ov
20
se
kP
a
ca
E=
20
0C
ha
rg
e
u
er
ex
ca
v.
JG
P
(
E(
1.
JG
0m
P)
)
=
10
0M
Pa
Pr
el
oa
d
50
%
B
0
or
.7
EI
ed
D
pi
-W
le
al
no
l
tm
od
el
le
d
N
o
pr
el
oa
d
rc
er
en
c
1.
0m
Su
R
ef
Bending Momen
nt (kNm/m)
ef
er
en
ce
Su
ca
rc
se
ha
rg
e
20
kP
a
E=
20
1.
0C
0m
u
ov
er
ex
ca
v.
JG
P
(1
E(
.0
JG
m
P)
)
=
10
0M
Pa
Pr
el
oa
d
50
%
B
0.
or
7E
ed
ID
pi
-W
le
al
no
l
tm
od
el
le
d
N
o
pr
el
oa
d
Deflection
n (mm)
November 2009
Excavation Design
Sensitivity Study on Wall Deflection
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
Excavation Design
Design H,max = 200 mm

47
Sensitivity Study on Wall Bending Moment
5000
4500
4000
3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
Design Mmax = 3400 kNm/m
48
24
Wong Kai Sin
Excavation Design
rc
ha
e
20
en
ce
rg
fe
r
ca
se
1.
kP
a
E=
20
0m
0C
ov
u
er
ex
c
J G av .
P
E(
(1
JG
.0
P)
m
)
=
10
0M
Pr
Pa
el
oa
d
Bo
50
0.
re
%
7E
d
pi
ID
le
-W
no
al
tm
l
od
el
N o l ed
pr
el
oa
d
Su
Re
S trut loa d (kN/m )
1.
0m
E=
20
0C
u
ov
er
ex
ca
v.
JG
P
(1
E(
.0
JG
m
P)
)
=
10
0M
Pa
Pr
el
oa
d
50
%
B
0.
or
7E
ed
ID
pi
-W
le
al
no
l
tm
od
el
le
d
N
o
pr
el
oa
d
R
ef
er
en
ce
Su
ca
rc
se
ha
rg
e
20
kP
a
Shear Forc
ce (kN/m)
November 2009
Excavation Design
Sensitivity Study on Wall Shear Forces
3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
Excavation Design
Design Vmax = 2200 kN/m

49
Sensitivity Study - Maximum Strut Load (S1)
500
450
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
Design S1 = 420 kN/m
50
25
Wong Kai Sin
Excavation Design
Bo
re
pi
le
no
No
el
oa
el
le
pr
od
al
50
Pa
-W
0M
ID
oa
10
v.
0m
ca
0C
se
kP
(1
.
ex
7E
el
tm
0.
Pr
JG
P)
20
ca
E=
20
er
rg
en
ce
ov
ha
0m
rc
fe
r
E(
JG
1.
Su
Re
S trut load (kN/m )
Bo
r
ed
pi
le
10
oa
el
le
d
all
%
-W
el
od
pr
tm
ID
50
)
Pa
m
0M
.0
0C
ca
v
(1
ad
7E
lo
No
no
0.
Pr
e
JG
P
ex
20
kP
a
ca
se
20
E=
ov
er
GP
)
0m
nc
ge
re
ar
fe
ch
E(
J
1.
Su
r
Re
Strut load ((kN/m)
November 2009
Excavation Design
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
Excavation Design

51
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
52
26
Wong Kai Sin
Excavation Design
or
ed
pi
N
o
al
l
pr
el
oa
d
ll e
d
-W
50
od
e
ID
ad
Pa
.0
m
(1
10
0
el
o
0.
7E
Pr
P)
xc
av
20
0C
er
e
JG
ov
no
t
JG
le
E(
1.
0m
se
kP
ca
20
E=
rg
e
re
nc
e
ha
ef
e
Su
rc
Strut load (kN/m )
or
ed
rc
pi
-W
%
al
l
50
Pa
od
el
le
d
o
pr
el
oa
d
tm
ID
ad
.0
m
M
(1
u
xc
av
10
0
el
o
0.
7E
Pr
P)
no
JG
le
E(
er
e
JG
ov
20
0C
se
kP
ca
20
E=
rg
e
re
nc
e
ha
ef
e
1.
0m
Su
Strut load (kN/m )
November 2009
Excavation Design
1000
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
Excavation Design
53
600
500
400
300
200
100
54
27
November 2009
Excavation Design
Best Estimates and Design Values

Best
Estimates
Design
Values
based on
Sensitivity
St d
Study
Deflection
mm
168
200
Moment
kNm/m
2980
3400
Shear
kN/m
2065
2200
Strut S1
Force
kN/m
417
420
Strut
St
ut S2
S
Force
o ce
kN/m
/
771
780
80
Strut S3
Force
kN/m
929
960
Strut S4
Force
kN/m
836
880
Strut S5
Force
kN/m
474
550
Diaphragm
Wall
Excavation Design
55
Elevation (m)
Elevation (m)
Bending Moment and Shear Forces at Various Stages
3000
-2000
-1000
1000
2000
Bending moment (kN.m/m)
Bending Moment (kNm/m)

Excavation Design
Wong Kai Sin
3000
4000
000
-1000
1000
2000
3000
Shear force (kN/m)
Shear Force (kN/m)

56
28
November 2009
Excavation Design
From the results of sensitivity studies

studies, we
can proceed to finalize the design:
Wall design
Strut design
Waler/stiffer design
Set alert levels
Instrumentation plan
Contingency plan
Design drawings
Excavation Design
57
Analysis of Control Section for Construction Control

RL (m)
Fill
E
Fill
E
UMC
UMC
F2 upper
F2 upper
Wall deflection profiles

85.4
Wall bending moments

LMC
69.4
F2
lower
61.2
59.2
Deflection vs Excav. depth

Strut forces
LMC
LMC
63.7
Use best estimated

parameters to compute:
F2
F2 lower
OA N = 20
OA N = 30
72.1
Wall shear forces

66.8
64 7
64.7
OA N = 20
OA N = 30
OA N = 70
OA N = 70
60.0
OA N = 100
Ground settlement
Pore pressures
55.0
Results are to be compared with field measurements.

Excavation Design
Wong Kai Sin
58
29
November 2009
Excavation Design
How reliable is your design?
sand
Benchmarking
Exercise in
Germany
Excavation Design
59
Benchmarking
Exercise in
Germany
Measurement
Five worst results

were OMITTED!
Excavation Design
Wong Kai Sin
60
30
November 2009
Excavation Design
Prediction Exercise in Singapore

Maximum Wall Deflection
vs
Excavation Level
102
100
Elevation Level (RL in m)

E
98
96
94
92
90
88
86
84
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Maximum Wall Deflection (mm)
Excavation
Particpant # 7
Particpant # 3
Particpant # 12
Particpant # 14
Design
Particpant # 10
Particpant # 9
Particpant # 6
Particpant # 12
Particpant # 1
Particpant # 8
Particpant # 13
Measured
Particpant # 5
Particpant # 11
Particpant # 4
61
Design vs As-Built Construction Sequence

As-Built
Excavation Design
Wong Kai Sin
Design
62
31
November 2009
Excavation Design
OverExcavation
(Clough & ORouke, 1990)
Excavation Design
63
Excessive Surcharge
q = 20 kPa
Excavation Design
Wong Kai Sin
64
32
November 2009
Excavation Design
Dont be over-confident about your analysis!
Be prepared to face a few surprises.
Implement Observational Method diligently.
If in doubt, get a second opinion.
Wong Kai Sin
Excavation Design
65
Excavation Design
66
33

Wong Design Analysis Deep Excavations Session03

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Wong Design Analysis Deep Excavations Session03

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

November2009

How to reduce wall deflection

Can a elastic soil simulate undrained behaviour of clay?

Can a elastic soil simulate undrained behaviour of clay?

c' 'overpredictedcu !!!

100 120 140 160

DoesMethodA alwaysoverestimatecu forNCclay?

Wall Deflection (mm)

Soft Marine Clay

Soft Marine Clay

MethodB(cu u)andKo (1sin)

Current Effective Stress (kPa)

AtA,('V 'H)='V (1 Ko)=74 kPa

Pois. Ratio = 0.4

Designing Temporary Work

Designing Temporary Work is a Continuous Process

Types of Analysis in TERS Design

Wong Kai Sin

Back-Analysis & Re-analysis

Analysis for preliminary design

Analysis for working or Final design

Wong Kai Sin

Back-Analysis during Construction

Re-Analysis during Construction

Wong Kai Sin

Overview of Design Process

Design Step 1: Site Investigation

Preparation for FEA

Designer must be actively involved in the site investigation.

Wong Kai Sin

To check pre-existing conditions

Things you can see ..

Patches under new paint

Preparation for FEA

Settlement of aprons & driveway

A comprehensive pre-con survey provides the designer

Wong Kai Sin

Pre-Construction Survey Pre-existing Conditions

Fill thickness and variations

Soft clay thickness and variations

State of consolidation of soft clay

Preparation for FEA

3. Evaluation of Soil Conditions

Depth to hard stratum & variations

Wong Kai Sin

Design Soil Profile & Parameters

Upper Marine Clay

Intermediate Stiff Clay

Lower Marine Clay

Extract only the reliable facts from Factual Report.

Example on Idealised Soil Profile

Soil Profile at ABH-32 adopted in Original Design

Wong Kai Sin

Example on Soil Profile -- Half-mesh based on ABH-32

Example on Soil Profile

Wong Kai Sin

Example -- Results can be very sensitive to variations in soil profile

Results can be very sensitive to minor variations in soil profile

Wong Kai Sin

Results can be very sensitive to minor variations in soil profile

Preparation for FEA

Wong Kai Sin

Preliminary Design Configuration

Wall type & size