Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
ULSDesign&StrutForces
MajorDesignConsiderationsinDeepExcavations
Struttingsystemfailure
WongKaiSin
November2009
ULSDesign&StrutForces
Overall Stability
ULSDesign&StrutForces
UpliftInstabilityorBlowoutFailure
Fill E UMC F2 LMC
E/F2
Sand
1. Whatisthepermeabilityofthesand?
ULSDesign&StrutForces
2. Isthereafreesupplyofwater?
WongKaiSin
November2009
ULSDesign&StrutForces
BlowoutFailure
Forverylongexcavation:
B
T Bd+2cu d Fs= w h B hB
T
R R
ULSDesign&StrutForces
PipinginSand
Pipingisaphenomenonofwaterrushingupthroughpipe shaped Piping is a phenomenon of water rushing up through pipeshaped channelsduetoupwardseepageunderhighgradient.Itcanlead tototalcollapseofthesystem.Sufficientpenetrationofsheetpile mustbeusedtolengthentheseepagepathandtoreducethe hydraulicgradient.
ULSDesign&StrutForces 6
WongKaiSin
November2009
ULSDesign&StrutForces
PenetrationDepth againstPiping
(Teng,1962) Fs=1.5
ULSDesign&StrutForces
BasalHeaveStability
qo qult
Whenqo >qult,failureinimminent.
ULSDesign&StrutForces 8
WongKaiSin
November2009
ULSDesign&StrutForces
Whichmethodshould weuse?
Terzaghi Bjerrum&Eide Eideetal. Tschebotarioff Goh Chang WongandGoh O'Rourke Suetal. Ukritchonetal. Plaxis
DoesFOS1meanfailure?
ULSDesign&StrutForces 9
MethodsofAnalysis
ULSDesign&StrutForces
10
WongKaiSin
November2009
ULSDesign&StrutForces
TerzaghisMethod
(Terzaghi,1943)
ULSDesign&StrutForces
11
Terzaghis Method
HardStratum
ULSDesign&StrutForces
12
WongKaiSin
November2009
ULSDesign&StrutForces
ModificationtoTerzaghisMethod
ULSDesign&StrutForces
13
BjerrumandEidesmethod(1956)
cu Nc FS = -------------H+q
ULSDesign&StrutForces
14
WongKaiSin
November2009
ULSDesign&StrutForces
ULSDesign&StrutForces
15
Eideetal.sMethod(1972)
ULSDesign&StrutForces
16
WongKaiSin
November2009
ULSDesign&StrutForces
ULSDesign&StrutForces
17
ULSDesign&StrutForces
18
WongKaiSin
November2009
ULSDesign&StrutForces
ULSDesign&StrutForces
19
ULSDesign&StrutForces
20
WongKaiSin
10
November2009
ULSDesign&StrutForces
EffectofDepthtoHardStratum(T)
ULSDesign&StrutForces
21
0.97
ULSDesign&StrutForces 22
WongKaiSin
11
November2009
ULSDesign&StrutForces
Sheetpiles are very flexible. They tend to move along with the soil.
ULSDesign&StrutForces
23
ULSDesign&StrutForces
24
WongKaiSin
12
November2009
ULSDesign&StrutForces
ULSDesign&StrutForces
25
EffectofWallPenetration
(ZhangandZhang,1994)
ULSDesign&StrutForces
26
WongKaiSin
13
November2009
ULSDesign&StrutForces
Method1:
Method2:
ULSDesign&StrutForces
27
ModifiedTerzaghis MethodforDiaphragmWall
(WongandGoh,2001)
ULSDesign&StrutForces
28
WongKaiSin
14
November2009
ULSDesign&StrutForces
ModifiedTerzaghis MethodforDiaphragmWall
(WongandGoh,2001)
ULSDesign&StrutForces
29
ULSDesign&StrutForces
30
WongKaiSin
15
November2009
ULSDesign&StrutForces
Narrow Excavation for all Wall Types Modified Eide et al.s Method
ULSDesign&StrutForces
31
WideExcavationwithSheetpileWall
cuh
cub T
HardStratum
ULSDesign&StrutForces
32
WongKaiSin
16
November2009
ULSDesign&StrutForces
cuh
cud
cud cub
HardStratum
ULSDesign&StrutForces
33
Howimportantistheshapefactor?
ULSDesign&StrutForces
34
WongKaiSin
17
November2009
ULSDesign&StrutForces
BasalHeaveFailureinTaipei(1998)
ULSDesign&StrutForces
35
BasalHeaveFailureinTaipei(1998)
Factor of Safety Method Terzaghi Bjerrum & Eide Wong & Goh
ULSDesign&StrutForces
WongKaiSin
18
November2009
ULSDesign&StrutForces
Whatfactorofsafetyshouldweuse?
ULSDesign&StrutForces
37
HowreliableisthecomputedF.S.?
ULSDesign&StrutForces
38
WongKaiSin
19
November2009
ULSDesign&StrutForces
Whattypeoftestshouldweconducttodeterminecu?
cu
2.
3.
ULSDesign&StrutForces
Case7 SheetpileWall
ULSDesign&StrutForces
40
WongKaiSin
20
November2009
ULSDesign&StrutForces
Case8 DiaphragmWall
ULSDesign&StrutForces
41
Case9 SheetpileWall
ULSDesign&StrutForces
42
WongKaiSin
21
November2009
ULSDesign&StrutForces
ExcavationwithFullPenetrationofWallintoHardStratum
ULSDesign&StrutForces
43
ULSDesign&StrutForces
44
WongKaiSin
22
November2009
ULSDesign&StrutForces
ToeKickinStability
Pp
Scenario1
Pa
Scenario2
v1
v1
5.29cu v1
ULSDesign&StrutForces
5.29cu v1
45
ToeKickinStability
MA =? A
ULSDesign&StrutForces
46
WongKaiSin
23
November2009
ULSDesign&StrutForces
Howtoovercomethenegativenetpressure?
Option1
Option2
A
AddJGPslab
A MA =?
negativenetpressure
ULSDesign&StrutForces
Penetrateintohardstratum
47
Howtoovercomenegativenetpressure?
Option3
Useshorterwall
negativenetpressure
ULSDesign&StrutForces 48
WongKaiSin
24
November2009
ULSDesign&StrutForces
ULSDesign&StrutForces
49
ADeepExcavationin Oslo
(Aas,1985)
30kPa
1.13
ULSDesign&StrutForces
50
WongKaiSin
25
November2009
ULSDesign&StrutForces
ULSDesign&StrutForces
51
BasalHeave
ToeStability
Pp
Pa
ULSDesign&StrutForces
52
WongKaiSin
26
November2009
ULSDesign&StrutForces
Pa &Pf arebasedon
unfactoredstrength:
ToeKickoutStability
M
Lp
Pp
Pa
La
Ppf& Paf are based on factored strength: f &P f arebasedonfactoredstrength: Method4: Ppf Lp >PafLa Method5: Ppf Lp +Mall>PafLa
53
ToeKickoutStability
M
Lp
Pp
Pa
La
WongKaiSin
27
November2009
ULSDesign&StrutForces
A A
ULSDesign&StrutForces
55
D=0,8&17m
ULSDesign&StrutForces
56
WongKaiSin
28
November2009
ULSDesign&StrutForces
Shouldtheoreticalearthpressuresbeusedintheanalysis?
ULSDesign&StrutForces
57
SoilArching&RowesMomentReduction
ULSDesign&StrutForces
58
WongKaiSin
29
November2009
ULSDesign&StrutForces
Net
ULSDesign&StrutForces
59
H=8m
o
=18kN/m3 cu =25kPa
D=8m
Depth (m)
10
12
14
16
ULSDesign&StrutForces
60
WongKaiSin
30
November2009
ULSDesign&StrutForces
H=8m
2
o
=18kN/m3 cu =25kPa
D=8m
Depth (m)
Mo(kNm/m)
10
Theory Sheetpile
12
Theory
Diaphragm
14
16
ULSDesign&StrutForces
61
H=8m
4 6 8 10
o
=18kN/m3 cu =25kPa
D=15m
Depth (m)
12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26
ULSDesign&StrutForces
62
WongKaiSin
31
November2009
ULSDesign&StrutForces
H=8m
o
=18kN/m3 / cu =25kPa
D=15m
Depth (m)
12 14 16 18 20
Theory
22 24 26
ULSDesign&StrutForces
63
Soilstructureinteractionaffects PA &PP
NetEarthPressure(kPa) Passive Pressure (kPa)
-100 -50 0 2 4 6 8 10 0 50 100 150 200
B&DcanaffectPA &PP
B
Depth (m)
12 14 16 18 20
Theory
22 24 26
Analysisbasedonearthpressuretheoriescanleadto unrealisticresults!
ULSDesign&StrutForces 64
WongKaiSin
32
November2009
ULSDesign&StrutForces
Methods1to3are basedonunfactored strength: Method1: Pp L p Fs= Fs = Pa La Method2: Pp Lp +Mall Fs= Pa La Method3: Pp Lp +Mult Fs= Pa La
ULSDesign&StrutForces
ToeKickoutStability
1. Methods1,2andyieldaboutthesameFS becauseMall andMult arenegligiblewhen comparedtotheotherterms. 2. Methods4&5yieldaboutthesameFSforthe 2 Methods 4 & 5 yield about the same FS for the samereasongivenin(1). 3. Ifearthpressuretheoryistobeusedtocompute Pa andPp,all5methodscanbeused. 4. IfPa istobedeterminedfromFEA,onlyMethods 1or3shouldbeused. Methods4&5arebasedonfactoredstrength: Method4: Ppf Lp >PafLa Method5: Ppf Lp +Mall>PafLa
65
Lp
Pp
Pa
La
1. 2.
Iffactorofsafetyagainstbasalheaveisadequate,toestabilityisnot anissue.Noanalysisisnecessary. ComputePa andPp fromearthpressurestheory.IfthecomputedFS isadequatewithoutrequiringexcesspenetrationdepth,nofurther is adequate without requiring excess penetration depth no further analysisisneeded. Iftherequiredpenetrationdepthfrom(1)isexcessive,tryusingPa fromFEA.
3.
ULSDesign&StrutForces
66
WongKaiSin
33
November2009
ULSDesign&StrutForces
ULSDesign&StrutForces
67
LateralEarthPressureinBracedExcavations
WongKaiSin
34
November2009
ULSDesign&StrutForces
CIRIAsCharacteristicPressureDiagramforSand
(CIRIA,1996)
P=0.2H
ULSDesign&StrutForces 69
StrutForcesinStifftoVery StiffClay
(CIRIA,1996)
ULSDesign&StrutForces
70
WongKaiSin
35
November2009
ULSDesign&StrutForces
ULSDesign&StrutForces
71
CIRIAsCharacteristicPressureDiagramforSoftClay
(CIRIA,1996)
SoftClay (Unstablebase)
ULSDesign&StrutForces
72
WongKaiSin
36
November2009
ULSDesign&StrutForces
CIRIAsCharacteristicPressureDiagramforSoftClay
(CIRIA,1996)
FirmClay (stable)
SoftClay (stable)
ULSDesign&StrutForces 73
CIRIAsCharacteristicPressureDiagramforSoftClay
(CIRIA,1996)
ULSDesign&StrutForces
74
WongKaiSin
37
November2009
ULSDesign&StrutForces
StrutForcesbyTributaryareamethod
PA PB PC
ComparisonofAPD SheetpileWall
ULSDesign&StrutForces
76
WongKaiSin
38
November2009
ULSDesign&StrutForces
ComparisonofAPD DiaphragmWall
AreFEresults reliable?
ULSDesign&StrutForces
77
StrutForcesonDiaphragm WallinSand
(Kastner &Lareal,1974)
ULSDesign&StrutForces
78
WongKaiSin
39
November2009
ULSDesign&StrutForces
EffectofWallStiffnessonStrutForces
(Chang&Wong,1996)
x107
ULSDesign&StrutForces
79
EffectofWallStiffnesson StrutForces
(Chang&Wong,1996)
(m=1)
ULSDesign&StrutForces 80
WongKaiSin
40
November2009
ULSDesign&StrutForces
ULSDesign&StrutForces
81
DegreeofRestraint
(CIRIA,1996)
B=StiffClayC=GranularSoilsD=MixedSoils
ULSDesign&StrutForces 82
WongKaiSin
41
November2009
ULSDesign&StrutForces
DegreeofRestraint
(CIRIA,1996)
ULSDesign&StrutForces
83
TemperatureEffecton StrutForces
(Battenetal.,1996)
ULSDesign&StrutForces
84
WongKaiSin
42
November2009
ULSDesign&StrutForces
TemperatureEffecton StrutForces
(Battenetal.,1996)
Tubularsteelprops
ULSDesign&StrutForces
85
ULSDesign&StrutForces
86
WongKaiSin
43
November2009
FiniteElementAnalysis
MajorDesignConsiderationsinDeepExcavations
WhatdoyougetfromFiniteElementAnalysis?
WongKaiSin
November2009
FiniteElementAnalysis
DeformationAnalysisusingFiniteElementPrograms
MethodofAnalysis
Plaxisoffersthefollowingchoicesforanalysisofshortterm performanceofTERSinclay: A. MohrCoulomb:effectivestress,c ,undrained B. B C. D. E. F. G. H. I. J. K. MohrCoulomb:effectivestress,c MohrCoulomb: effective stress cu u,undrained undrained MohrCoulomb:totalstress,cu u,nonporous,undrained MohrCoulomb:effectivestress,c ,consolidation MohrCoulomb:effectivestress,cu u,consolidation SoftClay:effectivestress,c ,undrained SoftClay:effectivestress,c ,consolidation Mod.CamClay:effectivestress,c ,undrained y , , Mod.CamClay:effectivestress,c ,consolidation AdvancedHardening:effectivestress,c ,undrained AdvancedHardening:effectivestress,c ,consolidation
Whichoneshouldweuse?
FiniteElementAnalysis 4
WongKaiSin
November2009
FiniteElementAnalysis
Blessings&cursesofcommercialsoftware
Blessings: Userfriendly User friendly Generatesoutputwithbeautifulplots Givesuserasenseofaccomplishment Curses: Sometimesitabortswithoutsuggestingthe nextcourseofaction t f ti Sometimesitproducespuzzlingresults
FiniteElementAnalysis
Geotechnical problem
User
Faithfulbutnottoo intelligent
FiniteElementAnalysis 6
WongKaiSin
November2009
FiniteElementAnalysis
Advice to Users
1. Attendtrainingcourse! y p 2. Studythemanualanddothetutorialproblems. 3. Donotassumeitwillworkthewayyouthink. 4. Whenindoubt,deviseasimpleproblemandtestout howtheprogramworks. 5. Checkinput mesh,designparameters 6. Studyoutput: Isthemodeofdeformationcorrect? Arethemagnitudesreasonable?
FiniteElementAnalysis 7
2DFiniteElementMethod
FiniteElementAnalysis
WongKaiSin
November2009
FiniteElementAnalysis
FEModelingofanExcavation
Useofhalfmeshbecauseofsymmetry
FiniteElementAnalysis 9
HalfmeshorFullmesh?
HalfMesh
FiniteElementAnalysis
FullMesh
10
WongKaiSin
November2009
FiniteElementAnalysis
NotesonMeshGenerationforFEA
1.Setleftandrightboundariesfarawayfromareaofinterest.
FiniteElementAnalysis
11
EffectofMeshFinenessonWallDeflection
FiniteElementAnalysis
12
WongKaiSin
November2009
FiniteElementAnalysis
Itdependsonthepermeabilityofsoiland durationofconstruction.
FiniteElementAnalysis 13
Effectofpermeabilityonwalldeflection
FiniteElementAnalysis
14
WongKaiSin
November2009
FiniteElementAnalysis
Effectofpermeabilityongroundsettlement
FiniteElementAnalysis
15
Isitimportanttoconductconsolidationanalysisfordeep excavationinclay?
FiniteElementAnalysis
16
WongKaiSin
November2009
FiniteElementAnalysis
CoefficientofPermeabilityk
k (m/s)
Clean gravels
Clean sands
Clays
Drained
Undrained
FiniteElementAnalysis
17
1D(BeamnSpring)AnalysisbyFiniteElementMethod
FiniteElementAnalysis
18
WongKaiSin
November2009
FiniteElementAnalysis
ParametersfortheBeamandSpringModel
Kh = ??? cu =???c
FiniteElementAnalysis
19
Ka &Kp
FiniteElementAnalysis
20
WongKaiSin
10
November2009
FiniteElementAnalysis
CalibrationofSoilModulususing1Dand2DPrograms
EXCAV97 2Dcontinuum HyperbolicModel
RIDO:1D BeamandSpring
Ks /cu =???
FiniteElementAnalysis
Ei /cu =???
21
FiniteElementAnalysis
22
WongKaiSin
11
November2009
FiniteElementAnalysis
ComparisonofResults LavenderStation
FiniteElementAnalysis
23
ComparisonofResults SyedAlwiCondo
FiniteElementAnalysis
24
WongKaiSin
12
November2009
FiniteElementAnalysis
FiniteElementAnalysis
25
LimitationsofBeamandSpringMethod
1. Itignoredtheeffectofwidthonwall deflection. 2.Itignoredtheeffectofclay thicknessonwalldeflection.
FiniteElementAnalysis
26
WongKaiSin
13
November2009
FiniteElementAnalysis
LimitationsofBeamandSpringMethod
1. Itignoredtheeffectofwidthon strutforce. 2.Itignoredtheeffectofclay thicknessonstrutforce.
FiniteElementAnalysis
27
IsEu/cu=200applicabletoallsoilmodelsandprograms?
MOE Building
WALLAP, Mohr Coulomb, Eu/ cu SAGE CRISP Mohr Co lomb Eu/cu CRISP, Coulomb, SAGE CRISP, Hyperbolic, Ei/cu EXCAV97, Hyperbolic, Ei/cu 250 100 300 200 Rochor Complex 250 150 300 200 Syed Alwi Project 300 300 300 200 Lavender Station 300 500 300 200
FiniteElementAnalysis
28
WongKaiSin
14
November2009
FiniteElementAnalysis
MajorShortcomingsof2DAnalysis
Is2Danalysis y appropriate?
I1
Is2DAnalysisappropriateat I1,I2andI3?
I5 I4 I3 (AfterOuetal.,1996) I2
FiniteElementAnalysis
30
WongKaiSin
15
November2009
FiniteElementAnalysis
3DEffectinBraced Excavation
(AfterOuetal.,1996) I5 I4 I3
I1
I2
(I4&I5) FiniteElementAnalysis 31
Whichsectionisclosertoplanestraincondition?
A
L=100m B=100m
B
L=40m B=20m
A PSR=0.91
B PSR=0.90
WongKaiSin
16
November2009
FiniteElementAnalysis
PSR=0.60
PSR=0.83
PSR=0.91
PSR=0.50
B=40m L=60m
PSR=0.42
B=40m L=100m
FiniteElementAnalysis
33
ReductionFactorforH,max dueto3DEffect
(DevelopedbasedondatafromOuetal.,1996)
1 0. 9 0. 0 8 0. 7 PSR 0. 6 0. 5 0. 4 0. 3 0. 2 0. 1 0 0
FiniteElementAnalysis
B=20m
20
40
60 L (m)
80
100
120
34
WongKaiSin
17
November2009
FiniteElementAnalysis
ReductionFactorforH,max dueto3DEffect
(DevelopedbasedondatafromOuetal.,1996)
1. 2
B=80m B=100m
B=60m
B=40m
B=20m
0. 8
PSR
0. 6
L B
0. 4
0. 2
0 0
FiniteElementAnalysis
0. 5
1. 5
2. 5
3. 5
35
L/B
FiniteElementAnalysis
36
WongKaiSin
18