Final Project File
Transcript of Final Project File
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
1/63
KTH AF2611 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING ,ADVANCED COURSE
SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE AND BUILT ENVIRONMENT
DIVISION OF SOIL AND ROCK MECHANICS
Geotechnical Design ReportTemporary Sheet Pile wall Design for a Highway
Project
Yohannes Kiflat 810214-5854
Yohannes Mehari 870110-0573
STOCKHOLM
2012-10-22
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
2/63
Geotechnical Design Report
1
Content
Table of Content ................................................................................................................................................ 1
Objective and Purpose ....................................................................................................................................... 2
Basis for Design and Valid Documents ............................................................................................................. 2
Geology and Ground Condition ........................................................................................................................ 4
Characterstic Values .......................................................................................................................................... 5
Recommendations ............................................................................................................................................. 7
Design ................................................................................................................................................................ 8
Descripiton of Construction ......................................................................................................................... 8
Design Values............................................................................................................................................. 11
Assumptions ............................................................................................................................................... 13
Calculations ................................................................................................................................................ 14
Ultimate Limist State Design (ULS) .......................................................................................................... 14
Serviceability Limit State Design (SLS) .................................................................................................... 38
Control Program .............................................................................................................................................. 58
List of Symbols................................................................................................................................................ 60Appendix ......................................................................................................................................................... 62
References .................................................................................................................................................. 62
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
3/63
Geotechnical Design Report
2
Objective and Purpose
It is a common sight in the modern engineering world to witness elevated bypasses or underpasses
in highway construction. These structures are constructed to reduce the trafficable road demand in
most cities where the available space is limited due to existing important structures. In the
construction of the above stated bypasses or underpasses there is a need for a cut in to the existing
ground (underpasses) or filling in to the existing ground (bypasses). In the case of underpasses there
is a need for a deep excavation work where the depth of the soil is supposed to be retained by an
earth retaining structure. This specific project is concerned with such kind of excavation work for a
road ramp which is part of a bigger highway interchange. Since the depth of excavation is high (8.3
m below the surface) the ground will be unstable and risky as a construction site.
The main objective of this project work is to design a temporary sheet pile wall to support 8, 3 m
deep road side excavation using the ultimate limit state and serviceability limit state design .The
eventual goal is to achieve a safe retaining structure with a maximum deformation of 50 mm. A
suitable work order of notable purpose and efficiency is prepared .Such a work order and design
shall guarantee a safe flow of work with respect to achieving the necessary deformation and safety
requirements of the project.
In performing this design, a geological model for the project is prepared from the available
geological data. This geological model is used to determine geological parameters which can be
used in the analysis part of this project. Using the ultimate limit state design method the strength
parameters necessary for the determination of section sizes and dimensions of the variouscomponents of the temporary retaining structure such as sheet pile section , wale beam, struts and
dowels are calculated. Finally using finite element software (PLAXIS) the deformations at each
level of excavation are checked to comply with the requirement of maximum 50 mm displacement.
To perform the construction a specific work order program is prepared for each excavation stage in
the project. Suitable control points to measure and counter check deformations at each level of
construction are also pointed.
Basis for Design and Valid Documents
The basis for design of this project is as per the Sponthandboken T18:1996 guidelines as presented
in the course AF2609 for the ultimate limit state design where the basic principle is that the acting
forces and moments should be less than the resisting force and moments determined. In this design
guide lines the partial safety factors (m and n) have been used to determine the design values for
the calculations. For this project the structure is designed in safety class 3.
All the appropriate forces acting on the wall of the retaining wall are taken in to consideration.
Moreover, Ground water table is established to act at the top of the dry crust level even though the
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
4/63
Geotechnical Design Report
3
site investigation data points out that it is below the dry crust level. This is done to cater for the
unexpected pore pressures which are entrapped in the upper pockets of the clay from water in the
rainy season.
In specifying the necessary section properties for the sheet pile wall components, manufacturerstables have been used. The reference for these tables is presented in the appendix of this document.
The site location map for this design and the points for core drilling tests are as presented in the
figure below. One wall is considered for design due to symmetry with respect to the opposite side of
the wall.
Fig.1 Location plan
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
5/63
Geotechnical Design Report
4
Geology and Ground Condition
An investigation into the geological formation of the area has been done and tests carried out to find
the different soil layers that exist around the project site. These tests are carried out in different
localities around the projects site. A total of 8 tests were done in 8 different locations.
The tests include both probing tests ( Vim- Machine driven weight sounding test ; Jb-Rock drilling
test; Cpt-cone penetration test ;Hfa-ram sounding test ) and Insitu test (Vb-Vane test).
The results of the geological investigation reveal that in the shallow soil layers fill materials are
predominant with varying layer thickness from 0,8 m to 1,4 m. Below the fill layer a dry crust layer
of varying thickness ranging from 0,4 -1,2 m follows. This dry crust layer rests on a clay deposit of
up 10 m depth. Below this clay layer deposits of sand /sil layer exists with a layer depth between 3-
1,5 m. This friction soil continues to a more firm moraine further down.
The investigation shows that the depth of the bed rock is found between 6- 19 m below the surface
of the ground. Ground water in the soil exists in a magazine in the friction soil beneath the clay and
sometimes the upper fill material. For the design purpose the ground level is taken at the top of the
dry crust level even though the investigation shows that it is located in the upper part of clay and
sometimes on the fill part.
Based on the test results and engineering judgement a more conservative but yet optimal geological
model is developed as shown below in the fig.
Fig.2 Geological Model
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
6/63
Geotechnical Design Report
5
Characteristic Values
The characterstic values for this project are summarized in the table below. The undrained shear
strength for clay varies and has to be corrected. This is done as follows:
The uncorrected undrained shear strength of clay sample test has been collected from the boreholes
of LID_7, LID_3 and RV584. According to the figure below there is a worst and best line for the
undrained shear strength of clay. If we take the best line we may have some failure in the passive
part of the soil.to be conservative with undrained shear strength we have taken a line in between the
worst and best line.hence the dash line in the figure used as corrected undrained shear strength for
this project.
Corrected undrained shear strength where = (0,43/WL)0,45 andCuk = uncorrected shear strength
WL= liquid limit
Fig.3 Corrected Undrained shear Strength
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
undrained
shear strength
undraineds
hearstrength
depth
corrected undrained shear strength
LID_7
LID_3
RV584
corrected
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
7/63
Geotechnical Design Report
6
Loads
Loads from traffic and build traffic shall be applied. The characteristics load from build traffic can
be set 10 kPa. If higher loads exist, like crane load, these should be considered in design. the active
earth pressure in saturated clay should be complemented by hydrostatical pore water pressurethrough the clay layer from at least the upper surface of the clay.
Characteristic Values for the project
Soil type FillDry
crustClay
Sand &
siltMoraine
Internal angle friction (k) 35 32 38
Saturated Unit Weight k (kN/m3) 18 18 17 21 22
Unsaturated Unit Weight k (kN/m3) 18 18 17 18 19
Unit weight of unsaturated k
(kN/m3)18 19 21
Young's modulus Ek (Mpa) 20 6 250*Cuk 15 40
Undrained shear strength Cuk
(Kpa)0 25 16
Table 1. Characteristic Values
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
8/63
Geotechnical Design Report
7
Recommendations
Based on the analysis of the retaining structure both in ultimate limit state (ULS) and the
serviceability limit state (SLS) , the following results and recommendations can be made.
A. Sheet Pile wall
#Msd
(KN m/m)
Wxd
(cm3/m)
Wact
(cm3/m)
t
(mm)Profile
Sheet Pile 314.2 1142. 1405 10 AU 14
B. STRUTSStrut
Nsd
(KN /m)
Msd(KN m/m)
Wel
(cm3/m)
t
(mm)
d
(mm)Profile
Strut 1 396 25.8 328 10 219.1 STEEL TUBE
Strut 2 340.2 20.8 270 8 219.1 STEEL TUBE
Strut 3 327 20.8 270 8 219.1 STEEL TUBE
Strut 4 336 20.8 270 8 219.1 STEEL TUBE
C. WALE BEAMS
Strut
Level
Msd(KN m/m)
Wx(cm
3/m)
Wel(cm
3/m)
t
(mm)
A
(mm2)
Profile
1 132 461 570 15 7808 HEB-2002 113.4 396 426 14 6525 HEB-180
3 109 380 426 14 6525 HEB-180
4 47.3 165 216 12 4296 HEB-140
D. DOWELS
Circular dowels of high strength steel (fy =355 MPa) witha diameter of 90 mm shall be used.
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
9/63
Geotechnical Design Report
8
Design
Description of Construction
The following figures depict specifically what goes on the construction of the project.
1. FIRST EXCAVATION STAGE
Fig.4 Construction stage 1
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
10/63
Geotechnical Design Report
9
2. SECOND EXCAVATION STAGE
Fig.5 Construction stage 2
3. THIRD EXCAVATION
Fig.6 Construction stage 3
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
11/63
Geotechnical Design Report
10
4. FOURTH EXCAVATION
Fig.7 Construction stage 4
5. FINAL EXCAVATION
Fig.8 Construction stage 5
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
12/63
Geotechnical Design Report
11
Design Values
Parital Coefficients
The Partial safety factor for this design are summarized in the table below.
Soil Material
Partial coefficients of soil material
Ultimate limit state (m) serviceability limit state (m)
Existing fill, tan 1.1 1
Existing fill 1.6 1Clay,Cu 1.4 1
Clay,E 1.5 1
Friction material and
moraine( tan)
1.2 1
Friction material and
moraine E
1.2 1
Table 2. Partial Coefficient Soil Materials
Steel Material
Partial coefficent for steel material
Steel Material m
sheet pile 1
wale beam 1
strut 1dowel 1.6
Table 3. Partial Coefficient Steel Material
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
13/63
Geotechnical Design Report
12
Design Results
1. Sheet Pile# Msd kNm/m Wx cm^3/m
Sheet Pile 314,2 1142,5
2. Struts
Strut Nsd Msd (kN/m) Wx cm^3/m
St.1 396 25,8 328
St.2 340,2 20,8 270
St.3 327 20,8 270
St.4 336 20,8 270
3. Wale Beams
Strut Level Msd Wx cm^3/m
1 132 461
2 113,4 396
3 109 380
4 47,3 165
4. Dowel# Nsd Msd Wx cm^3/m
Dowel 308,07 80,1 276
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
14/63
Geotechnical Design Report
13
Assumptions
The following terms are assumed in the design of the temporary sheet pile in the ultimate limit state
(ULS) design approach.
1. A homogenous soil layer is assumed in the design of the temporary retaining structure.2. A horizontal ground surface is assumed when doing the calculations.3. No friction or cohesion between the soil and the sheet pile structure.4. Deformations are high enough that the full active and passive pressures are developed.5. In cohesive soils the active soil pressure is at least equal to the pore water pressure from the
top of the soil layer.
6. The Sheet pile wall is assumed to be symmetric with respect to the other side of the wall andhence one wall is analyzed.
7. Dowel partial safety factor is assumed to be 1.6 as it is for deep excavation.
The following terms are assumed in the design of the temporary sheet pile in the serviceability limit
state design approach.
1. Plain Strain condition is chosen for the analysis of the structure in PLAXIS.2. The analysis is also done in two dimensional analyses where in fact a 3 dimensional analysis
will give more accurate results.
3. Mohor-columb soil failure mode is used in analysis.4. Deformation is high enough that full active and passive pressures are developed.5. Soil wall interaction is taken into account by assuming and doing sensitivity analysis of
different interface values.
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
15/63
Geotechnical Design Report
14
Calculations
Ultimate Limit State Design
The following formulas have been used to calculated the active and passive pressures in the following tables:
Active Pressure
Friction Soil:
( ) Clay :
Passive Pressure :
Friction Soil :
( )
Clay :
The table of calculations for each step of excavation and the respective force distribution for the
calculations of the anchor forces and sheet pile moments are presented below.
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
16/63
1. First Excavation StageActive earth pressure
Soil Profile Level h w q k Cuk k m n Cud d d ka v u v' a
Fill3.8 0.0 9.8 10.0 18.0 35.0 1.1 1.2 0.0 13.6 27.9 0.4 10.0 0.0 10.0 3.6
2.8 1.0 9.8 10.0 18.0 0.0 35.0 1.1 1.2 0.0 13.6 27.9 0.4 23.6 0.0 23.6 8.6
Dry crust2.8 1.0 9.8 10.0 18.0 25.0 0.0 1.4 1.2 14.9 10.7 0.0 1.0 25.0 0.0 25.0 -4.8
1.8 2.0 9.8 10.0 18.0 25.0 0.0 1.4 1.2 14.9 10.7 0.0 1.0 35.7 9.8 25.9 -29.8
Clay
1.8 2.0 9.8 10.0 17.0 16.0 0.0 1.4 1.2 9.5 10.1 0.0 1.0 35.7 9.8 25.9 16.7
0.8 3.0 9.8 10.0 17.0 16.0 0.0 1.4 1.2 9.5 10.1 0.0 1.0 45.8 9.8 36.0 26.8
-0.2 4.0 9.8 10.0 17.0 16.0 0.0 1.4 1.2 9.5 10.1 0.0 1.0 56.0 29.4 26.5 36.9
-4.2 8.0 9.8 10.0 17.0 16.0 0.0 1.4 1.2 9.5 10.1 0.0 1.0 96.4 68.7 27.8 77.4
Sand/Silt
-4.2 8.0 9.8 10.0 21.0 0.0 32.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 14.6 23.5 0.4 96.4 68.7 27.8 80.6
-6.4 10.2 9.8 10.0 21.0 0.0 32.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 14.6 23.5 0.4 128.1 90.0 38.1 106.4
-6.7 10.5 9.8 10.0 21.0 0.0 32.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 14.6 23.5 0.4 132.9 93.2 39.7 110.3
Moraine-6.7 10.5 9.8 10.0 22.0 0.0 38.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 15.3 28.5 0.4 132.9 93.2 39.7 107.3
-8.7 12.5 9.8 10.0 22.0 0.0 38.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 15.3 28.5 0.4 163.4 112.8 50.6 130.7
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
17/63
Geotechnical Design Report
16
Passive Earth Pressure
Soil Profile Level h w q k Cu k m n Cud d d kp vp u v' P a P(netto)
Clay
0.8 0.0 9.8 - 17.0 16.0 0.0 1.4 1.2 9.5 10.1 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 19.0 -20.2 8.5
-0.2 1.0 9.8 - 17.0 16.0 0.0 1.4 1.2 9.5 10.1 0.0 1.0 10.1 9.8 0.3 29.2 -10.4 8.5
-4.2 5.0 9.8 - 17.0 16.0 0.0 1.4 1.2 9.5 10.1 0.0 1.0 50.6 49.1 1.5 69.6 28.8 8.5
Sand/Silt
-4.2 5.0 9.8 - 21.0 0.0 32.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 14.6 23.5 2.3 50.6 49.1 1.5 52.6 80.6 -28.0
-5.2 6.0 10.8 - 21.0 0.0 32.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 14.6 23.5 2.3 65.2 60.0 5.2 72.0 106.4 -34.3-6.7 7.5 9.8 - 21.0 0.0 32.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 14.6 23.5 2.3 87.1 75.0 12.1 103.0 110.3 -7.3
Moraine-6.7 7.5 9.8 - 22.0 0.0 38.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 15.3 28.5 2.8 87.1 75.0 12.1 109.0 107.3 1.8
-8.7 9.5 9.8 - 22.0 0.0 38.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 15.3 28.5 2.8 117.6 95.0 22.6 158.8 130.7 28.1
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
18/63
Geotechnical Design Report
17
Fig.9 Pressure diagram excavation stage 1
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
19/63
Geotechnical Design Report
18
Fig.10 Shear Force Diagram
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
20/63
Geotechnical Design Report
19
2. Second Excavation StageActive earth pressure
Soil Profile Level h w q k Cuk k m n Cud d d ka v u v' a
Fill3.8 0.0 9.8 10.0 18.0 35.0 1.1 1.2 0.0 13.6 27.9 0.4 10.0 0.0 10.0 3.6
2.8 1.0 9.8 10.0 18.0 0.0 35.0 1.1 1.2 0.0 13.6 27.9 0.4 23.6 0.0 23.6 8.6
Dry crust 2.8 1.0 9.8 10.0 18.0 25.0 0.0 1.4 1.2 14.9 10.7 0.0 1.0 25.0 0.0 25.0 -4.81.8 2.0 9.8 10.0 18.0 25.0 0.0 1.4 1.2 14.9 10.7 0.0 1.0 35.7 9.8 25.9 -29.8
Clay
1.8 2.0 9.8 10.0 17.0 16.0 0.0 1.4 1.2 9.5 10.1 0.0 1.0 35.7 9.8 25.9 16.7
-0.2 4.0 9.8 10.0 17.0 16.0 0.0 1.4 1.2 9.5 10.1 0.0 1.0 56.0 29.4 26.5 36.9
-1.2 5.0 9.8 10.0 17.0 16.0 0.0 1.4 1.2 9.5 10.1 0.0 1.0 66.1 39.2 26.9 47.0
-4.2 8.0 9.8 10.0 17.0 16.0 0.0 1.4 1.2 9.5 10.1 0.0 1.0 96.4 68.7 27.8 77.4
Sand/Silt
-4.2 8.0 9.8 10.0 21.0 0.0 32.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 14.6 23.5 0.4 96.4 68.7 27.8 80.6
-6.4 10.2 9.8 10.0 21.0 0.0 32.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 14.6 23.5 0.4 128.1 90.0 38.1 106.4
-6.7 10.5 9.8 10.0 21.0 0.0 32.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 14.6 23.5 0.4 132.9 93.2 39.7 110.3
Moraine-6.7 10.5 9.8 10.0 22.0 0.0 38.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 15.3 28.5 0.4 132.9 93.2 39.7 107.3
-8.7 12.5 9.8 10.0 22.0 0.0 38.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 15.3 28.5 0.4 163.4 112.8 50.6 130.7
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
21/63
Geotechnical Design Report
20
Passive Earth Pressure
Soil Profile Level h w q k Cu k m n Cud d d kp vp u v' P a P(netto)
Clay-1.2 0.0 9.8 - 17.0 16.0 0.0 1.4 1.2 9.5 10.1 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 19.0 57.1 -11.8
-4.2 3.0 9.8 - 17.0 16.0 0.0 1.4 1.2 9.5 10.1 0.0 1.0 30.4 14.7 15.6 49.4 77.4 -11.8
Sand/Silt
-4.23.0 9.8 - 21.0 0.0 32.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 14.6 23.5 2.3 30.4 14.7 15.6 51.0 80.6 -29.6
-5.4 4.2 9.8 - 21.0 0.0 32.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 14.6 23.5 2.3 47.9 26.5 21.4 76.1 106.4 -30.2
-6.7 5.5 9.8 - 21.0 0.0 32.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 14.6 23.5 2.3 66.8 39.2 27.6 103.3 110.3 -7.0
Moraine-6.7 5.5 9.8 - 22.0 0.0 38.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 15.3 28.5 2.8 66.8 39.2 27.6 117.1 107.3 9.8
-8.7 7.5 9.8 - 22.0 0.0 38.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 15.3 28.5 2.8 97.4 58.9 38.5 167.6 130.7 36.8
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
22/63
Geotechnical Design Report
21
Fig.11 Pressure diagram excavation stage 2
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
23/63
Geotechnical Design Report
22
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
24/63
Geotechnical Design Report
23
3. Third Excavation StageActive earth pressure
Soil Profile Level h w q k Cuk k m n Cud d d ka v u v' a
Fill3.8 0.0 9.8 10.0 18.0 0.0 35.0 1.1 1.2 0.0 13.6 27.9 0.4 10.0 0.0 10.0 3.6
2.8 1.0 9.8 10.0 18.0 0.0 35.0 1.1 1.2 0.0 13.6 27.9 0.4 23.6 0.0 23.6 8.6
Dry crust 2.8 1.0 9.8 10.0 18.0 25.0 0.0 1.4 1.2 14.9 10.7 0.0 1.0 25.0 0.0 25.0 -4.81.8 2.0 9.8 10.0 18.0 25.0 0.0 1.4 1.2 14.9 10.7 0.0 1.0 35.7 9.8 25.9 -29.8
Clay
1.8 2.0 9.8 10.0 17.0 16.0 0.0 1.4 1.2 9.5 10.1 0.0 1.0 35.7 9.8 25.9 16.7
-0.2 4.0 9.8 10.0 17.0 16.0 0.0 1.4 1.2 9.5 10.1 0.0 1.0 56.0 29.4 26.5 36.9
-2.2 6.0 9.8 10.0 17.0 16.0 0.0 1.4 1.2 9.5 10.1 0.0 1.0 76.2 49.0 27.2 57.1
-4.2 8.0 9.8 10.0 17.0 16.0 0.0 1.4 1.2 9.5 10.1 0.0 1.0 96.4 68.7 27.8 77.4
Sand/Silt
-4.2 8.0 9.8 10.0 21.0 0.0 32.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 14.6 23.5 0.4 96.4 68.7 27.8 80.6
-4.5 8.3 9.8 10.0 21.0 0.0 32.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 14.6 23.5 0.4 109.7 71.6 38.2 88.0
-6.4 10.2 9.8 10.0 21.0 0.0 32.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 14.6 23.5 0.4 128.1 90.0 38.1 106.4
-6.7 10.5 9.8 10.0 21.0 0.0 32.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 14.6 23.5 0.4 132.9 93.2 39.7 110.3
Moraine
-6.7 10.5 9.8 10.0 22.0 0.0 38.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 15.3 28.5 0.4 132.9 93.2 39.7 107.3
-8.5 12.3 9.8 10.0 22.0 0.0 38.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 15.3 28.5 0.4 160.4 110.9 49.5 128.4
-8.6 12.4 9.8 10.0 22.0 0.0 38.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 15.3 28.5 0.4 161.9 111.8 50.1 129.6
-8.7 12.5 9.8 10.0 22.0 0.0 38.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 15.3 28.5 0.4 162.7 112.3 50.4 130.2
-8.7 12.5 9.8 10.0 22.0 0.0 38.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 15.3 28.5 0.4 163.4 112.8 50.6 130.7
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
25/63
Geotechnical Design Report
24
Passive Earth Pressure
Soil Profile Level h w q k Cu k m n Cud d d kp vp u v' P a P(netto)
Clay-2.2 0.0 9.8 10.0 17.0 16.0 0.0 1.4 1.2 9.5 10.1 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 19.0 57.1 -21.9
-4.2 2.0 9.8 10.0 17.0 16.0 0.0 1.4 1.2 9.5 10.1 0.0 1 .0 20.2 19.6 0.6 39.3 77.4 -21.9
Sand/Silt-4.2 2.0 9.8 - 21.0 0.0 32.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 14.6 23.5 2.3 20.2 19.6 0.6 21.1 80.6 -59.6
-6.7 4.5 9.8 - 21.0 0.0 32.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 14.6 23.5 2.3 56.7 22.1 34.6 102.4 110.3 -7.9
Moraine-6.7 4.5 9.8 - 22.0 0.0 38.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 15.3 28.5 2.8 56.7 22.1 34.6 119.7 107.3 12.5
-8.7 6.5 9.8 - 22.0 0.0 38.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 15.3 28.5 2.8 87.3 24.1 63.1 202.4 130.7 71.6
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
26/63
Geotechnical Design Report
25
Fig.12 Pressure diagram excavation stage 3
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
27/63
Geotechnical Design Report
26
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
28/63
Geotechnical Design Report
27
4. Final Excavation Stage
Active earth pressure
Soil Profile Level h w q k Cuk k m n Cud d d ka v u v' a
Fill3.8 0.0 9.8 10.0 18.0 0.0 35.0 1.1 1.2 0.0 13.6 27.9 0.4 10.0 0.0 10.0 3.6
2.8 1.0 9.8 10.0 18.0 0.0 35.0 1.1 1.2 0.0 13.6 27.9 0.4 23.6 0.0 23.6 8.6
Dry crust2.8 1.0 9.8 10.0 18.0 25.0 0.0 1.4 1.2 14.9 10.7 0.0 1.0 25.0 0.0 25.0 -4.8
1.8 2.0 9.8 10.0 18.0 25.0 0.0 1.4 1.2 14.9 10.7 0.0 1.0 35.7 9.8 25.9 -29.8
Clay
1.8 2.0 9.8 10.0 17.0 16.0 0.0 1.4 1.2 9.5 10.1 0.0 1.0 35.7 9.8 25.9 16.7
-0.2 4.0 9.8 10.0 17.0 16.0 0.0 1.4 1.2 9.5 10.1 0.0 1.0 56.0 29.4 26.5 36.9
-2.2 6.0 9.8 10.0 17.0 16.0 0.0 1.4 1.2 9.5 10.1 0.0 1.0 76.2 49.0 27.2 57.1
-4.2 8.0 9.8 10.0 17.0 16.0 0.0 1.4 1.2 9.5 10.1 0.0 1.0 96.4 68.7 27.8 77.4
Sand/Silt
-4.2 8.0 9.8 10.0 21.0 0.0 32.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 14.6 23.5 0.4 96.4 68.7 27.8 80.6
-4.5 8.3 9.8 10.0 21.0 0.0 32.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 14.6 23.5 0.4 109.7 71.6 38.2 88.0
-6.4 10.2 9.8 10.0 21.0 0.0 32.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 14.6 23.5 0.4 128.1 90.0 38.1 106.4
-6.7 10.5 9.8 10.0 21.0 0.0 32.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 14.6 23.5 0.4 132.9 93.2 39.7 110.3
Moraine
-6.7 10.5 9.8 10.0 22.0 0.0 38.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 15.3 28.5 0.4 132.9 93.2 39.7 107.3-8.5 12.3 9.8 10.0 22.0 0.0 38.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 15.3 28.5 0.4 160.4 110.9 49.5 128.4
-8.6 12.4 9.8 10.0 22.0 0.0 38.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 15.3 28.5 0.4 161.9 111.8 50.1 129.6
-8.7 12.5 9.8 10.0 22.0 0.0 38.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 15.3 28.5 0.4 162.7 112.3 50.4 130.2
-8.7 12.5 9.8 10.0 22.0 0.0 38.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 15.3 28.5 0.4 163.4 112.8 50.6 130.7
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
29/63
Geotechnical Design Report
28
Passive Earth Pressure
Soil Profile Level h w q k Cu k m n Cud d d kp vp u v' P a P(netto)
Sand/Silt-4.5 0.0 9.8 - 21.0 0.0 32.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 14.6 23.5 2.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 88.0 -88.0
-6.7 2.2 9.8 - 21.0 0.0 32.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 14.6 23.5 2.3 32.1 21.6 10.5 46.0 110.3 -64.3
Moraine-6.7 2.2 9.8 - 22.0 0.0 38.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 15.3 28.5 2.8 32.1 21.6 10.5 51.2 107.3 -56.0
-8.7 4.2 9.8 - 22.0 0.0 38.0 1.2 1.2 0.0 15.3 28.5 2.8 62.6 41.2 21.4 101.7 130.7 -29.0
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
30/63
Geotechnical Design Report
29
Fig.13 Pressure diagram excavation stage 4
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
31/63
Geotechnical Design Report
30
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
32/63
Geotechnical Design Report
31
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
33/63
Design of sheet pile wall
Condition MRd Mmax
Mmax = 314,2 KNm/m
Mmax 3/m
Design of struts
Strut Strut Force [KN/m]
q1 132
q2 113,4
q3 109,4
q4 112
Design load of the strut
Strut one Nsd1 = 1,5 *q1*c where c is the spacing between strut which is 2m
NRd1=396 KN
Strut two Nsd2 = 1,5 *q2*c
Nsd2 = 340,2 KN
Strut three Nsd3 = 1,5 *q3*c
Nsd3 = 327 KN
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
34/63
Geotechnical Design Report
33
Strut four Nsd4 = 1,5 *q4*c
Nsd4 =336 KN
From the hollow KCKR welded round, cold formed
Diameter of the struts, D=219,1mm, t =10 mm, g (self-weight) = 51,6 kg/m (strut one )
Diameter of the struts,D=219,1mm, t =8 mm g (self-weight) = 41,6 kg/m (strut two ,three, four)
Moment on the struts due to self-weight(g)
where L =20 m length of strut
Axial resistance of the strut from the selected diameter
NRd4 =563 kN, Ds = 219,1 mm , t =10 mm
NRd4 =462 kN Ds = 219,1 mm , t =8 mm
NRd4 =462 kN Ds = 219,1 mm , t =8 mm
NRd4 =462 kN Ds = 219,1 mm , t =8mm
Elastic section modulus of struts
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
35/63
Geotechnical Design Report
34
Moment resistance of the struts
, Fyd =355 MPa , =1
=128,08 kNm =105,3 kNm =105,3 kNm =105,3 kNm
Check the struts against buckling
()
Strut Nsd Nrd Msd
(kN/m)
Mrd Buckling
Check
St.1 396 563 25,8 128,084 0,95608701
St.2 340,2 462 20,8 105,435 0,98011949
St.3 327 462 20,8 105,435 0,95572387
St.4 336 462 20,8 105,435 0,97237813
Design of wale beams
Wale beam at the first strut level
Fyk= 275 MPa ,= 1,25 n= 1,2 (safety class 3) ,m=1
Condition MRd1 Msd1
where c is spacing between struts
where Wx1 is elastic section modulus
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
36/63
Geotechnical Design Report
35
Wx1 461 cm3Wale beam at the second strut level
Condition MRd2 Msd2
where c is spacing between struts where Wx2 is elastic section modulus
Wx2 396 cm3Wale beam at the third strut level
Condition MRd3 Msd3
Where c is spacing between struts Where Wx3 is elastic section modulus
Wx3 380 cm3
Wale beam at the fourth strut level
Condition MRd4 Msd4
where c is spacing between struts where Wx4 is elastic section modulusWx4 165 cm3
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
37/63
Geotechnical Design Report
36
Design of dowels
Sheet pile width b = 750 mm
Dowel spacing c/c = 2*b = 1,5m
h =d+ 60mm , where h is the effective gap and d is 0,2m (spohantboken)
horizontal load along the toe of the wall
qd =205,38 kn
Horizontal force per dowel
NSd = qd*c/c
NSd = 205,38 * 1,5 = 308,07 kN
Msd is bending moment in the dowel
Msd =N*(h +0,06) ,
Msd = 308,07 * 0,26m = 80,1kNm
Shear force capacity of the dowel
NRd = ((pi*d^2)/20)*fyd where d is diameter of dowel, d= 90mm
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
38/63
Geotechnical Design Report
37
Fyd =fy/(m*n) fy= 355 MPa for S355
m = 1,6 (material partial safety factor) , n=1,2
Fyd =290,4 MPa
NRd = 369,48 KN (shear force capacity of of dowel )
NRd NSd OkElastic section modulus of dowel
MRd MSd , , ,
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
39/63
Geotechnical Design Report
38
Serviceability Limit State
Analysis of the serviceability limit state design is done by finite element method software called
PLAXIS.The deformations at each level of excavation are presented below.
A. DeformationTable: Depth Vs Deformation
# Excavation Stage Depth (m) Maximum
Deformation(mm)
1 First Excavation Level 2 36.1
2 Second Excavation Level 4 38.23 Third Excavation Level 6 45.1
4 Final Excavation Level 8.3 49.3
B. Shear Forces on the Sheet Pile
Table: Depth Vs Shear Force
# Excavation Stage Depth (m) Maximum Shear
Force(kN/m)
1 First Excavation Level 2 36.6
2 Second Excavation Level 4 72.9
3 Third Excavation Level 6 126.2
4 Final Excavation Level 8.3 211.2
C. Bending Moment on the Sheet PileTable: Depth Vs Bending Moment
# Excavation Stage Depth (m) Maximum Bending
Moment(kN.m/m)
1 First Excavation Level 2 76
2 Second Excavation Level 4 156
3 Third Excavation Level 6 277.8
4 Final Excavation Level 8.3 443
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
40/63
Geotechnical Design Report
39
Geometry
Fig14. Geometry and Boundary conditions on PLAXIS.
SoilSheet Pile Interface
The interface between the soil and the sheet pile are taken by taking an interface value of 0,85 . A
sensitivity analysis is done by changing the values of this interface values . The sensitivity analysis
results of Rint and deformation is summarized below.
# Rinterface Value Max. Deformation (mm)
1. 1 48
2. 0,9 493. 0,8 514. 0,7 51
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
41/63
Geotechnical Design Report
40
Deformation
Phase 1: Initial Excavation Cantilever Case .Depth of Excavation at 2 m from top
Surface.
Fig.15 Phase 1 , Cantilever Case , Depth of excavation 2 m , Max. Horizontal Deformation = 36.1 mm
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
42/63
Geotechnical Design Report
41
Phase 2 Second Excavation Stage After installation of strut -2 at 3 m from top
surface. Depth of excavation at 4 m from top surface.
Fig.16 Phase 2 , Second Excavation , Depth of excavation 4 m , Max. Horizontal Deformation = 38.2 mm
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
43/63
Geotechnical Design Report
42
Phase 3 Third Excavation Stage After installation of strut -3 at 3 m from top
surface. Depth of excavation at 6 m from top surface.
Fig17. Phase 3 , Third Excavation , Depth of excavation 6 m , Max. Horizontal Deformation = 45.1 mm
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
44/63
Geotechnical Design Report
43
Phase 4 Final Excavation Stage After installation of strut -4 at 7 m from top
surface. Depth of excavation at 8.3 m from top surface.
Fig.18 Phase 4 , Final Excavation , Depth of excavation 8.3 m , Max. Horizontal Deformation = 49.3 mm
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
45/63
Geotechnical Design Report
44
Deformed Mesh Diagrams
Initial Excavation Stage Cantilever Depth at 2 m from top surface.
Fig.19 Initial Excavation , Depth of excavation 2 m , Max. Horizontal Deformation = 36.1 mm
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
46/63
Geotechnical Design Report
45
Second Excavation Stage After installation of strut -1 at 1 m from top surface.
Depth of excavation at 4 m from top surface
Fig.20 Second Excavation , Depth of excavation 4 m , Max. Horizontal Deformation = 38.2 mm
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
47/63
Geotechnical Design Report
46
Second Excavation Stage After installation of strut -2 at 3 m from top surface.
Depth of excavation at 4 m from top surface
Fig.21 Second Excavation , Depth of excavation 4 m , Max. Horizontal Deformation = 38.2 mm
(Installation of strut 2)
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
48/63
Geotechnical Design Report
47
Third Excavation Stage After installation of strut -2 at 3 m from top surface. Depth
of excavation at 6 m from top surface.
Fig.22 Third Excavation , Depth of excavation 6 m , Max. Horizontal Deformation = 45.1 mm
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
49/63
Geotechnical Design Report
48
Third Excavation Stage The installation of strut -3 at 5 m from top surface. Depth
of excavation at 6 m from top surface
Fig.23 Third Excavation , Depth of excavation 6 m , Max. Horizontal Deformation = 45.1 mm
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
50/63
Geotechnical Design Report
49
Final Excavation Stage The installation of strut -4 at 7 m from top surface. Depth of
excavation at 8.3 m from top surface
Fig.24 Final Excavation , Depth of excavation 8.3 m , Max. Horizontal Deformation = 49.5 mm
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
51/63
Geotechnical Design Report
50
Sheet Pile Shear Force Diagram
Shear for on Sheet Pile at initial Excavation Stage.
Fig.25 Initial Excavation Shear force diagram
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
52/63
Geotechnical Design Report
51
Shear Force Diagram after installation of 1st
strut
Fig.26 Installation of 1st
strut Shear force diagram
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
53/63
Geotechnical Design Report
52
Shear Force Diagram after installation of 3rd strut
Fig.27 Installation of 3rd strut Shear force diagram
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
54/63
Geotechnical Design Report
53
Shear Force Diagram after installation of 4th
strut
Fig.28 Installation of 4th
strut Shear force diagram
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
55/63
Geotechnical Design Report
54
Sheet Pile Bending Moment Diagrams
Bending Moment Diagram Initial Excavation Stage
Fig.29 Initial Excavation Stage Bending Moment diagram
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
56/63
Geotechnical Design Report
55
Bending Moment Diagram 2nd
Excavation Stage
Fig.30 Second Excavation Stage Bending Moment diagram
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
57/63
Geotechnical Design Report
56
Bending Moment Diagram 3rd
Excavation Stage
Fig.31 Third Excavation Stage Bending Moment diagram
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
58/63
Geotechnical Design Report
57
Bending Moment Diagram 4th
Excavation Stage
Fig.32 Fourth Excavation Stage Bending Moment diagram
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
59/63
Geotechnical Design Report
58
Control Program
A Control plan is essential in such a way that the contractor will be able to know exactly where the
sensitive locations of the project are and what he shall do when the deformation values exceed the
alert value of 25mm. Moreover, it is essential to prescribe the steps of excavation as the load and
deformation logically increase when the excavation go deeper.
The following control program describes the procedures that shall take place at each level of
progress of the construction.
1. Driving of the Sheet Pile Wall:The temporary sheet pile wall is driven with a suitable pile driving machine to the bed rock
level approximately 12.5 m below the ground surface. During the pile driving process care
should be taken so that the vibration of the machine should not cause movements and
vibrations beyond the prescribed value by the authorities.
2. Initial Excavation ( Cantilever Stage )It was determined from the ultimate limit state design and the serviceability limit state
design that excavating to a depth of 2 m below the surface will give deformation value less
than the deformation limit of 50 mm in addition the total passive forces at this level are
much bigger than the active forces which will cause rotation about the base of the sheet pile
hence the structure is safe to excavate to this level without a strut. However to control and
check the deformation, reflectors for total stations or bench marks are fixed at the top of the
sheet pile . By taking measurements of this benchmark points the contractor can always
control the deformations of the sheet pile wall.
3. Second Excavation Level ( To a depth of 4 m)After fixing the 1st strut at a depth of 1 m below the surface, excavation is proceeded to adepth of 4 m below the surface. Suitable deformation control should be taken at the top of
the sheet pile wall and a distance half way on the sheet pile wall by fixing reflectors or
benchmarks. Water stored in clay pocket might present water inflow problems into the
excavation. The bottom of the excavation level shall always be pumped dry. At this stage
the 2nd
strut level is fixed along with the wale beams.
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
60/63
Geotechnical Design Report
59
4. Third Excavation Level ( To a depth of 6 m )The third excavation follows to a depth of 6 m. At this stage also the deformation
measurements shall continue in the same manner as described in the above excavation stage.
The 3rd strut is installed and the ground water at the bottom of the excavation is pumped out.If the deformation in the sheet pile exceeds 25 mm, the contractor should be alerted in that
the use of heavier vehicles around the construction site should be restricted not to exceed the
allowable deformation limit.
5. Final Excavation Level (To a depth of 8.3 m)The final excavation shall be done after bracing the excavation with the 4
thstrut at a depth
of 7 m from the ground surface. As the deformation increases as the excavation depth is
increased proper note shall be taken of the deformation measurement locations on the sheet
pile and proper alert preconditions shall as well be taken if the deformation values exceedthe specified alert value of 25 mm.
6. Installation of DowelA dowel separate drilling is done to insert the dowels at the bottom of the sheet pile wall.
The dowels shall be adequately grouted as per the specifications. The dowels are introduced
to partially take the large moment experienced at the bottom of the sheet pile wall.
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
61/63
Geotechnical Design Report
60
List of Symbols
Notation Definition
v Vertical stress
v Effective vertical stress
U Pore water pressure
a Active lateral earth pressure
p Passive lateral earth pressure
d Unit weight
k Characteristics angle of internal friction
d Design angle of internal friction
Cu Characterstic Undrained shear Stregth
Cud Design Undrained shear Stregth
pnet Net passive pressure
ka Coefficient of active pressure
kp Coefficient of passive pressure
qi Load on strut level i
Nbud Buckling capacity of the strut
Ncb Stability number
Nsd i Design load on strut
M Moment
Msd Design moment
fyk Characteristics yield stress of sheet pile and wale beam
fyd Design yield stress
q Traffic load on soil
C Spacing between the anchors
n Design safety class factor
m Material factor
Pi Pressure on area i
As Area of strut
Ash Area of sheet pile
Ish Moment of inertia of sheet pile
Is Moment of inertia of strut
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
62/63
Geotechnical Design Report
61
Ek Characteristic Youngs Modulus
Ed Design Design Youngs Modulus
Wsh Elastic section modulus of sheet pile
H Excavation height
-
7/29/2019 Final Project File
63/63
Geotechnical Design Report
Appendix
References
1. Sponthandboken -T18:19962. Lecture Notes, AF2609 Foundation engineering3. US Army of Corps Engineering Manual ,1994 ,Design of Sheet Pile Wall ,EM-1110-2-
2504
4. ArcelorMittal, U-shape sheet pile walls design Cross section Table,http://www.arcelormittal.com/sheetpiling/page/index/name/usections
5. TIBNOR,Konstruktionstabeller , Steel Section Design Table,http://www.e-magin.se/v5/viewer/files/viewer_s.aspx?gKey=ndrj52ff&gInitPage=1
6. RUUKI infrastructure solutions data sheet,http://www.ruukki.com/Products-and-solutions/Infrastructure-solutions