Handbook of Hands

Project Title: PROPOSED SEWERS IN LORONG CHUAN AND LIM
TUA TOW AREAS
Impact Assessment On CCL Tunnels Analysis Report
(Document No. 2017-80423-Hock Hai Lorong Chuan-Geotech 3D FEM-01)
Prepared by
ONE SMART Engineering Pte Ltd

Geotechnical, Civil & Structural Engineering Consultancy
0 29 Aug 2017 Original For Submission OCW

Rev Date Description Approved For Issue By
Project Title: PROPOSED SEWERS IN LORONG CHUAN AND LIM
TUA TOW AREAS
(Document No. 2017-80423-Hock Hai Lorong Chuan-Geotech 3D FEM-01)
DOCUMENT PREPARATION RECORD
Document Rev: Rev 0 Signature

Prepared By : LCK
Checked By : NPY
Approved By : Dr OCW
Er NCC
Date Issued : 29 Aug 2017
PROPOSED SEWERS IN LORONG CHUAN AND LIM TUA TOW AREAS
Document Revision
Revision No. Description of Revision Date
0 Original 28 Aug 2017
Disclaimer: This report is produced and issued for specific request of our client under specific purposes
connected with the above captioned project only. It should not be used by any other party for any other
purpose without permission. The content of this report remains as intellectual property of ONE SMART
Engineering Pte Ltd and any duplication of the report or any part of the report shall be treated as
infringement of copyright. ONE SMART Engineering Pte Ltd shall reserve the right to take legal action against
any infringement of copyright of this report. We accept no responsibility for the consequences of this report
being used by any other party for any other purpose, or containing any error or omission which is due to an
error or omission in data given to ONE SMART Engineering Pte Ltd by other parties. This document contains
confidential information and proprietary intellectual property. It should not be shown to other parties
without consent from us and from the party which commissioned it.
2017-80423- Hock Hai Lorong Chuan-Geotech 3D FEM-01 August 2017

TABLE OF CONTENT
1 PROJECT INFORMATION .............................................................................................. 2
1.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 2
1.2 Scope .............................................................................................................................. 2
1.3 Supplied Information ...................................................................................................... 2
1.3.1 Information That Are Required But Not Yet Fully Available ............................................ 3
2 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS .......................................................................................... 4
2.1 Soil Layers ....................................................................................................................... 4
2.2 Groundwater Conditions ................................................................................................. 4
2.3 Soil Parameters ............................................................................................................... 5
3 PROPOSED WORKS ....................................................................................................... 6
3.1 Proposed Pipe jacking And Associated Manholes .......................................................... 6
3.2 Interface With CCL Tunnel Railway Reserves .................................................................. 7
4 CRITERIA TO ASSESS FEASIBILITY OF PROPOSED FOUNDATION SYSTEM.............. 8
4.1 Code of Practice For Railway Protection ......................................................................... 8
5 IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF PROPOSED WORKS TO CCL TUNNELS .......................... 11
5.1 Method of Analysis ....................................................................................................... 11
5.2 Assumptions In FEM Analysis ........................................................................................ 11
5.3 FEM Model & Construction Sequence .......................................................................... 11
5.4 FEM Analysis Results ..................................................................................................... 15
6 DISCUSSION ON ANALYSIS RESULTS FOR THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT ................. 20
7 PROPOSAL FOR APPLICATION OF WAIVER FROM CODE OF PRACTICE FOR RAILWAY

PROTECTION ............................................................................................................... 20
APPENDICES
Appendix 1: Proposed Works

Appendix 2: Soil Investigation
Appendix 3: PLAXIS3D Input and Output

1 PROJECT INFORMATION
1.1 INTRODUCTION
ONE SMART Engineering Pte Ltd has been engaged by the contractor for this project, M/S Hock Hai
Civil Engineering & Building Pte Ltd, as the geotechnical consultant for the impact assessment for
the existing Circle Line (CCL) tunnels near Lorong Chuan Station due to the proposed sewer pipe jacking
works and associated shafts as shown in Figure 1. The asset owner of the sewer pipes and its associated
shafts is the Public Utilities Board (PUB). The proposed sewer pipes are within the railway reserves of
the existing CCL tunnels.
Figure 1 Satellite image of the proposed development site overlaid with elements of the
development, existing KVMRT L1 IVS and underground tunnels
1.2 SCOPE
The scope of this report includes:
a) Brief description of the ground conditions (from existing and completed soil investigation
reports)
b) Impact assessment for the proposed sewers and its associated manholes on CCL Tunnels
c) Proposal of application for waiver from Code of Practice for Railway Protection
1.3 SUPPLIED INFORMATION
The following information/documents were received by ONE SMART for the preparation of this report:
1. ERSS Design and Impact Assessment Analysis Report for the proposed sewers in Lorong Chuan
And Lim Tua Tow Areas – by M/S T S LEE CIVIL STRUCTURAL ASSOCIATES
2. ERSS Plan, Section, And Details For The 4.0m Diameter Shaft For 800mm Diameter Pipe Jacking
– By M/S T S LEE CIVIL STRUCTURAL ASSOCIATES

3. ERSS Sequence Of Construction For 5.5m Diameter Jacking Shaft For 1200mm Diameter Pipe
Jacking – By M/S T S LEE CIVIL STRUCTURAL ASSOCIATES
4. ERSS Sequence Of Construction For 4.0m Diameter Jacking Shaft For 800mm Diameter Pipe
Jacking – By M/S T S LEE CIVIL STRUCTURAL ASSOCIATES
5. Sewer Layout Plan With Instrumentation, ATM And Prism – Survey drawing prepared by L P ONG
& Associates
6. Sewer Section Drawing With Instrumentation – Survey drawing prepared by L P ONG &
Associates
7. Report On Soil Investigation Works For Proposed Sewers In Lorong Chuan And Lim Tua Tow
Areas (Boreholes: BH4, BH7, BH8, BH9, BH10, BH11 & BH12) Revision 0 – Soil Investigation
Report prepared by M/S GeoLS Pte Ltd, for the Public Utilities Board (PUB)
1.3.1 Information That Are Required But Not Yet Fully Available
The following information are crucial for the this report but not yet fully available to ONE SMART
Engineering during the time of preparation of this report:
1. As-built alignment of the CCL Tunnels and any associated structures interfacing with the
proposed Sewers In Lorong Chuan And Lim Tua Tow Areas – as such, the approximate alignment
of the CCL Tunnels was used, and any assumptions made in the impact assessment analysis was
made conservatively to reflect the maximum impact induced to the tunnels due to the proposed
works.

2 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
The report on soil investigation works conducted and prepared by GeoLS Pte Ltd was referred for this
impact assessment analysis (item 7 in section 1.3).
Figure 2 Probable soil profile from BH4 to BH12 (taken from SI report prepared by
GeoLS).
2.1 SOIL LAYERS
Generally, the following soil layers are encountered:
Soil Layer Borehole Reduced level Description

(mRL)
Fill BH4, BH7, BH8, BH9, 106 – 103 Comprises sandy CLAY, occasionally slightly
BH10, BH11 & BH12 gravelly
E BH9, BH10, 102 - 92 Peaty CLAY, occasionally with decayed wood
F2 BH8, BH10 96 – 95 Sandy CLAY, occasionally with peat.
F1 BH9 93 – 92 SAND, occasionally slightly gravelly, slightly silty
M BH9 96 – 95 Marine Clay
Old BH4, BH7, BH8, BH9, 103 – 60 Gravelly Silty SAND, with various degrees of
Alluvium BH10, BH11 & BH12 weathering that decreases with depth.
Table 1 Summary of soil layers encountered

In view of Table 1, borehole BH10 was adopted for a conservative impact assessment.
2.2 GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS

The highest water table was adopted, at 2.0m below existing ground level, as referenced from water
standpipe observation in BH4 which shows the highest water table, shown in Figure 3.

Figure 3 Water standpipe observation at BH4, taken from the SI report prepared by
GeoLS Pte Ltd.
2.3 SOIL PARAMETERS
For the Fill, E, F2, F1, and M soil layers, the parameters recommended in the Civil Design Criteria For
Road And Rail Transit Systems by the Land Transport Authority (LTA) of Singapore was adopted, unless
otherwise proven by extensive soil tests. As for the OA soil layers, in view of the lack of consolidated
triaxial tests, the friction angle, φ’, and cohesion, c’ were based on past project experiences. The soil
parameters adopted are summarised in Table 2.
Soil Layer Bulk Effective friction Effective Undrained Elastic

Density, γ’ angle, φ’ cohesion, c’ shear Modulus, E
(kN/m3) (kPa) strength, cu (MPa)

(kPa)
Fill 19 30 0 0 2N
E 15 5 0 17 0.3Cu
F2 19 22 0 19 0.3Cu
O(D) 20 32 10 - 3N
SPTN=19
O(C) 20 33 14 - 3N
SPTN=35
O(B) 20 34 16 - 3N
SPTN=65
O(A) 20 34 16 - 3N
SPTN=100
Table 2 Summary of soil parameters

3 PROPOSED WORKS
3.1 PROPOSED PIPE JACKING AND ASSOCIATED MANHOLES
The proposed sewers and its associated manholes are shown in Figure 4. The proposed pipes will be
installed using the pipe-jacking method; and the manholes will be constructed using the pressed-in
steel mould caissons, details as shown in Figure 5, Figure 6, and Figure 7.
Figure 4 Layout of proposed pipes and manholes.
Figure 5 Steel mould segment details
Figure 6 Base slab of typical manholes for this project.

Figure 7 Typical section view of pressed-in steel mould caissons.
3.2 INTERFACE WITH CCL TUNNEL RAILWAY RESERVES
The proposed works will interface with the Railway Reserve in the following manner:
Within CCL Tunnel Railway 1st Reserve

i. At least two (2) manholes with excavation depths of maximum 10m from ground surface, that
are away from the tunnel body (manhole caisson minimum FEL at 96.765mRL, max tunnel
crown level at 92.45mRL, in OA soil.)
ii. Pipe jacking works with minimum pipe invert level (IL) at 97.4mRL.
Figure 8 Interface of proposed works with the CCL tunnels.

4 CRITERIA TO ASSESS FEASIBILITY OF PROPOSED FOUNDATION SYSTEM
4.1 CODE OF PRACTICE FOR RAILWAY PROTECTION
Referring to the “Deemed-To-Satisfy Provisions”, Section 9, Code of Practice For Railway Protection,
October 2004 Edition by the Land Transport Authority (LTA) of Singapore, all development and building
works in the railway protection zone shall meet the technical requirements contained in the section, as
follows:
• Allowable imposed loads

• Allowable movement limits
• Allowable track distortions
• Vibration limit
• Monitoring of Rapid Transit Systems

The above criterion will be used for the impact assessment.
From the Code of Practice For Railway Protection abovementioned, the following tables are referred:


As for the feasibility of the proposed scheme, Section 9.3.7 “Excavation Works” of the abovementioned
Code of Practice For Railway Protection are referred:
Disclaimer: It is assumed that the architectural, and electrical and mechanical considerations for
the interfacing development has been taken into account complying with the “Deemed-To-
Satisfy Provisions, Section 9” of the Code of Practice For Railway Protection, 2004 Edition
abovementioned. If any, the architectural, and electrical and mechanical considerations shall be
developed by the architect, and electrical and mechanical engineers. The scope of this report
covers only the impact assessment due to the pipe jacking works and its associated manholes as
mentioned in Section 1.2 of this report. The instrumentation layout plan, design of the earth
retaining structural system (ERSS) are designed by the design engineer, M/S T S LEE CIVIL
STRUCTURAL ASSOCIATES, and is adopted in the impact assessment analysis as per the scope of
this report.

5 IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF PROPOSED WORKS TO CCL TUNNELS
5.1 METHOD OF ANALYSIS
Geotechnical 3D Finite Element Method (FEM), using the software PLAXIS3D is adopted for the present
analysis to assess the impact of the proposed sewer pipe jacking and associated manholes on the CCL
MRT Tunnels. The analysis is carried out to address the induced displacement as well as the forces on
the CCL MRT Tunnels.
5.2 ASSUMPTIONS IN FEM ANALYSIS
The following assumptions were made in the Finite Element Model:
• The CCL Tunnel Alignment information adjacent to the proposed works are not fully available yet,
as mentioned in section 1.3.1. Hence, the approximate alignment of the CCL tunnels were used.
• Due to difficulties in meshing the curved CCL tunnels in the Finite Element software, best fit lines of
the curved tunnels were devised; at along the best fit lines, the existing CCL tunnels were even
brought closer to the proposed sewer pipes and manholes, for a maximum impact.
• For the 3D FEM Analysis, no jet grouting/ground improvement of any form was simulated for the
manhole caisson construction.
• The pipe jacking was simulated using a 1% volume loss applied throughout the entire jacked pipes.
• The input parameters for the FEM analysis is included in Appendix 4 for reference.
• The ground conditions as discussed in Section 2 of this report are modelled (with reference to
BH10).
5.3 FEM MODEL & CONSTRUCTION SEQUENCE
The Finite Element simulation follows closely the envisaged construction sequence:
i. Wish-in place of existing CCL tunnels
ii. Construction of manhole caissons for pipe jacking/receiving
iii. Pipe jacking works with 1% volume loss

Figure 9 View of the 3D Finite Element Mesh of the entire model.
800mm
diameter
pipe jacking
1200mm
diameter
pipe jacking
Manholes
CCL Tunnels
Figure 10 View of the 3D Mesh with some soil elements and interface elements partially
hidden for clarity of display purposes only.

In PLAXIS, the construction sequence are modelled, as follows:
1. Initial phase
2. Surcharge application
20kPa
surcharge
applied
3. Wish-in-place of CCL Tunnels
CCL
Tunnels

4. Construction of manholes
Manhole
caissons
5. Pipe jacking
Pipe
jacking

5.4 FEM ANALYSIS RESULTS
For the impact assessment, the following results were extracted from the analysis:
CCL Tunnel movements
• CCL Tunnel wish-in place
• Construction of manhole caissons
Total tunnel
movements
<15mm, OK!!

• Pipe jacking
Total tunnel
movements
<15mm, OK!!
CCL Inner Tunnel Distortion
Tunnel movement profile

0.00025
0.00020
Tunnel movement
0.00015
0.00010
0.00005
0.00000
0.000 50.000 100.000 150.000 200.000 250.000 300.000 350.000
Chainage
Distortion calculation:
It can be seen that there is not much differential movement along the simulated tunnel.
Differential settlement = <1mm
Span = 310m
Distortion < 1: 310,000 (<1:2000 as per Code of Practice For Railway Protection, OK!)

CCL Outer Tunnel Distortion
Tunnel movement profile

0.0003
0.0003
Tunnel movement
0.0002
0.0002
0.0001
0.0001
0.0000
0.0000 50.0000 100.0000 150.0000 200.0000 250.0000 300.0000 350.0000
Chainage
Distortion calculation:
It can be seen that there is not much differential movement along the simulated tunnel.
Differential settlement = <1mm

Span = 310m
Distortion < 1: 310,000 (<1:2000 as per Code of Practice For Railway Protection, OK!)
CCL Tunnel Forces
• Assuming an unreinforced concrete section of 275mm thick, the N-M interaction diagram of
the induced internal forces acting on the tunnel lining are plotted below:
Tunnel Segment NM Interaction Diagram

8000 Tunnel segment NM
Interaction
7000
CCL outer tunnel forces
6000
Axial force (kN/m)
CCL inner tunnel forces

5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
-100 -50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300
-1000
Bending Moment (kNm/m)
It can be seen that the internal forces of the tunnel segment are within the capacity of an
unreinforced concrete section of 275mm thick. (FOS=1.5 applied). Hence, OK!

CCL Tunnel External Stresses
The external stresses, or the normal stresses acting on the CCL tunnels are extracted from the analysis.
In accordance to the Code of Practice For Railway Protection, Table 9.1(a), as shown in this report in
Section 4.1, the change in external stresses acting on the tunnel lining shall not exceed 25kPa.
The change in external stresses acting on the tunnel lining are tabulated below:
CCL Tunnel Change in external stress (kPa)
Inner 0.6
Outer -0.01
Due to the large amount of data which needs to be shown to derive the change in external stress, only
the figures showing the max/min interface stresses from the PLAXIS3D analysis are shown below:
• Stresses acting on CCL Tunnels during CCL Tunnels wish-in-place simulation

• Stresses acting on CCL Tunnels during pipe jacking simulation

6 DISCUSSION ON ANALYSIS RESULTS FOR THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT
From the FEM analysis carried out, it can be inferred that the proposed pipe jacking and associated
caisson works have negligible impact the existing CCL underground tunnels, based on the “Code of
Practice For Railway Protection, October 2004 Edition by the Land Transport Authority (LTA) of
Singapore”:
1. Estimated induced movements to the CCL Underground tunnels do not exceed 15mm;
2. Estimated induced differential movements to the CCL Underground tunnels do not

exceed 1:2000;
3. Estimated induced internal forces acting on the CCL tunnel lining do not exceed the
capacity of an unreinforced tunnel section;
4. Estimated induced stress change to the tunnels do not exceed 20kPa throughout.
In addition, it is worth noting that the simulated CCL tunnels have been fitted to a best fit line to fit the
curved geometry of the alignment (refer to Section 5.2 for FEM Simulation assumptions), and the best
fit lines of the tunnel alignment are brought closer to the proposed shafts and proposed pipes, hence
increasing the impact to the tunnel. Under these adverse conditions, the impacts to the CCL Tunnels
are still negligible.
7 PROPOSAL FOR APPLICATION OF WAIVER FROM CODE OF PRACTICE FOR RAILWAY

PROTECTION
Based on the results of the detailed analysis presented in Section 5, we would like to propose to the
authority for waiver of the following conditions stipulated in the Code of Practice For Railway Protection:
i. In accordance to Table 9.3.7 – Excavation Works, where the Code states that no excavation
within the Railway 1st Reserve is allowed, and where the excavation over underground rapid
transit system tunnels that is greater than 2m depth but stops above 3m vertically of the rapid
transit system tunnel may be considered on a case-by-case basis.

• It has been predicted using 3D geotechnical FEM as discussed in Section 5 that there is negligible
impact to the interfacing CCL Tunnels due to the proposed works.

Appendix 1: Proposed Works

Appendix 2: Soil Investigation

23
40
41
Appendix 3: PLAXIS3D Input and Output

20170823-Lorong Chuan Impact Assessment
PLAXIS Report
1.1.1.1.1.1 Materials - Soil and interfaces - Hardening soil (1/2)
Identification   FILL E F2 O(C) N=35 O(B) N=65

Identification number   1 2 3 4 5
Drainage type   Drained Undrained (B) Undrained (B) Drained Drained
Colour  
Comments          
γ unsat kN/m³ 18.00 15.00 19.00 21.00 21.00
γ sat kN/m³ 18.00 15.00 19.00 21.00 21.00
Dilatancy cut-off   No No No No No
e init   0.5000 0.5000 0.5000 0.5000 0.5000
e min   0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
e max   999.0 999.0 999.0 999.0 999.0
Rayleigh α   0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
Rayleigh β   0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
ref
E 50 kN/m² 10.00E3 5100 5700 105.0E3 195.0E3
ref
E oed kN/m² 10.00E3 5100 5700 105.0E3 195.0E3
ref
E ur kN/m² 30.00E3 15.30E3 17.10E3 315.0E3 585.0E3
2

power (m)   0.5000 0.5000 0.5000 0.5000 0.5000
Use alternatives   No No No No No
Cc   0.03450 0.06765 0.06053 3.286E-3 1.769E-3
Cs   0.01035 0.02029 0.01816 0.9857E-3 0.5308E-3
e init   0.5000 0.5000 0.5000 0.5000 0.5000
c ref kN/m² 1.000 17.00 19.00 14.00 16.00
φ (phi) ° 30.00 0.000 0.000 33.00 34.00
ψ (psi) ° 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
Set to default values   Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
ν ur   0.2000 0.2000 0.2000 0.2000 0.2000
p ref kN/m² 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0
nc
K 0   0.5000 1.000 1.000 0.4554 0.4408
c inc kN/m²/m 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
z ref m 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
Rf   0.9000 0.9000 0.9000 0.9000 0.9000
Tension cut-off   Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Tensile strength kN/m² 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
Undrained behaviour   Standard Standard Standard Standard Standard
Skempton-B   0.9866 0.9866 0.9866 0.9866 0.9866
3

νu   0.4950 0.4950 0.4950 0.4950 0.4950
K w,ref /n kN/m² 1.229E6 626.9E3 700.6E3 12.91E6 23.97E6
Strength   Manual Manual Manual Manual Manual
R inter   0.6700 0.6700 0.6700 0.6700 0.6700
Consider gap closure   Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
δ inter   0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
K 0 determination   Automatic Automatic Automatic Automatic Automatic
K 0,x = K 0,y   Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
K 0,x   0.5000 1.000 1.000 0.4554 0.4408
K 0,y   0.5000 1.000 1.000 0.4554 0.4408
OCR   1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
POP kN/m² 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
k x m/s 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
k y m/s 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
k z m/s 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
e init   0.5000 0.5000 0.5000 0.5000 0.5000
S s 1/m 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
c k   1000E12 1000E12 1000E12 1000E12 1000E12
4
1.1.1.1.1.2 Materials - Soil and interfaces - Hardening soil (2/2)
Identification   O(A) SPTN=100 O(D) SPTN=19

Identification number   6 7
Drainage type   Drained Drained
Colour  
Comments    
γ unsat kN/m³ 21.00 21.00
γ sat kN/m³ 21.00 21.00
Dilatancy cut-off   No No
e init   0.5000 0.5000
e min   0.000 0.000
e max   999.0 999.0
Rayleigh α   0.000 0.000
Rayleigh β   0.000 0.000
E 50 ref kN/m² 300.0E3 57.00E3
5

E oed ref kN/m² 300.0E3 57.00E3
E ur ref kN/m² 900.0E3 171.0E3
power (m)   0.5000 0.5000
Use alternatives   No No
Cc   1.150E-3 6.053E-3
Cs   0.3450E-3 1.816E-3
e init   0.5000 0.5000
c ref kN/m² 16.00 10.00
φ (phi) ° 34.00 32.00
ψ (psi) ° 0.000 0.000
Set to default values   Yes Yes
ν ur   0.2000 0.2000
p ref kN/m² 100.0 100.0
K 0 nc   0.4408 0.4701
c inc kN/m²/m 0.000 0.000
z ref m 0.000 0.000
Rf   0.9000 0.9000
6

Tension cut-off   Yes Yes
Tensile strength kN/m² 0.000 0.000
Undrained behaviour   Standard Standard
Skempton-B   0.9866 0.9866
νu   0.4950 0.4950
K w,ref / n kN/m² 36.87E6 7.006E6
Strength   Manual Manual
R inter   0.6700 0.6700
Consider gap closure   Yes Yes
δ inter   0.000 0.000
K 0 determination   Automatic Automatic
K 0,x = K 0,y   Yes Yes
K 0,x   0.4408 0.4701
K 0,y   0.4408 0.4701
OCR   1.000 1.000
POP kN/m² 0.000 0.000
kx m/s 0.000 0.000
7

ky m/s 0.000 0.000
kz m/s 0.000 0.000
e init   0.5000 0.5000
Ss 1/m 0.000 0.000
ck   1000E12 1000E12
8
1.1.1.2 Materials - Plates -
Identification   Steel_Liner 250mm base slab 800mm dia pipe 1200mm dia pipe Tunnel Lining
Comments          
Colour  
d m 0.06000 0.2500 0.07300 0.3000 0.2750
γ kN/m³ 58.50 4.000 4.000 4.000 4.000
Linear   Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Isotropic   Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
End bearing   No No No No No
E 1 kN/m² 210.0E6 30.00E6 27.00E6 27.00E6 32.00E6
E 2 kN/m² 210.0E6 30.00E6 27.00E6 27.00E6 32.00E6
ν 12   0.1500 0.2000 0.2000 0.2000 0.2000
G 12 kN/m² 91.30E6 12.50E6 11.25E6 11.25E6 13.33E6
G 13 kN/m² 91.30E6 12.50E6 11.25E6 11.25E6 13.33E6
G 23 kN/m² 91.30E6 12.50E6 11.25E6 11.25E6 13.33E6
Rayleigh α   0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
9
Identification   Steel_Liner 250mm base slab 800mm dia pipe 1200mm dia pipe Tunnel Lining
Rayleigh β   0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
10
1.1.1.1 Calculation results, Initial phase [InitialPhase] (0/0), Connectivity plot

1.1.1.2 Calculation results, Surcharge Application [Phase_1] (1/5), Connectivity plot

1.1.1.3 Calculation results, Wish-in Place of existing tunnels [Phase_2] (2/8), Connectivity plot
1.1.1.4 Calculation results, Wish-in place of shafts [Phase_3] (3/12), Connectivity plot
1.1.1.5 Calculation results, Wish-in place of jacked pipes [Phase_4] (5/15), Connectivity plot
1.1.2 Volume information
Volume information
Bounds
Minx -0.4380*10-15 m
Miny 0.000 m
Minz 40.00 m
Maxx 310.0 m
Maxy 150.0 m
Maxz 105.0 m
Total volume
Total 3.023*106 m³
Volume per cluster
Cluster 1 62.69 m³
Cluster 2 139.3*103 m³
Cluster 3 33.17 m³
Cluster 4 63.38 m³
Cluster 5 33.17 m³
Cluster 6 0.8426 m³
Cluster 7 1.136 m³
Volume information
Cluster 8 42.10 m³
Cluster 9 20.65 m³
Cluster 14 278.4*103 m³
Volume information
Cluster 29 46.45*103 m³
Cluster 34 138.6*103 m³
Cluster 37 6595 m³
Cluster 38 6595 m³
Cluster 39 95.52*103 m³
Cluster 40 80.63*103 m³
Cluster 41 19.91*103 m³
Cluster 44 557.3*103 m³
Cluster 45 1.651*106 m³
Volume information
1.1.3.1 Calculation results, Initial phase [InitialPhase] (0/0), Materials plot

1.1.3.2 Calculation results, Surcharge Application [Phase_1] (1/5), Materials plot

1.1.3.3 Calculation results, Wish-in Place of existing tunnels [Phase_2] (2/8), Materials plot
1.1.3.4 Calculation results, Wish-in place of shafts [Phase_3] (3/12), Materials plot
1.1.3.5 Calculation results, Wish-in place of jacked pipes [Phase_4] (5/15), Materials plot
1.1.4 Calculation information per phase
Identification Phase Start from Calculation type Loading input Pore pressure Time step [s] First step Last step Log
Initial phase [InitialPhase] 0 N/A K0 procedure N/A Phreatic 0.000 0 0 ?
Surcharge Application [Phase_1] 1 0 Plastic Ultimate time Phreatic 0.000 1 5 ?
Wish-in Place of existing tunnels [Phase_2] 2 1 Plastic Ultimate time Phreatic 0.000 6 8 ?
Wish-in place of shafts [Phase_3] 3 2 Plastic Ultimate time Phreatic 0.000 9 12 ?
Wish-in place of jacked pipes [Phase_4] 5 3 Plastic Ultimate time Phreatic 0.000 13 15 ?
3.1.1.1.1.1 Calculation results, Plate, Initial phase [InitialPhase] (0/0), Phase displacements |Pu|
3.1.1.1.1.2 Calculation results, Plate, Surcharge Application [Phase_1] (1/5), Phase displacements |Pu|
3.1.1.1.1.3 Calculation results, Plate, Wish-in Place of existing tunnels [Phase_2] (2/8), Phase displacements |Pu|
3.1.1.1.1.4 Calculation results, Plate, Wish-in place of shafts [Phase_3] (3/12), Phase displacements |Pu|
3.1.1.1.1.5 Calculation results, Plate, Wish-in place of jacked pipes [Phase_4] (5/15), Phase displacements |Pu|
3.1.1.1.2.1 Calculation results, Plate, Initial phase [InitialPhase] (0/0), Phase displacements Pux
3.1.1.1.2.2 Calculation results, Plate, Surcharge Application [Phase_1] (1/5), Phase displacements Pux
3.1.1.1.2.3 Calculation results, Plate, Wish-in Place of existing tunnels [Phase_2] (2/8), Phase displacements Pux
3.1.1.1.2.4 Calculation results, Plate, Wish-in place of shafts [Phase_3] (3/12), Phase displacements Pux
3.1.1.1.2.5 Calculation results, Plate, Wish-in place of jacked pipes [Phase_4] (5/15), Phase displacements Pux
3.1.1.1.3.1 Calculation results, Plate, Initial phase [InitialPhase] (0/0), Phase displacements Puy
3.1.1.1.3.2 Calculation results, Plate, Surcharge Application [Phase_1] (1/5), Phase displacements Puy
3.1.1.1.3.3 Calculation results, Plate, Wish-in Place of existing tunnels [Phase_2] (2/8), Phase displacements Puy
3.1.1.1.3.4 Calculation results, Plate, Wish-in place of shafts [Phase_3] (3/12), Phase displacements Puy
3.1.1.1.3.5 Calculation results, Plate, Wish-in place of jacked pipes [Phase_4] (5/15), Phase displacements Puy
3.1.2.1.1 Calculation results, Plate, Initial phase [InitialPhase] (0/0), Axial forces N1
3.1.2.1.2 Calculation results, Plate, Surcharge Application [Phase_1] (1/5), Axial forces N1
3.1.2.1.3 Calculation results, Plate, Wish-in Place of existing tunnels [Phase_2] (2/8), Axial forces N1
3.1.2.1.4 Calculation results, Plate, Wish-in place of shafts [Phase_3] (3/12), Axial forces N1
3.1.2.1.5 Calculation results, Plate, Wish-in place of jacked pipes [Phase_4] (5/15), Axial forces N1
3.1.2.2.1 Calculation results, Plate, Initial phase [InitialPhase] (0/0), Axial forces N2
3.1.2.2.2 Calculation results, Plate, Surcharge Application [Phase_1] (1/5), Axial forces N2
3.1.2.2.3 Calculation results, Plate, Wish-in Place of existing tunnels [Phase_2] (2/8), Axial forces N2
3.1.2.2.4 Calculation results, Plate, Wish-in place of shafts [Phase_3] (3/12), Axial forces N2
3.1.2.2.5 Calculation results, Plate, Wish-in place of jacked pipes [Phase_4] (5/15), Axial forces N2
3.1.2.3.1 Calculation results, Plate, Initial phase [InitialPhase] (0/0), Bending moments M11
3.1.2.3.2 Calculation results, Plate, Surcharge Application [Phase_1] (1/5), Bending moments M11
3.1.2.3.3 Calculation results, Plate, Wish-in Place of existing tunnels [Phase_2] (2/8), Bending moments M11
3.1.2.3.4 Calculation results, Plate, Wish-in place of shafts [Phase_3] (3/12), Bending moments M11
3.1.2.3.5 Calculation results, Plate, Wish-in place of jacked pipes [Phase_4] (5/15), Bending moments M11
3.1.2.4.1 Calculation results, Plate, Initial phase [InitialPhase] (0/0), Bending moments M22
3.1.2.4.2 Calculation results, Plate, Surcharge Application [Phase_1] (1/5), Bending moments M22
3.1.2.4.3 Calculation results, Plate, Wish-in Place of existing tunnels [Phase_2] (2/8), Bending moments M22
3.1.2.4.4 Calculation results, Plate, Wish-in place of shafts [Phase_3] (3/12), Bending moments M22
3.1.2.4.5 Calculation results, Plate, Wish-in place of jacked pipes [Phase_4] (5/15), Bending moments M22
3.2.1.1.1 Calculation results, Interface, Initial phase [InitialPhase] (0/0), Effective normal stresses s'N
3.2.1.1.2 Calculation results, Interface, Surcharge Application [Phase_1] (1/5), Effective normal stresses s'N
3.2.1.1.3 Calculation results, Interface, Wish-in Place of existing tunnels [Phase_2] (2/8), Effective normal stresses s'N
3.2.1.1.4 Calculation results, Interface, Wish-in place of shafts [Phase_3] (3/12), Effective normal stresses s'N
3.2.1.1.5 Calculation results, Interface, Wish-in place of jacked pipes [Phase_4] (5/15), Effective normal stresses s'N
3.2.1.2.1 Calculation results, Interface, Initial phase [InitialPhase] (0/0), Total normal stresses sN
3.2.1.2.2 Calculation results, Interface, Surcharge Application [Phase_1] (1/5), Total normal stresses sN
3.2.1.2.3 Calculation results, Interface, Wish-in Place of existing tunnels [Phase_2] (2/8), Total normal stresses sN
3.2.1.2.4 Calculation results, Interface, Wish-in place of shafts [Phase_3] (3/12), Total normal stresses sN
3.2.1.2.5 Calculation results, Interface, Wish-in place of jacked pipes [Phase_4] (5/15), Total normal stresses sN
4.1.1 Calculation results, Initial phase [InitialPhase] (0/0), Deformed mesh |u|
4.1.2 Calculation results, Surcharge Application [Phase_1] (1/5), Deformed mesh |u|
4.1.3 Calculation results, Wish-in Place of existing tunnels [Phase_2] (2/8), Deformed mesh |u|
4.1.4 Calculation results, Wish-in place of shafts [Phase_3] (3/12), Deformed mesh |u|
4.1.5 Calculation results, Wish-in place of jacked pipes [Phase_4] (5/15), Deformed mesh |u|
4.2.1 Calculation results, Plate, Initial phase [InitialPhase] (0/0), Total displacements |u|
4.2.2 Calculation results, Plate, Surcharge Application [Phase_1] (1/5), Total displacements |u|
4.2.3 Calculation results, Plate, Wish-in Place of existing tunnels [Phase_2] (2/8), Total displacements |u|
4.2.4 Calculation results, Plate, Wish-in place of shafts [Phase_3] (3/12), Total displacements |u|
4.2.5 Calculation results, Plate, Wish-in place of jacked pipes [Phase_4] (5/15), Total displacements |u|

Handbook of Hands

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Handbook of Hands

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Project Title: PROPOSED SEWERS IN LORONG CHUAN AND LIM

TUA TOW AREAS

Impact Assessment On CCL Tunnels Analysis Report

(Document No. 2017-80423-Hock Hai Lorong Chuan-Geotech 3D FEM-01)

ONE SMART Engineering Pte Ltd

0 29 Aug 2017 Original For Submission OCW

Impact Assessment On CCL Tunnels Analysis Report

(Document No. 2017-80423-Hock Hai Lorong Chuan-Geotech 3D FEM-01)

DOCUMENT PREPARATION RECORD

Document Rev: Rev 0 Signature

Revision No. Description of Revision Date

0 Original 28 Aug 2017

2017-80423- Hock Hai Lorong Chuan-Geotech 3D FEM-01 August 2017

1 PROJECT INFORMATION .............................................................................................. 2

1.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 2

1.2 Scope .............................................................................................................................. 2

1.3 Supplied Information ...................................................................................................... 2

2 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS .......................................................................................... 4

2.1 Soil Layers ....................................................................................................................... 4

2.2 Groundwater Conditions ................................................................................................. 4

2.3 Soil Parameters ............................................................................................................... 5

3 PROPOSED WORKS ....................................................................................................... 6

3.1 Proposed Pipe jacking And Associated Manholes .......................................................... 6

3.2 Interface With CCL Tunnel Railway Reserves .................................................................. 7

4 CRITERIA TO ASSESS FEASIBILITY OF PROPOSED FOUNDATION SYSTEM.............. 8

4.1 Code of Practice For Railway Protection ......................................................................... 8

5 IMPACT ASSESSMENT OF PROPOSED WORKS TO CCL TUNNELS .......................... 11

5.1 Method of Analysis ....................................................................................................... 11

5.2 Assumptions In FEM Analysis ........................................................................................ 11

5.3 FEM Model & Construction Sequence .......................................................................... 11

5.4 FEM Analysis Results ..................................................................................................... 15

6 DISCUSSION ON ANALYSIS RESULTS FOR THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT ................. 20

7 PROPOSAL FOR APPLICATION OF WAIVER FROM CODE OF PRACTICE FOR RAILWAY

Appendix 1: Proposed Works

2017-80423- Hock Hai Lorong Chuan-Geotech 3D FEM-01 August 2017

the existing CCL tunnels.

The scope of this report includes:

1.3 SUPPLIED INFORMATION

2017-80423- Hock Hai Lorong Chuan-Geotech 3D FEM-01 August 2017

Jacking – By M/S T S LEE CIVIL STRUCTURAL ASSOCIATES

2017-80423- Hock Hai Lorong Chuan-Geotech 3D FEM-01 August 2017

impact assessment analysis (item 7 in section 1.3).

Generally, the following soil layers are encountered:

Soil Layer Borehole Reduced level Description

E BH9, BH10, 102 - 92 Peaty CLAY, occasionally with decayed wood

F2 BH8, BH10 96 – 95 Sandy CLAY, occasionally with peat.

F1 BH9 93 – 92 SAND, occasionally slightly gravelly, slightly silty

M BH9 96 – 95 Marine Clay

Table 1 Summary of soil layers encountered

2.2 GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS

2017-80423- Hock Hai Lorong Chuan-Geotech 3D FEM-01 August 2017

parameters adopted are summarised in Table 2.

Soil Layer Bulk Effective friction Effective Undrained Elastic

(kN/m3) (kPa) strength, cu (MPa)

Table 2 Summary of soil parameters

2017-80423- Hock Hai Lorong Chuan-Geotech 3D FEM-01 August 2017

3.1 PROPOSED PIPE JACKING AND ASSOCIATED MANHOLES

Figure 4 Layout of proposed pipes and manholes.

Figure 5 Steel mould segment details

Figure 6 Base slab of typical manholes for this project.

2017-80423- Hock Hai Lorong Chuan-Geotech 3D FEM-01 August 2017

Figure 7 Typical section view of pressed-in steel mould caissons.

3.2 INTERFACE WITH CCL TUNNEL RAILWAY RESERVES

Identification   FILL E F2 O(C) N=35 O(B) N=65

Identification   FILL E F2 O(C) N=35 O(B) N=65

Identification   FILL E F2 O(C) N=35 O(B) N=65

Identification   O(A) SPTN=100 O(D) SPTN=19

Identification   O(A) SPTN=100 O(D) SPTN=19

Identification   O(A) SPTN=100 O(D) SPTN=19

Identification   O(A) SPTN=100 O(D) SPTN=19