Design and Construction of

Foundation in Schedule Area No 2

(North-western New Territories)
with vibration performance consideration

Presented by
Ir. Adam Choy (Director – Meinhardt (C&S) Ltd)
Ir. Alex Lai (Technical Director – Meinhardt (C&S) Ltd)
Ir. Jacqueline Tse (Senior Engineer – Meinhardt (C&S) Ltd)
31 Aug 2013
Content of Presentation

Project Information

Site Constraints

Schedule Area No.2

Classification System

Foundation Design in Marble Zone

Vibration Assessment

Monitoring and Public Relation Plan

Construction Consideration
Project Information

Proposed development
in YLTL 518. Yuen Long
WANG CHAU ROAD

Bounded by Yuen Long
On Ning Road at the

YUEN LONG ON LOK ROAD

southern side, Tai Kiu
Road at the western side

YUEN LONG ON NING ROAD

and Yuen Long On Lok
Road at the northern
side
THE SITE

Consists of 4 towers and
each contains 32-33
storeys with Podium and

WEST RAIL STATION

basement below
TAI KIU ROAD

West Rail Long Ping
Station aligned along
the northern side and
16m away from site
Site Constraints
• Photo of the site

Existing Aged
Village Housing Authority’s
THE Site
SITE
Major Concerns on Design and Construction

Complex geology and possible presence of

cavity
◦ Limitations of increased vertical stress on marble
surface karst

Vibration Effect on existing aged buildings
◦ Limitations of Induced Vibration to Surrounding
Existing Structures
Schedule Area No. 2

Scheduled Area No. 2 is
defined as an area where the
presence of marble containing
cavities is possible at depth.

Scheduled Area No. 2 covers a

large area where complex
geology and marble-bearing
rocks of the Yuen Long
Formation and Tuen Mun
Formation can be expected.
 Geology of Yuen Long

Distribution of marble-bearing
Typical geological section
sedimentary rock
Features in Marble
Factors affecting Karst Dissolution

Surface Karst Form by weakened and dissected marble

Overhangs Rock mass undercut
Dissolution Joints Joints locally opened by dissolution
Deep Cavity Zone Form by concentrated water flow, usually in form of series of
medium size cavities.
Underground Channel Form by collapse of small cavities
Underground Cavity Occurred at marble/non-marble boundary, usually large cavity.
Classification System
Marble Quality Designation (MQD):

Site Zoning and Classification:

Stage 1 GI

Calculate MQD (every 5m of all BH)

Borehole Rating

Plot BH Rating and Identify problem area

Assign Site Classes

Classification System
Marble Class
Classification System
Site Zoning and Classification:

Site Classification
Ref. GEO report 29 page 11&12

BH Rating
Site Zoning Of Classification
Stage 1 BH / Existing BH rating
=0

Stage 1 BH / Existing BH rating ≥

5
Stage 2 BH rating = 0
2
0
0 Stage 2 BH rating ≥ 5
0
Zone 1 0
5 0 0 2 Adjacent Site
1
(Very Difficult Site) 0 (Very Difficult Site)
0
0
0 0 1
0 0 2 2 0
00 0 0
0 0 Tower 5 0
0
2 2
0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0 0 5
Tower 1 2 0
0
0
0 5 0
0
0 0
0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0

Zone 2 (Fair Site)

0

0
Adjacent Site
0 2 0
0 0 0 0 (Fair Site)
0 0 0
0 2
0 0
Podium
Tower 2 0 0
5
0 0 0 0 0
0
0 0
Tower 3
0

0 0 0 0
0 0 0

0
Design Guidelines
1. Redundancy Factor
• Easy Site:
Driven H-piles with 10% – 20% redundancy
• Fair Site:
Driven H-piles with 20% – 30% redundancy
• Very Difficult / Extremely Difficult Site:
No simple rules
Ref. GEO report 29
2. Limits on Increase of Vertical Stress on marble surface

(Easy Site)
(Fair Site)
(Very Difficult Site)
(Extremely Difficult Site)

Ref. GEO publication No.1/2006

Foundation Design in
Marble Zone
 Ground Investigation
Problems need to verify in GI works:
• Present of cavities
• Cavity-fill material
• Highly irregular rockhead level
• Associated with collapse feature

Special requirement in GI works:

• Carry out GI in stage
• 20m of continuous MARBLE / METHAMORPHIC rock
class II or better cavity free rock with TCR> 85%
• Layout of the BH – Drillholes shall be at the edges of the
main pile foundation area
 Approximate thickness(m) /
Stratum Description
level (mPD)
Layers
Fill Sandy silty CLAY 2.0m – 9.1m
Appear
Alternatively Stiff to very stiff sandy, silty CLAY
Alluvium 5.5m – 26.1m
and silty fine to medium SAND
Metamorphosed Completely to highly decomposed
16.0m – 145m
Siltstone metamorphosed SILTSTONE
Fault Gouge Very stiff slightly sandy SILT 2.0m – 35m

Angular medium to coarse GRAVEL,

Karst Collapse COBBLES and BOULDERS of impure 2m – 35m
marble and pure marble

Approx. -82mPD ~ -
Sound Marble Slightly decomposed MARBLE
209mPD
 T1 T5
Average Average
rockhead level rockhead level
(-100 ~ -110mPD) (below -150mPD)

T2 T3
Average Average
rockhead level rockhead level
(-120 ~ -130mPD) (below -150mPD)
 Geological Profile

Fill

Alluvium
E1 E1
Founding

Metamorphosed
Siltstone, Fault
Gouge, Karst
Collapse Appear
Alternatively

Sound
Marble Section E1-E1
 Geological Profile

Fill
F1
Alluvium

Founding

F1
Metamorphosed
Siltstone, Fault
Gouge, Karst
Collapse Appear
Alternatively

Marble

Section F1-F1
Geological Profile

Marble
(light grey,
depth 95-99m)

Marble
(white,
depth 103-107m)
Geological Profile

Cavity
/cavity infill
Geological Profile

Fault zone
(fault gouge,
depth ~68m)
 Foundation Options
Options Advantage Disadvantage Remark
Driven H-
H- 1. Lower construction cost 1. H-pile driven to design Adopted for Tower
pile with 2. Conventional foundation type for level, otherwise review of 2, 3 & 5
preboring marble area additional stress on cavity
is required
2. More nos. of pile required
due to redundancy
control
Shaft-
Shaft- 1. Higher capacity for piles terminated 1. Trial pile with load-test is NOT adopted for
Grouted at shallower depth to avoid stress required this site
Friction increase on the cavities 2. Excessive grout loss in
Barrette / 2. Minimal vibration and noise to the Karst collapse layer
Friction local residents 3. Friction cannot developed
Bored Pile 3. The existing Franki piles within the in Karst collapse layer
site can be removed by chiselling or 4. High construction cost
pulling out
4. Hard layers can be overcome by
trench cutter or chiseling
End 1. Higher capacity achieved at 1. Sound marble bedrock over Adopted for Tower
Bearing rockhead 110m below ground and 1 to minimize the
Bored Pile 2. Minimal vibration and noise to the exceeded the practical limit additional stress
local residents of conventional end bearing due to Tower 2,3 &
bored pile (except Tower 1) 5 foundation
loading
Tower 1 Bored pile layout

◦ Average founding level

around -100mPD~-110mPD
◦ Bored Piles dia. are 2.5m with
3.75m bellout
◦ Pile Capacity = 55223 kN
 Tower 1 Bored pile section

E2 T1 T5 E2
Average Average
founding level founding
(-100~-110mPD) level (below
-150mPD)

T2
T3
Average
Average
founding level
founding level
(-120~-130mPD)
(below
-150mPD)
•Grade S450 305X305X180 kg/m to be used
•Pile length vary from 44-89m

Without Group With Group

Factor Factor
T2,3 and Pile Capacity 2958 kN 2514 kN
Zone B (Without Wind)
Podium
Pile Capacity 3697 kN 3143 kN
(With Wind)
T5 and Pile Capacity 2000 kN 1700 kN
Zone A (Without Wind)
Podium Pile Capacity 2500 kN 2125 kN
(With Wind)
• The site is divided
into three parts:
– T5 & Zone A
Podium (Driven
H-Pile) T5 T3
– T2,3 & Zone B
Podium (Driven ZONE B PODIUM
ZONE A PODIUM
H-Pile)
– T1 (Bored Pile)
T1 T2
Pile termination criteria will be based on :
(i) ±5m range of proposed founding level
(ii) Final set table

Ifthe pile terminated outside the termination

criteria, the subjected pile will be investigated
and foundation amendment will be submitted
for approval

Overcome underground obstruction / Karst
Cobbles obstruction

Minimize vibration effect

Backfill with compacted sand after preboring

Scope of vibration assessment:

Pilingactivities, i.e. driven H-pile, induce

vibration which may bring negative effect on
surround structures.

To control the effect of piling activities on

surround structures and meet the requirement
stated in PNAP APP-137 (Ground-borne
Vibrations and Ground Settlements Arising
from Pile Driving and Similar Operations)

Assessment on structure conditions of
surround existing structures.

Estimation of vibration effect on surround

existing structures.
 West-Rail Nullah
Station

Tai Kiu Village

Housing
Authority’s Site

Low-rise
rise Building along
Yuen Long On Ning Road

Surround Existing Structures

No. of Foundation
Distance Age(yr) Condition
Storeys Type

Tai Kiu Village,

~ 20m 1–4 Footings 5 - 400 Fair
Tai Kiu Road
Precast
Low Rise Buildings,
~ 23m 6 – 13 Concrete 35 - 44 Good
Yuen Long On Ning Road
Piles
Nullah between
On Lok Road, ~ 20m N/A N/A N/A Good
Long Yip Street

Site Occupied by
Adjacent N/A N/A N/A N/A
Housing Authority

Condition of surrounding buildings

WANG CHAU ROAD

YUEN LONG ON LOK ROAD

YUEN LONG ON NING ROAD

GOOD
THE SITE GOOD
WEST RAIL STATION

TAI KIU ROAD

FAIR

Photo 1 - Tai Kiu Village 1

Photo 2 - Tai Kiu Village (Arch)
2

Photo 3 - Tai Kiu Village (Entrance Tower)
3

Photo 4 - Tai Kiu Village (indoor condition)
4

Photo 5 - Tai Kiu Village (indoor condition)
5
 7
6

Photo 6 - Tung Cheong

Photo 7 - Po Fung Building,
Building, 59B Yuen Long On
59A Yuen Long On Ning Road
Ning Road
 9

Photo 8 - Nullah along
Photo 9 - Adjacent site

Yuen Long On Lok Road occupied by Housing
Authority

Assessments process
◦ Based on BS5228-2:2009

Given the Empirical formula,

 W
vres = k p  1.3 
r 
Where v res – resultant PPV (mm s-1)
W – nominal hammer energy (J)
L – pile toe depth (m)
x – distance measured along the ground surface (m)
r – slope distance from pile toe (m), r2 = L2 + x2
kp for piles not at refusal 1 ≤ kp ≤ 3 depending on soil type (kp =1 adopted in vibration assessments)

Range of parameters suggested in BS5228

1 ≤ L ≤ 27m
1 ≤ x ≤ 111m
1.5 ≤ W ≤ 85kJ

According to PNAP APP-137, the following
empirical values are used for assessment :
Location Type of Maximum ppv (mm/s)
Building
Transient Vibration (e.g. Drop Continuous Vibration (e.g.
hammer) Vibration hammer)

PNAP Proposed PNAP Proposed

Low rise side Robust and 15 7.5 7.5 7.5

stable
buildings in
general
Tai Kiu Village Vibration 7.5 3.0 3.0 3.0
side sensitive /
dilapidated
buildings