NUS CONFIDENTIAL

CE5108 

               NATIONAL UNIVERSITY OF SINGAPORE

 
CE5108 - EARTH RETAINING STRUCTURES

(Semester 1: AY2016/2017)

Time Allowed: 2.5 Hours

______________________________________________________________________

INSTRUCTIONS TO CANDIDATES

1. Please write your student number only. Do not write your name.

2. This assessment paper contains FOUR questions and comprises SEVEN

printed pages.

3. Answer ALL questions. All questions DO NOT carry equal marks.

4. Please start each question on a new page.

5. This is an “OPEN BOOK” assessment.

6. Linear MM graph paper is provided.

7. Programmable calculators are NOT allowed for this exam.

…/2
NUS CONFIDENTIAL
-2- CE5108
 

Question 1 [20 marks]

A simple truss bridge is to be supported by two abutments (gravity walls) at its ends,
as shown on Figure Q-1a. The ground water table is located below the abutments.
Truss Bridge

Abutment Abutment

Soil

Figure Q-1a
Due to ambient temperature changes, the bridge will experience lateral expansion
which is resisted by the abutments and the adjacent ground.

(a) If the abutment is constructed on a dry sand layer as shown on Figure Q-1b,
calculate the horizontal force that the adjacent sand can provide to resist the
thermal expansion effects. Assume wall friction  = (2/3)’. [8 marks]

Sketch the failure surface in the dry sand associated with the development of this
resistance force. [2 marks]

Bridge
Abutment

8m
Dry Sand
 dry = 17 kN/m3
’ = 33, c’ = 0
 wall = (2/3) ’

Figure Q-1b

…/3

 
NUS CONFIDENTIAL
-3- CE5108
 

(b) Pre-construction soil investigation works reveal that rock is actually present at the
site, and that the abutment will be constructed on the sand-rock profile as shown
on Figure Q-1c.

14m
Bridge
Abutment
Dry Sand
 dry = 17 kN/m3 sand-rock
interface friction
8m ’ = 33, c’ = 0
 sand-rock = ?
 wall = (2/3) ’

Sound, Hard Rock (Dry)

Figure Q-1c

Structural calculations show that the maximum thermal expansion force

transmitted from the bridge to the abutment is 3000 kN/m. By considering a
failure wedge with a sliding plane along the sand-rock interface (see Figure Q-
1c), calculate the minimum friction angle (sand-rock) required at the sand-rock
interface in order that the sand mass can mobilize sufficient resistance to resist
this maximum thermal expansion force of 3000 kN/m. [10 marks]

Hint:
You can use either hand calculations (with the aid of a calculator) or graphical
approach to solve this problem. The following trigonometrical relationships may
be useful:

Cosine rule: c2 = a2 + b2 – 2ab cos (C) a C b

Sine rule: a/sinA = b/sinB = c/sinC B A
c

…/4

 
NUS CONFIDENTIAL
-4- CE5108
 

Question 2 [30 marks]

(a) (i) Describe briefly and distinguish between ‘Principles’ and ‘Application Rules’
when using Eurocode 7. [3 marks]
(ii) What is the role and significance of the ‘National Annex’ in Eurocode 7.
[2 marks]

(b) The sides of an excavation 6 m deep are to be supported by a single-strut sheet

pile wall, as shown on Figure Q-2. The soil profile consists of a 6.5m thick layer
of loose to medium dense dry sand overlying a stiff clay layer. The unfactored
soil parameters shown on Figure Q-2 are obtained from the Site Investigation
report. The wall is rough, so that wall = ’ may be assumed. A variable surcharge
loading of q kN/m2 is applied uniformly over the ground surface as shown on the
figure.

surcharge q kN/m2

2m
A Loose to Medium Dense,
T Dry Sand
6m  dry = 18 kN/m3 6.5 m
c’ = 0, ’ = 33
 wall ’

Stiff Clay
5.5 m  sat = 20 kN/m3
su (or cu) = 50 kN/m2

Figure Q-2

(i) For the wall embedment shown on Figure Q-2, and using Eurocode 7 Design
Approach 1 Combination 1 partial factors, calculate the maximum surcharge
q that may be applied uniformly on the surface of the dry sand.

State any assumptions you make. Please include a clear and legible sketch of
the lateral earth pressure diagram to aid in your calculations. [15 marks]
(ii) Calculate the strut force T supporting the wall when the maximum surcharge
loading q from part (i) is applied. [3 marks]
…/5

 
NUS CONFIDENTIAL
-5- CE5108
 

(iii) Using the lateral earth pressure diagram and the answers from parts (i) and (ii)
corresponding to the maximum surcharge loading q, calculate
(1) the depth dmax below the ground surface at which the maximum moment
Mmax in the wall occurs,
(2) the magnitude of this maximum moment Mmax.
[7 marks]

Question 3 [25 marks]

(a) The Bjerrum and Eide (BE) Base Factor of Safety (FS) for a long strip
excavation with width B and depth H, without ground surcharge and wall
embedment is given by:

Cub N b
FS 
H
How is the Bjerrum Eide theory different from Terzaghi? Sketch the base
failure mechanism for Terzaghi’s theory for above case with a wall
embedment depth of D, and show how would you derive the Terzaghi’s FS to
include the strength (Cuh) of the soils above the base of the excavation? Note
that Cub in the (BE) equation is the clay undrained strength below base of
excavation to a depth >B (width of excavation).
[10 marks]

(b) Explain which of the two theories (Bjerrum & Eide or Terzaghi) give an upper
bound or lower bound solution to base heaving? Which is more appropriate for
a wide excavation compared to a narrow excavation, and why is this so?
[5 marks]

(c) An MRT station site consists of a 15m width and 200m length excavation in
30 m thick layer of very soft marine clay soil of  = 15kN/m3 and average
undrained shear strength of Cuh=20 kPa above 12m and Cub=30kPa below 12m
depth. Estimate the FOS for base heave of a 12m deep excavation using a
floating Diaphragm Wall design (ignore contribution of wall moment
capacity), with wall embedment of 3m in the soft clay. Assume a nominal
ground surcharge of 20 kPa, and use modified Terzaghi theory. What would
be the improved FOS if a base grout layer of 3m depth is applied below the
excavation base, with Cu=450 kPa, and adhesion factor, =0.33? Is this design
adequate based on EC7 DA1, Combination 2 analysis?

[10 marks]

…/6

 
NUS CONFIDENTIAL
-6- CE5108
 

Question 4 [25 marks]

(a) The site at Marina Bay is a cut and cover excavation in very thick marine clay
as shown in Fig.4. If the Diaphragm wall is embedded 3m into dense sand,
what would be the deepest excavation depth that can be safely executed with
safety against hydraulic uplift of 1.1? If a deeper excavation than this level is
needed, what are the practical solutions to prevent uplift failure?
Explain why a c/phi reduction is NOT appropriate using elastic plate elements
as the model wall?
[10 marks]

(b) Briefly describe what is Method A, B and C for Undrained Strength and
Stiffness of soft Normally Consolidated (NC) clays when using a Mohr
Coulomb model in FEM analysis? Illustrate what would be your choice of the
Mohr-Coulomb strength, stiffness and Ko parameters for a 30 m thick layer of
soft marine clay with the properties of:
c'  0 kPa,  '  200 , E'  5000 kPa, ν'  0.33, γ  15 kN/m3
to get the same results in the 3 separate FEM analysis of a deep excavation
model, using Method A, B and C separately.
[8 marks]

(c) How would you relate the average shear strain at failure (u) of a soft clay to
the maximum wall deflection (hmax) using the Bolton MSD (Mobilized
Strength Design) concepts? What would be the expected maximum wall
deflection for soft clay site with failure shear strain of 5.0% and MSD factor of
1.2?
[7 marks]

…/7

 
NUS CONFIDENTIAL
-7- CE5108
 

- END OF PAPER -