Sei sulla pagina 1di 20

PSZ 19:16 (Pind.

1/07)

UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MALAYSIA


DECLARATION OF THESIS / UNDERGRADUATE PROJECT PAPER AND COPYRIGHT

FAUDZIAH BT SHUKOR Authors full name : Date of birth Title : : 28/04/1957 COMPARISON OF BACK ANALYSIS AND MEASURED LATERAL DISPLACEMENT OF CANTILEVER DIAPHRAGM WALL

2008/2009 Academic Session: I declare that this thesis is classified as :

CONFIDENTIAL RESTRICTED OPEN ACCESS

(Contains confidential information under the Official Secret Act 1972)* (Contains restricted information as specified by the organisation where research was done)* I agree that my thesis to be published as online open access (full text)

I acknowledged that Universiti Teknologi Malaysia reserves the right as follows : 1. The thesis is the property of Universiti Teknologi Malaysia. 2. The Library of Universiti Teknologi Malaysia has the right to make copies for the purpose of research only. 3. The Library has the right to make copies of the thesis for academic exchange.

Certified by :

SIGNATURE

SIGNATURE OF SUPERVISOR

570428-08-5944
(NEW IC NO. /PASSPORT NO.)

PROFESSOR DR AMINATON BT MARTO


NAME OF SUPERVISOR

Date : 18th May 2009

Date : 18th May 2009

NOTES :

If the thesis is CONFIDENTIAL or RESTRICTED, please attach with the letter from the organisation with period and reasons for confidentiality or restriction.

I hereby declare that I have read this project report and in my opinion this project report is sufficient in terms of scope and quality for the award of the degree of Master of Engineering (Civil-Geotechnics).

Signature

Name of Supervisor

PROF DR AMINATON MARTO

Date

i COMPARISON OF BACK ANALYSIS AND MEASURED LATERAL DISPLACEMENT OF CANTILEVER DIAPHRAGM WALL

FAUDZIAH BTE SHUKOR

A project report submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the award of the degree of Master of Engineering (Civil-Geotechnics)

Faculty of Civil Engineering Universiti Teknologi Malaysia

MAY 2009

ii

I declare that this project report is the result of my own work except as cited in the references. The project report has not been accepted for any degree and is not concurrently submitted in candidature of any other degree.

Signature

Name

: FAUDZIAH BTE SHUKOR

Date

iii

DEDICATION

T O MY DEAR HUSBAND AND FAMILY

iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Formost, I wish to express my sincere appreciation to my supervisor, Professor Dr.Aminaton bt. Marto. She has given me her full patient, advice, guidance, comments and her valuable time in assisting me to complete the project. She has assisted me in my difficulties of getting the work done. Without her patience and guide I feel I may not be able to complete the project in the time schedule. Thank you again to my dear Professor Dr.Aminaton.

I would like also to express my gratitude to Ir.Law Kim Hing who has provided me the data for the case study. He has also assisted me in trouble-shooting during the running of the analysis.

My sincere thanks also to my other colleagues, friends and lecturers who have some how or rather been directly or indirectly helped me in the project.

Finally, my gratitude to my husband and children who have given me courage and strength to complete the project.

ABSTRACT

This study is aimed to evaluate the performance of a cantilever diaphragm wall earth retaining system, constructed by staged excavation. The actual performance extracted from geotechnical instrument is compared with the numerical method. The numerical method is using Soil Hardening model. The simulation of the computer analysis has been carried out using different soil stiffness parameter which have been correlated from 2000N, 2500N, 3000N and 3500N values (with N is the Standard Penetration Test values). The results obtained had been used to compare with the actual performance of the field data. From the results of the finite element analysis, the obtained lateral displacement profile is reasonably in close agreement when compared to the
ref ref ref instrumentation profile. Thus the soil stiffness parameters ( E50 , Eoed , Eur ) which have

been used to correlate based on 3500N values are suitable for the soil at the site of Kenny Hill formation, analysed in this project. The instrumentation data and the analyses have yielded very useful information for deep basement construction in terms of the selection of the soil parameters.

vi

ABSTRAK

Kajian ini adalah bertujuan untuk menilai prestasi sistem tembok penahan tanah diaphragm kantilever dalam pembinaan pengorekan tanah secara berperingkat. Prestasi sebenar tembok yang di perolehi dari alatan instrumentasi geoteknikal akan di bandingkan dengan cara numerikal. Cara numerikal tersebut adalah mengunakan model Hardening soil model. Kekuatan tanah yang di perbandingkani dengan nilai 2000N, 2500 N, 3000N dan 3500N (dimana N adalah nilai dari Standard Penetration Test) disimulasi dengan mengunakan computer. Keputusannya digunakan untuk membuat perbandingan dengan prestasi sebenar yang diperolehi dari data tapak. Keputusan dari simulasi komputer , menghasilkan pergerakan tembok adalah menepati pergerakkan jika dibandingkan dengan profil instrumentasi. Dengan itu parameter kekuatan tanah
ref ref ref ( E50 , Eoed , Eur ) dimana perbandingkan 3500N adalah bersesuaian untuk tanah Kenny

Hill formation.. Data dari instrumentasi dan analisis telah menghasilkan penting dalam pemilihan parameter tanah untuk kerja pembinaan basemen.

maklumat

vii TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER

TITLE

PAGE

TITLE PAGE DECLARATION DEDICATION ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ABSTRACT ABSTRAK TABLE CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES LIST OF FIGURES LIST OF SYMBOLS INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Background of the Problem 1.2 Statement of Problem 1.3 Objectives of the Study 1.4 Scope and Limitation
1.5 Significant of the Study

i ii iii iv v vi vii x xi
xiii

1 1 2 3 3 4 5 5 5 7 7 12 14 16 18

LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Retaining Wall Type 2.2 Excavation Effects 2.3 Geotechnical Instrumentation 2.4 Previous Research In Deep Excavation 2.5 Elastic Properties of Soil 2.6 Applications OF Finite Element Analysis 2.6.1 2.6.2 Plaxis Hardening Soil Model

viii 2.7 Design Approach 2.7.1 2.7.2 Stability Analysis Free Earth Support Method and Fixed Earth Support Method 2.7.3 2.7.4 Stress and Deformation Analysis Settlement Induced by the Construction of Diaphragm Wall 24 27 21 21 24

2.7.5 2.7.6

Excavation depth Analysis of ground surface settlement Induced by excavation 2.7.6.1 Pecks Method

28 29

29 31 31 31 32 33 33 34 35

2.8 2.9

Mobilisation of Earth Pressure Engineering properties of retained soils 2.9.1 2.9.2 2.9.3 2.9.4 2.9.5 2.9.6 Angle of Internal Friction Cohesion Unit Weight of soil Active Earth Pressure Passive Earth Pressure At-Rest Pressure

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 Introduction Technical Literature Data Collection Parametric Study Analysis of Data

36 36 36 36 37 37

ix 4 CASE STUDY OF DEEP EXCAVATION IN KUALA LUMPUR 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 Introduction Project Description Stratigraphy Profile Field Instrumentation Stage Construction Finite Element Simulation 4.6.1 4.6.2 4.6.3 2-D Modeling Soil Parameters and constitutive model Parametric Study 39 39 40 42 44 47 47 47 50 39

ANALYSIS RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 5.1 5.2 Introduction


ref ref Influence Soil Stiffness ( E50 , Eoed )

52 52 52

CONCLUSION 6.1 6.2 6.3 Introduction Conclusion Recommendations

61 61 61 62 63

REFERENCES

x
LIST OF TABLES

TABLE NO.

TITLE

PAGE

2.1

Typical Values in Terms of Top Movement Caused from Rotation of Basement Wall at its Base

2.2 2.3 2.4

Empirical Equations for Es (Bowles, 1998) Ranges of Es for Various Soils (Bowles, 1998) A Correlation between the Angle of Internal Friction and the Standard Penetration Test (Winterkom and Fang)

13 14 32

4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4

Simulation of Construction Work Soil Parameters for Hardening Soil Model Typical Parameters for Hardening Soil Model Stiffness Soil Parameters for Hardening Soil Model (2000N)

44 48 48 49

4.5

Stiffness Soil Parameters for Hardening Soil Model (2500N)

49

4.6

Stiffness Soil Parameters for Hardening Soil Model (3000N)

49

4.7

Stiffness Soil Parameters for Hardening Soil model (3500N)

49

4.8 5.1

Soil Stiffness Input in Soil Hardening Model Comparison of the Back Analysis in the Numerical Simulation with the Actual Performance for Horizontal Displacement at the Final Stage, at the Soil Surface.

50 52

5.2

Extreme Bending Moment and Shear Force Values for the Different Soil Stiffness

60

5.3

Vertical Displacement Values at Final Stage for the Different Soil Stiffness

60

xi

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE NO.

TITLE

2.1

Deformed Mesh for Analysis of Sheet Pile Wall (Bakker and Brinkgreve 1991)

17

2.2

Hyperbolic Stress-Strain Relations in Primary Loading Standard Drained Triaxial Test. (Brinkgreve et al,2004)

19

2.3

Definition of

in Oedometer Test Results

21

(Brinkgreve et al,2004) 2.4 Overall Shear Failure Modes (a) Push-In and (b) Basal Heave (Chang, 2006) 2.5 Free Earth Support Method (a) Deformation of Rretaining Wall and (b) Distribution of Earth Pressure (Chang, 2006) 2.6 Fixed Earth Support Method (a) Deformation of Retaining Wall and (b) Distribution of Earth Pressure (Chang, 2006) 2.7 Envelope of Ground Surface Induced by Trenched Excavation (Clough and O Rourke, 1990) 2.8 Envelope of Ground Surface Settlement Induced by Diaphragm Wall Construction (Ou and Yang, 2000) 2.9 Relationship between Maximum Wall Deflections and Excavation Depths (Ou 29 28 27 26 25 23

et,1993)

xii 2.10 Pecks Method (1969) for Estimating Ground Surface Settlement 2.11 2.12 Mohr Circle Diagram (Macnab,2002) Rankine Diagram Active Pressure (Macnab,2002) 2.13 Rankine Diagram Passive Pressure (Macnab,2002) 3.1 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 Methodology Flow Chart Diaphragm Wall Elevation and Llocation Plan Geological Map of Malaysia SPT-N Values Profile Stages of Construction and Simulation on Hardening Soil Model 5.1 Horizontal Wall Displacement versus Wall Depth for 2000N 5.2 Horizontal Wall Displacement versus Wall depth for 2500N 5.3 Horizontal Wall Displacement versus wall depth for 3000 N 5.4 Horizontal Wall Displacement versus Wall depth for 3500N 5.5 Comparison of Horizontal Wall Displacement for 2000N, 2500N, 3000N and 3500N with Measured Field Data,at the Final Excavation Stage 5.6 Typical Profile for Computed Shear Force Diagram for the Diaphragm Wall 5.7 Typical Profile for Computed Bending Moment Diagram for the Diaphragm Wall 60 59 57 56 55 54 53 39 40 41 43 46 34 32 34 30

xiii

LIST OF SYMBOLS

Cross sectional area Effective cohesion Undrained shear strength

c' cu d E Eref
ref E50
ref Eoed ref Eur

Distance from wall


Youngs modulus Youngs modulus for Mohr-Coulomb model Secant stiffness in triaxial test Tangent stiffness in oedometer test Unloading reloading stiffness Youngs modulus of sand or clay Yield function Total depth of excavation Moment of inertial Plasticity index

Es f H I Ip K oNC kx ky L m n P' p ref

K o value for normal consolidation


Permeability in horizontal direction Permeability in vertical direction Width of excavation Power for stress level dependency stiffness Porosity Mean effective stress Reference stress for stiffness, pref = 100 kpa

xiv

q qc
RL

Deviator / Deviatoric stress Tip resistance of cone penetration test Reduced level Failure ratio Interface reduction factor Standard penetration test N value

Rf Rint er
SPTN, N

u
wL

Pore water pressure


Liquid limit Effective friction angle Undrained friction angle Dilatancy angle Shear stress
1

' u

Effective stress Total stress Major, intermediate and minor principal stress, respectively Poissons ratio Poissons ratio for unloading reloading Axial strain Soil unit weight Soil unit weight Soil unit weight

' ' 1' , 2, 3

vur

1 , a unsat sat

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

1.1

Background of Problem

The most cost effective and practical method to support an excavation is to slope back the sides of the excavation. The design requires only the soil properties of the excavated area so as to determine the angle of reponse. The concept of the design requires wider space for the proposed slope and the excavation may not be deep. Another setback will be the excavated area is near to the adjacent building. The subject of the construction for deep excavation become more complicated, when there is no adequate space, slope cannot be accommodated and therefore an earth retaining system is the solution. The three basic types of earth retaining systems are cantilevered, braced or tied-back system.

The design of the retaining wall system can be from a simple empirical method towards a more complicated complex computer analysis. Whatever the method, the design aspects are the stresses, loads related to the wall system and the effect of construction method. Other than those design methods, the designer past experience is significant too. The designer must be equipped with the subject literature, aided with the geotechnical journals and texts for him to apply an appropriate solution from many options to excavation support problem.

However in the increasingly competitive environment where value engineering is required followed by the reluctance of the client to invest in geotechnical cost, the designer is required to produce a design with minimal cost. Whatever the preferred solution from the many available solutions, the risks involved have to be evaluated and any failures of the retaining wall must not happened. The

2 preferred solution must therefore produce safe and economical design taking all aspects into consideration.

1.2

Statement of Problem

The occurrence of ground displacement due to excavation works in deep excavation is based on many factors such as the stratigraphy, soil properties, lateral earth pressure, the method of constructions, contractual matters, soil loads, water table, seepage problem and workmanship. These factors need to be considered in the design procedure to understand the ground response due to excavation. Related to the deep excavation, other important aspect is the evaluation of the foundation for the adjacent properties and the effects of the excavation on the serviceability of the adjacent structures.

The subsoil stratigraphy is generally obtained by auger deep boring supported with Standard Penetration Test result from borehole. With the data taken from the multiple boreholes and then drawn in the geometry, can lead to understand the soil stratigraphy. The soil properties such as friction angle, cohesive intercept, and poissons ratio are required for any design method of earth retaining structure whether using numerical or simplified method.

This data used in the design process is confirmed by the instrumentation monitoring on the behavior of the earth retaining system. Both the predicted and actual behavior of the retaining system must be the same during/and at end of the construction period. The need to monitor the behavior of the earth retaining wall in conjunction with the stage of excavation which is required to evaluate the actual behavior is similar to the predicted or as designed. If otherwise immediate action is necessary to resolve the problem cause by the unexpected behavior of the supported soil. This may be due to the construction nearby causing the change in the water level or wrong interpretation of soil data.

This study is aimed to evaluating the performance of a cantilever diaphragm wall earth retaining system, constructed by staged excavation. The actual

3 performance extracted from geotechnical instrument will be compared with the numerical method. The numerical method is using Soil Hardening model.

1.3

Objective of the Study

The objectives of the study are as follows:

i) To determine soil properties and the standard penetration test (SPT-N) values of the soil layers at site location.

ii) To determine the correlation between the soil stiffness parameter with the field SPT-N values by comparing the monitoring measurement results with the values obtained from the finite element analysis result using Hardening Soil model for the lateral displacement of cantilever diaphragm wall.

iii) To determine the wall deflection using the previous researchers correlation of soil stiffness and SPT-N values.

1.4

Scope and Limitation

This case study has been conducted on particular project, which is represent by a development with a 7 m depth basement at a site somewhere in Kuala Lumpur. The detail of the subsoil parameters, existing and proposed soil platform, the stages of excavation, the retaining wall system and the on-site instrumentation data has been used in the case study. The analysis has been carried out with numerical method using Finite Element Analysis by the aid of computer program (Plaxis). The lateral displacement results compare with the actual behaviour of the retaining wall system, taken from the instrumentation data. However, the instrumentation data used was for the horizontal deflection of the wall only. The limitation of using the Plaxis analysis is limited to Soil Hardening Model using the available soil data obtained from the available borehole results.

1.5

Significant of the Study

This study will be very useful to geotechnical engineers to be used as reference for analyzing the stability of the retaining wall system with respect to the lateral movement created during construction. The outcome of the study will show that the design and construction method of the project will be used as guidance to similar condition of other construction sites for prediction of horizontal movement. The soil parameter for the individual soil type can be used as a guide to all designers with similar condition. The design model is also significant whereby it can be used for similar condition.