design, construction and monitoring of...

Guo Yeang Yang

Mohd Nazri

DESIGN, CONSTRUCTION AND

MONITORING OF EMBANKMENT

FOR MINIMAL SETTLEMENT

2

SCOPE OF PRESENTATION

• Introduction

• Design Criteria

• Design Concept

• Ground Condition

• Design Parameters

• Construction and Monitoring Records

• Conclusion

INTRODUCTION

4

Introduction

9+

000.

10+000.

11+000.

12+000. 13+000. 14+000.

15+

000.

16+

000.

0.

1+000. 2+000.

3+000. 4+000. 5+000. 6

+000.

7+

000.

8+

000.

17+

000.

18+

000.

19+

000.

20+

000.

21+000.

22+000.

23+000.

PACKAGE 3A

BATU MAUNG

INTERCHANGE

PACKAGE 3C

BATU KAWAN

TRUMPET

INTERCHANGE

BATU KAWAN

EXPRESSSWAY

PULAU

AMAN

MAIN LAND

(BATU KAWAN)

P292

P0

MAIN NAVIGATIONAL

SPAN

P24-P27

PULAU

JEREJAK

PENANG ISLAND

(BATU MAUNG)

LAND PACKAGES

6

PACKAGE 3A: BATU MAUNG INTERCHANGE

3 TIERS

DIRECTIONAL

RAMPS

7

PACKAGE 3B: BATU KAWAN EXPRESSWAY

CLOVERLEAF INTERCHANGE

8

PACKAGE 3C: BATU KAWAN TRUMPET INTERCHANGE

AT MAINLAND

(BATU KAWAN)

LINKING NSE AT

KM154.8

2 TIERS

TRUMPET

INTERCHANGE

9

PACKAGE 3D: TOLL PLAZA, ADMINISTRATION

BUILDING & RELATED WORKS

ADMINISTRATION

BUILDING

SECOND PENANG

BRIDGE TOLL

PLAZA

PLUS TOLL PLAZA

PROPOSED GROUND

TREATMENTS

11

CLOVERLEAF

INTERCHANGE

PB2X TOLL

LAND

BRIDGE

PLUS TOLL

SG. TENGAH

BRIDGE

BRIDGE OVER CANAL

AND ARCH CULVERT

12

LAND BRIDGE

13

PB2X TOLL

14

CLOVER LEAF INTERCHANGE

15

PLUS TOLL

16

SG. TENGAH BRIDGE

17

BRIDGE OVER CANAL AND ARCH CULVERT

DESIGN CRITERIA

19

DESIGN CRITERIA DESIGN CHECK MAIN DESIGN CRITERIA

Year 2007 2008 2009 2011

Stability (short-term during construction)

1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25

Settlement

90% consolidation

settlement during

construction

400mm post-

construction

settlement for the

first 7 years

90% consolidation

settlement during

construction

250mm post-

construction

settlement for the

first 5 years

100% consolidation

settlement during

construction (under

the permanent load)

50mm post-

construction

settlement for the

first 2 years

100mm post-

construction

settlement for the

first 5 years

Main Carriageway

100% consolidation

settlement during

construction (under the

permanent load)

50mm post-construction

settlement for the first 20

years

Other areas

100% consolidation

settlement during

construction (under the

permanent load)



years



years

DESIGN CONCEPT

21

DESIGN CONCEPT

Effects of surcharging on secondary compression (Ladd, 1971)

22

DESIGN CONCEPT

C’/C vs. AAOS % (Saye et. al, 2001)

23

DESIGN CONCEPT

The reduction in rate of secondary compression proposed by Ladd (1971)

24

DESIGN CONCEPT

GROUND CONDITION

26

GROUND CONDITION

27

GROUND CONDITION

28

GROUND CONDITION

29

GROUND CONDITION

30

GROUND CONDITION

31

GROUND CONDITION

32

GROUND CONDITION

Typical Piezocone Result

Moisture Content

Atterberg Limit

Plasticity Index

Liquidity Index

Bulk Density

Preconsolidation Pressure

Overconsolidation Ratio

Void Ratio

Compression Index

Compression Ratio

Coefficient of Consolidation (Cv)

Coefficient of Consolidation (Ch)

Corrected Peak Strength

Corrected Remolded Strength

Sensitivity of Soft Clay

Cu/v’

Cu/Pc’

33

TYPICAL PIEZOCONE RESULT

(NEAR PDC CLOVERLEAF

INTERCHANGE)

34

TYPICAL PIEZOCONE RESULT

(NEAR LAND BRIDGE)

35

MOISTURE CONTENT

36

ATTERBERG LIMIT

37

PLASTICITY INDEX

38

LIQUIDITY INDEX

39

BULK DENSITY

40

PRECONSOLIDATION PRESSURE

41

OVERCONSOLIDATION RATIO

42

VOID RATIO

43

COMPRESSION INDEX

44

COMPRESSION RATIO

45

COEFFICIENT OF CONSOLIDATION

(CV)

46

COEFFICIENT OF CONSOLIDATION

(Ch)

47

CORRECTED PEAK STRENGTH

48

CORRECTED REMOLDED STRENGTH

49

SENSITIVITY OF SOFT CLAY

50

Cu/v’

51

Cu/Pc’

DESIGN PARAMETERS

53

DESIGN PARAMETERS

Properties Symbol Unit Upper CLAY Lower CLAY

Bulk unit weight gb kN/m3 15.0 16.0

Undrained shear strength

Cu kPa 5 + 1.5z * 24.5 + 0.4z*

Friction angle f’ degrees 2.5 2.5

Effective cohesion c’ kPa 21 23

Pre-overburden pressure

Pc’ – svo’ kPa 20 20

Initial voids ratio eo - 2.5 1.8

Compression index Cc - 1.0 0.6

Re-compression index

Cr - 0.10 0.06

Compression ratio Cce = Cc/(1+eo) - 0.286 0.214

Re-compression ratio

Cre = Cr/(1+eo) - 0.029 0.021

Coeff. of vertical consolidation

Cv m2/year 1.5 1.5

Coeff. of horizontal consolidation

Ch m2/year 5 5

Secondary compression index

Ca - 0.035 0.021

GEOTECHNICAL

DESIGN

55

GEOTECHNICAL DESIGN

Scheme Ref.

Fill Height, H (m)

PVD Spacing (m c/c)

Surcharge Height (m)

Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3

Basal Reinforcement (kN)

Max. Fill

Height (m)

Filling Rate

(m/wk)

Rest Period (mth)

Max. Fill

Height (m)

Filling Rate

(m/wk)

Rest Period (mth)

Max. Fill

Height (m)

Filling Rate

(m/wk)

Rest Period (mth)

1 H 2.5 1.4 1.5 2.0 0.5 2 4.0 0.5 6 - - - HS Geotextile 200/50

2 2.5 < H 3.5 1.2 2.0 3.5 1.25 2 4.5 1.0 2 5.5 0.5 6 HS Geotextile 200/50

3 3.5 < H 4.5 1.2 2.2 3.5 1.25 2 4.5 1.0 2 6.7 0.5 6 HS Geotextile 400/50

SUMMARY OF EMBANKMENT STAGED CONSTRUCTION ON PVD

TREATED GROUND

Scheme Ref.

Fill Height, H (m)

SC Spacing (m c/c)

Surcharge Height

(m)

Stage 1 Stage 2

Basal Reinforcement (kN) Under Main

Carriageway

Under Side Slope

Max. Fill

Height (m)

Filling Rate

(m/wk)

Rest Period (mth)

Max. Fill

Height (m)

Filling Rate

(m/wk)

Rest Period (mth)

A 4.5 < H 6.5 2.5 2.3 1.5 4.0 1.0 - 8.0 0.5 3.0 HS Geotextile 400/50

B 6.5 < H 8.5 2.4 2.1 2.0 4.0 1.0 - 10.5 0.5 2.5 HS Geotextile 400/50

C 8.5 < H 9.5 2.1 1.8 2.0 4.0 1.0 - 11.5 0.5 2.5 Geogrid 400/100

D 9.5 < H

10.0 1.8 1.8 2.2 4.0 1.0 - 12.2 0.5 2.5 Geogrid 400/100

SUMMARY OF EMBANKMENT CONTROLLED FILLING ON SC

TREATED GROUND

CONSTRUCTION AND

MONITORING RESULTS

57

GEOTECHNICAL INSTRUMENTATION

Instruments Approx. Spacing Quantities Remarks

Rod Settlement Gauges (RSG) 100m intervals 131 nos.

Closer spacing at interface between different treatment methods

3 nos. of RSGs provided at every 200m intervals, i.e. at centreline, RHS and LHS.

Ground Surface Markers 100m to 150m

intervals 151 nos.

Closer spacing at interface between different treatment methods Inclinometers 200m intervals 47 nos.

Pneumatic Piezometers 200m intervals 39 nos.

Deep Levelling Datum - 3 nos. Reference datum

Hydrostatic Profile Gauge - 5 nos. Settlement profile across the embankment

58

GEOTECHNICAL INSTRUMENTATION LAYOUT

59


PB2X TOLL

60 CLOVERLEAF INTERCHANGE


61 PLUS TOLL PLAZA


62 SUNGAI TENGAH BRIDGE


63 BRIDGE OVER CANAL AND ARCH CULVERT


64

TYPICAL ARRANGEMENT OF INSTRUMENTS

PVD AND STONE COLUMNS

65 PVD AND STONE COLUMN

TYPICAL DETAILS AT INTERFACE BETWEEN TREATMENTS

66

RSG-108 (PVD)

Reduced Level and Settlement Plot (Short Term)

67

RSG-108 (PVD)


68

RSG-108 (PVD)

Asaoka Plot

69

RSG-108 (PVD)

Creep Settlement Plot

70

RSG-110 (PVD)


71

RSG-110 (SC)

Reduced Level and Settlement Plot (Long Term)

72

RSG-110 (SC)

Asaoka Plot

73

RSG-110 (SC)


74

RSG-114 (SC)


75

RSG-114 (SC)


76

RSG-114 (SC)

Asaoka Plot

77

RSG-114 (SC)


78

INCLINOMETER NEARBY

RSG-114 (SC)

Inclinometer Plot (Face A-A)

79 Inclinometer Plot (Face B-B)

INCLINOMETER NEARBY

RSG-114 (SC)

80

RSG-117 (SC)


81

RSG-117 (SC)


82

RSG-117 (SC)

Asaoka Plot

83

RSG-117 (SC)


CONCLUSION

85

CONCLUSION

In order to fulfill the minimum settlement design

criteria, the following steps were employed:-

1) Higher surcharge

2) Longer surcharge period

3) Pumping from well points to remove trapped

water

4) Proper drainage to ensure that water can be freely

discharged from sand blanket

5) Sufficient testing and instrumentation

86

http://www.kelloggforum.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/thank-you-and-Follow-up.jpg

design, construction and monitoring of...

Documents