faudziahma071517geoteknik09aminatonttp

8/2/2019 faudziahma071517geoteknik09aminatonttp

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/faudziahma071517geoteknik09aminatonttp 1/20

PSZ 19:16 (Pind. 1/07)

DECLARATION OF THESIS / UNDERGRADUATE PROJECT PAPER AND COPYRIGHT

FAUDZIAH BT SHUKOR Author’s full name :

Date of birth : 28/04/1957

Title : COMPARISON OF BACK ANALYSIS AND MEASURED LATERAL

DISPLACEMENT OF CANTILEVER DIAPHRAGM WALL

2008/2009

Academic Session :

I declare that this thesis is classified as :

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 purposeof 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 PROFESSOR DR AMINATON BT MARTO (NEW IC NO. /PASSPORT NO.) 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.

UNIVERSITI TEKNOLOGI MALAYSIA

CONFIDENTIAL (Contains confidential information under the Official Secret

Act 1972)*

RESTRICTED (Contains restricted information as specified by the

organisation where research was done)*

OPEN ACCESS I agree that my thesis to be published as online open access

(full text)



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.



v

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

instrumentation profile. Thus the soil stiffness parameters ( ref E 50 , ref

oed E , ref

ur E ) 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 E 50 , ref

oed E , ref

ur E ) dimana perbandingkan 3500N adalah bersesuaian untuk tanah Kenny

Hill formation.. Data dari instrumentasi dan analisis telah menghasilkan maklumat

penting dalam pemilihan parameter tanah untuk kerja pembinaan basemen.



vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER TITLE PAGE

1

TITLE PAGE

DECLARATION

DEDICATION

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

ABSTRACT

ABSTRAK

TABLE CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES

LIST OF FIGURES

LIST OF SYMBOLS

INTRODUCTION

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

2 LITERATURE REVIEW 5

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 Plaxis

2.6.2 Hardening Soil Model

5

5

7

7

12

14

16

18



viii

2.7 Design Approach

2.7.1 Stability Analysis

2.7.2 Free Earth Support Method and

Fixed Earth Support Method

2.7.3 Stress and Deformation Analysis

2.7.4 Settlement Induced by the

Construction of Diaphragm Wall

2.7.5 Excavation depth

2.7.6 Analysis of ground surface settlement

Induced by excavation

2.7.6.1 Peck’s Method

2.8 Mobilisation of Earth Pressure

2.9 Engineering properties of retained soils

2.9.1 Angle of Internal Friction

2.9.2 Cohesion

2.9.3 Unit Weight of soil

2.9.4 Active Earth Pressure

2.9.5 Passive Earth Pressure

2.9.6 At-Rest Pressure

21

21

24

24

27

28

29

29

31

31

31

32

33

33

34

35

3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 36

3.1 Introduction

3.2 Technical Literature

3.3 Data Collection

3.4 Parametric Study

3.5 Analysis of Data

36

36

36

37

37



ix

4 CASE STUDY OF DEEP EXCAVATION IN

KUALA LUMPUR

39

4.1 Introduction

4.2 Project Description

4.3 Stratigraphy Profile

4.4 Field Instrumentation

4.5 Stage Construction

4.6 Finite Element Simulation

4.6.1 2-D Modeling

4.6.2 Soil Parameters and constitutive model

4.6.3 Parametric Study

39

39

40

42

44

47

47

47

50

5 ANALYSIS RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 52

5.1 Introduction

5.2 Influence Soil Stiffness ( ref E 50 , ref

oed E )

52

52

6 CONCLUSION 61

6.1 Introduction

6.2 Conclusion

6.3 Recommendations

61

61

62

REFERENCES 63



x

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE NO. TITLE PAGE

2.1

2.2

2.3

2.4

4.1

4.2

4.3

4.4

4.5

4.6

4.7

4.8

5.1

5.2

5.3

Typical Values in Terms of Top Movement Caused

from Rotation of Basement Wall at its Base

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)

Simulation of Construction Work

Soil Parameters for Hardening Soil Model

Typical Parameters for Hardening Soil Model

Stiffness Soil Parameters for Hardening Soil Model

(2000N)


(2500N)


(3000N)

Stiffness Soil Parameters for Hardening Soil model

(3500N)

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.

Extreme Bending Moment and Shear Force Values

for the Different Soil Stiffness

Vertical Displacement Values at Final Stage for the

Different Soil Stiffness

6

13

14

32

44

48

48

49

49

49

49

50

52

60

60



xi

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE NO. TITLE

2.1

2.2

2.3

2.4

2.5

2.6

2.7

2.8

2.9

Deformed Mesh for Analysis of Sheet Pile Wall

(Bakker and Brinkgreve 1991)

Hyperbolic Stress-Strain Relations in Primary

Loading Standard Drained Triaxial Test.

(Brinkgreve et al,2004)

Definition of in Oedometer Test Results

(Brinkgreve et al,2004)

Overall Shear Failure Modes (a) Push-In and (b)

Basal Heave (Chang, 2006)

Free Earth Support Method (a) Deformation of

Rretaining Wall and (b) Distribution of Earth

Pressure (Chang, 2006)

Fixed Earth Support Method (a) Deformation of

Retaining Wall and (b) Distribution of Earth

Pressure (Chang, 2006)

Envelope of Ground Surface Induced by

Trenched Excavation (Clough and O’ Rourke,

1990)

Envelope of Ground Surface Settlement

Induced by Diaphragm Wall Construction (Ou

and Yang, 2000)

Relationship between Maximum Wall

Deflections and Excavation Depths (Ou

et ,1993)

17

19

21

23

25

26

27

28

29



xii

2.10

2.11

2.12

2.13

3.1

4.1

4.2

4.3

4.4

5.1

5.2

5.3

5.4

5.5

5.6

5.7

Peck’s Method (1969) for Estimating Ground

Surface Settlement

Mohr Circle Diagram (Macnab,2002)

Rankine Diagram Active Pressure

(Macnab,2002)

Rankine Diagram Passive Pressure

(Macnab,2002)

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

Horizontal Wall Displacement versus Wall

Depth for 2000N


depth for 2500N

Horizontal Wall Displacement versus wall

depth for 3000 N


depth for 3500N

Comparison of Horizontal Wall Displacement

for 2000N, 2500N, 3000N and 3500N with

Measured Field Data,at the Final Excavation

Stage

Typical Profile for Computed Shear Force

Diagram for the Diaphragm Wall

Typical Profile for Computed Bending Moment

Diagram for the Diaphragm Wall

30

32

34

34

39

40

41

43

46

53

54

55

56

57

59

60



xiv

q Deviator / Deviatoric stress

qc Tip resistance of cone penetration test

RL Reduced level

f R Failure ratio

er Rint Interface reduction factor

SPT’N’, N Standard penetration test N value

u Pore water pressure

Lw Liquid limit

'φ Effective friction angle

uφ Undrained friction angle

ψ Dilatancy angle

τ Shear stress

σ 1

Effective stress

σ

Total stress

'

3

'

,2

'

1 , σ σ σ Major, intermediate and minor principal stress, respectively

ν Poisson’s ratio

ur v Poisson’s ratio for unloading reloading

aε ε ,1 Axial strain

γ Soil unit weight

unsat γ Soil unit weight

sat γ Soil unit weight



1

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

poisson’s 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.



4

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.

faudziahma071517geoteknik09aminatonttp

Documents