For a cantilever pile wall shown in Figure 1, assess the performance of the system and answer the following questions.

Similar documents
DESIGN OF AXIALLY LOADED STEPPED FOOTING DATA :- SBC of soil =200 KN /m 2 Concrete Mix =M20 Steel Grade = Fe 415 Clear cover of bottom slab =50 mm

m v = 1.04 x 10-4 m 2 /kn, C v = 1.29 x 10-2 cm 2 /min

Formation level = m. Foundation level = m. Height of the wall above the Ground Level = 7.42 m

Reinforced Soil Retaining Walls-Design and Construction

UNIT-I SOIL EXPLORATION

computed using Equation 3-18 by setting the 2nd term equal to 0 and K A equal to K o and using the pressure distribution as shown in Figure 3-23.

This document downloaded from vulcanhammer.net vulcanhammer.info Chet Aero Marine

INSTITUTE OF AERONAUTICAL ENGINEERING (Autonomous) Dundigal, Hyderabad

Effective stress. Chapter Total vertical stress at 5 m depth: kpa. Pore water pressure: kpa. Therefore, effective vertical stress: kpa

Department of Civil & Geological Engineering GEOE Engineering Geology

Tension Cracks. Topics Covered. Tension crack boundaries Tension crack depth Query slice data Thrust line Sensitivity analysis.

INSTITUTE OF AERONAUTICAL ENGINEERING (Autonomous) Dundigal, Hyderabad CIVIL ENGINEERING TUTORIAL QUESTION BANK

SOLUTIONS TO TUTORIAL EXAMPLES CHAPTER 13

APPENDIX G SCA BASIN CALCULATIONS

Lateral Load Analysis Considering Soil-Structure Interaction. ANDREW DAUMUELLER, PE, Ph.D.

REPORT GEO-TECHNICAL INVESTIGATION FOR THE PROPOSED BLOCK-7 SUB-STATION SY NO-225, NEAR RAYACHERLU VILLAGE

REPORT GEO-TECHNICAL INVESTIGATION FOR THE PROPOSED BLOCK-1 SUB-STATION SY NO-44, NEAR KYATAGANACHERLU VILLAGE

Tutorial 5 Relative equilibrium

The tensile capacity of suction caissons in sand under rapid loading

Displacement-based calculation method on soil-pile interaction of PHC pipe-piles

Cubzac-les-Ponts Experimental Embankments on Soft Clay

Prof. B V S Viswanadham, Department of Civil Engineering, IIT Bombay

Analysis of dilatometer test in calibration chamber

Theory of a vertically loaded Suction Pile in CLAY

Lab 7 Rotational Equilibrium - Torques

Irrigation &Hydraulics Department lb / ft to kg/lit.

CENGRS GEOTECHNICA PVT. LTD. Job No Sheet No. 1

CHAPTER IV FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF THE KNEE JOINT WITHOUT A MEDICAL IMPLANT

Pore-Air Entrapment during Infiltration

Pressure Measurement

Influence of Settlement on Bearing Capacity Analysis of Shallow Foundations on Sandy Clays in the Niger Delta, Nigeria

Pushover analysis with ZSOIL taking soil into account. Stéphane Commend GeoMod Ing. SA, Lausanne

Adaptive Pushover Analysis of Irregular RC Moment Resisting Frames

Pros and Cons of the Analysis of Slope Stability by Various Methods of Slices or Columns

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING, IIT BOMBAY CE306 STRUCTURAL MECHANICS III

Introduction of world construction methods and trends. Franz-Werner Gerressen, Head of Method Development, Tokyo,

Exam Question 9: Hydrostatics. March 6, Applied Mathematics: Lecture 8. Brendan Williamson. Introduction. Density, Weight and Volume

APPLICATION OF PUSHOVER ANALYSIS ON EARTHQUAKE RESPONSE PREDICATION OF COMPLEX LARGE-SPAN STEEL STRUCTURES

Infiltration and Air Pressure Build-up

SOIL ANCHORS ETSAB/UPC J.Llorens - ETSAB/UPC PASSIVE ANCHORS - ANTECEDENTS

Bearing Capacity and Settlement Response of PMS Tanks on Cohesionless Soil Lithology in Lekki, Lagos of Nigeria

Assistant Lecturer Anees Kadhum AL Saadi

Erratum to: Effect of seabed slope on the pile behaviour of a fixed offshore platform under lateral forces

Module 7 Lecture 1. Swelling and Collapse Behavior

Engineering Practice on Ice Propeller Strength Assessment Based on IACS Polar Ice Rule URI3

Desaturating sand deposit by air injection for reducing liquefaction potential

Submerged Slope with Excess Pore- Water Pressure

Equipment Productivity

ESTIMATION OF LATERAL SPREAD OF A CAISSON TYPE QUAY CAUSED BY BACK FILL LIQUEFACTION

Theory of multi-bench retaining for large area foundation pit and its engineering application

Fehmarnbelt Fixed Link. Geotechnical Large Scale Testing

Vertical Uplift Capacity of a Group of Equally Spaced Helical Screw Anchors in Sand

Deepwater Challenges Pipeline Installation Case

Truss Analysis Method of Sections Steven Vukazich San Jose State University

Conventional Ship Testing

COMPFIRE CCFT-FP_550_55_ September 2010 Fin Plate Connection to Circular Concrete-Filled Tube Test Result

Item 404 Driving Piling

Mechanical Stabilisation for Permanent Roads

STABILITY OF MULTIHULLS Author: Jean Sans

A STUDY ON LIQUEFIED GROUND DISRUPTION EFFECTS ON LIQUID STORAGE TANK BEHAVIOR

Level 3 Cambridge Technical in Engineering 05822/05823/05824/05825/05873 Unit 3: Principles of mechanical engineering

3. Types of foundation

V-H-M Yield Surface describing Soil Structure Interaction of Sub-sea Structures and Wind Turbines on Caisson Foundations in Soft Clays

RELIABILITY ASSESSMENT, STATIC AND DYNAMIC RESPONSE OF TRANSMISSION LINE TOWER: A COMPARATIVE STUDY

ABSTRACT. The design of a temporary slope and excavation retaining wall system often is carried out

FC-CIV HIDRCANA: Channel Hydraulics Flow Mechanics Review Fluid Statics

σ = force / surface area force act upon In the image above, the surface area would be (Face height) * (Face width).

3. Moments and Pressure

THE EFFECT OF EMBEDMENT DEPTH ON BEARING CAPACITY OF STRIP FOOTING IN COHESIVE FRICTIONAL MEDIUM

Saturated-Unsaturated Consolidation

Pressuremeters in Geotechnical Design

(Refer Slide Time: 1:22)

Typical factors of safety for bearing capacity calculation in different situations

Applying Hooke s Law to Multiple Bungee Cords. Introduction

. In an elevator accelerating upward (A) both the elevator accelerating upward (B) the first is equations are valid

THE USE OF SPIN FIN PILES IN MASSACHUSETTS

A comprehensive method for the structural design and verification of the INNWIND 10MW tri-spar floater

3 1 PRESSURE. This is illustrated in Fig. 3 3.

Edit this text for your title

The Usage of Propeller Tunnels For Higher Efficiency and Lower Vibration. M. Burak Şamşul

LYSAGHT W-DEK. Design and Construction Manual. Structural steel decking system

Effect of Depth of Periphery Beams on Behavior of Grid Beams on Grid Floor

Quantitative Risk of Linear Infrastructure on Permafrost Heather Brooks, PE. Arquluk Committee Meeting November 2015

Application of pushover analysis in estimating seismic demands for large-span spatial structure

SHEAR PERFORMANCE OF RC FOOTING BEAMS BY CAP-TIE SYSTEM USING WELDED STIRRUPS

using Strength Ratios

Impact Test Equipment Ltd & User Guide. User Guide

Slope Stability Analysis Of Class I Landfills With Co Disposal Of Bios

HCMTCB MATERIALS SAMPLING & TESTING PERFORMANCE CHECKLIST

ME311 Machine Design

[Barve, 4(7): July, 2015] ISSN: (I2OR), Publication Impact Factor: 3.785

PhysicsAndMathsTutor.com

SPECIAL FOOTINGS AND BEAMS ON ELASTIC FOUNDATIONS

3. A fluid is forced through a pipe of changing cross section as shown. In which section would the pressure of the fluid be a minimum?

The Adequacy of Pushover Analysis to Evaluate Vulnerability of Masonry Infilled Steel Frames Subjected to Bi-Directional Earthquake Loading

Semi-Submersible Offshore Platform Simulation Using ANSA & META

Cabling in Multiple Fall Ropes of Lifting Systems for Deep Water

TYPES OF FOUNDATION. Superstructure. Substructure. Foundation

Pressure Plate Drying and Wetting

Session 1. Pushover Analysis of a Torsionally Eccentric Cellular Abutment. Date 11/03/ PM 4 PM Eastern Time

Transcription:

Question 1 For a cantilever pile wall shown in Figure 1, assess the performance of the system and answer the following questions. Figure 1 - Cantilever Pile Wall i. Estimate the net resulting horizontal thrust by using Rankine s Earth Pressure Theory and limit equilibrium method using Slide software. ii. Estimate the minimum depth d to achieve a FS=1.5 against a global rotational failure. iii. Now model the problem by using RocScience RS2 software. Complete the excavation in 3 sets of 2m excavation stages. Assume a socket depth of 9m. Draw the axial force, shear and moment diagrams for each excavation stages. Similarly draw horizontal & vertical displacement profiles. iv. Check if 16 Φ20 reinforcement with concrete cover of 7.5 cm is suitable to resist the estimated maximum moments. v. Check if Φ16/ 20 cm spiral reinforcement fulfills the shear demand. vi. After the completion of the design, a piezometer was installed at 13 m depth which recorded pore water pressure of 100 kpa. Discuss how this data may change your assessment.

Question 1.1 Estimate the net resulting horizontal thrust by using Rankine s Earth Pressure Theory and limit equilibrium method using Slide software. If we were to calculate the net resulting horizontal thrust by using Rankine s Earth Pressure Theory; K a 1sin 1sin(27) 0.376 1sin 1sin(27) 25 0.376 Tension crack, z0 2 c Ka / Ka wet 0.88m 0.37618.5 2 29.48 (6 0.88) pa 0.376 18.5 (6 0.88) 2 5 0.376 29.48 kn / m P X 75.47 kn / m 2 In order to estimate the net resulting horizontal thrust by using Slide software, back analysis is performed. For this analysis, Janbu Simplified limit equilibrium method is used. Figure 2 - Back Analysis Result in Slide Software

Net Resulting Horizontal Thrust(Using Slide Back Analysis) = 68.8822kN/m Question 1.2 Estimate the minimum depth d to achieve a FS=1.5 against a global rotational failure. To estimate the minimum depth d to achieve the described criteria, free-earth method for cantilever walls is used[3]. Calculations are made using the following Excel tables. At the end, you wıll get a third degree equation which is composed on moment equilibrium to the the lower part of socket part, point O. ın excel, by trial and error once you write the forces and moments arms in a correct way according to unknown X (socket depth in the silty sand layer), it takes very short to achieve D0 D0 = 7.35 Soil No Saturated Unit Weight Wet Unit Weight c' φ' Ka Kp 1-18.5 5 27 0.375525 2.662939929 2 19.5-10 26 0.390462 2.561070605 3 20-0 38 0.237883 4.203745843 Estimated do is checked in order to achieve moment equilibrium at Point O. Disturbing moments : 111*0.375*6*0.5 * (2+5+X) = 874.125 + 124.875X 111*0.390*5*(2.5+X) = 541.125 + 216.45X (158.5-111)*0.390*5*0.5* ((5/3) + X) = 77.187 + 46.31X 158.5*0.237*X * (X/2) = 18.782 X 2 [(158.5+10X)-158.5]*0.237*X*0.5*(X/3) = 0.395 X 3 Resisting Moments 47.5*3.56*5*0.5*((5/3) + X)= 704.58 + 422.75X 47.5*4.20*X*(X/2) = 99.75 X 2 [(47.5+10X)-47.5]*4.20*X*0.5*(X/3) = 7 X 3 Where X is the amount of penetrated depth in silty sand layer. At the equilibrium, net moment should be zero. Therefore equation becomes

6.605 X 3 + 80.97 X 2 + 35.12 X 787.86 = 0 X = 2.65 m ( in silty sand layer) It means a total of d= 5+2.65 = 7.65 m penetration depth needed to satisfy moment eq. In free-end method, calculated d is increased %20, then checked if corresponding R value ( horizantal forces difference above point O moment equilibirium point- ) is smaller than those net passive resistance which is obtained from this increased %20 portion of socket length Active force on wall above O = 124.87 + 216.45 + 46.31 + 99.55 + 8.32 = 495.5 Kn/m Passive force on wall above O = 422.75 + 528.66 + 147.47 = 1098.88 Kn/m By using the force equilibrium, R is estimated as 1098.88-495.5 = 603.38 Kn/m D_final =1.2*7.65 =9.20 m At point O, vertical stress on passive side below point O = 158.5+ 2.65*10 =185 Kpa At tip of socket, vertical stress on active side below point O = 47.5+ 2.65*10 =74 Kpa At tip of socket, vertical stress on passive side below point O = 158.5+ 4.2*10 =200.5 Kpa At tip of socket, vertical stress on active side below point O = 47.5+ 4.2*10 =89.5 Kpa Extra resistance due to %20 increase = (185+200.5) *4.20*0.5*(9.2-7.65) - (74+89.5) *0.237*0.5*(9.2-7.65) =1224.7 Kn/m FS = extra resistance due to %20 R = 1224.7 603.38 = 2.02 It is calculated above that a 9.2-7.65=1.55m increase in the depth do would result in an approximately FS = 2.02. It means even a smaller ıncrement would satisfy FS=1.5 To find the optimum value, iterative solution may be applied. d0 = 9.2 m but can be smaller for a global rotational failure with FS=1.5

Question 1.3 Now model the problem by using RocScience RS2 software. Complete the excavation in 3 sets of 2m excavation stages. Assume a socket depth of 9m. Draw the axial force, shear and moment diagrams for each excavation stages. Similarly draw horizontal & vertical displacement profiles. For this question, the cantilever pile wall is modelled in RS2 software using the following properties; Model geometry and the generated mesh for the question;

Moreover, The model is staged in 4 stages. First one being without any excavation and the following three stages being 2m excavation stages. The cantilever pile wall model used is an elastic standard beam that has no reinforcement in. This has no non-neglectable effect over the force/shear/moment diagrams, but it should effect the horizontal & vertical displacement profiles. For the definition of soil material, effective Poisson ratio (v ) is used. Moment/Shear/Axial Force diagrams and Vertical & Horizontal Displacement profiles for each stage is as follows; Stage 1 - Horizontal Displacement - Maximum Value 0.002973m - Minimum Value -0.002925m - Vertical Displacement - Maximum Value 0m - Minimum Value -0.0084674m

Stage 2 - Horizontal Displacement - Maximum Value 0.0081512m - Minimum Value -0.0030820m - Vertical Displacement - Maximum Value 0.0450910m - Minimum Value -0.0040839m

Stage 3 - Horizontal Displacement - Maximum Value 0.0244610m - Minimum Value -0.0012434m - Vertical Displacement - Maximum Value 0.0727060m - Minimum Value -0.0054501m

Stage 4 - Horizontal Displacement - Maximum Value 0.04409m - Minimum Value 0m - Vertical Displacement - Maximum Value

The following questions will be analysed using the maximum values obtained from all four stages of this analysis.

Question 1.4 Check if 16 Φ20 reinforcement with concrete cover of 7.5 cm is suitable to resist the estimated maximum moments. For the analysis of the reinforced concrete cantilever pile wall, the pile wall is modelled as a column for this question. In the analysis, methods described in A.Topçu s textbook Reinforced Concrete [1] and U.Ersoy s charts[2] for cylindrical columns are used. Estimated concrete & reinforcement specifications are; Concrete: C30/37 fcd=20mpa Reinforcement: B420C fyd=365.22mpa The chart used for this analysis, Figure 3 - Chart 8-53[2]

Design Moment Md = 319.872 knm Design Axial Force = 64 kn Area of Concrete = 2 800 502654.8246mm 4 2 d h 65 0.8125 Chart 8-53 is selected. 80 Nd Af c cd 64000 0.0064 502654.8246 20 6 M d 319.872 10 0.04 A h f 502654.8246 800 20 c cd m 0.08 Read from the Chart 8-53 f yd 365.22 0.08 0.0044 f 20 cd Ast 2 0.0044502654.8246 2202.091mm Required reinforcement area 16 20 5026.55 2202.091 2 2 Ast mm mm Checked. 5026.55 0.01 0.01 0.04 Checked 502654.8246 Reinforcement is suitable to resist the estimated maximum moments.

Question 1.5 Check if Φ16/ 20 cm spiral reinforcement fulfills the shear demand. For the analysis of the spiral reinforcement a beam model is used in order to check the fulfilment of the shear demand. A.Topçu s textbook Reinforced Concrete [1] is used for this analysis also. Design Shear Force = 150.2 kn Design Axial Force = 228.22kN Area of Concrete = 2 800 502654.8246mm 4 2 Max. Shear Force = Vmax 0.22 f A 0.22 20502654.8246 2211.681kN cd c Critical Shear Force = ( 0.3) Nd Vcr 0.65 fctd Ac (1 ) 361.245kN A c V V V Shear demand can single-handedly fulfilled by concrete cross-section d only. cr max If the shear demand can single-handedly fulfilled by concrete only, then it is safe to say that Φ16/ 20 cm spiral reinforcement would also fulfil the shear demand.

Question 1.6 After the completion of the design, a piezometer was installed at 13 m depth which recorded pore water pressure of 100 kpa. Discuss how this data may change your assessment. Normally, the expected pore water pressure at 13m depth is around 80 kpa. This could be seen in the figure below. If the pore pressure is 100kPa at that depth, this would indicate a 25% increase in pore pressure at that depth. This would approximately mean a 25% increase in the axial, shear forces and moments for the cantilever pile wall. According to the calculations in 1.5 and 1.4 structurally, pile wall would still fulfil those extra forces. That being said, with the increase in the pore water pressure, excavation behind the wall could be subjected to base heave but boiling or seepage into the excavation is not expected due to cohesive soil both under and around the excavation. References [1] A.Topçu, Reinforced Concrete. 2015. [2] U. ERSOY, Taşıma Gücü El Kitabı. Ankara, 1980. [3] Cetin, K. O. (2016), Deep Excavations & Retaining Stuctures Lecture 6