0 Голоса «за»0 Голоса «против»

Просмотров: 010 стр.ssssss

Nov 27, 2019

© © All Rights Reserved

PDF, TXT или читайте онлайн в Scribd

ssssss

© All Rights Reserved

Просмотров: 0

ssssss

© All Rights Reserved

- SLOPE Modeling
- Geotechnical Engineering a Practical Problem Solving Approachabc - Nagaratnam Sivakugan
- 1985_02_0090
- Points for Discussion on 15-03-15
- Reinforcement With Anchors
- dynamic bearing capacity
- ENG3202 – Geoengineering
- Geo5 Engineering Manuals
- Comparison Between Dynamic and Static Pile Load Testing
- Konstruksi Timbunan Tinggi Dl Daerah Yang Curam
- Updated Report
- s 070585695 (slope stability)
- Soldier pile wall analyzed with limit-equilibrium and non-linear analysis methods.pdf
- Factor of Safety and Reliability Analysis of Rock Slope using GEO5 Software
- Liang Vita 2012-Upfdated
- vipul2018.pdf
- (PDF) Analisis Kestabilan Lereng Dengan Metode Fellenius (Studi Kasus_ Kawasan Citraland)
- 60_2001_04_0007
- 1.User Guide
- Stability of Slopes

Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 10

Anchorage Methods

1

Graduate student, Department of Civil Engineering, Kharazmi University,

Tehran, Iran.

Email address: std_farshad_rashidi70@khu.ac.ir

2

Graduate student, Department of Civil Engineering, Kharazmi University,

Tehran, Iran.

e-mail address: amintrbpr@gmail.com

ABSTRACT

One of the most important issues in geotechnical engineering is using suitable method for stabilizing

the deep excavations. Among widely used methods, nailing and anchorage methods are being used

more in order to stabilizing soil walls in deep excavations recently. Applying prestressing force is one

of the differences between nailing method and anchorage one ,which causes less deformations and

displacements, while in nailing method, the movement of soil mass makes force to the wall. In this

paper, the data of stabilized wall by Briaud and Lim (1999) were used for verifying numerical

simulations. Parametric analyses were performed on nine stabilized walls with different properties and

deformations and settlements of the walls were determined. The main purpose of this paper is

analyzing the performance of soil nail wall in comparison to anchorage method which are simulated in

Plaxis 2D (finite element software) and compared to obtained deformations of the wall according to

these two mentioned methods.

KEYWORDS: Numerical Modelling, Pile & Anchorage, Concrete Block & Anchor, Nailing,

Plaxis 2D

INTRODUCTION

Due to urban developments, land size limits in cities and increasing the population, excavations

for residential and commercial building become important. Nailing and anchorage are the most

operative methods for stabilizing deep excavations in urban areas. These two mentioned methods are

more applicable in urban stabilizing excavations and engineering practice because of decreasing the

occupied area less than the other methods.

Nailing method is one of the newest operative approach in permanent and temporary stabilizing

of trenches, slopes and soldier walls. Nailing is an in-situ earth retaining technique. For increasing the

strength of soil wall using nail in soil; because the nails are not prestressed, they are called passive

elements. While the wall intends to move forward, the nails act like tensile elements. Permanent or

temporary concrete facing is performed on stabilized wall at the end. Anchorage is also one of the

stabilizing method for reducing the deformations of adjacent structures. The main difference between

anchorage and nailing method is the induced prestressing force to anchors for reducing displacements

in comparison to nailing method. The anchorage method is always performed with piles or concrete

- 265 -

Vol. 23 [2018], Bund. 03 266

blocks for controlling deformations and maximum values of stress. The differences of concrete block-

anchor and pile-anchor systems are in the implementation of these two systems and pile is also a

continuous element in wall height but concrete block is not. Zhang et al. (1999) analyzed the effect of

some parameters like soil wall height, nail length and horizontal distances between nails in slopes

stability by numerical simulation. Fan and Luo (2007) carried out numerical analyses about the effect

of angle and nail arrangement on slope stability of soil walls. The horizontal and vertical distances of

nails should be equal for better performance of nailing in seepage control (Mittal, 2006). Nailing

causes high value in horizontal displacement of the wall and maximum axial tensile force of nails also

increased and safety factor decreased in this method (Singh and Babu, 2009). Using anchorage

method for slope stability indicates the stiffness and prestressing feature of anchors, the performing

time of anchors into the wall will also have effect on lateral displacements of stabilized soil wall

(O’Rourke, 1981). Briaud and Lim (1999) determined the effects of prestressed force anchors, free

length of anchors and the soldier piles fixed end according to numerical simulation with finite

element methods. Lee and Yoo (2008) analyzed the deformations of berlin wall and ground surface

settlement under the surface of excavation. Muntohar and Liao (2013) accomplished some numerical

simulations with Plaxis 2D for analyzing the effect of soil parameters according to two structures in

Taiwan.

In this study, the numerical modelling was verified according to the result of stabilized wall by Briaud and Lim

(1999). Some parametric analyses were performed on nine soil walls with different properties then

displacements and settlements of walls were determined. According to FHWA manual, the safety factor was

determined for analyzed walls and the stabilized soil walls were designed by Slope/W (Geostudio software),

finally the stress-strain analysis and modelling were simulated by finite element software (Plaxis 2D).

The stabilizing method for a wall with 7.5 meters height and 60 meters length is pile-anchor. The center to

center space of two H-shaped piles is about 2.44 meters, also two rows of anchor with angle of 30 degrees and

12.35 meters length is performed. The soil type of this site is sand and the unit weight of this is 18.5 kN/m3, and

the underground water level is also on 9.5 meters depth under the ground surface. Table 1 indicates the

properties of soil, anchor and pile.

a) Soil

(kN/m3) C (kPa) (deg)

0.93 21 1200 272 0.65 0 32

b) Anchor

Lock-off Tendon Tendon

Lock-off

load 1 stiffness 1 Stiffness 2

(m) (m) load 2 (kN)

(kN) (kN.m) (kN.m)

7.3 5.05 182.35 160 19846 19479

c) Pile

Diameter Spacing EI EA

(m) (m) (mm) (m) (kN. ) (kN)

9.15 1.65 250 2.44 11620 1.47E+06

Figure 1 shows the variation of horizontal displacement versus the depth of excavation and there

is good agreement between the model results and measured data.

Vol. 23 [2018], Bund. 03 267

2D NUMERICAL MODELING

As mentioned, numerical models of stabilized wall with both pile & anchorage and concrete & anchorage

methods were created in Plaxis 2D. In this software, the hardening behavior of (HS) was applied to soil clusters.

The soil behavior model was assumed to be nonlinear elastoplastic with isotope hardening that is appropriate for

static analyses of soil material. Simulation of confining stress effects on deformation modulus of soil, plastic

strains, failure, separation of loading and unloading are another ability of this behavior model. Soldier pile,

nail, concrete block and shotcrete were modelled by using plate element in Plaxis based on two dimensional

modelling, an equivalent stiffness was computed for the length of the wall, the unbond length of anchors

(section between fixed end part of anchor and equivalent point on the pile) was also modelled considering with

Node to Node element. According to tensile behavior of anchor and insignificant moment value on this, the

modelling of fixed end section of anchors was done by Geogrid element with elastic behavior in Plaxis 2D and

equivalent stiffness was considered along the length of wall. Prestressing force were also divided to horizontal

distance of anchors.

The boundaries were considered according to Figure 2 in accomplished analyses. According to this Figure,

in order to ensure that boundaries of models do not affect analysis results, the length of ground surface behind

the soil wall (Be) was assumed to be 3 times of the value of soil height (H), and the length of ground surface in

front of soil wall (We) is also equaled to the value of wall height (H). According to model, defining appropriate

boundary conditions is required for stability of model and determining stiffness matrix; so the boundaries of

model was locked horizontally and both horizontally and vertically at two sides and base, respectively.

Vol. 23 [2018], Bund. 03 268

Triangular elements with 15 nodes were used to mesh the soil cluster in modelling process. The

mesh dimensions around the stabilized wall and specially around the anchors must be fine in order to

reduce the modelling errors and high amount of stress-strain variations, and also to reduce the

calculating time, the mesh dimensions for other areas were considered medium size. Figure 3 shows

the dimensions of mesh around the stabilized wall and soil cluster for one of the 9 models.

The analysis phases must be defined including excavation soil in front of the wall with specified

height and activating the anchor or nail elements in each executive phases. According to FHWA

manual, the recommended allowable safety factor for stabilized wall considering to anchorage or

nailing method are 1.3 and 1.5, respectively. Figure 4 illustrates two cases of limit equilibrium

Vol. 23 [2018], Bund. 03 269

analyses in Geostudio (Slope/W) to define the arrangement of nails or anchors and the length of them

based on FHWA manual.

method

Two types of soil were used in analyses. Table 2 indicates the properties of these two soil types.

Soil E C

type (MPa) (kPa) (deg)

I 80 20 0.3 30 36 6

II 80 20 0.3 10 36 6

Tables 3&4 indicates the propertise of models for both nailing and anchorage methods.

Stabilizing Model Soil L Angle Prestressing Strand Surcharge

system No. type (m) (deg) number

( ) ( )

1 I 8 to 10 65.5 1 0

Pile-Anchor 14

4 II 8 to 10 112 1 0

14

7 I 8 to 10 101 1 40

14

2 I 8 to 10 76 1 0

Block- 14

Anchor 5 II 8 to 10 121.5 1 0

14

8 I 8 to 10 110 1 40

14

Vol. 23 [2018], Bund. 03 270

Stabilizing Model Soil L Angle Diameter Surcharge

system No. type (m) (deg) (m) ( )

3 I 5 to 14 10 28 0

Nailing 6 II 6 to 17 10 34 0

9 I 5 to 16 10 34 40

The type of performed pile for pile-anchor system and the dimensions of concrete block for

block-anchor system were doubled IPE200 and 0.8×0.8×0.35, respectively, and the diameter and area

of strand cables were also 15 mm and 142 mm2 respectively and the bond length of anchors and the

thickness of shotcrete were considered 4 meters and 10 cm, respectively.

The equivalent Young’s modulus for the part of bond length of anchors and nails which is

included reinforced element and grout injected could be expressed as follows:

An Ag

Eq = En ( ) + Eg ( ) (1)

A A

In Eq. (1), En and Eg are the Young’s modulus of reinforced element with steel and grout,

respectively, and A, An and Ag are also the total cross section, the area of reinforced element and the

grout area, respectively.

As it is obvious in Figure 5 (a) the horizontal displacement of stabilized wall with pile-anchor

system was less than other methods. The obtained horizontal displacement of nailed wall was the

greatest, the calculated horizontal displacement of stabilized wall with concrete block-anchor system

was also between those of two other mentioned methods. In pile-anchor system, the maximum

horizontal displacement occurred at the final one third of stabilized wall height while for two other

methods, the maximum horizontal displacement occurred at the crest of stabilized wall. A similar

analysis were done on soil type II and as it can be apparently seen in Figure 5(b) the maximum and

minimum values of horizontal displacements of stabilized wall between three methods were similar to

those of models with soil type I; but the values of horizontal displacements of models with soil type II

are greater than horizontal displacement values of models with soil type I.

Vol. 23 [2018], Bund. 03 271

Figure 5: The variation of horizontal displacements in depth of stabilized wall, a) Soil type I,

b) Soil type II

Figures 6 (a-b) indicate the variation of ground surface settlement at a distance from the edge of

stabilized wall. About 70 percent of considerable ground surface settlements of models occurred at

the distance which was about half height of soil wall, the rate of ground surface settlement also

decreased and became about 1 mm over this distance which was three times the height of wall. In

Figures 6 (a-b), the minimum ground surface settlement of the stabilized wall was obtained in pile-

anchor method, the nailed wall also gave the maximum ground surface settlement and the obtained

ground surface settlements in concrete block-anchor were somewhere between the results of two

other mentioned methods.

Figure 6: The variation of ground surface settlement at a distance from edge of stabilized

wall, a) Soil type I, b) Soil type II

In next models (7, 8 and 9) with 40 surcharge, as shown in Figure 7, the horizontal

displacement of stabilized model in pile-anchor system became minimum values due to continuous

Vol. 23 [2018], Bund. 03 272

element of pile and great stiffness in comparison to other mentioned methods, the maximum

horizontal displacement of stabilized wall with pile-anchor system occurred in the last one third of

wall height in comparison to two other methods. The maximum values of horizontal displacement

were obtained in nailed wall in these three methods.

Figure 7: The variation of horizontal displacement in depth of stabilized wall (soil type I)

The ground surface settlement of stabilized wall in pile-anchor system is less than two other

methods, the maximum ground surface settlement also occurred in nailed wall as shown in Figure 8.

Figure 8: The variation of ground surface settlement at a distance from edge of stabilized

wall (soil type I)

Vol. 23 [2018], Bund. 03 273

The purpose of this paper was investigating the operation of stabilized walls using anchorage and

nailing in finite element method software Plaxis 2D, according to obtained results from numerical

models and comparing these for 3 methods of excavating, results were achieved as follows:

According to minimum safety factor recommended by FHWA manual in nailing and anchorage

methods, the obtained horizontal displacement considering to anchorage method is less than nailing

method for both soil type I and II.

The horizontal displacements of stabilized wall in concrete block-anchor system were greater

than this in pile-anchor stabilized system due to continuousness and more stiffness in element of pile.

Ground surface settlements behind the stabilized wall have direct relationship with horizontal

displacements and in this case the minimum values also occurred in the pile-anchor stabilized system

comparing to two other methods.

The maximum deformations of stabilized wall occurred in nailing method, the obtained

deformations of soil wall into concrete block-anchor system were also greater than pile-anchor

system.

According to existence of surcharge on wall, the performance of pile-anchor stabilized system

can control horizontal displacement and settlement better than two other methods. The horizontal

displacement in concrete block-anchor method is less than this in nailing method.

Generally it can be concluded that using pile-anchor method in some parts of excavation wall,

where is more sensitivity, is more effective in decreasing excavation deflections significantly. So this

method would be applicable in some excavations with high sensitivity.

REFERENCES

[1] Briaud, J. L and Lim, Y. (1999) “Tieback walls in sand: numerical simulation and

design implications,” Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenviromental Engineering,

125(2), 101-110.

[2] Fan, C. C and Luo, J. H. (2007) “Numerical study on the optimum layout of soil-nailed-

slopes,”

[3] Mittal, S. (2005) “Soil nailing application in erosion control–an experimental study,”

Geotechnical and Geological Engineering, 24, 675-688.

[4] Muntohar, A. S and Liao, H. J. (2013) “Finite element analysis of the movement of the

tie-back wall in alluvial-silty soils,” Procedia Engineering, 54, 176-187.

[5] O'Rourke. (1981) “Ground Movement Caused By Braced Excavations,” Journal Of

Geotechnical Engineering ASCE, 107(9), 1159-1178.

[6] Sabatini, P. J, Pass, D. G and Bachus, R. C. (1999) “Geotechnical engineering circular

NO. 4: Ground anchors and anchored systems,” Federal Highway Administration

(FHWA), Report No. FHWAIF-99-015.

[7] Singh, V. P and Babu G. L. (2009) “Plaxis practice-simulation of soil nail structures

using Plaxis 2D,” Plaxis Bulletin.

[8] Singh, V. P and Babu G. L. (2010) “2D Numerical simulations of soil nail walls,”

Geotech Geol Eng, 28, 299-309.

Vol. 23 [2018], Bund. 03 274

[9] Yoo, C and Lee, D. (2008) “Deep excavation-induced ground surface movement

characteristics-A numerical investigation,” Computer and Geotechnics, 35, 231-252.

[10] Zhang, M and Song, E and Chen, Z. (1999) “Ground movement analysis of soil nailing

construction by three-dimensional (3-D) finite element modeling (FEM),” Journal of

Computer and Geotechnics, 25, 191-204.

© 2017 ejge

Editor’s note.

This paper may be referred to, in other articles, as:

Farshad Rashidi and Amin Torabipour: “2D Numerical Simulation of

Stabilized Soil Wall by Nailing and Anchorage Methods” Electronic

Journal of Geotechnical Engineering, 2018 (23.03), pp 265-274.

Available at ejge.com.

- SLOPE ModelingЗагружено:Sarah Wulan Sari
- Geotechnical Engineering a Practical Problem Solving Approachabc - Nagaratnam SivakuganЗагружено:Daniel Escobar
- 1985_02_0090Загружено:juan Perez
- Points for Discussion on 15-03-15Загружено:Sushil Dhungana
- Reinforcement With AnchorsЗагружено:senhu
- dynamic bearing capacityЗагружено:Peter Mattews
- ENG3202 – GeoengineeringЗагружено:Andrew Cantwell
- Geo5 Engineering ManualsЗагружено:Muhammad Habib
- Comparison Between Dynamic and Static Pile Load TestingЗагружено:Yasmin Pinheiro
- Konstruksi Timbunan Tinggi Dl Daerah Yang CuramЗагружено:Ramzi Yahya
- Updated ReportЗагружено:Lucas Chan
- s 070585695 (slope stability)Загружено:Ah Chia
- Soldier pile wall analyzed with limit-equilibrium and non-linear analysis methods.pdfЗагружено:Robert Junior Koumetio
- Factor of Safety and Reliability Analysis of Rock Slope using GEO5 SoftwareЗагружено:GRD Journals
- Liang Vita 2012-UpfdatedЗагружено:Sen Hu
- vipul2018.pdfЗагружено:Pedro Alcarraz Rojas
- (PDF) Analisis Kestabilan Lereng Dengan Metode Fellenius (Studi Kasus_ Kawasan Citraland)Загружено:Tariazoc
- 60_2001_04_0007Загружено:Fernando Fante
- 1.User GuideЗагружено:Phuoc
- Stability of SlopesЗагружено:Trudeep Dave
- slope stabilityЗагружено:Juan Gomez
- Chapter7 Slope stability AnalysisЗагружено:j_mustain
- p p abdulЗагружено:sunil reddy
- Price ListЗагружено:Yanuar Widyarsa
- %2For...Pune_40_abhigarg_CE_Array.pdfЗагружено:Anurag Prabhakar
- SIGMAW 2007 engineering book.pdfЗагружено:rlpr
- Seismic Safety AnalysisЗагружено:prashanthatti
- Cofferdam DesignconstructionandinstallationforthreplacementcrossingedinburghЗагружено:amer
- WORK PROCEDURE Comaparison Sheet for PileЗагружено:Monali Varpe
- Final Hcrh Rockfall Hazard StudyЗагружено:RoshanRSV

- kahle_cv_2019_03_18Загружено:Thaung Myint Oo
- FULLTEXT01(1)Загружено:Thaung Myint Oo
- materials-11-00553Загружено:Thaung Myint Oo
- 01018Загружено:ambachew64
- strut+tie.pdfЗагружено:Marko Šimić
- 0_4371_2.pdfЗагружено:Thaung Myint Oo
- 1a14b223e47a227b52763582e55361b80391Загружено:Thaung Myint Oo
- 10A15PЗагружено:Thaung Myint Oo
- Influence_of_heave_reducing_piles_on_ground_movements_around_excavations.pdfЗагружено:Thaung Myint Oo
- A1060085117Загружено:Thaung Myint Oo
- MSE Wall Spreadsheet Users ManualЗагружено:scribd_geotec
- Basis-of-Design-Principles-for-Timber-Structures.pdfЗагружено:aturer_834628232
- StateoftheArtReport-AComparativeSTUDYONSOFTWAREЗагружено:Thaung Myint Oo
- 273029905-State-of-the-Art-Report-Analysis-and-Design.pdfЗагружено:Thaung Myint Oo
- GE_MTech_CivilЗагружено:Thaung Myint Oo
- KeynotePaper-El-NahhasЗагружено:Thaung Myint Oo
- yongnam051005Загружено:Thaung Myint Oo
- 12PLAXISBulletinЗагружено:Mark Chan
- ..-HKIE-download-Tunnel related failures.pdfЗагружено:Abdelali Sol
- 201312Загружено:Thaung Myint Oo
- 9789814632300_0001Загружено:Thaung Myint Oo
- article_file-385Загружено:Thaung Myint Oo
- 5(1).pdfЗагружено:Thaung Myint Oo
- Haftom ReddaЗагружено:Thaung Myint Oo
- mpc15-280.pdfЗагружено:Thaung Myint Oo
- 28860Загружено:Thaung Myint Oo
- sr247-017.pdfЗагружено:Thaung Myint Oo
- ART-19Загружено:Thaung Myint Oo
- bhm-zurich02.pdfЗагружено:Thaung Myint Oo
- 101.pdfЗагружено:Thaung Myint Oo

- Properties of EnzymesЗагружено:Niyanthesh Reddy
- 22306 Som All Theory Question and Answers Shaikh Sir NotesЗагружено:Swapnil Jadhav
- Artificial GravityЗагружено:api-3700791
- FRONT AXLE AND STEERING SYSTEM.pptxЗагружено:GouthamPrasad
- WAVE AND OSCILLATION QUESTIONS.docxЗагружено:Alok Chaturvedi
- Buckman Asia Treatment Guidelines - Boiler Cooling Water di highlight.pdfЗагружено:Ryan Sumule
- PHYS 259 Labatorial 01 Charges and Forces WI2018Загружено:Ian Christopher Roman
- Lab #6 - closed loop position controlЗагружено:Christy Cheriyan
- College Algebra_Module 3.pptxЗагружено:Mineski Prince Garma
- Lesson Plan TEЗагружено:annadurai
- 320F Diagrama Hidraulico Variable.pdfЗагружено:RICHARD
- Casing Design Manual - BG (2001)Загружено:PetroleumEngineering
- Expansion ProblemЗагружено:Pak Tri Bissa Ajja
- Approved solar manufactureЗагружено:subin babu
- Table Help 1Загружено:Kushtrim Kransici
- 1. Brinell Hardness TestЗагружено:Baibhav Mohanty
- Inertial Navigation IntroductionЗагружено:edwin_killedlaw
- physics Maxwell's Equations and Electromagnetic Radiation vol 2Загружено:Mani Pillai
- Chapter 1Загружено:Matthew Carpenter
- Fun With Pascal's TriangleЗагружено:paul david jacksonj
- motion 9.docxЗагружено:Anil
- MJC 2011 H2 Chem Paper 2 NO ANSWERSЗагружено:onnoez
- 3.05 Potential Cancer Risk IRSN PaperЗагружено:cliffwinsky
- joliveau2004Загружено:rairochadel
- Bourchure ICARIMMIEM-2014Загружено:Ysharath Chandramouli
- Mechanical EngineeringЗагружено:engghom
- Operators Instructions Boltec MC, LC Mk 7BЗагружено:marcelo espinoza
- General InstructionsЗагружено:Francisco Ribeiro Fernandes
- CCEA Maths SpecificationЗагружено:astargroup
- Chockfast 610MЗагружено:leronius

## Гораздо больше, чем просто документы.

Откройте для себя все, что может предложить Scribd, включая книги и аудиокниги от крупных издательств.

Отменить можно в любой момент.