Professional Documents
Culture Documents
CONTENTS
A. Section1:GeotechnicalAnalysisusingPLAXISPrograms
B. Section2:ModellingofDeepExcavations
C. Section3:ModellingofPiledFoundations
D. Section4:ModellingofTunnelSoilStructureInteractionProblems
E. Conclusions
F. References
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
1
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
GEOTECHNICALANALYSISUSINGPLAXISFINITEELEMENTCODES
SECTION1.0
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
SECTION1
A. Versions
1. Pre2010(Version7.x,8.xand9.x)
2. Post2010(Version2010,2011,2012)
B. NewDevelopments(20112012)
1. Ongoingsoftwaredevelopments
2. Researchprojects
3. Conclusions
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
2
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Plaxis2D:Features
ThePLAXIS2D(Currentlyatv2010movingtov2011)
ProgramincludingthePLAXISDynamicsandPLAXISPlaxFlowmodules
Afiniteelementpackageintendedforthetwodimensionalanalysisofdeformation
andstabilityingeotechnicalengineering
ThePLAXISDynamicsModule
AnextensiontoPLAXIS2D
TheDynamicsmodule offersthetoolstoanalysethepropagationofwavesthroughthesoilandtheirinfluence
onstructures.
Thisallowsfortheanalysisofseismicloadingaswellasvibrationsduetoconstructionactivities.
PLAXISDynamicsoffersthepossibilitytoperformdynamiccalculationsinindividualcalculationphases.
PlaxFlow
AnaddonmoduletothePLAXIS2Dprogram.
Simulationofthenonlinear,timedependentandanisotropicbehaviourofsoils
and/orrockinsaturatedandpartiallysaturatedsituations.
PlaxisVIPThesespecialextensionsare:
CADInterfaces
NewMaterialModels
UserDefinedSoilModels
MultiphaseCalculations
SensitivityAnalysis
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
Plaxis2Dv2011
Plaxis2DWorkflowcanbefoundat:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LMy895GCsBQ&list=PLF7F3CDD69090AF3A&index=1&feature=plpp_video
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
3
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Plaxis3D,3DF&3DT
1. PLAXIS3Disafiniteelementpackageintendedfor three
dimensionalanalysisofdeformationandstabilityingeotechnical
engineering.Itisequippedwithfeaturestodealwithvarious
aspectsofcomplexgeotechnicalstructuresandconstruction
processes
1. 3DFoundationisafiniteelementpackageintendedforthethree
dimensionaldeformationanalysisoffoundationstructures
2. 3DTunnel isageotechnicalfiniteelementpackagewhichis
specificallyintendedforthethreedimensionalanalysisof
deformationandstabilityintunnelprojects.
Plaxis3Dv2011
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
4
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
PLAXIS3DINPUT
Generaltoolbar
Modeswitches
Selectionexplorer
Drawingarea
Modelexplorer
Modetoolbar
Commandline
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
Plaxis3DInput:Modes
Definitionofsoilstratigraphy Definitionofstructuralelements,
loads
andboundaryconditions
SOIL STRUCTURES
Letmedemonstrate!
5
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
GEOTECHNICALANALYSISUSINGPLAXISFINITEELEMENTCODES
SECTION1.1:FEMMODELS
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
TunnelPileSoilInteraction1
Bldg. load
Plate modelling
Building superstructure EI & EA
40m
Fill
1m 48 Franki piles
CDG (Embedded Piles)
Tunnel
Tunnel 120m advance
140m
6m tunnel
Analysis by Plaxis 3D ( 70,000 Tets)
6
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
TunnelPileSoilInteraction1
Tunnel Tunnel
advance advance
Animation
PiledFoundations1
7
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
PiledFoundations2
PiledFoundations2
Piled Raft Foundation for a storage platform and Stacker Reclaimer Runways
Plaxis Seminar, Jakarta 2012
8
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
PiledFoundations3
DeepExcavation
Video
Plaxis Seminar, Jakarta 2012
9
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Dam:CFRD Malaysia
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
10
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Model:CFRWCH3002D(SouthSumatra20070912)
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
11
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Model:DomainMesh
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
StabilityAnalysis:MUDMAT
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
12
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
FillingofSpudcanFootprints:
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
13
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
GEOTECHNICALANALYSISUSINGPLAXISFINITEELEMENTCODES
SECTION1.2:NEWDEVELOPMENTS
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
1. Designapproaches
2. Anisotropicplatesandgeogrids
3. Directinputofbendingmoments
4. SekiguchiOhtamodel
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
14
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
4. Partial factors definition remain the entire responsibility of the user (no
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
2
1
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
15
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
PLAXIS3D2011
1. Shapedesigner
2. Steadystategroundwaterflowanalysis
3. Sectioncontraction(tunnelsandshafts)
4. Anisotropicgeotextiles
5. Parallelcomputing
6. Outputvisualizationduringcalculation
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
16
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Shape Designer
Definitionofpolycurve (seriesofcurvedsections)whichcanthenbe
extruded
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
Porepressuredistributioninadamduringfullpoolconservation
17
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
SECTION CONTRACTION
Tomodelvolumelossduring
constructionoftunnelsor
shafts
Applicabletoplatesonly
Contractiondefinition:
section section
Ainitial - Afinal Contraction
c[ % ] = section
Ainitial
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
PARALLEL COMPUTING
Reducecomputationtimeby
usingdomaindecomposition
Twonewsolversavailable
PICOSsolver(multicore
iterative)
PARDISOsolver(multicore
direct)
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
18
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Multilayerground withtunnel:
100000elements
148000nodes
414000d.o.fs
WillopentheOutputprogram
whenthecalculationisstill
running
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
19
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
NewmodellingworkflowPLAXIS2D
SoilConstitutiveModels
Modelparametersdefinitionfromlaboratorytestresultsbyinverse
analysisinSoilLabtest
Freefieldboundaryelements
ReinforcementelementforpilemodellinginPLAXIS2D
StructuralforcesinsolidelementinPLAXIS2D
Thermohydromechanicalcoupling
NewPLAXIS3Daddonmodules:DynamicsandTransientGWF
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
20
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Userdefinedsoilmodels: 15
10
5
1. AnisotropicSClay1(S)model
xy[kPa]
0
0 50 100 150 200
-5
2. AnisotropicCreepModel -10
-15
p'[kPa]
3. BarcelonaBasicmodel(unsaturatedsoil)
4. Hypoplasticmodelwithintergranularstrain
5. UBCSANDmodel(liquefaction)
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
1. BasedonSoilTestfacility
2. Importofreallabtestdata(triaxial,oedometer)
3. Optimisationofselectedmodelparametersbasedonparticleswarm
algorithm
4. Differentcurvescanbeconsideredsimultaneously
Bestmatchbetweencurvesfromrealtestsandmodelsimulation
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
21
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
=24 180
c=5.5kN/m2 160
Eoed=9700kN/m2 140
E50 =9700kN/m2
|Sigma1 - Sigma 3|
120
100
80
CalculatedHSparameters:
60
=24.30 40
c=4.68kN/m2 20
Experimental
Eoed=9627kN/m2 0
Calculated
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
Freefieldconditiondefinition
1Dsoilcolumn
Tiedhorizontaldisplacementonleftand
rightboundaries(Ux2=Ux1)
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
22
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
PracticalapplicationoffreefieldelementsinPLAXIS
Structure Structure
Freefieldcondition
Freefieldcondition
Viscousboundary
Viscousboundary
Viscousboundary
Viscousboundary
Soil Soil
Dynamicinput(accorvel) Dynamicinput(accorvel)
FreeField
elements
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
Offerpilemodellingcapabilitiesin2D
Developmentoflineinterfaceelementsinsertedbetweensoilandthe
pile(Samemodellingstrategyas3Dembeddedpile)
Thebeamrepresentingthepileslidesoverthe2Dgeometryandnot
throughthe2Dgeometry
2Dmodel 3DEquivalentrepresentation
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
23
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Differentthancombiningplatewithsurroundinginterfaces
Soilcannotflowfreely(asitshouldinbetweenthepiles)
Interfacesintroduceunrealisticfailuresurfaces
2Dmodel
3DEquivalentrepresentation
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
Viewofintegratedstressesalongdrawnneutralaxis
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
24
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
Research Projects
ParticipationinResearchprojects:
Piles(inst.effects,embeddedpiles) i.c.w.TUD,TUGraz
Liquefactionofunderwaterslopes i.c.w.TUD
GeoInstall(soilmodelling,MPM) EUproject(#partners)
Notes(dynamics) EUprojecti.c.w.TCD
Cyclicliquefaction,geotech EQ.eng. i.c.w.UCBerkeley,UIUC
StochasticFEA i.c.w.TUD
25
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
MODELLINGOFDEEPEXCAVATIONS
SECTION2.0
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
GEOMETRY MODELDISCRETIZATION
3-D MODEL
2-D Plane Strain
26
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
GEOMETRY MODELDISCRETIZATION
Axi-symmentry
27
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
3DMODELS
Piled building
Tower crane
Strut layout
Piled building
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
28
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
3DMODELOFANEXCAVATION
Top of PW (70/90)
N
Top of Grade III or Better
CONSTITUTIVEMODELS
1: Mohr Coulomb
2: Hardening Soil
3:Hardening Soil + Small Strain Overlay
Plaxis Seminar, Jakarta 2012
29
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
SURFACEHEAVEININITIALEXC./CANTILEVERWALL
3 m deep excavation with cantilever wall
20kPa
5m
3m
7m
3 analyses with Mohr Coulomb, Hardening Soil & Hardening Soil-Small models
using equivalent soil input parameters
Compare ground movements, wall displacements & wall stability
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
SOILINPUTPARAMETERSFOR3ANALYSES
Parameters for soil strength & initial stress state
Analyses Material c' ' Rinter
Model (or ur)
3
(kN/m ) (kPa) (Deg) [-] [-]
1 MC 20 5 35 0.3 0.426 0.67
2 HS 20 5 35 0.2 0.426 0.67
3 HSsmall 20 5 35 0.2 0.426 0.67
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
30
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
PREDICTEDSURFACESETTLEMENTBEHINDWALL
Distance behind wall (m)
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
0.006
0.004 Heave
0.002
Settlement (m)
0.000
-0.002
-0.004
-0.006 Settlement
MC
-0.008 HS
HSsmall
-0.010
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
0.015
Heave (m)
0.010
0.005
0.000
-0.005
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
31
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
PREDICTEDWALLRESULTANTDISPLACEMENT
MC
Ux=6mm HS HSsmall
Ux=11mm Ux=10mm Ux: wall horizontal
displacement
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
PREDICTEDSTABILITYOFWALL
3 Sum-Msf = FOS FOS=2.8
2.5
MC Rotation mechanism
2 with FOS 2.8
1.5
Sum-Msf = FOS
3 FOS=2.8
2.5
2
HS
1.5
Phi-c' reduction for predicting FOS
FSP III sheetpile properties:
3 Sum-Msf = FOS FOS=2.8 EI=34440 kNm2/m; EA=3.92106kN/m
2.5 Mp=369 kNm/m; Np=3575 kN/m
2 HSsmall
1.5
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
32
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
SUMMARYOFPREDICTIONS
Analyses Surface settlement Heave at Wall horizontal FOS for wall
behind wall excavation level displacement stability
MC Heave 4 mm Heave 20 mm 6 mm 2.8
(not OK)
HS Settle 9 mm Heave 11 mm 11 mm 2.8
HSsmall Settle 9 mm Heave 8 mm 10 mm 2.8
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
VARIATIONOFSOILSTIFFNESSINEXCAVATION
1. Soil stiffness is not constant and varies with
a. stress-level. Higher stress, higher stiffness
b. strain-level. Higher strain (or displacement), lower stiffness
c. stress-path (recent soil stress history).
d. Rotation of stress path, higher soil stiffness
2. During excavation, soil elements at different locations experience
different changes in stress, strain & stress-path direction
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
33
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
SOILSTRESSPATHSNEAREXCAVATION
GCO No.1/90
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
SOILSTRESSPATHSNEAREXCAVATION
20kPa 25 20kPa
Failure line
20
3m A K0
15 A
Exc. A
B 10
B
Exc.
t (kPa)
K0 20kPa
7m 5
B
5m
-5
-10
Failure line
A: unloading compression
B: unloading extension -15
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
s' (kPa)
34
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
STRESSPATHDEPENDENTSOILSTIFFNESS
Stress path rotation,
Shear modulus, 3G (MPa)
t
=0
=180
K0
=90
s'
STRESSPATHDEPENDENTCDG STIFFNESS
Stress-level Test series
Extension
Compress
Compression
Extension
=90
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
35
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
WHYMCPREDICTSINCORRECTSURFACEHEAVE?
1. MC models a constant soil stiffness prior to failure not realistic
2. In reality, stiffness of soil elements near excavation varies according to
a. stress-level
b. strain-level
c. direction of stress-path
3. Realistic prediction of wall deflections & ground settlements in all excavation
stages requires a constitutive model that considers above factors, e.g. HS &
HSsmall models
4. HS & HSsmall consider factors (1), (2) & (3) in determining the operational
soil stiffness (E), i.e. E is changing during excavation
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
INFLUENCEOFSMALLSTRAINSATFARFIELDAREAS
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
36
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
MODELLINGOFDEEPEXCAVATIONS
SECTION2.1:EXAMPLES
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
37
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
38
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
39
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
40
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
41
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
MODELLINGOFDEEPEXCAVATIONS
SECTION2.2:VALIDATIONS
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
42
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Plaxisvs.SAP2000
25m
85
Plaxis Seminar, Jakarta 2012
43
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Plaxis 3D Foundation
SAP2000
87
Plaxis Seminar, Jakarta 2012
Validation3 DeformedMesh
Plaxis 3D Foundation SAP2000
44
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Validation3 DWallDeflection
Validation3 StrutAxialForce
90
Plaxis Seminar, Jakarta 2012
45
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Validation3 DWallBendingMoment
91
Plaxis Seminar, Jakarta 2012
MODELLINGOFPILEDFOUNDATIONS
SECTION3
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
46
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
OUTLINE
A. Volume piles
B. Embedded piles
1. Concept
2. Model
3. Properties
4. Deformation behaviour
5. Elastic region
6. Output
C. Verification & validation
1. Axial loading, pile groups, lateral loading
D. Further research
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
Volumepiles
Volume piles:
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
47
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Volumepiles
Volume piles:
Import
cylinder
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
Volumepiles
Volume piles:
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
48
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Volumepiles
Volume piles:
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
Embeddedpiles Concept
Sadek & Shahrour (2004):
A three dimensional embedded beam element for reinforced geomaterials
Beam arbitrarily through volume elements
Shear interaction between beam element and surrounding soil.
Septanika (2005)
A finite element description of embedded pile model
Shaft interaction similar to Sadek & Shahrour (2004)
NEW: - Tip interface
- Shaft interface
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
49
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Embeddedpiles kt
Model t
kn Skinstiffness:
ks tmax
ks:axialstiffness
pile
kt Kn ,kt :lateralstiffness k
1
kn Skintractions: urel
ks
ts =qs/length = ks (uspileussoil)tmax
t skin kt tn =qn/length =kn (unpileunsoil)
tt =qt/length =kt (utpileutsoil)
Ffoot
kn
soil ks
Basestiffness:
s kb:base/footstiffness
t Base/Footforce:
Fb = kb (ubpile ubsoil)Fmax
kb
n
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
Embeddedpiles Model
Embedded piles:
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
50
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
Embeddedpiles Properties
Connection:
Rigid
(only at beams / plates)
Hinged
Free
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
51
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Embeddedpiles Properties
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
Embeddedpiles
BearingCapacity=
(Ttop+Tbot)Lpile +Fmax
Ttop
Lpile
Tbot
Fmax
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
52
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Embeddedpiles Deformation
behaviour
tmax
Specifiedbearingcapacity k
1
urel
Globalpileresponse F
fromsoilmodelling
andpilesoilinteraction Fmax
k
1
u urel
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
Embeddedpiles Withoutelastic
region
.
1000
750
Load (kN)
500
FINE MESH
MEDIUM MESH
250
COARSE MESH
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
Displacement (mm)
53
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Embeddedpiles
ElasticRegion
.
Around shaft
Around foot
Soil stress points inside elastic region are forced to remain elastic
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
Embeddedpiles Output
u N Ts
C B
A
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
54
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Verification&validation
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
Verification&validation Axial
loading(Plaxis)
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
55
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Verification&validation Axial
loading(Plaxis)
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
Verification&validation Axialloading
(METU)
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
56
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Verification&validation Axialloading
(METU)
Alzey Brigde Single Pile Load Test
3500
PILE CAPACITY
3000
2500
2000
Load (kN)
Skin Friction
PILE CAPACITY
HS-CS
500
HS-CS-Base Res.
Verification&validation Pilegroups
(TUDelft)
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
57
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Verification&validation Pilegroups
(TUDelft)
Verification&validation Pilegroups
(TUDelft)
AverageSettlement(mm) Moment(MNm/m)
50,0 1,2
45,0
1,0
40,0
35,0 0,8
30,0
25,0 0,6
FETa&Small
FETa&Small
Poulos &Davis
20,0
FE+BESinha
FE+BESinha
Plate(GASP)
Plate(GASP)
Plaxis3DFnd
Plaxis3DFnd
Strip(GASP)
Strip(GASP)
0,4
15,0
Randolph
10,0 0,2
5,0
0,0 0,0
DifferentialSettlement(mm) %LoadonPiles
10,0
100,0
9,0
90,0
8,0
80,0
7,0 70,0
6,0 60,0
FE+BESinha
Plate(GASP)
FETa&Small
Plaxis3DFnd
Randolph
Strip(GASP)
5,0 50,0
FETa&Small
4,0 40,0
FE+BESinha
Plate(GASP)
Plaxis3DFnd
Strip(GASP)
3,0 30,0
2,0 20,0
10,0
1,0
0,0
0,0
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
58
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Verification&validation Axialloading
(TUGraz)
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
Verification&validation
3D model - volume piles: 70 mm
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
59
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Verification&validation Axialloading
(TUGraz)
* Implemented in PLAXIS 3D
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
Verification&validation Lateralloading
(TUDelft)
Validation for lateral loading:
Comparison with volume pile
Lateral movement of pile in horizontal soil slice
Lateral loading of pile top
Lateral loading by soil movement (embankment construction)
Comparison with measurements from centrifuge test
Lateral loading by soil movement (embankment construction)
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
60
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Verification&validation Lateralloading
(TUDelft)
Lateral movement of pile in horizontal soil slice:
> Embedded pile almost behaves as volume pile due to elastic region
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
Verification&validation Lateralloading
(TUDelft)
Lateral loading by soil movement due to embankment construction
> Bending moments in reasonable agreement with measurements
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
61
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Verification&validation Lateralloading
(TUDelft)
1. Conclusions from research at TUDelft:
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
Furtherresearch
1. Research at TUDelft on pile installation effects:
2. Press-replace technique to simulate pile installation with the purpose
to generate data for different situations
3. Results are used in generalized model, where (embedded) piles are
wished-in-place and installation effects are superimposed
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
62
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
CONCLUSIONS
A. Volume pile
1. Pile composed of volume elements or wall elements with pile props
2. Massive piles or tubes (wall elements)
3. Not feasible for many piles
B. Embedded piles
1. Efficient way to model different types of piles
2. Validated for axial loading, pile groups and lateral loading
C. Limitations of embedded piles:
1. Primarily for bored piles (no installation effects)
2. Primarily for serviceability states
3. Mesh-dependency of results
4. Full bonding considered in lateral movement
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
TUNNELSANDTUNNELLING
SECTION4.0
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
63
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
CONTENTS
b. Conclusions
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
ModellingofTunnellinginPlaxis3D
To be able to:
Model tunnel geometries in different ways
Model construction stages for tunnels
Model volume loss due to tunnel construction
Analyse deformations, stability, lining forces
64
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Geometricmodellingissues
Circular tunnel shapes (TBM tunnels)
Geometricmodellingissues
Circular tunnel shapes (TBM tunnels) Example
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
65
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Geometricmodellingissues
Cross passages and entrance shafts Example
Hint: Draw cross section surface and use Extrude command to create shafts
PLAXIS 3D will automatically create intersections
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
Geometricmodellingissues
Non-circular tunnel shapes
* new in 3D 2011
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
66
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
Geometricmodellingissues
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
67
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Geometricmodellingissues
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
Constructionstages
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
68
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Constructionstages
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
Modellingvolumeloss
* New in 3D 2011
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
69
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Contraction
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
Modellingvolumeloss
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
70
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
TUNNELSANDTUNNELLING
SECTION4.1:VALIDATIONS
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
Validation1 Plaxis3DTunnelvs.Plaxis2D
Plaxis 2D Model a plane strain tunnelling
Layered ground Fill, Alluvium, CDG
GWL 2 mbgl
6m dia. tunnel, tunnel axis 23 mbgl
Stress relief by 30% due to tunnel exc.
Linings take 70% initial soil stress
Plaxis 2D V8.2 (BD No. G0133) - 456
nos 6-noded triangular elements
Plaxis 3D Tunnel
Plaxis 3D Tunnel V2.4 - 4,560 nos 15-
noded wedge elements
Fineness of 2D & 3D meshes identical
in-plane
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
71
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Validation1 InputParameters
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
Validation1 GroundSurfaceSettlement
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
72
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Validation1 LiningHoopForce&BendingMoment
Plaxis 2D Plaxis 3D Tunnel
Hoop force
Bending moment
145
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
Validation2 Plaxis3DTunnelvs.CentrifugeTestinSand
Centrifuge model
Stability of shallow tunnel in sand
Minimum tunnel support pressure (T)
before tunnel collapse
Centrifuge tests by Atkinson & Potts
(1977) in Leighton Buzzard Sand
Acceleration 75g, 60mm dia. model
tunnel is 4.5m dia. prototype tunnel
Centrifuge tests at C/2R ratios of
0.34, 0.63, 1.0, 1.37 & 2.0
Plaxis 3D Tunnel replicates centrifuge
tests in prototype scale
Predicted T compared to measured
T
146
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
73
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Validation2 InputParameters
147
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
Validation2 CollapseMechanism
148
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
74
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Validation2 Comparison
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
Validation3 Plaxis3DTunnelvs.CentrifugeTestinClay
Stability of tunnel heading in clay
Minimum tunnel support pressure (T)
in unlined section P before collapse
Centrifuge tests by Kimura & Mair
(1981) in soft kaolin clay
Acceleration 125g, 60mm dia. model
tunnel is 7.5m dia. prototype tunnel
Centrifuge model
Centrifuge tests at C/D of 1.5 to 3.0,
P/D of 0 to 3
Plaxis 3D Tunnel replicates centrifuge
tests in prototype scale with C/D = 3,
P/D = 0, 0.5, 1, 2 & 3
Predicted T compared to measured
T
75
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Validation3 Plaxis3DTunnelModel&StabilityRatioN
Stability Ratio, N
Prototype scale
151
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
Validation3 InputParameters
152
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
76
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Validation3 CollapseMechanism
P/D=0
P/D=2
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
Validation3 Comparison
154
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
77
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Validation4 Plaxis3DTunnelvs.SAP2000
Model 6m dia. circular lining subjected to
Plaxis 3D Tunnel 100 kPa external radial pressure
Lining 0.25 m thick, E=20 GPa, =0.2
Compare lining radial displacement, hoop
force, axial force & bending moment
Plaxis 3D Tunnel V2.4 uses Plate element
SAP2000 Nonlinear V7.40 (BD No. S0476)
uses Shell element
Both predictions compare to known
theoretical solutions
SAP2000
155
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
Validation4 TheoreticalSolutionCylinderUnderExternalRadialPressure
78
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Validation4 Comparison
157
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
Validation5 Plaxis3DTunnelvs.ClosedFormSolution+BoundaryElementMethod
0.8m
Loganathan, N., Poulos, H. G. & Xu, K. J. (2001). Ground and pile-group responses
due to tunnelling. Soils and Foundations, JGS, 41(1), 57-67.
158
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
79
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Validation5 Plaxis3DTunnelModel
Deformed mesh
159
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
Validation5 Comparison
Pile Settlement Horizontal disp. Axial force Bending moment
160
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
80
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Validation6 TunnellingbelowHuaTaiBuilding,SheungWan
Sheung Wan
Crossover Box
Hua Tai Bldg. built in 1964, 10-storey R.C. frame structure, founded on 73 nos.
of 0.457m dia. Franki piles
5.8m dia. overrun tunnel built in 1980s, trimmed 17 nos pile toes, Fill grouted,
increase size of central raft PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012 161
TunnellingBeneath/NearBuildingPiles
Advantage of 3D over 2D analysis
Proposed U/T tunnel 1. progressive advance of tunnel face
2. assess stability of tunnel
face/heading
Existing overrun tunnel
3. model individual piles
(Proposed D/T tunnel)
4. model plan area of buildings
5. model varying support pressure on
tunnel face & along/around TBM
6. soils vary in tunnel axis direction
-10
-20
-30
-40
162
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
81
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
RemovalofExistingTunnelLinings
Validation6 TunnellingbelowHuaTaiBuilding,SheungWan
WIL Overrun
Overrun WIL
Bldg settled 6-9 mm, ground settled 4-6 mm
164
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
82
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Validation6 Plaxis3DTunnelModel
165
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
Validation6 ModellingofTunnelling
83
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Validation6 InputParameters
SGI
167
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
Validation6 Ground&PileDisplacement
Front Rear
168
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
84
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Validation6 ComparisonofSettlement
169
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
Validation7 InterfaceBehaviour
100kN
170
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
85
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Validation7 InterfaceBehaviour
100kPa
171
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
Validation7 StraightInterfaceInputShearStrength
172
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
86
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Validation7 CurvedInterfaceInputShearStrength
173
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
Validation7 Comparison
Straight interface
50kPa x 1m2 = 50 kN
Input shear strength 50 kN
Curved interface
160kPa x 2.9688m2 = 475 kN Input shear strength 474 kN
174
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
87
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
TUNNELSANDTUNNELLING
SECTION4.2:APPLICATION1
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
Scenario1:
Impactoftunnelling
onexistingpiles
88
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Scenario2:
Impactofpiling
loadingonexisting
tunnels
(1)Aproposeddevelopmentwaslocatedadjacenttothefuture
developmentMRTtwintunnels;
(2)ThepilingsystemwithinMRTProtectionZoneadoptsboredpiles
soastominimizethedynamicimpactduringconstruction.
RCpilesoutsideMRT
ProtectionZone
Boredpiles
withinMRT
ProtectionZone
MRTProtection
Zone
Future MRTtwin
tunnels
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
89
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
HOWtosimulatetheproblemusingPlaxis3D?
Mostcritical
sectionadoptedfor
thepresent3DFEM
analysis
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
Typicalcrosssection
Roadsurface
Boredpiledia.
1000mmwith40m
lengthwith28minto
underlyingOAsoils
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
90
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Boreholesatthislocalareaareadoptedfortheinterpretation
ofsubsurfacesoilprofile
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
GIBR soilparametersareadoptedfortheanalysis.Effectivedrained
parametersareadoptedduetothelongtermnatureoftheproject
Boredpiledia.
1000mmwith40m
lengthtorestonthe
underlyinghardOA
withSPT N>100
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
91
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
IllustrationofeffectivedrainedsoilparametersfollowingGIBR
adoptedin3DFEManalysis
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
IllustrationofeffectivedrainedsoilparametersfollowingGIBR
adoptedin3DFEManalysis
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
92
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Constructingthe3DFEMmesh
3DFEMmeshwithsubsurfacesoilprofiles,pilegroups,tunnels
Pilegroups
25kPasurcharge
Workingload
Topfill
onpilecap
OA(E) F1
OA(D) F2 Upperand
closertunnel
OA(C)
OA(B) Lowerand
farthertunnel
Underlyinghard
OA(N>100)
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
93
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Hidingofsomesoilelementstorevealthetunnelsandpiles
Pilegroups
25kPasurcharge
Workingload
onpilecap
Boredpiles
dia.1mwith
40mlength
tunnels
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
Scenario1:
Pilegroupsassumedtobeconstructedfirst;
Effectof2tunnelling(with2%volumelosseach)
ontheadjacentpilegroups
94
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Simulationsequence:
25kPasurcharge Pilegroupswith
loadingsappliedfirst
TunnelsNOT
constructedyet
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
Lowertunnelactivatedwith2%volumeloss
Lowertunnel
activatedwith
2%volumeloss
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
95
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Theinvertofthetunnelwasrestrainedfromheavingup,soas
toinducemaximumtunnelshrinkinginwardwithmaximum
impacttosurroundingground
Crosssectionofmodeltunnel 3Dview
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
Asurprise:tunnelhasanoverallshrinkingin,therestraintat
theinverthasNOTeffect
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
96
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Asurprise:tunnelhasanoverallshrinkingin,therestraintat
theinverthasNOTeffect
hexagon
hexagon
tunnel
tunnel
composedof30
composedof24
sides,each12
sides,each15
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
Arelieftoremovetheunpleasantsurprise
Correctrestraintof
invertoftunnel
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
97
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Followedbytheuppertunnelactivatedwith2%volumeloss
Followedbythe
uppertunnel
activatedwith
2%volumeloss
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
Finaltunnelvolumelossshapes(scaledupby25times)
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
98
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Finalgroundmovementcontourplot
Maxgroundmovementaroundtunnelcrown,anddissipatesawayfromthetunnels
Immediatelyabovethetunnel,theinducedgroundsurfacesettlementisabout25mm;
whilethegroundmovementattheadjacentsiteisabout10mm
10mm
25mm
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
Theinducedmaxpiledeflectionisonlyabout6mmduetothe
2tunnelling with2%volumelosseach
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
99
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Theinducedmaxpilesettlementislessthan5mm
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
Maxpileaxialforceof5386kNbeforetunnelling;and5766kNafter2
tunnelling,anincrementof380kN,orabout7%incrementonly.
AxialforceBEFORE2tunnelling
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012 AxialforceAFTER2tunnelling
100
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
MaxpileBMtowardstunnels(M22)of90kNmbeforetunnelling;and104kNmafter2
tunnelling,anincrementof14kNmwhichisnegligibleforaboredpileof1mdiameter.
Bendingmomenttowardstunnels Bendingmomenttowardstunnels
M22BEFOREtwotunnelling
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012 M22AFTERtwotunnelling
MaxpileBMparalleltotunnels(M33)of60kNmbeforetunnelling;and63kNmafter2
tunnelling,indicatingnegligibleincrementofBMparalleltothetwotunnelling.
Bendingmomenttowardstunnels Bendingmomenttowardstunnels
M33BEFOREtwotunnelling M33AFTERtwotunnelling
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
101
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
Finalpilemaxloading
condition:
FinalMaxworkingaxialforce=
5766kN;
FOS=1.4;
Factoredaxialforce=5766*1.4=
8072kN
MaxworkingBM:
M22=104kNm;M33=63kNm;
SoCompositeBM=122kNm;
FOS=1.4;
FactoredBM=170*1.4=170kNm
Thefinalloadingstateislocated
wellwithintheMNplot
envelope
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
TUNNELSANDTUNNELLING
SECTION4.2:APPLICATION2 Stop
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
102
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
ZonesofInfluence
Pile settlement
C B A
Depth
Selementas et al. (2005)
45 45
For pile toe located in
Zone A: pile head settlement > soil surface settlement; decrease in pile
axial force
Zone B: pile head settlement soil surface settlement
Zone C: pile head settlement < soil surface settlement; increase in pile
axial force
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
ANALYSISOFTUNNELPILEINTERACTION
A. Typicallyusethecombinationof
1.empiricalrelationships/closedformsolutionstoestimate greenfield
groundmovements;and
2.boundaryelementmethodstocomputepiledeformations andstresses
A. Suitableforpreliminaryassessment,withsomelimitations
B. Alternatively,use3Dnumericalanalysis
Pros:modeltunnelling,tunnelpilebuildinginteraction& geotechnical
entitiesinonesingleanalysis
Cons:complicated,relativelylonganalysistime&require advanced
constitutivemodelforsoilnonlinearbehaviour
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
103
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
EXAMPLEOFTUNNELLINGBELOWPILEDBUILDING
25m
25m
0 mbgl P4 P5 Rear P6
2m Pile cap
5 mbgl Fill 9m 10m
1m
4m
MD
10 mbgl P1 P2 Front P3
CDG 10m 6m tunnel
1m
4m
Tunnel 2m pile
6m Pile design load 15MN (~5MPa)
30 mbgl
31.5 mbgl Rock 3m bell-out
P1/P4 P2/P5 P3/P6
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
INFORMATIONFORTUNNEL,PILES&GROUND
A. 6mdiametertunnelexcavatedbyTBM,tunnelaxisdepthat20mbglin
CompletelyDecomposedGranite
B. 15storeybuildingsupportedby6nosof2mdiameterboredpileswith3m
diameterbelloutsinrockat32mbgl
C. Eachpiletakes15MNdesignload(~5MPa).
D. Buildingplansizeis25mby9m,pilecap2mthick
E. Stratigraphyis5mFill,5mMarineDeposits,20mCDGandrock.
Groundwatertableat2mbgl
F. Tunnelconstructedinbetweenpiles,tunneledgetopileedgedistancesare
1m,4mand10m
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
104
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
SOILSMALLSTRAINNONLINEARSTIFFNESS
0.01% 0.1% 1%
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
CDGSmallStrainNonlinearStiffness
Laboratory small strain stiffness
results for CDG samples Hardening Soil + Small
Strain Overlay (HSsmall)
Ng et al. (1998) constitutive model to consider
CDG small strain non-linear
stiffness
1600
1400 Triaxial_Upper
Adopted line Triaxial_Low er
1200
HSsmall_Upper
1000
HSsmall_Low er
Gsec /p'
800 HSsmall_Baseline
600
400
200
0
0.0001 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10
Shear strain (%)
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
105
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
3DFiniteElementModel(PlaxisGiD)
Rear Load 15 MN
Building Plate
40m Pile cap
Bored pile
Front
Fill Tunnel face
Tunnel MD 149m
CDG
120m Rock TBM
length
Bell-out
43,000 elements Linings
TUNNELCONFINEMENT(FACESUPPORT)PRESSURE
A
PIV PIII Confinement (face support)
Rear
PI
Front pressure (PI to PII) = hydrostatic
pore pressure + overpressure
6m TBM shield 9m
Higher confinement pressure,
PII lower ground loss
PVI Along TBM shield, tunnel support
PV pressures vary to consider
A 1. conical shape of TBM shield /
PIII over-cutting
2. ground loss into tail void in rear
Any combination of support
pressure profiles can be modelled
Pressure
PV increases
Section A-A with depth
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
106
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
MODELLINGOFTUNNELFACEADVANCE
TBM shield
(elements nulled) shield are deactivated
Apply tunnel support pressure
1.5 1.5m
profiles
Shield is not modelled
For each face advance, shift
Lining
Lining
TBM shield
(elements nulled) tunnel support pressures
forward & correspondingly erect
new lining behind TBM
1.5 1.5m
The process is repeated as
tunnelling progresses
Lining
Lining
TBM shield
(elements nulled)
1.5 1.5m
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
MODELLINGOFSTRUCTURES
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
107
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
PREDICTIONONGROUNDSURFACESETTLEMENT
Settlement (mm)
-8 VL 1.61%
-12
Mid-building
CDG
-16
Greenfield
Tunnel -20
Gaussian
-24
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
PredictiononPileTransverse
Displacement
Overpressure 20 kPa
Transverse horizontal disp. (mm) +10D
-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0
0
-2D
Front 5
Rear +2D
10
+2D
Depth (mbgl)
+10D 15
Rear
20 1m P2
Front
25
30 -2D
35
Tunnel advance
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
108
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
PredictiononPileLongitudinal
Displacement
Overpressure 20 kPa
Longitudinal horizontal disp. (mm) +10D
-3 -2 -1 0 1 2
0
10 +2D
Depth (mbgl)
15 Rear
-2D 20 1m P2
Tunnel advance
Front Front
25
Rear
30 -2D
+2D
+10D 35
Tunnel advance
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
PredictiononPileSettlement&Axial
Force
Overpressure 20 kPa
Settlement (mm) Increase in axial force (MN)
0 -1 -2 0 1 2 3 4
0 0
P2 -2D P2 -2D
5 Front 5 Front
Rear Rear
10 +2D 10 +2D
+10D
Depth (mbgl)
Depth (mbgl)
+10D
15 7
15
20 20
25 25
A B
30 30
C
35 35
Pile toe
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
109
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
PredictiononPileBendingMoment
Overpressure 20 kPa
Transverse moment (kNm) Longitudinal moment (kNm)
1500 500 -500 -1500 1500 500 -500 -1500
0 0
P2 P2
5 5
10 -2D 10 -2D
Depth (mbgl)
Depth (mbgl)
Front Front
15 15
Rear Rear
+2D +2D
20 20
+10D Tunnel advance
+10D
25 25
30 30
35 35
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
CheckonPotentialStructureDamage
OP 40kPa
25 OP 40kPa
_
Bldg. settlement (mm)
-0.4 0.2
/L (%)
15
5 -0.8 Cat. 3
0.1
-5 =0.14 mm 2
-1.2 1
-15
0
0.0
-15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 0 0.1 0.2 0.3
Moment, M (MNm) -1.6 h (%)
110
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
ComparisonwithClosedFormSolution
Greenfield subsurface settle. (mm) Greenfield subsurface horiz. disp. (mm)
-35 -25 -15 -5 5 15 -15 -10 -5 0
0
0 0
Fill Fill
5 5
MD MD
10 10
Depth (mbgl)
Depth (mbgl)
15 CDG 15
CDG
20 20
25 25
Loganathan Loganathan
et al. (2001) 30 et al. (2001) 30
Rock
3D analysis Rock 3D analysis
35 35
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
3DFEAvs.AnalyticalSolution
Issues 3D FEA Analytical Solution
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
111
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
3DFEAvs.AnalyticalSolution
Issues 3D FEA Analytical Solution
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
REFERENCES(1)
1. Atkinson, J. H. & Sallfors G. (1991). Experimental determination of soil properties. Proc. 10th
ECSMFE, Florence, Vol.3, 915-956
2. Burland, J. B. (1995). Assessment of risk of damage to buildings due to tunnelling and excavation. 1st
Int. Conf. on Earthquake Geotech. Engrg., IS Tokyo.
3. Geotechnical Control Office (GCO) (1985). Technical Note T4/85 - MTR Island Line: Effects of
Construction on Adjacent Property. Civil Engrg. Services Dept., Hong Kong.
4. Hake, D. R. & Chau, I. P. W. (2008). Twin stacked tunnels - KDB200, Kowloon Southern Link, Hong
Kong. Proc. 13rd Australian Tunnelling Conference, 445-452.
5. Loganathan, N., Poulos, H. G. & Xu, K. J. (2001). Ground and pile-group responses due to tunnelling.
Soils and Foundations, 41(1), 57-67.
6. Moller, S. (2006). Tunnel induced settlements and structural forces in linings. PhD thesis, University
of Stuttgart.
7. Moller, S. & Vermeer, P. A. (2008). On numerical simulation of tunnel installation. Tunnelling &
Underground Space Technology, 23, 461-475.
8. Ng, C. W. W., Sun, Y. F. & Lee, K. M. (1998). Laboratory measurements of small strain stiffness of
granitic saprolites. Geotechnical Engineering, SEAGS, 29(2), 233-248.
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
112
PLAXISJAKARTA2012
REFERENCES(2)
1. Pang, C. H. (2006). The effects of tunnel construction on nearby pile foundation. PhD thesis,
National University of Singapore.
2. Potts, D. M. & Addenbrooke, T. I. (1997). A structures influence on tunnelling-induced ground
movements. Geotechnical Engineering, Proc. ICE, 125, 109-125.
3. Schnaid, F., Ortigao, J. A. R., Mantaras, F. M., Cunha, R. P. & MacGregor, I. (2000). Analysis of self-
boring pressuremeter (SBPM) and Marchetti dilatometer (DMT) in granite saprolites. Canadian
Geotechnical J., 37, 796-810.
4. Selementas, D. (2005). The response of full-scale piles and piled structures to tunnelling. PhD thesis,
University of Cambridge.
5. Storry, R. B. & Stenning, A. S. (2001). Geotechnical design & contraction aspects of the Tsing Tsuen
Tunnels KCRC West Rail Phase; Contract DB320. Proc. 14th SEAGC, Hong Kong, 443-448.
6. Storry, R. B., Stenning, A. S. & MacDonald, A. N. (2003). Geotechnical design and construction
aspects of the Tsing Tsuen Tunnels contract DB320 KCRC West Rail Project. Proc. ITA World
Tunnelling Congress, (Re)claiming the Underground Space, Saveur (ed.), 621-626.
7. Vermeer, P. A. & Brinkgreve, R. (1993). Plaxis Version 5 Manual. Rotterdam, a.a. Balkema edition.
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
PlaxisSeminar,Jakarta2012
113