Sheet Pile Wall

Sheet Pile Walls
By
Dr. Ashraf Kamal Hussein
Professor of Geotechnical Engineering and Foundations
Faculty of Engineering - Cairo University
2012
1. Introduction
- Same purpose as retaining walls.
- Commonly used as:
● Temporary structures to facilitate excavation and dewatering of limited
area.
● Water front structures.
Faculty of Engineering Sheet Pile Walls

Cairo University
2. Types of Sheet Pile Walls
● Cantilever
● Anchored
● Strutted
Cantilever SPW Anchored SPW Strutted SPW

Cairo University
Materials:
● Timber: (shallow excavations)
● Precast reinforced concrete

● Steel

Cairo University
- Steel SPW is the most common type since:
● it resists high driving stresses.
● it is of relatively light weight.
● it can be reused several times.
● it is more durable.
● it is easy to increase its length by welding or bolting.
Typical Shapes:

Cairo University
3. Cantilever Sheet Pile Walls
Stability:
- from passive resistance.
H
Excavation Height:
- H<7m
t
Design Steps:
● determine forces acting on SPW.
● determine penetration depth (t).
● determine Mmax and section modulus.

Cairo University
Design:
- Forces
- Simplification
H H
Ea Ea
Ep Ep
t C t
O O Ep
M Ea

Cairo University
Design: Cohesionless Soils
- Penetration Depth γ
H φ
- ∑Mo = 0 Ea
D
Ep
neglect ∆M Ea ya – Ep yp = 0 t
O C
get D ∆M
t = 1.2D

Cairo University
- Maximum Moment γ
φ
H
- Mmax @ pt of zero shear (n) Eay
y Epy
Eay = Epy Mmax
t n
get y
M at pt (n) = Mmax
Sec. Modulus: Z = Mmax/σy

Cairo University
Net Earth Pressure γ
H φ
- Penetration Depth Ea1
- at distance u: zero pressure Ea2

u
eau = epu t x
Ep
O O C
γ Ka (H + u) = γ Kp u get u epn
∆M
- epn = γ x (Kp – Ka)
- ∑Mo = 0
neglect ∆M ∑Ea ya – Ep yp = 0
get x
t = 1.2(u + x)
Cairo University
γ
Net Earth Pressure H φ
Ea1
- Maximum Moment Ea2
- Mmax @ pt of zero shear (n) Epy

y Mmax
t n
O
∑Ea = Epy epn
get y
M at pt (n) = Mmax

Cairo University
- Effect of GWT γ
φ GWT
H
Ew1
GWT
Ea
Ew2
D Ep
t
O C
∆M

Cairo University
Design: Cohesive Soils
Short Term Analysis cu, φ = 0 zo
γ
H cu
- ea = γ H – 2cu Ea
ea
- epn = 4cu – γ H D Ep
t
O O
Limiting Height: epn
- HL < (4cu – q)/γ

Cairo University
4. Anchored Sheet Pile Walls
Stability:
- from passive resistance and
tension in anchor rods.
H
Effect of Anchors:
● reduces lateral deflection.
● reduces penetration depth. t
● reduces bending moments.
Methods of Design:
● free earth support.
● fixed earth support.

Cairo University
Conditions of Free and Fixed Earth Support
H H
Mmax
Mmax
t t
Free Fixed

Cairo University
Conditions of Free and Fixed Earth Support
Free Fixed
- Soil type compressible soil (loose sand, clay) strong soil (φ > 32o)
- Penetration depth relatively short greater depth
- Section relatively stiff flexible

Cairo University
Design Steps:
● determine forces acting on SPW. H
● determine penetration depth (t).
● determine forces in anchor rod.
● determine Mmax and section modulus. t
● design anchor rod and anchor plate.

Cairo University
Free Earth Support:
1- Forces
a a
γ γ
H φ H φ
Ea1
Ea2
Ea u
t Ep t
x Ep O
epn
Net Earth Pressure

Cairo University
Free Earth Support:
Design: Cohesionless Soils a γ
H φ
2- Penetration Depth
Ea
- ∑Ma = 0 Ea ya – Ep yp = 0 t Ep
get D
t=D

Cairo University
Free Earth Support:
Design: Cohesionless Soils a
γ
H φ
Ea1
Net Earth Pressure
Ea2
u
2- Penetration Depth
t
x Ep O
- ∑Ma = 0 ∑Ea ya – Ep yp = 0
epn
get x Net Earth Pressure
t=u+x

Cairo University
Free Earth Support:
A
γ
H φ
3- Force in Tie Rod

Ea
- ∑X = 0 A = Ea – Ep t/m t Ep
force in each tie rod:
T = A.S ton
as S = spacing between rods (2 to 4 m)

Cairo University
Free Earth Support:
A
H y
Eay
4- Maximum Moment
n Mmax
- Mmax @ pt of zero shear (n)

t
(n) lies above L.G.L.
A = Eay get y
M at pt (n) = Mmax

Cairo University
Fixed Earth Support:
1- Forces
H
Ea1
Ea Ea Ea2
Ep Ep
t Ep
Ep
C C
O O
Ea ∆M ∆M
Net Earth Pressure

Cairo University
1- Forces
Assumptions:
● Point of zero B.M. (N) is point of zero loading (b).
● Virtual hinge is at point of zero loading (b).
H
Ea1
Mmax
Ea2
u
t Ep b N
x
C
O
∆M
Cairo University
Fixed Earth Support: d A
a
H
2- Penetration Depth Ea1
- For upper beam:
Ea2
at distance u: zero pressure u
b R
eau = epu b R
x Ep
γ Ka (H + u) = γ Kp u get u
epn O 2R
∑Ma = 0
∑Ea ya – R( H + u – d) = 0 get R
- For lower beam:
for equilibrium with Ep
reaction at O should be 2R
3R = Ep = γ x2 (Kp– Ka)/2 get x
t = u + 1.2x
Cairo University
Fixed Earth Support: A
a
Design: Cohesionless Soils H

Ea1
3- Force in Tie Rod Ea2

u
b R
- For upper beam:
∑X = 0 A = ∑Ea – R t/m
force in each tie rod:
T = A.S ton
as S = spacing between rods (2 to 4 m)

Cairo University
A
y
H Eay
4- Maximum Moment n
Mmax
Ea2
- For upper beam: u
b R
- Mmax @ pt of zero shear (n)
(n) lies above L.G.L.
A = Eay get y
M at pt (n) = Mmax

Cairo University
5- Design of Wales
- Transfer horizontal reaction from S.P.W. to

tie rods.
M = A.S2/10
Two channels:
Sec. Modulus: Z = Mmax/2σy

Cairo University
6- Design of Anchor Rod A
- Area of rod:
area = T / σy
as T = A.S
area = π d2/4

Cairo University
7- Design of Anchor Plate t2
d
- Continuous Plate: t1
A
t2 < t1/3
ep ea
γ t 12 K p
A possib = Ε p − Ε a == ( − Ka )
2 FS
as FS = 1.5
For equilibrium d = 2/3 t1 t1 = 1.5 d
Aexist < Apossib if not increase d

Cairo University
7- Design of Anchor Plate
- Continuous Plate: d
B
A
for small anchor forces
Kp ed ea
ed = γ d ( − Ka )
FS
A exist
Β=
Kp
γ d( − Ka )
FS
ΑΒ
M max = t.m/m
8
t
Μ
My 6Μ
σy = = 32 = 2 as t = thickness of plate
Ι t t
12
Cairo University
7- Design of Anchor Plate
- Isolated Plate:
d
B
T
T
Β.L =
Kp ed ea
γ d( − Ka )
FS

Cairo University
45–φ/2
8- Length of Anchor Rod (IV)
H (II)
(I)
- Zone I active zone dangerous (III)
φ
t
45+φ/2
- Zone II transition zone capacity reduced
- Zone III transition zone capacity reduced
- Zone IV passive zone full capacity

Cairo University
5. Strutted Sheet Pile Walls
Types:
● Soldier Beams:
- Soldier beams: vertical steel or
timber beams driven into
ground before excavation.
- Laggings: horizontal timber
planks are placed between
soldier beams as excavation
proceeds.
- Wales and Struts: horizontal
steel beams are installed when
excavation reaches desired
depth.

Cairo University
Types:
● Sheet Piles:
- Sheet piles: (steel, concrete, or
timber) driven into ground
before excavation.
- Wales and Struts: inserted
immediately after excavation
reaches desired depth.

Cairo University
Types:
- timber lagging, steel

wales, and timber

Cairo University
Lateral Earth Pressure:
- Braced cut shows different type of

wall yielding where deformation of
wall gradually increases with depth.
- Deformation depends on:

● type of soil. Retaining Wall Strutted SPW
● depth of excavation.
● workmanship.
● strutting configuration.
● construction sequence.
● relative flexibility of wall.

Cairo University
- at top very little wall yielding
close to at rest E.P.
- at bottom larger yielding much
lower than Rankine active E.P.
Retaining Wall Strutted SPW

Distribution of E.P. in strutted SPW varies substantially
compared to the linear distribution in R.W.
- Field measurements show that E.P. does not follow same laws
(Rankine or Coulomb).
E.P. distribution cannot be predicted from theory.

Apparent E.P. Envelopes
Cairo University
0.2H
Cohesionless Soils:
H
0.8H
Loose: φ < 32o
ea ew
ea = 0.8 (γ H + q) Ka
as Ka = Rankine active E.P. coefficient
Ea = 1.44 Ea(Rankine)
as Ea(Rankine) = γ H2Ka/2
In case of GWT:
- take hydrostatic water pressure (triangular distribution), E.P. with γsub

Cairo University
0.2H
Cohesionless Soils:
H 0.6H
Dense:
0.2H
ea
ew
ea = 0.8 (γ H + q) Ka
as Ka = Rankine active E.P. coefficient
Ea = 1.28 Ea(Rankine)
as Ea(Rankine) = γ H2Ka/2
In case of GWT:
- take hydrostatic water pressure (triangular distribution), E.P. with γsub

Cairo University
0.25H
Cohesive Soils:
H
0.75H
Short Term Analysis cu, φ = 0
Soft to Medium Stiff Clay: ea
Ns = γ Η / cu > 4
ea = (γ H + q) – m (4cu)
m depends on soil below F.L.
m = 1.0 if stiff layer below F.L.
m = 0.4 if no stiff layer below F.L.

Cairo University
0.25H
Cohesive Soils:
H 0.5H
0.25H
Stiff Clay: ea
Ns = γ Η / cu < 4
ea = α (γ H + q)
α: 0.2 to 0.4 for long construction period.

Cairo University
Cohesive Soils:
Multiple layers
- when several clay layers are encountered in the cut:

cu(avg) = (cu1 H1 + cu2 H2 + cu3 H3 + …) / H
γ(avg) = (γ1 H1 + γ2 H2 + γ3 H3 + …) / H

Cairo University
Design of Struts:
- min vertical spacing of 2.75 m. H

- subjected to compression forces buckling
provide vertical & horizontal supports at
ea
intermediate points
- depth of 1st strut < depth of tension crack zo = 2cu/γ

Cairo University
Design of Struts:
A A
Forces in Struts
B B1 B2
H C C1 C2
D D
ea
- TA = A.S
- Assume intermediate hinges at
- TB = (B1 + B2) S struts (B) and (C)
- TC = (C1 + C2) S
- TD = D.S
as S = spacing between struts

Cairo University
Design of Sheet Pile:
A A
B B1 B2
H C C1 C2
D D
ea
- for each beam, determine maximum moment.
- determine absolute Mmax.
- Sec. Modulus: Z = Mmax/σy.

Cairo University
Design of Wales:
A A
B B1 B2
H C C1 C2
D D
ea
- Continuous horizontal beams.
- Mmax = A.S2/10.
- Sec. Modulus: Z = Mmax/σy.

Cairo University
Base Stability:
Cohesive Soils:
Deep Excavation: Η / Β > 1
cu Nc
FS = ≥ 1.5
γ H+q
as cu = undrained strength below base

Nc = bearing capacity factor (see chart)

Cairo University
Base Stability:
Cohesive Soils:
Shallow Excavation: Η / Β < 1

- load = 0.7B (γ H + q) – cu H
- resistance = 0.7B (cu Nc)
cu Nc D
FS = ≥ 1.5
cu Η
γ H+q−
0.7Β
as cu = undrained strength below base
Nc = bearing capacity factor (see chart)
if depth to firm layer D < 0.7 B take D instead of 0.7 B
Cairo University
Base Stability:
Cohesive Soils:

Cairo University
Base Stability:
Cohesive Soils:
Short Term Analysis cu, φ = 0 H
If FS < 1.5
Sheet pile should be driven deeper t
cu Nc
FS = ≥ 1.5
2c t
γ H+q− a
Β
as ca = soil adhesion = α cu
α = 0.35 to 1.0 (soft)

Cairo University
Base Stability:
Cohesionless Soils:
- Base heave due to B.C. failure is not critical.
- Base heave is more critical due to upward seepage.
i crit
FS = ≥2
i exit
γ sub
as i crit =
γw
iexit from flow analysis or see chart
If FS against piping < 2

1-Sheet pile should be driven
deeper to limit iexit
Cairo University
Base Stability:
Cohesionless Soils:
iexit from chart

Cairo University
Base Stability:
Cohesionless Soils: GWT
H
2- Cutoff penetrates into Sand
impermeable layer
hw
d1 γ1 t
γ1d1 + γ 2 d 2
FS = ≥ 1.1 d2 γ2 Clay
γw hw
γwhw Sand

Cairo University
Base Stability:
Cohesionless Soils: GWT
H
3- Cutoff by means of grout plug Sand
hw
d γ1 t
γ1d γwhw
FS = ≥ 1.1
γw hw
get d = depth of grout plug

Cairo University
Settlement adjacent to Strutted Excavation
depends on:
- wall height.
- soil type below bottom of cut.
- elapsed time between excavation and placement of
wales and struts.
- stiffness of wall.
- lateral yielding will cause ground surface to settle.

- sheet pile is driven to a certain depth below bottom
of excavation to reduce lateral yielding of wall (δh).

Cairo University
- Lateral yield (δh) induces ground settlement (δv).
- Prediction of ground settlement in various types of
soil (see Figure).
δv(max) = 0.5 1.0 δh(max)

Cairo University
For Cohesionless Soils:
δh(max) = 0.2% H
if bracings are installed as soon as support levels are reached.
Means of Reducing Movements:

- unsupported depth of wall between supports can be decreased by using more levels of
bracings.
- top braces should be placed as high as possible
- vertical spacing of 2.5 m between strut levels is minimum with 4 to 5 m being max.
- unsupported depth of wall can be reduced by use of soil berms.
- if stiff layer lies below clay layer, wall should be embedded in the stiff layer. This will
greatly reduce lateral yield.
Cairo University

Sheet Pile Wall

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sheet Pile Wall

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sheet Pile Walls

Faculty of Engineering Sheet Pile Walls

Cantilever SPW Anchored SPW Strutted SPW

Faculty of Engineering Sheet Pile Walls

● Precast reinforced concrete

Faculty of Engineering Sheet Pile Walls

Faculty of Engineering Sheet Pile Walls

Faculty of Engineering Sheet Pile Walls

Faculty of Engineering Sheet Pile Walls

Faculty of Engineering Sheet Pile Walls

- Mmax @ pt of zero shear (n) Eay

Sec. Modulus: Z = Mmax/σy

Faculty of Engineering Sheet Pile Walls

- at distance u: zero pressure Ea2

- Mmax @ pt of zero shear (n) Epy

Sec. Modulus: Z = Mmax/σy

Faculty of Engineering Sheet Pile Walls

Faculty of Engineering Sheet Pile Walls

- HL < (4cu – q)/γ

Faculty of Engineering Sheet Pile Walls

● reduces bending moments.

Faculty of Engineering Sheet Pile Walls

Faculty of Engineering Sheet Pile Walls

- Penetration depth relatively short greater depth

- Section relatively stiff flexible

Faculty of Engineering Sheet Pile Walls

● design anchor rod and anchor plate.

Faculty of Engineering Sheet Pile Walls

Net Earth Pressure

Faculty of Engineering Sheet Pile Walls

Faculty of Engineering Sheet Pile Walls

get x Net Earth Pressure

Faculty of Engineering Sheet Pile Walls

3- Force in Tie Rod

force in each tie rod:

as S = spacing between rods (2 to 4 m)

Faculty of Engineering Sheet Pile Walls

- Mmax @ pt of zero shear (n)

Sec. Modulus: Z = Mmax/σy

Faculty of Engineering Sheet Pile Walls

Faculty of Engineering Sheet Pile Walls

Design: Cohesionless Soils H

3- Force in Tie Rod Ea2

force in each tie rod:

as S = spacing between rods (2 to 4 m)

Faculty of Engineering Sheet Pile Walls

(n) lies above L.G.L.

Sec. Modulus: Z = Mmax/σy

Faculty of Engineering Sheet Pile Walls

- Transfer horizontal reaction from S.P.W. to

Sec. Modulus: Z = Mmax/2σy

Faculty of Engineering Sheet Pile Walls

6- Design of Anchor Rod A

Faculty of Engineering Sheet Pile Walls

For equilibrium d = 2/3 t1 t1 = 1.5 d

Aexist < Apossib if not increase d

Faculty of Engineering Sheet Pile Walls

7- Design of Anchor Plate

Faculty of Engineering Sheet Pile Walls

- Zone II transition zone capacity reduced

- Zone III transition zone capacity reduced

- Zone IV passive zone full capacity

Faculty of Engineering Sheet Pile Walls