Chapter 5 Retaining Walls

RETAINING WALLS CONTENTS
Page No

Introduction 5/1

5.1 Types of Wall 5/1

5.2 Design (General) 5/2

5.3 Dealing with Water 5/3

5.4 Design Situations 5/4

5.5 Factor of Safety 5/6

5.6 Softened Zone 5/8

5.7 Analysis of Pressure Diagrams 5/8

5.8 Design for Bending Moments 5/9

5.9 Bending Moment Reduction .5/10

5.10 Support Location 5/1 0

5.11 Calculating Support Forces 5/10

5.12 Walls Supported by More Than

One Level of Struts or Ties 5/11

5.13 Selection of Pile Section 5/15

5.14 Development of Section Strength 5/15

5.15 Design Bending Stresses 5/17

5.16 Low Propped Walls 5/17

5.17 Anchorages 5/18

5.18 Walings 5/23

5.19 Design of Walings in Continuous

Anchor Walls 5/24

5.20 Tie Rods 5/28

5.21 Relieving Platforms 5/36

5.22 Miscellaneous Details 5/37

5.23 Design of Cantilever Retaining Walls 5/39

5.24 Design of Walls with Free Earth Support .. 5/42 5.25 Design of Walls with Fixed Earth Support .. 5/46

5.26 Analysis by Graphical Method 5/50

5.27 Design of Sheet Pile Deadman Anchorage .. 5/52

5.28 Typical Retaining Walls 5/56

Introduction

A sheet pile retaining wall has a significant portion of its structure embedded in the soil and a very complex soil/structure interaction exists as the soil not only loads the upper parts of the wall but also provides support to the embedded portion.

Current design methods for retaining walls do not provide a rigorous theoretical analysis due to the complexity of the problem. The methods which have been developed to overcome this, with the exception of finite element modelling techniques, introduce empirical or empirically based factors which enable an acceptable solution to the problem to be found. As a result, no theoretically correct solution can be achieved and a large number of different approaches to this problem have been devised.

The design of a retaining structure using currently available techniques requires the performance of two sets of calculations, one to determine the geometry of the structure to achieve equilibrium under the design conditions, the other to determine the structural requirements of the wall to resist bending moments and shear forces determined from the equilibrium calculations. The selected design conditions

should be sufficiently severe and varied so that all reasonable situations which may occur during the life of the structure are taken into account.

Designers should not overlook the possibility of global failure resulting from deep seated slip failure of the soil and ensure that the proposed pile toe passes through the critical slip plane. Similarly, anchor walls should be located outside potential slip planes.

5.1 Types of Wall

Retaining walls can be classified into cantilever or supported types. Cantilever walls are dependent solely upon penetration into the soil for their support and clearly, fixity of the toe is required to achieve equilibrium of the forces acting on the structure. As fixity of the wall toe requires longer and, in many cases, heavier piles to achieve the necessary penetration into the soil, this type of wall can only be economic for relatively small retained heights. Variations in soil properties, retained height and water conditions along a wall can have significant effects on the alignment of a cantilever wall and care must be taken when designing them for permanent structures, although provision of a capping beam will often alleviate alignment problems.

Fig 5.1.1

hc---, -----10

Deadman

""'"

, ,

(':'"

Alternative <, -, _/

Ground Anchor

a) Cantilever Wall

b) Anchored Wall

Page 5/1

Piling Handbook, Feb 97

c) Propped Wall

Supported walls, which can be strutted or tied, achieve stability by sharing the support to be provided between the soil and the supporting member or members. In this situation the soil conditions at the toe of the wall are not as critical to the overall stability of the structure as in the case of a cantilever wall. The provision of longitudinal walings to transfer the tie or strut force uniformly along the wall also caters for variations in displacement along the structure.

5.2 Design (General)

A retaining wall structure must be designed to perform adequately under two particular sets of conditions, those that can be regarded as the worst possible to occur during the life of the structure and those that can be expected under normal service conditions. These design cases represent the ultimate and serviceability limit states for the structu re.

Ultimate limit states to be taken into account in design include instability of the structure as a whole including the soil mass, failure of the structure by bending or shear and excessive deformation of the wall or soil to the extent that adjacent structures or services are affected. Where the mode of failure of the structure involves translation or rotation, as would be expected in the case of a retaining wall, the stable equilibrium of the wall relies on the mobilisation of shear stresses within the soil. Full mobilisation of soil shear strength results in limiting active and passive conditions and these only act together on the structure at the point of collapse, the ultimate limit state.

Design for serviceability involves a consideration of the deformation of the structure and movement of the ground to ensure that acceptable limits are not exceeded. The deformations of the ground which accompany full shear strength mobilisation are large in comparison to those which occur in

Page 5/2

normal service and as the forces on the structure and the forces from the retained soil are inversely proportional to movement, the serviceability limit state of displacement will often be the governing criterion for equilibrium. Although it is impossible, or impractical. to directly calculate displacements, serviceability requirements can generally be achieved by limiting the magnitude of the mobilised soil strength.

The designer of a retaining wall must assess the design situations to which the wall could be SUbjected during its lifetime and apply these to the structure to analyse their effect. The design situations spSp4houid include the following where appropriate:

5.2.1 Applied Loads and any Combinations

Surcharges and externally applied loads on each side of the wall: a minimum surcharge of 10kPa on the retained side of the wall should be used in design. Where very high levels of su rcharge or concentrated loads occur, eg ports and harbours, it is often more economical to carry the loads on bearing piles which transfer them to a lower stratum where no lateral pressure is exerted on the retaining structure.

5.2.2 Geometry of the Problem

A minimum unplanned depth of excavation in front of the wall of O.Sm or 10% of the retained height of a cantilever or 10% of the distance below the lowest support in a supported wall should be included. In the case of a retaining structure with services buried in the passive zone, allowance should be made for future excavation to replace or maintain the cables or pipes.

5.2.3 Material Characteristics

In permanent structures, the long term performance of steel must be considered.


5.2.4 Environmental Effects

Variations in ground water level, due to dewatering, flooding or failure of drainage systems. Consider the effects of providing weep holes to prevent the accumulation of ground water behind the wall; however these must be designed to prevent clogging by any fines transported in the flowing water. Scour, erosion and tree removal will all affect the structure. Weathering, freezing and other effects of time and environment on the material properties.

5.2.5 Mining Subsidence

Consider the tolerance of the structure to deformation.

5.2.6 Construction

Driving of sheet piles into dense soils may

necessitate the provision of a section larger than that needed to satisfy the structural requirements. Drivability should be considered at an early stage in the design process as the need to provide a minimum section for driving may lead to a more efficient support system.

5.3 Dealing with Water

The water pressure conditions adopted in retaining wall design should be the most onerous that can be possibly imagined as the effect of water pressures on design calculations is very significant.

When an analysis is being carried out assuming that drained conditions exist, the effect of flow beneath the toes of the sheet pile wall is to increase the active pressures on the wall and decrease the passive pressures.

Fig 5.3.1

,

-,

, ,

-,

, ,

-,

, , \

Note: Above Pressure Diagram

to be amended as necessary to comply with minimum

design pressure requirements.


\ Theoretical

:r~~:f tension

~ Hydrostatic Pressure applied over depth

of tension crack

\

"

,

\

\ ,

Calculated ________ Earth Pressure

___ Envelope

Page 5/3

The minimum design pressure acting on a retaining wall should be the pressure due to retention of a fluid with an effective density of 5kN/m3. However, if the designer considers that water could be present behind the wall to the ground surface, in a tension crack for example, then the design should incorporate full hydrostatic pressures behind the wall.

In order to reduce the effect of large water pressures resulting from differences in water level on each side of a retaining structure, the designer may provide weep holes through the wall preventing an accumulation of ground water.

These will generally be located at the bottom of the exposed section of wall to maximise their effect as a means of reducing water levels. It should be noted, however, that weep holes are only fully effective when free drainage is possible and they should be designed in such a way that any fine material transported by the flow of ground water will not cause them to become clogged. In

. cohesive soils, weep holes are ineffective in the relief of water pressure behind the wall.

5.4 Design Situations

When designing a retaining wall, the designer may choose between the adoption of free and fixed earth conditions at the toe of the wall. The difference between these two conditions lies in the influence which the depth of embedment has on the deflected shape of the wall. This is illustrated in Figs 5.4.1 and 5.4.2 and in the examples section.

A wall designed on free earth support principles can be considered as a simply supported vertical beam, one support being provided by the soil pressures acting in the embedded zone, the other support being provided by a prop or tie near the top of the wall. In this situation, the wall is embedded into the soil a sufficient distance to prevent translation, but is able to rotate at the toe. For a given set of conditions, the length of pile required is minimised, but the bending moments are at a maximum.

Fig 5.4.1

Deflected shape

Idealised earth pressure distribution Free Earth Support

~ I I I

I

[

E

Page 5/4


A wall designed on fixed earth principles is a propped vertical cantilever, fixity at the foot of the wall being provided by the soil pressures resulting from increased embedment, the upper support reaction being provided by either a tie or a prop. In this case the pile length is such that the toe of the wall is sufficiently embedded to prevent both tra nslation a nd rotation.

The effect of this toe fixity is to reduce the bending moments for a given set of conditions but at the expense of increased pile length.

When a retaining wall is designed using the assumption of fixed earth support, provided that the wall is adequately propped and capable of resisting the applied bending

moments and shear forces, no failure mechanism relevant to an overall stability check exists. However, empirical methods have been developed to enable design calculations to be carried out, an example of which is given later in this chapter.

Designers must be careful when selecting the design approach to adopt. For example, walls installed in soft cohesive soils may not generate sufficient pressure to achieve fixity and in these soils it is recommended that free earth conditions are assumed. Similarly, where driving to the required depth may be problematic, assumption of free earth support conditions will minimise the driven length and ensure that the bending moment is not reduced by the fixity assumed.

Fig 5.4.2

Fixed Earth Support

I

\ \

Deflected Shape

\

\ \

\ Kp \ I

\ \

\

\

Idealised Earth Pressure Distribution

Earth Pressure

Simplified Earth Pressure Distribution


Page 5/5

The design methods used to determine the pile length required for both free and fixed earth support conditions do not apply if the support is provided below the mid point of the retained height as the assumptions made in the analysis models will not be valid.

5.5 Factor of Safety

Many different methods of analysis have been developed to calculate the embedment depth required to ensure stability in a retaining structure. In the main, these methods are empirical and start with the concept that the soil will attain active and passive pressure conditions at the point of failure. The pressure diagrams resulting from this ultimate condition are then used to determine the length of the pile required to achieve moment equilibrium. However, as this represents imminent failure of the wall, a factor of safety is applied, to ensure that the soil stresses are limited to an appropriate value and that the failure condition is not realised in practice.

The factor of safety can be applied in a number of different ways:

• Application of a multiplying factor to increase the calculated depth of embedment required for limiting equilibrium.

• Reduction of the soil strengths by application of an appropriate factor.

• Increasing the net or gross pressures acting on the structure by application of an appropriate factor.

The magnitude of the factor or factors to be applied is dependent upon the method of analysis to be used and should reflect the confidence the designer places in his choice of soil parameters for design and the deformation limits to be applied to the structure.

Methods by which factors of safety can be introduced to design calculations based on

Page 5/6

active and passive limit pressures include the gross pressure method, the net pressure method, the revised method and the factor on strength method. These are discussed in general terms below.

5.5.1 Gross Pressure Method (Fp)

Fig 5.5.1.1

Gross Pressure Method

Commonly referred to as the CP2 method, the factor of safety is applied to the gross passive pressure diagram only. This approach can lead to an anomaly in undrained conditions where Ka=Kp=1 as, beyond a certain depth of embedment, the calculated factor of safety decreases with increasing length of wall. This situation results from the fact that the bulk weight of the soil on the passive side, used to calculate the earth pressures acting on the wall, is effectively reduced by the factor of safety.


5.5.2 Net Pressure Method (Fnp)

The method has been used by designers for many years and is often referred to as the British Steel Piling Handbook method. The factor of safety is applied to the net passive pressure diagram which is derived by subtracting the active earth pressure and

Net total pressure method

water pressure at a given level from the passive earth pressure and water pressure. The method tends to give higher factors of safety for a given geometry when compared to other methods, but careful selection of conservative design parameters will give acceptable analysis results.

5.5.3 Revised Method (Fr)

Fig 5.5.3.1

Net available passive resistance (Burland-Potts method)

Often referred to as the Burland and Potts method, the factor of safety is applied to the moment of the net available passive


resistance. This is the difference between the gross passive pressure and those components of the active pressure which result from the weight of soil below dredge level. In effect the factor of safety is applied to the dead weight of soil below dredge level on both sides of the wall. This method partially overcomes the anomaly in the gross pressure method.

5.5.4 Factor on Strength Method (Fs)

In this approach, the strength parameters of the soil are reduced by an appropriate factor in a method analogous to the calculation of of embankment stability. The effect is to increase Ka and decrease Kp, modifying the pressure distribution relative to that used as a base in the other described methods.

This distortion of the pressure diagram affects the bending moment calculation and it is recommended that this method is only used to determine the wall length. The advantage of this method is that the parameters which introduce the greatest uncertainty to a design are factored.

With each method of analysis, for the same input parameters, the limiting equilibrium condition (factor of safety = 1), will result in the same depth of penetration. The application of the factor of safety to different areas of the moment equation as required by the various methods of analysis will result in different penetration lengths for the same factor of safety value.

Note: The factor on strength approach to design is favoured by BS 8002:1994 and Eurocode 7, the standards which govern the design of earth retaining structures in the UK. In both documents, partial factors are applied to the various parameters affecting the wall design (ie soil density, surcharges, loads etc) to enhance unfavourable (disturbing) loads and pressures and downrate favourable ones. The 'adjusted' input data are then analysed to determine the equilibrium condition as the

Page 5/7

partial factors provide the appropriate factor of safety. Different factors are applied dependent upon the nature of the analysis being carried out, ie serviceability or ultimate limit state.

5.6 Softened Zone

Where soft cohesive soils are exposed at dredge or excavation level it is advisable when calculating passive pressures to assume that the cohesion increases linearly from zero to the design cohesion value over

'th,e top metre of passive soil.

. 5.7 Analysis of Pressure Diagrams

When creating a pressure diagram to work with, it is essential that the pressure conditions are calculated at every change

Fig 5.7.1

a

, , , , ,

! 2

, ,

----------~----------

b

3

c

Area 1 = a x c

Area 2 = a x d x 1/2 Area 3 = b x (c-d) x 1/2

Moments about 0:

Area 1:

[a x cJ x [b + a/2J Area 2:

[a x d x 1/2J x [b + a/3J Area 3:

[b x (c-d) x 112J x [2 x b/3J

Page 5/8

of state of the problem, ie strata boundaries, water tables, excavation depth etc. However, when designs involve a support, it is often convenient to include a pressure calculation at this level.

When taking moments of pressures about a given position, the diagram can be broken down in different ways to produce a series of sensible units.

It should be noted that in the situation where the pressure diagram is divided into rectangles and triangles, care must be taken to introduce the 1/2 factor for areas of triangles and either 1/3, 2/3 or 1/2 when assessing moments of areas about a point. When divided only into triangles, the 1/2 factor in the area calculation appears everywhere and the moment factor will be 1/3 or 2/3.

Fig 5.7.2 -A - ,---",

b[

a

2

c

Area 1 = a x c x 1/2 Area 2 = a x (c-d) x 1/2 Area 3 = b x (c-d) x 1/2

Moments about 0:

Area 1:

[a x c x 1/2J x [b + 2a/3J Area 2:

[a x (c + d) x 1/2J x [b + a/3J Area 3:

[b x (c-d) x 1/2J x [2 x b/3J


5.8 Design for Bending Moments

There are two methods by which bending moments in retaining structures can be calculated from limit equilibrium pressures, one for the equilibrium condition where the earth pressure diagram is truncated at the wall length where the rotational factor of safety is 1 and the other for the in-service condition where the earth pressure diagram over the specified wall length is adopted. These are often referred to as ultimate and working bending moments respectively (to the confusion of some structural engineers).

For the equilibrium condition, bending moments and shear forces in the

wall are computed at limiting

equilibrium with unfactored soil

parameters, ie factor of safety = 1. The actual design depth of embedment is deeper than required to achieve stability against rotational failure, but this additional length, which will in effect cause a partial fixity of the wall and

therefore a reduction in maximum bending moment, is not taken into account in calculations.

For the in-service condition, bending moments and shear forces in the wall are computed from the earth pressures acting on the wall in its specified state. The service pressures are obtained from the limiting equilibrium pressures by dividing the relevant pressure component by the current factor of safety. The result of the calculation is therefore dependent upon the method used to determine the factor of safety.

In the case of a cantilever, the difference in bending moments calculated by each method is very small.

In the new partial factor design methods, a service condition for the bending moments results as the earth pressures are already factored and the calculated pressure diagram is used to compute structural forces and moments in the wall.

Fig S.S.l

Bending Moment

~~

Ultimate

Working


/' /'

/'

/'

Page 5/9

5.9 Bending Moment Reduction

The simplifying assumptions made in design calculations concerning the linear increase in active and passive pressures in a material does not take into account the interaction between the soil and the structure. Studies have shown that this can have a significant effect on the distribution of earth pressures and consequent bending moments and shear forces on a structure.

The reduction in calculated bending moments is a function of the soil type and the flexibility of the wall in comparison to the supported soil. When a supported, flexible wall deflects, a movement away from the soil occurs between the support position and the embedded portion of the wall. This effect often leads to a form of arching within the supported soil mass which allows the soil to maximise its own internal support capabilities effectively reducing the pressures applied to the wall. For a relatively flexible structure, such as an anchored sheet pile wall, the effect of wall deformation will increase the pressures acting above the anchor level, as the wall is moving back into the soil using the support as a pivot, and reduce the pressures on the wall below this level where the biggest deflections occur.

The result of a redistribution of pressures is therefore a reduction in the maximum bending moment on a wall, but an increase in support reaction.

Redistribution should not be considered for cantilever walls or where the structure is likely to be subjected to vibrational or large impact forces which could destroy the soil 'arch'. Similarly, if the support system is likely to yield or movement of the wall toe is expected, moment reduction should not be applied. Where stratified soils exist, moment reduction should be

Page 5/10

viewed with caution since soil arching is less likely to occur in soils of varying strength.

5.10 Support Location

The location of supports to a retaining structure has a critical bearing on the structural requirements of the wall itself. As has been illustrated in the preceding sections, consideration of the wall as either fixed or free in terms of its mode of operation directly affects the bending moments and shear forces to be resisted by the wall. Similarly, the position at which supports are assumed to act will affect the magnitude of bending moments and shear forces and consequently the support reaction required for stability.

Conventional design methods assume a particular form of failure for the structure. For example, in the case of a wall designed for free earth support, forward rotation of the toe of the wall occurs and to achieve this, the support system must act above the mid-point of the retained height. The factor of safety methods discussed previously all assume that this form of failure occurs and are all based on the provision of a single support location. When multiple supports are provided, the conventional methods of analysis do not apply and consideration must be given to the mode or modes of failure which will occur.

5.11 Calculating Support Forces

For a wall with a single support, the support reaction can be calculated using either of the two methods indicated for the calculation of bending moments; ie under equilibrium conditions when the factor of safety equals 1 or under inservice conditions when the particular factor of safety calculated for the prescribed pile length is used to factor the applied earth pressures.


It is recommended that the calculated reaction force is increased by 25% to allow for arching and stress redistribution behind the wall. However, experience with similar structures in the particular soil types may enable the designer to reduce that figure.

The design of the support system for a retaining structure should incorporate a factor of safety of at least 2 and it is prudent to be conservative when assessing the support loads and member sizes as the effects of under design can be catastrophic.

As with bending moment calculations, adoption of a partial factor design philosophy will result in the calculation of support reactions for the service condition.

5.12 Walls Supported by more than One Level of Struts or Ties

As discussed above, the conventional design methods based on a factor of safety against rotational failure assume that the wall will fail in a particular manner. When more than one level of support is provided to a wall the potential failure mode changes provided that the supports are not close enough together to act as a single support. With multiple levels of support, the wall will not fail by rotation and failure will be as a result of collapse of the support system or excessive bending of the piles. Consequently, provided that the wall and supports are sufficiently strong to resist the worst credible loading conditions, failure of the structure cannot occur.

To assess the bending moments and reaction forces in a multipropped wall, a number of analysis methods have been developed. Unfortunately, the structure is statically indeterminate and a number of assumptions need to be made to enable the structure to be analysed.


Page 5/11

Fig 5.12.1.1

b) Frame 1 installed Excavation for frame 2

c) Frame 1 and 2 installed Excavation for frame 3

T,

?'

Free or fixed earth support

d) Frames 1,2,3 installed final excavation

a) txcavetlon for frame 1

5.12.1 Hinge Method

This method allows the structure to be analysed at successive stages of construction, modelling the retaining wall at a number of construction stages when additional supports are introduced. The method assumes that a hinge occurs at each support position except the first, the spans between the frames being considered as simply supported beams loaded with earth and water pressures; the span between the lowest support and excavation level is designed as a single propped wall with the appropriate earth and water pressures applied. Prop loads calculated using this method include the respective load from adjacent spans.

The analysis of structures using this method is carried out on a stage by stage basis with excavation being carried out to

Page 5/12

sufficient depth to enable the next level of support to be installed. It is therefore possible that the support loads and bending moments calculated for a given stage of excavation are exceeded by those from a previous stage and it is important that the highest values of calculated support force and bending moments are used for design purposes.

Using this method, it is possible to calculate a depth of penetration to give a factor of safety against rotational failure as the lowest span is treated as a singly supported wall and can therefore be analysed as such. This can be a comfort to designers as the calculations show that a given FoS has been achieved. However, this should only be considered as an indicative value as the remainder of the piled wall has been ignored and failure will not be in the form assumed.


Fig 5.12.2.1

)
Struts
'" I
,_ U

O.2YH-0.4YH

5.12.2 Pressure Envelopes

This method of analysis is empirical and based upon loads measured in struts which were then used to construct envelope diagrams of the horizontal earth pressures acting on a wall. The envelopes, which take into account the variations in strut load that occur in practice, are trapezoidal in form, the magnitude of the loading diagram being a function of the ground type. The total load represented by the area of the trapezoid exceeds the load predicted using the Rankine pressure distribution by a factor between 1.3 and 1.75 depending on soil types.


The most frequently used diagrams are those developed by Terzaghi and Peck, which were subsequently modified by Peck. For granular and mixed soils, the water and surcharge pressures should be added to the diagram to enable the prop forces to be calculated. No allowance should be made for continuity of the wall when using this method, each support load being calculated from a summation of the appropriate parts of the pressure envelope. This method of analysis is not recommended for the calculation of bending moments.

Page 5/13

5.12.3 Continuous Beam Method

The wall is assumed to act as a vertical beam subjected to a pressure distribution with reactions at support points. The bottom of the beam is also assumed to be supported below excavation level by a soil reaction at the point at which the net active pressure on the wall falls below zero. Mobilised earth pressures are assumed to act on the wall, the magnitude of these pressures are dependent upon a factor governed by the permissible movements of the wall being designed. The minimum recommended mobilised earth pressure is however 1.3 times that resulting from the use of ka to determine soil pressures on the wall.

Each support is modelled either as rigid or as a spring, depending on its compressibility. The displacement at a rigid support is zero, whereas in a spring it is proportional to the force carried by the spring.

The hypothetical soil support is modelled in one of three ways.

If the net pressure does not fall to zero anywhere along the wall, the hypothetical soil support is ignored and the embedded portion of the wall is treated as if it were a cantilever. This situation is likely to occur if there is only a short depth of embedment

or the active pressures are particularly large. The applied load in this case is carried entirely by the props.

If the net pressure does fall to zero along the length of the wall, the hypothetical soil support is considered as a rigid prop. This situation is likely to occur if there is a large depth of embedment or the active pressures are particularly small. The applied load in this case is shared by the props and the soil. The force carried by the soil is equal to the jump in shear force that occurs at the hypothetical soil support. Under this assumption it is essential to check that the force assumed to be provided by the hypothetical soil support is not greater than the available soil resistance below that support. If it is greater, the following method should be applied.

If the net pressure falls to zero, but the available soil resistance below the point at which that occurs is less than that required by the rigid soil prop, a finite soil reaction equal in magnitude to the available soil resistance should be adopted in subsequent calculations. This situation is likely to occur if there is a moderate depth of embedment. The applied load in this case is shared by the props and the soil. The force carried by the soil is equal to the change in shear force that occurs at the hypothetical soil support.

Fig 5.12.3.1

Cantilever support


Page 5/14

I I

Finite Soil Support

Rigid Soil Support

5.13 Selection of Pile Section

The section required for installation should be considered at an early stage in the design process as it may be necessary to provide a heavy section and/or a high quality of steel where it is anticipated that piles will need to be driven to deep penetration or where driving will be hard. Provision of piles for driving will influence the support requirements. Information regarding the selection of piles on the basis of installation conditions is given in Chapter 8.

The absolute minimum sheet pile section required for the retaining wall is obtained from the bending moments which have been derived by calculation for the particular case in question.

The requirements with respect to the effective life of the retaining wall should then be applied to the minimum section required for bending. The effect of corrosion on the steel piles is to reduce the section strength and the design must ensure that the section selected will be able to resist the applied bending moments at the end of the specified life span without exceeding design stresses. In many instances the need for a heavy section for driving automatically introduces the additional strength needed for durability. This is covered in more detail in Chapter 8.

5.14 Development of Section Strength

The development of full section modulus in a sheet pile wall is based upon the assumption that any two adjacent flanges are able to work together when subjected to bending. Bending induces tension in one face of the wall and compression in the other and the parts of the pile


connecting the two flanges together must maintain this stress state for the wall to develop full inertia and hence section modulus.

The flange sections of Z profile piles are connected by continuous webs and full section modulus will always be developed in this type of sheet pile wall.

In the case of U profile piles, the connecting section incorporates an interlock which is located on the centre line or neutral axis of the wall. This is the position where the stress induced in the wall due to bending is theoretically zero with one pile in the interlocked pair in tension and the other in compression. If the two piles are able to displace relative to one another along the interlock then the full modulus of the combined sections will not be realised, but if that movement is prevented they will act as a combined unit and full modulus will result.

The movement can be resisted or eliminated by physically connecting the individual sections together. This can be practically achieved by welding or crimping the interlocks or by embedding the pile in a capping beam or in soil. In most situations, the longitudinal movement will be resisted by the development of friction in the common interlock; the greater the frictional resistance generated in the interlocks, the higher the proportion of the combined section modulus which can be developed. If it is assumed that there is no interaction at all, which is a very extreme situation, the section modulus of single piles must be used in calculations as the piles will be able to bend independently and combined action will not occur.

In practice, friction will always be present in one form or another, and the following

Page 5/15

are some of the factors which will affect the development of friction in interlocked piles.

• The variation of interlock geometry along the length of a pile as a result of production tolerances will result in a degree of interference when adjacent sections are interlocked.

• Driving the piles into the ground will cause soil particles to be forced into the interlocks enhancing any frictional resistance.

• The application of strut or tie forces through walings will force the interlocks together preventing relative movement.

• The fact that the piles are driven substantial distances into the soil to

generate the required passive

resistance will prevent relative

longitudinal movement.

• Any deflection will cause adjacent piles to bind up due to the relatively close fitting nature of the interlocks.

The situations which may require consideration regarding the development of full section modulus when designing U profile pile walls are as follows:

• Piles acting in cantilever when no head restraint in the form of a capping beam is to be provided.

• Piles cantilevering for significant distances above or below a support.

• Piles supporting water or very soft materials when the piles are not driven to the design penetration depth, ie as a result of obstructions.

The introduction of lubricants into the

Page 5/16

interlocks of Larssen piles as an aid to driving will effectively reduce the frictional resistance developed in the interlocks and it should not be overlooked that this action may reduce the section modulus of the wall.

Larssen or U profile piles have been in use for over 60 years in the construction of embedded retaining walls and only in a limited number of very specific cases has reduced modulus action been observed, for example where piles were not embedded or very soft clays were present. However, should the designer wish to guarantee the wall modulus, the main options are to specify Z piles or alternatively weld/crimp piles together into pairs. (see section 1.4.7 for further details.)


5.15 Design Bending Stresses

The allowable bending stresses which may be used for the design of sheet piled retaining walls are given below. When designing the wall as a temporary structure, a higher stress can be allowed to develop in the steel than in the case of a permanent structure as a temporary wall will not require any allowance for corrosion and increased deflections may be acceptable.

The design stress in the steel may be slightly increased over the allowable temporary stress for design cases which occur during intermediate stages in the construction of a temporary wall at the descretion of the engineer. However this condition must be of short duration for an increase in allowable stress to be adopted.

The following table indicates the design stresses to be used in calculations:

Table 5.15.1

Steel Allowable Allowable
Quality Permanent Temporary
Stress Stress
(N/mm2) (N/mm2)
EN 10248:1995 180 200
S270GP
EN 10248: 1995 230 260
S355GP 5.16 Low Propped Walls

Research at Imperial College, London has shown that the earth pressures acting on retaining walls that are restrained with a single level of support at or near excavation level, are different to those assumed In conventional limit equilibrium calculations. Conventional calculations assume that the mode of failure for a retaining structure


supported at or near the top will be in the form of a forward rotation of the pile toe and the pressure distribution at failure is based on this assumption. The failure mode assumed for a low propped wall is that the pile will move away from the soil in a similar manner to a cantilever and the pile will move back into the soil below the support level. This will result in the generation of passive pressures on the back of the wall and active pressures on the front.

To design a wall incorporating a low prop, there are two fundamental requirements which must be satisfied for the calculation method to be correct. Firstly, the prop must be sufficiently rigid to act as a pivot and prevent any forward movement of the wall and secondly, the sheet piles forming the wall must be capable of resisting the bending moments induced at the prop level to ensure that rotation of the pile occurs rather than buckling.

Fig 5.16.1

y

Intermediate

Active

The design rules resulting from the Imperial College work suggest that the earth pressures below the support should be calculated assuming that active pressures apply at and above the prop position with full passive pressure at the toe of the pile; the change from one to the other being linear.

The support may be considered to be at low level if the depth to the support exceeds two thirds of the retained height of the excavation.

Page 5/17

5.17 Anchorages 5.17.1 General

An anchorage for an earth retaining structure is a system installed into the retained soil to provide a tensile support to the main wall. Consideration must be given to the ground conditions, the effect of the installation method on the soil properties and the effect of the anchor system on adjacent buildings and the land under which the anchorage is to be installed.

Anchorages can be divided into three general categories, rock or soil anchors, tension pile anchors and deadman anchorages.

The design of soil or rock anchors is dealt with in BS 8081 but should be undertaken by a specialist with appropriate experience and knowledge of both the soils and the techniques to be employed. It is normal for anchors of this type to be inclined in order that the anchorage can be formed in the more competent ground found at depth. The depth achieved by inclination of the anchors also results in increased overburden pressures acting on the anchor.

Tension piles used as an anchor for retaining walls are usually found either beneath relieving platforms, as part of an A frame with compression piles or as a raked tension anchorage attached directly to the wall. The capacity of a driven pile can be assessed from the soil properties, but the effective anchorage length should not include any part of the tension member which is within the active failure

Page 5/18

zone behind the wall to be supported. It is recommended that any calculations based on soil properties to assess the resistance of the section to tensile loading are verified by means of a pull-out test. This will not only supply data relevant to the capacity of the pile under tension but will also yield valuable information on the likely movement of the pile under working load conditions. The effect of cyclic loading and creep must be considered when designing tension anchorages in cohesive soils and weak rocks as the resistance can fall to a residual value under these conditions.

Deadman anchorages generally comprise a second row of sheet piles or concrete blocks installed at an appropriate distance behind the main wall and attached to the wall by tendons or tie rods. In each instance the anchorage can be a continuous wall or discrete units depending upon the anchorage capacity required and any physical limitations on position dictated by the structure being built. Sheet pile anchorages can be either of the balanced or cantilever type.

Whilst the concrete deadman anchorage does not require walings for the distribution of load from the tie rod, it is necessary to excavate to the full depth of the anchorage during construction which may cause difficulties when the water table is close to the ground surface.

The deadman anchorage is designed to mobilise the passive resistance of the soil in front of the anchorage plus any shear resistance resulting from the movement of the anchorage and passive soil wedge through the soil.


Fig 5.17.1.1


Page 5/19

5.17.2 location of Anchorages

In order for an anchorage system to be effective it must be located outside the potential active failure zone developed behind a sheet pile wall. Its capacity is also impaired if it is located in unstable ground or if the active failure zone prevents the development of full passive resistance of the system.

If the anchorage is located between lines CA and DE (See Fig 5.17.3.1.1), only

Fig 5.17.2.1

partial resistance is developed due to the intersection of the active and passive failure wedges. However, the theoretical reduction in anchor capacity may be determined analytically.

In cohesive soils, the correct position for the anchorage is outside the critical slip circle and at a sufficient distance behind the wall to develop a shear resistance equal to the ultimate capacity of the anchorage. See Fig 5.17.2.1.

r\"~ G\~" S\.W

Total shear resistance over this distance e ual to the ultimate resistance of the anchorage~

Page 5/20


5.17.3 Design of Deadman Anchorages

5.17.3.1 Balanced Anchorages

The deadman anchorage should be positioned such that the passive failure wedge from the toe of the anchor wall does not coincide with the active failure zone behind the main wall. This is illustrated in Fig 5.17.3.1.1

The net passive resistance to be obtained from the soil is calculated as for the retaining structure, but no account should be taken of wall friction when deriving the earth pressure coefficients. The worst conceivable combination of circumstances should be considered

when assessing soil loading. This includes the effect of variations in the ground water level which may change the soil strength properties and the application of surcharge loading to the active side of the anchorage only, maximising the disturbing loads and minimising the restoring loads.

The top of the anchorage is assumed to be at a depth below the ground surface equal to 1/3 of the overall depth to its toe. The tie rod or tendon is placed such that it connects with the anchorage at 2/3 of the overall depth to the toe (on the centre line of the anchorage element). This arrangement ensures that the tensile force passes through the centre of passive resistance.

Fig 5.17.3.1.1

I

FOR FREE EARTH SUPPORT X ~ DEPTH DF CUT-OFF FOR FIXED EARTH SUPPORT X ~ Y. DEPTH OF CUT-OFF


Page 5/21

The entire passive wedge developed in front of the anchorage, including that above the top of the deadman unit, is effective in providing resistance. In addition when the design is based on the provision of discrete anchorage units, an additional force equal to that required to shear the wedge of soil in front of the anchorage from adjacent soil at each side can be added to the passive resistance to give the total anchorage resistance. However, a check should be made to ensure that the resistance provided by a series of discrete anchorages does not exceed that of a continuous anchorage.

The additional resistance resulting from shearing of the soil is calculated using the following equations;

Cohesionless soils:

Ps = 1/3 Y d3 Ka tan(4S+4>J2)tan<jJ

and Cohesive soils:

Ps = c d2

Where;

Ps is the total shear resistance on both sides of the wedge.

d is the depth to the toe of the anchorage.

c is the undrained cohesion of the soil.

In the case of an anchorage in cohesive soil, the top metre of soil should be ignored if tension cracks are likely to develop parallel to the tie rods.

The total resistance of the anchorage should be at least twice the calculated tie

Page 5/22

rod load, giving a minimum factor of safety of two for the anchorage itself. The design of the elements for a sheet pile anchorage is normally based on this factored tie rod load, but the stress level adopted in the design of the sheet piles and steel walings is increased from general working stresses to allow for the fact that the safety factor has already been introduced through the tie rod load.

5.17.3.2 Cantilever Anchorages

Cantilever anchorages may be considered where good soil is overlain by a layer of poor soil. This type of anchorage can be designed in the same manner as a cantilever wall where the piles must be driven to sufficient depth in a competent stratum to achieve fixity of the pile toes. The earth pressures can be assessed using conventional methods, but an additional load is introduced to represent the tie rod load and the whole system is then analysed to determine the pile length required to give rotational stability about the pile toe under the applied loads. An additional length of pile is then added to ensure that toe fixity is achieved. A check must be made to ensure that horizontal equilibrium of the forces acting on the anchorage is achieved.

The bending moments induced in this type of anchorage are generally large and wherever possible this type of anchorage should be avoided. Raking piles can often be an economic alternative to this type of anchorage.


5.18 Walings

Walings usually comprise two rolled steel channel sections placed back to back and spaced to allow the tie rods to pass between the channels. This spacing must allow for the diameter of the tie rod and thickness of any protective material applied to the rod and take into account any additional space required for inclined tie rods which will pass between the walings at an angle.

It is generally convenient to use 1 02mm or 127mm channel section diaphragms at approximately 1.5m centres. The walings

may be fixed either at the back or front of the retaining wall. The first arrangement is usually adopted for the sake of appearances and, in the case of a wall in tidal or fluctuating water level conditions, to prevent damage to the waling by floating craft or vice versa.

When the waling is placed behind the wall it is necessary to use short anchor bolts and plates at every alternate pile to connect the waling and the wall together. Placing the waling in front of the wall eliminates the need for connection bolts and this arrangement is therefore more economical. For ease of handling, walings

Fig 5.18.1

WASHER PLATE

APPROX t OF

, THE TIE ROD SPACING

SPLICE

WASHER

WASHER

LARSSEN PILING

BEARING

APPROX t OF THE TIE ROD SPACING

WASHER

FClODINGHAM PILING

Page 5/23


.1

TIE ROD

Fig 5.18.2

Back to back channel waling

Channel section spacers L....-..I\ '~--LJ at approx 1 .5m pitch

are generally supplied in 10m lengths. Splices should be located at a distance of 1/5 of the tie rod spacing from the tie rod as this will be close to the position of minimum bending moment in the waling. The walings should be supplied 75mm longer than the theoretical dimensions to allow for any creep which may develop in the wall as the piles are driven, one end only of each length being drilled for splicing (if the splice is achieved by bolting). The other end should be plain for cutting and drilling on site, after the actual length required has been determined by measurement of the driven piles.

In order to facilitate drainage, holes should be provided at 3m centres in the webs of the walings. Where sheet pile anchorages are used, similar walings to those at the retaining wall are required. These are always placed behind the anchor piles and consequently no anchor bolts are required. Where walings form part of the permanent structure they can be supplied with a protective coating applied before despatch, a further coat being applied at site after completion of the works.

Page 5/24

Anchor bolt

5.19 Design of Walings in Continuous Anchor Walls

For design purposes, the waling may be considered to be simply supported between the tie rods (which will result in a conservative bending moment) with point loads applied by the anchor bolts. The magnitude of the tie bolt load is a function of the bolt spacing and the design support load per metre run of wall. Alternatively, the waling can be considered as continuous with allowance being made for end spans. Although the waling is then statically indeterminate it is usual to adopt a simplified approach where the bending moment is assumed to be wL 2/10 where w is the calculated support load acting as a uniformly distributed load and L is the span between tie rods.

Where inclined ties are used, the vertical component of the anchor load must not be overlooked and provision must be made to support the waling, usually in the form of brackets or welded connections.


Ihe walings should be designed to accommodate the possibility of the failure of a tie rod. The wall and waling should be designed to be capable of distributing the load from a failed tie rod or anchor.

Under these conditions, it is permissible to increase the allowable steel stress to the yield value.


Page 5/25

Page 5/26

E 2 E Jiio:::~ ~lDrti

2 E o:::~ <:tN

E 2 E ,§o:::~ ~lDrti

2 E o:::~

<:tN

00 N

00

VI C o

0-8

QJ Vl

C QJ VI

~

III --'

Vi O"l C

~


VI C o

B

OJ VI

E

to s:

Cl C

""0

2

LL

~

C

~ E
'<t ~ ~ '<t
ii: 1.0 (J) Lf) 0 (J) co r--.. r-, co 0 N
oq ~ ~ ~ co \.0 Lf) '<t (Y) (Y) N
00 !Yl
E ~ E
E 00 N ~ co (J) Lf) =r
ii: 0'1 co 0 0 r-, (Y) ~ Lf) \.0 (J) (Y)
!Yl (J) r-, Lf) =r
00 1.0 00 (Y) (Y) N ~ ~ ~
'<t !"Ii
~ E
N Lf) (Y) \.0 r--- 0 co (J) N co
c::: M \.0 0 ~ Lf) r--.. N 00 Lf) ~ \.0
~ r-, \.0 '<t (Y) N N ~ ~ ~ 00
'<t
....
~ E
00 r--.. Lf) r-,
ii: 0 (J) Lf) 0 N 0 (J) m m 0 N
m r-, Lf) '<t (Y) (Y) N
00 oq ~ ~ ~
!Yl
E ~ E
E 1.0 '<t 0 '<t '<t m 00 r-, co ~ '<t
.c::: In m ~ ~ 00 (Y) ~
1.0 00 (Y) (Y) N ~ ~ ~ (J) r-, \.0 =r
...... 1.0 !"Ii
'<t
~ E
'<t r-, ~ co 00 00 Lf) Lf) r--.. N
c::: 0 00 N N \.0 r-, (Y) (J) Lf) N m
~ r-, \.0 '<t (Y) N N ~ ~ ~ 00
'<t
....
~ E
ii: In Lf) 0 0 r-, 00 m ~ (Y) l.J') m
N \.0 (Y) m r-, Lf) <r '<t (Y) N ~
0 o:t ~ ~
....
~ E r--.. Lf) '<t Lf)
ii: 0 '<t m (Y) ~ r-, <r ~ (J) 00 00
'<t 00 r-, \.0 '<t (Y) N
E 00 rri N ~ ~ ~
E
In
N ~ E
'<t '<t m m ~ '<t r--.. N
ii: In (J) 00 \.0 (Y) r-, '<t N 00 \.0 \.0
In '<t (Y) N N ~ ~ ~ (J) r-, Lf)
1.0 !"Ii
<II E 00 m r--.. ~ m Lf) '<t \.0 N ~
ii: 0 00 r-, (Y) \.0 '<t m '<t m Lf) ~
": (J) r-, Lf) <r (Y) N N ~ ~ ~
'<t ....
.....
m N (Y) co
E 00 \.0 r-, \.0 0 N 0 '<t \.0 (Y)
III ~u m Lf), 0, N 0 m (J) (J) 0 N
<II (J) r-. Lf) '<t (Y) (Y) N
.... c:: ...... ~ ~ ~
..... ·u N
c::
<II ttl '<t 0 00
u Co. In ... ... 0'1 '<t 1.0 00 .... '<t 00
III
.!o: Lri Lri ID ~ ...... ...... ": oq CC! oq
u "t:J <II 1.0 In '<t .... Lri !"Ii 0'1 1.0 M ......
0 0 x x X '<t M M N N N ....
-.:: a:: N N N N X X X X X X X
<II <II Vi 0 0 0 0'1 0'1 0'1 0'1 0'1 0'1 1.0
..... i= c ... .... ... 00 00 00 00 00 00 ......
e x x )( x ~ x )( x x x
- 0 N .... In In 0'1 M 00 N N
-.;:; M 00 0 0 In N 0 ...... In In
u '<t M M M N N N .... .... ....
<II ....._ ..._ ..._ ..._ ..._ ..._ ..._ ..._ ..._ ..._
III N N N N N N N N N N Page 5/27


governed by the nature of the load conditions, and are greater in the parent bar than in the threaded section. Table 5.20.1 sets out the value to be used as a proportion of the yield stress,fy.

5.20 Tie Rods

When designing tie rods, it must be remembered that the load cannot be determined with any great degree of accuracy due to factors such as arching of the retained soil and variability of the material retained. It is possible that the actual load on a tie rod may exceed the theoretical value by as much as 15%. It is, therefore, usual to adopt a working stress lower than the value which would be used in most structural applications.

Table 5.20.1

In Threaded In Parent

Temp. Structures Occasional Surcharges

The required diameter of tie rods is calculated from the permissible stress acting on the stress area of the thread as defined in BS3580.

Suggested permanent working loads for steel sheet piling tie rods are given in Table 5.20.3, based on rolled threads. The suggested working loads for high strength alloy tie rods are based on a factor of safety of three on the failure load.

Permissible stresses in tie rods specified in most European codes of practice are

Table 5.20.2
Nom Max Ultimate Yield Modulus
Grade Diam Length Tensile Stress of
(mm) (m) Stress (N/mm2) Elasticity
(N/mm2) (approx)
50-63
63-83 12 410
83-100
EN 10025 S355 (Grade 50) 50-63 12 490
63-83
83-100 12 490 315 205
40~10O NOTE: 1.

2.

Lengths up to 17.5m are available by prior arrangment with manufacturers. 0.1 % proof stress


Page 5/28

Table 5.20.3

Nom Metric 5275 5355 Specification MACALLOY
Diam Thread (Grade 43) (Grade 50) 17M or NM17 H.S. Alloy
(mm) Size WL=0.5fy WL=0.5fy WL=0.5fy Steel
(kN) (kN) (kN) WL=0.33fu
(kN)
25 - - - - 169
32 - - - - 276
36 - - - - 350
40 M42 - - 251 432
45 M48 - - 330 -
50 M56 253 332 456 674
60 M64 334 438 602 -
70 M76 468 620 879 -
75 - - - - 1,437
80 M85 604 801 1,134 -
85 M90 647 867 1,267 -
90 M95 726 973 1,421 -
95 M100 810 1,086 1,587 -
100 M105 861 1,129 1,760 - The elongation of the tie rods under the design load should be checked. For steels of higher tensile strength used at a working stress greater than the mild steel value, the strain at working load may be more than the structure can accommodate. Movement under superimposed loads may be reduced in many cases by pre-loading the tie rods at the time of installation to develop the passive resistance of the ground. Details of this technique are given in section 5.20.5 "Site Assembly".


The effect of sag of the tie rods and forced deflection due to settlement of fill should also be considered. Bending stresses induced at a fixed anchorage may significantly increase the tensile stress in the tie rod locally. Shear stresses may also be induced if a tie rod is displaced when the fill settles causing compound stresses which must be allowed for in the detailed design. This can often be overcome by provision of articulated joints or settlement ducts.

Page 5/29

5.20.1 Fittings

For normal use, tie rod assemblies are provided with a nut at each end, a plate to suit the bearing conditions at each end, and usually a turnbuckle with right and left hand threads to give length adjustments and take out sag. If the length of the complete rod is such that more than two elements of bar are required, couplers with two right hand threads are also included. For very large diameter ties, a coupler with left hand and right hand threads can be provided to eliminate the need to turn the whole bar, which could weigh up to 1 tonne, when making the connection.

Taper washers or spherical seating washers are used when the axis of a tie rod is not perpendicular to its seating. In some instances it is desirable to allow for rotation of the axis of a tie rod relative to the bearing face, and "articulated" anchorages are available for this purpose.

Plates are needed to transmit the load imposed on sheet piling to the tie rods and from the tie rods to the anchorages. Washer plates are used when the tie rods are anchored within the pans of sheet piles and bearing plates when the load is transmitted through walings. When the load is taken to a concrete wall or block, anchorage plates distribute the load to the concrete. The waling loads are transmitted to the anchorages by means of anchor bolts which

. also require bearing plates and washers of such size as to provide adequate bearing to the sheet piling, walings, etc.

Tie rods are generally available in lengths of up to 12m and it is advisable to provide them with turnbuckles. Lengths over 12m can be made up by using additional turnbuckles and couplers.

Page 5/30

Tie rods are normally supplied in weldable structural steel complying with BS EN10025 grades S275 and S355. For very high loadings steels with higher tensile strengths are available, as shown in Table 5.20.2

Threads may be produced by cold rolling or machining. ISO metric threads to BS3643 are usually offered on tie rods. However, Macalloy high strength alloy steel bars are supplied with a rolled thread of a specially designed profile.

5.20.2 Tie Bar Corrosion Protection

Steel sheet piles are used in many aggressive environments and consequently corrosion protection or factors influencing effective life must be considered. Several options are available to the designer.

Effective Life With No Corrosion Protection

In this situation, consideration should be given to the probable corrosion rates in a particular environment. If the design calculations are completed using stress levels appropriate to BS EN10025 S355JR (BS 4360 Gr 50 B) and a higher grade of steel is provided, it is permissible to allow sacrificial corrosion to take place because of the superior mechanical properties of the steel.

Protective Coatings

Several options are available, such as painting using the British Steel paint systems, galvanising or wrapping. It is however usual to wrap tie bars to give an appropriate level of corrosion protection. The vulnerable anchor head should be protected, and Fig 5.20.2.1 shows a recommended detail.


Fig 5.20.2.1

Commonly adopted wrapping systems are indicated in Table 5.20.2.1 below.

Table 5.20.2.1 Levels of protection Using Petrolatum Fabric Reinforced

Tape and Rubber! Bitumen Tape

Description Application Shop/Site Application Method
Paste, soft petrolatum Backfill, non tidal area or Shop and site application
reinforced tape, 15mm overlap Debond through concrete Machine or hand application
As above, 55% overlap Backfilled marine environment Shop and site application
Machine or hand application
As above, 55% and pvc overwrap Backfilled marine environment Shop and site application
Also ease of handling Machine or hand application
As above, 55% overlap, Denso Aggressive environments, marine Shop application recommended
Therm overwrap environments Machine or hand application
Denso Pol 60 tape system, Aggressive environments, marine Shop application only
55% overwrap environments, long life machine application only
maritime structures. 5.20.3 Plates

Dimensions suggested for each type of plate with each diameter and type of steel tie rod are set out in Tables 5.20.3.1 and 5.20.3.2. Their use is illustrated in Fig 5.20.6. Dimensions of washer plates are governed by the type of sheet piling used. Details are given for Larssen and Frodingham sections. Washer plate dimensions have been increased from those previously used, bringing them more in line with those used


elsewhere in Europe. As a general rule the plate length is approximately 80% of the pan flat and its thickness is approximately 40 to 50% of the thread diameter.

Plates for high strength alloy steel tie rods are designed to suit each specific application.

Taper washers are required when the axis of the tie rods are not perpendicular to their anchorage seatings. The thickness is varied

Page 5!31

Fig 5.20.2.2

(A)

to enable the nut to seat square with the axis of the tie rod.

5.20.4 Special Fittings

Any bending in a tie rod, especially in the thread length increases the stress locally with the possibility of yield or even failure if the bending is severe. In order to eliminate the risk of bending, several options are available which allow rotation of the axis of a tie rod while maintaining its tensile capacity. Some of these methods are illustrated in Fig 5.20.2.2. These include fork ends and spades or a fork end pinned to a bracket onto the sheet pile. Other options are nuts and washers with spherical seatings or pairs of taper washers which can be rotated to give any angle between zero and a predetermined maximum. The last two methods will cater for initial angularity but will not move to accommodate rotation in service.

Page 5/32

EYE COUPLER

/

.... --_

(S)

BRACKETS FOR c->: PILE CONNECTION SWIVEL PIN

~

5.20.5 Site Assembly

Tie rods are normally assembled with component bars supported to the correct level. Any slack is then taken out by tightening either a turnbuckle or the nut at one end. It is not possible to apply more than a nominal tension by tightening the end nut.


5.20.6 Installation

Tie bars perform best in pure tension, so it is good practice to ensure that this is achieved. The following is a recommended sequence of events to ensure that tie rods are installed and tensioned correctly.

1. Backfill to approximately 150mm below the finished level for the ties.

2. Layout tie bars on sand bags placed every 6m and on either side of a coupler/turnbuckle or articulated joint.

3. Fit settlement ducts over the ties.

4. Assemble with turnbuckles set such that there is a 100mm gap showing between the ends of the bars. Couplers should be fully engaged.

5. Tension from the anchorage outside of the wall to take up the slack.

6. Tension turnbuckles.

7. Place sand fill over the settlement

ducts.

8. Backfill to required level.

This procedure applies to a simple situation and additional activities may be considered, for example applying pretensioning to pull the piles in before final backfilling, stressing after backfilling to prevent future movement due to subsequent loading.

Further information on stressing details is available on request from tie rod manufacturers.

Fig 5.20.6

r

Ii I

+L

~f:lw*! =r-. ANCHOR

WASHER""""---- I[I[ II BOLT

PLATE U

CONCRETE

BEARING PLATE


Page 5/33

OILfl Lfl (Y)I(Y) (Y)

..... .. ~ .• 0 I •• ~. 0 0 ill OJ ill OJ
.... (Y) (Y) (Y) .s: .c: -5i .c;
:2! Ig x x x V1 V1 V1
<U <U <U <U
Z 0 !~ 0 0 5: 5: 5: 5:
0 ~ Ln
S .. ~ 01 01 D1 D1
:2! x .~ .. x x -~ .~ -~ ;~
.... ~ ..• 0 0 0 D1 0) D1 01
..... -0 -0 -0 --0
";i;' .... 00 ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~
Cll .-=- N
N
"iii
= Cll
5 "'C .• ~. .. ~. I~ ill ill ill ill
'" 0 0
c.. (Y) (Y) L .s: L .s:
'" x x ~ ~ ~ V)
UJ ~
...J Q) ..... g 0 .. ~. 0 l~
c:: Cll ..... 0 (Y)
.... M 01 D1 D1 01
:2: II> '" ... ~ ..• x g x .~ c c ~ c
.... 6-> 6-> 6->
~ '" 0 0 01 -0
:J: .0 co 00 -0 -0 -0 ;::
I!l Cll . ~ .. p &i ~ ~ co
z i=
is
0 ill tv ill ill
a:: I~ • Lfl ... ~. Lfl L()
U- N N N .s: -'= .s: .s:
X X >< V1 '" V1 V>
m ~ ro ~
..... 0 ip 0 0 5: 5:
..... 0 ~ Ll">
N I··~. 01 01 01 01
'" x I~ x >< -~ _f; -~ .~
I@ 0 0 0 01 01 01 D1
-0 "'1:) -0 -0
CO CO 0 ~ ~ -;:: ~
I'-=- N CO
N
M Page 5/34


III C o 'iii c Q)

E i:S

Q) ..... til

c::

....

o s: u c « -0 c til

Ol C '': til Q) CO N M

ci

N

Lli

Q)

::c ~

Q) LI) LI) LI) a a a a a a a
- '" '" '" [Y) .q .q LI) LI) LI) Ln
III <tI >< x >< x x x >< x >< x
0- c:: LI) LI) a a Ln a LI) a LI) a
<tI 0 '" r- a LI) '" a '" LI) r--, a
..c '" '" [Y) [Y) .q LI) LI) LI) LI) <.D
Q) ..0:: >< x >< >< >< >< >< x >< x
j:: ...
!:::: LI) Ln a a Ln a LI) a LI) a
...... -c '" r-c, a LI) '" a N Ln r- a
...... '" '" [Y) [Y) .q Ln LI) LI) LI) <.D
:2:
z
0 Q) a a a a a a a a a a
<- [Y) [Y) [Y) [Y) .q <r .q .q .q .q
:2: <tI >< x >< x x x x x x x
...... c:: a a a a a a 0 a a a
...... 01 co co co co a a LI) Ln LI) LI)
c ~ ~ ~ ~ '" '" '" '" N N
.;:: >< x x x x x >< x >< x
<tI a a a a a a a a a a
Q) co co co co a a LI) L.{) LI) L.{)
m ~ ~ e-e- ~ N N N N N N
Q) a LI) a LI) LI) a a LI) LI)
- N N [Y) [Y) [Y) .q .q .q .q
ttl X X X X X >< X X X
c:: a LI) LI) LI) a LI) a LI) a
0 [ LI) r-, N r- a N LI) r- a
N N [Y) [Y) .q .q .q .q LI)
..0:: x >< x x x >< x >< x
e IJ
!:::: a LI) LI) LI) a LI) a LI) a
ttl <t: LI) r-c, N r- a N L.{) r-; 0
a:l N N [Y) (Y) .q .q .q .q L.{)
Q)
j::
LI"I Q) a 0 a 0 a 0 a 0 a
LI"I - (Y) (Y) (Y) .q .q .q .q <r .q
M <tI x x x x x >< x >< x
VI c:: a 0 a 0 a 0 a 0 a
01 [ co co co 0 0 LI) L.{) LI) LI)
·2 ~ -e-e- ~ '" '" N N N '"
X >< >< x >< >< x >< x
<tI 0 0 a 0 0 0 a 0 0
Q) co co co 0 0 LI) LI) LI) LI)
co ~ ~ ~ N N N N N N
Q) a 0 LI) 0 a LI) Ln 0 a
..... N N N (Y) (Y) (Y) (Y) .q .q
<tI x x x x x >< x x x
c:: LI) a LI) Ln a LI) a LI) a
0 [ N LI) r-; N Ln r- a N LI)
N N N (Y) (Y) (Y) .q .q .q
..0:: x >< >< x >< >< x >< x
~ IJ LI) a LI) Ln a LI) a LI) a
s::::
<tI <t: N LI) r- '" Ln r- a '" LI)
..c '" ('oJ ('oJ (Y) (Y) (Y) .q .q -er
Q)
j::
LI"I Q) L.{) L.{) L.{) L.{) L.{) L.{) L.{) L.{) L.{)
...... ..... N ('oJ ('oJ (Y) (Y) (Y) (Y) (Y) (Y)
N ttl x x x x x x x x x
VI c:: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
01 [ co co co 0 0 L.{) LI) LI) If)
-2 ~ ~ ~ ('oJ ('oJ N ('oJ ('oJ ('oJ
x x x x x x x >< x
<tI a 0 0 a 0 a 0 0 0
Q) co co co a a L.{) If) L.{) If)
m ~ ~ ~ ('oJ N N ('oJ N ('oJ
Q)
N
Vi N co <.D .q <.D L.{) 0 If) 0 If)
"C -er <r LI) <.D r- co Q) Q) 0 a
ttl ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~
.s:
I-
.~
"C
n; 0 Ln ('oJ a '" ;; LI) a L.{) a
a:l .q .q LI) <.D r- co 0"\ Q) a
E ~
0
Z '0
(j)
E
:::l
Vl
vi
ru
(j)
+-'
(j)
b
c
0
u
E
E
-<,
z
0
~
en
-<,
.s:
+-'
01
C
(!!
+-'
Vl
(j)
_o
:::l
U
(j)
+-'
(j)
b
c
0
u
C
0
-a
(j)
Vl
ru
sx
-a
ro
_Q
01
C
''::::
ru
(j)
.o
Vl
(j)
+-'
ru
0..
0
s:
u
c
<r:
w
I-
0
z
Page 5/35 Piling Handbook, Feb 97

5.21 Relieving Platforms

When the depth of soil to be retained and/or the applied surcharge loading (eg from heavy wharf cranes) is excessive, soil pressures may be reduced by the use of a relieving platform.

The relieving platform is constructed such that it will support the surcharge loads and the upper portion of the retained soil, these loads being transferred to lower strata where there will be no effect on the pressures acting on the wall. Bearing piles, which support the platform and transfer the loads into the soil at depth, may also be designed to provide an anchorage to the wall.

The platform can be supported in part by the main sheet pile wall (see Chapter 6, Axially Loaded Sheet Piling) and if the vertical loading becomes excessive, box or high modulus piles may be introduced into the wall at appropriate intervals to carry this load. Alternatively, bearing piles may be provided immediately behind the wall.

The relieving platform must be designed such that it will intersect the plane of rupture from the soil above and behind the platform preventing any load from that soil acting on the wall. The main sheet piles may extend up to ground level or be curtailed at platform level with a concrete retaining wall being provided above that level; the concrete wall must be designed to derive its stability from the platform.

Fig 5.21.1

HIGH WATER

LOW WATER

TYPICAL EXAMPLE OF A RELIEVING PLATfORM (SHEET PilES AT FRONT OF PLATFROM)

TYPICAL EXAMPLE OF A REUEVING PLATFORM (SHEET PILES AT REAR O~ PLAtfORM)

Page 5/36


Miscellaneous Details

Fig 5.22.1

TIMBER CAPPINGS

.,

.;110

t;~f~*~,"Ji

R.C. CAPPING

Larssen 6 Fender Pile

NOTE: This type of ladder can only be used when the pile depth 'h' is 270 mm or more.

LADDERS

..... Location brackets


Page 5/37

..

Timber

The following pages contain sample calculations employing the net pressure approach for the design cases detailed below:

1. Cantilever retaining walls.

2. Design of walls with free earth support.

3. Design of walls with fixed earth support.

4. Analysis by graphical method.

5. Design of a balanced anchorage.

6. Designs for typical retaining situations.

Fig 5.23.1

A

CROSS SECTION

NET PRESSURES

Page 5/38

SHEAR BENDING MOMENT DEFLECTION


5.23 Design of Cantilever Retaining Walls

The earth pressures are calculated as in Chapter 4 - one metre of wall being considered. Figure 5.23.1 indicates the theoretical forces acting on the wall

F1 (Representing area A.O.B 1) = total net active pressure

F2 (Representing area O.C.C 1) = total net passive pressure

F3 (Representing area C.0.01) = total net passive pressure required to fix the toe of the wall

Forces F1, F2 and F3 act through the centres of gravity of their respective areas.

Calculations may be simplified by considering the line C1.C.01. to be horizontal and to pass through point C. The area C. D. 01. is replaced by force F3 acting at C as shown in Fig 5.23.2 below.

The depth O.c. should be such that the moments of forces F1 and F2 about F3 are in equilibrium. The value of force F3 is such that the algebraic sum of forces F1, F2 and F3 is zero.

The 'Piling Handbook' method of design for cantilever piles has been successfully used over many years but as can be seen from these sample calculations, a finite factor of safety has not been incorporated. The factor of safety is introduced by the adoption of reasonably conservative soil strength parameters. Should designers wish to include a specific factor of safety against rotational failure, the depth O.c. is determined such that restoring moments about point C equate to the disturbing moments multiplied by the desired factor of safety.

In uniform cohesion less soils, when the depth O.c. has been derived, it should be increased by 0.2 x O.c. in order to correct the error produced by the simplified method.

Hence, depth of cut off = B.O. + 1.2 x O.c.

The maximum bending moment on the piles is derived by calculating the level X.Y. at which zero shear occurs (ie where area O.X.Y. = area A.B1.0.) and obtaining the net moment of these areas about this level.

Fig 5.23.2

~~:;;:;::n

A

u,

(;

f::> u

(;

I

~

c

CROSS SECTION

Page 5/39


NET PRESSURES

Cantilever Wall - Example

SURCHARGE 10 kNjm'

p22t?22~;;Z ~2 2 ~ a (

y =17·16 kN/m' 1> = 30';~= 0" C= OkN/m'

.-----rf·3

/ / /

/

/~12-4

'\

\ ,

\69<l

NED PRESSURE CIA. kl>i/m'

,,:" [
Water Soil Soil Water
Passive Active OVER BURDEN kN,m'

A wall is to be built to retain a height of 3.5m of sandy soils. The effective wall height = 3.5m + 0.5m = 4m

(Minimum over excavation allowance = 0.5m or 10% of retained height) Minimum surcharge load = 10kN/m2.

Pressure on active side Pa = y . h . Ka - 2c v'Ka + Pw

Pressure on passive side Pp = y . h . Kp + 2c v'Kp + Pw

The coefficients of earth pressure are obtained from the tables in Chapter 4 on Earth and Water Pressures.

Loose fine sand Compact fine sand

Ka = 0.33 Ka = 0.27

Pa at ground level

Pa at 4m below ground level in loose sand Pa at 5m below ground level in loose sand

Pa at 5m below ground level in compact sand Pa at 6m below ground level in compact sand Pa at 9m below ground level in compact sand

Pp at 4m below ground level in loose sand

Pp at 5m below ground level in loose sand

Pp at 5m below ground level in compact sand Pp at 6m below ground level in compact sand Pp at 9m below ground level in compact sand

Page 5/40

Kp = 3.0 Kp = 3.7

Note: Wall friction has been ignored in this example, however, itsbeneficial effect can be included at the discretion of the designer.

= 10 x 0.33 78.6 x 0.33

= 95.8 x 0.33 95.8 x 0.27 114.4 x 0.27

146.8 x 0.27 + 29.4

17.2 x 3 17.2 x 3.7 35.8 x 3.7

68.1 x 3.7 + 29.4

= 3.3kNlm2 = 25.9kNlm2 = 31.6kNlm2 = 25.9kN/m2 = 30.9kNlm2 = 69kNlm2

= OkNlm2

= 51.6kNlm2 = 63.6kNlm2 = 132.5kNlm2 = 281.4kNlm2


Net Pp at 5m below ground level in loose sand Net Pp at 5m below ground level in compact sand Net Pp at 5m below ground level in compact sand Net Pp at 5m below ground level in compact sand

As the pressure diagram below '0' is not uniform, the depth OC is best determined by trial and error.

Try o, = 3.0m

Moments about and above point C:

3.3 x 4.0 x 5.56

22.6 x 4.0 x 1/2 x 4.893 25.9 x 0.56 x 1/2 x 3.373 = -20 x 0.44 x 1/2 x 2.707

-37.7 x 1.0 x 2.06

-63.9 x 1.0 x 1/2 x 1.893

-101.6 x 1.56 x 0.78

-57.6 x 1.56 X 1/2 x 0.52

73.4 221.2

24.5 -11.9

-77.7

-60.5

-123.6

-23.4

+22.0 kNm

As the sum of the moments is slightly positive, the correct value of OC is marginally greater than 3.0m. However it is accurate enough in this case to take OC = 3.0m.

Depth of cut-off required = 0.56 + 1.2 x 3.0

= 4.2m (rounded to nearest 0.1 m)

Total active pressure = (3.3 + 25.9) x 1/2 X 4.0 + 25.9 x 0.56 x 1/2

= 58.4

= 7.25 65.65kN/m

The level at which zero shear occurs (where the area of the net passive diagram equals the active force calculated above) is S.9m below the top of the pile.


= 51.6-31.6 = 63.6 - 25.9 = 132.5 - 30.9 = 281.4 - 69.0

= 20kNlm2

= 37.7kNlm2 = 101.6kNlm2 = 212 .4kNlm2

Moments about and above the level of zero shear:

3.3 x 4.0 x 3.9 51.5 (25.9 - 3.3) x 4.0 x 1/2 x 3.233 = 146.1

25.9 x 0.56 x 1/2 x 1.713 12.4

-20.0 x 0.44 x 1/2 x 1.047 -4.6

-37.7 x 0.9 x 0.45 -15.2

-(95.2 - 37.7) x 0.9 x 1/2 x 0.3 -7.8

182.4kNm/m

The calculated bending moment on the piles is 182.4kNm/m.

Section modulus required =

182.4 x 1000 x 100 =1013 crnvrn 180 x 100

Provide LX 12 or Frodingham 2N sheet piles in EN 10248:S270GP steel. 8.2m in length.

Note: Although this sheet pile section will be adequate for structural purposes the designer must check that it will be drivable to the required depth and for permanent construction ensure that the pile will provide the required life expectancy (as outlined in Chapter 3).

Page 5/41

5.24 Design of Walls with Free Earth Support

In this condition the penetration of the piles is such that the passive pressure in front of the piles is sufficient to resist the forward movement of the toes but not sufficient to prevent rotation. Thus the piles are supported by ties at the top of the wall and the soil at its base in a manner similar to a beam on simple supports.

Figure 5.24.1 indicates the loads acting on the wall.

Area AO.B 1 = total net active pressure Area 0.c.e1 = total net passive pressure (Factor of safety = 1)

Area 0.D.D1 = total net passive pressure (Factor of safety = 2)

T = Force applied at waling level

The depth of cut off should be sufficient to give a factor of safety of 2 against rotation of the wall about the waling.

For stability the moments of areas AO.B1 and o.c.e 1 about the waling level should be in equilibrium.

The bending moment on the piles is derived by calculating the level XY at which zero shear occurs (ie where area XYB1.0 = Area O.c.el) and obtaining the net moment of these areas about this level.

The force T at waling level = Area AO.B 1. - Area o.c.e 1.

The depth of cut off should be such that the moment of area O.D.Dl is twice the moment of area AO.B 1 about tie rod level.

Fig 5.24.1

A

_T

///V TI=E~R=O=D-~.f-

D 01

NET PRESSURES SHEAR BENDING MOMENT DEFLECTION

CROSS SECTION

Page 5/42


Free Earth Support - Example

Active pressure Pa

= y.h.ka - 2c vka + Pw kN/m2 Passive pressure Pp

= y.h.kp + 2c vkp + Pw kN/m2

The coefficients of earth pressure used in the calculations are:

Loose fine sand: ka = 0.33, kp = 4.9 Dense fine sand: ka = 0.27, kp = 6.0

SURCHARGE 10kN/m'

Fig 5.24.2

iC----- LJTie rod -g

rl :;:

Y ~ 17·16 kN/m3 ~ E

9= 30' .;: .,.

c = 0 kN/m2 3;

£ ;PhO~ GW~ ~

~owwate.!..

,~ y!", 10·8 kN/m3

~. .p= 35'

c= 0 kN/m'

...

~ 19-6

"'" r; = 9-8 kN/m' ~ E

el ~ r-,

"'I ~

~~--=-~-=- ~ __ 58~

o 111-()

43·11541

78-6

68£

[_

.. I

.. / I

207·2L 1

._._ 3-3 T

o

89'4

9~

29-4

Passive

Water Soil Soil Water

Active

NET PRESSURE DIA. kN/m2

OVERBURDEN kN/m'

pa at ground level

pa at 4m below ground level in loose fine sand

pa at 4m below ground level in dense fine sand pa at 5m below ground level in dense fine sand pa at 7m below ground level in dense fine sand pa at 11 m below ground level in dense fine sand

pw at 7m below ground level

= 10 x 0.33

= 78.6 x 0.33

= 78.6 x 0.27

= 89.6 x 0.27 + 9.8

= 111.2 x 0.27 + 29.4 = 154.4 x 0.27 + 68.6

Pp at 11 m below ground level in dense fine sand = 43.1 x 6.0 + 58.8 Net Pp at 7m below ground level in dense fine sand = 59.4 -19.6

Net Pp at 11 m below ground level in dense fine sand = 317.4 - 110.2


= 3.3kN/m2 = 26kN/m2

= 21.3kN/m2 = 34kN/m2

= 59.4kN/m2 = 11 0.3kN/m2

= 19.6kN/m2 = 317 AkNlm2 = 39.8kN/m2 = 207.2kNlm2

Page 5/43

Moments of active pressures about waling level:

Active Pressure

Moment of Active Pressure about '0'

3.3 x 4.0 x 1/2 6.6 6.6 x 0.333 2.2
26 x 4.0 x 1/2 52.0 52.0 x 1.667 86.7
21.2 x 1.0 x 1/2 10.6 10.6 x 3.333 35.3
34xl.0x1/2 17.0 17.0 x 3.667 62.3
34 x 2.0 x 1/2 34.0 34.0 x 4.667 = 158.7
39.8 x 2.0 x 1/2 39.8 5.9 x 5.333 = 212.3
39.8 x 0.645 x 1/2 12.8 12.8x6.215 = 79.8
172.7kN 637.3kNm For stability the moment of passive pressure about the waling level must be at least equal to the moment of active pressure about the waling.

The rate of increase of the passive pressure with depth = (39.8 + 207.2) = 61.75kN/m2 per metre.

4

Hence 61.75 x2 (6.645 + 2x) = 637.3 and therefore x "" 1.63m.

2 3

The total net passive pressure is 61.75 x 1.632 x 1/2 = 82.0kN/m.

Moment of passive pressure about waling level = 82 x (6.645 + 2 x 1.63) = 634kNm 3

Total net active pressure = 172.7 kN

Therefore the force in the walings and supports = 172.7 - 82.0 = 90.7 kN/m run of wall.

Zero shear (where area of active pressure diagram = waling force) is at 5.12m below pile top.

Moments about and below level of zero shear:

82.0 x 3.612

-34.3 x 1.880 x 1/2 x 0.627

-39.8 x 1.880 x 1/2 x 1.25

-39.8 x 0.645 x 1/2 x 2.095

= 296.2 = -20.2 = -46.8 = -26.9

202.3kNm

Page 5/44


The maximum bending moment on the piles = 202.3kNm per metre run of wall Section modulus required = 202.3 x 1000 x 100 = 1124 cm3/m

180 x 100

In this example it has been assumed that the wall is to be used for permanent works for which a working stress of 180N/mm2 is adopted.

Penetration required to give a factor of safety of 2 against rotation of the wall about the waling level = y + 0.645 + 7.00

To find y, 61.75 y2 (6.645 + 2YJ = 2 x 636.4 and therefore y '" 2.24m.

2 3

Moments of net passive pressure with 2.24 + 0.645 = 2.885m penetration. 2.24 x 61.75 x 2.24 x 1/2 x (6.645 + 2 x 2.24) = 1260.7kNm

3 (c.f.2 x 637.3 = 1275kNm)

Therefore actual Factor of Safety against rotational failure = 1260.7 = 1.98 637.3

Total pile length required = 7.00 + 0.645 + 2.24 = 9.885 say 10m.

Use LX12 or Frodingham 2N piles in EN10248: S270GP steel, 10m long.

Note: Although these sheet pile sections will be adequate for structural purposes the designer must check that they will be drivable to the required depth and will provide the required effective life.


Page 5/45

5.25 Design of Walls with Fixed Earth Support

Fig 5.25.1

TIE ROD

It

o >'::J o u.. o

~I ~_L__

CROSS SECTION

CROSS SECTION

A

01

SHEAR

Fig 5.25.2

TIE ROD

NET PRESSURES

u.. u..

s a

u..

o ::c I.... u.I Q

BENDING MOMENT DEFLECTION

A

-----T

NET PRESSURES

Page 5/46


In this condition the penetration of the piles is such that the passive pressure generated is sufficient to prevent both forward movement and rotation at the toes. Thus the piles have a simple support due to the ties or struts at the top of the wall and fixed support due to soil at the wall base in a manner similar to a propped cantilever.

Figure 5.25.1 indicates the forces acting on the wall.

F1 (Representing area A.O.B 1) = total net active pressu re.

F2 (Representing area O.C.C 1) = total net passive pressu re.

F3 (Representing area C.0.01) = total net passive pressure required to fix the toe of the wall.

T = Support force applied at waling level.

Forces F1, F2 and F3 act through the centres of gravity of their respective areas.

As in the case of a cantilever wall, calculations may be simplified by considering the line C1.C.01 to be horizontal and to pass through the point C. The area C.0.01 is replaced by force F3 acting at C, as shown in Fig 5.25.2.

The force T at waling level is obtained by taking moments of area A.0.B1 about O.


The depth OC should be such that the moments of forces T, F1 and F2 about F3 are in equilibrium.

The value of the force F3 is such that the algebraic sum of forces T, F1, F2 and F3 is zero.

When depth OC has been derived, it should be increased by 0.2 x OC in order to correct the error produced by the simplified method.

In uniform cohesion less soils, the penetration is obtainable directly from the formula.

Depth of cut-off below excavation level = y + 1 .2V'{6R/y.(kp - ka)}

where Y is the depth below excavation level of the point 0 (zero net pressure) and R is the reaction at point 0 when the pile is considered as a beam simply supported at the waling level and point 0 and loaded with active pressure A.O.B 1.

The maximum bending moment is obtained again by considering the pile as a beam simply supported at the waling level and point 0 loaded with active pressure A.0.B1.

Page 5/47

Fixed Earth Support-Example

NET PRESSURE DIAGRAM kN/m"

=

'-~~M3'3

~L._ ~TI'ROd

Y=lN6 kN/m3 l

¢ =30' l ~

c=OkN/m2

*

Weep holes ..J

§~\ ow.=:- _._

Lowwaler y~ 10-8 kN/m3

-=::- 1'=35'

c = 0 kN/m~

Dredge L~I

Fixed Earth Support - Example

Active Pressure pa = y.h.ka - 2cv'ka + pw kN/m2 Passive Pressure pp = y.h.kp - 2cv'kp + pw kN/m2

The coefficients of earth pressure used in the calculations are:

Loose fine sand: ka = 0.33, kp = 4.9 Dense fine sand: ka = 0.27, kp = 6.0

pa at ground level

pa at 4m below ground level in loose fine sand pa at 4m below ground level in dense fine sand pa at 5m below ground level in dense fine sand pa at 7m below ground level in dense fine sand pa at 11 m below ground level in dense fine sand

pw at 7m below ground level

po at 11 m below ground level in dense fine sand

= 10 x 0.33

= 78.8 x 0.33 = 78.8 x 0.27

= 89.6 x 0.27 + 9.8

= 111.2 x 0.27 + 29.4 = 154.4 x 0.27 + 68.6

= 43.1 x 6.0 + 58.8

Net pa at 7m below ground level in dense fine sand = 59.4 - 19.6 Net pp at 11 m below ground level in dense fine sand = 317.4 - 110.2

Page 5/48

= 3.3 kN/m2

= 26 kN/m2

= 21.3 kN/m2 = 34 kNlm2

= 59.4 kN/m2 = 110.3 kNlm2

= 19.6 kNlm2 = 317.4 kNlm2

= 39.8 kNlm2 = 207.2 kNlm2


Active Pressure

3.3 x 4.0

(26 - 3.3) x 4.0 x 1/2 21.2 x 1.0

(34 - 21.7) x 1.0 x 1/2 34 x 2.0

(39.8 - 33.9) x 2.0 x 1/2 39.8 x 0.645 x 1/2

13.2 45.4 21.2

6.2 68.0 5.9 12.8 172.7 kN

Moment of Active Pressure about '0'

13.2 x 5.645 45.4 x 4.978 21.2x3.145 6.2 x 2.978 68 x 1.645 5.9 x 1.312 12.8 x 0.430

74.5 226.0

66.7

18.5 111.9

7.7

5.5 510.8 kNm

Force in walings and supports = 510.8/6.645 = 76.9 kN/m of wall.

Total active force = 172.7 kN/m and is applied 510.8/172.7 = 2.957m above '0'. Net passive pressure at any depth 'd' below point '0' = y' .(kp-ka).d

= 10.8.(6.0 - O.27).d = 61.9d

Moments of the total active force, net passive pressure and support force T about the pivot point at the toe of the pile must be in equilibrium.

Hence 172.7 x (2.957 + d) = 76.9 x (6.645 + d) + (d x 61.9d x 1/2 x 0.33d) d = 3.1m

Depth of cut-off required for fixity = 0.645 + 1.2 x 3.1 = 4.365 say 4.5m Zero shear occurs 4.7m below ground level.

Moments about and above point of zero shear:

76.9 x 3.70

-3.3 x 4.0 x 2.70

-22.7 x 4.0 x 1/2 x 2.033

-21.2 x 0.7 x 0.35

-8.9 x 0.70 x 1/2 x 0.233

284.5 -35.6

-92.3

-5.2

-0.7

150.7 kNm/m (say 151 kNm/m)

Section modulus required = 151 x 1000 x 100 = 755 cm3/m

200 x 100 (assuming temporary works stress)

Length of pile required = 4.5m + 7m = 11.5m

Use LX8 or Frodingham 2N piles in EN 10248:S270GP steel, 11.5m long.

Note: Although this sheet pile section will be adequate for structural purposes the designer must check that it will be drivable to the required depth.


Page 5/49

5.26 Analysis by Graphical Method

As an alternative to the analytical method, the bending moment, embedment and the anchor force can be obtained by means of graphical construction.

5.26.1 Explanation of the Method

The pressure diagram is constructed in the normal way and subdivided into a number of sections which need not be equal but must be of sufficient number to form a reasonably smooth curve when the bending moment diagram is plotted.

From the centre of gravity of these sections, horizontal lines are drawn and numbered to represent the forces acting on the wall.

A vector diaqrarn is then constructed by marking out horizontally the forces acting in each section.

Choosing polar distances '0' and '01', lines are drawn from each point on the horizontal vector lines to their respective points '0' and '01',

A funicular polygon or bending moment diagram is then constructed by drawing lines parallel with those of the vector diagram to the horizontal lines drawn from the centre of gravity of each section of the pressure diagram.

The first upper line of the funicular polygon is produced to cut the horizontal line of the tie bar force at X. From the point X a base line is drawn so that the area A multiplied by the distance from its centre of gravity to X equals the areas B multiplied by the distance from its centre of gr~lVity .to X. The force T is obtained by drawinq line OZ parallel to the base line XY.

The depth of cut off is shown where the base line cuts the bending moment curve at Y.

It is necessary to increase this distance by 20% to allow for satisfactory cut off and full fixity at the toe.

Results of Analysis

Maximum bending moment = 140 kNm x 1.07m

Required section modulus = {150 x 1 OOO} x 100

200 100

Embedment depth = 0.6 + 1.2 x 3.12

Length of pile required

= 150 kNm = 750 cm3/m

= 4.4m + 7m = 11.4m

= 4.344m

Page 5/50


Fig 5.26.'1

E'

---=i

I

~l

«>,

SURCHARGE 10kN/m2 =

IEROD

Page 5/51

207·2 NET PRESSURE DIAGRAM kNinf

LOADING IN kN FOR lmetre LENGTH OF WALL

FUNICULAR POLYGON or 8.M. DIAGRAM to any scale

Fig 5.26.2

13

1.


5.27 Design of Sheet Pile Deadman Anchorage

The following example illustrates the method which has been widely used for the design of balanced anchorages.

11m
Fig 5.27.1 I
'-~'_ "
I '-.J ,<;) .._________ "0 -: _L:ij_ ~
r-tt ~ E d
Y = 17·2kNfm' /~ . - '"
I <P = 30° :2 ------. '--.._____t, ~I
Ka=0'33 /450~~:/' .,
"'
Kp=3 0 <.
0
E G.W.L / 'j ¢~30° ..J
... -:;:- / ,/ <.
<,
~ r <,
"0
t:
.>. '"
"'
/\f/35° .,
c
;;::
<I>
/ '"
e
.,
Q
It> /
r-,
~
'" !\45'+~ = 62Y,o
It)
'"
::: Tie rod load (calculated from limit equilibrium condition) = 77kN/m

Assume LX anchor piles are selected:-

Assume tie rods will be at 8 pile centres. Tie rod spacing = 4.8m Load per tie rod = 77 x 4.8 = 369.6 kN

Therefore from Table 5.20.3 of permissible tie rod loads select 70mm diameter rods in S275 grade steel or 60mm diameter rods in S355 grade steel

A factor of safety of 2 is applied to the tie rod load to calculate the ultimate anchorage load required.

(The factor of safety against failure will therefore be 2) Ultimate anchorage load = 2 x 369.6 = 739.4 kN

The net passive pressure at any depth 'd: in front of the anchorage = y x d x (kp - ka)

Assume that the depth to the centre of the anchorage is 2m. Therefore, for a balanced anchorage, the depth to the toe = 3m

Page 5/52


Average net pressure in front of the anchorage = 17.2 x 1.5 x (3 - 0.33) = 68.9 kN/m2 ( y = 17.2 kN/m3 , depth to mid point of anchorage = 1.5m, kp = 3 and ka = 0.33 )

Total soil shear resistance at the ends of the anchorage: = 113 x y x d3 x ka x tan(45 + <p12) x tane

= 0.33 x 17.2 x 33 x 0.33 x tan(45 + 30/2) x tan 30 = 51 kN

Therefore, the anchorage width required = 739.4 - 51 = 3.33m 68.9 x 3

Therefore, adopt a 5 pile anchorage giving a width of 3.00m

(When designing an anchorage using Larrsen piles an odd number of piles should be used)

The depth of anchorage must therefore be increased to allow for this reduction in nominal width but can be approximated to

739.4 - 51 = 3.33m 68.9 x 3

(A more accurate calculation will result in a smaller anchorage depth as the 'd' variable used to calculate both the average pressure in front of the anchorage and shear resistance at the sides should be increased, but it is normally sufficiently accurate to use previously calculated values at this stage)

Area of anchorage

= 3.0 x 2.22

= 6.66m2

Average pressure on the anchorage = 739.4 I 6.66

= 111 kN/m2

Consider 1 m width of anchorage.

Bending moment on the piles = w x L2 = 111 X 2.222 = 68.4kNm

8 8

( L = actual length of anchor piles ie 2 x 3.33/3)

Therefore minimum section modulus required = 68.4 x 1000 = 254 cmvrn 270

(Note that the yield stress of the steel anchor piles is used in this calculation as the loading applied to the anchorage has already been factored by 2 to calculate the ultimate anchorage load)


Page 5/53

Therefore, adopt Larssen LX8 steel sheet piles in EN 10248: S270GP steel, 2.2m in length.

Load on the anchorage waling = 111 x 2.22 = 246.4 kN/m Bending moment on the waling = 246.4 x 32 = 277.2 kNm 8

Therefore, minimum section modulus required = 277.2 x 1000 = 1008cm3/m 275

Adopt 2/305 x 102 x 46.18 kg/m R.S.C in grade S275 steel as the waling.

If Z piles are to be used, an even number of piles should be chosen.

For this example, the overall width of piling to be provided should be approximately 3.33m

Therefore, consider 6 Nr Frodingham piles. Overall width = 6 x 0.483 = 2.898m

Depth of anchorage required = 739.4 - 51 = 3.45m 68.9 x 2.898

Area of anchorage = 3.45 x 2/3 x 2.898 = 6.665m2

Average pressure on anchor piles = 739.4 = 111 kN/m2 6.665

Consider 1 m width of anchorage.

B.M. on anchor piles = 111 x 2.32 = 73.4kNm/m 8

Section modulus required = 73.4 x 1000 = 272 cmvrn 270

Use 6 Nr. Frodinghan 1N profile piles in EN 10248: S270GP steel, 2.3m long

Load on anchorage waling = 111 x 2.3 = 255.3 kN/m

B.M. on anchorage waling = 255.3 x 2.8982 = 268 kNm 8

Section modulus required = 268 x 1000 = 975 cm3 275

Use 2/ 305 x 102 x 46.18 kg/m R.S.C. in grade S275 steel as the waling

Page 5/54


River Retaining Wall, Swansea

Client:

Main Contractor:

Sub-Consultant:

West Glamorgan County Council Edmund Nuttall Limited

Ove Arup & Partners


Page 5/55

5.28 Design Example

Consider a cantilever sheet pile wall in good granular material to retain 4.0m of water. The work is temporary and the intention is to use grade S270GP grade steel piles. Select the appropriate table, in this case Table 5.28.6.

On the horizontal scale select 4.0m.

1. Read up the chart to the line for S270GP steel (temporary). Read the required minimum section modulus from the left hand vertical scale. In this case 1300cm3/m. Therefore use either LX16 or Frodingham 3N or 3NA sheet piles.

2. Read up the chart to the maximum pile length line. Read the required minimum pile length from the right hand vertical scale. In this case 9.0m long.

Suggested piles for this example LX16 or Frodingham 3N or 3NA in grade S270GP steel

Page 5/56


5.28.6 EXAMPLE

CANTILEVER WALLS - COHESION LESS SOILS

§INIMUM PILE LENGTH AND SECTION MODULU$i

2400

Li 1
~ / '/
/
/ v 11/ II
r== of==. l- I/' Ili/ r/
''== F 1= io==r II ;]r/
1/ I/; 1111
1/ /; ') V
/
/ ~ ~ V
/
V ~ ~ ,~
,/
~ ~ V
h-
~ ~ ~
- L...= 2QOO

1600

E

i 1200

BOO

400

1.5

2.5

3.5

12

10

6 I

4.5

Note: The selected section modulus must be checked for drivability.

[m} RET,AJNED HEIGHT (H)

,-----------------.

• S270GP STEEL (TEMPORARY)

• S270GP STEEL (PERMANENT)

.. S355GP STEEL (TEMPORARY)

L

* S355GP STEEL (PERMANENT)

• MIN. PILE LENGTH (L) FOR Pnp=l


Page 5/57

5.28.1 Typical Retaining Walls

The following charts indicate the requirements for a retaining wall for the conditions specified.

The user should select the conditions which represent the case in question and then scale off from the charts the bending moment, support force and minimum pile length. The figures thus obtained are unfactored. The sheet pile section required may then be ascertained by dividing the theoretical bending moment by the permissible design stress to obtain the minimum section modulus.

The charts are based on the assumption that weep holes are provided where necessary and the retained soil is capable of allowing the design water regime to be realised. In the case of cohesive soils, the charts allow for the accumulation of ground water in any tension cracks which may develop.

The soil conditions adopted in the production of the charts assume a softened zone to a depth of 1 m below excavation level when cohesive soils exist at excavation level.

The length of pile below excavation level has not been checked to ensure that there is sufficient penetration to prevent piping or heave and provide a water cut-off where appropriate. This must be considered separately.

The selected section must be checked for drivability.

Page 5/58

Note:

Cantilever walls in excess of 4.Sm high are not generally recommended as the section required to resist bending moments and the length required for stability mean that uneconomic designs may result. In circumstances where the retained height exceeds 4.Sm, a cantilever wall may be considered, but the deflection of the wall is likely to be large and this should be checked to ensure that serviceability criteria are not exceeded.

It is further recommended that cantilever walls are not used in soft clays.

When Larssen sheet piles are selected for the construction of cantilever retaining walls, the designer must satisfy himself that the section is capable of developing the required section modulus. Guidance on the selection of pile sections is given in 5.13.

Cantilever walls should not be designed for permanent construction using total stress soil parameters.



Page 5/59

5.28.1 CANTILEVER WALLS - COHESIONLESS SOILS

IMINIMUM PILE LENGTH AND SECTION MODULUS I
1400 14

1200 12
/
1000 II 10
1/ /
/ /A ~ 2
BOD a I
1 /; II to
~ j .~
I ::1
I .> ~ V / n:
"
/' :J
600 6 "
V I; ~ / i1
"
V
V ,/ I; /j V
400 4
V /' V: ~
/
V ,/ d ~ V
200 ~ ~ 2
a
~ ~ ""
~
0 a
1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5
1m)
RETAINED HEIGHT (H)
~ = 30°
• S270GP STEEL (TEMPORARy) surchame v 10kN/m'
, , , l , T , , ...
+ 8270GP STEEL (PERMANENT) " i\1 ~
H
t= 17.2kNfm'
* S355GP STEEL (PERMANENn L ~ia_ y'''' 10.3kNlm'
Ka'" 0.33
Kp '" 4.9
• MIN. PILE LENGTH (L) FOR Fnp=1 s '" D.66~
- S '" o~
.. Note: The selected section modulus must be checked for dTlvabillty.

Page 5/60


5.28.2 CANTILEVER WALLS - COHESION LESS SOILS

$=30°

IMINIMUM PILE LENGTH AND SECTION MODULUS!

SODO 20
~
4000 V rs
/
o I/. ~
z /
is
z
W
<II 12
0: 3000 V V; [7 d:
~ I
....
" VI o
3 z
:> i ~
c :§: ::I
0 .s V ~ I~ If
" V 1[
z "
0 ! :>
i= V "
o Z
w
" 2000 V V 8 "
" V
::l V
" II;
z
" V 1/
V V ~ ~ V
10DO / / V' 4
V ~ ~ V
~
~ ~ ~
l...:=i
0 ..- 0
1 1.' 2 2.' S 3.5 4 4.5
(rn)
RETAINED HEIGHT (H)
~ = 30"
• S270GP STEEL (TEMPORARy) Surcharge = 1 OkN/m~ ~W
"""'" ,
• S270GP STEEL (PERMANENT) t %.
.. S355GP STEEL [TEMPORARY) Gw- jH
£ '1= 17.2kN/m~
L i= 10.3kNIrn'
* S355GP STEEL (PERMANENT) Ka= 0,33
Kp=4.9
• MIN. PILE LENGTH (L) FOR Fnp=t L &=O.6~ s= o- Note: The selected section modulus must be checked for drivability.

Page 5/61



$ = 30°

IMINIMUM PILE LENGTH AND SECTION MODULUSI

3000

/
1/
1/
1/ I
/
1/ II;
/ 1/ 1/
/ /
/ / Vj 1//
/
V I. l'i
/ /
1/ ~ ~ r;
/
V ~ ~ V
V ~ ~ [7
)~ ~ t::/
~ ~ ~
J-..j 4.5

12

10


2500

2000

E

~ 1500 ~

1000

500

1.5

2.5

'.5

(m) RETAINED HEIGHT (H)

,-----------------,

Page 5/62




11: S355GP STEEL (PERMANENT)

• MIN. PILE LENGTH (L) FOR Pnp=t

0- 0.66+



!MINIMUM PILE LENGTH AND SECTION MODULUS I
1000 10
/ 8
800 ~
)
o V V; /
z /
0
z
w
m 6
'" 6(]0 7 /1; V V d:
e / J:
<n t;
:3 z
OJ E / ~
0 ;;- :§: ~
0 E ~ ;; [7
" .e. / a:
z "
0 OJ
i= V / "
o Z
w ';i
'" 40() 4
" V r [717
OJ
" V II; V
z
:;; 1/
V ~ ~ V
/ ~ 2
200 ~ V
~
~
~ ~ ~
~
p.-
O 0
1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5
1m)
RETAINED HEIGHT (H)
$ ~ 35"
• S27QGP STEEL (TEMPORARY) Surcharge·10kN/m'
• S270GP STEEL (PERMANENll J~~
.. S355GP STEEL [TEMPORARY)
~AW!!W';A 1 ~ 17.2lo;Nlm'
* S355GP STEEL (PERMANENT) L yO"'10.3kNlm'
Ka" 0.27
Kp" 6.4
• MIN. PILE LENGTH (L) FOR Fnp=1 ~ 5=0.66, (I" o- Note: The selected section modulus must be checked for drivabiJity.

Page 5/63



(MINIMUM PILE LENGTH AND SECTION MODULUS!

4000 .-,....---r-...,....-:=::;=:;:=;::::;:=~=;::::;:=::,...-r---r-""T""""1 16

1.5

2.5

3.5

4.5

Page 5/64

1m)

RETAINED HEIGHT (H)

.-------~------------~

~-35°

• S270GP STEEL (TEMPORARy)

surch.uge '" 10kNlm2 GW.L

1-. -._' m~'~'~'~'~'~l~'~' 'W

F ~

• S270GP STEEL (PERMANEND

'i=17.2kN/rrt' y'-=10.3kN/m3 Ka = 0.27 Kp=6.4

H



L

• MIN. PILE LENGTH (L) FOR Fnp=1

0"0.66<)




C"J 1600
Z
0
Z
ur
m
'"
12
<fJ
:3
:J ~
0 1200
0 §.
"
Z
0
~
'"
"
:J
"
Z
" 800 §INIMUM PILE LENGTH AND SECTION MODULUj

2400

/ V,
/ / rl
/
/ V 1/ II
/V II; 1(/ fl
V II I) V
V
V I;) ~ V
1/
/ V I) ~ V
V /, ~ ~
~ ~ V
~
~ ~ f?/
..- 1.....== 4.5

12

10

2000

400

1.5

2.5

3.5

(ml

r- ....:R.::E~TAINEDHEIGHT(HI



... 8355GP STEEL (TEMPORARY)

L




Page 5/65

5.28.7 ANCHORED WALLS - COHESIONLESS SOILS


8000

IWALING LOADS I
I Includes 25% allowance for arching. i
350 V
300
250 / I
0
-c
9 E'200
"" V
5 ~150 /
~ ~
100 /
50
0 / ~ ~
4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
(m)
EXCAVATION HEIGHT (H)

V I/; ~
/
/ i ~
/ ~ ~
/ A
. ~ ~
~
..- I I I I I I I 12

20

16


6000

E

.'E 4000

""

2000

8


r---------------------~

10

11

w

W

~ ~ 30'

Page 5/66

• S270GP STEEL (TEMPORARy)

Surcharge = 10kN/m~ "~"~'ll"~ Wi Wi

• S270GP STEEL (PERMANEN1)

.. S355GP STEEL (TEMPORARy)

H

t '" 17.2kN/m~ 1'= 10.3kNlm= xe » 0.33 Kp= 4.9

e '" o~

L

* S355GP STEEL (PERMANEN1)



5.28.8 ANCHORED WALLS - COHESIONLESS SOILS


sooo rFr;;;I;;;;;;~~~~~~Tr=n'Tn 20

I WALING LOADS I

~O~~++++~~~~~~ I~

~ E 200 II-t--I-~-+--l-+-Ik<~-l '6

o Z 150 H--t+H+++\~:4-l+l++I I /f I

r,OO l/V/11

SO~~++++114H~~~~ U~_J __ +_J~~_JW/~~~~

0I.W4....L...1.S ...u.s .l...L.7 (mJ....L.\ 9'-'-''-'-'0 11...I...LJ'2 /V IVI J

EXCAVATION HEIGHT (H) I J ,/

3000 1----tb=r=~~""""'!"v=T"'vJl-bv'1-t--HI/vI--A-Vt1-)/7'H 12

VV I/J7l7 [7

V //rlv

2000 I---l-+v--+-v--+-v-A---+----+--+---+-+-~-+-~f+,l~--lf-v-,f---t----+-+---I 8

v' V)~~V

'000 ~1--+-+_-+--l-~---I---,lc.."t.:tI~:.-+__lI_+--f_+-+__+_l 4

k;:~~V _/,~~

4000

I Includes 25% allowance for archins I 300

12

w

Note: The selected section modulus must be checked for drJvability~

10

"



r__ oS" 0.66,

Surcharg&= 10kN/m'

, , , T , , , , ,

1~-~~§m

H


:.: ~~:~~~~~: ~

Ka: 0.27 Kp=6.4 <:;"00

.. S355GP STEEL (TEMPORARy)


• MIN. PILE LENGTH (L) FOR Fnp;2


Page 5/67

5.28.9 CANTILEVER WALLS - COHESIVE SOILS TEMPORARY WORKS ONLY

c =50kN/m2

~INIMUM PILE LENG1H AND SECTION MODULU~

1500 15
/
II
/ J
1000 II ~ 10
V 2:
r
I l-
V e
z
I ::J
If II g ~
~ 0:
"
V :0
V "
z
V s
1/ J
500 V II' V 5
V V V V
./ V V V
V t;: V
~
~ ~
I,...... ~
a 0
1 1.S 2 2." 3 3." 4 4."
(m)
RETAINED HEIGHT (HI
c-50kN/m2
Surcharge = 10kN/m2
"~"~'ll"~
• S270GP STEEL (TEMPORARY) ~
H
.... 8355GP STEEL (TEMPORARY)
• MIN. PILE LENGTH (L) FOR Fnp=t L ~ r '" 1a.GkNIm~
~ '" a~
K", ="Kp=1.0
KaC"'Kpc=2.0
. . Note: The selected section modulus must be checked for d"vabllity .

Page 5/68



c =75kN/rrr

Page 5/69

~INIMUM PILE LENGTH AND SECTION MODULU~

1500 15
/
II
1000 / 10
II ~
1/ e
I
vi ....
o
z
¥ ~
:g: ~
i V V 0:
II "
:::l
V ;;
z
V :E
/ /
500 V II 5
t> I/
v
V V V
V / /
V V ~ V
~
~ b:::
.._, j..::::::
0 0
1 1.S 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.S
1m)
RETAINED HEIGHT (H)
c-75kN/m'
Surcharge = 10kN/m'
, """"
• S270GP STEEL (TEMPORARY) .-vL
• MIN. PILE LENGTH (L) FOR Fnp=l L r = 1a.6kN/m~
+ =0·
Ka =Kp =1,0
Kac"'Kpc"'2.0
.. Note: The selected section modulus must be checked for dnvabillty .


5.28.12 CAN'TILEVER WALLS" COHESIVE SOILS TEMPORARY WORKS ONLY .

c =75kN/m2

1500 I 15
MINIMUM PILE LENGTH AND SECTION MODULUS
/
if
e 1000 / 10
z II (
5
z
UJ
co ;j
e: /
rr ~
3 V
:J 'f ~
0 g ~
0 E V /V
" s, il:
z "
0 / ::>
!d 7 "
z
'" "
" v /
:J
" L
z
" SOD S
/ V 1/ /
V V / V
-: / /'
V V -: V
~
V ~
I-=" ~
0 0
1 1.5 2 2.S 3 3.S 4 4.5
(m)
RETAINED HEIGHT (H)
C - 75kN/m2
• S270GP STEEL (TEMPORARY) w~ 1 H
L t • 18.6kN/m2
• MIN. PILE LENGTH (ll FOR Fnp=1 rID = 9.8kN/m"
pO'
~ Ka = Kp "" 1.0
Kac = Kpc = 2.0

.. NOTE: The selected section modulus must be checked for dnvabillty .

Page 5170



c =7SkN/m2

Page 5/71

150a I 15
MINIMUM PILE LENGTH AND SECTION MODULUS

/
I II
1000 / to
II ~
/ ,e
:I:
) l-
o
I z
I ~
g ~
V -: a:
/ '"
::>
J '"
z
V "
/" /
sec V [71/ 5
V
/" V / V
V / / i
V v t;: V i
~
P ~
~ ~
a a
1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5
1m)
RETAINED HEIGHT (H)
C - 75kN/m2
• S270GP STEEL (TEMPORARY) "~L 1H
... S355GP STEEL (TEMPORARY)
L y =0 18_6kN/m3
• MIN. PILE LENGTH (L) FOR Fnp=1 rro = 9.BkN/m'
¢ =0"
j_ Ka = Kp == 1.0
Kac ::; Kpc ::; 2.0 NOTE: The selected section modulus must be checked for drivability.


Page Sn2


Chapter 5 Retaining Walls

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

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

Chapter 5 Retaining Walls

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

RETAINING WALLS CONTENTS

You might also like

Chapter 5 Retaining Walls

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

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

Chapter 5 Retaining Walls

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

﻿RETAINING WALLS CONTENTS

You might also like

RETAINING WALLS CONTENTS