Foundation Design and Construction of the Tanjung Bin Fly-Ash Jetty

By: Wesley Wong Yew Wei B.Eng (Hons), MPhil, PhD (Cantab) Sinclair Knight Merz Engineering Sdn Bhd Abstract A dedicated fly-ash loading jetty has been constructed in Johor, the southern state of Malaysia. The new loading facility is in line with the existing 350m coal unloading jetty at the Tanjung Bin 3x700MW Coal Fired Power Plant. The main challenge of the project was the ground variability encountered at the site and very tight schedule for project completion. A hard layer consisting of siltstone and weathered rock was found at shallow depths with soft marine deposits above. The pile tensile capacity was achieved by a minimum 7m rock socket. A rock probing exercise was carried out at every pile points to determine the hard layer and hence the pile length. The construction of the major items of the jetty was completed two months ahead of schedule and on budget with zero lost time injuries, despite very difficult ground conditions and operational constraints from the existing coal unloading jetty. 1 Introduction A new dedicated fly-ash loading jetty has been constructed in Tanjung Bin, Pontian, Johor, the southern state of Malaysia. The new loading facility is part of the Tanjung Bin 3x700MW coal Fired Power Plant, developed by Tanjung Bin Power Sdn Bhd, and was constructed alongside the existing 350m coal unloading jetty. Sinclair Knight Merz (SKM) was appointed by Lafarge Cement Malaysia (LCM) to conduct a Feasibility Study for the fly-ash jetty in April, 2005 and subsequently SKM carried out the design, project management and preparation of Tender Document for the Marine Works in January 2006. The contract for construction was awarded in May 2006, SKM was also commissioned by the Client to carry out project management and site supervision during the construction phase of the project. The construction of all major items of the jetty was completed in December 2006, two months ahead of schedule and within budget This paper describes the foundation aspect of the design and construction of the new fly-ash jetty. The very tight project program was one of the key requirements developed by the Client. 2 Site Description The project site is located at the Tanjung Bin Coal Fired Power Plant alongside the coal jetty which is used for berthing of coal bulk carrier up to 150,000 dwt and 18m draft. There is also an existing auxiliary marine jetty located at the North-West end of the flyash jetty. A site layout plan is shown in Figure 1. 2.1 Tides Tidal Levels Highest Astronomical Tide (HAT) Mean Higher High Water (MHHS) Mean Lower High Water (MLHW) Mean Sea Level (MSL) Mean Higher Low Water (MHLW) Mean Lower Low Water (MLLW) Lowest Astronomical Tide (LAT) Table 1 Tide Information Above or Below Chart Datum (CD) +3.80m +3.14m +2.28m +1.82m +1.36m +0.50m +0.0m

2.2 General Arrangement The general arrangement of the proposed new facilities consist of an island berth structure, i.e. main loading platform with two berthing dolphins and two mooring dolphins, it is integrated with the coal unloading jetty located at the south-east end. The stern of the fly-ash vessels will be moored at the coal jetty as shown in Figure 2. The export of approximately 282,000 tpa of fly-ash will be through 3,000 to 10,000 dwt (equivalent 2000 7000 fly-ash tonnage) vessels.

The following Table 1 was derived from year 2004 Tide Tables published by Royal Malaysian Naval (RMN) and was the basis for the design of the fly-ash jetty.

Figure 1 Site Layout Plan

M2
SEAWARD LEEWARD

M1

B2 MLP2
Y TT JE MLP1
CAPEMAX LADEN AT L.A.T

AS YFL

B1
SEAWARD

CJ2 CJ1
GE ED DR H N EPT CD G D SI .0m DE -18

LEEWARD

CO

AL

UN

G IN AD LO

Y TT JE

CAPEMAX BALLASTED AT H.A.T

Figure 2 General arrangement of the site. 2.2.1 Operational

Figure 3 Typical sections showing Coal and Fly-Ash vessels at LAT and HAT. 3 Design

The current arrangement imposes a certain operational constraints to the fly-ash jetty. There are four possible vessels arrangement anticipated at the coal jetty, namely Case 1 150,000 dwt Coal Bulk Carrier, Case 2 35,000 dwt Handimax, Case 3 Barge Highline 20 and 35,000 dwt Handimax and Case 4 Panamax vessels. It was found that the proposed largest fly-ash vessels, i.e. 10,000 dwt can be calling at the jetty in the event of Cases 1, 2 & 4. However, the mooring lines of the coal and fly-ash vessels will be crossing over in Case 3, although all mooring lines will be moored at separate bollards. Figure 3 shows the coal and fly-ash vessels at LAT and HAT, it can be seen that the deck reduced levels (RL) for the fly-ash vessels are always lower than the coal vessels. Therefore, as a standard operational procedure, the mooring lines of the fly-ash vessels are to be secured below the lines for the coal vessels.

3.1 General The design elements of the Marine Work are marine piling, main fly-ash loading platform, berthing and mooring dolphins, piping trestle to support up to three pneumatic pipelines for exporting fly-ash from shore to the loading platform and pedestrian walkways connecting the jetty structures. 3.1.1 Requirements The Clients requirement for the design of the Marine Works can be summarized as follows: All marine structures to safely withstand all berthing, mooring, material handling, environmental, services loads that are likely to be experienced in the next 25 years. Meet all operational requirements for the loading facilities using pneumatic piping system with regards to fenders, bollards, etc. Ease of construction to ensure minimum risks and completion by the target date for the commissioning of the loading facilities, and within budget. Minimum maintenance on the structures for the next 25 years. 3.1.2 Loads The design loads considered are as given below: Berthing Mooring Deck loads due to pneumatic piping and services Environmental loads from wind, waves and currents.

3.1.3 Design Methodology The design of the marine elements was carried out to all appropriate British Standards including the general structural standards and the standards for bridges. Where the bridge standards were relevant they shall supersede the general structural standards. A Limit State Design philosophy was used in the design. The British Standards on Maritime Structures, BS 6349 were referred for the mooring and berthing design and where applicable the PIANC Guidelines for berthing practices. The PIANC Guidelines were used to determine relevant design loads. 3.2 Marine Piling

up the construction program, i.e. Contractor has the option of driving long piles and hence reduce the need for in-situ splices. Can also be easily extended in-situ if required. More robust in handling and driving, can be driven through the hard layer with stiffening shoes. Durability issues can be managed through cathodic protection (CP) system below tide level and protected by HDPE pile sleeves from low tide level to pile cap level.

The quayline of the fly-ash jetty was aligned with the coal jetty, for which the channel has been dredged to 18m Chart Datum (CD) to cater for the 150,000 dwt coal bulk carrier. 3.2.1 Site Investigation There were a total of seven site investigation boreholes. Four of the boreholes were drilled along the jetty alignment, while two boreholes were drilled to evaluate stability of the dredged channel. One of the boreholes was drilled along the piping trestle alignment. Figure 4 shows the elevations of the seabed levels, N>50 strata and assumed pile termination depths intersected by the boreholes drilled along the jetty. It can be seen that the depth of N>50 strata below seabed varies from 6m to 9m, piles were expected to refused approximately 2m below N>50 strata and hence the pile embedment below seabed was expected to be about 8m to 11m. A layer of approximately 2-3m thick of soft marine deposits (N<5) was found below the existing seabed based on the borehole results.
BHs along Jetty Line
0 0 -5 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200

Two types of pile sizes were adopted: 800mm diameter with 16mm thickness pile was used to support the main jetty structures, i.e. loading platform, berthing and mooring dolphins and 600mm diameter with 16mm thickness pile to support the piping trestle. All the 800mm piles were 1 in 4 slope raking piles to take the high design load both axial compression and tension. Figures 5 and 6 show the calculated safe working load (SWL) in axial compression and uplift forces respectively, against the pile embedment length for the 800mm diameter piles. The
SWL (Axial Compression) vs Embedment for 800mm STEEL Pile
5000 4500

Geotechnical Safe Working Load (kN)

4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0

Pile embedment below seabed (m) BH3 BH4 BH5 BH6

Figure 5 SWL in axial compression.

SWL (UPLIFT) vs Embedment for 800mm STEEL Pile
900

-10

Geotechnical Safe Working Load (kN)

800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100

Elevation (m, ACD)

-15

-20

-25

-30

0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 11.0 12.0

-35

Pile embedment below seabed (m) BH3

Distance (m) Seabed elevation N>50 elevation EOH elevation

-40

BH4

BH5

BH6

Figure 6 SWL in uplift. Pile group analyses were carried out based on different load combinations to determine the maximum compression and tension loads experience by the piles. The maximum service axial compression load was 220t and the maximum tensile uplift was 100t. Therefore, the axial compression load of the pile could be safely resisted by the 800mm steel pile based on Figure 6.

Figure 4 Elevations of different levels along jetty line. 3.2.2 Pile Design Both steel tubular piles and concrete spun piles were considered in the selection of pile types. Driven steel tubular piles were preferred over spun piles based on the following factors: High quality control and can be readily available to be rolled into the required pile lengths to speed

However, the uplift capacity of the piles which is a function of the pile embedment length as shown in Figure 6 was found inadequate and hence pile anchoring was required to enhance the pile tensile capacity. This could be achieved by: Driving the steel pile to set and boring a socket into the N>50 strata using reverse circulation drilling (RCD); the tension load would be transferred through the pile to the structure through the reinforced concrete infill; or Underpinning the pile using micropiles; or Anchoring the piles using rock anchors. The first two methods are passive system and hence are preferred to the third method where prestress checks are required throughout the service life of the jetty. The following procedures were used for determination of the additional uplift resistance to be provided. Piles were assumed to refuse at 2m into N>50 strata; Determine the safe working load for this embedment from the theoretical analyses; and Calculate the shortfall (design loads minus SWL) to be provided by the rock sockets or micropiles. The rock socket lengths range from 5m to 7m for 800mm diameter pile, the diameter of the rock socket was limited to the internal diameter of the stiffening ring minus 100mm. Whereas the micropile socket lengths range from 9.5m to 16m for the 800mm diameter pile. Rock socket was preferred based on the ease to control quality and ultimate resistance. The minimum factor of safety for the calculated socket length was 2.0. 3.2.3 Stability of Dredged Channel Stability analyses were carried out on two cross sections through the dredged channel based on data obtained from two numbers of boreholes. The theoretical factor of safety for the dredged channel was ranged from 1.6 to 1.9. Therefore, stability of the dredge channel was not considered to be a design consideration given the proximity of the dredged channel to the proposed jetty and the relatively high theoretical factors of safety. 4 Construction

based on a 7m socket into the N>50 strata. On completion of driving, the difference between the actual total penetration length from cut-off level and those from the total supplied pile length was found to be less than 5%. The following piling equipment was used for the piling works: Piling barge and onboard 150 tons crane; 20 tons hydraulic hammer and 160 leader; 250-350 HP tug boat and anchor boat; Material barge. The piling works were carried out using piling barge of dimension 150 x 50 x 10 fixed with a leader of height 160 complete with a double hydraulic jack that can be raked to a maximum forward and backward rake of 1 in 4 slope. Figure 7 shows the barge piling at the site.

Figure 7 Piling barge During the early stage of the construction, the Contractor proposed an alternative to drive the pile open ended with stiffening shoe/ ring and socket into the N>50 strata instead of boring using RCD method as per original design discussed in Section 3.2.2. This option was initially discarded during the design stage to avoid pile overstressed and also potential risks of pile buckling during driving. The Designer worked closely with the Contractor in order to revisit technical feasibility of the proposal by carrying out several pile driveability studies using GRLWEAP (2005). Based on the studies, the recommended minimum hammer weight was 20t with a stroke of 1000mm. The end of drive set of 50mm for the last 10 blows. All the piles are strengthened with a 1m stiffening shoe/ ring of 35mm wall thickness. A 40m length test pile of 800mm x 16mm with 1 m stiffening shoe was driven on the 21st August 2006. Stress monitoring was carried out for the last 15m of 41m length. The Case Pile Wave Analyses Program (CAPWAP) analysis estimated the total pile capacity of 277t and hence did not achieve the required capacity of 380t at the end of drive. Re-strike was carried out on the following day. The set obtained on the re-strike was 35mm/10 blows with temporary compression of 30mm. The re-strike CAPWAP analysis estimated 424t capacity after one day for soil set-up effect.

The Piling Works began with a rock probing exercise, in which the Contractor to determine the hard layer, N>50 strata at every pile positions in view of the variability in ground conditions. The probing exercise was using the conventional site investigation method, i.e. using wash bore and SPT. An 80t crane barge was mobilised to carry out the probing works. Based on the rock probing results, the Contractor fabricated and pitched piles in lengths of 36m, 40m and 44m in order to accommodate the variations in hard strata levels. The estimated pile lengths were

A Maintained Tension Pile Load Test by reaction system was carried out on the same pile on 29th August 2006. All pressure gauges, dial gauges and load cells used in the load test were tested and calibrated by an independent body. The set up of the load test is shown in Figure 8.

requirements. An extensive SH&E Plan was developed by the Contractor and approved by both the Client and the Engineer before the construction could proceed. Two full time Safety Officers were deployed, one representing the Client and one from the Contractor. The ratio of safety personnel to the general staff was 1 in 25. All staff working at the site, including those visiting the site needed to be inducted on safety. A daily toolbox talk was carried out at the site. Risk assessments were carried out on all construction methods and machinery, equipment, etc. With the completion of major Marine Works in December, 2006, the site has achieved 200,000 hours worked without Lost Time Injury (LTI) as a result of the full commitment on safety from the Client, the Engineer and the Contractor. 5 Conclusion The fly-ash jetty was successfully completed ahead of time and within budget despite very difficult ground conditions and site constraints due to existing operations at the adjacent existing jetties. It shows that careful planning from the conceptual or feasibility study stage, till the design stage and finally selection of contractor and site implementation is essential. All design assumptions made were found to be valid and hence all the Works were constructed as per the design and to the required standards. It can be concluded that it is important for the Designer to work hand in hand with the Contractor, to understand construction aspects, show flexibility to adopt alternative and innovative solutions, as well as to incorporate safety in design. It is also crucial to understand the Clients requirements and so work towards meeting or if possible exceed their expectations. Figure 10 shows the completed fly-ash jetty at Tanjung Bin, Johor, Malaysia.

Figure 8 Tension Pile Load Test set-up. The tension pile test results showed 5.04mm displacement at the design load and 12.06mm at two times of the design load. The residual settlement is 0.56mm. The test results were within the acceptable criteria for tension pile load test, as shown in Figure 9.
Uplift test - Load vs Displacement 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 0 5 Displacement (m m) First Cycle - 1 x Working Load Second Cycle - 2 x Working Load 10 15

Figure 9 Tension pile load test results. A total of 56 numbers of 800mm diameter piles and 6 numbers of 600mm diameter piles were driven on average two piles per day. Most of the piles were driven to the required depths and only 3 numbers of the piles could not achieve the design socket lengths. High strain dynamic pile tests using a Pile Driving Analyzer (PDA) and CAPWAP were carried out to evaluate the activated capacity, driving stresses, hammer performance and assess pile structural integrity on these piles. All test results showed that the piles have adequate compression and tension capacity. 4.1 Safety, Health and Environmental on Site

Load (t)

Figure 10 Completed Tanjung Bin Fly-Ash Jetty.

Very strict safety, health and environmental (SH&E) procedures were implemented at the site, especially on Safety as this was one of the Clients key