Skip to main content
Log in

Numerical modelling of installation effects for diaphragm walls in sand

Acta Geotechnica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The scopes of this work are to study the mechanisms of load transfer and the deformations of the ground during slurry trenching and concreting in dry sand and to evaluate their effects on service structural loads, wall deflections and ground displacements behind the wall caused by subsequent excavation. A series of three-dimensional finite element analyses was carried out modelling the installation of diaphragm walls consisting of panels of different length. The soil was modelled as either linearly elastic-perfectly plastic or incrementally non-linear (hypoplastic) with elastic strain range. Plane strain analyses of diaphragm walls of identical cross section were also carried out in which wall installation was either modelled or the wall was wished in place (WIP). The analyses predict ground movements consistent with the experimental observations both in magnitude and trend. The results also show that the maximum horizontal wall deflections and structural loads reduce with increasing panel aspect ratio towards a minimum which is about twice the value computed for WIP analyses. Panel aspect ratios should be larger than about three to take advantage of the three-dimensional effects. The pattern and magnitude of surface vertical displacements obtained from linearly elastic-perfectly plastic analyses, no matter whether three- or two-dimensional, are unrealistic.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18
Fig. 19
Fig. 20
Fig. 21
Fig. 22
Fig. 23
Fig. 24
Fig. 25
Fig. 26

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

B :

Excavation width

c′:

Shear strength at zero effective stress

E :

Young’s modulus

e c0 :

Critical void ratio at zero pressure

e d0 :

Minimum void ratio at zero pressure

e i0 :

Maximum void ratio at zero pressure

G :

Shear modulus

G sec :

Mobilised secant shear modulus

h :

Excavation depth

H :

Total wall height

h c :

Critical depth

h s :

Granulate hardness

K 0 :

Coefficient of earth pressure at rest

K a :

Active earth pressure coefficient

K p :

Passive earth pressure coefficient

L :

Panel length

M :

Bending moment

m R, m T :

Ratios of characteristic stiffness

N :

Axial load in the prop

n :

Exponent regulating the decrease of voids ratio with mean effective stress

p′:

Mean effective stress

q, q 0 :

Deviatoric stress and initial deviatoric stress

R :

Size of elastic range

t :

Panel thickness

u :

Horizontal displacement orthogonal to the wall

w :

Vertical displacement

x :

Distance from the centre of the primary panel along the wall

y :

Distance from the edge of the trench orthogonal to the wall

z :

Depth below ground level

Z :

Thickness of sand layer

α, β:

Exponents in scalar factors accounting for barotropy and picnotropy

βR, χ:

Exponents regulating transition between different deformation modes

εs, εs0 :

Shear strain and initial shear strain

εv :

Volume strain

γ:

Soil bulk unit weight

γb :

Unit weight of bentonite slurry

γc :

Unit weight of fresh concrete

φ′:

Peak friction angle

\( \varphi^{\prime }_{\text{c}} \) :

Critical friction angle

\( \sigma^{\prime }_{\text{h}} \) :

Horizontal effective stress

\( \sigma^{\prime }_{\text{v}} \) :

Vertical effective stress

ψ:

Angle of dilatancy

References

  1. Al-Tabbaa A, Wood DM (1989) An experimental based ‘bubble’ model for clay. In: Proceedings of 3rd international conference on numerical models in geomechanics, Niagara Falls, pp 91–99

  2. Atkinson JH, Coop MR, Stallebrass SE, Viggiani G (1993) Measurement of stiffness of soils and weak rocks in laboratory tests. In: Proceedings of 25th annual conference Engineering Group of the Geological Society, Leeds, pp 21–27

  3. Burland JB, Hancock RJR (1977) Underground car park at the House of Commons: geotechnical aspects. Struct Eng 55:87–100

    Google Scholar 

  4. Callisto L (2010) A factored strength approach for the limit states design of geotechnical structures. Can Geotech J 47(9):1011–1023

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Clough GW, O’Rourke TD (1990) Construction induced movements of in situ walls. In: PC Lambe, LA Hansen (eds) Design and performance of earth retaining structures. ASCE GSP No. 25, Ithaca, pp 430–470

  6. Dafalias YF (1986) Bounding surface plasticity. I: mathematical foundation and hypoplasticity. J Eng Mech ASCE 112(9):966–987

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Dafalias YF, Herrmann LR (1986) Bounding surface plasticity. II: application to isotropic cohesive soils. J Eng Mech ASCE 112(12):1263–1291

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. De Moor EK (1994) An analysis of bored pile/diaphragm wall installation effects. Géotechnique 44(2):341–347

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. De Sanctis L, Mandolini A, Viggiani GMB (2006) Finite element analysis of the excavation of the new Garibaldi station of Napoli underground. In: Triantafyllidis T (ed) Numerical modelling of construction processes in geotechnical engineering for the urban environment. Bochum, Taylor & Francis, London, pp 57–68

    Google Scholar 

  10. de Wit JCWM, Lengkeek HJ (2002) Full scale test on environmental impact of diaphragm wall trench installation in Amsterdam. In: Proceedings of international symposium on geotechnical aspect of underground construction in soft ground, Toulose, France

  11. EN (1997) Eurocode 7, part I: geotechnical design—general rules

  12. Frank R, Bauduin C, Driscoll R, Kavvadas M, Krebs Ovesen N, Orr T, Schuppener B (2004) Designers’ guide to EN 1997–1: Eurocode 7: geotechnical design—general rules. Thomas Telford, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

  13. Finno RJ, Harahap IS, Sabatini PJ (1991) Analysis of braced excavations with coupled finite element formulations. Comput Geotech 2:91–114

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Gourvenec SM, Powrie W (1999) 3D finite-element analysis of diaphragm wall installation. Géotechnique 49(6):801–823

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Gunn MJ, Clayton CRI (1992) Installation effects and their importance in the design of earth retaining structures. Géotechnique 42(1):137–141

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Gunn MJ, Satkunananthan A, Clayton CRI (1992) Finite element modelling of installation effects. Proc ICE Retain Struct 46–55

  17. Herle I, Gudehus G (1999) Determination of parameters of a hypoplastic constitutive model from properties of grain assemblies. Mech Cohes Frict Mater 4:461–486

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Jardine RJ, Potts DM, Fourie AB, Burland JB (1986) Studies on the influence of non-linear stress–strain characteristics in soil–structure interaction. Géotechnique 36(3):377–396

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Kolymbas D (1991) An outline of hypoplasticity. Arch Appl Mech 61:143–151

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  20. Lächler A, Neher HP, Gebeyehu G (2006) A comparison between monitoring data and numerical calculation of a diaphragm wall construction in Rotterdam. In: Triantafyllidis T (ed) Numerical modelling of construction processes in geotechnical engineering for the urban environment. Bochum, Taylor & Francis, London, pp 83–96

    Google Scholar 

  21. Lings ML, Nash DFT, Ng CWW, Boyce MD (1991) Observed behaviour of a deep excavation in Gault clay: a preliminary appraisal. In: Proceedings of tenth European conference on soil mechanics and foundation engineering, Florence, vol 2, pp 467–470

  22. Lings ML, Ng CWW, Nash DFT (1994) The lateral pressure of wet concrete in diaphragm wall panels cast under bentonite. Proc Inst Civ Eng Geotech Eng 107:163–172

    Google Scholar 

  23. Mayer PM, Gudehus G (2002) Prediction of soil movements due to diaphragm wall construction. Geotech Spec Publ 116:696–712

    Google Scholar 

  24. Ng CWW (1994) Effects of modelling wall installation on multi-staged excavations in stiff clays. In: Proceedings 1st international conference on ‘pre-failure deformation of geomaterials’, Sapporo vol 1, pp 595–600

  25. Ng CWW, Lings ML, Simpson B, Nash DFT (1995) An approximate analysis of the three dimensional effects of diaphragm wall installation. Géotechnique 45(3):497–507

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Ng CWW, Yan RWM (1998) Stress transfer and deformation mechanisms around a diaphragm wall panel. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng Div ASCE 124(7):638–648

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Niemunis A, Herle I (1997) Hypoplastic model for cohesionless soils with elastic strain range. Mech Cohes Frict Mater 2:279–299

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. NTC (2008) Nuove Norme Tecniche per le Costruzioni. Gazzetta Ufficiale della Repubblica Italiana, No. 29, 4 Febbraio 2008—Suppl. Ordinario No. 30 (in Italian)

  29. Pastor M, Zienkiewicz OC, Chan AHC (1990) Generalized plasticity and the modelling of soil behaviour. Int J Numer Anal Methods Geomech 14:151–190

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  30. Poh TY, Goh ATC, Wong IH (2001) Ground movements associated with wall construction: case histories. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng ASCE 127(12):1061–1069

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Powrie W, Pantelidou H, Stallebrass SE (1998) Soil stiffness in stress paths relevant to diaphragm walls in clay. Géotechnique 48(4):483–494

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Potts DM, Fourie AB (1884) The behaviour of a propped retaining wall: results of a numerical experiment. Géotechnique 34(3):383–404

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Potts DM, Zdravković L (1999) Finite element analysis in geotechnical engineering: theory. Finite element analysis in geotechnical engineering. Thomas Telford, London

    Google Scholar 

  34. Rampello S, Stallebrass SE, Viggiani GMB (1998) Ground movements associated with excavations in stiff clays: current prediction capability. In: Proceedings of the 2nd international symposium on the geotechnics of hard-soils/soft rocks. Naples, vol 3, pp 1527–1540

  35. Richards DJ, Powrie W, Page JRT (1998) Investigation of retaining wall installation and performance using centrifuge modelling techniques. Proc ICE Geotech Eng 131(3):163–170

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Shäfer N, Triantafyllidis T (2004) Modelling of earth and water pressure development during diaphragm wall construction in soft clay. Int J Numer Anal Methods Geomech 28:1305–1326

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Shäfer N, Triantafyllidis T (2006) The influence of the construction process on the deformation behaviour of diaphragm walls in soft clayey ground. Int J Numer Anal Methods Geomech 30(7):563–576

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. St. John HD, Potts DM, Jardine RJ, Higgins KG (1993) Prediction and performance of ground response due to construction of a deep basement at 60 Victoria Embankment. In: Houlsby GT, Schofield AN (eds) Proceedings of the Wroth memorial symposium on ‘predictive soil mechanics’. Thomas Telford, London, pp 581–608

  39. Stallebrass SE, Taylor RN (1997) The development and evaluation of a constitutive model for the prediction of ground movements in overconsolidated clay. Géotechnique 47(2):235–253

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Symons IF, Carder DR (1993) Stress changes in stiff clay caused by the installation of embedded retaining walls. In: Clayton GC (ed) Retaining structures. Thomas Telford, London, pp 227–236

    Google Scholar 

  41. Tedd P, Chard BM, Charles JA, Symons IF (1984) Behaviour of a propped embedded retaining wall in stiff clay at Bell Common Tunnel. Géotechnique 34(4):513–532

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Viggiani GMB, Mandolini A, Flora A, Russo G (2010) Excavations in the urban environment: examples from the construction of Napoli underground. Invited lecture. In: Proceedings of the international geotechnical conference on “geotechnical challenges in megacities”, GeoMos2010, Moscow, 7–10 June 2010, vol 1, pp 236–258

  43. Viggiani G, Tamagnini C (2000) Ground movements around excavations in granular soils: a few remarks on the influence of the constitutive assumptions on FE predictions. Mech Cohes Frict Mater 5:399–423

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. von Wolffersdorff PA (1996) A hypoplastic relation for granular materials with a predefined limit state surface. Mech Cohes Frict Mater 1:251–271

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The work described in this paper was prompted by the construction of some of the new stations of Napoli Underground; the Authors wish to express their gratitude to Alessandro Mandolini for creating the opportunity to work together, for his many valuable comments, energy and general support. The routine for the extended hypoplastic model was provided by Ivo Herle while precious advise on the numerical modelling was given by Claudio Tamagnini.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Giulia M. B. Viggiani.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Conti, R., de Sanctis, L. & Viggiani, G.M.B. Numerical modelling of installation effects for diaphragm walls in sand. Acta Geotech. 7, 219–237 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11440-011-0157-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11440-011-0157-0

Keywords

Navigation