Professional Documents
Culture Documents
No
Title
1.0
1.1.1
Angle of fiction for the original ground in front of the wall (2)
1.1.2
Design appraisal
2.1
2.2
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.6
10
3.7
11
3.8
Elastic settlement
13
Safe construction
15
CONSTRUCTION STAGE
16
5.0
19
6.0
Appendix X
22
6.1
30
6.2
38
6.3
42
6.4
46
1.1
2.0
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.1
Page
1|P a ge
Items
Description
Comment
The soil profile shows the variation of the layers where the majority of the soil
1.0 Site
Investigation
is granule soil especially SILT (Figure X4). The worst case as it can be seen
(SI)
from the SI is at borehole 2 (BH2) where the water table is one meter bellow
the ground surface. The number of blows at BH2 shows that the soil layers are
softer and looser than the soil layers at BH1 and BH3 (Figure X2). Taking
X3 (Appendix X)
into consideration the first 5B depth there will be three similar layers and the
top layer. The layers as can be seen from the soil profile are sandy CLAY with
1.1 Deriving
soil
parameters
Depth: 5B = 21 m
SILT (MVG) and 12.5 m of very stiff SILT (MH) with high plasticity.
See Figure X4
The number of blows N was corrected in the table using Microsoft Excel.
Depth(m)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
12
13.5
15
16.5
18
19.5
21
(kN/m2)
18
20.38
30.57
40.76
50.95
61.14
71.33
81.52
91.71
101.9
122.28
137.565
152.85
168.135
183.42
198.705
213.99
CN
2.305
2.166
1.769
1.532
1.37
1.251
1.158
1.083
1.021
0.969
0.884
0.834
0.791
0.754
0.722
0.694
0.669
Nf
11
8
10
9
8
8
10
9
11
10
18
16
19
19
22
22
22
N 60
25
17
18
14
11
10
12
10
11
10
16
13
15
14
16
15
15
Avg. N60= 14
Avg. 2= 37
2
42.36067977
38.43908891
38.97366596
36.73320053
34.83239697
34.14213562
35.49193338
34.14213562
34.83239697
34.14213562
37.88854382
36.1245155
37.32050808
36.73320053
37.88854382
37.32050808
37.32050808
14.23529412
N60 = CNNf
2|P a ge
1.1.1 Angle
of fiction for
the original
ground in
front of the
wall (2)
1.1.2 Soil
cohesion (c)
CN = 9.78 (
= 14
N60(Avg.)= 14
(equation 12.20)
2= 20 60 + 20 = 730
Textbook
The cohesion for the first layer sandy CLAY (cc) was taken to be minimum of
cohesion = 10 kN/2 .
because the firs layer have organic material so it is expected to have low value
the other layers where silt is majority with some sand and gravel the range of
m = 4 kN/2
3|P a ge
Depth(m)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
12
13.5
15
16.5
18
19.5
21
(kN/m2)
18
20.38
30.57
40.76
50.95
61.14
71.33
81.52
91.71
101.9
122.28
137.565
152.85
168.135
183.42
198.705
213.99
Cu (design) (kN/m2)
3.877218036
4.389872421
6.584808631
8.779744842
10.97468105
13.16961726
15.36455347
17.55948968
19.75442589
21.9493621
26.33923453
29.63163884
32.92404316
36.21644747
39.50885179
42.8012561
46.09366042
Avg. Cu (design) (kN/m2)=
High Plasticity
PI = 40 %
(See Figure X5 in
appendix X).
22.11287681 kN/m2
As the table shows the cohesion of the first layer of silt is c s= 4 and by using
eqn. (12.29) from the text book the average cohesion was calculated.
()
eqn. (12.29)
eqn. (12.30)
cavg.= 22 kN/2
4|P a ge
2.0 Design
appraisal
Two different theories were used to design the wall for overturning and
sliding namely Rankine and Coulomb. Then the soil bearing capacity and
2.1 Rankine
theory
(cantilever
wall)
settlement were checked. Also two different retaining wall Gravity &
Cantilever - were design for comparison and selection.
= 0.8 = 22.4
The available materials for construction are rough which will cause friction
between the wall and the backfill soil with an angle of 0.8 . This make
Appendix R shows
2.2 Coulomb
theory
Coulomb theory more accurate and practical.
(cantilever
& gravity
Using Trial and error method by Microsoft Excel (See Figure X6) the
walls)
appropriate design was a Gravity wall based on Coulomb theory.
Rankine calculation
The first trial was using a cantilever wall to minimize the cost but it fall due to
second trial
The second trial was a gravity wall where the inclination angle was 10 to
first trial
vertical. This wall resist the overturning moment but it didnt meet the factor
based on approximate
The third trial was to increase the dimension where the weight will be increase
also. This help to resist the overturning moment with more than two as factor
of safety and more than 1.5 factor of safety for sliding. However the
& X8
B
6
5|P a ge
The forth trial was success and meet all the needed factors of safety for the
See dimension in
overturning moment, sliding and bearing capacity. In this trial the incline
Figure X9
3.0 Design
calculation
details
3.1 Given
data and
parameters
3.2 soil
parameters
under and in
front of the
wall
H = 6 m
Soil2 parameters under the retaining wall:
2 = 16 kN/ m3
weight
sat.= 20 kN/ m3
N60 = 14 blows
derived.
6|P a ge
3.3
Retaining
wall
dimension
cavg.= 22 kN/2
Based on approximate
dimension (refer to
Figure X8 &X9)
7|P a ge
3.4
Calculation
of active
force
(horizontal
& vertical)
, =22.4o , = 20o
2 ()
(+)sin() 2
]
cos(+)cos()
2 (+)[1+
2 (2820)
(22.4+28)sin(2820) 2
]
cos(22.4+20)cos(2020)
2 20 (22.4+20)[1+
Ka = 0.79
8|P a ge
force.
Pa h: horizontal active
force.
Total Pa v = 196.56 kN/m
Total Pa h = 215.51 kN/m
MPv: resisting
3.5
Calculation
of
overturning
moment, Mo
& resisting
moment, Mr
due to
active force
Soil no
Pa
Pv
MPv
Ph
Mo
Soil 1
15.99
10.78
2.129
22.95
11.82
59.11
Soil 2
81.50
54.93
3.327
182.77
60.23
1.5
90.35
Surcharge
94.8
63.89
2.813
179.73
70.05
210.17
Water
99.32
66.94
3.327
222.73
73.4
1.5
110.1
291.6
196.54
-------
608.18
215.5
----
469.73
9|P a ge
concrete = 24 kN/m3
Section
Area
Weight/unit
Moment
Moment
M: resisting moment
No
(m2)
length (kN/m)
arm from
(kN.m/m)
point C
(m)
Mr=1163.44 kN.m/m
5.30.4= 2.12
2.1224=50.88
1.59
80.74
V = Pv + total
0.55.30.687=1.82
1.8224=43.68
1.16
50.59
0.74.2=2.94
2.9424=70.56
2.1
148.17
0.51.8135.3=4.8
4.824=115.2
2.39
275.73
Pv=196.54
M = 555.23
The desirable FS is
V=476.99
Mr =MPv
equal to 2
+M = 1163.44
MR
M0
1163.44
469.73
2.48 > 2
ok
3.6 Factor of
safety
against
sliding, FS
pressure equation.
2 (+)
Kp = 1.151 >
()sin(+) 2
]
cos()cos()
2 ()[1
2 (37+20)
(3722.4)sin(37+20)
2 20 (22.420)[1cos(22.420)cos(2020)]2
=1.151
10 | P a g e
unsaturated CLAY in
Pp 1 = Kp 1 D2 + 2C'D
() (12)+22+
FS(sliding) =
215.5
(476.99) (37)+(4.24)+37.65
Ok
e=2 -
4.2
2
1163.44 469.73
476.99
=0.64 m< 6 =
= 0.3 ok
qtoe =
(1+
(1
) =
tension force.
467.99
4.2
(1+
6(0.64)
4.2
) = 214.4 kN/m2
qtoe:Maximum pressure
qhell: Min. pressure
qhell =
(1-
) =
467.99
4.2
(1-
6(0.64)
4.2
) = 9.73 kN/m2
Case 1 textbook
11 | P a g e
2 = submerged
Nc, Nq, N are from
Table 16.2 textbook
Fcs=Fqs=F=1
because it is continues
Fcs=Fqs=F=1
basement
2 = submerged = 20 9.81 = 10.19 kN/m
B'= B 2e = 4.2 - 20.64 = 2.92 m
11.085
215.5
12 | P a g e
F = (1- )2 = (1-
24.31 2
)
90
24.31 2
) =
37
= 0.53
0.117
qu = (2255.631.0870.53)+(21.142.921.0850.53) +(
10.192.9266.1910.117) = 1339.64 kN/m2
Qult = qu A = 1339.64 (2.921) = 3911.75 kN
Qult
qu = L =
3911.75
4.21
FS ( Bearing Capacity)
FS(Bearing Capacity)=
3.8 Elastic
settlement
= 931.37 kN/m2
qu
q toe
931.37
217.40
= 4.28 3.0 Ok
m'= =
150
4.2
= 35.7
21
4.2
2
= 10
meter length.
13 | P a g e
Is = F1+
12
1
F2 = 0.74+
120.3
10.3
0.15 = 0.826
1.5
& X11)
4.2
references
2
Se=qo ( B')
(420)+(320)+(12.515)
19.5
1 2
= 16.8 MN/m
10.32
14 | P a g e
Earthwork
Survey
work
Benchmarking
measurement
Leveling
Workers and
equipments
Assign Workers
Order
equipment &
Materials
Excavation
Construction
Concrete
Formwork
Site preparing
sheet piling
Start Excavation
Order Concrete
Install Formwork
Concrete
pouring
Concrete curing
Uninstall
Formwork
15 | P a g e
4.1.2 Earthwork:
In this stage the contractor assign workers on the site with their assignments on the site
and ordering the equipment and material, then cleaning the site and remove existing
plants topsoil and other debris that maybe in the way of the excavation work for
preparing the land for excavation before that sheet piles must be in place at desirable
16 | P a g e
depth before excavating the land or it will cause soil failure excavation will be about
depth of 1.5 m and breadth of 4.2 m with 150 m long.
4.1.3 Constructing:
After the excavation finish the formwork are installed in the shape of Earth Gravity
Retaining Wall while that the concrete ordered for 1753 m3 of concrete, after that filling
the concrete in the formwork with vibration machine to fill in the gabs and let out the air
voids.
17 | P a g e
After filling the concrete in the formwork starts curing the concrete to prevent cracking
and loss in moisture for 3-7 days, why this time? Because Concrete which is moist cured
for 7 days is about stronger than uncured concrete.
18 | P a g e
To have fast curing is suggested to use waxy super cure layer this will prevent any loss in
moisture and this material can be painted after 24 hours. Then remove formwork and
install waterproofing and drainage system along the wall, after that finish the wall as
desired. After that back filling the active area of the wall with the desired soil which is
sandy soil.
19 | P a g e
Item Description
Time
Quantity
(Days)
Price per
Cost
unit
(RM)
(RM)
2
500
4000*
General Workers
Full time
30
65 per day
39000
General contractor
Full time
97 per day
1940
Full time
4000
Full time
461 m2
50
23450
Disposal Lorry
500
8000
Excavation work
945m3
90
85050
Full time
1752m3
45
78840
Concrete Mix
1752m3
184
322552
500
500
Planting grass
362 m2
20
7240
1200 m3
50
60000
Surveying engineer
Total Cost
634572
* For the surveying engineer first survey will happen before anything and second day will
be after excavation to insure the ground levelling and if the excavation is based on the
drawing measurements. However they will do two more days for checking the formwork
and levelling of formwork and two days will be included in the project time but another
to days will the beginning and the final survey. The project period is 3 months if
everything going as planed but in case of delay it will take 4 months to 6 months.
20 | P a g e
Additional information
While designing the retaining wall and beside the factors of safety of the design, the cost
is also a major concern. Using Microsoft Excel (refer to Figure X6) we came out with the
optimal retaining wall design. Here are some technics that were used for the optimal
design:
The inclination of the wall on the backfill side was increase to 20 to the vertical.
This technic will help to increase the vertical pressure of the backfill soil to
stabilize the wall.
Using minimum allowable size which meet all the design criteria to reduce the
concrete volume during construction.
Using Microsoft Excel for automatic calculation of the factors of safety which
were close to the minimum desirable FS to avoid any additional cost.
21 | P a g e