Existing Building Stability

Evaluation by Deep Foundation Pit

Construction of Subway Station
Dr. Liu Hui
Sichuan College of Architectural Technology, Deyang, Sichuan, 618000,China
e-mail: xglyz@sina.com

ABSTRACT
It is important to reduce the effect of constructing project on constructed projects and vice versa.
To achieve this goal, taking a project in Wuxi as an example, finite element models were built
using Plaxis to simulate the effect of three types of foundation pit enclosure systems, namely slope
excavation enclosure system, cantilever sheet pile wall enclosure system and retaining pile +
internal support enclosure system on the displacement of nearby constructed project. The pattern
of displacement and deformation was obtained by comparing and analyzing the calculated results
of displacement. The study shows that the retaining pile + internal support enclosure system is able
to constrain the horizontal and vertical deformation of both the major structure and accessory
structure of the station while keeping the foundation base rebound within 6mm, which not only
ensures construction safety but also reduces their effect on one another.
KEYWORD: Plaxis finite element, slope excavation, cantilever sheet pile wall, retaining
pile and internal support

INTRODUCTION
With the development of rail transport, subways play an increasingly important role in public
transportation. The excavation of foundation pit for a subway station and the completion of its
superstructure will result in the redistribution of stress in nearby soil, which will certainly affect
existing structures in terms of displacement and stress(LI Z.G. ZENG Y. and LIU G.B,2008;SUN
K.G.,LI S.C. and LI S.C.,2008; REN J.X. and LIU J., 2007). Researches by Guan Baoshu and
others determined the critical range of mutual effect between neighboring buildings(GUAN
B.S.,2003;YU X.F. and WANG J.,2008). XIA(XIA B.R.,2011) and YAO (YAO G.S.,2013)others
discussed the effect of foundation pit excavation on nearby buildings and the deformation control
of existing subway stations. However, there is an urgent need to find a suitable and effective
construction method to ensure the safety of existing buildings. In this study, Harding-soil
constitutive models were built using Plaxis finite element software to simulate and compare the
displacement and stress of constructed buildings under the influence of three construction
methods, which are slope excavation, cantilever sheet pile wall and retaining pile + internal
support.

COMMON FOUNDATION PIT ENCLOSURE

STRUCTURES
Foundation pit project is a highly systematic and comprehensive project, comprising mainly
of the design and construction of foundation pit enclosure structure and soil excavation. With the
advancing of design concept and enclosure structure for foundation pit, enclosure structures can

- 1857 -
 Vol. 20 [2015], Bund. 7 1858

be divided into two types according to their mechanical characteristic: those bearing force with
retaining structures and those bearing force with soil itself. Falling into the scope of the latter are
slope excavation enclosure structure, soil nail wall enclosure structure and tension anchor
enclosure structure. Slope excavation is applicable to shallow foundation pit project carried out in
good geological condition and with broad construction yard. Its major advantage is the stability
during excavation. Soil nail wall enclosure structure is realized by installing soil nails into
foundation pit slope to form reinforced gravity retaining wall. Soil nails are normally installed by
drilling, reinforcing, grouting or shooting and anchor rods are usually used to replace soil nails if
soil is soft. tension anchor enclosure structure are made up of enclosure system and anchor
system. To apply this enclosure structure, the foundation soil must be able to provide enough
anchoring force to the anchor rod. Retaining structures include gravity enclosure structure,
cantilever enclosure structure and internal bracing enclosure structure. Gravity retaining structure
is usually of lattice system but it must be used with caution since it is susceptible to the organic
content in soil; Cantilever retaining structure ensures the stability and safety of the structure by
sufficient buried depth and the bending resistance of the structure. Common cantilever retaining
structures include reinforced concrete row piling wall, timber sheet piling, steel sheet piling,
reinforced concrete sheet piling and underground diaphragm wall. These structures can be used in
shallow foundation pit project in good soil condition. Internal bracing retaining structure consists
of retaining wall structure and bracing structure. Retaining wall bears the soil pressure and water
pressure incurred by foundation pit excavation and transfer them onto the bracing structure, which
is comprised of enclosing purlins, bracing, columns and other accessories.

MODELS AND PARAMETERS

Geometric model
Foundation pits have strong space effect, usually presented by combination of irregular
rectangles and arcs. It has been proved that the two-dimension calculation for foundation pit
deformation at accident-prone corners is safer than the three-dimension calculation while the
calculated results are similar for other parts. In view of this, the comparatively safer two-
dimension finite element method is adopted in this paper for simulated calculation of foundation
pit. The excavation width of the model was 63.6m and the depth was 4.8 to 5.5m. The positional
relation between the existing station, both the main and accessory structure, and the land lot is
illustrated in Fig.1. Foundation pit excavation boundary line of the land lot is 24.4m from the
external boundary line of the main structure and 7.1m away from the external boundary line of the
accessory structure's enclosure structure which is 4.7m wide and is 12.5m from the main
structure.

Retaining wall Lateral supports

Main structure of station

Excavation face

Accessory structure of station

.639

Figure 1: Positional relation between the existing station, both the main and accessory
structure, and the land lot
 Vol. 20 [2015], Bund. 7 1859

Figure 2: Grid partitioning of slope excavation model for plan one

Calculation model and grid partitioning of three types of

enclosure structures
Analyzing the working condition settings for slope excavation as follows(Plan one): (1)
generating initial stress (2) constructing station structure (3) applying overload on the top of
station (4) first slope excavation of the foundation pit, with excavation boundary being 10m from
the foundation pit boundary; (5) second excavation of the foundation pit, transferring the residual
soil to the foundation base; (6) constructing base plate; (7) constructing top plate; (8) constructing
superstructure. During slope excavation, the focus should be on the response of the main and
accessory structure of the station after the superstructure is completed. The excavation slope is
assumed as 1:1 in accordance with the local experience in Wuxi and the investigation report.
Finite element model and mesh in Fig.2 for plan one.

Analyzing the working condition settings as follows（Plan two）: (1) generating initial
gravity stress; (2) station construction. (3) applying overload on the top of station (4) slope
excavation inside the foundation pit, with excavation boundary being 10m from the foundation pit
boundary; (5) constructing the enclosure structure for foundation pit mixing piles; (6) moving the
residual soil to foundation base; (7) constructing base plate; (8) constructing top plate; (9)
constructing superstructure. Key working condition to be analyzed are: when foundation pit is
excavated to the foundation base, after the construction of the main structure and the response
from the existing main structure and accessory structures. To address the specific character of this
foundation pit project, options of cantilever sheet pile wall include cement mixing piles, steel
sheet piles, drilled piles, precast concrete wall and so on. Following tradition in Wuxi, cement
mixing piles were adopted as the representative method for cantilever sheet pile wall construction
method. Mechanical parameters of the cement mixing piles took the lower limit values specified
in Excavation Engineering Manual; width of the mixing piles was 4m (0.73 times of the
excavation depth); inserting ratio was 1:1.

Analyzing the working condition settings as follows(Plan Three): (1) generating initial gravity
stress; (2) station construction. (3) applying overload on the top of station (4) slope excavation
into the foundation pit central island, with excavation boundary being 10m from the foundation
pit boundary; (4) constructing enclosure piles; (5) first excavation of the residual soil; (7)
applying steel bracing and continuing excavating until the foundation base is reached; (8)
constructing base plate; (9) removing bracings; (10) constructing top plate; (11) constructing
superstructure. Key working condition: the response of the main and accessory structure of the
station after foundation pit has been excavated to the foundation base and the main structure is
completed. Options of retaining piles for this foundation pit include steel sheet piles and drilled
piles; for internal bracing system, reinforced concrete bracing or steel bracing can be used. If the
foundation pit is large in area, then bracing could be directly set up on the previously constructed
 Vol. 20 [2015], Bund. 7 1860

basement structure after excavation in central island. The major considerations for adopting steel
sheet piles + steel bracing are its convenience in construction and low cost. Effect of pre-applied
force from steel bracing was not read into the calculation. Specification for steel sheet piles is
500x225, which were knocked in through small preliminary shaft with a insertion ration of 1:1.
Steel bracing was assumed to be 10m long, using 609 steel pipes with a thickness of 16mm which
were laid with an interval of 8m.

HS small constitutive model and parameters

In the mainland of China, softwares available to simulate the excavation of underground
project are FLAC, ANSYS, MIDAS-GTS and PLAXIS. The Plaxis finite element software used
in this paper is a large finite element software developed in the Neitherland to analyze
deformation and stability in geotechnical engineering. This software simulates the soil character
under non-linear deformation after yielding using Mohr-Coulomb model, thus is capable of
solving many complex problems in geotechnical engineering(ZHANG Z.F.,2008). HS small
model is an advanced model which can simulate the behavior of different types of soil, including
both soft soil and hard soil. Under principal deviator, the stiffness of soil decreases and at the
same time irreversible plastic strain occurs. This also reflects the shear strengthening of soil under
small strain condition.

PROJECT ANALYSIS WITH NUMERICAL SIMULATION

Project profile
This two-story T-shaped island transfer station in Wuxi crosses a road and was constructed
with open cut method. Soil within the project range is mainly silt and clayey silt with ④silty sand
layer in between. The burial depth of bedrock was more than 37m and the foundation pit of the
station was about 18.4m. Underground diaphragm wall + steel bracing was adopted as the
enclosure structure. The burial depth of the station's top plate was 3.2m; the bottom plate was
located in ⑥clay layer whose top surface elevation was about -10.810m. The positional relation
of the major structures in the land lot under development relative to existing station structures is
as follows: (1) S1# was a three-story commercial frame structure with one-story basement about
5.5m deep; Boundary line of foundation pit excavation was 7.1 to 9.1m from the No. 11 and
No.12 Exits of the accessory structures of existing station and 24.4m from the boundary line of its
main structure. The three-story commercial building was located within the control zone of the
station's main structure(50m) and the 11-story residential building was on the exterior edge of the
control zone; however, this three-story commercial building was also within the protected zone
for the No.11 and No. 12 entrance and exit of the accessory structures while this 11-story
residential building was in their control zone. Both the foundation pit excavation and the
construction of the superstructure had effect on the main structure and accessory structures of the
existing station but the effect on the accessory structures was larger. The excavation depth of
foundation pit was 4.8 to 5.5m. It was carried out in two phases without the influence of
precipitation. In the first phase, foundation pit was excavated to 2.5m deep with sloping method
and in the second operation three types of enclosure structures were adopted until the bottom was
reached.

HS small mechanical parameters of the foundation soil are shown in the table 1 below:
 Vol. 20 [2015], Bund. 7 1861

Table 1: Table of soil parameter

Volume
Soil layer G0 E50 Eoed Eur C Φ
weight R0.7 m interface K0
No. 3
（kN/m ) （MPa） （MPa） （MPa） （MPa） （kPa） (Degree)
1-1 20 120 1.50E-04 8 4 40 0.8 10 5 0.85 0.5
3-1 19.7 279 1.50E-04 18.6 9.3 93 0.8 37 20.5 0.85 0.46
3-2 19.3 195 1.50E-04 13 6.5 65 0.8 21 21.4 0.85 0.51
6-1 19.8 294 1.50E-04 19.6 9.8 98 0.8 34 20.6 0.85 0.46
6-2 19.2 195 1.50E-04 13 6.5 65 0.8 17 19.7 0.85 0.46
7-1 18.7 159 1.50E-04 10.6 5.3 53 0.8 14 19.2 0.85 0.46
8-1 19.9 285 1.50E-04 19 9.5 95 0.8 23 20.9 0.85 0.65
11-4 20 294 1.50E-04 19.6 9.8 98 0.8 39 21 0.85 0.46

To simulate the effect of increased soil stiffness under small strain condition, HS small
introduced the shear stiffness of the soil under such condition; G0 was the shear modulus of soil
under small strain r, which was the corresponding strain range under such condition. The initial
stress of the foundation soil was generated by K0 method, in which the K0 coefficient came from
the geological survey report. The load standard value for the three-story commercial building was
equivalent to an evenly distributed load of 45KPa while that for the 11-story residential building
was equivalent to an evenly distributed load of 165kPa. SMW construction method was adopted
for the accessory structures, considering the reinforcement effect of cement mixing piles on soil.
Intensity parameters took the lower limit values specified in the Excavation Engineering Manual
and Mohr-Coulomb model was adopted. E=50MPa, v=0.25, c=100kPa, Φ= 20° .

a) Horizontal displacement nephogram of the main structure and accessory structures at slope excavation
stage

b) Horizontal displacement of the main structure and accessory structures at slope excavation stage
Figure 2: Results of the numerical simulation of horizontal displacement in Plan One
 Vol. 20 [2015], Bund. 7 1862

a) Horizontal displacement nephogram of the main structure and accessory structures at cantilever sheet pile
wall stage

b) Horizontal displacement of the main structure and accessory structures at cantilever sheet pile wall stage

Figure 3: Results of the numerical simulation of horizontal displacement in Plan Two

a) Horizontal displacement nephogram of the main structure and accessory structures at retaining pile +
internal support stage
 Vol. 20 [2015], Bund. 7 1863

b) Horizontal displacement nephogram of the main structure and accessory structures at retaining pile +
internal support stage
Figure 4: Results of the numerical simulation of horizontal displacement in Plan Three

Effect of three types of construction methods on the existing

Metro structure
Simulation of the horizontal displacement of the existing main and accessory structures after
the construction of the superstructure of the new project. The response analysis of the existing
station after the equivalent evenly distributed load of the new superstructure was applied was
shown in Fig.2, Fig. 3 and Fig. 4.

It could be seen from Fig. 2 to Fig.4 that while constructing the superstructure, the color of the
main structure in the above three nephogram changed from dark to light and back to dark. At sloping
method stage, compressive deformation and compressive dislocation of the main structure and
accessory structures of existing station in reverse to the land lot prevailed with a maximum horizontal
deformation of 0.51mm; at cantilever sheet pile wall stage, compressive dislocation facing the land lot
prevailed, with a maximum horizontal displacement of 0.36mm; at retaining pile + internal support
stage, vertically compressive displacement occurred, with a maximum horizontal displacement of
0.43mm. It could be seen that horizontal displacement of the structures was the smallest at cantilever
sheet pile wall stage while largest occurred at slope excavation stage. Fig.5 shows that three curved
lines have similar features, which indicates that all three types of enclosure structures can prevent
horizontal deformation with cantilever sheet pile wall having best restrain effect. The reason for this is
that foundation pit excavation changed the initial stress of soil resulting in redistribution of soil stress
while at the same time the release of initial stress led to horizontal displacement of foundation pit side
wall; when cantilever sheet pile wall was applied, its tensile strength prevented the lateral
displacement of foundation pit wall; and since internal support does not affect maximum horizontal
displacement, cantilever sheet pile wall showed the best effect in constraining lateral displacement of
foundation pit.
 Vol. 20 [2015], Bund. 7 1864

0.6

Horizontal displacement of the

Plan one

main structure(unit:mm)
0.5 Plan two
Plan three
0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
0 10 20 30 40 50
Horizontal distance of the station from the
pit(unit:m)

Figure 5: Comparison of the simulated results for the horizontal displacement of the
main structure and accessory structures
Simulation of the vertical displacement of the existing main and accessory structures
after the construction of the superstructure of the new project. The vertical effect on the
existing station of the equivalent evenly distributed load of the new superstructure was applied
was shown in Fig.6 to Fig.8:

a) Vertical displacement nephogram of the main structure and accessory structures at slope excavation stage

b) Vertical displacement of the main structure and accessory structures at slope excavation
stage
Figure 6: Results of the numerical simulation of horizontal displacement in Plan One
 Vol. 20 [2015], Bund. 7 1865

a) Vertical displacement nephogram of the main structure and accessory structures at

cantilever sheet pile wall stage

b) Vertical displacement of the main structure and accessory structures at cantilever sheet pile
wall stage
Figure 7: Results of the numerical simulation of horizontal displacement in Plan Two

a) Vertical displacement nephogram of the main structure and accessory structures at

retaining pile + internal support stage
 Vol. 20 [2015], Bund. 7 1866

b) Vertical displacement of the main structure and accessory structures at retaining pile +
internal support stage
Figure 8: Results of the numerical simulation of vertical displacement in Plan Three

0.7
Vertical displacement of the

Plan one
main structure(unit:mm)

0.65
Plan two
0.6 Plan three
0.55
0.5
0.45
0.4
0.35
0.3
0 10 20 30 40 50
Horizontal distance of the station from the
pit(unit:m)

Figure 9: Vertical displacement of the main structure and accessory structures

Comparing the simulation result after the construction of superstructure yields the following
result: at slope excavation stage, compressive dislocation facing the land lot prevailed (see Fig. 6),
with a maximum vertical displacement of 0.65mm; at cantilever sheet pile wall stage,
compressive dislocation facing the land lot prevailed (see Fig. 7), with a maximum vertical
displacement of 0.51mm; at retaining pile + internal support stage, vertically compressive
displacement occurred (see Fig.8), with a maximum total vertical displacement of 0.46mm. Color
around the main and accessory structures of the existing station changed from dark to light,
obviously indicating the retaining pile + internal support structure was safer. In Fig. 8, it can be
seen that retaining pile + internal support structure produced the smallest vertical displacement,
thus was the safest choice. Fig. 9 shows the these three retaining curve lines are similar, which
means all of the three enclosure structures can restrain the vertical deformation of the main and
accessory structures of existing station and deformation becomes smaller the further the
foundation pit is from the structure. Among them, retaining pile + internal support structure
produced the smallest vertical deformation of f. The reason is as follows: due to the soil's elastic
 Vol. 20 [2015], Bund. 7 1867

effect, rebound deformation would occur at the bottom of the foundation pit after vertical loads
were lifted, which was subjected to the excavation depth, the size of the foundation pit, the
excavating order and soil type. After bracing, soil stiffness increased as the maximum positive
shear stress of the piles was transferred to the bracing points. This improved the restraining
performance of the enclosure structure and prevented the vertical plastic dislocation of the soil.

CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

Displacement and deformation of the main and accessory structures of the existing station
caused by foundation pit excavation with three different types of enclosure structures were
simulated and calculated, from which the patterns were generated as follows:

A) The effect of foundation pit excavation and superstructure construction using such
construction methods as slope excavation, cantilever sheet pile wall and retaining pile + internal
support on the existing station structures were all limited;

B) When excavation reached the bottom of the foundation pit, all three types of enclosure
structure showed restrain effect on the existing station and the further from the foundation pit the
smaller the deformation; horizontal displacement and deformation of the main and accessory
structures of the existing station were the smallest when using cantilever sheet pile wall method;
vertical displacement and deformation of the main and accessory structures of the existing station
were the smallest when using retaining pile + internal support method;

C) Retaining pile + internal support structure is made up of retaining structure and internal
bracing structure, which increases the soil stiffness and constrain its deformation.

D) In view of the negative effect of slope excavation and precipitation on existing station,
especially when new project is near the existing one, and to reduce engineering risk, open
excavation method is not recommended. retaining pile + internal support structure is recommend
for foundation pit excavation near existing station because it is stable, costs less and saves space.

REFERENCES
GUAN B.S. (2003) “Construction Points of Tunnel engineering,”Beijing: China
Communications Press.
LI Z.G., ZENG Y. and LIU G.B.(2008) “Numerical simulation of displacement transfer
law of excavation adjacent metro station,”Rock and Soil Mechanics, 29(11):3104-
3108.
REN J.X. and LIU J.(2007) “FEM analysis of the deformation laws of deep excavation
of Senlin Park Subway Station,”Rock and Soil Mechanics,28(S1):639-642.
SUN K.G., LI S.C. and LI S.C.(2008) “Simulation and prediction research of enclosure
structure deformation for an open-cut metro station,” Chinese Journal of Rock
Mechanics and Engineering, 27(S1):3210-3215.
XIA B.R.(2011) “Research on fundation excavation’s effect to adjacent subway stations
and intervals track,” Dissertation of China University of Geosciences.
YAO G.S.(2013) “ Application of earth pressure calculation method considering
displacement in excavation engineering,” Chinese Journal of Geotechnical
Engineering,35(S2):693-696.
YU X.F. and WANG J.(2008) “Research status and thinking of the interaction of
approaching excavation in subway tunnel,” Journal of Beijing University of Civil
Engineering and Architecture,24(3):30-34.
Vol. 20 [2015], Bund. 7 1868

ZHANG Z.F.(2008) “Analysis on excavation simulation by Finite element method,”

Dissertation of Central South University.

© 2015 ejge