See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/282653093

Jeyarajan ISSS_2015 full paper

Data · October 2015

CITATIONS READS

0 162

1 author:

S. Jeyarajan
National University of Singapore
23 PUBLICATIONS   40 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by S. Jeyarajan on 08 October 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 8th International Symposium on Steel Structures, November 5-7, 2015, Jeju, Korea
Productive Underground Excavation Support System using Tubular Section
S.Jeyarajan*
*
Design Engineer, Mott MacDonald, Singapore. Selvarajah.jeyarajan@mottmac.sg

Abstract
In a deep excavation support system, waler beams around the periphery of excavation transferring earth loads to the struts,
struts across the width of the excavation, kingposts supporting the struts, runners between struts at King-post locations,
bracing between struts at an interval to contain the longitudinal forces in a layer of struts, bracing between king posts are
the other major components of the strutting system. In this study, effectiveness of compound strut versus tubular pipe strut
are compared in terms of construction productivity and cost. Compound strut using universal beams has been widely used
in Singapore as a strutting system for deep excavations associated with the underground construction. Generally buckling
about major and minor axis governs the strut size. Compound struts are used to compensate the weakness of a universal
beam in its minor axis. King-posts are introduced to support the struts and hence to reduce the effective buckling lengths
about major axis. However, installation of king-post obstructs the working space and it requires additional temporary
foundation to support the king-post (e.g. pile). Compound struts involved with numerous bolted connections compared to
therefore tubular pipe struts are studied as an alternative option for the king-post free excavation support system for
typical excavations of twenty to thirty meter wide excavations for underground metro stations. This will help to enhance
the productivity in a labour intensive construction industry while providing an unobstructed clear space for a safe working
environment. Generally splays are not used in tubular strut due to the complicated connection details which will further
ease on the space. Splay free tubular struts will require bigger walers compared to a compound strut with splays.
Comparison study between compound strut and tubular strut system in terms of construction productivity and cost shows
that the strutting system using circular tube generally performs better than the twin beam/compound strut.

Keywords: Tubular strut, Compound strut, Waler, Connection, Splay

1. Introduction As summarised in Tables 1 and 2, there are numerous

Great variety of excavation methods and earth retaining benefits in tubular pipe strut compared to the conventional
supporting systems are available for a deep excavation, twin-beam strut. However the major drawback is material
associated with underground construction, which is cost for tubular pipe is higher than the universal
chosen based on soil type, nearby structure, available column/beam in Singapore. Number of connections in
equipment, excavation depth, construction budget and tubular strut is less than the compound strut and thus
time, etc. Some of the excavation methods are: open-cut, construction time, cost, labour used could be reduced. In
braced excavation (e.g. strut-waler), island excavation, terms of construction productivity and labour usage, the
anchored excavation, top-down construction and zoned tubular pipe shall be a great choice for underground
excavation. For the braced excavation system, which is construction in Singapore.
frequently adopted in Singapore, compound struts using
twin-universal beams are generally designed to resist the Table 1: Compound strut versus tubular strut
earth pressure. As lateral torsional buckling is govern Compound Tubular Remarks
factor of strut resistance, king-post is frequently used to strut (CS) strut (TS)
enhance the lateral torsional buckling resistance of Compression Low High Buckling
compound strut by reducing the effective buckling length. resistance governs
However, installation of king-post obstructs the working Material cost Low High
space and it requires additional structural system to Fabrication, High Low More steel
support the king-post (e.g. pile). Therefore tubular pipe Installation, component in
strutting system is investigated here, as an alternative Labour cost CS
option for the king-post free excavation support system. Working Low High TS avoids
Due to a major excavation collapse occurred in Singapore, space for king-post,
2004, tubular strutting system is encouraged now as an construction pile, etc.
alternative solution, since it has numerous benefits as Productivity Low High TS avoids
summarised in Table 1. It is generally cumbersome to king-post, etc
adopt splays in a tubular strut and thus tubular strut Additional High Low/Nil
spacing is smaller than the compound strut. The strut support
spacing is mainly governed by the waler size for the Dismantling Slow Fast
tubular strut, whereas the strut spacing shall be governed &
by effective buckling length of strut and waler size for reinstallation
compound strut. Typical excavation support system using
compound strut and tubular strut are shown in Figure 1.
 Table 2: Struts compression resistance
Type Leff NE,Rd A kg/m
(m) (kN) (mm2)
Φ1000x19 25 9250 58556 460
2/UKB 838x226 25 Fail 57800 452*
Φ900x16 10 12250 44434 349
2/UKB 762x173 10 9000 44000 346*
Excluding lacings*
Figure 1: Typical deep excavation supporting system
2. Design of strutting elements
Circular hollow pipe is used as a strut in a tubular strut
with the sizes of CHS 800x16, CHS 900x16 and CHS
1000x19 for about 25m wide excavation. The strut type
only differs from the twin-beam strutting system and thus
designing of waler, king-post, and splay for both
excavations supporting system shall be similar. Normal
working condition, accidental impact and one strut failure
combinations are verified with appropriate load factor for
both types of strut. The design loading for the temporary
strutting are obtained from the geotechnical analysis.
Besides, temperature load is considered as well. The
accidental impact loads of 50kN ultimate load applied
anywhere along the struts. The component level structural
design approach, used for its strength and stiffness against
its demand, masks some underlying principles and tends
to obscure the need to look at the global level for global
stability, global stiffness, etc. It is inadequate to conclude
the connection response without looking a 3-dimentional
(3D) response of connection. Therefore, commercially
available software, Staad.Pro is used to investigate the
connection response in 3D. The elemental design of
connection components are performed manually using
Eurocodes and then checked with the 3D results. It is
observed that stress concentration in stiffener, end-plate
of a joint in 3D analysis provides the clear idea and the 3D
joint model avoids under-designing the joints.
2.1. Design of strut
Tubular pipe structural steel is used as a strut with the
sizes of CHS 800x16, CHS 900x16 and CHS 1000x19 for
about 25m wide excavation. The proposed maximum
spacing between the laced strut shall be about 5m and the
strut spacing is generally govern by the waler size. The
maximum in plane buckling length of the strut is
approximately 25 m depending and the Kingpost is placed
when the lengths exceed this. Once the length exceeded
this range restraints are provided by tie beam or runner
View publication stats
beam and kingposts to reduce the in plane and out of plane
buckling length. Buckling lengths are then assumed to be
the full length between walers to king-post or supporting
beam. Typical strutting arrangement using tubular strut is
shown in Figure 1. It could be observed that the strutting
layout is effective in terms of workmanship and
productivity compared to the conventional twin-beam
strutting system. The splice connection behaviour is
investigated elementally using Eurocode 3-1-8 and
compared using 3D analysis, as shown in Figure 2.
2.2. Design of waler
Twin universal beam is commonly used as walers. The
eccentricity in waler design is taken as 10% of the overall
dimension of the strut in the vertical plane and not less
than 30mm for single or twin walers. Waler beams are
designed as continuous member. Moment acting on waler
beams is assumed to be ωL2/10 for both standard and one
strut failure cases. Axial forces are considered in the
walers if linked to the diagonal struts. The waler members
are designed for bending, shear and axial forces. It is
assumed that there is no friction between the waler and
diaphragm wall, which will help to dissipate the axial
force on waler. Strut-to-waler connection is designed
using Eurocode-3-1-8 and then compared with 3D
modelling, as shown in Figure 2. It is found that stress
concentration in many connection components could not
be predicted using elemental design approach and thus it
is recommended to perform 3D analysis to avoid
under-designing the structural elements.
Figure 2: Stress contour on connection components
3. Conclusions
Compound struts are used to compensate the weakness of
a universal beam in its minor axis. Installation of
king-post obstructs the working space and it requires
additional temporary foundation to support the king-post.
Compound struts involved with numerous bolted
connections compared to therefore tubular pipe struts are
studied as an alternative option for the king-post free
excavation support system for typical excavations of
20-30m wide excavations for underground metro stations.
Comparison study between compound strut and tubular
strut shows that the strutting system using tube generally
performs better than the compound strut. However the
major drawback is material cost for tubular pipe is higher
than the universal beam in Singapore. In terms of
construction productivity and labour usage, the tubular
pipe shall be a great choice for underground construction.