Soil Nailing in Germany

University of Applied Sciences Munich / Germany Prof. Dr.-Ing. G.
Gssler
Department of Civil Engineering Presentation at Universidade de Braslia 03/2010
1
Soil Nailing in Germany: Development, Design, Execution
[Eigene Dateien\Brasilia Powerpoint\Soil Nailing in Germany-63-Brasilia.ppt]
University of Applied Sciences Munich / Germany Prof. Dr.-Ing. G. Gssler
2
2. Design: Verification of stability of a nailed wall
2.1 General design considerations
2.2 Example: Verification of stability of a 10 m high wall
1.1 Principle static analyses
1.2 Model tests
1.3 Field tests
Summary and conclusions
3. Execution: Several examples in soil and soft rock
3.1 Practical cases of nailed cuts near to the vertical
3.2 Practical cases of nailed slopes
3.3 Quality control and warnings
Scope of Presentation
Introduction
1. Development: German research programme
3
Introduction
Soil nailing: is a technique of reinforcing natural ground
by the insertion of slender tension-carrying elements called nails.
Applications: excavation pits, permanent retaining structures and (natural) slopes.
Origin and idea of in situ reinforcing cuts or slopes:
1972: First recorded case of a nailed wall in France:
temporary stabilising of a 70 cut in cohesive sand
(commercial project, no subsequent research!)
1975 - 1981: Research and development project
Soil Nailing in Germany (Univ. of Karlsruhe
in joint venture with the contractor BAUER)
1979: First international publication on soil nailing
by the Univ. of Karlsruhe and BAUER (In this
publication the term Soil nailing was created)
1986 1990: National Research Project Clouterre in France
1976 - 1981: Research and development project
Lateral Earth Support System (Univ. of Cal.)
Fig.: First test wall in history of soil
nailing pushed to failure (1976)
4
Construction method
(2) face stabilization using shotcrete
(3) installation of nails and grouting
The procedure is repeated until
the required depth is reached.
Three basic processes are involved in
soil nailing:
(1) excavation in steps
h
0.5-0.7 h
(1)
.
.
.
.
.
(2)
(3)
(1)
Fig. 1: Installed temporary nail of a test
wall in sand (digged out after test)
Fig. 2: Temporary nail after German
approval (System BAUER)
5
tension!
slip surface
displacement
small
STEEP CUTS:
TENSION NAILS
1
te
n
s
io
n
!
d
i
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
s
m
a
l
l
2a
TENSION NAILS
2
FLAT SLOPES
bending!
s
l
i
p
s
u
r
f
a
c
e
d
i
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t
l
a
r
g
e
!
w
e
a
t
h
e
r
e
d
t
o
p

l
a
y
e
r
s
o
l
i
d
g
r
o
u
n
d
2b
DOWEL NAILS
Principle mode of operation of soil nails
Remark: Nails in case 1 and 2a act also as bending elements carrying shear forces at the slip line;
but: These shear forces are of secondary order and are neglected in the following design example!
6
1. German research and development programme
comprised:
4. Derivation of partial safety factors on
a statistic-probabilistic basis
and
Development of a practical design
method
2. Model tests in sand
1. Static analyses on the basis of kinematical
failure mechanisms of rigid earth blocks
3. Field tests in sand and clay
7
Single wedge
(may be chosen for low nailing
densities or rough calculations)
Note: For given parameters (soil, load, nailing) the most unsafe failure mode is the one that, under vari-
ation of the slip lines, requires the absolute maximum of the pull-out resistance per unit nail length T
m,k
!
1.1 Static analyses on the basis of kinematical failure mechanisms of rigid earth blocks
Several kinematic failure models for nailed walls were investigated.
An overview is given on the four different potential failure mechanisms that turned out to be critical.
Note: the following failure modes were - theoretically investigated by stability analyses but also
- verified in model tests and full scale tests
Two-part wedge with circular slip lines
(theoretically the least safe mechanism in case of
very high surcharge in the rear or in case of
earthquake
Two-part wedge with
straight slip lines
(shall be chosen in
non-cohesive soils)
Slip circle
(shall be chosen in cohesive
soils as well as in non-cohe-
sive soils)
8
1.2. Model tests
1.2.1 Simple wedge failure mechanism with a straight slip line
Fig.: Model test in Sand with low nailing density
9
Fig. 1: Observed 2-part-wedge mechanism with straight
slip lines in a model box filled with sand
Fig. 2: Kinematics of earth block (1) and (2)
1.2.2 The 2-part-wedge failure mechanism with straight slip lines
This failure mode was observed in a model test, where the rigid facing of the nailed construction (h = 40
cm) in dense sand was progressively moved to the air side.
10
a) Observed 2-part-block with circular slip lines
in a model box filled with sand
b) Kinematics of earth block (1) and (2) with centre
points and radii of the three slip circles
Fig.: Model test of a nailed wall in sand with a high load beyond the nailed zone
1.2.3 The 2-part-wedge failure mechanism with curved slip lines
This failure mode was observed in a model test, where a nailed wall (h = 40 cm) was progressively
surcharged by a water pressure cushion beyond the nailed zone until failure occurred.
11
What is the explanation for this special failure mode?
Answer: The high earth pressure force E of wedge (2) due to the high area load, acting upon the nailed
block in its upper part, leads to an overturning moment
12
1.3 Field tests
Fig.: Field tests in sand and clay
13
Fig. 1: Front view of the first test wall in history of
soil nailng with measuring facilities
Height: 6.0 m; Nail lengths: 3.0 m to 4.0 m
Load: Strip load in the rear (hydraulic jackets)
Fig. 2: Seperation of the proper test wall fromthe
surrounding ground by thin slurry walls to
achieve 2-D conditions
Test A: Strip load in the rear
14
Fig. 1: Cross-section of test wall A with inclino-
meter boreholes to locate the slip lines
Fig. 2: Cross-section of test wall A in moment of failure
(Wall was weakened by further excavation and
pulling-out of bottom nail row)
Failure mode: Two-part wedge mechanism with
straight slip lines
Test A: Measuring results
15
Test A
Fig.: Field test A: Nailed wall after failure: total displacement ca. 20 cm
(Movement of wall during failure parallel to itself is clearly to be seen)
16
Measurements: 1 Displacements using inclinometer
and geodetic instruments
2 Earth pressures using hydaulic cells
3 Nail forces using electr. strain gauges
Fig. 1: Cross-section of instrumented test wall B
Test B: Strip load near the crest
Fig. 2: Cross-section of wall B with horizontal defor-
mation after completion (under dead weight)
u = horizontal displacement
h = height of the wall
Non-cohesive soils u/h 2.5 - 3
(Cohesive soils u/h 3 - 5 )
17
Fig. 3: Test B: Earth pressure after completion
(i. e. dead weight)
Fig. 4: Test B: Earth pressure due to loading
until failure (failure load 150 kN/m)
18
Fig. 6: View of test wall B after failure from the
side (Movement of wall during failure in
rotation clearly to be seen)
Fig. 5: Test B: Cross-section with rupture
line located in the inclinometer
boreholes after failure
19
Fig.: Cross-section of test wall B with axial nail forces
after completion and during loading until failure
Test B
Test D: Nailed edge in sand
1.3 Field tests (continuation)
Fig.: 2nd excavation step just finished
21
Test G in clay
Fig.: View at test wall G in slightly overconsolidated clay with loading equipment
22
Test G
B1, B2, B3 .... Boreholes for inclinometer measurements (horiz. & vertical deformations)
Fig.: Test G in overconsolidated clay: Measured horizontal and vertical deformations of facing
and nailed soil after completion (i. e. under dead weight)
23
2.1 Presenting the design example: cross-section and soil parameters
2.2 Preconsiderations on the type of design approach
2.3 Derivation of design values
2.4 Identification of the unsafest failure mechanism
2.5 Determination of the required characteristic nail resistance
2.6 Further stability checks for the total structure
2. Design: Verification of stability of a nailed wall with shotcrete facing
Scope:
2.1 Design example: Permanent nailed wall in sand with a transient surface load
Given geometric data:
Height of the wall: h = 10 m;
Horizontal nail length at the bottom: l = 6.0 m
Wall inclination (to the vertical): = 10;
Nail inclination: = 10
Vertical nail spacing: s
v
= 1.10 m
Horizontal nail spacing: s
h
= 1.25 m
Acting characteristic parameters:
Transient surface load: q
k
= 23 kN/m
Unit weight of soil:
k
= 18 kN/m
Resisting characteristic parameters:
Friction angle of soil:
k
= 35; cohesion: c
k
= 0
Lowest value in a series of pulling-out tests of nails in-situ:
F
P
= 160 kN (Index P denotes Proof load)
Bonded length of all test nails: l
b
= 5.0 m
Hence: the ultimate pull-out resistance per unit nail length
is yielded by: T
Pm,k
= F
P
l
b
= 160 / 5.0 = 32 kN/m
Question: Is this nailed wall safe after EC-7 and DIN 1054?
25
2.2 Preconsiderations on the type of design approach
Eurocode 7 clearly states: Verification of total stability has to be performed in ultimate limit state
However: there are several options in EC 7 for the design approach!
DIN 1054 recommends the application of Design Approach DA1-2 of EC 7 for soil nailing.
Note: For all verifications the principle procedure after EC 7 provides a strict rule:
seperation of actions (e. g. loads) fromresistances (e.g. friction angle )
2.3 Derivation of the design values from the characteristic values
Resistances: friction angle
k
(given in the foundation report)
|
|
.
|
\
|
=
k
d
tan
arctan
Definition of partial factor
after EC 7 sec. 2.4.6.2:

25 . 1
tan
tan
= =
d
k
~ =
|
.
|
\
|

= 29 3 . 29
25 . 1
35 tan
arctan
d
/ 30 23 30 . 1 m kN q q
k Q d
= = =
/ 18 m kN
k d
= =
Definition of partial
factor
Q
after EC 7 sec.
2.4.6.2:
30 . 1 = =
k
d
Q
q
q
00 . 1 = =
k
d
G
Actions:
26
2.4 Identification of the unsafest failure mechanismfor the given example
As shown above, the stability proof of a nailed wall with conditions as given in the example can be based on
- the two-part wedge mechanism with straight slip lines,
or as well as on - the slip circle
NOTE: As the two-part wedge failure mechanism is more comprehensible for a presentation,
it will be used in the following design procedure!
27
h' = 5,8 m
0
(1)
= 35
q
d
1
st
Variation 0
(1)
= 35
Actions or driving forces:
W
d
W
d
= 694 kN/m
K
a
: active earth pressure coefficient
K
a
= 0,308
P
d
= q
d
b = 30 4.2 = 126 kN/m
P
d
b = 4.2 m
E
a,d
= h ( h + 2q
d
) K
a
(
d
)
d
= 29
E
a,d
E
a,d
= 5.8 (18 5.8 + 2 30) 0.308 = 147 kN/m
?
?
?
?
Z
d
=
2
3
0
k
N
/m
Q
0
(1)
= 35
6
7
8
9
W
d
P
d
d
= 29
E
a,d
N
6,d
N
7,d
N
8,d
N
9,d
intersection axial force of nail i:
N
i,d
= T
m,d
l
i
Resistances or resisting forces:
N
i,d
= T
m,d
l
i
9
6
Z
d
= T
m,d
(1.4 + 2.8 + 4.0 + 5.4)
Z
d
= T
m,d
13.6
Z
d
=
Z
d
l
9
=
5
.4
m
l
6
=
1
.4
m
l
8
=
4
.0
m
l
7
=
2
.8
m
230 = T
m,d
13.6
T
m,d
= 230 13.6 = 16.9 kN/m/m
for 0
(1)
= 35
Q
d
W
d
=
694 kN/m
P
d
=
126

d
E
a,d
= 147 kN/m
29
0
(2)
= 40
6
7
8
9
5
Z
d
Q
d
Z
d
= T
m,d
(0.8 + 2.0 + 3.2 + 4.3 + 5.6)
Z
d
= T
m,d
l
i
9
5
275 = T
m,d
15.9
T
m,d
= 275 15.9 = 17.3 kN/m/m
fr 0
(2)
= 40
Z
d
=
2
7
5
k
N
/m
Q
W
d
=
649 kN/m
P
d
=
126

d
E
a,d
= 115 kN/m
l
9
=
5
.6
m
l
6
=
2
.0
m
l
8
=
4
.3
m
l
7
=
3
.2
m
l
5
=
0
.8
m
W
d
P
d
d
= 29
E
a,d
h = 5.0 m
2
nd
Variation 0
(2)
= 40
0 = 5
0
(3)
= 45
6
7
8
9
5
4
Z
d
d
Z
d
=
3
0
0
k
N
/m
Q
W
d
P
d
E
a,d
l
9
=
5
.6
m
l
6
=
2
.6
m
l
8
=
4
.6
m
l
7
=
3
.6
m
l
5
=
1
.6
m
W
d
P
d
E
a,d
h = 4.0 m
3
rd
Variation 0
(3)
= 45
l
4
=
0
.6
m
16.1 18.6 300 45
17.3 = MAX! 15.9 275 40
16.9 13.6 230 35
[kN/m/m] [m] [kN/m] []
T
m,d
= Z
d
/ l
i
l
i
Z
d
0
design pull-out resistance: T
m,d,max
= 17.3 kN/m/m
characteristic pull-out resistance:
with partial safety
factor (DIN 1054,
Table 3)

N
=
T
m,k
T
m,d
T
m,k,max
=
N
T
m,d
T
m,k,max
= 1.40 17.3
T
m,k,max
= 24.2 kN/m/m
31
Remember: established horizontal spacing was: s
h
= 1.25 m
Thus, the required characteristic pull-out resistance per unit nail length of the physical
nail is yielded by:
T
m,k
= 24.2 1.25 = 30.25 kN/m
Remember: ultimate pull-out resistance, verified in a series of load tests was:
Result of slip line variation:
T
m,k,max
= 24.2 kN/m/m (i.e. per unit length of a virtual nail per unit width of the wall)
T
Pm,k
= 32 kN/m (P indicates: Proof load)
It can be seen: T
m,k,max
< T
Pm,k
which is OK!
The maximum ultimate pull-out resistance per unit nail length in the design is less than ultimate
pull-out resistance per unit nail length in the load test in-situ.
Conclusion: 1. The design is safe!
2. The design is also economic, as
the utilisation factor for the nails: T
m,k
/ T
Pm,k
= 30.25 / 32 = 0.95 or 95%
2.5 Determination of the required characteristic nail resistance
(a) Groundfailure
(a) Groundfailure
(c) Overall (or external) stability
(c) Embankment
failure
M
(b) Failure against horizontal sliding (often involved in varia-
ion of slip staight lines)
(b) Horizontal sliding
2.6 Further stability checks for the nailed wall
After DIN 1054, sec. 12.4.4 (2) the nailed (or reinforced) part of
the soil has to be considered as a solid block or gravity wall.
If in doubt, the following stability checks have to be made:
NOTE: Verification of nails and facing cannot be presented here (please, see publications!)
33
DC-Nail
www.dc-software.com
Munich/ Germany
Fig.: Checking internal stability by two-wedge failure mechanisms with straight slip lines and
external stability by slip circles using German computer programDC-Nail
Anlisis de Suelos Enclavados
Program DC-Nail
Anlisis de suelos enclavados de acuerdo a
DIN 1054:2005 (basado en EUROCODE 7),
DIN 1054:1976
Diseo de revestimiento de hormign
lanzado de acuerdo a DIN 1045, DIN 1045-1
Anlisis con factores de seguridad parcial o
con seguridad global
Versiones del programa en Alemn, Ingls,
Francs, Italiano, Espaol
Anlisis de acuerdo con el mtodo general de
deslizamiento de bloques
Determinacin de la estabilidad interior y
exterior
34
3. Execution: Several examples in soil and soft rock or weatherd rock
3.1 Practical cases of nailed cuts near to the vertical
a) Auger drilling for the nails b) Pull-out test of a nail
Fig. 1: One of the first permanent nailed walls near to the vertical in sand/ gravel,
executed by the German contractor BAUER near Stuttgart, 1985
35
3.1 Practical cases of nailed cuts near to the vertical (1
st
continuation)
a) Shotcreting b) Drainage provided by drain
mats (System ENKA)
Fig. 2: Permanent nailed wall near to the vertical in sand/ gravel as before
(Nails coverd by shotcrete to prevent corrosion)
36
a) Permanent soil nail with corrugated plastic sheath
for complete corrosion protection
Fig. 2: Permanent nail (System BAUER, Germany)
b) Permanent nail on site
37
a) b)
Fig. 2: Cross-section of the nailed cut (a) after completion,
(b) in final state with a revetment wall to be greened
Fig. 1: Permanent nailed cut in mountaineous area
in Southern Germany (Nails heads covered
by shotcrete, only weep hole pipes to be seen)
(National Road widening scheme project)
Permanent nailed wall with revetment wall
38
Fig. 3: Wall shortly after completion: Greening yet to come
Fig. 1: Mounting of the prefabricated concrete
elements by a crane
Permanent nailed wall with revetment wall
Fig. 2: Fixing of
concrete elements
at the top
39
Fig.: Permanent cutting slope in Keuper marl (South-West Germany) for a new National Road;
due to significant creeping property of marl: nail lengths 23 m; calculation by slip circles
40
Fig 1: Permanent nails without plastic sheath; corrosion protection
only by in-situ grouting; diameter of GEWI tendon: 50 mm
(Degradation due to corrosion incorporated in the design)
Fig. 2: Permanent facing with double reinforce-
ment layers (earth-sided and air-sided)
Landslide is a nightmare for every geotechnical engineer!
3.2 Practical cases of nailed slopes
Fig.: Landslide due to fossil slip surfaces reactivated in a cutting (Marlstone)
42
Fig.: Reinforcing a 30 cut in marlstone to prevent sliding on potential geologic slip
surfaces possibly reactivated by excavation in front of a tunnel portal of the
German high speed railway line Mannheim - Stuttgart
43
INCLINOMETRE
BOREHOLE
SOIL-
NAILS
2
0
m
1
5
m
2
4
m
GEOLOGIC-
SLIP-
SURFACES
10
DRAIN TUBES
EXTENSO-
METRE
(GREENED) (GREENED)
NATURAL GROUND LEVEL
FREE SURFACE
1

:

1
,
7
5
1

:

1
,
1
5
NATURAL GROUND LEVEL
FREE SURFACE
1

:

1
,
7
5
1

:

1
,
1
5
1

:

1
,
1
5
Fig.: Cross-section of the 30 cut (i.e. 1:1.75) in marlstone to prevent sliding on potential
geologic slip surfaces reactivated by excavation
(Slip surfaces were not localized but expected due to the experienced landslide shown before)
44
Fig.: View at geologic slip surface found in reality during excavation process:
Nailing absolutely necessary for reasons of safety!
Fig.: Special drilling rig for 18 m long nails constructed by BAUER
46
Nail setting
Fig. 3
Fig. 2
Fig. 5
Fig. 1
Fig. 4
47
Fig. 1
Fig. 2 Fig. 3
48
Fig. 2: Setting of instrumented nail for pulling-out
test to verify the assumptions of design
Fig. 1: Analysis for the worst case: Geologic slip surface assumed at the
bottomof the slope (assumed failure: two-part wedge mechanism)
49
Question: Assumption of mean pull-out resistance per unit nail length T
m
(kN/m) correct?
Fig. 2: Test loading facilities
Fig. 1: Axial force distribution along the instrumented test nail
for different loads (soil: weathered Keuper Marl)
Fig.: Completed nailed slope with hidden nails under green surface
(Picture taken few months before opening to traffic, 1991)
51
Quality control:
- Work: according to the plans?
- Excavation steps: following the
admissible depth and the time sequence?
- Free standing of boreholes?
(if not: casing!)
- Nails: Length correct?
Diameter of the steel
tendon correct?
- Soil conditions: according to geotechnical report?
Put the following questions on the site:
Missing quality control:
Nails too short! Facing too thin! =>
52
Quality control:
- Work: according to the plans?
- Excavation steps: following the
admissible depth and the time sequence?
- Free standing of boreholes?
(if not: casing!)
- Nails: Length correct?
Diameter of the steel tendon correct?
- Grouting water-cement-factor correct?
- Shotcrete: thickness?
- Mounting of mats: sufficient overlapping?
- Soil conditions: according to geotechnical report?
Put the following questions on the site:
- Pull-out tests of nails: performance correct?
results according to the design?
53
Benefits of Soil Nailing:
- Economic advantage
- Construction flexibility
- Small construction equipment
- Special solutions: Remedial work
Fig.: Restoring and stabilizing historic
masonry walls using soil nails
54
Limitations and Warnings:
- No excavations in groundwater!.
- Attention to layer groundwater!
- Attention to existing buildings near to the excavation!
- No underpinning without special measures!
- Do not underestimate the first excavation step!
Fig.: Temporary excavation using nails
near to a settlement-sensitive house
2. The ultimate limit state design of nailed walls and slopes is based on kinematic
failure mechanisms proved in model and field tests of the research programme.
Summary and Conclusions:
1. The research and development programme in Germany (1976 1981) yielded
numerous results on the bearing behaviour and the stability of nailed walls.
3. The application of the principles of new European Standard EC 7-1 Geotechnical
Design combined with the detailed rules in German Standard DIN 1054
provides a safe and practicable limit state design of soil nail constructions.
4. Execution of soil nailed constructions needs experience and good knowledge of the
ground conditions.
5. Soil nailing involves numerous benefits but also some limitations.
6. Today soil nailing is a well established construction method in many contries all
over the world.
There is a wide field for its application in Brazil, too!
Not guys doing it like that:
Last but very important conclusion:
Soil nailing needs experienced engineers!
Thank you very much for your attention!
Cartoon by courtesy of
Sddeutsche Zeitung,
Germany

Soil Nailing in Germany

Încărcat de

Informații document

Descriere originală:

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Soil Nailing in Germany

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

University of Applied Sciences Munich / Germany Prof. Dr.-Ing. G.

after EC 7 sec. 2.4.6.2:

S-ar putea să vă placă și