Proceedings of Indian Geotechnical Conference

December 13-15, 2012, Delhi

STABILITY ANALYSIS OF 18 M DEEP EXCAVATION USING MICRO PILES

Amit Srivastava, Asst. Professor, Dept of Civil Engg, Jaypee University of Engg & Tech, Guna, 2002.lala@gmail.com
Pawan Kumar, Project Assistant, Department of Civil Engineering, IISc, Bangalore, xeropawz@gmail.com
G. L. Sivakumar Babu, Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, IISc, Bangalore, gls@civil.iisc.ernet.in

ABSTRACT: An 18 m deep excavation for a 3-storey basement structure for a shopping mall in Bangalore is proposed to be
stabilized using micro piles. The offset of the deep excavation from the adjoining buildings is in the range of 5m and
foundation pressures of existing buildings are estimated to be 200 kPa. For the stability analysis of the given deep excavation,
in situ soil properties are evaluated from the field and or laboratory test results and implemented in commercially available
finite element based software tool PLAXIS 2D. Stability analysis is performed by considering in situ soil following Mohr-
Coulomb constitutive behaviour and modelling micro piles as plate elements. Global factor of safety of the given deep
excavation problem is evaluated using Strength Reduction Technique available as an inbuilt option in the numerical package
and information on estimated deformation values are reported.

INTRODUCTION Common Uses of Micropiles

Micropiles were first introduced in Italy by an Italian
contracting company as Pali radice and later the technique
was brought to North America for performing several
underpinning jobs in the city of New England,
Massachusetts. Since mid 1980s, micropiles have been used
mainly as elements for foundation support to resist static and
seismic loading conditions, and as in situ reinforcements for
slope and excavation stability. FHWA [1] provided a unique
and innovative classification system for micropiles based on
two main criteria: (a) Philosophy of behaviour (design), and
(b) Method of grouting (construction). A detailed review of
literature on micropiles is provided in [2].
A micropile is a small-diameter (typically less than 300 mm),
drilled and grouted replacement pile that is typically
reinforced [3]. Generally, micropiles are applicable when
there are problems with using conventional deep foundation
systems. These problem conditions include: obstructions,
adjacent structures, limited access job sites, and other shaky
areas like caves, sinkholes, underground rivers. For example,
micropiles are commonly the preferred foundation choice in
the challenging areas that feature nearby buildings and
difficult access. The unique characteristics of micropile offers
advantages when other deep foundation systems are not
applicable include:
Limited access situations due to size of equipment
Environmentally sensitive projects because they create
relatively little disturbance to the surrounding area
Seismic Retrofit
Arresting Structural Settlement
Resisting Uplift/Dynamic Loads
Underpinning
Reticulated Pile Wall
Installation techniques vary depending on the load bearing
specifications of the project. The selection of the installation
technique depends largely on soil conditions and load transfer
requirements.
To replace deteriorating foundation systems
To provide extra support for structures during renovation
To provide pile foundations where access, geology or
environment prevent the use of other methods
To support structures affected by adjacent excavation,
tunnelling or de-watering activities
To provide a fast, effective alternative to more traditional
underpinning methods
Benefits of Micropiles
Can be installed through most ground condition,
obstruction and foundation at any incline.
Ensure minimum vibration or other damage to
foundation and subsoil.
Can be installed in as little headroom as 6' and close to
existing walls.
Depending on situation, could actually allow facility
operations to be maintained during construction.
Simple and economical connection to existing and new
structures.
Can be preloaded to working load before connecting to
particularly sensitive structures.
MICROPILES INSTALLATION PROCESS
FHWA has produced the Micropile Design and Construction
Guidelines Implementation Manual and a Micropile Design
and Construction NHI course [4]. The objective is to provide
practitioner oriented technical guidance needed to: do
micropile design, produce construction specifications,
conduct construction inspection and integrity testing, develop
cost estimates and select contracting methods; to facilitate
and speed the implementation and cost-effective use to
micropiles on transportation projects.
The installation of micropiles begins with first determining
the geological condition by doing a detailed subsurface
investigation at the site. Based on known soil data, the design
engineer will design and specify the types of micropiles to be

652
Amit Srivastava, Pawan Kumar & G. L. Sivakumar Babu
used. The step by step procedure followed is briefly indicated
below:
1. After marking the position of the micropiles on the
ground by a competent land surveyor, the drilling rig is
manoeuvred to the micropile position (Fig. 1).
2. Drilling will start and the types of drilling tools used
depend on the soil and site condition. In dry ground and
rocky condition is expected, the drilling tool known as
Down The Hole Hammer (DTHH) is used. This is a
pneumatic tool and works much like a jack hammer.
Suitable for drilling in almost any soil condition and
particularly best in rock.
3. Once the required drilling depth is reached, the drilled
hole is flushed clean to remove any remaining debris
before the drilling rods are removed from the drilled
hole. Then a prefabricated reinforcement steel rod or
rods with grouting hose attached is then lowered into the
drilled hole.
4. After that water is first pumped through the grouting
hose to make sure the hose is not blocked during the
lowering process. It is also a way to give the drilled hole
a final cleaning. If all is good, water will be seen being
displaced and flows out smoothly from the hole.
5. Then grout made of cement and water mixture is pumped
into the drilled hole. This is known as grouting. This is
done using a grouting pump under pressure. During
grouting water in the hole will be displaced and flows
out smoothly.
6. The grouting hose is given a jerk to loosen it and slowly
raised at the same time grout is continuously pumped
into the hole. Grouting will stop once good grout is seen
coming out from the hole. When this happens, the
grouting hose is removed. Fig. 1 shows these steps for
micropiling for better illustration purposes.
Fig. 1 Drilled micropiles installation process
7. PROBLEM DEFINITION
An 18 m deep excavation for the proposed 3-storey basement
structure for a shopping mall in Bangalore is to be stabilized
using soil nailing technique. The offset from the adjoining
buildings is in the range of 5m and foundation pressures of
the existing buildings are estimated to be 200 kPa. As
micropiles enable the full utilization of the space and also
support excavations with adequate factor of safety, it is
653
suggested to use for stabilization of excavation work. Finite
Element Method tool, PLAXIS 2D, is utilized to evaluate the
global stability and provide information on deformation
pattern of deep excavation.
SITE CONDITIONS
The soil investigation provides the borehole information as
well as SPT values. There is no ground water table. The
report indicates that the encountered material in general is
disintegrated rock in many locations. Disintegrated rock, at
times being particulate, normally cannot stand without
support and beyond a certain height depending on cohesion
and will cave in. It is likely the excavation of 18m is likely to
collapse due to saturation of excavated areas. To prevent
collapse, use of micropiling is suggested.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Improving the stability of excavations using micropiling is an
appropriate solution for the present case. The suggested
systems are designed based on the data supplied by the
clients. The following are the recommendations:
1. Micro-piles in the form of steel pipes of 125mm dia with
6mm thickness, spaced at 25cm and 27m length are
suggested.
2. Horizontal component of shear resistance provides
resistance for induced shear forces due to excavating and
loading. In addition 4 rods of 20mm tor steel rods are
provided in the annular space of micropile to provide
additional shear resistance and can be positioned in the
central space of the pile. The space in the pile and
between the steel rods can be filled up with grouting.
Micropiles have a spacing of 25cm between the piles to a
depth of 27m, the factor of safety is 1.446.
3. The spacing between the piles can be nailed with short
driven nails of 1m length and 16m dia if loose pockets
exist and shotcreted using appropriate wire mesh to
prevent erosion of soil between the piles.
4. In the monsoon, migration of surface run off towards the
excavation should be prevented with appropriate
measures as indicated in precautions. Additional toe
ditches shall be provided to properly drain of the water
during construction and shall be maintained until a
permanent retaining wall is constructed in front of the
stabilized excavation.
5. Excavation in the water logged conditions shall be done
carefully by draining out water from the excavated areas
using appropriate pumping scheme.
6. If loose soil is encountered at any stage of excavation,
restrict the depth of excavation to about 0.75m. If the soil
has tendency to fall, spray cement on the surface so that
the stability of excavation is maintained till nail is
inserted.
7. Any deviation in the soil profiles from the geotechnical
reports and anomalous conditions may be brought to the
notice of the consultant. Consultant may be contacted in
case of clarifications.
STABILITY ANALYSIS USING FEM

The stage construction responses, global stability and
deformation pattern in any deep excavation problems are
generally predicted by finite element method (FEM) using
2D or 3D numerical modelling. The easiest and fastest way is
to define a 2D plane strain model using PLAXIS -2D. Finno
et. al. [5] observed that when the ratio of excavated length to
excavated depth of a wall is greater than six, the results of
plane strain simulations yield the same displacements in the
centre of that wall as those analyzed by a 3-D simulation.
Stability analyses are conventionally assessed using Limit
Equilibrium (LE) methods and lately the Finite Element (FE)
method has been found to be suitable in performing stability
calculations. Griffiths and Lane [6] highlighted that the FE
method provides a more powerful alternative to traditional
LE methods in assessing stability in their study of
unreinforced or reinforced slopes and embankments.
The stability of excavation is assessed in terms of factor of
safety, which is obtained through strength reduction
technique [5]. In this approach, factor of safety is taken as a
factor (F) by which the soil shear strength parameters, i.e.,
cohesion (c) and angle of internal friction (), is reduced (c1,
1) to bring the slope on the verge of failure.
1 There are 4 such pipes per meter length, hence moment of
c1 c (1)
F
1 1 (2)
1 tan tan Moment of inertia of each HYSD bar (I2) = (/64) d4 =
F (/64) 204 = 7853.981 mm4
Further, prediction of the deformation behavior of a soil-
nailed structure through FEM is required to ensure that
displacement limits set by the construction requirements are
not exceeded. For predicting deformation using FEM, one
has several possibilities to model the constitutive behavior of
in situ material; the most commonly used is Hardening soil
model [8, 9] for deep excavation problems. However, if all
the input parameters for HS-model are not available,
alternatively Mohr- Coulomb material model can be used [8].
Facings and micropiles can be modeled as elastic materials
using plate element. 15-node triangular elements can be used
for generating finite element mesh.
Briaud and Lim [11] provided information about where to
place the boundaries so that their influence on the results of
the numerical simulation of soil nail wall can be minimized.
They suggested that bottom of the mesh is best placed at a
depth where soil becomes notably harder (say at a depth D
below the bottom of the excavation). Based on the studies of
Briaud and Lim [9], if D is not exactly known, D can be
taken as two to three times the vertical depth of excavation H.
Further, for known values of D and H, width of excavation
We can be taken equal to three to four times D and the
horizontal distance from wall face to the end of mesh
boundary Be can be chosen equal to three to four times (H +
D) of the dimensions.
The most important input material parameters for plate
elements are the flexural rigidity (bending stiffness) EI and
the axial stiffness EA. Plate structural elements are
rectangular in shape with width equal to 1 m in out-of-plane
direction. Since, the micropiles are circular in cross-section
and placed at designed horizontal spacing, it is necessary to
654
Stability analysis of 18 m deep excavation using micro piles
determine equivalent axial and bending stiffness for the
correct simulation. Fig. 2 shows the plan view of micropiles
arrangements per meter length of excavation.
Estimation of axial and bending stiffness
Fig. 2 plan view-micropiles arrangements per meter length of
excavation
Calculation of EI for equivalent plate element
Moment of Inertia of each pipe section (I1) = (/64) (D14-
D24) = (/64) (1254-1194)
= 2140539.077 mm4
inertia of 4 pipe sections about X-X
= 4 2140539.077 = 8562156.308 mm4
There are 4 bars in each pipe and there for total no of bars in
each meter length of wall = 20
Moment of inertia of all the bars (HYSD) about XX axis = 20
7853.981 mm4
=157079.63 mm4
Total moment of inertia of the assemble of 4 pipes and 20
HYSD bars
= 8562156.308 mm4 + 157079.63 mm4 = 8719235.94 mm4
Elastic modulus of steel = 200 109 N/m2
EI value of the pipes and bars = 200 109 N/m2
8719235.94 mm4 = 1743 KN-m2/m
Calculation of EA for equivalent plate element
X-section area of one pipe = (/4) (D12-D22) = (/4)
(1252-1192) = 1149.82 mm2
There are 4 such pipes per meter length, hence x-sectional
area of 4 pipe sections
= 4 1149.82 mm2 = 4599.29 mm2
X-sectional area of each HYSD bar (I2) = (/4) d2 = (/4)
202 = 314.16 mm2
There are 4 bars in each pipe and there for total no of bars in
each meter length of wall = 20
X-sectional area of all the bars (HYSD) = 20 314.16 mm 2
= 6283.18 mm2
Total X-sectional area of the assemble of 4 pipes and 20
HYSD bars
= 4599.29 mm2 + 6283.18 mm2 = 10882.48 mm2
Elastic modulus of steel = 200 109 N/m2
EA of the assembly per meter length = 200 109 N/m2
10882.48 mm2 = 2176495.39 KN/m
Table 1 Properties of in situ soil mass
Amit Srivastava, Pawan Kumar & G. L. Sivakumar Babu
Property Values
Stiffness
E 50.0 103 kN/m2
0.32
Strength
cref 20.0 kN/m2
25
Advanced
Stiffness
Einc 10.0 kN/m2/m
ref 43.0 m
Strength
cinc 10.0 kN/m2/m
ref 43.0 m
The soil properties used in the numerical analysis is provided
in Table 1. Figure 3 shows the deformation contours of 18
meter deep excavation supported with micropiles. It can be
noted that the maximum deformation predicted is 23.41 mm.
Fig. 3 deformation pattern of micropiles supported deep
excavation
The maximum and minimum bending moments in the plate
elements were obtained as 3.773 kNm/m (element 9 at node
1693) and -10.62 kNm/m (element 9 at node 1691),
respectively. The maximum and minimum values of axial
forces were obtained as 0.382 kN/m (element 1 at node 2590)
and -562.4 kN/m (element 9 at node 1691), respectively. The
maximum and minimum values of shear force were obtained
as 13.59 kN/m (element 10 at node 1691) and -67.44 kN/m
(element 9 at node 1691), respectively.
Initially, the stability of the excavation is checked without
micropiles and 200 kPa surcharge load. The factor of safety
value is obtained as 0.325, which is not acceptable as it is less
than 1.0. Hence, stabilization of this deep excavation using
micropiles is essentially required The factor of safety value
for the excavation with support system is evaluated as 1.62,
which is more than the minimum acceptable limit of 1.5.
655
CONCLUSION
The paper presents the FEM analysis of 18 m deep
excavation, which is stabilized using micropiles. It is
demonstrated through FEM analysis that the safety of deep
excavation with micropiles is considerable improved. To
model micropiles, plate element is utilized and a calculation
procedure is demonstrated to evaluate the equivalent EA and
EI values of plate element representing micropiles
arrangement. The material behaviour is modelled as Mohr-
Coulomb. It is concluded that 18 m deep excavation can be
stabilized with the provision of micropiles with high quality
construction, and good quality control are taken by the field
engineers.
REFERENCES
1. FHWA (1997), Micropile Design and Construction
Guidelines Implementation Manual FHWA-SA-97-070
FHWAs Geotechnical website:
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/bridge/geo.htm
2. Abdul Karim Elsalfiti (2011). Skin friction of micropiles
embedded in gravelly soils. MS thesis submitted in the
Department of Building, Civil and Environmental
Engineering, Concordia University, Montreal, Quebec,
Canada.
3. Bruce, D.A., Bruce, M.E.C., and Traylor, R.P. (1999),
High Capacity Micropiles Basic Principals and Case
Histories. GeoEngineering for Underground Facilities.
Proc. of the 3rd National Conference of the Geo-Institute
of the ASCE. Geotechnical Special Publication No. 90,
Urbana-Champaign, IL, June 13-17, pp. 188-199.
4. NHI Micropile Design and Construction course #
132078. http://www.nhi.fhwa.dot.gov
5. Finno, R.J., Atmatzidis, D.K.. and Roboski, J.F. (2007),
Three-dimensional effects for supported excavations in
clay, Journal of Geotechnical Engineering Division,
ASCE, 115(8), 10451064.
6. Griffiths, D.V. and Lane, P.A. (1999), Slope stability
analysis by finite elements, Geotechnique, 49(3), 387-
403.
7. Matsui, T. and San, K-C. (1992), Finite element slope
stability analysis by shear strength reduction technique,
Soils and Foundations, 32(1), 59-70.
8. Shanz, T., Vermeer, P.A. and Bonnier, P.G. (1999),
Formulation and verification of the Hardening Soil
Model, In proceedings (Editor R.B.J Brinkgreve),
Beyond 2000 in Computational Geotechnics,
Balkema,Rotterdam, 281-290.
9. Brinkgreve, R.B.J. (2002), Plaxis finite element code for
soil and rock analysis: Manual, Balkema: Rotterdam.
10. Plaxis (2010). Plaxis User Manual, Delft University of
Technology & Plaxis bv The Netherlands.
11. Briaud, J-L and Lim, Y. (1997), Soil nailed wall under
piled bridge abutment: simulation and guidelines,
Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental
Engineering, ASCE, 123(11), 1043 1050.