MINISTRY OF MEGAPOLIS & WESTERN DEVELOPMENT

METRO COLOMBO URBAN DEVELOPMENT PROJECT

Design and Building of St. Sebastian North Lock Gates and Pumping Station
Contract No: MCUDP/SLLRDC/W/12

REPORT ON DESIGN OF CANAL LINING AND

RETAINING WALLS
ADDENDUM 01

CHINA GEO ENGINEERING CORPORATION

Feb-19 MCUDP/NLGPS/D/DOC/S/003 – A1
Item Employer’s Comments Contractor’s Reply Note to the Revisions
No. (Ref. No. DH-KOR-MCUDP-LKA-
170904-790 dated 31st Jan. 2019)

1 Please find our replies below.

Design of site eastern boundary walls
(RW06,RW06a) has been changed
totally from flexible reinforced soil (in
which we have minor concerns about
bearing capacity and settlement issues)
to rigid concrete walls, following
should be clarified:

a It is also a practice of using geosynthetic- Clarified

Designer has assumed that the bearing
capacity of the site soil (75 KPa) will
be improved up to 200KPa by using a
single combigrid layer with 250mm
crushed material. This concept is more
general in road engineering works in
which load influenced depth of the
vehicles wheels are so limited
comparing with a 3.0m width wall
footing.
reinforced foundation soil to support
shallow foundations. In usual practice
one or more layers of geosynthetic are
placed inside a controlled granular fill
beneath the footings. Such reinforced
foundation soils provide improved load-
bearing capacity and reduced settlement
by distributing the imposed load over a
wider area of weak soil. It shall also be
noted that the 155kPa bearing pressure is
only the maximum which will apply on
very small width and the average
pressure over the 3m width is only
92kPa.

b It shall be noted that the estimated Clarified

Your previous calculations in former
design had shown the potential of soil
settlement around 75-200mm under
45KPa net filling pressure while we
have up to 155KPa pressure in RW06
wall foundation.
settlement was due to the soil fill which
is assumed to be acted over an infinite
area and also it was mainly based on the
soil properties near to the canal. The
bearing pressure exerts from the
retaining wall will be 92kPa in average
over a width of 3m and hence the effect
will be quite different. With the
introduction of ground improvement as
explained above the effect would be
expected further less. Moreover, the
retaining walls have been designed with
movement joints at every 6m intervals
considering the effect of settlements.

c Considering above issues, Please The relevant recommendations with the Clarified. The supplier was
provide combigrid manufacture properties of the material have already informed to provide if there
confirmation with backup analysis to are any additional details.
Page 1 of 3
 verify the sufficiency of proposed been submitted with the proposal of
treatment method for bearing capacity reinforced earthwork.
and settlement of the walls in order to
keep them in allowable range.
d We are aware that the bearing pressure Clarified.
It is recommended to use a wall toe can be brought down to the allowable
with 0.75m length in RW06 in order to range by doing this but it is not allowed
reduce the foundation bottom pressure to extend the foundation to a land which
around 75KPa. is not possessive. However, it can be
considered case wise during the
construction as we are very much aware
the benefit of that.

e Noted & corrected. Refer the revised r/f detail of

Foundation top bar in RW06 should be RW06.
change to 16@200 instead of bottom
bar.

f Noted & corrected. Refer the revised design of

Top widths of RW06 should be
RW06.
changed to 0.25m in design report
although it is correct in drawings.

2 The suitable joint type has already been Refer the revised note at the
Water tight method for the wall joints agreed at the site and it will be 20mm connection detail.
with PVC water stops should be noted thick expandable polystyrene sheet with
in drawing for RW06, RW06a and suitable sealing. The relevant note will be
others. updated for all the retaining walls
accordingly.

3 It shall be noted that the friction angle of Clarified.

For wall RW02a without strut
members, designer has increased the
base friction constant up to 0.84 which
is proportional to the friction angle of
40deg. It should be noted that base
friction angle is about 0.67 which is
equal to 26deg. Hence sliding factor of
safety is not satisfactory.
0.6-0.8 are reasonable for concrete
walls where forms are used giving a
relatively smooth back face and 0.67
commonly estimate for a concrete wall
formed using plywood or metal forms so
the back face is fairly smooth. However,
for concrete directly cast on a compacted
fill, it can be δ =. Please refer Clause 12-
6.6 and Table 11-6 of Bowles Foundation
Analysis & Design 5th Edition. Hence the
considered value is satisfied.

4 It shall be noted that Ka specified in ERQ Clarified. Refer the amended

Same situation exists in RW03a
without strut members. Designer has
reached the required sliding factor of
safety by optimistic assumptions such
as Ka=0.226, Kp=2.56 and friction
constant=0.84. Ka should be
accounted at least 0.33 as per ERQ
clause 2.2.7.10.6, Kp maximum value
is equal to 2Ka as per provisions of
BS-8002 and friction constant is
around 0.48 considering friction angle
is just for general material use for details of RW03a in the
backfill. Since this is a special situation drawing.
the backfill material has been changed to
a superior one and the real properties of
the material must be allowed. We had
clarified about the Kp value earlier as
well and wish to bring your attention
again to Annex C of EN 1997-1:2004.
The value of Kp has been calculated
according to the said Annex C based on
Page 2 of 3
 of 26deg. In addition, proposed 1.3mthe existing material properties and still
conservative.
height shear key in design report has
been changed to 0.6m height in The height of the shear key has corrected.
drawings with Some deficiency of reinforcement
insufficient
between base and stem is due to the
reinforcement. Reinforcement
different requirements of thermal &
deficiency is seen similarly in the base
shrinkage crack control for base slab and
and stem of the wall in drawings. wall. However, it has been amended
appropriately to make it simple.
5 It has been clarified appropriately and no Clarified
Regarding clause 3 and 4, Design of reason for rejection.
left bank walls (RW02a, RW03a)
without strut members is not
acceptable.

6 No struts connect to the RW04. Clarified.

Wall RW04 foundation thickness
should be increased to withstand struts
loads. 200mm thickness is not enough.

7 It has been proposed a gate for right bank Clarified.

Use of flap valve is an appropriate culvert based on the Client’s
solution and is recommended also for requirement.
existing culvert of the right bank.

8 It is according to the slope of the existing Clarified.

Longitudinal slope of the storm water ground and the levels of the existing
drainage canal seems to be reversed to pipelines.
the upstream instead of downstream.

9 Agreed and the relevant coating has been Refer the revised note in the
As you are going to use sheet pile specified in the final drawing. sheet pile detail.
members (class FSP IIIA) for
permanent application in upstream
side and considering their marginal
calculated bending moment capacity
comparing with applied loads, you are
requested to propose suitable coating
method in order to provide enough
corrosion resistance for whole life
cycle of the project.

Page 3 of 3
 Project Design and Building of St. Sebastian North Lock Gates and
CHINA GEO ENGINEERING CORPORATION Pumping Station Calc by CDM
Contract.No: MCUDP/SLLRDC/W/12 Che by DAJ
Component Canal Lining 11.01.2019 A1
Reference Calculations Output

DESIGN OF CANAL LINING AND EARTH RETAINING SYSTEM

This report is an addendum to the original design report MCUDP/NLGPS/D/DOC/S/003 - R2. The
report provides additional design claculations for the revised proposals to fulfill the client's instructions
received via PMU/MCUDP/NLPS/2018/W/12/04-b and 04-b II. As shown in section 3 of the report the
additional calculations includes here for sheet pile retaining wall in the right bank of upstream canal,
reinforced concrete retaining wall for eastern side of the site boundary and re-design of part of the
reinforced concrete retaining walls in left bank without struts considering the decision for keeping the
bank level as it is.

1 References and Software

- FHWA-HIF-12-003 (FHWA)
Evaluating Scour at Bridges- 5th Edition

- ENVIROMESH (ENSH)
Designing with Gabions & Mattresses - Volume 3

- HEC 11
Design of Riprap Revetment

- EN 1992 (EC2)
Design of concrete structures

- EN 206-1:2000
Concrete - Part 1: Specification, performance, production and conformity

- EN 197-1
Cement - Part 1: Composition, specifications and conformity criteria for common cements

- Foundation Analysis and Design (FAD)

Joseph E. Bowles, P.E., S.E - Fifth Edition

- Standard Method of Detailing Structural Concrete (IstructEM)

Institution of Structural Engineers UK

- G/5056 - Geotechnical Investigations for proposed St. Sebastian North Lock Gates and Pumping Station
(July 2017)

- ELS SI 4003 - Report 2, Soil investigation for lock gate, left canal bank and canal bed (ELS4003-2)

- Hydraulic Design Report (HDR)

- Employer's Requirements (ERQ)

- Software
- PROKON 3.0
- Auto Cad 2016 - MS Excel 2013
- PLAXIS

Page 1 of 19
 Project Design and Building of St. Sebastian North Lock Gates and
CHINA GEO ENGINEERING CORPORATION Pumping Station Calc by CDM
Contract.No: MCUDP/SLLRDC/W/12 Che by DAJ
Component Canal Lining 11.01.2019 A1
Reference Calculations Output
2 Design Data and Parameters
2.1 Material Properties
3
EC1-Table A.1 Density of Concrete (ϒc) = 25 kN/m

ERQ- Cl..2.2.7.3 Type of cement = Ordinary Portland Cement

Cl.3.6.3.1 CEM I according to EN 197
G5056- P.16

3
ERQ-VI-3-16 Density of Water (ϒw) = 10 kN/m

3
Density of soil fill (ϒs) = 18 kN/m
(Type I or II soil. Gravel-Sand mix as per ICTAD SCA/5) =
FAD, Table 2-6
0
ELS4003-2 Angle of shearing resistance (φk) = 30

** Geotechnical parameters for existing soil will be obtained from the ELS 4003-2 as relevant.

2
ERQ Vertical surcharge = 20 kN/m

Minimum strength class of concrete for concrete retaining = C25/30

wall

Nominal cover to reinforcement (Cnom) = 50 mm

Page 2 of 19
 Project Design and Building of St. Sebastian North Lock Gates and
CHINA GEO ENGINEERING CORPORATION Pumping Station Calc by CDM
Contract.No: MCUDP/SLLRDC/W/12 Che by DAJ
Component Canal Lining 11.01.2019 A1
Reference Calculations Output
3 Identified components for design

Design of following components are presented here

1 Eastern side concrete retaining walls

2 Left bank concrete retaining walls

3 Sheet pile retaining wall

FIG 01 PLAN VIEW

Page 3 of 19
 Project Design and Building of St. Sebastian North Lock Gates and
CHINA GEO ENGINEERING CORPORATION Pumping Station Calc by CDM
Contract.No: MCUDP/SLLRDC/W/12 Che by DAJ
Component Canal Lining 11.01.2019 A1
Reference Calculations Output
4 Design of Concrete Retaining Walls

4.1 Retaining wall along eastern side site boundary

Reinforced concrete walls with movement joints at 6m intervals are proposed to be provided along the boundary.
Two different retaining wall sections have identified for the design namely RW06 & RW06a as shown in the drawing.

The design calculations has been done using 'Retaining Wall Design Module' in PROKON.

4.1.1 Design of RW06

Input

Starting level of retaining wall = +1.0 m MSL (500mm below the

existing level)
Finish level of retaining wall = +4.5 m MSL
2
Recommended allowable bearing capacity = 75 kN/m
without ground improvement

Proposed ground improvement via the reinforced earth system

Improved CBR value = 12.5 %

Correlations between CBR value and bearing capacity

According to the W.P.M Black, The calculation of laboratory and in-sity values of
California bearing capacity data, Geotechnique, 11, 1969, pp. 14-21,

qu = 70*CBR kPa
= 875 kPa
with F.O.S of 3 qa = 291.67 kPa

According to Portland cement association (PCA), Design of concrete airport pavement, 1955
qu = 26.16*CBR0.664 psi
= 964.95 kPa
with F.O.S of 3 qa = 321.65 kPa

According to the paper by Zumrawi M.E of "Predicting bearing strength characteristics from soil index properties
2016"
qu = 65*(CBR-1.5) kPa
= 715 kPa
with F.O.S of 3 qa = 238.33 kPa
Adopting the minimum value
Allowable bearing capacity after soil improvement = 200 kPa (conservatively assume
with additional safety
msrgin)
Maximum characteristic load on the retained side = surcharge from the
vehicles
2
= 20 kN/m
0
ELS4003-2 Angle of shearing resistance for existing soil = 26

Page 4 of 19
 Project Design and Building of St. Sebastian North Lock Gates and
CHINA GEO ENGINEERING CORPORATION Pumping Station Calc by CDM
Contract.No: MCUDP/SLLRDC/W/12 Che by DAJ
Component Canal Lining 11.01.2019 A1
Reference Calculations Output

0
Angle of shearing resistance of backfill soil = 30
0
Angle of shearing resistance of crushed stone base = 40
material

Friction angle between the wall and backfill soil = 0.67*30

0
= 20.1
0
Friction angle between the concrete base slab and the = 40
base material (concrete directly cast against the base material)

Input to the software

Output Results

Page 5 of 19
 Project Design and Building of St. Sebastian North Lock Gates and
CHINA GEO ENGINEERING CORPORATION Pumping Station Calc by CDM
Contract.No: MCUDP/SLLRDC/W/12 Che by DAJ
Component Canal Lining 11.01.2019 A1
Reference Calculations Output

OK

Page 6 of 19
 Project Design and Building of St. Sebastian North Lock Gates and
CHINA GEO ENGINEERING CORPORATION Pumping Station Calc by CDM
Contract.No: MCUDP/SLLRDC/W/12 Che by DAJ
Component Canal Lining 11.01.2019 A1
Reference Calculations Output
4.1.2 Design of RW06a
Input

Starting level of retaining wall = +1.0 m MSL

Finish level of retaining wall = +4.5 m MSL

Soil fill = +3.0 m MSL

Maximum characteristic load on the retained side = No vehicle movement

2
= 10 kN/m (conservative)
=
0
ELS4003-2 Angle of shearing resistance for existing soil = 26
(average)
0
Angle of shearing resistance of base soil = 26 (No special improvement)
2
Allowable bearing capacity at foundation level = 75 kN/m

Output

Page 7 of 19
 Project Design and Building of St. Sebastian North Lock Gates and
CHINA GEO ENGINEERING CORPORATION Pumping Station Calc by CDM
Contract.No: MCUDP/SLLRDC/W/12 Che by DAJ
Component Canal Lining 11.01.2019 A1
Reference Calculations Output

OK

4.1.3 Design of RW02a (Re-design)

Starting level of retaining wall = -2.5 m MSL

Finish level of retaining wall = +3.5 m MSL

Soil fill = No additional fill

+1.0 - +1.5 existing ground
2
Maximum characteristic load on the retained side = 20 kN/m (Surcharge from
= vehicles)
=
0
ELS4003-2 Angle of shearing resistance for existing soil = 26
(average)
0
Angle of shearing resistance of base soil = 40 (Min. 300mm thick crushed
aggregate base)
2
Allowable bearing capacity at foundation level = 75 kN/m

Page 8 of 19
 Project Design and Building of St. Sebastian North Lock Gates and
CHINA GEO ENGINEERING CORPORATION Pumping Station Calc by CDM
Contract.No: MCUDP/SLLRDC/W/12 Che by DAJ
Component Canal Lining 11.01.2019 A1
Reference Calculations Output
Input

Output

Page 9 of 19
 Project Design and Building of St. Sebastian North Lock Gates and
CHINA GEO ENGINEERING CORPORATION Pumping Station Calc by CDM
Contract.No: MCUDP/SLLRDC/W/12 Che by DAJ
Component Canal Lining 11.01.2019 A1
Reference Calculations Output

OK

4.1.4 Design of RW03a (Re-design)

Input

Starting level of retaining wall = -2.5 m MSL

Finish level of retaining wall = +4.5 m MSL

Soil fill = Fill the excavation with crushed stones

= Finish the ground at present level of
1.0m MSL - 1.5m MSL

Maximum characteristic load on the retained side = surcharge from the vehicles
2
= 20 kN/m
Maximum possible water level at the back of wall = 4.12 m MSL

**analysis with water pressure is critical than the analysis with vehicle surcharge

Note: It has been conservatively neglected the canal side water pressure in this calculation.
0
ELS4003-2 Angle of shearing resistance for backfill soil = 40
(Average)
0
Angle of shearing resistance for base soil = 40
2
Allowable bearing capacity at foundation level = 75 kN/m

Page 10 of 19
 Project Design and Building of St. Sebastian North Lock Gates and
CHINA GEO ENGINEERING CORPORATION Pumping Station Calc by CDM
Contract.No: MCUDP/SLLRDC/W/12 Che by DAJ
Component Canal Lining 11.01.2019 A1
Reference Calculations Output

Note-: In the above calaculations, the program has checked the shear based on the required reinforcements and the
value of shear force has been taken at the wall-slab joint.
To correct this, the shear check has separately carried out based on the proposed reinforcement and the value of
shear force at a distance 'd (effective depth)' from the top face of base slab and the calculation is presented below.
In addition to that deflection check has also presented.

Page 11 of 19
 Project Design and Building of St. Sebastian North Lock Gates and
CHINA GEO ENGINEERING CORPORATION Pumping Station Calc by CDM
Contract.No: MCUDP/SLLRDC/W/12 Che by DAJ
Component Canal Lining 11.01.2019 A1
Reference Calculations Output
Check For Shear

OK

OK

Page 12 of 19
 Project Design and Building of St. Sebastian North Lock Gates and
CHINA GEO ENGINEERING CORPORATION Pumping Station Calc by CDM
Contract.No: MCUDP/SLLRDC/W/12 Che by DAJ
Component Canal Lining 11.01.2019 A1
Reference Calculations Output
5 Design of Sheet pile Retaining Walls

Input to the Plaxis software

10kN/m2

No structures in the vicinity of 25m

+2.0
Backfill soil
Surface fill
Canal Very loose clayey sand
-2.0
FSP IIIA sheet pile

Organic clay

Loose to very loose sand

Stiff to very stiff lateritic clay

-10

Completely weathered rock

Page 13 of 19
 Project Design and Building of St. Sebastian North Lock Gates and
CHINA GEO ENGINEERING CORPORATION Pumping Station Calc by CDM
Contract.No: MCUDP/SLLRDC/W/12 Che by DAJ
Component Canal Lining 11.01.2019 A1
Reference Calculations Output
Analysis phases

Phase 1 - Driving sheet piles with canal water level at +1.0 m MSL

Phase 2 - Load apply due to the backfill and surcharge with canal water level at +1.00 m MSL

Page 14 of 19
 Project Design and Building of St. Sebastian North Lock Gates and
CHINA GEO ENGINEERING CORPORATION Pumping Station Calc by CDM
Contract.No: MCUDP/SLLRDC/W/12 Che by DAJ
Component Canal Lining 11.01.2019 A1
Reference Calculations Output
Phase 3 - F.O.S calculations for Phase 2 (applying phi c reduction)

Phase 4 - Load apply due to backfill and surcharge with canal dry condition (i.e at -2.00m MSL)
A conservative assumption

Phase 5 - F.O.S calculations for Phase 4 (applying phi c reduction)

Output Results

Page 15 of 19
 Project Design and Building of St. Sebastian North Lock Gates and
CHINA GEO ENGINEERING CORPORATION Pumping Station Calc by CDM
Contract.No: MCUDP/SLLRDC/W/12 Che by DAJ
Component Canal Lining 11.01.2019 A1
Reference Calculations Output

Phase 1
a) Horizontal displacements

b) Bending moment and shear force diagrams of pile

Page 16 of 19
 Project Design and Building of St. Sebastian North Lock Gates and
CHINA GEO ENGINEERING CORPORATION Pumping Station Calc by CDM
Contract.No: MCUDP/SLLRDC/W/12 Che by DAJ
Component Canal Lining 11.01.2019 A1
Reference Calculations Output
Phase 2
a) Horizontal displacements

b) Bending moment and shear force diagrams of pile

Phase 3

Page 17 of 19
 Project Design and Building of St. Sebastian North Lock Gates and
CHINA GEO ENGINEERING CORPORATION Pumping Station Calc by CDM
Contract.No: MCUDP/SLLRDC/W/12 Che by DAJ
Component Canal Lining 11.01.2019 A1
Reference Calculations Output
Phase 4
a) Horizontal displacements

b) Bending moment and shear force diagrams of pile

Phase 5

Page 18 of 19
 Project Design and Building of St. Sebastian North Lock Gates and
CHINA GEO ENGINEERING CORPORATION Pumping Station Calc by CDM
Contract.No: MCUDP/SLLRDC/W/12 Che by DAJ
Component Canal Lining 11.01.2019 A1
Reference Calculations Output
Design Checks

Considering all the phases,

Maximum deflection (SLS) = 97.01 mm

(satisfies as there are no any
structures in the vicinity of25m)

Minimum F.O.S against the failure = 1.43 > 1.2 OK

(recommended for effective
stress parameters in
BS8002:1994)

Maximum ultimate moment (MEd) = 432.76 kNm/m

2
Yield strength of sheet pile (fy) = 295 N/mm
(test results shows higher values
3
Elastic section modulus per 1m width of sheet pile = 1.52E+06 mm

Design moment resistance (MRd) = Wel * fy/ϒM0

= 448.40 kNm/m > MEd
OK

Maximum ultimate shear force (VEd) = 183.26 kN/m

2
Shear area per 1m width of sheet pile wall (Av) = 2880 mm
(Av = A-hwtw)

Design shear resistance of sheet pile wall (VRd) = Av*(fy/√3)/ϒM0

= 490.52 kN/m > VEd OK

Page 19 of 19