5 Tips On Designing To Ec 7 and Guidelines On Pre Construction Survey DR Poh

Tips on designing to EC 7 and guidelines
on pre-construction survey
Dr Poh Teoh Yaw

Deputy Director
Building and Construction Authority
1
Contents
1. Tips on EC7
a. Use of NCCI
b. Case study on pile foundation
c. Sample submission for ERSS
d. Effectiveness of interlocks for sheet pile walls
2. Determination of Ground Types in accordance to
EC8
3. Guidelines on Pre-construction survey
2
1. Tips on EC 7 - Use of NCCI
3
Use of NCCI
National Annex to SS EN 1997-1:2010

(NCCI)
These documents (latest version)

can be used to complement
Eurocodes.
In the event that the use of these
documents presents a conflict,
the Eurocodes take precedence.
4
Use of NCCI
Example
Foundation design: Load Test
Pile test to 1.5 times representative load
EC 7
What is representative load? complement

What is the settlement criteria?
settlement criteria
NCCI
Source: Dr Ng of Golder Associates, GeoSS Seminar 24 Apr 2015

5
1. Tips on EC 7 - Case study on pile
foundation
6
Case study on pile foundation
Site A: Bored piles in OA
Adopted design approach
Pile design
1. Adopted lower R4 with SLS verification 7
2. Adopted Model Factor = 1.2 – with maintained load test
Pile design: EC7-1 [7.6.2.2 (14)]
No guidance given when to

use equation (7.4) and (7.5)
Pile design
Site A
ULT Tests
Unit skin friction, fs = 2.3N (limited to 230kPa)
Unit end bearing, fb = 65NkPa (limited to 6500kPa)
Loading
Pile length
Pile Ref Diameter Pile length based on EC7 based on
Gk Qk Gk+Qk
Eq (7.4) Eq (7.5) BS/CP4
C97 1.4 11628 1402 13030 24.5 21.5 28.7
C193 1.4 11628 1402 13030 27.5 24.5 30.1
C417 1.4 11628 1402 13030 24.5 21.5 28.7

Which equation to adopt?
• Pile lengths based on EC7 are 10% to 15% shorter than BS/CP4
• If computation based on equation (7.5), the pile length will be much shorter.
9
Case study of pile foundation
Qs/1.5
Qs/2 +Qb/3
(Qs+Qb)/2.5
10
Source: Dr Ng of Golder Associates, GeoSS Seminar 24 Apr 2015
Pile design
Loading
Pile length
Pile Ref Diameter Pile length based on EC7 based on
Gk Qk Gk+Qk
Eq (7.4) Eq (7.5) BS/CP4
C97 1.4 11628 1402 13030 24.5 21.5 28.7
C193 1.4 11628 1402 13030 27.5 24.5 30.1
C417 1.4 11628 1402 13030 24.5 21.5 28.7
Adopted
• Pile settlement is the governing factor !
11
Case study of pile foundation
Pile design: EC7-1 [7.6.2.2 (14)]
Likely governing for cases where end bearing contribute more than about 30%
of the design resistance and for larger diameter pile say diameter larger than
1.5 m
Likely governing for cases where end bearing contribute less than about
30% of the design resistance
Learning points:
• Proportion of end bearing increase with the increase in pile
diameter, hence FS of skin friction alone drop with the
increase in pile diameter
• Current EC7 has lower partial factor on end bearing as
compared to CP4, hence higher proportion of pile capacity to
be sustained on end bearing.
• To meet settlement criteria, designer may consider adopting
separate load case with Qs/1.5, especially for large diameter
bored piles.
• Alternatively, designer may consider to derive the
characteristic end bearing from the results of load tests
based on acceptable settlement criteria.
13
1. Tips on EC 7
Sample submission for ERSS
14
ERSS Submission
Singapore NA adopted Design Approach 1

Piles and Anchors All Others ERSS
• Check for the following • Base on EC7 clause 2.4.7.3.4.2(1)

combinations of sets of partial Check for the following
factors: combinations of sets of partial
• Combination 1: A1 “+” M1 “+” R1 factors:
• Combination 2: A2 “+” M1 “+” R4
• Combination 1: A1 “+” M1 “+” R1
• EC 7 encourages Site Investigation • Combination 2: A2 “+” M2 “+” R1
and Pile Load Testing via lower
partial factors applied.
ERSS Submission
ERSS: Verification of limit states – EC7-1[2.4.7.1]
•(STR)— internal failure or excessive deformation of the

structure or structural elements;
•(GEO)— failure or excessive deformation of the ground;
•(EQU) — loss of equilibrium of the structure or the
ground;
•(UPL)— loss of equilibrium of the structure or the
ground due to uplift by water pressure (buoyancy) or
other vertical actions;
•(HYD)— hydraulic heave, internal erosion and piping in
the ground caused by hydraulic gradients.
ERSS Submission
Partial factor A1
Partial factor A2
Accidental case
17
ERSS Submission
Partial factor soil material (M1, M2); resistance factor R1
18
ERSS Submission
Sample check
Hydraulic uplift (UPL)
Case 1a – without pressure relief well
Action = udst;d
Resistance = Gstb;d
Source: MM Singapore ERL project
19
ERSS Submission
Sample check
Hydraulic uplift (UPL)
Case 2 – with tension piles and ground improvement
Action = udst;d
Resistance = Gstb;d + Rd-1 + Rd-2 +Rd-3
Rd-1 = Design resistance due to soil-ERSS wall friction/adhesion
Rd-2 = Design resistance due to ground improvement-ERSS wall adhesion
Rd-3 = Design resistance due to ground improvement-tension piles adhesion
20
ERSS Submission
Sample check
Base heave
The check is only for cases where ERSS
toe is terminated in Marine clays
Action
ABH= γHB1 + qBs
Resistance
RBH= 5.7 cu B1 + cuh H + (1+α) cud D
ULS verification by calculation, using

DA1-Combination 1 & Combination 2
21
ERSS Submission
Sample
calculations ERSS toe-in – rotational failure
Evaluation at Lowest Strut Level (LSL)
Effects of Action
ELSL = PA1 * l1
Resistance
RLSL = PP * l2 + Ms
ULS verifications are carried out on

• DA1-C1 – drained
• DA1-C1 – undrained
• DA1-C2 – drained
• DA1-C2 - undrained
Notes
• Ms is assumed to be minimum BM capacity
of ERSS wall (mostly diaphragm walls with
minimum rebars)
• Ms is considered as permanent favourable
effect of action
22
ERSS Submission
Sample
calculations
ERSS Geotechnical Design
Following EC7, 4 analyses are performed for each ERSS design.
Analysis:
Drained
1) DA1-C1
UnDrained
4 CASES
Drained
2) DA1-C2
UnDrained
DA1-C1: DA1-C2:
- Characteristic soil parameter - Reduction of c’ by 1.25
- Reduction of cu by 1.4
γQ= 1.1; Unfav. Variable loading - Reduction of tan φ’ by 1.25
γG= 1.0 ; perm unfav. loading γQ= 1.3; Unfav. Variable loading
γG= 1.0 ; perm unfav. loading
Source: PB Singapore ERL project
ERSS Submission
Sample
calculations
ERSS Geotechnical Design (Cont’d)

ULS – for wall design
• DA1-C1 – analysis forces*1.35
SLS – for crack control, wall displacement and ground

settlement
*DA1-C2 is with application of partial factors -> reduction in soil

parameters (part of input) & surcharge increase by partial factor 1.3 to
26kPa. Hence, analysis forces are already in ULS.
Source: PB Singapore ERL project

ERSS Submission
Sample
calculations ERSS Design Methodology - EC7
SLS ULS ULS OSF (Optional)
Comb 1 Comb 2
Plaxis Run Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 Run 4
Surcharge 20 kPa 1.1x20 = 1.3x20 = Use Run 1 to do
22 kPa 26 kPa OSF if relevant
Soil Parameters GIBR (*) GIBR (*) Factored
1.25 drained
(*) Characteristic Soil Parameters given in GIBR 1.4 undrained
Final Excavation Soffit+0.1m Soffit+0.1+0.5 Soffit+0.1+0.5
Level (overdig) (overdig)
Groundwater Table At surface At surface At surface
EC 7 ULS forces Use for DA 1.35x(Run 2) 1.00x(Run 3) 1.00x(Run 4)
Previous BS Use for Damage 1.00x(Run 3) 1.05x(Run 4)

Approach to ULS Assessment and (done at Arup using
forces ULS (SLSx1.4) CIRIA C580 factors)
Source: Arup Singapore ERL project

25
1. Tips on EC 7 - Effectiveness of
interlocks for sheet pile walls
26
Advisory Note 1/09 on ERSS
Engineer to specify specification of steel material on

Use only good condition plan and check the condition of steel material at site.
sheet pile
The use of alternative steel materials shall comply
with BC1
For sheet piles wall in difficult ground such as soft

ground and sand, new sheet piles should be used.
Where re-used structural steel is used, the structural

design shall fully consider any imperfections and
conditions of such materials, and only sheet piles in
good conditions should be used.
Why it is crucial to ensure proper
interlocking of sheet pile walls in soft clay
Soft clay can “flow” through even

minor hole !
Ensure proper interlocking between
sheet piles
Work out exact dimension of sheet pile

wall to ensure proper interlocking can
be carried out or provide detail for
corner pile
Improper control of wall installation/ gap between wall

Effectiveness of interlocks
For U-Type piles:

The interlock lies on the neutral axis with maximum shear stress
U-type piles may not act as a fully composite section due to possible joint
slippage
For Hat-Type and Z-Type piles:

The interlocks are located at the most outer edge.
The shear force does not occur in the interlocks.
30
Reduction factors
• To account for a possible lack of shear for

transmission in the interlocks, EC3-5 has
additional reduction factor βB for moment
resistance and reduction factor βD for wall
stiffness compared to BS5950.
The effectiveness of interlocks is taken into account in the design of

steel sheet piles according to EC3-5 using reduction factors βB and
βD to reduce moment resistance and flexural stiffness of sheet piles,
especially for U-Type sheet piles
31
Reduction factor for moment resistance
The design moment resistance of the cross-section Mc,Rd is determined

from the following:
Class 1 or 2 Class 3 Class 4
Clause 6.1.4, EN
M c,Rd = βBWpl f y γ M0 M c,Rd = βBWel f y γ M0 1993-1-3
Wel is the elastic section modulus determined for a continuous wall;

Wpl is the plastic section modulus determined for a continuous wall;
γM0 1.0
βB is to account for a possible lack of shear force transmission in the interlocks.
• The numerical values of βB and βD for Z-Type piles and U-Type

piles are given in NA to EC3-5.
32
Reduction factor for flexural stiffness
The effective flexural stiffness of sheet piling may be determined as

follows, taking into account the degree of shear force transmission in
interlock.
( EI )eff = β D ( EI )
Where:
I is the second moment of area of the continuous wall
βD is to account for the possible reduction due to insufficient shear force
transmission in the interlock.
βD depends on many local influences. The numerical value for βD are given in
the National Annex to EC3-5.
33
Example
Reduction Factor for U-Type Sheet Piles (NA to EC3-5)
Reduction factor βB and βD
Number of Highly
Type of U-pile Unfavorable Favorable
structural unfavorable
unit conditions conditions
support levels conditions
βB βD βB βD βB βD
0 0.40 0.30 0.50 0.35 0.60 0.40
Singles or
uncrimped 1 0.55 0.35 0.60 0.40 0.70 0.45
doubles
>1 0.65 0.45 0.70 0.50 0.80 0.55
0 0.70 0.60 0.75 0.65 0.80 0.70
Crimped or
1 0.80 0.70 0.85 0.75 0.95 0.80
welded doubles
>1 0.90 0.80 0.95 0.85 1.00 0.90
Note Any restraint device which leads to the shear force changing from positive to negative or
vice versa may be considered as a structural support. The toe of the piles should not be
considered as a restraint. The benefit of the restraint should only be taken into account for
design situations following installation of the relevant restraint. Restraints may be regarded as
34
structural supports only when designed as such in accordance with standards.
Enhancement to reduction factors
Interlocks not treated with sealants or lubricants

• βB may be increased by 0.05 (to a maximum value of 1.0)
• βD may be increased by 0.05 (to a maximum value of 1.0)
Welding near the wall top

• βB may be increased by 0.1, 0.15 or 0.2 respectively for highly
unfavorable, unfavorable and favorable conditions ( to a maximum
value of 1.0)
• βD may be increased by 0.15, 0.2 or 0.25 respectively for highly
unfavorable, unfavorable and favorable conditions ( to a maximum
value of 1.0)
35
3. Determination of ground types in
accordance to EC8
Classification of ground types
Suggested investigation/tests for classification of ground types
Test Measurement/correlated value
Down-hole/cross-hole/PS logging seismic wave test Shear wave
piezocone test (CPTU) In situ relative density

(Note: should be carried whenever feasible for building of
important Class I)
Correlated shear wave and maximum
shear modulus
In-situ permeability tests Field permeability
SPT tests SPT N value

in-situ density tests In-situ density
Laboratory tests; sieve analysis, Atterberg Basic soil properties
limits, moisture content, specific gravity, bulk and
dry densities, and maximum and minimum dry
densities tests; constant head permeability tests on
sand, one-dimensional consolidation tests on
clayey soils, and unconsolidated undrained (UU)
triaxial tests on clayey soils
37
Suspension P-S velocity logging system
38
Classification of
ground types
Ground types based

on EC8(+A1:2013)
39
40
Worked example
Depth (m) Description of soil layer SPT
1.5 Fill 4
3.0 Fill 4
4.5 Firm sandy clay/silt 7
6.0 Firm sandy clay/silt 8
7.5 Firm to very stiff sandy silt 22
Soil profile 9.0 Firm to very stiff sandy silt 20
25.5 Hard sandy silt 42
27.0 Hard sandy silt 75
Moderately highly weathered
28.5 sandstone 100
30.0 sandstone 100
41
Worked example
Should equation (3-1) be also used for SPT N or cu values?
?
42
Worked example
Using SPT Using correlated Vs from SPT N values
Depth (m) Description of soil layer SPT Depth/SPT Average value Depth/Vs Lower bound Depth/Vs
(m/s) value (m/s)
1.5 Fill 4 0.375 146 0.0102 146 0.0102
3.0 Fill 4 0.375 146 0.0102 146 0.0102
4.5 Firm sandy clay/silt 7 0.214 164 0.0092 164 0.0092
6.0 Firm sandy clay/silt 8 0.188 168 0.0089 168 0.0089
7.5 Firm to very stiff sandy silt 22 0.068 311 0.0048 259 0.0058
25.5 Hard sandy silt 42 0.036 384 0.0039 316 0.0048
27.0 Hard sandy silt 75 0.020 466 0.0032 378 0.0040
28.5 sandstone 100 0.015 512 0.0029 413 0.0036
30.0 sandstone 100 0.015 512 0.0029 413 0.0036
2.240 0.1132 0.1283
Avg SPT
13.4 265 m/s 234
43m/s
Class D Class C Class C
Sand Fill
Sand Fill
Sand Fill Sample of shear wave

measurements using
PS logging in
compacted sand fill
Residual
soil
Residual
soil
44
Summary:
Where applicable, QP should include shear wave measurement as
part of the ground investigation program. The shear wave velocity
is the preferred parameter:
• Most rational
• Provide the best estimate of the site class
In cases where test results from piezocone test (CPTu), SPT N

profile or undrained shear strength profile in the upper 30m are
being used, these values should be converted to shear wave
velocities for assessment of site class.
For soft clayey materials with SPT-N value less than or equal to 5,
SPT N values should not be used to derive shear wave velocities.
This is because for these soft clays the SPT N values are often
very low (frequently zero) and not representative for the strengths
expected for these materials.
45
FAQ
Can designer used Singapore Geological Map for site classification?
The above example showed that for an area within the same geological
formation, there could be big variation in ground type classification. As
such, the designer cannot just solely rely on the geological map.
Each project should use its own boreholes to determine the site
classification
46
4. Guidelines on Pre-con Survey
47
Why Pre-con ?
Example of pre-existing cracks

Pre-existing Conditions
Pre-existing Conditions
Adequacy of zone of pre-con survey
Case study in difficult ground

Zone of pre-con survey
Excavation depth = 8 m
Zone of survey = 25 m ~ 3 times
the excavation depth
Ground Conditions
Soft Ground
Basement excavation level
Control Measures for basement excavations
ERSS in difficult ground conditions

Learning points:
• Recharge wells
• Monitoring of ground
water level behind the
recharge zone to verify
effectiveness of recharge
wells
• Adequate zone of pre-con
survey
Circular issued on
Guideline on Pre-
con Survey
https://www.corenet.gov.sg/e
info/Uploads/Circular/CBCA
150130.pdf
http://www.bca.gov.sg/Structu
ralPlan/others/Guidelines_on_
Preconstruction_Survey.pdf
54
Guidelines on Preconstruction Survey
30 Jan 2015
Building Engineering Group

Building and Construction Authority
55
Contents
1. Introduction
2. Demolition Works
3. Piling Works
4. Excavation Works
5. What Builder Should Do if Entry for
Preconstruction Survey is Not Possible
6. Areas of Responsibility When There Are More Than
One Builder In The Project
56
End
57

5 Tips On Designing To Ec 7 and Guidelines On Pre Construction Survey DR Poh

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Judul Asli

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

5 Tips On Designing To Ec 7 and Guidelines On Pre Construction Survey DR Poh

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Tips on designing to EC 7 and guidelines

Dr Poh Teoh Yaw

National Annex to SS EN 1997-1:2010

These documents (latest version)

What is representative load? complement

Source: Dr Ng of Golder Associates, GeoSS Seminar 24 Apr 2015

Adopted design approach

Pile design: EC7-1 [7.6.2.2 (14)]

No guidance given when to

Unit end bearing, fb = 65NkPa (limited to 6500kPa)

C97 1.4 11628 1402 13030 24.5 21.5 28.7

C193 1.4 11628 1402 13030 27.5 24.5 30.1

C417 1.4 11628 1402 13030 24.5 21.5 28.7

C97 1.4 11628 1402 13030 24.5 21.5 28.7

C193 1.4 11628 1402 13030 27.5 24.5 30.1

C417 1.4 11628 1402 13030 24.5 21.5 28.7

• Pile settlement is the governing factor !

Pile design: EC7-1 [7.6.2.2 (14)]

Singapore NA adopted Design Approach 1

• Check for the following • Base on EC7 clause 2.4.7.3.4.2(1)

ERSS: Verification of limit states – EC7-1[2.4.7.1]

•(STR)— internal failure or excessive deformation of the

Source: MM Singapore ERL project

ULS verification by calculation, using

Source: MM Singapore ERL project

ULS verifications are carried out on

Source: MM Singapore ERL project

ERSS Geotechnical Design (Cont’d)

SLS – for crack control, wall displacement and ground

*DA1-C2 is with application of partial factors -> reduction in soil

Source: PB Singapore ERL project

Groundwater Table At surface At surface At surface

EC 7 ULS forces Use for DA 1.35x(Run 2) 1.00x(Run 3) 1.00x(Run 4)

Previous BS Use for Damage 1.00x(Run 3) 1.05x(Run 4)

Source: Arup Singapore ERL project

Engineer to specify specification of steel material on

For sheet piles wall in difficult ground such as soft

Where re-used structural steel is used, the structural

Soft clay can “flow” through even

Work out exact dimension of sheet pile

Improper control of wall installation/ gap between wall

For U-Type piles:

For Hat-Type and Z-Type piles:

• To account for a possible lack of shear for

The effectiveness of interlocks is taken into account in the design of

Reduction factor for moment resistance

The design moment resistance of the cross-section Mc,Rd is determined

Class 1 or 2 Class 3 Class 4

Wel is the elastic section modulus determined for a continuous wall;

• The numerical values of βB and βD for Z-Type piles and U-Type

Reduction factor for flexural stiffness

The effective flexural stiffness of sheet piling may be determined as

Enhancement to reduction factors

Interlocks not treated with sealants or lubricants

Welding near the wall top

piezocone test (CPTU) In situ relative density

SPT tests SPT N value

Ground types based

Should equation (3-1) be also used for SPT N or cu values?

Sand Fill Sample of shear wave

In cases where test results from piezocone test (CPTu), SPT N

Example of pre-existing cracks

Case study in difficult ground