Volume 167 Issue GE2 Geotechnical Engineering 167 April 2014 Issue GE2
Pages 205–216 http://dx.doi.org/10.1680/geng.13.00040
A soil-nailed excavation for the Brisbane Paper 1300040
Airport Link project, Australia Received 01/04/2013 Accepted 12/11/2013
Published online 03/02/2014
Bridges and Gudgin Keywords: excavation/geotechnical engineering/temporary works
j
1 j
2
The Airport Link project in Brisbane, Australia, involved 15 km of tunnelling including 5.7 km of twin road tunnels,
busway tunnels and connecting ramps. The Kedron area is the location of a number of entry and exit ramps which
join the tunnel. The construction site consisted of a number of tunnels crossing each other and formed using a
number of techniques. Access was required to a maximum of 18 m below ground level to allow for the construction
of a pile-supported capping slab, which would act as a roof slab for a mined tunnel passing east to west. This paper
presents details of the design and construction of the soil-nailed walls which provided support to three sides of this
excavation. The excavation also provided access for commencement of a mined tunnel using canopy tubes heading
eastward through one of the soil-nailed walls. The project constraints meant that the solution required close
coordination between the contractor and the designers of the temporary and permanent works. The excavation was
constructed successfully and has now been decommissioned. Design risks were managed throughout construction
through continuous on-site observation and a comprehensive monitoring programme.
205
Geotechnical Engineering A soil-nailed excavation for the Brisbane
Volume 167 Issue GE2 Airport Link project, Australia
Bridges and Gudgin
The project requirement was to allow construction of the westbound variable strength and can be gritty and friable, due to the high
exit ramp from the southbound tunnel. The ground conditions were quartz content of the rock.
such that traditional tunnelling methods were not considered to be
viable; therefore, a cut-and-cover solution was preferred. Figure 1 Key geological risks identified included the possibility of sand
shows the complex interaction of the tunnels in this area; of lenses within the upper residual soils, clay seams within the
particular relevance to this paper is the interaction between the exit Aspley and Tingalpa formations and the possibility of weak ash
ramp from the main southbound tunnel (10) and the entry ramp zones within the tuff. These could lead to planes of weakness or
onto the main southbound tunnel which underlies it (11). instability and groundwater flow paths.
8
2
1. Kedron Park Hotel
2. Car park
3. Moreton Bay fig tree 3
4. Church hall
5. Church
6. Lutwyche Road 7
7. Construction loading 9
8. Deep excavations
9. Tunnel through wall 10
4
10. East–west tunnel
(exit ramp main
southbound tunnel) 11
11. North–south tunnel 6 5
(entry ramp main
southbound tunnel)
206
Geotechnical Engineering A soil-nailed excavation for the Brisbane
Volume 167 Issue GE2 Airport Link project, Australia
Bridges and Gudgin
were a number of key constraints (Figures 1 and 2), given below, j proposed blasting of the mined tunnel underneath the
which follow the numbering on Figure 1. structure
j tower crane immediately behind the wall (1 m offset)
(a) The Kedron Park Hotel and car park (1 and 2) is a large j other construction loads at minimal distance behind the wall
building to the north of the excavation; it is a pub housed in a owing to the constrained site.
historic building of local significance.
(b) A mature Moreton Bay fig tree (3), which was protected and
4. Design
could not be disturbed, is adjacent to the north wall.
(c) A church hall (4) and church (5) are adjacent to the south 4.1 Design options and concepts
wall. The original design concept was to construct a cut-and-cover
(d ) A major arterial road (Lutwyche Road) lies to the west of the tunnel at this location with contiguous piled external walls and
excavation (6). using top-down construction to form temporary and permanent
(e) Deep excavations (8) surround the site to the north, west and propping. The total excavation was to be 30 m deep with the
beneath. tunnel roof constructed at 20 m below ground level. The contrac-
( f ) A mined tunnel (10) was to be constructed from east tor explored alternative solutions, particularly focusing on soil
to west immediately at the base of the excavation, with nailing due to perceived cost and programme benefits.
the tunnel also cutting through the east wall of the
excavation (9). The concept design focused on initially reviewing the feasibility of
(g) A tunnel (11) runs north to south going underneath the east– a soil-nailed excavation for the full depth of 30 m. Owing to site
west tunnel was to be constructed simultaneously with the constraints and constructability concerns, the excavation would
excavation and mined tunnel. need to have near-vertical walls (.858), with absolute vertical
walls at the south-east corner, near the church hall, and at least part
As the design and construction process continued, a number of of the east face where the westbound tunnel would penetrate the
additional issues arose with regard to construction loading and wall. Stability analyses were undertaken to determine a proposed
processes nailing pattern for preparation of a cost–benefit assessment.
Hotel
Inclinometer
5
Tunnel nel
Piled wall ed tun
advance ed min
supported Propos
excavation through
Soil-nailed excavation wall
(cut-and-cover)
Church
Pr tun
hall
op ne
Inclinometer
os l u
Church
ed n
3
m der
Ma
in
A
ed
Tower crane
jor
pile supported
a
rte
ria
l ro
ad
207
Geotechnical Engineering A soil-nailed excavation for the Brisbane
Volume 167 Issue GE2 Airport Link project, Australia
Bridges and Gudgin
The adopted solution consisted of a soil-nailed excavation to the were also important in overcoming the concern of some indivi-
tunnel roof at approximately 20 m below current ground level duals in the construction team with respect to the height and
(design by the temporary works designer), below which a inclination of the soil-nail wall. This was due to the lack of
temporary anchored, piled retention system would be installed experience of soil nailing within the construction team and the
(design by the permanent works designer). This was developed in perception that significant deformations would result.
response to concerns from the tunnelling team regarding the out-
of-balance forces that would be exerted on the north–south
tunnel, which passed less than 5 m below the base of the full 4.2 Detailed design
excavation. The 1.2 m dia. piles, spaced at 1.3 m centres, would The Australian standard on earth retaining structures (AS 4678-
be propped by a temporary arched capping slab and two or three 2002 (Standards Australia, 2002)) includes the design of soil-
rows of ground anchors. The maximum soil-nailed excavation nailed walls as an informative appendix only. The complexity of
depth was now 18 m in order to reach a platform level for this wall as well as its height, however, specifically moves it
installation of the piles. The pile-supported excavation extended outside the limitations of this standard. Various international
an additional 10 m below the soil-nail wall, allowing for con- guides and standards were available at the time of design,
struction of the elliptical tunnelling (Figure 3). including BS 8006:1995 (BSI, 1995), Ciria C637 (Phear et al.,
2005), Geoguide 7 (GEO, 2008) and Geotechnical Engineering
After installation of the piles, an arched roof would bridge Circular No. 7 (Lazarte et al., 2003). The authors had previous
between the piles of the north and south walls. A tunnel would knowledge of Ciria C637 and this guide was adopted. The design
then be mined beneath the arch and a permanent lining installed also had to comply with the various project specifications and the
between the piled walls. project deed, which incorporated client-specific requirements that
fell outside the specifications.
The adoption of this temporary works scheme led to major
changes in the permanent works over the original tender design. Ciria C637 uses the limit state design methodology of Eurocode
A smooth interface between the two design teams was, therefore, 7 (BSI, 2004), where partial factors are applied to the soil
crucial and a series of meetings were held between the two teams strengths and to the actions affecting the wall. The partial factors
of designers and the contractor to develop the design (temporary used were as detailed in Table 8.2 of Ciria C637 and are
and permanent) for this section of the works. These meetings reproduced in Table 1.
Construction sequence:
1. Top heading of southbound
tunnel constructed.
2. Soil-nailed excavation
completed. Church hall
3. Bored piles installed and roof
slab formed. ails
ng soil n Excavation
4. Pilot tunnel of westbound 15 m lo
tunnel constructed with backfilled on
completion of Residual soil
ground anchors installed as
mined tunnel stiff clay
excavation proceeded. Southbound 2
tunnel completed. roof
3
5. Westbound tunnel completed. Residual soil
Temporary
excavation level very stiff to
4
hard clay
Extremely weathered silts
tone
Mined tunnel
(westbound) 4
5
3 Very low-strength
3
siltstone
1 Permanent
Southbound structure
mined tunnel
Medium-strength
siltstone
4
208
Geotechnical Engineering A soil-nailed excavation for the Brisbane
Volume 167 Issue GE2 Airport Link project, Australia
Bridges and Gudgin
Resistance (R)
A summary of the geotechnical parameters adopted in the Snailz was primarily used to determine the soil nail length required
analyses is presented in Table 2. The geotechnical parameters based on the design nail spacing, borehole diameter, soil properties
were derived from the available site investigation data, including and facing strength. This analysis was then checked using Slope/W.
limited laboratory testing. These parameters were agreed by the The two programs assess soil nails differently, with Snailz allowing
teams designing the temporary and permanent works. for different bond stresses for each soil type and including the
effect of the soil nail head in the analysis. Slope/W, however, allows
The design was carried out using limit state design and a limit for a different bond stress for each nail and a more complex
equilibrium method of analysis. Two software packages were geometry can be analysed. On this project Snailz generally gave
utilised for design work, namely higher factors of safety than Slope/W, most likely owing to Snailz
considering the contribution of the nail head in the analyses. A
j Slope/W, limit equilibrium slope stability analysis program typical section analysed is shown in Figure 4.
developed by Geostudio
j Snailz, soil reinforcement program developed by Roadway The characteristc bond or skin friction (ave ) was initially
Geotechnical Engineering, California Department of estimated using Equation 1 based on equation 8.4 of Ciria report
Transportation. C637
Geological unit Description ªb : kN/m3 c9: kPa 9: degrees E: MPa ave : kPa K0
Note: ªb , bulk unit weight; c9, effective cohesion; 9, effective friction angle; E, elastic modulus; ave , average ultimate bond stress; , Poisson
ratio; K0 , earth pressure coefficient.
209
Geotechnical Engineering A soil-nailed excavation for the Brisbane
Volume 167 Issue GE2 Airport Link project, Australia
Bridges and Gudgin
RL 22·2
Soil nails:
Top row – 0·5 m below crest
Spacing – 1·2 m V: 1·5 m H
Residual soil – stiff clay Ten 15 m nails
Four 12 m nails
Inclination 10° below horizontal
Sub-horizontal drains:
GWL (RL12) Top row – 5 m long
Bottom row – 10 m long
Spacing – 5 m H
Inclination 10° above horizontal
1: tave ¼ (K v9 tan 9 þ c9) (kPa) (c) Install contiguous piles from base of excavation.
(d ) Construct roof slab.
(e) Construct westbound pilot tunnel.
where, v9 is the effective vertical stress at the centre of the length
( f ) Excavate and complete southbound tunnel.
of a soil nail beyond the calculated failure surface (kPa), 9 is
(g) Finish westbound tunnel.
the effective friction angle (degrees), c9 is the effective cohesion
(kPa) and K is a constant taken as 1.
In the Plaxis analysis, characteristic values were adopted and the
The results of the assessment of the characteristic bond were predicted and actual ground movements (measured by inclin-
compared to typical values of bond stress typically experienced ometers) at two sections on achieving final excavation level are
for this material in South-East Queensland and appropriate values given in Figure 5.
of characteristic bond were adopted for each material. This was
confirmed during the design phase by the execution of an As a requirement of the project deed, a minimum surcharge of
ultimate load test. 20 kPa had to be adopted in all significant temporary works
designs. In addition, specific surcharges from construction plant
In order to determine the maximum working loads on each row including mobile cranes and concrete trucks at the crest of the
of soil nails, analysis of each stage of construction of the soil- walls also had to be considered. Proposed equipment was
nailed walls was carried out using a global factor of safety discussed with the construction team during the early stages of
approach (unfactored soil parameters) within Snailz, whereas design development.
overall stability was checked using partial factors.
Soil nails of 32 mm dia. with a steel grade of 500 MPa were
The two-dimensional finite-element analysis software, Plaxis, was nominated. These were installed in 150 mm dia. holes at an angle
used to predict ground movements, particularly in the vicinity of of 108 below the horizontal in 40 MPa grout. The nail lengths
the church hall and church at the crest of the south wall. The varied from 10 m to 15 m due to the change in excavation height,
construction sequence considered in the Plaxis modelling consid- varying load conditions around the excavation and improving
ered the construction of the temporary and permanent works. ground conditions with depth.
Models were generated by both the temporary works and
permanent works design teams and compared and agreed before The soil nails were installed with a vertical spacing of 1.2 m and
construction began. The construction sequence adopted was as a horizontal spacing of 1.5 m centre to centre (Figure 4). The soil
follows (Figure 3). nail heads consisted of a 200 mm 3 200 mm 3 20 mm thick
plate placed on top of the shotcrete surface and held in place by a
(a) Construct southbound top heading. nut. The shotcrete was nominally 100 mm thick with a minimum
(b) Staged soil nail excavation to the base of excavation. strength of 40 MPa at 28 days and had a single layer of mesh
210
Geotechnical Engineering A soil-nailed excavation for the Brisbane
Volume 167 Issue GE2 Airport Link project, Australia
Bridges and Gudgin
Inclinometer 3 Inclinometer 5
20 20
20
Residual soil –
18 stiff clay Residual
soil – stiff
16 15 15 clay
14
Residual soil –
12 hard clay
Residual
10 10 10 soil – hard
Base depth Base depth clay Base depth
8 (RL 6·8) (RL 6·8)
(RL 6·8)
6
5 Moderately 5
4 weathered siltstone
Moderately
2 Actual weathered Actual
Predicted siltstone Predicted
0 0 0
0 50 100 ⫺5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 ⫺5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55
SPT N: blows Horizontal displacement: mm Horizontal displacement: mm
(SL82) placed centrally throughout, with an additional layer of The most significant effect on the design, however, was the
mesh (1 m2 ) at the soil nail heads. location of the future tunnel portal on the eastern face of the
excavation (Figure 6). Here, the steel nails were replaced by
The structure was nominated as being required for 2 years; glass-reinforced plastic (GRP) nails to enable the bars to be
however, the project deed stipulated a design life of 5 years for ripped up during tunnelling. The GRP nails were 40 mm dia.
the tensile elements. Given the short duration, durability was installed in 150 mm grout holes. Unlike steel bars, which can
considered through sacrificial thicknesses of steel elements. behave plastically and creep after their tensile capacity has
Sheathing of the soil nails, as required for permanent soil nails, been reached, the GRP nails require greater deformation to
was not undertaken. achieve their ultimate capacity, after which they fail in a brittle
manner. The GRP nails adopted had a ‘break load’ capacity of
The detailed design took account of the site constraints as 860 kN.
detailed in Section 3.2. The location of the Moreton Bay fig tree
immediately at the crest of the north wall, for example, meant Given that the excavation was to remain in place for 24 months,
that the upper row of soil nails beneath the tree could not be
installed. The project arborist recommended that the cut face was
protected by plastic sheeting beneath the shotcrete so that the soil
adjacent to the tree would not dry out. The shotcrete was,
therefore, thickened and heavily reinforced over this zone with
the next row of soil nails designed to take the additional load.
The location of the tower crane led to the position of the soil
nails being amended to avoid the supporting piles. Similarly, the
soil nails were also located to avoid the inclinometers behind the
wall facing.
The interaction between the wall and the proposed tower crane
was considered in detail. This included finite-element modelling
to assess the soil–structure interaction within the system. It was
critical to design the tower crane foundation within the rotation
tolerance of the crane. The relative movement of the soil-nailed
wall and the tower crane piles led to additional down-drag, or
negative skin friction, in the foundation. As a result, design loads Figure 6. East wall during construction showing canopy tubes
in the piles were estimated to be greater than that from the static set out
load of the crane itself.
211
Geotechnical Engineering A soil-nailed excavation for the Brisbane
Volume 167 Issue GE2 Airport Link project, Australia
Bridges and Gudgin
The construction was complicated by the need initially to Ultimate load testing to confirm design parameters was also
maintain an access ramp from the south wall and into the specified and six tests on short bond lengths were undertaken at
excavation for as long as possible, until full access could be different levels within the excavation. It was decided that the
provided from the cut-and-cover tunnel to the west of the ultimate load tests were to be carried out within the excavation
excavation to service the works. This meant that the nails on the rather than in the excavation face, which enabled the nails to be
south wall could not be installed until a majority of the nails on exhumed and examined after testing as a measure of construc-
the north and east walls were complete. Figure 7 shows the tion quality control. Figure 8 is a photograph showing one of
varying excavation depths across the structure while the access the exhumed nails. The exhumed soil nails showed that the
ramp was in operation. This required close coordination between grout column around the nail remained intact after failure, with
the site and design team to ensure that an adequate width of ramp some nails showing a clean break in the grout at the end of the
was left in place to provide stability to the wall. nail. This indicated that the soil nail and grout failed as one
element as it was pulled out of the excavated face. All testing
Full-time observation of the works was undertaken by a represen- was carried out in accordance with the recommendations of
tative of the temporary works designer owing to the high level of Ciria C637.
risk associated with this excavation. Their responsibilities in-
cluded All the soil nails passed the acceptance tests; however, there were
issues with poor-quality centralisers being used, which collapsed
j mapping of the excavation to confirm that the geotechnical under the weight of the steel bars. This product was quickly
conditions were consistent with design replaced with one of acceptable quality. The ultimate load tests
j nomination of test nails and observation of nail testing confirmed the design parameters used with calculated ultimate
212
Geotechnical Engineering A soil-nailed excavation for the Brisbane
Volume 167 Issue GE2 Airport Link project, Australia
Bridges and Gudgin
bond stresses up to 250 kPa in the hard residual clay. Some tests
were cut short as failure had not occurred when the load had
reached 80% of the ultimate tensile capacity of the nail, beyond
which it was not safe to continue the test.
On completion of the excavation, the permanent works began Figure 10. Aerial photograph during arch construction
with piles being installed along the toes of the north and south
walls and part of the east wall. In addition, 114 mm dia.
canopy tubes, 12 m to 15 m long, were installed in the east
wall in preparation for the mined tunnel. Once the piles were
installed, fill was placed inside the excavation in order to 6. Performance
provide a form for the tunnel’s arched roof. The reinforced Wall movements were monitored by reflector survey prisms
concrete roof arch was cast (Figures 9 and 10). The tunnel was which were fixed to the shotcrete wall at two levels as the
then mined and permanent lining was placed beneath the arch. excavation proceeded. In addition, lateral movements were also
Upon completion of tunnelling, the excavation was backfilled monitored by inclinometers which were located around the
with flowable fill. excavation, along with ground settlement monitoring markers to
measure vertical deformations. Trigger levels were established for
During construction the issue of rock blasting within the tunnels all monitoring points and the results of all monitoring were
during mining was raised. An independent specialist assessed the distributed around the design and construction teams. The wall-
effect of blasting on the soil nailing and concluded that there monitoring system, with the exception of the reflector survey
would be no effect. The design team reviewed this assessment prisms, was unchanged from that planned for the original piled
and reanalysed selected wall sections in Snailz using unfactored wall.
parameters and a horizontal coeffiecient of acceleration of 0.2,
while targeting a factor of safety of greater than 1. Two monitored sections of the excavation are presented in Figure
213
Geotechnical Engineering A soil-nailed excavation for the Brisbane
Volume 167 Issue GE2 Airport Link project, Australia
Bridges and Gudgin
5, which shows the predicted and actual lateral ground movement which would have added a surcharge throughout the construction
at completion of the full depth of excavation. The encountered period on this section of the wall. In addition, the wall at
ground conditions at inclinometer 3 comprised approximately inclinometer 3 was higher than that at inclinometer 5.
4 m of stiff residual clay over 8 m of hard residual clay, overlying
moderately weathered siltstone. At this location the measured The following is a general summary of the wall behaviour.
lateral ground movements towards the excavation reached 31 mm
at completion of the excavation, against a predicted movement of j Horizontal wall movements were approximately 0.2% of the
40 mm. The prisms were installed as the excavation proceeded wall height.
and could only measure deflections from the time of installation. j Vertical wall movements were between 70% and 100% of the
They would not, therefore, show the total movements of the wall, horizontal movements.
but would be indicative of the deformations that were occurring j The measured wall movements were consistent with case
and could be checked against the inclinometers, which were histories (Figure 11).
approximately 2 m back from the wall face. At completion of the j The inclinometers identified lateral movement at the residual
excavation the prisms at this section had moved 28 mm at 18.2 m clay–siltstone boundary.
AHD (Australian height datum) and 12 mm at 13.4 m AHD, 2 m j Measured wall movements were less than those estimated by
and 6.8 m below the wall crest, respectively. The upper prism Plaxis.
compared well to the inclinometer data, but the lower prism j There was no visual evidence of significant wall movement.
showed much less movement, which may be indicative of the j There was no identifiable damage to the church and church
delay in placing the prism after excavation. hall.
214
Geotechnical Engineering A soil-nailed excavation for the Brisbane
Volume 167 Issue GE2 Airport Link project, Australia
Bridges and Gudgin
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
Wall height, H: m
Figure 11. Lateral wall movement plotted against wall height (comparison with case histories (see Bruce and Jewell, 1986; Clough and
O’Rourke, 1990; Durgunoglu et al., 2007a, 2007b; Ho et al., 1989; Shen et al., 1981; Stocker and Riedinger, 1990; Thompson and
Miller, 1990)
tors’ respect for the risks involved with this element of the works the Design and Performance of Earth Retaining Structures,
was the key to its success. Connell University, Ithaca, NY, USA, pp. 439–470.
Durgunoglu HT, Keskin HB, Kulac HF, Ikiz S and Karadayilar T
Locating the instrumentation within a metre of the wall face (2007a) Performance of soil nailed walls based on case
required the use of an experienced survey team, which enabled studies. Proceedings of the XIV European Conference on Soil
the soil nails to be placed such that they did not impact on the Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering, Madrid, Spain, pp.
inclinometers or crane piled foundations. The results of the 559–564.
monitoring indicate that the movement of the wall was within Durgunoglu HT, Keskin HB, Kulac HF, Ikiz S and Karadayilar T
those typically expected (Figure 11). (2007b) Performance of very deep temporary soil nailed
walls in Istanbul. Proceedings of the TC17 Ground
Ultimately, over 1500 soil nails, steel and GRP were installed in Improvement Workshop, XIV Conference of the International
this excavation. Ground movements were less than anticipated, Society for Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering,
with no damage occurring to adjacent structures, and the soil- Madrid, Spain.
nailing option reduced the programme time by 3 months, com- GEO (2008) Guide to Soil Nail Design and Construction.
pared with the original piled wall scheme. (Geoguide 7). Government of the Hong Kong Special
Admininstrative Region, Hong Kong.
Acknowledgements Ho CL, Ludwig HP, Fragaszy RJ and Chapman KR (1989) Field
The authors would like to acknowledge the Thiess and John performance of a soil nail system in loess. Proceedings of
Holland joint venture for their support in the preparation of this Foundation Engineering: Current Principles and Practices,
paper. Evanston, IL, USA, pp. 1281–1292.
Lazarte CA, Elias V, Espinoza D and Sabatini PJ (2003)
Geotechnical Engineering Circular No. 7: Soil Nail Walls.
REFERENCES Federal Highway Administration, US Department of
Bruce DA and Jewell RA (1986) Soil nailing: application and Transportation, Washington, DC, USA.
practice – Part 1. Ground Engineering 19(8): 10–15. Phear A, Dew C, Ozsoy B et al. (2005) Soil Nailing – Best
Bruce DA and Jewell RA (1987) Soil nailing: application and Practice Guidance. Ciria, London, UK, Ciria C637.
practice – Part 2. Ground Engineering 20(1): 21–33. Shen CK, Bang S, Romstad KM, Kulchin L and Denatale JS (1981)
BSI (1995) BS 8006:1995: Code of practice for strengthened/ Field measurements of an earth support system. Proceedings
reinforced soils and other fills. BSI, London, UK. of the American Society of Civil Engineers – Journal of the
BSI (2004) BS EN 1997-1:2004: Eurocode 7: Geotechnical design Geotechnical Engineering Division 107(12): 1625–1642.
– Part 1: General rules. BSI, London, UK. Standards Australia (2002) AS4678-2002: Australian standard –
Clough GW and O’Rourke TD (1990) Construction induced Earth-retaining structures. Standards Australia, Sydney,
movements of in situ walls. Proceedings of the Conference on Australia.
215
Geotechnical Engineering A soil-nailed excavation for the Brisbane
Volume 167 Issue GE2 Airport Link project, Australia
Bridges and Gudgin
Stocker MF and Riedinger G (1990) Bearing behaviour of nailed Proceedings of a Conference on the Design and
retaining structures. Proceedings of a Conference on the Performance of Earth Retaining Structures, Cornell
Design and Performance of Earth Retaining Structures, University, Ithaca, NY, USA, pp. 629–643.
Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA, pp. 612–628. TMR (2010) Drainage, Retaining Structures and Protective
Thompson SR and Miller IR (1990) Design, construction and Treatments. Queensland Government, Brisbane, Australia,
performance of a soil nailed wall in Seattle, Washington. MRTS03.
216