Please wait a minute...
Frontiers of Structural and Civil Engineering

ISSN 2095-2430

ISSN 2095-2449(Online)

CN 10-1023/X

Postal Subscription Code 80-968

2018 Impact Factor: 1.272

Front. Struct. Civ. Eng.    2019, Vol. 13 Issue (6) : 1415-1431    https://doi.org/10.1007/s11709-019-0565-z
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Seepage failure by heave in sheeted excavation pits constructed in stratified cohesionless soils
Serdar KOLTUK1(), Jie SONG2, Recep IYISAN3, Rafig AZZAM2
1. HPC AG, Stuttgart 70597,Germany
2. Department of Engineering Geology and Hydrogeology, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen D-52064, Germany
3. Civil Engineering Faculty, Istanbul Technical University, Istanbul 34646, Turkey
 Download: PDF(6278 KB)   HTML
 Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks
Abstract

In this study, experimental and numerical investigations are performed to clarify the seepage failure by heave in sheeted excavation pits in stratified cohesionless soils in which a relatively permeable soil layer (kupper) lies above a less permeable soil layer (klower) between excavation base and wall tip. It is shown that the evaluation of base stabilities of excavation pits against seepage failure by using Terzaghi and Peck’s approach leads to considerably lower critical potential differences than those obtained from the model tests. On the other hand, a relatively good agreement is achieved between the results of the model tests and the finite element (FE) analyses. Further investigations are performed by using axisymmetric excavation models with various dimensions and ground conditions, and a comparison between the results obtained from Terzaghi and Peck’s approach and finite element analyses is given.

Keywords seepage failure by heave      cohesionless stratified soil      model test      Terzaghi and Peck’s approach      FE analysis     
Corresponding Author(s): Serdar KOLTUK   
Just Accepted Date: 24 July 2019   Online First Date: 29 September 2019    Issue Date: 21 November 2019
 Cite this article:   
Serdar KOLTUK,Jie SONG,Recep IYISAN, et al. Seepage failure by heave in sheeted excavation pits constructed in stratified cohesionless soils[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2019, 13(6): 1415-1431.
 URL:  
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fsce/EN/10.1007/s11709-019-0565-z
https://academic.hep.com.cn/fsce/EN/Y2019/V13/I6/1415
Fig.1  Heave zones lifted by pore water pressure in cohesionless soils according to Terzaghi and Peck: (a) homogeneous soil; (b) upper layer is less permeable than lower layer (kupper <klower); (c) lower layer is less permeable than upper layer (klower <kupper).
Fig.2  Test apparatus.
Fig.3  Grain-size distribution curves of the test soils.
soil No. Cu Cc D50 (mm) emax emin ka) (m/s) φb) ψ e Dr
1 2.1 1.2 0.16 1.110 0.728 2.7×10−5 39.9° 3.5° 0.995 30%
2 4.0 1.4 0.40 0.784 0.471 6.1×10−5 44.3° 5.5° 0.652 42%
3.0×10−5 48.2° 13.5° 0.480 97%
3 2.0 0.9 0.80 0.822 0.570 2.5×10−4 43.9° 3.5° 0.738 33%
1.5×10−4 49.5° 14.5° 0.575 98%
4 10.5 0.3 1.30 0.656 0.388 3.5×10−5 42.6° 8.0° 0.501 58%
5 8.6 0.7 0.80 0.688 0.425 2.1×10−4 42.7° 7.0° 0.549 53%
Tab.1  Physical properties of the test soils
test
No.
embedment depth, D+d (cm) upper layer No. D of the upper layer (cm) Dr of the upper layer γsat of the upper layer (kN/m3) kupper/klower AHcollapse (exp) (cm) BHTerzaghi&Peck (cm) A/B
1 5.0 2 2.5 42% 19.6 2.3 20 16.2 1.23
2 5.0 2 2.5 97% 20.7 1.1 17.5 15.6 1.12
3 7.5 2 5.0 42% 19.6 2.3 31 (31.5) 23.1 1.34
4 7.5 2 5.0 97% 20.7 1.1 26 (26.5) 22.3 1.17
5 5.0 3 2.5 33% 19.1 9.3 24 16.8 1.43
6 5.0 3 2.5 98% 20.1 5.6 25.5 (26) 17.6 1.45
7 7.5 3 5.0 33% 19.1 9.3 37.5 25.4 1.48
8 7.5 3 5.0 98% 20.1 5.6 40.5 (40) 26.3 1.54
9 5.0 4 2.5 58% 20.6 1.3 25 (24.5) 15.9 1.57
10 7.5 4 5.0 58% 20.6 1.3 40 (39) 22.9 1.75
11 5.0 5 2.5 53% 20.3 7.8 26 (27) 17.9 1.45
12 7.5 5 5.0 53% 20.3 7.8 a) 27.3 a)
Tab.2  Test configurations and the corresponding potential differences in the limit state
Fig.4  Determination of ΔHTerzaghi&Peck for Test No. 10: (a) Dimensions of the test box and the test soils with developing potential loss; (b) theoretically determined average hydraulic head at the bottom of the failure zone of Terzaghi and Peck for ΔH = 1 cm.
Fig.5  Development of seepage failure by heave in Test No. 10: (a) ΔH <ΔHTerzaghi&Peck;(b) ΔH = ΔHTerzaghi&Peck; (c) ΔHTerzaghi&Peck<ΔH <ΔHcollapse (exp); (d) total collapse, ΔH = ΔHcollapse (exp).
Fig.6  Numerical simulation of the performed model tests with an embedment depth of 7.5 cm.
Fig.7  Effect of mesh density on the critical potential difference.
Fig.8  Effect of mesh density on the failure zone. (a) very coarse; (b) coarse; (c) medium; (d) fine; (e) very fine; (f) local refinement.
test No. upper layer No. kupper/klower ΔHcollapse(num) (cm) ΔHcollapse?(exp)?/ΔHcollapse?(num) ΔHcollapse?(exp)?/ΔHTerzaghi&Peck
1 2 2.3 18.1 1.1 1.23
2 2 1.1 17 1.03 1.12
3 2 2.3 26.2 1.18 1.34
4 2 1.1 24.2 1.07 1.17
5 3 9.3 19.9 1.21 1.43
6 3 5.6 20.9 1.22 1.45
7 3 9.3 29.7 1.26 1.48
8 3 5.6 31.5 1.29 1.54
9 4 1.3 17.2 1.45 1.57
10 4 1.3 24.4 1.64 1.75
11 5 7.8 20.9 1.24 1.45
12 5 7.8 31.8 a) a)
Tab.3  Results of the finite element analyses and their comparison with experimental results
Fig.9  Numerical simulation of Test No. 10: (a) deformed mesh in the numerical limit state; (b) failure zone.
Fig.10  Relatively wide circular-shaped excavation pit: (a) three-dimensional model; (b) equivalent axisymmetric model with dimensions.
Fig.11  Axisymmetric finite element model for the relatively wide circular-shaped excavation pit.
Fig.12  Effect of D on the critical potential diffences obtained from (a) the numerical analyses, (b) the approach of Terzaghi and Peck, (c) the model tests of Marsland (modified from Marsland [3]).
Fig.13  Ratios of ΔHcollapse?(num)?/ΔHTerzaghi&Peck depending on D/(D+d) and kupper/klower for the relatively wide circular-shaped excavation pits.
Fig.14  Incremental displacements for the relatively wide circular-shaped excavation pit with kupper?/klower = 10: (a) D/(D+d) = 0; (b) D/(D+d) = 0.125; (c) D/(D+d) = 0.5; (d) D/(D+d) = 0.875.
Fig.15  Effect of φ on ΔHcollapse (num) for the relatively wide circular-shaped excavation pit: (a) kupper/klower = 2.5; (b) kupper/klower = 10.
Fig.16  Effect of φupper?/φloweron ΔHcollapse (num) for the relatively wide circular-shaped excavation pit: (a) kupper/klower = 2.5; (b) kupper/klower = 10.
Fig.17  Relatively narrow axisymmetric numerical model.
Fig.18  Ratios of ΔHcollapse?(num)?/ΔHTerzaghi&Peck depending on D/(D+d) and kupper/klower for the relatively narrow circular-shaped excavation pit.
Fig.19  Incremental displacements for the relatively narrow circular-shaped excavation pit with kupper?/klower = 10: (a) D/(D+d) = 0; (b) D/(D+d) = 0.125; (c) D/(D+d) = 0.5; (d) D/(D+d) = 0.875.
Fig.20  Relatively narrow circular-shaped excavation pit with D/(D+d) = 0.5 and kupper?/klower = 10: (a) Incremental displacements; (b) deformed mesh.
1 L F Harza. Uplift and seepage under dams on sand. Transactions of the American Society of Civil Engineers, 1935, 100: 1352–1385
2 K Terzaghi, R B Peck. Soil Mechanics in Engineering Practice. New York: John Wiley & Sons., 1948
3 A Marsland. Model experiments to study the influence of seepage on the stability of a sheeted excavation in sand. Geotechnique, 1953, 3(6): 223–241
https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.1953.3.6.223
4 R N Davidenkoff. Seepage under water-retaining structures . Düsseldorf: Werner Verlag, 1970 (in German)
5 T Tanaka, A Verruijt. Seepage failure of sand behind sheet piles. The mechanism and practical approach to analyse. Journal of the Japanesse Geotechnical Society of Soils and Foundations, 1999, 39(3): 27–35
https://doi.org/10.3208/sandf.39.3_27
6 B Aulbach, M Ziegler. Simplified design of excavation support and shafts for safety against hydraulic heave. Geomechanics and Tunnelling, 2013, 6(4): 362–374
https://doi.org/10.1002/geot.201300031
7 B Aulbach, M Ziegler. Hydraulic heave-design charts and design formula for the required embedded length. Engineering Structures and Technologies, 2014, 6(1): 1–6
https://doi.org/10.3846/2029882X.2014.957898
8 S Koltuk, T M Fernandez-Steeger, R Azzam. Investigations on hydraulic heave in foundation pits excavated in homogeneous soils. Grundwasser, 2016, 21(3): 203–215 (in German)
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00767-015-0309-5
9 S Koltuk, J Song, T M Fernandez-Steeger, R Azzam. Effect of particle-size distributions of non-cohesive homogeneous soils on seepage failure. Grundwasser, 2018, 23(3): 245–256 (in German)
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00767-018-0395-2
10 F Cai, K Ugai, C Takahashi, H Nakamura, I Okaki. Seepage analysis of two case histories of piping induced by excavations in cohesionless soils. In: The First International Conference on Construction IT. Beijing: ICCI, 2004
11 T Tanaka, R Tachimura, S Kusumi, S Nagai, K Inoue. Experimantal findings of 3D seepage failure of soil within a cofferdam. Japanese Geotechnical Society Special Publication, 2016, 2: 1608–1613
12 T Rabczuk, T Belytschko. A three-dimensional large deformation meshfree method for arbitrary evolving cracks. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2007, 196(29–30): 2777–2799
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2006.06.020
13 T Rabczuk, G Zi, S Bordas, H Nguyen-Xuan. A simple and robust three-dimensional cracking-particle method without enrichment. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2010, 199(37–40): 2437–2455
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2010.03.031
14 T Rabczuk, S Bordas, G Zi. On three-dimensional modelling of crack growth using partition of unity methods. Computers & Structures, 2010, 88(23–24): 1391–1411
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruc.2008.08.010
15 P Areias, M A Msekh, T Rabczuk. Damage and fracture algorithm using the screened Poisson equation and local remeshing. Engineering Fracture Mechanics, 2016, 158: 116–143
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfracmech.2015.10.042
16 P Areias, T Rabczuk. Steiner-point free edge cutting of tetrahedral meshes with applications in fracture. Finite Elements in Analysis and Design, 2017, 132: 27–41
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.finel.2017.05.001
17 P Areias, J Reinoso, P P Camanho, J Cesar de Sa, T Rabczuk. Effective 2D and 3D crack propagation with local mesh refinement and the screened Poisson equation. Engineering Fracture Mechanics, 2018, 189: 339–360
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfracmech.2017.11.017
18 H Ren, X Zhuang, Y Cai, T Rabczuk. Dual-horizon peridynamics. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 2016, 108(12): 1451–1476
https://doi.org/10.1002/nme.5257
19 H Ren, X Zhuang, T Rabczuk. Dual-horizon peridynamics: A stable solution to varying horizons. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2017, 318: 762–782
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2016.12.031
20 D Gawin, F Pesavento, B A Schrefler. Hygro-thermo-chemo-mechanical modelling of concrete at early ages and beyond. Part I: hydration and hygro-thermal phenomena. International Journal for Numerical Methods in Engineering, 2006, 67(3): 299–331
https://doi.org/10.1002/nme.1615
21 F Pesavento, D Gawin, M Wyrzykowski, B A Schrefler, L Simoni. Modeling alkali-silica reaction in non-isothermal, partially saturated cement based materials. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2012, 225–228: 95–115
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2012.02.019
22 Y Zhang, M Zeiml, C Pichler, R Lackner. Model-based risk assessment of concrete spalling in tunnel linings under fire loading. Engineering Structures, 2014, 77: 207–215
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2014.02.033
23 Y Zhang, M Zeiml, M Maier, Y Yuan, R Lackner. Fast assessing spalling risk of tunnel linings under RABT fire: From a coupled thermo-hydro-chemo-mechanical model towards an estimation method. Engineering Structures, 2017, 142: 1–19
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engstruct.2017.03.068
24 X Zhuang, R Huang, C Liang, T Rabczuk. A coupled thermo-hydro-mechanical model of jointed hard rock for compressed air energy storage. Mathematical Problems in Engineering, 2014, 2014: 1–11
https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/179169
25 C de Lyra Nogueira, R F de Azevedo, J G Zornberg. Coupled analyses of excavations in saturated soil. International Journal of Geomechanics, 2009, 9(2): 73–81
https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)1532-3641(2009)9:2(73)
26 J P Hsi, J C Small. Analysis of excavation in an elastro-plastic soil involving drawdown of the water table. Computers and Geotechnics, 1992, 13(1): 1–19
https://doi.org/10.1016/0266-352X(92)90008-H
27 W Zhang, K Maeda, H Saito, Z Li, Y Huang. Numerical analysis on seepage failures of dike due to water level-up and rainfall using a water-soil-coupled smoothed particle hydrodynamics model. Acta Geotechnica, 2016, 11(6): 1401–1418
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11440-016-0488-y
28 K M Hamdia, H Ghasemi, X Zhuang, N Alajlan, T Rabczuk. Sensitivity and uncertainty analysis for flexoelectric nanostructures. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 2018, 337: 95–109
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2018.03.016
29 K M Hamdia, M Silani, X Zhuang, P He, T Rabczuk. Stochastic analysis of the fracture toughness of polymeric nanoparticle composites using polynomial chaos expansions. International Journal of Fracture, 2017, 206(2): 215–227
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10704-017-0210-6
30 N Vu-Bac, T Lahmer, X Zhuang, T Nguyen-Thoi, T Rabczuk. A software framework for probabilistic sensitivity analysis for computationally expensive models. Advances in Engineering Software, 2016, 100: 19–31
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advengsoft.2016.06.005
31 N Benmebarek, S Benmebarek, R Kastner. Seepage failure of sand within a cofferdam. Computers and Geotechnics, 2005, 32(4): 264–273
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compgeo.2005.03.001
32 N Benmebarek, A Bensmaine, A Benmebarek, L Belounar. Critical hydraulic head loss inducing failure of a cofferdam embedded in horizontal sandy ground. Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, 2014, 51(4): 173–180
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11204-014-9274-8
33 T Kodaka, F Oka, R Morimoto. Seepage failure analysis of sandy ground using a liquefaction analysis method based on finite deformation theory. Computational Mechanics-New Frontiers for New Millennium, 2001, 1: 387–392
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-043981-5.50060-2
34 K Okajima, T Tanaka. Evaluation of analyses of downstream piping of weirs by model experiments and elastro-plastic FEM. In: The Fourth International Conference on Scour and Erosion. Tokyo, 2008
35 B Odenwald, O Stelzer. Verification against hydraulic heave by using FEM based on EC7. Hamburg: Hamburg University of Technology, 2013
36 T Tanaka, E Toyokuni. Seepage-failure experiments on multi-layered sand columns. Effects of flow conditions and residual effective stress on seepage-failure phenomena. Soil and Foundation, 1991, 31(4): 13–36
https://doi.org/10.3208/sandf1972.31.4_13
37 P Schober, C Boley. The influence of a surcharge filter on hydraulic failure. Geotechnik, 2014, 37(4): 250–258 (in German)
https://doi.org/10.1002/gete.201400012
38 EAU. Recommendations of the Committee for Waterfront Structures, Harbours and Waterways. Berlin: Ernst & Sohn-Wiley, 2012
39 R B J Brinkgreve, S Kumarswamy, W M Swolfs. Plaxis 2D Manuals. Delft: Plaxis bv, 2017
40 D Tan, S K Sarma. Finite element verification of an enhanced limit equilibrium method for slope analysis. Geotechnique, 2008, 58(6): 481–487
https://doi.org/10.1680/geot.2008.58.6.481
41 N D Marachi, J M Duncan, C K Chan, H B Seed. Laboratory shear strength of soil. ASTM Special Technical Publication, 1981, STP740: 294–302
[1] Nabarun DEY, Aniruddha SENGUPTA. Effect of a less permeable stronger soil layer on the stability of non-homogeneous unsaturated slopes[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2020, 14(6): 1462-1475.
[2] Jianan QI, Yuqing HU, Jingquan WANG, Wenchao LI. Behavior and strength of headed stud shear connectors in ultra-high performance concrete of composite bridges[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2019, 13(5): 1138-1149.
[3] Xin LIANG,Qian-gong CHENG,Jiu-jiang WU,Jian-ming CHEN. Model test of the group piles foundation of a high-speed railway bridge in mined-out area[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2016, 10(4): 488-498.
[4] Zhiming ZHAO, Xihua WANG. Evaluation of potential failure of rock slope at the left abutment of Jinsha River Bridge by model test and numerical method[J]. Front Struc Civil Eng, 2013, 7(3): 332-340.
[5] Xi CHEN, Wei XU. Parametric sensitivity analysis of cellular diaphragm wall[J]. Front Struc Civil Eng, 2012, 6(4): 358-364.
[6] Toshifumi MUKUNOKI, Naoko KUMANO, Jun OTANI. Image analysis of soil failure on defective underground pipe due to cyclic water supply and drainage using X-ray CT[J]. Front Struc Civil Eng, 2012, 6(2): 85-100.
[7] Hehua ZHU, Qianwei XU, Wenqi DING, Feng HUANG. Experimental study on the progressive failure and its anchoring effect of weak-broken rock vertical slope[J]. Front Arch Civil Eng Chin, 2011, 5(2): 208-224.
[8] Chunlin DING , Xiaohong MENG , . Centrifuge model test and field measurement analysis for foundation pit with confined water[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2009, 3(3): 299-304.
[9] ZHU Hehua, LIAO Shaoming, XU Qianwei, ZHENG Qizhen. Experimental study on working parameters of earth pressure balance shield machine tunneling in soft ground[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2008, 2(4): 350-358.
[10] ZHANG Feng, OKAWA Katsunori, KIMURA Makoto. Centrifuge model test on dynamic behavior of group-pile foundation with inclined piles and its numerical simulation[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2008, 2(3): 233-241.
[11] TONG Lewei, GU Min, CHEN Yiyi, ZHOU Liying, SUN Jiandong, CHEN Yangji, LIN Yingru, LIN Gao. Strength of tubular welded joints of roof trusses in Shanghai Qizhong Tennis Center[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2008, 2(1): 30-36.
[12] JIANG Guanlu, LIU Xianfeng, ZHANG Jianwen, ZHAO Ruyi. Shaking table test of composite foundation reinforcement of saturated silty soil for high speed railway[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2007, 1(3): 353-360.
[13] SONG An, SUN Jinliang, LU Hai, WANG Yi′an. Model test study for ice force on the bank-head of the lead-navigating bank[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2007, 1(2): 222-228.
[14] YANG Linde, ZHENG Yonglai, ZHANG Dongliang, JI Qianqian, YANG Chao. Design of a shaking table test box for a subway station structure in soft soil[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2007, 1(2): 194-197.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed