Eleventh Southeast Asian Geotechnical Conference, 4-8 May, 1993, Singapore

New Procedure for Predicting Basal Heave Stability

ATCGOH Swinburne University of Technology, Australia

SYNOPSIS The basal stability of braced excavations systems in soft clay has been investigated using the finite element
method. The study indicates that the important factors affecting basal stability are the thickness of the clay layer beneath the
bottom of the excavation, the depth ofthe wall below the bottom of the excavation, the width/height ratio of the excavation and
the stiffness of the wall. Simple design charts have been developed for predicting the basal heave stability.

INTRODUCTION
B

Braced and anchored retaining wall systems are commonly

used to maintain the stabilitY. of excavations in soft clay
soils, fox: example in the construction of subways, open-cut H
tunnels and basements of multi-storey buildings. Excessive

r
settlement and lateral displacements have been known to
occur with these types of excavations. The magnitude of
, , , ,
these displacements have been shown to be influenced by the
basal stability of the excavation (Mana and Clough, 1981; T
Wong and Broms, 1989). These lateral displacements
generally increase rapidly when the factor of safety against , , , , , , , , , ,
Rigid stratum
basal heave falls below 1.5 (Clough and O'Rourke, 1990). It
is therefore important that this factor of safety be accurately
predicted. Figure 1 Excavation geometry

In this paper the basal stability of braced excavation

systems in soft clays is investigated. Firstly, a brief overview Terzaghi's method, the factor of safety (FS) is calculated
of current methods of predicting the factor of safety and the from limit equilibrium analysis as
major limitations of these methods is presented. A simple
technique based on the finite element method which FS = 5.7Cu (1)
H(y--<:u/0.7B)
overcomes many of these limitations is then described. The
major factors influencing the basal heave stability are then
examined using this method through a series of parametric where cu is the undrained shear strength of the clay and y is
studies. Finally, a simple design procedure to evaluate basal the total unit weight of the clay. ForT< 0.7B, the term 0.7B
heave stability is proposed. in equation (1) is replaced by T.

For deep excavations with HIB greater than one, Bjerrum

CURRENT DESIGN METHODS
A review of the literature and undergraduate texts indicate
that the theoretical formulations of Terzaghi (1943) and
Bjerrum and Bide (1956) still remain the two fundamental
approaches for evaluating the basal heave stability.
Terzaghi's method is used for shallow or wide excavations
where HIB as illustrated in Figure 1 is less than one. In
and Bide (1956) proposed the following formulation.
FS = CuNc (2)
yH
where N <is a function of the length of the excavation and the
ratio of HIB. For clay layers of limited depth (T < 0.7B)
modified values ofN< based on Button (1953) are commonly
used (e.g. NAVFAC 1982).

709
 These methods were primarily developed for flexible
braced sheet pile walls, before the introduction of more
.sophisticated construction techniques such as diaphragm
walls and secant piles. As these "stiffer" retaining walls can
in many cases lead to smaller lateral wall movements, it is
conceivable that the reduced soil movements and strains
associated with these wall types would lead to larger factors
of safety against basal heave.
While it is generally recognised that an appreciable
increase in basal stability (as well as reductions in
deformations) occurs if the sheet pile wall is driven into the
hard stratum, there is currently no generally accepted
analytical method to assess the effects of increasing the
depth of embedment of the retaining wall or penetrating the
wall into the hard stratum. In addition, the procedures for
modifying the equations for clay layers of limited depth
described earlier, appear to give conservative estimates of
factors of safety (Goh 1990).
NODAL DISPLACEMENT METHOD
In a recent publication, Goh (1990) proposed a simple and
rational method for estimating basal stability using the finite
element method. The method takes into consideration the
stiffuess of the wall and the depth of penetration of the wall
below the bottom of the excavation. The safety factor
obtained by this method reflects both safety against shear
failure and large deformation.
The method, termed the "Nodal Displacement Method
(NDM)", essentially involves performing separate finite
element analyses, each with the strength parameter cu for
each soil material incrementally modified by multiplying
with a common factor, the "strength modification factor (N)".
The undrained elastic modulus of the soil (EJ is multiplied
by the same factor in order to maintain a constant Ejcu for
the clay. The factor of safety (FS) can then be obtained in
terms of N when the modified strength parameters are
associated with incipient failure. The displacements of
selected nodal points provide a means of predicting this
situation. The value of 1/N for which the nodal
displacements indicate a rapid increase in the deformation or
where the slope of the curve first reaches a steady minimum
value (Azam et al. 1991) is taken as the factor of safety, FS.
FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSES
Numerical Procedure
Analyses were carried out using a plane-strain finite element
program. The program essentially followed the "initial
stress" finite element formulations ofNayak and Zienkiewicz
(1972). Eight noded isoparametric elements with reduced
integration were used to model the soil and wall elements.
710
The soil was modelled as linear elastic-perfectly plastic with
a Mohr-Coulomb yield surface and the wall was assumed to
behave linear elastically. The struts were modelled using
linear elastic bar elements. Short term undrained conditions
were considered and the clay was assumed to be saturated
and incompressible with a Poisson's ratio of 0.49. The finite
element mesh consisted of 169 elements and 560 nodes. The
nodes representing the hard stratum (i.e. at the bottom of the
mesh) were assumed to be completely restrained from
movement.
In the analyses, the stage-by-stage excavation of the soil
and the installation of the struts were simulated. Excavation
was simulated by removing the row of elements in front of
the wall and applying nodal forces along the boundary
equivalent to the insitu soil stresses. The analyses were
carried out in six increments, with the excavation of the
fourth row of elements onwards being carried out in five
sub-increments. The norm of displacement changes criterion
(Nayak and Zienkiewicz 1972) was used to ensure sufficient
accuracy of the solution before the iterative process is
terminated. Convergence was assumed when the change in
nodal displacements, non-dimensionalised with respect to the
largest absolute value, nowhere exceeded 0.1 %.
Examples of Analyses
Figure 2 shows the results of two typical analyses. The
excavation is 24 m wide and the final depth of excavation
(H) is 9 m. Three levels of struts at depths of 0, 3 and 6 m
were assumed. The stiffuess (EI) of the sheet pile was 45
MNm2 • The clay properties were y = 16 kN/m3, cu = 35 kPa
and Ejcu = 250. A more distinct failure curve was obtained
for the case of the soft clay extending to a considerable depth
(T = 80 m). The asymptotic value of the nodal displacement
curve is approximately 1.54. Note that the depth to bedrock
(T) is measured from the bottom of the final excavation
level. For the clay of limited depth (T = 9 m), the presence of
the bedrock near the bottom of the excavation significantly
influenced the soil displacements and ultimate failure
condition. The slope of the curve first reaches a steady
minimum value at approximately 1/N = 2.4.
PARAMETRIC STUDIES
A series of parametric studies were carried out for the 9 m
deep excavation. Table 1 lists the parameters used. The
primary variables are the wall stiffuess (EI), the width of
excavation (B), the thickness ot the clay layer beneath the
bottom of the excavation (T) and the depth of embedment of
the wall beneath the base of the excavation (D). Only wide
excavations with HIB < 1 were considered. Note that when
the wall penetrates into the bedrock (i.e. for D/T = 1), the
wall is assumed to be completely restrained from movement
at the base. In all, a total of 120 combinations of the
variables were studied. To obtain the FS for any particular
 H•9m Table 1 Summary of parameters
3
Value

35
2.5 250
16
1.0

-z I stifliless EI (MNm') 45, 360

(m) 9
..... (m) 15, 24, 36
I'B 0.375,0.67,1,1.25,3.33
1.5 8=24 T=80 0=9 0.25,0.5,0.75,1

1
Sheet Pile Wall

Figure 3 shows a typical plot of the effects of varying the

0.5 width (B) of the excavation with T/B = 1.25. The general
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 trend is for FS to diminish with increasing B. The effects of
Nodal Disp. I B the thickness of the clay layer beneath the bottom of the
excavation forB= 36m and B =24m is shown in Figure 4.
The results suggest that the presence of the bedrock close to
Figure 2 Typical nodal displacement plots
the base of the excavation increases the FS. This is because
the size of the yielding zone is affected, since the
displacement of the soil beneath and around the excavation is
T I B = 1.25 restrained when the rigid stratum is close to the base of the
2 excavation. It should be noted that similar trends are also
observed for footings with bedrock near the base of the
footings (Azam et al. 1991) Also shown in Figure 4 for
1.9 comparison, are the corre~ponding FS calculated using
Terzaghi's method and the NAVFAC (1982) method. The
results suggest that both methods may lead to overly
conservative factors of safety particularly for T/B less than
~ 1.8
w DIT = 0.25 0.67. For example, forB = 24m and D!f = 0.25, the factor
LL -e- of safety obtained by Terzaghi's method and the NAVFAC
en
LL
DIT = 1.0
""""*--
method are respectively approximately 26% and 35% smaller
1.7 than the NDM factor of safety.

The FS is plotted against the. D!T ratio in Figure 5 to

1.6 demonstrate the effect of the wall embedment depth on the
factor of safety for the three excavation widths analysed. The
trend is for FS to increase with increasing Dff and
1.5 decreasing B. These increases in FS are more pronounced for
1 2 3 4 5 T/B less than unity. This suggests that for clay extending to a
considerable depth below the base of the excavation (i.e. for
B/H large T), the effects of increasing the depth of embedment of
the wall will result in only marginal increases in FS.

Figure 3 Effect of B
Diaphragm Wall

The use of a much stiffer diaphragm wall does improve the

configuration involved a rmmmum of 10 separate finite stability of the excavation as shown in Figure 6. Once again,
element analyses. The results of the analyses with a sheet the general trend is for FS to increase with increasing D!f
pile wall (EI = 45 MNm2) are presented first, followed by the and decreasing B. For example. forB = 24 m, T = 24 m and
analyses assuming a diaphragm wall (EI = 360 MNm2). D!T = 0.75, the use of the diaphragm wall in place of the

711
 Figure 4 Effect ofT
sheet pile wall increased the FS by approximately 20%.
However, the increases in FS were only marginal for the
large clay layer (T = 80 m), even when orr = 1. The increase
in FS as D increases is likely to be because the wall stiffuess
reduces the tendency of the clay adjacent to the base of the
excavation to be displaced toward the excavation. As stated
earlier, computations of FS using conventional methods are
unable to take into consideration the stiffuess of the wall and
could lead to very conservative results. For example, forB =
24m, T =24m and Drr = 0.75, the NDM prediction forFS
is approximately 27% and 44% larger than the FS predicted
by the Terzaghi and NAVFAC methods respectively.
712
PROPOSED DESIGN PROCEDURE
On the basis of these NDM results, a simple design
procedure has been developed for predicting basal stability.
The method takes into account the width of the excavation,
the thickness of the clay below the base of the excavation,
the depth of the wall below the bottom of the excavation and
the stiffuess of the wall. The methodology is essentially a
modification of the Bjerrum and Eide (1956) equation and
the factor of safety is expressed in the following form
(3)
 8•24m. T•M)m
7.4

l•he...:ile d~agm I 7.2

2.5
~ 8.8
w
u. ~ 6.8
CJ)
u. 2
6.4

6.2

1.5
0.2 0.4 0.8 O.B 5.8
0.2 0.5 0.8 0.7
0/T H/8
(a)

1.5
B•24m, T•:Mm
1.4

I sh~ie d~agm I 1.3

~ 2.5 lit 1.2

w
u.
1.1
CJ)
u.

-------
2
1
0 1.5 2.5 3.5
'T/B
1.5 "" (b)
0.2 0.4 0.8 O.B 1.3

0/T

--
1.2

J.lu 1.1
T/B = 0.67
B•24rn, T•11m T/B• 1

T/8 >• 1.25

'!... 0.0 0.76
D/T
~ 2.5
(c)
w
u.
CJ)
u. 2

1.5oL.2-----o-'-.4----~o.s_____o_.,..e_ _ _ ___,

0/T
sheetplle wall
0
·8.2io,------.,';-.-----~:,.,_,::-.-------__j
D/T
(d)

Figure 6 Effect of wall stiffness

Figure 7 Proposed design charts

where Nh is the modified bearing capacity factor, llt is the

clay thickness modification factor, lld is the wall embedment • the thickness of the clay layer beneath the bottom of the
modification factor and Jlw is the wall stiffness modification excavation
factor. These factors are illustrated in Figure 7. As mentioned
earlier, it should be noted that only wide excavations with • the depth of the wall below the bottom of the
HIB < 1 have been considered in all the NDM analyses. excavation

A comparison of FS using equation (3) and the actual • the width/height ratio of the excavation
NDM finite element results is shown in Figure 8. The good
agreement between the results is very encouraging. • the stiffness of the wall

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS The results suggest that for T/B > 1, increasing the wall
depth (D) and/or increasing the wall stiffness (EI} will only
The finite element studies indicate that the important factors result in marginal increases in basal stability. On the other
affecting basal stability are : hand, when T/B is small, increasing the wall depth (D)

713
 ACKNOWLEDGMENT

The author is grateful for the assistance of Ken Wright and

4 Martin Gaedke in performing some of the preliminary
numerical analyses.
"'C
~
:0
e
a.
3 REFERENCES
VJ Azam, G., Hsieh, C.W. and Wang, M.C. (1991).
LL

2
Performance of strip footing on stratified soil deposit with
void. Journal of Geotechnical Engineering Division, ASCE,
117 (5), 753-772.

Bjerrurn, L. and Eide, 0. (1956). Stability of strutted

2 3
excavations in clay. Geotechnique, 6 (1), 32-47.
FS FEM
Button, S. (1953). The bearing capacity of footings on a two
layer cohesive subsoil. Proc. 3rd Int. Conf. on Soil
Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, 1, 332-335.

Clough, G.W and O'Rourke, T.D. (1990). Construction

4 induced movements of insitu walls. ASCE Spec. Conf. on
Design and Performance of Earth Retaining Structures,
~ Cornell University, 439-470
tS
:0
a.
e3 Gob, A.T.C. (1990). Assessment of basal stability for braced
excavation systems using the finite element method.
VJ
LL Computers and Geotechnics, 10, 325-338.
2
Mana, I.A. and Clough, G.W. (1981). Prediction of
movements for braced cuts in clay. Journal of Geotechnical
Engineering Division, ASCE, 107 (6), 759-777.
2 3 4 5
FS FEM NAVFAC Design Manual DM7.2 (1982). Foundations and
earth structures. Dept. of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engrg.
Comm., Alexandria, Va.
Figure 8 Comparison of results
Nayak, G.C. and Zienkiewicz, O.C. (1972). Elasto-plastic
stress analysis. A generalisation of various constitutive
and/or increasing the wall stiffness (EI) can significantly relations including strain-softening. Int. Jnl. of Numerical
increase the basal stability. The NDM results indicate that methods in Engineering, 5 (1), 113-135.
current analytical techniques can lead to conservative
estimates of basal heave stability. Terzaghi, K. (1943). Theoretical soil mechanics. John Wiley
& Sons, Inc., New York.
A simple design procedure for estimating basal heave
stability of braced excavation systems has been proposed. Wong, K.S. and Broms, B.B. (1989). Lateral wall deflections
The method is able to take into consideration the width of the of braced excavations in clay. Journal of Geotechnical
excavation, the thickness of the clay stratum beneath the Engineering Division, ASCE, 11,5 (6), 853-870.
bottom of the excavation, the depth of embedment of the
wall, and the stiffness of the wall. However, the analyses
were performed only for a range of soil, wall and layer
characteristics. Further efforts are currently being carried out
to expand the range of conditions.

714