CGN 4905/6905

Ground Modification Design

HW # 4 04/02/2021 Paola Castillo Page 1 of 7

1 Write about the Soil Anchor method of soil modification. Summarize the method and its main application, advantages, and
disadvantages. Compare it with Soil Nail and explain when you would use one or another.

On the surface, Soil Nailing and Soil Anchoring seem to be the same, however, this is far from the reality. The Soil Anchor Method
consists of cement grouted prestressed tendons as a structural element installed in soil or rock which transmits and applied load of a
structure onto a competent, load-bearing soil. The grout is a Portland cement-based mixture that provides load transfer from the tendon
to the ground and corrosion protection for the tendon. Anchors are installed in grout filled drill holes. The basic components of a ground
anchor are the following: (1) Anchorage; (2) Free stressing (unbonded) length; (3) Bond length. These components are shown in Figure
1:

Figure 1. Anchor components and types.

Source: https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/engineering/geotech/pubs/if99015.pdf

In the US, ground anchors were first used for temporary support of excavation systems, and its use as permanent support in public
sector projects became common in 1970’s. Three main anchor types are used in the US (See Figure 1): (1) Straight shaft gravity-grouted
ground anchors (Type A); (2) Straight shaft pressure-grouted ground anchors (Type B); (3) Post-grouted ground anchors (Type C), and
(4) Underreamed anchor (Type D). Soil and rock anchors can be drilled by different methods such as: rotary, percussion,
rotary/percussive, or auger drilling. Specific procedures and methods used to drill the ground anchors holes are determined by the
contractor based on the project specifications and characteristics.

• Anchors Type A: Are typically installed in rock and very stiff to hard cohesive soil employing rotary drilling or hollow-stem auger
methods. The borehole may be cased or uncased depending on its stability.
• Anchors Type B: Are appropriate for coarse granular soils and weak fissured rock, as well as fine grained cohesionless soils.
With this type of anchor, grout is injected into the bond zone under pressures greater than 0.35 MPa. The borehole is typically
drilled using a hollow stem auger or using rotary techniques with drill casings.
• Anchors Type C: Use delayed multiple grout injections to enlarge the grout body of straight shafted gravity grouted ground
anchors. Each injection is separated by one or two days. Post grouting is accomplished through a sealed grout tube installed
with the tendon
• Anchors Type D: Consist of tremie grouted boreholes that include a series of underreams. Can be used in firm to hard cohesive
deposits. In addition to resistance through side shear, resistance may also be mobilized through end bearing. Care must be
taken to form and clean the underreams.

The main advantages of using Soil Anchors as a soil modification technique are the following:

• Versatile form of earth retention.

• High loads can be obtained in relatively poor ground conditions.
• Driven anchors can be used in a variety of soil conditions.
• Soil Anchors can increase the useful life of a project since they are resistant to corrosion and to alkalis; and can also decrease
the need for maintenance as well as the life-cycle costs.
• Can produce valuable savings in program and budget.

The use of anchored walls instead of concrete gravity retaining walls in the support of a highway, offers several advantages, such as:

• Reduced construction time and reduced right-of-way (ROW) acquisition.

 CGN 4905/6905
Ground Modification Design
HW # 4 04/02/2021 Paola Castillo Page 2 of 7

• Unobstructed workspace for excavations

• Ability to withstand relatively large horizontal wall pressures without requiring a significant increase in wall cross section.
• Elimination of the need to provide temporary excavation support since an anchored wall can be incorporated into the
permanent structure.
• Elimination of need for select backfill.
• Elimination of need for deep foundation support.

Between the disadvantages of using soil anchors as a soil modification technique there are found:

• Designing and constructing soil anchors require special equipment and experienced professional engineers.
• Difficulty of applying soil anchors in weak soil and at great depths.
• Anchor execution may possibly affect the land of surrounding construction works

Soil Nails and Soil Anchors are similar in many ways in the sense that both create minimal disturbance to surrounding soils or structures
and can be installed easily and used for temporary support or long-term applications. The main difference is that Soil Nails are not
pretensioned and develop tension as the ground deforms laterally in response to ongoing excavation, and Soil Anchors are pretensioned.
Soil Nails only take passive force after the deformation of soil body. The number of Soil Anchors is usually limited while Soil Nails are
arranged in dense, do not need strict accuracy and strict quality in the construction as anchor.

In Figure 2, it is included the areas of application of Soil Anchors:

Figure 2. Areas of Application

Source: Anchoring systems for geotechnical engineering, Freyssinet.
 CGN 4905/6905
Ground Modification Design
HW # 4 04/02/2021 Paola Castillo Page 3 of 7

Soil Anchors are used for shallow shoring and support applications, and Soil Nails are used in steep slope excavations and stabilization
and are a deep foundation solution, especially compared to Soil Anchors.

REFERENCES
The information stated previously was based on:

• Anchoring systems for geotechnical engineering, Freyssinet.

• GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING CIRCULAR NO. 4, Federal Highway Administration – Ground Anchors and Anchored
Systems.
• Juran, E. & Elias, V. GROUND ANCHORS AND SOIL NAILS IN RETAINING STRUCTURES

2 Review the files “Stability of a Mechanically Stabilized Earth Wall”, “Reinforcement with Geosynthetics”, “Reinforcement with Soil
Nails” and “Reinforcement wit Anchors” from the GeoStudio folder in canvas. Solve the examples from each one of the PDFs using
Slope/W. Turn in a printout of the output file in the landscape format.

2.1 Stability of a Mechanically Stabilized Earth Wall (MSE Wall)

Figure 3. Sliding Analysis Obtained Vs. Result in PDF.

Figure 4. Circular Slip Surface Analysis Obtained Vs. Result in PDF.

 CGN 4905/6905
Ground Modification Design
HW # 4 04/02/2021 Paola Castillo Page 4 of 7

Figure 5. Compound F o S Dependent Analysis Obtained Vs. Result in PDF.

2.2 Reinforcement with Geosynthetics

Figure 6. Base Case Analysis Obtained Vs. Result in PDF.

Figure 7. F o S Dependent Analysis Obtained Vs. Result in PDF.

 CGN 4905/6905
Ground Modification Design
HW # 4 04/02/2021 Paola Castillo Page 5 of 7

Figure 8. Overburden Pressure Analysis Obtained Vs. Result in PDF.

2.3 Reinforcement with Soil Nails

Figure 9. Distributed load Analysis Obtained Vs. Result in PDF.

Figure 10. F o S Dependent Analysis Obtained Vs. Result in PDF.

 CGN 4905/6905
Ground Modification Design
HW # 4 04/02/2021 Paola Castillo Page 6 of 7

Figure 11. No connection to the face Analysis Obtained Vs. Result in PDF.

2.4 Reinforcement wit Anchors

Figure 12. Distributed Load Analysis Obtained Vs. Result in PDF.

Figure 13. Anchor Forces Concentrated Analysis Obtained Vs. Result in PDF.
 CGN 4905/6905
Ground Modification Design
HW # 4 04/02/2021 Paola Castillo Page 7 of 7

Figure 14. F o S Dependent Analysis Obtained Vs. Result in PDF.

Figure 15. Shear Force in Anchors Analysis Obtained Vs. Result in PDF.

As shown in all the figures, the safety factors obtained following the logic of the PDFs were similar to those included in the PDFs,
however, in some cases decimal digits of safety factors may vary due to the convergence tolerance determined.