INTERNATIONAL SOCIETY FOR

SOIL MECHANICS AND

GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING

This paper was downloaded from the Online Library of

the International Society for Soil Mechanics and
Geotechnical Engineering (ISSMGE). The library is
available here:

https://www.issmge.org/publications/online-library

This is an open-access database that archives thousands

of papers published under the Auspices of the ISSMGE and
maintained by the Innovation and Development
Committee of ISSMGE.

The paper was published in the proceedings of the 12th

Australia New Zealand Conference on Geomechanics and
was edited by Graham Ramsey. The conference was held
in Wellington, New Zealand, 22-25 February 2015.
 Retaining wall analysis in weak rock – a case study review
S. Maqbool1,MIEAust, CPEng, D. Chong1 and M. Broise1
1
Douglas Partners, Pty Ltd, P.O. Box 5051, South Melbourne VIC 3205; PH (+61 - 3 - 9673 - 3500; FAX (+61 - 3
9673 - 3599; email: Sajjad.maqbool@douglaspartners.com.au

ABSTRACT

A retaining wall of about 18 m height was designed for the new Royal Children’s Hospital (RCH) in
Melbourne. For the lateral retention system, a conventional bored pile and cable ground anchor
combination was adopted over the full retained height to minimise adverse effects on an adjacent
high-value, very movement sensitive, operational research facility.
The movement of the wall was observed and recorded at different stages of excavation including after
completion of full excavation. Minor cracks were observed beneath the anchor head plates of some of
the piles indicating relaxation in prestress forces applied to each ground anchor.
In order to estimate the amount of relaxation, a continuum elasto-plastic finite element model
(PLAXIS) was employed. This method employs basic strength and stiffness parameters with resulting
earth pressures determined from the predicted deformations. By reducing the prestress force to 1/6th
of that initially applied for the top two rows of anchors, the calculated lateral movements of the wall
reasonably matched with the observed values on site. Based on the results from the back analysis, a
reduced level of prestressing may be considered to the top 2 to 3 rows of anchors when staged deep
excavation is to be undertaken in order to minimize cracking in piles. Additional analyses including
sensitivity analyses are required to further verify the results.

Keywords: retaining walls, rock, retention, wall movement, monitoring, numerical analysis

1 INTRODUCTION

Melbourne Mudstone is the dominant lithology that impacts on underground works in the wider city
area. The geotechnical properties of this rock formation have been studied in detail over many years
through University research programmes which have been complemented by several large scale field
testing trials. However, there are relatively few case histories on the performance of deep basements
in fractured weathered rock outside of some notable enclosed underground works such as the
Underground Rail Loop (1970’s construction) and the CityLink tunnel (late 1990’s).
This paper provides a case history of a deep basement constructed in the Melbourne Mudstone (a
fractured and folded rock mass) with a particular focus on design and performance aspects, and
provides data on the magnitude and pattern of wall movements adjacent to high value assets. Back
analysis was undertaken by using Plaxis software which models relaxation in prestress forces due to
minor cracks in the piles at some locations.
While basement walls provide both temporary and permanent ground support, they are clearly
temporary works and designs should ensure that all risks, where foreseeable, are appropriately
considered. Wall designs in fractured rock typically involve analysis for kinematic stability of critical
defect sets and of a continuum model where failure surfaces follow a step-path through the rock mass.
The practical limitations and uncertainties in dealing with the latter are discussed. The statistical
determination of rock strength and judgemental assessment of parameters for geological features
without laboratory testing are examined. Methods for assessing stability risks are also suggested.

2 LITHOLOGY AND STRUCTURE OF MELBOURNE FORMATION

The Silurian age Melbourne Formation comprises an interbedded sequence of predominantly

siltstones with mudstones and thin sandstones horizons. Siltstone consists predominantly of angular
quartz and occasional feldspar grains which were deposited by variable density flows in the form of
turbidite fans. Structurally, the strata have been tightly and isoclinally folded and faulted by several
phases of mainly east-west tectonic compression. The broad structural axes are typically upright and
strike NNE-SSW although the multiphase folding has resulted in a high degree of structural complexity
at a local site-scale level. Intrusive igneous dykes are not uncommon and these can significantly
affect retention and foundation designs.
In the wider Melbourne area, outside of the Quaternary age flooded valleys, the Melbourne Formation
has weathered under a chemically oxidising environment that has penetrated to several tens of metres
depth. Deeper zones of weathering occur along major fault planes and other structural defects.
(McDonald et al. 2013)

3 RCH DEVELOPMENT

3.1 Introduction

The new Royal Children’s Hospital (RCH) is located in the inner northern Melbourne suburb of
Parkville. The 165,000 square metres hospital is directly adjacent to the old RCH building. The
hospital complex comprises a multilevel basement up to 18 metres deep and 5 to 6 above ground
levels. Development required the construction of 600 linear metres of anchored soldier pile walls
around the perimeter of the site which abuts the old operating hospital with a sensitive laboratory
facility that housed ongoing long-term research experiments. The new main structure is supported on
pad footings. A plan of the basement footprint and surrounding features is shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Site Location of RCH Development

The old hospital comprised a series of interconnected buildings. The building abutting the new
basement had up to 3 floors above ground level and was supported on spread footings. The main old
hospital building, with 10 floors above ground level supported on spread footings, was set back
approximately 8 m from the new basement.
 3.2 Site Geotechnical Characteristics

The site is underlain by Silurian age siltstone (Melbourne Mudstone) which has varying weathering
profile and strength. The ground profile comprised 3 m to 5 m of residual clay underlain by weathered
siltstone. The siltstone was initially extremely weathered, extremely low strength, and with depth
became highly weathered to moderately weathered of very low to low strength. An intrusive leuco-
granitic dyke was encountered in the north eastern part of the site at about 15 m depth. The dyke
material was identified at the investigation stage and its persistence was traced during construction.
The dyke was associated with a sheared/fault zone and the rock material immediately above and
below was more weathered. The approximate extent of the dyke material is shown in Figure 1. The
siltstone was fractured and folded with varying strike and dip of the bedding, and was disrupted
around the dyke. Structural orientation of the strata is shown in Figure 1. No groundwater was
encountered above the lowest basement level.
A series of point load strength index (Is50) tests and saturated moisture content tests were undertaken
on siltstone samples in order to estimate its compressive strength. Strength estimation from saturated
moisture content values based on empirical correlation is adopted for Melbourne Mudstone and has
been found to provide broad but generally reliable trends, which is typical for mudrock suites that
exhibit progressive weathering. The saturated moisture content values ranged between 8% and 13%
over the excavated wall height and these correspond to an unconfined compressive strength of about
2 MPa. A plot of saturated moisture content values with depth is presented in Figure 2. UCS tests
performed on three dyke samples recorded compressive strength values between 0.8 MPa and 1.2
MPa.

kPa

Figure 2. Ground Retention Details

 3.3 Basement Retention & Construction

The basement retention system comprised a perimeter anchored soldier pile wall with shotcrete infill
panels. The piles were non load bearing. The retention was designed based on uniform earth
pressure distributions of 4H (kPa) (no adjacent structures) and 6H (kPa) (with adjacent structures),
where H is the retained height in metres.
The perimeter piles were 600 mm diameter bored piles generally installed at 2.4 m centre to centre
spacing, reduced to 1.6 m spacing for the section of retaining wall adjacent to the old hospital building.
Piles were embedded 2 m to 3 m below basement level. The piles were restrained by multiple rows of
temporary, prestressed cable anchors. The anchor holes were 150 mm diameter and were drilled by
a rotary percussion drill rig with air flush. The bonded length of the ground anchors started at least
1 m outside of a line taken up at 45º from the base of the lowest basement. Ground to grout adhesion
values adopted for the different material types are shown in Figure 2.
During construction, logging of the shaft material was undertaken for some of the piles to assess the
weathering grade and field strength of the siltstone. Samples were collected from the borings for
saturated moisture content testing to verify the field strength assessments. After completion of the
perimeter piles, a staged bulk excavation was undertaken to enable progressive installation of the
anchors. The excavation was generally taken to not more than 0.5 m below each row of anchors.
Proof load testing was undertaken to confirm sufficient bonding between the ground and the grout.
Each ground anchor was proof load tested to 1.25 times Design Working Load (DWL), held for 20
minutes and no stress relaxation was observed in any anchor.

Section A – A’

Figure 3. Panoramic View of the Site

Monitoring Points

Figure 4. Typical Location of Monitoring Points

 3.4 Monitoring Results

A series of survey monitoring points were positioned along the perimeter wall capping beams prior to
the start of the bulk excavation in February 2008. Additional points were installed on piles and infill
panels as the bulk excavation progressed. These points were surveyed on a monthly basis to assess
performance of the retention system. The bulk excavation and basement retention were completed in
July 2008 whilst construction of the basement floors began in November 2008.
From February 2008 to November 2008, a maximum lateral movement (towards excavation) of 8 mm
was recorded for the points on the perimeter capping beam adjacent to the old hospital building.
Away from the adjacent old hospital, lateral movements of between 5 mm and 15 mm were recorded
for the capping beam over the same period. In all instances the recorded lateral movements were
less than 0.1% of the retained height. Some minor cracking was observed in the piles possibly
resulting in stress relaxation. To estimate the amount of stress relaxation, numerical modelling using
the finite element program “Plaxis 2D” was performed (Plaxis Bulletin, 2009). The results from the
modelling are reported in the following sections.

Section A – A’

Top of Wall @ RL33.6

-14 -12 -10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2

20º RESIDUAL SOIL/SILTY CLAY: Very stiff to hard

Excavation Level SILTSTONE (EW): Extremely low strength

on 7/4/2008

22 m / 8 m
Excavation
Staging 600 mm Ø at 2.4 m
centre to centre spacing 21 m / 10 m
Excavation Level SILTSTONE (HW): Very low strength
on 30/5/2008
13 m / 5 m

12 m / 6 m

9m/6m SILTSTONE (HW-MW): Low strength

Excavation Completed in July 2008 B3 Level @ RL15.3 45º

Legend
X / Y = Drill Length / Bond Length
= Location of Monitoring Point

Figure 5. Retention Wall (Section A-A’)

3.5 Numerical Modelling using Plaxis 2D

A Plaxis model (Model 1) was generated to simulate the monitoring results. In this model, five rows of
ground anchors and the piled wall were modelled with the use of geogrids and plate element
respectively. Geotechnical input parameters used in the model are given in Table 1.

Table 1: Geotechnical parameters adopted in Plaxis modelling

Young’s
Unit Wt.
Soil Type 3 Modulus, E Ko C’ (kPa) ɸ (degrees)
(kN/m )
(MPa)
Residual Soil/
18 20 0.5 5 25
Silty Clay
Siltstone
22 100 0.5 30 35
(EW)

Siltstone
24 600 0.5 35 35
(HW/HW-MW)
EW: Extremely weathered. HW/HW-MW: Highly weathered or highly to moderately weathered.

To estimate the wall movements without any stress relaxation, a Plaxis model was created where all
five anchors were prestressed to the forces given in Table 2 for Model 1.
Table 2: Prestress Forces in Anchors
Adopted Prestress Forces in Anchors (kN)

Anchor No. Model 2

Model 1
During Excavation After Excavation

Anchor 1 (top) 750 125 62

Anchor 2 905 151 75

Anchor 3 675 675 675

Anchor 4 750 750 750

Anchor 5 (bottom) 725 725 725

At each construction stage, analysis was carried out with regards to the maximum lateral (horizontal)
displacement of the wall and was compared with the monitoring results at a similar stage. A maximum
movement of 38 mm was calculated near to the top of the wall. The direction of the piled wall
movement however, was opposed to that recorded from the site monitoring. The predicted deformed
shape of the wall at the final stage of excavation is shown in Figure 6.

Figure 6. Model 1 – Deformed Shape

In order to simulate the site monitoring results, a new Plaxis model (Model 2) by adopting reduced
prestress forces in the top two rows of anchors was generated. The adopted forces are given in
Table 2 for Model 2. An additional stage to simulate the wall movement after excavation was also
incorporated using further reduced prestress values. The Plaxis output for the horizontal movement of
wall at different stages was calculated and compared with the monitoring results, as shown in Figures
7 & 8. A reasonable match was obtained for the observed and calculated values of horizontal
displacement.
Based on the results from the back analysis, a reduced level of prestressing may be considered to the
top 2 to 3 rows of anchors when staged deep excavation is to be undertaken in order to minimize
cracking in piles. Additional analyses including sensitivity analyses are required to further verify the
results.
 Excavation level on 7/4/2008

Excavation level on 30/5/2008

Complete Excavation on 13/8/2008

Figure 7. Model 2 – Lateral Movement of the Piled Wall at Different Stages during Excavation
 After Excavation Stage on 11/11/2008

After Excavation Stage on 11/11/2008

Figure 8. Model 2 – Lateral Movement of the Piled Wall after Completion of the Bulk Excavation

4 CONCLUSIONS

A conventional bored pile cable ground anchor combination was adopted over the full retained height
to minimise adverse movement of an adjacent high-value, sensitive operational research facility.
The initial design of the retention system was robust to satisfy potentially adverse geological
conditions encountered in the later stages of the deep excavation.
Deflection of the retaining wall was well within expectations however some piles experienced cracking
due to initial overstressing. A reduced level of prestressing in the top 2 to 3 rows may be considered
where deep excavation is to be undertaken in stages in order to minimize cracking in piles. Additional
analyses including sensitivity analyses are required to further verify the results.

5 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The authors thank Lend Lease for giving permission to use the data and publish this paper.

REFERENCE

McDonald, P., Broise, M., and Chong, D. (2013). “Deep basements in Melbourne Siltstone.”Australian
Geomechanics Society, Sydney Chapter Symposium, November 2013.
Plaxis Bulletin, Spring Issue, (2009). “Simulation of Soil Nail Structures using Plaxis 2D.”