Failure of A Pile Retaining Wall

GROUND MODIFICATION, PROBLEM SOILS, AND GEO-SUPPORT 161
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by DEAKIN UNIVERSITY on 08/10/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Failure of a Pile Retaining Wall
Vishnu Diyaljee, Ph.D., F.ASCE, P.Eng
Managing Director, GAEA Engineering Ltd, 212, 9054-51 Avenue, Edmonton, Alberta, T6E 5X4
diy001@gaeaeng.com
ABSTRACT: This paper addresses the failure of a pile retaining wall constructed as a
remedial measure to arrest instability of a highway embankment resulting from
movement of its sideslope which was contiguous with the valley slope of a nearby
creek. A drainage blanket was incorporated within the distressed section of the
highway in 1983 to mitigate the pavement distress that was occurring. This remedial
measure proved to be effective over a two-year period after which pavement distress
re-occurred in the summer of 1990 following a period of increased rainfall. Further
geotechnical investigation in 1990 resulted in the construction of a cantilever pile wall
to isolate the highway from the perceived slide activity of the highway sideslope.
Failure of this pile wall occurred in the summer of 1993 about 3 years after its
construction, eventually requiring realignment of the highway. Failure to fully
understand the site conditions from the inception of the geotechnical investigation
played a major role in the short-lived performance of the remedial measures.
INTRODUCTION
A 50 m section of Secondary Highway (SH) 507:02 between Pincher Creek and

Beaver Coal Mines in Southern Alberta, Canada was experiencing pavement distress
in the form of cracking and settlement along the eastbound lane for a number of years
(Fig.1). Based on visual inspections, the pavement distress was determined to be an
indirect consequence of slide activity occurring beyond the sideslope on the south side
of the highway.
In 1983 and 1990, this section of highway was the subject of geotechnical
investigations and the implementation of remedial measures aimed at mitigating
periodic pavement distress. A drilled shaft cantilever pile retaining wall was
constructed in May 1990 to isolate the highway prism from a larger slide activity
encroaching the highway. However, this pile wall failed in the summer of 1993 by
tilting as a result of the loss of soil support behind the walls. This paper addresses the
site conditions, investigations, remedial measures and the pile wall failure and
concludes with lessons learned from the pile wall failure.
161
Copyright ASCE 2009 2009 International Foundation Congress and Equipment Expo
Page 1
Contemporary Topics in Ground Modification, Problem Soils, and Geo-Support
162 GROUND MODIFICATION, PROBLEM SOILS, AND GEO-SUPPORT
FIG.1. Project Location
SITE CONDITIONS AND HISTORY
The SH 507:02 alignment is along an east-west route through the hilly terrain
prevalent in the Rocky Mountain foothills around Pincher Creek, Alberta. At the
location of the pavement distress, the highway follows a ridge between two valley
sections. There are two creeks on either side of the ridge - Mill Creek on the south and
a no-name creek on the north. The pavement cracking and settlement was on the
eastbound lane in proximity to the north valley slope of Mill Creek, the crest/top of
bank of which is only about 60 m south of the centreline of the highway. Mill Creek is
on a bend in this area, and its flow is eroding the valley face at its toe thus leading
indirectly to slumping of the material from the higher elevations of the valley face.
The approximate elevation difference between the highway and the Mill Creek flood
plain is about 40 metres. From a review of the 1950 air photos, it was observed that the
entire Mill Creek valley at this location was plagued with landslide problems in the
past.
From historical records, pavement distress along this section of highway dated back
to 1973 when the existing roadway was upgraded. Apparently, a spring source,
approximately 100 m west of the distressed area, was covered up at the time and pit
run gravel used to bridge the location.
GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS
1983 Investigation
A limited geotechnical investigation, consisting of drilling a few test holes, was

undertaken in March 1983 within the highway right-of-way. The stratigraphy in the
distressed area from testhole drilling consisted of 6 m of silty sand followed by 6 m of
162
Page 2
Copyright ASCE 2009 2009 International Foundation Congress and Equipment Expo
silty clay overlying clay shale and sandstone. The top 2 m of soil was found to be well
above standard Proctor optimum moisture for the material. As a result, the installation
of a granular blanket to a depth of about 3 m within the affected area and daylighting
on the sideslope was recommended (Fig.2). This measure was implemented in
1985. The purpose of the granular blanket was mainly to facilitate the removal
of moisture from the roadbed, which was thought at the time to be responsible
for movement of the sideslope and hence pavement distress occurring within the
traveled highway.
CL
BACKFILLED WITH LOCAL FILL

mm MATERIAL AND RESHAPED
500
m
m
00
03
GRANULAR BLANKET
NON-WOVEN GEOTEXTILE
FIG.2. Drainage Blanket
1990 Investigation
The implementation of the drainage blanket remedial measure resulted in a decrease

in pavement distress until around 1990 after which pavement distress resumed at an
increasing rate. This renewed activity after a five (5) year period was felt to have been
promoted by increased rainfall than in previous years. It is well known in Alberta that
prolonged periods of low rainfall or drought conditions for several years are often
followed by periods of heavy rainfall.
During the first week of May 1990, the distressed pavement section was reported to
have settled about 1 m. As a result of this significant distress and the need to maintain
traffic along this highway immediate attention was required. A detailed site review
was undertaken on May 16. This was followed by testpitting and testhole drilling. The
testhole drilling was undertaken with a Texoma Drill Rig normally used for the
construction of bored concrete piles. This drill was used in the investigation instead of
the conventional soil testing drill to determine whether there would be any problems
in constructing bored piles should this alternative be chosen for stabilizing the
roadway.
163
Copyright ASCE 2009 2009 International Foundation Congress and Equipment
Page 3 Expo
Subsequent to the site visit, on May 29, the distressed section was reported to be
worsening. The fence along the south side of the highway right-of-way moved 2 m
and the distressed section of highway settled considerably at its centreline. As a result
only one lane of the highway was trafficable. This renewed activity coincided with
continuous heavy rainfall.
During the first week in June drilling with the Texoma rig was undertaken to a depth
of 12 m where hard clay shale was encountered and drilling terminated after
penetrating this layer about 1 m. The drilled hole stood up without any caving of its
sides indicating that bored piles could be constructed without the need for casing of
the pile holes.
1990 Remedial Measures
In view of the urgency of the situation and the observed site conditions, two
remedial options were considered - toe berm construction and the construction of a
pile retaining wall. The toe berm option was ruled out due to the proximity of the steep
valley face to the highway, river erosion causing steepening of the valley face, and the
fragile nature of the south slope to the valley crest. Other forms of stabilization were
not considered practical since little disturbance of the buffer zone was advisable
because existing trees and vegetation were assisting in maintaining the stability of the
area between the crest and highway right-of -way.
In deciding on the pile retaining wall option, several assumptions/judgments were
made. These included the opinion that while the creek was actively eroding the
banks, there was a sufficient buffer zone between the banks and roadway and it
would take some time before this event would create a global instability of this
area. Also, the presence of very hard material and sandstone and clay shale
inclusions would create a restraint against the river erosion forces.
The fast tracked pile retaining wall required thirty, 760 mm diameter drilled shaft
piles installed at 1.5 m centres to span across the length of the slide area. Each pile
was reinforced with a 14 m long H-pile (W410x60) and nominal helical
reinforcement, with the top 3 m consisting of H-pile and timber lagging to retain the
roadway fill (Fig.3). The pile design was provided by the Contractor and installation
of this pile retaining wall was implemented in July 1990.
The side slope portion on either outer side of the pile wall system was also
reconstructed with granular material backfill to help free drainage to the sideslope.
FIG.3. Plan and X-Section Showing Pile Layout
164
Page 4 Expo
A subsurface trench drain with a perforated pipe was also installed in the ditch of the
westbound lane as an added precaution to minimize the flow of subsurface
water from the higher ground existing on the north side of the distressed section.
The perforated pipe was daylighted in the treed area on the south side away from
the slide area.
SITE STATUS IN 1990-1991
Following the implementation of the pile retaining wall, a site inspection was
undertaken on October 29, 1990. This inspection showed no cracks in the highway
surface. The sideslope where the piles were installed was neatly trimmed and showed
no signs of cracking and bulging. During this inspection, the installation of three (3)
slope indicators was considered to monitor the performance of the retaining wall and
surrounding area. However, installation of these slope indicators was not undertaken.
Although the pile wall system was effective in preventing further settlement of the
eastbound lane, the south sideslope slumped once again in the summer of 1991
following heavy rainfall in the general area.
An inspection of the site was undertaken on July 1991 following the reported
slumping. This inspection showed that the retaining wall was still performing well
since no cracks could be observed along the highway within the length of the pile
wall. However, it was noted that the sideslope outside of the pile wall had slumped
exposing the backface of the pile wall (Fig.4).
FIG.4. Sideslope Slump FIG.5. Sawdust Fill in Sideslope Repair
This failure was attributed to river erosion and the distinct possibility of seepage
within the highway grade since instability of the distressed section was noted to be
coincident with periods of heavy rainfall. This opinion was confirmed during the 1990
investigation prior to the recommendation of the pile wall as the preferred stabilization
measure. There was also some evidence of cracking towards the highway shoulder
outside of the limits of the pile wall.
Based on the site observations, it was decided to restore the failed sideslope using
sawdust lightweight fill to minimize the load on the sideslope in the hope that it would
minimize further slumping of the sideslope. Whether or not the pile wall should be
extended was to be considered following restoration of the sideslope.
165
Page 5 Expo
Figure 5 shows a schematic outline of remedial measures implemented. A thin layer

of top soil was used overtop of the sawdust to encourage vegetation growth.
1993 Failure
The slide activity increased at a fast rate in the month of July 1993 due to heavy rains
resulting in mass movement of the soil towards the Mill Creek valley slope. As a
result of loss of lateral support, many of the piles experienced bending away from the
road, the lateral movement being small in the centre of the slide area but more
towards the outer limits of the slide area. The roadway subgrade soil also slowly
moved through the openings in between the concrete piles below the elevation of
the timber lagging resulting indirectly in a 0.6 metre drop in the road grade. Typical
photographs of tilted piles and slide area are shown in Figures 6 through 8.
FIG.6. Tilted Piles (1993)
FIG.7. Displaced Tilted Piles (1994) FIG.8. Overview of Slide Area
Two slope indicators (SI 1A and SI 1B) were installed within the slide scarp area in
August 1993 to monitor the depth of slide movement. These SIs were located over the
length of the pile wall parallel to the south shoulder of the highway, outside of the pile
166
Page 6 Expo
wall but within the highway right-of-way. Their monitoring indicated a slip plane at 6 m
below the ground surface at the location of the SI 1A.
A cross-section of the highway within the distressed section, Figure 9 shows the
location of the SI 1A, relative to centreline of the roadway, inferred plane of
movement and soil profile. The depth of movement corresponded with the interface of
the silty clay and gravelly sand layers. The slide plane was at about a depth of 11 m in
relation to the finished roadway grade. In relation to the length of pile installed, the
slide plane removed most of the pile fixity, which resulted in the tilting of the piles.
FIG.9. Cross-section of Highway at Slide
REMEDIAL MEASURES
A review of possible remedial options indicated that it would be quite expensive to

restore the verticality of the piles and to implement subsurface trench drainage
measures within the slide area between the piles and the top of the valley face. Even
then, it was felt that the long term effectiveness of the subsurface drainage measures in
stabilizing the slide was debatable, since the toe erosion in the creek was very active.
FIG.10. Bank Slumping at Bend in Mill Creek
167
Page 7 Expo
In the final analysis, it was decided to shift the alignment of the highway by 20
m north of the slide area filling in the creek on the north side. The highway grade
line was also lowered such that the new grade would be close to the elevation of
the plane of movement. The principle behind the lowering of the grade line was
to remove as much soil with moisture content wetter than optimum. Excavation
of additional material from the south backslope which is likely being influenced
by the slide activity was also recommended. The horizontal alignment was
adjusted for a length of about 2 km for consistency with the ground features that
existed beyond the slide area.
Since the no name creek on the north side would be covered up with the new
grade, the creek alignment was also shifted further north and would flow partly in
open cut and partly through a long 600 mm diameter culvert.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
Based on observations from 1983 to 1993, groundwater seepage and toe erosion
appeared to be primary contributory factors to the recurring roadway distress since
distress only occurred during periods of heavy rainfall. These factors may have acted
singly or in combination.
The gravel blanket constructed in 1983 at the 3 m depth to remove groundwater
seepage to ensure stable site conditions was not entirely successful since the source of
groundwater was at around 11 m below the roadway grade at centreline. It is unlikely
that the sawdust fill could have become saturated and contributed to increasing the
weight of the sideslope leading to the 1993 failure since the sawdust was encapsulated
with polyethylene and capped with clay.
The failure of the pile wall resulted in a reflection of whether the pile wall system
might not have failed if a tie-back system were designed and installed in 1991 or in
1993. Of course, the tie-back system might not have solved the problem permanently
since the failure plane was deeper than the depth of embedment of the piles. However,
this system could have likely extended the serviceability of the road for a few more
years by preventing the tilting of the piles.
This case study illustrates how engineering judgments can sometimes go wrong
when all the site conditions are not carefully investigated and analyzed. Review of
aerial photographs would have been prudent from the inception of the investigation in
1983 but this was not done at the time. This review would have given insight into the
instability problems along the creek and could have obviated the use of the pile wall or
indicated that deeper piles would have been required. However, in hindsight, while
this may have been the most sensible approach, very often there are social factors that
influence engineering decisions. In this case, there was a need to have this roadway
open to traffic at all times, and as such quick action was required.
The lesson learned from this failure is that the resolution of geotechnical problems
requires the careful understanding of all the factors that influence the behaviour of a
site and requires not only examining the location of failure but the surrounding terrain.
This can be supported by reviewing aerial photographs and an understanding of the
site geology. This failure resulted in the subsequent recognition that review of aerial
photographs was an important aspect of landslide site evaluation irrespective of
whether a site failure from observation is judged to be simple or complex.
168
Page 8 Expo

Failure of A Pile Retaining Wall

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Failure of A Pile Retaining Wall

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Failure of A Pile Retaining Wall

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

GROUND MODIFICATION, PROBLEM SOILS, AND GEO-SUPPORT 161

Failure of a Pile Retaining Wall

Vishnu Diyaljee, Ph.D., F.ASCE, P.Eng

A 50 m section of Secondary Highway (SH) 507:02 between Pincher Creek and

FIG.1. Project Location

SITE CONDITIONS AND HISTORY

A limited geotechnical investigation, consisting of drilling a few test holes, was

BACKFILLED WITH LOCAL FILL

FIG.2. Drainage Blanket

The implementation of the drainage blanket remedial measure resulted in a decrease

1990 Remedial Measures

FIG.3. Plan and X-Section Showing Pile Layout

SITE STATUS IN 1990-1991

FIG.4. Sideslope Slump FIG.5. Sawdust Fill in Sideslope Repair

Figure 5 shows a schematic outline of remedial measures implemented. A thin layer

FIG.6. Tilted Piles (1993)

FIG.7. Displaced Tilted Piles (1994) FIG.8. Overview of Slide Area

FIG.9. Cross-section of Highway at Slide

A review of possible remedial options indicated that it would be quite expensive to

FIG.10. Bank Slumping at Bend in Mill Creek

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

You might also like