Temporary Works, Second edition

Pallett, Peter F and Filip, Ray

ISBN 978-0-7277-6338-9
https://doi.org/10.1680/twse.63389.193
ICE Publishing: All rights reserved

Chapter 14
Contiguous and secant piled walls
Chris Robinson
Design Manager, Cementation Skanska Limited

Andrew Bell
Chief Engineer, Cementation Skanska Limited

Contiguous and secant piled walls can be used to form embedded retaining walls, for
example, to construct tanks, shafts, tunnel portals, road/rail cuttings, basement exca-
vations, cut and cover tunnels and other forms of underground structures. They are com-
monly adopted where alternative methods cannot be successfully implemented because of
the nature of the ground or performance requirements. In common with diaphragm walls,
the economics of contiguous and secant piled walls become increasingly attractive when
they form part of the permanent works. This chapter includes a description of common
uses of contiguous and secant walls and their method of construction (including aspects
of additional temporary works required to facilitate construction), a summary of typical
construction details which can aid construction of a high-quality finished product, and a
description of common design approaches and design considerations.

14.1. Introduction
Contiguous and secant piled walls are two common forms of embedded retaining walls.
The most significant difference between these two forms of retaining wall is that contig-
uous piles are designed to be totally independent reinforced elements with, typically,
150 mm between adjacent pile elements at commencing level, whereas secant piles are
designed to form an interlocking wall. Secant piles can therefore retain both ground and
groundwater (subject to construction tolerances, as discussed in Section 14.3).

14.1.1 Contiguous pile wall

Contiguous piled walls are suitable where the groundwater table is below excavation
level, as groundwater is free to flow through the interstices between pile elements.
Permanent works applications for contiguous piled walls therefore require an additional
reinforced concrete lining to secure exposed soil and resist long-term groundwater
pressures. Figure 14.1 depicts a typical contiguous piled wall.

14.1.2 Secant pile wall: hard/soft or hard/firm

Where short-term water retention is required this system, consisting of interlocking
bored piles, offers the most cost-effective and rapid solution. Female (or primary) piles

193

Downloaded by [ The Institution of Civil Engineers] on [21/10/19]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 Temporary Works, Second edition

Figure 14.1 Contiguous piled wall. (Courtesy of Cementation Skanska Limited)

Figure 14.2 Hard/soft or hard/firm secant piled wall. (Courtesy of Cementation Skanska Limited)

are constructed first using a ‘soft’ cement–bentonite mix (commonly 1 N/mm2) or ‘firm’
concrete (commonly 10 N/mm2). Male (or secondary) piles, formed in structural
reinforced concrete, are then installed between (and cutting into) the female piles, with
a typical interlock of 150–250 mm. These walls may need a reinforced concrete lining for
permanent works applications, depending on the particular watertightness requirements
of the project. An illustration of a typical hard/soft or hard/firm secant piled wall is
provided in Figure 14.2.

14.1.3 Secant wall: hard/hard

Hard/hard wall construction is very similar to that for a hard/firm wall except that the
primary piles are constructed in higher-strength concrete and may be reinforced by
reinforcement cages or steel beam or column sections. Heavy-duty rotary piling rigs,
using tools fitted with specially designed cutting heads, are necessary to cut the second-
ary piles. As structural concrete is used throughout, there may be no need to provide a

Figure 14.3 Hard/hard secant piled wall. (Courtesy of Cementation Skanska Limited)

194

Downloaded by [ The Institution of Civil Engineers] on [21/10/19]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 Contiguous and secant piled walls

lining wall. The end product provides a fully concreted face and can be an effective
alternative to diaphragm wall construction. Figure 14.3 depicts a typical hard/hard
secant piled wall.

14.2. Applications
Contiguous and secant piled walls can be adopted to provide solutions to a variety of
constructed situations. They tend to be adopted where the general site conditions, depth
of excavation, ground conditions or watertightness requirements (note: secant piled walls
only) preclude the adoption of alternative (potentially cheaper) methods, for example,
construction in open-cut excavations, king post walls or sheet piling (see Chapter 11).

In addition to providing ground support (and a groundwater exclusion function in the

case of secant piling), contiguous and secant piled walls can also be used to carry vertical
loads (temporary and/or permanent vertical loads). Where the magnitude of vertical
loading exceeds the available wall capacity (based on an embedment length required
to maintain wall stability), the wall piles can be constructed to a greater depth than
required by consideration of wall stability alone in order to satisfy design criteria relating
to factors of safety. This additional depth of pile can be constructed from plain
unreinforced concrete, subject to the superstructure loading being compressive in nature.
The additional depth of excavation would clearly need to be suitably reinforced to carry
any tensile loads (e.g. hydrostatic uplift forces). When designing embedded retaining
walls to withstand applied vertical loads, it is usual to consider only that part of the wall
below the deepest excavation level.

Where particularly onerous ground conditions are present, for example, very loose fine
sands, a secant piled retaining wall may represent the preferred solution, even if ground-
water is not present above the excavation level. The nature of such ground may pose an
unacceptable risk of ground loss through insufficient arching capability of the ground,
which may in turn pose a risk to the stability and serviceability of adjacent structures
or services or ground to be supported.

14.3. Construction methods and plant

14.3.1 General considerations
Most forms of replacement piling can be employed to construct contiguous and secant
walls. The plant employed will have certain constraints or limitations on the physical
dimensions of piles that can be constructed. As discussed in Chapter 13 on diaphragm
walls, the construction methods and plant employed need to be determined through
consideration of each individual project’s particular characteristics. This will include
consideration of aspects such as site-specific ground conditions, length of wall piles to
be constructed, watertightness requirements, access restrictions, headroom restrictions,
any working time restrictions and party wall issues.

The drawing sequence presented in Figures 14.4 and 14.5 shows the typical sequence of
site operations for contiguous pile wall and secant pile wall construction, respectively.
Pile construction needs to be sequenced to ensure that construction of any pile does not
adversely affect any previously constructed piles. For secant walls, the sequence needs

195

Downloaded by [ The Institution of Civil Engineers] on [21/10/19]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 Figure 14.4 Contiguous piled wall and indicative sequence of construction. (Courtesy of Cementation Skanska Limited)

196
Temporary Works, Second edition

Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3a Stage 3b Stage 3c Stage 4 Stage 5

Platform construction Guide wall construction 1st pile construction 1st pile construction 1st pile construction 2nd pile construction 3rd pile construction
(if required) day 1 day 1 day 1 day 1 day 1
CFA rig pile boring concrete placement cage placement CFA pile boring, concrete CFA pile boring, concrete
& cage placement & cage placement

Stage 6 Stage 7 Stage 8 Stage 9 Stage 10 Stage 11

4th pile construction 5th pile construction 6th pile construction 7th pile construction 8th pile construction 9th pile construction
day 2 day 2 day 2 day 3 day 3 day 3

Downloaded by [ The Institution of Civil Engineers] on [21/10/19]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
CFA pile boring, concrete CFA pile boring, concrete CFA pile boring, concrete CFA pile boring, concrete CFA pile boring, concrete CFA pile boring, concrete
& cage placement & cage placement & cage placement & cage placement & cage placement & cage placement
 Figure 14.5 Secant piled wall and indicative sequence of construction. (Courtesy of Cementation Skanska Limited)

Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3a Stage 3b Stage 4 Stage 5 Stage 6 Stage 7

Platform construction Guide wall construction 1st female pile construction 1st female pile construction 2nd female pile construction 3rd female pile construction 4th female pile construction 5th female pile construction
rotary segmentally cased concrete placement via tremie concrete placement via tremie concrete placement via tremie concrete placement via tremie concrete placement via tremie
bored pile

Stage 8 Stage 9 Stage 10 Stage 11 Stage 12 Stage 13

Downloaded by [ The Institution of Civil Engineers] on [21/10/19]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
6th female pile construction 1st male pile construction 2nd male pile construction 3rd male pile construction 4th male pile construction 5th male pile construction
concrete placement via tremie cage placement, cage placement, cage placement, cage placement, cage placement,
concrete placement via tremie concrete placement via tremie concrete placement via tremie concrete placement via tremie concrete placement via tremie
Contiguous and secant piled walls

197
 Temporary Works, Second edition

also to take account of the strength gain of the female pile concrete (female pile concrete
can potentially crack when male piles are cut into them if the concrete is too strong,
which may have a significant impact on the wall watertightness).

As well as being a temporary works solution in their own right, both contiguous and
secant piled wall construction can require some considerable elements of additional
temporary works for their successful execution. As described in Chapter 13 on dia-
phragm walls, these include aspects such as guide walls, support fluids, temporary
anchorages and/or temporary props, working platforms for tracked plant (see Chapters 5
and 7), consideration of slope stability (see Chapter 10), temporary screening to
protect the public and personnel, protection of watercourses and protection of adjacent
services.

Precautionary measures may be adopted such as using long temporary casings, limiting
the number of piles constructed along sensitive elevations within one shift, or under-
pinning of particularly sensitive adjacent structures.

14.3.2 Site preparation

Many sites require demolition works to be undertaken in advance of wall construction
operations; this will often entail excavation or grubbing out of existing foundations.
Where this occurs along the line of the wall it is good practice to ensure the backfill
to these areas is selected not only to give adequate support to tracked plant but also
to mitigate against high overbreak occurring and adversely affecting the finished surface
of the piled wall. This may require trimming back if the overbreak is in excess of the
specification limits. Suitable backfill materials that are often used are stiff clays or
clay-bound hogging. These materials, properly placed and compacted, will give a
relatively smooth high-quality finish to the wall over the backfill depth and can aid wall
verticality.

14.3.3 Working platforms

As with any other site where tracked plant (predominantly piling rigs and cranes) is to be
employed, a suitable working platform should be provided to ensure that an adequate
factor of safety against platform failure is maintained under the range of loading which
will be applied by the plant operating on it. Refer to Chapter 5 for full details of working
platform design.

14.3.4 Guide walls

Guide wall construction will usually follow on from construction of the working plat-
form, although this is not always the case. It is usual for guide walls to be constructed
in advance of secant piled wall construction to enable greater dimensional control at the
commencing level to be achieved. Generally a limit of positional tolerance of +25 mm at
commencement level can be achieved through the use of a guide wall.

When constructing contiguous piled walls, guide walls tend to be used less often because
construction tolerances are usually less critical (contiguous piled walls are not designed
for groundwater exclusion and therefore do not have any watertightness performance

198

Downloaded by [ The Institution of Civil Engineers] on [21/10/19]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 Contiguous and secant piled walls

criteria to satisfy). Without a guide wall, a plan positional tolerance of +75 mm is

typically specified.

Unlike contiguous piled wall construction, secant piled wall construction will almost
invariably require the construction of a scalloped guide wall in advance of piling
operations. The very nature of secant piled walls requires the piles to interlock, usually
for watertightness.

14.3.5 Pile construction techniques

Different pile construction techniques will have different limits to attainable verticality.
Most rotary piling techniques will typically have a verticality limit of 1 : 75. Stiff double-
walled continuous flight auger (CFA) strings may be able to achieve verticality limits of
the order of 1 : 75 to 1 : 125, whereas cased CFA and large-diameter segmentally cased
piled walls may be able to achieve a pile verticality of the order of 1 : 150 to 1 : 200.
Specific guidance should be sought from specialist contractors on a case-by-case basis.

A large range of piling techniques can be adopted for construction of contiguous and
secant walls, although practical considerations may limit the use of some of these for the
construction of interlocking secant walls.

A non-exhaustive list of applicable piling techniques includes CFA, cased CFA, segmen-
tal flight auger (SFA), large-diameter rotary bored piling with conventional slip casings,
large-diameter rotary bore piling with segmental casing, mini piled case/auger and
drilled pile systems (e.g. Symmetrix).

Some of the above piling techniques (e.g. rotary bore piling, case and auger piling) can
be employed by adopting a short length of temporary casing (although care needs to be
taken when assessing the pile spacing for cased and uncased diameters) where the ground
is self-supporting. Others may require full-length casing in unstable ground or the use of
a bore support fluid, while CFA and SFA provide full bore support without the need for
temporary casings or support fluid.

14.3.6 Reinforcement cages

Reinforcement cages for wall piles are typically fabricated using at least six bar cages.
There are exceptions to this general rule, but the design must take account of the
potential for unfavourable cage orientation within the pile bore.

The number of longitudinal reinforcing bars forming the pile cage needs to be compati-
ble with the pile diameter and minimum reinforcement requirements. In most instances,
the reinforcement requirements of wall piles will satisfy minimum reinforcement require-
ments without explicit consideration.

Female piles to secant piled walls are not normally reinforced. However, when designing
the wall as a hard/hard wall, the female pile will be constructed from a structural
concrete mix (with a specified characteristic strength) and will be suitably detailed to
facilitate subsequent male pile construction. The requirement for the male piles to cut
into the female pile clearly imposes constraints on the amount of reinforcement that can

199

Downloaded by [ The Institution of Civil Engineers] on [21/10/19]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 Temporary Works, Second edition

be accommodated within the female pile. Notwithstanding this limitation, reinforcement

of the female pile can provide the additional wall capacity (in terms of bending
resistance), which may otherwise require larger-diameter male piles or the adoption of
alternative construction methods.

It is possible to vary the pile reinforcement within fabricated cages to the structural
requirements at different levels within the pile. Bars can potentially be curtailed or
changes in bar sizes made across cage splice zones. It should be noted that it is not
generally possible to economise pile cages to the same degree as within diaphragm wall
cages; this is partly due to the requirements to consider unfavourable cage orientation
within the pile bore and the design of the pile as a column element.

Where cage lengths are to be spliced, the splice detail should be carefully detailed to limit
bar congestion. This will assist in maintaining a high-quality finished product.
Reinforcement bar congestion is often the primary cause of poor-quality concrete at the
exposed face of the pile. As with detailing of reinforcement cages for diaphragm wall
panels, the cage splices should be detailed to ensure that operatives are not required
to place their hands within the cage, where serious injury could be incurred should the
cage sections move relative to each other.

It may be possible to introduce couplers and box-outs within pile reinforcement cages.
However, it is the authors’ experience that a high degree of redundancy (in terms of the
number of couplers fabricated into the reinforcement cage) is usually required to ensure
that sufficient couplers can be located when the box-out is exposed. Pile reinforcement
cages have a tendency to twist within the pile bore. This is particularly the case where
pile cages are plunged within wet concrete, but can also occur where cages are hung
or suspended within the empty pile bore with concrete subsequently being placed via
a tremie pipe. Another consideration in pile box-out design is to ensure that there is
sufficient space for concrete to flow between all the reinforcing elements and to ensure
that the box-out (typically constructed with polystyrene or Styrofoam to facilitate
exposure of the couplers) does not cause buoyancy instability of the pile cage.

14.3.7 Concreting
As described in Section 14.3.5, a variety of piling techniques can be adopted. Where piles
are constructed adopting CFA or SFA techniques, concrete will be introduced from the
toe of the pile and brought up to the level of the piling platform. Reinforcement cages are
installed following the concreting operation.

For open bore piling techniques (e.g. large-diameter rotary bored piling, cased and auger
piling), concreting of the pile (or grouting for small-diameter piles) will usually be under-
taken following installation of the reinforcement cage. For open bore techniques,
sectional tremie pipes are generally employed that typically have a diameter of 200–
300 mm. The diameter of the tremie pipe will depend on the individual contractor’s
equipment and the depth of the tremie pipe. Consideration of the diameter of the
reinforcing cage is also important in order to ensure the tremie pipe can easily be inserted
and removed without causing damage to, or snagging on, the cage.

200

Downloaded by [ The Institution of Civil Engineers] on [21/10/19]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 Contiguous and secant piled walls

For guidance on the performance of fresh concrete and its method of placement using
tremie methods in deep foundation elements, reference should be made to the Best
Practice Guide to Tremie Concrete for Deep Foundations (EFFC/DFI, 2016).

14.4. Design
14.4.1 Scope
This section on design is not intended to provide full guidance on how to design embedded
retaining walls. This subject is covered in detail within the various codes of practice and
best practice guidance listed at the end of this chapter. In particular, the reader is referred
to the Construction Industry Research and Information Association (CIRIA) publication
C760 (Gaba et al., 2017), BS 8002:2015 (BSI, 2015) and Eurocode 7 (BSI, 2004b).

The aim for this section is to provide commentary on specific design aspects of con-
tiguous and secant piled walls. High-level guidance on the aspects most relevant to the
design of embedded retaining walls is given in Chapter 13, Section 13.4.3.

14.4.2 Temporary support for lateral wall stability

Contiguous and secant walls may be designed as cantilever walls. This will depend on the
depth of excavation, the depth to which the wall piles can be economically installed, the
prevailing ground conditions, and the magnitude of tolerable wall displacement and
associated ground movement.

Where the various factors are unfavourable, some form of temporary support will be
required. This may take the form of temporary berms (generally to facilitate installation
of another temporary support measure), temporary props or temporary ground
anchorages. Each of these measures will require suitable design. Should temporary
ground anchorages be adopted, this may require a way-leave if the anchorages are to
be installed beyond the site boundary. It will also be necessary to undertake a design
check to ensure that vertical stability is maintained, as the anchorages will impart a
downward vertical load onto the embedded retaining wall.

Temporary ground anchorages and temporary props will generally require a waling
beam to span along the wall to distribute the load between the wall and the anchors/
props. Often an in situ capping beam will be constructed to be used in place of a waling
beam. Waling beams for ground anchors can be more complex, particularly if they are
fabricated from steel. A twin parallel flange channel arrangement is often adopted which
allows the anchorage to pass between the two channel sections at the required angle of
declination (often 30–458 below horizontal). An alternative solution for ground
anchorages is to construct an in situ head block detail (Figure 14.6) which spans adjacent
reinforced piles.

14.4.3 Instrumentation
Where wall deflections are a critical element of the design (most particularly where the
observation method is being employed), inclinometer reservation tubes can be installed
within the reinforced piles. A suitably sized thin-walled steel tube (with a sealed end) is
attached to the reinforcement cage (in sections with threaded couplings if spliced cages

201

Downloaded by [ The Institution of Civil Engineers] on [21/10/19]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 Temporary Works, Second edition

Figure 14.6 In situ anchor head block. (Courtesy of Cementation Skanska Limited)

Female piles

Male piles

Pile concrete
broken/scabbled
back to sound concrete

Steel bearing
plate

2 No. dowels

are required). The reservation tube facilitates subsequent installation (grouting in) of
inclinometer tubes, which generally take the form of plastic ducts with orthogonal guides
for the inclinometer torpedo. It is usual for the inclinometer duct installation to be
undertaken outside the piling contract.

Alternative methods of monitoring wall deflections are available such as cast-in-place

inclinometers; these are more limiting by their very nature, however, allowing monitor-
ing of deflections only at the levels the instruments are installed (compared to a full
deflection profile for conventional inclinometer instruments). Cast-in-place inclin-
ometers are particularly useful in situations where access is difficult or impossible.

Other forms of instrumentation can be installed within wall piles, generally fixed to
reinforcement cages (e.g. vibrating wire strain gauges or fibre-optic strain gauges to
monitor the state of stress within the wall piles). Again this is most commonly associated
with the observational method, for example, when assessing whether additional tempor-
ary support measures may be omitted. For full details on the observational method, refer
to CIRIA R185 (Nicholson et al., 1999).

14.4.4 Reinforcement design

Reinforcement requirements should be determined adopting analysis methods com-
patible with the stability analysis, for example, Eurocode 2 (BSI, 2004a) for structural
concrete design and Eurocode 7 (BSI, 2004b) for geotechnical design.

Care needs to be taken to ensure that the reinforcement design is compatible with the
method of pile construction proposed. For example, plunging cages within CFA/SFA
piles has practical limitations on the depth attainable for a given cage weight and

202

Downloaded by [ The Institution of Civil Engineers] on [21/10/19]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 Contiguous and secant piled walls

rigidity. A maximum practicable reinforcement cage plunge depth of around 15 m is

often adopted. Although it is possible to adequately reinforce these pile types to deeper
levels, specific guidance from specialist piling contractors should be sought.

There may be opportunity to refine the reinforcement design according to the distri-
bution of bending moment and shear force magnitude with depth. Bars can
potentially be curtailed or bar sizes changed across splice zones to provide the most
economical configuration.

When designing reinforcement cages, the recommendations of BS EN 1536:2010 +

A1:2015 (BSI, 2010) regarding bar spacing should be applied to avoid cage congestion
and the potentially negative effect on construction quality.

The reinforcement cage design should take into account any requirements for handling/
lifting the cages to ensure that they are sufficiently robust. This may require the inclusion
of suitable lifting bands and so on. Where cages are required to be spliced, sufficient
attention to detail should be given to the method used to form the splice such that oper-
atives are not required to put their hands within the cage during the splicing operation.

14.4.5 Watertightness and wall toe level for groundwater cut-off

(secant walls only)
Secant walls must be designed to ensure they maintain interlock to the required level. It
should be noted that whatever degree of interlock is designed for secant walls cannot be
guaranteed to provide a watertightness greater than BS 8102:2009 (BSI, 2009) Grade 1.
Section B1.9 in ICE Specification for Piling and Embedded Retaining Walls, 3rd edition
(ICE, 2016) provides information on watertightness assessments.

While it is usual to maintain male–female pile interlock to below the dredge level, there
may be opportunity in certain circumstances to found the female piles above the dredge
level if a suitable low-permeability stratum is present. It is important to clearly commu-
nicate any risks that may be present in such an arrangement, and have a suitable contrac-
tual arrangement in place covering risks associated with watertightness and the costs of
any potential remedial works.

Where water-bearing strata are retained by the secant wall, it is often a requirement to
take the toe of the retaining wall to a depth where it will provide a vertical cut-off by
effectively sealing in to a low-permeability stratum. This relies on the presence of such
a suitable stratum within a sensible depth of the toe level which is designed for wall
stability. In addition, a check should be undertaken to ascertain the level to which
male–female pile interlock can be maintained.

Where there is no low-permeability stratum within a depth considered to be economi-

cally or practically viable, the required toe level of the secant wall can be assessed by
undertaking a flow net analysis in conjunction with an assessment of flow rates into the
excavation which are considered to be tolerable. A sensitivity analysis should be under-
taken to assess the likely envelope of inflow rates based on potential variations in

203

Downloaded by [ The Institution of Civil Engineers] on [21/10/19]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 Temporary Works, Second edition

permeability (both vertical and horizontal), which in turn will depend on the degree of
anisotropy of the soil. Guidance on groundwater control is given in Chapter 6.

14.4.6 Vertical capacity of walls

Embedded retaining walls can also be required to carry vertical loads. The embedded
retaining wall can be constructed to a deeper toe than required for wall stability alone.
Any additional depth of wall can be constructed from plain concrete (i.e. constructed
unreinforced), subject to the net vertical loading being compressive in nature. Clearly,
the additional depth would need to be suitably reinforced to carry any tensile loads
(e.g. hydrostatic uplift forces). When designing embedded retaining walls to withstand
vertical loads, it is usual to consider only that part of the wall below the deepest
excavation level (i.e. the fully embedded length of the wall).

Where temporary lateral support to the wall is provided through ground anchorages, the
vertical stability of the wall should be checked due to the increased vertical loading on
the wall from the anchorages.

14.4.7 Other aspects

CIRIA C760 (Gaba et al., 2017) recommends that embedded retaining wall design makes
an allowance for unplanned excavation of 10% of the design retained height up to 0.5 m,
although this requirement may be reduced or omitted entirely subject to the agreement of
all interested parties and the implementation of sufficient control measures to ensure that
the design constraints are fully realised.

Where cohesive materials are present at the dredge level, consideration should be given
to the potential for these materials to degrade and soften, usually just within the top 1 m,
thus potentially adversely affecting the passive resistance afforded to the retaining wall.

The design surcharge load (generally a minimum surcharge of 10 kN/m2) should be

allowed to act on the active side of the retaining wall.

As well as considering the required wall toe level to maintain lateral and vertical stability,
certain ground conditions may require the wall toe to be taken deeper by consideration
of more global factors. One such scenario is where an embedded retaining wall is to be
constructed within deep soft cohesive deposits. The potential for basal failure of the
excavation, whereby the soft cohesive materials affect flow around the toe of the wall,
should be assessed in such a situation. Piping failure may need to be avoided and poten-
tial slip planes may need to be intercepted (see Chapter 10).

REFERENCES
BSI (British Standards Institution) (2004a) BS EN 1992-1-1:2004 + A1:2014. Eurocode 2:
Design of concrete structures. General rules and rules for buildings. BSI, London, UK.
BSI (2004b) BS EN 1997-1:2004 + A1:2013. Eurocode 7: Geotechnical design. General
rules. BSI, London, UK.
BSI (2009) BS 8102:2009. Code of practice for protection of below ground structures
against water from the ground. BSI, London, UK.

204

Downloaded by [ The Institution of Civil Engineers] on [21/10/19]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.
 Contiguous and secant piled walls

BSI (2010) BS EN 1536:2010 + A1:2015. Execution of special geotechnical works. Bored

piles. BSI, London, UK.
BSI (2015) BS 8002:2015. Code of practice for earth retaining structures. BSI, London,
UK.
EFFC/DFI (European Federation of Foundation Contractors/Deep Foundations Institute)
(2016) Best Practice Guide to Tremie Concrete for Deep Foundations, 1st edn. EFFC/
DFI, Bromley, UK/Hawthorne, NJ, USA.
Gaba A, Hardy S, Doughty L, Powrie W and Selemetas D (2017) Guidance on Embedded
Retaining Wall Design. CIRIA, London, UK, C760.
ICE (Institution of Civil Engineers) (2016) ICE Specification for Piling and Embedded
Retaining Walls, 3rd edn. ICE Publishing, London, UK.
Nicholson D, Tse CM and Penny C (1999) The Observational Method in Ground Engineer-
ing: Principles and Applications. CIRIA, London, UK, R185.

FURTHER READING
BSI (British Standards Institution) (1997) BS 8110-1:1997. Structural use of concrete. Code
of practice for design and construction. BSI, London, UK.
BSI (2015) BS 8004:2015. Code of practice for foundations. BSI, London, UK.
ICE (Institution of Civil Engineers) (2009) Reducing the Risk of Leaking Substructure. A
Clients’ Guide. ICE, London, UK.
ICE (2016) ICE Specification for Piling and Embedded Retaining Walls, 3rd edn. ICE Pub-
lishing, London, UK.
Powrie W and Batten M (2000) Prop Loads in Large Braced Excavations. CIRIA, London,
UK, PR77.
Puller MJ (2003) Deep Excavations: A Practical Manual, 2nd edn. Thomas Telford,
London, UK.
Twine D and Roscoe H (1999) Temporary Propping of Deep Excavations – Guidance on
Design. CIRIA, London, UK, C517.

Useful web addresses

Deep Foundations Institute: http://www.dfi.org (accessed 01/08/2018).
European Federation of Foundation Contractors: https://www.effc.org (accessed 01/08/
2018).
Federation of Piling Specialists: https://www.fps.org.uk (accessed 01/08/2018).

205

Downloaded by [ The Institution of Civil Engineers] on [21/10/19]. Copyright © ICE Publishing, all rights reserved.