VERTICAL SIDED EXCAVATIONS and SUPPORT STRUCTURES

Definition
An opened ground is normally called an excavation or trench. A trench is usually a means to an end,
a steep temporary cutting which will be backfilled as soon as a drain, pipeline, sewer or foundation
has been constructed. The structural design of a trench is usually the responsibility of the
construction company that has contracted to do the work, although the client’s engineer will wish to
veto any temporary works that are unsafe. The siting of the trench is normally constrained by its
function.

Excavation
Excavation is an undertaking which is usually on the critical path of a construction programme,
because construction work cannot start until it is completed. The time periods allocated to the
excavation operations must therefore be kept to, or bettered, otherwise delays to the whole
construction programme will ensue. For this reason planning each excavation, large or small, is
important and the figure below shows the principal decisions in the selection of the method of
excavation.

Decision diagram for selecting the method of excavation

Other factors
Other factors influencing the decisions are as follows:

Method of excavation and Choice of excavation equipment

It is far cheaper to excavate an area in one large operation (in bulk) than in several smaller
operations (in small bites). Similarly the choice of excavation equipment may influence the method
of excavation. The excavation plant needs to be no bigger than that which can excavate rapidly
enough to keep the excavation ahead of construction or if the rate excavation is limited by the rate at
which spoil can be carted away, can keep the lorries or conveyors filled.
1

Excavations and Support structures

Volume of earthwork (steepness of side slopes)
The volumes of an excavation is affected by the steepness of the side slopes. The figure below
shows how the gradient of the side slopes influences the volume of material to be removed for three
sizes of the square excavations.

Effect of gradient of side slopes on excavation volumes for square excavations

STABILITY/FAILURE OF EXCAVATION

Assessing the stability of an excavation mainly involves estimation of the limiting height/depth of
excavation and checking the possibility against base heave.

Modes of failure of trenches

The chief options in the design of a trench concern the slopes of its sides, the degree of structural
support of its sides, the length opened at any one time, and the removal of ground water. The most
frequent sources of trouble are depicted in the figures below.

Excavations and Support structures

Modes of failure of trenches

Excavations and Support structures

(i) the collapse of the vertical sides of poorly supported trenches, which can kill workers in the
trench and cause neighbouring ground to subside,

(ii) the heaving or softening of the base of the excavation due to high groundwater pressure, which
spoils the foundation for the pipe, etc.

(iii) the heaving of the base of the excavation due to shear failure of the soil, causing local
subsidence outside the trench and spoiling the levels inside,

(iv) the erosive action of the groundwater, washing sand or silt into the trench and causing local
subsidence, and

(v) the consolidation of neighbouring compressible soils due to the local reduction in groundwater
pressure which causes settlement of neighbouring foundations or the opening of sewer joints etc.

Note: The pressure of groundwater in the vicinity of the proposed trench is the KEY to each of the
modes of failure depicted in Figure 1. As seen in 203BE when we discussed the Rankine lateral
earth pressure, the presence of static groundwater behind the face of a retaining wall could double
or treble the thrust on it, perhaps causing the inadequate strutting to break or buckle as a wedge of
soil slides into the trench as shown in (i). If the ground is sandy or silty, high groundwater levels
will be immediately obvious due to influx of water into the trench, which will either flood it or be
successful in drawing down the water table.

Soil type
Vertical cuts in soil can only be supported when soil behaves in an undrained way (with an
undrained strength cu) or in a drained soil where there is some cohesion (c′). Clay therefore could
often be relied on to stand unsupported because of the cohesion. It can be shown theoretically that
an open excavation in normally consolidated clay soil will stand vertically without support provided
the height of the face does not exceed a certain critical depth, called the limiting depth, which
depends on the undrained (cu) or drained (c′) value . This is very useful during temporary works in
fine grained soils (typically clays). The excavation of trial pits/trenches and bored pile construction
techniques are two examples of where this is used in engineering practice.

Dry sands and gravels can stand at slopes equal to their natural angle of repose (Ɵ), depicted in the
figure below, no matter what the depth. With loose sands and gravels where c´ is zero, Ɵ may be
taken to be equal to φ´. Thus a drained cohesionless soil will always fail when the slope angle
reaches φ´, as in the absence of chemical or other bounding between soil particles, c′ = 0. Damp
sand possess some cohesion and can stand vertically for some time.

Cone shaped heap of loose sand

Ɵ = φ'

Angle of Repose

Excavations and Support structures

LIMITING HEIGHT/DEPTH OF EXCAVATION AND TENSION CRACKS

Unsupported vertical side excavations

Unsupported excavations would theoretically be possible in c – φ soils if the active lateral pressure
would not exceed the strength of the soil.

Failure of vertical sides

Consider the undrained excavation in a saturated clayey soil in Figure 6 showing the distribution of
active earth pressure against a smooth vertical surface.
The general expression for active lateral pressure in undrained clay is
 ha  K a H  2cu K a

At ground surface, H = 0

Thus the magnitude of the active lateral pressure at the ground surface is obtained as follows:
Substituting H = 0 in the equation  ha  K a H  2cu K a and solve for ha we get
 ha  2cu K a as the stress at the top of the excavation i.e. ground surface.

It will be seen that negative tensile stresses at the surface exists down to depth z0. The active lateral
stress at the bottom of the excavation is given by  ha  K a H  2cu K a . The lateral earth pressure
diagram is thus as shown in the figure below.

()2cu K a

z0

H Excav z0
Hc
ation

c u ,  u  sat

K a H  2c u K a
Distribution of active pressure in saturated clay

Tension cracks
A zone of tensile () stresses in the ground implies the formation of tension cracks. The depth z0 is
thus crucial. The theoretical maximum depth of the crack z0 can be determined by recognizing that
at the bottom of the crack, i.e. at depth z0 the lateral earth pressure is zero
ha = 0
Substituting ha = 0 in the equation  ha  K a H  2cu K a and solve for H = z0 we get

Excavations and Support structures

 2cu
z0  (Note that z0 is only the theoretical value thus must be used cautiously when
 Ka
estimating magnitudes of water pressure if crack is filled with water)
2c
NOTE here that if undrained conditions exist i.e. u = 0, then z 0  u


Lower bound value

z0 is the lower bound for vertical cut i.e. there would be no plastic deformation of the vertical cut
side from the ground surface to that depth. The wall is very stable.
It is difficult to rely on the tensile forces and they are usually ignored i.e. they cannot act on the wall
and thus provide support. The tensile stresses reduce the force required for stability of the wall.
Ignoring the tensile stresses therefore gives a more conservative solution. The pressure distribution
on the wall becomes as shown in the figure below.

z0

Distribution of active pressure in a saturated clay

If water is available it can fill up the tension crack and provide additional pressures on the wall. In this
situation the pressure diagram becomes as shown in the figure below

z0 Water

w z 0
Soil

Distribution of active pressure in a saturated clay plus effect of WT

Unsupported vertical side excavations

Unsupported excavations would theoretically be possible in c- soils and c-soils only if the active
lateral pressure would not exceed the strength of the soil.

Upper bound value

The theoretical maximum depth (Hc) for excavation without support would be at any point on the
vertical boundary of the excavation where the active lateral force (Pa) becomes equal to zero (refer
to figure on at the bottom of page 8 for tension cracks), thus

Excavations and Support structures

 1
Pa  0   H ( K a H  2cu K a )
2
1
0  K a H 2  2cu H K a
2
and solve for H = Hc
4cu 4c
Hc  NOTE here that if undrained conditions exist i.e. u = 0, then H c  u
 Ka 
Therefore Hc = 2z0

Hc is the upper bound for the vertical cut i.e. plastic deformation occurs, wall is at incipient failure
unsupported.

Heave (failure of trench excavation at the base)

If the soil below the base of the excavation is soft, normally consolidated soil, it is possible that
heaving can occur. The column of soil abcd shown in the figure below, above the base of the
excavation, acts as a surcharge on the soil below the excavation level c – d.

Bearing capacity of the ground adjacent to the excavation

This surcharge load may exceed the bearing capacity of the soft, normally consolidated soil, resulting
in heaving. The term heave refers to a condition where clay soil flows into the excavation giving rise
to the base elevation. The figure shows the generally assumed mechanism of base failure in a cohesive
soil. The slope of the straight portion of the slip surface is at 45° to the horizontal and the curved
portion is a circular arc with its centre at the base corner of the vertical side. From geometry of the
figure, the radius of this arc R = Btsin45° = 0.7Bt.
Surface or level c – d may be regarded as the base of the footing with width B carrying the weight of
the column of the soil abcd above it plus any surcharge qs on the surface a – b.
The downward movement is resisted by the shearing resistance T along the surface b – c.
T = H0 for undrained clay  = cu
Therefore T = cuH0
v is the net vertical stress on plane c – d and the net load is Bv
If the bearing capacity of the clay along plane c – d is just adequate to avoid foundation failure then the

Excavations and Support structures

equilibrium can be presented by
Bv = (BH0 – cuH0) + qsB

Solving for net vertical stress v

c
 v  H 0 (  u )  q s where B = 0.7Bt
B

Ultimate bearing capacity qult of the soil is calculated in the same way as for a footing using
appropriate bearing capacity factors:

qult = DNq + 0.5BN + cuNc in the figure D = H0 depth of footing

Since Nq =1 and N = 0
thus qult = D + cuNc

The net bearing capacity qnet = qult - D

Thus qnet = cuNc

Factor of safety against heave is given by the ratio of net bearing capacity to net stress. Add
surcharge stress to the net stress if applicable.

cu
( F S ) heave  N c substituting for v
 v  qs
cu
( F S ) heave  N c
c
H 0 (  u )  q s
B
NOTE: The above equation best suits conditions where H0/B > 1. If H0/B <1 the shear resistance
along b – c is ignored making the design more pessimistic (worse case scenario). Bjerrum and Eide
(1956) showed that the factor of safety against bottom heave in this case is basically the ratio of
bearing capacity of undrained clay to the overburden pressure (+ any surcharge)
cu cu
( F S ) heave  N c or ( F S ) heave  N c
 v  qs H 0  q s
where Nc is a bearing capacity coefficient or factor which can be obtained from several charts e.g.
Skempton (1951). For practical purposes coefficient Nc can be approximated by

 H  H H
N c  61  0.2 0  for 0  2.5 and N c  9 for 0  2.5
 B  B B

where H0 / B is the depth to width ratio.

If (FS)heave < 1.5, the sheeting should be extended below the base of the excavation for stability.

As a rule of thumb (FS)heave ≥ 1.5

CANTILEVER SHEET PILE WALLS

These may be used as either temporary or permanent supports for excavations in granular soil and
perhaps short-term ones to clays and silts. The supported height is comparatively small due to the
8

Excavations and Support structures

flexibility of the wall. The piles are driven into the soil to a depth necessary for stability which
depends completely on the passive resistance of the soil.

Stability
For a cantilever wall the stresses acting at failure can be as shown in the figure below. Cantilever sheet
pile walls are analysed by assuming that rotation occurs at some point just above the base (toe) of the
wall. The consequence of assuming rotation above the base is that, below the point of rotation, the
lateral pressure is passive behind the wall and active in front of the wall, thus the rotation is resisted by
two passive forces Pp1 and Pp2.

x Active
d Passive
C
z Passive
C, Point of Rotation
(a) Actual wall (b) Actual Pressure distribution

(a) Geometry and (b) Pressure diagram on Cantilever Sheet Pile Wall

For design we need to determine the required depth of penetration d for stability and then to size the
wall to resist the maximum moment. To determine d required for a given height H we need to consider
both moment and force equilibrium:

 F x= 0 M=0

If the soil is dry (γ) and the soil type is cohesionless or frictional, i.e. -soils, the pressures and
forces are as shown in the figure below
Pressures Forces

Pa1

  K  x    K  ( x H )
h p h a Pp1 ya =(H + x)/3
   K  ( x H )
h p
yp = x/3

Pp2

   K  (d  H )
h p
Approximation of Pressure and Force Quantities
9

Excavations and Support structures

As the determination of the Pp2 is complicated, the stability calculations are simplified by:
a) Assuming that Pp2 acts at the point of rotation as shown in the figure above and
b) Lengthening the theoretical penetration depth (x) by 20%, so that

z = 0.2x
d=x+z
Thus d = 1.2x
Also the passive resistance is decreased by a factor of safety FSp.

Forces can be calculated as:

1 xH
Pa1  K a  ( x  H ) 2 acting at ya 
2 3
1 1 x
Pp1  K P  x 2 Factored Pp1  KP x2 acting at yp 
2 2 FS p 3
The FSp is usually between 1.5 and 2.0.

Note: If moment of forces are taken about the centre if rotation, then Pp2 can be eliminated, thus it
need not be taken into consideration any more.

For equilibrium, the sum of moments about C = 0

M C  PP1 y p  Pa1 y a  0

1 x 1 (x H )
 K p x 2  K a  ( x  H ) 2 0
2 3 2 3

K p x 3 K p ( x  H )3 Cancelling  and the divisor 6

  0
6 6

K px 3  K a ( x  H )3  0

K a (x  H )3  K p x3

xH 
3
Kp
  
 x  Ka

H Kp
1  3
x Ka
H Kp
3 1
x Ka
H
From which x
Kp
3 1
Ka

10

Excavations and Support structures

 1.2 H
And total depth of penetration, d: d
Kp
3 1
Ka

Factor of safety
Before the above formulae can be applied, the value of Kp has to be calculated so that it includes a
factor of safety. Two methods are introduced below:

Method 1 – The Factored Moment Method (FMM)

The passive pressures are reduced by using a reduced value of the passive earth pressure coefficient,
Kp(design) and Ka remains unaltered.
Kp
K p ( design )  where the value of FSp is usually = 2 or more.
FS p
1.2 H
The previous formula is thus expressed as for d: d 
Kp
3 1
FS p K a

Method 2 – The Factored Strength Method (FSM)

The soil strength is given by  = c +  tan 
For a frictional -soils both Kp and Ka are modified by a factor. This is achieved by dividing tan  by
a Factor FS. The design parameters are:


 design  where the value of FS = 1.2 – 1.5,
FS
and using the reduced angle of friction when calculating the earth pressure coefficients Ka and Kp.

1  sin  design
Kp =

1  sin  design
1
Ka =
Kp
1.2 H
Substituting Ka into previous formula for d: d
K p 1
3 2

For a frictionless (cohesive) cu-soils this is achieved by dividing cu by FSu.

c
cu design  u where FSu = 1.5 – 2.
FS u

The application of these mobilisation factors results in a higher active pressure and lower passive
pressure than the unfactored soil strength parameters.

Bending of sheet piles (structural strength)

Sheet pile wall could fail in bending because of its flexibility. Having determined the required depth
of penetration, the next stage in design is to calculate the magnitude of maximum bending moment
Mmax in the wall so that an appropriate wall thickness and strength (i.e. suitability stiff pile) can be
selected from the manufacturer’s catalogue. The position down the wall of the maximum moment
11

Excavations and Support structures

can be found by determining where the shear stress in the wall is zero. The maximum bending
moment occurs at the point of zero shear force where active and passive forces are equal in
magnitude, located at a depth h below B in the figure below (i.e. below the excavation).

B
Pa
h Pp
yp ya

Bending Moment

Applying Method 1:
1
Active force: P a  K a  (h  H ) 2
2
1
Passive force: P p  K p h 2
2 FS p
Equating forces: Pa = Pp
1 1
or K a  (h  H ) 2  K p h 2
2 2 FS p
K ph2
K a (h  H ) 
2

FS p
hH 
2
Kp
  
 h  K a FS p

H  Kp
Re-arranging,  1 
h  K a FS p
H Kp
From which  1
h K a FS p
H
Hence the position of Mmax is given by: h 
Kp
1
K a FS p
For Mmax, take moments about point of zero shear.
hH
Pa is acting at: ya 
3
h
Pp is acting at yp 
3
max = Ppyp – Paya
1 1
 M max  K p h 3  K a  (h  H ) 3
6 FS p 6

12

Excavations and Support structures

   K ph 
3

M max    K a (h  H ) 3 
6  FS p 

Surface Loading
Note that as the factor of safety increases the maximum moment also increases.
The factor of safety can be dramatically reduced by surcharge loadings on the supported ground next to
the wall as shown in the figure below. For a uniform surcharge then the effective active pressure can
be increased by Ka s, while for a concentrated load from a footing the Coulomb method of trial
wedges can be used to determine the active force on the wall. In the latter situation allowance must be
made for the fact that the point of application of the load will also change.
s

QL

PA

 h  K a ( s  d z ) The force PA can be estimated using the method

of wedges. The line of action can be estimated
using elastic solutions
 v  s  d z
Effect of Surface Loading on Sheet pile wall stability

Ground water
Consideration must also be given to the water pressures acting on the wall.

Water
Table
Water

Effective stresses must be used in Total vertical stress,  v  sat z

evaluating the lateral stresses from
Water pressures can be determined from flow net
Rankine’s method  h  K v
Hence  v  v u and  h  K v
Pore water pressures are the same on
Forces due to water pressures are different on the
each side of the wall so their effects
two sides of the wall so their effects must be
cancel when considering force and
included when considering force and moment
moment equilibrium
equilibrium.

Effects of pore water pressure

For economic reasons cantilever walls are usually limited to excavations less than 6 m deep. They are
often used to support low banks of free draining sand and gravel soils. They are not suitable for the
13

Excavations and Support structures

 long term support of soft clayey soils (clay or silt). Corrosion can also be a problem with steel sheet
piles.

Anchored sheet pile walls

These are suitable for permanent supports to both cohesionless and cohesive soils.

Advantages:
1. Reduction in the depth of penetration
2. Increase in the height to be supported
3. Allowing the use of lighter sections, due to the reduction of bending moments and deflections.

Unknowns
a) Depth of penetration (d)
b) Tension (T0 in the tie rods
c) Maximum bending moments (Mmax)

In principle, anchored sheet piles are usually used when the height of the retained soil is in excess of 5
m. With increasing height, a series of anchors, as opposed to single anchor, might be necessary, so as
to limit the deflection and control the bending moments.

There are two main methods of analysis:

i) Free-earth support method.
ii) Fixed-earth support method.

Free-earth support method

It is assumed, in this analysis, that
1. The wall is hinged at its base, hence it can rotate about this point.
2. There will be no reaction and the sheet pile is supported by the passive pressure in front of the
face and the anchor.

Deflected h
position of
Anchor or Prop T
the wall
between sides of
excavation
H

Pa

d
Pp

Free-earth support method

Considering a cohesionless soil

1
Active force: P a  K a  (d  H ) 2
2
14

Excavations and Support structures

 1
Passive force: P p  K p  hd 2
2 FS p
Tension Force: For equilibrium the sum of horizontal forces = 0
F = T + Pp – Pa = 0
 T = Pa – Pp
1 1
T  K a  (d  H ) 2  K p d 2
2 2 FS p
 K pd 2 
 Tension force: T   K a (d  H )  
2

2  FS p 
For d, take moments about the tie rod
2  Pp  2d 
 M 0  Pa  3 (d  H )  h  FS  3  H  h   0
p

2  Pp  2d 
Equating Pa  (d  H )  h    H  h
3  FS  3
p 
As Pa and Pp are also expressed in terms of d, there is no advantage in deriving a complicated cubic
formula in order to evaluate it. As easier application of the equation above is illustrated by the tutorial
example question.

Fixed earth support method

In this analysis the lower end of the pile is assumed to be fixed and cannot rotate. The fixity is
provided by the passive resistance of the soil. Because the achievement of perfect fixity is doubtful in
most soils, the method is applied only to DENSE SANDS and GRAVELS. The solution is again
derived by means of the net pressure diagram. This is a statically indeterminate problem.

Note: the free-earth support method is used commonly in ALL soils.

Steps in analysis for anchored sheet pile wall design:

 Determine the effective vertical stresses
 Determine the effective lateral stresses assuming Rankine active and passive pressures
 Factor the lateral pressures to limit the deformations - either by factoring Kp or by factoring ´
 Add in water pressures if water levels different on two sides of the wall
 Take moments about the anchor/strut to determine the required depth of the wall
 Use force equilibrium to determine the anchor force
 Design anchor to withstand the force
 Determine maximum moment in the wall and check that section is acceptable

Anchorage
There are two points to consider in the design of the support to the tie rods.
1. The distance of the anchor from the sheet piles, that is the length of the tie rod.
2. The prevention of bearing failure of soil supporting the anchor.

Length of the tie rod (L)

It is important to place the anchor well away from the sheet pile wall that is outside the zone of
possible failure. The figure below shows the safe zone suggested by Lohmeyer (1934).

15

Excavations and Support structures

Construction of anchors
Anchors may be constructed in various ways. The most common are shown in the figure below:
(a) Sheet pile anchor wall lying parallel to the sheet pile wall, extending from the ground surface.
(b) Raking pile anchor.
(c) Ground grouted anchor (the most common, easier and cheaper to construct).

Horizontal bracing
This method of support is applied to vertical cuts, deeper than 1.2 m. These are normally narrow, deep
trenches – excavated to accommodate pipelines etc to prevent collapse prior or during construction.

Timber support
For cohesive soils, one or several poling board may be omitted (open timbering) whilst closed
timbering is appropriate in loose wet soils. At least 1 m high handrail should be constructed on both
sides for safety.

16

Excavations and Support structures

The horizontal and vertical distances between the struts (or braces) depend on their strength to carry
the estimated pressures acting on the poling boards and the waling.
Also the cross section of the strut depend on its material, length (l) and the axial forces transmitted by
the waling.

The supporting arrangement may be in various ways:

1. Using adjustable steel struts.
2. Using standard steel columns or beam section.
3. Using sheet piles instead of poling board for deeper cuts.

Pressure distribution against the sheeting

In contrast to retaining wall problems, there is no theoretical solution for the soi-pressure distribution
over the depth of cut. The reason for this is twofold:

1. Whilst the a retaining wall is homogenous, stiff structure, the sheeting is flexible. The
flexibility depends on the positioning of the struts during excavation. Moreover any non-
uniformity in the supported soil can greatly influence the magnitude of force in each strut, but
has no effect on a rigid wall.
2. The development and magnitude of force in the struts depend largely on the sequence of their
installation, hence on the method of excavation.
Notes:
Should one strut fail, then the adjacent members would carry its load. This cannot occur, when the
support is a solid wall.
Because of uncertainties involved, the pressure distribution, in this case ca only be approximated on
the bases of actual measurement of strut loads during and after construction. Terzaghi and peck
suggested the distributions, for cohesionless soils as shown in the figure below.

Lateral earth pressure distribution behind braced excavation in -soils

1  sin  
where K a =
1  sin  

17

Excavations and Support structures

For Cohesive soils
Terzaghi and Peck suggested the pressure diagrams shown below for cohesive soils i.e. clay.

Lateral earth pressure distribution behind braced excavation in c- soils

H
The choice of the diagram depends on the stability number of the clay given by the ratio and the
cu
degree of consolidation:
H
If  4 then (c) is to be used and corresponding maximum pressure is calculated by:
cu
pmax = 1.0KAH where KA = 1 – (m4cu/H). Substitute and re-arrange we get pmax = H – 4mcu
where 0.4  m < 1.
For stable sensitive NC clay use m =1, thus pmax = H – 4cu. The lateral earth pressure is less thus
lesser support force is required.
For soft NC clay use m = 0.4, thus pmax = H – 1.6cu. The lateral earth pressure is more thus more
support force is required.

H
If 4 then (b) is to be used and corresponding maximum pressure is calculated by:
cu
pmax = 0.2H to 0.4H The clay is considered to be Over Consolidated (OC).

Other alternatively LEP expressions

pmax = H – 4mcu is expressed as pmax = H – mcu in

this figure on the left where m = 0.4FSheave

The range of FSheave is 1.6 for OC clay to about 4 for

soft NC clay.

18

Excavations and Support structures