See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/245408157

Finite-element analysis of secant pile wall installation

Article  in  ICE Proceedings Geotechnical Engineering · January 2010

DOI: 10.1680/geng.2010.163.4.209

CITATIONS READS

3 827

2 authors:

Lindsey Sebastian Bryson David G. Zapata-Medina

University of Kentucky National University of Colombia
64 PUBLICATIONS   363 CITATIONS    35 PUBLICATIONS   169 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Forecast model for the evaluation of tunnel inflows in crystalline rocks of the high plateau of Eastern Antioquia (Colombia) View project

Performance of Urban Cofferdams Braces with Segmental Steel and Reinforced Concrete Ring Beams View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Lindsey Sebastian Bryson on 12 July 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Proceedings of the Institution of
Civil Engineers
Geotechnical Engineering 163
August 2010 Issue GE4
Pages 209–219
doi: 10.1680/geng.2010.163.4.209
Paper GE-D-08-00045
Received 12/08/2008
Accepted 21/10/2009
L. Sebastian Bryson
Keywords: diaphragm walls/ Assistant Professor,
excavation/retaining walls Department of Civil
Engineering, University of
Kentucky, Lexington, USA
Finite-element analysis of secant pile wall installation
L. S. Bryson MSc, PhD and D. G. Zapata-Medina
A common practice in the USA for excavation support
system design is to assume that the complete support
system is ‘wished in place’. This implies that the
construction of the in situ wall component and the
installation of the supports do not cause any movements
or changes in the in situ stress state. However, the
installation can cause appreciable changes in the in situ
soil stress conditions, which result in significant
movements in the surrounding ground. This paper
presents the results of efforts to evaluate the factors
that influence movements associated with excavation
support wall installation, using a series of three-
dimensional finite-element models. These analyses
demonstrated that soil responses and the processes that
produce them are three-dimensional in nature. Thus it
can be concluded that fully three-dimensional analyses
are required to provide insight into these complex
relationships.
1. INTRODUCTION
Construction projects involving deep excavations are prevalent
in many urban areas around the world. Stiff excavation
support systems, which typically involve the construction of in
situ retaining walls such as secant and contiguous pile walls
and diaphragm walls, are widely used to minimise lateral and
vertical ground movements. A common practice for excavation
support system design in the USA is to assume that the
complete support system is ‘wished in place’ (WIP). This implies
that the construction of the in situ wall component and the
installation of the supports do not cause any movements or
changes in the in situ stress state. However, the installation
process can cause appreciable changes in the in situ soil stress
conditions, which result in significant movements in the
surrounding ground (Gourvenec and Powrie, 1999; Ng, 1992;
Ng and Yan, 1999). Finno et al. (2002) observed this to be the
case during the excavation for the Chicago Avenue and State
Street subway renovation project in Chicago, Illinois. The
lateral deformations recorded during wall installation were
approximately 25% of the total displacement measured during
the excavation. Thus the assumption of a WIP system would
have led to a significant underestimation of excavation-related
lateral movements for this case.
This paper presents the results of efforts to evaluate the factors
that influence movements associated with excavation support
wall installation. Because of the complexity associated with
Geotechnical Engineering 163 Issue GE4
David G. Zapata-Medina
Former Research Assistant,
Department of Civil
Engineering, University of
Kentucky, Lexington, USA
MSc
evaluating the wall installation process and the related ground
movements, a three-dimensional (3D) finite-element model is
required for a realistic analysis. The finite-element software
Plaxis 3DFoundation version 2.0 beta was used to model the
installation sequences. The Chicago and State excavation was
used as a reference case. This excavation is well documented
(Bryson, 2002; Finno and Bryson, 2002; Finno et al., 2002),
and is one of the few cases in the literature that include a
sizable amount of detail regarding the wall installation
activities and possible influences of adjacent and underground
structures. Although several researchers (Gourvenec and
Powrie, 1999; Ng and Yan, 1999; Schafer and Triantafyllidis,
2004, 2006) have presented 3D numerical models of wall
installation effects, those efforts concerned only diaphragm
walls. The research presented in this paper adds the case of a
3D numerical analyses of a secant pile wall.
2. CHICAGO AND STATE EXCAVATION SUPPORT
WALL INSTALLATION
Details of the Chicago and State excavation and support system
performance have been presented by Finno and his co-workers
(Finno and Bryson, 2002; Finno et al., 2002). However, specific
information about the case is presented in this paper to provide
a frame of reference for the modelling assumptions and
simulation choices used for this research.
2.1. Description of the site
The Chicago Avenue and State Street subway renovation
project in Chicago, IL, included a 13 m excavation in soft to
medium clay to expose the existing subway station and
tunnels. The crown of the tunnels was located approximately
5.8 m below ground surface. Field instrumentation was
installed prior to constructing the support wall to monitor the
performance of the excavation support system and the
excavation-induced response of the adjacent Frances Xavier
Warde School. The structural response of the Warde School
was of particular interest because of its close proximity to the
excavation. The basement wall of the school was located
approximately 2.1 m from the centreline of the support wall
(i.e. a clear distance between the support wall and the wall of
the school is 1.65 m). See Bryson (2002) for a complete
description of the adjacent structures.
Figure 1 shows a plan view of the Chicago and State
excavation support wall in reference to the field
instrumentation locations, the tunnel, and the Warde School.
Finite-element analysis of secant pile wall installation Bryson • Zapata-Medina 209
Delivered by ICEVirtualLibrary.com to:
IP: 128.163.155.166
On: Sun, 21 Aug 2011 01:55:38

Chicago Avenue
N modelling the construction of
5 the tunnel and the school,
0 5
Scale: m
State Street
4 1
Secant pile wall
Inclinometer
location 2
Subway
Piezometer
location tunnel
Figure 1. Plan view of excavation site
As shown in the figure, several inclinometers located around
the site were used to measure lateral movements of the soil
mass behind the secant pile wall. In situ pore pressures were
recorded on both sides of the excavation, at locations
corresponding to the inclinometer 1 and inclinometer 4
locations. Measurements for both the inclinometers and
piezometers were taken before the installation of the wall, and
at frequent intervals during construction.
2.2. Subsurface conditions
Figure 2 shows the subsurface conditions, index properties and
undrained shear strengths obtained from both field and
laboratory tests for the Chicago and State project site. These
data are shown with reference to the secant pile wall. The
elevations in the figure are given in terms of Chicago City
datum (CCD), where an elevation of 0 m CCD corresponds to
the mean average level of Lake Michigan. The subsurface
conditions consist of a fill deposit overlying a sequence of
lightly overconsolidated glacial clay deposits. The fill is mostly
medium dense sand but also contains construction debris.
Beneath the fill lie four geologic strata: Blodgett, Deerfield,
Park Ridge and Tinley. The top three strata are ice margin
layers deposited under water, and are distinguished by water
content and undrained shear strength, whereas the Tinley is a
lodgement till characterised as being very dense to hard and
relatively incompressible (Chung and Finno, 1992).
3. DEVELOPMENT OF THE FINITE-ELEMENT MODEL
It was suggested by Finno et al. (2002) that the existing
subway tunnel and the presence of the Warde School reduced
predicted ground movements because the tunnel added a
stabilising weight to the centre of the excavation, and the
presence of the school reduced the overall weight of soil
behind the wall, since it weighed less than the excavated soil. It
was thus hypothesised that the school and the tunnel would
also affect ground movements associated with wall installation.
210 Geotechnical Engineering 163 Issue GE4 Finite-element analysis of secant pile wall installation
Delivered by ICEVirtualLibrary.com to:
IP: 128.163.155.166
On: Sun, 21 Aug 2011 01:55:38
These potentially significant
effects were evaluated by
and including those
modelling phases in the
overall model of the wall
Frances Xavier installation. Realistic models
Warde School
of the tunnel and school
constructions were possible
because of the comprehensive
nature of the case data
presented by Bryson (2002)
and the historic data recorded
for the original construction
of the Chicago and State
subway station and tunnel
(Terzaghi, 1943).
3.1. Modelling the tunnel
Terzaghi (1943) described the
construction methods and
procedures for the original
Chicago subway project.
Excavation was performed
using the liner-plate
tunnelling method. The tunnel consists of twin subway tubes
and passenger platforms, and is symmetrical about its
centreline. The tunnel travels in the north and south directions,
beneath State Street. Each tube is approximately 5 m wide and
6 m tall in the interior, and each passenger platform is 2 m
wide and 5 m tall in the interior. The bottom elevation of the
tunnel is located at
9 m CCD.
3.1.1. Temporary support system. Figure 3 shows a
representation of the temporary liner-plate support system used
for the construction of the Chicago and State tunnel, and the
equivalent system employed in the analysis. Also included in
the figure are the section properties of the steel ribs sections.
The ribs consisted of 150 mm 3 25.7 kg/m (6 in 3 17.25 lb/ft)
steel I-beam sections spaced at 0.6–0.76 m (2–2.5 ft) on
centres, and were installed in sections, starting at the crown.
The spaces between the ribs were bridged by the liner-plates.
For modelling purposes, the actual system section was
converted into a plate element with an equivalent thickness de
¼ 98 mm. This equivalent thickness accounts for the steel ribs
and the actual thickness of the liner plates.
3.1.2. Permanent support system. The cross-section of the
permanent concrete liner for the Chicago and State tunnel can
be seen in Figure 4. The liner thicknesses at the crown, mid-
height and bottom are 0.6 m, 0.75 m and 0.8 m respectively.
For modelling purposes, the shape of the tunnel was
approximated to straight elements. Note that just horizontal
and vertical members were used, because Plaxis 3DFoundation
does not allow the input of inclined planes. Walls are
considered to be vertical members, and were modelled using
eight-node quadrilateral plate elements with six degrees of
freedom per node: three translational degrees of freedom and
three rotational degrees of freedom. Floors are considered to be
horizontal members. These members were modelled using six-
node triangular plate elements with six degrees of freedom per
Bryson • Zapata-Medina
 Elevation:
m CCD Su: kPa Moisture content: %
Secant pile 0 50 100 150 0 10 20 30 40 50
5 wall

and fill
Sand
Fill
0

clay
Stiff
Soft clay
Blodgett

⫺5 Med.
clay
Deerfield

Medium
clay

⫺10
Park Ridge

Stiff clay

⫺15
Tinley

Hard
clay

Field vane Plastic limit

CIU TXE Liquid limit
CIU TXC Natural moisture content
⫺20

Figure 2. Subsurface profile

0·0048 m
tf

Supporting
plate
de
Depth, d x

Steel ribs
1·0 m

tw
bf 0·61 m
(a) (b)

in ⫻ lbf/ft Area d bf tf tw Ixx Iyy

2 4
5·07 in 6·00 in 3·565 in 0·359 in 0·465 in 26·3 in 2·31 in4
S6 ⫻ 17·25
3·271 ⫻ 10⫺3 m2 0·1524 m 0·0905 m 0·0092 m 0·0118 m 1·09 ⫻ 10⫺5 m4 9·61 ⫻ 10⫺7 m4

Figure 3. Temporary support system: (a) actual; (b) equivalent

node. Both floor and wall elements allow for plate deflections
due to shearing as well as bending. In addition, the plate
elements can change length when an axial force is applied. For
further reference see Brinkgreve and Broere (2004). An elastic
modulus of concrete Ec ¼ 21 3 106 kPa was assumed for both
wall and floor elements of the permanent liner.
3.2. Modelling the school
The Warde School is a three-storey concrete frame building
supported on shallow foundations. The floor slabs are
supported by columns at interior locations and masonry
bearing walls around the perimeter. The interior columns rest
on reinforced concrete spread footings, which are 0.76 m thick

Geotechnical Engineering 163 Issue GE4 Finite-element analysis of secant pile wall installation Bryson • Zapata-Medina 211
Delivered by ICEVirtualLibrary.com to:
IP: 128.163.155.166
On: Sun, 21 Aug 2011 01:55:38
 0·6 m 80
0·6 m Columns footing
loads (typ)
136 106 117

1·3 m
0·75 m
108 116

80
71 72 62

0·8 m

Actual tunnel Approximated 96

section tunnel section 165 80 139

80
90
Figure 4. Permanent support liner

Footing loads
in kPa
106
and vary in size from 3 m 3 3 m to 4.5 m 3 4.5 m. The 74
bearing walls rest on a 2.75 m tall reinforced concrete

80
basement wall, which is supported by a continuous footing N
0.2 m thick and 1.2 m wide. The average depth of the 110 91
foundations was found to be at 3.7 m below ground surface 73 Scale: m
(i.e. +0.6 m CCD). Figure 5 shows a plan view of the school’s Strip footing
loads (typ) 0 5
foundation, and indicates the input footing loads used in the
finite-element model simulation. 80

Floor and wall elements were used to model the footings and
reinforced concrete basement wall respectively. In addition, a
floor slab resting on the ground at an elevation of +1.5 m CCD
was included in the analysis to model the final basement floor
and avoid basal heave of the soil. An elastic modulus of
concrete Ec ¼ 25 3 106 kPa was assumed for all the elements
of the school. Table 1 presents the floor and wall material
parameters assigned to the structural elements of the tunnel
and school. In the table, d is element thickness; ª is bulk unit
weight; E1 and E2 are Young’s modulus in the major and
minor principal directions respectively; and
is Poisson’s ratio.
3.3. Modelling the wall construction
The secant pile wall was constructed with overlapping drilled
shafts 915 mm in diameter and 18.3 m long, filled with 7 MPa
strength concrete. Each shaft overlapped adjacent shafts by
150 mm. W24 3 55 steel sections were placed in alternating
shafts to provide additional stiffness to the wall (Finno et al.,
2002). Figure 6 shows the construction sequence of the secant
pile wall. Due to the high number of elements required to
model circular shafts, and the consequent increase in
Figure 5. Frances Xavier Warde School foundation plan and
applied loads
calculation time and modelling effort, a simplified geometry of
rectangular slots was used to model the secant pile wall.
The construction of a single segment of the wall was simulated
in the finite-element model using two construction-stage
calculations. In the first calculation stage the soil within the
slot was removed, and a load per unit area was applied to the
exposed faces. These loads modelled the hydrostatic pressure of
the support fluid (i.e. water or bentonite) acting on the faces of
the excavated slot. This pressure ensured the stability of the
excavated hole. In addition, some models were completed
without applying hydrostatic loads, in order to model an
unsupported hole. This was the case during the wall
construction at the Chicago and State excavation. In the
second calculation stage the applied loads were deactivated,
and the slot clusters were filled with a linear elastic grout
material.

Units Linear (isotropic) model parameters

d: mm ª: kN/m3 E1 ¼ E2 : kN/m2

Warde School parameters

Internal footings 760 23.6 25 3 106 0.2
Wall footings 200 23.6 25 3 106 0.2
Basement floor and wall 400 23.6 25 3 106 0.2
Tunnel parameters
Temporary liner (floor and wall) 98 76.8 2 3 108 0.3
Permanent liner (bottom) 800 23.6 21 3 106 0.2
Permanent liner (top) 600 23.6 21 3 106 0.2
Permanent liner (sides) 750 23.6 21 3 106 0.2
Permanent liner (middle) 1300 23.6 21 3 106 0.2

Table 1. Floor and wall material parameters for school and tunnel

212 Geotechnical Engineering 163 Issue GE4 Finite-element analysis of secant pile wall installation Bryson • Zapata-Medina
Delivered by ICEVirtualLibrary.com to:
IP: 128.163.155.166
On: Sun, 21 Aug 2011 01:55:38
 Model parameters Input values
Secondary shafts
(complete within 48 h
of primary shafts) Type Non-porous
ª: kN/m3 24
k x ¼ k y ¼ k z : m/day 0
Eg : kN/m2 8.9 3 106

0.2
Rinterf 1
1·524 m
Table 2. Linear-elastic material parameters for secant pile wall

6·15 m
modulus of the grout, Eg , is a composite value that includes
0·75 m the contribution of the steel sections.

3.4. Soil constitutive models

The hardening soil model (HSM) was used to represent the
W24 ⫻ 55
I ⫽ 5·666 ⫻ 10⫺4 m4 Upper Blodgett, Lower Blodgett, Deerfield, Park Ridge, and
Tinley clay. The HSM is an elasto-plastic multi-yield surface
f ⬘g ⫽ 7 MPa
model. Details of the mathematical formulation of the model
can be found in Schanz et al. (1999). Failure is defined by
Mohr–Coulomb failure criteria. Two families of yield surfaces
0·75 m
Primary shafts are considered to account for both volumetric and shear plastic
strains. A yield cap surface controls the volumetric plastic
0·915 m 0·90 m strains. On this cap, the flow rule is associative. On the
(a) (b) shearing yield surfaces, increments of plastic strain are non-
associative, and the plastic potential is defined to ensure a
Figure 6. Secant pile wall: (a) as constructed; (b) modelled as hyperbolic stress–strain response for triaxial compression load
rectangular slots conditions.

The input parameters used for modelling the wall material are
presented in Table 2. These parameters are the unit weight of
the grout material ª, the hydraulic conductivity k (the
subscripts denote direction), and the interface strength Rinterf .
Note that Rinterf ¼ 1.0 for a rigid interface (i.e. the interface has
the same strength as the associated soil layer) and Rinterf , 1.0
for a flexible interface (i.e. the interface has a strength less
than that of the associated soil layer). The elastic stiffness
The input HSM values used for this research are given in Table
3. These values were determined from extensive triaxial
laboratory testing of samples taken from Chicago soils
(Roboski, 2001). The friction angle , cohesion c and dilatancy
angle ł are estimated assuming Mohr–Coulomb failure
criteria. The secant stiffness at 50% stress level in a standard
drained triaxial test, E ref50 , the tangent stiffness for primary
oedometer loading, E ref oed , and the unloading–reloading
stiffness, E ref
ur , are stiffness parameters corresponding to a

Hardening soil model Upper Lower Deerfield Park Ridge Hard clay
parameters Blodgett Blodgett

Behavior Undrained Undrained Undrained Undrained Undrained

ªunsat : kN/m3 18.1 18.1 18.85 19.63 20.42
ªsat : kN/m3 18.1 18.1 18.85 19.63 20.42
k x ¼ k z : m/day 0.00015 0.00015 0.00015 0.00015 0.00015
k y : m/day 0.00009 0.00009 0.00009 0.00009 0.00009
E ref
50 : kN/m
2
2350 3700 4000 11700 24658
ref
E oed : kN/m2 1600 2300 2440 4090 17261
E ref
ur : kN/m
2
10 000 29 100 30 500 35 000 73 975
cref : kN/m2 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05
: degrees 24.1 27 28.9 31.4 35
ł: degrees 0 0 0 0 0

ur 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2
pref : kN/m2 100 100 100 100 100
m 1.0 0.91 1.0 0.94 0.6
KNC0 0.59 0.55 0.52 0.48 0.426
Rf 0.7 0.77 0.71 0.83 0.9
Rinterf 1 1 1 0.5 0.5

Table 3. Constitutive model parameters for clay layers (Roboski, 2001)

Geotechnical Engineering 163 Issue GE4 Finite-element analysis of secant pile wall installation Bryson • Zapata-Medina 213
Delivered by ICEVirtualLibrary.com to:
IP: 128.163.155.166
On: Sun, 21 Aug 2011 01:55:38
 reference stress (pref ¼ 100 kPa), and are used to write stress- obtained using inverse modelling techniques at a different
dependent hyperbolic relationships for E50 , Eoed and Eur . The excavation site in the Chicago area with the same lithology
amount of stress dependence is given by the power m. These (Blackburn, 2005). Unfortunately, because the sand fill and clay
relations are given as crust data were obtained using inverse analyses at a different
site, direct comparison of the parameters is not strictly valid.
  However, the Mohr–Coulomb and HSM input parameters, as
c cos 

93 sin  m
1 E i ¼ E ref complete sets, will tend to adequately reflect the behaviour of
i
c cos  þ p ref sin 
the sand fill and clay crust layers.

where Ei ¼ E50 , Eoed and Eur , and
93 is the confining stress in
the triaxial test. The Poisson’s ratio for unloading—reloading,

ur , is usually set between 0.15 and 0.3. For this study a value
of
ur ¼ 0.2 was typically used. The parameter K NC 0 was
0 ¼ 1
sin  )
estimated using Jaky’s empirical relationship (K NC
and the peak friction angle. The failure ratio Rf is given as qf /
qa , where qf is the ultimate deviatoric stress and qa is the
asymptotic value of the shear strength.
The sand fill and the clay crust layers were modelled using the
classical Mohr–Coulomb soil model. Table 4 lists the model
parameters, along with other input data required for the finite-
element model. These data were obtained from laboratory data
and inverse modelling, and were developed in support of the
plane-strain modelling efforts of the Chicago and State
excavation (Calvello, 2002). The inverse modelling here refers
to an iterative process by which a back-analysis is performed
using observed data to update the input parameters to the
finite-element code. The iterations are continued until the input
parameters produce a satisfactory match to the observed
behaviour. To account for the increase in stiffness with depth,
the increase in Young’s modulus per unit depth, Einc , is used.
The stiffness is set to the value of the reference modulus, Eref ,
at the reference depth yref . Table 4 also lists HSM input values
for the sand fill and clay crust layers (the latter referred to as
the upper ‘stiff clay layer’ in Figure 2). These values were
4. CALCULATION PHASES
The calculation phases used for the simulation of the tunnel,
Warde School, and wall construction are given in Table 5. The
initial phase calculates the initial stress field by means of the
simplified K0 procedure. This procedure generates initial
stresses on the basis of soil weight and K0 input. Deformations
calculated in this phase are not considered to be relevant, and
are reset to zero at the beginning of the next calculation phase.
The plastic calculations refer to the elastic-plastic small
deformation analyses associated with staged construction
loading conditions. These calculations are considered
appropriate for these stages because the timescale of
construction does not allow much dissipation of excess pore
pressures in these strata. The consolidation phase is a coupled
analysis, which controls the development and dissipation of
excess pore pressures as a function of time.
4.1. Tunnel construction
As presented in Table 5, phase 2 models the installation of the
permanent concrete liner. Phase 3 represents a plastic nil-step
stage where no additional loads or elements are included. It is
used to eliminate possible out-of-balance forces that may have
been generated during the previous phases. In phase 4, the
water table at the tunnel location is lowered to the bottom
tunnel elevation. The original design (Terzaghi, 1943) shows
the void behind the liner plates filled with pea gravel. Thus it is

Parameters Hardening soil model Mohr–Coulomb model

Sand Clay crust Sand Clay crust

Behavior Drained Drained Drained Undrained

ªunsat : kN/m3 18.85 18.8 18.85 19.64
ªsat : kN/m3 18.85 18.8 18.85 19.64
k x ¼ k z : m/day 9.1 9.1 15.24 0.00015
k y : m/day 9.1 9.1 15.24 0.00009
E ref
50 : kN/m
2
7185 14 370
ref
E oed : kN/m2 7185 14 370
E ref
ur : kN/m
2
21 555 43 110
Eref : kN/m2 17 620 25 051
Einc : kN/m2 4,713 0
cref : kN/m2 1 1 19.1 0.05
yref : m 2.74 0
: degrees 37 40 35 32.8
ł: degrees 5 15 5 0

ur 0.2 0.2 0.33 0.2
pref : kN/m2 5 5
Power, m 0.5 0.5
KNC0 0.398 0.357
Rf 0.9 0.9
Rinterf 1 1 0.67 0.5

Table 4. Constitutive model parameters for sand fill and clay crust (data from Calvello, 2002 and
Blackburn, 2005)

214 Geotechnical Engineering 163 Issue GE4 Finite-element analysis of secant pile wall installation Bryson • Zapata-Medina
Delivered by ICEVirtualLibrary.com to:
IP: 128.163.155.166
On: Sun, 21 Aug 2011 01:55:38
 Element Phase Identification Calculation Load input

Initial stress field 0 Initial phase K0 procedure Staged construction

Tunnel construction 1 Dry excavation and installation of temporary ribs Plastic Staged construction
(late 1930s) 2 Installation of permanent liner Plastic Staged construction
3 Plastic nil-step stage Plastic Staged construction
4 Dewatering of the site Plastic Staged construction
5 Consolidation for 19 years Consolidation Ultimate time
School construction 6 Reset displacements to zero (plastic nil-step stage) Plastic Staged construction
(late 1950s) 7 Stepped excavation for school and excavation of footings Plastic Staged construction
8 Place basement wall and footings Plastic Staged construction
Backfill surrounding soil
9 Activate school loads Plastic Staged construction
10 Plastic nil-step stage Plastic Staged construction
11 Consolidation for 40 years Consolidation Ultimate time
Wall construction 12 Reset displacements to zero (plastic nil-step stage) Plastic Staged construction
13–27 Install east wall along State Street Plastic Staged construction
27–41 Install west wall along State Street Plastic Staged construction
41–45 Install north wall along Chicago Avenue Plastic Staged construction

Table 5. General calculation phases used for the analyses

presumed that the tunnel tubes act as drains. Finally, phase 5
simulates the consolidation of the clay layers between the end
of tunnel construction (late 1930s) and the construction of the
school (late 1950s). An ultimate time load input condition of
19 years (6940 days) was specified to terminate the
consolidation calculation.
4.2. School construction
Table 5 shows that six phases were used to simulate the
construction of the Francis Xavier Warde School. In phase 6
the displacements are reset to zero during a plastic nil-step
stage. Phase 7 models the stepped excavation for the school
basement and its footings. In phase 8 the structural elements of
the school (basement wall, floor and footings) are placed, and
the soil around the school is backfilled. In phase 9 the footing
loads, which represent the weight of the school, are activated.
Phase 10 is a plastic nil-step stage, and as with other nil steps
is required after a calculation phase in which large loadings are
activated. Lastly, phase 11 simulates the consolidation of the
clay layers between the end of the school construction and the
beginning of the wall installation. An ultimate time load input
condition of 40 years (14 610 days) was specified to terminate
the consolidation calculation.
4.3. Wall construction
The modelling procedure for the wall construction consisted
principally of two calculation stages.
total of 34 calculation phases were necessary to model the
installation of the secant pile wall. In phase 12 the
displacements were reset to zero during a plastic nil-step stage.
Phases 13 to 27 model the construction of the east portion of
the wall along State Street. In phases 27 to 41 the west section
of the secant pile wall along State Street is installed. Phases 41
to 45 model the construction of the north wall along the
Chicago Avenue. No consolidation phases were included in the
wall construction stage. The complete 3D input model for the
Chicago and State wall installation model is shown in Figure 7.
5. PERFORMANCE OF MODELS
5.1. Effects of adjacent structures and soil model
Analyses were performed to investigate the effects of modelling
adjacent structures and the effects of the employed soil
constitutive model on the lateral deformations due to wall
installation. The results of these analyses are shown in Figure
8. For such purposes, three models were used
(a) a model that simulates the wall installation for free field
conditions (i.e. tunnel and school not modelled)
(b) a complete model including the tunnel, school and wall
installation sequence, using the Mohr–Coulomb soil
constitutive model for the sand fill and clay crust layers
(c) a complete model using the hardening soil model (HSM)
for all of the layers.

(a) Four alternating slots were excavated to a depth of 18.3 m
below ground surface (
14 m CCD). The slots were kept
unsupported during the calculation stage in order to
resemble closely the actual installation procedure at the
Chicago and State Street excavation (Finno et al., 2002).
(b) The stage 1 slots were filled with an elastic grout material
that had the composite material properties described
earlier, and the next four alternating slots were excavated.
The calculation phases were advanced in four-slot intervals,
because that was the approximate number of piles completed
in 1 day for the Chicago and State wall construction (Bryson,
2002). Following the aforementioned modelling procedure, a
Figure 8 shows the lateral deformations for the three
aforementioned models and compares those results with the
measured deformations. The deformations are given at the
locations of inclinometers 1 and 4. Inclinometer 1 was located
between the Warde School and the excavation support wall,
and therefore represents constrained conditions, whereas
inclinometer 4 represents free-field conditions.
The figure shows that including the adjacent structures (i.e.
tunnel and school) in the wall installation model increases the
amount of lateral deformation predicted. This behaviour
highlights the dependence of soil response on the initial stress
conditions at the time of wall construction, and shows the

Geotechnical Engineering 163 Issue GE4 Finite-element analysis of secant pile wall installation Bryson • Zapata-Medina 215
Delivered by ICEVirtualLibrary.com to:
IP: 128.163.155.166
On: Sun, 21 Aug 2011 01:55:38
 Secant pile wall
Chicago and State Street
subway tunnel station
N
Figure 7. Complete input for the Chicago and State wall installation model
effects of constructing the tunnel and the school on the overall
ground movements. In investigations of relative shear stresses
(i.e. the ratio between the current shear stress and shear stress
at failure for the current value of mean normal stress), it was
observed that models that included the tunnel construction
produced relative shear stresses near failure in the soil adjacent
to the tunnel. This was due to the stress relief associated with
the excavation. It was observed that the most critical values of
relative shear occurred at a distance from the tunnel equal to
approximately 15% of the tunnel base width (0.15B). This
places the most critical value of relative shear at the
approximate locations of the east and west secant pile walls.
Thus, when the tunnel construction is included in the wall
installation model, the soil appears to exhibit localised post-
yield behaviour, characterised by larger deformations.
Including the school will further modify the behaviour of the
soil. Son and Cording (2005) concluded that excavation-related
ground movements will be less near an adjacent structure than
are observed for free-field conditions. This is because the soil–
structure interactions will produce a stiffening effect in the soil
mass. Hence the predicted responses and the measured response
shown in Figure 8 are greater at the inclinometer 4 location (i.e
free-field conditions) than at the inclinometer 1 location, where
the soil mass is constrained.
All of the models underpredicted the lateral deformations in
the clay layers for the constrained conditions, and
overpredicted the maximum lateral deformations for the free-
field conditions. However, using the HSM for all layers and
including the tunnel and school construction yielded the better
performance for free-field conditions. The lateral deformations
in the Blodgett stratum were underpredicted by approximately
9% only, and the model response in the Park Ridge stratum
virtually matched the measured response. For the constrained
condition, using the Mohr–Coulomb model for the sand and
clay crust layers and not including the tunnel and school
produced the better performance. This was most likely due to
the net sum of factors influencing lateral movements. The ‘just
wall installation’ model did not include the greater
216 Geotechnical Engineering 163 Issue GE4 Finite-element analysis of secant pile wall installation
Delivered by ICEVirtualLibrary.com to:
IP: 128.163.155.166
On: Sun, 21 Aug 2011 01:55:38
Francis Xavier
Warde School
Sand fill
Clay crust
Upper Blodgett
Lower Blodgett
Deerfield
Park Ridge
Hard clay
deformations associated with the critical relative stress values
at the end of tunnel construction, but also did not include the
added stiffness in the soil mass due to the presence of the
school.
5.2. Effects of stress relief
Although no time effects were included in the wall
construction stage, the influence of stress relief was a concern.
The amount of unloading or stress relief of the ground may be
related to the number of rectangular slots (i.e. augered holes)
open at any one time. From a numerical standpoint, the ability
to increase the number of shafts per calculation phase
decreases the number of phases required to install the wall, and
consequently reduces the computational time required for the
wall installation stage. The concern was that increasing the
number of shafts per phase would also increase the magnitude
of stress relief associated with wall construction. This increase
in stress relief could possibly lead to a corresponding increase
in lateral deformations. In order to investigate the effects of
construction rate on the lateral deformations, three different
cases were modelled: (a) four slots per phase; (b) half wall per
phase; and (c) whole wall per phase. These models did not
include construction of the tunnel or the school, and used a
Mohr–Coulomb failure criterion to model the sand and clay
crust layers (see the ‘just excavation’ model shown in Figure 8).
Figure 9 shows the lateral deformations for the three
aforementioned cases, and compares those results with the
measured deformations. At the inclinometer 1 location, the
half-wall-per-phase model overestimates the maximum lateral
deformation by approximately 220%, and the whole-wall-per-
phase model overestimates the maximum lateral deformation
by approximately 290%! At the inclinometer 4 location, the
half- and whole-wall-per-phase models overestimate the lateral
deformations by 59% and 100% respectively. The four-slots-
per-phase model agreed well with the measured inclinometer 1
data, most probably because it closely modelled the actual
construction sequence and rate. However, at inclinometer 4, the
lateral deformations given by the four-slots-per-phase model
Bryson • Zapata-Medina
 Lateral deformation: mm Lateral deformation: mm
0 5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
0 0

5 5

10 10

15 15
Depth: m

Depth: m
N 5
N 5
20 20

Frances Xavier

Frances Xavier
Warde School

Warde School
4 1 4 1
25 25

30 30
2
2

35 35
(a) (a)

Lateral deformation: mm Lateral deformation: mm

0 5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
0 0

5 5

10 10

15 15
Depth: m

Depth: m

20 20

Measured (Chicago and State)

Just wall installation Measured (Chicago and State)

25 25
(Mohr–Coulomb for sand and crust)
Four slots per phase
Tunnel, school and wall installation
(Mohr–Coulomb for sand and crust)
Half wall per phase
30 30
Tunnel, school and wall installation
(Hardening soil for sand and crust) Whole wall per phase

35 35
(b)
(b)

Figure 8. Effects of adjacent structures and constitutive soil Figure 9. Effects of stress relief: (a) inclinometer 1;
model: (a) inclinometer 1; (b) inclinometer 2 (b) inclinometer 2

underestimate the measured deformations by approximately
47%. This is attributable to the fact that neither the tunnel nor
the school was modelled in this case, and thus the influences of
these activities on the deformations are not included.
Furthermore, the construction records (Bryson, 2002) indicate
that the west wall was constructed at a faster rate than the east
wall. Thus, in effect, more than four slots were opened at one
time. If it is assumed that the west wall was constructed at a
rate of about 1.9 times faster than the east wall, and the
predicted values for the four-slots-per-phase model are

Geotechnical Engineering 163 Issue GE4 Finite-element analysis of secant pile wall installation Bryson • Zapata-Medina 217
Delivered by ICEVirtualLibrary.com to:
IP: 128.163.155.166
On: Sun, 21 Aug 2011 01:55:38
 multiplied by this number, the predicted values match the Lateral deformation: mm
measured response relatively well. ⫺20 ⫺10 0 10 20 30 40
0
5.3. Effects of construction techniques
The secant pile wall was constructed by first auguring down to
the clay crust and installing temporary steel casing to provide 5
support for the sand fill during construction. Then the
remainder of each shaft was drilled uncased and unsupported.
Grout was typically placed within 2 h of completing the hole, 10
but occasionally longer intervals resulted from delays in grout
delivery. Of interest was the influence of excavation techniques
employed in the construction of the support walls. Three
15
different construction techniques were investigated:

Depth: m
(a) excavation under bentonite slurry head
20
(b) excavation under hydrostatic pressure N 5
(c) unsupported excavation.

Frances Xavier
Warde School
Unit weights of 12 kN/m3 and 9.8 kN/m3 were assumed for the 25 4 1
bentonite and water respectively. For these simulations, the
secant pile wall was modelled as a series of trenches
approximately 0.9 m wide, 18.3 m deep and 6.2 m long. The 30
length of the trench was intended to approximate the 2
simultaneous opening of four slots.
35
Lateral deformations at the end of wall installation are shown (a)
in Figure 10. Where lateral pressures were used (e.g. excavation
under slurry head and hydrostatic pressure), negative values Lateral deformation: mm
⫺20 ⫺10 0 10 20 30 40
between approximately 0 m and 8 m of depth were observed.
0
This response is most likely due to the use of an average
pressure to represent the hydrostatic pressure, as opposed to
using a pressure that varies with depth. Regardless, the
5
simulations allow for a qualitative evaluation for the influence
of various construction techniques.

For the inclinometer 4 location the unsupported model 10

matched the measured response almost perfectly in the upper

layers. This is of interest in that the construction records
(Bryson, 2002) indicate that temporary steel casing was not 15
Depth: m

used for many of the shafts on the west side. Other matches are
not possible, because holding times were not included in the
simulations. This may be of interest for future investigations, 20
because Poh and Wong (1998) presented data showing that
Measured
lateral displacements tend to increase as a function of (Chicago and State)
increasing holding time. Of final note, the figure does show 25
that the heavier fluid causes the depth at which the maximum Excavation under
slurry head
lateral deformation occurs to shift downwards. This implies
that a different stress history will be imparted in the stratum, Excavation under
30 hydrostatic pressure
depending on the construction technique used.
Unsupported excavation
6. CONCLUSIONS
35
This paper presents the procedures used and the results of (b)
efforts to develop a three-dimensional model of a well-
documented, secant pile wall installation case history. From the Figure 10. Effects of construction techniques: (a) inclinometer
information presented, the following conclusions can be drawn. 1; (b) inclinometer 2

(a) Including the Chicago and State subway tunnel and Warde
School constructions in the wall installation models
highlights the dependence of the initial stress conditions at
the time of wall construction on soil response. The analyses
showed that including the adjacent structures increases the
amount of lateral deformations predicted.
(b) The stress relief associated with the tunnel construction
produced relative shear stresses near failure in the soil
adjacent to the tunnel. The most critical values of relative
shear occurred at a distance from the tunnel equal to

218 Geotechnical Engineering 163 Issue GE4 Finite-element analysis of secant pile wall installation Bryson • Zapata-Medina
Delivered by ICEVirtualLibrary.com to:
IP: 128.163.155.166
On: Sun, 21 Aug 2011 01:55:38
 approximately 15% of the tunnel base width excavation,
which is the approximate location of the east and west
secant pile walls. Thus, when the tunnel construction is
included in the wall installation model, the soil appears to
exhibit localised post-yield behaviour, characterised by
larger deformations.
(c) The presence of the Warde School along the east side most
likely caused smaller deformations than predicted because
the soil–structure interactions produced a stiffening effect
in the soil mass along that side. However, the various
models were unable to adequately match the observed
behaviour. Better matches may possibly be achieved by
using a soil constitutive model that captures soil stiffness
behaviour at the relatively low strain levels.
(d ) The stress history in the soil mass at the beginning of the
excavation will depend on the construction technique used
to install the wall. Thus including the construction
technique actually used or anticipated will result in more
realistic predictions.
There may be a tendency to conclude that the accuracy of the
results does not justify the added complexity of the three-
dimensional model. It is conceded that for standard design
purposes, without the benefit of advanced laboratory data
required as input for advanced constitutive models, plane-
strain analysis will most likely suffice. However, the modelling
efforts performed for these evaluations clearly demonstrated
that soil responses and the processes that produced them are
three-dimensional in nature. Thus fully three-dimensional
analyses are required to provide insight into these complex
relationships. Well-documented case histories such as this
enable better predictions to be achieved as constitutive models
are developed and improved.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The material presented in this paper is based upon work
supported by the National Science Foundation under grant No.
CMS 06-50911 under programme director Dr R. Fragaszy.
Without this support, this work could not have been done.
REFERENCES
Blackburn JT (2005) Automated Sensing and Three-dimensional
Analysis of Internally Braced Excavations. PhD thesis,
Northwestern University, Evanston, IL.
Brinkgreve RBJ and Broere W (2004) Finite Element Code for
Soil and Rock Analysis, Plaxis 3DFoundation, Version 1.6
Manual. Balkema, Rotterdam.
Bryson LS (2002) Performance of a Stiff Excavation Support
System in Soft Clay and the Response of an Adjacent
Building. PhD thesis, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL.
Calvello M (2002) Inverse Analysis of a Supported Excavation
through Chicago Glacial Clays. PhD thesis, Northwestern
University, Evanston, IL.
Chung CK and Finno RJ (1992) Influence of depositional
processes on the geotechnical parameters of Chicago glacial
clays. Engineering Geology 32(4): 225–242.
Finno RJ and Bryson LS (2002) Response of building adjacent
to stiff excavation support system in soft clay. Journal of
Performance of Constructed Facilities, ASCE 16(1): 10–20.
Finno RJ, Bryson LS and Calvello M (2002) Performance of a
stiff support system in soft clay. Journal of Geotechnical and
Geoenvironmental Engineering, ASCE 128(8): 660–671.
Gourvenec SM and Powrie W (1999) Three-dimensional finite-
element analysis of diaphragm wall installation.
Géotechnique 49(6): 801–823.
Ng CWW (1992) An Evaluation of Soil–structure interaction
Associated with a Multi-propped Excavation. PhD thesis,
University of Bristol, UK.
Ng CWW and Yan RWM (1999) Three-dimensional modelling
of a diaphragm wall construction sequence. Géotechnique
49(6): 825–834.
Poh TY and Wong IH (1998) Effects of construction of
diaphragm wall panels on adjacent ground: field trial.
Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering,
ASCE 124(8): 749–756.
Roboski JF (2001) Soil Parameters for Constitutive Models of
Compressible Chicago Glacial Clays. Masters thesis,
Northwestern University, Evanston, IL.
Schafer R and Triantafyllidis T (2004) Modelling of earth and
water pressure development during diaphragm wall
construction in soft clay. International Journal of Numerical
and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics 28(13): 1305–
1326.
Schafer R and Triantafyllidis T (2006) The influence of the
construction process on the deformation behaviour of
diaphragm walls in soft clayey ground. International Journal
of Numerical and Analytical Methods in Geomechanics
30(7): 563–576.
Schanz T, Vermeer PA and Bonnier PG (1999) The hardening
soil model: formulation and verification. Proceedings of the
Plaxis Symposium ‘Beyond 2000 in Computational
Geotechnics: 10 Years of PLAXIS’. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp.
281–296.
Son M and Cording EJ (2005) Estimation of building damage
due to excavation-induced ground movements. Journal of
Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, ASCE
131(2): 162–177.
Terzaghi K (1943) Liner-plate tunnels on the Chicago, IL
subway. Transactions of the American Society of Civil
Engineers 108: 970–1007.

What do you think?

To discuss this paper, please email up to 500 words to the editor at journals@ice.org.uk. Your contribution will be forwarded to the
author(s) for a reply and, if considered appropriate by the editorial panel, will be published as discussion in a future issue of the
journal.
Proceedings journals rely entirely on contributions sent in by civil engineering professionals, academics and students. Papers should be
2000–5000 words long (briefing papers should be 1000–2000 words long), with adequate illustrations and references. You can
submit your paper online via www.icevirtuallibrary.com/content/journals, where you will also find detailed author guidelines.

Geotechnical Engineering 163 Issue GE4 Finite-element analysis of secant pile wall installation Bryson • Zapata-Medina 219
Delivered by ICEVirtualLibrary.com to:
IP: 128.163.155.166
On: Sun, 21 Aug 2011 01:55:38
View publication stats