References for Soilder Pile Wall Design 1

[jakeh76]

Can anyone give me a good reference for the design of soilder pile walls? Thanks.

 

[BigH]

There was a very nice paper in one of the Pan-Am Geotechnical Conferences by Golder (HQ) and Seychuk (JL). I think that it was in the late 1960s. Don't laugh at such an old reference. Whilst it may not be "high tech" - these were times that geotechs "thought" about their problems and came up with solutions. The article dealt with the cut and cover section of the Toronto Subway line. [fumanchu]

 

[PEinc]

1960's???????????????

How about a reference from the new new millenium or at least the last few decades? (Sorry BigH)

Such as...........

Geotechnical Special Publication No. 74, Guidelines of Engineering Practice For Braced and Tied-Back Excavations

FHWA-SA-96-038, Geotechnical Engineering Circular No. 2, Earth Retaining Systems

FHWA-IF-99-015, Geotechnical Engineering Circular No. 4, Ground Anchors and Anchored Systems

FHWA-RD-97-130, Ground Anchor Walls

FHWA-RD-75-130, Lateral Support Systems and Underpinning

Earth Retention Systems Handbook, McGraw-Hill, Alan Macnab

Tiebacks in Foundation Engineering and Construction, 2nd edition, Schnabel & Schnabel

Handbook of Temporary Structures in Construction, McGraw-Hill, Robert Ratay

........ just to name a few!

 

[BigH]

PEinc - Never be sorry . . . But, with your kind permission, I feel the urge to do a .

Don't knock or sell short the 60s and 70s - the best papers ever came from those decades!! (e.g., ASCE Journal of Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering - 1967 on slope stability). See papers written by Bjerrum, Skempton, Bishop to name a few great geotechnical engineers and authors. Sure - there are lots of great new compilations out there now - but, you know, I believe, that most eminate from the old stuff. (Have you ever seen Bjerrum's paper on failure of a large oil tank due to edge failure? - a classic; simple, but, it works!). Techniques have changed - better methods of gaining data and information of the ground conditions - better theories, etc - but remember that many many jobs still don't have the budgets for such sophistications. Sometimes you need to take in on the KISS.

I don't mind dating myself, a dinosaur - I missed working the 60s having graduated mid-70s (Ed Marinaro Heisman time) but when I started working, I found the ASCE SM&FE, Geotechnique, Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Ground Engineering magazine great sources of information - and interesting reading (ever see the use the paper on using elephants for compacting soils (Canadian Geotechnical Journal - my Moynihan (I believe) - a spoof!!). I admit I do like to see the newer references as well - at least what I can get overseas - but I find that the older papers and books (by the founders of our profession) read better. Also, they take more time to mould you in learning how to think as a geotechnical engineer than do newer sources (compare Tschebatarioff, Tomlinson, Chellis, Krynine and Judd to your FHWA manuals - you will see and learn things that the FHWA manuals will NEVER mention - and the graphics are better too). Use them for the basics - then gravitate . . . Take it all in from the dinosaurs to the techies! Best to all.

p.s. Thanks for the list!!

 

[PEinc]

BigH,

I agree with you. I'm a grad of the early 70's myself. However, lots of new research has been done in the last 10-20 years on tieback anchors and anchored walls. In the 70's and 80's it seems that everyone was glad to see the specialty design/build contractors handle the retention problems for them - no questions asked. Today, everyone thinks they are experts in tiedback walls and that the specialty contractors are just trying to get away with bad design and field construction. Many consultants today feel they know much more than the contractors who developed the industry and who have been doing design/build anchor work for 30 years. Funny how the pendulum swings.

I also agree that the newer references seem to ignore (or are oblivious to) the information from the older references. Today, it seems that people don't want to follow or use methods that have worked for many years. Just because a computer program is capable of designing a structure to 1000 decimal places doesn't mean that the simpler, empirical design methods of yesteryear are not appropriate.

I think we are in agreement. It's just that there have been so many new developments in anchored walls since the mid 80's that the older references do not cover.

 

[BigH]

More dinosaurs around than I thought. I agree that the tie-back walls is a field that has developed much bigger recently. When I moved out to Vancouver, I saw the anchors/shotcreting for protecting deep excavations next to existing buildings. I also put into a design a system used at the Stuttgart Germany subway - of working a wall from the top down using precast "footings" that were tied back - sort of like the MSE walls but that there is no full face other than shotcreting in between to keep the soil from coming out. If you follow my thoughts - you will know that whilst computers are great, they make people feel too "smart" as they can go to so many decimals they lose reality. Will continue to look to the threads for you, PEinc., Focht3, VAD, Ron and others. There is a wealth of knowledge out there taking part in this and we need those histories of the experienced to keep some of the newer members to the profession on a more even keel.

Chow (or chou, or . . . 'ell, hasta la vista!

 

[BigH]

I ran across CalTrans site last night rummaging around the net - they have a manual on Trenching and Shoring (1997!!!!!) - I've taken a cursory look at it and it seems to be practical.

http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/esc/construction/Manuals/ManualMain.htm

 

[LicensedToPEe]

California Dept. of Transportation, check their website for Soldier Pile Systems Design Manual

 

[DRC1]

The classic design manual is the Pile Buck Sheet pile Design manual (

http://www.pilebuck.com)

It is a redo of the even more classic US Steel design manual.Principles in sheetpile design and soldier pile and lagging are similar.Pile Buck is comming out very shortly with a new manual that should be a lot more comprehensive. Bowles Foundation Design also covers shoring to some extent. Unlike say traditional foundation design, the only real way to learn it is to do it.

 

[PSlem]

The FHWA has one called Tiebacks or Permanent Tiebacks by Cheny? that has an excellent design calc written in the back that shows how to take moments about the next lower tier of ties, figure the cantilever, etc. In the industry there are a few savings like taking 80% of the moment for soldier beam design. (Comes from an old Peck textbook)

 

[PEinc]

PSlem,

Sorry, but I strongly disagree that Cheney's book (FHWA-DP-68-1R, Permanent Ground Anchors, has excellent calculations. Of all the books and manuals I have and have read, Cheney's book has, perhaps, the worst design calculations. I've also attended several of his seminars to various DOT offices. Pass on that manual.