seismic design approach for large counterfort wall ... · pdf file2 •arup •seismic...
TRANSCRIPT
North American Chinese Geotechnical Engineers Association - 8th Geotechnical Workshop
A-Level Los Angeles Room, Los Angeles Department of Water and Power
Friday September 9, 2011
Seismic Design Approach for Large Counterfort Wall Retaining Structures
Andy Dodds
Senior Geotechnical Engineer
2
• Arup
• Seismic Design Approach for Large Counterfort
Wall Retaining Structures
Outline
Outline of Presentation
3
• Ove Arup, a Danish engineer, started the practice bearing his name in 1946, at the age of 51, and is most often remembered as the structural engineer for the Sydney Opera House.
The W’s
• Arup is a global design and consulting firm, organized into three main business practices:
Buildings,
Infrastructure, and
Consulting.
90 Offices Worldwide
Who is Arup?
What and Where is Arup?
4
International, national and local.
Some Arup Projects
5 Presentation
Seismic Design Approach for Large
Counterfort Wall Retaining Structures
Co-authors:
Philip Davies, BEng (Hons), MSc, DIC, CPEng, MIEAust
James McIlquham, BEng (Hons), CEng, CPEng, MICE, MIEAust Golder Associates, Sydney, Australia
6
N
Existing
Port Botany Site
Port Botany
Expansion
Sydney Airport
Third Runway
1km
NSW
Australia
Project Location
Location
7 Plan View
Site
8 Oblique View
Site Works
9 Oblique View of Completed Works
Completed
Works
Boat Ramp
Bridge, Road,
Services and
Foreshore
Enhancement Works
Dredging
PBE Expansion
Counterfort
Units
10 Counterfort Retaining Structure
Counterfort Unit (~
65
ft)
11 Cross-Section
Typical Section
12 Cross Section
Dredging and Filling
13 Longitudinal Section
N
Existing
Port Botany
Site
Port Botany
Expansion
Sydney
Airport
Third Runway
1k
m
Foundation Conditions
14 Oblique View
Berth Structure
15 Static and Pseudostatic Loading
Design Loadings
16 Global Bearing Capacity
Bearing (Shear) Mode of Failure?
17 Numerical Modeling
Dynamic Finite Element Modeling
18 Numerical Modeling
Dynamic Results
19 Dynamic Model Movement
Dynamic Results
20 Pseudostatic Considerations
Pseudostatic versus Dynamic
)(tFkxxcxm
Dynamic: An
Idealized
System
Time (t)
Pseudostatic:
FPGA ?
PGA
Acceleration
Earthquake
F
21 Newmark Model
Newmark Sliding Block
• Predominantly translational mode of movement noted in dynamic model
• Self-stabilizing nature will promote translational tendencies
22 Validation
50% PGA Validation
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0
Slid
ing
Blo
ck D
isp
lace
me
nt (
mm
)
Threshold Acceleration / PGA
EQ1
EQ2 - 227 degree component
EQ2 - 137 degree component
EQ3
Displacement of
dynamic model
23 Findings
Messages
• Limit equilibrium is limited!
• Justify a reduction in PGA when undertaking a pseudostatic design approach.
24 Sitewide
General View
25 Sitewide
General View
26 Circular Precast Yard
Counterfort Precast Yard
27 Precast Yard
Counterfort Falsework
28 Precast Yard
Counterfort Falsework
29 Precast Yard
Counterfort Rotation
30 Movement on Land
Counterfort Transportation
31 Storage on Land
Counterfort Storage
32 Movement over Water
Counterfort Crane Barge
33 Movement over Water
Lifting Frame
34 Placement
Placing Counterfort Units
35 Reclamation
Reclamation by Pipe Discharge
36 Ground Improvement
Land Vibrocompaction
37 Ground Improvement
Underwater Vibrocompaction
38 Ground Improvement
Dynamic Compaction
39 Ground Improvement
Dynamic Compaction
40 Happy Friday
Thanks.