Ground Improvement Solutions for TC 211 IS GI Brussels 2012 the - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
ground improvement solutions for
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Ground Improvement Solutions for TC 211 IS GI Brussels 2012 the - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Jul 06, 2023 124 likes •681 views

geotecnia Ground Improvement Solutions for TC 211 IS GI Brussels 2012 the new Cruise Terminal in Lisbon Alexandre Pinto , apinto@jetsj.pt Rui Tomsio , rotomasio@jetsj.pt Joo Ravasco , jmravasco@somague.pt Session S7 Biogrout &

slide-1
SLIDE 1

geotecnia

Ground Improvement Solutions for the new Cruise Terminal in Lisbon

Alexandre Pinto, apinto@jetsj.pt Rui Tomásio, rotomasio@jetsj.pt João Ravasco, jmravasco@somague.pt

TC 211 – IS – GI Brussels 2012

Session S7 – Biogrout & Other Grouting Methods, 1st June 2012

slide-2
SLIDE 2

 Introduction  Main constraints  Quay walls refurbishment and underpinning  Landfill foundations  Design  Monitoring and survey  Quality control / quality assurance  Alternative solutions  Conclusion remarks

geotecnia

TC 211 – IS – GI Brussels 2012

OUTLINE

slide-3
SLIDE 3

Site Location

N Tagus River

TC 211 – IS – GI Brussels 2012

Lisbon Tagus River

geotecnia

slide-4
SLIDE 4

TC 211 – IS – GI Brussels 2012

Dockyard on high tide before the filling works Existent quay wall to be close and refurbished

geotecnia

slide-5
SLIDE 5

Perspective of the new Cruise Terminal Alfama Hill

geotecnia

TC 211 – IS – GI Brussels 2012

slide-6
SLIDE 6

TC 211 – IS – GI Brussels 2012

Perspectives of the new Cruise Terminal

geotecnia

slide-7
SLIDE 7

Dockyard before the filling works Existent quay wall to be close and refurbished

geotecnia

New quay deck: reinforced concrete slab,

  • ver bored piles

TC 211 – IS – GI Brussels 2012

slide-8
SLIDE 8

 Introduction  Main constraints  Quay walls refurbishment and underpinning  Landfill foundations  Design  Monitoring and survey  Quality control / quality assurance  Alternative solutions  Conclusion remarks

geotecnia

TC 211 – IS – GI Brussels 2012

OUTLINE

slide-9
SLIDE 9

Dockyard before the earth works Centenary masonry quay walls Centenary buildings Water supply f1,0m pipe Metro tunnel

geotecnia

TC 211 – IS – GI Brussels 2012

slide-10
SLIDE 10

TC 211 – IS – GI Brussels 2012

geotecnia

Miocene (NSPT>50) Muddy sands (NSPT<12) Fill

GEOLOGICAL PROFILE

Alluvium (Cu<20kPa) Dockyard (before earth works) Tagus River

Centenary buildings Water supply f1,0m pipe Centenary masonry quay walls

slide-11
SLIDE 11

Earth works in difficult conditions

TC 211 – IS – GI Brussels 2012

geotecnia

slide-12
SLIDE 12

Jet grouting works in difficult conditions

geotecnia

TC 211 – IS – GI Brussels 2012

slide-13
SLIDE 13

 Introduction  Main constraints  Quay walls refurbishment and underpinning  Landfill foundations  Design  Monitoring and survey  Quality control / quality assurance  Alternative solutions  Conclusion remarks

geotecnia

TC 211 – IS – GI Brussels 2012

OUTLINE

slide-14
SLIDE 14

Cross section of the adopted solution Reinforced concrete slab and beams Self drilling micropiles sealed inside jet grouting columns

Miocene Muddy sands LTP

Existent centenary masonry quay wall

Alluvium

TC 211 – IS – GI Brussels 2012

New quay deck reinforced concrete slab

slide-15
SLIDE 15

Refurbishment and underpinning micropiles at the top of the existent quay wall

TC 211 – IS – GI Brussels 2012

geotecnia

slide-16
SLIDE 16

geotecnia

TC 211 – IS – GI Brussels 2012

Quay wall refurbishment and underpinning beams

slide-17
SLIDE 17

Quay wall refurbishment and underpinning beams

TC 211 – IS – GI Brussels 2012

geotecnia

slide-18
SLIDE 18

 Introduction  Main constraints  Quay walls refurbishment and underpinning  Landfill foundations  Design  Monitoring and survey  Quality control / quality assurance  Alternative solutions  Conclusion remarks

geotecnia

TC 211 – IS – GI Brussels 2012

OUTLINE

slide-19
SLIDE 19

Piles Sheet piles

Miocene Alluvium LTP Fill

Quay wall closing structure

Tagus River

New quay deck reinforced concrete slab Self drilling micropiles sealed inside jet grouting columns

Muddy sands

TC 211 – IS – GI Brussels 2012

slide-20
SLIDE 20

Quay wall closing structure Quay wall

TC 211 – IS – GI Brussels 2012

geotecnia

Quay wall

slide-21
SLIDE 21

Cross section of the adopted solution Plan of the adopted solution

Landfill Miocene

Jet grouting wall

LTP Muddy sands Alluvium Fill

Jet grouting columns

TC 211 – IS – GI Brussels 2012

slide-22
SLIDE 22

TC 211 – IS – GI Brussels 2012

geotecnia

Installation of geogrids

slide-23
SLIDE 23

Installation of geogrids

TC 211 – IS – GI Brussels 2012

geotecnia

slide-24
SLIDE 24

Landfill works on low tide

TC 211 – IS – GI Brussels 2012

geotecnia

slide-25
SLIDE 25

TC 211 – IS – GI Brussels 2012

geotecnia

Landfill works on low tide

slide-26
SLIDE 26

TC 211 – IS – GI Brussels 2012

geotecnia

Landfill works after conclusion

slide-27
SLIDE 27

 Introduction  Main constraints  Quay walls refurbishment and underpinning  Landfill foundations  Design  Monitoring and survey  Quality control / quality assurance  Alternative solutions  Conclusion remarks

geotecnia

TC 211 – IS – GI Brussels 2012

OUTLINE

slide-28
SLIDE 28

Jet grouting columns LTP base vertical displacements

3D FEM MODEL

Sandy alluvium Miocene: dense sand and sandstone Muddy alluvium LTP Loads at the surface

TC 211 – IS – GI Brussels 2012

slide-29
SLIDE 29

Vertical displacements: max 76mm Vertical effective stresses Plan where the results were

  • btained

TC 211 – IS – GI Brussels 2012

geotecnia

slide-30
SLIDE 30

 Introduction  Main constraints  Quay walls refurbishment and underpinning  Landfill foundations  Design  Monitoring and survey  Quality control / quality assurance  Alternative solutions  Conclusion remarks

geotecnia

TC 211 – IS – GI Brussels 2012

OUTLINE

slide-31
SLIDE 31

Topographic mark

TC 211 – IS – GI Brussels 2012

geotecnia

slide-32
SLIDE 32
  • 0,40
  • 0,35
  • 0,30
  • 0,25
  • 0,20
  • 0,15
  • 0,10
  • 0,05

0,00 3-dez 18-dez 2-jan 17-jan 1-fev 16-fev 3-mar 18-mar 2-abr 17-abr 2-mai 17-mai 1-jun 16-jun 1-jul 16-jul 31-jul 15-ago 30-ago 14-set 29-set Topographic marks at the landfill base

Vertical displacements at the landfill base [m]

+1,5 [m] +5,7 [m]

TC 211 – IS – GI Brussels 2012

slide-33
SLIDE 33

Jet Grouting design pressure for 4,2m of landfill height [19 kg/cm2] Pressure at the load cell [kg/cm2] Landfill height = 3,0m (0,60MPa)

TC 211 – IS – GI Brussels 2012

slide-34
SLIDE 34

Installation of rod extensometer at the LTP geogrid

TC 211 – IS – GI Brussels 2012

geotecnia

slide-35
SLIDE 35

 Introduction  Main constraints  Quay walls refurbishment and underpinning  Landfill foundations  Design  Monitoring and survey  Quality control / quality assurance  Alternative solutions  Conclusion remarks

geotecnia

TC 211 – IS – GI Brussels 2012

OUTLINE

slide-36
SLIDE 36

UCS tests Cores gathering for UCS tests

TC 211 – IS – GI Brussels 2012

geotecnia

slide-37
SLIDE 37

Jet grouting columns full length core samples Jet grouting columns core collection

TC 211 – IS – GI Brussels 2012

geotecnia

slide-38
SLIDE 38

TC 211 – IS – GI Brussels 2012

geotecnia

Jet grouting parameters registration

slide-39
SLIDE 39

TC 211 – IS – GI Brussels 2012

Vertical Full Scale Load Tests

geotecnia

slide-40
SLIDE 40

TC 211 – IS – GI Brussels 2012

Vertical Head Load [kN] Depth [m] 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 5 10 15 20 25

slide-41
SLIDE 41

1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 0,00 5,00 10,00 15,00 20,00 25,00 30,00 Carga (kN) Deslocamento (mm)

Vertical Head displacement [mm] Vertical load [kN] 3rd cycle 2nd cycle 1st cycle Service load

geotecnia

7000 6000 5000 2000 4000 3000 1000 5,0 10,0 15,0 20,0 25,0 30,0

slide-42
SLIDE 42

TC 211 – IS – GI Brussels 2012

geotecnia

Horizontal Full Scale Load Tests

slide-43
SLIDE 43

100 200 300 400 500 600 700

  • 20,00
  • 10,00

0,00 10,00 20,00 30,00 40,00 50,00 Carga (kN) Deslocamento (mm)

TC 211 – IS – GI Brussels 2012

Horizontal Load [kN] Horizontal Head Displacement [mm]

geotecnia

20,0 30,0 40,0 50,0 10,0 0,0

  • 10,0
  • 20,0

700 600 500 400 300 200 100

slide-44
SLIDE 44

Horizontal load [kN] Horizontal stifness [kN/m]

TC 211 – IS – GI Brussels 2012

geotecnia

100 200 300 400 500 600 20.000 40.000 60.000 80.000 100.000 120.000

slide-45
SLIDE 45

 Introduction  Main constraints  Quay walls refurbishment and underpinning  Landfill foundations  Design  Monitoring and survey  Quality control / quality assurance  Alternative solutions  Conclusion remarks

geotecnia

TC 211 – IS – GI Brussels 2012

OUTLINE

slide-46
SLIDE 46

Jet grouting / Deep soil mixing columns

Foundation stiffness: LTP demanding

Geodrains

Settlements with time Preloading Drainage Bearing capacity

Driven piles

  • r

micropiles Stone columns Bed Rock

Uniform settlements mainly during earth works

TC 211 – IS – GI Brussels 2012

slide-47
SLIDE 47

geotecnia

TC 211 – IS – GI Brussels 2012

OUTLINE

slide-48
SLIDE 48

 Introduction  Main constraints  Quay walls refurbishment and underpinning  Landfill foundations  Design  Monitoring and survey  Quality control / quality assurance  Alternative solutions  Conclusion remarks

geotecnia

TC 211 – IS – GI Brussels 2012

OUTLINE

slide-49
SLIDE 49

geotecnia

TC 211 – IS – GI Brussels 2012

CONCLUSION REMARKS

BIG VERSATILITY

slide-50
SLIDE 50

geotecnia

TC 211 – IS – GI Brussels 2012

CONCLUSION REMARKS

BIG VERSATILITY POSSIBILTY TO REINFORCE

THE COLUMNS WITH STEEL PROFILES / MICROPILES

slide-51
SLIDE 51

geotecnia

TC 211 – IS – GI Brussels 2012

CONCLUSION REMARKS

BIG VERSATILITY POSSIBILTY TO REINFORCE

THE COLUMNS WITH STEEL PROFILES / MICROPILES

NO NEED FOR PRELOADING ON

SOFT SOILS

slide-52
SLIDE 52

geotecnia

TC 211 – IS – GI Brussels 2012

CONCLUSION REMARKS

BIG VERSATILITY POSSIBILTY TO REINFORCE

THE COLUMNS WITH STEEL PROFILES

NO NEED FOR PRELOADING ON

SOFT SOILS

ENVIRONMENTAL ADVANTAGES

slide-53
SLIDE 53

geotecnia

TC 211 – IS – GI Brussels 2012

CONCLUSION REMARKS

BIG VERSATILITY POSSIBILTY TO REINFORCE

THE COLUMNS WITH STEEL PROFILES

NO NEED FOR PRELOADING ON

SOFT SOILS

ENVIRONMENTAL ADVANTAGES CONFINEMENT EFFECT ON

SOFT SOILS

slide-54
SLIDE 54

geotecnia

TC 211 – IS – GI Brussels 2012

CONCLUSION REMARKS

BIG VERSATILITY POSSIBILTY TO REINFORCE

THE COLUMNS WITH STEEL PROFILES

NO NEED FOR PRELOADING ON

SOFT SOILS

ENVIRONMENTAL ADVANTAGES CONFINEMENT EFFECT ON

SOFT SOILS

EXECUTION CONTROL: QC / QA

slide-55
SLIDE 55

THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION

www.jetsj.pt

geotecnia

TC 211 – IS – GI Brussels 2012