Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Efficacy of Engineered Backfilling in Limiting Settlements During Future Deep Excavations

  • Technical Note
  • Published:
International Journal of Geosynthetics and Ground Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Nuclear power plants and their associated facilities are supported by rock formations and require deep excavation to reach an appropriate level, which is often between 15 and 20 m in the context of India. Currently, these facilities are planned with provisions for future expansion and to facilitate future excavation, retaining walls are designed and constructed along with the main plant. Engineering backfilling is carried out with field compaction around the counterfort retaining wall, where few critical structures will be located. The efficacy of this engineering backilling in limiting the settlements during future excavation was studied using finite element software PLAXIS employing constitutive models, namely, the Mohr–Coulomb and Hardening Soil models. Stiffness properties of improved soil were determined using pressuremeter tests and compared with that obtained from back analysis using field instrumentation data. Since the settlements of engineered backfill soil mass were found to be beyond the permissible limits during future excavation, additional measures such as strutting and stiffness improvement of already placed backfill are essential to limit the settlements within the permissible limit. This is required to ensure the safety of critical structures which will be located in this zone of influence. However, a proper instrumentation scheme to monitor settlement of soil mass must be employed during the future excavation for identifying corrective actions required to ensure the safety of adjacent structures.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Banerjee S, Gupta HP (2017) The evolution of the Indian nuclear power programme. Prog Nucl Energy 101:4–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Clough GW (1990) Construction induced movements of in situ walls. Des Perform Earth Retain Struct 439–470

  3. Goldberg DT, Jaworski WE, Gordon MD (1976) Lateral support systems and underpinning. Des Constr I:15–24

    Google Scholar 

  4. Ou CY, Hsieh PG, Chiou DC (1993) Characteristics of ground surface settlement during excavation. Can Geotech J 30(5):758–767

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Ou CY, Hsieh PG, Duan SM (2005) A simplified method to estimate the ground surface settlement induced by deep excavation. Geotechnical Research Report

  6. Peck RB (1969) Deep excavations and tunneling in soft ground. In: Proceedings of 7th ICSMFE, 1969, pp 225–290

  7. Boominathan A (2004) Seismic site characterization for nuclear structures and power plants. Curr Sci 87(10):1388–1397

    Google Scholar 

  8. Sivakumar C, Elango L (2008) Assessment of water quality in Kalpakkam Region, Tamil. Nat Environ Pollut Technol 7(4):687–691

    Google Scholar 

  9. Lambe TW, Whitman RV (1969) Soil mechanics. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  10. O’Rourke TD (1981) Ground movements caused by braced excavations. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 107:ASCE 16511

    Google Scholar 

  11. Ou CY, Hsieh PG (2011) A simplified method for predicting ground settlement profiles induced by excavation in soft clay. Comput Geotech 38(8):987–997

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Hsieh PG, Ou CY (1998) Shape of ground surface settlement profiles caused by excavation. Can Geotech J 35(6):1004–1017

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Nicholson DP (1987) The design and performance of the retaining walls at Newton Station. In: Proceedings of the Singapore mass rapid transit conference, Singapore, pp 6–9

  14. Bhatkar T, Barman D, Mandal A, Usmani A (2017) Prediction of behaviour of a deep excavation in soft soil: a case study. Int J Geotech Eng 11(1):10–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Goh ATC, Zhang F, Zhang W, Zhang Y, Liu H (2017) A simple estimation model for 3D braced excavation wall deflection. Comput Geotech 83:106–113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Hsieh PG (1999) Prediction of ground movements caused by deep excavation in clay. Doctoral dissertation, Ph. D. dissertation, Department of Construction Engineering, National Taiwan University of Science and Technology, Taipei, Taiwan (in Chinese)

  17. Hsiung BCB (2009) A case study on the behaviour of a deep excavation in sand. Comput Geotech 36(4):665–675

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Hsiung BCB, Yang KH, Aila W, Hung C (2016) Three-dimensional effects of a deep excavation on wall deflections in loose to medium dense sands. Comput Geotech 80:138–151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Khoiri M, Ou CY (2013) Evaluation of deformation parameter for deep excavation in sand through case histories. Comput Geotech 47:57–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Law KH, Othman SZ, Hashim R, Ismail Z (2014) Determination of soil stiffness parameters at a deep excavation construction site in Kenny Hill Formation. Measurement 47:645–650

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Ou CY, Lai CH (1994) Finite-element analysis of deep excavation in layered sandy and clayey soil deposits. Can Geotech J 31(2):204–214

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Ou CY, Liao JT, Cheng WL (2000) Building response and ground movements induced by a deep excavation. Geotechnique 50(3):209–220

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Pan XY, Fu HY (2012) Numerical prediction of settlement adjacent to deep excavation of metro station in Ju-Zi-Zhou island, Changsha. In: Yang W, Li Q (eds) Applied mechanics and materials, vol 204. Trans Tech Publications, Zurich, pp 1484–1487

    Google Scholar 

  24. Pakbaz MS, Imanzadeh S, Bagherinia KH (2013) Characteristics of diaphragm wall lateral deformations and ground surface settlements: case study in Iran-Ahwaz metro. Tunn Undergr Space Technol 35:109–121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Usmani A et al (2010) Analysis of braced excavation using hardening soil model. In: Proceedings of Indian geotechnical conference, GEOtrentz, Mumbai, India, pp 231–234

  26. Yoo C, Lee D (2008) Deep excavation-induced ground surface movement characteristics—a numerical investigation. Comput Geotech 35(2):231–252

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Zheng G, Zeng CF, Diao Y, Xue XL (2014) Test and numerical research on wall deflections induced by pre-excavation dewatering. Comput Geotech 62:244–256

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Brinkgreve RBJ, Vermeer PA (1992) On the use of Cam-clay models. In: Proceedings of NUMOG IV symposium, 24–27th August. Swansea, UK

  29. Schanz T, Vermeer PA (1998) On the stiffness of sands. In: Jardine RJ, Davies MCR, Hight DW, Smith AKC, Stallebrass SE (eds) Pre-failure deformation behaviour of geomaterials. Thomas Telford Publishing, Telford, pp 383–387

    Google Scholar 

  30. Menard L, Broise Y (1975) Theoretical and practical aspect of dynamic consolidation. Geotechnique 25(1):3–18

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Baguelin F (1978) The pressuremeter and foundation engineering, vol 617. Trans Tech Publications, Zurich

    Google Scholar 

  32. Gambin MP, Rousseau J (1988) The Menard pressuremeter: interpretation and application of pressuremeter test results to foundation design. ISSMFE Tech Comm Pressuremeter Dilatometer Test Gen Memo Sols Soils 26:50

    Google Scholar 

  33. Bowles JE (1996) Foundation analysis and design. McGraw-hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

  34. Kulhawy FH, Mayne PW (1990) Manual on estimating soil properties for foundation design (No. EPRI-EL-6800). Electric Power Research Inst., Palo Alto, CA (USA); Cornell Univ. Geotechnical Engineering Group, Ithaca

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge Dr. A. Boominathan, Professor, IIITM, Chennai for his guidance in carrying out this work; the authors are thankful to IITM, Chennai for allowing the use of the infrastructure available at IITM for performing this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Indira Gandhi Center for Atomic Research (IGCAR), Kalpakkam, India

    G. Padmanabhan

  2. Homi Bhabha National Institute, Mumbai, India

    G. Padmanabhan & G. Sasikala

  3. Material Mechanics Section, IGCAR, Kalpakkam, India

    G. Sasikala

  4. Fast Reactor Fuel Cycle Facility (FRFCF), IGCAR, Kalpakkam, India

    A. Ravisankar

Authors
  1. G. Padmanabhan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. G. Sasikala
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. A. Ravisankar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to G. Padmanabhan.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Padmanabhan, G., Sasikala, G. & Ravisankar, A. Efficacy of Engineered Backfilling in Limiting Settlements During Future Deep Excavations. Int. J. of Geosynth. and Ground Eng. 4, 31 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40891-018-0149-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40891-018-0149-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation