FACULTY OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

GEOTECHNICS I

SKAA 2722

(PROJECT)

SECTION : 03

LECTURER : DR.SITI NORAFIDA BT JUSOH

KHAVILESHWARHY SATHASIVAN (B16KA0011)

SU XIAO WEN (B16KA0009)

NORLELA BINTI ABD RAHMAN (B16KA0024)

NURUL FATIHAH BINTI RAMLI (B16KA0097)

WAN NUR ZAIHIRA BINTI WAN DAUD (B16KA0039)

NUR ATIQAH BINTI ZULKEFLI (B16KA0091)

1
 CONTENTS

SUBJECTS PAGE

1.0 Introduction 3

2.0 Slope Failure 4

2.1 Causes Of Slope Failure 4

2.2 Method To Overcome Slope Failure 6

3.0 Bore 7

3.1 Types Of Bore Holes 7

4.0 Retaining Wall 9

4.1 Types Of Retaining Wall 10

5.0 Methodology 13

5.1 Standard Penetration Test 13

5.2 Piezometer 14

6.0 Background Of Study 15

6.1 Objectives 16

6.2 Bore Log Results 17

6.3 Water Stand Pipe Results 24

6.4 Soil Profile & Soil Description 26

6.5 Design Of Retaining Wall 34

6.6 Geotechnical Analysis For Retaining Wall Design 36

7.0 Discussion 43

8.0 Conclusion 44

References 45

Appendices 47

2
1.0 Introduction

The developments in soil and rock mechanics play an important role in the evolution of
slope stability analyses in geotechnical engineering. The increasing demand for the engineered
cut and fill slopes in construction projects has enhanced the needs for deepened understanding
on the analytical methods, investigation tools and stabilization methods in order to solve
slope stability problems. (Abramson et al., 2002). In Malaysia, landslide records from the year
1966 to 2003 showed that 42% of landslides occurred in hilly terrain areas and more than 90%
occurred in developed area such as in the infrastructural area, residential area and commercial
area. In order to carried out more investigation works for landslides in 2004, Public Works
Department Malaysia has establish a new branch called Slope Engineering Branch that
involved in mitigation, research and development, risk management, safety and planning on
slope and etc. (Slope Engineering Branch, 2010)

Slope Engineering Branch Malaysia state that the investigations carried out thus far
revealed that causes of landslides are due to physical, geological and human elements. Based
on landslide forensic statistical data for large scale failure from year 2004 to 2007, it was found
that about 57% of landslides were due to human factor, whereas 29% were attributed to
physical factor and 14% was caused by various geo- 2 logical factors. It has also discovered
that most of the landslides occurred at manmade slopes. With the increased developments
that have encroached into the hilly areas over the past two decades, Malaysia experience
frequent landslides with a number of major slope failure which cause damage and
inconvenience to the public. Among the most notorious landslides was the collapse of a slope
with rubble wall, bringing down Tower 1 Apartment of Highland Towers and killing 48 people
on 11th December 1993. The towers were built in 1978 at Taman Hillview, Hulu Klang
Selangor. (Gue & Cheah , 2007)

This landslide tragedy should be a good lessons for the relevant parties in Malaysia so
that improvement and more effective precaution measures can be taken by them to avoid the
destruction of lives and properties. Landslides not only bring detrimental effects to the
environment, but to the people and the economy as well. Therefore, a reliable slope stability
analysis should be carried out so that similar incidents can be avoided in future. To deal with
these slope stability issues various approaches have been adopted and developed over the
years. The approaches now have been more of computational rather than the manual. Various

3
 software are available to analyze the slopes that are liable to failure by the calculating the factor
of safety.

2.0 Slope Failure

Slope Failure is a serious geologic hazard in many countries in the world including
Malaysia. In this country, most cases of the tragedies involved a hillside areas and cause of
deaths, injuries and property damages. A slope failure is a phenomenon that a slope collapses
abruptly due to weakened self-retainability of the earth under the influence of a rainfall or an
earthquake. Stable slope is determined by the balance of shear stress and shear strength. The
main interest of slope stability analysis is typically to determine a factor of safety value (FS)
against slope failure. A lot of researches have been performed in the last the past few decades
but slope stability analysis still remains a challenge in geotechnical engineering.

2.1 Causes Of Slope Failure

i. Steepness of the Slope

It goes without saying that the steeper a slope is, the more unstable it will be. It’s true
for making sand castles and it’s true for making hillside homes. The natural tendency
of steep slopes is to move some of its materials downwards until the natural angle of
repose is found. Any form of slope modification, whether it be through natural means
such as a stream undercutting the banks of a river or by workers removing a section of
the slope’s base to build roads, will impact the stability of a slope.

ii. Water and Drainage

Water is several times heavier than air. During heavy rains when the soil becomes
saturated and water takes the place of air between the grains of soil, the earth in slopes
becomes a lot heavier. This becomes a problem when the earth is being held back by
a retaining wall at its base. Specifically, if the weight of the earth behind the retaining
wall exceeds the retaining wall’s structural capacity, the retaining wall will buckle and
collapse releasing the earth behind it in a catastrophic deluge. Water also reduces
grain-to-grain contact which, in turn, reduces cohesiveness and then soil’s angle of

4
 repose. Along with changes in the groundwater fluid pressure in slope rocks during the
rainy season, water saturation by itself already increases the probability of downslope
mass movement.

iii. Soil Composition

The composition of the slope’s soil is a very important consideration when it comes to
mitigating slope failure. Different types of soils will have very different characteristics
when it comes to frictional resistance to erosion and cohesion among the grains. Loose
soil or sand, for example, has very low cohesion and will easily erode when saturated
with water. Soils that have a large amount of clay, on the other hand, tend to expand
when exposed to water; this makes them heavier and more prone to movement.

iv. Vegetation

The amount and type of vegetation found in a slope is also proportional to the strength
of that slope. Vegetation, specifically its roots, holds the soil in place and makes it more
resistant to erosion. The bigger the size of vegetation, the more widespread its roots
are and the more it is able to hold the soil in place. The more vegetation there is,
moreover, the more stable the slope is likely to be. This is the reason why slopes that
have had their vegetation removed or razed by bush fires are prime candidates for
slope failures during the rainy season.

v. Bedding Plant

A bedding plane is basically a surface that separates a layer of stratified rock or bed
from another. Think of it as butter spread between two slices of bread. Because of their
nature, exposed beds in a slope are also at a high risk of slope failure. This is risk is
exacerbated if there is a weak layer of rock sandwiched in the bed. To illustrate, imagine
placing a panel of glass on a slide and a block of wood on top of it. The contact surfaces
between the slide, the glass and the wood are bedding planes angled downwards. Even
though the frictional force keeping the block of wood on the glass is strong, the glass-
slide connection is weak, and this causes the whole structure to erode downwards.

5
 vi. Joints & Fractures

Joints and fractures are natural cracks in the rocks forming a slope. These are caused
by the natural expansion of rocks due to cooling or the removal of overlying rocks due
to erosion. Because of these cracks, the cohesion between the rocks that make up the
slope is greatly reduced, increasing the likelihood of a landslide in the slope.

vii. Sudden Shocks

Sudden shocks like earthquakes, hurricanes, volcanic eruptions, the passage of heavy
trucks, blasting, and others may trigger the sudden mass movement of the soil in
slopes.

2.2 Methods To Overcome Slope Failure

There are many methods being practiced in geotechnical engineering for the purpose of
slope remedial work or slope stabilization. These methods may be adoptedsingly or
in combination. Generally, common adopted remedial measures can be grouped into three
main categories (Broms and Wong, 1985):

i. Geometrical method

This method is usually simple and cost effective. The stability of a slope can be
increased by changing the slope geometry from a steep to a gentler slope. This method
can be done by cutting the slope, removing external load on top of the slope or
backfilling the toe of the slope. However, this method requires sufficient space to be
applied.

ii. Drainage method

Building up of pore water pressure inside subsoil is one of the slope failure factors. The
chances for pore water pressure to build up can be minimized if proper drainage system
is provided. Normally this method is used in combination with other methods.

6
 iii. Retaining structure method

Due to its flexibility in a constrained site, this method is the most commonly adopted
method. However, it is more costly. The principle of this method is to use a retaining
structure to resist the downward forces of the soil mass. The retaining structures include
gravity type of retaining wall, cantilever wall, contiguous bored piles, caisson, steel
sheet piles, etc. The analysis of these alternative remedial measures for soil slope
problems requires experience and sound judgment on the part of the engineer.

In evaluating the alternatives, the engineer will be influenced by a few factors such as
the nature of failure, ground and groundwater conditions, site topography,
environmental impact, availability of materials, labor and equipment, design life and
maintenance requirements, adjacent and underground structures, confidence in design
and construction, time constraints, and costs (Oliphant et al., 2000)

3.0 Bore

The Oxford English Dictionary defines a bore as a hole made by boring in later use
chiefly an auger hole, or other cylindrical perforation. A deep vertical hole of small diameter
bored into the earth to ascertain the nature of the underlying strata or to obtain water. As far
as BGS is concerned it is any hole drilled or dug into the sub-surface for the purpose of
extracting or investigating the material at that particular point. Commonly cylindrical the length
of the hole will always be several orders of magnitude greater than its width or diameter.
Boreholes include any drilled onshore and offshore, for any purpose and to any depth and
include auger holes, shafts, pits, auger holes, shot-holes, wells and vibrio core.

3.1 Type Of Bores

There are two main types of bore which are open holes and cored holes and there are
two main types of drilling rigs, rotary and percussion. For the purposes of its work BGS also
considers probe holes and trial pits as the equivalent of boreholes. This is because they provide
similar information.

7
i. Open Holes

The uncased portion of a well. All wells, at least when first drilled, have open hole
sections that the well planner must contend with. Prior to running casing, the well
planner must consider how the drilled rock will react to drilling fluids, pressures and
mechanical actions over time. The strength of the formation must also be considered.
A weak formation is likely to fracture, causing a loss of drilling mud to the formation and,
in extreme cases, a loss of hydrostatic head and potential well control problems. An
extremely high-pressure formation, even if not flowing, may have wellbore stability
problems. Once problems become difficult to manage, casing must be set and
cemented in place to isolate the formation from the rest of the wellbore. While most
completions are cased, some are open, especially in horizontal or extended-reach wells
where it may not be possible to cement casing efficiently.

ii. Cored Holes

A cored holes is A borehole put down by a core drill. A core hole is a well that is drilled
using a hallow drill bit coated with synthetic diamonds for the purposes of extracting
whole rock samples from the well. These rock samples are called cores, and are very
useful for characterizing lithological and structural features within a well. It also a cast
hole cored with a dry-sand core instead of delivering as a hole directly from the pattern.
In general, the term is applied to any hole in a casting that is not bored or drilled in the
shop.

a) The main purposes for drilling boreholes

Shallow drilling for site investigation and construction e.g. Motorways

Mineral exploration, including sand and gravel
Drilling for water and water abstraction
Oil and gas exploration and extraction
Monitoring

8
 b) Method of drilling

Hand auger or hand digging

Shell and auger rigs (as seen at the side of motorways) used for site investigation
Small scale rotary drilling often lorry mounted
Hammer Air flush drilling for water supply Offshore drilling from ships
Large rigs on large platforms both onshore and offshore.

A borehole record is a written description of the material that comes out of the ground
as a result of drilling a bore. Alternatively it may be electronically generated from the properties
of the rocks by lowering instruments down the bore. Boreholes are useful both to BGS and
external organisations. They provide site-specific information that can help determine the
geology and nature of the ground and can help identify any apparent or potential hazards.

4.0 Retaining Wall

A retaining wall is a structure designed and

constructed to resist the lateral pressure of soil, when
there is a desired change in ground elevation that
exceeds the angle of repose of the soil. A basement
wall is thus one kind of retaining wall. But the term
usually refers to a cantilever retaining wall, which is a
freestanding structure without lateral support at its top.
These are cantilevered from a footing and rise above
the grade on one side to retain a higher level grade on
the opposite side. The walls must resist the lateral pressures generated by loose soils or, in
some cases, water pressures.

Every retaining wall supports a “wedge” of soil. The wedge is defined as the soil which
extends beyond the failure plane of the soil type present at the wall site, and can be calculated
once the soil friction angle is known. As the setback of the wall increases, the size of the sliding
wedge is reduced. This reduction lowers the pressure on the retaining wall. The most important
consideration in proper design and installation of retaining walls is to recognize and counteract

9
 the tendency of the retained material to move downslope due to gravity. This creates lateral
earth pressure behind the wall which depends on the angle of internal friction (phi) and the
cohesive strength (c) of the retained material, as well as the direction and magnitude of
movement the retaining structure undergoes.

Lateral earth pressures are zero at the top of the wall and – in homogenous ground –
increase proportionally to a maximum value at the lowest depth. Earth pressures will push the
wall forward or overturn it if not properly addressed. Also, any groundwater behind the wall that
is not dissipated by a drainage system causes hydrostatic pressure on the wall. The total
pressure or thrust may be assumed to act at one-third from the lowest depth for lengthwise
stretches of uniform height.

Unless the wall is designed to retain water, It is important to have proper drainage
behind the wall in order to limit the pressure to the wall's design value. Drainage materials will
reduce or eliminate the hydrostatic pressure and improve the stability of the material behind
the wall. Drystone retaining walls are normally self-draining. As an example, the International
Building Code requires retaining walls to be designed to ensure stability against overturning,
sliding, excessive foundation pressure and water uplift; and that they be designed for a safety
factor of 1.5 against lateral sliding and overturning.

4.1 Type Retaining Wall

There is much to consider when choosing the right retaining wall for your application.
Retaining walls can be broadly divided into four main categories which are gravity walls,
cantilever walls, anchored walls, and reinforced soil or nailed walls. Each type of retaining wall
has its own particular characteristics, which make it more suitable for certain applications.

i. Gravity Walls

These are arguably the oldest and most frequently used retaining walls. They are often
made from stone or other heavy materials, and rely on the weight of their own mass to
resist pressures from the retained material. Gravity walls should be a minimum of 50 to
60% as thick as the height of the wall. They may have to be larger if there is a slope or
surcharge on the wall. Modern gravity walls include concrete crib walls, gabions,

10
 boulders, and large, precast concrete blocks. Gabions are a type of soil strengthening,
consisting of wire mesh cages into which roughly cut stone or other material is filled.
Gabions work to reduce internal movement and erosive forces.

ii. Cantilever walls

Before the introduction of modern reinforced-soil gravity walls, cantilevered

walls were the most common type of taller retaining wall. This type of wall uses much
less material than a traditional gravity wall. Cantilevered walls are made from a
relatively thin stem of steel-reinforced, cast-in-place concrete or mortared masonry,
fixed at one end, usually by way of a simple, embedment or cantilever foundation (often
in the shape of an inverted T). These rigid concrete footings must be positioned into
firm suitable foundations.

The wall operates like a beam cantilevering the load to a large, fixed structural
base converting horizontal pressures from behind the wall into vertical pressures onto
the ground below. Sometimes cantilevered walls are buttressed on the front, or include
a counterfeit on the back, to improve their stability against heavy loads. Buttresses are
short wing-like walls at right angles to the main trend of the wall. Typical cantilever walls
include reinforced concrete, or concrete-filled block work, concrete or timber sleeper
walls, concrete, steel or timber sheet pile, or contiguous piling.

iii. Anchored walls

These walls are pinned both top and bottom using cables, or other stays, which
are anchored in the rock or soil behind it. Anchors are driven into the material and then
expanded at the end of the cable, either by mechanical means or by injecting
pressurised concrete into the hole. They concrete expands to form a bulb in the soil.
The wall may be embedded at the base and tied to a slab at the top or to a “deadman
anchor” — a concrete structure which is driven into the ground or anchored to the earth
with sufficient resistance. The horizontal cable, rod or helical anchor, and deadman
structure resists forces that would otherwise cause the wall to become unstable. This
method, though technically complex, is useful where high loads are expected, or where
the wall itself has to be slender and would be too weak without anchoring.

11
iv. Reinforced soil or nailed walls

These systems do not simply consist of the wall itself, but make use of
reinforcing grids or straps to contain and stabilize the slope. The traction-resistant
reinforcement elements change the nature of the soil mass and reduce the earth
pressure acting on the wall. In mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) walls the soil is
artificially reinforced with layered horizontal mats (geosynthetics). These mats provide
additional internal shear resistance beyond that of simple gravity retaining structures.
Layered steel straps may also be used. Reinforcing layers are attached to outer facing
walls (typically segmental retaining walls).

The wall face is usually made of precast concrete units that can tolerate some
differential movement. When the reinforced soil mass is sufficiently large to retain the
pressure from the soil behind it, it works with the wall to provide stability. Nailed walls
make use of slender elements — normally steel reinforcing bars — which are inserted
into pre-drilled hole and grouted into place. The reinforcing bars are usually installed
un tensioned at a slight downward angle. Isolated soil nail heads or a rigid (or flexible)
facing (often of sprayed concrete) may be used on the surface of the wall. Typical
reinforced soil or nailed walls include concrete or steel panel-faced R.E. walls,
segmental R.E. walls, wire mesh or fabric-faced R.E. walls and shotcrete-faced nailed
walls.

12
5.0 Methodology

5.1 Standard Penetration Test

The Standard Penetration test (SPT) is a common in situ testing method used to
determine the geotechnical engineering properties of subsurface soils. It is a simple and
inexpensive test to estimate the relative density of soils and approximate shear strength
parameters.

Procedures :

i. Standard Penetration Test, SPT, involved driving a standard thick-walled sample

tube into the ground at the bottom of a borehole by blows from a slide hammer with
standard weight and falling distance.
ii. The sample tube was driven 150 mm into the ground and the number of blows was
recorded, for the tube to penetrate each 150 mm (6 in) up to a depth of 450 mm (18
in).
iii. The sum of the number of blows required for the second and third 6 in. of
penetration is reported as SPT blow count value, commonly termed " standard
penetration resistance" or the "N-value".
iv. The data was converted into the bore log.
v. The N-value provided an indication of the relative density of the subsurface soil, and
it is used in empirical geotechnical correlation to estimate the approximate shear
strength properties of the soils.

13
5.2 Piezometer

A piezometer is either a device used to measure liquid pressure in a system by

measuring the height to which a column of the liquid rises against gravity.

Procedures :

i. A small (usually 19mm) diameter plastic pipe with a porous section at the bottom
was prepared.
ii. The pipe was installed inside a borehole and the porous section is positioned at
the depth where the pore water pressure is to be measured.
iii. The annulus between the porous filter and the borehole is filled with sand, the top
and bottom surfaces of the sand are sealed with bentonite and the rest of the
borehole is filled with a cement or bentonite grout.

iv. The pressure of the ground water pushes water into and up the standpipe until the
level of water inside the standpipe (h) is equivalent to the pore water pressure in
the ground at the elevation of the porous filter.

v. The data is collected, recorded and transferred into table.

14
6.0 Background Of Study

The site investigation of the Slope Remedial Work Project was carried out accordance to the
British Standard Code of Practice, BS 5930:1981 to explore the subsurface condition of the
failure slope. A total of 5 boreholes was drilled on site where BH3, BH4 and BH5 are located
on the Cross Section A-A.

Figure 1: The Location Plan

Figure 2: Survey Plan and Cross Section of A-A

15
 The bore logs of BH3, BH4 and BH5 present the results of the site investigation works. The
Standard Penetration Test (SPT) was conducted to determine the natural bearing resistance
of the subsoil.

Figure 3: The boreholes location

6.1 Objectives

i. To identify the profile of the soil with the values of cohesions, friction angles, and unit weight
unit weight from the Standard Penetration Test.
ii. To determine the ground water level from piezometer (WSP 1 and WSP2).
iii. To decide a suitable retaining wall type, design its dimensions and the most suitable location
for retaining wall on the slope in order to prevent the weak soil from failure.
iv. To check the factor of safety for retaining wall against overturning, sliding along the base
and to calculate the factor of bearing capacity.

16
6.2 Bore Logs Result

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
6.3 Water Stand Pipe Result

Borehole No. : WSP1

Ground Level : 0.000 mRL (Assumed)
Top Of Tube. : 0.165 mRL

Date Time Depth of WL From Actual Depth Climate Remark

Top of Pipe (m) of WL (m)
Initial
06-09-13 12:05 2.550 2.385 Fine Reading
07-09-13 11:40 3.150 2.985 Fine
08-09-13 11:27 3.550 3.385 Fine
09-09-13 11:15 4.010 3.845 Fine
10-09-13 10:02 2.950 2.785 Fine
11-09-13 10:22 4.320 4.155 Fine
12-09-13 11:05 4.265 4.100 Fine
13-09-13 16:05 3.250 3.085 Fine
14-09-13 11:05 4.020 3.855 Fine
15-09-13 11:02 5.520 5.355 Fine
16-09-13 11:15 3.270 3.105 Fine
17-09-13 11:25 4.150 3.985 Fine
18-09-13 11:25 3.720 3.555 Fine
19-09-13 11:55 3.300 3.135 Fine
20-09-13 11:15 4.002 3.837 Fine
21-09-13 11:15 3.020 2.855 Fine
22-09-13 11:57 3.750 3.585 Fine
23-09-13 11:32 3.360 3.195 Fine
24-09-13 14:02 3.270 3.105 Fine
25-09-13 11:35 3.560 3.395 Fine
26-09-13 12:37 3.750 3.585 Fine
27-09-13 11:20 3.640 3.475 Fine
28-09-13 12:42 3.520 3.355 Fine
29-09-13 11:16 3.240 3.075 Fine
TOTAL 83.177

Calculation :
Actual Depth of WL 83.177
=
Total of Date 24
= 3.466

24
 Borehole No. : WSP2
Ground Level : 0.000 mRL (Assumed)
Top Of Tube. : 0.397 mRL

Date Time Depth of WL From Actual Depth Climate Remark

Top of Pipe (m) of WL (m)

06-09-13 12:09 2.918 2.521 Fine Initial Reading

07-09-13 11:45 2.819 2.422 Fine
08-09-13 11:20 2.979 2.582 Fine
09-09-13 11:15 3.397 3.000 Fine
10-09-13 11:07 2.995 2.598 Fine
11-09-13 11:15 3.207 2.810 Fine
12-09-13 11:08 3.072 2.675 Fine
13-09-13 16:09 2.968 2.571 Fine
14-09-13 11:15 2.965 2.568 Fine
15-09-13 11:08 2.863 2.466 Fine
16-09-13 11:20 2.920 2.523 Fine
17-09-13 11:30 2.952 2.555 Fine
18-09-13 11:30 2.865 2.468 Fine
19-09-13 11:30 2.865 2.468 Fine
20-09-13 11:15 2.702 2.305 Fine
21-09-13 11:15 2.865 2.468 Fine
22-09-13 11:57 Fine
Total 41.000

Calculation :
Actual Depth of WL 41.000
=
Total Date 17
= 2.412

25
6.4 Soil Profile & Soil Description

A. Soil Profile

26
B. Name & Depth Of Each Soil Layer

27
C. The shear strength values (total strength and effective strength) of angle of
friction, , cohesive strength, c and unit weight,  for each layer

i. Internal friction

Relationship between  , and standard penetration number for sands, (from Peck
1974, Foundation Engineering Handbook).

SPT Penetration, N-Value

(blows/ foot) Density of Sand  (degrees)
<4 Very loose <29
4 - 10 Loose 29 - 30
10 - 30 Medium 30 - 36
30 - 50 Dense 36 - 41
>50 Very dense >41

Relationship between , and standard penetration number for sands, (from Meyerhof
1956, Foundation Engineering Handbook).

SPT Penetration, N-Value

(blows/ foot) Density of Sand  (degrees)
<4 Very loose <30
4 - 10 Loose 30 - 35
10 - 30 Medium 35 - 40
30 - 50 Dense 40 - 45
>50 Very dense >45

28
ii. Cohesion

Guide for Consistency of Fine-Grained Soil, NAVFAC 7.02

SPT Penetration (blows/ foot) Estimated Consistency Suc (tons/ft2)

<2 Very Soft <0.25
2-4 Soft 0.25 - 0.50
4-8 Medium 0.50 - 1.0
8 - 15 Stiff 1.0 - 2.0
15 - 30 Very Stiff 2.0 - 4.0
>30 Hard >4

Empirical Values for Consistency of Cohesive Soil, (from Foundation Analysis,

Bowels)

SPT Penetration (blows/ foot) Estimated Consistency Suc (kips/ft2)

0-2 Very Soft 0 - 0.5
2-4 Soft 0.5 - 1.0
4-8 Medium 1.0 - 2.0
8 - 16 Stiff 2.0 - 4.0
16 - 32 Very Stiff 4.0 - 8.0
>32 Hard >8

Typical Strength Characteristics (from Lindeburg, Civil Engineering Reference

Manual for the PE Exam, 8th ed.)

USCS Soil Group c, as compacted (lb/ft2) c, saturated (lb/ft2)

GW 0 0
GP 0 0
GM - -
GC - -
SW - -

29
 SP - -
SM 1050 420
SM-SC 1050 300
SC 1550 230
ML 1400 190
ML-CL 1350 460
CL 1800 270
OL - -
MH 1500 420
CH 2150 230

iii. Unit weight

Empirical values for , of granular soils based on the standard penetration

number, (from Bowels, Foundation Analysis).

SPT Penetration, N-Value

(blows/ foot)  (lb/ft3)
0-4 70 - 100
4 - 10 90 - 115
10 - 30 110 - 130
30 - 50 110 - 140
>50 130 - 150

Empirical values for , of cohesive soils based on the standard penetration

number, (from Bowels, Foundation Analysis).

SPT Penetration, N-Value

(blows/ foot) sat (lb/ft3)
0-4 100 - 120
4-8 110 - 130
8 - 32 120 - 140

30
Typical Soil Characteristics (from Lindeburg, Civil Engineering Reference
Manual for the PE Exam, 8th ed.)

Soil Type  (lb/ft3) sat (lb/ft3)

Sand, loose and uniform 90 118
Sand, dense and uniform 109 130
sand, loose and well graded 99 124
Sand, dense and well graded 116 135
glacial clay, soft 76 110
glacial clay, stiff 106 125

Typical Values of Soil Index Properties (from NAVFAC 7.01)

Soil Type  (lb/ft3) sub (lb/ft3)

Sand; clean, uniform, fine or medium 84 - 136 52 - 73
Silt; uniform, inorganic 81 - 136 51 - 73
Silty Sand 88 - 142 54 - 79
Sand; Well-graded 86 - 148 53 - 86
Silty Sand and Gravel 90 - 155 56 - 92
Sandy or Silty Clay 100 - 147 38 - 85
Silty Clay with Gravel; uniform 115 - 151 53 - 89
Well-graded Gravel, Sand, Silt and Clay 125 - 156 62 - 94
Clay 94 - 133 31 - 71
Colloidal Clay 71 - 128 8 - 66
Organic Silt 87 - 131 25 - 69
Organic Clay 81 - 125 18 - 62

31
Typical Soil Characteristics (from Lindeburg, Civil Engineering Reference
Manual for the PE Exam, 8th ed.)

Soil Type  (lb/ft3) sat (lb/ft3)

Sand, loose and uniform 90 118
Sand, dense and uniform 109 130
sand, loose and well graded 99 124
Sand, dense and well graded 116 135
glacial clay, soft 76 110
glacial clay, stiff 106 125

32
D. Piezometric Line

33
6.5 Design Of Retaining Wall

A. Location of Retaining Wall

34
B. Explanation For The Location of Retaining Wall

The selected remedial work for the failure slope is by constructing a retaining wall at
the toe of the slope. The best location for constructing the retaining wall if the potential slip
surface failure is occur (as shown in Figure 4) should be at 2m after the potential slip
surface failure. Retaining wall are create a strong barrier to hold the soil, can manage
storm water runoff and establish functional landscape beds for vertical landscaping. So,
the reason why we choose this location is to provide functional support for keeping soil in
place. A retaining wall is a protective structure, first and foremost. It is a structure that
holds back soil from a building or structure. Retaining walls prevent down slope movement
and provide support for vertical or near- vertical grade changes. So, the retaining wall will
be support all and can avoid from the slope of soil is collapse.

The earth pressure which acts on an earth retaining structure is strongly dependent
on the lateral deformations which occur in the soil. Hence, unless the deformation
condition can be estimated with reasonable accuracy, rational prediction of the magnitude
and distribution of each pressure in the structure is not possible. The minimum active
pressure which can be exerted against a wall occurs when the wall moves sufficiently for
outwards for the soil behind the wall to expand laterally and reach a state of plastic
equilibrium. Similarly, the maximum passive pressure occurs when the wall movement is
towards the soil. The amount of movement necessary to reach these failure conditions is
dependent primarily on the type of backfill material.

If the retaining wall located 2m before from the potential slip surface failure, the
slope of soil will be collapse. Then, the presence of water behind a wall has a marked
effect on the pressures applied to the wall. When the water intersect the walls, a
hydrostatic pressure will exert against the wall, together with uplift pressures along the
base of the wall. Even when there is no water in direct contact with the wall, such as when
adequate drainage is provided, there is an increased pressure on the wall due to the
increase earth pressure. The effect of water behind the wall is significant; the total force
may be more than double that applied for dry backfill. Many recorded wall failures can be
attributed to the presence of water. Last but not least, the best location for constructing
the retaining wall if the potential slip surface failure happen is 2m after potential slip surface
failure. The retaining wall will give many advantage and can avoid many failure of soil.

35
 6.6 Geotechnical Analysis For Retaining Wall Design

A. Pressure Distribution Acting On The Retaining Wall

σ VT (KN/m2) uv(KN/m2 ) σ' v(KN/m2) σh'(KN/m2) uH(KN/m2) σhT (KN/m2)

0.6 m
θ = 13°

θ'=30
2.5 m ϒ=16
C=0
49.6 49.6 18.40 18.40

ϒsat = 18
3.7 m θ'= 30
C=0

116.2 36.3 79.90 29.64 36.30 65.94

Cosβ - √ Cos² β - Cos² (θ')

Ka =
Cosβ + √ Cos² β - Cos² (θ')

Cos 13 - √ Cos² 13- Cos² (30)

Ka =
Cos 13 + √ Cos² 13 - Cos² (30)

= 0.371

= ½ × 18.40 × 3.1
= 18.40 × 3.7 = 28.52 KN
= 68.08 KN

= ½ × (29.64-18.40) × 3.7 = ½ × 36.30 × 3.7

= 20.79 KN = 67.16 KN

∑Pa = 28.52 + 68.08 + 20.79 + 67.16

= 184.55 KN

36
 B. Forces Acting On The Retaining Wall

σVT (KN/m2) uv(KN/m2) σ' v(KN/m2) σh'(KN/m2) uH(KN/m2) σhT (KN/m2)

2m θ'= 30
ϒsat = 18
C=0

18 X 2 = 36 9.81 X 2 = 19.62 36 - 19.62 = 16.38 16.38 x 3 = 49.14 9.81 X 2 = 19.62 49.14 + 19.62 = 68.76

= ½ × 49.14 × 2 = ½ × 19.62 × 2
= 49.14 KN = 19.62 KN

∑Pa = 49.14 + 19.62

= 68.76 KN

37
C. Factor Of Safety

i. Overturning

a)
∑ 𝑴𝑹
∑ 𝑴𝒐
≥ 2.5

𝑯′
b) ∑ 𝑴𝒐 = 𝑷𝒉 ( )
𝟑

Ph = Pa cos α
= 184.55 cos 13º
= 179.82 kN/m

𝑯′
∑ 𝑴𝒐 = 𝑷𝒉 ( )
𝟑
6.8
= 179.82 ( 3 )

= 407.59 kNm/m

Section Area (m2) Aγ (kN/m) ̅

𝒙 Aγ (kNm/m)
1 2.5 x 2.79 6.98 x 16 2.64 294.84
= 6.98 = 111.68

2 3.08 x 2.79 8.59 x 18 2.64 408.20

= 8.59 = 154.62

3 0.4 x 5.58 2.23 x 23.58 1.04 54.68

= 2.23 = 52.58

4 1 0.61 x 23.58 0.69 9.92

2
x 5.58 x 0.22
= 14.38
= 0.61

5 4.03 x 0.62 2.50 x 23.58 2.02 119.08

= 2.50 = 58.95

6 1 0.84 x 16 3.1 41.66

x 2.79 x 0.6
2
= 13.44
= 0.84

Pv = 41.51 4.03 167.28

TOTAL
∑v = 447.16 ∑𝑴𝑹 =1095.66

38
 c) Unit Weight of Concrete = 23.58 kN/m3

d) Pv = Pa sin α
= 184.55 sin 13 º
= 41.51 kN/m

∑ 𝑴𝑹 𝟏𝟎𝟗𝟓.𝟔𝟔
e)
∑ 𝑴𝒐
=
𝟒𝟎𝟕.𝟓𝟗

= 2.69 ≥ 2.5 (OK)

ii. Sliding Along The Base

∑𝑭𝑹
a) FS =
∑𝑭𝒅

b) ∑𝑭𝑹 = (∑V) tan ϕ + Bc2 + Pp

= 447.16 tan 30 + 4.03(0) + Pp

𝟏
c) Pp = 𝟐 (𝜸𝟐 𝑯𝟐 𝑲𝒑 )
1 𝟏
= 2 (18 x 22 x 3) + 𝟐 (9.81 x 22 x 3)

= 166.86 kN

d) ∴ ∑𝑭𝑹 = 447.16 tan 30 + 166.86

= 425.03 kN/m

e) ∑𝑭𝒅 = ∑Ph
= Pa cos 13º
= 184.55 cos 13º
= 179.82 kN/m
∑𝑭𝑹 425.03
f) FS = =
∑𝑭𝒅 179.82

= 2.36 > 2.0 (OK)

39
iii. Bearing Capacity Failure

𝑩 4.03
a) 𝟔
=
6
= 0.67m

𝑩 ∑ 𝑴𝑹 − ∑𝑴𝒐
b) e= −
𝟐 ∑𝑽
4.03 1095.66−407.59
= −
2 447.16
= 0.48 m < 0.67m

∑𝑽 𝟔𝒆
c) qmax-min = (𝟏 ± )
𝑩 𝑩
447.16 6(0.48)
= (1 ± )
4.03 4.03
= 190.25 kN/m2 (max) , 31.66 kN/m2 (min)

d) 𝒒u = 𝒄′𝟐𝑵𝒄𝑭𝒄𝒅𝑭𝒄𝒊+ 𝒒𝑵𝒒𝑭𝒒𝒅𝑭𝒒𝒊 + 𝟏𝟐𝛾2 𝑩′𝑵ɣ𝑭ɣ𝒅𝑭ɣ𝒊

ɸ′
Nq = tan2 (45 + ) e π tan ɸ'
2
30
= tan2 (45 + 2
) e π tan 30

= 18.40

Nc = (Nq - 1)cot ɸ'

= ( 18.40– 1)cot 30°
= 30.14

Nɣ = 2(Nq +1) tan ɸ'

= 2 (18.40 + 1) tan 30
= 22.40

40
Β’ = β -2e
= 4.03 – 2(0.48)
= 3.07 ≈ 3.1

q = ɣ2 D
= 18(2)
= 36 kN/m2

𝐷
Fcd = 1 + 0.4 (𝛽′)
2
= 1 + 0.4 (3.1)

= 1.26

𝐷
Fqd = 1 + 2 tan Φ2 (1-sin Φ)2 (𝛽′)
2
= 1 + tan (30) (1- sin 30)(3.1)

= 1.3

Fɣd = 1.0

𝐅𝐜𝐢 = 𝐹𝑞𝑖
𝝍 2
= (𝟏 − )
𝟗𝟎𝒐

𝛴𝑃ℎ
𝛙 = tan-1 ( 𝛴𝑉 )
179.82
= tan-1 ( 447.16)

= 21.91 o

𝐅𝐜𝐢 = 𝐹𝑞𝑖
21.91 2
= (1 − )
90𝑜

= 𝟎. 𝟔

41
 𝜓
𝐅ɣ𝐢 = (1 − ɸ′ )2
2

21.91 2
= (1 − )
30

= 0.1

1
𝑞𝑢 = (0)(30.14)(1.26)(0.6) (36)(18.40)(1.3)(0.6) (18)(3.1)(22.40)(1)(0.1)
2

= 0 + 516.67 + 62.5
= 579.17 kN/m3

𝑞𝑢
e) FS (BEARING CAPACITY) =
𝑞𝑡𝑜𝑒
579.17
=
190.25

= 3.04 > 3.0 (OK)

42
7.0 Discussion

In this project, a water tank is planned to be built. The area of the project is on a slope.
A part of that slope contained soil that was likely to fail and cause a massive damage. We were
assigned build a retaining wall to prevent that possible soil failure. In order to design a retaining
wall there we need to get some essential information and parameters based on site
investigation conducted. From the two WSPs we could calculate the ground water level and
from BH3, BH4, and BH5 we could estimate the soil profile which later helped us in the
calculation of the stresses acting on our designed retaining wall.

Other essential parameters we needed to complete this project were the values of C
and ø and the unit weight. They are important to calculate the lateral stresses (both active and
passive) acting on the designed retaining wall. After we calculated the required parameters,
we decided which type of retaining wall we should use. We agreed on using cantilever retaining
wall. Our selection was made due to the advantages of cantilever retaining wall such as: more
economical because it uses less volume of concrete compared to gravity walls, as it contains
reinforcement steel which helps strengthen the concrete structure.

The location of the wall was carefully decided to be located around 2 meters from the
end of the potential slip/failure area. This decision was made to prevent the wall from a direct
contact with force might be created in case a failure. Weep holes is placed around 1 meter
from center to center at the base of retaining wall. These weep holes are intended to bleed off
excess moisture the collects behind the wall. Though simple sub-drainage, the lateral earth
pressure on this wall are reduced drastically especially during rain.

43
8.0 Conclusion

This project was done to identify the profile of the soil with the values of cohesions,
friction angles, and unit weight unit weight from the Standard Penetration Test accordance to
the British Standard Code of Practice, BS 5930:1981, to overcome the slope failure. The
ground water level was determined based from piezometer. The retaining wall was design
according to the soil stresses at the BH3, BH4 & BH5. Retaining wall was design at there to
prevent the weak soil from fail and collapse. The retaining wall design was checked with the
factor of safety against overturning, sliding along the base and the bearing capacity. The
objectives of this project is successfully achieved when the result obtain for design of retaining
wall able to construct at the site.

44
 REFERENCES

1. Engineer from GEOLAB (M) SDN BHD (Bibiligraphy Atteched)

2. Cohesion Of Soil. (2007). Retrieved from Geotechnical Info.Com:

http://www.geotechnicalinfo.com/cohesion.html

3. Hughes. (2003). Slope Failure. Environmental Geology, 28.

4. Inc., E. E. (2008). Soil Mechanics. Geotechnical Engineering Overview, 68.

5. PTE.LTD, E. (2007). Soil Investigation. Soil Investigation At Land Parcel (A), Marina
View, 96.

6. Retaining Wall. (2017, April 10). Retrieved from Wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retaining_wall

7. Dr. Mohammed E. Haque, P.E, Retaining Walls, Retrieved from

http://people.tamu.edu/~mhaque/cosc421/Rwalls

8. (Prof. Dr. Sarah Springman, 2001,Geotechnical information, Retrieved from

http://geotip.igt.ethz.ch/index.php?&gfield=knowledge&gmenuleft=pictures

9. Robert W.Day, Fellow, ASCE, 1 February 1997, Design and Construction of

Cantilevered Retaining Walls, Retrieved from
http://ascelibrary.org/doi/abs/10.1061/(ASCE)1084-0680(1997)2%3A1(16)

10. Bryan P. Strohman ,2014, Retaining Wall Design Approach, Retrieved from
http://csengineermag.com/article/retaining-wall-design-approach/

11. R.F.Craig. (2005). Craig's Soil Mechanics Solution Manual (Seventh Edition). New
York: Spon Press.

45
 ENGINEER'S PROFILE

Name : Norfazihah Binti Hamdun

Designation : Geotechnical Engineer (Site Investigation Department)

Company : GEOLAB (M) SDN BHD

Expirience : 7 Years (GEOLAB) & 3 Years (Consultancy Company)

Project : Forest City, Country Garden and many more.

Contact : 018 - 788 3632

46
APPENDICES

47
48