Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
ABSTRACT: The deformation behaviour of 1.0 m and 0.8 m thick retaining walls supporting a maximum
excavation of about 27.0 m for a luxurious apartment block with an eight level mechanical basement car park
in the City of Kuala Lumpur is presented in this paper. The area of excavation was about 34.0 m long and 20.0
m wide which exposes the residual soils from the Kenny Hill Formation. This paper presents the comparison
between the measured deformation profile with those predicted using a quasi-finite element program
“FREW”. The choice of retaining system and construction method is also discussed.
45
S P T "N " g re a te r
40 2 0 0 b lo w s >
(e x tra p o la te d )
35
M O D ER ATELY
< C O N S E R V A T IV E
30
25
20 L o w e s t e x c a v a tio n
le v e l, R L 1 8 .6 3 m
15
-5 LEGEN D
BH1
-1 0 BH2
BH3
-1 5 BH4
BH5
BH6
-2 0
-2 5
-3 5
The movements of selected two diaphragm wall The author wishes to thank the following individuals
panels are presented here; Panel P4 and Panel P11 for their direct and/or indirect contribution to this
(Figure1). Panel P4 of Wall D is retaining the adja- paper: Ir. Dr Kem Yah, Ir. Dr. Gue See Sew, Ir
cent Petrol Station ground at RL46.0 m near the Simon Tan Siow Meng (Managing Director of SSP
boundary. The thickness of panel P4 is 1.0 m. Panel Geotechnics), Steven Ng Tak Kee and Dr Logana-
P11 of Wall B, 0.8 m thickness, is retaining the than Nagendran.
ground at RL40.0 m. The original ground level of -2 0
W A L L D IS P L A C E M E N T (m m )
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 -2 0
W A L L D IS P L A C E M E N T (m m )
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
this site was approximately RL45.0 m. The first
temporary strut was installed at RL39.0 m. Hence, 46
44
42
46
44
42
Panel P4 were cantilevered by 7.0 m, where as Panel 40
38
36
E x ca v a tio n
L e ve l R L 3 8 .4 m
40
38
36
LG2
B2
P11 were strutted almost at the top of the wall. The 34
32
34
32
28 B5 28 B5
E X C A V A T IO N B6
wall, prediction is in good agreement with the meas-
26 26
24 L E V E L R L 2 4 .6 m 24 B7
22 22
ured movement. 20
18
16
20
18
16
E X C A V A TIO N
L E V E L R L 1 8 .6 3 m
14 14
12 12
10 10
8 8
6 6
4 4
6 CONCLUSION 2
0
2
0
-2 STA G E 5 -2 STAG E 7
-4 -4
Two diaphragm walls of different thicknesses were Figure 4. Wall movements of Panel P4.
analysed. In the initial stage of excavation, before
the struts were introduced, cantilever type deflec- -2 0
W A L L D IS P L A C E M E N T (m m )
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 -2 0
W A L L D IS P L AC EM E N T (m m )
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
28 28
savings. 12
10
12
10
8 8
6 6
4 4
2 2
ST A G E 5 S TA G E 7
0 0
Figure 5. Wall movements of Panel P11.
7 REFERENCES