Gabion Alternative Provides Affordable Core Solution

CAUSEWAY
Gabion Alternative
CCLEC – May 2018
Cebu - Cordova Link Expressway

Index
1. Introducction DANIEL MUÑOZ

2. Background CLJV ENGINEERING MANAGER
3. Gabion alternative
4. Investigation of dredged material JOSÉ LUIS MONSÓ
SENER SENIOR ADVISOR
5. Embankment protection design
6. Global Stability
CESAR GARCÍA &
7. Settlements SYLVIE BRETELLE
GHD GEOTECHNICAL DIRECTOR
8. Compaction
9. Filters, Surface preparation
CARLOS ROS
10. Constructability CLJV CAUSEWAY CONST. MNG.
11.Next steps. Timeline DANIEL MUÑOZ

1. Introduction
CCLEC – May 2018

1. Introduction.CCLEX General Layout
CORDOVA TIE-IN
TOLL PLAZA
CAUSEWAY
MAIN
BRIDGE
CSCR
RAMPS

2. Background
CCLEC – May 2018

2. Background. Baseline Solution. Tender proposal
 Conventional solution
 100% Quarry materials
AREA Material
 Reliable performance
Quarry Run I 1-150 kg
 Durable (if good rock quality)
INTERIOR
Quarry Run II 1-50 kg  Permeable core  Easier design
Armour Rock, 60-300 kg
 Main disadvantages:
EXTERIOR PROTECTION Armour Rock, 300-1000 kg
• Cost of quarry materials
Armour Rock, 1-1,5 T
• Logistics
• Environmental impacts
• Community impacts
2. Background. Geotube solution. Tender alternative.
 Geotubes filled with sandy material confine the core constituted

with dredge materials. Sand is pumped and not compacted
 Resolve all the main issues of the quarry run solution
 However it presents the following technical concerns:
• Worse performance of armour rock (Impervious core)

• Possible licuefaction of geotube sandy fill under seismic
loads
• Uncertainties on durability of geotube fabric AFFORDABLE
• Difficult to maintain and repair RISK???
• Difficult interfaces with utilities, drainage, electrical and
communication ducts
• Long term settlements of geotube fill
• Subject to vandalism
2. Background. Geotube solution. Tender alternative.

3. Gabion
Alternative
CCLEC – May 2018

3. Gabion Alternative. DED proposed solution
Q: How to combine the advantages of geotube solution without

assuming so elevated risks?
 The solution should be conceptually similar to Geotubes: Barriers to contain

the dredged material that fills the core.
 These barriers should be either precast or assemblied ahead of time
 The barriers should be flexible enough to accomodate to the seabed surface
 The barriers should meet the filter criteria
 The barriers should be A MORE CONVENTIONAL SOLUTION to waive most of

the risks of the geotubes.
ALL THESE CONDITIONES ARE MET BY GABIONS!!!!


• Include gabions box as containment structure in the lower part of

the section and a core filled with dredged material.
• Include geo-composite filter in the inner side (to avoid fill

material outflow)
• Allows core filling with dredged material (up to aprox +1.2 m MSL)
• Upper fill with dry selected and heavily compacted materials

3. Gabion Alternative. Main advantages
Similar constructability concept than geotubes solution with the followig MAIN
ADVANTAGES:
 Better performance of armouring: increase permability of the core.
 Durability. Gabions baskets are only required as temporary confinement
 Maintenance free
 Better integration with other civil Works: Utilities, drainage…
 Better seismic performance. Sand in the core is propertly compacted. Gabion stones
are not liquefactable
 No materials susceptible to long term settements. Dredged sand of the core is

propertly compacted
CONFIDENTIAL
3. Gabion Alternative. Durability
DURABILITY
 Gabion Baskets as filled with durable rock. Size is typically 100-200 mm
 Gabions wire mesh is only required as temporary confinement
 Once it is protected and confined by the armour rock the mesh is not strictly required
 Filter criteria should be met between the gabion stones and the armour rocks
 Filter cloth needs to be placed between the dredged sand and the gabions
 Polimer and PVC based coating of wire mesh is available. Expectency life is up to 120
years depending the product and the environment (refer to EN-10223-3 Hexagonal
Steel wire mesh products for civil engineering purposes)
CONFIDENTIAL
3. Gabion Alternative. Durability
CONFIDENTIAL
4. Investigation of
dredged material
CCLEC – May 2018

4. Investigation of Dredged Material
INVESTIGATION IN TWO STAGES
STAGE 1:
 Shallow sampling along Mactan Channel
 Purpose is to identify potential sources of adecuate material to carry out more
detailed investigation (stage 2)
 Field identification + Lab testing
STAGE 2:
 To Determine accurately volumen of suitable material
 Grid of Boreholes 5 m Deep + Bathymetry
 Continuos sampling along the depth (1 spt every half a meter)
 Lab testing including chemical analysis
CONFIDENTIAL
4. Investigation of Dredged Material. Stage 1
CONFIDENTIAL
CONFIDENTIAL
CONFIDENTIAL
Unit Grain Size Atterberg Specific Organic Carbonate

Toxicity CBR
Weight Distribution Limits Gravity Content (%) (%)
B1 x x x x x x x x
C1 x x x x x x x x
C2 x x x x x x x x
C3 x x x x x x x x
SANDY
D1 x x x x x x x x
SOILS
D2 x x x x x x x x
D4 x x x x x x x x
D6 x x x x x x x x
D7 x x x x x x x x
B2 x x x
B3 x x x
D3 x x x
D5 x x x
CLAYEY DBH1 x x x
SOILS GS1 x x x
GS7 x x x
GS16 x x x
GS20 x x x
A8 x x x
A12 x x x
CONFIDENTIAL
TOXICITY TESTS:
 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon (TPH) Test
 Monocyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons Test
 Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs)

Tests
 Metals / Metaloids Test
 Other Organics Test
CONFIDENTIAL
CONFIDENTIAL
5. Embankment
protection design
CCLEC – May 2018

A) DESIGN REQUIREMENTS:
• Stability against wave action
• Limited wave overtopping
• Durability

B) PRELIMINARY DESIGN FEATURES
• Gabions act as a containment system of the dredged core backfill. Stone sizes between 10 and
20 cm are recommended inside the gabions in order to minimize the motion of individual
stones within and avoid possible deformation of the basket and the abrasion of the mesh-wires.
• It is recommended to move the gabions towards the core in order to install a filter material
between gabions and main armour layer. This should guarantee a uniform slope for the
installation of the rubble-mound protection.
• The solution is to place heavy armor stone as the primary defense to dissipate a large
proportion of the wave energy. However, armor stones are recommended to be less than two
tones because of availability limitations in local quarries.
• Permeablity is an important parameter to determine the design of the armor stones. More
permeability gives more stability and less run-up and overtopping.
• In order to assess the permeability of the structure 2D physical model test should be performed

C) DESIGN TO BE CONFIRMED BY PHYSICAL MODEL TESTS:
• WHY TESTING?
• Core permeability drives the design of the main armor and run-up values
• Formulations depend on notional permeability (P) which can only be well defined with 2D
physical model tests
FIGURE 1. Notional permeability factor P.

Fig. 2. Sensitivity analysis of main

layer weight depending on notonial
permeability.
• Despite this solution will have higher permeability than a geotube based solution
(impervious core), it is complex to define the permeability of the core and its effects on the
main armor stability.
• A sensitivity analysis of the impact of permeability in the armor layer weight is shown in Fig.
2. For the tender design inputs Hs= 1.58 m and Tm-1=4.76 s, main armor layer weight (Wn50)
is in the range of 2.1 t to 0.9 t for permeability values ranging from 0.1 up to 0.5.
• In order to well define the notional permeability P of our sections, 2D tests should be run.

• DESIGN STRATEGY OF THE PREFERRED SOLUTION
• Gabion boxes act solely as retaining structures of the dredged material inside the core and
they are not considered in the marine design protection against waves.
• A filter layer should be included in the wave exposed area (south side) between gabions
and armor layer.
• Three different sections are proposed depending on the depth range in order to guarantee
a minimum top elevation of gabions of +1.2 m MSL. Dredging material top elevation is also
+1.2 m MSL.
• Rubble-mound weights will be variable depending on wave heights of different zones of

the causeway and proposed section to be tested corresponds to section B of the tender
with Hs=1.58 m.
• DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED SECTION TO BE TESTED
• 2x1x1 m gabions filled with stones of diameter 10-20 cm

• Non-woven PET geotextile filter and drainage geo-composite
• Filling in material in the core: dredged material up to +1.2 m MSL and regular backfill (dry
material from excavation) from +1.2 m up to top level.
• Granular filter layer
• Rubble-mound stones for armor layer
SECTION 1. DEPTHS RANGE -1.80 UP TO -0.80 m MSL

SECTION 2. DEPTHS RANGE -0.80 UP TO +0.20 m MSL

SECTION 3. DEPTHS HIGHER THAN +0.2 m MSL

• SETTING OF THE PHYSICAL MODEL TESTS:
• Objectives:
 Analysis of the causeway’s cross-section stability
 Analysis of the run-up and overtopping rates over the causeway
 Optimization or adjustment of the proposed solution

• Features of the physical model tests:
 Irregular waves ranging from 0.5 m up to 3 m will be tested
 Scale of the wave 2D model will be 1/5 (big scale)
 Wave heights shall progressively increase 0.5 m steps with a total of six wave height
steps to be tested. Three periods will be considered ranging from 3.5 till 6.5 s
 Wave series shall consist of a minimum of 1,500 waves per interval
 A unique tidal level is to be fully tested. If needed, an additional set of tests

including a second tidal higher level will be assessed
 The causeway is located in an area with limited depth, so depth-limited breaking

waves are expected. Physical model tests will consider this wave breaking effect.
Finally, after physical model test conclusions, additional tests of a second cross section could
also be proposed. This new cross section would include geometry modifications and
improvements based on the results obtained.

6. Global Stability
CCLEC – May 2018

6. Global Stability. Tender stage causeway design – Slide
model
CONFIDENTIAL
6. Global Stability. Detailed design stage causeway
design – Slide model
CONFIDENTIAL
6. Global Stability. Comparison between Tender and
Detailed Design
Causeway Tender Detailed Remarks

properties design
1. Geometry
1.1 Depth of seabed -1.50 m MSL -1.30 m MSL Updated bathymetry survey used
in detailed design (April 2018)
1.2 Height of 7.50 m 5.50 m Tender embankment height was
embankment based on highest fill height.
Current model was based on
representative height from new
longitudinal profile (27 April
2018)
1.3 Slope 1.50H:1V 1.50H:1V
1.4 Road width 22 m~ 22 m~
CONFIDENTIAL
6. Global Stability. Comparison between Tender and
Detailed Design
Causeway Tender Detailed design Remarks

properties
2. Construction
material
2.1 Rock armour Present Present
2.2 Filter Present Present
2.3 Core Quarry run Dredged material
2.4 Gabions Not present Present For containment of
dredged material
2.5 Geosynthetics Not present Present Refers to geogrid/
geocomposite/ geotextile
(see next slide)
3. Seismic Load Kh = 0.165 Kh = 0.208 Change due to SHA report

for detailed design
CONFIDENTIAL
6. Global Stability. Geotechnical Parameters
Soil Type Color Unit Weight Cohesion Friction Reference

(kN/m3) (kPa) Angle (°)
Dredged Top 20 5 25 NAVFAC
(1.10m MSL to RL)
Dredged Bottom (Sea- 19 0,2.5,5 25 NAVFAC
bed to 1.10m MSL)
Gabion Fill 17.5 17 40 Macaferri
(TN-DT-027)
Rock fill 20 5 42 CIRIA SP83 (1991)
Filters 20 0 42 NAVFAC
Gravelly limestone 22 5 38 RocLab
(foundation)
Limestone (Bedrock) 22 60 45 RocLab
Cohesion of dredged material may vary due to fines content and

compaction. Adopt sensitivity analysis for bottom dredged material.

6. Global Stability. Design Loads & Load Cases (from
Basis of Design)
Reference
Design Live Load 10 kPa AASHTO 3.6.2
Seismic coefficient Kh = 0.50PGA From DPWH Sec 16.2.6.1

Kv = 0
PGA 0.416 From Seismic Hazard
Assessment report, Soil Type I
Resistance factor for 0.75 DPWH Vol 5 Sec 16.2.3.3
Service Load Combination 1 (FoS = 1.30)
Resistance factor for Level 2 0.90 DPWH Vol 5 Sec 16.1.7

EQ (FoS = 1.10)
Consideration for Tidal lag Water table to be +1.10m MSL (MHHW) on causeway,
falling to 0m MSL outside the causeway

6. Global Stability. Factor of Safety
Results of Analyses (c=0 kPa, 2.5 kPa, and 5 kPa Dredged bottom)
Cohesion of
Internal Global
Cases wet dredged
FSBishop FSBishop
material
1a 0 kPa Seismic (Level 2) 1.11 1.11
1b 0 kPa Normal 1.46 1.48
2a 2.5 kPa Seismic (Level 2) 1.17 1.15
2b 2.5 kPa Normal 1.53 1.55
3a 5 kPa Seismic (Level 2) 1.11 1.14
3b 5 kPa Normal 1.50 1.50
 All cases passed

 FoS in the range of 1.11 to 1.14 for Seismic Level 2 Global stability
 FoS in the range of 1.11 to 1.17 for Seismic Level 2 Internal Stability

Case 1a - Seismic Case, c=0kPa
Internal FSBishop=1.11 Global FS=1.11

Case 1b - Static Case, c=0kPa

Case 2a - Seismic Case, c=2.5kPa

Case 2b - Static Case, c=2.5kPa

Case 3a - Seismic Case, c=5kPa

Case 3b - Static Case, c=5kPa

Summary of Results for H=4.8m
Summary of Results for Embankment Height 5.5m

Cases1 Maccaferri Minimum
Geogrid Wrap-around No. of Layers Length
(PET woven) Length (m)
c=0 kPa ParaGrid HF 2.50m 1 Continuous
125
c=2.5 kPa ParaGrid HF 2.50m 1 Continuous
125
c=5 kPa ParaGrid HF 2.50m 1 Continuous
100
1 As per varying cohesion of Dredged Bottom filling material

7. Settlements
CCLEC – May 2018

7. Settlements. Preliminary evaluation
Key considerations
 Dredged fill unlikely to be clay

 Worse case scenario: 2.4m silt layer, normally consolidated
– Cc = 0.1
– E0 = 1
– Cv = 20m/yr
– Predicted time to achieve 90% consolidation: 1 month
– Surcharge loading
 Construction solution:
– use geocomposite of high hydraulic transmissivity surrounding the core to allow free
drainage
– use surcharge loading to fast-track consolidation
CONFIDENTIAL
8. Compaction
CCLEC – May 2018

8. Compaction
 Dredged material up to MHW (+0.5 MSL will require compaction by dynamic roller (that can
improve 2-3m to very dense to avoid liquefaction risk). This material shall be evaluated for
compaction and settlements.
CONFIDENTIAL
8. Compaction
Graph showing depth of influence of dynamic roller = 3.85m
*ISSMGE 0 TC 211 International Symposium on Ground Improvement (31 May and June 2012)
https://www.broons.com/images/uploads/tech_papers/Quantifying-the-Zone-of-Influence-
of-the-Impact-Roller.pdf
Material = iron magnetite tailings
CONFIDENTIAL
8. Compaction
• Significant density and strength improvement

is usually obtained to depths of 1-2m in clay
soils and 2-3m (or more) in sands and waste
materials (Source:
https://www.broons.com/images/uploads/te
ch_papers/Avalle_Impact_Rollers_Aug04.pdf)
• Figure on right shows the results after 12

passes on a filled site in the Netherlands,
comprising uniform fine sand (Source:
https://www.broons.com/images/uploads/te
ch_papers/Avalle_Conf_Paper_Kuala_Lumpur.
pdf)
CONFIDENTIAL
8. Compaction
Details of Port Coogee, QA project

Equipment Broons BH-1300 HD
“square” impact
roller
Weight of roller 12t
No of passes 10 – 40
First lift 1m above water

level
From Trials and validation using the

“square”impact roller (Avalle 2007)
Video
CONFIDENTIAL
9. Geosyntetics,
Surface preparation
CCLEC – May 2018

Typical Section
LEGEND
1 – Heavy duty separation 1
geotextile (MacTex N90.1) 4.2 m MSL
2 – ParaGrid HF125/HF100
geogrid
3 – Drainage geocomposite
(MacDrain W1071) 2
4 – Separation Geotextile
(MacTex N40.1) 3
4 2.5m
0.6m
+1.1 m MSL Gabion
0 m MSL Gabion Gabion
Gabion Gabion Gabion

-1.3 m MSL

9. Geosyntetics and surface preparation
Name Purpose Photo taken from Macaferri website
Uniaxial geogrid Tensile

reinforcement
Geotextile Separator
between filters
and dredged
material
Geocomposite Drainage/
Tensile
reinforcement/
Separator
CONFIDENTIAL
9. Geosyntetics and surface preparation
 Based on boreholes for causeway alignment, removal of sediments is not expected to be

required.
CONFIDENTIAL
10. Constructability
CCLEC – May 2018

10. Constructability. Locations

10. Constructability. Locations

10. Constructability. Sequence of Work
1. Installation of geotextile
2. Positioning of Gabions
3. Gabions will be covered with geotextile
4. Placing of dredged materials
5. Compaction of embankment with dredged material
6. Installation of Geogrid Layer
7. Installation of Armour Rocks (First Phase)
8. Backfilling materials above water level in dry condition
9. Installation of Armour Rocks (Second Phase) .

10. Constructability. Installation of Geotextile
Installation of geotextile
- a layer of geotextile will be laid and hold with the weight of the gabions.
DFL 1.48m
MSL 0.00m
-0.50m
One layer of
geotextile

10. Constructability. Positioning of Gabions
Positioning the Gabions
Gabions will be placed on its specified location using an amphibious excavator. Gabion
self weight will keep the geotextile in place.
DFL 1.48m
MSL 0.00m
-0.50m
Gabions

10. Constructability. Gabions will be covered with
geotextile
Geotextile will cover the inner part of the gabion line to prevent the seepage of the dredged
materials into the gabions.
Geotextile covering
the gabions
DFL 1.48m
MSL 0.00m
-0.50m

10. Constructability. Placing of Dredged Materials
Dredged materials are dumped right above the geocomposite until the level of the gabions.
DFL 1.48m
MSL 0.00m
-0.50m
Dredged Materials

10. Constructability. Compaction of Dredged Material
When the backfill reaches

the gabion top elevation, dry
conditions are assured.
Although fine material
compacts by hydraulic
compaction, dynamic
compaction can be done to
improve its conditions.

10. Constructability. Installation of Geogrid Layer
A geogrid layer will be installed so other materials can be used for backfilling while improving the
conditions of the embankment.
DFL 1.48m
MSL 0.00m
-0.50m
Geogrid Layer

10. Constructability. Installation of Armour Rocks (First
Phase)
Armour rocks are placed for the additional protection of the filling materials.
DFL 1.48m
MSL 0.00m
-0.50m
Armour Rocks

10. Constructability. Backfilling Materials in Dry Conditions
Backfilling materials will be poured above the compacted layer and after which, the armour rocks
on the 2nd phase will be dumped.
2nd Phase Armour

Rock
DFL 1.48m
MSL 0.00m
-0.50m
Backfilling in Dry
Condition

10. Constructability. Flow Chart of Gabions
Receipt, inspection and

approval of the material
(Gabions and Boulders)
Filling up gabion baskets

Placing of Gabions
with boulders
Transportation of
Loading of Gabions and Gabions to the
Hauling to the jetty specific location
Marine Transportation
of Gabions to Cordova
Wharf
*Flowchart may vary change once the causeway platform is already available

10. Constructability. Filling up gabion baskets with rocks
Before filling up the gabion, receipt, inspection and

approval of materials will commence in the
CLJV compound.
Location:
CLJV Compound, SRP Cebu
Rate:
2 Gabions/man per day

10. Constructability. Logistics
 Flat Barges
 To be used in transporting from the compound to the jetty and marine
transportation from the jetty to the Cordova Wharf
 Floating Platform
 To be used in transporting the gabions and geocomposites to their
specific locations
 Amphibious Excavator
 To be used in picking up the gabions from the platform to its
assigned place.

10. Constructability. Transportation of Gabions
Floating Platforms
 Pulled by outboard jet

10. Constructability. Placing of Gabions
Amphibious Excavator

11. Next steps.
Timeline
CCLEC – May 2018

11. Next Steps. Timeline
 Stage 2 Geotechnical Investigation (18 boreholes)
 Stage 2 Lab Testing 25/5/2018
 Bathymetry
 Marine Studies preliminary results (wave height, Surge,…)  25/5/2018
 CHANGE OF DESIGN FLOOD LEVEL??? (MEANTIME +1.48 M BEING USED AS PER

E.R.).
 Predesign of the causeway cross section (+2-3 weeks)  12/6/2018
 Physical Model Test at IH Cantabria (+8 weeks)  7/8/2018
 Final Design of Causeway  10/9/2018 (4/8/2018 in Schedule rev B)
 Start of Causeway Construction (Permanent Works)  2/11/2018
 Other activities before construction: permits, trial test (temporary works)


Gabion Alternative Provides Affordable Core Solution

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Gabion Alternative Provides Affordable Core Solution

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

CAUSEWAY

CCLEC – May 2018

Cebu - Cordova Link Expressway

1. Introducction DANIEL MUÑOZ

11.Next steps. Timeline DANIEL MUÑOZ

Cebu - Cordova Link Expressway

CCLEC – May 2018

Cebu - Cordova Link Expressway

Cebu - Cordova Link Expressway

CCLEC – May 2018

Cebu - Cordova Link Expressway

 Geotubes filled with sandy material confine the core constituted

• Worse performance of armour rock (Impervious core)

Cebu - Cordova Link Expressway

CCLEC – May 2018

Cebu - Cordova Link Expressway

Q: How to combine the advantages of geotube solution without

 The solution should be conceptually similar to Geotubes: Barriers to contain

 These barriers should be either precast or assemblied ahead of time

 The barriers should be flexible enough to accomodate to the seabed surface

 The barriers should meet the filter criteria

 The barriers should be A MORE CONVENTIONAL SOLUTION to waive most of

ALL THESE CONDITIONES ARE MET BY GABIONS!!!!

Cebu - Cordova Link Expressway

Cebu - Cordova Link Expressway

• Include gabions box as containment structure in the lower part of

• Include geo-composite filter in the inner side (to avoid fill

• Upper fill with dry selected and heavily compacted materials

 Better performance of armouring: increase permability of the core.

 Durability. Gabions baskets are only required as temporary confinement

 Better integration with other civil Works: Utilities, drainage…

 No materials susceptible to long term settements. Dredged sand of the core is

 Gabion Baskets as filled with durable rock. Size is typically 100-200 mm

 Gabions wire mesh is only required as temporary confinement

CCLEC – May 2018

Cebu - Cordova Link Expressway

Unit Grain Size Atterberg Specific Organic Carbonate

 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon (TPH) Test

 Monocyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons Test

 Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs)

 Metals / Metaloids Test

 Other Organics Test

CCLEC – May 2018

Cebu - Cordova Link Expressway

• Stability against wave action

• Limited wave overtopping

Cebu - Cordova Link Expressway

B) PRELIMINARY DESIGN FEATURES

Cebu - Cordova Link Expressway

C) DESIGN TO BE CONFIRMED BY PHYSICAL MODEL TESTS:

FIGURE 1. Notional permeability factor P.

Cebu - Cordova Link Expressway

Fig. 2. Sensitivity analysis of main

Cebu - Cordova Link Expressway

• Rubble-mound weights will be variable depending on wave heights of different zones of

• 2x1x1 m gabions filled with stones of diameter 10-20 cm

SECTION 1. DEPTHS RANGE -1.80 UP TO -0.80 m MSL

Cebu - Cordova Link Expressway

SECTION 2. DEPTHS RANGE -0.80 UP TO +0.20 m MSL

Cebu - Cordova Link Expressway

SECTION 3. DEPTHS HIGHER THAN +0.2 m MSL

Cebu - Cordova Link Expressway