Please wait a minute...

Frontiers of Structural and Civil Engineering

Front Struc Civil Eng    2012, Vol. 6 Issue (4) : 358-364     https://doi.org/10.1007/s11709-012-0177-3
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Parametric sensitivity analysis of cellular diaphragm wall
Xi CHEN(), Wei XU
College of Civil Engineering, Tongji University, Shanghai 200092, China
Download: PDF(336 KB)   HTML
Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks
Abstract

The deformation law of the cellular diaphragm wall in deep foundation pits was studied through numerical simulation. Based on the example of the dock wall in engineering, the full three-dimensional finite element model was used to simulate the excavation of the foundation pit. Interaction between the cellular diaphragm wall and the soil was also taken into account in the calculation. The results indicated that the maximum lateral displacement, which is the evaluation index of sensitivity analysis, appeared on the top of the interior longitudinal wall with an excavation depth of 10 m. The centrifuge model test was carried out to study the deformation regulation for a cellular diaphragm wall. The most sensitive factor was found by adjusting the length of the partition wall, the spacing of the partition wall and the thickness of the wall. In the end, a suggestion was proposed to optimize the cellular diaphragm by adjusting the length of the partition wall.

Keywords cellular diaphragm wall      sensitivity analysis      optimization      centrifuge model test     
Corresponding Author(s): CHEN Xi,Email:kukuwindy@163.com   
Issue Date: 05 December 2012
 Cite this article:   
Xi CHEN,Wei XU. Parametric sensitivity analysis of cellular diaphragm wall[J]. Front Struc Civil Eng, 2012, 6(4): 358-364.
 URL:  
http://journal.hep.com.cn/fsce/EN/10.1007/s11709-012-0177-3
http://journal.hep.com.cn/fsce/EN/Y2012/V6/I4/358
Service
E-mail this article
E-mail Alert
RSS
Articles by authors
Xi CHEN
Wei XU
interior longitudinal wallexterior longitudinal wallpartition wallexcavation depth
thicknessdepththicknessdepththicknessdepthlengthspacing
0.8250.8230.821137.210
Tab.1  Sectional dimensions of the cellular diaphragm wall (unit: m)
Fig.1  Finite element calculation model of the cellular diaphragm wall. (a) Calculation scale and element division of the whole model; (b) calculation model of a cellular diaphragm wall
soil layerthickness/mγ/(kN·m-3)e0φνλκMK0
yellow clayey soil418.850.94320.300.11770.00981.240.47
gray mucky clay817.851.18290.350.10050.00841.380.52
soft silty clay817.151.43180.400.15870.01320.70.55
gray silty clay1018.251.03320.350.10810.00901.290.47
pale-green cohesive soil419.800.71300.300.06470.00541.200.50
yellow silty soil/ gray fine silt sand1619.250.76330.300.06470.00541.330.45
clay with silt2018.450.94230.300.06470.00540.900.61
Tab.2  Constitutive characteristic parameters for the soil
work conditionsdefinitionnote
1analysis of initial geostressdisplacement reset
2construct of concrete diaphragm wall
3excavation of the 1st soil layerexcavation depth of 5 m
4excavation of the 2nd soil layerexcavation depth of 5 m
Tab.3  Work conditions
depth/mdisplacement in 3rd work condition/mmdisplacement in 4th work condition/mm
interior longitudinal wallexterior longitudinal wallinterior longitudinal wallexterior longitudinal wall
031.412.456.225.1
2.531.412.356.225.1
530.412.355.724.3
7.529.912.254.822.1
1028.811.354.121.0
12.527.210.652.819.9
1526.19.251.417.7
17.525.07.749.115.7
2022.96.547.914.2
22.520.74.444.512.8
Tab.4  Lateral displacement of the cellular diaphragm wall
physical quantityratio of similitudephysical quantityratio of similitude
displacementnqualityn3
stress/strain1friction coefficient1
arean2density1
volumen3cohesion1
forcen2saturation1
Tab.5  Ratio of Similitude between the centrifugal model and the prototype
interior longitudinal wallexterior longitudinal wallpartition wallexcavation depth
thicknessdepththicknessdepththicknessdepthlengthspacing
M10.8250.8230.821137.210
M20.8251230.82187.210
M30.8251230.821131210
Tab.6  Sectional dimensions of the cellular diaphragm wall (unit: m)
layersoiltriaxial rigidity testvane strengthunconfined compressionconsolidated quick shearing resistancelateral pressure coefficientpermeability coefficient
Ccu/kPa?cu/(.)C'/kPa?'/(-)Cu/(kPa)qu/(kPa)C/(kPa)?/(-)kPaK/(cm·s-1)
1aclay1812.482130.3451310.00.582.0E-7
Tab.7  Physico-mechanical parameters of soil
Fig.2  Centrifuge model
Fig.3  Placement of Eddy displacement sensor
M1M3
depth/mexcavation depth of 5 mexcavation depth of 10 mexcavation depth of 5 mexcavation depth of 10 m
039604267
Tab.8  Lateral displacement of the top of the interior longitudinal wall for Model M1/M3 (unit: mm)
length of partition wall/mchange ratio of length/%maximum lateral displacement of top of diaphragm wall /mmchange ratio of maximum lateral displacementsensitivity coefficientaverage value of sensitivity coefficient
130.056.20.0%
11-15.963.212.5%-0.79
9-30.882.346.4%-1.51
1515.449.7-11.6%-0.75-1.02
Tab.9  Sensitivity coefficient for the length of the partition wall
spacing of partition wall/mchange ratio of spacing/%maximum lateral displacement of top of diaphragm wall /mmchange ratio of maximum lateral displacementsensitivity coefficientaverage value of sensitivity coefficient
7.20.056.20.0%
1038.959.15.1%0.13
1266.760.47.3%0.11
1494.468.421.7%0.230.16
Tab.10  Sensitivity coefficient for the spacing of the partition wall
thickness of wall/mchange ratio of thickness/%maximum lateral displacement of top of diaphragm wall /mmchange ratio of maximum lateral displacementsensitivity coefficientaverage value of sensitivity coefficient
0.80.056.20.0%
0.912.556.0-0.36%-0.029
1.02555.9-0.53%-0.021
1.25055.4-1.4%-0.028-0.026
Tab.11  Sensitivity coefficient for the spacing of the partition wall
1 Gifford D G, Wheeler J R. Concrete slurry wall for temporary and permanent foundation wall at gallery at harbor place-Baltimore. In: Paul D B, Davidson R R, Cavalli N J, eds. Maryland: ASTM Special Technical Publication, 1992, 1129: 151-163
2 Wang G P. Li H M, Fei Y C, Zhao H Q. Application of gridding concrete retaining wall in trench engineering. Chinese Journal of Underground Space and Engineering , 2005, 1(4): 584-586 (in Chinese)
3 Li Y, Gu Q Y, Fei Y C. Design and analysis of lattice diaphragm wall structure in extension project of existing dock structures. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering , 2010, 32(z2): 323-326 (in Chinese)
4 Fang G. Application of super-long cantilever lattice diaphragm wall in dock room foundation pit . Shanghai Construction Science & Technology , 2010, 4: 51-53 (in Chinese)
5 Xu W, Zuo Y, Zang P. Force Analysis of 3-D numerical simulation for lattice shaped diaphragm wall. Building Construction , 2010, 32(10): 1070-1071
6 Zuo Y Z, Xu W, Li X. Numerical simulation analysis of mechanism of soil interaction in lattice shaped diaphragm wall. Building Construction , 2010, 32(10): 1072-1073
7 Peck R B. Deep excavation and tunneling in soft ground. In: Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering . State-of-the-Art-Volume, Mexico City, 1969: 225-290
8 Roboski J F. Three-dimensional Performance and Analyses of Deep Excavations. Evanston: Northwestern University, 2004
9 Xu Z H. Deformation behavior of deep excavations supported by permanent structure in Shanghai soft deposit. Dissertation for the Doctoral Degree . Shanghai: Shanghai Jiaotong University, 2007 (in Chinese)
10 Liu X W, Shi Z Y, Yi D Q, Wu S M. Deformation characteristics analysis of braced excavation on soft clay. Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering , 1999, 21(4): 456-460 (in Chinese)
11 Moormann C. Analysis of wall and ground movements due to deep excavations in soft soil based on a new worldwide database. Soil and Foundation , 2004, 44(1): 87-98
doi: 10.3208/sandf.44.87
12 Arai Y, Kusakabe O, Murata O, Konishi S. A numerical study on ground displacement and stress during and after the installation of deep circular diaphragm walls and soil excavation. Computers and Geotechnics , 2008, 35(5): 791-807
doi: 10.1016/j.compgeo.2007.11.001
13 Wen H, Cheng Q G, Chen X D, MengF C. Study on bearing performance of rectangular closed diaphragm walls as bridge foundation under vertical loading . Chinese Journal of Geotechnical Engineering , 2007, 29(12):1823-1829 (in Chinese)
14 Wong K S, Broms B B. Lateral wall deflection of braced excavation in clay. Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division , 1989, 115(6): 853-870
doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9410(1989)115:6(853)
15 Xu Z H, Wang J H, Wang W D. Deformation behavior of diaphragm walls in deep excavations in Shanghai. China Civil Engineering Journal , 2008, 41(8): 81-86 (in Chinese)
Related articles from Frontiers Journals
[1] Shahaboddin SHAMSHIRBAND, Amir MOSAVI, Timon RABCZUK. Particle swarm optimization model to predict scour depth around a bridge pier[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2020, 14(4): 855-866.
[2] Hamed FATHNEJAT, Behrouz AHMADI-NEDUSHAN. An efficient two-stage approach for structural damage detection using meta-heuristic algorithms and group method of data handling surrogate model[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2020, 14(4): 907-929.
[3] Meisam RABIEI, Asskar Janalizadeh CHOOBBASTI. Innovative piled raft foundations design using artificial neural network[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2020, 14(1): 138-146.
[4] Xiao YAN, Zizheng SUN, Shucai LI, Rentai LIU, Qingsong ZHANG, Yiming ZHANG. Quantitatively assessing the pre-grouting effect on the stability of tunnels excavated in fault zones with discontinuity layout optimization: A case study[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2019, 13(6): 1393-1404.
[5] Tugrul TALASLIOGLU. Optimal dome design considering member-related design constraints[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2019, 13(5): 1150-1170.
[6] Reza KHADEMI-ZAHEDI, Pouyan ALIMOURI. Finite element model updating of a large structure using multi-setup stochastic subspace identification method and bees optimization algorithm[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2019, 13(4): 965-980.
[7] Tugrul TALASLIOGLU. Optimal design of steel skeletal structures using the enhanced genetic algorithm methodology[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2019, 13(4): 863-889.
[8] Fengjie TAN, Tom LAHMER. Shape design of arch dams under load uncertainties with robust optimization[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2019, 13(4): 852-862.
[9] Mohammad Reza GHASEMI, Charles V. CAMP, Babak DIZANGIAN. Novel decoupled framework for reliability-based design optimization of structures using a robust shifting technique[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2019, 13(4): 800-820.
[10] M. SALAR, M. R. GHASEMI, B. DIZANGIAN. Practical optimization of deployable and scissor-like structures using a fast GA method[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2019, 13(3): 557-568.
[11] M. Houshmand KHANEGHAHI, M. ALEMBAGHERI, N. SOLTANI. Reliability and variance-based sensitivity analysis of arch dams during construction and reservoir impoundment[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2019, 13(3): 526-541.
[12] Babak DIZANGIAN, Mohammad Reza GHASEMI. Border-search and jump reduction method for size optimization of spatial truss structures[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2019, 13(1): 123-134.
[13] Lingyun YOU, Zhanping YOU, Kezhen YAN. Effect of anisotropic characteristics on the mechanical behavior of asphalt concrete overlay[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2019, 13(1): 110-122.
[14] Faezehossadat KHADEMI,Mahmoud AKBARI,Sayed Mohammadmehdi JAMAL,Mehdi NIKOO. Multiple linear regression, artificial neural network, and fuzzy logic prediction of 28 days compressive strength of concrete[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2017, 11(1): 90-99.
[15] Nazim Abdul NARIMAN. Control efficiency optimization and Sobol’s sensitivity indices of MTMDs design parameters for buffeting and flutter vibrations in a cable stayed bridge[J]. Front. Struct. Civ. Eng., 2017, 11(1): 66-89.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed