ERSS ANALYSIS FOR EC7

USING PLAXIS

1
 CONTENTS

1. Introduction
2. Design Concepts
3. Study Outcomes

2
INTRODUCTION
ERSS ANALYSIS FOR EC7

3
• 3 Design Approach (DA) specified in the Eurocode will be considered.
• Each DA may be broadly classified as follows:
• DA1 This approach required 2 design combination (DC) to be examined
• DC1 Factors on actions (loads) (DA1-1)
• DC2 Factors on actions and resistances (DA1-2)
• DA2 Factors on actions and resistances
• DA3 Factors on actions and material strength.
• In general only one of these three DA is permitted by the National
Application document, Singapore National Annex states that Design
Approach 1 shall be used. Table NA.1 2.4.7.3.4.1(1) P

4
• Partial factor values for STR and GEO recommended by EC7 is tabulated
below according to the each DA.

Parameter Symbol DA1-1 DA1-2 DA2 DA3

Action / Permanent Unfavourable c 1.35 1.0 1.35 1.0/1.35*
Action effect
Favourable c 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Variable Unfavourable Q 1.5 1.3 1.5 1.3/1.5*
Favourable Q 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Resistance R 1.0 1.0 1.1/1.4+ 1.0
Soil c’ c ’ 1.0 1.25 1.0 1.25
Parameters
tan ’ tan ’ 1.0 1.25 1.0 1.25
cu cu 1.0 1.4 1.0 1.4
*DA3 values for actions are given for geotechnical/structural actions. + Factors on resistance depend on resistance type

based on Singapore Annex

5
DESIGN CONCEPTS
ERSS ANALYSIS FOR EC7

6
 Design Approach 1-1

Verification of limit state GEO (DA1-1)

Actions and action effects Material properties and resistance

Representative Characteristic
actions material properties
Frep Xk

Design material M from set M1

Design actions
f from set A1 Fd
properties
Xd

Geotechnical analysis

Design effect of
E from set A1 Design resistance R from set R1
actions
Rd
Ed
Verify
Ed  Rd

7
 Design Approach 1-2

Verification of limit state GEO (DA1-2)

Actions and action effects Material properties and resistance

Representative Characteristic
actions material properties
Frep Xk

Design material M from set M2

Design actions
f from set A2 Fd
properties
Xd
On variable
actions
only
Geotechnical analysis

Design effect of
E from set A2 Design resistance R from set R1
actions
Rd
Ed
Verify
Ed  Rd

8
• Plaxis has introduced a convenient facility named “Design Approach” to
users set up an Ultimate Limit State (ULS) calculation.
• This facilities is set up in a generic way such that any safety approach based
on partial factors can be easily introduced.
• To use this facilities, user should be at “Structures” mode. Following a the
steps to create a Design Approach on Plaxis:
At “Structures” mode, click on Structures  select Design Approaches
(Design Approaches toolbox will pop up)  select Add button and
named  Input the partial factors value for Loads and Materials

9
1 2

4 3

10
• In DA1-1 the actions from the soil on the wall (geotechnical actions) are calculated using
characteristic values for the soil properties. A partial factor should now be applied to these
‘geotechnical actions’. However within a FE model this approach is not possible.
• Eurocode 7 however also allow within EC7-DA1 to apply the partial factors directly to the action
effects (such as the bending moments in the wall and the anchor forces).
• In the following practical method is used: a factor of 1 is used for the permanent unfavourable
actions (instead of 1.35) and a factor of 1.5 / 1.35 = 1.11 for the variable unfavourable actions
(instead of 1.5). The actions effects should now be scaled up with a factor of 1.35

11
• In DA1-1 the actions from the soil on the wall (geotechnical actions) are calculated using
characteristic values for the soil properties. A partial factor should now be applied to these
‘geotechnical actions’. However within a FE model this approach is not possible.
• Eurocode 7 however also allow within EC7-DA1 to apply the partial factors directly to the action
effects (such as the bending moments in the wall and the anchor forces).
• In the following practical method is used: a factor of 1 is used for the permanent unfavourable
actions (instead of 1.35) and a factor of 1.5 / 1.35 = 1.11 for the variable unfavourable actions
(instead of 1.5). The actions effects should now be scaled up with a factor of 1.35

12
• In order to perform design calculations, new phases need to be defined in
addition to the serviceability state calculations.
• There are TWO main schemes to perform design calculations in relation to
serviceability calculations (Scheme 1 & Scheme 2)

Reference:
Bauduin C., De Vos M., Simpson B (2000 International Workshop on Limit
State Design in Geotechnical Engineering. Melbourne, Australia.

13
 Scheme 1

0. Initial Phase The design calculation (ULS) are performed for

each serviceability state calculation separately.
This means that Phase 4 starts from Phase 1,
1. Phase 1 (SLS) 4. Phase 4 (ULS)
Phase 5 from Phase 2, etc. Note that in this
case partial factor on a stiffness parameter is

2. Phase 2 (SLS) 5. Phase 5 (ULS) only used to calculate additional displacements

as a result of stress redistribution due to
factored (higher loads and the factored
3. Phase 3 (SLS) 6. Phase 6 (ULS) (reduced) strength parameters.

Recommend scheme for FE analysis and check only critical stages of a long list of SLS, where
collapse may be possible

14
 Scheme 2

0. Initial Phase 4. Phase 4 (ULS) The design calculation (ULS) start from the
initial situation and are performed subsequently.
This means that Phase 4 starts from the Initial
1. Phase 1 (SLS) 5. Phase 5 (ULS)
phase, Phase 5 from Phase 4, etc. In general it
is recommended to establish the initial stress

2. Phase 2 (SLS) 6. Phase 6 (ULS) filed from characteristic value of K0 (some

exceptions however may occur).

3. Phase 3 (SLS)

15
STUDY OUTCOMES
ERSS ANALYSIS FOR EC7

16
17
 RL 106.5
GWT 1m below ground level
GVI (N=13)
RL 95.5

GV (N=32)
RL 80.6
RL 75.7 GV (N=56)
Struts at
GV (N=72) S1 RL106.5 Depth = 0.0 m Vert Spacing
RL 64.7
S2 RL102.5 Depth = 4.0 m (4.0 m)
GV (N=100) 3m thick ground treatment
Relief wells not considered for this analysis S3 RL99.0 Depth = 7.5 m (3.5 m)
S4 RL95.5 Depth = 11.0 m (3.5 m)
S5 RL92.5 Depth = 14.0 m (3.0 m)
S6 RL89.0 Depth = 17.5 m (3.5 m)
S7 RL86.0 Depth = 20.5 m (3.0 m)
FEL RL82.6 Depth = 23.9 m (3.4 m)

SLS = Excavation to 1 m below strut level for each stage Assumed lateral spacing of strut is 7m
ULS = Excavation to 1.5 m below strut level for each stage (for both combination 1 & 2)

Analysis stops once excavation reaches FEL (Have not include strut removal stage)

18
 Phases SLS DA1-1 (SCHEME 1) DA1-2 (SCHEME 1)

Phase 1
Excavate
for S1

19
 Phases SLS DA1-1 (SCHEME 1) DA1-2 (SCHEME 1)

Phase 3
Excavate
for S2

20
 Phases SLS DA1-1 (SCHEME 1) DA1-2 (SCHEME 1)

Phase 5
Excavate
for S3

21
 Phases SLS DA1-1 (SCHEME 1) DA1-2 (SCHEME 1)

Phase 7
Excavate
for S4

22
 Phases SLS DA1-1 (SCHEME 1) DA1-2 (SCHEME 1)

Phase 9
Excavate
for S5

23
 Phases SLS DA1-1 (SCHEME 1) DA1-2 (SCHEME 1)

Phase 11
Excavate
for S6

24
 Phases SLS DA1-1 (SCHEME 1) DA1-2 (SCHEME 1)

Phase 13
Excavate
for S7

25
 Phases SLS DA1-1 (SCHEME 1) DA1-2 (SCHEME 1)

Phase 15
Excavate to
FEL

26
• Recommend using Scheme 1 for EC7 analysis using FE analysis and check
only critical stages of a long list of SLS, where collapse may be possible.
• Using the DA concept on FE will optimize the time for different analysis (SLS
and ULS).

27
THANK YOU

28