This document discusses recent developments in bored pile and diaphragm wall design and construction for marine structures. It covers topics such as diaphragm wall finish, cage detailing practice, tremie concreting practice, panel stability, and improvements in safety. The key points are that diaphragm walls are well-suited for marine works; plant and material advances present opportunities and risks; and newly published industry guidance aims to achieve better quality and safety outcomes.

1. Independent expertise in depth
Guidance for good practice in bored pile and diaphragm wall
design and construction for marine structures

2. Contents
• Introduction
• Recent developments
• Diaphragm wall finish
• Cage detailing practice
• Tremie concreting practice
• Panel stability
• Improvements in safety
• conclusions

3. Introduction

4. Introduction

5. Introduction

6. Introduction

7. Introduction

8. Why concrete at London Gateway ?
• Illustrative design based on combi
wall
• Safer installation of DWall on dry land
• Risk of driving into very dense Thanet
Sand mitigated
• Dwalls will act as foundations for the
gantry cranes
• Steel prices high and volatile in 2007
• Much reduced steel content in DWall

9. Design of Diaphragm Wall
• Key challenges
• Relatively high retained height (ca.
28m lowest dredge)
• Changing ground conditions
• Complex soil-structure interaction
• Tight displacement criteria - limit
permanent change of gauge ca. 14.75
mm
• Complex load cases involving tidal lag,
crane, vessel berthing and mooring
• Crack widths limited to 0.24 mm (SLS)
in the splash zone

10. Thanet Sand Section
Soil Model One
London Clay Section
Soil Model Three
W E
Transition
Soil Model Two

11. London Gateway Port – Typical Section

12. Recent developments - deeper CFA
Soil Mech SF50 Fundex F3500
CFA pile reach limited by mast
height and pull back winch capacity
• Dia. 300 to 1500mm
• Length max 32 metres

13. Recent developments – cased CFA secant walls
Cased CFA Rotary
CFA

14. CFA - Secant wall examples

15. Cased CFA - Secant wall examples

16. Diaphragm walls – new horizons
100m+ wall depth
1800mm thickness
Verticality 1 in 300
C60 concrete

17. Rotary drum cutters
Mud Pump
Inclinometer
Guide Frame
Mud to the
desanding
plant
Mud return into the trench
after treatment
Diaphragm wall - Hydrofraise

18. Excavation verticality control
Hydraulically
operated
verticality
control pads

19. Adjust alignment
as excavation
proceeds
Diaphragm wall – Grab versus Hydrofraise comparison
Theoretical position
of wall
Re-excavate to
correct
alignment
Grab Hydrofraise
Specified limits of
deviation

20. Diaphragm wall – What does a finished Dwall look like?

21. Diaphragm wall – What does a finished Dwall look like ?

22. Diaphragm wall – What can a finished Dwall look like ?
Bleed channels Mud inclusion Mattressing

23. Diaphragm wall – Latest design and execution practice?
• Careful mix design
• Pre-start concrete trials
• Monitor concrete
production facility
• Observe good cage
detailing practice
• Follow good tremie
practice
• Slump and strength are
not sufficient testing eg.
bleed and stability tests

24. Diaphragm wall – latest guidance on cage detailing

25. Diaphragm wall – Latest guidance on cage detailing
• Final clear horizontal distance on vertical
bars at least 100 mm
• Can be reduced at laps to 80 mm
• Multiple layers of vertical bars to be lined
up behind eachother
• Final clear vertical distance on horizontal
bars at least 150 mm provided max
aggregate is 20 mm
• 3D model may be required in areas of high
congestion to avoid clashes
• Minimum distance between cages 200 mm
• Ensure nominal cover is sufficient to
achieve required design cover, to satisfy
durability requirements, allowing for
construction tolerances

26. Diaphragm wall – Latest guidance on tremie practice

27. Diaphragm wall – Latest guidance on tremie practice
• At start of pour tremie to the panel bottom and raise <200 mm
• Prior to first discharge install effective separator ie. ball or vermiculite volume
to create plug length at least 2x tremie diameter
• Discharge to all tremies simultaneously until at least 3 m depth of concrete
• Thereafter keep difference in concrete level to a minimum
• Avoid repeated raising and lowering of the tremie (surging)
• Minimum tremie embedment 3 m (may be reduced to 2 m if concrete level
accurately known)
• Excessive tremie embedment to be avoided (preferably less than 10m)
• Remember the first concrete which enters the tremie will not usually reach the
top of the pour

28. Trench instability

29. How do we check trench stability?
OVERALL STABILITY
• Limit Equilibrium Method
• Finite Element Model
• Limit Analysis
T
T
G
θ
E
Ls
H
Y
X
Z
q
σy,surcharge
q‘K0
σy,poids
Q
φ
Ls
Z Z
Fc
dS
FoS required:
1.1 to 1.3

30. 0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
14.0
16.0
18.0
20.0
0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00 35.00 40.00
Pressure (KPa)
Depth
(m)
Active Pressure Bentonite Pressure
Trench stability example

31. 0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
14.0
16.0
18.0
20.0
0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00 35.00 40.00
Pressure (KPa)
Depth
(m) Active Pressure Bentonite Pressure
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
14.0
16.0
18.0
20.0
0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00 35.00 40.00
Pressure (KPa)
Depth
(m)
Active Pressure Bentonite Pressure
Add 20KPa
surcharge I.0m drop in
bentonite
level
Guidewall
depth
Potentially
unstable
Trench stability considerations

32. How to improve trench stability in poor ground
Standard measures
• Slurry level min 1.5m higher than
groundwater level
• Reinforcement continuity along guide
wall sections
• L-shaped guide walls
• Careful consideration of where to
position the plant
• Use short panels (single bite)
Additional measures
• Elevated guide walls (no more than 500mm)
• Increased density of support fluid
• Lower groundwater
• Ground improvement

33. Horizontal to vertical - Tandem lift D-wall

34. Temporary works rebar – very important
Additional rebar to ensure safe:
• Fabrication
• Transportation
• On and off loading
• Storage
• Lifting from horizontal to vertical
• Hanging
• splicing
All elements require design e.g. bars,
welds and connectors

35. Horizontal to vertical lift – tandem lift
Tandem lifting points
@ top of z bars and cathedral bar

36. • Were developed to splice ropes, not
reinforcement bars
• Must use lowest tested strength and
robust procedure due to high
variation of tensile strength results
Cage splicing - Bulldog grips

37. New cage splicing systems - SuperlatchTM
• Size of
superlatch
varies with cage
weight
• No fingers in
cage
• Expensive but
safe

38. Improvements in safe working – platforms and barriers

39. Conclusions
• Cast in situ concrete diaphragm and secant pile walls have many potential
applications in marine works
• Diaphragm walls in particular have been used on many quay wall projects
• Plant and material developments have brought opportunities and risks
• Recently published industry guidance designed to achieve better outcomes
in terms of quality and safety
• Good practice should be shared by all