Documentos de Académico
Documentos de Profesional
Documentos de Cultura
by
H. OSTERMAYER and f. SCHEELE
Institute of ,Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Technical University, Munich/Fed. Rep. Germany
SOMMAIRE SUMMARY
Des essais d'ancrages en vraie grandeur sur Full scale field tests on a'nchors have been
chantier ont été effectués dans des massifs de performed in one and the sa me gravelly sand
sables graveleux compactés à différentes densités. compacted to various densities. During the pull-
Des jauges de déformation collées sur des bar- out tests the distribution of skin friction along
reaux d'acier donnent la distribution' des contrain- the fixed anchor length was determined from strain
tes dans la zone fixe d'ancrage. Ces dernières gauge measurements. The results of 5 series of
augmentent progressivement avec la force appli- tests comprising 30 anchors complement a pre-
quée en tête d'ancrage jusqu'à la rupture. Afin viously published design chart and give an addi-
d'e.stimer par ,des essais standards in situ, l'in- tional correlation between carrying capacity of
'fluence du type et de la densité du sol sur la anchors and number of blows of penetration tests.
capacité portante du tirant d'ancrage, on a pré- The variation of skin friction along fixed anchor
senté le rapport entre la charge critique et le length with increasing load or with load kept cons-
nombre de corps d'essais de pénétration (marteau tant over a longer period of time, helps to explain
de 50 kg). the influence of soil density and fixed anchor
length on the carrying éapacity and longterm beha-
viour of anchors.
INTRODUCTION
The last Conference on Diaphragm Walls and An- carrying behaviour of anchors in non-cohesive soil has
chorages (London 1974) and the Seminar on the same not yet been tackled systematically in field tests.
topic (London 1976) showed that current practice in In 1975-1976 a major research program was carried
the field of ground anchors is ahead of theory and that out in Munich to examine the influence of soil density
there is urgent need for a proper understanding of on the carrying capacity of anchors. In order to have
the behaviour of the anchors and the surrounding a better insight into the carrying behaviour of anchors,
ground under working conditions (C.P. Wroth, 1975). research' aimed at investigating the distribution of
Design charts, which are based on field test results of stresses for different anchor lengths. The effect of
about 300 anchors (H. Ostermayer,1975) may help to time on the variation of stresses was also studied. The
estimate carrying capacity of anchors in relation to so sought inforn1ation should then help toexplain the
fixed anchor length in certain soil conditions. How- various important factors that influence the carrying
ever, the main factor of soil density influencing the capacity and long-term behaviour of anchors.
TEST PROGRAM
On a test site five series of six anchors each were sand was varied for each series. After every test
installed and pull-out tests were· performed. A sche- series the soil was removed and compacted again in,
matic arrangement of the test pit is shown in Fig. 1. layers of about 30 cm height to a desired uniform
The dimensions of the test pit were about 5 X 10 X 10 density with the help of vibrators. The compacted
meters. A rigid concrete wall was used as abutment sand carried a surcharge of about 2 f i grave!. For
for the pulling jack. each series the soil density was checked by 8 standard
The anchors of the first series were installed in penetration tests (SPT) and 4 dynamic penetration
the existing soil, which was sandy gravel of high tests (50 kg hammer weight and 15 cm2 cone area).
density. For the following four test series the soil was In 'addition unit weight and density index were
replaced by gravelly sand. The grain size distribution determined for at least 6 samples.
curve of the test. soil is given in Fig. 1, the coefficient A temporary anchor construction (Type A) was
of uniformity was U == 8 to 10. The density of the used with a total length of 9 m and an inclination of
92
5tressing head ~ Electrical laad cel!
TABLE 1
Anchor and soit data for 5 series
OISPI~~::~~~~~U~?_ ~ HOllOoW :O~ j:Ck 0 • 0 0 • ~ of tests with 6 anchors each
: f- 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
o
0 0 : 0 0 0 ;
~ .' ,<:" ~
Test .series No 1 2 3
14 5
:
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Gravel surcharge 0 0 1 1
L:~~·en;·:~o~:::~tSi~o~~:::~~
Prestressing- 4 X 16 mm
steel tendon dia. 32 mm dia.
'jT
L
hydraulic p~mp
Autamatic electrical
laad regulatar
50
0.06
~~/~1i11
2.0[mm) 6 0 ·
.'
. 1 U/l]
~
~
ro
ro
""0
~
0
Casing
diameter (mm) 89 1
76 89
.
114
l Strain gouges
Grouted body
tendon length is shown in Fig. 2. It is pointed out
that the gauges were mounted on the profiled sicles
of the bar, which were carefully treated before the
gauges were cemented to the steel-bar (see Detail A).
To protect against the grouting, the strain gauges and
wire connections were given several waterproof coatings~
Each gauge was calibrated in t4e laboratory by
stressing the steel bar.
The procedure of the installation of the anchors was
as follows:
- the steel casing was driven to the depth of about
8 m;
TEST RESULTS
SPT
Type of soil Oensity N30[bl/30cm]
2000
Very dense
• Gravelly
Very dense 120
__ 1800
z:
~
• sand Oense 60
• U=d60/ d l0 Medium d. 43
..... 1600 =1,6/0,16
t-.:.
• Loose 11
-~
u
c
1400 x
Sandy gravel
U=15/0,3
Very dense >130
a.
c
u 1200 .11,3 =Diameter of grouted body do=ll.3cm
CJ)
c::
Ë' 1000
c JITITill Sandy gravel
llJII1II u 5~10
U
=
'1J
c 800
0
- QJ
c
600 Gravelly sand
~
E U=8~10
and
::;::) 400
Medium ta coarse sand
(with gravel)
200 U= 3,5 ~ 4,5
Fig. 4. - Carrying capacity of anchors in sandy gravel and gravelly sand showing influence of soil type, density and
bond~to-ground length. .
94
---------~--------=------------:,....,.,...--------------~-------------------
Test series 5
1000 Anchor Lv =3,0 m
Test series 5
:z
average do =155mm
~ 900 Anchor Lv =3,0 m
average do =155mm Failure
'- 1000 skin friction
-c 800
c
0 C'J
E 900
~ 700 :z:
.::tt:. Short - term
Cf)
c
800 m~~~--r- skin friction
~
Q)
-t--
600 \
\ c:
Long - term
0
700 skin friction
'\..-10'(Minutes) u
500 \ .;: 600
\
\ c:
\ .::tt:.
ln
400 \
500
300 400
300
200
200
100
L--
length 100
-
-
-
=
~
~
~
~
Il 1 1 1 1 ~ length
%f(~~a~.
1 1 1 1 1 l--l
Fig. 5. - Distribution of tensile load along bond length of . Fig. 6. - Distribution of skin friction in the soiljgrout
tendon (grouted body in dense sand). interface along bond length (grouted body in dense sand).
Increase
anchor end when the test load is increased. The Oecrease Test series
reason is that the elastic deformations of the steel Anchor Lv = 3,0 m
tendon cause progressive displacements in the grout/ average do =155 mm
soil interface. This progressive displacement causes
the shear resistance of the dense sand to shift beyond Fig. 7. - Variation of skin friction along bond lengthover
the peak -point into the region of lower residual a period of 300 minutes (load of 785 kN was kept
shear values. constant).
95
Q) Short Anchor
When evaluating skin friction 'ts in the grout/soil
interface from the bond stresses 't b in the steel bar/
grout interface (Fig. 8) it must be taken into consi-
deration that the bond-to-ground length La is longer
than the bond length of tendon Lv. In the front part
of the grouted body there is no steel/grout bond (due
to the plastic tube), so that the forces resulting from
skin friction 'ts in this area are transmitted further
back and cause a concentration of bond stresses 'tb in Grouted body
the front part of bond length of tendon. These very Bar
high bond stresses which are obtained by strain gauge , ~ f
measurements are schematically shown in Fig. 8, where t db do
the existing 't b is converted to an equivalent skin •
friction 't's through the factor db/do, ('t/ == 'tb . db/do).
The actual skin friction is achieved by equalizing the
equivalent value over the entire length including the
front part of the grouted body (see area d 'F) in order
to get the actual skin friction 'ts.
In the case of dense sands the limit values of skin
friction, max 'ts ' are effective along a .relatively short
length. For 'short anchors this length will correspond
almost with the whole bond-to-ground length (Fig. 8 a).
For long anchors this length of max 'ts is only- a part
of the bond-to-ground length. The location of this
part shifts towards the anchor rear when the test load
is increased (distribution of skin friction near failure
load is shown in Fig 8 b). Assuming that the limit
value max 't s is identical for different bond-to-ground
lengths, the mean values (mean 't s ) for long anchors
are smaller than for short anchors. This has already T's skin fr i ct ion i n the 9r 0 ut / soi 1 i nter face
been presented in the chart of Fig. 4 in terms of carrying
capacity versus bond length. ' Tb bond stress in the steel bar / groùt interface
For the last loading step before failure load was Fig. 8. - Qualitative distribution of skin friction and
reached Fig. 9 shows. the «long-term skin friction» bond stresses for short and long anchors in dense ground
values of all test anchors in sand, which were equipped at ultimate load.
with strain gauges (diameter of grouted body being 9
to 12 cm).
Soi 1 densi ty Bond length
. For dense and very dense sand the skin friction Lv
values obtai.ned experimentally fit very well with the .....0-- Very dense 2.0 m
qualitative distribution of skin friction of Fig. 8, thereby -e- 4.5 m
confirming the assumption made. The limit values, -0-- Dense 3.0m
max 't5 of shorter anchors (Lv == 2 m) ho\vever are likely 1300
to exceed the corresponding values of longer anchors
(Lv == 4 m). The difference may be partly traced back 1200 -.-
-0-
-IJ.-
Medium
dense
Loose
l.Om
4.5 m
2,0 m
to the larger radial confining pressures in the front 1100 4.5 m
part of anchors.
E 1000
In loose and medium dense sand the skin friction ~
~
is found to be more or less constant along the whole
bond-to-ground length. This corresponds with the
stress-strain-behaviour of the sand for these densities. L~ 800
c:
The decisive influence of soil density is obvious in .; 700
these tests when for example in the case of long anchors ..t: 600
one compares the limit values of skin friction for 100 se .~
~
and medium dense sand (about 150 and 300 kN/m 2 V> 500
respectively) with the limit values for very dense sand 400 0 Medium
(about 800 kN/m2). .....---, dense
These high values of skin friction are mainly the 300 ·~.~!..-:=-::::'~·-r
result of an interlocking or wedging effect due to the '" max Ts~meanTs
dilatation of soil (E. Wernick, 1977). The peak values
of up to 1 300 kN/m 2 do not represent the actual ~~~·~~~t~
~ • moxTs",meonT
skin friction but the equivalent skin friction as already s
explained in Fig. 8.
1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 Length [m]
1 .
.
Penetration Tests and, Carrying Capacity =rm__?::ŒZ::@_~'0055i5555550J
of Anchors Lv =2.0m Lv =3.0m Lv =4.5m
Fig. 9. - Distribution of long-term skin friction 't s at
As the density of non-cohesive soils is in current ultimate load in relation to bond length Lv and soil
practice very often indirectly determined by penetro- density.
meter tests, it was decided to plot a diagram showing Grouted bodies (do = 9.1 - 12.6 cm) in gravelly sand.
96
carrying capacity of anchors in relation· ta penetration
resistance. Fig. 10 shows the results of the 30 test
~ 2000
i-i--T--l-JiDf anchors supplemented by additional results of other
.~[
z:
---
~
CONCLUSIONS
Ta investigate the important influence of the density tians in test results are possible due ta the inhomo-
of non-cohesive soils on the carrying behaviour of geneity existing in the sail at site, even when the
anchors it was for the first time that full scale field anchors have been properly installed.
tests were performed in one and the same sail com- The different shapes of distribution of skin friction
pacted ta different densities. Under these controlled which were derived through measurements help ta
conditions the exact distribution of skin friction along give an explanation for the influence of bond length
the bond length could be calculated from strain gauge of anchors and density of soils on the carrying capacity
measurements. as shawn in the design chart (Fig. 4).
On the basis of the results of the 5 series of tests The different shapes of distribution of skin friction
comprising 30 anchors, the original design chart of of skin friction along the bond length with increasing
1975, showing carrying capacity versus bond length load paved the way for the inclusion of valid assump-
for different sail conditions, has now been cample- tians in the calculation of carrying capacity in terms
mented. Furthermore a diagram is presented from of sail constants.
which it is possible ta estimate carrying capacity of In addition the variation of skin friction with res-
anchors with different bond lengths from ': the number pect ta time was measured for several loading steps.
of blows of standard penetration tests (SPT) and The results (shown for only one anchor in Fig. 7)
dynamic penetration tests. When using one of these will provide a basis for anticipating the long-term
charts it must be borne in mind that certain fluctua- behaviour of anchors.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
REFERENCES
97