Timbering of Foundation Trenches
Timbering of Foundation Trenches
v. Sheet piling:
In case where (a) soil to be excavated is loose or soft, (b) depth of
excavation is large, (c) width of trench is also large, and (d) the sub-
soil water exists. The exigencies of the situation require further
improved method for protection of the trench sides — sheet piling is
adopted.
:
After completion of the main structure, the trenches are filled and
the struts are removed gradually but the diaphragm wall is left in
position.
The angle of slope should not be more than the angle of repose of
the soil. This will increase the cost of earthwork in excavation and
back-filling of the trenches; but may still be economical in view of
the high cost of timbering materials and construction difficulties.
ii. When the trench is very deep, and sufficient space for making the
walls slope at desired angle is not available, timbering of the
trenches will have to he resorted to; however, in cases, a
combination of timbering and sloping of the walls may be done
according to the suitability of the site.
The piles are driven first in rows and then excavation is done and
simultaneously the wall is braced with horizontal bracings and
struts. In cases of excavation of basement, horizontal strutting may
not be possible, inclined strutting may have to be resorted to with
proper anchorage.
iv. According to the situation a combination of piling and sloping of
the sides may be adopted.
The closed pile walls always have gaps, providing passage for water
to come out. If water only comes out, it would not be harmful; but if
mud comes out which means flow of soil it is a sign of danger.
Pumping of water from the trench must be stopped immediately
and the temporary closed pile walls must be checked for stopping
the leakage.
Sheet piling would have been the best answer; but it is very costly.
The length of the piles need be 2 times the proposed depth of
excavation. After construction, it becomes very difficult to extract
the sheet piles and, in cases, they are left in situ which increases the
cost.
The diaphragm walls which are considered a substitute to sheet
piles and are left in position are also very costly. The height of the
diaphragm wall need be 2 times the’ proposed depth of excavation.
Both sheet piles and diaphragm walls are required to be provided
with horizontal supports which make them costlier.