See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/313472758

Instrumentation and measurements of a ground anchor for a retaining structure

Conference Paper · June 2016

CITATIONS READS
0 797

3 authors:

Horatiu Popa Alexandra Ene

Technical University of Civil Engineering of Bucharest POPP & ASOCIATII INGINERIE GEOTEHNICA
38 PUBLICATIONS   43 CITATIONS    13 PUBLICATIONS   9 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Dragos Marcu
Popp & Asociatii
15 PUBLICATIONS   17 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Green Court Bucharest View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Alexandra Ene on 08 February 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Instrumentation and measurements of a ground anchor for a retaining
structure
H. Popa
Technical University of Civil Engineering, Bucharest, Romania
A. Ene & D. Marcu
S.C. POPP & ASOCIAȚII INGINERIE GEOTEHNICĂ S.R.L., Bucharest, Romania

ABSTRACT: The use of pre-stressed ground anchors is a classical support solution. On the contrary, the
analytical and numerical modelling of ground anchors is not simple considering the complexity of the param-
eters involved and the interaction between these. Therefore, physical modelling of the ground anchors is re-
quired by the norms through investigation testing to confirm or determine the bearing capacity and behaviour
estimated by calculations.
The paper presents the test anchors for a retaining structure of a deep excavation in Bucharest, Romania. Dur-
ing the tests, the reinforcement displacements were measured at various time intervals according to test meth-
od 1 of SR EN 1537:2002. Additionally, one of the anchors was instrumented with load cell and displacement
transducer with the purpose to determine the load transfer along the fixed length. The paper shows the results
records during the test and describes briefly the analysis of the data and the conclusions resulted.

1 INTRODUCTION significantly allowing complex models with ad-

The use of pre-stressed ground anchors is a common vanced constitutive laws, in this case, the interaction
practice for construction works, for retaining struc- parameters are very difficult to control and the theo-
tures and other geotechnical works. These can be retical models can lead to erroneous results. For this
used both for temporary and permanent works. reason, the instrumentation and monitoring of some
One of the often uses in urban areas is that of tested ground anchors is often needed and used.
temporary support of the retaining structures for Moreover, even the design regulations for ground
deep excavations. Under these circumstances, the es- anchors require the performance of tests on ground
timation and limitation of the displacements for an- anchors in order to establish the bearing capacity
chored structures is of most importance considering and behavior of loaded anchors. The Romanian
the risks associated with the execution of such works technical norm NP 114-04 for geotechnical design of
for the neighboring structures. The Romanian tech- ground anchors establishes besides calculation
nical norm NP 120-2014 for deep excavations in ur- methods the requirements for the necessary tests.
ban areas requires particular care to minimize the in- This paper presents the case of an anchored re-
fluence of such works on the existing neighboring taining structure of slurry walls. In order to establish
structures. the performance of the ground anchors, three inves-
However, the calculation (analytical or numerical tigation tests were performed through failure, ac-
modeling) of the ground anchors is not an easy task cording to test method 1 of SR EN 1537. Supple-
due to the complex mechanism of the load transfer. mentary, another ground anchor was instrumented
Thus, the traction load from the reinforcement of the with four specific displacement transducers for ten-
anchor is transmitted firstly to the grout body on the don and steel cable mounted at imposed spacing on
bond length, which passed the load, through adhe- the reinforcement and a load cell at the head of the
sion and friction, to the surrounding ground. So, ground anchor and it was tested to a maximum load
there are three materials, with different characteris- imposed by the retaining structure capacity.
tics, implied in the load transfer mechanism: steel
reinforcement (flexible or rigid), the cement grout
bulb and the ground.
In order to understand the mechanism of the load
transfer through the three materials, it is necessary to
establish the load distribution through each compo-
nent. Although the numerical models have evolved
2 RETAINING SYSTEM AND GROUND 2.3 Ground lithology and design parameters
CONDITIONS The typical lithology for Bucharest was encountered
on site during the performance of the geotechnical
investigations: filling, followed by deposit silty clay
2.1 Excavation pit retaining system at the surface (very thin layer here, the site being on
the side of Dâmbovița River), then Colentina sands
For performing the excavation works from the
with rare gravel, intermediate clay and then
ground level at 66.00 m ASL, a diaphragm wall of
Mostistea fine sands. The above mentioned lithology
60 cm thickness and 17 m length was realized
permitted performing the ground anchors in the
through the slurry wall technology.
higher capacity non-cohesive layer of sand with
The calculations of the retaining system were per-
gravel.
formed by 2D plain strain Finite Element Method
In Table 1, the schematic lithology on site can be
considering Hardening Soil with small stiffness be-
followed as well as the characteristic values of the
havior and linear elastic behavior for the diaphragm
main geotechnical parameters - as resulted from the
wall and ground anchors.
geotechnical report. The design geotechnical model
can also be observed in Figure 1.
2.2 Temporary supporting
Table 1. Lithology and main geotechnical parameters
After performing a feasibility study, ground anchors Absolute Characteristic values
performed on one level were chosen for the tempo- Layer
level γ  Ic Eeod Φ' c'
rary support on two sides of the diaphragm wall, description
m ASL kN/m3  - MPa ° kPa
sides where the neighboring sites belonged to the Filling 66... 65 18 - 5 20 0
same landholder. This meant that after performing Silty clay 65... 63 20 0.75 10 18 30
the diaphragm walls together with the capping beam, Sand with gravel 63... 52 21 - 35 34 0
77 ground anchors were drilled, installed, injected Clay 52... 46 20 0.80 16 22 50
and finally tensioned. The geometrical characteris- Fine sand < 46 21 - 40 34 0
tics are indicated in Figure 1 and Figure 2.  - unit weight at natural moisture content;
The platform from which the ground anchorages Ic - consistency index;
were performed, was the platform for performing the Eoed - oedometric deformation modulus for a reference
capping beam at about 65.00 m ASL. pressure of 200kPa;
’ - effective angle of friction;
c’ - effective cohesion.

The groundwater level as indicated in the ge-

otechnical report was around 65.00 m ASL.

3 GROUND ANCHOR INSTRUMENTATION

AND MONITORING

Measuring the load distribution within the ground

anchors' reinforcement is important for understand-
ing the complex mechanism of load transfer from the
tendon to the grout bulb and then to the surrounding
ground. At the same time, the bearing capacity of a
ground anchor and its behavior when loaded, the
elongation and the displacements at the anchor head
related to the applied load and time are highly im-
portant for dimensioning these geotechnical works.

3.1 Initial testing programme

At first, three investigation tests were performed on
ground anchors loaded to traction loads through
failure. The positions were chosen in representative
locations for the excavation pit retaining system.
Figure 1. Characteristic section of the excavation pit retaining The reinforcement displacements were measured at
system
various time intervals at the maximum load in each
cycle, according to test method 1 of SR EN 1537.
 The investigation anchors were 15 m long, with The displacement transducers were Vibrating
9 m of free length and 6 m of fixed length (bulb), Wire type designed to measure deformation in ten-
having 7 strands of 7Φ5 mm Y1860C reinforcement. dons and steel cables, including ground anchors.
These were executed on the particular diaphragm The instrument consists of a vibrating wire sens-
wall panels, calculated to support the high loads re- ing element in series with a spring which is connect-
sulted from the traction forces imposed. ed to the wire at one end and a connecting rod at the
A relatively large variance of the test results was other. As the connecting rod is pulled out, the spring
observed (characteristic resistance between 520 kN is elongated causing an increase in tension which is
and 1080 kN), although the ground anchors were sensed by the vibrating wire. The tension in the wire
performed in the similar technological and ground is directly proportional to the extension; hence, the
conditions. The results for the ground anchors with change in deformation is determined very accurately
maximum and minimum bearing capacity resulted by measuring the strain change with the vibrating
from the tests are presented in paragraph 4. wire readout. The unit is fully sealed and operates at
pressures of up to 250 psi. (Geokon).
The displacement transducers used are shown in
3.2 Detailed testing on instrumented ground anchor
Figure 3. They were fixed with two clamps at each
Due to the high variability of tests' results, it was de- end to be held firmly onto the cable and resist the in-
cided to lower injection pressures and also increase stallation and injection conditions.
the fixed length of the ground anchors and to per- The load cell used is shown in Figure 4. It was
form an additional test on an instrumented anchor Vibrating Wire type designed with center hole to be
having the new proposed dimensions. The supple- used to determine load in ground anchors. It is fluid
mentary test anchor was 16 m long, with 9 m of free filled with a vibrating wire pressure sensor attached
length and 7 m of fixed length, having 7 strands of to it to convert the load into a frequency output.
7Φ5 mm Y1860C reinforcement and it was injected The main technical specifications of the vibrating
at lower pressures. wire instruments used are given in Table 2.
The pull-out test force for the supplementary in-
strumented ground anchor was limited to Table 2. Specifications of the VW instruments
750 kN corresponding to capacity of the support sys- Displacement Load Cell
tem consisting of diaphragm walls performed for re- transducers
taining the excavation pit. Range: 3 mm (15 000 με) 2 000 kN
The instrumentation of the supplementary test Resolution: <5 με
Accuracy: ±0.1%·FS ±1%·FS
ground anchor consisted of four displacement trans-
Nonlinearity: 0.5%·FS ±2%·FS from 10% to FS
ducers placed at equal interval along the fixed length Temperature range: -200C to +800C -100C to +550C
for determining the load transfer along the bulb area Length: 203 mm Interior Diameter:
and also so as to be guarded against the injection Dimensions:
Width:43 mm 130 mm
machetes (as shown in Figure 2). Also, a force cell FS – Full Scale of the instrument
was placed at the head of the ground anchor for
higher precision of determining the load applied. All
the instruments used were calibrated in the produc-
er’s laboratory before their use for the present work.

Figure 3. Displacement transducer used for measuring the

strain in the anchor reinforcement. Model 4410 by Geokon

Figure 4. Load cell used. Model ELC-31V (2000 kN) by

Figure 2. Sketch of the instrumented test anchor ENCARDIO RITE
 The data acquisition of the vibrating wire instru- The apparent free length was also determined as
ments was performed through Model GK-405 VW prescribed by SR EN 1537. The limits for 15 m long
Readout produced by Geokon (US) for the dis- anchors with 9 m of free length and 6 m of fixed
placement transducers and VWnote produced by length are: 12.3 m (upper limit) and 7.5 m (lower
Soil Instruments (UK) for the load cell. Both devices limit) and for 16 m long anchors with 9 m of free
take manual readings and stored the data on their in- length and 7 m of fixed length the limits are: 12.9 m
ternal memory for retrieval later on the PC. (upper limit) and 7.6 m (lower limit).

3.3 Testing procedure 4 EXPERIMETAL RESULS AND

The load was applied to the ground anchors incre- INTERPRETATION
mentally in cycles through failure or to proof load.

4.1 Test anchor A2T results (maximum capacity)

Test anchor A2T was loaded to 1105 kN, where the
creep rate was 2.12 mm. On the following loading
cycle, the load could not be maintained constant. By
linear interpolation it results a bearing capacity of
1080 kN for 2 mm creep rate. Brief results of the test
on ground anchor A2T are given in Table 3, Figure 7
and Figure 8.
Table 3. Results of the test on anchor A2T
Figure 5. Loading cycles and time intervals Max. Load Max. Remaining Creep Apparent
on cylcle displacement displacement rate free length
Seven tensioning cylinders (one for each strand) kN mm mm mm m
325 10.68 3.84 - 6.8
were operated simultaneously through a distributor
520 22.53 5.46 - 8.4
from a single hydraulic pump. The load was applied 715 35.36 8.62 1.03 8.8
and maintained constant manually and checked with 910 49.05 12.37 1.09 9.1
a digital manometer having an accuracy of 2.5%·FS. 1105 69.68 19.04 2.12 10.0
The displacements at the anchors’ head were
measured with dial micrometers mounted on each
strand end and related to a fixed reference system.
The data acquisition for the initial testing and de-
tailed instrumented anchor was done at the time in-
tervals prescribed by SR EN 1537 for Testing Meth-
od 1: 1’, 2’, 3’, 5’, 15’, 20’, 30’, 45’, 60’.
The failure of the ground anchors was defined at
creep rate of 2 mm after a constant creep displace-
ment rate over two time intervals (on the linear end
of the log time versus displacement plot).

Figure 7. Load-displacement plot for test on anchor A2T

Figure 6. Picture during the test showing the loading system

and micrometers

Figure 8. Log time versus displacement plot for test on A2T

4.2 Test anchor A3T results (minimum capacity)
Test anchor A3T was loaded to 715 kN, where the
creep rate was 24.09 mm. On the following loading
cycle, the load could not be maintained constant.
The bearing capacity of 520 kN was considered for
2 mm creep rate. Brief results of the test on ground
anchor A3T are given in Table 4, Figure 9 and Fig-
ure 10.

Table 4. Results of the test on anchor A3T

Max. Load Max. Remaining Creep ra- Apparent
on cylcle displacement displacement te free length
kN mm mm mm m
325 10.48 7.37 - 3.2
520 24.17 14.85 1.48 4.6 Figure 11. Load-displacement plot for test on anchor A4T
715 47.28 19.77 24.09 6.5

Figure 12. Log time versus displacement plot for test on A4T

Figure 9. Load-displacement plot for test on anchor A3T

Figure 10. Log time versus displacement plot for test on A3T
Figure 13. Load measured through the displacement transduc-
ers along the fixed length during test on anchor A4T
4.3 Test anchor A4T results (instrumented)
Test anchor A4T was loaded to 750 kN, the maxi-
mum load corresponding to the capacity of the sup-
porting system. The creep rate at maximum load was
0.58 mm. Brief results of the test on ground anchor
A4T are given in Table 5, Figure 11 and Figure 12.

Table 5. Results of the test on anchor A4T

Max. Load Max. Remaining Creep ra- Apparent
on cylcle displacement displacement te free length
kN mm mm mm m
185 4.37 2.64 - 7.5
300 11.01 3.61 - 7.2
415 18.07 4.60 0.14 8.2
525 24.79 5.82 0.28 8.7
Figure 14. Residual load measured through the displacement
640 32.79 6.78 0.36 9.2
transducers on the last loading cycle during test on anchor A4T
750 40.83 8.36 0.58 9.8
 Due to the fact that the supporting system consist- 5 CONCLUSIONS
ing of diaphragm walls was not calculated for a load
corresponding to failure of the ground anchor, the As presented within the examples given in the pre-
maximum load was limited to 750 kN, significantly sent paper, the differences regarding the capacity
lower than the bearing capacity of the ground an- and behavior of the ground anchors can be very im-
chor. Based on the results registered, it can be esti- portant even for similar ground anchors.
mated that the anchor capacity corresponding to In this actual case, the difference between the
2 mm creep is between 1130 kN (down value) and ground anchors (the capacity resulted of 520 kN to
1450 kN (optimistic value). 1080 kN) it was considered due to the fact that in the
The calculated apparent free length was within area of anchor A3T showing minimum capacity,
the limits indicated by SR EN 1537 for load steps marks of hydrocarbon was found in the ground dur-
415 kN, 525 kN, 640 kN and 750 kN (Table 5): the ing the execution of the diaphragm walls.
upper limit is 12.9 m and lower limit is 7.6 m. It is What is more, the experience showed the capacity
usual that for small values of the tensioning load the of ground anchors is dependent on many execution
apparent free length is lower due to the incontrolla- factors as well: injections pressures, post-injection,
ble load transfer along the free length. Also, it can uniformity of the bulb area etc. For this reason, after
be noticed from the displacement transducers meas- the first three preliminary tests, the execution tech-
urements (Figure 13) that more than half of the load nology was slightly adapted. The fourth test per-
is transmitted from the reinforcement to the grout formed on instrumented ground anchor showed a
body and then to the surrounding ground until the good behavior and higher bearing capacity.
level of the first displacement transducer which is The instrumentation of the anchors gives supple-
1.4 m distance from the upper limit of the bulb. The mentary valuable information. This way, the load
values of the load in the reinforcement at the theo- transfer from the reinforcement through the grout to
retical upper limit of the bulb was estimating by ex- the surrounding ground can be more accurately es-
trapolating the data through a second order polyno- timated. Also, the integrity and the efficiency of the
mial function (the dotted lines in Figure 13). bulb can be evaluated through instrumentation. Later
The values registered on the displacement trans- on, the data registered can be used in an advanced
ducers also confirmed the spare bearing capacity theoretical modeling and improvement of the calcu-
since the friction was not mobilized on the entire lation model for the ground anchors.
fixed length and also show the normal behavior and
good execution of the ground anchor by mobilizing
the load gradually from the upper part. 6 REFERENCES
After each loading and unloading cycle, at the
reference load of 75 kN, an important residual load Draft EN ISO 22477-5. 2009. Geotechnical investigation and
was registered on the displacement transducers testing - Testing of geotechnical structures – Part 5: Test-
(Figure 14). The value of this residual load depend- ing of anchorages
ed on the maximum load applied on each cycle, ex- Dunnicliff, J. 1988. Geotechnical Instrumentation for Monitor-
ceeding almost double the reference unloading force. ing Field Performance. John Wiley & Sons
Ene, A., Marcu, D. & Popa H. 2014. Testing of ground an-
Considering the fact that the test anchor did not chorages for a deep excavation retaining system in Bucha-
reach failure and the creep values are below the al- rest. Conference proceedings of the 15th Danube-
lowable limits even for control and reception tests, it European Conference on Geotechnical Engineering (Eds.
was decided to use this ground anchor also for sup- Brandl H. & Adam D.), 1021-1026. Vienna:
porting the excavation pit and measuring the strains Osterreichischer Ingineur- und Architekten- Verein.
during the execution. However, after lock-off, only Geokon. Instruction Manual for Model 4410 Vibrating Wire
small redistributions (around 5%) of the load be- Strandmeter.
tween the displacement transducers were registered. Kim, N. K., Park J. S. & Kim S. K. 2006. Numerical Simula-
The values measured with the load cell mounted tion of Ground Anchors. Computers and Geotechnics 34
(2007), 498-507.
at the top of the tested ground anchor showed about NP 114-2014. Technical norm regarding the geotechnical de-
1...2% difference than the load measured from the sign of ground anchors.
manometer of the hydraulic pump. The greater dif- NP 120-2014. Technical norm regarding design, construction
ferences were noticed for smaller load steps of and monitoring of deep excavations in urban areas.
185 kN (8% difference), 300 kN (5%), as the pro- SR EN 1537:2002. Execution of special geotechnical works.
ducer also indicates in the technical specification Ground anchors.
(Table 2). The load losses registered at the maxi- SR EN 1997-1:2004. Eurocode 7: Geotechnical design. Part 1:
mum load of each cycle, during the observation pe- General Rules.
riod of 60 minutes, were less than 10 kN (meaning Stephenson, P. 2013. Case Study of Current Practice of Anchor
about 1...2% of the applied load), so there were no Design in Relation to Limit States. Proceedings of the 5th
significant influences on the creep evaluation on the International Young Geotechnical Engineers’ Conference.
Paris: IOS Press.
instrumented ground anchor.

View publication stats