Penang Second Bridge

Transcription

1 Penang Second Bridge Marine Bridge Substructure Construction Spun Pile Main Span Pilecap Construction by Ir. Cheng Kim Bong Senior Resident Engineer MMSB Consult Sdn. Bhd.

2 Content Penang Second Bridge Alignment Type Of Piles Summary of Piles Pile Testing Locations Pile Testing of Spun Pile, Steel Pile & Bored Pile Spun Pile Spun Pile Detail Spun Pile Length Spun Pile PDA Test Spun Pile Test For BHT11 (P163) Mobilization Factor of Spun Pile Pile Head Damage Analysis Validation of Spun Pile Main Span Pilecap Construction

3 Penang Second Bridge

4 Penang Second Bridge Alignment

5 Type Of Piles P0-P11 : Spun Pile P12-P23 : Steel Pile P24-P27 : Bored Pile P28-P43 : Steel Pile P44-P144 : Spun Pile P145-P282 : Spun Pile P283-P292 : Bored Pile Approach Span Main Span Approach Span Approach Span P000 P023 P024 P027 P028 P144 P145 Batu Maung P292 Batu Kawan

6 Summary of Piles Description Passed Pile (Nos.) Rejected Pile (Nos.) Total Pile (Nos.) Steel Pile (Ø1.6m) Spun Pile (Ø1.0m) * * Bored Pile (Ø2.3m-2.0m) (P26-20 rejected) Bored Pile (Ø1.5m) * 19 nos. replacement spun piles P A & B, P A & B, P A & B, P A & B, P122-07A & B, 8A, P137-7A & 7B, P193-21A & B, P9-17 A&B, P280-R15 A&B

7 Pile Testing Locations BHT8 BHT9 BHT10 BHT7 BHT6 BHT4 BHT11 BHT3&5 BHT2 BHT1 BHT12

8 Pile Test No. Chainage Location (near to) Pile Type Working Load (kn) Total Test Done Total Passed O-Cell Test BHT 3 CH P161 Ø1.2m Steel Pile 5, O-Cell Test BHT 7 CH P33 Ø1.6m Steel Pile 8, O-Cell Test BHT 9 CH P25 Ø2.3~2.0m Bored Pile Not Conclusive 25, MLT & PDA BHT 1 CH P273 Ø1.0m Spun Pile 3, MLT & PDA BHT 2 CH P197 Ø1.0m Spun Pile 3, MLT & PDA BHT 5 CH P161 Ø1.0m Spun Pile 3, MLT BHT 4 CH P48 Ø1.0m Spun Pile 3, MLT & PDA BHT 6 CH P48 Ø1.2m Spun Pile 4, MLT & PDA BHT 3 CH P161 Ø1.2m Steel Pile 5, MLT & PDA BHT 11 CH P163 Ø1.0m Spun Pile 3, Statnamic - CH P185-L08 Ø1.0m Spun Pile 3, Statnamic BHT 11 CH P163 Ø1.0m Spun Pile 3, MLT & (Statnamic on Anchor Pile) MLT & (Statnamic on Anchor Pile) Pile Testing On Spun Pile, Steel Pile & Bored Pile BHT 12 CH P292 Ø1.5m Bored Pile 8, BHT 8 CH P15 Ø1.6m Steel Pile 7, Statnamic - CH P49-R15 Ø1.0m Spun Pile 3, Statnamic - CH P25-09 Ø2.0m Bored Pile 27,

9 SPUN PILE

10 Spun Pile Detail ICP Spun Pile Sectional Details Revised pile shoe detail as per next slide SEE DETAIL X

11 Spun Pile Detail Pile Shoe Details DETAILS OF PILESHOE

12 Extension Joint Spun Pile Detail

13 Extension Joint Spun Pile Detail

14 Spun Pile Detail 4 Lifting Points of Spun Pile L1 L2 L3 L4 L5 L L= Pile Length L1 = 0.05L L2 = 0.28L L3 = 0.31L L4 = 0.23L L5 = 0.13L * Average Pile Length is about 58.5m

15 Spun Pile Length Design Pile Length vs Actual Pile Length Description Spun Pile (Ø1.0m) Total Pile (Nos.) Difference Between Design Pile Length & Actual Pile Length 0 to 2m 2 to 5m > 5m (92%) 329 (6%) 114 (2%) Average Design Length = 58.67m Average Nett Length = 57.28m Average Cut-off Length = 1.38m (2.4%)

16 Spun Pile Length Bore Log Record For BHT 11 (near P163) ~ SPT = 50

17 Spun Pile Length Design Pile Length vs Actual Pile Length Pier Design Pile Length (m) Design Toe Level (m) Actual Toe Level (m) Differences P to to <2m P to to <2m P to to <2m P to to <2m P to to <2m

18 Spun Pile PDA Test PDA Test Summary Description Initial Strike for Pile Integrity BTA <80% Re-strike Total PDA Done Total (nos.) PDA Test Frequency At least two PDA to be carried out at a pair of pilecap : i) PDA initial : to verify pile integrity ii) PDA re-strike : to verify pile capacity

19 Spun Pile Test For BHT11 (P163) Objective Of Pile Load Test To determine the pile ultimate bearing capacity To determine the pile ultimate resistance at pile base To determine pile shaft skin friction parameter at each soil layer To determine correlation between Static Load Test, PDA & Statnamic To provide the basis for the revision of pile final set criteria To provide parameters for verification or modification basis for working pile PDA analysis To obtain Load vs Settlement relationship

20 PDA Test... Spun Pile Test For BHT11 (P163)

21 Statnamic Test... Spun Pile Test For BHT11 (P163)

22 Spun Pile Test For BHT11 (P163) Static Load Test... Load Cell

23 Spun Pile Test For BHT11 (P163) BHT 11 (P 163) Setting Up Anchor Pile, M2-1 Anchor Pile, M2-2 Pile Spun Pile Pile Length Design Toe Level Actual Toe Level 4m Reference Pile, J2-1 Test Pile, S2 Reference Pile, J2-2 M2-1 Ø1000mm 59m M2-2 Ø1000mm 59m M2-3 Ø1000mm 59m M2-4 Ø1000mm 59m m J2-1 Ø1000mm 50m J2-2 Ø1000mm 50m Anchor Pile, M2-3 4m 4m Anchor Pile, M2-4 S2 Ø1000mm 61m * Working load = 3720kN

24 Spun Pile Test For BHT11 (P163) BHT 11 (P 163) Testing Process Anchor Pile, M2-1 PDA (EOD) Test Pile, S2 PDA (EOD) Min. 7 days after pile installation Statnamic w/o instrumentation PDA (Restrike) Min. 28 days after pile installation MLT Statnamic Min. 15 days after MLT

25 Spun Pile Test For BHT11 (P163) Comparison of Static 2 nd Cycle Static and Statnamic Load Test Results

26 Spun Pile Test For BHT11 (P163) Comparison of Static 2 nd Cycle Nett Static and Statnamic Load Test Results

27 Spun Pile Test For BHT11 (P163) Comparison of Static and Statnamic Load Test Displacement Table 1 : Comparison of Static & Statnamic Load Test Displacement Table 2 : Comparison of 2 nd Cycle Nett Static & Statnamic Load Test Displacement From Table 1, settlement recorded from Statnamic test for M2-1 at 2.0 WL is 5.14mm less than Static test for S2 From Table 2, settlement recorded from Statnamic test for M2-1 at 2.0 WL is 2.38mm less than Static test for S2

28 Spun Pile Test For BHT11 (P163) Summary Comparison Between Statnamic & Static Load Test

29 Spun Pile Test For BHT11 (P163) Comparison Between PDA & Static Load Test Test Pile Pile Length (m) Penetrated Length (m) Set (mm) Ultimate Capacity of MLT(kN) Initial PDA (kn) Restrike PDA (kn) Restrike / Initial MLT / PDA Initial S > 11, , > Summary Comparison Between PDA & Static Load Test It can be observed the analytical results of PDA test are accurate verified by BHT11 s MLT test result and can be concluded that the PDA test procedures are in order.

30 Mobilization Factor of Spun Pile M-Factor of Spun Pile Using PDA Major objective of PDA restrike test is to verify the pile capacity to satisfy the required design capacity (2.5 times of working load) In order to verify the capacity of piles which no restrike test but only end of drive test (EOD) was performed, recommended mobilization factor is proposed based on : i) pile embedment ii) pile toe founding layer iii) total number of blow Mobilization factor of bearing capacity of a given pile can be obtained by dividing restrike test capacity (Q2) by EOD test capacity (Q1)

31 Mobilization Factor Mobilization Factor of Spun Pile M-Factor vs Pile Embedment 3 Relationship Diagram Between Pile Embedment & Mobilization Factor LP (m)

32 Mobilization Factor Mobilization Factor of Spun Pile M-Factor vs Blow Count 3 Relationship Diagram Between Blow Count & Mobilization Factor Blow Count

33 Mobilization Factor Mobilization Factor of Spun Pile Mobilization vs Set 3 Relationship Diagram Between SET & Mobilization Factor SET (mm)

34 Mobilization Factor Mobilization Factor of Spun Pile Mobilization vs Period 3 Relationship Diagram Between Period & Mobilization Factor Period (Day)

35 Mobilization Factor of Spun Pile Recommended M-Factor of Spun Pile Using PDA Conservative Considering According to the statistical result of comparison between M-factor and pile embedment, final set and period, it is found that the effect of EOD set to M-factor is most dominant and relatively obvious among the three factors considered. 98% of the restriked piles have penetration of 0.0mm. It is understood that most piles did not achieve its maximum capacity during restrike test due to limited energy. From the data collected from tested working piles, the average M-factor is On the other hand, the M-factor for BHT 11 test pile is Therefore, M-factor of 1.77 to 2.00 is a conservative engineering selection. Recommended M-Factor Based on the abovementioned analysis and statistics, it is recommended to use M-factor of 1.7 for spun pile.

36 Cases Pile Head Damage Analysis Pile Head Damage Cases vs Month MayJune JulyAug Sep Oct 09 Nov 09 Dec 09 Jan 10 FebMar AprMayJune JulyAug SepOct Month Nov 10 DecJanFebMarAprMay JuneJuly AugSep Pile Head Damage Cases Total cases = 55

37 % Pile Head Damage Pile Head Damage Analysis % Pile Head Damage vs Monthly Progress 8% 7% 6% 5% 4% 3% 2% 1% 0% May 09 June July Aug 09 Sep 09 Oct Nov Dec Jan 10 Feb Mar Apr May June July 10 Aug 10 Sep 10 Oct Nov Dec Jan 11 Feb 11 Mar 11 Apr May June July Aug Sep 11 Monthly Progress (nos.)

38 % Pile Head Damage Pile Head Damage Analysis % Pile Head Damage vs Cumulative Piles Driven 1.59% 1.37% 1.14% 0.91% 0.68% 0.46% 0.23% 0.00% May 09 June July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Cumulative Piles Driven (nos.) Jan 11 Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sep

39 Pile Head Damage Analysis List of Preventive Actions No Actions Taken Remarks 1 QC on standard operating procedure with introduction of additional checklist (Spun pile production) 2 QC on standard operating procedure (Piling Operation) Mould inspection Concrete feeding process Spinning process Steam curing Staking yard More frequent checking on raw material Concrete cubes & cores strength Calibration certificates To replace hammer cushion once worn out Provide sufficient cushion materials Ensure hammer hits pile evenly and axially Reduce pile driving stresses by controlling hammer drop height during hard driving 3 Factory visit, inspection and QAQC procedure auditing at ICP factory

40 Pile Head Damage Analysis Other Stringent QAQC Measures Production data for each produced pile is recorded in In-process checklist. 2 hours waiting time was set aside for pile which has undergone spinning process. On top of that, 8 hours of steam curing time is above the usual practice of 5 hours. Audit to supplier raw material suppliers (sand, aggregate) was conducted on a regular basis to ensure the conformity of material supplied. The allowable gap between end plates is only 2mm, which is much more stringent than 5mm tolerance stated in MS1314: Part4:2004. Monthly inspection from CHEC & MMSB to ensure all piles produced to the highest standard as stipulated in the Technical Requirements for Spun Pile.

41 Pile Head Damage Analysis Other Stringent QAQC Measures Welding facilities at ICP factory enable us to overcome constraints of on-site welding and reduce the possibility of pile damage, which usually associate with on-site welding. MIG wire was used to ensure top quality welding work was performed. The welding quality of jointed pile was further inspected with the use of Magnetic Particle Test.

42 Pile Head Damage Analysis Other Stringent QAQC Measures Top Beam Of Jacking Frame Jack Test Pile Support Dial Gauges Support Pile Bending Test (MS1314 Part 2:2004)

43 Pile Head Damage Analysis Other Stringent QAQC Measures Pile Bending Test

44 List of Investigation Actions Pile Head Damage Analysis No. Actions Taken Remarks 1 Thorough investigation involving ICP s R&D department 2 Additional tests been carried out Petrographic examination X-ray diffraction (XRD) 3 Additional PDA tests been carried out P160 (10 nos) P121-P123 (18 nos)

45 Pile Head Damage Analysis Comments On Additional Test Results Raw material testing found comply to requirement Petrographic examination & XRD found satisfactory except some air and water voids Additional PDA test results shown no pile integrity problem

46 Pile Head Damage Analysis Repair Method For Pile Head Damage Carry out pile head strengthening work (with carbon fiber & ICP method) PDA Test Coring Test PDA & coring test result found satisfactory Pile considered acceptable

47 Validation of Spun Pile Validation Process Piling work done in accordance with : - Approved construction drawing - Set criteria - HPDI revised pile length confirmation - Shop drawing (if any changes) Pile Driving Record Pile Certification Report -PDA test report - PDAR if required - SOR / NCR closure if any Pile Cutting

48 Set Criteria Validation of Spun Pile

49 Validation of Spun Pile Piling Record H>2m

50 Validation of Spun Pile PDA Result > 80% > 2.5 x WL

51 Validation of Spun Pile Pile Driving Acceptance Record (PDAR) PDAR is required when the different between design toe level and actual toe level > 2m. The pile is considered acceptable if : - Pile capacity shown in PDA test > 2.5WL - Pile integrity, BTA value in PDA test > 80% BTA value classification: i) 100 % : Uniform. No apparent anomaly was detected ii) 80-99% iii) 60-79% iv) <60% : Minor anomaly. Relatively minor impedance reduction detected : Moderate anomaly. Relatively moderate impedance reduction detected : Major anomaly. Relatively major impedance reduction detected

52 Validation of Spun Pile Pile Driving Acceptance Record (PDAR)

53 Pile Certification Report Validation of Spun Pile

54 Cost Comparison For Different Types Of Pile Foundation Pile Type PHC Driven Spun Pile Diameter Average Length Number / Pier Economic Rate (m) (m) m Driven m Steel Pile Bored Pile m

55 Main Span Pilecap Construction

56 Main Span Pilecap Construction Main Span Structure Location P24 P25 P26 P27

57 Main Navigation Span Span Length p25 p26 p27 p m m m 150 m Navigation Navigation Channel Channel

58 Main Navigation Span Pylon Detail 30m 5m

59 Main Navigation Span General Description Main Span arrangement : 117.5m 240m 117.5m Cable at 6m (typical) spacing Deck constructed by cast-insitu balanced cantilever method Deck post-tensioned longitudinally and transversely The structure design service life is 120 years.

60 Main Span Pilecap Construction P25 & P26 Pilecap Layout 17.5m 48.1m 6m

61 Main Span Pilecap Construction P25 & P26 Steel Fender Layout

62 Main Span Pilecap Construction P24 & P27 Steel Fender Layout

63 Main Span Pilecap Construction Steel Fender Cross Section STEEL FENDER steel fender P025 & P026 P024 & P027

64 Main Span Pilecap Construction Construction Flow Chart Clearing of formwork platform Installation of supporting brackets and bearing beams Installation of hydraulic jacks Hydraulic jacks in operation Demarcation of platform Installation of operation platform Discharge seawater, load transfer Platform clearing and 1 st stage rebar fixing 1 st stage 3m thk. pilecap concreting Construction joint Fabrication of rebar onshore Remove corbels below platform 2 nd stage rebar fixing Fabrication of rebar onshore Installation of steel fender Lower down formwork to design level Platform leveling and verticality check 2 nd stage 3m thk. pilecap concreting Mass concrete casting

65 Main Span Pilecap Construction Mechanism Of Lowering Down Steel Fender

66 Main Span Pilecap Construction Mechanism Of Lowering Down Steel Fender

67 Main Span Pilecap Construction Hydraulic Jack Arrangement Steel eel Casing case Steel eel Casing case

68 Main Span Pilecap Construction Steel Fender Installation

69 Main Span Pilecap Construction Lowering Mechanism Installation

70 Main Span Pilecap Construction Steel Fender At Design Level

71 Main Span Pilecap Construction Lean Concrete Casting

72 Main Span Pilecap Construction Transferring Of Support System The transferring of supporting system will be carried out after water is pumped out from mass concrete and before proceeding for installation of 1 st layer pilecap reinforcement m -5.12m -3.32m Corbels as loading transferring points of hanging rods

73 Main Span Pilecap Construction Concreting Of Pilecap +3.48m +2.68m 2 nd Layer (3.0m) the second layer concrete of the pilecap(3.0m) steel fender 2 nd Layer (2.0m) the second layer concrete of the pilecap(2.0m) +0.68m steel fender 1 st Layer (3.0m) the second layer concrete of the pilecap(3.0m) 1 st Layer (2.0m) the first layer concrete of the pilecap(2.0m) Mass mass Concrete concrete(1.2m) (1.2m) -1.32m -2.52m Mass Concrete mass concrete(1.8m) (1.8m) P025 & P026 P024 & P027

74 Main Span Pilecap Construction Temperature Control JKR Specification NO. Items Requirement 1 Placing Temperature 36 2 Maximum Internal Temperature 70 3 Maximum Temperature Gradient Rise rate in Temperature 10 /30min

75 Main Span Pilecap Construction Temperature Control Measures Low heat cement (Portland Pulverised-Fuel Ash Cement) to be used Additive like GGBS and silica fume are added to the design mix to minimize the cement content Water cooling pipe with cycling of ice water and thermocoupler to be embedded in the concrete

76 Main Span Pilecap Construction Cooling Pipe System Water boat Thermocoupler Cooling pipe

77 Main Span Pilecap Construction Temperature Monitoring For P24 & P27

78 Main Span Pilecap Construction Temperature Monitoring For P25 & P26

79 Temperature/ Main Span Pilecap Construction Temperature Monitoring For P25 & P Ambient Tempt. 80 Peak Temperature Time/h

80 Thank You