DESIGN OF STRUTTING

SUPPORT SYSTEM
 TR 26: 2010

Technical Reference
for
Deep Excavation

Published by Spring Singapore

2
 Partial Factors for Soil Load
The design values of the geotechnical parameters Xd should be derived
using
Xd = Xk / m

Xk is the moderately conservative estimate of the soil parameter and m

is the reduction factor for the parameter.

Soil parameter Symbol

Angle of shear resistance a ’
Effective cohesion c’
Undrained shear strength cu
Unconfined strength qu
Weight density 
 GEO/STR Limit states

Design Approach 1 (DA1):

Combination 1: A1 + M1 + R1
Combination 2: A2 + M2 + R1

A M

4
GEO/STR Limit states

5
• The term “moderately conservative” is
taken to mean the “cautious estimate” of
the value relevant to the occurrence of the
limit state as specified in CIRIA C580. It is
also equivalent to “representative value”
as specified in BS 8002 and to the
“characteristic value” as in EC7.
 surcharge
Analysis of
strut forces
Earth Pressure

pore water pressure

Effective active pressure
Effective passive pressure

Hinge Method
 Additional Loads for the Design of
Strutting System
In addition to the excavation load, the following loads must also be considered
• A minimum surcharge of 10 kPa should be considered. Where there is
vehicular traffic, a design surcharge load of 20 kPa should be used. Higher
surcharge load (> 20 kPa) may be required if heavy construction
equipments are employed.
• Change of strut force due to temperature difference of ± 10 C should be
considered.
• Change of strut force due to the installation and removal of struts at any
level.
• Change of strut force induced by wall rotation and relative displacements
between the supported ends, if any.
• Accidental impact load of 50 kN to be applied normal to the strut at any
point in any direction, unless otherwise demonstrated by risk assessment.
• Axial force on the waler due to the inclined struts (in plan).
• Accidental removal or failure of one strut/anchor or its connections.
 Partial Factors for Loads
Design limit Self- ***Strut *Imposed Load *Temperature Accident
states Weight Force from (Construction Load Impact
(Dead Soil 1kN/m) (0=0.6, 1=0.5, 2=0) Force
Load) Analysis (0=1.0, 1=0, 2=0.2) (50kN)
ULS 1.35 Design Strut Leading live load = Accompany
Force 1.5 Temperature = 1.5x0.6 0

Accompany live
Leading
load = 1.5x0.7
Temperature = 1.5
ALS 1.0 Characteristic Leading Live load Accompany
50kN Point Strut Force = 0.7* Temperature = 0 1.0
Load in y or Accompany live Leading
z direction load = 0.6 Temperature = 0.5
ALS 1.0 Characteristic Leading Live load Accompany 0
One Strut Strut Force = 0.7* Temperature = 0
Failure Accompany live Leading
(OSF)** load = 0.6 Temperature = 0.5

* values obtained Table A1.1, EN1990 and National Annex

ULS: Table A1.2(B), EN1990-2002, pg 53
**requires soil-structure analysis for accuracy. Values not given
ALS: Table A1.3, EN1990-2002, pg 54
under application for buildings.
***Soil-structure interaction analysis to satisfy both DA1-1 and DA1-
2 for GEO/STR limit state
 strut x
y
Examples on Load Combinations

Case No. Design limit State Load Combinations

Case 1a ULS: DA1-1: A1+M1+R1 1.35DL+1.5LL+1.35SF+0.9 TL

1.35DL+1.5LL+1.0SF+0.9 TL
Case 1b
ULS: DA1-2: A2+M2+R1
ALS: Accidental Loading in horizontal
Case 2a 1.0DL+0.5LL+1.0F+1.0SF
direction
Case 2b ALS: Impact Load in vertical direction 1.0DL+0.5LL+1.0F+1.0SF

Case 3 ALS: One Strut Failure 1.0DL+0.5LL + 1.0SF

Where; DL = Self weight of the member

SF = Strut Force from soil analysis
LL = Live load along the strut, 1.0kN/m
TL = Temperature load (axial force due to change of temperature)
IF = Impact force
 Design Against One Structural
Component Failure

TR 26: 2010

The system should not collapse due to the possible failure

of any one structural component.

The wall and the supporting structural members including

their connections shall be capable of re-distributing the load
from the failed member. The remaining structural system
shall continue to remain safe without causing any danger to
surrounding adjacent structures and properties.

11
One Strut Failure

• TR26:2010 clause 3.7.4

“design for deep excavation should accommodate
possible failure of any individual strut, tie rod, ground
anchor, structural member or connection at each stage
of the construction works.”
• lack of clear authoritative guidance on appropriate
design standards  Absence of an industry-wide
approach
• 3 possible approaches are generally used as follow:
 Design for One Strut Failure
Approach 1 – One strut failure
• Use waler to distribute the strut
force to left and right struts
• Waler section becomes very
large (M = Wl2/10).
• Plastic design may be used for
waler beam (if the section is
plastic)
• Use splay beams to improve the
overall strutting performance.
13
Approach 1 – One strut failure

TD T TD

S F S

BD B BD
Without Splay beam – waler moment increases significantly

2L
With Splay beam –waler length after OSF remains as L

L L

L
 Approach 2 – one level failure
• One entire level of struts is assumed to fail and be removed.
• Loads from the failed struts are distributed to adjacent top and bottom struts by the wall.
• Wall is designed to withstand one level strut failure.
• Plane strain 2D FEM analysis is usually performed to assess vertical bending moment in
the wall.
• Generally conservative with increase in wall thickness & reinforcement
Approach 3 – 3D analysis
– Remove one strut
– Perform 3D structural/soil interaction analysis
– Allow plastic hinge formation
– The structural system and wall shall continue
to remain safe and without causing any
danger to surrounding adjacent structures and
properties.
– One strut failure scenario may not always
govern the design

18
One Strut Failure – Approach 3
• Loads from the failed struts are distributed to surrounding struts
taking into account of the three dimensional effect
• Need 3D FEM analysis to determine the load re-distribution
Approach 4 – Alternate Strut Failure. This is not
proven and therefore not recommended
• In 2D-Plaxis, carry out the strutted wall analysis with all the
struts in place, but model one of the strut layers with half the
original stiffness(EA) to simulate one strut failing, i.e. the strut
layer is not made to vanish but is modelled with an equivalent
stiffness of that particular layer of struts being reduced to
50% of original EA.
• Obtain the waler uniformly distributed load from the resulted
strut force and design the waler accordingly. This is similarly
repeated for other layer of struts in different runs.
• The above seems to be equivalent to an alternate strut failure
instead of a full layer strut failure (where EA=0), and is less
critical than the latter. But this works only if the waler is
infinitely rigid.
20
 Approach 4
• Approach 4 - Residual stiffness effect
(insufficient scientific research to back up
this approach) P

Stiffness = 0.5EA
EA

0.5EA


Limitations of 2D Analysis
• Results of lateral wall displacements show 2D analyses are
inaccurate and always more conservative than 3D analyses.
• When L/H < 4.5 and L/B < 3.5, 2D analysis may over-predict the wall
displacement leading to uneconomical design. This is because
corner effect (soil arching) becomes significant
• Shorter length L  larger effect of soil arching
• Corner stiffening effect is non-existent in 2D cases where excavation length is
infinitely long.
B

L
 E x a m p l e : S t r u t & Wa l e r D e s i g n ( O S F C a s e )
B. Waler Section With OSF Condition
Waler Section OSF case did
Strut Strong Waler One Level Failure Without OSF not affect the
Capacity Approach Approach Consideration strut section
200 1x UC 305 x 305 x 1x UC 203 x 203 x 1x UC 203 x 203 x 60
198 86.1
500 1x UC 400 x 400 1x UC 305 x 305 x 1x UC 305 x 305 x 137
x415 198
1200 2x UC 356 x 406 1x UC 305 x 305 x 1x UC 305 x 305 x
x467 312.5 312.5
One level failure approach is adopted for the waler design.

If this approach is adopted at first level strut large displacement will occur on the
wall, which may caused inefficient design for the wall. Therefore, only for the first
level the strong waler approach is adopted and concrete cap beam may be used
to redistribute the load due to OSF.
Accidental Load
50kN is applied
in one direction
at a time
Spacing of struts
Side view
Vertical clear spacing of strut >3.5m
should be at least 3.5m Wall
(preferably 4m) because the
height of an excavator is about
3.5m.

l >4m
Horizontal spacing of strut
depends on the dimension of strut
excavator (excavator plan l
dimension is about 3.5m x 4m).

Waler

Plan view
 Strut Force
P1
Strut force F l
h
P2 strut

l
Wall

Side Elevation

F = 0.5(P1 + P2)h x l Waler

Plan View
 Design Moment of Waler Beam
• Simply support beam Plastic design
M = wL2/8 (sagging) M = wL2/16
• Continuous beam
M = wL2/10 (hogging)

WL2/10` WL2/10
0.08WL2 0.025WL2 0.08WL2

0.4WL 1.1WL 1.1WL 0.4WL

L L L
Continuous beam
 Waler Beam
Wall

Mx Mx

strut
Beam-column problem

N Ed M y , Ed M z , Ed
 k yy  k yz 1
major axis buckling N b , y , Rd M b , Rd M z , Rd

N Ed M y , Ed M z , Ed
minor axis buckling  k zy  k zz 1
N b , z , Rd M b , Rd M z , Rd
 Axial Force in Waler Beam
• Diagonal struts will induce axial force in
the waler. The waler needs to be
designed for both axial compression and
bending.
• The axial force in the waler may be
transmitted to the wall provided that
1) shear connectors are installed between the
wall and the concrete backing and
2) shear connectors are provided between the
waler and the concrete backing.
 Shear Connectors for Diagonal Strut

• To transfer shear force from diagonal strut to wall

• Axial force on waler will not accumulate

View B
 Shear Studs
• Axial force to be transfer from waler to wall = F
• Shear resistance of one stud = PRd
CBP
CBP CBP
No of studs required = F/ PRd

Axial Force = F
Design resistances PRd (kN) of shear connectors to BS EN 1994-1-1

Concrete strength (N/mm2)

Stud diameter and height
(mm) C20/25 C25/30 C30/37 C35/45

19 mm dia  100 mm 63 73 81 81

22 mm dia  100 mm 85 98 108 108

16 mm dia  75 mm 45 52 57 57

Design resistance = Characteristic resistance/1.25

For concrete grade greater than C35/45, failure of shear stud is governing

32
Axial Force on Waling Beam
 Axial Force Transferred to Waler
F/3 2F/3 2F/3 F/3
F F F


(F/3)cossin

(F/3)/sin
(F/sin
* cos

(F/sin
* cos

Axial (F/sin
force * cos F
distrib
ution

Strut with Splays
Diagonal Struts
 Load Transfer in E-W Direction
High Concentration Axial Load at Waler

Earth Pressure
Strut Force 
Waler Axial Force 35
Shear Stud at Diagonal Zone

36
Waler Details

Stiffeners are required to

ensure stability
 Eccentric Loads
• The design of struts, walers and
strut/waler connections shall take into
account of eccentricity in transfer of load
from the waler to the strut.
• For walers made from a single section UC
or UB, the eccentricity shall be taken as
10% the depth of the strut, but not less
than 30mm of the overall dimension of the
strut in the vertical plane.
Design strut for load eccentricity
M=Fe

e = 10%d >
30mm
Single waler

F1
e = 10%d >
30mm Double waler
D

F2

39
 Design Waler for load eccentricity
M=Fe
e = 10%d > 30mm
F

Single Waler

Stiffeners may be needed

to prevent side sway
M=Fe F/2 +Fe/D = F1
F D
F/2 - Fe/D = F2

Double Waler

This is because rotation of wall (deflection of wall) is now

limited to 0.05H% and hence one waler failure scenario is
not possible.
40
 Minimum Load Eccentricity
A minimum load eccentricity of 30mm may
be used with the following conditions:
• Use of proper installation method (use to
temporary guide plate) to control and
ensure the eccentricity is kept to minimum
• Include eccentricity in the checklist.
Eccentricity to be checked prior to
approval.
Buckling length of strut
Buckling length of strut
 Horizontal Bracing

UC152x152x37kg/m 45
46
 t
Check Local Buckling
of I-Section under D d

pure compression
T
b
Compression element Ratio Limiting values

Class 1 Class 2 Class 3

Outstand element of b/T   
d/t < 120 
compression flange
1+ 2.0 r 2

Internal element of b/T   

compression flange
 Design of Lateral Restraints
e0d  q
q d L  N Ed 8 ; e0d = L/500
L
If q = L/2000 (assume nominal deflection of rigid
support)
NP
q d L  2%N Ed Ed

If q =0,

q d L  1.6%N Ed

N Ed F

F = 1.6 to 2.0%NEd

N Ed
 Lateral Restraint to Strut
to be designed for 2% NEd
 Strut to Runner Beam Connection & Runner
Beam Bracket
• Strut to runner beam
– Angle members on runner beam restraint strut from buckle vertically and horizontally
– Strut is allow to move its longitudinal axis
• Runner beam bracket
– To transfer load from runner beam to kingpost, including axial force from runner beam
– Angle members provide vertical restraint to prevent uplift of the runner beam

Side View Side View

 Bracing system that provides restraint
to more than one member shall be
designed to resist the sum of the
restraint forces from each member
reduced by the factor m

 1
 m  0.5 1  
 m
m =number of parallel members
to be restrained.

Example: m = 4

m = (0.5 (1+1/4))0.5 = 0.79

F= 0.79 x 0.02P
Assume q = L/2000
R 51
Liew
deflection of rigid support)
 Design of braced frame to support
horizontal struts
Design braced frame for the horizontal
loads F1 and F2:

Equal to

0.5% (1.35 Dead Load + 1.5 Imposed Load)

(This is equivalent horizontal force
account for frame imperfections)
Plus
Restrained force = 2.0% (sum of strut
force at that level) x m
PLAN BRACING LAYOUT

Can be replaced by vertical bracing

 TEMPPERATURE EFFECTS ON STRUTS
L=tL
L = change in strut length
L = strut length
t = change in temperature from the installation temperature
 = thermal coefficient of expansion = 1.2 x10-5 per °C for
steel.

 = L/L =  /E = P/EA
N = EA L/L

Force induced: N=tEA

E = Young's modulus
A = cross-sectional area of strut
N= change of strut force due to thermal effect
 TEMPERATURE EFFECTS
N=ktEA
• Temperature load shall be added to the strut loads.
• In Singapore, a change in temperature of 10oC is
expected. A conservative assumption is to assumed both
ends of the strut are fixed.
• k = 1.0 is for a fully restrained strut where both ends are
prevented to expand freely. If the degree of restraint of
the strut allows some expansion, lesser strut load due to
temperature effect will result.
• In the absence of rigorous analysis, k = 0.6 is
recommended for flexible sheet pile walls and k = 0.8 for
stiff wall with stiff soil condition. Temperature effects are
normally added to the predicted strut loads after the
analysis is completed.
 Diaphragm wall (stiff wall)
Example:
UC 305x305x158 S355, A= 201 cm2,
Le = 10m,
T = 10oC, Ley = 10m, Ncy =1780kN
N=tEA= 494kN (28% of Pcy)
Actual value will be less due to movement of
wall. For diaphragm wall (stiff wall)
N=ktEA= 0.8x494kN = 395 kN
Measured strut loads and temperature
change with time at site

Strut temperature

Strut Force

Measured strut force/temperature versus time

 Example
Strut size used was H400x400x172 kg/m with sectional area of A= 219
cm². E, Young’s modulus of steel E is equal to 205x106 kN/m² and
thermal coefficient of expansion for steel is equal to 12x10-6 per oC.

Measured temperature t = 48.5 – 26 = 22.5 oC

Measured change in force

 N = 900 kN

A = 219 cm2

N= ktEA
k = 0.74 (which is between 0.6 and 0.8)

Use k = 0.8 is conservative.

 King Post & Decking
Kingposts and decking structures should be designed with
the appropriate loads and load factors in accordance with
the relevant codes of practice to achieve robustness and
adequate factor of safety such that no disproportionate
catastrophic collapse would occur.

Where appropriate, anticipated retaining wall movements

under the most onerous conditions should be considered in
the design and detailing of kingposts and decking
structures.
TR26: Technical reference for deep excavation, 2010
 Kingpost Design

 Purpose
1. Kingpost helps to provide support to struts and
runner beams.
2. It reduces the effective length of the struts about
the x-x axis.

 Design Considerations
1. ensure joints are capable of transmitting forces
2. ease of installation and handling.
3. ensure economic design.
4. effective length of an embedded king post
should be determined from analysis to derive
the position of fixity below the ground. The
analyses should also include construction
stages when the temporary support members
or struts are removed.

60
EXAMPLE ON DESIGN OF KINGPOST
 Maximum unbraced length of King Post = 5m
 Effective Length = 5m + 2m (below formation level)


5000m - Maximum unbraced length

after excavation

 5m
7m
 Design of King Post
• Vertical load increases progressively as
struts are installed level by level
• Need to design for moment due to
eccentricity of load or horizontal load
• King post provides vertical restraint to
struts, hence add 1.0% strut force acting
vertically
• Depth of embedment of king post = shaft
friction + end bearing
VERTICAL LOAD RESISTANCE OF KING POST

Pdesign < R

Resistance of a steel pile

R = Rs/( s) + Rb/ ( b)
• Rs is the ultimate shaft
friction resistance
• Rb is the ultimate base
resistance
• Material factors for driven
pile  = 1.5, s= b=1.3
VERTICAL LOAD RESISTANCE OF KING POST

R = Rs+ Rb = qs As + qb Ab

qs = unit shaft friction. For more than one

soil type, the average value of qs over
the length of the pile is taken
As = surface area of the pile in contact with
the soil
qb = End bearing resistance
Ab = steel cross-section area of the base
of the pile or plug cross-sectional area
• Cohesive Soil
qs =Cu 0.3 < Cu < 0.6 (Undrained shear strength)
qb =9Cu Cu = 20kN/m2 for soft clay
to 400 kN/m2 for hard clays

• Cohesiveness Soil (e.g. Sand)

qs =2Nb Nb = average standard penetration
(STP) value of each soil layer
qb =400Nb Nb = STP value at the pile tip
 eccentricity
If designed to provide lateral
restraint to horizontal strut, add
1.0% strut force to king post.

Avoid transferring of horizontal load to king post

 Bracket Design
• Detail of Bracket on Kingpost
 Bracket Design
• Detail of Bracket on Kingpost with ECC
King post provides restraints to struts

1%P1 strut
P1

Add 1% strut force horzontally

P2 1%P2 and vertically
strut

P3 1%P3

strut
wall

King post
 Stability of Node Point

0.002P

0.002P

0.001P
 Web bearing and buckling
DESIGN OF CONNECTIONS check for each layer of strut to
waler connection
Strut-Waler Connection
15mm Thk Stiffner Plate
With 12mm Fillet Weld all round

Waler Strut

Waler
20mm Thk End Plate

80x80x8mm Angle Bracket 20mm Thk End Plate

Waler

18mm Thk Flange Plate Strut 4M 20 Grade 8.8 Bolt & Nut
10M 20 Grade 8.8 Bolt & Nut
10mm Thk Web Plate

Note: All steel plates and sections shall be S355 unless

Typical Splice Detail otherwise stated.
TYPICAL DETAILS OF WALER (2)

Typical shear studs, dia. 19mm

(300mm embedment depth) at
200mm spacing
Waler Bracket

CBP wall
Design of Temporary Platform
 Temporary Platform

20 kN/m2
Typical Mobile Crane (25 Tonne
DEMAG Model)
 CONTRUCTION DECK DESIGN

MACHINERY SPECIFICATION

MODEL: SCX- 800

WEIGHT: 80 TONNE
SIZE= 6.06m x 4.83m
TRACK SIZE: 2NOS. X(5.15m x 0.8m)
TRACK PRESSURE: 90 kPa
PROPOSED WORKING RADIUS: 15m
LIFTING CAPACITY
JIB LENGTH= 7 TONNE
CLAMSHELL= 6.5 TONNE
 CONTRUCTION DECK DESIGN

ENLARGED CONSTRUCTION DECK PLAN
METRO DECK= 200mm THK
LTA STANDARD DETAIL OF GUARD RAIL AT EDGE
MAIN BEAM= 610 X 324 X 195 kg/m UB
SECONDARY BEAM= 610 X 229 X 140 kg/m UB
 CONTRUCTION DECK DESIGN

SECONDARY BEAM (SB)
LOADING CONSIDERATION

CASE 1: DESIGN FOR 20kPa LIVE LOAD CASE 2: TRACK PRESSURE 
PERPENDICULAR TO SB

CASE 3: TRACK PRESSURE PARLLEL TO  CASE 4: TRACK PRESSURE 
SB (MID SPAN) PARLLEL TO SB (END SPAN)
 CONTRUCTION DECK DESIGN

MAIN BEAM (MB)
LOADING CONSIDERATION

CASE 1: DESIGN FOR 20kPa 
CASE 2: TRACK PRESSURE PARALLEL TO MB
REACTION FORCE FROM SB

CASE 3: TRACK PRESSURE PERPANDICULARTO MB (MID SPAN)
 Loading
Imposed Load x 1.5
• Wheel load x 1.3 (for Impact)
• Construction load = 20kN/m2 for constructional activity;
stacking of materials, equipment and plant.
Dead load x 1.35
• Weight of Platform, any temporary works connected to
the platform structure.
Dynamic Loading due to Lifting load moving
vertically
• The static loading of the moving item should be
increased by 25% when
1. using mechanically operated lifting gear .
2. Otherwise use 10% for manually operated lifting gear
 Decking Loading Cases Consideration
80ton crawler with 20ton Lifting
• Case 3: Front Lifting – Boom is perpendicular to crane shoe
• Shoe A and B carry equal loading.

900 4500 900

50% of A B 6300 50% of

crane load crane load

83
 Decking Loading Cases
Consideration
• Case 2: Side Lifting – Boom is perpendicular to crane shoe
• Shoe A carries 75% of the load while Shoe B carries 25%.

6300

75% of A 900
crane load

4500

25% of
crane load B 900
 Secondary Beam

6300 mm

Lsb = 9.5m

• Secondary beam is designed for 9.5m span.

• Metro deck provide lateral restraint for Secondary Beam 
Ly = 2m

85
 Main Beam
P1 P2
P1 P2

4500
4500

Lmb Lmb

a) Crane shoe at center b) Crane shoe at end

• Main beam is designed for 11.5m span length.

• The loading from secondary beam is acting as a point
load to the main beam.
• Main beam is laterally restrained by secondary beam
resting on top.
• The lateral buckling length of the main beam is 2m.
86
Vehicle Load on
Platform
20m3
concrete
truck
 For crane moving in a direction parallel to the
beam

For crane moving in a direction perpendicular to the beam

 CONTRUCTION DECK DESIGN

MAIN BEAM (MB)
LOADING CONSIDERATION

MAIN BEAM SUPPORTED BY DECK POST AND TOP FLANGE IS RESTRAINED BY SB
 CONTRUCTION DECK DESIGN

TYPICAL SECONDARY BEAM TO MAIN BEAM  DETAIL
Connection Details - metro deck

92
Typical Connection of MB to Deck Post/King Post

93
 CONTRUCTION DECK DESIGN

TYPICAL SECONDARY BEAM TO MAIN BEAM  DETAIL
 CONTRUCTION DECK DESIGN

SECONDARY BEAM TO CAPPING BEAM DETAIL
 CONTRUCTION DECK DESIGN

SECONDARY BEAM TO CAPPING BEAM DETAIL

Slotted holes to facilitate movement

 Homework 4 Q2
Propose an efficient strutting layout plan

All units in m
 Concrete this Conner

• Provide equal spacing of strut and achieve equal span length for waler.
• Provide plan bracing to anchor the lateral ties to shorten the minor axis buckling length
of the struts
• provide diagonal bracing at the corner.
• Concrete the corner, as shown, to provide effective strengthening of the bad corner
• Use splay beams to widen the spacing of struts