Performance Based Design

CEPTUNIVERSITY,SCHOOLOFBUILDINGSCIENCE&TECHNOLOGY,KASTURBHAILALBHAICAMPUS,
UNIVERSITYROAD,NAVRANGPURA,AHMEDABAD380009INDIA.
ThesisTitle:
PerformancebasedseismicdesignofWharf(Jetty)
Structure
Guide:
SubmittedBy:
Mr.MehulPatel
Mr.HarnishTanna
H.O.D.(Planning&Engineering)SD1208
PMCProjects(INDIA)PrivateLimited
Ahmedabad
CEPTUniversity
Ahmedabad
CEPTUNIVERSITY
SCHOOLOFBUILDINGSCIENCE&TECHNOLOGY
KasturbhaiLalbhaiCampus,UniversityRoad,
Navrangpura,Ahmedabad380009
India.
ThesisTitle:
PerformancebasedseismicdesignofWharf(Jetty)Structure
APPROVALCERTIFICATE
The following study done by Mr. Harnish Tanna is hereby certified as a creditable work on the
approvedsubject,carriedoutandpresentedinamannersufficientlysatisfactorilytowarrantits
acceptability as partial fulfillment towards M.Tech. in Structural Design for which it has been
submitted. It is to be understood that by this approval the undersigned does not necessarily
endorse or approve any statement made, opinion expressed or conclusions drawn therein, but
approves the study only for the purpose for which it is submitted and satisfies his work as per
requirements.
Guide:
HeadofDepartment:
Mr.MehulPatel,
H.O.D.(Planning&Engineering),
PMCProjects(INDIA)PrivateLimited,
Ahmedabad
Mr.V.R.Shah,
M.Tech.(StructuralDesign)
CEPTUniversity,
Ahmedabad
ACKNOWKLEDGEMENT
This thesis may not be that what it is without many people whose accompany and support
make this possible. It is a pleasant aspect that I have now the opportunity to express my
gratitude for all of them.
First of all thank you Jalaram Bapa for giving me Mr. Mehul Patel as my thesis guide. I
know him as a sympathetic and principle-centered person. His enthusiasm and integral
view on research and expertise on this subject has made a deep impression on me. I owe
him lots of gratitude for having me shown this way of research. I express my deepest
appreciation to him for guiding me, and encouraging me during the long efforts.
I sincerely thank to Prof. V. R. Shah who kept an eye on the progress of my work and
always available when I needed their advice. I would also like to thank my co-guide Mrs.
Dhara Shah who monitored my work and always helpful during my journey towards M.
Tech. degree. I am thankful to all staff members who took effort in reading and providing
me with valuable comments on this thesis.
I am very grateful to my parents and my sister Bhumika, for their love, blessings and
patience during my M.Tech. Thesis, without their blessings this was not possible.
I acknowledge with thanks to my batch mates, seniors, colleagues and juniors who had
directly or indirectly encourage me, provided me useful suggestion with references
during the journey.
Lastly I acknowledge with thanks to Structure Engineering Forum India (SEFI) from
where I got useful literature and advice from Mr. R.N. Iyengarmy, The director of
Institute of Seismic research department of science and technology, Raisan, Gandhinagar
for Seismic hazard Maps of India which is very useful for deriving site specific spectra.
Last but not the least I am very thankful to google for getting any information and
documents useful for my research work.
ii
ABSTRACT
Performance based seismic design is a new philosophy widely accepted by world for
different structures. Countries like Japan, Turkey, USA, China has started adopting
performance based seismic design for Buildings, Bridges and Marine structures.
Harbours and jetties are lifeline structures as they provide a cost-effective method for
transporting large quantities of goods and raw materials into and out of a region. These
are important structures especially in islands. These structures also play a significant role
in the transportation system in terms of evacuation of people before or after natural
disasters, e.g. earthquakes and tsunamis. Further, these are useful to supply relief
materials after the natural disaster when other transportation systems fail to deliver.
After 26 December 2004, when the great Sumatra earthquake of magnitude Mw 9.1
caused a devastating tsunami in the Indian Ocean. Some damaged, unserviceable offshore
and foreshore harbour structures, north of Port Blair (capital of A&N Islands, India),
caused total disruption of sea transport that caused a delay in the supply of relief work in
the earthquake and tsunami affected areas. This underlines the need to design these
structures so that they can withstand earthquakes. According to the Indian seismic hazard
zone map, the entire A&N Islands lie in the most severe seismic zone, i.e. zone V, where
the expected intensity of shaking is IX or greater on the MSK intensity scale. However,
in the case of the 2004 Sumatra earthquake, it was observed that the intensity of shaking
in the Andaman Islands, located about 1000 km northwest from the epicenter (03.295N
95.982E according to USGS) was between VI and VII. Performance of the structures
could have been better than what was observed if these were designed and detailed
properly.
iii
INDEX
Certificate
Acknowledgement
Abstract
Index
List of Figures
List of Tables
List of Symbols
Chapter
No.
1.
2.
i
ii
iii
iv
v
vi
vii
Topic
Pages
INTRODUCTION
1-3
1.1
General
1.2
Objective
1.3
Scope of Work
1.4
Organization of Thesis
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
4-24
2.1
General-Why performance based design
2.2
Performance based seismic design Parameters
2.2.1
Design Earthquake Motions
2.2.1.1 Site-specific spectra for Earthquake using probabilistic approach 6
2.3
2.4
2.2.1.2 Steps for Response Spectrum for a particular site
10
2.2.1.3 Illustrative Example for a D-type site at Mundra
11
2.2.2
Acceptable level of Damage
13
2.2.3
Performance Grades
14
Modeling Parameters
18
2.3.1
Moment Curvature relationship for Piles
18
2.3.2
Plastic hinge length
19
2.3.3
Plastic Rotation
19
2.3.4
Soil-Structure Interaction
20
Analysis Methods for Wharf (Jetty) Structure
21
2.4.1
21
Simplified Analysis
2.5
2.4.2
Simplified Dynamic Analysis
21
2.4.3
Dynamic Analysis
22
Performance Based Seismic Design-List of Standards available

Worldwide
3.
24
PROBLEM FORMULATION/ CASE STUDY
25-64
3.1
General
25
3.2
Selection of Space frame
25
3.2.1
Site Condition
27
3.2.2
Soil Profile
27
3.2.3
Ship Dimensions
27
3.2.4
Jetty Dimensions
27
3.2.5
Levels
28
3.3
3.4
Generating the Structural Model
28
3.3.1
Material Properties Used
28
3.3.2
Element Specifications
28
Load Data
29
3.4.1
Dead Load
29
3.4.2
Live Load
29
3.4.3
Berthing Load (One Fender)
30
3.4.4
Berthing Load (Two Fenders)
31
3.4.5
Mooring Load
32
3.4.6
Earthquake Load in X direction (Transverse direction)
34
3.4.7
Earthquake Load in Y direction (Longitudinal direction)
34
3.4.8
Wind Force Operational Condition in X direction
35
3.4.9
Wind Force Extreme Condition in X direction
35
3.4.10 Wave and Current Forces in Y direction
36
3.4.11 Hydrodynamic Force due to Earthquake in X direction

(Transverse direction)
43
3.4.12 Hydrodynamic Force due to Earthquake in Y direction

(Longitudinal direction)
43
3.4.13 Temperature Load
44
3.4.14 Earth pressure
44
3.5
Load Combinations
45
3.6
45
3.7
Seismicity
45
3.8
Structural Weight
46
3.9
Pile Moment-Curvature characteristics
48
3.10
Ultimate Concrete Strain Capacity
50
3.11
Cracking Moment and Curvature
51
3.12
Moment and Curvature Summary
52
3.13
Pile Pushover Analysis
53
3.14
Performance Limits from Pushover analysis results
58
3.15
Sample Calculation for Design acceleration spectrum A
59
3.15.1 Method A: Equivalent Single Mode Analysis
59
3.15.2 Method B: Push over analysis
61
4.
OBSERVATION AND CONCLUSION
65-70
4.1
Comparison of Results
65
4.2
Conclusion
68
4.3
Limitations
69
4.4
Future Scope
70
References
71-73
ANNEXURE-1
Load Combinations
ANNEXURE-2
Geotechnical
ANNEXURE-3
Pile Design
ANNEXURE-4
Design spectra for different sites
LIST OF FIGURES:
FIGURES:
CHAPTER 2 :
FIGURE 2.1
Short Period Spectral Acceleration at T = 0.2 second with Return

Period of 2500 years on A-type Sites (5% damping)
FIGURE 2.2
Long Period Spectral Acceleration at T = 1 second with Return Period

of 2500 years on A-type Sites (5% damping)
FIGURE 2.3
Design spectra for D-type site in Mundra, Gujarat (5% damping)
FIGURE 2.4
Schematic figure of performance grades S, A, B and C by PIANC Code
FIGURE 2.5
Example of Seismic performance

Structure a: Satisfy Performance Grade A,
Structure b: Satisfy Performance Grade B
FIGURE 2.6
Idealized Moment-Rotation Curve
FIGURE 2.7
Flowchart for Performance Based Seismic Design for Wharf (Jetty

Structure)
CHAPTER 3 :
FIGURE 3.1
Jetty Layouts (Plan & Elevation)
FIGURE 3.2 & 3.3 Fender Rubber Grades and Generalized Performance Curve
FIGURE 3.4
Fender Dimensions & Spacing
FIGURE 3.5
Soil pressure on Deep Beam at Grid E
FIGURE 3.6
Wharf (Jetty) Dimensions (Elevation)
FIGURE 3.7
Moment-curvature Curve for Pile grid A for pitch of 65 mm using

12 mm diameter
FIGURE 3.8
Moment-curvature Curve for Pile grid A for pitch of 250 mm using

12 mm diameter
FIGURE 3.9
Material property input in XTRACT for generating Stress-Strain Curve
FIGURE 3.10
Simplified Moment-Curvature relationships
FIGURE 3.11
(a) Transverse section for analysis, (b) Force-displacement response

and hinge sequence for transverse excitation
FIGURE 3.12
(a) Pile Model for longitudinal analysis, (b) Individual pile longitudinal
Force-displacement response
FIGURE 3.13
Results of Pushover analysis
FIGURE 3.14
Results of Pushover analysis for Individual Piles (From A to E top to

bottom)
FIGURE 3.15
(a) Pushover Curve, (b) Plastic Hinge Sequence
CHAPTER 4 :
FIGURE 4.1
Displacement Capacities for different conditions
LIST OF TABLES:
TABLES:
CHAPTER 2 :
TABLE 2.1
Site Class Definitions (Ref: International Building Code IBC-2009)
TABLE 2.2
Site coefficients Fa for short period range
TABLE 2.3
Site coefficients Fv for 1-second period
TABLE 2.4
PSHA at site for A-type rock level
TABLE 2.5
Design spectra for D-type site in Mundra, Gujarat (5% damping)
TABLE 2.6
Acceptable level of damage in Performance based design by PIANC

Code
TABLE 2.7
Performance grades S, A, B and C classified by PIANC Code
TABLE 2.8
Importance of structure defined in Different codes
TABLE 2.9
Types of analysis related to performance grades
CHAPTER 3 :
TABLE 3.1
Soil Profile
TABLE 3.2
Summary of Wind Force
TABLE 3.3
Hydrodynamic Force due to Earthquake in X direction
TABLE 3.4
Hydrodynamic Force due to Earthquake in Y direction
TABLE 3.5
Pile load calculations
TABLE 3.6
TABLE 3.7
Moment and Curvature for different confinement
TABLE 3.8
Pile Force Displacement Response
TABLE 3.9
Displacement Limits
TABLE 3.10
Pile forces for displacement of 0.031 m
TABLE 3.11
Pile forces for displacement of 0.129 m
CHAPTER 4 :
TABLE 4.1
Displacement Capacities for different conditions
LIST OF SYMBOLS:
M
Moment
Curvature
Time period
vs
Average shear velocity
Average standard penetration resistance
su
Average undrained shear strength
PI
Plasticity Index
Moisture Content
Fa
Site coefficient for short period range
Fv
Site coefficient for long period range
Ss
Mapped spectral acceleration for short period
S1
Mapped spectral acceleration for 1 second period
SMS
Maximum considered earthquake spectral response acceleration at short period
SM1
Maximum considered earthquake spectral response acceleration at 1second period
SDS
Design basis earthquake spectral response acceleration at short period
SD1
Design basis earthquake spectral response acceleration at 1second period
Ts, To
Time period
Sa
Spectral acceleration
Mp
Plastic moment
Lp
Plastic hinge length
Lc
Distance from critical section of plastic hinge to point of contra-flexure in pile
dbl
Diameter of longitudinal bar
fye
Expected yield strength of longitudinal reinforcement
Dp
Pile diameter
p,m
Plastic rotation for the OLE, CLE or DE strain limit
p,m
Plastic curvature for the OLE, CLE or DE strain limit
Ultimate rotation
Idealized yield rotation
Total rotation at the OLE, CLE or DE strain limit
ks
Modulus of sub grade reaction
Youngs modulus of elasticity
Es
Youngs modulus of soil
Eb
Youngs modulus of the pile material
Ib
Moment of inertia of the pile cross section
Poissons ratio of the soil
Cohesion of soil
Effective unit weight of soil
sub
Submerged weight of soil
Angle of friction
DWT
Dead weight tonnage
DT
Displacement tonnage
WD
Displacement tonnage of the vessel
fck
Grade of concrete
fy
Grade of steel
Length of vessel
Beam of the vessel
Draught of vessel
Velocity of vessel
Cm
Mass coefficient
Ce
Eccentricity coefficient
Cs
Softness coefficient
Unit weight of water
Angle of vessel approach
Berthing Energy
Acceleration due to gravity
Projection of Fender
Fender deflection
RB
Bow radius
Centre to centre spacing of fenders
CTW
Transverse wind co-efficient
Density of Air
AL
Longitudinal projected area of ship above W.L
Design wind speed
FTW
Transverse wind force
CTC
Transverse current force co-efficient
CLC
Longitudinal current force co-efficient
CCT
Transverse Depth correction Factor
CCL
Longitudinal Depth correction Factor
LBP
Length between perpendiculars of ship
Dm
Mean draught of ship (For Fully Located)
Vc
Avg. current velocity of mean depth
FTC
Transverse Current Force
Height of structure
Importance factor
Response reduction factor
Sa/g
Average response acceleration coefficient for soil sites
Undamped natural period of vibration
VB
Design seismic base shear
Seismic weight of the structure
Wi
Seismic weight of floor
Zone factor
k1, k2, k3
Multiplication factors
Pz
Design wind pressure at height Z
Vb
Regional basic wind speed
Vz
Design wind velocity at height z
Fd
Force acting on pile dia.
Fs
Force acting on deck slab & beam
Uc
Current velocity at surface
Ub
Current velocity at bottom
CD
Drag Co-efficient
Ka
Co-efficient of active earth pressure
Asp
c/s area of spiral reinforcement
D'
Diameter of core of section
fc
28 day compressive strength of concrete
cc
Strain at peak stress for Concrete
sm
Strain at peak stress for Confining reinforcement
fyh
Yield stress of confining steel
Effective volume ratio of confining Steel
f'cc
Confined Concrete
cu
Ultimate concrete strain Capacity
Section Modulus of Pile
fcr
Tensile strength of Concrete
Ec
Modulus of elasticity of concrete
Yield strain
Lo
Deep water wave length
LA
Airy approximation of wave length
Effective length factor
Unbraced length
Radius of gyration
Critical elastic buckling coefficient
Fb
Allowable bending stress
Qf
Skin friction resistance
Qp
Total end bearing
Unit skin friction capacity
As
Side friction area of pile
Ap
Gross end area of pile
Po
effective overburden pressure at the point
Coefficient of lateral earth pressure
N , Nq , Nc
Bearing capacity factors depending upon the angle of internal friction
Ks
Modulus of sub grade reaction
As
Constant for either horizontal or vertical members
Bs
Coefficient for depth variation
Introduction
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 GENERAL
Harbours and jetties are lifeline structures as they provide a cost-effective method for
transporting large quantities of goods and raw materials into and out of a region. These
structures also play a significant role in the transportation system in terms of evacuation
of people before or after natural disasters, e.g. earthquakes and tsunamis. Further, these
are useful to supply relief materials after the natural disaster when other transportation
systems fail to deliver.This underlines the need to design these structures so that they can
withstand earthquakes.
In India, currently there is no code for earthquake-resistant design of Wharf or Jetty

(Port) structures. The existing earthquake-resistant design codes i.e. IS 1893-2002 and IS
13920-1993 are intended for building systems and are not sufficient for Port structures
which behave differently than buildings and bridges. Therefore, it is necessary to develop
codes and guidelines for the seismic design and retrofit of harbour structures in India to
minimize economic losses in future earthquakes. The performance based seismic design
method has taken in the seismic design standards of buildings and bridges. However,
wharf structure still uses conventional design methods.
The method of performance based seismic analysis of port structures depends on the type
of structure. Analysis methods available for this type of structures can be classified as
simplified analysis, simplified dynamic analysis and dynamic analysis. In simplified
analysis, the pile deck system of pile supported wharves/jetties is modelled by single
degree of freedom (SDOF) or multi degree of freedom (MDOF) system. Earthquake
motions are generally represented by the response spectrum method. In simplified
dynamic analysis, pushover analysis is performed by modelling the pile-supported
wharves as SDOF/MDOF system for evaluating ductility factor/strain limit. Soil
structure interaction (SSI) effects are not considered in the analyses. Displacement,
ductility factor, location of plastic hinge and buckling in the structures can be obtained
Performance based seismic design of Wharf (Jetty) Structure
Introduction
from such analysis. In dynamic analysis, SSI is considered using finite element method or
finite difference method.
1.2 OBJECTIVE
The main objective of this study is to understand philosophy of performance based
seismic design for Wharf (Jetty) Structure which takes into account the requirements of
seismic performance of a port structure against the probabilistic occurrence of earthquake
motion. The goal is to control the extent of hazards and losses due to earthquakes. The
performance based design guidelines for wharf structures are intended to allow a certain
extent of damage depending on the specific functions, the response characteristics of a
wharf structure and the probability of earthquake occurrence in the region. This method is
also intended to offer design engineers a choice of analysis methods ranging from simple
to sophisticated.
1.3 SCOPE OF WORK

In the present work, an attempt has been made to study the behavior, analysis and design
of vertical piled Wharf (Jetty) for Bulk ore Carrier located for seismic zone V using
Concrete Piles. The structure will design using Conventional seismic design and
evaluation will perform using performance based seismic design.
The scope of work is limited to bored cast-in-situ concrete piles.
In order to achieve the above objective, the present work includes:
Study various Indian and Foreign standards available for analysis on seismic design
of Wharf (Jetty) Structures.
Study various Indian and Foreign Standards available for performance based seismic
design of Wharf (Jetty) Structures.
Analysis and design using Conventional design for Wharf (Jetty) Structures for
seismic zone V.
Developing Moment-Curvature (M-) interaction diagrams for Piles.
Developing site specific spectra using PSHA maps for return period of 2500 years for
different sites.
Introduction
Evaluation using performance based seismic design approach for Wharf (Jetty)
Structures for different sites.
Comparison of Results for different sites for different levels of earthquake.
1.4 ORGANIZATION OF THE THESIS

This thesis has been organized in four chapters.
In the first chapter a general introduction, objective, and scope of the dissertation is
given.
In the second chapter Review of various literatures is presented. It briefs about what is
performance based seismic design and its requirement over conventional method. It also
includes parameters used worldwide for the method.
Third chapter is on the problem formulation, conventional seismic design and
performance based seismic design using pushover analysis of the selected Case study and
the results obtained.
Fourth chapter consists of comparison of results and conclusions derived from the results
and Future scope.
Review of Literature
CHAPTER 2
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
2.1 GENERAL WHY PERFORMANCE BASED DESIGN
Most failures of structures, from practical perspective, result from excessive
deformations, not catastrophic collapse. Design methods based on displacements and
ultimate stress states are desirable over conventional force-based design methods for
defining the comprehensive seismic performance of structures.
The performance based design is an emerging art. This is to overcome the limitation in
the conventional seismic design, which is based on the force balance against a design
seismic force. The performance based design is a user friendly approach to take into
account the requirements of the seismic performance of a structure against the
probabilistic occurrence of earthquake motions. In conventional seismic design, the
design is accomplished based on the force balance against a design seismic force but
design does not provide the information on the performance of a structure when
exceeding the limit of the force balance. In the performance based design, design
earthquake motions are defined in different levels (two or three) and the required
performance of a structure specified in terms of displacements and stress levels for
varying levels of the earthquake motions. The performance based design should be the
key to accomplishing higher reliability of a structure against earthquake without
appreciable increase in construction cost. If we demand that limit equilibrium not be
exceeded in conventional design for the relatively high intensity ground motions
associated with a very rare seismic event, the construction/retrofitting cost will most
likely be too high. If force-balance design is based on a more frequent seismic event, then
it is difficult to estimate the seismic performance of the structure when subjected to
ground motions that are greater than those used in design.
2.2 PERFORMANCE BASED SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS
2.2.1 Design Earthquake Motions
In performance-based design, appropriate levels of design earthquake motions must be
defined. Two levels of earthquake motions are typically used as design reference
motions, defined as follows:
Level 1 (L1): the level of earthquake motions that are likely to occur during the life-span
of the structure;
Level 2 (L2): the level of earthquake motions associated with infrequent rare events, that
Typically involve very strong ground shaking.
Earthquake motion that is likely to occur is express in Terms of Return Period. Return
period is inverse of Annual probability of Occurrence (Of getting exceedence). For
Example: Ground motion having 90% probability of not being exceeded in 50 years,
Also express as Ground motion having 10% probability of being exceeded in 50 years
Here 90% is Non-exceedence Probability and 50 years is Exposure Time or Design
Life of the structure.
So, Return Period=T/r*
Where,
T
r
= Exposure Time or Design life of Structure,

= -loge(NEP),
NEP = Non-exceedence Probability

For Example, 10% Occurrence Probability and exposure time of 50 years,
r=0.10
r* = -loge(NEP),
= -2.3026 x log10 (NEP)
(here, NEP=1-r)
= -2.3026 x log10 (0.9)

r* = 0.10536
So, Return Period = T/r*
=50/0.10536
=474.56 years 475 years
Similarly, for 50% Occurrence Probability, Return Period 75 years
and for 2% Occurrence Probability, Return Period 2475 years
According to IS: 1893 (Part 4):2005, Clause 6.1.3 and 8.1, the design approach should
ensure that structures possess minimum strength to withstand minor earthquake (< DBE)
which occur frequently, without damage; resist moderate earthquakes (DBE) without
significant structural damage though some non-structural damage may occur and
withstand a major earthquake (MCE) without collapse. For all important projects, and all
industries dealing with highly hazardous chemicals, evaluation of site-specific spectra for
earthquake with probability of exceedence of 2 percent in 50 years (MCE) and 10 percent
in 50 years (DBE) is recommended.
2.2.1.1 Site-specific spectra for Earthquake using probabilistic approach
For evaluation of site-specific spectra for earthquake probabilistic analysis carries out
which involves the evaluation of earthquake motion taking into consideration all possible
seismic sources possible in and around the region. Probability of earthquake occurrence
in each seismic source and the seismic motion are calculated and statistically
accumulated. There are various organizations and government bodies who develop these
maps, e.g. United States geological survey (USGS), Institute of seismic research (ISR),
National disaster management association (NDMA) etc.
NDMA develops Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis (PSHA) maps using catalogue of
Earthquakes of moment greater than four magnitudes in and around India assembled from
eighteen sources which includes 38860 events including Foreshocks and Aftershocks.
The results of the main report are in the form of tables and figures. The tables can be
directly used to construct the mean and percentile response spectra at A-type sites
anywhere in India. The data required would be the magnitude and hypo central distance
of the shock to the site.
Fig. 2.1 Short Period Spectral Acceleration at T = 0.2 second with Return Period of
2500 years on A-type Sites (5% damping)
(Reference: Final Report of NDMA)
Fig. 2.2 Long Period Spectral Acceleration at T = 1 second with Return Period of
2500 years on A-type Sites (5% damping)
(Reference: Final Report of NDMA)
Design Spectrum following International Building Code-2009, Classification of sites
based on the average shear wave velocity of the top 30 meters of the subsoil is popular
among engineers as a quick way of understanding how ground motion during an
earthquake differs on rock sites and soil sites. Standard documents such as IBC- 2009 can
be referred for classifying sites based on borehole data or velocity profiling. The standard
site classification definitions are shown in Table 2.1.
Table 2.1 Site Class Definitions (Ref: International Building Code IBC-2009)
Site Class
Average shear
wave velocity
(vs)
Average
standard
penetration
resistance (N1 or Nch)
Average Undrained shear

strength in the case of
cohesive soils (su)
A : Hard Rock
>1500 m/s
Not applicable
Not applicable
B : Rock
760 to 1500
m/s
370 to 760 m/s
Not applicable
Not applicable
>50
>100kPa
C :Very dense
soil or soft
rock
D : Stiff soil
E : Soft soil
F : Soils
requiring
site-specific
evaluation
180 to 370 m/s 15 to 50

50 to 100 kPa
<180 m/s
<15
<50 kPa
Any profile with more than 3 m of soil having Plasticity Index PI>20,
Moisture content 40% ,Average Undrained shear strength su < 24 kPa
Soils vulnerable to potential failure or collapse (liquefiable, quick- or
highly sensitive clays, collapsible weakly cemented soils)
More than 3 m of peat and/or highly organic clays
More than 7.5 m of very high plasticity clays (PI>75)
More than 37 m of soft to medium clays
When the soil properties are not known in sufficient details to determine the site class,
site class D is used unless it can be established that E or F type soil is likely to be present
at the site. After the local soil classification is carried out and the soil type is fixed up, the
design spectrum can be constructed following the approach of IBC briefly illustrated
below. IBC-2009 defines two site coefficients Fa and Fv corresponding to the 2500-year
spectral acceleration (5% damping) value for representative short and long period ranges
as shown in Tables 2.2 and 2.3.
Table 2.2 Site coefficients Fa for short period range
Site
Class
A
B
C
D
E
F
Mapped spectral response acceleration at short periods

Ss 0.25
Ss = 0.50
Ss = 0.75
Ss = 1.0
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.2
1.2
1.1
1.0
1.6
1.4
1.2
1.1
2.5
1.7
1.2
0.9
Site-specific analysis shall be performed
Ss 1.25
0.8
1.0
1.0
1.0
0.9
Table 2.3 Site coefficients Fv for 1-second period

Site
Class
A
B
C
D
E
F
Mapped spectral response acceleration at short periods

S1 0.1
S1 = 0.2
S1 = 0.3
S1 = 0.4
0.8
0.8
0.8
0.8
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.7
1.6
1.5
1.4
2.4
2.0
1.8
1.6
3.5
3.2
2.8
2.4
Site-specific analysis shall be performed
S1 0.5
0.8
1.0
1.3
1.5
2.4
2.2.1.2 Steps for Response Spectrum for a particular site

Step 1: Determine, maximum considered earthquake spectral response acceleration at
0.2s period and 1s period as
SMS = Fa Ss
(2.1)
SM1 = Fv S1
(2.2)
SS and S1 are mapped spectral accelerations for short period and 1 s period obtain from
figure 2.1 and 2.2 respectively.
Step 2: Determine design basis earthquake spectral response acceleration at 0.2s period
and 1s period using the equations
SDS = (2/3) SMS
(2.3)
SD1 = (2/3) SM1
(2.4)
10
Step 3: Calculate characteristic time periods To and Ts
To = 0.2
TS =
S D1
S DS
(2.5)
S D1
S DS
(2.6)
Step 4: Design spectra construction:

Let T is the fundamental time period of the structure
a). For periods less than or equal to To, design spectral response acceleration, Sa is
given by
Sa = 0.6(SDS/To) T + 0.4SDS
(2.7)
b). For periods greater than or equal to To and less than or equal to Ts,
Sa = SDS
(2.8)
c). For periods greater than or equal to Ts

Sa = SD1/T
(2.9)
2.2.1.3 Illustrative Example for a D-type site at Mundra

The latitude and longitude of the Mundra site considered are 22 43 88 N and 69 42
34 E respectively. Based on interpolation of PSHA results available at the four grid
points of the 0.2ox0.2o square encompassing the site, the values of Ss and S1 for A-type
rock level are obtained.
Table 2.4 PSHA at site for A-type rock level

Return Period Yrs.
2500
Ss(g)
0.40
S1(g)
0.10
It is given that the site has been classified as of D-type. Since the IBC procedure requires
the maximum considered earthquake spectral response acceleration at 0.2s period and 1s
period at Type B rock level, a correction factor of 1.25 has to be applied (Tables 2.2, 2.3).
11
The maximum considered earthquake spectral response acceleration at 0.2s period and 1s
period at Type B rock level are obtained as
Ss (g) = 0.4 x 1.25 = 0.5 and S1 (g) = 0.1 x 1.25 = 0.125
The site coefficients Fa and Fv for D-Type site are obtained as 1.6 and 2.4 from Tables
2.2 and 2.3, respectively. The short period and long period MCE spectral response
acceleration are obtained as
SMS (g) = 1.6 x 0.5 = 0.80 and SM1 (g) = 2.4 x 0.125 = 0.3
The design basis spectral accelerations are:
SDS (g) = 2/3 x 0.80 = 0.533 and SD1 (g) = 2/3 x 0.3 = 0.2
The characteristic time periods are:
T = 0.2
o
0.20
0.533
= 0.075 and T
0.20
0.533
= 0.3752
Table 2.5 Design spectra for D-type site in Mundra, Gujarat (5% damping)
Period
(s)
0
0.2
0.4
Spectral Acceleration (g) for

2500 years Return Period
0.213
0.533
0.500
Spectral Acceleration (g) for IS:18932002, Zone-V, Medium Soil

0.180
0.450
0.450
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2
2.2
2.4
2.6
2.8
3
3.2
3.4
3.6
3.8
4
0.333
0.250
0.200
0.167
0.143
0.125
0.111
0.100
0.091
0.083
0.077
0.071
0.067
0.063
0.059
0.056
0.053
0.050
0.408
0.306
0.245
0.204
0.175
0.153
0.136
0.122
0.111
0.102
0.094
0.087
0.082
0.077
0.072
0.068
0.064
0.061
12
Fig. 2.3 Design spectra for D-type site in Mundra, Gujarat (5% damping)
Note: ZPA is obtained as the ordinate at zero period. This need not be same as the
mapped PGA value.
2.2.2 Acceptable level of Damage

The seismic performance criteria are defined by specifying acceptable extent of damage
to a structure against different levels of design earthquake motions. The acceptable level
of damage is specified according to the specific needs of the users/owners of the facilities
and may be defined on the basis of the acceptable level of structural and operational
damage given in Table 2.6.
The Structural damage category is directly related to the amount of work needed to
restore the full functional capacity of the structure and is often referred to as direct loss
due to earthquakes. Structural damage depends on a structural type, for example extent of
damage to a gravity quaywall is mainly specified by displacement and Tilting. For Sheet
pile quaywall is mainly specified by stress states in the structure.
13
The operational damage category is related to the amount of work needed to restore full
or partial serviceability. Operational damage includes such effects of damage as threats to
human lives and properties, loss of function as an emergency base for transportation,
threats from hazardous materials, depending on functions of port structures.
Table 2.6 Acceptable level of damage in Performance based design by PIANC Code
Acceptable level of damage
Structural
Operational
Degree I: Serviceable
Minor or no damage
Little
or
no
loss
of
serviceability
Degree II: Repairable
Controlled damage*
Short-term
loss
of
serviceability**
Degree III: Near collapse
Degree IV: Collapse***
Extensive damage without Long-term or complete loss

collapse
of serviceability
Complete loss of structure
Complete
loss
of
serviceability
*With limited inelastic response and/or residual deformation
** Structure out of service for short to moderate time for repairs
*** Without significant effects on surroundings
2.2.3 Performance Grades

Once the design earthquake levels and acceptable damage levels have been properly
defined, the required performance of a structure may be specified by the appropriate
grades S, A, B and C as defined in Table 2.7. In performance based design, a structure is
designed to meet these performance grades.
Table 2.7 Performance grades S, A, B and C classified by PIANC Code

Performance grade
Design Earthquake
Level 1
Level 2
Grade S
Grade A
Grade B
Degree III: Near Collapse
Grade C
Degree IV: Collapse
14
The extent of damage shown in figure 2.4 is most qualitative terms into three degrees.
Grade S: The extent of damage remains degree I for Level 2 motion.
Grade A: The extent of damage remains degree I for Level 1 motion and degree II for
Level 2 motion.
Grade B: The extent of damage remains degree I for Level 1 motion and degree III for
Level 2 motion.
Grade C: The extent of damage remains degree II for Level 1 motion and Collapse of
structure, if occurs at Level 2 motion, does not have threats to the surrounding.
Grade C
Grade B
Grade A
Grade S
IV: Collapse
Level of Damage
III: Near Collapse
II: Repairable
I: Serviceable
L1
L2
Fig. 2.4 Schematic figure of performance grades S, A, B and C by PIANC Code

The performance grades defined above closely related to the importance of structures. A
structure with higher importance requires a higher performance grade. The importance of
port structures is generally measured by the seismic effects on serviceability and
structural damage. For example, the categorization of important structures specified in IS:
1893 (Part 4):2005, Clause 7.1 and in the current Japanese design code are Categorized
into four classes as shown in Table 2.8.
15
Grade C
Grade B
Grade A
Grade S
IV: Collapse
Structure a
Level of Damage
III: Near Collapse

Structure b
II: Repairable
I: Serviceable
L1
L2
Fig. 2.5 Example of Seismic performance

Structure a: Satisfy Performance Grade A,
Structure b: Satisfy Performance Grade B
Seismic performance is evaluated through seismic analyses and/or model tests of a
designed structure for varying levels of earthquake motions. The analyses and/or test
results in an extent of damage defined as a function of an earthquake motion level. This
curve will be called a seismic performance curve. Evaluation of seismic performance is
accomplished by determining whether the seismic performance curve is included in the
area of the performance grade required in Fig.2.4.For example, if a designed structure has
the seismic performance curve a in Fig.2.5, the curve is included in the area of
performance grade A through levels 1 and 2 earthquake motions. Thus, this structural
design assures the performance grade A. Similarly for performance curve b grade is B.
Selection of performance grade is done by Owners/users, while defining damage criteria
16
is responsibility of Engineers and Owners/users. Evaluation of seismic performance is
done by Engineers.
Table 2.8 Importance of structure defined in Different codes

According to IS: 1893 (Part 4):2005
Importance Definition (Seismic effect on
of Structure Structure)
Category 1 Structures whose failure can
cause conditions that can lead
directly or indirectly to
extensive loss of life/property
to population at large in the
areas adjacent to the plant
complex
Category 2 Structures whose failure can
cause conditions that can lead
directly or indirectly to serious
fire hazard/extensive damage
within the plant complex.
Structures, which are required
to
handle
emergencies
immediately
after
an
earthquake, are also included
Category 3
Category 4
According to current Japanese design code

Importance Definition (Seismic effect on
of Structure Structure)
Special
Structures having more serious
Class
effects for 1 to 3 than Class A
Class A
Structures
whose
failure, Class B
although expensive, does not
lead to serious hazard within
the plant complex
All other structures
Class C
Note: The term failure used in the definition

of categories implies loss of function and not
complete collapse. Pressurized equipment
where cracking can lead to rupture may be
categorized by the consequences of rupture
1. Structures resulting in
extensive loss of human
lives and properties upon
seismic damage
2. Key structures designed
serviceable for recovery
from earthquake disaster
handling
3. Structures
hazardous materials
4. Structures, if disrupted,
devastating the economic
and social activities of the
earthquake damage area
5. Structures, if damaged,
being difficult to restore
Structures other than those of
Special Class and Classes A and
C
Small easily restorable structure
other than those of Special Class
and Class A
_
17
2.3
Modeling Parameters
For performance based nonlinear analysis of Wharf (Jetty) Structure modeling is done
using sophisticated softwares readily available in the market. For modeling of structure
certain parameters are required as listed below:
1) Moment Curvature relationship for Piles,
2) Plastic Hinge Length,
3) Plastic Rotation,
4) Soil-Structure Interaction.
2.3.1 Moment Curvature relationship for Piles
Moment curvature analysis is a method to accurately determine the load-deformation

behavior of a concrete section using nonlinear material stress-strain relationship. For a
given axial load there exists an extreme compression fiber strain and a section curvature
( = /c in 1/length) at which the nonlinear stress distribution is in equilibrium with the
applied axial load. A unique bending moment can be calculated at this section curvature
from the stress distribution. The extreme concrete compression strain and section
curvature can be iterated until a range of moment-curvature values are obtained.
The plastic moment capacity, Mp, of the piles shall be calculated by Moment-Curvature
(M-) analysis using expected material properties. The analysis must be capable of model
Separately the core and cover concrete, and must be capable of representing the enhanced
concrete strength of the core concrete. The pile in-ground hinge section shall be analyzed
as a fully confined section due to the soil confinement. Reinforcement nonlinearity must
also be realistically modeled. Moment curvature analysis provides a curve showing the
moments associated with a range of curvatures for a cross section based on the principles
of strain compatibility and equilibrium of forces. The analysis shall include the pile axial
load. For our case, Moment curvature relationship for piles is derived using software
XTRACT.
18
2.3.2 Plastic hinge length
The plastic hinge length needs to be determined to convert the moment-curvature
relationship into a force-displacement or moment-plastic rotation relationship for the
nonlinear pushover analysis.
For concrete pile dowel connections, the piles plastic hinge length, Lp (above ground),
when the plastic hinge forms against a supporting member, may be taken as:
Lp = 0.08Lc + 0.022 fye dbl 0.044 fye dbl
(2.10)
Where,
Lc = distance from the critical section of the plastic hinge to the point of contra-flexure in
the pile
dbl = The diameter of the longitudinal reinforcement
fye = Expected yield strength of longitudinal reinforcement
For steel pipe sections connected to the deck by a concrete plug with dowels, the plastic
hinge length for the top of pile hinge may be taken as:
Lp = 0.3 fye dbl + dgap
(2.11)
Where,
dgap = The distance from the top of the steel shell to the soffit
The plastic hinge length Lp for all in-ground hinges may be taken as:
Lp = 2Dp
(2.12)
Where,
Dp = Pile diameter
2.3.3 Plastic Rotation

The plastic rotation can be determined from the following equations:
p,m = Lp p,m = Lp (m - y)
(2.13)
Where,
p,m = Plastic rotation for the OLE, CLE or DE strain limit
19
p,m = Plastic curvature for the OLE, CLE or DE strain limit

The idealized Moment-Rotation (M-) diagram is shown below:
Moment
p,m
p,m
Rotation
Fig. 2.6 Idealized Moment-Rotation Curve

u = Ultimate rotation
y = Idealized yield rotation= y Lsp
m = Total rotation at the OLE, CLE or DE strain limit
2.3.4 Soil-Structure Interaction

For Wharf (Jetty) structure, soil is modeled with springs below the dredge level. The
modulus of sub grade reaction for a pile is calculated using Vesics equation and
Newmarks distribution.
Vesics equation is as given below:
ks =
1.3 Es D 4 Es
12
D Eb I b 1 s 2
(2.14)
Where,
ks = Modulus of sub grade reaction
D = Pile diameter
Es = Youngs modulus of soil
20
Eb = Youngs modulus of the pile material

Ib = Moment of inertia of the pile cross section
s = Poissons ratio of the soil
The Top (KT), intermediate (KI) and bottom (KB) spring stiffness can be calculated using
Newmarks distribution.
KT = (DL/24)*(7ks(1)+6ks(2)-ks(3))
(2.15)
KI = (DL/12)*(ks(i-1)+10ks(i)+ks(i+1))
(2.16)
KB = (DL/24)*(7ks(n)+6ks(n-1)-ks(n-2))
(2.17)
Where L is the segment length
2.4 Analysis Methods for Wharf (Jetty) Structure
2.4.1 Simplified Analysis
Simplified analysis of open pile/frame structures is typically done by idealizing the

pile/deck system of pile-supported wharves by a single degree of freedom (SDOF) or
multi-degree of freedom (MDOF) system. In this analysis, earthquake motions are
generally represented by the response spectrum. Structural and geotechnical conditions
are represented by a resonant frequency and damping factor of the deck-pile system. A
ductility factor may also be introduced. The movement of the dike/slope is generally
assumed to be negligible. Results of the SDOF/MDOF analysis are useful to evaluate
approximate limit state response of a pile-deck system. This method is for appropriate for
evaluating approximate threshold level and/or elastic limit and magnitude of
displacements
2.4.2 Simplified Dynamic Analysis
In simplified dynamic analysis of open pile/frame structures, the SDOF or MDOF

analysis of pile-deck structure is combined with pushover analysis for evaluating the
ductility factor/strain limit. The movement of the dike/slope is often assumed to be
negligible but sometimes estimated by a sliding block type analysis. Movement of a pilesupported deck could thereby be estimated by summing-up the dike/slope movement and
21
structural deformation. Soil-structure interaction effects are not taken into account, and
thus there is a limitation in this analysis. Interaction between the pile-supported wharves
and cranes can be taken into account by MDOF analysis. Displacement, ductility factor/
strain, and location of yielding or buckling in the structure are generally obtained as a
result of the analysis of this category. Failure modes with respect to sliding of retaining
walls/dikes/slopes are not evaluated but assumed and there is, thus, another limitation in
this type of analysis. Using this method it is possible to evaluate extent of displacement/
stress/strain based on assumed failure modes.
2.4.3 Dynamic Analysis
Dynamic analysis is based on soil-structure interaction, generally using FEM/ FDM

methods. Similar comments to those related to the dynamic analysis of earth/retaining
structures apply also to the open pile structures. Using this method it is possible to
evaluate both failure modes and extent of displacement/stress/strain.
Table 2.9 Types of analysis related to performance grades
Types of Analysis
Performance Grade
Grade C
Grade B
Grade A
Grade S
Simplified Analysis:
Appropriate for evaluating approximate
threshold level and/or elastic limit and orderof-magnitude displacements.
Simplified Dynamic Analysis:
Of broader scope and more reliable. Possible
to
evaluate
extent
of
displacement/stress/ductility/strain based on
assumed failure modes.
Dynamic Analysis:
Most sophisticated. Possible to evaluate both
failure
modes
and
extent
of
displacement/stress/ductility/strain.
Index:
Standard/Final Design
Preliminary design or low level of excitations
22
Design Earthquakes
(Levels 1 & 2)
Importance of Structure
Define Performance Criteria

Modify/Up-grade
Structural Design &
Liquefaction
Remediation Measures
Evaluate Seismic Performance (Displacement/Stress)
No
Is performance criteria Satisfied?
Yes
End of Seismic Design
Fig. 2.7 Flowchart for Performance Based Seismic Design for Wharf (Jetty Structure)
23
2.5
Performance Based Seismic Design-List of Standards available Worldwide
A list of the primary codes and guidelines for seismic design of port structures around the
world is listed below.
1. PIANC-Seismic design guidelines for Port Structures, Working Group No.34 of
the Maritime Navigation Commission International Navigation Association
2. Seismic Guidelines for Ports, ASCE-Technical Council on Lifeline Earthquake
Engineering, Port Committee (Werner, 1998)
3. Technical standards for Port and Harbor Facilities in Japan (Ministry of
Transport,Japan,2009)
4. Recommendations of the Committee for Waterfront Structures Harbors and
Waterways (EAU,Germany,1996)
5. US Navy seismic design guidelines (Ferritto,1997a,b)
6. California Marine Oil Terminal Standard (California State Lands Commission,
USA, May 2000)
7. ROM 0.6:Acciones y efectos Sismicos en las Obras Maritimas y Portuarias
(Puertos del Estado, Madrid, Spain, 2000)
8. New Turkish Seismic design code for Port Structures, September, 2008
9. European Pre-standard, Euro code 8-Design provisions for earthquake resistance
of structures (CEN, 1994)
Part 1-1: General rules-Seismic actions and general requirements for structures,
ENV-1998-1-1, May 1994
Part 5: Foundations, retaining structures and geotechnical aspects ENV 1998-5,
June 1994
10. New Zealand Standards,
NZS 4203-1992 General Structural Design Loadings for Buildings
NZS 3101-1995, Part-1 The Design of Concrete Structures
Transit New Zealand (TNZ) Bridge Design Manual
24
Problem Formulation/Case Study
CHAPTER 3
PROBLEM FORMULATION/ CASE STUDY
3.1
GENERAL
This chapter presents analysis of an open pile jetty, with vertical piles using concrete as material.
Analysis is done using SAP2000. The procedure adopted for the present task consists of the
following.
Selection of a space frame for the present task.
Calculation of Dead, Live, Berthing, Mooring, Seismic, Wind, Wave, Current,

Hydrodynamic, Temperature and Earth pressure forces to be applied on the space frame.
Analysis of selected space frame using the software SAP2000.
Design of Piles using Conventional seismic design.
Evaluation of Piles using Performance based seismic design.
3.2
SELECTION OF SPACE FRAME
For the present work, following data has been formulated. The description is given below:
A 3D space frame is considered with beam elements to represent a unit of 58.5 m length of the
berth. The piles are interconnected at top by Cross beams and deck slab elements. Piles are
supported by lateral springs representing soil.
Pile members are idealized to represent the total length of the pile. Lateral spring supports are
applied over the depth of pile below the rock bund (starting from 2 m below the top of the slope)
at every 1 m interval. A combined lateral (only in perpendicular direction to the berthing line)
spring constant (support) is considered in the extreme land pile row at the tie rod level to
represent the tie-rod and Anchor wall system. This is also representative of the lateral restraint
through the passive pressure mobilized by the 4 m deep beam provided along Grid-E. Since
Bracket Wall is not considered in the structure, no longitudinal restraint at deck level is
considered in the model.
25
Fig. 3.1 Jetty Layouts (Plan & Elevation)
26

3.2.1
Site Condition
Site Location
Mundra
Latitude & Longitude
22 43 88 N and 69 42 34 E
3.2.2 Soil Profile (Table-3.1)

Soil
Soil Description
Unit
Elevation (m)
Thk.
Cohesion
Ang. of
Sub. Density
From
To
(m)
(c) kN/m2
Fri.()
() kN/m3
Unit 1
Filled up Soil
+6.86
+5.06
1.80
Unit 2
Soft Silt & Clay
+5.06
+0.16
4.90
Unit 3
Medium Sandy Silt
+0.16
-1.54
1.70
5.89
24
7.36
Unit 4
Dense fine Sand
-1.54
-15.04 13.50
32
10.40
Unit 5
Hard Silt & Clay
-15.04 -18.14 3.10
39.24
21
10.10
Unit 6
Lime cemented Sand
-18.14 -27.14 9.00
38
13.15
Unit 7
Hard Silt & Clay
-27.14 -43.44 16.30
49.05
21
9.81
Unit 8
Lime Stone
-43.44 -48.64 5.20
38
13.15
Unit 9
Hard Silt & Clay
-48.64 -50.14 1.50
46.11
20
9.81
3.2.3
Ship Dimensions
Bulk ore carrier ship of DWT 1, 25,000 is considered.

Overall Length
280.00 m
Breadth of ship
42.0 m
Height of ship
24.5 m
Light vessel draft
5.0 m
Fully loaded draft
15.0 m
3.2.4 Jetty Dimensions

Length of jetty
618 m
Width of jetty
48.5 m
Longitudinal spacing of piles
6.5 m
Transverse spacing of piles
7.6 & 11.2 m
Spacing of expansion joint
58.5 m
27

3.2.5
Levels
All levels are related to Chart Datum (= +0.00m)

Abbreviation CD = Chart Datum
Sea water levels
HAT
+6.5 m
MHHT
+5.4 m
MLLT
+1 m
Deck level
+7.5 m
Seabed level (excl. scour)
-19.0m
Scour level
-20.0m
Pile fixation point
-25.0m
3.3 GENERATING THE STRUCTURAL MODEL

In the present task, software SAP2000 has been used for performing interactive analysis of this
structure. The details for generating the structural model in the software are given as below:
3.3.1
Material Properties Used
Grade of Concrete (fck):
M40
Grade of Reinforcing Steel (fy):
Fe500
3.3.2
Element Specifications
Piles A1 to A9: - 1.30 m dia.

Piles B1 to B9: - 1.00 m dia.
Piles C1 to C9: - 1.00 m dia.
Piles D1 to D9: - 1.20 m dia.
Piles E1 to E9: - 1.20 m dia.
Beams in line A and line D in longitudinal direction: - 1.0 m x 2.0 m
Beams in line B and line C in longitudinal direction: - 0.5 m x 0.5 m
Beam in line E in longitudinal direction: - 1.0 m x 4.0 m
Beams in line 1 to 9 in Transverse direction: - 1.0 m x 2.0 m
28

Fender Beams: - 3.0 m x 1.0 m
All Secondary Beams: - 2.0 m x 0.5 m
Deck slab: - 1.0 m x 0.5 m
3.4
LOAD DATA
In the present structural model, the loads have been assigned under the following categories:
1
Dead Load
Live Load
Mooring Load
Earthquake in X direction
Earthquake in Y direction
Wind Force Operational X direction
Wind Force Extreme X direction
10 Wave Force Operational Y direction

11 Current Force Operational Y direction
12 Hydrodynamic Force in X direction
13 Hydrodynamic Force in Y direction
14 Temperature
15 Earth Pressure
3.4.1
Dead Load
The following material Unit weights have been used to find Dead loads.
Reinforced Concrete 25.0 kN/m3
Reinforcing Steel
3.4.2
78.5 kN/m3
Live Load
As per IS: 4651 (Part III) 1974, page-5, uniform vertical live load = 30 kN/m2 considered.
So, equivalent U.D.L. = 30 x 6.5 = 195 kN/m run on beams in X-direction.
29

3.4.3
Load is calculated as per IS: 4651(Part-III), cl. 5.2, page-6

Berthing Energy, E = WD. V2. Cm. Ce. Cs / 2g
We have considered Dead Weight Tonnage (DWT) = 1, 25,000 T
DT/DWT = 1.17
(as per Cl.3.1.2, Page-5)
Displacement Tonnage (DT) of the vessel = 1, 46,250 T

We have considered Ship dimensions,
Length of vessel (L) = 280.0 m
Beam of the vessel (B) = 42.0 m
Draught of vessel (D) = 5.0 m
Approach velocity (v) = 0.1 m/sec (For Shelter & Favorable Condition) (as per Table-2, Page-8)
Unit weight of water (w) = 1.03 T/m3
(as per Cl. 5.2.1.2.b, Page-9)
Angle of vessel approach () = 10 deg.

Acceleration due to gravity (g) = 9.81 m/s2
Softness coefficient (Cs) = 0.95
(as per Cl. 5.2.1.4, Page-10)
Mass Coefficient (Cm) = 1+ (/4 .D2. L. w) / WD = 1.35

Radius of gyration (r = 0.2L) = 56
l = L/4 = 70. So, l/r = 1.25
Eccentricity Coefficient (Ce) = (1 + (L/r) 2. sin2 ) / (1 + (L/r) 2) = 0.41
Berthing Energy (E) = WD. V2. Cm. Ce. Cs / 2g = 39.06 T. m
Design Energy = 1.4. E = 54.68 T. m
Twin cell fenders of MCS 1450 are provided.
30
Fig. 3.2 & 3.3 Fender Rubber Grades and Generalized Performance Curve
(Source : www.maritimeinternational.com)
Transverse Load = 900 kN

Longitudinal Load = 270 kN (Generally Taken as 30% of Trans. Load)
3.4.4
Transverse Load = 450 kN (On each Fender)

Longitudinal Load = 135 kN (On each Fender)
(Generally Taken as 30% of Trans. Load)
31

Fender Spacing as per Frentek Marine Systems Catalogue
Assuming two fenders are taking Berthing Energy
Taking Maritimes International's Cell type fender of MCS 1450
Berthing Energy (E) = 54.68 T.m
Energy per Fender (E/2) = 27.34 T.m
Projection of Fender (H) = 1.45 m
Outer Diameter (D) = 1.85 m
Uncompressed fender projection in adding rubber panel (PU) = 1.45 m
Length of vessel (L) = 280.0 m
Beam of the vessel (B) = 42.0 m
Fender deflection (f) = 0.52 x H = 0.754 m
Clearance distance (C) (5% to 15% of uncompressed fender projection) = 0.07 m
Bow radius (RB) = 0.5. [(B/2) + (L2/8B)] = 127.17 m
Centre to centre spacing of fenders (S) = 2. [RB2-(RB-PU+ f +C) 2]0.5 = 25.15 m
Provide Fenders at spacing of 6.5 x 3 = 19.5 m c/c
Figure 3.4 Fender Dimensions & Spacing

3.4.5
Mooring Load
Load is calculated as per IS: 4651(Part-III), cl. 5.3, page-10 and BS: 6349 (Part-I), cl.4.2.2,
Page-92, 93.
32

Mooring load applied to model in terms of Joint load @ Bollard.
Mooring Load mainly generate due to following two Forces:
(1). Due to Wind
(2). Due to Current
(1). Due to Wind
FTW = CTW. A. AL. w2. 10-4
Where,
CTW = Transverse wind co-efficient = 2 (At angle of bow 120`)
(as per Fig.27, Page-93)
A = Density of Air = 1.25 kg/m3

Length of Ship (L) = 280 m
Ship above W.L. (d) = 6 m
AL = Longitudinal projected area of ship above W.L. = 1680 m2
w = Design wind speed = 50 m/sec (Operating Condition)
FTW = Transverse wind force in kN = 1050 kN = 105 T
Considering wind force will be taken by two bollards
So, Per Bollard FTW = 52.5 T
(2). Due to Current
FTC = CCT. CTC . .LBD. Dm . Vc2. 10-4
FLC = CCL. CLC . .LBP. Dm. Vc2. 10-4
Where,
CTC = Transverse current force co-efficient = 1.6 (Aft)
(as per Fig.26, Page.93)
CTC = Transverse current force co-efficient = 0.95 (For)

CLC = Longitudinal current force co-efficient = 0.4
CCT = Transverse Depth correction Factor = 6
CCL = Longitudinal Depth correction Factor = 0.731
= Density of water = 1.03 T/m3
LBP = Length between perpendicular of ship = 90 m
Dm = Mean draught of ship (For Fully Located) = 6 m
Dm = Mean draught of ship (For Lighter Located) = 3 m
33

Vc = Avg. current velocity of mean depth = 1.143 m/sec
FTC = Transverse Current Force = 414.19 kN = 41.419 T
Total Force in One Bollard = 73.21 T
(Using BS Code)
FLC = Longitudinal Current Force = 21.25 kN = 2.125 T

But, As per IS: 4651-(Part-III), For 1, 25,000 DWT = 100 T
Increase 25% for impact = 125 T = 1250 kN
(Using IS Code)
So, Take Bollard pull = 125 T

3.4.6
Earthquake Load in X direction (Transverse direction)
Load is calculated as per IS: 1893-2002, cl. 6.4.2

Seismic effect on live load is applied for 50% of the total L.L.
Mundra falls under Seismic Zone V (Ref. Fig.1 of IS: 1893-2002)
Basic Seismic Co-efficient (Z)
= 0.36
Importance Factor (I)
= 1.5
Response reduction Factor (R)
= 3.0
Height of structure (h)
= 51.5 m
Base dimension in x-direction (dx)
= 41.2 m
Time Period (T)
= 0.72 seconds
Sa/g =
= 1.888
Horizontal seismic co-efficient, Ah = (Z/2). (I/R). (Sa/g) = 0.170

Hence Earthquake load on structure in the given direction is 0.170.W
3.4.7
Earthquake Load in Y direction (Longitudinal direction)
Load is calculated as per IS: 1893-2002, cl. 6.4.2

Seismic effect on live load is applied for 50% of the total L.L.
34

Mundra falls under Seismic Zone V (Ref. Fig.1 of IS: 1893-2002)
Basic Seismic Co-efficient (Z)
= 0.36
Importance Factor (I)
= 1.5
Response reduction Factor (R)
= 3.0
Height of structure (h)
= 51.5 m
Base dimension in x-direction (dx)
= 52 m
Time Period (T)
= 0.64 seconds
Sa/g = 1.36/T
= 2.125
Horizontal seismic co-efficient, Ah = (Z/2). (I/R). (Sa/g) = 0.191

Hence Earthquake load on structure in the given direction is 0.191.W
3.4.8
Wind Force Operational Condition in X direction
Load is calculated as per IS: 875 (Part-III)-1984

For Operating Condition
Pz = 0.6. Vz2
Vz = Vb. k1. k2. k3
Where,
Basic Wind Speed (Vb) = 22.4 m/sec
Co-efficient (k1) = 1
Design Wind Speed (Vz) = 22.4 m/sec
Design Pressure (Pz) = 301.06 N/m2
Dia of Pile (D) = 1.3 m
Ht. of deck slab & Beam (d) = 2.0 m
Force acting on pile dia. (Fd) = Pz. D = 0.39 kN/m
Force acting on deck slab & beam (Fs) = 0.60 kN/m
3.4.9
Wind Force Extreme Condition in X direction
Load is calculated as per IS: 875 (Part-III)-1984
35

For Operating Condition
Pz = 0.6. Vz2
Vz = Vb. k1. k2. k3
Where,
Basic Wind Speed (Vb) = 60 m/sec
Design Wind Speed (Vz) = 60 m/sec
Design Pressure (Pz) = 2160 N/m2
Ht. of deck slab & Beam (d) = 2.0 m
Force acting on pile dia. (Fd) = Pz. D = 2.81 kN/m
Force acting on deck slab & beam (Fs) = 4.32 kN/m
Table-3.2 Summary of Wind Force
a) Wind forces on Piles (kN/m)
Pile Diameter (m)
Basic Wind Speed (m/sec)
1.30
1.00
1.20
Operational (kN/m)
22.40
0.39
0.30
0.36
Extreme (kN/m)
60.00
2.81
2.16
2.59
b) Wind forces on Cross beam (kN/m)

Operational wind force = 0.60 kN/m
Extreme wind force = 4.32 kN/m
3.4.10 Wave and Current Forces in Y direction
CM and CD are calculated taking keulegan carpenter number in account.
Marine growth of 50 mm is considered on piles.
Stokes 3rd order theory is used to calculate kinematics of waves.
36
a) Grid-A Piles
Current force on piles
Diameter of Pile = 1.3 m
With Marine Growth of 50 mm = 1.4 m
Current velocity at MSL is 3.5 knots (MSL is taken as mean of high water and low water spring)
Uc, Current velocity at surface = 1.80 m/s
Ub, Current velocity at bottom = 0.00 m/s
Dia. Of Pile (m) = 1.4 m
CD, Drag Co-efficient = 0.7
, Density of Seawater = 1005 kg/m3
Force (Surface) 0.5. CD. .D.Uc2 = 1.60 kN/m
Force (Bottom) = 0.00 kN/m
Inertia Force
Wave Height (H) = 1 m
Wave Period (T) = 8 sec
Wave Length (L) = 90.24
Water Depth (d) = 21.4 wrt MSL
Water partial Acceleration (ax) = 0.35 m/s2
Inertia Co-efficient from keulegan carpenter number = 2.2
FI = Cm. . (/4). D2. ax = 1.19 kN/m
Drag Force
Dia. of Pile = 1.4 m
Wave Length (L) = 90.24
Water partial velocity = 0.44 m/sec
Drag Co-efficient (CD) = 0.7
37

FD = 0.5. CD. .D.U2 = 0.10 kN/m
FTOTAL (Surface) = 2.79 kN/m
FTOTAL (Bottom) = 0.00 kN/m
FRESULTENT = 29.87 kN
Resultant force acting at 7.1 m below MSL
MSL
21.4 m
Water particle kinematics are very less at sea bed, hence wave forces are negligible at bottom
drag force is minimum on pile, hence force acting on pile is taken as sum of Inertia & Current
Force
b) Grid-B Piles
Inertia Force
38

Wave Length (L) = 80
Water Depth (d) = 14 wrt MSL
FI = Cm. . (/4). D2. ax = 0.86 kN/m
Drag Force
Wave Length (L) = 80
FD = 0.5. CD. .D.U2 = 0.10 kN/m
MSL
14 m
Force
39
c) Grid-C Piles
Inertia Force
Wave Length (L) = 53.11 m
FI = Cm. . (/4). D2. ax = 1.28 kN/m
Drag Force
40

FD = 0.5. CD. .D.U2 = 0.12 kN/m
MSL
10 m
Force
d) Grid-D Piles
Inertia Force
41

Water Depth (d) = 4.1 m wrt MSL
FI = Cm. . (/4). D2. ax = 2.58 kN/m
Drag Force
FD = 0.5. CD. .D.U2 = 0.41 kN/m
MSL
4.1 m
Force
42
3.4.11 Hydrodynamic Force due to Earthquake in X direction (Transverse)

As per IS: 1893-1984, Cl.6.5.2
Horizontal Force, F = Ce. h.We
Diameter of Pile with Marine Growth = 1.4 m
Radius of enveloping cylinder, R = 0.7 m
Height of submerged portion of Pile, H = 22.8 m
H/R = 22.8/0.7 = 32.6
Ce (Co-efficient corresponding to H/R) = 0.73
Weight of water of the enveloping cylinder, We = /4 x 1.4 x 1.4 x 22.8 x 1 = 361.51 kN
Total force, F = Ce. h.We =0.73 x 0.21 x 361.5 = 55.40 kN
Table-3.3 Hydrodynamic Force due to Earthquake in X direction
Grid
Pile Dia. (m)
1.3
1.0
1.0
1.2
Submerged Height (m)
22.8
16.9
12.9
7.0
Total Force (kN)
55.4
25.4
19.35
14.7
Distance from top (m)
13.0
10.0
8.0
5.0
3.4.12 Hydrodynamic Force due to Earthquake in Y direction (Longitudinal)

As per IS: 1893-1984, Cl.6.5.2
Horizontal Force, F = Ce. h.We
Diameter of Pile with Marine Growth = 1.4 m
Radius of enveloping cylinder, R = 0.7 m
Height of submerged portion of Pile, H = 22.8 m
H/R = 22.8/0.7 = 32.6
Ce (Co-efficient corresponding to H/R) = 0.73
Weight of water of the enveloping cylinder,
We = /4 x 1.4 x 1.4 x 22.8 x 1 = 361.51 kN
Total force, F = Ce. h.We =0.73 x 0.105 x 361.5 = 27.78 kN
43

Table-3.4 Hydrodynamic Force due to Earthquake in Y direction
3.4.13
Grid
Pile Dia. (m)
1.3
1.0
1.0
1.2
Submerged Height (m)
22.8
16.9
12.9
7.0
Total Force (kN)
27.8
12.7
9.7
7.35
Distance from top (m)
13.0
10.0
8.0
5.0
Temperature Load
Axial Elongation, which is the change in temperature that will cause axial elongation in members
or uniform volume expansion in elements, difference of 20 deg., is considered.
3.4.14
Earth pressure
Soil Parameters
Angle of internal friction () = 34 deg.
Bulk density of Soil (b) = 19 kN/m3
Submerged Density of Soil = 8.95 kN/m3
Co-efficient of active earth pressure, Ka = (1-sin) / (1+sin) = 0.283
Depth of Deep Beam (D) = 4.0 m
h1 = 2.20 m
h2 = 1.30 m
Active Earth pressure

a-s = 0 at Surface
a-h1 = Ka. h1. b = 11.82 kN/m2
a-h2 = Ka. (h1. b + h2. sub) = 15.11 kN/m2
Pa1 = h1. (a-s+a-h1)/2 = 13.01 kN/m
Pa2 = h2. (a-h1+a-h2)/2 = 17.52 kN/m
Total Earth Pressure / metre turn of Beam = 30.53 kN/m
44

FFL CD +8.5 m
h1
MHWS CD+5.8 m
h2
CD +4.5 m
Active Pressure
Deep Beam
Figure 3.5 Soil pressure on Deep Beam at Grid E
3.5
Load Combinations
Please see Annexure-1 for load combinations.

3.6
For Wharf (Jetty) structure, soil is modeled with springs below the dredge level. The modulus of
sub grade reaction for a pile is calculated using Newmarks distribution. Please see Annexture-2
for Horizontal sub-grade modulus and Passive resistance. Also please see Annexture-3 for
Design of piles.
3.7
Seismicity
Level 1 (L1): The level of earthquake motions that are likely to occur during the life-span of the
structure with a probability of exceedence of 50% having a return period of 75 years during the
life-span is considered.
Level 2 (L2): The level of earthquake motions associated with infrequent rare events, that
Typically involve very strong ground shaking with a probability of exceedence of 2% having a
return period of 2475 years (nearly 2500 years) during the life-span is considered.
45

The structure is to be assessed for Level 2 (Damage control) response only. Some tentative
conclusions related to a level 1 earthquake whose intensity for this case study is assumed to be
30% that of level 2 of earthquake will be made.
Please see Annexture-4 for design spectra for different sites considered for analysis.
3.8
Structural Weight
E
Landward Edge
26.5 m
19.97 m
15.96
m
9.85 m
4.45 m
Rockfill line 1: 1.90

Dredge line 1: 4.00
2.8 m
11.2 m
7.6 m
11.2 m
11.2 m
4.5 m
Figure 3.6 Wharf (Jetty) Dimensions (Elevation)

For computation of the effective structural weight, one third of the pile weight for a length of pile
from the deck soffit to 5D below the rip-rap surface is added to the deck weight.
Consider Following DATAs for weight calculation:
Tributary length of the Wharf (B) = 6.5 m
Width of the Wharf (D) = 48.5 m
46

Thickness of Deck (d) = 0.5 m
Unit Density for Concrete (w) = 25 kN/m3
Live load on deck (wLL) = 4 kN/m2 (For piping and Equipment load as per TR-2103-SHR, Vol-I)
Fraction of Pile weight taken (p) = 0.333 (1/3 of pile weight)
Table-3.5 Pile load calculations
Pile
Dist.
Dia. of
5 x Dia.
Pile Length
Run
Load (kN)
Grid
(m)
Pile (m)
(m)
(m)
(kN/m)
26.50
1.30
6.50
33.00
33.18
365.01
19.97
1.00
5.00
24.97
19.63
163.43
15.96
1.00
5.00
20.96
19.63
137.18
9.85
1.20
6.00
15.85
28.27
149.38
4.45
1.20
6.00
10.45
28.27
98.49
Total = 913.50
Deck Weight:
Dead Load = 3940.625 kN
Live load =
630.5 kN
Total Load = 4571.13 kN

Pile Weight:
One third of the pile weight for a length of pile from the deck soffit to 5D below the rip-rap
surface is added to the deck weight.
Total Pile Load calculated = 913.50 kN
Total Weight of Wharf taken = Total Deck load + Pile Load
= 4571.13 kN + 913.50 kN
= 5484.622 kN / 6.5 m
Center of Mass:
Center of mass is calculated from landward edge (from pile grid E).
So, X = 25.462 m (From Landward edge of wharf)
47

3.9
Pile Moment-Curvature characteristics
Moment-curvature relationship for piles calculated using software XTRACT. Total axial force
on piles is estimated to very between about 0, 500, 1000, 2000, 3000, 4000, 5000 and 6000 kN.
The program used for moment-curvature analysis include the effects of enhancement to concrete
compression strength and ultimate compression strain capacity resulting from confinement
provided by the spirals and differentiate between the unconfined cover concrete and the confined
core.
Figure 3.7 Moment-curvature Curve for Pile grid E for pitch of 65 mm using 12 mm diameter
48
Figure 3.8 Moment-curvature Curve for Pile grid E for pitch of 250 mm using 12 mm
diameter
Figure 3.9 Material property input in XTRACT for generating Stress-Strain Curve
49

Here note that the ultimate curvatures are much lower for the section in above figure 3.8 as
compare to figure 3.7. The ultimate curvature is reduced as the axial force on the section
increases. However, over the range of axial load considered, the influence of axial force on
moment capacity and ultimate curvature is not great.
3.10
Ultimate Concrete Strain Capacity
Typically the ultimate compressive concrete strain of unconfined concrete is about 0.0035 for
use in computing flexural strength as reported by Pristley et al (1992). For Confined concrete
following equation from TR-2103-SHR, Volume-I, Equation (3-26), Page.3-62 may be used.
cu = 0.004 + (1.4. s. fyh. sm)/f'cc 0.005
Where,
D = Diameter of Pile = 1300 mm
= Diameter of spiral reinforcement = 12 mm
Asp = c/s area of spiral reinforcement = 113.10 mm2
c = Cover to spiral reinforcement = 75 mm
S = Pitch of spiral reinforcement =
For Case-I: 65 mm,
For Case-II: 250 mm
D' = Diameter of core of section = 1138 mm
fc = 28 day compressive strength of concrete = 40 N/mm2
cc = Strain at peak stress for Concrete = 0.004406
sm = Strain at peak stress for Confining reinforcement = 0.1
fyh = Yield stress of confining steel = 415 N/mm2
Effective volume ratio of confining Steel (s) = 4. Asp/D'.S =
For Case-I: 0.00612,
For Case-II: 0.00159
Confined Concrete (f'cc) = fc (cc/0.01+0.8) = 49.624 N/mm2,
So, Ultimate concrete strain Capacity (cu) = For Case-I: 0.01116,
For Case-II: 0.00586.
50

For the damage control limit state for the section with pitch of 65 mm ultimate concrete strain
capacity is 0.01116. This exceeds the design level of 0.008 recommended for in-ground hinges
as described on page-3-62 as described below. However, for safety evaluation of the existing
structure, the higher strain corresponds to unacceptable damage is probably more appropriate
than the lower limit, which is intended to guard against long term corrosion following a seismic
event.
cu = 0.004 + (1.4. s. fyh. sm)/f'cc 0.005 as per page-3-62.
Concrete extreme fiber compression strain:
Pile/deck hinge:
Value given by above equation, but <0.025
In-ground hinge:
Value given by above equation, but<0.008
Above equation defines a safe lower bound estimate of the ultimate compression strain of
concrete confined by hoops or spirals. Actual compression failure initialed by fracture of spiral
or hoop reinforcement will typically not occur until strains are on average 50% larger than the
value given by equation providing an adequate margin for uncertainty.
Curvatures at the serviceability limit state are based on strain limits sufficiently low so that
spalling of cover concrete will not occur under the Level 1 earthquake and any residual cracks
will be fine enough so that remedial grouting will not be needed.
Concrete extreme fiber compression strain: 0.004
Reinforcing steel tension strain: 0.010
3.11
For pile, the first data point calculated corresponds to an extreme fiber compression strain of
0.001. It is useful to calculate the moment and curvature corresponding to cracking:
Diameter of Pile (D) = 1.30 m
Concrete Strength (fck) = 40 N/mm2
C/S area of Pile (A) = 1.327 m2
51

Section Modulus of Pile (Z) = 0.216 m3
Tensile strength of Concrete (fcr) = 0.7. fck = 4427.2 kN/m2
Modulus of elasticity of concrete (Ec) = 5000. fck = 31622776.6 kN/m2
Table-3.6 Cracking Moment and Curvature
3.12
Force (kN)
Stress (kN/m2)
Mcr = f. Z (kN.m)
= f/Ec
cr = /(D/2)
4427.189
954.900
1.40E-04
5.3846E-05
500
4803.887
1036.150
1.52E-04
5.8428E-05
1000
5180.585
1117.400
1.64E-04
6.3009E-05
2000
5933.981
1279.900
1.88E-04
7.2173E-05
3000
6687.377
1442.400
2.11E-04
8.1336E-05
4000
7440.773
1604.900
2.35E-04
9.0499E-05
5000
8194.170
1767.400
2.59E-04
9.9662E-05
Moment and Curvature Summary
Moment-curvature curves are plotted in figure 3.7 and 3.8. A summary of moment-curvature
corresponding to serviceability and damage control limit states is listed below:
Serviceability limit states are based on
c = 0.004 and s = 0.010
Table-3.7 Moment and Curvature for different confinement
Confinement
Force, P (kN)
Serviceability
Damage Control
Moment, M
Curvature,
Moment, M
Curvature,
(kN.m)
(1/m)
(kN.m)
(1/m)
7000
0.013
8000
0.069
500
7100
0.014
8100
0.067
1000
7300
0.015
8250
0.065
2000
7600
0.013
8500
0.062
3000
8000
0.015
8900
0.0575
4000
8250
0.011
9000
0.056
5000
8500
0.010
9350
0.053
6000
8750
0.010
9550
0.051
12mm@65
mm
52

Confinement
Force, P (kN)
Serviceability
Damage Control
Moment, M
Curvature,
Moment, M
Curvature,
(kN.m)
(1/m)
(kN.m)
(1/m)
7100
0.014
7200
0.027
500
7250
0.015
7350
0.020
1000
7500
0.014
7550
0.023
2000
7750
0.013
7500
0.022
3000
8000
0.014
7750
0.022
4000
8250
0.011
8000
0.021
5000
8500
0.011
8250
0.020
6000
8750
0.010
8400
0.018
12mm@250
mm
Here note that serviceability moment-curvature is not significantly influenced by amount of

confinement but damage control values are.
3.13
Pile Pushover Analysis
In order to carryout pushover analysis it is necessary to simplify the analytical curves of figure
3.7 and 3.8.
For Pile Grid A, (2.8+11.2/2). (6.5). (25 x 0.5+15) =1501.5 kN
For Pile Grid B, (7.6/2+11.2/2). (6.5). (25 x 0.5+15) =1680.25 kN
For Pile Grid C, (7.6/2+11.2/2). (6.5). (25 x 0.5+15) =1680.25 kN
For Pile Grid D, (11.2/2+11.2/2). (6.5). (25 x 0.5+15) =2002 kN
For Pile Grid E, (4.5+11.2/2). (6.5). (25 x 0.5+15) =1805.37 kN
From above figure 3.7 interpolate for 1800 kN as average of pile force from A to D is 1700 kN is
closer to pile force for E for 65 mm pitch,
Note that Igross = 0.1402 m4
Elastic Stiffness: Yield strain y = fy/Es =415/2x105 = 0.002075
53

For P=1000 kN, y = 0.002075, y = 0.0035, M = 4900 kN.m
Ec. Ieff = M/ = 1.400 x 106 kN.m2 So, Ieff = 0.0443 m4 = 0.316. Igross
For P=2000 kN, y = 0.002075, y = 0.0040, M = 5500 kN.m
Ec. Ieff = M/ = 1.375 x 106 kN.m2 So, Ieff = 0.0435 m4= 0.310. Igross
Interpolate for P=1800 kN, we get Ieff = 0.311. Igross = 0.0436 m4
Strength, P = 1000 kN, Ms = 7300 kN.m (From Table-3.7)
Strength, P = 2000 kN, Ms = 7600 kN.m
Interpolating, P = 1800 kN, Ms = 7540 kN.m
Design strength for pushover = 0.97.Ms =7314 kN.m

y = M/Ec. Ieff = 0.0053
Similarly, u = M/Ec. Ieff = 0.064
Simplified moment-curvature relationship is plotted as shown in figure 3.10 below.
7314
0.0053
0.064
Figure 3.10 Simplified Moment-Curvature relationships
54
Figure 3.11 (a) Transverse section for analysis, (b) Force-displacement response and hinge
sequence for transverse excitation
Figure 3.12 (a) Pile Model for longitudinal analysis, (b) Individual pile longitudinal Forcedisplacement response
55
Figure 3.13 Results of Pushover analysis
Figure 3.14 Results of Pushover analysis for Individual Piles (From A to E top to bottom)
56

Table-3.8 Pile Force Displacement Response
Displacement
Base Force
Pile A
Pile B
Pile C
Pile D
Pile E
Total
KN
KN
KN
KN
KN
KN
0.007667
21.262
23.123
26.986
59.605
132.273
263.249
0.015333
42.524
46.247
53.972
119.21
264.546
526.499
0.023
63.786
69.37
80.957
178.815
396.819
789.747
0.030667
85.048
92.494
107.943
238.421
529.091
1052.997
0.038333
106.31
115.617
134.929
298.026
545.063
1199.945
0.046
127.573
138.741
161.915
357.631
561.034
1346.894
0.053667
148.835
161.864
188.9
417.236
577.006
1493.841
0.061333
170.097
184.988
215.886
445.076
592.977
1609.024
0.069
191.359
208.111
242.872
460.946
608.949
1712.237
0.076667
212.621
231.235
269.858
476.815
624.921
1815.45
0.084333
233.883
254.358
296.843
492.685
640.893
1918.662
0.092
255.145
277.482
323.829
508.554
656.865
2021.875
0.099667
276.407
300.605
350.815
524.424
672.838
2125.089
0.107333
297.669
323.729
377.801
540.293
688.81
2228.302
0.115
318.931
346.852
404.786
556.163
704.783
2331.515
0.122667
340.194
369.976
431.772
572.033
720.755
2434.73
0.130333
361.456
393.099
450.494
587.902
736.728
2529.679
0.138
382.718
416.223
466.281
603.772
752.701
2621.695
0.145667
403.98
439.346
482.068
619.642
768.674
2713.71
0.153333
425.242
462.47
497.855
635.512
772.689
2793.768
0.161
446.504
485.593
513.643
651.382
788.337
2885.459
0.168667
467.766
501.312
529.43
667.252
803.985
2969.745
0.176333
480.281
517.031
545.218
683.122
819.633
3045.285
0.184
492.796
532.75
561.005
698.992
835.281
3120.824
0.191667
505.311
548.468
576.793
714.862
850.928
3196.362
0.199333
517.826
564.187
592.581
730.732
866.576
3271.902
0.207
530.341
579.906
608.369
750.983
882.224
3351.823
0.214667
542.856
595.626
624.157
766.669
897.872
3427.18
0.222333
555.371
611.345
639.945
782.354
913.52
3502.535
0.23
567.886
627.064
655.733
798.04
929.168
3577.891
57

3.14
Performance Limits from Pushover analysis results
Results of the individual pile pushover analysis are expressed in terms of pile force vs deck
displacement in figure 3.12 and table 3.8 up to a maximum displacement of 0.230 m which is
calculated displacement capacity of pile grid E as established below.
From figure 3.12 the pushover analysis for pile grid E, the pile top yield moment of M = 7314
kN.m occurs at a displacement of 32.2 mm. Second plastic hinge form 2.5 m below grade
develops in the pile at a displacement of 0.0576 m. (Distance between two hinges = 4.45+2.5 =
6.95 m)
Plastic Hinge length (Lp) = 0.08L+0.022fy. db 0.044fy. db as per equation 3-30 (a)
Where,
L = (6.95/2) = 3475 mm
fy = 500 N/mm2
db = 32.2 mm
So, Lp = 632.2 mm 708.4 mm whichever is more. Lp = 708.4 mm governs.
Figure 3.15 (a) Pushover Curve, (b) Plastic Hinge Sequence
58

Table-3.9 Displacement Limits
Displacement Limits
Parameters
12mm dia. at 65 mm pitch
12mm dia. at 250 mm pitch
y (Figure-3.10)
0.0053
0.0053
Serviceability Criteria
s (Table-3.7)
0.0080
0.0080
ps = (s y).Lp (Equ.3-29)
0.00191
0.00191
s = y + 2L.ps
0.046
0.046
Damage Control Criteria

u (Table-3.7 and Figure-3.10)
0.064
0.016
pu = (u y).Lp (Equ.3-29)
0.0416
0.00758
u = y + 2L.pu
0.321
0.085
Here note that there is no need to calculate the displacement limits for piles other than the
landward row pile grid E, since there will significantly exceed than for the landward pile grid
E.
3.15
Sample Calculation for Design acceleration spectrum A
3.15.1 Method A: Equivalent Single Mode Analysis

From TR-2103-SHR, Volume-I, page-3-52 and 3-53.
For bilinear approximation at yield, Initial stiffness is calculated using,
Yield Force from push-over analysis (F) = 1386 kN
Displacement corresponding to F () = 0.034 m
Ki = F/ = 41250 kN/m
Tributary weight of Wharf (W) = 5484.62 kN
Time Period (T) = 1.06 sec
From site specific acceleration response spectrum,
Response Acceleration (Sa/g) = 1.064
59

Elastic Response force (FE) = 5835.637 kN
Note that this is not the true response force, but the elastic response for a structure with given
time period and ultimate elastic strength.
Using the equal displacement approximation, displacement of the inelastic system =
Displacement of the elastic system
T = FE/Ki = 0.1415 m
Thus method A estimate of displacement under pure transverse excitation is T = 0.1415 m
Amplification for combined transverse + longitudinal response
Calculate elastic eccentricity under longitudinal response
XT = (ni. Vi. Xi)/(ni. Vi)
Where,
ni = Number of piles/Tributary length on row i
Vi = Shear force on each pile on row i at specified displacement
Xi = Distance of row i from datum
Chose row of pile near landward side as a datum and Displacement = 0.031 m (98% of yield) as
specified displacement
Table-3.10 Pile forces for displacement of 0.031 m
Displ. (m)
Pile
Pile
Pile
Pile
Pile
Grid A
Grid B
Grid C
Grid D
Grid E
0.031
85.05
92.49
107.94
238.42
529.09
Distance X (m)
41.20
30.00
22.40
11.20
0.00
Total
1053.00
XT = (ni. Vi. Xi)/(ni. Vi) = 10.795 m (From Landward row)

Center of Mass (cg) = 24.944 m
Distance between landward row & Deck = 4.5 m
Eccentricity between Center of Mass and Center of Stiffness is, e= 9.645 m
Thus from TR-2103-SHR, Volume-I, eqs.3-19, page-3-52.
For Combined longitudinal and transverse response,
60

Where,
max = T 1 + (0.3(1 + 20.e / LL )) 2
LL = Length of Wharf segment (m) = 618 m
So, max = 0.152 m
Assessment:
Displacement Capacity for Case 1 = 0.321
Capacity is more than demand so It's OK !

Capacity is less than demand so It's not OK !

For Level 1 Earthquake [Serviceability]
With Level 1 = 0.3 times Level 2 earthquake assume.
Maximum displacement = 0.0457 m
Assessment:
Capacity is more than demand so its just OK!

Capacity is more than demand so its just OK!
3.15.2 Method B: Push over analysis

This method uses results of the inelastic pushover analysis and the substitute structure approach
(effective stiffness + damping at maximum response) to estimate transverse displacement
demand. This method is given in TR-2103-SHR, Volume-I, pages-3-54 to 3-59.
Pushover analysis results provide the backbone for the hysteretic response. The method of
analysis requires following Six steps:
61

Step-1. Guess the Maximum displacement
Seismic Weight of Wharf (W) = 5484.622 kN
Based on previous analysis, take T = 0.14 m
Step-2. Calculate the effective stiffness at Maximum displacement

From Push-over analysis for above assumed Max. Displacement,
Total pile Force (F) = 2621.695 kN
So, Effective Stiffness (k) = 18726.40 kN/m
Step-3. Calculate the effective period at Maximum displacement

Effective Period (T) = 2 (W/k) 0.5 = 1.086 sec
Step-4. Calculate the effective damping at Maximum displacement

Assuming a hysteretic response, an explicit relationship between damping
And ductility exists:
= 0.05 +
1 (1 r)
1
r
Where,
= Displacement Ductility
r = Second slope stiffness ratio = 0.113
y = Displacement from bilinear approximation = 0.034 m
= T/y = 4.167
= 0.157, i.e.15.7 %
Step-5. From response spectrum, Calculate Maximum displacement

The response spectrum is given for 5% damping only. The following relationship from
Eurocode 8 is used to reduce response for different damping levels:
R =
=
(7/ (2+)) 0.5

0.63
For T = 1.086 sec from chart, Sa/g = 0.70
62

5% Spectral displacement:
S5 = T2/ (4. 2). g. Sa5
= 0.205 m
Correction for damping () = R. S5 = 0.129 m
Step-6. Iteration from step-1 to 5 till convergence

This is larger than initial assumed and Iteration is required. To speed convergence assume 0.185
m as maximum displacement
Effective Period (T) = 2 (W/k) 0.5 = 1.046 sec
= T/y = 3.869
= 0.154, i.e. 15.4%
R = (7/ (2+)) 0.5
= 0.634
S5 = T2/ (4. 2). g. Sa5
= 0.204 m
Correction for damping () = R. S5 = 0.129 m
Correction for combined longitudinal and transverse response
Note: Here eccentricity is different from Method A, due to reduction in stiffness at maximum
response of piles F, E and D. force at displacement 0.129 m from Push-over analysis results.
Table-3.11 Pile forces for displacement of 0.129 m

Displ. (m)
Pile Grid A
Pile Grid B
Pile Grid C
Pile Grid D
Pile Grid E
0.129
361.46
393.10
450.49
587.90
736.73
Distance X (m)
41.20
30.00
22.40
11.20
0.00
Total
2529.68
63

Eccentricity from A line,
XA = 17.14 m
Center of Mass (cg) = 25.462 m
Distance between landward row & Deck = 4.5 m
Eccentricity between center of Mass and center of stiffness is, e = 3. 821 m
Thus from TR-2103-SHR, Volume-I, eqs.3-19, page-3-52.
For Combined longitudinal and transverse response,
max = T 1 + (0.3(1 + 20.e / LL )) 2

Where,
LL = Length of Wharf segment (m) = 618.0 m
So, max = 0.137 m
For Level 1 Earthquake [Serviceability]

Assume Avg. Max. Displ. = 0.070 m
Total pile Force (F) = 1712.24 kN
Effective Period (T) = 2 (W/k) 0.5 = 0.95sec
= T/y = 2.083
= 0.1208, i.e. 12.08 %
R =
(7/ (2+)) 0.5
= 0.705
For Level 1 Earthquake assume = 0.4 times Level 2 earthquake
Sa/g = 0.288
S5 = T2/ (4. 2). g. Sa5
= 0.0646 m
Correction for damping () = R. S5 =0.0455 m
64
Observation and Conclusion
CHAPTER 4
OBSERVATION AND CONCLUSION
4.1 Observations
From the analysis using method A: Equivalent single mode analysis and method B: Pushover
analysis for confinement providing using i). 65 mm pitch and ii). 250 mm pitch for different
design site specific spectra for different site conditions (refer Annexure-4)
A. California for return period of 2500 years and 5% damping
B. Andaman for D-type site return period of 2500 years and 5% damping
C. Mundra for D-type site return period of 2500 years and 5% damping
D. As per IS: 1893-2002 for Seismic Zone V considering 5% damping for Medium type of Soil
following results are observed.
Table-4.1 Displacement Capacities for different conditions

Displacement Capacities
Method A
Serviceability
Method B
Damage
Serviceability Damage
Control
Control
Capacity for Case-I
0.046
0.321
0.046
0.321
Capacity for Case-II
0.046
0.085
0.046
0.085
California
0.0458
0.153
0.0455
0.137
Andaman
0.0279
0.093
0.021
0.075
Mundra
0.0143
0.048
0.0102
0.034
IS: 1893-2002 for Zone V
0.0175
0.058
0.0154
0.035
65
0.35
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
Capacityfor Capacityfor California
CaseI
CaseII
Andaman
Mundra
IS:1893
2002for
ZoneV
Legend:
Serviceability Criteria using Method A
Damage Control Criteria using Method A
Serviceability Criteria using Method B
Damage Control Criteria using Method B
Figure 4.1 Displacement Capacities for different conditions
From above table 4.1 and figure 4.1 following observations are drawn:
Both Mundra and Andaman fall in seismic zone V as per IS: 1893-2002 criteria but using
microzonation site specific spectra for both sites are different.
Design spectra for seismic zone V using IS: 1893-2002 is in-between of Andaman and
Mundra.
Displacement limits for case I, pitch using 65 mm satisfies for all cases.
Displacement limits for case II, pitch using 250 mm satisfies for Mundra and using
seismic zone V.
66
Displacement limits using method A for serviceability and damage control criteria gives
2 to 10% higher than displacement limits using method B.
For California, displacement limits using pitch 250 mm for both serviceability and
damage control criteria does not satisfy while using pitch 65 mm satisfy for both
methods.
For Andaman, displacement limits using pitch 250 mm for damage control criteria does
not satisfy using method A, while using pitch 65 mm satisfy for both methods.
For Mundra, displacement limits using pitch 250 mm and 65 mm satisfy using both the
methods.
For spectra using IS: 1893-2002 for seismic zone V, displacement limits using pitch 250
mm and 65 mm satisfy using both the methods.
67
4.2 Conclusion
Looking to the above results, following are conclusions.
For seismic analysis of special structures microzonation is required as zoning does not
predict actual site condition.
For structure located in highly seismic hazard area evaluation should perform using
performance based seismic design for different levels of earthquake after performing
conventional seismic design.
Site with highly seismic activity requires special confinement to limit displacement for
different levels of earthquake as these structures fail due to excessive deformation not
catastrophic collapse.
68
4.3 Limitations
In the case study a plan of regular symmetrical about both axes is used. So Torsion due to
T-shaped or L-shaped is not considered.
In the case study only a component of a long wharf is considered for analysis. So long
wharf modeling using expansion joint or shear key for connection is not taken for
analysis.
Analysis using push-over analysis is carried out but analysis time history analysis gives
more nearer results.
69
4.4 Future Scope
This study is limited to symmetrical shape, similar analysis can carried out using Tshaped or L-shaped jetty to consider torsion effect.
This study is limited to for only a component of a long wharf for long wharf modeling
using expansion joint or shear key for connection is not taken for analysis.
This study is limited for analysis using push-over analysis, analysis using time history
analysis can also perform.
70
References
REFERENCES
Books
1.
Seismic design guidelines for Port Structures By PIANC, Working Group No. 34 of the
Maritime Navigation Commission International Navigation Association.
2.
Seismic Guidelines for Ports By Stuart D. Werner, ASCE Port Manual.
3.
Technical Standards and Commentaries for Port and Harbour Facilities in Japan By
Ministry of Transport, Japan.
4.
Handbook on Liquefaction Remediation of Reclaimed Land By Port and Harbour

Research Institute, Ministry of Transport, Japan.
5.
Marine Structural Design By Yong Bai.
Codes
1.
IS:4651
Code of Practice for Planning and Design of Ports and Harbours,

Part-III, Loading (1974)
Part-IV, General Design Considerations (1989)
Part-V, Layout and Functional Requirement (1980)
2.
IS:2911
Code of Practice for Design and Construction of Pile Foundation,

Part-I, Concrete Piles, Section-2, Bored Cast-in-situ Piles (1979)
3.
BS:6349
Maritime Structures
Part-I, Code of Practice for General Criteria (2000)
4.
MOTEMS
Marine Oil Terminal Engineering and Maintenance Standards By

California State land Commission, Marine Facilities Division,
Chapter-31F (2005)
71
References
Technical Reports and Papers
1.
Seismic Criteria for California Marine Oil Terminals, Volume-I By John Ferritto, S.
Dickenson, N. Priestley, S. Werner, C. Taylor, Technical Report TR-2103-SHR, Naval
Facilities Engineering Service Center, Port Hueneme, 1999.
2.
Design Criteria for Earthquake Hazard Mitigation of Navy Piers and Wharves
By J.M. Ferritto, Technical Report TR-2069-SHR, Naval Facilities Engineering Service
Center, Port Hueneme, 1997.
3.
Presenting Performance-Based Design Criteria of Pile and Deck Structures According

to Seismic Design Guideline for Port Structure (PIANC) By Dr. Khosrow Bargi,
University of Tehran.
4.
Performance Based Design for Port Structures By Susumu Iai and Koji Ichii.
5.
Seismic Design of Port Structures By Atsushi Nozu and Koji Ichii, Journal of Japan
Association for Earthquake Engineering, Vol.4, No.3 (Special Issue), 2004.
6.
New Turkish Seismic Design Code for Port Structures: A performance-based Approach
By M. Nuray, Poster Proccedings ICCE, 2008.
7.
A Performance-Based Design Approach in Turkish Seismic Design Code for Port

Structures By M. Nuray, The 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering
in China, 2008.
8.
Parametric Study on Displacement Amplification Factor to Equivalent Single Mode

Spectral Method for Seismic Analysis of Pile-Supported Wharves By Pham Ngoc
Thach, Lu Ziai, http://www.paper.edu.cn
9.
Need for earthquake-resistant design of harbour structures in India in view of their

performance during the 2004 Sumatra earthquake By Current Science, Vol.91,
No. 9, 10, 2006.
10.
Displacement-Based Seismic Design of a Large Naval Pier By Louis Klusmeyer.
72
References
Useful Websites
1.
http://peer.berkeley.edu
2.
http://geohazards.usgs.gov
3.
http://earthquake.usgs.gov
4.
http://eqint.cr.usgs.gov
5.
http://www.seismo.ethz.ch
6.
http://geology.about.com
7.
http://rahat.up.nic.in
8.
http://asc-india.org
9.
http://gmt.soest.hawaii.edu
10.
http://www.cessind.org
11.
http://www.sciencedirect.com
12.
http://www.springerlink.com
13.
http://geohazards.cr.usgs.gov
14.
http://www.consrv.ca.gov/dmg
15.
https://portal.navfac.navy.mil
16.
http://gldims.cr.usgs.gov
17.
http://ndma.gov.in/ndma/disaster/earthquake/PSHA%20_Letter.pdf
18.
http://ndma.gov.in/ndma/disaster/earthquake/India-psha-finalreport.pdf
73
Annexure-1
Annexure-1 Load Combinations (As per IS: 4651-Part-4-1989)
DL
LL
3
4
Berthing
One Fender
LC
5
MF
6
7
Seismic
Two Fender
Limit State of Collapse
Limit State of Serviceability
X
1
9
Wind
10
11
12
13
14
Wave & Current Hydrodynamic Tem. Earth Pressure
OP
EX
OP
1
1
1
1
1
10
11
12
15
16
1
1.5
1.5
103
1.5
1.5
1.5
1.5
1
1
14
1.5
1
1
1
1
13
1.5
1
1
1.5
1
1
1.5
1
1
101
1
1
102
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
104
1.5
1.5
105
1.5
1.5
1.5
1
1
106
1.5
1.5
1.5
107
1.5
1.5
1.5
108
1.5
1.5
1.5
109
1.5
1.5
1.5
110
1.5
1.5
1.5
1
1
1
1
111
1.5
1.5
1.5
112
1.5
1.5
1.5
113
1.2
1.2
114
1.2
1.2
115
1.2
1.2
116
1.2
1.2
117
1.2
1.2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1.5
1
1.5
118
1.2
1.2
119
1.2
1.2
1.5
1.5
1
1
1
120
1.2
1.2
121
1.2
1.2
1.5
122
1.2
1.2
1.5
123
1.2
1.2
1.5
1
1
1
1
74
Annexure-2
Annexure:
2
PageNo:
75
Rev.
JobTitle:PileDesignParametersSubgradeModulus,SoilSpringStiffness&Passive
Resistance
CALCULATIONSHEET
Subject:GeotechnicalParameters
MadeBy:
Date:
Remarks
CheckBy:
Date:
1.SubgradeModulus,SoilSpringStiffness&PassiveResistance
1.1GeotechnicalParameters:
Elevation
SoilUnit
From
6.86
5.06
0.16
1.54
15.04
18.14
27.14
43.44
48.64
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Cohesion
To
5.06
0.16
1.54
15.04
18.14
27.14
43.44
48.64
50.14
Angleof
(Degree)
0
0
24
32
21
38
21
38
20
C(kN/m )
0.00
0.00
5.89
0.00
39.24
0.00
49.05
0.00
46.11
Density
2
sub(kN/m )
0.00
0.00
7.36
10.40
10.10
13.15
9.81
13.15
9.81
1.2Profile:
A
RockFillLine
Slope1: 1.90
DredgeLine
Slope1: 4.00
11.2m
7.6m
11.2m
11.2m
A
17.03
17.80
44.00
1.30
B
11.13
15.00
44.00
1.00
C
7.13
13.10
44.00
1.00
1.3ProfileDATA:
GridMark
RockfillLevel(m)
DredgeLevel(m)
Fdg.Level(m)
Dia.OfPile(m)
D
1.24
10.30
44.00
1.20
E
4.66
7.50
20.00
1.20
75
Annexure-2
Annexure:
2
PageNo:
76
Rev.
JobTitle:PileDesignParametersSubgradeModulus&PassiveResistance
Subject:SoilSpringConstants,PassiveResistance
MadeBy:
Date:
Remarks
CheckBy:
Date:
CALCULATIONSHEET
2.AlongGridA:
2.1SoilSpringConstants:
DesignDredgeLevelalongGridlineA=
RockfillLevelalongGridlineA=
VirtuallineLevelalongGridlineA=
17.80
17.03
19.00
m
m
m
(ForcalculationVirtualline
hasbeenconsideras2m
Forcalculationpurposevirtuallineisconsideredashorizontal.
belowRockfilllevel.)
2.2HorizontalSubgradeModulus:
ThemodulusofhorizontalsubgradeReaction,
Ks=
Where,
As=
Bs=
Z=
n=
C=
=
B=
Cm=
=
=
=
As+Bs*Zn
Cm.C.[c.Nc+0.5..B.N]
Cm.C.[.Nq]
DepthofInterest
ExponenttogiveKs,bestfit= 0.5
FactordependsondisplacementofPile= 40
3
UnitweightofSoil(kN/m )
DiameterofPile(m)=
1.30
SizeFactor
1.0+2*0.5
ifB<=0.457m
1.0+(0.457/B)^0.75>=1.5
ifB>=0.457m
1.0+0.25
ifB>1.2m
Cm= 1.25
UnitNo. 3
AngleofInternalFriction(24
CohesionofSoil(c)=
5.89
Sub.weightofSoil(sub)= 7.36
20
kN/m2
Nc= 19.542
Nq= 9.808
N= 9.782
14.83
6.40
5.39
20.72
10.66
10.88
As= 8094.97
Bs= 3609.34
Ks= 8094.9734+
3609.344x
Z^0.5
25
76
Annexure-2
Annexture:
2
PageNo:
77
Rev.
MadeBy:
Date:
Remarks
CheckBy:
Date:
CALCULATIONSHEET
UnitNo. 4
CohesionofSoil(c)=
0
30
Nc= 36.532
Nq= 24.36
N= 32.652
30.14
18.40
22.40
46.12
33.30
48.03
As= 11036.38
Bs= 12667.20
Ks= 11036.376+
12667.2x
Z^0.5
UnitNo. 5
CohesionofSoil(c)=
39.24
20
14.83
6.40
5.39
20.72
10.66
10.88
As= 33537.38
Bs= 3662.26
Ks= 33537.382+
3662.26x
Z^0.5
Nc= 63.634
Nq= 51.84
N= 84.858
46.12
33.30
48.03
As= 36266.19
Bs= 34084.80
Ks= 36266.1878+ 34084.8x
25
Nc= 16.008
Nq= 7.252
N= 6.488
UnitNo. 6
CohesionofSoil(c)=
0
35
35
40
75.31
64.20
109.41
Z^0.5
77
Annexure-2
Annexure:
2
PageNo:
78
Rev.
MadeBy:
Date:
Remarks
CheckBy:
Date:
CALCULATIONSHEET
UnitNo. 7
CohesionofSoil(c)=
49.05
Nc= 16.008
Nq= 7.252
N= 6.488
14.83
6.40
5.39
As= 41328.157
Bs= 3557.106
Ks= 41328.1566+ 3557.106x
UnitNo. 8
CohesionofSoil(c)=
0
Nc= 63.634
Nq= 51.84
N= 84.858
46.12
33.30
48.03
As= 36266.19
Bs= 34084.80
Ks= 36266.1878+ 34084.8x
UnitNo. 9
CohesionofSoil(c)=
46.11
Nc= 14.83
Nq= 6.4
N= 5.39
14.83
6.40
5.39
As= 35909.03
Bs= 3139.20
Ks= 35909.0318+ 3139.2x
20
25
20.72
10.66
10.88
Z^0.5
35
40
75.31
64.20
109.41
Z^0.5
20
25
20.72
10.66
10.88
Z^0.5
78
Annexure-2
CALCULATIONSHEET
Annexure:
2
PageNo:
79
Rev.
MadeBy:
Date:
Remarks
CheckBy:
Date:
TheSpringconstantvaluesareobtainedusingNewmark'sequationsgivenbelow:
TopSpringValue,
K1=BL/24*(7Ks1+6Ks2Ks3)
IntermediateSpringValue,
Ki=BL/12*(Ks(i1)+10Ksi+Ks(i+1))
BottomSpringValue,
Kn=BL/24*(7Ksn+6Ks(n1)Ks(n2))
TheSpringStiffnesscalculationsaretabulatedbelow.
2.3PassiveResistance:
Pressuretheoryisgivenby,
Pp= Kp..h+2.c.(Kp)0.5
Where,
Pp=
Kp=
=
c=
h=
PassiveearthpressureIntensity,kN/m2
Coefficientofpassivepressure=
(1+Sin)/(1Sin)
3
CohesionofSoil(kN/m2)
HeightofSoilspringfromdredge/Scourlevel(m)
Passiveresistanceisgivenby,
Pforce= PratnodexExposedArea
Pratnode= Pressureattheelevationconsidered(Nodelocation)
ExposedArea= Unitheight(1m)xDiameterofPile
PassiveforceatToplevelfr
2
27.64
Pratnode=
kN/m
2
ExposedArea=
0.65
m
PassiveForce=
17.97
kN
19m()
(Pratnode)
(0.5mxDiameterofPile)
PassiveforceatIntermediatePointswithintheLayer 23m()
221.12
(Pratnode)
Pratnode=
kN/m2
2
(1mxDiameterofPile)
ExposedArea=
1.30
m
PassiveForce=
287.45
kN
365.45
(Pratnode,LowerLayer)
Pratnode=
kN/m2
2
442.23
(Pratnode,UpperLayer)
Pratnode=
kN/m
2
AveragePressure=
403.84
kN/m
ExposedArea=
1.30
(1mxDiameterofPile)
m2
PassiveForce=
524.99
kN
79
Annexure-2
Annexure:
2
PageNo:
80
Rev.
MadeBy:
Date:
Remarks
CheckBy:
Date:
CALCULATIONSHEET
PassivePressureCalculation:
SoilUnit Datum(),m Depth,h(m)
6
19
0
20
1
upto
21
2
Depth
22
3
27.14
23
4
m
24
5
25
6
26
7
27
8
7
27
8
28
9
upto
29
10
Depth
30
11
43.44
31
12
m
32
13
33
14
34
15
35
16
36
17
37
18
38
19
39
20
40
21
41
22
42
23
43
24
8
43
24
44
25
upto
Depth
48.64
m
c(kN/m2)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
49.05
49.05
49.05
49.05
49.05
49.05
49.05
49.05
49.05
49.05
49.05
49.05
49.05
49.05
49.05
49.05
49.05
0
0
(degree)
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
38
38
sub (kN/m3)
13.15
13.15
13.15
13.15
13.15
13.15
13.15
13.15
13.15
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
13.15
13.15
4.204
4.204
4.204
4.204
4.204
4.204
4.204
4.204
4.204
2.117
2.117
2.117
2.117
2.117
2.117
2.117
2.117
2.117
2.117
2.117
2.117
2.117
2.117
2.117
2.117
2.117
4.204
4.204
sub.h
0.00
13.15
26.30
39.45
52.60
65.75
78.90
92.05
105.20
105.20
115.01
124.82
134.63
144.44
154.25
164.06
173.87
183.68
193.49
203.30
213.11
222.92
232.73
242.54
252.35
262.16
262.16
275.31
Pp(n)
0.00
55.28
110.56
165.84
221.12
276.40
331.68
386.95
442.23
365.45
386.22
406.99
427.75
448.52
469.29
490.06
510.83
531.60
552.36
573.13
593.90
614.67
635.44
656.21
676.97
697.74
1102.05
1157.33
80
Annexure-2
Annexure:
2
PageNo:
81
Rev.
MadeBy:
Date:
Remarks
CheckBy:
Date:
CALCULATIONSHEET
SoilSpringStiffnessandPassiveResistance:
6
19
0
20
1
upto
21
2
Depth
22
3
27.14
23
4
m
24
5
25
6
26
7
7
27
8
28
9
upto
29
10
Depth
30
11
43.44
31
12
m
32
13
33
14
34
15
35
16
36
17
37
18
38
19
39
20
40
21
41
22
42
23
8
43
24
44
25
upto
Depth
48.64
m
As
36266.19
36266.19
36266.19
36266.19
36266.19
36266.19
36266.19
36266.19
41328.16
41328.16
41328.16
41328.16
41328.16
41328.16
41328.16
41328.16
41328.16
41328.16
41328.16
41328.16
41328.16
41328.16
41328.16
41328.16
36266.19
36266.19
Bs
34084.80
34084.80
34084.80
34084.80
34084.80
34084.80
34084.80
34084.80
3557.11
3557.11
3557.11
3557.11
3557.11
3557.11
3557.11
3557.11
3557.11
3557.11
3557.11
3557.11
3557.11
3557.11
3557.11
3557.11
34084.80
34084.80
Ks
36266.19
70350.99
84469.37
95302.79
104435.79
112482.12
119756.56
126446.09
51389.1717
51999.4746
52576.71344
53125.74254
53650.33324
54153.48468
54637.62854
55104.7689
55556.5806
55994.48036
56419.67924
56833.22219
57236.01824
57628.8641
58012.46264
58387.43769
203246.9237
206690.1878
K
32039.576
89293.256
109454.315
123709.418
135648.802
146143.131
155620.158
155524.054
75003.206
67595.735
68346.671
69060.818
69743.111
70397.471
71027.075
71634.539
72222.048
72791.449
73344.320
73882.025
74405.746
74916.522
75415.267
91556.158
248900.910
141262.627
PratNode
27.64
55.28
110.56
165.84
221.12
276.40
331.68
386.95
442.23
365.45
386.22
406.99
427.75
448.52
469.29
490.06
510.83
531.60
552.36
573.13
593.90
614.67
635.44
656.21
676.97
899.90
Pforce
17.97
71.86
143.73
215.59
287.45
359.32
431.18
503.04
538.97
502.08
529.08
556.08
583.08
610.08
637.08
664.08
691.08
718.07
745.07
772.07
799.07
826.07
853.07
880.07
1169.87
752.27
81
Annexure-2
CALCULATIONSHEET
Annexure:
2
PageNo:
82
Rev.
MadeBy:
Date:
Remarks
CheckBy:
Date:
3.AlongGridB:
DesignDredgeLevelalongGridlineB=
RockfillLevelalongGridlineB=
VirtuallineLevelalongGridlineB=
15.00
11.13
13.13
m
m
m
hasbeenconsideras2m
Ks=
Where,
As=
Bs=
Z=
n=
C=
=
B=
Cm=
=
=
=
As+Bs*Zn
Cm.C.[.Nq]
DepthofInterest
ExponenttogiveKs,bestfit=
0.5
FactordependsondisplacementofPile=
40
3
1.00
DiameterofPile(m)=
SizeFactor
1.0+2*0.5
ifB<=0.457m
1.0+(0.457/B)^0.75>=1.5
ifB>=0.457m
1.0+0.25
ifB>1.2m
Cm= 1.556
RockFill
AngleofInternalFriction( 40
CohesionofSoil(c)=
0
Sub.weightofSoil(sub)= 11
Nc= 75.31
Nq= 64.2
N= 109.41
75.31
64.20
109.41
40
45
138.88
134.88
271.76
As= 37448.99
Bs= 43948.91
Ks= 37448.99037+ 43948.9111x Z^0.5
TheSoilsringstiffness
&passiveresistance
inthislayerisconsider
as70%ofthecalculated.
82
Annexure-2
CALCULATIONSHEET
Annexure:
2
PageNo:
83
Rev.
MadeBy:
Date:
Remarks
CheckBy:
Date:
UnitNo. 5
CohesionofSoil(c)=
39.24
Nc= 16.008
Nq= 7.252
N= 6.488
14.83
6.40
5.39
20
25
20.72
10.66
10.88
As= 41130.90
Bs= 4558.27
Ks= 41130.89846+ 4558.26506x Z^0.5
UnitNo. 6
CohesionofSoil(c)=
0
Nc= 63.634
Nq= 51.84
N= 84.858
46.12
33.30
48.03
35
40
75.31
64.20
109.41
As= 34722.34
Bs= 42423.95
Ks= 34722.33757+ 42423.9548x Z^0.5
UnitNo. 7
CohesionofSoil(c)=
49.05
Nc= 16.008
Nq= 7.252
N= 6.488
14.83
6.40
5.39
20
25
20.72
10.66
10.88
As= 50845.32
Bs= 4427.38
Ks= 50845.32046+ 4427.38418x Z^0.5
83
Annexure-2
CALCULATIONSHEET
Annexure:
2
PageNo:
84
Rev.
MadeBy:
Date:
Remarks
CheckBy:
Date:
UnitNo. 8
CohesionofSoil(c)=
0
Nc= 63.634
Nq= 51.84
N= 84.858
46.12
33.30
48.03
35
40
75.31
64.20
109.41
As= 34722.34
Bs= 42423.95
Ks= 34722.33757+ 42423.9548x Z^0.5
UnitNo. 9
CohesionofSoil(c)=
46.11
Nc= 14.83
Nq= 6.4
N= 5.39
14.83
6.40
5.39
20
25
20.72
10.66
10.88
As= 44200.91
Bs= 3907.23
Ks= 44200.90788+ 3907.23369x Z^0.5
84
Annexure-2
Annexure:
2
PageNo:
85
Rev.
MadeBy:
Date:
Remarks
CheckBy:
Date:
CALCULATIONSHEET
TopSpringValue,
K1=BL/24*(7Ks1+6Ks2Ks3)
BottomSpringValue,
Pp= Kp..h+2.c.(Kp)0.5
Where,
Pp=
Kp=
=
c=
h=
(1+Sin)/(1Sin)
3
2
CohesionofSoil(kN/m )
PassiveforceatToplevelfro
2
Pratnode=
25.29
kN/m
2
ExposedArea=
0.50
m
PassiveForce=
8.85
kN
13m()
(Pratnode)
(70%consideredinRockFill)
PassiveforceatIntermediatePointswithintheLayer
22m()
2
Pratnode=
(Pratnode)
497.43
kN/m
2
(1mxDiameterofPile)
ExposedArea=
1.00
m
PassiveForce=
497.43
kN
27m()
2
Pratnode=
433.49
kN/m
2
Pratnode=
773.83
kN/m
2
AveragePressure=
603.66
kN/m
2
ExposedArea=
1.00
(1mxDiameterofPile)
m
PassiveForce=
603.66
kN
85
Annexure-2
Annexure:
2
PageNo:
86
Rev.
MadeBy:
Date:
Remarks
CheckBy:
Date:
CALCULATIONSHEET

RockFill
5
upto
Depth
18.14
6
upto
Depth
27.14
7
upto
Depth
43.44
8
upto
Depth
48.64
13.13
14.13
15.13
15.13
16.13
17.13
18.13
18.13
19.13
20.13
21.13
22.13
23.13
24.13
25.13
26.13
27.13
27.13
28.13
29.13
30.13
31.13
32.13
33.13
34.13
35.13
36.13
37.13
38.13
39.13
40.13
41.13
42.13
43.13
43.13
44.13
0
1
2
2
3
4
5
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
30
31
c(kN/m2)
(degree)
0
0
0
39.24
39.24
39.24
39.24
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
49.05
49.05
49.05
49.05
49.05
49.05
49.05
49.05
49.05
49.05
49.05
49.05
49.05
49.05
49.05
49.05
49.05
0
0
40
40
40
21
21
21
21
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
38
38
3
sub(kN/m ) Kp=(1+Sin)/(1
Sin)
11
4.599
11
4.599
11
4.599
10.1
2.117
10.1
2.117
10.1
2.117
10.1
2.117
13.15
4.204
13.15
4.204
13.15
4.204
13.15
4.204
13.15
4.204
13.15
4.204
13.15
4.204
13.15
4.204
13.15
4.204
13.15
4.204
9.81
2.117
9.81
2.117
9.81
2.117
9.81
2.117
9.81
2.117
9.81
2.117
9.81
2.117
9.81
2.117
9.81
2.117
9.81
2.117
9.81
2.117
9.81
2.117
9.81
2.117
9.81
2.117
9.81
2.117
9.81
2.117
9.81
2.117
13.15
4.204
13.15
4.204
sub.h
Pp(n)
0.00
11.00
22.00
20.21
30.31
40.41
50.51
65.73
78.88
92.03
105.18
118.33
131.48
144.63
157.78
170.93
184.08
137.34
147.15
156.96
166.77
176.58
186.39
196.20
206.01
215.82
225.63
235.44
245.25
255.06
264.87
274.68
284.49
294.30
394.36
407.51
0.00
50.59
101.18
156.97
178.36
199.74
221.12
276.31
331.59
386.87
442.15
497.43
552.71
607.99
663.27
718.55
773.83
433.49
454.26
475.03
495.80
516.57
537.33
558.10
578.87
599.64
620.41
641.17
661.94
682.71
703.48
724.25
745.02
765.78
1657.79
1713.07
86
Annexure-2
Annexure:
2
PageNo:
87
Rev.
MadeBy:
Date:
Remarks
CheckBy:
Date:
CALCULATIONSHEET
RockFill
13.13
0
14.13
1
5
15.13
2
Depth
16.13
3
18.14
17.13
4
6
18.13
5
Depth
19.13
6
27.14
20.13
7
21.13
8
22.13
9
23.13
10
24.13
11
25.13
12
26.13
13
7
27.13
14
Depth
28.13
15
43.44
29.13
16
30.13
17
31.13
18
32.13
19
33.13
20
34.13
21
35.13
22
36.13
23
37.13
24
38.13
25
39.13
26
40.13
27
41.13
28
42.13
29
8
43.13
30
Depth
44.13
31
48.64
As
37448.99
37448.99
41130.90
41130.90
41130.90
34722.34
34722.34
34722.34
34722.34
34722.34
34722.34
34722.34
34722.34
34722.34
50845.32
50845.32
50845.32
50845.32
50845.32
50845.32
50845.32
50845.32
50845.32
50845.32
50845.32
50845.32
50845.32
50845.32
50845.32
50845.32
34722.34
34722.34
Bs
43948.91
43948.91
4558.27
4558.27
4558.27
42423.95
42423.95
42423.95
42423.95
42423.95
42423.95
42423.95
42423.95
42423.95
4427.38
4427.38
4427.38
4427.38
4427.38
4427.38
4427.38
4427.38
4427.38
4427.38
4427.38
4427.38
4427.38
4427.38
4427.38
4427.38
42423.95
42423.95
Ks
26214.29
56978.53
47577.26
49026.05
50247.43
129585.18
138639.38
146965.57
154715.4022
161994.2021
168878.6622
175426.6779
181683.228
187684.082
67411.07518
67992.50565
68554.85718
69099.89308
69629.12072
70143.84068
70645.18444
71134.14359
71611.59299
72078.30907
72534.98473
72982.24136
73420.63879
73850.68349
74272.83546
74687.51393
267087.908
270928.9214
K
19908.083
53631.405
48481.430
49007.095
56757.126
123728.221
138578.713
146917.542
154676.150
161961.340
168850.625
175402.389
181661.920
177161.260
77482.278
67990.916
68553.414
69098.576
69627.912
70142.726
70644.152
71133.184
71610.699
72077.472
72534.200
72981.503
73419.943
73850.026
74272.213
90686.324
251374.626
142680.933
PratNode
17.71
35.41
129.08
178.36
199.74
248.72
331.59
386.87
442.15
497.43
552.71
607.99
663.27
718.55
603.66
454.26
475.03
495.80
516.57
537.33
558.10
578.87
599.64
620.41
641.17
661.94
682.71
703.48
724.25
745.02
1211.79
1713.07
Pforce
8.853
35.41
129.08
178.36
199.74
248.72
331.59
386.87
414.51
497.43
552.71
607.99
663.27
718.55
603.66
454.26
475.03
495.80
516.57
537.33
558.10
578.87
599.64
620.41
641.17
661.94
682.71
703.48
724.25
745.02
1211.79
856.53
87
Annexure-2
CALCULATIONSHEET
Annexure:
2
PageNo:
88
Rev.
MadeBy:
Date:
Remarks
CheckBy:
Date:
4.AlongGridC:
DesignDredgeLevelalongGridlineC=
RockfillLevelalongGridlineC=
VirtuallineLevelalongGridlineC=
13.10
7.13
9.13
m
m
m
hasbeenconsideras2m
Ks=
Where,
As=
Bs=
Z=
n=
C=
=
B=
Cm=
=
=
=
As+Bs*Zn
Cm.C.[.Nq]
DepthofInterest
0.5
40
3
1.00
DiameterofPile(m)=
SizeFactor
1.0+2*0.5
ifB<=0.457m
1.0+(0.457/B)^0.75>=1.5
ifB>=0.457m
1.0+0.25
ifB>1.2m
Cm= 1.556
RockFill
AngleofInternalFriction()40
CohesionofSoil(c)=
0
Sub.weightofSoil(sub)=
11
40
45
Nc= 75.31
Nq= 64.2
N= 109.41
75.31
64.20
109.41
As= 37448.99
Bs= 43948.91
Ks= 37448.99037+
43948.9111x Z^0.5
138.88
134.88
271.76
&passiveresistance
88
Annexure-2
CALCULATIONSHEET
Annexure:
2
PageNo:
89
Rev.
MadeBy:
Date:
Remarks
CheckBy:
Date:
UnitNo. 4
CohesionofSoil(c)=
0
10.4
30
Nc= 36.532
Nq= 24.36
N= 32.652
30.14
18.40
22.40
As= 10566.56
Bs= 15766.35
Ks= 10566.55791+
15766.3451x Z^0.5
UnitNo. 5
CohesionofSoil(c)=
39.24
10.1
46.12
33.30
48.03
20
25
Nc= 16.008
Nq= 7.252
N= 6.488
14.83
6.40
5.39
As= 41130.90
Bs= 4558.27
Ks= 41130.89846+
4558.26506x Z^0.5
UnitNo. 6
CohesionofSoil(c)=
0
13.15
35
20.72
10.66
10.88
35
40
Nc= 63.634
Nq= 51.84
N= 84.858
46.12
33.30
48.03
As= 34722.34
Bs= 42423.95
Ks= 34722.33757+
42423.9548x Z^0.5
75.31
64.20
109.41
89
Annexure-2
CALCULATIONSHEET
Annexure:
2
PageNo:
90
Rev.
MadeBy:
Date:
Remarks
CheckBy:
Date:
UnitNo. 7
CohesionofSoil(c)=
49.05
9.81
20
Nc= 16.008
Nq= 7.252
N= 6.488
14.83
6.40
5.39
As= 50845.32
Bs= 4427.38
Ks= 50845.32046+
4427.38418x Z^0.5
UnitNo. 8
CohesionofSoil(c)=
0
13.15
20.72
10.66
10.88
35
40
Nc= 63.634
Nq= 51.84
N= 84.858
46.12
33.30
48.03
As= 34722.34
Bs= 42423.95
Ks= 34722.33757+
42423.9548x Z^0.5
UnitNo. 9
CohesionofSoil(c)=
46.11
9.81
25
75.31
64.20
109.41
20
25
Nc= 14.83
Nq= 6.4
N= 5.39
14.83
6.40
5.39
As= 44200.91
Bs= 3907.23
Ks= 44200.90788+
3907.23369x Z^0.5
20.72
10.66
10.88
90
Annexure-2
Annexure:
2
PageNo:
91
Rev.
MadeBy:
Date:
Remarks
CheckBy:
Date:
CALCULATIONSHEET
TopSpringValue,
K1=BL/24*(7Ks1+6Ks2Ks3)
BottomSpringValue,
Pp= Kp..h+2.c.(Kp)0.5
Where,
Pp=
Kp=
=
c=
h=
(1+Sin)/(1Sin)
3
2
2
Pratnode=
25.29
kN/m
2
ExposedArea=
0.50
m
PassiveForce=
8.85
kN
9m()
(Pratnode)
11m()
2
Pratnode=
(Pratnode)
101.18
kN/m
2
(1mxDiameterofPile)
ExposedArea=
1.00
m
PassiveForce=
70.82
kN
(70%consideredinRockfill)
13m()
2
Pratnode=
143.20
kN/m
2
Pratnode=
141.65
kN/m
2
AveragePressure=
142.42
kN/m
2
ExposedArea=
1.00
(1mxDiameterofPile)
m
PassiveForce=
142.42
kN
91
Annexure-2
CALCULATIONSHEET
Annexure:
2
PageNo:
92
Rev.
MadeBy:
Date:
Remarks
CheckBy:
Date:

RockFill
4
upto
15.04
5
upto
Depth
18.14
6
upto
Depth
27.14
7
upto
Depth
43.44
8
upto
Depth
48.64
9.13
10.13
11.13
12.13
13.13
13.13
14.13
15.13
15.13
16.13
17.13
18.13
18.13
19.13
20.13
21.13
22.13
23.13
24.13
25.13
26.13
27.13
27.13
28.13
29.13
30.13
31.13
32.13
33.13
34.13
35.13
36.13
37.13
38.13
39.13
40.13
41.13
42.13
43.13
43.13
44.13
0
1
2
3
4
4
5
6
6
7
8
9
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
34
35
c(kN/m2)
(degree)
3
sub(kN/m )
Kp=(1+Sin)/(1
Sin)
sub.h
Pp(n)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
39.24
39.24
39.24
39.24
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
49.05
49.05
49.05
49.05
49.05
49.05
49.05
49.05
49.05
49.05
49.05
49.05
49.05
49.05
49.05
49.05
49.05
0
0
40
40
40
40
40
32
32
32
21
21
21
21
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
38
38
11
11
11
11
11
10.4
10.4
10.4
10.1
10.1
10.1
10.1
13.15
13.15
13.15
13.15
13.15
13.15
13.15
13.15
13.15
13.15
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
13.15
13.15
4.599
4.599
4.599
4.599
4.599
3.255
3.255
3.255
2.117
2.117
2.117
2.117
4.204
4.204
4.204
4.204
4.204
4.204
4.204
4.204
4.204
4.204
2.117
2.117
2.117
2.117
2.117
2.117
2.117
2.117
2.117
2.117
2.117
2.117
2.117
2.117
2.117
2.117
2.117
4.204
4.204
0.00
11.00
22.00
33.00
44.00
44.00
54.40
64.80
64.80
74.90
85.00
95.10
95.10
108.25
121.40
134.55
147.70
160.85
174.00
187.15
200.30
213.45
213.45
223.26
233.07
242.88
252.69
262.50
272.31
282.12
291.93
301.74
311.55
321.36
331.17
340.98
350.79
360.60
370.41
370.41
383.56
0.00
50.59
101.18
151.76
202.35
143.20
177.05
210.90
251.37
272.76
294.14
315.52
399.78
455.06
510.33
565.61
620.89
676.17
731.45
786.73
842.01
897.29
594.62
615.39
636.16
656.93
677.69
698.46
719.23
740.00
760.77
781.54
802.30
823.07
843.84
864.61
885.38
906.15
926.91
1557.11
1612.39
92
Annexure-2
CALCULATIONSHEET
Annexure:
2
PageNo:
93
Rev.
MadeBy:
Date:
Remarks
CheckBy:
Date:
RockFill
9.13
0
10.13
1
11.13
2
12.13
3
4
13.13
4
15.04
14.13
5
5
15.13
6
Depth
16.13
7
18.14
17.13
8
6
18.13
9
Depth
19.13
10
27.14
20.13
11
21.13
12
22.13
13
23.13
14
24.13
15
25.13
16
26.13
17
7
27.13
18
Depth
28.13
19
43.44
29.13
20
30.13
21
31.13
22
32.13
23
33.13
24
34.13
25
35.13
26
36.13
27
37.13
28
38.13
29
39.13
30
40.13
31
41.13
32
42.13
33
8
43.13
34
Depth
44.13
35
48.64
As
37448.99
37448.99
37448.99
37448.99
10566.56
10566.56
41130.90
41130.90
41130.90
34722.34
34722.34
34722.34
34722.34
34722.34
34722.34
34722.34
34722.34
34722.34
50845.32
50845.32
50845.32
50845.32
50845.32
50845.32
50845.32
50845.32
50845.32
50845.32
50845.32
50845.32
50845.32
50845.32
50845.32
50845.32
34722.34
34722.34
Bs
43948.91
43948.91
43948.91
43948.91
15766.35
15766.35
4558.27
4558.27
4558.27
42423.95
42423.95
42423.95
42423.95
42423.95
42423.95
42423.95
42423.95
42423.95
4427.38
4427.38
4427.38
4427.38
4427.38
4427.38
4427.38
4427.38
4427.38
4427.38
4427.38
4427.38
4427.38
4427.38
4427.38
4427.38
42423.95
42423.95
Ks
26214.29
56978.53
69721.50
79499.52
42099.25
45821.18
52296.32
53190.93
54023.62
161994.2021
168878.6622
175426.6779
181683.228
187684.082
193458.2415
199029.6081
204418.1569
209640.7844
69629.12072
70143.84068
70645.18444
71134.14359
71611.59299
72078.30907
72534.98473
72982.24136
73420.63879
73850.68349
74272.83546
74687.51393
75095.10232
75495.95232
75890.38747
76278.70624
282094.3774
285705.8391
K
18985.406
55476.758
69474.417
75567.992
45526.098
46050.612
51831.278
53185.774
62951.777
153570.358
168850.625
175402.389
181661.920
187665.191
193441.342
199014.373
204404.330
197537.927
81339.653
70142.726
70644.152
71133.184
71610.699
72077.472
72534.200
72981.503
73419.943
73850.026
74272.213
74686.923
75094.541
75495.418
75889.878
93397.652
265244.027
150676.185
PratNode
17.71
35.41
70.82
106.23
142.42
177.05
231.14
272.76
294.14
357.65
455.06
510.33
565.61
620.89
676.17
731.45
786.73
842.01
745.96
615.39
636.16
656.93
677.69
698.46
719.23
740.00
760.77
781.54
802.30
823.07
843.84
864.61
885.38
906.15
1242.01
806.19
Pforce
8.85
35.41
70.82
106.23
142.42
177.05
231.14
272.76
294.14
357.65
455.06
510.33
565.61
620.89
676.17
731.45
786.73
842.01
745.96
615.39
636.16
656.93
677.69
698.46
719.23
740.00
760.77
781.54
802.30
823.07
843.84
864.61
885.38
906.15
1242.01
806.19
93
Annexure-2
CALCULATIONSHEET
Annexure:
2
PageNo:
94
Rev.
MadeBy:
Date:
Remarks
CheckBy:
Date:
5.AlongGridD:
DesignDredgeLevelalongGridlineD=
RockfillLevelalongGridlineD=
VirtuallineLevelalongGridlineD=
10.30
1.24
3.24
m
m
m
hasbeenconsideras2m
Ks=
Where,
As=
Bs=
Z=
n=
C=
=
B=
Cm=
=
=
=
As+Bs*Zn
Cm.C.[.Nq]
DepthofInterest
ExponenttogiveKs,bestfit= 0.5
FactordependsondisplacementofPile= 40
3
1.20
DiameterofPile(m)=
SizeFactor
1.0+2*0.5
ifB<=0.457m
1.0+(0.457/B)^0.75>=1.5
ifB>=0.457m
1.0+0.25
ifB>1.2m
Cm= 1.500
RockFill
AngleofInternalFriction40
CohesionofSoil(c)= 0
Sub.weightofSoil(sub)=11
40
45
Nc= 75.31
Nq= 64.2
N= 109.41
75.31
64.20
109.41
138.88
134.88
271.76
As= 43326.36
Bs= 42372.00
Ks= 43326.36+
42372x
Z^0.5
&passiveresistance
94
Annexure-2
CALCULATIONSHEET
Annexure:
2
PageNo:
95
Rev.
MadeBy:
Date:
Remarks
CheckBy:
Date:
UnitNo. 4
Sub.weightofSoil(sub)=10.4
Nc= 36.532
Nq= 24.36
N= 32.652
30.14
18.40
22.40
As= 12224.91
Bs= 15200.64
Ks= 12224.909+ 15200.64x
UnitNo. 5
CohesionofSoil(c)= 39.24
Nc= 16.008
Nq= 7.252
N= 6.488
14.83
6.40
5.39
As= 40048.27
Bs= 4394.71
Ks= 40048.272+ 4394.712x
UnitNo. 6
Nc= 63.634
Nq= 51.84
N= 84.858
46.12
33.30
48.03
As= 40171.78
Bs= 40901.76
Ks= 40171.777+ 40901.76x
30
35
46.12
33.30
48.03
Z^0.5
20
25
20.72
10.66
10.88
Z^0.5
35
40
75.31
64.20
109.41
Z^0.5
95
Annexure-2
CALCULATIONSHEET
Annexure:
2
PageNo:
96
Rev.
MadeBy:
Date:
Remarks
CheckBy:
Date:
UnitNo. 7
Nc= 16.008
Nq= 7.252
N= 6.488
14.83
6.40
5.39
As= 49402.85
Bs= 4268.53
Ks= 49402.846+ 4268.5272x
UnitNo. 8
Nc= 63.634
Nq= 51.84
N= 84.858
46.12
33.30
48.03
As= 40171.78
Bs= 40901.76
Ks= 40171.777+ 40901.76x
UnitNo. 9
20
25
20.72
10.66
10.88
Z^0.5
35
40
75.31
64.20
109.41
Z^0.5
20
25
Nc= 14.83
Nq= 6.4
N= 5.39
14.83
6.40
5.39
20.72
10.66
10.88
As= 42932.21
Bs= 3767.04
Ks= 42932.21+
3767.04x
Z^0.5
96
Annexure-2
CALCULATIONSHEET
Annexure:
2
PageNo:
97
Rev.
MadeBy:
Date:
Remarks
CheckBy:
Date:
TopSpringValue,
K1=BL/24*(7Ks1+6Ks2Ks3)
BottomSpringValue,
Pp= Kp..h+2.c.(Kp)0.5
Where,
Pp=
Kp=
=
c=
h=
(1+Sin)/(1Sin)
3
2
PassiveforceatTopleve
2
Pratnode=
25.29
kN/m
2
ExposedArea=
0.60
m
PassiveForce=
10.62
kN
3m()
(Pratnode)
2
Pratnode=
(Pratnode)
354.12
kN/m
2
(1mxDiameterofPile)
ExposedArea=
1.20
m
PassiveForce=
297.46
kN
2
Pratnode=
250.60
kN/m
2
Pratnode=
247.88
kN/m
2
AveragePressure=
249.24
kN/m
2
ExposedArea=
1.20
(1mxDiameterofPile)
m
PassiveForce=
299.09
kN
97
Annexure-2
CALCULATIONSHEET
Annexure:
2
PageNo:
98
Rev.
MadeBy:
Date:
Remarks
CheckBy:
Date:
SoilUnit Datum(),mDepth,h(m)
RockFill
upto
15.04
5
upto
Depth
18.14
6
upto
Depth
27.14
7
upto
Depth
43.44
3.24
4.24
5.24
6.24
7.24
8.24
9.24
10.24
10.24
11.24
12.24
13.24
14.24
15.24
15.24
16.24
17.24
18.24
18.24
19.24
20.24
21.24
22.24
23.24
24.24
25.24
26.24
27.24
27.24
28.24
29.24
30.24
31.24
32.24
33.24
34.24
35.24
36.24
37.24
38.24
39.24
40.24
41.24
42.24
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
7
8
9
10
11
12
12
13
14
15
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
c(kN/m2)
(degree)
sub(kN/m )
Kp=(1+Sin)/(1
Sin)
sub.h
Pp(n)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
39.24
39.24
39.24
39.24
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
49.05
49.05
49.05
49.05
49.05
49.05
49.05
49.05
49.05
49.05
49.05
49.05
49.05
49.05
49.05
49.05
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
32
32
32
32
32
32
21
21
21
21
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
38
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
21
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
10.4
10.4
10.4
10.4
10.4
10.4
10.1
10.1
10.1
10.1
13.15
13.15
13.15
13.15
13.15
13.15
13.15
13.15
13.15
13.15
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
9.81
4.599
4.599
4.599
4.599
4.599
4.599
4.599
4.599
3.255
3.255
3.255
3.255
3.255
3.255
2.117
2.117
2.117
2.117
4.204
4.204
4.204
4.204
4.204
4.204
4.204
4.204
4.204
4.204
2.117
2.117
2.117
2.117
2.117
2.117
2.117
2.117
2.117
2.117
2.117
2.117
2.117
2.117
2.117
2.117
0.00
11.00
22.00
33.00
44.00
55.00
66.00
77.00
77.00
83.20
93.60
104.00
114.40
124.80
124.80
131.30
141.40
151.50
151.50
210.40
223.55
236.70
249.85
263.00
276.15
289.30
302.45
315.60
315.60
245.25
255.06
264.87
274.68
284.49
294.30
304.11
313.92
323.73
333.54
343.35
353.16
362.97
372.78
382.59
0.00
50.59
101.18
151.76
202.35
252.94
303.53
354.12
250.60
270.78
304.63
338.48
372.32
406.17
378.40
392.16
413.54
434.92
636.87
884.47
939.75
995.03
1050.31
1105.59
1160.86
1216.14
1271.42
1326.70
810.88
661.94
682.71
703.48
724.25
745.02
765.78
786.55
807.32
828.09
848.86
869.63
890.39
911.16
931.93
952.70
98
Annexure-2
CALCULATIONSHEET
Annexure:
2
PageNo:
99
Rev.
MadeBy:
Date:
Remarks
CheckBy:
Date:
RockFill
3.24
0
4.24
1
5.24
2
6.24
3
7.24
4
8.24
5
9.24
6
4
10.24
7
11.24
8
12.24
9
13.24
10
15.04
14.24
11
5
15.24
12
Depth
16.24
13
18.14
17.24
14
6
18.24
15
Depth
19.24
16
27.14
20.24
17
21.24
18
22.24
19
23.24
20
24.24
21
25.24
22
26.24
23
7
27.24
24
Depth
28.24
25
43.44
29.24
26
30.24
27
31.24
28
32.24
29
33.24
30
34.24
31
35.24
32
36.24
33
37.24
34
38.24
35
39.24
36
40.24
37
41.24
38
42.24
39
8
43.24
40
Depth
44.24
41
48.64
As
43326.36
43326.36
43326.36
43326.36
43326.36
43326.36
43326.36
12224.91
12224.91
12224.91
12224.91
12224.91
40048.27
40048.27
40048.27
40171.78
40171.78
40171.78
40171.78
40171.78
40171.78
40171.78
40171.78
40171.78
49402.85
49402.85
49402.85
49402.85
49402.85
49402.85
49402.85
49402.85
49402.85
49402.85
49402.85
49402.85
49402.85
49402.85
49402.85
49402.85
40171.78
40171.78
Bs
42372.00
42372.00
42372.00
42372.00
42372.00
42372.00
42372.00
15200.64
15200.64
15200.64
15200.64
15200.64
4394.71
4394.71
4394.71
40901.76
40901.76
40901.76
40901.76
40901.76
40901.76
40901.76
40901.76
40901.76
4268.53
4268.53
4268.53
4268.53
4268.53
4268.53
4268.53
4268.53
4268.53
4268.53
4268.53
4268.53
4268.53
4268.53
4268.53
4268.53
40901.76
40901.76
Ks
30328.45
59988.85
72274.59
81701.77
89649.25
96651.12
102981.30
52442.02
55218.81
57826.83
60293.55
62639.73
55272.00
55893.63
56491.78
198583.6125
203778.8172
208814.054
213703.2484
218458.4157
223090.0087
227607.1885
232018.0369
236329.7272
70314.27327
70745.48208
71168.14957
71582.76403
71989.76895
72389.56854
72782.53243
73168.99971
73549.28231
73923.66799
74292.42285
74655.79355
75014.00928
75367.28339
75715.81492
76059.7899
298857.221
302070.828
K
24997.884
70249.156
86443.654
97894.156
107484.541
115914.178
117890.612
68262.033
66245.696
69378.065
72340.209
73411.131
67125.337
67070.009
81939.503
224610.672
244518.584
250562.261
256430.495
262137.741
267696.569
273117.993
278411.728
266562.958
101021.794
84893.724
85400.974
85898.556
86387.002
86866.799
87338.389
87802.181
88258.549
88707.839
89150.369
89586.437
90016.317
90440.266
90858.522
113517.093
336670.283
191578.967
PratNode
17.71
35.41
70.82
106.23
141.65
177.06
212.47
249.24
304.63
338.48
372.32
406.17
392.28
392.16
413.54
535.89
884.47
939.75
995.03
1050.31
1105.59
1160.86
1216.14
1271.42
1068.79
661.94
682.71
703.48
724.25
745.02
765.78
786.55
807.32
828.09
848.86
869.63
890.39
911.16
931.93
952.70
1592.32
1133.22
Pforce
10.62
42.49
84.99
127.48
169.98
212.47
254.96
299.09
365.56
406.17
446.79
487.41
470.74
470.59
496.25
643.07
1061.36
1127.70
1194.03
1260.37
1326.70
1393.04
1459.37
1525.71
1282.55
794.33
819.25
844.18
869.10
894.02
918.94
943.86
968.79
993.71
1018.63
1043.55
1068.47
1093.39
1118.32
1143.24
1910.78
1359.87
99
Annexure-2
CALCULATIONSHEET
Annexure:
2
PageNo:
100
Rev.
MadeBy:
Date:
Remarks
CheckBy:
Date:
6.AlongGridE:
DesignDredgeLevelalongGridlineD=
RockfillLevelalongGridlineD=
VirtuallineLevelalongGridlineD=
7.50
4.66
3.00
m
m
m
hasbeenconsideras2m
Ks=
Where,
As=
Bs=
Z=
n=
C=
=
B=
Cm=
=
=
=
As+Bs*Zn
Cm.C.[.Nq]
DepthofInterest
0.5
40
3
1.20
DiameterofPile(m)=
SizeFactor
1.0+2*0.5
ifB<=0.457m
1.0+(0.457/B)^0.75>=1.5
ifB>=0.457m
1.0+0.25
ifB>1.2m
Cm= 1.500
RockFill
CohesionofSoil(c)=
0
Sub.weightofSoil(sub)= 11
40
45
Nc= 75.31
Nq= 64.2
N= 109.41
75.31
64.20
109.41
138.88
134.88
271.76
As= 43326.36
Bs= 42372.00
Ks= 43326.36+
42372x
Z^0.5
&passiveresistance
100
Annexure-2
CALCULATIONSHEET
Annexure:
2
PageNo:
101
Rev.
MadeBy:
Date:
Remarks
CheckBy:
Date:
UnitNo. 4
CohesionofSoil(c)=
0
30
Nc= 36.532
Nq= 24.36
N= 32.652
30.14
18.40
22.40
46.12
33.30
48.03
As= 12224.91
Bs= 15200.64
Ks= 12224.9088+
15200.64x
Z^0.5
UnitNo. 5
CohesionofSoil(c)=
39.24
20
25
Nc= 16.008
Nq= 7.252
N= 6.488
14.83
6.40
5.39
20.72
10.66
10.88
As= 40048.27
Bs= 4394.71
Ks= 40048.272+
4394.712x
Z^0.5
UnitNo. 6
CohesionofSoil(c)=
0
35
35
40
Nc= 63.634
Nq= 51.84
N= 84.858
46.12
33.30
48.03
75.31
64.20
109.41
As= 40171.78
Bs= 40901.76
Ks= 40171.7772+
40901.76x
Z^0.5
101
Annexure-2
CALCULATIONSHEET
Annexure:
2
PageNo:
102
Rev.
MadeBy:
Date:
Remarks
CheckBy:
Date:
UnitNo. 7
CohesionofSoil(c)=
49.05
20
Nc= 16.008
Nq= 7.252
N= 6.488
14.83
6.40
5.39
20.72
10.66
10.88
As= 49402.85
Bs= 4268.53
Ks= 49402.84608+
4268.5272x
Z^0.5
UnitNo. 8
CohesionofSoil(c)=
0
35
40
Nc= 63.634
Nq= 51.84
N= 84.858
46.12
33.30
48.03
75.31
64.20
109.41
As= 40171.78
Bs= 40901.76
Ks= 40171.7772+
40901.76x
Z^0.5
UnitNo. 9
CohesionofSoil(c)=
46.11
25
20
25
Nc= 14.83
Nq= 6.4
N= 5.39
14.83
6.40
5.39
20.72
10.66
10.88
As= 42932.21
Bs= 3767.04
Ks= 42932.2104+
3767.04x
Z^0.5
102
Annexure-2
Annexure:
2
PageNo:
103
Rev.
MadeBy:
Date:
Remarks
CheckBy:
Date:
CALCULATIONSHEET
TopSpringValue,
K1=BL/24*(7Ks1+6Ks2Ks3)
BottomSpringValue,
Pp= Kp..h+2.c.(Kp)0.5
Where,
Pp=
Kp=
=
c=
h=
(1+Sin)/(1Sin)
3
2
2
Pratnode=
25.29
kN/m
2
ExposedArea=
0.60
m
PassiveForce=
10.62
kN
3m(+)
(Pratnode)
5m()
2
Pratnode=
(Pratnode)
404.70
kN/m
2
(1mxDiameterofPile)
ExposedArea=
1.20
m
PassiveForce=
339.95
kN
10m()
2
Pratnode=
465.41
kN/m
2
Pratnode=
460.35
kN/m
2
AveragePressure=
462.88
kN/m
2
ExposedArea=
1.20
(1mxDiameterofPile)
m
PassiveForce=
555.45
kN
103
Annexure-2
CALCULATIONSHEET
Annexure:
2
PageNo:
104
Rev.
MadeBy:
Date:
Remarks
CheckBy:
Date:

RockFill
upto
15.04
5
upto
Depth
18.14
6
upto
Depth
27.14
3
2
1
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
10
11
12
13
14
15
15
16
17
18
18
19
20
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
c(kN/m2)
(degree)
sub(kN/m )
Kp=(1+Sin)/(1
Sin)
sub.h
Pp(n)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
39.24
39.24
39.24
39.24
0
0
0
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
32
32
32
32
32
32
21
21
21
21
38
38
38
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
10.4
10.4
10.4
10.4
10.4
10.4
10.1
10.1
10.1
10.1
13.15
13.15
13.15
4.599
4.599
4.599
4.599
4.599
4.599
4.599
4.599
4.599
4.599
4.599
4.599
4.599
4.599
3.255
3.255
3.255
3.255
3.255
3.255
2.117
2.117
2.117
2.117
4.204
4.204
4.204
0.00
11.00
22.00
33.00
44.00
55.00
66.00
77.00
88.00
99.00
110.00
121.00
132.00
143.00
143.00
145.60
156.00
166.40
176.80
187.20
187.20
202.00
212.10
222.20
222.20
315.60
328.75
0.00
50.59
101.18
151.76
202.35
252.94
303.53
354.12
404.70
455.29
505.88
556.47
607.06
657.64
465.41
473.87
507.72
541.56
575.41
609.26
510.50
541.83
563.22
584.60
934.07
1326.70
1381.98
104
Annexure-2
CALCULATIONSHEET
Annexure:
2
PageNo:
105
Rev.
MadeBy:
Date:
Remarks
CheckBy:
Date:
RockFill
3
0
2
1
1
2
0
3
1
4
2
5
3
6
4
7
5
8
6
9
7
10
8
11
9
12
4
10
13
11
14
12
15
13
16
15.04
14
17
5
15
18
Depth
16
19
18.14
17
20
6
18
21
Depth
19
22
27.14
20
23
As
43326.36
43326.36
43326.36
43326.36
43326.36
43326.36
43326.36
43326.36
43326.36
43326.36
43326.36
43326.36
43326.36
12224.91
12224.91
12224.91
12224.91
12224.91
40048.27
40048.27
40048.27
40171.78
40171.78
40171.78
Bs
42372.00
42372.00
42372.00
42372.00
42372.00
42372.00
42372.00
42372.00
42372.00
42372.00
42372.00
42372.00
42372.00
15200.64
15200.64
15200.64
15200.64
15200.64
4394.71
4394.71
4394.71
40901.76
40901.76
40901.76
Ks
30328.45
59988.85
72274.59
81701.77
89649.25
96651.12
102981.30
108802.49
114220.73
119309.65
124122.87
128700.87
133075.09
67031.60
69100.50
71096.73
73027.47
74898.75
58693.46
59204.38
59702.02
227607.1885
232018.0369
236329.7272
K
24997.884
70249.156
86443.654
97894.156
107484.541
832464.899
123526.659
882074.715
137031.947
966241.304
148923.925
1028877.519
152648.338
87249.154
82913.329
85309.531
87627.018
87471.258
72103.769
71043.925
88383.178
256779.194
278411.728
140940.456
PratNode
17.71
35.41
70.82
106.23
141.65
177.06
212.47
247.88
283.29
318.70
354.12
389.53
424.94
356.64
507.72
541.56
575.41
609.26
559.88
541.83
563.22
759.34
1326.70
1381.98
Pforce
10.62
42.49
84.99
127.48
169.98
212.47
254.96
297.46
339.95
382.45
424.94
467.43
509.93
427.97
609.26
649.88
690.49
731.11
671.86
650.20
675.86
911.20
1592.04
829.19
105
Annexure-2
Annexure:
2
PageNo:
106
Rev.
Subject:SpringStiffnessatAnchorBlockLevel
MadeBy:
Date:
Remarks
CheckBy:
Date:
CALCULATIONSHEET
6.SpringStiffnessatAnchorBlockLevel:
GroundLevel=
HeightofAnchorBlock=
AnchorRodLevel=
WaterLevel=
TopofAnchorBlock=
BottomofAnchorBlock=
HeightfromGLtoWaterLevel(h1)=
HeightfromGLtobottomofBlock(h2)=
8
4
5.5
5.8
7.5
3.5
2.2
4.5
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
6.1sandProperties
AngleofInternalFriction()=
UnitDensityofSoil(d)=
UnitDensityofSoil(sub)=
34
18
7.95
kN/m
3
kN/m
CoefficientofEarthpressure(Kp)3.54
Passiveearthpressureattopofblock
Attopofblock=Kp.d.D
31.83
AtWaterLevel=
140.07
AtBottomofBlock=
204.75
kN/m
2
kN/m
2
kN/m
Avg.Pre.Abovewaterlevel(Pp1)=
85.95
Avg.Pre.belowwaterleveltobott.ofblock(Pp2) 172.41
AveragePressure(Pp1+Pp2)/2=
129.18
Consideringtheaveragepassivepressureas,
SubgrademodulusKs=Cx(gult)=
AllowableDisplacement=
6
Therefore,e=1/0.006
=
166.67
Ks=
21530.0806
Therefore,SoilStiffness=KsxArea
=
279891.047
kN/m
2
kN/m
2
kN/m
mm
3
kN/m
kN/m
6.2StiffnessinTieRod
StiffnessofTieRod=(AE/L)xCosn
Assumen=
0
DiameterofTieRod=
AreaofTieRod(A)=
LengthofTieRod(L)=
,Cosn=
1.00
120
0.0113
12.5
mm
2
m
m
106
Annexure-2
Annexure:
2
PageNo:
107
Rev.
Subject:SpringStiffnessatAnchorBlockLevel
MadeBy:
Date:
Remarks
CheckBy:
Date:
CALCULATIONSHEET
200.0E+6 kN/m2
3.25
m
180955.737 kN/m
Young'sModulusofTieRod(E)=
SpacingofTieRods,S=
StiffnessofTieRod=
TotalSpringStiffnessatTieRodLevelspacing@
1/K=(1/K1)+(1/K2)=
3.25
0.00001
So,K= 109901.80
@
3.25
ApplyonModelspringstiffnesso 219803.60
m=
kN/m
mAnchorRodspacing
kN/m
Toavoidthestiffness
attheTierodlevelfor
TieRodspacingof6.5m
Theabovevalue"K"
shallbemultiplyby2
6.3DeepBeamAlongGridG
SoilParameters
AngleofInternalFriction()=
BulkDensityofSoil(b)=
UnitDensityofSoil(sub)=
34
18
7.95
kN/m
3
kN/m
CoefficientofEarthpressure(Kp)3.537
SpacingofTieBar(s)=
3.25
DepthofDeepBeam,D=
h1=
h2=
m
m
m
PassiveEarthPressure
atSurface=
h1=Kp.b.h1
h2=Kp.(b.h1+sub.h2)
4
2.2
1.3
0
140.07
176.63
kN/m
2
kN/m
2
kN/m
Avg.Pre.Abovewaterlevel(Pp1)=
70.04
Avg.Pre.belowwaterleveltobott.ofblock(Pp2) 158.35
SubgrademodulusKs=Cx(Pp1.A1+Pp2.A2)=
2
A1=h1xs=
7.15
m
2
A2=h2xs=
4.23
m
(Pp1.A1+Pp2.A2)=
1169.774
kN
AllowableDisplacement=
6
Therefore,e=1/0.006
=
166.67
Ks=
187163.911
@
3.25
kN/m
2
kN/m
PropertiesoftheFillup
mm
Consider,
160
kN/m
mAnchorRodspacing
Soilconsideredbehinddeep
beamshallbeensuredatsite
duringexecution.
107
Annexure-3
Annexure:
3
JobTitle:PileDesign
Subject:designofPiles
MadeBy:
CheckBy:
CALCULATIONSHEET
PageNo:
Date:
Date:
108
Rev.
Remarks
1.DesignOfPiles:
DesignisdoneasperIS:4562000andSP16.
Designofpilesischeckedforallpossibleseverecombinationofresultant
forcesanddesignispresentedforatypicalgoverningforcecombination
(MomentandAxialforceCombination).
Theresultantforcesforthepileshavebeenextractedbysortinguptothe
lengthofLowerpointofcontraflexure(InBendingMomentEnvelope)
immediatelybelowthedredgelevel.Beyondthispointthebending
momentsinthepileareapproximatelyzeroandnotconsideredfor
thestructuraldesign.
UnsupportedlengthLoconsideredfor
CalculationofBuckling(Slenderness)
moments
LevelofFirstSpring
d/2
d=Depthoflowerpointofcontraflexurefromfirstspring
Lowerpointofcontraflexure
(ApproximatezeroBMpoint)
TypicalPileBMEnvelope
Effectivelengthofthepileconsideredis,Leff=1.2*Lo
UnsupportedlengthofPiles
Grid
PileType
GridA
GridB
GridC
GridD
GridE
A
B
C
D
E
Depthof
lowerpoint
Unsuppor
Fixitydepth
Lengthoffirst
of
Idealisedlevel
ted
(0.5d)
spring(m,CD) contraflexur
ofpile(CD,m) Length
considered,m
efromfirst
Lo,m
springd,(m)
19.00
13.50
9.50
3.50
2.50
9.00
7.00
8.00
10.00
10.00
4.50
3.50
4.00
5.00
5.00
7.50
7.50
7.50
7.50
6.50
31.00
24.50
21.00
16.00
8.50
108
Annexure-3
Annexure:
3
JobTitle:PileDesign
MadeBy:
CheckBy:
CALCULATIONSHEET
2.PileType
PageNo:
Date:
Date:
109
Rev.
Remarks
2.1MaximumBMlocation:
AxialForce,Pu=
9710.00
MomentinYdirection,My=
2.446
MomentinZdirection,Mz=
2.758
Consideringrootmeansquarevalue,
DesignResultantMoment,Mu=
4
GradeofConcrete,fck=
40
GradeofSteel,fy=
500
DiameterofPile,D=
DiameterofBarassumed=
Clearcovertooutermostbar=
DiameterofHelicals=
Areaofpile,Ag=
d'=
Areaofpilecore,Ac=
d'/D=
LengthofPile=
Eff.Lengthfactor=
Eff.LengthofPile=
Leff/Dratio=
Columnisaslendercolumn
1300
32
75
12
1327322.896
103
1038689.071
0.079
31.00
1.20
37.2
28.62
Slendernessmoments
eax/D=
AdditionalMoment=
0.4
5168.11
Assuming%ofReinforcementas,Pt=
2.00
Puz/Ag=(0.45.fck.Ac+0.75.fy.As)/Ag=
Puz=
21.6
28651.325
kN
kN.m
kN.m
kN.m
2
N/mm
2
N/mm
mm
mm
mm
mm
2
mm
mm
2
mm
mm
m
m
IS:4562000,
Cl.39.7
kN.m
kN
Chart63
SP:16
Pb=(k1+k2.p/fck)fck.b.D
k1=
k2=
0.168
0.495
Pbx=
13029.90
Table60
SP:16
kN
109
Annexure-3
SheetNo:
2of6
JobTitle:PileDesign
MadeBy:
CheckBy:
CALCULATIONSHEET
PageNo:
Date:
Date:
110
Rev.
Remarks
kx= (PuzPu)/(PuzPbx)
= 1.21
kx=valueislimitedto1,Sokx=
Max= kxxMax=
1
5168.11
MinimumEccentricity(emin)=L/500+D/30=
Mux2=Pu.emin=
1022.79
DesignMoment=Max+Mux
Mu=
6190.90
kN.m
kN.m
105.333
mm
(HereMux1isequalstoMux2
,Asshapeiscircular)
kN.m
Pu/fck.D2=0.144
Mu/fck.D3 0.070
p/fck=
5.10
p=
2.04
Asreq=
27077.39
SP:16
Chart60
%
2
mm
MinimumareaoflongitudinalreinforcementasperCl.5.11.1ofIS:2911(PartI/Sec2)is
0.4% ofSectionalArea=
5309.29
mm2
ProvidereinforcementAsof=
Provide:
Noofbarsprovided=
DiameterofBar1=
Noofbarsprovided=
DiameterofBar2=
TotalAsProvided=
ReinforcementprovidedisOK
27077.39
34
32
0
25
27344.42
mm
Nos.
mm
Nos.
mm
mm2
110
Annexure-3
SheetNo:
2of6
JobTitle:PileDesign
MadeBy:
CheckBy:
CALCULATIONSHEET
PageNo:
Date:
Date:
111
Rev.
Remarks
2.2Helicalreinforcement
(a)Pitchofreinforcementshallnotbemorethanleastofthefollowing:
Leastlateraldimension=
1300
mm
16xsmallestdia.Oflong.Bar=
400
mm
Upperlimitforspacing=
300
mm
ProvidePitch=
250
mm
IS:4562000,
Cl.26.5.3.2(d)
(b)Diameterofreinforcementshallnotbelessthanfollowing:
1/4dia.Oflongitudinalbar=
6.25
mm
6mm
ProvideHelicalreinf.ofDia.=
12
mm
2.3DevelopmentLength
IS:4562000,
Cl.26.2.1
Ld=.s/4.bd
Bondstressbd=
1.9Mpa
for
60%increaseinbondstressfordeformedbars
Hence,designbondstress
3.04Mpa
Stressinbars=0.87fy=
435Mpa
DevelopmentLength,Ld=
Takenearervalue=
35.77
40
IS:4562000,
Cl.26.2.1.1
111
Annexure-3
Annexure:
3
JobTitle:PileDesign
MadeBy:
CheckBy:
CALCULATIONSHEET
2.PileType
PageNo:
Date:
Date:
112
Rev.
Remarks
AxialForce,Pu=
5330.00
3.459
2.652
4
40
GradeofSteel,fy=
500
DiameterofPile,D=
DiameterofHelicals=
Areaofpile,Ag=
d'=
Areaofpilecore,Ac=
d'/D=
LengthofPile=
Eff.Lengthfactor=
Eff.LengthofPile=
Leff/Dratio=
1000
32
75
12
785398.1634
103
567450.1731
0.103
24.50
1.20
29.4
29.40
Slendernessmoments
eax/D=
AdditionalMoment=
0.4
2303.52
kN
kN.m
kN.m
kN.m
2
N/mm
2
N/mm
mm
mm
mm
mm
2
mm
mm
2
mm
mm
m
m
IS:4562000,
Cl.39.7
kN.m
2.00
Puz=
20.5
16104.58934 kN
Chart63
SP:16
k1=
k2=
0.160
0.443
Pbx=
7286.00
Table60
SP:16
kN
112
Annexure-3
Annexure:
3
JobTitle:PileDesign
MadeBy:
CheckBy:
CALCULATIONSHEET
PageNo:
Date:
Date:
113
Rev.
Remarks
= 1.22
Max= kxxMax=
1
2303.52
Mux2=Pu.emin=
438.84
Mu=
2742.36
kN.m
kN.m
82.333
mm
,Asshapeiscircular)
kN.m
Pu/fck.D2=0.133
Mu/fck.D3 0.069
p/fck=
4.80
p=
1.92
Asrequire
15079.64
SP:16
Chart60
%
2
mm
0.4% ofSectionalArea=
3141.59
mm2
Provide:
Noofbarsprovided=
DiameterofBar1=
Noofbarsprovided=
DiameterofBar2=
TotalAsProvided=
15079.64
20
32
0
25
16084.95
mm
Nos.
mm
Nos.
mm
mm2
113
Annexure-3
Annexure:
3
JobTitle:PileDesign
MadeBy:
CheckBy:
CALCULATIONSHEET
PageNo:
Date:
Date:
114
Rev.
Remarks
1000
mm
400
mm
300
mm
ProvidePitch=
250
mm
IS:4562000,
Cl.26.5.3.2(d)
6.25
mm
6mm
12
mm
IS:4562000,
Cl.26.2.1
Ld=.s/4.bd
Bondstressbd=
1.9Mpa
for
3.04Mpa
435Mpa
Takenearervalue=
35.77
40
IS:4562000,
Cl.26.2.1.1
114
Annexure-3
Annexure:
3
JobTitle:PileDesign
MadeBy:
CheckBy:
CALCULATIONSHEET
2.PileType
PageNo:
Date:
Date:
115
Rev.
Remarks
AxialForce,Pu=
2510.00
1110.000
149.856
1120
40
GradeofSteel,fy=
500
DiameterofPile,D=
DiameterofHelicals=
Areaofpile,Ag=
d'=
Areaofpilecore,Ac=
d'/D=
LengthofPile=
Eff.Lengthfactor=
Eff.LengthofPile=
Leff/Dratio=
1000
32
75
12
785398.1634
103
567450.1731
0.103
21.00
1.20
25.2
25.20
Slendernessmoments
eax/D=
AdditionalMoment=
0.3
796.98
Puz=
kN
kN.m
kN.m
kN.m
2
N/mm
2
N/mm
mm
mm
mm
mm
2
mm
mm
2
mm
mm
m
m
IS:4562000,
Cl.39.7
kN.m
2.00
20.5
16104.58934 kN
Chart63
SP:16
k1=
k2=
0.160
0.443
Pbx=
7286.00
Table60
SP:16
kN
115
Annexure-3
Annexure:
3
JobTitle:PileDesign
MadeBy:
CheckBy:
CALCULATIONSHEET
PageNo:
Date:
Date:
116
Rev.
Remarks
= 1.54
Max= kxxMax=
1
796.98
Mux2=Pu.emin=
189.09
kN.m
Mu=
986.06
kN.m
Pu/fck.D2=
Mu/fck.D3=
kN.m
75.333
mm
,Asshapeiscircular)
0.063
0.025
p/fck=
3.00
p=
1.20
Asrequired=
9424.78
SP:16
Chart60
%
2
mm
0.4%
ofSectionalArea=
3141.59
mm2
Provide:
Noofbarsprovided=
DiameterofBar1=
Noofbarsprovided=
DiameterofBar2=
TotalAsProvided=
9424.78
10
32
10
25
12951.22
mm
Nos.
mm
Nos.
mm
mm2
116
Annexure-3
Annexure:
3
JobTitle:PileDesign
MadeBy:
CheckBy:
CALCULATIONSHEET
PageNo:
Date:
Date:
117
Rev.
Remarks
1000
mm
400
mm
300
mm
ProvidePitch=
250
mm
IS:4562000,
Cl.26.5.3.2(d)
6.25
mm
6mm
12
mm
IS:4562000,
Cl.26.2.1
Ld=.s/4.bd
Bondstressbd=
1.9Mpa
for
3.04Mpa
435Mpa
Takenearervalue=
35.77
40
IS:4562000,
Cl.26.2.1.1
117
Annexure-3
Annexure:
3
JobTitle:PileDesign
MadeBy:
CheckBy:
CALCULATIONSHEET
2.PileType
PageNo:
Date:
Date:
118
Rev.
Remarks
AxialForce,Pu=
3730.00
4220.000
934.476
4322
40
GradeofSteel,fy=
500
DiameterofPile,D=
DiameterofHelicals=
Areaofpile,Ag=
d'=
Areaofpilecore,Ac=
d'/D=
LengthofPile=
Eff.Lengthfactor=
Eff.LengthofPile=
Leff/Dratio=
1200
32
75
12
1130973.355
103
865901.4751
0.086
16.00
1.20
19.2
16.00
Slendernessmoments
eax/D=
AdditionalMoment=
0.1
572.93
Puz=
kN
kN.m
kN.m
kN.m
2
N/mm
2
N/mm
mm
mm
mm
mm
2
mm
mm
2
mm
mm
m
m
IS:4562000,
Cl.39.7
kN.m
2.00
21.3
24068.52672 kN
Chart63
SP:16
k1=
k2=
0.163
0.471
Pbx=
10745.28
Table60
SP:16
kN
118
Annexure-3
Annexure:
3
JobTitle:PileDesign
MadeBy:
CheckBy:
CALCULATIONSHEET
PageNo:
Date:
Date:
119
Rev.
Remarks
= 1.53
Max= kxxMax=
1
572.93
Mux2=Pu.emin=
268.56
kN.m
Mu=
841.49
kN.m
Pu/fck.D2=
Mu/fck.D3=
kN.m
72.000
mm
,Asshapeiscircular)
0.065
0.012
p/fck=
5.50
p=
2.20
Asrequired=
24881.41
SP:16
Chart60
%
2
mm
0.4%
ofSectionalArea=
4523.89
mm2
Provide:
Noofbarsprovided=
DiameterofBar1=
Noofbarsprovided=
DiameterofBar2=
TotalAsProvided=
24881.41
32
32
0
25
25735.93
mm
Nos.
mm
Nos.
mm
mm2
119
Annexure-3
Annexure:
3
JobTitle:PileDesign
MadeBy:
CheckBy:
CALCULATIONSHEET
PageNo:
Date:
Date:
120
Rev.
Remarks
1200
mm
400
mm
300
mm
ProvidePitch=
250
mm
IS:4562000,
Cl.26.5.3.2(d)
6.25
mm
6mm
12
mm
IS:4562000,
Cl.26.2.1
Ld=.s/4.bd
Bondstressbd=
1.9Mpa
for
3.04Mpa
435Mpa
Takenearervalue=
35.77
40
IS:4562000,
Cl.26.2.1.1
120
Annexure-3
Annexure:
3
JobTitle:PileDesign
MadeBy:
CheckBy:
CALCULATIONSHEET
2.PileType
PageNo:
Date:
Date:
121
Rev.
Remarks
AxialForce,Pu=
3960.00
2870.520
54.593
2871
40
GradeofSteel,fy=
500
DiameterofPile,D=
DiameterofHelicals=
Areaofpile,Ag=
d'=
Areaofpilecore,Ac=
d'/D=
LengthofPile=
Eff.Lengthfactor=
Eff.LengthofPile=
Leff/Dratio=
Columnisashortcolumn
1200
32
75
12
1130973.355
103
865901.4751
0.086
8.50
1.20
10.2
8.50
kN
kN.m
kN.m
kN.m
2
N/mm
2
N/mm
mm
mm
mm
mm
2
mm
mm
2
mm
mm
m
m
57
Mux2=Pu.emin 225.72
,Asshapeiscircular)
kN.m
mm
ForDesignMoment,takegreaterofMux1andMux2.
Mu=
2870.52
kN.m
Pu/fck.D2=
Mu/fck.D3=
0.06875
0.041529514
p/fck=
2.500
SP:16
p= 1.00
Asrequired= 11309.73355+
mm
121
Annexure-3
SheetNo:
2of6
JobTitle:PileDesign
MadeBy:
CheckBy:
CALCULATIONSHEET
ofIS:2911(PartI/Sec2)is
0.4 ofSectionalArea=
Provide:
Noofbarsprovided=
DiameterofBar1=
Noofbarsprovided=
DiameterofBar2=
TotalAsProvided=
PageNo:
Date:
Date:
122
Rev.
Remarks
4523.893421
mm
11309.7
mm
16.00
Nos.
32.00
mm
8.00
Nos.
25.00
mm
16794.9543x mm2
1200.0
mm
smallestdia.Oflong.Bar=
400.00
mm
300.00
mm
ProvidePitch=
250.00
mm
notbelessthanfollowing:
/4dia.Oflongitudinalbar=
6mm
6.25
IS:4562000,
Cl.26.5.3.2(d)
mm
12
mm
IS:4562000,
Cl.26.2.1
Ld=.s/4.bd
Bondstress 1.9
for
435.00
Takenearervalue=
35.77
40.000
40
IS:4562000,
Cl.26.2.1.1
122
Annexure-4
ANNEXURE 4
DESIGN SPECTRA FOR DIFFERENT SITES
A4.1 Observations
A4.1.1 Design acceleration spectrum for:
A. California for return period of 2500 years and 5% damping
Period
Spectral
(s)
Acceleration
Design acceleration spectrum for California

(5% damping with ZPA = 0.52 g for 2500 years
Return Period)
(g)
0
0.520
1.60
0.03
0.520
1.40
0.1
1.060
1.20
0.2
1.380
0.3
1.370
0.4
1.260
0.5
1.150
0.60
0.6
1.064
0.40
0.7
0.978
0.20
0.8
0.892
0.9
0.806
0.720
1.5
0.548
0.380
2.5
0.328
0.223
0.170
1.00
0.80
0.00
0
123
Annexure-4
B. Andaman for D-type site return period of 2500 years and 5% damping
Period
(s)
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2
2.2
2.4
2.6
2.8
3
3.2
3.4
3.6
3.8
4
Spectral
Acceleration
(g)
0.350
0.875
0.975
0.650
0.488
0.390
0.325
0.279
0.244
0.217
0.195
0.177
0.163
0.150
0.139
0.130
0.122
0.115
0.108
0.103
0.098
Design spectra for D-type site in Andaman

Return Period)
1.20
1.00
0.80
0.60
0.40
0.20
0.00
0
124
Annexure-4
C. Mundra for D-type site return period of 2500 years and 5% damping
0
0.2
0.4
Spectral
Acceleration
(g)
0.213
0.533
0.500
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2
2.2
2.4
2.6
2.8
3
3.2
3.4
3.6
3.8
4
0.333
0.250
0.200
0.167
0.143
0.125
0.111
0.100
0.091
0.083
0.077
0.071
0.067
0.063
0.059
0.056
0.053
0.050
Period
(s)
Design spectra for D-type site in Mundra,Gujarat

Return Period)
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
0
125
Annexure-4
D. As per IS: 1893-2002 for Seismic Zone V considering 5% damping for Medium type
of Soil
Period
(s)
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2
2.2
2.4
2.6
2.8
3
3.2
3.4
3.6
3.8
4
Spectral
Acceleration
(g)
0.180
0.450
0.450
0.408
0.306
0.245
0.204
0.175
0.153
0.136
0.122
0.111
0.102
0.094
0.087
0.082
0.077
0.072
0.068
0.064
0.061
Design spectra for Zone V as per IS:1893-2002

(5% damping for Medium soil site)
0.50
0.45
0.40
0.35
0.30
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0.00
0
126

Performance Based Design

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Performance Based Design

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Performance Based Design

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CEPTUNIVERSITY,SCHOOLOFBUILDINGSCIENCE&TECHNOLOGY,KASTURBHAILALBHAICAMPUS,

General-Why performance based design

Performance based seismic design Parameters

Design Earthquake Motions

2.2.1.1 Site-specific spectra for Earthquake using probabilistic approach 6

2.2.1.2 Steps for Response Spectrum for a particular site

2.2.1.3 Illustrative Example for a D-type site at Mundra

Acceptable level of Damage

Moment Curvature relationship for Piles

Plastic hinge length

Analysis Methods for Wharf (Jetty) Structure

Simplified Dynamic Analysis

Performance Based Seismic Design-List of Standards available

PROBLEM FORMULATION/ CASE STUDY

Selection of Space frame

Generating the Structural Model

Material Properties Used

Berthing Load (One Fender)

Berthing Load (Two Fenders)

Earthquake Load in X direction (Transverse direction)

Earthquake Load in Y direction (Longitudinal direction)

Wind Force Operational Condition in X direction

Wind Force Extreme Condition in X direction

3.4.10 Wave and Current Forces in Y direction

3.4.11 Hydrodynamic Force due to Earthquake in X direction

3.4.12 Hydrodynamic Force due to Earthquake in Y direction

3.4.13 Temperature Load

3.4.14 Earth pressure

Pile Moment-Curvature characteristics

Ultimate Concrete Strain Capacity

Cracking Moment and Curvature

Moment and Curvature Summary

Pile Pushover Analysis

Performance Limits from Pushover analysis results

Sample Calculation for Design acceleration spectrum A

3.15.1 Method A: Equivalent Single Mode Analysis

3.15.2 Method B: Push over analysis

OBSERVATION AND CONCLUSION

Design spectra for different sites

Short Period Spectral Acceleration at T = 0.2 second with Return

Long Period Spectral Acceleration at T = 1 second with Return Period

Design spectra for D-type site in Mundra, Gujarat (5% damping)

Schematic figure of performance grades S, A, B and C by PIANC Code

Example of Seismic performance

Idealized Moment-Rotation Curve

Flowchart for Performance Based Seismic Design for Wharf (Jetty

Jetty Layouts (Plan & Elevation)

Fender Dimensions & Spacing

Soil pressure on Deep Beam at Grid E

Wharf (Jetty) Dimensions (Elevation)

Moment-curvature Curve for Pile grid A for pitch of 65 mm using

Moment-curvature Curve for Pile grid A for pitch of 250 mm using

Material property input in XTRACT for generating Stress-Strain Curve

Simplified Moment-Curvature relationships

(a) Transverse section for analysis, (b) Force-displacement response

Results of Pushover analysis

Results of Pushover analysis for Individual Piles (From A to E top to

(a) Pushover Curve, (b) Plastic Hinge Sequence