Case Study - Wembley Stadium: DR Andrew Bond, Geocentrix LTD DR Francesco Basile, Geomarc LTD

Case study – Wembley Stadium
Dr Andrew Bond, Geocentrix Ltd
Dr Francesco Basile, Geomarc Ltd

Experience from new Wembley Stadium
• With 90,000 seats, the new

Wembley stadium will be the
largest football stadium in the
world with every seat under
cover. There will be NO
obstructed views.
• The main architectural feature is

a 133m high triumphal arch,
7.4m in diameter, with a weight
of 1,750 tonnes. With a span of
315m, it is one of the largest
and most slender structures in
the world.
• Construction of 4000 piles, pile

diameter 0.45-1.5m, pile lengths
up to 40m. Extensive pile
testing programme.
Feb-07 Repute hands-on ©2006 Geocentrix Ltd 2

Experience from new Wembley Stadium
• Design by Mott MacDonald who

performed extensive Repute
analyses (both linear and non-
linear) of pile groups during raising
of triumphal arch.
• Large pile groups subject to

complex loading (V, H, M, T)
– soil non-linearity essential
for realistic prediction
• During raising of the arch,

monitoring was installed to
determine the movements of the
pile groups. These were compared
to Class A predictions from Repute
(see Hardy & O’Brien, 2006, for
more information).

Ground conditions
• Made ground (varying thickness)

• 30-35m London Clay
– unit weight γ = 20 kN/m3
– undrained strength
• Cu = 40 + 7.5z kPa (z in m) for z < 10m
• Cu = 115 + 4.5z kPa (z in m) for z ≥ 10m
– Young’s modulus stiffness anisotropy:
• Vertical Ev = 60-232 MPa (depending on strain level)
• Horizontal Eh = 9-171 MPa (ditto)
• Chalk
• Water table at 2.5m depth

Shear modulus from seismic cone & self-boring
pressuremeter
Shear Modulus at Small Strain (MN/m2)
0 100 200 300 400
0
Depth below Top of London Clay (m)
Weathered
5 London Clay
SBP
10
SCPT Unweathered
London Clay
15
Unit B
20
25
Unit A
30
35 Lambeth Group
40

Using linear model to match lateral pile tests
500
Horizontal Load (kN)

400
Unconservative
design 300
200
Over-
Back analysis using
conservative 100 linear elastic model
design
0
0 20 40 60 80
Lateral M ovem ent (m m )
• Ev drops: 232 MPa (initial) > 118 (FoS = 1.7) > 60 (failure)
• Eh drops: 171 MPa (initial) > 23 (FoS = 1.7) > 9 (failure)
• Non-linear analysis essential if large lateral loads exist

Using non-linear model to match lateral pile
tests
Horizontal Load (kN) 500
400 T est D at a
300
200
Non-linear
100
Single pile testing
0
0 20 40 60 80
Lateral M ovem ent (m m )

Arch lifting mechanism
• The most critical engineering activity during the stadium

construction was raising the arch to its final position (112o)
Arch at
Turning Original
Struts Position
Jacking Arch
Points Stillage
Base
Original Position
of Arch
Eastern Western
Arch Base Arch Base
Turning Struts
Jacking
Feb-07 Bases
Repute hands-on ©2006 Geocentrix Ltd 8
Design of permanent Eastern Arch Base
• Pile group
– No. 19 Piles (L =33m, D =1.5m)
– Spacing: Sx = SY = 5m
• No. 121 load cases covering each angle of the arch at
5o intervals
• “Observational method” applied:
– System of precision levelling (+/- 0.1mm) to determine
movements of pile groups (settlements, deflections, rotations)
during the arch lift
– On the basis of the non-linear Repute analyses, amber and
red limits were set

Comparison Repute vs measured behaviour:
pile-group deflection in y direction
14
12
Deflection in y direction: mm
10
8
Measured
6 Repute
4 Amber limit
2 Red limit
0
-2
-4
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Angle of arch: degrees

Conclusions (from Hardy & O’Brien, 2006)
• “The predicted movements correlated very well with

the observed movements and illustrate the
importance of non-linear soil behaviour in modelling
pile groups.
• If linear analyses had been undertaken, the
movements and structural forces could have been
under or over estimated by a considerable amount.
• Consequently the amber and red limits would have
been set incorrectly and the safety of the arch lift
could have been compromised”.

Case Study - Wembley Stadium: DR Andrew Bond, Geocentrix LTD DR Francesco Basile, Geomarc LTD

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case Study - Wembley Stadium: DR Andrew Bond, Geocentrix LTD DR Francesco Basile, Geomarc LTD

Uploaded by

Document Information

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

Case Study - Wembley Stadium: DR Andrew Bond, Geocentrix LTD DR Francesco Basile, Geomarc LTD

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case study – Wembley Stadium

Dr Andrew Bond, Geocentrix Ltd

Dr Francesco Basile, Geomarc Ltd

• With 90,000 seats, the new

• The main architectural feature is

• Construction of 4000 piles, pile

Feb-07 Repute hands-on ©2006 Geocentrix Ltd 2

• Design by Mott MacDonald who

• Large pile groups subject to

• During raising of the arch,

Feb-07 Repute hands-on ©2006 Geocentrix Ltd 3

• Made ground (varying thickness)

Feb-07 Repute hands-on ©2006 Geocentrix Ltd 4

Feb-07 Repute hands-on ©2006 Geocentrix Ltd 5

Horizontal Load (kN)

Feb-07 Repute hands-on ©2006 Geocentrix Ltd 6

Horizontal Load (kN) 500

Feb-07 Repute hands-on ©2006 Geocentrix Ltd 7

• The most critical engineering activity during the stadium

Feb-07 Repute hands-on ©2006 Geocentrix Ltd 9

Angle of arch: degrees

Feb-07 Repute hands-on ©2006 Geocentrix Ltd 10

• “The predicted movements correlated very well with

Feb-07 Repute hands-on ©2006 Geocentrix Ltd 11

You might also like

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.