Prediction of Surface Settlement Due to Deep Excavation in Indo-Gangetic Plain: A Case Study

  • M. S. AswathyEmail author
  • M. Vinoth
  • Achal Mittal
  • Siddharth Behera
Case Report


Excessive settlement occurred during the installation of collection chamber of sewage pumping station induced minor-to-major damages in the adjacent structures which cautioned the authorities. CSIR-Central Building Research Institute, India, investigated and identified the cause and control further damages to the adjacent structures due to excavation construction. Initial study revealed that excessive settlement occurred due to dewatering carried out after the installation of collection chamber by well sinking method. The presence of soft soil and high water table caused soil movement towards the collection chamber, leading to severe settlement issues. This necessitated a proper study before carrying out further excavation of the adjacent inlet and screen chambers. The evaluations for the remaining two chambers have been carried out using numerical analysis by finite element method and supplemented by comparing with existing analytical approaches and field values. Based on this study, a robust as well as economical shoring scheme is suggested to cater for minimal damage to the nearby buildings.


Settlement FEM Underwater grouting Propped support system Wall deflection 



The authors are thankful to the Director, CBRI, for granting permission in publishing the research work. The authors would also like to acknowledge Ms. Aradhna Sharma for her contribution in carrying out the analytical study.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. 1.
  2. 2.
    Korff M (2009) Deformations and damage to buildings adjacent to deep excavations in soft soils. Deltares, DelftGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Peck RB (1969) Deep excavation and tunneling in soft ground. In: Proceeding of the 7th international conference on soil mechanics and foundation engineering, Mexico City, State-of-the-Art Volume, pp 225–290Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    O’Rourke TD (1981) Ground movements caused by braced excavations. J Geotech Eng Am Soc Civ Eng 107:1159–1178Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mana AI, Clough GW (1981) Prediction of movements for braced cuts in clay. J Geotech Eng Div Am Soc Civ Eng 107(6):759–777Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Clough GW, Smith EW, Sweeney BP (1989) Movement control of excavation support system by iterative design. Found Eng Curr Princ Practi 2:869–882Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Long M (2001) Database for retaining wall and ground movements due to deep excavation. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng ASCE 127(3):203–224. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Boone SJ (2003) Design of deep excavations in urban environments. Ph.D. Thesis, University of TorontoGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wong IH, Chua TS (1999) Ground movements due to pile driving in an excavation in soft soil. Can Geotech J 36:152–160. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ou CY (2006) Deep excavation: theory and practice. Taylor and Francis, LondonGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Preene M, Roberts TOL, Powrie W, Dyer MR (2000) Ground water control-design and practice. CIRIA Report 515Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Terzaghi K (1943) Theoretical soil mechanics. Jolm Wiley, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Clough GW, O’Rourke TD (1990) Construction induced movements of in situ walls. In: Proceedings of design and performance of earth retaining structure, ASCE special conference, Ithaca, New York, pp 439–470Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    PLAXIS 3D (2012) Reference ManualGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bahrami M, Khodakarami MI, Haddad A (2018) 3D numerical investigation of the effect of wall penetration depth on excavations behavior in sand. Comput Geotech 98:82–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Poh TY, Wong IH (1998) Effects of construction of diaphragm wall panels on adjacent ground: field trial. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 124(8):745–756. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Finno RJ, Bryson S, Calvello M (2002) Performance of a stiff support system in soft clay. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 128:660–671. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Thorley CBB, Forth RA (2002) Settlement due to diaphragm wall construction in reclaimed land in Hong Kong. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng 128:473–478. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Likitlersuanga S, Surarak C, Wanatowski D, Erwin O, Balasubramaniam A (2013) Finite element analysis of a deep excavation: a case study from the Bangkok MRT. Soils Found 53(5):756–773. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ma JQ, Berggren BS, Bengtsson PE, Stille H, Hintze S (2006) Back analysis on a deep excavation in Stockholm with finite element method. Numerical methods in geotechnical engineering-Schweiger. Taylor and Francis, London, pp 423–428Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hsieh PG, Ou CY (1998) Shape of ground surface settlement profiles caused by excavation. Can Geotech J 35(6):1004–1017. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Bowles JE (1996) Foundation analysis and design, 5th edn. McGraw-Hill Inc, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Goh ATC, Zhang F, Zhang W, Chew OYS (2017) Assessment of strut forces for braced excavation in clays from numerical analysis and field measurements. Comput Geotech 86:141–149. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hsieh P-G, Ou Chang-Yu, Lin Y-L (2012) Three-dimensional numerical analysis of deep excavations with cross walls. Acta Geotech 8:33–48. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ou CY, Chiou DC, Wu TS (1996) Three-dimensional finite element analysis of deep excavations. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng ASCE 122(5):337–345CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Rankin WJ (1988) Ground movements resulting from urban tunnelling: predictions and effects. In: Bell FG, Colshaw MG, Cripps JC, Lovell MA (eds) Engineering geology of underground movements. Geological Society, London, pp 79–92Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Indian Geotechnical Society 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.CSIR-Central Building Research InstituteRoorkeeIndia

Personalised recommendations