GROUND TREATMENT AT LANDSIDE EXPRESSWAY

BY

Dato’ Dr. Dennis Ganendra, Director

Dr. Nagendra M.V. General Manager, Geotechnical Division
Minconsult Sdn. Bhd.

Abstract

This paper presents the details of the various methods of ground treatment adopted for
the construction of the Land Expressway of Penang Second Bridge. The necessity
and methods of ground treatment have been decided based on the rigid performance
requirement, used for the first time in Malaysia, to achieve 100 % primary
consolidation and stringent differential settlement prior to hand over of the expressway.
The choice of method of treatment depends on the sub-soil conditions, thickness of fill,
driving comfort, available construction time, suitability of the method, cost and other
related factors. In view of the sub-soil conditions present and the thickness of fill being
different for the three packages of the expressway, the criteria adopted for selecting
the method of ground treatment varies for the three packages. Prefabricated vertical
drain, stone column and piled embankment are the methods generally used in this
project. Various methods of treatment at the transition zones to minimize the
differential settlement between two methods of ground treatment have also been
considered for a comfortable riding.

Staged construction has been adopted to ensure stability of the fill at all times during
construction. In addition, counterweight berm and woven geotextile reinforcement
have also used considering long term stability. Use of surcharge to accelerate the
required settlement to occur within the available construction period has also been
considered. Monitoring of settlement and lateral movement is proposed to be carried
out using geotechnical instrumentation at various locations at regular intervals along
the expressway to ensure stability during construction as well as to achieve the
performance requirement.

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The Second Penang Bridge Project (SPBP) has been proposed to link the Penang
Island to the Mainland which starts from Batu Maung in Penang Island and ends at
Batu Kawan in Mainland. The Second Penang Bridge is approximately 24 Km in
length which consists of the following three (3) packages : -

Package 1 – Main Navigation Span and Substructure & Foundation Works of

Approach Spans
Package 2 – Superstructure Works of the Approach Spans
Package 3 – Land Expressway
 Package 3 has been divided into the following three (3) sub packages as shown in
Table 1.

Table 1 : SUBPACKAGES OF LANDSIDE EXPRESSWAY

Sl. No. Package Name Designer

1 Package 3A Batu Maung Interchange PJS Consultants Sdn.
Bhd.

2 Package 3B Batu Kawan Expressway KKJP2 Sdn. Bhd.

3 Package 3C Batu Kawan Trumpet SSP Sdn. Bhd.

Interchange

Minconsult Sdn Bhd has been appointed as the Independent Checking Engineer (ICE).

Package 3A consists of the approach to the main bridge (start of package 1) from
Penang Island. This consists of about 500 m long bridge structure, four (4) numbers
approach ramps from Penang island to bridge structure, widening of the existing
Bayan Lepas Expressway for about 1 km length and widening of Sg. Nipah bridge.
The approach ramps (1 and 2) at the Western side of the interchange originate from
the widened portion of the Bayan Lepas Expressway and ramps 3 and 4 originate from
the Eastern side of the expressway. The maximum height of approach ramp at the
bridge structure is about 7.0 m.

Package 3B consists of about 5.2 km long expressway to be constructed on the fill

embankment. The proposed alignment of the expressway includes crossing over 4
bridges, one arch culvert and two tidal gates, rest and service area and two toll areas
(PLUS and Penang Second Bridge – P2B). The maximum height of fill embankment is
about 11.5 m.

Package 3C consists of the extension of Batu Kawan Expressway by about 0.5 km

and connecting the existing PLUS highway through an interchange. The interchange
has a bridge over PLUS highway, four approach embankments to the bridge and a
new box culvert. Three existing culverts across the PLUS highway are to be extended
for constructing the approach embankments. The maximum height of approach
embankment is about 8.5 m.

The overall alignment of the expressway is shown in Fig. 1 to 3.

2.0 DESIGN REQUIREMENTS

The stringent design requirements, set for the first time in Malaysia, for satisfactory
performance of the embankment of Land Expressway are :

i) On completion of earthworks and prior to preparation of pavement, 100 %

Consolidation Settlement is achieved under final embankment load.

ii) On completion and handing over of works, Total Settlement shall not exceed :
 - 50 mm at any point on the road pavement within the first twenty (20) years of
service

iii) All slopes shall have a factor of safety against instability of no less than 1.25 under
temporary construction conditions and 1.5 under long term conditions.

3.0 GEOLOGY AND SUB-SOIL CONDITIONS

3.1 Geology of the Area

The site is located in marine and continental deposits of Quaternary age. These
deposits consist of clay, silt, sand and peat with some gravel. The proposed
expressway alignment traverses mostly on marine and brackish deposits of clay and
silt. The coastal plain represents the top surface of unconsolidated wedge sediment
deposits. The surface of the coastal plain is made up of a fairly ordered horizontal
succession of beach, lagoon, swamp and river deposits. The coastal plain deposits
consist predominantly of clay and sandy clay, with thinner intercalated layers and
lenses of sand, peat and rarely gravel. Shells and decayed vegetation can also found
in this area. Evidence of continental fluvial and swamp deposits below the present sea
level is provided mainly by the records of peat, wood and oxidized iron in the
boreholes. This intermixing of marine and non-marine deposits in the unconsolidated
sediments reflects the major fluctuation in sea level.

3.2 Soil Investigation and Sub-soil Conditions

3.2.1 Package 3A

Soil investigation has been carried out in two stages. In the investigation carried out in
November – December 2007 the following were executed.

- Sixteen (16) numbers boreholes (BH 1 to BH 15 and BH3A) with associated field
and laboratory tests. The depth of BH was varying from 80 to 81.5 m.

- Two (2) numbers Piezo-cone tests (PZ1 to PZ2) up to depths varying from 20.5 m
to 28.5 m.

- Nine (9) numbers Dynamic Cone Penetration tests.

- Twenty seven (27) numbers Mackintosh Probings (MP1 to MP27) up to depths

varying from 0.9 m to 15.0 m.

Additional soil investigation is being carried out (2010 - 2011) to confirm / finalize the
design and for possible optimization. This investigation consists of fifteen (15)
numbers boreholes (BHA-7 to BHA-21) up to depth varying from 16.9 m to 67.8 m with
associated field and laboratory tests. Eleven (11) numbers Mackintosh Probings
(MPA-1 to MPA11) are also proposed.

Based on the available results of the above soil investigation, it is observed that the
sub-soil consists of very soft alluvial deposits inter-bedded with very loose sand layers
up to about 18 m depth underlain by consolidated alluvium and residual soil up to
about 80 m depth. The ground water table was generally less than 1.0 m depth below
ground level. Typical sub-soil profile is presented in Fig. 4.
3.2.2 Package 3B

Soil investigation has been carried out in three stages. In the investigation carried out
in January – February 2007, the following were executed.

- Fifteen (15) numbers boreholes (BH 22 to BH 36) with associated field and
laboratory tests. The depth of BH was varying from 60.0 to 80.0 m.

- Fifteen (15) numbers Piezo-cone tests (PZ1 to PZ15) up to depths varying from
20.5 m to 40.0 m.

- In-situ Vane Shear tests in boreholes.

Supplementary soil investigation carried out in September – December 2007 consisted

of

- Twenty four (24) numbers boreholes (LB-BH1 to LB-BH3 and A-BH(1S) to A-

BH(21S) and four (4) preliminary boreholes with associated field and laboratory
tests. The depth of BH was about 36.0 to 71.0 m.

- Fifteen (15) numbers Piezo-cone tests (A-PZ1(S) to A-PZ15(S)) up to depths

varying from 21.0 to 40.0 m.

- In-situ Vane Shear tests in thirty two (32) nos. boreholes.

Additional soil investigation is being carried out (2010- 2011) to finalize the design and
for possible optimization. This investigation consists of forty five (45) numbers
boreholes (BH-A1 to BH-A45) with associated field and laboratory tests, Forty eight
(48) nos. Piezo-cones (PZ-A1 to PZ-A48) and Vane Shear tests in eighty nine (89)
boreholes (GV-1 to GV89).

Based on the available results of the above soil investigation, it is observed that
generally the sub-soil consists of very soft to soft clay with shell fragments up to
depths varying between 16 to 24 m underlain by inter-bedded layers of either very
loose to dense silty sand or firm to very stiff sandy clay / silt up to about 80 m depth.
At some locations, hard sandy silt / clay or very dense silty sand layer was
encountered at depths between about 63 to 66 m. The ground water table was
generally less than 1.0 m depth below ground level. Typical sub-soil profile is
presented in Fig. 5a and 5b.

3.2.3 Package 3C

Soil investigation has been carried out in two stages. In the investigation carried out in
February 2008 the following were executed.

- Eight (8) numbers boreholes (PBH 01 to PBH 04 and BH 37 to BH 40) with

associated field and laboratory tests. The depth of PBH boreholes varied from 43
m to 63.3 m and depth of BH37 to BH 40 varied from 28 m to 71 m.

- Four (4) numbers penetration Vane Shear tests (PGV-1 to PGV-4) up to depths
varying from 1.95 m to 12.45 m.
 Additional soil investigation was carried out (November 2010) to finalize the design
and for possible optimization. This investigation consisted of nine (9) numbers
boreholes (ABH-1 to ABH-9) up to depth varying from 16.9 m to 67.8 m with
associated field and laboratory tests. Eight (8) numbers penetration Vane Shear tests
(VS/ABH-2 to VS/ABH-9) up to depths varying from 5 m to 8 m. Thirty two (32) Cone
Penetration tests with Dissipation tests in Five (5) CPT locations.

Based on the results of the above soil investigation, it is observed that the sub-soil
consists of soft sandy clay / silt layer up to depths varying from 9 to 15 m underlain by
medium dense silty sand or stiff to very stiff sandy silt layer of 10 to 50 m depth.
Granite bed rock was encountered in some of the boreholes at depths from 25 m to 32
m. Generally, the ground water table was less than 1.0 m depth below ground level.
Typical sub-soil profile is presented in Fig. 6.

In this paper, only the typical borelogs of packages 3A and 3C and typical sub-soil
profile of package 3B are included. The details of the soil investigation carried out in
this project and the results of the investigation are covered in the accompanying paper
on “Soil Investigation at Land Expressway in accordance with MS2038 and in the
referred reports on soil investigation.

3.4 Embankment Alignment and Profile

The main alignment begins at the Batu Maung directional map and end at the
proposed trumpet interchange approximately 154.7 km of North South Expressway
(NSE). The design speed is 80 kmph and reduced to 60 kmph at the interchanges.
The maximum gradient of the alignment is 5 %.

3.5 Stability and Settlement of Embankment

Considering the geological and subsoil conditions, the road construction over soft
ground or marine deposits pose major problems due to settlement and low bearing
pressure which results in stability problems for the during embankment construction.

Ground treatment has been designed to address the settlement and stability problems
during and after construction and also to minimize the remedial measures and
maintenance of the road in the long term. Though there are many factors to be
considered for the design of ground improvement, the method of ground treatment
depends mainly on the sub-soil conditions and the height of fill.

4.0 GROUND TREATMENT

It is the general practice to decide the method of ground treatment depending on the
height of embankment, sub-soil conditions, available construction time, stability during
construction, driving comfort, available Right-of-way as well as the cost. Where
different methods of ground improvement are possible for a given condition, the choice
of the method is finally based on the available time and cost. Considering these
factors, the following ground improvement methods have been adopted in this project.

1 Prefabricated Vertical Drain (PVD)

2 Stone Column (SC)
3 Piled Embankment (PE)
 In the design of Prefabricated Vertical Drain, the factors for drain spacing, mandrel
size and smear effect have been calculated using the method suggested by Hansbo
(1979).

In the design of Stone column, the improvement factor of the composite ground has
been calculated using the method suggested by H.J. Priebe (1995).

Ground treatment design has been carried out to ensure stability during construction
and to achieve 100 % consolidation at the end of construction. Considering the
differential settlement between the rigid abutment structure and the adjacent flexible
embankment fill, piled embankment with transition slab has been adopted for certain
length of the approach embankment immediately next to the abutment.

Besides the differential settlement in the normal embankment fill, the differential
settlement at the interfacing between the rigid structure (bridge abutment / box culvert)
and the adjacent flexible embankment fill and at the interfacing between two methods
of ground treatment are also addressed. To minimize the differential settlement at
other locations with in the area of same method of ground improvement, the
requirement to compact the embankment fill to 100 % of maximum dry density
(Modified Proctor) has been specified.

Due to the presence of thick soft compressible soil, staged construction of the
embankment, has been considering in the design. The embankment has to be
constructed in stages and at controlled rate of filling to ensure stability during all stages
of construction. The design of each stage filling ensures the minimum required factor
of safety of 1.25 during construction. A waiting period is provided at the end of each
stage of construction to allow the soft soil to consolidate and gain some shear
strength. The design of subsequent filling stages takes into account the increased
shear strength during the previous stages. The overall thickness of the embankment
fill to achieve the final formation level considers the additional fill thickness due
compensate the estimated 100 % primary consolidation settlement of the soft ground.

Surcharge is recommended at certain locations to accelerate the settlement to ensure

100 % consolidation settlement is occurs within the stipulated construction period.
Additional surcharge to increase the settlement during construction (and to reduce the
primary settlement and differential settlement after construction) has also been
considered, subject to stability of the fill under additional surcharge load.

Stability analysis has been carried out using SLOPE/W software to ensure the
minimum factor of safety of 1.25 during all stages of construction and a factor of safety
of 1.5 in the long term. Live load of 10 kPa has been considered in the stability
analysis of embankment. For stability requirement during and after construction,
Woven Geotextile Reinforcement and Counter Weight Berm (CWB) have also been
used where required.

4.1 Package 3A

Generally, the sub-soil consists of very soft alluvial deposits inter-bedded with very
loose sand layers up to about 18 m depth underlain by consolidated alluvium and
residual soil up to about 80 m depth.

The length of the four approach ramps varies from 100 m to 170 m and the maximum
height of fill at the abutment of the ramps varies from 4.5 m to 7.0 m. Depending on
 the height of fill, sub-soil conditions and considering a reasonably short length of the
approach ramps, only two methods of ground treatment have been adopted.

Considering the differential settlement between the rigid abutment structure and the
adjacent flexible embankment fill, piled embankment has been adopted up to fill height
of about between 7 m and 3 m. For embankment fill < 3.0 m, ground treatment using
Prefabricated Vertical Drain (PVD) has been adopted. For the widening of the Bayan
Lepas Expressway, where the height of fill is about 2 m, PVD has been adopted.

The estimated settlement is about 1.4 m.

4.1.1 Prefabricated Vertical Drain

Prefabricated Vertical Drain has been used in the area where the height of
embankment fill is less than 3.0 m. This method has been adopted considering the
available time for construction and the cost.

The design spacing of PVD is 1.0 m for fill height > 2 m and 1.1 m for fill height < 2.0 m
and installed in triangular grid. Considering the low fill height, single stage filling is
adopted. The estimated depth of PVD is about 19.0 m. The details of PVD,
Surcharge Height and Rest Period are summarized in Table 2.

Table 2 : SURCHARGE AND WAITING PERIOD – PACKAGE 3A

Height Spacing of Height of Rest Period

H (m) PVD Surcharge T (months)
(m) S (m)
< 2.0 m 1.1 1.5 6
2.0 m to 3.0 m 1.0 2.0 5

H - Embankment Height (H) above Original Ground Level (OGL)

S – Estimated Surcharge Height (m)
T – Estimated Rest Period (months)

The rate of construction of embankment is limited to 1.0 m height per week.

4.1.2 Piled Embankment

Piled embankment has been adopted for length varying from 50 m to 85 m for the
portion of the approach ramp immediately next to the abutment to minimize the
differential settlement between the rigid bridge abutment and the flexible embankment
fill.

Jack-in pile of 300 mm diameter pre-stressed spun concrete pile (Pre-stress –

5N/mm2, Working Load - 700 kN) is used. All piles are jacked to 1.5 times the working
load. The estimated length varies from 30 m to 41 m at spacing varying from 1.5 m to
2.7 m. The details of piled embankment area are summarized in Table 3.
 Table 3 : DETAILS OF PILED EMBANKMENT – PACKAGE 3A

Ramp Maximum Length Length Spacing

No. Height of Fill of Fill of Pile of Pile
H (m) (m) L (m) ( m)
1 5.5 85.0 41.0 1.5 to 2.7
2 4.5 75.0 39.0 1.5 to 2.4
3 7.0 65.0 30.0 1.5 to 2.2
4 6.5 50.0 33.0 1.5 to 2.3

H - Embankment Height (H) above Original Ground Level (OGL)

L – Estimated length below Existing Ground Level (m)

4.1.3 Differential Settlement and Transition

Differential settlement is also anticipated at the interface of piled embankment and

ground treated with PVD. To minimize this differential settlement, the following
method is adopted.

- For transition zone between piled embankment and Prefabricated Vertical Drain, 6
rows of piles at 1.8 m spacing have been provided with its length gradually
reducing towards PVD area from 24 m to 6 m in steps of 3 m.

4.1.4 Sequence of Construction

The following sequence of construction is envisaged at the interface of PVD and piled
embankment.

PVD is installed first and the embankment is constructed. After the required
consolidation is achieved in this area, excavation of the fill is carried out up to ground
level for installation of embankment pile and laying of transition slab. Subsequently,
embankment over piled area is constructed.

4.2 Package 3B

Generally, the sub-soil consists of soft compressible soil up to about 23 m. The

maximum height of fill is about 11.5 m at the abutment of the PDC road crossing.
Depending on the height of fill, sub-soil conditions and the available time for
construction, the method of ground treatment has been selected.

For embankment fill < 4.5 m, ground improvement using Prefabricated Vertical Drain
(PVD) has been adopted. For embankment fill > 4.5 m, ground improvement using
Stone Column has been adopted. Considering the differential settlement between the
rigid abutment structure and the adjacent flexible embankment fill, piled embankment
has been adopted length varying from 50 m to 62 m of the approach embankment
immediately next to the abutment.
 The estimated settlement varies from 1.2 m to 2.5 m in PVD area and 0.8 m to 1.5 m
in Stone Column areas.

4.2.1 Prefabricated Vertical Drain

Prefabricated Vertical Drain has been used in the area where the height of
embankment fill is less than 4.5 m. This method has been adopted considering the
available time for construction and the right of way and the cost.

The design spacing of PVD is 1.2 m for fill height > 2.5 m and 1.4 m for fill height < 2.5
m and installed in triangular grid. For this spacing, the degree of consolidation during
the staged construction is calculated to obtain the increase in shear strength.
Considering the stability during construction, the rate of embankment filling is also
varied depending on the height of fill for different stages. The details of the staged
construction in PVD area are shown in Table 4.

Table 4 : DETAILS OF STAGED CONSTRUCTION IN PVD LOCATIONS

PACKAGE 3B

Stages H < 2.5 m 2.5 m < H < 3.5 m 3.5 m < H < 4.5 m
(S = 1.0 m) (S =1.2 m) * (S =1.5 m) * $
Height Filling Rest Height Filling Rest Height Filling Rest
(m) Rate Period T (m) Rate Period T (m) Rate Period T
(m/week) (months) (m/week) (months) (m/week) (months)
1 2.0 0.5 2 3.5 1.25 2 3.5 1.25 2
2 3.5 0.5 6 4.5 1.0 2 4.5 1.0 2
3 - - - 4.7 0.25 6 6.0 0.25 6

H - Embankment Height (H) above Original Ground Level (OGL)

S – Estimated Surcharge Height (m)
T – Estimated Rest Period (months)
* - 2.5 m high and 10.0 m wide Counter Weight Berm (CWB) is also provided.
$ - Woven Geotextile KT 400 / 50 is also provided for stability consideration.

Depending on the thickness of soft compressible soil at various locations, the

estimated depth of PVD varies from 17.5 to 22.0 m.

4.2.2 Stone Column

Stone Column has been used in the area where the height of embankment fill is
between 4.5 m to 10.0 m. This method has been adopted considering the available
time for construction and stability of embankment fill.

The design spacing of 1000 mm diameter Stone Column varies between 1.8 m to 2.5
m (square grid) as shown in Table 5.
 Table 5 : SPACING OF STONE COLUMN – PACKAGE 3B

Embankment Height C/C spacing (m) of Stone Column Under

(m) Carriage Way Side Slope
4.5 m to 6.5 m 2.5 m 2.3 m
6.5 m to 8.5 m 2.4 m 2.1 m
8.5 m to 9.5 m * 2.1 m 1.8 m
9.5 m to 10.0 m * 1.8 m 1.8 m

* Geogrid KT 400 / 100 is also used for stability.

For this spacing, the change in the ground condition is calculated to obtain the
increased in shear strength of the composite ground. Considering the stability during
construction, the staged construction of the embankment is adopted. The rate of
construction of embankment fill is limited to 1 m per week and 0.5 m per week for
stages 1 and 2 respectively. The details of the staged construction in Stone Column
area are shown in Table 6.

Table 6 : DETAILS OF STAGED CONSTRUCTION – PACKAGE 3B

Embankment Surcharge Stage 1 Stage 2

Height (m) Height (m) (Filling rate 1 m / week) (Filling rate 0.5 m / week)
Fill Height Rest Period Fill Height Rest Period
(m) T (months) (m) T (months)
4.5 to 6.5 1.0 4.0 3 6.5 + 1.0 3
6.5 to 8.5 1.2 4.0 2.5 8.5 + 1.2 2.5
8.5 to 9.5 1.2 4.0 2.5 9.5 + 1.2 2.5
9.5 to 10.0 1.5 4.0 2.5 10.0 + 1.5 2.5

Depending on the thickness of soft compressible soil at various locations, the

estimated depth of stone column varies from 19 to 23.5 m.

The rate of construction of embankment is also varied between 1.25 m (max.) and
0.25 m (min.) height per week.

4.2.3 Piled Embankment

Piled embankment has been adopted for length varying from 50 m to 62 m of the
approach embankment immediately next to the abutment to minimize the differential
settlement between the rigid bridge abutment and the flexible embankment fill. About
5 m long transition slab is also used at the top of fill to care of the settlement of the fill.
Piled embankment has been provided at seven (7) locations along the length of the
expressway.

350 mm diameter pre-stressed concrete pile (Pres-stress 7N/mm2 and 750 kN working
load) is used. The estimated length varies from of 36 to 40 m at spacing varying from
 1.5 m to 2.0 m. To validate the pile design, 1 MLT on trial pile and 5 PDA tests on
working piles have been envisaged for each location. The details of piled
embankment area are shown in Table 7.

Table 7 : DETAILS OF PILED EMBANKMENT – PACKAGE 3B

Location Bridge / Crossing Maximum Length Pile Length Pile

No. Height of Fill of Fill L (m) Spacing
H (m) (m) ( m)
1 Bridge over Canal 6.0 61.0 36.0 2.0
2 Bridge over Canal 6.0 62.0 36.0 2.0
3 Bridge over Sg. 8.3 46.0 36.0 2.0
Tengah
4 Bridge over Sg. 8.3 50.0 40.0 1.6
Tengah
5 PDC road crossing 10.5 57.0 40.0 1.6
6 PDC road crossing 10.0 56.0 40.0 1.5 to
1.85
7 Land Bridge 8.3 50.0 36.0 1.7

H - Embankment Height (H) above Original Ground level (OGL)

L – Estimated length below Original Ground Level (m)

4.2.4 Differential Settlement and Transition

Differential settlement is also anticipated at the interface of different types of ground

improvement methods. To minimize this differential settlement, the following method
is adopted.

- For transition zone between prefabricated vertical drain and stone column, stone
column are installed at larger spacing compared to the spacing at the adjacent
stone column treated area. High strength woven geotextile (KT 400/50) is also
proposed to provide a smother transition.

- For transition zone between stone column and piled embankment, stone column
are installed at closer spacing compared to the spacing at the adjacent stone
column treated area. A 10 m long transition slab is also provided to provide a
smoother transition between the two methods of ground treatment.

- Where culvert is located in the stone column area, the spacing of stone column
below the culvert is gradually reduced from 2.0 m to 1.5 m in three steps.

- Where culvert is located in the PVD area, eight (8) rows of stone column are
provided below the culvert at spacing of 1.5 m to 2.0 m.

4.2.5 Sequence of Construction

 The following sequence of construction is envisaged at the interface of different
methods of ground treatment.

- At the interface of PVD and stone column, PVD is installed first followed by stone
column.

- At the interface of stone column and piled embankment, stone column is installed
first and the embankment is constructed. After the required consolidation is
achieved in this area, excavation of the fill is carried out up to ground level for
installation of embankment pile and laying of transition slab. Subsequently,
embankment over piled area is constructed.

- At the culvert location, the ground treatment and embankment construction with
surcharge is first carried out. After the required settlement criteria are achieved,
the embankment is excavated to construct the culvert and the embankment is
reconstructed.

4.3 Package 3C

Generally, the sub-soil consists of soft compressible soil up to about 10 m. The

maximum height of fill is about 8.5 m at the abutment of the bridge crossing PLUS
highway. Depending on the height of fill, sub-soil conditions and available time, the
method of ground treatment has been selected.

For embankment fill < 4.5 m, ground treatment using Prefabricated Vertical Drain
(PVD) has been adopted. For embankment fill > 4.5 m, ground treatment using Stone
Column has been adopted. Considering the differential settlement between the rigid
abutment structure and the adjacent flexible embankment fill, piled embankment has
been adopted for 20 m length of the approach embankment immediately next to the
abutment.

The estimated settlement varies from 1.0 m to 2.0 m.

4.3.1 Prefabricated Vertical Drain

Prefabricated Vertical Drain has been used in the area where the height of
embankment fill is less than 4.5 m. This method has been adopted considering the
available time for construction and the right of way and the cost.

The design spacing of PVD is 1 m triangular grid. For this spacing, the degree of
consolidation during the staged construction is calculated to obtain the increase in
shear strength and this increased strength is used to check the stability of the
subsequent stage. The details of the staged construction in PVD area are shown in
Table 8.

Table 8 : DETAILS OF STAGED CONSTRUCTION – PACKAGE 3C

 Stages H < 2.5 m 2.5 m < H < 3.5 m $ 3.5 m < H < 4.5 m *
(S = 1.0 m) (S =1.2 m) (S =1.5 m)
Height Rest Period Height Rest Period Height Rest Period
(m) T (months) (m) T (months) (m) T (months)
1 2.0 3 2.5 2 2.5 2
2 2.5 3 4.5 2 4.5 2
3 3.0 3 4.7 6 6.0 6
4 3.5 3 - - - -

H - Embankment Height (H) above Original Ground Level (OGL)

S – Estimated Surcharge Height (m)
T – Estimated Rest Period (months)
$ - Woven Geotextile WX 200 / 50 is provided.
* - 2.5 m high and 10.0 m wide Counter Weight Berm (CWB) is also provided.

Depending on the thickness of soft compressible soil at various locations, the

estimated depth of PVD varies from 7 to 9 m.

4.3.2 Stone Column

Stone Column has been used in the area where the height of embankment fill is
between 4.5 m to 8.5 m. This method has been adopted considering the available
time for construction and stability of embankment fill.

The design spacing of 1000 mm diameter Stone Column varies between 1.7 m to 2.5
m (square grid) as shown in Table 9.

Table 9 : SPACING OF STONE COLUMN

Embankment Height C/C spacing (m) of Stone Column Under

(m) Carriage Way Side Slope
4.5 m to 6.5 m 2.5 m 2.0 m
6.5 m to 8.5 m 2.3 m 1.7 m

For this spacing, the change in the ground condition is calculated to obtain the
increased in shear strength of the composite ground. Considering the stability during
construction, the staged construction of the embankment is adopted. The rate of
construction of embankment fill is limited to 1 m per week. The details of the staged
construction in Stone Column area are shown in Table 10.

Table 10 : DETAILS OF STAGED CONSTRUCTION – PACKAGE 3C

 Stages 4.5 m < H < 6.5 m 6.5 m < H < 8.5 m
(S = 1.0 m) (S =1.0 m)
Height Rest Period Height Rest Period
(m) T (months) (m) T (months)
1 4.0 1 4.0 1
2 6.5 2 6.5 1
3 7.5 2 8.5 2
4 - - 9.5 2

Depending on the thickness of soft compressible soil at various locations, the

estimated depth of Stone Column varies from 9 to 10 m.

The rate of construction of embankment is limited to 1.0 m height per week.

4.3.3 Piled Embankment

Piled embankment has been adopted for 20 m length of the approach embankment
immediately next to the abutment to minimize the differential settlement between the
rigid bridge abutment and the flexible embankment fill. 5 m long transition slab is also
provided at the top of fill near the abutment.

300 mm square precast concrete pile (800 kN working load) and estimated length of
33 m (near Abutment A) and 27.5 m (near Abutment B) at 2 m spacing has been used.
To validate the pile design, 1 MLT and 10 PDA tests have been envisaged for each
abutment. The details of piled embankment area are summarized in Table 11.

Table 11 : DETAILS OF PILED EMBANKMENT PACKAGE 3C

Abutment Maximum Length Length of Spacing

Height of of Fill Pile of Pile
Fill (m) L (m) ( m)
H (m)
A 8.5 20.0 33.0 2.0
B 8.5 20.0 27.5 2.0

H - Embankment Height (H) above Original Ground Level (OGL)

L – Estimated length below Original Ground Level.

The new box culvert at Ch. 22790 m is supported on pile foundation. 350 mm square
pre-cast concrete piles (Grade 45) are provided at a lateral spacing of 1.68 m and
longitudinal spacing of 2.0 m. The base of the culvert has been designed to serve as
pile cap also. The estimated length of pile having 1300 kN capacity is 20 m.

For the foundation of extension of existing box culverts (3 nos.), 150 mm square pre-
cast concrete piles at 450 mm c/c both ways have been provided. !2 m long piles are
proposed with an estimated capacity of 100 kN.
4.3.4 Differential Settlement and Transition

Differential settlement is also anticipated at the interface of different types of ground

improvement methods. To minimize this differential settlement, the following method
is adopted.

- For transition zone between prefabricated vertical drain and stone column, stone
column are installed at larger spacing compared to the spacing at the adjacent
stone column treated area. High strength woven geotextile (KT 200/50) is also
proposed to provide a smother transition.

- For transition zone between stone column and piled embankment, stone column
are installed at closer spacing compared to the spacing at the adjacent stone
column treated area. A 10 m long transition slab is also provided to provide a
smoother transition between the two methods of ground treatment.

- 6 m long transition slab is also provided at the top of culvert towards the adjacent
PVD area.

4.3.5 Sequence of Construction at Interface Areas

The following sequence of construction is envisaged at the interface of different

methods of ground treatment.

At the interface of PVD and stone column, PVD is installed first followed by stone
column.

At the interface of stone column and piled embankment, stone column is installed first
and the embankment is constructed. After the required consolidation is achieved in
this area, excavation of the fill is carried out up to ground level for installation of
embankment pile and laying of transition slab. Subsequently, embankment over piled
area is constructed.

5.0 INSTRUMENTATION AND MONITORING

Instrumentation to monitor the settlement and stability of embankment during

construction has been provided.

The types of monitoring instruments proposed to record the settlement, lateral

movement of the embankment fill and development of pore water pressure during
embankment construction are shown in Table 12.

Table 12 : MONITORING INSTRUMENTS

 Sl. No. Instrument Package 3A Package 3B Package 3C
1 Settlement Marker 29 151 62
2 Settlement Gauge 29 131 66
3 Inclinometer 2 47 3
4 Piezo-meter 2 39 2
5 Deep Levelling Datum - 3 -
6 Hydraulic Profile Gauge - 5 -

The locations of these instruments have been identified based on the sub-soil
conditions, thickness of fill and the type of ground improvement. The settlement data
of the instruments are analyzed to estimate the degree of consolidation at any time
during construction to enable to assess the extent of ground improvement achieved
before the next stage of embankment is allowed to be constructed.

The instruments are monitored generally twice a week and reviewed once in two
weeks during the rest period or earlier, if required, to continue the next stage
embankment filling or removal of surcharge. The results of settlement monitoring are
analyzed using the procedure recommended by Asaoka (1989).

6.0 QUALITY CONTROL

Suitable procedures to ensure design assumptions and number field tests and tests
are proposed to ensure good quality control of site construction activities.

6.1 Construction Procedure for Embankment

- Site Clearance
- Roller Compaction
- Laying Geotextile Separator
- Placing and compacting first layer of Drainage Blanket
- Installation of Settlement Gauges
- Installation of PVD / Stone Column
- Placing and compacting second layer of Drainage Blanket
- Installation of Inclinometers and Piezo-meters
- To provide additional base width to consider the embankment settlement.
- Construction of Embankment in Stages including Surcharge
- Installation of Surface Markers
- Removal Surcharge after required Consolidation Settlement is achieved.
- In transition area between Stone Column or PVD and piled embankment, after
required consolidation is achieved, excavation of the fill is carried out up to ground
level for installation of embankment pile and laying of transition slab.

6.2 Field Checks / Tests

 Embankment Fill : Field density tests for each layer of compacted fill to ensure
the required compaction is achieved.
Drainage Blanket : Gradation Test to ensure proper drainage for the water
expelled from PVD / Stone Columns.
PVD ; Use of Data logger to ensure the required depth of Installation,
penetration rate and verticality.
Stone Column : Use of Data logger to record installation data, Quantity of
stone consumption, Ensure termination in strata having cone
resistance > 1 mPa, In Trial area, load tests on single and four
column group, Review of Installation records, Dry method of
installation, Polymer fluid in sandy layer.
Scupper Drains : Provided at the toe of drainage blanket to discharge water
coming from PVD / Stone Columns.
Drainage Ditch : Inspection and maintenance to ensure proper water discharge
Well points : Installed in PVD areas to pump out ground water, if required,
in case of reduced discharge of water from scupper drains.

7.0 MATERIAL

All the materials viz., Geotextile Separator, Drainage Blanket, Stone aggregate,
Prefabricated Vertical Drain, Woven Geotextile, Geo-grid, Earth fill, Pre-stressed spun
concrete piles have been tested to ensure that the properties meet the requirements of
the project specifications. Test to confirm the permeability of PVD under distorted
condition due to consolidation of the compressible layer has also been carried out.

8.0 CONSTRUCTION

At the time of writing this paper, about 70 % of the ground improvement works are
completed and at few locations the construction of embankment is ongoing. In
package 3B, at the two toll areas which are to be completed on priority, the second
stage of embankment construction has commenced. A comparison of the monitored
results of settlement at the end of first stage embankment fill has shown good
agreement with the estimated settlement.

9.0 CONCLUSIONS

The method of ground treatment is decided based on the height of embankment, sub-
soil conditions, available construction time, stability during construction, driving
comfort, available Right-of-way as well as the cost. The sub-soil condition along the
proposed bridge alignment shows presence of soft compressible clay up to about 23 m
below ground level. Where different methods of ground improvement are possible for
a given condition, the choice of the method is finally based on the available time and
cost. Considering the rigid performance requirement, adopted for the first time in
Malaysia, to achieve 100 % primary consolidation and stringent differential settlement
prior to hand over of the expressway, three methods of ground improvement, viz.,
prefabricated vertical drain, stone column and piled embankment are used.
Differential settlement between two types of ground treatments are also addressed by
providing suitable transition zone and adopting necessary construction sequence. By
 ensuring 100 % primary consolidation and 100 % compaction of the embankment fill,
the requirement of very nominal settlement after construction is expected to be
achieved. Monitoring of instruments and field quality control of material and testing
during construction need to be executed as per specification and design requirements
to ensure the desired performance of the Penang Second Bridge Land Expressway.
At the two toll plaza areas, the results of settlement monitoring carried out till date,
have shown good agreement with the estimated settlement.

10.0 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The authors thank Ir. Mohd. Shuhaimi b. Hassan (Pengerus), Lembaga Lebuhraya
Malaysia for continuing support, and Dato’ Ir. Dr. Ismail Bin Mohamed Taib, Managing
Director, Jambatan Kedua Sdn. Bhd. for inviting us to prepare and present this paper.
The authors also thank the designers PJS Consultants Sdn. Bhd., KKJP2 Sdn. Bhd.
and SSP Sdn. Bhd. of Package 3A, 3B and 3C respectively for useful discussions
during design and for providing necessary inputs to prepare this paper. The authors
also acknowledge the involvement and contributions of Dr. J. Raman, Ir. Lam Yoon
Cheong, Krishna Prasad and Doris Chew of Minconsult Sdn Bhd in this project. The
assistance of Firra A Roslan and Mohd Zharif Mat Mahir for in preparing this paper is
also acknowlegded.

11.0 REFERENCES

1. Asaoka A (1978) – “Observational Procedure of Settlement Prediction”, Soils and

Foundations, Japanese Society of Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering,
Vol. 18, No. 4, December, pp. 87-101.
2. Factual Reports on Soil Investigation for Packages 3A, 3B and 3C.
3. Geotechnical Design Reports for Package 3A by PJS Consultants Sdn. Bhd.,
Package 3B by KKJP2 Sdn Bhd. and Package 3C by SSP Sdn. Bhd.
4. Hansbo S (1979) – “Consolidation of Clay by Band-shaped Prefabricated Drains”,
Ground Engineering, July, pp. 16-25.
5. JKSB (2009) – “Second Penang Bridge – Land Expressway Design Brief”,
Package 3.
6. Priebe H.J. (1995) – “The Design of Vibro Replacement”, Ground Engineering,
December, 31-37.