Tel: 1-206-279-3300

2-Day Deep Excavation and Soil nail wall design Workshop

16 PDH @ Plano, TX

Sep 30, Oct 1st, 2019

Only 5 spots left!

Renaissance Hotel, Legacy West

Renaissance Hotel Plano Legacy West

Early registration ends soon!

DeepEX 2019 is here!

Deep Excavation Software

DeepEX 2017 talk to it and design your deep excavation!

Excavations in 3D, VR, AR

Holographic model of a deep excavation with HoloDeepEX

Get the Free 3D Viewer


Free 45 min webinar

Deep Excavation Design

Fully booked!

Free Helical Pile Design Webinars:

To be announced

New Deep Foundation Software

DeepFND - Deep Foundation Software, caissons, CFA, drilled piles, driven piles, concrete, timber


New helical pile software HelixPile
Signup for a free trial and get our free pdf on the five most common errors in deep excavation design
Our Software Solutions
DeepFND 2020: Deep Foundation software (NEW: Pile-Group/Pile Raft Analysis!)
DeepEX 2019: Deep Excavation software
Soldier pile walls
Sheet pile walls
Secant pile Walls
Tangent piles
Diaphragm Walls
Soldier and Tremied Concrete
Soil Mix walls
Combined king pile sheet piles
Slope stability
Cost estimation for braced excavations
Waler-Strut Cofferdams
Snail-Plus 2019: Soil nailing - soil nailing walls
SiteMaster: Inclinometer software (adopted by Geokon)
HelixPile: Helical Pile Software
RC-Solver: Concrete Design ACI-318, EC2, EC8
Steel-Beam: Steel beam column design, full equations, AISC, EC3

Measured vs. Theoretical Ground Anchor Loads for a 21.2m Deep Excavation in Santiago, Chile

Occasionally we get a chance to compare measured deep excavation performance against different methods. This 21.2m deep excavation case history in Santiago, Chile compares various conventional methods against measured ground anchor loads.

The excavation was constructed in competent cohesive gravels and was supported by two levels of ground anchors and 0.8m diameter reinforced concrete piles spaced at 3.2m. Reported displacements were under 2.0 cm. A 2m pile embedment below the final excavation subgrade was provided.

Various popular methods of conventional analysis were examined. In all cases wall to soil interface friction was ignored.

Most conventional methods produced reasonable agreement and came within 10% of the maximum measured loads. The PECK methods with the tributary height approach underpredicted reactions by as much as 25%. The CALTRANS approach with FHWA pressures overpredicted the upper ground anchor load by 17% and underpredicted the lower ground anchor load by 20%. The method producing the closest match was the German EAB approach which came in remarkably close.

The approach of using 50% of active and 50% of at-rest earth pressures severely overpredicted support reactions vs. the actual measured loads.

A critical aspect in case histories like this is the actual applied ground anchor prestress. In this project, the applied prestresses were in closer agreement to the German EAB approach. Should prestress levels had been applied in consistency with CALTRANS loads, measured ground anchor reactions could have been different.

With all due respect to German engineering, this case history clearly demonstrates the importance of evaluating different deep excavation analysis methods.

Deep excavation model in Santiago Chile

Measured vs theoretical tieback loads deep excavation Santiago Chile

Interested in more? Contact us and book a free 30 min web meeting!



Deep excavation software

Our flagship software program.
Design deep excavations, stepped walls, piles, sheet pile design, non-linear analysis, secant pile walls, slurry walls, AASHTO,  ACI, AISC, Eurocode 2,3,7,8, British BS standards, + DIN! DeepEX is the software of choice for more than 1200 engineers worldwide.