Are you looking for a reliable and efficient software solution for your deep excavation models? Look no further than DeepEX. We understand the challenges and demands of the structural and geotechnical design process, and our software is designed to meet those challenges head-on.

Unlike Plaxis, DeepEX offers fast and efficient model generation, thanks to our intuitive Wizards and user-friendly interface. Our software allows you to create and edit any model, with all construction stages included, in moments. Plus, all items in the DeepEX model area are accessible and can be edited in seconds, including positions, lengths, structural sections, spacings, and more.

​

But DeepEX is more than just a fast and efficient software solution. We also guide you to a more reasonable and safe solution, with valuable warnings and recommendations from common practice. In contrast, Plaxis can lead to unreasonable and unsafe designs by inexperienced users, as we recently discovered in our review of their tieback wall design example.

​

In this article we reviewed a training video based on an official example in Plaxis. The video "Lesson 3 Dry Excavation Using a Tie Back Wall" illustrates a tieback wall design example, included in the Plaxis software training documentation. The time-consuming procedure to create and edit any model in that software is obvious and well known. What we found surprizing, is that the suggested model is unrealistic and potentially unsafe, leading to strong questions about the judgement required to evaluate this model in a real-life project scenario. The Plaxis analysis actually shows that this model works, without taking into account neither the constructability, nor the structural checks and risks.

​

Key points and differences for a 10m deep excavation in sand.

 

a) Duration of video: Plaxis 28 min, DeepEX 7.5 min

b) Bending moments: Plaxis - Unconservative drawdown DeepEX safer without

c) Number of anchor strands - Unreasonable assumption in Plaxis with roughly 22 strands per anchor, DeepEX can optimize and find the required number of strands

d) In Plaxis there was no basis for establishing the prestress levels. In DeepEX running LEM and our Non-linear analysis indicates that the tiebacks in the example were prestressed to more than two times of what should have been the design load.

e) Inexperienced Plaxis documentation and users specified only a 3m bond zone. DeepEX screams red that the tiebacks have insufficient pullout geotechnical strength

f) Otherwise, FEM results were practically identical between Plaxis and DeepEX

At DeepEX, we believe in caution when it comes to Finite Element Analysis. That's why we recommend that designers review a model with different methods that can recognize different design challenges. With DeepEX, you can trust that you're getting a reliable and safe solution for your deep excavation models. So why not switch from Plaxis to DeepEX today?