J.G. de Gijt
Please Note
12 records found
1
Reliability assessment of flexible dolphins
Reducing uncertainty in the design approach of flexible dolphins
Reliability updating of existing quay walls based on the effects of past performance
Introduction of a novel mathematical application in the probabilistic assessment and evaluation of quay walls
• The irreducible time-dependent uncertainty related to the model uncertainty factor. Randomness or natural variation is included in the model uncertainty factor. This is performed by considering situations with a reduced autocorrelation ρ(Zi, Zj) (0.25, 0.50 and 0.75). The reducible time-dependent uncertainty of load variables including q, wa and wp. Knowledge uncertainties (epistemic uncertainties) are reducible in time, meaning autocorrelation approaching 1. The autocorrelations of the considered variables distributions are derived by using transformed random distributions.
• Degradation by corrosion of the stiffest elements in the steel front wall. Corrosion is studied by considering the effects of a log normally distributed wall thickness loss according to corrosion curve 3. This corrosion rate affects the primary element characteristics of the equivalent combined wall. The correlation between the water levels on the active and passive is reconsidered and changed from 0.75 to 0.25.
As follows, the below figures show the annual development of the annual reliability as a function of time t. Notice that the annual reliability index increases as the extent to which the uncertainty is epistemic increases. Further, the reliability converges less rapid to larger value(s) in case of auto-correlation approaching 0. In this research, corrosion is considered as an epistemic uncertainty. Two modelling approaches have been considered: an engineering approach, a second order approach. The engineering approach solely considers a reducing section modulus W, whereas the second order approach is additionally including the second moment of inertia I. Corrosion curve 3 results in both approaches to a flattening of the conditional reliability index as time progresses. In addition, the speed in which the influence of time-independent epistemic uncertainties decreases, is less in case of corrosion. Hence, the involvement of stochastic degradation negatively affects the extent to which the uncertainties are reducible. The updated reliability index is also calculated per reference period. This is performed with probabilistic calculation rules. The corresponding sensitivity values, given survival of previous years (see figure(s) 5), can be used in the semi-probabilistic level I method for derivation of the updated partial safety factors. These factors can be applied in the derivation of the design values per random variable considering a service life time t. Hence, the reliability of a quay wall and the transformed sensitivity coefficients can be updated with the Equivalent Planes method. Incorporation of degradation and other time-related effects is seemingly possible. However, further research with finite element modelling is recommended for verification purposes. ...
• The irreducible time-dependent uncertainty related to the model uncertainty factor. Randomness or natural variation is included in the model uncertainty factor. This is performed by considering situations with a reduced autocorrelation ρ(Zi, Zj) (0.25, 0.50 and 0.75). The reducible time-dependent uncertainty of load variables including q, wa and wp. Knowledge uncertainties (epistemic uncertainties) are reducible in time, meaning autocorrelation approaching 1. The autocorrelations of the considered variables distributions are derived by using transformed random distributions.
• Degradation by corrosion of the stiffest elements in the steel front wall. Corrosion is studied by considering the effects of a log normally distributed wall thickness loss according to corrosion curve 3. This corrosion rate affects the primary element characteristics of the equivalent combined wall. The correlation between the water levels on the active and passive is reconsidered and changed from 0.75 to 0.25.
As follows, the below figures show the annual development of the annual reliability as a function of time t. Notice that the annual reliability index increases as the extent to which the uncertainty is epistemic increases. Further, the reliability converges less rapid to larger value(s) in case of auto-correlation approaching 0. In this research, corrosion is considered as an epistemic uncertainty. Two modelling approaches have been considered: an engineering approach, a second order approach. The engineering approach solely considers a reducing section modulus W, whereas the second order approach is additionally including the second moment of inertia I. Corrosion curve 3 results in both approaches to a flattening of the conditional reliability index as time progresses. In addition, the speed in which the influence of time-independent epistemic uncertainties decreases, is less in case of corrosion. Hence, the involvement of stochastic degradation negatively affects the extent to which the uncertainties are reducible. The updated reliability index is also calculated per reference period. This is performed with probabilistic calculation rules. The corresponding sensitivity values, given survival of previous years (see figure(s) 5), can be used in the semi-probabilistic level I method for derivation of the updated partial safety factors. These factors can be applied in the derivation of the design values per random variable considering a service life time t. Hence, the reliability of a quay wall and the transformed sensitivity coefficients can be updated with the Equivalent Planes method. Incorporation of degradation and other time-related effects is seemingly possible. However, further research with finite element modelling is recommended for verification purposes.
reasonable speed and without exceeding acceptable material stress. In this report will be researched how the probability of refusal of a sheet pile installed by vibro-driving can be predicted by means of a driving speed-depth-curve (vp-z-curve). Having insight in probability of refusal improves risk assessment and decision-making on driving projects. The focus is on sheet pile installation by vibro hammers as these projects are generally executed in large numbers and under similar conditions. Therefore, these project types are very suitable for application of probability theory. Allwave-PDP is used as a basis to create a probabilistic prediction method. Parameters of the pile driving system (pile, hammer and soil) modelled in Allwave-PDP are turned into stochastic parameters in the probabilistic method. Probability of refusal is predicted with a Monte Carlo simulation. Pile and hammer parameters are modelled by deterministic parameters. Variability of soil parameters is caused by soil heterogeneity and transformation variability. The probabilistic method is validated with three well-reported case studies in Woudsend, Den Oever and Rotterdam. Predicted results show agreement with measured results. The model is a proof of concept that shows the potential of applying probability theory to driveability prediction methods. A proof of concept of the modelling (transformation and spatial variability) and the method (extension of Allwave-PDP) is given. Not any existing model is known to incorporate probability theory in driveability prediction methods. The probabilistic method can simply be extended to other pile types or impact hammers. Therefore, this method is promising to predict different pile driving system configurations. ...
reasonable speed and without exceeding acceptable material stress. In this report will be researched how the probability of refusal of a sheet pile installed by vibro-driving can be predicted by means of a driving speed-depth-curve (vp-z-curve). Having insight in probability of refusal improves risk assessment and decision-making on driving projects. The focus is on sheet pile installation by vibro hammers as these projects are generally executed in large numbers and under similar conditions. Therefore, these project types are very suitable for application of probability theory. Allwave-PDP is used as a basis to create a probabilistic prediction method. Parameters of the pile driving system (pile, hammer and soil) modelled in Allwave-PDP are turned into stochastic parameters in the probabilistic method. Probability of refusal is predicted with a Monte Carlo simulation. Pile and hammer parameters are modelled by deterministic parameters. Variability of soil parameters is caused by soil heterogeneity and transformation variability. The probabilistic method is validated with three well-reported case studies in Woudsend, Den Oever and Rotterdam. Predicted results show agreement with measured results. The model is a proof of concept that shows the potential of applying probability theory to driveability prediction methods. A proof of concept of the modelling (transformation and spatial variability) and the method (extension of Allwave-PDP) is given. Not any existing model is known to incorporate probability theory in driveability prediction methods. The probabilistic method can simply be extended to other pile types or impact hammers. Therefore, this method is promising to predict different pile driving system configurations.
For a soil profile consisting clay, the magnitude of preconsolidation of the soil plays an important role. For the alternative design approach, increasing values of pre-loading results in decreasing values of sectional forces and displacements of the wall. This effect is stronger in comparison to the conventional design approach. In further research the aim should be to increase the reliability of the alternative design approach. This can be done by using in-situ measurements of the displacements of the wall to validate if the model represents the reality accurately. ...
For a soil profile consisting clay, the magnitude of preconsolidation of the soil plays an important role. For the alternative design approach, increasing values of pre-loading results in decreasing values of sectional forces and displacements of the wall. This effect is stronger in comparison to the conventional design approach. In further research the aim should be to increase the reliability of the alternative design approach. This can be done by using in-situ measurements of the displacements of the wall to validate if the model represents the reality accurately.
Load testing of a quay wall
Evaluating the use of load testing by application of Bayesian updating
Test Loading of Quay Structures using FEM
A case study to determine the load capacity of the old Amazonehaven and the SIF quay structures
A literature study was performed to gain insight into the areas of interest that needed to be studied. This theory in combination with a review of the structures led to the critical cross sections of the respective structures. These cross sections were then modelled with conventional design methods (Blum and D-Sheet Piling). The Blum method determined the individual contributions of several aspects (loads, water, soil) to the horizontal stress distribution along the combined sheet pile wall and calculated the reaction forces using a set of boundary conditions. Within D-Sheet Piling the relieving platform was modelled by removing it, the loads that acted on it, and the soil that rested on it. The last method that was applied was a FEM software (Plaxis 2D). The FEM models were validated in three steps: First, by comparing their results to that of the conventional methods, it was found that the results of the conventional methods were within ca. 30% of the FEM results. Second, by comparing the results to actual field data, here the results showed both deviation and similarities, these deviations could however be explained. Lastly, by critically assessing the models to ensure that certain aspects were incorporated into the models correctly, this resulted in uncertainty about drained or undrained soil conditions for the thicker clay layers. The main function of both quay structures was the storage of certain goods, for that reason the only aspect that was not constant in the test loading set up was the magnitude of the primary surcharge. Both geotechnical and structural failure were taken into consideration for the quay structures.
The results of the FEM models showed that neither of the structures had failed at their design loading conditions. For the Amazonehaven it was found that the magnitude of the primary surcharge at the first failure of the model was relatively close to that of the design loading conditions, it was incited by the exceedance of the geotechnical bearing capacity of the M.V.-piles. The first failure of the SIF model occurred at a surcharge that was more than 4 times the magnitude of the design loading conditions, it was incited by the exceedance of the normal stress capacity of the M.V.-piles. ...
A literature study was performed to gain insight into the areas of interest that needed to be studied. This theory in combination with a review of the structures led to the critical cross sections of the respective structures. These cross sections were then modelled with conventional design methods (Blum and D-Sheet Piling). The Blum method determined the individual contributions of several aspects (loads, water, soil) to the horizontal stress distribution along the combined sheet pile wall and calculated the reaction forces using a set of boundary conditions. Within D-Sheet Piling the relieving platform was modelled by removing it, the loads that acted on it, and the soil that rested on it. The last method that was applied was a FEM software (Plaxis 2D). The FEM models were validated in three steps: First, by comparing their results to that of the conventional methods, it was found that the results of the conventional methods were within ca. 30% of the FEM results. Second, by comparing the results to actual field data, here the results showed both deviation and similarities, these deviations could however be explained. Lastly, by critically assessing the models to ensure that certain aspects were incorporated into the models correctly, this resulted in uncertainty about drained or undrained soil conditions for the thicker clay layers. The main function of both quay structures was the storage of certain goods, for that reason the only aspect that was not constant in the test loading set up was the magnitude of the primary surcharge. Both geotechnical and structural failure were taken into consideration for the quay structures.
The results of the FEM models showed that neither of the structures had failed at their design loading conditions. For the Amazonehaven it was found that the magnitude of the primary surcharge at the first failure of the model was relatively close to that of the design loading conditions, it was incited by the exceedance of the geotechnical bearing capacity of the M.V.-piles. The first failure of the SIF model occurred at a surcharge that was more than 4 times the magnitude of the design loading conditions, it was incited by the exceedance of the normal stress capacity of the M.V.-piles.
Brouwershaven
Is there a necessity to adapt the harbour constructions in the harbour of Brouwershaven, or to secure them against the reduced tide in the Grevelingen lake?
The idea is to bring this reduced tide back by constructing a sluice caisson or tidal power plant into the Brouwersdam. This tidal range was determined in a way that the fauna and flora on the islands could remain. Another problem that arises with this reduced tide is that it is unknown what the consequences are for the harbours around the Grevelingen lake and their structures. Brouwershaven specifically gets its income from the harbour and its tourism. This made the Gemeente Schouwen-Duiveland ask to investigate the consequences of a potential reduced tide in its harbour. This led to the following research question:’ Is there a necessity to adapt the harbour constructions in the harbour of Brouwershaven, or to secure them against the reduced tide in the Grevelingen lake?’.
This research was started by investigating the different boundary conditions such as:
• Wind 1,54 m/s Southwest
• Occurring water levels +0,7 m NAP and -0,5 m NAP
• Not exploded explosives Not taken into account
• Soil structure Exists mainly of clay and peat, with a thick sand layer at -16 m NAP
• Profile of the harbour bottom Design level of the harbour bottom at -2,75 m NAP
• Shipping Limiting factors: ship draught of 2 m and length of 14 m
• Flow rate through the guard lock In case of tidal power plant: 0,154 m/s In case of sluice caisson: 0,0719 m/s
The new part of the harbour was designed after the closure of the Grevelingen. This is why the option was to check the stability of the structure in this part of harbour. At the end of the calculation it turned out that there was no danger for the structures to become unstable by the reduced tide. However, there is a statistical probability that the scaffoldings as well as the quay wall will be flooded once in a hundred years. The bigger problem that was found was the accessibility of the harbour. The harbour is now only accessible for ships with a draught of 2 m at a water depth of 2,5 m. Which at a lower water level would cause problems to safely enter and manoeuvre in the harbour.
In the search for a solution a brainstorm session was held with the construction company ‘Aquavia’. With the help of a multi criteria analysis (MCA) it was found that the best solutions were:
• Construction a new harbour in front of the guard lock
• Creating a new function for the existing harbour and shifting the harbour function to a new location in front of the guard lock
• Demolition of the sills in the guard lock and dredging the harbour to a deeper level
In consultation with ‘Gemeente Schouwen-Duiveland’ it was decided to design the first and the last bullet in more detail.
The first variant that was dealt with was that of the demolition of the sills in the guard lock and the dredging of the harbour. The idea here was to lower the bottom of the harbour and the guard lock to at least a level of -2,75 m NAP, which produces a volume of 5143 m3¬ of material such as silt to be dredged away. Which includes the possibility of:
• Finding not exploded explosives
• The quay walls of the oldest part of the harbour becoming unstable.
Also the stability of the guard lock construction after removing the sills had to be checked. This unfortunately was not executed due to the lack of technical data and drawings of the reinforcement. Finally an estimation of 300.000 EUR was made to realise this variant.
The idea for the second variant is to leave the harbour behind the guard lock in the state it is currently in and to construct a new harbour in front of the guard lock. In this way smaller ships can still use the old harbour whereas the ships that cannot enter the harbour anymore can moor in the new harbour as well as even larger ships. In this new harbour then there would also be a place to moor the fishing boats as well as a river cruise ship. Because of strict time scheduling it was decided to only design one of the important structures of the harbour, namely the harbour mole. For this design there were 2 variants to take into account. In the first variant the total mole construction (breakwater + the pier) was made of wood, whereas in the second variant only part of the breakwater was made of wood. The pier, however, was made of concrete. Finally it was estimated that the construction of the new harbour would cost 7 million EUR. Which is a big difference compared to the price estimation of the demolition of the sills in the guard lock. Both variants have their pros and cons. By demolishing the sills and dredging the harbour to a lower level the problem of the harbour is resolved while a smaller/ more optimised version of the other variant could enable more future prospects to be worked out for the harbour by increasing the capacity and attracting new functions to the harbour. This could of course increase the harbour profits.
...
The idea is to bring this reduced tide back by constructing a sluice caisson or tidal power plant into the Brouwersdam. This tidal range was determined in a way that the fauna and flora on the islands could remain. Another problem that arises with this reduced tide is that it is unknown what the consequences are for the harbours around the Grevelingen lake and their structures. Brouwershaven specifically gets its income from the harbour and its tourism. This made the Gemeente Schouwen-Duiveland ask to investigate the consequences of a potential reduced tide in its harbour. This led to the following research question:’ Is there a necessity to adapt the harbour constructions in the harbour of Brouwershaven, or to secure them against the reduced tide in the Grevelingen lake?’.
This research was started by investigating the different boundary conditions such as:
• Wind 1,54 m/s Southwest
• Occurring water levels +0,7 m NAP and -0,5 m NAP
• Not exploded explosives Not taken into account
• Soil structure Exists mainly of clay and peat, with a thick sand layer at -16 m NAP
• Profile of the harbour bottom Design level of the harbour bottom at -2,75 m NAP
• Shipping Limiting factors: ship draught of 2 m and length of 14 m
• Flow rate through the guard lock In case of tidal power plant: 0,154 m/s In case of sluice caisson: 0,0719 m/s
The new part of the harbour was designed after the closure of the Grevelingen. This is why the option was to check the stability of the structure in this part of harbour. At the end of the calculation it turned out that there was no danger for the structures to become unstable by the reduced tide. However, there is a statistical probability that the scaffoldings as well as the quay wall will be flooded once in a hundred years. The bigger problem that was found was the accessibility of the harbour. The harbour is now only accessible for ships with a draught of 2 m at a water depth of 2,5 m. Which at a lower water level would cause problems to safely enter and manoeuvre in the harbour.
In the search for a solution a brainstorm session was held with the construction company ‘Aquavia’. With the help of a multi criteria analysis (MCA) it was found that the best solutions were:
• Construction a new harbour in front of the guard lock
• Creating a new function for the existing harbour and shifting the harbour function to a new location in front of the guard lock
• Demolition of the sills in the guard lock and dredging the harbour to a deeper level
In consultation with ‘Gemeente Schouwen-Duiveland’ it was decided to design the first and the last bullet in more detail.
The first variant that was dealt with was that of the demolition of the sills in the guard lock and the dredging of the harbour. The idea here was to lower the bottom of the harbour and the guard lock to at least a level of -2,75 m NAP, which produces a volume of 5143 m3¬ of material such as silt to be dredged away. Which includes the possibility of:
• Finding not exploded explosives
• The quay walls of the oldest part of the harbour becoming unstable.
Also the stability of the guard lock construction after removing the sills had to be checked. This unfortunately was not executed due to the lack of technical data and drawings of the reinforcement. Finally an estimation of 300.000 EUR was made to realise this variant.
The idea for the second variant is to leave the harbour behind the guard lock in the state it is currently in and to construct a new harbour in front of the guard lock. In this way smaller ships can still use the old harbour whereas the ships that cannot enter the harbour anymore can moor in the new harbour as well as even larger ships. In this new harbour then there would also be a place to moor the fishing boats as well as a river cruise ship. Because of strict time scheduling it was decided to only design one of the important structures of the harbour, namely the harbour mole. For this design there were 2 variants to take into account. In the first variant the total mole construction (breakwater + the pier) was made of wood, whereas in the second variant only part of the breakwater was made of wood. The pier, however, was made of concrete. Finally it was estimated that the construction of the new harbour would cost 7 million EUR. Which is a big difference compared to the price estimation of the demolition of the sills in the guard lock. Both variants have their pros and cons. By demolishing the sills and dredging the harbour to a lower level the problem of the harbour is resolved while a smaller/ more optimised version of the other variant could enable more future prospects to be worked out for the harbour by increasing the capacity and attracting new functions to the harbour. This could of course increase the harbour profits.
Moreover, new buildings will be constructed in the coming years at Kop van Zuid. The construction of these buildings will lead to more logistics problems at the current terminal that will influence the viability of the entire area. Currently, the port of Rotterdam is facing an increase of entrance demand of cruise ships. The number of double mooring calls and the dimensions of the cruise ships are expected to grow in the coming years. The current cruise terminal cannot, without technical improvements, guarantee enough berthing space for two cruise ships at the same time.
For these reasons, in 2015 the Port of Rotterdam Authority started the project “Zeecruise lange termijn visie”. One of the conclusions of the “Zeecruise lange termijn visie” project in case that the Port of Rotterdam Authority and the municipality of Rotterdam decide to change the location of the cruise terminal, was that the most suitable location for the future cruise terminal is Pier 1 of the Merwehaven. The Merwehaven is composed of four piers that were constructed between 1923 and 1931 using caissons as quay walls.
Due to the age of the construction of the caissons and the requirements imposed by the new cruise terminal, a full feasibility study of the Merrwehaven had to be performed. The feasibility study is described in this report and mainly concerns the adaptation of the existing quay wall of Pier 1. The aim of this study was to maintain the existing caissons, avoiding the demolition of the structure and the need for constructing a completely new quay wall.
The approach used to achieve this objective follows the principles of the basic design cycle of Roozenburg and Eekels. Different design phases distinguish this method and the structure of this report follows these phases.
In the first phase, the functions, operational aspects, boundary conditions and assumptions of the Merwehaven and cruise market were analyzed. Based on this analysis the quay walls of Pier 1 were assessed. The main scope of the assessment was to establish whether the quay walls meet the requirements for the new cruise terminal and to identify the main issues that hinder the mooring of the cruise ships. The assessment proved that the quay walls do not meet the requirements of the new cruise terminal. Therefore, the conclusion was that to maintain the existing caissons of Pier 1 and ensure their stability a technical design solution must be provided.
Different design concepts were proposed to solve the issues that hinder the mooring of the cruise ships along the caissons. Through a first design loop, the design concepts that did not have sufficient feasibility to become the final solution were excluded. From the remaining design variants the best design variant was selected, by means of an evaluation based on a Multi Criteria Analysis (MCA) and a cost estimation. From this evaluation, it turned out that the best technical design solution is to drive an underwater sheet pile wall in front of the caissons of Pier 1.
Then, before performing the detailed design of the best design variant, special attention was given to the design bollard capacity of the cruise terminal. The bollard force is an important load in the design of quay walls. Hence, an extended study concerning the loads acting on the design cruise ship was carried out to define the required bollard capacity of the new cruise terminal. From this study, it turned out that the wind force is the dominant load acting on the design cruise ship and that the effect of passing vessels can be neglected. Based on this conclusion a static mooring analysis was performed to determine the load on the mooring lines of the design cruise ship and consequently the required bollard capacity. On the basis of the results of this analysis, the conclusion was that the existing bollards located on top of the caissons cannot withstand the mooring force and therefore new bollards with a capacity of 1700 kN have to be provided.
In the last phase, the design variant with underwater sheet pile wall was elaborated in more detail. This detailed design was performed by analyzing the overall stability of the caisson and the deformation of the underwater sheet pile wall using the PLAXIS software. Based on these analyses the conclusion was that the design variant with the underwater sheet pile wall can adapt the existing caisson, used as quay wall at Pier 1 in the Merwehaven for the future cruise terminal of Rotterdam.
...
Moreover, new buildings will be constructed in the coming years at Kop van Zuid. The construction of these buildings will lead to more logistics problems at the current terminal that will influence the viability of the entire area. Currently, the port of Rotterdam is facing an increase of entrance demand of cruise ships. The number of double mooring calls and the dimensions of the cruise ships are expected to grow in the coming years. The current cruise terminal cannot, without technical improvements, guarantee enough berthing space for two cruise ships at the same time.
For these reasons, in 2015 the Port of Rotterdam Authority started the project “Zeecruise lange termijn visie”. One of the conclusions of the “Zeecruise lange termijn visie” project in case that the Port of Rotterdam Authority and the municipality of Rotterdam decide to change the location of the cruise terminal, was that the most suitable location for the future cruise terminal is Pier 1 of the Merwehaven. The Merwehaven is composed of four piers that were constructed between 1923 and 1931 using caissons as quay walls.
Due to the age of the construction of the caissons and the requirements imposed by the new cruise terminal, a full feasibility study of the Merrwehaven had to be performed. The feasibility study is described in this report and mainly concerns the adaptation of the existing quay wall of Pier 1. The aim of this study was to maintain the existing caissons, avoiding the demolition of the structure and the need for constructing a completely new quay wall.
The approach used to achieve this objective follows the principles of the basic design cycle of Roozenburg and Eekels. Different design phases distinguish this method and the structure of this report follows these phases.
In the first phase, the functions, operational aspects, boundary conditions and assumptions of the Merwehaven and cruise market were analyzed. Based on this analysis the quay walls of Pier 1 were assessed. The main scope of the assessment was to establish whether the quay walls meet the requirements for the new cruise terminal and to identify the main issues that hinder the mooring of the cruise ships. The assessment proved that the quay walls do not meet the requirements of the new cruise terminal. Therefore, the conclusion was that to maintain the existing caissons of Pier 1 and ensure their stability a technical design solution must be provided.
Different design concepts were proposed to solve the issues that hinder the mooring of the cruise ships along the caissons. Through a first design loop, the design concepts that did not have sufficient feasibility to become the final solution were excluded. From the remaining design variants the best design variant was selected, by means of an evaluation based on a Multi Criteria Analysis (MCA) and a cost estimation. From this evaluation, it turned out that the best technical design solution is to drive an underwater sheet pile wall in front of the caissons of Pier 1.
Then, before performing the detailed design of the best design variant, special attention was given to the design bollard capacity of the cruise terminal. The bollard force is an important load in the design of quay walls. Hence, an extended study concerning the loads acting on the design cruise ship was carried out to define the required bollard capacity of the new cruise terminal. From this study, it turned out that the wind force is the dominant load acting on the design cruise ship and that the effect of passing vessels can be neglected. Based on this conclusion a static mooring analysis was performed to determine the load on the mooring lines of the design cruise ship and consequently the required bollard capacity. On the basis of the results of this analysis, the conclusion was that the existing bollards located on top of the caissons cannot withstand the mooring force and therefore new bollards with a capacity of 1700 kN have to be provided.
In the last phase, the design variant with underwater sheet pile wall was elaborated in more detail. This detailed design was performed by analyzing the overall stability of the caisson and the deformation of the underwater sheet pile wall using the PLAXIS software. Based on these analyses the conclusion was that the design variant with the underwater sheet pile wall can adapt the existing caisson, used as quay wall at Pier 1 in the Merwehaven for the future cruise terminal of Rotterdam.
As a conclusion the best and most feasible designs are chosen. The best design is the lay-out that obtained the highest score in the MultiCriteria- Analysis (MCA). The most feasible design is the design having the highest cost/benefit ratio determined by a Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA). The east bank is located close to the current port, Ingeniero White, on tidal flats which are inundated at high-water and dry at low-water. For the East expansion, different port lay-outs are developed mainly differing in amount of reclaimed land, length of viaducts and the presence of a mooring basin. The best design on the east is characterised as being very compact and having small viaducts between the dry bulk and agribulk terminals and jetties. The main advantage of this design is the small expected increase of siltation, good safety and sufficient future expansion possibilities. The most feasible design, however, is characterised by long viaducts reducing the costs of the design. The other appointed location for the port expansion is the south bank, opposite of the current port development. This location, however, is characterised by one main disadvantage; It is far from any form of connection with the hinterland. Nevertheless, in 2013, the port authority (CGPBB) initiated the start of small reclamation works. The best and most feasible design fully utilises this reclaimed portion of land. Moreover, the best design has a small expected increase of siltation in the port area. For a final designs, all previous designs are combined to create a design in which all the advantages of each of the designs are fully incorporated. Therefore, this design has little reclamation as well as viaducts with only intermediate lengths. ...
As a conclusion the best and most feasible designs are chosen. The best design is the lay-out that obtained the highest score in the MultiCriteria- Analysis (MCA). The most feasible design is the design having the highest cost/benefit ratio determined by a Cost-Benefit Analysis (CBA). The east bank is located close to the current port, Ingeniero White, on tidal flats which are inundated at high-water and dry at low-water. For the East expansion, different port lay-outs are developed mainly differing in amount of reclaimed land, length of viaducts and the presence of a mooring basin. The best design on the east is characterised as being very compact and having small viaducts between the dry bulk and agribulk terminals and jetties. The main advantage of this design is the small expected increase of siltation, good safety and sufficient future expansion possibilities. The most feasible design, however, is characterised by long viaducts reducing the costs of the design. The other appointed location for the port expansion is the south bank, opposite of the current port development. This location, however, is characterised by one main disadvantage; It is far from any form of connection with the hinterland. Nevertheless, in 2013, the port authority (CGPBB) initiated the start of small reclamation works. The best and most feasible design fully utilises this reclaimed portion of land. Moreover, the best design has a small expected increase of siltation in the port area. For a final designs, all previous designs are combined to create a design in which all the advantages of each of the designs are fully incorporated. Therefore, this design has little reclamation as well as viaducts with only intermediate lengths.
The main personal objectives creating this master thesis are to present a: Compact, comprehensive, consistent, reader friendly, and to the point report. ...
The main personal objectives creating this master thesis are to present a: Compact, comprehensive, consistent, reader friendly, and to the point report.