Ground Engineering (GE) Solutions

Australian GE Team
• Tom Glasby (National) ph 0423 298033
• Richard Austin (National) ph 0414 838891
Presentation Outline
1. Introduction
2. Titan system – components & installation method
3. Benefits of self drilling micropiles
4. Applications & Project examples
5. Design
6. Questions and discussion
1. Introduction: History
• Founded in Germany in 1881 as a steel foundry by
Friedrich Ischebeck, Ennepetal Ruhr Valley.

• Began making steel trench props and other construction

products in 1950’s.

• Hollow bar micropile developed from the screw jack in

1983 by Ernst Ischebeck.

• Introduced to Australia 2008

• Office and warehouse at Kingston, Brisbane

Ischebeck remains a private company, now managed by the

5th generation of the Ischebeck family.
1. Introduction: What are micropiles ?
▪ Small diameter friction piles with a high level of stiffness.
▪ Introduced by Fernando Lizzi in Italy to repair WW2 damaged buildings
▪ They work like a centrally reinforced confined concrete column in the ground
▪ IMPORTANT ductile reinforcement required as per Reinforced Concrete
 1. Introduction: Typical applications
Foundations / Underpinning :
Transmission Towers

Foundations / Underpinning Anti-heaving

Soil nailing / slope stabilization Securing excavations Tie-back of retaining walls Tie-back of sheet pile walls
 2. TITAN system: One system many applications
SELF DRILLING INSTALLATION
USING THE HOLLOW
THREADED BAR IN
CONJUNCTION WITH THE
SACRIFICIAL DRILL BIT
CREATES A:-
3 in 1 Device:
1. Drilling Rod/Tool
2. Grout Flushing Conduit
3. Tendon
 2. TITAN system: Product range
Ground Anchors & Tie-backs

Micropiles

16 30
TITAN 30/16

Soil Nails / Rock Bolts

TITAN 30/16
16 mm 30 mm

130 mm 196 mm

TITAN 196/130 Unique titan coupling nut

 2. TITAN system: Drill bits

Thread insert
adaptor allows
drill bit from 1-
bar size up to
be used
2. TITAN system : Coatings : Galv and Duplex

• Hot-dip galvanised - EN ISO 1461

• High temperature galvanising (HTG)
• 560 – 630oC
• Offers greater corrosion protection
compared to NTG
• Between 80 – 120 µm

• Epoxy powder coating – EN ISO 12944

• Corresponding to the highest corrosion
category (C5-M Medium)
• Between 120 – 180 µm
• Provides an additional 15 years
protection to the zinc (Galv) coating
2. TITAN system: 196/130 micropiles VIDEO
2. TITAN system: Drilling equipment

Hydraulic
Rotary
Percussive Drill
or “Drifter” or
“Top Hammer”

Flushing
head: Allows
rotation,
percussion
and flushing
actions

Micropile Hollow Bar

Many different mobile rig options to suit access and physical
space limitations
2. TITAN system: QA
Drilling Logs Mill Certificates Cube Tests
3. Benefits of Titan hollow bar micropiles
• Allows simultaneous drilling,
installation and grouting
• Eliminates casing
requirements - even in
collapsing soil
• Very little spoil to be removed
• Increases production rates –
typically 2 to 3 times
• Allows ‘bottom-up’ grouting
through hollow bar and
ensures no air pockets
Lateral drilling • Low noise and vibration Vertical drilling
• Light drill rigs and equipment
 3. Benefits : Bond to soil
Solid Bar Micropile Titan Self-Drilling Hollow Bar Micropile
Cased drilling Un-cased drilling
• Drill hole with casing • Direct drilling & installation of hollow
• Remove drill rods and bit bar system with sacrificial drill bit

• Insert the solid bar into the hole • Flushing suspension stabilizes the hole
• Dynamic drilling and grouting to
• Remove casing improve bond
• Hole filled via injection hoses: • Faster installation time:
may require several post grouting Installation up to 2.5-3 x faster than
operations for cased micropiles

Reduction of
bonded length
by at least 20%

Bond friction value : Grouted Self-Drilling Hollow Bar Micropiles >1.20

Grouted Solid Bar Pile
3. Benefits : Design Life and durability
DIBt (German - & European)
Approval for
100+ YEARS Permanent Works

Corrosion protection provided by grout

encapsulation ALONE
3. Benefits : Durability by Grout Encapsulation
1. Titan steel bar specification
▪ Low carbon content (≤ 0.22%) ensures ductility
▪ Elongation at Max Load (Agt) ≥ 5% ensures ductility
▪ Notched impact strength (Charpy test) W ≥ 40 J at -200C
▪ This ensures robustness for the impact effects of drilling
▪ Yield stress limited to 500-600 MPa to limit grout crack width / opening
2. Titan thread : geometry same as REBAR in RC
▪ Flank angle of 45° optimizes shear force transfer between grout and steel
inducing controlled cracking

3. Grout cover minimums

4. Ischebeck QA : Testing provides results on MILL CERTIFICATES
with full traceability
 3. Benefits : Grout Encapsulation: Validation

Testing: comparison of R32 bars and Titan 30 bars

• Maximum crack width measured in testing was
0.08mm compared to 0.21mm for a rope thread.
• Thread carries depth when compared to rope thread,
increasing tenacity
 3. Benefits : Validation:– Crack width measurements
Tension test on an exhumed TITAN 103/78 (RM,k = 1,626kN) (Technical University Munich, 2000)
Diameter grouted body: Φavg ≈ 200mm / Grout compressive strength: fcm = 42 N/mm2
Z = 600kN Z = 900kN Z = 1350kN
F = 150kN
QUESTION /DISCUSSION POINT FOR ATTENDEES

Design life

Corrosion protection method

 4. Project Examples : Repair to existing structures

Symbion Warehouse, Sydney. 2011

• 12m long 40/20 Black Permanent Brisbane City Hall Restoration, South Light Well Mezz Floor. 2010
Micropiles • 15m long 52/26 Black Permanent Micropiles
• D&C: Keller Ground Engineering • Brisbane City Council
4. Project Example : Underpin bridge foundations
Kedron Brook Rail Bridge. Underpinning Foundations, Toombul, Brisbane. 2012
• 33 no.18.5m to 22m long 40/16 Duplex Permanent Micro Piles.
• Client: Queensland Rail
• Contractor: ARK Constructions / Piling & Concreting Australia (PCA)
4. Project Example : Underpin bridge foundations
Rawdon Island Bridge. Repair to 65 year old RC piers, Hastings River Crossing, Port Macquarie. 2021
• 33 no. 6m to 10m long 40/16 Duplex Permanent Micro Piles, drilled through 5m water depth.
• Client: Port Macquarie Hastings Council
• Consultant: BG&E (Newcastle) Engineers
• Contractor: Duratec Australia / Piling & Concreting Australia (PCA)
4. Project Example : Stabilising existing walls
Crib Wall Stabilisation, Nambour Shell Service Station 2010
• 15m long 40/16 Duplex Permanent Soil Nails
• Client: Meinhardt Group

4m Block Wall Stabilisation, Alderley, Brisbane 2022

• 3m long 40/20 Duplex Permanent rock anchors
• Client: Retaining Technologies Group (RTG)
• Consultant: Pacific Geotech
• Drilling Contractor: Rutledge Drilling Pty Ltd
4. Project Example : Micropile A-Frame foundation
Hamilton Highway, Geelong VIC 2021
• 102 no. 12m long 52/26 Duplex Micro Piles. A-Frame Retaining Wall foundation
• 154 no. 12m to 18m long 40/20 Duplex Soil Nails for slope below wall.
• Client: Vic Roads
• Consultant: Soilsrock Engineering Pty. Ltd
• Contractor: Geovert Ground Engineering Pty Ltd

“Micropiles were an interesting and

useful option for the difficult site
conditions”……..Vic Roads
4. Project Example : Micropile A-Frame foundation
Nimbin Rd Landslip Repair, Nimbin NSW 2023
• 504 no. 15m long, Titan 52/26 Black bar with Ø175mm carbide y-cross drill bits
• Client: Lismore Council
• Consultant: Civil Consult
• Principal Contractor: CMC
• Drilling contractor: Rix GE

Design by Civil Consult

4. Project Example : Rock bolts Mine wall stability
Kidston Pumped Hydro 2021
• Ischebeck Titan 40/20 Duplex rock bolts
• Design Consultant: GHD in JV with Mott MacDonald
• Drilling Contractor: Geovert

Disused Gold Mine: 2 existing pits designed into a Koolan Island Iron Ore Mine 2021 main pit
natural battery storage. • Ischebeck Titan 40/16 Black rock bolts
• Client: Mount Gibson Iron
• Drilling Contractor: Geovert
4. Project Example : Soil / Rock nailed slope
Rock falls and slope instability above Tamborine Mountain Road, 2021
• 300+ no. 6m to 9m 40/16 Duplex bars with Ø90mm carbide button drill bit,
Permanent Rock Anchors (50 year Design Life)
• QLD Transport & Main Roads
• Main Contractor: SEE Civil
• Consultant: Golder and CGC
• Contractor: Rix Asset Maintenance (RAM)

Slope failure Armidale road, 2022

• 515 no. 8m to 6m 40/20 Duplex
anchors in Ø100 mm predrilled hole
(50 year Design Life)
• Client: Armidale Council NSW
• Consultant: GHD
• Contractor: (RAM)
 4. Project Example : Micropiled transmission tower
Shoalwater training Area, QLD: 4 x Tripod Wireless Towers, 2023
• 48 no. TITAN 73/35 Black micropiles, 9 m long, 130mm drill bit
• Client: Australian Radio Towers Group (ART)
• Drilling Contractor: NAVIQ Group
• Consultant: Geoinventions Group

Ingham to Tully 275/132 kV Line, 2013.

• 4600 no. 7.5m to 21m long 52/26 Black Micro Piles.
• Client & Consultant: Powerlink Queensland
• Drilling Contractor: PCA
 4. Project Example : Stressed micropile anchors
Tonkin Gap Highway, WA 2023
• 52 no. 15m long anchors; 40/16 Duplex bar with Ø150mm hardened clay drill bit (100 year Design Life)
• Main Contractor: Georgio, BMD & Main Roads Western Australia (MRWA)
• Consultant: BG&E, GHD and Golder
• D&C Anchors Contractor: Fortec Australia

Design to facilitate road widening and additional

lanes
The anchors were stressed to a test
Permanent active hollow bar anchors installed load of 277.5 kN and designed for a
by Fortec Australia using their versatile rig for working load of 185 kN.
drilling in confined space
Question /discussion point for attendees

1. Have you designed projects with self drilling anchors?

2. If so, any feedback?

5. Design : Hollow bar range and capacities

YIELD
LOAD
 5. Design: Skin friction
Solid Bar Micropile Hollow Bar Micropile

“Recommendations on Piling”, 2012, Wiley, Germany

• Tables 5.29, 5.30, 5.31, 5.32 (pp.110-112)

Ultimate limit state value Mean CPT cone resistance Ultimate limit state value
qs,k of pile skin friction qc [MN/m²] qs,k of pile skin friction
[kN/m²] [kN/m²]
Non- 135-175 7.5 170-210
Cohesive
215-280 15 255-320
Soils (sands)
255-315 > 25 305-365
Ultimate limit state value Shear strength cu,k of the Ultimate limit state value
qs,k of pile skin friction undrained soil [kN/m²] qs,k of pile skin friction
[kN/m²] [kN/m²]

Cohesive 55-65 60 70-80

Soils 95-105 150 115-125
(clays, 115-125 > 250 140-150
silts, etc)
Grouted Self-Drilling Hollow Bar Micropiles
Bond friction value: >1.20
Grouted Solid Bar Pile
5. Design: Standards

▪ Micropiles are not specifically covered by an Australian standard

▪ AS2159 “Piling – Design and installation” covers general pile design and construction
▪ AS5100.3 “Bridge Design Part 3: Foundation and soil supporting structures”
▪ AS4678 “Earth retaining structures”
▪ Above stds are limit state: load factors (AS1170 series) and material reduction factors
▪ International Design standards for reference:
▪ EN 14199 – “Execution of special geotechnical works – Micropiles”
▪ Limit state load factors (AS1170 series) and material reduction factors
▪ Need to refer to other application specific standards for soil nails and ground anchors
▪ Eg Soil Nailing: BS 8006-2:2011+A1:2017 (Part 2: soil nail design)
▪ US FHWA code – “Micropile design and construction” (2005)
▪ Not limit state – one overall (global) FOS
5. Design: Diameter ‘D’ of hole
d = drill bit diameter
a = borehole extension (widening due to drilling)
= 20mm

5.4.9.5 Empirical values of

skin friction in tubular
grouted piles
“If piles are installed with
external flushing, the pile
shaft diameter may be
adopted as the outside
casing diameter plus 20
mm.”

D=d+a
5. Design : Durability by Grout Encapsulation
▪ Cement grout protects the UNCOATED Titan bars
▪ Cover “c” - validated acc. DIBt German Technical Approval (Z-34. 14-209)
▪ Relies on controlling cracks, max 0.1mm
▪ Proven through testing
▪ Bar capacity factors for cover “c” when less than the minimum values
5. Design: “SmartTitan” online software
5. Design : Testing standards
• EC7
• EN1537
• BS8081: 1989
• EN 14199
• AS 2159
• Road Agency spec’s

Wireless
Tower 2023

Koolan
Island 2022

Deagan Motorway
2012
5. Design : References
Micropiles
▪ Lopez, F. et al, 2018, “Design of self drilling micropiles for permanent applications”, in Proc. 43rd
Conference on Deep Foundations, Deep Foundations Institute, Anaheim, CA.
▪ German Geotechnical Society, 2014, Recommendations on Piling (EA-Pfähle) , Wiley, Berlin.
▪ SMART TITAN – online design tool by Ischebeck

A-Frame Micropiles
▪ Herse, A., Ezaejugh, L. and Wilson, K., 2017, “Micropiles for combined deep slip and structural loading”,
in Proc. 13th Int. Workshop on Micropiles, Deep Foundations Institute, Hawthorne, NJ.
▪ Tandjiria, V. and Chew, K.C., 2015, “Comparison of A-frame micropile system and conventional bored piles
to remediate embankment slope failures”, in Proc. 12th Australia New Zealand Conference on
Geomechanics, Wellington, New Zealand.

Soil Nailing
▪ Phear, A. et al, 2005, CIRIA C637 Soil nailing – best practice guidance, CIRIA, London.
▪ Bridges, C., 2017, “Design of Soil Nailed Walls According to AS4678-2002”, in Proc., 8th Australian Small
Bridges Conference, Gold Coast, Australia.
5. Design : Soil nailed slope method comparison
▪ Limit Equilibrium analysis – (1) Bishops (simplified) vs (2) Morgenstern-Price
▪ Code method – (a) Working stress (FOS) vs (b) AS4678 Lim.state vs (c) BS8006 Lim.state
▪ One failure surface in slope shown below for comparison purposes

Drained Conditions
Effective stress parameters

c'(kPa) 1 kPa
Ø' 29 degrees
Insitu moist density= 19 kN/m3
 5. Design : Soil nailed slope method comparison
▪ Limit Equilibrium analysis – (1) Bishops (simplified) vs (2) Morgenstern-Price
▪ Code method – (a) Working stress (FOS) vs (b) AS4678 Lim.state vs (c) BS8006 Lim.state
▪ One failure surface in slope shown below for comparison purposes

Analysis method
Bishops Morgenstern-Price
Code Method Water table Water table No water No water Water table Water table
No water table No water table included included with table table with soil included included with
unreinforced with soil nails unreinforced soil nails unreinforced nails unreinforced soil nails
working stress FOS (1.2 temp;
1.10 1.74 0.63 1.27 1.11 1.56 0.73 1.19
1.5 permanent)
AS467 limit state FOS(1.0
0.87 1.37 0.50 1.01 0.84 1.17 0.61 0.94
required with factoring)
BS8006 limit state FOS(1.0
0.88 1.6 0.51 1.23 0.85 1.3 0.56 1
required with factoring)

▪ Green shows a satisfactory result for permanent works according to the method
6. Questions and Discussion

1. Standards used for: soil nail slopes ; micropiles ; ground

anchors ?