Design And Construction Of A 20.

5 M High Innovative Nehemiah Wall Near Cameron Highland,

Pahang

Ir. Lee Chee Hai, Managing Director of Nehemiah Reinforced Soil Sdn Bhd

Dr. Nimal S. Nilaweera, Head of Geotechnical Engineering, Terratech Consultants (M) Sdn Bhd

ABSTRACT: An exceptionally high wall of height 20.5 m was constructed to span a deep valley in the Cameron Highland using
the Nehemiah Anchored Earth technology. It was proposed as an alternative to the original design of a via duct. The
alternative was eventually constructed and found to be practical, cost effective and time saving. In addition, excessive
deep fills and cuts are minimized.

1.0 INTRODUCTION joints are generally tight with some discolored surfaces and
dry in nature.
After the successful completion of the first East-West
Highway, the construction of the second East-West Highway
was started in 1997. The second East-West Highway links
Simpang Pulai in Perak to Kuala Berang in Terengganu
while passing through Ladang Blue Valley in Pahang. This
highway is divided into eight packages. Package 1 which
stretches from Simpang Pulai to Pos Selim and Package 7B
which stretches from Kg. Teris to Kuala Berang have both
been completed. At the time of writing, Packages 2,3,4, and
7 have been awarded to some contractors and are now under
construction. Package 2 links Pos Selim to Ladang Blue
Valley in Cameron Highland. It cuts across the Main Range
of Peninsular Malaysia. The steepness of the mountain
terrain poses tremendous engineering challenge. Innovative
design and construction method are needed to overcome the
challenge and construct the highway within the budgetary
constraint of time and cost. This paper describes the use of Figure 1: Geological Ground Profile
innovative Nehemiah walls as one of the methods used to
avoid excessive deep fills. It is also found to be cost 3.0 GLOBAL STABILITY ANALYSIS
effective and practical when compared to the original design
of using long viaducts to span the deep valleys. The orientation of two joint systems was analyzed for
potential sliding with respect to the downslope below the
2.0 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION foundation level of the wall. According to the analysis the
formation of narrow wedges bounded by the two joint sets is
According to the site investigation that included subsurface possible. The sliding can occur along the joint set 2. The
exploration by boreholes and seismic refraction surveys and factor of safety became 0.28 under the loading condition
surface geological mapping, the area is underlain by induced by the wall. The wedges with average surface area of
moderately to slightly weathered schist. A typical geological 20 m2 on the ground slope can be stabilized by 50 tons
ground profile of the hill slope where the wall is located is external load applied on 15o inclination to the horizontal
shown in Fig. 1. The base of the wall is founded on a sloping direction. Therefore 10-ton capacity rock bolts with 6 m
ground with steepness of about 40o, and hence the anchorage length were used at 2m x 2m spacing to stabilize
preparation of foundation of the wall required some the failures with factor of safety of 1.6.
excavation into the slope in order to prepare the base
platform. Due to the nature of slope forming material the 4.0 DESIGN
global stability of the slope is not governed by slip circle type
failures. The intact strength properties of the bedrock are The Nehemiah wall is a type of reinforced soil system. It
very high when compared to the foundation pressure of the employs the combination of soil reinforcement and deadman
wall, and such occasions the global stability is controlled by anchorage technology. The advantage of such a system is
the presence and orientation of discontinuities in the bedrock cost effectiveness through design and use of locally available
with respect to the ground slope. Therefore, the discontinuity material like steel bars and concrete. The design is based on
patterns in the bedrock were mapped in detail. Generally the the BS 8006:1995 code of practice for
bedrock, schist, is closely foliated and dips into the hillside Strengthened/reinforced soils and other fills. The typical
hindering any possible sliding along it. Besides foliation two design cross section is shown in Fig. 2.
major joint systems were identified as, joint set 1: 210o/85
and joint set 2: 260o/46o in order of dip direction/dip. These
 tensile and pull-out failure of the reinforcing tendons are
adequate.

4.1.1 Tensile Failure

Ti = K Sv σv
where

Ti is tension developed in the reinforcing

tendon at i th level
K is the coefficient of earth pressure within
the reinforced block
Sv is the vertical spacing of the tendons
σv is the vertical stress acting on the i th level
of the tendons according to the Meyerhof
pressure distribution

In the design, it is important that the number and

size of reinforcing tendons are adequately provided
so that the tension developed in the tendons is
Figure 2: Typical Design Cross Section of Nehemiah Wall
always less than the allowable tensile strength of the
tendons.
The design of the Nehemiah wall involves the external
stability analysis and the internal stability analysis. For the
4.1.2. Pull Out Failure
external stability analysis, the Nehemiah wall is analyzed as a
gravity block. The various factors of safety against sliding,
The ultimate pull out resistance of the reinforcing
bearing, overturning and global stability analysis are
tendons is the sum of the shaft frictional resistance
checked. (see Fig. 3). The global analysis is discussed in the
and the anchor capacity of the anchor block. The
earlier section. The other externally stability analyses are
shaft resistance is determined by the friction
quite standard geotechnical analyses. As such, they shall not
developed between the backfill and the effective
be described in detail. The internal stability shall however be
length of the tendon which is shown in Fig. 4.
described in more detail below:

Figure 4: Effective Length of Reinforcing Tendons -

Le

The shaft resistance is computed as follows:

Fs = µ tan Ø ¶ d Le σv
where

Figure 3: External Stability Checklist Fs is the shaft resistance

µ is the coefficient of friction
4.1 Internal Stability Ø is the internal angle of friction of backfill
d is the diameter of the tendon
The internal stability analysis involved checks to ensure that Le is the effective shaft length (Fig. 4)
the factors of safety against
The anchor capacity is computed as follows:
 Pa = 4 Kp h w σv hoisted with the aid of a lifting device. They are
where placed in successive courses. The spacing, level and
alignment of each panel are checked immediately
Pa is the passive resistance of the backfill in after its placement and again at the completion of
front of the anchor block each course.
σv is the vertical stress at the i th level of
tendon
Kp is the coefficient of passive earth pressure
h is the height of the anchor block
w is the width of the anchor block

Hence, the total pull out resistance

P = Pa + Fs

5.0 CONSTRUCTION

The construction of the second East West Highway is a Figure 5: Construction of AE Wall
challenging task because of the steep terrain of the Main
Range. Normal design would results in excessive cut and The initial row of panels are braced externally.
fill. Excessive earthwork can results in slope instability, cost Each row of the panels are followed immediately by
escalation and adverse environmental impact. Nehemiah wall the placement of fill and the connection of the
is used as one of the innovative methods to overcome reinforcing bars before the next successive
excessive deep fills. This method is cost effective, saves horizontal row of panels is being erected. The
time and provides a long term stability in support of the road subsequent rows of panels shall be held in place by
embankment. The first step in the construction of the wall is temporary clamps securing the present rows of
site preparation. panels to the previously erected rows which is
already held firmly in place by the reinforcing bars
5.1 Site Preparation buried in the backfill.
5.1.1 Excavation Except for the bottom course of panels, all others
panels shall be tilted towards the fill material during
Excavation for the base of the wall is carried out in placement to compensate for the outward movement
accordance with the site setting out in accordance expected during or subsequent to compaction of the
with the drawing. fill material. The degree of inclination shall be
adjusted where necessary as placement and
5.1.2 Base Preparation compaction of fill material proceeds to ensure that
the verticality of the wall complies with the
The foundation base is graded level and well requirements.
compacted for a width equal to the length of the
reinforcing elements. Any weak material or debri 5.2.2 Joint Materials and Cushion Pads
shall be removed and replaced with compacted
granular material . Joint materials are placed in all the joints between
the panels. They shall be placed on the cleaned top
5.1.3 Concrete Levelling Pad edges of each facing panels just prior to the placing
of the mating facing panel. No joint material is
The plain concrete levelling pad is cast accurately to required between the leveling pad and the bottom
line and level as detailed on the drawing 24 hours course of the facing panels.
before the actual wall erection works commence.
Grade 20 concrete is used and no reinforcement is Cushion pads shall be placed at the slots on the top
required. edge of each panel before the installation of the
subsequent row of panels.
Once the site preparation is completed, the wall
erection can be commenced. 5.2.3 Alignment and Verticality
5.2 Wall Erection The alignment and verticality is constantly checked
with a plumb bob and adjusted with the aid of
5.2.1 Installation temporary timber wedges inserted into the joints
between the panels. The timber wedges shall be
The process of wall erection is summarized in the removed as soon as their functions are fulfilled.
sketch shown in Fig. 5. The facing panels are
5.3 Backfilling The fill material is compacted to 95% of the
maximum dry density as determined in accordance
5.3.1 Placement of Fill with BS 1377:1975.

Backfilling operation is carried out immediately During the backfilling operation and compaction,
following the completion of the installation of each trucks and heavy construction vehicles shall be kept
row of panels. The fill material shall be deposited, back at least 1.5 m away from the back face of the
spread, leveled and compacted in layers of thickness facing panel. The 1.5 m zone shall be compacted
of not exceeding 375 mm so that each reinforcing with a 1.0 ton vibratory plate compactor.
bar can be fixed at the required level on top of the
compacted fill material without any voids forming 6.0 CONCLUSION
directly underneath the reinforcing bar.
The Nehemiah wall was successfully completed in February
The direction of travel of the construction vehicle 2001 despite the challenge of very steep mountainous terrain.
for the placement, spreading and compaction of the Excessive deep fills are avoided through the use of Nehemiah
fill is parallel to the alignment of the wall at all time. wall. It was found to be cost effective and practical in
Sharp turn of vehicle causing centrifugal forces comparison with the original design of via duct. Further, the
exerting toward the rear face of the panels is time saved is significant. However, for such a height of wall,
avoided. it is imperative that the global stability is adequately checked
with input from engineering geologist.
No heavy vehicle weighing more than 1000 kg shall
7.0 REFERENCE
be allowed within the 1.5 m zone from the rear face
of the panel.
BS8006:1995 Code of Practice for Strengthened/Reinforced
Soils and Other Fills.
The traveling of construction vehicles especially
those with crawler track wheels directly onto the MTD (2001) “Slope Stabilization in Pos Selim – Ladang
reinforcing element is prohibited. Blue Valley Highway Project”, Proceedings for National
Slope Seminar 2001, Cameron Highlands, Pahang.
5.3.2 Compaction