Fill out the form to keep watching
Having trouble viewing the video?
Some regions or networks may restrict Vimeo playback.
Modelling underground structures like this underpass means connection and boundary assumptions have to reflect actual construction sequencing — not idealised fixed supports.
- Pile springs and compression-only springs for the SBP wall and surrounding soil
- Beam end releases at the base slab-to-SBP connection, driven by drill-in bar constraints
- Load combinations under LTA CDC Chapter 8, imported via the MCT Command Shell
- A plate model for vehicle collision loading on the underpass walls
A strong fit when validating beam end release assumptions before advancing load combinations under LTA CDC.
Your submission has been
successfully received
If you meet the certification criteria,
Your Certificate of Completion will be sent to your email.
If you need urgent support, contact us via
here.
We truly appreciate your participation!
Open Access Has Ended
The open access period has ended.
If you have a MIDAS account, sign in
and complete the access form to watch this session.
Full access is one step away 👀
Complete a short form to continue
Description
This session is based on a transport infrastructure project in Singapore involving the upgrade of an existing road network to improve traffic capacity and connectivity. The case study focuses on a typical underpass structure that crosses beneath an existing at-grade expressway, with an adjoining depressed road section. The underpass sits below existing ground level, with an excavation depth of up to 2m and a minimum inner vertical clearance of 5.6m, and is designed to account for uplift forces from groundwater pressure. The design combines bottom-up construction for the depressed road with top-down construction for the underpass, retained by an Earth Retaining and Stabilizing System (ERSS) of Secant Bored Pile (SBP) walls that serve as both temporary and permanent structures.
Using MIDAS CIVIL NX, a typical underpass cross-section is modelled as a 2D frame, with the SBP wall represented as pile springs and the surrounding soil as compression-only springs. Beam end releases are applied at the base slab-to-SBP wall connection to represent the moment release arising from drill-in bar constraints at that interface. Load combinations follow the LTA Civil Design Criteria (LTA CDC, Chapter 8) and are imported directly between models using the MCT Command Shell, rather than being recreated manually for each project. For vehicle collision loading on the underpass walls, a plate model with the same pile and soil springs applied is used instead of the frame model, to capture two-dimensional load distribution and local stress concentration around the impact location. Results — including axial force, bending moment, and shear force from the frame elements, and stress distribution from the plate elements — are extracted at planned node locations and compiled into a Word-based design report using the Dynamic Report Generator
Benefit
will be emailed after 2nd survey submission
Key Points
Modelling a typical underpass cross-section as a 2D frame, with the SBP wall as pile springs and the soil as compression-only springs
Applying beam end releases to represent the moment release between the base slab and SBP wall due to drill-in bar constraints
Setting up load combinations under the LTA Civil Design Criteria (LTA CDC, Chapter 8) and importing them between models using the MCT Command Shell
Switching to a plate model to assess vehicle collision loading and local stress concentration on the underpass walls
Extracting axial force, bending moment, and shear force results at planned node locations
Compiling analysis results into a design report using the Dynamic Report Generator
Speaker