ENGINEERS IRELAND

PILED EMBANKMENTS - RECENT EXPERIENCES

WYATT ORSMOND, Independent Geotechnical Consultant (previously RPS)

Cover Photo: Pile installation for the West Piled Embankment at Kilmacanoque Overbridge in the Glen of the Downs, Wicklow.

SYNOPSIS

Piled embankments, or load transfer platforms have been used on a number of occasions in Ireland
over the past years to support road embankments over areas of very soft ground. The support
arrangements ranged from geosynthetic basal reinforced systems to concrete slab platforms –
occasionally interfacing with bridge abutments. Some of these have experienced partial or total
failure and it is clear that the design principles are lacking in considering the pile and embankment
interaction as well as construction effects and long term factors.

This paper presents an overview of piled embankments, provides a summary of recent piled
embankments in Ireland, looks at working platforms which form a critical element of the
construction and reviews the design approach shortcomings from lessons learnt and practical
experience. It offers guidelines and points to consider from conception to completion.

36
INTRODUCTION the arching effect is no longer a contributing factor and the
structure behaves in a different way. To distinguish these,
Following the National Development Plan (1989-1993), a
the term “Load Transfer Platform” is used in this paper to
programme was set in place to improve the Irish road
describe embankments built on a pile supported concrete
network. This escalated in 2000 with several routes being
slab.. Although fundamentally different, many of the
upgraded to motorway. With towns expanding, property
issues encountered during construction are similar.
prices rising and numerous other factors like archaeology
and ecology being addressed, resulted in the new road
There is no optimum design for a piled embankment as it
corridors being “routed” through areas of unfavourable
is usually economics that plays the final part in the
ground.
selection of pile size, spacing, pile cap size and basal
Where previous roads had skirted bogs, the new highways
reinforcement type and strength. Pile spacing of 2.0m to
went right through some of the worst founding conditions
3.0m and pile caps from 0.5m to 2m is common. The
possible.
clear span gap created by the combination of these will
In many cases excavate and replace was not practical or
determine the strength of basal reinforcement although this
cost effective, consolidation of peat too slow and risky and
is also governed by the height of the embankment.
deep soil mixing had its limitations. The only option left
was to support the new road embankment on a grid of
For load transfer platforms, pile spacing is typically 3m to
piles, otherwise known as a piled embankment or load
4m with slab thickness ranging from 300mm to 500mm
transfer platform. But accessing the area was also a
but as with piled embankments, the ideal combination will
challenges and the working platform formed a critical
depend on economics.
element of the design.

The design of a piled embankment can be divided into a

First used in the late 1960’s in Finland, the design of piled
number of interacting elements. From the bottom up, we
embankments has been improved significantly with recent
have:
designs incorporating detailed 3D finite element analysis.
• the pile supporting condition (end bearing or
(Prelovsky et al, 2008, Zhuang 2009).
floating),
• the pile itself (type, joints, installation)
The design tends to focus on the interaction of the basal
• pile caps and their interaction with the pile,
reinforcement (geotextile), the pile caps and the
basal reinforcement and soil arching, and how
embankment soil and in some cases the soil below the
they are constructed
basal reinforcement. Soil arching forms a significant
• Basal reinforcement for taking vertical load
element of the design approach and much comparative
• Basal reinforcement for taking horizontal loads
studies have been done assessing the various methods.
• Edge conditions (horizontal tieback)
• Embankment height
However, although these various methods address the
• Road Pavement
design of the basal reinforcement and other methods
• Live loading
address the pile design, the overall interaction of each
element of the platform and the effects and implications of
In order to build the embankment, and particularly in the
construction are often not fully considered with disastrous
peat bogs commonly encountered in Ireland, a working
consequences.
platform is required. The construction of this temporary
platform and how it interacts with the piled embankment
OVERVIEW OF PILED
EMBANKMENTS also needs to be taken into account. As this is the first
element that is constructed it is dealt with first.
A piled embankment is typically a grid of piles with pile
caps over which strong layers of geotextile are placed and WORKING PLATFORM DESIGN
the embankment is then built on top of this. The loaded
geotextile layers displace downwards and partially support Many piled embankments in Ireland (eg A1N1 Flurry Bog,
the overlying soil in tension while arching effects within N7 Annaholty and Drominboy, N11 Glen of the Downs
the overlying soil onto the pile caps also add support. west embankment, A4/A5 Dungannon to Balleygawley)
are constructed over very poor ground conditions, where
Variations to this basic design is the inclusion of beams even foot access is limited, let along lightweight
between the pile caps or replacement of the geosynthetic construction plant as demonstrated in Photo 1 where a
layers with a concrete slab. When constructed with a slab,

37
lightweight amphibious vehicle got bogged down during
the additional ground investigations.

Photo 2: construction of the “thin” working platform on

Flurry Bog.

Photo 1: lightweight amphibious vehicle bogged down in
Flurry Bog.
It is therefore essential to have a working platform to
allow piling rigs and construction plant access in order to
build the piled embankment. The largest single load is
generally the piling rig and it is therefore essential that the
type of rig and its loading is confirmed prior to designing
the platform. Pile rig weights can vary from 25 ton to 100
ton and the type of rig also depends on the type of pile
driven, hence this is linked to the pile design and cost.
The working platform needs to be designed to be strong
enough to take the live loads but weak enough to allow the
piles to punch through when driving. If the pile
embankment is too thick, it could settle significantly and
the consequence of this needs to be taken into account in
the basal reinforcement and pile design. In order to
achieve a relatively thin but strong working platform, a
combination of geotextiles and geogrids with strong
interlocking rockfill is suggested and has successfully
been used to build platforms of 0.5m to 0.6m thick.
Regardless of which approach is used it is always
advisable to undertake site trials prior to construction and
to regularly monitor the performance of the working
platform. Also be aware of other loads – eg counterweight
for pile testing, a large crane brought onto site to move
piles. These are often not considered and the site team are
unaware of the load limitations of the working platform.
PILE DESIGN
The dead load of the embankment and the live loads are
transferred through the basal reinforcement and arching
effects into the piles. Where the subsoil has some level of
strength, it also takes some of the loading, however when
building over peat bogs, it would be unwise to consider
any form of load-share and all the loads need to be taken
by the piles. Figure 1 below (modified from BS8006)
shows the area of soil arching and the area of soil
supported by the basal reinforcement.

There are few design methods or guidelines for working

platform’s. One of the more common one’s would be the
BRE (2004) guidance document ‘Working platforms for
tracked plant’. However within this guidance document it
emphasises that it is not suitable for subgrade conditions
where the cu < 20 kPa. Considering that most peat bogs
have a cu in the range of 5 kPa to 15 kPa, the BRE
guidance document is of limited value in these conditions.
The use of finite element modelling is one approach but
even with this the high variation in soil properties,
interaction of the geogrid with the fill, variability in load
conditions etc makes it complex and tends to lead to
overdesign. Figure 1 : Areas of soil arching and area supported by
reinforcement.

38
When calculating the basal reinforcement consideration
needs to be given to the pile founding conditions – ie
either end bearing or friction pile (floating pile). With
floating piles, as the basal reinforcement strains and the
pile loads increase, the pile settles and some level of load-
share with the subsoil occurs, hence limiting the strain on
the basal reinforcement. In very soft subsoil conditions
(peat), this is not the case as all the load is taken by the
piles.
There are numerous ways to design the load carrying
capacity of a pile and is beyond the scope of this paper.
What is however not fully considered are the support
conditions of the pile, horizontal forces and possible
bending moments.
Peat has very low strength and is also know to creep. The
peat should therefore not be relied upon to offer horizontal
resistance. In other words, the pile should be designed as
a slender column, or at least this load scenario considered.
The load boundary condition (Figure 2) of the “column” is
also in some cases a matter of opinion. If the toe is
founded in firm clay/stiff silts/dense sands or gravels, it
could be considered “clamped”, but if for example its end
bearing on rock with a thin soft silt layer overlain by peat,
it may need to be considered as “hinged”. The pile cap
condition is also open to interpretation as it could be
considered “free”, “hinged” or even “clamped”. This can
only be assessed by looking at the overall restraint of the
full embankment, the interaction with the pile caps and
basal reinforcement and the contribution of the working
platform.
Figure 2: Column boundary conditions
Pile caps are effectively an extension of the pile and form
the interface with the basal reinforcement. The two design
philosophies are to consider the cap as a pin (hinged) joint
with the pile or to consider this connection as a full
moment joint.
If pinned there would be concerns of excessive rotation
during construction. This could lead to uneven stressing
and imbalanced arching possibly leading to over stressing
of the basal reinforcement and/or excessive surface
deflection. When pinned, the cap also needs to be located
centrally over the pile. If the pile is out of position, there is
no opportunity to correct this through repositioning the
cap or linking piles with joined caps as shown in Photo 3
(Annaholty Bog, N7 and experienced on most other
projects).
Photo 3 : effect of horizontal placement problems
requiring linked pile caps
It is also impractical to cast the cap totally independent of
the pile. In some cases the caps are precast with a central
hole which fits over the pile and is then finally cast into
position. As this connection is now partially fixed (even
though structurally its considered a pin), if loaded
eccentrically, it could crack the top of the pile exposing
the reinforcement and result in premature corrosion of the
rebar.

Piles are also not driven perfectly vertically or in exact

Fully fixed pile caps require more complex reinforcement
position. Both of these lead to the creation of eccentric
and are generally cast insitu. There are cost implications
loading and hence an induced bending moment within the
doing this however it does offer more flexibility and an
pile. Depending on the shape of the embankment, and
overall more robust design. One of the main advantages is
possibly other external loads (eg flood water loading on
that the pile caps can be slightly off-centre of the pile to
one side of the embankment), the piles may also need to
compensate positional placement errors of the pile. This
resist some horizontal loads. While the pile may have
keeps the clear span between caps more consistent and
ample capacity in axial compression, the combination of
leads to more uniform loading of the basal reinforcement.
these other loads may exceed the capacity of the pile in
bending.

39
An alternative to pile caps is the use of reinforced concrete
beams which span between the pile caps. These can be Depending on the height of the embankment and stiffness
simply supported or have full moment connections with of the basal reinforcement, a more flexible or more rigid
the pile. The pile “column” head boundary condition pavement could be selected. If creep and long term
could possibly be considered “clamped” although if the deflection is expected a more flexible asphalt based
group of piles which are interconnected do not tie into a pavement might be more suitable. For very shallow
rigid element, a “guided” condition may need to be embankments, a reinforced concrete pavement may be an
considered. option.

BASAL REINFORCEMENT DESIGN When designing the basal reinforcement for embankment
over highly compressible soil, particularly peat, the entire
Most of the piled embankment design methods concentrate
embankment loading should be taken onto the piles and no
on the design of the basal reinforcement. A common one
support from the subsoil should be considered. The
used is the BS8006 method which is based on Marston’s
weight of the working platform alone will result in the
arching formula, but there are others like the Nordic
subsoil settling away from the basal reinforcement. An
Guidelines method which uses Carlsson wedge shape and
example of this is shown in Photo 4 (Anaholty Bog, N7)
arching, the German method which adopts the multi shell
arching theory by Kempfert et al. (Satidi et al. Stuttgart
University (2007)). Many more arching theories have
been proposed and Britton & Norton (2008) provide a
comprehensive discussion on the more popular ones.

The design of the basal reinforcement considers the effect

of arching of the soil between the pile caps with the
stresses required to maintain the arch and also to keep the
embankment soil not supported by the arch in position.
The reinforcement also acts to resist horizontal movement
of the embankment side slope (lateral sliding). The basal
reinforcement perpendicular to the embankment therefore
Photo 4: Gap below and basal reinforcement.
takes higher tension loading than that running parallel.

Part of the basal reinforcement design assesses the bond

The important element to arching is the plane of equal
length (Lb) (refer to Fig.3, taken from BS8006) of the
settlement. Above this plane, arching is considered to be
reinforcement needed to resist the lateral sliding force. In
fully developed and the loads are transferred to the pile
most cases this ends up being longer than the slope of the
caps. Naughton and Kempton (2004) compared the
embankment and the reinforcement either needs to be
various methods and found that the location of the plane of
wrapped around and back into the embankment or
equal settlement varied from 1.4 to 2.5 times the clear
terminated in an anchor block. The anchor block is
span. In BS8006, the plane of equal settlement is 1.4 times
typically a line of gabions or geosynthetic 1m3 bags filled
the clear span. When the embankment height is above the
with gravel (shown in Photo 5) and is commonly placed
plane of equal settlement, the strength of the basal
along the top of the outer pile row.
reinforcement can be significantly reduced as the majority
of the loads are taken up through arching. The basal
reinforcement in this instance is mainly supporting the soil
below the arch. For shallow foundations, where the arch
is not fully developed, the basal reinforcement is taking
the majority of the soil load and live loads. The balance
between vertical displacement and basal reinforcement
tension is critical. Over-strong basal reinforcement could
result in limited build-up of soil arching and any long term
creep of the geosynthetics will be mirrored on the surface. Figure 3: Figure 71 from BS8006 showing the lateral
Similarly excessive strain due to low strength will also sliding interface and bond length.
result in surface deformation and possible rupture.

40

Photo 5 : gravel bag used to form the anchor wrap.
Critical to the design is a full understanding of how the
piled embankment is going to be constructed. Some
designs specify a layer of granular fill over the pile cap
surface prior to placing the basal reinforcement. Another
option is to place a layer of fill between the two
geosynthetic layers. There is also no fixed rule on the
number of layers of basal reinforcement. Whichever
layering system is decided, consideration needs to be
given as to how it is going to be built.
• Can it be done without causing excessive damage to
the reinforcement layers?
• Can the layers be placed taught over the surface and
covered in an even manner to get uniform strain?
• How does the placing of the grids affect the pile
caps?
PILED EMBANKMENTS IN IRELAND
AND NORTHERN IRELAND
The oldest reference received from enquiries and a review
of available literature on piled embankments in Ireland
and Northern Ireland is 1985 and relates to one built as
part of the New Shannon Bridge near Athlone. Since then
12 basal reinforced and 4 load transfer platforms have
been constructed (based on information received). The
details are summarised as follows:
Enniskillen Housing development (1999) with precast
piles on a 2.75 triangular grid with 3 layers of Tensar
geogrid (2xSS30, 1 x SS20). This embankment failed due
to settlement of the ground away from the fill material
below the lowest geogrid causing the LTP to sag to such
an extent that there was a failure of the arching mechanism
upon which the design depended. (Court Citation NIQB
68, ref COGC5319)
Scramoge (2002) using precast piles on a 2.5m grid and
embankment height of about 3.5m. (no other information
available) Had initial settlement issues but has since
performed well.
41
Gortinty N4 Drumsna to Jamestown Bypass (2002).
Using 200 mm square precast piles on a 1.6 to 1.45 m
square grid with 800mm square pile caps. Supporting a
1.3m to 1.8m high embankment. Basal reinforcement
comprised two layers of 150 kN/m Paragrid. Some issues
positional and verticality tolerances of piles during driving
and lateral movement of soft ground during driving the
outer row of piles. Since construction has performed well.
(info curtasy of Roughan & O’Donovan)
Shannon (2002) (Trial embankment) using vibro concrete
columns, three layers of geogrid (Tensar SS30 and SS20)
and one layer of Basetex 200/50. Performed well.
(Quigley et al, 2003)
Corravokeen – North Mayo (2003) Timber piled
embankment for Coillte using 250mm diameter Sitka
spruce poles on a 2.1m and 1.2m grid with basal
reinforcement of A252 steel mesh and later with 2 layers
of Stabilenka 200. Performed well as a temporary solution.
(Ryan et al, 2004)
Glen of the Downs Eastern Embankment (2002),
350mm square precast piles on a 2m grid with two layers
of Stabelenka supporting a bridge embankment 8m high.
Performed well. (Orsmond 2004)
Glen of the Downs Western Embankment (2002),
350mm square precast piles on a 2m grid with two layers
of Stabelenka supporting an 8m high embankment. Some
issues with pile installation but otherwise performed well.
(Orsmond, 2004)
A1N1 Flurry Bog (2006). 300mm square precast piles
with 0.8m caps on a 2.5m grid with two layers of Polyfelt
(PET) ranging from 600 and 800kN/m. Supporting an
embankment 3.5m high. Issues with pile verticality and
positional tolerances but post construction has performed
well. (Orsmond, 2008)
N7 Annaholty Bog (2009). 355mm precast piles on
various grids of 1.85 to 2.15 spacing with 0.8-1m pile caps
and Stabilenka basal reinforcement in two to three layers
ranging from 150 to 1000kN/m. Embankment height
ranged from 2m to 6m. Failure of outer piles on a short
section post construction (pre pavement) required
reconstruction of this section which was done with a
concrete slab. Some post construction deflection near
repair occurred but otherwise performing well. (Authors
personal observations).
N7 Drominboy Bog (2009). 355mm precast piles on 1.8
to 1.9m square grid supporting a 2.5m to 6m high
embankment. Designed as a basal reinforcement system
but finally built as a concrete slab due to pile vertical and
positional tolerance issues. (Authors personal
observations)
Limerick Tunnel bridge approach embankments
(2009). At two bridge locations steel H piles installed on a
4x4m grid supporting a concrete slab. Performed well.
(Buggy & Curran (2011)
A4/A5 Dungannon to Balleygawley (2010). 275mm and
350mm precast concrete piles on grids of 2.5m to 3m with
two layers of basal reinforcement ranging from 700 to
800kPa. Embankment failed during construction due to
excessive loading with landscape fill adjacent to
embankment. The remedial works included redoing the
full section with excavate and replace. (info courtesy of
AGEC Ltd.)
LEASSONS LEARNED
WORKING PLATFORMS
It is interesting to note that when constructing a piled
embankment along the A650 Bigley Relief Road in UK
over a bog, the working platform was removed to limit
long term settlement of the soft underlying peat. This
highlights the importance of building light platforms when
working in these exceptional conditions.
If full reliance is put on the in-situ or laboratory strength
parameters for peat, these very low strengths will result in
an excessively thick embankment. The designer needs to
therefore rely on the additional tensile strength of the
uppermost vegetative layer of peat. The small amount of
near surface consolidation caused as a result of the
platform load also provides some increase in strength.
Photo 6: A typical extent of a pile working platform
Thin platforms of 0.6m in thickness have successfully
been used to take a 60 ton piling rigs on the A4/A5
project. However, when undertaking the test piles, the
kentledge was placed directly onto the working platform
causing significant deformation. A more suitable approach
would be to support the kentlege on the surrounding piles.
The working platform was flooded during high rainfall
events – typical of low lying peat bogs, and is expected.
On the A1N1 Flurry bog project (Photo 6), a 0.5m thick
platform was used with a base separation geotextile
42
covered with geogrid and a second layer sandwiched in the
angular rockfill. This was designed to take a 30 ton pile
rig. When first constructed it moved (quaked) under
loading and waved, but with time firmed up and
performed well. For the static load pile test, the kentledge
was supported on a piled beam (see Photo 7). At one stage
a 60 ton crane was brought onto the platform to move
piles. Again the platform performed, but this level of
loading should not have happened. The platform settled to
about level with the top of the bog and on numerous
occasions was partially flooded with some areas
permanently just under water.
Photo 7: Static load pile test with kentledge supported on a
piled beam.
Along the N7 Anaholty and Drominboy bogs, working
platforms were built using a single layer of strong woven
basal reinforcement and 0.5m to 1.0m of rockfill. In some
locations it was observed that the working platform sunk
below bog level. The platforms performed well and in
places were used for haul roads.
PILING
Verticality: Piling through peat is very different to normal
day to day piling operations. Once the pile is in position, it
takes a few blows to penetrate through the working
platform before the pile freefalls a few meters into the
weak peat. Depending on how the pile is held in the rig,
the pile tends to slip slightly off vertical. At this point the
pile is too deep for forced vertical correction and it is best
to lift the pile up a few meters, realign and with the
hammer as additional weight, let the pile slip back down.
Good vertical tolerance is not always achieved. This is
noted on many of the projects, A1N1 (Photo 8) being no
exception.
Positional Tolerance: Basal reinforcement design is
directly related to the span length. This implies that the
pile position needs to be accurate and the tolerance set
must relate back to the design. On site this can be
difficult. When driving through the working platform, the
pile tends to hop and sometimes kicks as it tears through
the reinforcement. Pre-punching with a steel lance on the
front of an excavator has been tried with some success but
was time consuming. A steel pin protruding from the base
of the pile helped as well, but what was found most critical
on the A1N1 project was having tight slides/guides to hold
the pile as firmly as possible during the initial drive and
slip in.
Photo 8 : Problems with pile verticality and position.
When the pile exceeds its positional tolerance it might be
necessary to provide a larger pile cap or to link two pile
caps to correct the problem. When piles exceed vertical
tolerance, it may be necessary to install an additional pile
or, if there is sufficient moment capacity, to link the caps
with one or more caps (see Photo 3). On N7 Drominboy,
due to verticality and positional issues and the large
number of linked pile caps needed, a decision was made to
simple replace the caps with a continuous slab.
Pile joints: The pile joints are a critical element to the pile
design and installation. In very weak soils (eg peats), the
pile needs to act structurally like a slender column, hence
the pile joint needs to have full moment capacity. If a pin
joint is used, then a mechanism is created and the structure
is inherently unstable.
When driving a pile in peat, the additional sections of pile
added sometimes tend to rebound or spring back slightly.
This results in very high tension “shock” loads on the pile
joint and damage or full dislocation of the joints has been
witnessed and reported many times. The joint can become
displaced or off-set and when trying to achieve set, the pile
fails. A robust joint that can take tension is therefore
43
essential. Depending on the pile depth it is also advisable
not to have a joint close to the cap, but rather select pile
lengths to have the last joint as deep as possible.
Pile caps: Precast or cast in situ, either works but
consideration should be given to providing a full or partial
moment connection joint with the pile. If precast, there is
less option on doing any positional correction. The basal
reinforcement design should therefore allow a greater span
length so that positional tolerances can be increased.
Extent of piling: Design guidelines like BS8006 provides
a minimum outer position of the last row of piles (Lp in
Figure 2). This insures that the top of the embankment is
full supported by the piles. If however, the wedge of
embankment outside of this settles too much, it could
create a situation where ongoing erosion and ravelling
could cause undermining of the embankment edge. The
authors opinion is that the outer position of the piles as
suggested by BS8006 does not adequately support the side
slope, and a angle of 45° from the pile cap outer edge
should be a minimum (see Fig 4).
Figure 4: suggested minimum position of outer extent of
piles.
BASAL REINFORCEMENT
Generic basal reinforcement specification is not advised.
Almost every make of basal reinforcement, whether it be a
polyamide, polyester or high-density polyethylene has
different stress strain characteristics. It has also been
found that the same product but from different
manufacturing plants has different strain characteristics.
Placing a layer of fill over the pile caps before placement
of the basal reinforcement and granular layers between the
geotextiles layers is a matter of design choice. However
the “keep it simple” approach is advised as every time
material needs to be moved or spread over piles and over
geotextiles there is a likelihood of damage.
Ensure that the parallel basal reinforcement layers have
sufficient overlap and stagger the longitudinal overlaps.
As pile embankments are not built regularly, there is Naughton, P.J., Kempton, G.T. (2004) “Comparison of
limited construction experience. This could lead to analytical and numerical analysis design methods for piled
inadvertent damage, misunderstanding of the overall embankments.” Proc. Contemporary Issues in Foundation
concept and the structural and geotechnical interaction Engineering. GSP131, ASCE, GeoFrontiers, Austin.
between the various elements and/or inappropriate loading
of the working platform, piled embankment or surrounds Orsmond, W. (2008) “A1N1 Flurry Bog Piled
leading to failure. Embankment Design, Construction and Monitoring”
EuroGeo4, Edinburgh, Paper Number 290
Monitoring is essential. If further information can be
gathered on the long term performance of basal reinforced Prelovsky, B., Naughton, P.J., Scotto, M., Kempton, G.T.
embankments, the designs can be improved and optimised. (2008) “The development of piled embankments
techniques over 25 years”.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Quigley, P., Naughton, P.J. , (2007). “Design of Piled

Embankments”. Proceedings of the conference on soft
The authors would like to acknowledge all those who ground engineering, Geotechnical Society of Ireland,
provided information on previous embankments. Portlaoise, pp 2.3

REFERENCES Quigley, P., O’Malley, J, Rogers, M. (2003).

“Performance of a trial piled embankment constructed on
BRE (2004) Working platforms for tracked plant: good soft compressible estuarine deposits at Shannon, Ireland”.
practice guide to the design, installation, maintenance and Proceedings of the International Workshop on
repair of ground-supported working platforms. Garston, Geotechnics of Soft Soils, Theory and Practice, The
Watford, WD25 9XX Netherlands, pp 619-624.

British Standards Institution (BSI) BS8006: (1995). Code Ryan, T., McGill, C., (2004) “A timber piled road over
of Practice of Strengthened/Reinforced Soils and Other deep peat in North West Ireland, National University of
Fills, London, England. Ireland, Galway.

Britton, E., Naughton, P.J. (2008). “The arching Syawal Satibi, S., Van der Meij, R. Leoni, M. (2007),
mechanism in piled embankments under road and rail “Piled embankments: Literature review and required
infrastructure”. Proc. Of the 4th European conference on further research using numerical analysis” Institute for
Geosynthetics, Edinburgh, Scotland. Geotechnical Engineering, University of Stuttgart

Buggy, F. J. and Curran, E., (2011). “Limerick Tunnel Zhuang, Y,. (2009) “Numerical modelling of arching in
Approach Roads – Design Construction & Performance”. piled embankments including the effects of reinforcement
Paper presented at Geotechnical Society of Ireland and subsoil”. Thesis for degree of Doctor of Philosophy,
Meeting, Engineers Ireland, Dublin 8th December, 2011. Nottingham University.

Neurtral Citation No [2005] NIQB68 Reg: COGC5319,

The high court of Justice in Northern Ireland.

45