Search Documents

By Patrick E. Durnal, Henrik Dahl

"A joint venture of Ben C. Gerwick Inc., Sverdrup (now Jacobs) and DMJM (now DMJM + Harris) designed the $779 million seismic upgrade of the Richmond - San Rafael Bridge over the San Pablo Bay in the San Francisco Bay Area and provided construction support to Caltrans. Construction of the marine foundation retrofi t was completed by a joint venture of Tudor Saliba/Tidewater/Koch-Skanska and their subcontractors: Pomeroy Precast Construction, AGRA Foundations, Dutra Construction and Vortex Divers. Construction management and inspection was performed by Caltrans with the support of various consultants. MARINE FOUNDATION RETROFIT SCOPEThe retrofi t design of the submerged foundations included:??A total of 476 tension and compression micro piles (290- 1140 kips or 1290-5071 kN) installed through cored holes through the underwater bells at 31 pier locations??Fourteen 126/150/164 inch (3.20/3.81/4.17m) diameter CISS (Cast-in-steel shell) concrete shear piles (1160- 2660 kips or 5160-11832 kN) installed through new precast concrete pile cap extensions??Twelve CIDH (Cast-in-drilled-hole) shear piles (1060- 2130 kips or 4715-9475 kN) with 150 inch (3.91m) diameter steel shells to top of bedrock and 30 ft (9,14m) long and 11 ft (3.35m) diameter rock socket installed through new precast concrete pile cap extensions The specifi ed post bid test boring revealed deeper bedrock at one pier location allowing deletion of the rock socket. Thus 15 CISS and 11 CIDH shear piles were installed at 11 pier locations - 9 piers with 2 piles and 2 piers with 4 piles. Cut off elevations for the shear piles ranged from 46 ft to 60 ft (14.0m to 18.3m) below mean sea level and cut off for the micro piles was 8 ft to 46 ft (2.44m to 14.0m) below mean sea level. Almost all foundation retrofi ts required work under limited headroom conditions. Underwater construction connections required innovative design details and construction techniques for each pile type. The 11 piers had 22 precast concrete pile cap extensions installed in pairs and connected by either tremie concrete closure pours or by large pipe struts. The precast pile cap extensions were strapped underwater using large steel bands wrapping around the belled piers with grouted annulus. The precast pile caps were founded with 14 inch (355mm) diameter steel pipe piles, which were either support piles or seismic tension and compression piles. The seismic piles were connected in grouted corrugated steel pipe sleeves cast into the new concrete pile caps."

Jan 1, 2007

By Masahiko Yamaki, Takahiro Yamanashi, Hijiri Hashimoto, Hirochika Hayashi

"In this study, the authors used heat conduction analysis with the aim of quantitatively evaluating whether treating improved ground with cover soil is an effective measure for maintaining strength development in the surface layer of improved ground after constructing cement treated soil for the winter season. This report describes a simple procedure to evaluate covering soil thickness, which is necessary for the strength of the surface of cement treated soil, by using the freeze index and both the water content ratio and dry density.INTRODUCTIONIt was reported that when ground improvement using cement is performed in winter in a snowy cold region (Fig. 1 photo, Fig. 2), the uppermost 1 m of the improved ground (i.e., the cement-treated soil) tends to become prone to solidification failure from exposure to the cold air during curing (Hashimoto et al. 2006). In light of this, our research laboratory conducted unconfined compression tests using curing temperature as a parameter of analysis on improved ground toward understanding the influence of curing temperature (ambient air temperature) on the strength improvement afforded by ground improvement.The authors found that if the curing temperature is maintained at 0°C for the first 28 days after improvement and then at 5°C for the next 337 days after improvement, the improved ground is expected to have 90% of the unconfined compressive strength of improved ground whose temperature was maintained at 20°C for the first 365 days after improvement (Hashimoto et al. 2011)."

Jan 1, 2015

By Chris Sammon

The Block 75 portion of the City Creek redevelopment project in Salt Lake City required multiple shoring walls surrounding the 6 acre site constructed to depths ranging from sixty-five to ninety feet below original street grade. Shoring for the project was challenging due to site soils consisting of cobbles, sands and gravels, interlayered lakebed silty clay and fine sandy silt with incised stream deposits of silty/clayey sand and gravels combined with a high groundwater table. Moreover, several abutting structures each with a unique foundation system would be directly or indirectly supported by the shoring system. Three sections of interest are the shoring walls constructed at Main Street, Deseret Trust Building and Eagle Gate Tower. Main Street shoring extended to as much as sixty-five feet below street grade and utilized existing basement walls anchored in place in the upper zones with soil nail walls with pre-installed vertical elements for face stabilization below. Data are presented which illustrates the effect dewatering had on the settlement of the Main Street Shoring. The Deseret Trust Tower shoring supported a 12 story, historical masonry building. Site conditions dictated a separate design for the east side and the north side of the building allowing comparison of relative performance between these walls. Settlements of this structure were controlled by installing micropiles through the 90 year old structures spread footings. Shoring for the Eagle Gate Tower was to be constructed immediately adjacent to a mat supported 22 story high rise structure. This shoring system combined secant piles, ground anchors and incorporated existing abandoned-in-place pipe piles with infilling high pressure jet grouting to create a cutoff wall and eliminate the adverse impacts of dewatering below this sensitive foundation.

Jan 1, 2010

By J. Matos e Silva

"Abstract The paper refers five examples of executed diaphragm walls with one to five levels of anchorages. For each example a comparison is made between the results of the design using the traditional criteria and the ones obtained by using the Eurocode 7 and the Portuguese Norm related to the EC7 (NP EN 1997-1 2010), as the Eurocodes consider the possibility of each European country to adopt their own geotechnical parameters as these may vary from one country to another. A comparison is also made with the behaviour of these diaphragm walls during its construction phase; so the values from the design that were adopted in the construction are listed in tables 2 to 6 in the “Construction Options” columns. From the referred examples the author presents his conclusions.1 - INTRODUCTIONIn the so-called “traditional criteria” the soil parameters (dry unit weight, angle of internal friction and cohesion) have values obtained through tests or empirically. It is assumed that the characteristic values of the soil parameters adopted in Eurocode 7 are equal to the soil parameters adopted in the calculations by the “traditional criteria”. In the present paper the design according to the EC7 was made considering only the ultimate limit states and the respective Cases A1 and A2.The partial coefficients used for the actions in the present paper were those on Table 1:2 - CONSIDERED EXAMPLESThe five examples correspond to the situations of figures 1 to 5, and the respective results are summarized in tables 2 to 6.For all the considered examples, that are case histories, a simplified method published by Matos e Silva (March 2000) was adopted. This method attains good performances when compared with other more sophisticated ones as the finite elements and the elasto-plastic methods as described in a paper published by Matos e Silva (2000). All the obtained values were compared between them and with the so-called “Construction Options” that were the values adopted by the designers of the considered examples. For the wall bottom length calculation two possible situations were envisaged:"

Jan 1, 2014

By Dominic Parmantier, Karen Dawson, Suthan Pooranampillai, Seungcheol Shin

"This paper presents a case study of the deformation-based design, construction, and performance of stone column ground improvement (GI) beneath a mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) wall and bridge abutment with heights up to 50 feet. As part of the widening of Interstate 5 (I-5) to allow High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes in Tacoma, Washington, a new approach and span over the Puyallup River will be constructed. During the soils investigation and design phase of the project, low plasticity silts (ML) inter- bedded with silty sand layers and organic silt where identified as being potentially liquefiable. Stone column ground improvement was designed using a deformation-based approach to address static settlement and seismic stability of the proposed MSE embankments. The deformation-based design of the stone columns resulted in significant savings over a limit equilibrium-based approach. This paper presents the results of sonic coring taken from the initial stone columns installed and compares these results to the real-time data acquisition reports from the stone column installations. Vibration monitoring results during stone column installation are included. Settlement monitoring at the face of the MSE wall and buried vibrating wire settlement monitoring elements are presented and compared to the original settlement predictions.IntroductionStone column ground improvement was implemented as a means of supporting mechanically stabilized wall approaches for a new bridge over the Puyallup River, part of HOV improvements to I-5 in Tacoma, Washington. The work discussed in this case history was part of the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) I-5/Portland Avenue to Port of Tacoma Road, Stage 1 Northbound HOV contract, developed as an early work element to a follow-on bridge construction project. The area requiring stone column ground improvement is shown in Figure 1. The improved ground supports permanent geosynthetic walls and embankments up to 50 feet high. This wall can be seen in Figure 1. The selected ground improvement primarily provides global stability of the soils beneath the walls during anticipated seismic loading and also reduces the time and magnitude of consolidation settlement under the weight of the planned embankment.Approximately 74,000 cubic yards of liquefiable alluvial soils were improved by stone columns. Stone column construction occurred in late 2010 and early 2011. This was followed by the embankment and wall construction. Settlement monitoring began with the embankment construction and continued into 2012."

Jan 1, 2017

By Patrick P. A. Wolfs

In the summer of 2000, the ECR®/EFT® was first introduced in the Netherlands. After the first project a field test was performed together with other geophysical methods to prove the liability of these systems and their application in areas with soft soil and high groundwater levels. The objective of this test, which was carried out with three leakage detection systems, was to locate the holes. After this test several projects have been carried out. In this article the Dutch projects "Ringvaart Aqueduct" and "Bottleneck Limburg N296/N297" are mentioned.

Jan 1, 2006

By Theodore von Rosenvinge

Large diameter (2.4 meter) drilled shaft foundations were installed to depths of over 62 meters through soil into Arkose bedrock for Connecticut?s Pearl Harbor Memorial Bridge (I-95 over New Haven Harbor). The project involved many ?firsts? including the first ?extradosed? cable-stayed bridge in the US, and for Connecticut, the deepest drilled shafts, the first use of a rotator to install shaft casing, and the first use of the Mini-Sid technology for rock socket bottom inspection. Design utilized both friction and end bearing for rock sockets. O-Cell testing was employed to maximize performance factors during design and to allow adjustments to socket lengths during construction. Favorable test results permitted a reduction in socket lengths and significant cost saving.

Jan 1, 2011

By Bryan C. Field

The proposed construction schedule for the St. Anthony Falls I-35W Bride challenged the abilities of the design-build teams to utilize the best and most efficient methods to meet Minnesota Department of Transportation?s deadlines and design requirements to restore traffic to the Interstate 35W crossing of the Mississippi River, along with a sense of normalcy, following the bridge collapse. The project team ultimately designed and constructed two foundation systems at various substructures for bridge support. Steel H-section piles were driven to bedrock for south bridge abutment support and drilled shafts were used for the north bridge abutment and piers for the Mississippi River Bridge. Drilled shafts we also used for the abutments for the three single span bridges carrying I-35W over 2nd Street. The design-build team used high-strain dynamic pile testing with a Pile Driving Analyzer (PDA) to verify H-Pile capacities and performed drilled shaft inspection on a 24-hour basis during installation over the winter months. The drilled shaft inspection process was a vital part of the project quality control program to maintain the necessary methods for proper drilled shaft installation. Ultimately, with an efficient design, quality construction methods and operation, and a rigorous inspection and quality control plan; the I-35W Bridge was opened to traffic 3 months ahead of the already accelerated schedule.

Jan 1, 2009

By B. De Paoli

At Pietrafitta, between Assisi and Perugia, ENEL (Italian National Electricity Authority) has for some time been managing a power-station operated with lignite, mined from an open mine on the way to exhaustion. A new plant is under construction which is located in the mine that was filled with tailings, mainly clays, sandy silts, lignite and ashes produced by the power-station. The soil profile is shown in Fig. 1: the thickness of the made ground is around 27 m. The foundation of the new power-station is on 320 t piles, 1.20 m diameter, embedded in the cohesive base formation at a depth of 57.5 m. 2,350 piles will be constructed for a total length of 125 km. It is therefore one of the largest pile sites at present in operation in Italy. [ ]

Jan 1, 1994

By Anil Bhandari

Using subsurface data collected at each drilled shaft location is an ideal approach for conducting drilled shaft design. However, conducting subsurface tests at each drilled shaft location and subsequently performing the drilled shaft design can be a daunting task for a noise barrier wall that is divided into six (6) sections and stretches for approximately four (4) miles. In addition, having individual drilled shaft designs complicates the construction process. Grouping the subsurface conditions into broad categories and performing the design for each of those categories is an attractive alternative to the design per boring approach. Currently there are no existing guidelines to aid a designer on grouping the subsurface conditions for the drilled shaft design for the noise barrier walls. Therefore, a method was developed based on the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) N values of the near surface soils to categorize the soil profiles into distinct categories. Since the soil engineering properties of the near surface soils are known to be critical for drilled shaft lateral capacity, these soils were emphasized in the methodology. This method was successfully implemented for the design of drilled shafts supporting the noise barrier walls along the I-20 in Columbia, SC. For this project, two distinct soil profiles, labeled as ?strong? and ?weak?, were used. An overview of the soil profile grouping methodology is presented as well as the vertical and lateral drilled shaft capacity analyses for this project for the two general soil profiles. The analyses indicated that the axial capacity governed the design in the ?weak? soil profile and the lateral capacity controlled the design in the ?strong? soil profile. However, this is not a generalization and whether the axial or the lateral capacity governs the design of drilled shaft depends on the soil profile and design loads. Nonetheless, our findings emphasize that both lateral and axial capacity should be checked for drilled shaft design even when the vertical load are minor.

Jan 1, 2011

By Ke Yang

Drilled shafts are widely used as foundation system for sound walls to resist lateral loads. The design method based on the ultimate lateral capacity, such as Broms method, is often used for sound wall foundation design. Allowable Stress Design (ASD) is currently used for deep foundation design. However, by October 2007, all states Department of Transportations are required to use the Load Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) approach for the design of foundation in highway projects. There is a need to develop a calibrated resistance factor in LRFD lateral design of drilled shafts supporting sound barrier walls. This paper provides resistance factors for design of laterally loaded drilled shafts supporting sound walls using Broms method based on the study using reliability based method and fitting to ASD method. Additionally, the resistance factors for static lateral load tests are recommended. Furthermore, a methodology to update the resistance factors using Bayesian approach by incorporating the on-site full-scale lateral load test results is presented. To illustrate the Bayesian update methodology, two lateral load tests in Colorado were employed to develop the updated resistance factors.

Jan 1, 2007

By Hyu-Soung Shin

This study is concerned with the characteristics of the behavior of steel-concrete composite drilled shafts, a material that is used for large bridge foundations, and especially for weak submerged ground conditions. Depending on the loading or boundary conditions considered, the behavior of foundation will vary. The bearing capacity of steel-concrete composite drilled shaft is influenced by initiation and propagation of fractures along the interface between steel casing and filled concrete. The interface effect is taken into account with the following two simplified cases: (1) detached model with free interface (no shear stiffness of interface) between concrete core and steel casing, (2) confined model by an upper steel cap with free interface. In the confined model, it is intended to have an unified behavior of composite shaft between concrete core and steel casing but there is interface between them. Intensive numerical studies have been undertaken to investigate detailed behavior of the composite shaft. In this study, 3-D finite element analysis is employed. Ground conditions typical of those encountered for the design of drilled shaft under water are considered affecting the behavior. Also, an attempt is made to generate possible combinations of the loads which have been considered in fields. Detailed characteristics of the stress and displacement distributions are evaluated to understand the mechanisms of composite shafts.

Jan 1, 2007

By Derek Egan

"Abstract Construction clients want their foundation solutions to be right first time, every time; but it is often the geotechnical contractor who carries the most risk in achieving this. Robust validation to ensure that the installed geotechnical product is appropriate for the encountered ground conditions, will perform as required and be correctly measured for payment and record purposes is very important to minimise the contractor’s and the client’s risk. This paper outlines the development and operation of a robust real-time installation monitoring system which controls and validates the installation of driven cast in-situ (DCIS) piling. Using state of the art information technology the system allows the design engineer to interrogate the data acquired from the piling rig via his computer as the piles are completed. The use of the validation process, where data acquired during the driving of DCIS piles can be processed to estimate the finished pile performance, will be explained with reference to a new case study on large diameter DCIS piles. Examples of the routine use of the system will be presented to illustrate how automated monitoring of installation parameters can be used to raise the standard of reliability, efficiency and sustainability on piling projects. The conclusions to the paper will cover the key features and operational challenges characterising real-time monitoring of the execution of geotechnical works as developed from a number of years of experience of using a rig based data acquisition instrumentation system.INTRODUCTIONDriven Cast In-Situ (DCIS) piles have a long and successful history of use worldwide. The process, where a temporary steel drive tube, sealed at the bottom with a sacrificial base plate, is driven into the ground and filled with concrete before the tube is withdrawn, is well known (BS EN 12699, 2001 and Egan, 2013). Examples of large structures supported on DCIS piles installed by Keller UK include the Millennium Dome (now the O2 Arena) and the 2012 Olympic stadium in London.In recent times advances in piling rig instrumentation and telecommunications have enabled a new level of sophistication in the recording of installation parameters and the validation of pile performance. It is now possible to embed these features into the DCIS design and installation process which has improved the quality and efficiency of DCIS piling.This paper summarises the development and operation of a real time data acquisition and processing system for DCIS piling, but which is equally applicable to other forms of driven piling (for example concrete precast piling)."

Jan 1, 2014

By Rob Jameson

"Although seismic retrofit is recognized as a key micropile application, widely-used reference documents do not clearly address design and testing recommendations for micropiles that are loaded primarily under seismic conditions. The principles of micropile design and construction and their application to seismic retrofit projects are well understood and executed by leaders in the field. As the micropiling market grows, a wider audience relies on the information presented by DFI and similar industry groups. State-of-practice updates appear periodically in conference proceedings, but examination of recent bid documents makes it clear that there are opportunities to improve the specification of load, deflection, testing and acceptance criteria on many seismic retrofit projects. Updates to the FHWA Manual or DFI Sample Specification that specifically address seismic retrofit cases would be useful tools to disseminate information and enhance the state of practice.Micropile Survey UnderwayAs one step in this process, I am distributing surveys to contractors and designers prior to DFI Super Pile ’09 (June 4-6, San Francisco) seeking recommendations for design and testing procedures applicable to seismically loaded micropiles. I am also requesting any existing references that could be promoted as a standard for these cases. Anyone interested in participating in this survey, should contact me at rjameson@malcolmdrilling.com. Seismic RetrofittingMicropiles are ideally suited to seismic retrofit applications. Their high-tensile and compressive capacity can sustain the large concentrated loads induced during seismic events. They can be installed within and around the access limitations of existing structures, and can be drilled through and grouted into the wide variety of soil and rock materials encountered in seismically active zones.Seismic retrofits have included micropiles since the early 1990s, and they are now widely specified in the Western U.S. In the San Francisco Bay Area alone, thousands of micropiles have been installed for seismic upgrades of highway and transit aerial structures, and retrofits of commercial, residential and public buildings. Micropile use is growing in both public and private sectors, with large-scale retrofit projects currently underway for both the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) system-wide upgrades and renovations at San Francisco Airport."

Jan 1, 2009

By Ground Improvement Committee

The evaluation of earthquake-induced liquefaction has become a routine part of geotechnical engineering design. For a given project, if an analysis identifies a potential for liquefaction and the consequences of liquefaction are deemed unacceptable, then some form of hazard mitigation is required. Mitigation efforts may consist of removing the liquefiable soils, bypassing the liquefiable soils with deep foundations, structurally accommodating the deformations or strength loss caused by liquefaction, or preventing the onset of liquefaction through ground improvement. The fundamental ground improvement mechanisms for liquefaction mitigation include densification, drainage, and reinforcement. When evaluating, recommending and specifying various ground improvement methods for liquefaction mitigation, practitioners should understand the fundamental mechanics involved and applicability and limitations of the various methods. The DFI Ground Improvement Committee offers a review of the fundamental mechanics and commentary on the applicability and limitations of each method to provide clarity and guidance on the issues related to ground improvement for liquefaction mitigation.

Aug 1, 2013

By S. P. Mukherjee, Smita Tung

"Piles are generally subjected to uplift in case of under ground and water front structures. Sometimes piles are also to resist uplift loads in transmission towers, dry rock, and so on. Experimental investigations of single piles and pile groups have been carried out using model hollow circular aluminum piles, having 25.4 mm outer diameter and lengths of 600 mm, 750 mm and 900 mm. Pile groups of 2?1 and 2?2 arrangements have been used in the experimental investigations. L/d ratio has been kept equal to 24, 30 and 36 in all the cases. All the single piles and pile groups have been tested under vertical uplift. Spacing between two piles in a group has been varied with respect to pile diameter such that spacing to diameter ratios of pile are 3, 4 and 5 in case of pile groups. An attempt has also been made to analyze those models of single piles and pile groups under vertical uplift by PLAXIS 3D software. Good analogy has been observed between the results of experimental and numerical studies. A parametric study has been carried out to observe the variation of ultimate uplift capacity of pile groups with spacing and depth of embedment. It is observed that for a particular embedment length of pile and a particular group arrangement the ultimate uplift capacity increases with increase of spacing. It is also investigated that for a particular spacing and particular group arrangement, the ultimate uplift capacity increases with increase of embedment depth. Those variations have also been presented with graphs which are generated considering non dimensional forms of parameters. The paper brings out change in pullout capacity of pile groups with spacing and embedment depth of piles.1. INTRODUCTIONPrediction of uplift capacity of single piles and especially of pile groups is one of the most interesting areas of research in geotechnical engineering. Pile foundations are frequently used to transmit the superstructure loads to deeper strata if the subsurface soil is of inadequate strength. The worst possible case may be considered to occur when all the piles in a group subjected to uplift. In cohesionless soils, the shaft resistance is an important source of pile capacity under axial loading, especially when the pile is subjected to uplift loading. Poulos and Davis (1980) recommended estimating the uplift capacity of piles as 2/3 of the downward shaft resistance. Later Ramasamy et al. (2004) indicated that the upward shaft resistance is significantly less than the downward shaft resistance. Some studies were conducted on the behavior of a single pile under uplift loads, such as those by Sowa (1970), Vesic (1970), Das and Seeley (1976), Levacher and Sieffert (1984), Rao and Venkatesh (1985), Chattopadhyay and Pise (1986), and Shanker et al. (2007). Das et al. (1976) conducted a model study to test the uplift capacity of single piles and pile groups buried in sand, and they also determined a relationship between the efficiency of a pile group and its spacing. Chattopadhyay and Pise (1986) proposed an analytical method for predicting the uplift capacity of piles embedded in sand and obtained reasonable agreement between experimental and theoretical results. Gaaver (2013) investigated experimentally that an upward displacement of about 1.4–2.5% of the pile diameter is required to attain the net uplift capacity for both single piles and pile groups. The uplift resistance of pile groups depends on the several variables like group size, shape, spacing to diameter ratio of piles, embedment depth to diameter ratio of piles, soil type and its density and soil-pile friction angle."

Jan 1, 2015

By Farhad Elmi

In this paper, a new procedure is used to find the bearing capacity of single piles and cone penetration resistance in soils. Although the procedure is mainly applicable to clay and sand using any plasticity model, this paper deals only with steady penetration in Sand. Cylindrical cavity expansion around the probe in a calibration chamber is modeled by finite element method using the HUJEUX elasto-plastic multi-mechanism model. The penetration resistance (qc) is related to cylindrical cavity expansion pressure limit (pL) using the method of Salgado et al. (1997). This procedure is tested using the results found in 3S/IMG calibration chamber. In this article the word "penetrometer" refers to both pile and cone.

Jan 1, 2002

By Yu Chuang, Zai Jinmin, Liu Songyu

"The piled raft foundation is a geotechnical composite construction method, consisting of three elements, piles, raft and soils, which is applied for the foundation in an increasing number. Differential settlements have numerous negative effects on a superstructure in piled raft foundations. Through the analysis of the production mechanism of differential settlements and differential settlements control measures, a method of adjusting pile configurations is presented to control differential settlements. By comparing the measured data and finite element method analysis of one oil storage piled raft foundation, the new method is verified that the differential settlements can be reduced effectively and the inner forces of foundations are more reasonable with varying length pile configurations. The differential settlements can be minimized or even reduced to zero with right pile length.INTRODUCTIONPiled raft foundations are widely adopted for the prominent advantage of limited settlements and adequate bearing capacities. However, there always exits differential settlements in conventional piled raft foundations. The differential settlement is the main cause that produces additional stresses in the structure. Differential settlements have numerous negative effects on a superstructure as well as on a foundation, and should be restricted to allowable limits. How to control the differential settlement is the key interest.An increasing number of structures are founded on piled rafts. For this reason, design strategies that enable an optimized design have a major importance for safety and economy. An optimized design may be defined as a design achieving maximum economy of the solution, that is minimum cost for the installation of the foundation."

Jan 1, 2005

By Brian E. Ladd

"A load test program was performed on two auger cast piles constructed in the Inner Coastal Plain geology of North Carolina. Both test piles were installed through Coastal Plain deposits and into underlying Piedmont residual soils; one test pile was embedded into partially weathered rock (PWR). The recommended 100-ton design load was confirmed by a test program that included instrumenting the piles with strain gages. The two piles performed differently during the load tests due to the effect of embedment into PWR. Loading Test Pile No. 1, which was not embedded into PWR, to failure at about 230% of the design compressive load allowed for evaluation of the mobilization of the ultimate shaft and end bearing resistances. Mobilization pile resistance was evaluated by comparing shaft and end bearing resistances to top of pile deflection (d) normalized by the pile diameter (D). For Test Pile No. 1, the ultimate average shaft resistance was achieved at d /D of about 7.5% and ultimate end bearing resistance at d /D of about 9.5%. Test Pile No. 2, embedded into PWR, achieved a d /D of only about 4% at 200% of the design load and was not loaded to failure. Shaft resistance was mobilized at a different rate within each individual geologic layer, i.e. ultimate shaft resistance did not occur simultaneously for all geologic layers. As the available total shaft resistance was exceeded and end bearing mobilized, the unit shaft resistances reduced from the peak values. A modified Davisson offset using d /D of about 6.5% appears applicable for evaluating the ultimate capacity of auger cast piles in the Inner Coastal Plain.INTRODUCTIONAuger-cast-in-place (ACIP) piling was developed in the 1940’s and patented in 1956 (Neely, 1991). Since patent expiration in 1973, ACIP piles are abundantly used in the United States, particularly in the southeast. However, most literature addresses driven piles constructed in sand and clay with lesser discussion of drilled piles. Conventional design methodologies (a- method, ß-method, SPT or CPT correlations, etc.) are based on data derived from numerous projects in a great variety of geologies. O’Neil (2001) notes that there are significant levels of uncertainty in the “universal” databases as evidenced by coefficients of variation of 0.35 to 0.40 for geotechnical parameters (su, SPT-Nvalue, etc.) used to estimate pile capacities.There is a need to develop local databases developed from data obtained from load tests that measure shaft resistance and end bearing. This paper presents the results of load tests conducted on axially loaded auger-cast-in-place piles constructed in the Inner Coastal Plain geology of North Carolina. Shaft resistance, end bearing, and movements that initiated mobilization of these resistances are described. The information presented herein can be used to refine geotechnical correlations and parameters applied in auger cast pile design methodologies."

Jan 1, 2017

By Jack Hayes

The design and construction of deep foundations involve many uncertainties. For the designer there are uncertainties regarding soil and ground water variability, regarding sampling and lab testing, regarding analytical techniques and regarding construction technique. The latter being the uncertainty over which the engineer has least control and which may have the greatest impact on capacity. Foundations with a high design factor of uncertainty can be very costly. Foundations designed with a high factor of uncertainty may have a low factor of safety, which can be even more costly.

Jan 1, 2000