Search Documents

By Kevin Cunningham

"Litigation resulting from neighboring structures with settlement and/or lateral movement or improper pile design and faulty soils engineering analysis, are a multi-faceted opportunity for law firms. These types of claim scenarios are an attorney’s dream, and can obliterate a Deep Foundation Contractors profit and more importantly, can be avoided with a progressive approach to risk management in design and project management.The following (4) case studies will be examined and dissected to discern certain lessons learned for risk management solutions to avoid these deep foundation related challenges in the future.1) Pipe Flotation – Soil Conditions Not Anticipated in Specifications or Contract2) Easement Encroachment – Easement Dimensions Not Recognized Until Completion of Project3) Subjacent Lateral Support – Neighboring Structure Wooden Pile Unprotected Causing Structure to Settle4) Improper Pile Placement - Construction & Design Caused Retail Store to SettleSpecific Deep Foundation project challenges involving: buoyancy calculations regarding subsurface soil characteristics, design factors taking existing subsurface sewer line easements into account, structural instability as result of excavation causing exposure/heavy rainfall to existing wooden piles supporting adjoining building and improper pile location resulting from faulty pile design will be described with risk management recommendations to avoid these challenges in the future.From the very start of construction on any project deep foundation and excavating work poses numerous engineering and technical challenges for developers, contractors and engineers. Dealing with changing or hidden conditions is one of the most difficult challenges facing any contractor or engineer on a project. Relying on incomplete or inaccurate engineering reports is another common problem. Other challenges include dealing with technical errors or oversights that are deeply embedded in the project specifications or bid process.No matter what is the origin of the problem or how it manifests, deep foundation contractors, design professionals and engineers should be ever-mindful of good risk management practices that can prevent serious disputes that can result in costly litigation."

Jan 1, 2015

By Lynn Crayne

We used Glyoxal as the hardener, at a final concentration of 10% by volume and therefore 20% by volume in the A-Component. They worked pretty well what we did was we shaved the joints on each of the pipes when we assembled them so they wouldn't rip the packers and then we greased the packers very well going in. We had to replace some but we have any getting stuck or didn't lose any pipes.

Feb 10, 2003

By Hiren J. Shah

Across much of New York City, the geology of glacially deposited soils follows a common sequence. Outwash sands generally overlie varved silts and clays, which lie above a basal till deposit underlain by the bedrock. Pile foundations at projects with such typical stratigraphy generally develop their axial capacities by extending below the fine-grained deposits into the till or the bedrock. Contrastingly, at a project site on the Brooklyn waterfront, high capacity piles were efficiently and economically installed by driving them into the relatively shallow glacial drift and till deposits which lay above thick fine-grained compressible glacial lake deposits. An unusual aspect about the foundation design at the Brooklyn project site is that, relatively short and high capacity piles were driven into the shallow glacial drift and till deposits, overlying the thick fine-grained glacial lake deposits. In order for this unusual foundation scheme to be feasible and economical, the piles needed to achieve their driving criteria in the upper strata. Consolidation settlements in the lower stiff and over-consolidated glacial lake deposits below the pile tips had to be relatively small. The paper discusses the unusual stratigraphy in this area of Brooklyn in greater detail with geologic profiles and engineering characteristics of the glacial strata. It also discusses the design aspects of the pile foundations, settlement estimates, a pile drive test program during design, results of the static load test program during construction, and production pile installation results.

Jan 1, 2008

4.5.1 General The provisions of the article shall apply to the design of axially and laterally loaded driven piles in soil or extending through soil to rock. 4.5.1.1 APPLICATION (Revised Article 4.3.1.1) Piling may be considered when footings cannot be founded on rock, or on granular or stiff cohesive soils within a reasonable depth. At loca-tions where soil conditions would normally permit the use of spread footings but the potential for scour exists, piles may be used as a protection against scour. Piles may also be used where an unacceptable amount of settlement of spread footings may occur. 4.5.1.2 MATERIALS Piles may be structural steel sections, steel pipe, precast concrete, cast-in-place concrete, prestressed concrete, timber, or a combination of materials. In every case, materials shall be supplied in accordance with the provisions of this Article.

Jan 1, 1989

By Gerry Houlahan

The east span of the 3.5 km long SF-Oakland Bay Bridge is supported by different types of foundations along its span. Starting from the west, its first 460 m section comprising twin concrete box-girders is supported by sands and rock on Yerba Buena Island. A 620 m long steel suspension span then bridges a 25 m deep channel that is formed in sediments overlying rock. Twin concrete box girder structures, each 2.4 km long, complete the stretch over the remainder of San Francisco Bay to the engineered earth fill landing at its east end. For most of its length, the Skyway bridges water 3 to 10 m deep over soft surficial Young Bay Mud. The foundation types include spread footings with hold-downs, steel and concrete piles that are set in drilled rock sockets up to 3 m in diameter and 2.5 m diameter steel tubular piles driven to penetrations of up to 100 m. The design and construction-related considerations are presented. The different foundation types, influences of the site geology and earthquake demands on the substructures are discussed. The seismic motions of the bridge superstructures and substructures, as well as the depth-varying soil motions, influenced the foundation design. Together with performance-based design criteria, including post-earthquake footing displacement limits, these seismic demands influenced various aspects of the foundation design, including the use of battered and vertical piles.

Jan 1, 2013

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

"This paper presents a case study of the use of single axis cement deep soil mixing (CDSM) to deal with static settlement and seismic stability of the foundation soils under a reinforced soil slope (RSS) embankment up to 50 feet high. 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. CDSM was selected to address the embankment foundation concerns and allow for future trenchless installation of utility lines beneath the embankment. The presence of a confined, artesian aquifer within the design depth of the CDSM led to the installation of a depressurization system to avoid an upward gradient through the wet soil-cement. In addition to addressing the design approach, the paper discusses the challenges associated with quality assurance of CDSM within the time constraints of an ongoing project. The limited recovery rate of conventional triple tube coring in the soil-cement and double tube wet sampling led to the use of sonic coring to provide a near continuous core of the soil-cement.IntroductionCement deep soil mixing (CDSM) was used as a replacement for stone column ground improvement in a corridor which the owner, the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) wanted to reserve for future trenchless crossings beneath reinforced soil embankments within a freeway interchange. The work was part of HOV improvements to I-5 in Tacoma, Washington. The CDSM construction occurred in late 2010 and early 2011.Approximately 14,500 cubic yards of soil cement columns were placed by CDSM. The soil cement improved ground supports permanent geosynthetic reinforced slopes up to 50 feet high. The ground improvement was designed primarily to provide global stability of the reinforced slopes during seismic loading, but it was also utilized to reduce the time and total amount of settlement following construction of the embankments.This paper presents a discussion of the design approach and challenges associated with quality assurance of a relatively small volume of CDSM within the time constraints of an ongoing project. The challenges associated with attempts at collecting cores of the cured soil-cement mix cured by triple tube coring and pushing a double tube into the wet mix and allowing it to cure insitu are discussed, along with the eventual adoption of sonic coring combined with reliance on laboratory testing of wet mix samples collected daily."

Jan 1, 2017

This Workshop was held at the Doubletree Inn, Seattle, Washington from September 26 to 28, 1997. Run under the auspices of the Deep Foundations Institute (DFI), it was co-funded by the newly formed Japanese Association of Micropiles (JAMP), and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). The Workshop was jointly organized and facilitated by Fujita Research Corporation and ECO Geosystems, Inc., with close support by Donald B. Murphy Contractors, Inc. DFI kindly consented to publish these Proceedings. As is clear from the list of attendees, 42 specially invited engineers from all aspects of micropile technology were present, representing Japanese, European and American practice. This proved to be a most friendly and interactive group of people, who freely exchanged ideas, views and close comradeship, not only during the technical sessions, but (and especially!) during the numerous social events. Perhaps the best illustration of this came in Day 2 when the attendees were divided into five competing teams, each comprising representatives from the different geographic groupings. These teams had to quickly devise solutions to two technical problems (using standard data previously provided. A team of "referees" (who also acted as "coaches") later determined the most apposite response, based on constructability design concept, cost, schedule and so on. Not only were the winning team very liberal in distributing the prize (vintage California champagne) among themselves, but the whole Workshop soon benefited from their generous division of the spoils of victory.

Jan 1, 1997

Jan 1, 2001

By Reda Mikhail, M. Birkan Bayrak

The Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) State Route (SR) 167/70th Avenue East Vicinity Bridge Replacement Design-Build project is located in Fife, Washington. This $40 million project consists of replacing the existing 70th Avenue Bridge over Interstate 5 (I-5) with a single-span bridge of about 220 feet long with approach embankments. The subsurface conditions along the new bridge alignment generally consists of alluvial deposits with high potential of liquefaction overlying glacially overridden deposits. In the early stages of the project, drilled shafts were considered as the deep foundation system; however, after an additional subsurface investigation is completed at the site, driven pipe piles were selected as the deep foundation system. Bridge abutments are supported by 24-inch diameter, 80-foot-long open-end driven steel pipe piles. The pile length was determined to bypass a relatively thick liquefiable zone and to tip the piles above what could be compressible soils. The use of advanced seismic analysis was instrumental in optimizing the pile length. The dynamic testing performed on numerous piles indicated what could be unique soil setup factors compared to those measured in local projects as well as those reported in national design manuals. Detailed discussions of the pile foundations design and construction is presented in this paper.

Sep 8, 2021

By Donald A. Deardorff

The capacity of a helical pile can be determined analytically using the individual bearing or cylindrical shear methods which are dependent on soil strength parameters and helical bearing area. The torque correlation method is widely used in the helical industry to determine the capacity during installation by monitoring torque during the final seating of the helicals. This method has been shown to be a better predictor of strength than the individual bearing or cylindrical shear methods. To determine capacity using the torque correlation method, the final average installation torque (ft-lbs) is multiplied by an empirical torque correlation factor (Kt, ft-1). Kt values have been well documented for square bar shaft helical products and can vary from about 3 to 20 ft-1 depending on pile geometry and soil type. A default value of 10 ft-1 is generally used for all square shaft sizes and soil conditions. Less research has been done on determination of Kt for round pipe shaft helical products. Studies have indicated that factors which affect Kt include soil type/strength, number of helical plates, helix spacing, helix pitch, depth of embedment, downward pressure (crowd), shaft diameter (round pipe) and load application direction while other studies have discounted some of these factors as inconsequential. This paper reviews past research findings regarding Kt determination for square and round pipe shaft helical products and presents a case history of round shaft helical pile installations in Chicago clay which resulted in much lower than expected Kt values.

Jan 1, 2007

By Karen Dawson

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.

By Tomohiro Yamasaki

"At the pre-construction foundations of the controlled waste disposal site built at the Port of Kinuura, the clayey soil account for the most, and with lesser amounts of sand compaction piles and sand mat. The cement deep mixing method (CDM) was used to improve ground impermeability and to reinforce the foundations on the seawall. Laboratory mixing and testing was performed to determine the appropriate quantities of cement additive for clayey soil, SCP sand, and sand mat. The test results indicated that maintaining the design strength of qu = 1,550 kN/m2 would require C = 100 kg/m3 of cement additive for all three soil types (clayey soil, SCP sand, sand mat). The permeability performance needed to improve ground impermeability assumes a permeability coefficient of K = 1.0×10-6cm/s. And the clayey soil satisfied the performance requirements at C = 100 kg/m3. However, to improve grand impermeability of the SCP sand and sand mat required more than 5% of particles having diameters of less than 75 µm. Thus, in the latter two cases, the required cement adding quantity was C = 250 kg/m3. The test specimens at one to two weeks after the created with a permeability coefficient of K = 10-6cm/s became permeability coefficient of K = 10-7cm/s six week later due to the effects of cement solidification. So the permeability coefficient declined about one order. The permeability coefficient three months later tends to decline continued with a somewhat lower.INTRODUCTIONBetween 2008 and 2011, the Aichi Seaside Environment Center constructed the Kinuura No. 3 offshore controlled waste final disposal site at Taketoyo in Aichi prefecture. (see Figure 1). The disposal site offers a landfill capacity of 5.21 million m3 and measures 472,000 m2 in area, of which some 344,000 m2 is a managed controlled sector enclosed within an impermeable seawall."

Jan 1, 2015

By Waddah Akili

At an offshore site along the Red Sea coast of Saudi Arabia, marine structures were supported on tubular steel piles driven into coral and coral contaminated sands and silts. Surprises and disappointments faced during the installation of the piled foundation were, to a large measure, due to inappropriate design methodology and absence of proper soil information. The paper describes the design evolution process, highlights the static pile test program conducted to verify design parameters, and amplifies the need to prepare for worst possible scenario when coral deposits are encountered. Despite corrections made to the design, based on site-specific insitu parameters (skin friction, end bearing) perceived from load tests conducted on site; the final design adopted overestimated capacities in over 50 percent of total piles driven. The paper describes the changes introduced to the design during the execution of the project, highlights the pile test program conducted to verify the design, and compares pile design penetration with actual penetration depth. The unpredictable and erratic pile behavior observed, ascertains the need for more appropriate pile design and installation guidelines for driven piles in coral and coral contaminated formations.

"This model specification includes sample text shown in normal font with commentary in italics. The commentary is intended to highlight project-specific items the specification writer should consider during development of the specification. In some sections, typical values are presented to indicate common practice, and these values may be changed to reflect project-specific requirements. The commentary should be removed before using the specification for a project. 1. SCOPE The work consists of designing, furnishing, installing, and testing helical piles used to support foundation loads (compression, tension and lateral), and any ancillary materials (e.g., load transfer devices, etc.) according to the project plans provided and these specifications. Unless otherwise noted, the installing contractor shall provide all labor, tools, equipment and materials necessary to install the required piles. The parties referred to in this specification are as follows: • The Owner is the property owner. • The Owner’s representative is the individual or firm hired by the Owner to design and oversee the overall project. • The pile designer is the individual or firm generally hired by the installing contractor to design the helical piles. • Installing contractor installs and tests (if necessary) the helical piles, and possibly tasks associated with the project. It is important to clearly define the roles and responsibilities of every party on each project to promote good communication and reduce potential for contractual misunderstandings. Different types of contractual vehicles (design-build, value engineering, etc.) require different roles and responsibilities for the various parties, which should be considered in specification development. The Owner will provide suitable access to the construction site for the installing contractor’s personnel and equipment. Unless specifically noted otherwise in the contract documents, the Owner will remove and replace any structures, utilities, pavements, landscaping or other surficial improvements in the work area as necessary to facilitate the work. The Owner will be responsible for overall construction oversight to minimize potential for developing unsafe conditions. The work may include post-construction monitoring of pile performance if required by the Owner or the pile designer to confirm performance of the piles subsequent to their installation. The work may also include installation of additional piles if the initial installation does not meet specified capacity or performance requirements. Responsibility for providing subsurface investigation shall be addressed in the bid documents. The Owner is responsible for providing to the installing contractor all available subsurface soils, rock and groundwater information and geotechnical testing data."

Jan 1, 2015

By Masaru Sakakibara, Ngo Tuan Anh, Mitsuo Nozu

"In the southern region of Vietnam and the southern United States, numbers of Deep Mixing (DM) columns have been installed to increase the stability of slopes and mitigate ground settlement. However, in some cases, there were some quality problems for in-situ cement mixing such as inclusion of unmixed lumps. According to the investigations by the X-ray diffraction analyses, electrical conductivity (EC) test, and careful observations of in-situ mixing quality, it has been observed that the existence of expansive soil and its high EC value cause the insufficient in-situ mixing. The countermeasures to address these problems have been taken.INTRODUCTIONIn South Vietnam, under the guidance of numbers of references and standards (Miki, 1998, JGS, 2000, Kitazume et.al., 2001, BS 2005), Deep Mixing (DM) has been used in recent years for soft clay improvement to increase the stability of slopes and to reduce consolidation settlement (Nozu 2005, Tung et.al., 2009, S. T. G. Peng et.al, 2009). However, at the initial phase of the DM operation, the authors have encountered some unusual phenomena such as (1) lower strength and inclusion of unmixed lumps (Figure 1), (2) less amount of up-heaved soil, and (3) sticking of large lumps of clay to the mixing blades. In regard to the above (3), Photo 1 shows one of the countermeasures against the sticking. By means of the placement of additional plates, the stuck clay has been reduced significantly.Subsequently, we have noticed that the quality of DM columns has not been so good, which meant that there have been some unmixed lumps in the column despite high cement dosage such as more than 300kg/m3. The authors also have encountered the similar incidents in Vietnam and United States during the deep soil mixing work. For example, Photo 2 is the core samples taken from the DM test column in northern Vietnam adopting cement injection during penetration (CIDP) procedure. To solve this problem, various tests and investigations have been performed so far (Nozu 2010, 2012)."

Jan 1, 2015

By Waddah Akili

This paper describes the steps taken in planning, developing, and executing a case study/ case history course in geotechnical/ foundation engineering at an international university. The paper sheds light on: how a “workable” format for the course was arrived at; the organization of the course; and the results of evaluating the effectiveness of this approach versus traditional lecturing. Problems and challenges that could arise when offering the course for the first time are also addressed. Embedded in this experience and its related protocols are: the emphases on engineering design and the practice, teamwork and leadership development, organizational management, and oral and written communication skills. The paper concludes by confirming that discussions, through an open forum, are judged to be superior to traditional lectures in improving critical thinking, cultivating desirable personal attributes, and acquiring problem-solving skills.

Jan 1, 2005

By Monique Nykamp

"INTRODUCTIONTerminal 46 is located just south of downtown Seattle, and is one of the Port of Seattle’s busiest container terminals. The Terminal 46 Redevelopment Project was undertaken to replace the existing 15-m-wide (50 ft) cranes along the apron with 30-m-wide (100 ft) cranes, which can unload larger, post- Panamax ships. The project included upgrading the existing waterside crane rail with new piles and constructing a new land-side rail behind the sheetpile bulkhead. The new piles had to be installed adjacent to the existing apron without causing damage, which was a signifi cant geotechnical challenge due to the soft soil conditions at the site. An instrumentation program performed during the test pile program evaluated this challenge and allowed for the development of specifi c production pile installation procedures that had the least possible effect on construction costs and schedule. SITE HISTORYThe site lies along the west side of Elliott Bay, north of the mouth of the Duwamish Waterway. Prior to development, this area was part of the tide fl ats where the Duwamish River drained into Elliott Bay. Prior to 1970, there were several existing timber piers and structures in the area. In the 1970s, the Port of Seattle constructed a 900-m-long (3,000 ft), 30- m-wide (100 ft) apron to support fi ve, 15-m-wide (50 ft) container cranes. The contained backland area was then fi lled with dredged spoils (sand and silt with organics) and the upper 5 to 20 m (16 to 65 ft) backfi lled with sand and gravel.The existing apron was constructed using 0.4 m (16 in) octagonal prestressed concrete piles to support the precast concrete deck and crane rails. The pile-supported bents were spaced at 6.1 m (20 ft), center-to-center, along the longitudinal direction. Pile lengths typically varied from about 20 to 40 m (65 to 130 ft) with 15 to 26 m penetration below mudline (50 to 85 ft penetration). The slope below the apron was constructed at about 1.75 horizontal to 1 vertical to allow for suffi cient water depth for cargo ships. In most areas, a riprap buttress was placed at the toe of the slope. A typical cross section of the apron is shown on Figure 2.Several stability, settlement and pile driving issues arose during the original construction of T-46 (Pita, 1983). Reportedly, movement of the submarine slope occurred during pile driving, resulting in settlement behind the bulkhead. Pile driving reportedly caused settlement of adjacent piles. In addition, some piles were “running” (dropping quickly under one hammer blow) during installation."

Jan 1, 2007

By Monique Nykamp

"INTRODUCTIONTerminal 46 is located just south of downtown Seattle, and is one of the Port of Seattle’s busiest container terminals. The Terminal 46 Redevelopment Project was undertaken to replace the existing 15-m-wide (50 ft) cranes along the apron with 30-m-wide (100 ft) cranes, which can unload larger, post- Panamax ships. The project included upgrading the existing waterside crane rail with new piles and constructing a new land-side rail behind the sheetpile bulkhead. The new piles had to be installed adjacent to the existing apron without causing damage, which was a signifi cant geotechnical challenge due to the soft soil conditions at the site. An instrumentation program performed during the test pile program evaluated this challenge and allowed for the development of specifi c production pile installation procedures that had the least possible effect on construction costs and schedule.SITE HISTORYThe site lies along the west side of Elliott Bay, north of the mouth of the Duwamish Waterway. Prior to development, this area was part of the tide fl ats where the Duwamish River drained into Elliott Bay. Prior to 1970, there were several existing timber piers and structures in the area. In the 1970s, the Port of Seattle constructed a 900-m-long (3,000 ft), 30- m-wide (100 ft) apron to support fi ve, 15-m-wide (50 ft) container cranes. The contained backland area was then fi lled with dredged spoils (sand and silt with organics) and the upper 5 to 20 m (16 to 65 ft) backfi lled with sand and gravel.The existing apron was constructed using 0.4 m (16 in) octagonal prestressed concrete piles to support the precast concrete deck and crane rails. The pile-supported bents were spaced at 6.1 m (20 ft), center-to-center, along the longitudinal direction. Pile lengths typically varied from about 20 to 40 m (65 to 130 ft) with 15 to 26 m penetration below mudline (50 to 85 ft penetration). The slope below the apron was constructed at about 1.75 horizontal to 1 vertical to allow for suffi cient water depth for cargo ships. In most areas, a riprap buttress was placed at the toe of the slope. A typical cross section of the apron is shown on Figure 2.Several stability, settlement and pile driving issues arose during the original construction of T-46 (Pita, 1983). Reportedly, movement of the submarine slope occurred during pile driving, resulting in settlement behind the bulkhead. Pile driving reportedly caused settlement of adjacent piles. In addition, some piles were “running” (dropping quickly under one hammer blow) during installation."

Jan 1, 2007

By Brain 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 (?) normalized by the pile diameter (D). For Test Pile No. 1, the ultimate average shaft resistance was achieved at ?/D of about 7.5% and ultimate end bearing resistance at ?/D of about 9.5%. Test Pile No. 2, embedded into PWR, achieved a ?/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 of about 6.5% appears applicable for evaluating the ultimate capacity of auger cast piles in the Inner Coastal Plain.