Search Documents

By Kirty Dave

Foundations in any contract are the most uncertain parts of the contract and most of the "Construction-Contract-Disputes" are either directly related to foundations or arise as 'Side-effects of changes in promises related to foundations. Foundation Engineering is defined as ' The art of selection, designing and constructing the elements that transfer the weight of structure to the underlying Soil or Rock." (Ralph B. Perk). This art started becoming a science since 1920, when scientific efforts to determine the behaviour of sub-surface materials were made. The art and science merged to give new techniques and the science started dominating the field as more and more refinement came in techniques to predict more accurately the characteristics of the sub-surface elements. Inspite of good thorough investigations and design, the contractual promises drafted could leave some room for differences between the parties and above all the prudency expected of both the parties may fall short of the expectations raised in the contract. This may give rise to disputes which may need to be resolved as per principles of law. This paper attempts to initiate a dialogue amongst Foundations-Engineers and Contractors as to how do we minimise the differences arising out of or related to contracts concerning "Foundations".

Jan 1, 1996

By Kyle Murphy, John S. McCartney

This paper focuses on the seasonal thermo-mechanical response of two energy foundations installed at the new Denver Housing Authority Senior Living Facility in Denver, Colorado. The two drilled shaft foundations, which have diameters of 36 inches and depths of 45 ft and are end bearing in the Denver shale formation, include a closedloop series of polyethylene tubes through which fluid is circulated to exchange heat with the surrounding ground. The tubes within the foundations are coupled together with the conventional ground source heat pump system for the building and were installed to evaluate the heat exchange response of the foundations as well as any thermomechanical soil-structure interaction effects. A series of vibrating wire strain gages and thermistors were installed at different depths in the foundation to record the thermomechanical strain and temperature at different depths. Also, pipe-plug thermocouples are used to measure the inlet and outlet temperature of the heat exchanger fluid entering each of the foundations, which is necessary to evaluate the total heat exchange for the foundations and the efficiency of the heat pump. This paper will describe the energy foundation construction processes, the strain distribution and ambient temperature profiles during building construction and the seasonal strain and temperature distributions during heating and cooling of the building. The data indicates that typical heat exchange associated with heating and cooling operations leads to strains which are within acceptable limits, and that the foundations can provide a clear option for absorbing the base heating and cooling load for the building.

Jan 1, 2017

By Lin Li

A reliability based analysis method for a drilled shaft stabilized slope system is presented in this paper. In the past effort, a deterministic method using the limiting equilibrium method of slices for determining the global factor of safety of a slope reinforced by a row of drilled shafts was developed using the soil arching concept. The drilled shaft stabilization mechanisms for the slope were treated as the drilled shaft induced soil arching, which reduces the driving forces on the down slope side of the drilled shaft. The effect of drilled shafts induced soil arching on the reduction of the driving stresses in the limiting equilibrium slope stability analysis was quantified by the load transfer factor through extensive finite element simulation studies. A semi-empirical equation was also developed for expressing the load transfer factor as a function of the soil properties, including strength parameters and unit weight as well as the slope geometry and soil profile, the location and spacing of the drilled shaft, and the dimension of the drilled shaft. However, due to the inherent uncertainties of the soil properties and the model error of the semi-empirical load transfer equation, a modification of the deterministic method into a probabilistic method is developed in this paper. The Monte Carlo statistical method is used to generate random variables for the soil strength parameters based on the prescribed probability characteristics, including mean, COV, and the probability distribution function. In addition, the modeling error of the load transfer factor is also treated as a random variable in the Monte Carlo simulation method, in which the mean, COV, and probability distribution function for the bias of the semi-empirical equation are used. The developed theories were coded into a computer program for analyzing complex slope geometry and slope profile conditions. Two examples are shown in the paper to illustrate the analysis results of the developed probability approach for determining the reliability of a drilled shaft stabilized slope system.

Jan 1, 2017

By R. Paul De Bruyn

A. Crane Check List -- Make -- Model -- Year of Manufacture -- Where is load chart? Is it for this crane? -- Boom style and length -- Boom tip drawing (sketch) for fixed lead connection. Has the crane manufacturer been consulted on the point of attachment? -- How many drums; diameter and length of wire rope. -- Is the single part line pull enough to lift pile or hammer on single part line? -- What is the effective weight of the whole driving system - leads, pile, hammer, etc? -- Are there any auxilliary hydraulic systems? Are the line pulls on these adequate to lift the pile or hammer? -- What is the anticipated working radius? Will the spotter collapse to that length? -- Nature of foundation under crane - barge, marsh, unstable sand, etc. -- Does the crane meet OSAH and state regulations -current certification. Note - the operator is responsible for compliance with regulations. -- Is there any extra weight added to counterweight by compressors or hydraulic systems? What does crane manufacturer say? Consult factory before adding.

Jan 1, 1990

"Boston’s Central Artery passes beneath nine active railroad tracks carrying commuter and Amtrak trains into South Station, the City's busiest rail terminal. These railroad operations had to remain in service throughout the construction of the “Big Dig”. The solution was to jack the tunnel under the tracks, rather than build the tunnel by more conventional means.Jacking of utility pipes is fairly common, but jacking boxes as big as a highway had never been done in North America, until the Big Dig came along.Soil freezing was decided upon as a means of stabilizing the soil under the tracks. This allows the tunnels to be jacked into place without soil caving when the soil is excavated at the leading face of the advancing tunnel boxes. Hundreds of pipes were driven into the ground between the tracks. Inside the steel pipes were smaller plastic pipes. A freezing plant near the railroad tracks pumped refrigerated brine into the inner plastic pipes. The brine ran out the bottom of the inner pipe, flowed up to the top inside the outer pipe, and was re-circulated to the freezing plant and back again into the ground. Over several weeks the circulating brine drew the heat out of the soil little by little, and froze the ground outward from the pipes. Soil FreezingThe plan required the construction of jacking pits in which the tunnel boxes could be constructed, and from which they could be jacked forward to their final locations, as described in the accompanying article. Once the jacking pit was built and the tunnel box constructed inside the pit, crews made an opening in the headwall of the pit to allow passage of the tunnel sections, excavated about three feet of the frozen soil, pushed the tunnel box ahead, and repeated the procedure again and again."

Jan 1, 2003

By Masaki Kitazume

Five papers were presented orally to the topics of Jet Grouting and Deep Mixing. The session was started with a brief introduction by the moderators. Following the oral presentation, floor discussions were directed by the moderators. A brief introduction of each of the oral presentations is provided before each discussion.

Feb 10, 2003

By John Davie

We used a Remtek survey in Glenrock and had very good luck with it when we first started the initial investigation. We would have loved to have used that more but my understanding is the equipment is hard to find. It also requires a flooded mine workings. If you're in a dry mine the communication between the two holes is not quite as successful.

Feb 10, 2003

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 David S. Graham, Paul J. Axtell

Crosshole Sonic Logging (CSL) non-destructive integrity testing identified anomalous readings near the base of a 6.5-foot diameter drilled shaft rock socket. The anomaly was confirmed to be a defect by subsequent coring and core hole camera inspection. A large void and exposed rebar were visually observed in one of the core hole camera inspections. The center of the shaft was then excavated initially with 3-foot diameter tooling and subsequently with 4-foot diameter tooling as part of the remedial actions to address the defect. While excavating with 3-foot diameter tooling, the shaft defect was not encountered. Excavation with 4-foot diameter tooling revealed the defect, a significant void around the majority of the shaft circumference. The void extended radially from the circumference of the 4-foot diameter excavation to beyond the reinforcement cage to the exposed wall of the rock socket around approximately 80 percent of the shaft circumference. CSL results and observations made during remedial shaft investigation and excavation are in good agreement. The shaft defect, located primarily outside of the reinforcement cage, was effectively identified by CSL testing. Although the defect was confirmed by investigative coring, the remedial excavation demonstrates how the investigative coring could have easily missed the defect. This paper shows how CSL results compare to physical observations made during a rare opportunity to characterize the full extent and nature of a drilled shaft defect originally identified as an anomaly by CSL testing. INTRODUCTION The case history presented here pertains to a drilled shaft for a multi-shaft bridge pier in the Midwestern United States. However, the observations presented in this paper are not a result of unique site conditions or the particulars of the project. The lessons learned from this case history are applicable to almost any drilled shaft constructed in the wet. The overall length of the subject shaft is 22 feet including approximately 12 feet of permanently cased, 7-foot diameter shaft extending to bedrock and approximately 10 feet of uncased, 6.5-foot diameter rock socket. The shaft is designed to resist axial and lateral loads and considers the contributions of side and base resistance in the axial design. Six, 2-inch diameter steel Crosshole Sonic Logging (CSL) tubes are include in the shaft. The bedrock at the shaft location includes beds of sandstone, shale, and limestone. The shaft was drilled using conventional drilling equipment and tooling, and water was used as the drilling fluid. Conventional drilled shaft concrete appropriate for underwater tremie-placement was placed via a 10-inch diameter open hopper tremie.

Jan 1, 2019

By Marcelo Chuaqui

We certainly have the data to back calculate it. I must admit that I haven't, at the moment my priority is not on what is the stiffness of the jet grout but is making sure that the jet grout is really there. It's a bit like what Stuart Littlejohn was talking about this morning in terms of grouting on the dams a small window causes a big problem so it's having the jet grouting there at all, at the moment must have been my focus rather than just what is the stiffness once you've got it there.

Feb 10, 2003

By Peter Deming

"PART 1 OF 2INTRODUCTIONSlurry trenches are the least cost hydraulic barrier available, if the excavated spoils can be recycled into backfill. As such, slurry trenches are constructed where possible, sometimes at high risk. Slurry trenches are also used to install biopolymer drainage trenches, which have a low safety factor because the biopolymer slurry weight is marginally greater than the weight of water. In marginal ground the construction risk falls to both the Owner who designs and asks for the construction, and the Contractor who manages the work and promises to complete the project successfully. This paper discusses design and construction of slurry trench barriers in marginally stable ground and where groundwater chemistry invokes the need for slurry management details to obtain proper backfill placement.As a designer, Mueser Rutledge Consulting Engineers works for both Owners and Contractors. We are usually able to convince Owners of their responsibility for design detailing in order to obtain a working final product and to obtain reasonable bids from Contractors by disclosing construction needs and designing to reduce the contractor’s exposure. We often work for Contractors to produce designs which result in successful construction in projects where the Owner’s engineer places the responsibility of design and construction on the Contractor.This paper is intended to inform both Owner and Contractor audiences of resources which are available to reduce the risks of trench collapse in difficult ground conditions. We hope it serves this purpose.DESIGNSubsurface InvestigationsSubsurface conditions should be defined by borings focused on definition of the soil profile and soil design parameters. After general subsurface conditions are defined, barrier borings should be drilled along the final alignment.Definition of Soil Strength and CompactnessCompactness of sand and gravel strata should be defined with Standard Penetration Test N-values. The shear strength of cohesive materials should be defined by laboratory testing. Silt and fine sand strata with little cohesion should be investigated using mud rotary techniques to prevent disturbance. General strength characterization by soil layer should be used for analysis of trench wall stability."

Jan 1, 2006

By Dharmil Patel, Michael J. Chow

"Construction progress is nearing completion at a Brownfield Site for a 100,000sf mixed-use 10 story building plus cellar for Silver Star Motors including a two-floor pre-owned Mercedes Benz showroom; high-end residential rental studios, 1, 2, and 3 bedroom apartments; and penthouses on the upper two floors. Excavation through impacted soil extended to 15ft depth. Project is approximately 7 ft north of a NYCT subway station, portions of the SOE are within inches of a 6ft diameter NYCDEP Sewer, and cellar extends below the depth of adjacent structures, requiring over 200 lf of underpinning.A complex series of earth retention systems was utilized consisting of underpinning, drilled-in soldier piles (micro-piles), timber/concrete lagging, soil anchors and inclined rakers supported by a partially constructed foundation mat. Foundation mat subgrade was approximately 4 ft below the groundwater level creating more challenges during underpinning and achieving suitable foundation subgrades. All construction was undertaken on a non-union basis.This paper describes the design, construction, and lessons learned for the multiple earth retention systems, Brownfield Remediation requirements, instrumentation, and monitoring used to manage complications of building adjacent to an active subway station, in close proximity to existing utilities, with underpinning and mat foundation installation below the water table.Results of the instrumentation program are summarized which utilized an AMTS, monitoring prisms on adjacent structures, automated seismographs, and manual NYCT surveys."

Jan 1, 2016

By Max Gwynn, Tony Suckling

"The new Wembley Stadium is the most spectacular soccer stadium in the world, built to the highest specifications, using the latest technology and offering visitors an unrivalled match-day experience. Wembley Stadium is the home of English soccer, dating back to 1918 when the British Government began planning a British Empire Exhibition with a stadium as its centrepiece. The Empire Stadium, as it was originally known, was completed in 1924 in just 300 days and cost £750,000 ($1.4m). It was finally closed in 2000.The new Wembley Stadium, which opened in 2006, features fully covered seats for 90,000 fans and a striking arch that sits above the northern half of the stadium. With a span of 315 m (1040 ft), the 133-m (440-ft) tall arch is the longest single-span roof structure in the world. It supports the entire weight of the northern roof and 60% of the weight of the southern retractable roof. This means there is no need for columns within the stadium and ensures unobstructed views.Multiplex Constructions (UK) Ltd. employed Stent Foundations Limited to construct the £10m ($19m) foundations package for the new stadium. The scope of works for the foundation package included the design and construction of all foundations, including all main works piling, temporary works piles for the arch and roof, and tower crane piles. The scope also included trial piling and pile testing, setting out and removal of spoil.Piles were constructed by using bored cast-in-place techniques with both hydraulic and traditional crane-mounted rigs. Stent also installed sheet-piled walls at three locations to the site’s northern boundary. In addition to the main contract works, Stent constructed a £2m ($3.8m) contiguous bored-pile retaining wall within the demolition and earthworks package (Figure 1). This work was carried out as a subcontractor to Griffith McGee."

Jan 1, 2008

By Tony Suckling

The commercially available finite element program Plaxis has a key benefit over other finite element analysis programs in that it has a relatively simple user interface to input and output data. This benefit though may also be it?s weakness in that anyone, regardless of their grounding in geotechnical engineering, may use the program and produce results for design. It is essential, as for all engineering design, that the models are checked by competent engineers. This paper describes the key recurring problems found by the authors when checking Plaxis models, such as the generation of the initial in-situ ground stresses and the modelling of groundwater. Interestingly, the authors have not encountered similar problems when checking finite element models produced using other programs and conclude that this may be due to the higher calibre of modeller needed to use these other programs. The geotechnical industry is in a situation at the moment where senior managers who may not have been trained in finite element modelling are relying on less experienced staff who have had some training in modelling, either at university or post graduation. The quality of this training is variable and all organisations running easy to use programs need to be aware of the potential risks and dangers. Management procedures and engineering checks that are essential to validate the results of these models are described, assuming that those in charge are not experienced modellers themselves. The model checking process by competent persons is absolutely essential and it is hoped that this paper will help those organisations that do not have such procedures as part of their own internal Quality Assurance or design validation system. The procedures described are valid for all finite element programs.

Jan 1, 2010

By Charles G. Crans, Naresh Gurpersaud

"Toronto’s Union Station, a National Historic Site occupying an entire city block, is the busiest commuter rail transportation hub in Canada. An extensive project is being undertaken to revitalize Union Station while maintaining the historical significance of the building and minimizing disruption to commuters. A significant stage of the revitalization involves excavation indoors, to a depth of up to 5.5 m below the existing floor level to create space for a new transit concourse and a new lower-level pedestrian retail concourse. A hybrid excavation support system utilizing micropiles as soldier piles was constructed over an 18 month period between 2010 and 2011.Development and testing of connections between the micropiles, shotcrete facing, lagging, walers, and tiebacks presented significant challenges. The existing viaduct structure was constructed in the 1920’s on land reclaimed from Toronto Harbour, so there was significant (and ongoing) uncertainty with respect to buried obstructions including relic timber wharfs and abandoned steel and timber piles. Collectively all these conditions precluded the use of conventional methodology; new techniques, installed using modified equipment, and for the first time in the Greater Toronto Area, were required.Details of the existing site conditions, installation challenges, design, construction and performance of the hybrid excavation support system inside this historic structure are presented.INTRODUCTIONUnion Station in Toronto, Ontario is the busiest passenger rail facility in Canada, with 65 million passengers annually and an average of 200,000 passengers each day. Construction of the station was completed in 1920. It has been designated a National Historic Site of Canada and inducted into the North America Railway Hall of Fame in the Facility and Structure category.The Union Station Revitalization Project (USRP) was tendered in 2010 and awarded as a 6-year, $450M construction management / trade contract package. Included was a large scale grade reduction, referred to as “The Dig Down”, to create two basement levels and this required extensive excavation support constructed entirely indoors within the active station setting."

Jan 1, 2017

By Jean Wehbe, Daniel C. Brahana

"This paper presents a case history of drilled pier construction for a new stadium in Atlanta, Georgia. The stadium structure is supported on several different foundation types, with the heaviest ""mega columns"" typically bearing on drilled pier supported mats. The project includes 141 drilled piers with design diameters of 5.5, 6 and 6.5 feet. The piers bear on bedrock at depths of 20 to 110 feet below the ground surface. Many of the piers included rock sockets with design lengths of 5 to 18 feet. A pre-production drilled pier load test program was completed including one Statnamic load test, two Osterberg Cell tests and two lateral load tests. Non-destructive testing (crosshole sonic logging and sonic integrity testing) were also performed during construction. Production pier installation with over 3800 linear feet of earth excavation and over 1350 linear feet of rock excavation was completed in a little over four months. The piers were installed using both the cased hole method and the slurry method. All cased holed required downhole inspection and slurry holes were initially inspected with a mini-SID device and subsequently by sounding. Advanced drilling equipment and tooling were used to meet the production requirements for the project. This paper reviews the highly variable soil and rock conditions encountered at the site, briefly presents the results of the load tests, and discusses pier installation procedures and the equipment used for installation. The paper also presents conclusions related to the installation and lessons learned.INTRODUCTIONWith the opening of AT&T Stadium in Dallas, a new era of stadium construction began in the U.S. The new age stadiums are larger and have more amenities than their predecessors. The new Atlanta Falcons stadium is no exception. Many of the new features, including Atlanta’s innovative retractable roof, result in extraordinary structural loads. The roof structure is supported by a series of mega columns that bear on eight large caps, six of which are drilled pier supported. Each of the pier caps contains between 8 and 16 drilled piers that bear in the underlying bedrock. The design pier diameters are 6 and 6.5 feet. Augercast piles were used to support two of the mega column caps. Drilled piers, augercast piles, aggregate piers and spread footings are used to support the more lightly loaded portions of the structure."

Jan 1, 2017

By Patrick J. Lydon, Gregory A. Terri

"The recently opened Mansueto Library at the University of Chicago campus was a 2012 OPA runner-up. The dramatic elliptical shaped dome of this structure tells only part of this structure’s story. The underground automated storage and book retrieval system below ground required excavations as deep as 55 ft (17 m). The system that allows the University to store many of its publications well below grade also required an approximately 50 ft (15 m) clear span for the perimeter walls between the lower level and street level slabs. The latter requirement allows the conveyors to operate freely to retrieve and transport publications up to the lobby level. The design-assist-build team worked together to develop the most cost-effective solution for below-grade work in this challenging urban and geologic environment.The perimeter of the new oval-shaped library is over 620 ft (189 m) long and sits in a central location on campus—adjacent to the Regenstein Library and two city streets and the Henry Moore sculpture, which commemorates the location of the first self-sustaining controlled nuclear reaction. The new library construction not only had to meet challenging structural and geotechnical requirements, but also had to be sensitive to its active and historic surroundings. The soils at the site consist of about 25 ft (7.6 m) of sand, followed by lean clay, generally increasing in stiffness to the top of the dolomitic limestone. Five to 10 ft (1.5 to 3 m) pockets of saturated sand also lie on the north side of the site at about 45 ft (13.7 m) below grade. The top of weathered rock varies in elevation from 59 ft (18 m) below grade in the south to 69 ft (21 m) in the north. There is 1 to 2 ft (30 to 60 cm) of weathered rock. Groundwater at the site is about 7 ft (2 m) below grade.The new structure would extend 55 ft (17 m) below grade through saturated sand strata and into weathered rock for part of the structure’s footprint, so it was critical that the new permanent retention system minimize groundwater seepage laterally through the structure’s wall as well as piping through the weathered rock below the structure. The perimeter walls had to be very stiff to minimize ground movement around the structure’s perimeter due to the significant clear span between slabs."

Jan 1, 2013

By Francis B. Gularte

The Dalles Dam is located 192 miles upstream from the Columbia River?s mouth. As part of an effort to increase survival rates for young salmon migrating downstream to the Pacific Ocean, a river spillwall was constructed to guide the young salmon into the thalway and out of the reach of predators. The spillwall consisted of 43 large precast concrete cells constructed onsite. The 120-ton cells are positioned on the bedrock riverbed to form the 830-foot-long spillwall. Large capacity post-tensioned strand anchors extend through ducts in the precast units, anchoring the wall to the basalt. One hundred seventy-eight tie-down anchors consisting of 30, 32, or 40 strands were installed and post-tensioned to secure the cells. The logistic and technical challenges presented by positioning, installing, and stressing the precast cells in the tailrace of a large dam required a high level of cooperation and planning between the owner, general contractor, subcontractors, and suppliers in order to finish the project within the allotted in-water work windows to minimize impacts on seasonal salmon migration.

Jan 1, 2010

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 Christian Hoyme, Jochen Maurer, Hans Regler

Up to today, it has been very difficult to obtain qualitative and quantitative information about the status and production process of a construction site. It is becoming more and more important to be able to analyze this process so as to notice bottlenecks and interruptions on the site early on. The high costs of each shift in special foundation industry mean that making the wrong decision and/or interruptions can put the financial result at risk. Previously, keeping reliable data meant manual process documentation. This was done either by an additional staff member (incurring high additional costs for training, education, etc.) or by the equipment operators. The latter is critical, because they have to initiate every process step change, leaving no time to log data separately. Studies have shown that there are considerable deviations from the actual process steps. In this paper, a seamless, automated method will be introduced to analyze the construction process. This method recognizes each process step from the equipment data. The main purpose of the data recorded by the piling rig is the need of quality reports and now basis for the presented analysis. Here, a method was successfully transferred from theoretical computer science (compiler construction field) to find application for process recognition. Because the execution of works in special foundation construction can always be defined sequentially and therefore also practiced sequentially, recognition can occur step-by-step. Our method always recognizes the next step, so it does not have to monitor as much data at the same time. Individual trigger points are easier to define. Unlike solutions that are based on a global approach and allocate suitable process steps to data patterns, thereby also creating gaps, the presented method is always seamless. Furthermore, this method can be applied regardless of time or location provided that the necessary machine data is available, which is normally the case with production data logging. This means that construction sites even from the past can also be analyzed and the results used for comparisons. The first results from the analysis of a complete continuous flight augering (CFA piles) installation process of a construction site will be presented.

Sep 8, 2021