Search Documents

By Gary L. Seider, Dana A. Wesolek, Fred C. Schmednecht

"A new condominium project, The Atelier, developed by Pickus Companies located at the corner of Bryn Mawr and Sheridan in Chicago, IL required an earth retention system to protect the surrounding roads, alley, and existing neighboring apartment bui lding during its construction. Slurry Systems, Inc. (SSI) and Ground Engineering Consultants, Inc. designed the earth retention system using cantilevered sheet piling for three of the four sides: two sides bordering major streets and one side bordering an alley. For the fourth side, which borders an existing occupied brick building, a combination of sheet pil ing and AB. CHANCE® helical screw piers were used. SSI was actively involved in the review process of its earth retention system with the City of Chicago and quickly learned that there was no specific code for hel ical piers/anchors. (It appears that this is the case with most metropolitan cities throughout the United States). Consequently, the approval of underpinning for this project became the critical path, as much testing, calculations, meetings, and other details were required prior to its approval.SSI and AB. CHANCE® recognized that this process for underpinning approval must be seen by other contractors/suppliers who wish to use helical piers/anchors in the City of Chicago. Consequently, this project served as an opportunity to work with the City of Chicago and the City's Building Code Committee in furthering the development of the Helical Piers/Anchors Code, Section 1814. INTRODUCTION - HELICAL PIERSDefinition. A helical pier or anchor consists of one or more helix-shaped steel bearing plate(s) attached to a central steel stem (solid bar or pipe), which is installed by rotating or ""torquing"" into the ground. Each helix is attached near the tip, is circular in plan , and is formed into a screw thread with a defined pitch. Helical piers/anchors are pre-fabricated and can derive their load-carrying capacity through both end bearing and skin friction. The helical piers/anchors can be augmented with grout."

Jan 1, 2005

By Naoyuki Hanawa, Takeo Asanuma, Tatsuo Nagatsu, Sachihiko Tokunaga, Daisuke Nakagawa, Yoshiyuki Morikawa, Kazuhiko Ueno

"In the cement deep mixing (CDM) method, one approach to joint construction is creating a surface-contact joint. In this study, an unconsolidated-undrained triaxial compression test was performed on cement-treated soil specimens with joints artificially created by successive pouring. The effects of the presence or absence of such successive pouring joints on the strength of the specimens were then examined. The results showed that the compressive strength of the specimen decreased by approximately 0%–30% with a successive pouring joint.INTRODUCTIONIn the block type and wall type improvement patterns of the CDM(Cement Deep Mixing Method) application, an integrated body of soil-cement columns is constructed by partially overlapping individual treated soil columns. The overlapping operation should be implemented before the hardening of soils by cement progresses and thus, this operation is routinely performed in construction sites usually within 24 hours or within 48 hours at a maximum. However, when the operation is forced to be interrupted on account of a typhoon or any other adverse weather conditions, it is impossible to carry out the overlapping operation within the above time limitations. In such a case, it is necessary to improve the integrity between the treated soil columns solidified first and the treated soil columns to be constructed later.One of the methods that can be adopted is to prior agitate the target area by mixing blades “without cement”, integrating the preceding treated soil columns and the subsequently treated soil columns at construction joints. This method has been adopted so far in numerous sites because no additional materials or equipment are necessary. However, its effectiveness has scarcely been evaluated quantitatively in conventional studies.In the circumstances, the authors investigated in the present research the effect of the presence or absence of construction joints on the specimen strength by performing unconsolidated-undrained triaxial compression tests using specimens of cement treated soil artificially provided with surface-abutting construction joints.Therefore, this study examined the effects of the presence or absence of artificially created successive pouring joints on the strength of cement-treated soil specimens through an unconsolidated-undrained triaxial compression test."

Jan 1, 2015

By Racquel Nottingham, Marc Mastrantuono

Micropiles often provide a favourable solution for many deep foundation problems especially when significant site constraints such as confined construction sites or vibration limitations have been identified. Often the durability of buried steel elements are heavily scrutinized in order to effectively determine the rates of corrosion and methods to reduce this while still maintaining the structural integrity of the engineered solution. Practices such as sacrificial corrosion loss and the introduction of plastic sheaths have become the go-to methods of corrosion protection. Since the introduction of the micropile, other solutions have been developed, namely protection with an adequate grout encapsulation. This paper will explore corrosion protection of micropiles and the guidelines provided in the published codes and norms. Since few codes define the exact way to verify the durability of these micropiled structures, the existing data is presented and the analysis of grout encapsulation as an effective corrosion protection method is evaluated.

Oct 1, 2022

By Dr. Anup Kumar Mandal, Partha Roy, Shuvranshu Kumar Rout, Dipak Mandal, Biswajit Das

Installation of a new scalping station with bunker, apron feeder, scalping screen, ramp -retaining wall and approach bridge was planned in an existing integrated complex of phosphate fertilizer at a remote place in West Africa. Rock phosphate ROM, transported from mines by a combination of 100 Ton and 150 Ton dumper, would be fed to a steel bunker having capacity of 180 m3. Different options were studied for retaining wall at the junction of ramp and approach bridge. Initially options with conventional RCC Retaining Wall, Gravity Retaining Wall with Precast Concrete Blocks and Reinforced Earth walls were studied. Option with Reinforced Earth was selected as this option was much more cost effective compared to other options. But real engineering challenges cropped up when competent execution contractors were not available nearby the site. To minimize the cost, an innovative option with Stepped Retaining wall was then studied. Geotechnical parameters of native soils, selected for the construction of the approach ramp were determined and it was found that with available poor geotechnical parameters of the native soils, design of stepped retaining wall would not be feasible with respect to available bearing capacity, subjected dead load, live load, operational load and earth pressure. A conscious effort was then made to make the design feasible by improving the geotechnical parameters of the retained earth of ramp near the retaining wall. In view of that, mix design with locally available materials like Silexite, Sand, Laterite, Gravel and Silt at different proportions was made and samples were tested in the laboratory to determine relevant geotechnical parameters. Based on the test results, a suitable mix was selected that had high shear strength, enhanced bearing capacity and improved coefficient of earth pressures. Design of stepped retaining wall was then made with the selected construction materials and construction completed. The plant was successfully commissioned in December. 2021.

Sep 1, 2022

By Scott M. Mackiewicz

This project includes replacement of the historic vertical-lift span Meridian Bridge (U.S. Highway 81 over the Missouri River) that connects Yankton, South Dakota with rural Cedar County, Nebraska. The new 76-foot wide, 1,590-foot long steel plate girder structure required the use of drilled shaft foundations that extended into the underlying Carlile Shale formation. Designers indicated that an individual drilled shaft capacity of about 2,000 kips will be needed at each of the river piers, and based on the subsurface information, 8 to 10-foot diameter drilled shafts extending to about 115-foot would be required for support of the bridge structure. An Osterberg Load Test was performed on one test shaft to determine the ultimate skin friction and end bearing of the Carlile Shale. This paper describes the design and installation of the load test drilled shaft as well as presents the load test results as compared with predicted design values determined using FHWA methods.

Jan 1, 2008

By Brian W. Wilson

A case study is presented that describes the design and implementation of a combined blast densification and deep dynamic compaction program which was undertaken to improve the foundation soils for a proposed tailings dam raise in Ontario, Canada. Based on the results of the geotechnical investigation it was determined that the foundation of the dam would be situated on tailings of both variable thickness and density, much of which would be susceptible to liquefaction under the design earthquake for the region and type of facility. Blast densification trials were completed by the owner and the results of these made available to prospective tenderers in response to a call for a fixed price contract for the design and implementation of a densification program for approximately 800,000 m3 of foundation tailings. The variation in tailings gradation and the impacts of such on the ground improvement program are discussed, as are details of both the additional blast densification field trials completed by the contractor, and the selected blast pattern and explosive charging used for production blasting. The applicability of the various ground improvement techniques to the actual conditions encountered, and the results obtained are also discussed.

Jan 1, 2010

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 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 Bernard Hertlein, Chia K. Tan

"The move to LRFD methods for structural design by AASHTO, ACI, AISC , ASCE, and the FHWA has been a major change for the American construction industry. The deep foundations industry has arguably been placed most at risk by this situation, because of the need for, and the difficulty of providing, reliable quality assurance.LRFD is attractive for both the owner and the engineer because it promises cost reductions, but the assumption underlying LRFD is often overlooked - that the acceptable margin of safety can be rationally reduced, thus saving costs, provided that all the factors involved are closely controlled. This means that both the quality of the materials and the quality of the construction work must be closely monitored, and held to an acceptable standard.This paper describes the type of comprehensive quality management program that is needed in deep foundation construction projects based on LRFD. Case histories are used to illustrate the importance of both adequate inspection and reliable testing to a comprehensive quality management program.IntroductionOver the last thirty years, the major organizations that set standards and practice policies for the American construction industry, such as the American Association of State Highway and Transportation officials (AASHTO), the American Concrete Institute (ACI) , The American Institute for Steel Construction (AISC), the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), have embraced Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) as an alternative to, and in some cases, a complete replacement for, Allowable Stress Design (ASD). AASHTO first published a new set of LRFD-based design guidelines for bridges in 1996, with several revisions in 1997, 1998, and 1999 (AASHTO, 1996). The 1996 AASHTO Bridge Design Code was the first in the United States that required foundations to be designed using LRFD procedures. LRFD has a clear advantage over conventional ASD where variability in material strength, bias in design methodology, and degree of construction quality can be rationally accounted for to achieve an acceptable level of risk."

Jan 1, 2005

By Philip Derbyshire, Dale J. Scheffler

"Continuous Flight Auger (CFA) piling is a variation of Augered Cast-In-Place (ACIP) or augercast piling. In both cases a continuous auger with a hollow stem is used to drill a hole and a pile is formed by injection of cementitious material through the hollow stem as the auger is withdrawn. CFA differs from conventional American ACIP by the use of concrete rather than grout to form the pile, and by the type of equipment used to advance the auger into the ground and withdraw it. CFA installation uses a European style rig (i.e. fixed mast and rotary system) which can produce greater crowd and usually has a larger rotator or drill motor than the standard augercast setup. A standard augercast setup will consist of a lattice-boom crane and a set of leads to house the drill motor and auger. The auger size will range up to 24 inches (610mm). With CFA rigs larger diameter piles can be constructed, 24 to 36 in dia. (610mm to 915mm) are common and the technique has been applied with diameters up to 48-inch (1220mm). CFA makes use of sophisticated computer controlled monitoring systems, which have more recently been introduced for conventional ACIP piling. Developments in CFA have taken place over the last 25 years in Europe and particularly in the UK, but are relatively new in the USA. One application is in the construction of secant (overlapping) piled retaining walls. D.J. Scheffler Inc. recognized the potential of the CFA system following visits to the UK and has introduced its use into California for both secant piling and other applications.BACKGROUNDThe high price of real estate in many of the favored areas of California has increasingly led owners to want to build basements under their houses to increase the floor space available on a lot. Many of these areas are by the coast where the ground conditions are predominately granular and the water table is high. Conventional shoring and dewatering systems have often caused problems with adjoining properties. Clearly tangent walls are not suitable in these conditions because of leakage and loss of ground. The secant pile system, using CFA techniques, has proved very effective at overcoming the problems experienced by other methods. Other applications for CFA secant walls have included use for an emergency job on a highway following erosion caused by unusually heavy rainfall.METHODThe concept of secanting piles, whereby primary(female) piles are installed first and then secondary (male) piles are cut into the primary piles is not new. The method has been known for more than 30 years. Originally ‘Benoto’ grabbing rigs, developed in Japan, were used together with sectionalized double skinned casing and oscillators.This early method was slow, although very effective. More recently high torque rotary machines have been used. Contractors in the UK have increasingly used CFA techniques to further improve productivity of this type of piled wall. The improved capabilities of piling rigs available, as well as developments in concrete technology and instrumentation, have made this possible."

Jan 1, 2005

By Barry C. Roth

A Real Time Automated Remote Reading Electrolytic Tilt Monitoring System was effectively deployed for monitoring an existing five story brick building during underpinning, shoring and excavation operations for a directly adjacent thirty-foot deep excavation. The monitoring system was comprised of four sets of uniaxial electrolytic tilt meters connected to a Campbell datalogger with multiplexer, cellular modem and solar power. The excavation was for the foundation and underground parking as part of a new 55 story tower complex. Challenges to the contractors and to our monitoring personnel which were addressed included a tight urban site contemplating property line to property line new construction with directly adjacent old existing buildings, buried concrete foundations from former site use, cohesionless pervious sandy soils and high groundwater. Highly variable and diurnal ambient temperature regimes due to adjacent building shadows required careful corroboration and application of temperature corrections to the raw data. Earth tides were suspected on a very small scale and investigated by correlation between the data and the local sinusoidal tidal ephemera. Incidental inadvertent contractor interference with the instruments during underpinning due to site constraints was readily detected.

Jan 1, 2007

By John P. Turner, Steven S. Dapp, Dan A. Brown

"The Goethals Bridge Replacement (GBR) spanning the Arthur Kill Waterway between Elizabeth, NJ and Staten Island, NY consists of a dual-span 1,982.5-ft long cable-stayed bridge with approach spans of 2,545 ft on the NJ side and 2,788 ft on the NY side. The bridge is supported on over 200 drilled shaft foundations ranging in diameter from 4.5 ft to 10 ft and socketed into Passaic Formation siltstone. Drilled shaft resistances for design were based on load tests as described in a companion paper (Dapp et al. 2016). This paper presents the main foundation design considerations and challenges. The approach to construction of the rock sockets, with a focus on quality in order to support the use of high nominal values of side and base resistance, is described. Lessons learned from this project and their application to future similar projects are presented.INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUNDThe Goethals Bridge Replacement (GBR) project is a Public-Private Partnership (P3) that represents a major milestone for the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (PANYNJ) in its distinguished history of bridge building in the greater New York City metropolitan area. The new bridge will replace the existing Goethals Bridge, named after Major General George W. Goethals, Chief Engineer of the Panama Canal and the first consulting engineer for the Port Authority. The existing Goethals Bridge along with the Outerbridge Crossing and the Bayonne Bridge comprise the three Port Authority bridges connecting Staten Island with New Jersey. The existing Goethals Bridge and the Outerbridge Crossing are cantilever truss structures and both opened on the same day in 1928. They were designed by J.A.L. Waddell under the supervision of the eminent engineer Othmar H. Ammann (1879-1965), who was the designer of many other iconic bridges in the NY City area including the Bayonne Bridge (1931), the George Washington Bridge (1931), and the Verrazano Narrows Bridge (1964). The designer of record for the replacement Goethals Bridge is Parsons Corporation, which is the successor firm of Robinson & Steinman, whose principal David B. Steinman was also a notable NY area bridge designer and a contemporary and rival of O.H. Ammann.The replacement Goethals Bridge is supported on over 200 rock-socketed drilled shaft foundations. Each main pylon tower is supported on a group of six 9-ft diameter drilled shafts and each anchor pier is supported by two 10-ft diameter shafts. Each approach pier consists of a two-column bent with each column supported on a rock-socketed drilled shaft. A rendering of the Main Bridge crossing the Arthur Kill is shown in Fig. 1."

Jan 1, 2016

By Rasin Duzceer

In this paper, the results of pile load test on 24 piles from twelve sites are presented. The pile load tests were performed on 14 driven and 10 bored piles of varying diameters and lengths installed in different ground conditions in Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Kazakhstan. The purpose of this study is to evaluate and compare the axial capacity of the piles obtained using pile load test interpretation methods. Davisson, Brinch Hansen %80, Chin-Kondner, Shen-Niu, De-Beer, Housel, Mazurkiewicz, Fuller-Hoy, Brinch- Hansen (90%), Corps of Engineers, Butler Hoy and Tangent Intersection methods were used to determine the axial capacity of the piles. Static analysis using FHWA method was performed to predict the axial capacity of the piles. A statistical analysis was performed to compare and quantify the load test interpretation methods. The ratio of interpreted (Qi) to predicted (Qp) pile capacity was compared for each method. For each pile load test and for each interpretation method, the mean and coefficient of variation of (Qi)/ (Qp) were calculated. Among twelve methods investigated, the highest Qi/Qp value was obtained as 1.37 for Chin-Kondner method whereas the lowest Qi/Qp ratio of 0.70 was obtained from De Beer method.

Jan 1, 2002

By Daniel Ruffing, Charlie Krug

In recent years, the chain-style trencher has been proven a valuable tool for installing vertical walls on challenging sites where conventional methods may be less desirable. Like many tools, trenchers are most effective when used with the right application. Trenchers are commonly used for applications that could also be completed with conventional slurry trenching; low-permeability cutoff walls, collection trenches and permeable reactive barriers (PRBs). Drawing from a wealth of experience with conventional slurry trenching and the trencher, this paper compares and contrasts the technical considerations, treatability, installation, performance, and lessons learned for recent projects.

By John R. Grillo, Gordian Ulrich, Franz-Werner Gerressen

Most geotechnical construction professionals are aware of piling using hydraulic drill rigs and the so-called Kelly drill mode. Kelly drilling has many advantages as it can work with a wide range of tools facing almost all types of soil and rock conditions. Kelly drilling can also deal with diameters up to 10 ft (3.00 m) and bigger or depths of more than 330 ft (100 m). Nonetheless, there is a concern about Kelly drilling as it is a relatively slow installation process. Therefore, an alternative piling method like Cased CFA (CCFA) Piles (Cased Auger Cast Piles) provides a significant advantage in terms of installation performance, schedule and cost saving potentials. Major application for the Cased CFA system is the secant pile wall construction. Against the traditional secant pile wall systems like fully cased bored piles or CFA secant piling the Cased CFA secant pile wall system has the advantage in cost and time against the fully cased system and in quality against the standard CFA system. This paper will describe the methodology and installation process in general as well as first reference projects carried out in the United States. This paper will present the results in cost and schedule saving using this method. In addition, we will also describe the limitations of this method. INTRODUCTION In the changing construction environment, companies are searching for new technologies or improvement of existing technologies to complete their projects in shorter time frames to provide a good economic solution. Especially with the focus of increasing urbanization, the aim of fast construction becomes more and more important. When thinking of piling, most people will have the same picture in mind: that of a hydraulic drill rig working in Kelly drilling mode; however, the perpetual drill rig development provides a number of options for the execution of specialist foundation projects, either for foundations or for pile walls when using single pass applications like CFA, Cased CFA and Full Displacement Piling (FDP). Single pass means, in general, that the tool is pushed and rotated into the ground to the final depth in one stroke. After reaching the final depth, concreting is started and concrete is pumped continuously while the tool is withdrawn.

Jan 1, 2019

By Daniel W. Mageau, Larry W. Applegate, Aaron K. McCain

"An innovative method of ground freezing was successfully tested to create a “dry” excavation condition for a new building foundation at a site in downtown, Miami, Florida. The subsurface conditions in Miami generally consist of very porous, weak limestone and sand with groundwater near the surface. Water flow through these materials can be very high. Dewatering is extremely restricted in Miami so deep below-grade structures are rare and expensive. A new, innovative method to allow deep excavations in dry conditions without dewatering involves the creation of a thick, temporary, frozen soil plug below the planned excavation depth across the entire site to cut off vertical groundwater flow during construction. Frozen soil is impermeable and very strong and has long been used for temporary structural and water-tight shored walls. Using the same proven principals, frozen soil plugs are very effective at cutting off water from the bottom of the excavation as well as resisting upward buoyant forces. This new freezing method can be used for fairly deep excavations in new building construction supported on deep foundations. The building piles act as temporary anchors for the frozen plug to resist very high upward buoyant pressures until the permanent structural slab is completed.IntroductionUnlike other Cities, below grade basements are rare in Miami. The few basement foundations constructed have utilized a cumbersome and expensive method of excavation and shoring involving underwater excavation, tremie slabs, and commercial divers. The key issue for underground construction in this area of the country is the vertical flow of groundwater through the base of the excavation. To deal with this issue in the past, the contractor first installed all of the building piles and the perimeter shoring walls. Then, interior sheet pile walls are installed to create small manageable excavation pits. Each pit is then excavated through standing water “in-the-blind” and around the buildings support piles. The final excavation, interior struts, and inspection is performed by commercial divers. Finally a thick foundation tremie slab is poured under water. This method could be successful but proved to be time consuming and expensive. In addition, some building piles were occasionally damaged during the under-water construction process."

Jan 1, 2015

By Dawn Shuttle

In trying to find a grout, or some kind of stabilizer that would work in this application, we established some performance criteria. Of those, what I controlled the most was viscosity, then I had a whole list of other criteria. I needed a long, controllable gel time, durability and the ability to set and stabilize the soil. So I looked through a lot of different stabilizers, some really crazy ones and also the typical chemical grouts that are used. The typical chemical grouts were eliminated because of long-term durability concerns, the need for having extended gel times, and several other concerns. I would be happy to discuss that with you further after the talk if you're interested. But, generally it was based on viscosity, gel time, and the need for extended gel time. In terms of the relative density of the sand many other grouts could have been used. But the main issue was trying to develop this way to do low pressure grouting that would not cause invasive disruption of the site. We couldn't go in and grout it, put centers, so most of the other grouts wouldn't work for various reasons. The forty percent relative density samples were prepared by plubiation. That was both during the cyclic testing stage of the research, which happened a few years back, and also during the box model and the laminar box models at RPI. In terms of what criteria were used to determine the success of the grouting, when I initially started this work what I did was take the grouted samples and I subjected them to cyclic triaxial testing. What I did was take a look at the cyclic deformation resistance of different concentrations of grouted colloidal silica treated sand. I looked first at 20% concentration because I wanted something that I knew worked and then I gradually decreased to 15%, 10%, and 5%. What I was most concerned with was that it did not liquefy and that it was able to hold together it and experience some deformation. But most importantly it needed to not liquefy. So, that was the biggest issue in determining the success of the grouting. In terms of the centrifuge modeling it was done by looking at several components: from looking at the pictures of the bending moments, looking at the acceleration records and how the acceleration records were transferred through the soil, looking at the reduction in the lateral displacement and those kinds of issues. So let me show you the difference.

Feb 10, 2003

By W. G. K. Fleming

Mr P. Bermingham introduced paper 9.1, describing the development and trials of a new pile load-testing technique that the Authors had termed "Statnamic". The system involved launching a test weight mounted on the head of the pile by igniting chemical fuel in a pressure combustion chamber between the pile head and the test weight. The expansion products from the burning fuel generated large pressures which were used to launch the weight upwards at high velocity. The reaction from this force generates an equal and opposite force at the pile head. This force is typically of much longer duration compared with, for instance, dynamic load testing by drop hammer. In addition the pile experiences a much lower acceleration - typically of less than one g. Because of the long duration blow, the pile is loaded at below its natural frequency and is therefore under a uniform high stress over its full length throughout the duration of the test. The pile behaviour is not dominated by the complex action of an impulsive stress-wave as with standard dynamic testing. The test technique is thus essentially quasi-static. It was anticipated that a ram test weight of 16 tonne would be sufficient to provide the test reaction for a 600 tonne load test. It was pointed out that the device was still at the research stage, but had yielded encouraging results to date. Testing would proceed from model testing and computer simulation to full scale field testing.

Jan 1, 1991

By Joshua R. Omer

A numerical model is developed for predicting the load transfer and settlement behaviour of vertically loaded, bored cast in-situ piles. Based on analysis of full-scale pile tests, closed-form equations are formulated to uncouple the shaft and base transfer resistance components of the pile/soil system. Appropriate parameters are introduced to take into account: (i) the shaft resistance distribution in unlined and partially lined piles, (ii) the effects of ?soft toe? (voided toe pile) behaviour on base resistance development. For convenience, an interactive computer program has been developed in Matlab? with a user friendly interface system. The program can be applied to predict the complete load-settlement curve and axial force distribution in bored cast in-situ piles if reliable soil test data are available. To demonstrate its validity, the proposed method is applied to 4 test piles, which are also analysed using two previously published methods: (a) elastic solution method and (b) layer discretisation method. Methods (a) and (b) above are based on load transfer (t-z) and finite element models respectively. It is shown that the proposed method yields axial force distributions and load-settlement curves that are in good agreement with the observed pile test data.

Jan 1, 2010

By John Dunn, Matt Hawley, Kashif Butt, Nicholas Gura

"This paper presents the results of a static load testing program completed on helical pile foundations for the replacement of high voltage transmission line tower structures. The foundations were part of the Northeast Grid Reliability Project (NGRP) for the Public Service Electric & Gas Company (PSE&G) near Newark, New Jersey. Structure foundations “anchor bolts down” was a design build contract model with the superstructure as bid-build.The soil stratigraphy along the alignment generally consisted of fill over about 10 ft of organic deposits underlain by up to 260 ft of normally consolidated glacial lake clays and silts. Additional project challenges included working under/adjacent the existing live high voltage lines, narrow site access due to environmental permits, foundations in a tidally influenced area, and pile projections in the order of 10 feet to meet the 10 year flood level requirements.The helical piles were constructed of 12.75 inch diameter open ended pipe piles with 36 to 40 inch diameter helices. A total of seven static load tests (compression and tension) were completed on 60 ft and 90 ft long piles, using both welded and mechanical pile splices. To evaluate pile-soil setup in the sensitive fine grained soil and determine representative longer term installation torque factors (Kt) for the production piles, the static load tests were performed 7 to 49 days after pile installation.Helical piles were found to be the most cost effective foundation alternative for this project. The required length of helical piles was less than other alternatives for similar allowable axial capacity. Helical piles with mechanical splices were installed for the varying structure foundations including tangent and heavy deadend, to a deadend monopole. Installation of 448 production piles (34,320 linear ft) was completed in three months. The installation timeline was critical to meeting the semi-annual PSEG outage for switching the old and new structures. Helical piles employing a mechanical splice resulted in an efficient and effective foundation solution for the conditions encountered on the project."

Jan 1, 2017