Search Documents

By A. Paviani

The subject of this session is "Equipment Installa­tion, Recent Developments". This is a subject which is not usually addressed at conferences of Foundation Engineering. It is rare to find sessions dealing with the technological side of deep foundations, a subject which only recently seems to have aroused sufficient interest at national and international conferences. It is therefore natural for the subject of "Equipment", or the tools used to implement the various "technologies", to be over­looked or mentioned only occasionally during the discussion of other issues. At conferences, most of the attention is attached to research and to the theoretical interpretation of the performance and behaviour of deep foundations, as well as to establishing the most suitable calculation algorithms and approaches for the study, design and control of foundation structures. It is almost as if the subject of equipment is felt to be less important or, perhaps, that it is considered to belong more strictly to mechanical engineering than to civil engineering.

Jan 1, 1994

By Michael W. Neill, O&apos

This presentation addresses some of the problems encountered in estimating the capacity of drilled shafts and augered, cast-in-place piles in soft rock. Methods to quantify side and base resistance are suggested. However, the methods that are described should always be verified locally by performing load tests.

Jan 1, 2001

By Bengt H. Fellenius

It is a truism that in the design of pile foundations one must consider both capacity and settlement. As to capacity, most basic text books contain simple methods of design of capacity of single pile. More sophisticated methods are the subject of many journal papers. However, methods for design considering settlement of pile foundations are scarce. (Most confuse settlement with the movement due to load-transfer?the transfer of load from the pile to the soil). Furthermore, for both capacity and settlement, most methods include several simplifying assumptions regarding soil layering and neglect the effect of the frequently occurring fill and excavations, as well as changes of the groundwater table and pore pressure distribution. Therefore, the methods may provide qualitative results, but not quantitative. Because of this situation, pile design often appears as somewhat of a guessing game and a very subjective?and risky?occupation. This need not be. Pile foundation design is controlled by three factors: capacity, strength, and settlement requirements and these have been combined in a method called "the unified design of piles and pile groups considering capacity, settlement, and negative skin friction" (Fellenius, 1984; 1989), which method is summarized in this guide.

Jan 1, 1991

By Terry Eldridge, Keith MacKay, David Siddle, Luke Moger

On August 4th, 2014, a breach occurred in the Perimeter Embankment of the Tailings Storage Facility (TSF) located at the Mount Polley Mine, releasing approximately 10.6 million m3 of supernatant water, 7.3 million m3 of tailings solids, 6.5 million m3 of tailings interstitial water and 0.6 million m3of construction materials. A Temporary Upstream Rockfill Berm was constructed between August 2014 and February 2015 within the area of the tailings dam failure in order to retain the remaining tailings solids during the low flows of the winter season. The Temporary Upstream Rockfill Berm was constructed as part of the initial response phase, with the primary objective to abate the flow of tailings into the receiving environment. A secondary objective of its construction was facilitating the required investigation works downstream of the tailings dam failure. The selection of the coarse grained material used in the construction of the Temporary Upstream Rockfill Berm was based on the availability of the material (timeliness of construction) and the non-water retaining design of this initial response phase. Consequently, an alternative method was required in order to prevent further loss of mine-affected water and tailings from the TSF, as well as to provide short-term contingency water storage, during high flow conditions expected in late spring. Golder Associates Ltd. designed the 2015 Freshet Management Embankment, a deep mixing cut-off wall, to meet these site requirements, which was constructed by Mount Polley Mining Corporation and Golder Construction Inc. between December 2015 and April 2015. The works included 132 soil cement panels constructed to depths of up to 27 meters. This aspect of the works was completed using an RG25S Bauer CSM rig on a 24 hour per day, 7 day per week schedule. The cut-off wall specifications included a target unconfined compressional strength (UCS) of between 1 and 2 MPa, a maximum hydraulic conductivity of 1x10-6 cm/s, and a ductility to enable the soil cement to undergo a minimum of 5% strain without a reduction in strength or increase in hydraulic conductivity. In order to control and assure the quality of the soil cement, 2553 wet grab specimens were retrieved from the fresh soil cement panels using a project-developed sampler. Four of the soil cement panels were cored with a mud-rotary drill rig and optical and acoustic televiewers were placed into the boreholes in order to log several relevant parameters, including image, texture, relative hardness, borehole-shape, and temperature.

Jan 1, 2016

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 Gerald Verbeek, David Tara

"When selecting an impact hammer to drive a particular pile, the decision is often based on local experience. In those cases, the contractor falls back on previous experience or draws on the experience of the hammer manufacturer to select the hammer that will be able to do the job. Obviously, a more scientific approach would be to perform a pile driving simulation using one of several commercially available software packages (e.g., GRLWEAP, AllWavePDP or PDPWave).However, this type of analysis requires quite a bit more effort. First, an accurate model of the pile driving process has to be developed, which includes a model of the soil profile at the job site and input into the analysis program. Then, the model must be analyzed to assess whether the combination of hammer, pile and soil model work.Over the years, numerous individuals and organizations have tried to develop something that would fit nicely in between these approaches: something more advanced than a gut feeling yet something that could be done on the back of an envelope; in other words, a “Goldilocks” approach — not too simple, not too complex, but just right.Screening Tool CriteriaThe goals of the approach are twofold: (1) select the appropriate impact hammer to drive an open toe steel pipe or H-pile, and (2) then use the model for the subsequent high strain dynamic testing (HSDT). The Goldilocks approach centers around five different criteria.1. Maximum Driving StressTo minimize the risk of damage, the maximum driving stresses are generally limited to 80 to 90% of the yield stress (fy) of the steel section. This approach does not consider issues such as hammer alignment, initial imperfections, denting and/or elastic buckling, and pile material fatigue history. However, even when these issues are not applicable, limiting average stresses to 0.9fy or even 0.8fy does not necessarily mitigate the risk of pile damage (Mostafa, 2011)."

Jan 1, 2017

By A. David Miller, Chika Oya

"Field sampling and testing are part of the Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) requirements for all Cement Deep Soil Mixing (CDSM) Projects. Field sampling and testing are also used for determining the performance and quality of soil mixing method(s) and are the primary basis for accepting or rejecting the soil mixing wall among all other QC testing. Two of the most commonly recognized and used sampling methods for CDSM walls are wet grab sampling and verification coring. Depending on the types of wall construction and project budget, one or both of these methods are normally used to help evaluate the in-situ matrix and quality of the mixed soils. Additional to ASTM strength and permeability testing from wet grab sampling and verification coring, more and more testing methods are being employed and accepted. However, these other testing methods tend to be unnecessary, lack consistency and repeatability, and are more subjective to manipulation and interpretation. In certain projects, there are also misconceptions involved with the results of wet grab sampling and verification coring, hence it is important to note how these wet grab sampling and verification coring work and represent the work in terms of quality of production.TYPES OF PROJECTSCDSM projects include (but not limited to) in-situ stabilization, liquefaction mitigation, excavation support, groundwater cutoff, and pollution containment. Although these projects use similar equipment on the jobsites, each project is treated differently in terms of catering to specification, uses of different mix designs, and emphasis on certain steps during production.Different types of projects with different specification changes the focus of quality, but soil types in jobsite also determine how to proceed with production. For example, a jobsite with predominate gravel layer must be treated differently as opposed to jobsite with clayey sand as the main soil type.WET GRAB SAMPLEWet grab sampling is one of the most used testing methods for QA/QC. The wet grab sample specimen is retrieved right after finishing the production of the desired element.Wet grab sampling equipment consist the use of 28 cubic inch (458.84 cubic cm) box attached directly to one of the auger stems. Hinges attached to the top and bottom of the box is fabricated to allow collection only during auger withdrawal. The collection box is strapped just above the mixing paddles on the auger stem and measured from the center auger head tip to confirm proper depth of collection. This box method has been used in Japan and U.S. for numerous projects."

Jan 1, 2017

By Seth H. Hamblin, Leo J. Hart, John E. Regan

The Route 6 /10 10 Interchange Design/Build project, located in Providence, Rhode Island, involves the design and construction of five (5) new elevated bridge structures to replace and reconfigure the existing interchange and to provide a link between Route 10 northbound and Route 6 westbound. Due to site logistics, headroom restrictions, and depth to bedrock, 50 ton drilled micropiles installed in the deep medium dense sand strata were initially proposed as the deep foundation solution. Post project award, Geosciences Testing and Research, Inc. (GTR) performed various analyses and developed an alternate driven pile solution using steel Tapertube. The results of these analyses indicated that driven steel taper tube and steel pipe piles could develop greater capacities than the drilled micropiles in the granular soil layer, thereby reducing the number of foundation elements, decreasing construction schedule and providing a more cost effective foundation alternative. A comprehensive driven pile load test program was subsequently executed by GTR and the Design Build Team led by Barletta Heavy Division of Canton, Massachusetts, to assess the performance of Tapertube and steel pipe piles, including pile drivability, load-deformation characteristics under static and dynamic loading, and to develop site-specific design parameters in two (2) distinct test areas. The test pile program included dynamic, static compression, tension and lateral load tests on each test pile. Load test measurements were automated with embedded Vibrating Wire Strain Gages (VWSG) to measure load transfer with depth. The execution and results of the successful pile load test program are presented and offer unique case study and valuable data for the use of Tapertube piles on deep foundation projects in the New England region INTRODUCTION The Rhode Island Department of Transportation (RIDOT) Route 6 / Route 10 Interchange is located west of downtown Providence. Originally constructed in the 1950’s as a highway bypass around the historic Olneyville neighborhood, the interchange consists of a series of nine (9) bridges and ramps that serve as a vital east-west link between Interstate 295, 95 and 195. Based on recent bridge rating assessments, seven of the nine bridge structures are rated “structurally deficient”. With many bridge structures shored with temporary supports as many as 15 years ago, the interchange is in critical need of replacement. In 2018, RIDOT awarded the Route 6/10 Reconstruction Design-Build Project to 6/10 Constructors, Joint Venture. Led by Barletta Heavy Division of Canton, Massachusetts, the Design Build team includes O&G Industries, DW White Construction, Aetna Bridge Co. and AECOM. The scope of work includes the replacement of the bridges and ramps, and will provide direct access from Route 10 northbound to Route 6 westbound. Valued at over $400M (US), this is currently the largest project awarded in RIDOT history.

Jan 1, 2019

By Gerald Verbeek, Erick Baziw

Dynamic soil analysis (DSA) in geotechnical practice is intimately related to the capability of measuring the necessary soil properties of shear modulus and absorption. In DSA the methods of analysis are based upon the stress-deformation response of soils due to imposed shear strains. Typically the soil profile is numerically modeled as linear visco-elastic system. This technique is referred to as the Equivalent Linear (EL) method, and it requires the specification of the input parameters of low-strain (<10-5) shear modulus, modulus reduction, and the equivalent viscous damping ratio, which is directly related to the soil absorption value. Downhole seismic testing (DST) has proven to be a very accurate tool for estimating low strain shear modulus values as long as source wave raypaths are taken into account, especially for near-surface investigations. DST has also been utilized to estimate low-strain interval absorption values. In these cases standard frequency domain absorption estimation algorithms (such as the spectral ratio technique) are utilized where it is assumed that the source waves are traveling along the same travel path, which is obviously not the case for near surface DST investigations. This paper outlines a unique DST absorption estimation methodology, which is carried out in the time domain and takes into account source wave travel paths. 1. INTRODUCTION There is considerable interest in methods of geotechnical in-situ engineering that provide accurate estimates of the shear wave velocity and the associated absorption values in the ground, since these parameters form the core of mathematical theorems to describe the elasticity/plasticity of soils and they are used to predict the soil response (settlement, liquefaction or failure) to imposed loads (whether from foundations, heavy equipment, earthquakes or explosions).

Jan 1, 2019

By Justin Lukens, Di Stasim Jeffrey, Frank Di Salvo

Columbia University’s Manhattanville Campus expansion includes the construction of two new business school buildings. The new buildings require development of an entire city block bound by 12th Avenue, W 131st Street, W 130th Street and Broadway in Upper Manhattan. A support of excavation (SOE) package was first released, followed by a foundation package. The SOE package consisted of approximately 100 soldier piles and 280 anchors, up to 215’ long, to support a cut anywhere from 30’- 50’ below street level. The foundation package alone included approximately 1600 drilled micropiles. Given the breadth of the work scope, Hayward Baker Inc and Moretrench joint ventured on these two projects to bring sufficient knowledge and work resources to complete the work in an efficient and timely manner. This included working with the Owner/Engineer to propose different means and methods for construction to significantly reduce the schedule while meeting the design intent, such as large diameter (36” diameter) augercast piles in place of conventionally drilled soldier piles and large hollow-bar micropiles (103/51 bars) in lieu of pressure-grouted micropiles. The anchors, ranging from 3 to 22 strands, were used for earth retention through both soldier pile and lagging walls and existing slurry walls. These anchors were complicated based not only on their size and length, but also the need to drill some of them under the historic Studebaker building. The overall magnitude of the project with considerations to resource management and material lead times will be addressed, highlighting critical strengths provided by the Contractor to ensure project success. The scope of work discussed in this paper was executed under two separate competitive bid contracts. The first contract included the support of excavation work and the second contract included the foundation package. The support of excavation comprised of drilled soldier piles (performed by Case Foundation as a subcontractor to the JV), driven soldier piles, driven sheet piles, hollow bar tiebacks, multi-strand tieback anchors and micropile soldier piles. The foundation package consisted of drilled micropiles. Due to the large scope of work and critical schedule requirements of the project, the JV had to think outside the box and present value engineered alternates to expedite installation durations.

Jan 1, 2019

By Kevin R. Johnson, Matt Caskey, Bryan Plaskett

Working in urban environments presents unique logistical challenges beyond those typically associated with traditional geotechnical design and construction. These challenges can include constrained sites with limited access and laydown area, vibration concerns for adjacent structures, and the need to complete work within limited schedules. When challenging geotechnical conditions like variable bedrock elevations are present, the need to balance performance requirements with logistical constraints become the driving factor when selecting deep foundation systems. This paper focuses on the deep foundations used for a new elevated pedestrian bridge at a major health care facility in Tampa, Florida. In addition to the technical design requirements, the owner required a deep foundation system that could offer low vibrations, rapid production, and clean installation to limit impacts on their properties and the public roadway that separated them. The paper describes the project specific geotechnical and design conditions, describes Ductile Iron Pile design, and focuses on how installation of the system addressed the unique logistical challenges. In addition, the implementation of a full-scale load testing program to assess compression, uplift, and lateral design capacities is presented. This paper represents one of the few published references for Ductile Iron Piles on projects in the United States.

Oct 1, 2022

By Diego Bellato

Production data recorded by special foundation rigs during construction activities at the site are commonly used for quality assurance / quality control procedures and, in particular, to prove that the installed foundation elements comply with the geometrical and quality requirements defined in the design specifications. Parameters such as crowd force, penetration/withdrawal rate, rotational speed etc. are usually presented in reports in the form of depth and/or time profiles. This type of protocols are already standard QA/QC solutions for ground improvement methods like deep soil mixing or jet-grouting, but they are quite rarely applied in combination with other techniques like diaphragm walls or Kelly drilling. In the latter cases, one of the main reasons behind this lack of site documentation is related to the difficulty in interpreting huge amount of data collected during the creation of single elements, which, in some cases, can last several days (not always in a row). In addition, the building sequence is often characterized by many alternated operations involving different movements of the rig and the use of different tools. In this context, the identification of specific construction activities based only on the mere exam of the time profiles of the recorded production parameters is extremely difficult. In this paper, the time profiles of production parameters obtained from a fully-cased Kelly drilling rig employed on a site in Karlsruhe (Germany) have been investigated and compared with a detailed series of activities deduced from a video filmed during installation. Typical time profile patterns associated to specific procedures have been identified by combining the different information available. The outcome of this study helped project engineers to automatize the recognition of activities directly from production data and led to an overall understanding and optimization of the construction process. INTRODUCTION The special foundation industry is characterized by the use of highly sophisticated machinery for the realization of geotechnical systems such as piled rafts, retaining walls and slabs for excavation pits, cut-off walls for levees and embankments or ground improvement solutions. Rigs can vary in size, weight, and power and can be provided with several drilling tools to cope with the different soil conditions (e.g. clay, sand, rock) and the different geometries of the elements to be built at the site (e.g. micro-piles, large- diameter bored piles, diaphragm walls, anchors). Due to the challenging construction procedures, various types of sensors have started to be mounted on the equipment in the last decades to monitor the behavior of some important machine parameters and to inform rig operators about the on-going process and the status of their devices.

Jan 1, 2019

By Michael Perlow

Helical screw piles in use since 1838 are routinely used for energy, transportation, municipal, industrial, marine and coastal infrastructure as well as for excavation support, environmental remediation, and foundation repair. They are especially well suited for work in constrained areas, renovations and structure retrofits. Helical pile design procedures over the past 10 years have gone through a remarkable evolution with the establishment of the 2007 AC358 Helical Pile Acceptance Criteria and inclusion of helical screw piles in the 2009 International Building Code (IBC). New 2009 IBC building code requirements and AC358 Acceptance Criteria are presented along with advances in helical pile design procedures, installation, QA/QC, and recommended load test verification criteria. Use of helical smart piles to validate helical pile design and verification of ultimate pile capacity is highlighted.

Jan 1, 2011

By Michael Moran

Typical ACIP Pile Rig [ ] Hollow Stem Auger ? Continuous flight auger ? 3 inch inside diameter pipe ? Auger diameters: 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 30, and 36 inches ? Auger section lengths: 4, 5, 10, and 20 ft ? Weight ranges from about 70 lbs per ft for 12 inch to 120 lbs per ft for 24 inch and 200 lbs per ft for 36 inch

Jan 1, 2005

By Thomas G. Tavernaro, Jeffrey A. Schaefer

"The $106 million Olmsted Approach Walls Project, completed in the spring of 2004 by Massman Construction Co., Kansas City, MO, is one phase of a new $1.4 billion Corps of Engineers locks and dam facility located at Mile 964 on the Ohio River, approximately 17 miles (27.4 km) upstream of its mouth at the Mississippi River. When completed, the Olmsted Locks and Dam (Figure 1) facility will replace two aging locks and dams (Locks and Dams 52 & 53) built in the 1920’s, and produce an estimated $600 million annual economic benefit to the nation through reduced lockage time and operation and maintenance costs. PROJECT OVERVIEWThe Olmsted Approach Walls Project consisted of “in-the- wet” construction of four fixed nose pier structures, four floating concrete approach walls, one fixed wall and related underwater excavation, grading and stone placement. Over 12,000 tons (11,000 tonnes) of structural steel and pre-cast concrete elements, up to 335 tons (304 tonnes) in weight, were safely erected during the project.To support these massive structures, the Louisville District of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers teamed with INCA Engineers, Inc., Bellevue, WA to design thirty seven 10’ (3m) diameter shafts (cast-in-place steel-shell piles) capable of maintaining elastic behavior below ground while resisting barge impact loads, extreme head-on collisions from runaway tows, and environmental forces from river current, wind, and seismic events.The shafts (typically 150’ (45.7m) in length) were founded 100’ (30m) into the riverbed through alluvium, a very consolidated fine sand and clay Cretaceous soil, and finally into a hydrothermally altered rock. Thirty seven shafts were installed under open river conditions at the site, a group of four shafts at each nose pier-pylon location (Figure 2), and 21 at the fixed land wall. Due to difficulty in achieving the required casing tip elevation the team developed a design modification that was successfully implemented for 27 of the shafts.Concurrent with the work at Olmsted, eleven pontoon segments for the four floating approach walls were constructed at a graving yard in Paducah, KY, developed by Massman Construction Company specifically for the project. While the pontoon geometry varied, the pontoons averaged 350’ (107m) in length, 40’ (12.2m) in width and weighed 4,500 tons (4,082 tonnes). The longest of the four walls, at 1,700’ (518m) was comprised of five interconnected pontoons."

Jan 1, 2006

By Cassandra A. Wetzel

"Rock socketed mini-piles are a desirable foundation alternative when design capacity is more than 40 tons and there is limited access. In this case history mini-piles were designed to support between 75 and 200 kips at 12 locations adjacent to a perimeter wall, a party wall and at cast iron column piers. Limited geotechnical information, low overhead clearance, and active building population tested the creativity of the team to get the piles installed. The key geotechnical concern during installation of the mini-piles was the presence of a glacial till layer above the bedrock surface that restricted the seating of the casing into bedrock with a track mounted drill rig. Soil loss during the advancement of the rock socket using an air hammer was excessive and increased the risk of subsidence. Over a three week period the engineer worked with the contractor to modify the design, means, methods, and materials to install piles with adequate load capacity. This paper will present the changes in design and construction methods that were required.INTRODUCTIONRock-socketed mini-piles are a common and desirable deep foundation alternative to support loads more than 40 tons in New York City. Limited vertical clearance, accessibility, vibration control, and load capacity make this pile type attractive; it also does not require a static axial load test when socketed into rock. This added benefit makes this alternative all the more feasible.The installation of a drilled pipe extending to bedrock through a glacial till deposit presented challenges to the contractor and engineers to confirm the casing is seated sufficiently into the rock prior to drilling the rock socket. The loss of soil between the steel pipe and the till/bedrock interface can compromise the performance of the pile and soil loss can result in settlement of the ground surface.This paper presents the design and construction method changes made on one project during the installation of ten limited access rock socketed mini-piles."

Jan 1, 2017

By Onur Guvener, Kalaiarasi Vembu, C. Vipulanandan

"Installation procedure and the quality of the material used in the construction have significant effects on the behavior of the Auger Cast in Place (ACIP) piles. In this study, Installation and curing of a 760 mm (30 in.) diameter and 12 m (39 ft) long ACIP pile with a design capacity of 1140 kN (128 tons) in hard clay was investigated. Construction quality was monitored using the automated monitoring system where the volume of grout pumped and the pressures were monitored with depth. The curing of the pile was monitored using axial vibrating wire strain gages at four levels and lateral vibrating wire strain gages at two levels. The residual strain and temperature profile in the curing pile was monitored over a period of week to determine the appropriate time for load testing the pile. Axial behavior of Auger Cast in Place (ACIP) Piles in hard clay was studied using full scale load test on an instrumented pile. The load-settlement and load transfer relationships of the pile was investigated based on the load test results. Development of skin friction in the load test pile and the reaction pile was also investigated.INTRODUCTIONAugered cast-in-place piles (ACIP) are drilled foundation installed by drilling a hole with a continuous flight auger to a predetermined depth. Non-displacement Augered Cast-in-Place (ACIP) piles are increasingly used for supporting building, bridges, sound barrier walls and many other structures around the world. In an ACIP pile, depending on the soil type and rate of the auger advance, ground stresses are maintained near the value that existed before construction by using a continuous flight auger, which is never withdrawn until the cementitious material (fluid Portland cement grout) is placed by pumping the grout beneath the withdrawing auger under pressure through the hollow stem of the auger (Vipulanandan, 2005). ACIP piles are typically installed with diameters ranging from 0.3 to 1.0 m and lengths up to 30 m (Brown, 2005) although longer lengths have occasionally been installed. Comparing to the drilled shafts and driven piles of equivalent size ACIP piles can be installed more rapidly with fewer disturbances to the surroundings in favorable geological conditions. Hence the installation procedure and the quality of material used in the construction have significant effects on the behavior of ACIP piles (Vipulanandan, et al. 2007). In this paper construction quality control technique for ACIP piles was investigated. Load displacement and load transfer behavior of pile in compression and tension in hard clay was also studied. The development of side resistance in compression and tension for the load test piles and the reaction pile were also investigated."

Jan 1, 2017

By Tomio Tsuchiya

A construction method of bored steel H piles enclosed in soil-cement columns was developed by modifying steel H piles from the driven pile method and soil-cement walls from the earth retaining wall method, the latter of which produces cut-off walls and reduces noise and vibration during construction. In this method, as shown in Figure 1, rich mix cement paste is injected into the bottom of a borehole which is pre-excavated by a casing auger, then a steel H beam is inserted before it hardens. Since the high vertical resistance of piles created with this method has already been confirmed by loading tests, we have been investigating the applicability of this method for piles used to temporarily support building loads for top-down construction on raft foundations until the raft foundation is completed. However, in the loading tests, the bearing capacity at the lower end of the pile was measured by loading from ground surface on test piles which had friction cut to eliminate the shaft friction resistance. In other words, the loading tests neglected the effect of overburden pressure of soil above the lower end of the pile. To investigate the effect of the overburden pressure on the bearing capacity at the lower end of the pile, loading tests were carried out on a bored steel H pile of lm diameter (test pile) bored in a compacted sandy soil layer with N-value of 100 to 250 at each stage of a three-step excavation. The results show no significant change in the bearing capacity at the lower end of the pile when the depth ratio of the pile is in the range of 5.7 to 22.7.

Jan 1, 1996

By Herbert F. ?Buck? Darling

A bridge replacement project in Rochester, NY, encountered difficulties when it was determined that rock below one pier was sloping downward toward the river at an angle of 42 degrees versus anticipated 12 degrees. Cofferdam design and construction became very difficult. The unanticipated subsurface conditions delayed the project by eighteen months and increased the cofferdam cost by almost $3.0 million ($US) when direct costs and associated delays were taken into account. The initial approach after discovery of the problem was to use the same type pier design and modify the cofferdam accordingly. This resulted in a cofferdam 12 meters (39.4 feet) deep on the shore side and 18 meters (59.0 feet) deep on the water side. The design used a master pile system to attain required wall strength and used rock anchors to prevent the cofferdam from moving toward the river. The pier foundation was then redesigned by the owner using revised seismic parameters. The original stepped footing carved into rock was replaced by caissons socketed into the rock beneath a large tremie concrete placement. The revised pier and cofferdam designs caused a shift from a mostly land based cofferdam, excavation, and rock removal project into an almost entirely water based cofferdam, caisson drilling, and tremie construction project. These design changes resulted in a reliable, safe, and unusual cofferdam and construction method. All of this was accomplished within a very narrow worksite with a railroad on one side, and the river with its public and commercial freighter traffic on the other. In addition, the existing two-leaf drawbridge was to be maintained in place which put further limitations on the water borne equipment. The engineering and construction considerations, problems, and solutions related to these cofferdams and pier foundations are presented.

Jan 1, 2013

By Mark R. Svinkin

"Construction equipment and operations usually produce soil and structural vibrations which may harmfully affect various structures and also the content of buildings and houses. The level of structural vibrations depends on a number of factors such as characterized sources of vibrations, soil conditions, and susceptibility of structures. There are certain knowledge and experience for managing the effects of construction vibrations which require implementation of condition survey of structures, information on construction dynamic sources and soil conditions at a site, evaluation of possible vibration effects on structure, calculation of ground vibrations before construction, use mitigation measures to decrease vibrations, and a choice of appropriate vibration limits. The paper presents the application of known concepts for assessment of vibration effects on structures from bridge constructions.INTRODUCTIONVibrations producing by construction activities such as pile driving, dynamic compaction of loose soils, demolition work, heavy construction equipment and trucks can affect adjacent and remote structures. Vibration effects on structures, sensitive devices and processes may create significant practical problems. Legal actions are often required for solutions of vibration consequences. The level of construction vibrations depends on dynamic sources, soil conditions at a site in particularly availability of soils with settlement potential, distances from the sources, parameters of waves propagating at a site and susceptibility rating of adjacent and remote structures. It is likely that intolerable structural vibrations from direct vibration effects of impact pile driving and resonant floor vibrations from vibratory pile driving may be induced in adjacent structures to construction sites.Foundation settlements resulting from soil vibrations in loose soils usually occur in the proximity of dynamic sources, but it is important that dynamic settlement may happen at various distances from the source. There are such examples. First, Kaminetzky (1991) mentioned a case history of building settlements developed at a distance of about 305 m (1000 ft) away from a pile driving site. Foundations of the buildings were underpinned on piles down to the tip elevation of the new driven piles to prevent building settlements. Second, Lacy and Gould (1985) shows that the peak particle velocity (PPV) of 2.5 mm/s (0.1 in/s) of ground vibrations could trigger dynamic settlements at distances up to 30.5 m (100 ft) from driven piles."

Jan 1, 2016