Search Documents

By Kenneth Gavin, Weichao Li, Paul Doherty

"The lateral load capacity is one of the most important issues to be considered in designing piles to resist berthing loads, ship impact forces and for monopiles used in the offshore wind sector. A number of semi-empirical design approaches are available to calculate the ultimate soil resistance and assumed soil reaction profile along the piles’ embedded depth. In order to investigate the response of monopiles to lateral loading, a series of field experiments were conducted on instrumented steel pipe piles. Two lateral loading tests were performed on model piles with a diameter, D, of 340 mm and embedded depth, Lem, of 2.2 m, giving a Lem/D ratio similar to those adopted in the offshore wind sector. The piles were driven into dense sand at the University College Dublin geotechnical test bed site in Ireland. 10 pairs of strain gauges were installed on each model pile along the embedded depth at 10 levels to capture the load transfer and bending moment within the piles. The deflection and rotation at the model pile head were measured by Linear Variable Differential Transformer (LVDT) and inclinometers. The tests results were used to perform a detailed evaluation of current design methods. In the final section, discussion on the determination of the ultimate lateral load capacity for monopile design was conducted. IntroductionA pile’s lateral load capacity is determined, for design purposes, by two conditions: 1) the ultimate lateral load, Fu, divided by an appropriate safety factor; and 2) the load according to the maximum lateral deflection that the support structures can sustain. In view of the first condition, design methods to calculate the ultimate load were developed for piles used in the offshore oil and gas sectors, which tend to be much more slender than monopiles used in the wind industry. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether these design methods provide reasonable estimates of ultimate capacity, for short rigid monopiles.The methods to determine the ultimate lateral load generally follow three steps: 1) determine the ultimate soil resistance, Pu, along the pile embedded depth; 2) adopt the most appropriate soil reaction profile, Pz, along the piles embedded depth when the pile subjected to the ultimate lateral load condition (four of the most popular ones are depicted in Figure. 1); and 3) ensure equilibrium of lateral forces (see Equation 1, symbols are listed at the end of the paper) acting on the pile and bending moments (see Equation 2) about a point in pile is employed to determine the ultimate lateral load."

Jan 1, 2015

By William B. Conway

This paper will describe the large caisson pier foundations for four of the bridges crossing the Mississippi River in the New Orleans area; and will discuss some of the unusual problems encountered during their sinking. Certain settlement phenomena experienced during their service life will also be related: The four bridges in order of their construction: The Huey P. Long Bridge, River Mile 106.1, completed in 1935 The Greater New Orleans Bridge No.1, River Mile 96.0, completed in 1958 The Hale Boggs Bridge, River Mile 121.6, completed in 1983 The Greater New Orleans Bridge No.2, River Mile 96.1, completed in 1988 Each of these bridges employed large open-dredged concrete caissons as foundations for one or more of the river piers, with the smallest being the 65ft by 102ft caissons for Piers I and II of the Huey P. Long Bridge and the largest being the 99ft by 214ft caisson for Pier II of the Greater New Orleans Bridge No.2. The Huey P. Long caissons are founded in a dense fine sand at -170 while all of the other bridge caissons are founded in hard preconsolidated clay at elevations varying from -150 to -185. The Huey P. Long Bridge is currently being widened without increasing the caisson foundations under any of the river piers; and the design reasoning that led to this decision is presented.

May 11, 2007

By EFFC/DFI Concrete Task Group

Concrete technology continues to advance rapidly and modern mixes with five components – cement, additions, aggregates, (chemical) admixtures and water – often have characteristics which differ significantly from the older three component mixes – cement, aggregates and water. Recent trends have favoured higher strength classes and lower water/cement ratios, resulting in greater dependence on admixtures to compensate for reduced workability and to meet the (often competing) demands for workability in the fresh state and setting time. The application of testing methods which reflect the true rheological properties of the concrete has not developed at the same rate as the mixes themselves and it is still not uncommon for the slump or flow table test to be used as the only acceptance test for fresh concrete.A joint review of problems in bored piles (drilled shafts) and diaphragm walls cast using tremie methods by both the European Federation of Foundation Contractors (EFFC) and the Deep Foundations Institute in the United States (DFI) identified a common issue. The review determined that many of the problems were caused by (or in part due to) the use of inadequate concrete mixes with inadequate workability, or insufficient stability or robustness of the mixes. It further identified the primary causes as inadequate concrete specifications and inadequate testing procedures. The consequences of these problems are often significant and it has been recognised that spending more time and money on getting the concrete right is the most cost effective approach.A joint Concrete Task Group was set up by EFFC and DFI in 2014 to look at this issue and this guide is the output from that Task Group. A research and development project, funded by the Sponsors of this guide, is being carried out by the Technical University of Munich in conjunction with the Missouri University of Science and Technology. This project includes desk studies, laboratory testing, and onsite testing at worksites in Europe and the US. The research work will be completed during 2016.

Jan 1, 2016

By Michel Bustamante

The Arbre viaduct, 200 metres long, is the most important structure on the Belgian portion of the High Speed Train line between Paris and Brussels. The particular geotechnical conditions of the soil with carboniferous limestone affected by karstic phenomena, has prompted the designer to found the viaduct on systems of high capacity vertical and batter micropiles. The design of the working micropiles was validated by full scale tests performed on instrumented micropiles. The size of the structure and the deformation criteria to be met when HS trains are crossing the viaduct, together with the lack of references for such innovative structure, called for monitoring the movements of the piers as soon as the link was open to traffic. The authors report on the results of loading tests on micropiles and the results of settlement structure monitoring for a period of 4 years. Settlement of the foundation is estimated taking into account the group effect.

Jan 1, 2002

By Theodore von Rosenvinge

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

Jan 1, 2011

By Filippo Leoni, Wesley Schmutzler

"The LPV-111 East Back Levee Improvement Project lies along the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway (GIWW) in Orleans Parish of New Orleans, La., and is an essential component of the New Orleans Hurricane Protection System. The Hurricane Protection Office of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) attributed failure of the New Orleans East levees system to overtopping, erosion and subsequent breaching of LPV-111 along the GIWW, as well as other sections of flood protection during Hurricane Katrina in 2005. The existing levee suffered extensive damages from Hurricane Katrina, such that the USACE elected to provide earth stabilization and to rebuild the levee sections. Due to the adverse geotechnical properties of the foundation soils, the Corps deemed ground improvement necessary to stabilize the new levee and to limit its footprint. Wet Deep Mixing Method (DMM) was selected as the most suitable technology for this task.ChallengesDesign: This reach specifically protects East New Orleans and the Bayou Savage National Wildlife Refuge, the largest urban wildlife refuge in the U.S. and home to several threatened or endangered species of birds as well as many reptiles, amphibians and small mammals. The Corps chose DMM due to the sensitivity of the protected marshlands and because the method limits the footprint of the raised levees. The increase in the load bearing capacity of the treated soil significantly decreases the footprint necessary to attain the required height increase. This limitation required the new levee to have steep slopes, drastically increasing the surcharge on foundation soils characterized by overall poor geotechnical properties (soft clays and peats). The design also considered the increased horizontal stresses on the levees due to the extreme storm surges during a hurricane.The design of the 1.6 m diameter (5.25 ft) DMM elements called for overlapping them to form a double auger element that formed buttresses perpendicular to the levee alignment. The contractor installed the buttresses at a maximum on center spacing of 4.7 m (15.5 ft). One additional double auger DMM element was midway between consecutive buttresses at the centerline of the levee to further help prevent settlement (Figure 1)."

Jan 1, 2013

By George J. Tamaro

The design and construction of foundations in the New York City area are usually dictated by the widely varying geologic conditions encountered in the five boroughs, particularly along the spine of Manhattan Island. Rock extends well above sea level at the northern reaches and falls to depths in excess of 250 m at the barrier islands at the southern extremities. These highly variable geologic conditions, significantly affected by glacial activity, dictate different design and construction approaches throughout the five boroughs of New York City. Extensive rock removal is required at the north while long piling is dictated in the south. Similar changes can occur within a project site on Manhattan Island. This paper will describe these conditions in general, will identify the various solutions used to solve these problems and will summarize various foundation types used in the New York City area.

Jan 1, 2000

By Y. M. Ha, T. D. Nguyen, D. T. Nguyen, H. K. Choi

Conventionally, cement deep mixing (CDM) columns are designed to have constant diameters over the improved depth as this facilitates the construction procedures. However, this design pattern may be inefficient in cases of spread footings or shallow foundations. This paper first briefly introduces principles of an improved CDM method that can create head-enlarged CDM (termed PF) columns. A simple analysis approach was introduced to obtain optimal shape of PF columns that results in minimum settlement. The effectiveness of this improved method over the conventional CDM method was then illustrated by settlement analysis for an actual footing in a case study using two recommended analytical methods in the literature. Analysis results from the case indicated that by using the same amount of soil-cement mixed volumes, settlement from a footing on PF columns can reduce up to 10 % compared with that from the same footing on CDM columns. In addition, a material quantity comparison for the case indicated that to have the same settlement values the volume of each PF column can be reduced of around 10% compared with that of the CDM column. INTRODUCTION The cement deep mixing (CDM) method is one of the most popular methods in ground improvement works. Details on the method such as construction procedures, necessary equipment and recommendations are described in many references or manuals (e.g. Bruce et al. 2013, BS EN 2015, Kitazume and Terashi 2013). Conventionally, CDM columns are designed to have constant diameters over the improved depth as this facilitates the construction procedures. However, this design pattern is found inefficient in cases of spread footings or shallow foundations as the upper soil layers are naturally weaker than the deeper ones but are subjected to larger amount of induced stress from the superstructures.

Jan 1, 2019

By Andrew J. Ciancia

The construction of the Pennsylvania Station in Manhattan, the Beaux-Arts masterpiece, was completed in 1910. In financial ruin, the Pennsylvania Railroad Company sold the station in the 1960?s and the new Madison Square Garden and the Penn Plaza complex were constructed at the site. The demolition of Pennsylvania Station brought public awareness and outcry to protect historic structures and the Landmarks Preservation Commission (LPC) was subsequently established in 1965. In the 1960?s relatively little engineering data was available on the performance of historic structures during adjacent construction and thus, no published criteria were established by the LPC on allowable movements and vibrations. During the late 1970?s a commercial tower was planned adjacent to the landmark Fraunces Tavern Block (FTB) in lower Manhattan. Through negotiations between the LPC and the developer, Dr. M. I. Esrig and the author were retained to monitor the historic block during foundation construction. The monitoring data and building performance compiled from the project formed the basis of the published 1981 ASCE technical paper by Esrig and Ciancia entitled ?The Avoidance of Damage to Historic Structures Resulting from Adjacent Construction?. Based on the ASCE paper, the NYC Department of Buildings adopted Technical Policy and Procedure Notice #10/88 entitled ?Procedures for the Avoidance of Damage to Historic Structures Resulting from Adjacent Construction When Subject to Controlled Inspection by Section 27-724 and for Any Existing Structure Designated by the Commissioner?, June 1988. This paper describes the author?s recent experience during the installation of deep foundations within, or adjacent to, three Manhattan landmark structures. Discussions are provided on the foundation construction, monitoring programs and performances of the three structures.

Jan 1, 2008

By Hee-suk Yun, Dae-jin Hwang, Jeong-woo Seok, Myoung-mo Kim

"In this paper, the accuracy of the data measured by a newly developed displacement measuring system, DPRMs (Digital Pile Penetration and Rebound Monitoring system) and its applicability as a quality control tool were verified by field measurements of pile penetration and rebound for pile driving performed at 3 construction sites and 1 test site. The DPRMs data were found to be much better than handwork data. A new dynamic formula for pile capacities is proposed uses the results of a pilot dynamic load test and the final pile penetration. The ratios of pile capacities obtained by the new formula to those by the dynamic load test were 94%±7.4% in the contrast with 123±28.3% by the 5S formula and 68±24.0% by Hiley's formula. This result shows the superiority of the new formula. The ratios of the maximum compressive stresses calculated by using DPRMs to those calculated by using PDA (Pile Driving Analyzer) were about 90-110±10%. This result confirms the applicability of DPRMs as an overdriving monitoring tool. Two sets of DPRMs were used to measure the 3-D displacement behavior of a pile head at the test site. The more the pile head moves laterally, the less the final set values were expected because of the loss of driving energy, but this trend was not obvious within the limited data obtained at the test site.INTRODUCTIONPile construction monitoring consists of two parts. In the first part, enough capacity of the pile is secured to stand the design load. In the other part, pile damage during driving is prevented. Although several methods can be applied to achieve the first part, PDA is nearly the only tool for measuring pile stress.Several methods such as a static load test, a dynamic load test, an Osterberg cell, and numerous driving equations can determine the pile capacity. Among them, the static load test and the dynamic load test are most widely used. The static load test is advantageous because it has the highest reliability. The disadvantages are as follows: it is costly and time-consuming. Also, the capacity of the pile under construction cannot be evaluated. The dynamic load test has lower reliability than the static load test, but it is cheaper than the static load test, is reliable enough to determine the pile capacity, can evaluate the capacity of a pile during construction, and can offer information about construction conditions such as the pile integrity and the pi le stress during driving. The dynamic load test takes a relatively short time and is low cost compared with the static load test. However, it is still costly, time-consuming, and unnecessary to apply to all piles in the field as a construction measurement tool. Therefore, driving resistance (blowcounts) is commonly measured to confirm the pile capacity at construction sites."

Jan 1, 2005

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 is supported on over 200 drilled shaft foundations ranging in diameter from 4.5 ft to 10 ft and socketed into Passaic Formation siltstone. Four drilled shafts, two on each side of the bridge (NJ and NY), were load tested using the bi-directional axial load method. Axial test results demonstrate that RQD, taken by itself, is not necessarily a reliable indicator of side or base resistance. High recovery with low RQD can be a function of horizontally bedded siltstone and shale where the individual pieces of core do not exceed four inches, but may still provide very high side and base resistance. Axial testing was followed by a lateral rapid-load test (Statnamic) on each of the same four shafts. In addition, one of the shafts was subjected to a static lateral load test to validate the rapid-load method as being representative of static loading conditions. Results of the axial load tests provide the basis of unit side and unit base resistances used in the LRFD design of the rock sockets for axial loading, while results of the static and Statnamic lateral load tests were used to calibrate p-y curve parameters used for design under lateral and moment loading. This paper describes implementation of the load testing program and its role in the design process.INTRODUCTIONDesign of drilled shaft foundations for the Goethals Bridge Replacement (GBR) required load testing in order to validate the parameters used for calculating geotechnical axial and lateral resistances. The bridge, including foundations, was designed in accordance with the AASHTO LRFD design specifications, 6th Edition (2012). The bridge owner is the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (PANYNJ). One of the PANYNJ project requirements was stated as follows:“Perform a minimum of two (2) separate axial compression load tests (one [1] in New York and one [1] in New Jersey) for each demonstration shaft of different size and construction methodology to verify the design assumptions and construction procedures. At a minimum, one (1) demonstration shaft is required to be representative of production shafts with a diameter within one (1) foot above or below the demonstration shaft diameter.Conduct a minimum of two (2) lateral load tests (one [1] in New York and one [1] in New Jersey) for each demonstration shaft of different size and construction methodology. At a minimum, one (1) demonstration shaft is required to be representative of production shafts with a diameter within one (1) foot above or below the demonstration shaft diameter.”"

Jan 1, 2016

By Julie Clarke

In 1939 Dr. Ralph Peck criticized the Civil Engineering community for taking a bifurcated approach to the prediction of building damage due to subsurface geo-technical works. Specifically, he observed that Geotechnical Engineers concerned themselves only with subsurface issues implying that their results were largely independent of the presence and condition of the structures above. He continued that Structural Engineers charged with risk assessment of buildings approached their work nearly in isolation of below ground activities. Seventy years later, although the state-of-the-art has enabled a better understanding of soil-structure interaction, the reality remains that risk assessment from subsurface construction, is not yet an integrated activity when done on a large-scale basis. To help move beyond this, this paper proposes a new, integrated methodology for preliminary assessment that considers a three-stage process that involves the following: (1) traditional empirical relationships for predicting ground movement from tunneling, (2) recent advances in condition assessments, and (3) architectural designators related to usage and historic preservation listings. The methodology is applied to a study area of nearly 260 buildings in the city center of Dublin Ireland, in an area slated for an upcoming metro. The results are com-pared to the Environmental Impact Statement issued for the official project. Al-though the test case is for tunneling, the approach may be adapted to other subsurface construction activities including excavation and piling.

Jan 1, 2009

By Federico Pagliacci

"Many existing dams are subject to underwater seepage due to subsoil conditions, like deep alluvial deposits or pervious rocks or karst. Remedial works are necessary in order to install new cut-off walls to stop the water flow. In some cases the cut-off walls have to be executed at depths never reached so far, and difficult to reach with traditional foundation techniques. In many cases the Hydromill technology proved to be the best system to overpass rocky layers and ensure the required verticality. The maximum depth reached by the industry was in the range of 120-150 meters. This article describes the test performed to excavate and cast in place a 3.2x1.5 m panel to a depth of 250 m. The article will also describe the stratigraphy of the site down to 250 meters, as well as the technique adopted to achieve the said depth with deviations from verticality of 30 cm along the longitudinal axis (0.12%) and 20 cm along the transverse axis (0.10%), measured at the bottom of the excavation. The concreting of the panel, for about 1,100 m³, with plastic concrete in the lower portion and conventional concrete in the upper portion will be illustrated. Finally, the tests performed during the excavation and after concrete casting will be also described, with special attention to the continuous directional core drilling that was performed along the whole length of the panel to verify the results of the deviation from verticality, through the onboard instruments, and to control the quality of concrete at a depth never reached before. IntroductionMany existing dams are subject to underwater seepage due to subsoil conditions, like deep alluvial deposits or caves and cavities or acid solutions in the bedrock formations.Conventional remedial works generally consist in the construction of an additional cut-off wall throughout the dam body and the subsoil, in most cases being deeper than the original one. Today, many examples of successful remedial cut-off walls allow the engineers to design the most suitable solution according to the dam and subsoil characteristics and nature.The real difficulty stems from the depth at which the new cut-off wall has to be socketed in competent rock or soil, so as to eliminate underwater seepage. The maximum depth ever achieved with a cut-off wall is 122.5 m for the remedial work of Mud Mountain Dam, Washington, USA, in 1988-1990. This 0.85-1.0 m thick cut-off wall was realized by means of a Hydromill, by excavating single 2.8 m-wide secant panels."

Jan 1, 2017

By Vivek Samu, Murthy Guddati

A new method called Effective Dispersion Analysis of Reflections (EDAR) was recently developed to effectively analyze the dispersive waves generated from lateral impact to piles. This paper presents the results of nondestructive length estimation of existing piles through EDAR. EDAR provides a new visualization method for analyzing wave reflections by transforming the response into the frequency domain thus eliminating the need to perform difficult peak picking in the time domain. In addition to being able to analyze dispersive waves, EDAR also incorporates the effects of radiation damping due to the surrounding soil leading to more accurate length estimates. Concrete filled steel tubes of different embedment depths were tested both in laboratory and field conditions. Length estimates obtained were within 10% error margins after careful analysis accounting for the presence of soil effects and effects from pile top reflection.

By Ke Yang

"Drilled shafts are typically used to support structures subjected to large moments at the shaft head. The large moment can produce push and pull forces on the two sides of a drilled shaft. Consequently, the applied moment is partially resisted by the push-pull moment resistance induced from the vertical side shears. This type of push-pull resistance has not been fully recognized in most design and analysis methods. In this paper, a 30 finite element model for a drilled shaft subjected to lateral load and moment is presented and is validated against two field lateral load tests. Based on the 30 finite element model, a parametric study is carried out. It shows that the push-pull moment can resist 18-35% of the applied moment. The parametric study also shows that the push-pull resistance varies linearly with loading eccentricity when the eccentricity is less than the shaft embedment length. A method to estimate the push-pull resistance is proposed based on the results of the parametric study. Then, a new method for lateral capacity prediction is proposed to account for the push-pull resistance. The base shear resistance is significant for short drilled shafts; therefore it is also included in the proposed method. A case study on four lateral load field tests illustrates that the new method could improve the accuracy of lateral capacity prediction when compared with the traditional Broms method.INTRODUCTIONDrilled shafts are typically used to support a variety of structures subjected to large moments. Sound walls, highway signs, traffic signals, high-rise buildings, electrical transmission towers, and bridge piers are examples of cases where lateral loads with large eccentricity would result in high overturning moments on foundations.Current analysis methods for capacity predictions (Broms, 1964a and 1964b; Brinch Hansen, 1961) or deflection predictions (Reese, et al. 197 4) of laterally loaded drilled shafts are based on the lateral resistance of soils and rocks. However, O'Neill pointed out that moments can be partially resisted through the push-pull resistance provided by the vertical side shears due to the rotation of the pile (Reese, 1997)."

Jan 1, 2005

By Paolo Cavalcoli, Federico Pagliacci

"As opposed to the static functional recovery of existing structures, the construction of infrastructures in an urban environment, when combined with complex geological situations, often involves building foundation structures, whether circular or rectangular in section, through rock formations or chaotic strata (sand and gravel with cobbles). Until a few years ago, these formations or strata were sometimes an insurmountable constraint on traditional foundation installation techniques. The difficulty in overcoming these geological situations is sometimes added to the increasingly frequent need to reach depths that were unimaginable just a decade ago. These are real challenges for those carrying out these works and for those manufacturing the necessary equipment. There are two main methodological approaches to these problems, that can be summed up in the rhetorical figure of ""David and Goliath"": cunning versus force. In reference to the case studies in this article: the permanent retaining walls for the Copenhagen Metro, and the structural repairs to the Arapuni Dam in New Zealand and the Wolf Creek Dam in the U.S., we will describe the foundations constructed in presence of rock using combined small-diameter direction drilling solutions, associated with their enlargement up to the project’s size, at depths exceeding 300 feet. Finally, a case study will be presented on the implementation of a large cross-section of an excavation in the rock, at depths greater than 800 feet.IntroductionAs opposed to the functional recovery of existing structures, the construction of infrastructures in an urban environment, when combined with complex geological situations, often involves building foundation structures, whether circular or rectangular in section, through rock formations or chaotic strata (sand and gravel with cobbles).Until a few years ago, these formations or strata were sometimes an insurmountable constraint on traditional foundation installation techniques. The difficulty in overcoming these geological situations is sometimes added to the increasingly frequent need to reach depths that were unimaginable just a decade ago.These are real challenges for those building these works and for those manufacturing the necessary equipment. There are two main methodological approaches to these problems, that can be summed up in the biblical figures of ""David and Goliath"": cunning versus force. In the engineering field, the force is summarized in the use of ever-larger drilling equipment in terms of installed power, weight in working conditions, winch and rotary capacity."

Jan 1, 2015

By Terrence M. Carroll, Chu E. Ho

"A pile installation and load testing program on driven tapered piles was undertaken at John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York City for the extension of the existing Terminal 4. As part of the program, dynamic testing by means of the Pile Driving Analyzer (PDA) was performed on several preliminary test piles as well as production piles. The results of the dynamic tests and subsequent static load tests were reviewed to develop an understanding of the pile-soil response of a tapered pile during driving and after setup. Pile setup occurred as a result of increase in shaft resistance with virtually no increase in toe resistance. More than 150 tons of additional capacity was gained after the setup time.The capacities measured during driving from the PDA are typically used as the basis for determining the pile driving set criteria, with the required initial driving capacities determined largely by the contractor’s experience. An improved appreciation of the setup phenomenon is required to better refine the driving criteria at the end of initial driving such that the required ultimate capacities can be obtained, with reasonable confidence, after a period of setup.This paper presents interpretation of pile-soil behavior from Case Pile Wave Analysis Program (CAPWAP) analyses and discusses the mechanism of increased capacity as a result of setup effects. Time-dependent capacity gain as a result of setup effects should be based on the extrapolation of the shaft resistance component rather than the total pile capacity as is commonly practiced. Prediction of pile performance using this approach was in good agreement with observed static and dynamic load test results.IntroductionTapered piles have been adopted for various projects at John F. Kennedy International Airport (JFKIA) since the late 1940’s. Initially timber piles were used exclusively, with steel Monotube piles being used from at least the 1980’s (Horvath and Trochalides, 2004). The steel Tapertube pile was developed in the mid-1990’s and has commonly been used in recent construction (Brusey and Yin, 2008). The Tapertube piles used for this project consisted of a 25 foot long tapered section that was 8 inches in diameter at the tip and 18 inches in diameter at the top. An 18 inch diameter straight pipe was welded above the tapered section."

Jan 1, 2015

By James G. Ulinski, Sebastian Lobo-Guerrero, Vishal B. Patel

"Recently modified design equations used in the transportation industry to calculate side friction and end bearing capacity for drilled shafts are now providing more realistic estimations of capacities than did previous methods. Using multiple case studies and test results from various projects, a more realistic design approach was formulated by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), which resulted in greater values of ultimate capacity for side friction and end bearing and in a more efficient design overall.In 2010, the FHWA published GEC-10 – Drilled Shafts: Construction Procedures and LRFD Design Methods, which illustrates a different method of calculating side friction and end bearing resistance and results in greater values for design. In 2014, the Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) adopted the method put forth by FHWA, which was included in its LRFD Bridge Design th Specifications, 7 Edition. The Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT) recently adopted and incorporated the similar methodology as AASHTO for calculating side friction and end bearing for drilled shafts in rock, and these changes are reflected in the 2015 edition of the PennDOT Design Manual, Part 4 (DM-4). This article discusses the past and current design methodology along with a project case study with results from Osterberg Cell (O-cell) load testing, which presents a comparison between the design resistances of ultimate side friction and end bearing and the measured capacities at failure.The Old and the NewEditions of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Manual from 2012 and earlier estimated ultimate side resistance, qs, in rock using the following equation (modified from Horvath and Kenney, 1979):qs=0.65aEpa(qu/pa)0.5 < 7.8pa(f ’c/pa)0.5 where: qu is the uniaxial compressive strength of the rock in ksf; pa is the atmospheric pressure in ksf; aE is the reduction factor to account for jointing in rock; and f ’c is the compressive strength of the concrete in ksi. For intact rock, previous versions of the AASHTO manual required that the ultimate end bearing resistance, qp, was calculated using the following equation: qp=2.5qu."

Jan 1, 2017

By Paul J. Sabatini, Robert C. Bachus, Terence P. Holman, Panos Andonyadis

A recent landslide comprising approximately 12 acres (4.86 hectare) and a displaced volume of more than 500,000 cy (382,000 m3) caused the shutdown of a four-lane state highway and two high-capacity freight railway lines. After completion of immediate landslide stabilization activities, various long-term slope stabilization measures were implemented that focused primarily on gradual slope unloading in areas near and upslope from the scarp of the landslide. Near the completion of the upslope excavation, an anchored soldier beam and lagging wall was constructed to allow for the temporary unloading of the toe of the main landslide area to facilitate installation of a permanent underdrain. The design of the anchored wall utilized information collected during the rehabilitation construction and included inclinometer data, site survey results, piezometer data, and field construction observations. Using the history of site-specific movements, results of back-analysis calculations from the landslide, and geometry/performance of the post-construction slope configurations, the fully softened and residual shear strengths along two potentially critical sliding surfaces were calculated. Owing to the high confidence in the values of shear strength as afforded by this information, the confidence in local groundwater conditions, and control of the loads, the designers selected a relatively low, calculated short-term factor of safety (FS) (i.e., FS ˜ 1.1 to 1.2) for the most critical unloading step. Long term calculated FS values on the order of 1.2 to 1.3 were anticipated. This paper describes the detailed evaluation of the landslide slope movement data associated with the shallow and deep potentially critical failure surfaces and selection of the associated values of design shear strength for these potentially critical surfaces. A description is presented of the analyses and design of the anchored wall, measures implemented during construction to minimize slope movements, and post-construction monitoring results during the unloading and subsequent installation of the underdrain.

Jan 1, 2017

By Evangelia Ieronymaki

Civil engineering education relies on traditional methods of teaching, comprising mostly of deductive instruction by presenting the theory, followed by applications. This paper presents an alternative way for teaching foundation design to senior students, introducing a more inductive approach. The students are presented with a project/game adapted to a real-world problem at the beginning of the course. They are asked to identify the correct steps and methods throughout the lectures, for reaching an appropriate solution that they document and present at the end of the course. To make the project more enjoyable, the project has the format of a game where the students compete with each other on completing the task faster and more efficiently. The goal of this teaching approach is to enhance the ability of the students for problem solving and the engineering way of thinking, while playing a game. In the end, the students were requested to respond to a survey regarding the efficiency of this project/game on their learning. The results showed that students prefer more inductive methods for a design course, feeling that this project made them think more like engineers, while the ‘game’ twist of it made the whole course more fun. INTRODUCTION Most civil engineering courses are taught in 2019 the same way they used to be taught 40 years ago in the 80s. Classic methods are mostly deductive, where the instructor presents the theory first and then applications of that theory follow. Little or no attention is given initially to why the theory was developed or what are the problems it solves. The applications of the theory, and thus the purpose it serves, come only in the end and after methodologies have been presented, leading the students to show low interest in the material. As Albanese and Mitchell (1993) have reported, people are mostly motivated to learn things when they clearly see the need to know them. This explains the students’ little motivation that, if any, comes mainly from the fact that the material may be useful either in other courses or in their future careers. On the other hand, there are alternative inductive methods of teaching, where the role of the students is more active. A lot of researchers have highlighted the benefits of inductive methods in teaching engineering courses. Based on Prince and Fedler (2006), inductive methods include; a) inquiry-learning, b) discovery learning, c) problem and project-based learning (PBL), d) case-based teaching, and e) just-in-time learning. Inquiry-learning is maybe the most traditional method of inductive teaching/learning methods, where the instructor asks questions or poses problems and the students need to apply the theory they have learnt in order to find the solution (Bateman 1990; Prince 2004; Lee 2012). Similar to inquire-learning is the discovery learning, where students have to find the solution to a problem or answer to a question, while the instructor simply provides feedback to the students without guiding their efforts (Leonard 1988; Westbrook and Rogers 1994).

Jan 1, 2019