Search Documents

By Bill Shea, Gordon King

"For a drainage channel built in San Juan, Puerto Rico, a value engineering (VE) proposal incorporating a secant pile top-down approach saved time and facilitated construction work on the larger flood control project. The channel, at the Bechara Industrial Area, Puerto Nuevo Port Facility and the Puerto Rico Maritime Shipping Authority Dock, was needed to allow drainage of the Rio Puerto Nuevo into San Juan Bay. The port area, one of the busiest in the Caribbean, has over 6,000 ft (1,800 m) of berthing wharves for ocean-going container ships along with over 500,000 sq ft (46,000 m²) of container loading and unloading areas, and is critical to the local economy.Planners wanted to minimize the impact of construction to the port and dock users, and developed a construction methodology and work sequencing that would prevent a complete barrier to port traffic. This plan involved non-contiguous and limited work area that “leapfrogged” along the alignment so as to prevent long barriers to lateral traffic movement across the culvert alignment.After reviewing the project plans and schedule, Morris-Shea Bridge Company (MSB) proposed an alternate design and construction approach that provided significant cost and schedule benefits, and also provided better access for the port and dock users. The alternate VE proposal involved top-down construction methodology and redesigned drainage culvert geometry with two parallel 2,000 linear ft (lf) (600 m) secant walls installed on each side of the culvert. These walls facilitated excavation and formed part of the culvert permanent walls. The result was a significantly reduced required construction right of way that allowed construction work in contiguous areas largely without impact on ongoing port activity. MSB conceived the design concept, and engineered design and construction of the VE alternate secant pile culvert.The project initially consisted of an open channel in the industrial area picking up water from the existing Rio Puerto Nuevo, transitioning to an enclosed culvert through the port and dock areas, and outfall through the existing dock. The base bid construction included three main areas of work:"

Jan 1, 2012

By Dan Brown

Deep foundation contracting for transportation projects in the United States has typically followed the design-bid-build model in which contractors bid on a specific work product according to relatively inflexible prescriptive specifications. With continuous flight auger piling and the many types of proprietary drilled displacement auger piling, there appear to be advantages to contracting this work according to a different model. This paper provides a discussion of the use of a performance specification for this work in which the contractor has greater freedom to choose the most appropriate foundation system and also greater responsibility for the performance of the completed foundation. With public agencies subject to open bidding, this type of contractual arrangement presents opportunities to encourage innovation. There are also challenges for implementation in public works projects, notably the selection of qualified contractors and the verification of performance requirements on production foundations.

Jan 1, 2006

By Stefan Larsson, Jan Ekström, Jennie Kock-Larsen, Håkan Garin

"This paper describes the testing procedure (or protocols) for quality control of dry deep mixing columns in a major ground improvement project carried out in Sweden. Quality control was mainly based on column penetration tests performed at different stages in the project and on two occasions after installation. In the paper, the results from the tests are compared with tests on the unimproved clay. As expected, the results show that the correlation between undrained shear strength in the columns and in the unimproved soft soil depends mainly on the in-situ stress. However, the correlation probably depends on when the tests were performed after mixing. When the influence of the in-situ stress was excluded from the analysis, no significant correlation could be identified. This means that the undrained shear strength in the columns and in the unimproved soft can be considered to be uncorrelated when the strengths and the corresponding variability are evaluated with depth from groups of tests.INTRODUCTIONQuality control and quality assessment of deep mixing (QC/QA) constitute a key component in verification of the limit state design. Due to the complex mixing process and varying geological conditions, it is normally not possible to sufficiently assess the strength and deformation properties in advance. In Sweden, the most commonly used QC/QA method for verification of the limit state is the column penetration test (Axelsson and Larsson 2003; Bergman et al. 2013). The method works well but is time-consuming and requires many tests since property variability is normally high. The column penetration test can be used to assess the undrained shear strength Cu,col. However, it is not clear how the strength correlates to the undrained shear strength of the unimproved soil Cu,soil. There are common factors such as the in-situ stress state and the natural water content, which makes a positive correlation probable, i.e. as Cu,soil decreases, Cu,col also decreases and vice versa. The unimproved soil has a natural spatial variability, but it is not known if the improved soil follows the same variation. The mixing process has a substantial influence on the strength variability and may supersede the influence of other factors. However, if a sufficiently good correlation exists between Cu,col and Cu,soil, information from the geotechnical ground investigations can be used in the design and planning of QC/QA of deep mixing in a more stringent manner. Information about the correlation is also essential in reliability based design, where a strong positive correlation may have a negative influence on reliability. However, as discussed by Al-Naqshabandy and Larsson (2013), this correlation may be weak or insignificant for a representative failure domain where the mixing process may have a dominant influence on the strength variability. It is thus of interest to assess the correlation."

Jan 1, 2015

By Dominic Parmantier, Jason Page

"In the past, the designers of DSM have analyzed various failure modes and then specified a minimum unconfined compressive strength (UCS) for the soil-cement. The specified minimum UCS reflected the compressive stress in the soil-cement under design loads and an appropriate factor of safety. With the increased use of finite element analysis for the design of DSM applications where allowable strain as well as stress are considered, there is a growing trend for designers to specify a modulus and occasionally a tensile strength for the soil-cement in addition to the UCS. This paper compares the relationship of modulus and tensile strength to UCS for soil-cement from a recent DSM project with unique testing requirements. These results are compared to published data. The case is made that designers should utilize published relationships to characterize the required strength and stiffness by a single acceptance criterion: UCS.INTRODUCTIONAs the use of DSM has increased in popularity so has the use of service state deformation analysis in lieu of more traditional failure mode analysis. Most DSM designers are interested in the appropriate modulus values and occasionally tensile strength values of soil-cement as well as simply the unconfined compressive strength (UCS) of soil-cement.Although there are numerous published correlations between the UCS, tensile strength and modulus of soil-cement, some DSM project specifications are produced which have acceptance values for tensile strength, modulus, and UCS. If this specification of multiple strength properties is consistent with the nature of soil-cement, then there is really no harm except for the expenditure of client money on unnecessary testing. If however the multiple strength properties specified are inconsistent with the material properties of soil-cement, then the specifications can create the expectation that the DSM contractor can somehow create a custom soil-cement with tensile strengths and modulus characteristics which are unachievable.This paper presents a brief summary of a project in Burnaby, B.C. which specified minimum values for the tensile strength, modulus, and UCS of the soil-cement. A comparison of those test results to published correlations between the UCS and the tensile strength is presented. Additionally, a comparison of modulus derived from two different methods of testing is presented along with a comparison to published correlations between UCS and modulus for soil-cement."

Jan 1, 2015

By Siavash Mahvelati, Alireza Kordjazi, Joseph Thomas Coe

Deep foundations are often constructed as end bearing members with a significant amount of their capacity derived from bedrock. Sites with highly variable bedrock conditions therefore present a unique challenge when attempting to estimate the design elevation of deep foundations. Typical subsurface characterization techniques such as drilling, standard penetration testing (SPT), and cone-penetration testing (CPT) may fail to adequately establish top-of-rock elevation in geologic settings prone to karst and/or significant amounts of residuum, saprolite, and deformed bedrock. Seismic surface wave geophysical methods have been increasingly used to map bedrock topography in such settings. However, the current standard of practice for these methods introduces resolution limitations in spatially variable subsurface conditions due to averaging effects from the analytical framework used to process the acquired data. This study explores the use of a tomographic approach with full waveform inversion (FWI) to map top-of-rock elevations at a numerically simulated site representative of highly variable bedrock topography. Comparisons are made with seismic refraction (SR) and a dispersion-based multichannel analysis of surface waves (MASW) approach as more commonly used in geophysical subsurface investigations. The results highlight that FWI provides a superior estimate of top-of-rock topography than SR and MASW at a cost of a significant increase in the required computational resources and time.

Sep 8, 2021

By Siavash Mahvelati, Alireza Kordjazi, Joseph Thomas Coe

Deep foundations are often constructed as end bearing members with a significant amount of their capacity derived from bedrock. Sites with highly variable bedrock conditions therefore present a unique challenge when attempting to estimate the design elevation of deep foundations. Typical subsurface characterization techniques such as drilling, standard penetration testing (SPT), and cone-penetration testing (CPT) may fail to adequately establish top-of-rock elevation in geologic settings prone to karst and/or significant amounts of residuum, saprolite, and deformed bedrock. Seismic surface wave geophysical methods have been increasingly used to map bedrock topography in such settings. However, the current standard of practice for these methods introduces resolution limitations in spatially variable subsurface conditions due to averaging effects from the analytical framework used to process the acquired data. This study explores the use of a tomographic approach with full waveform inversion (FWI) to map top-of-rock elevations at a numerically simulated site representative of highly variable bedrock topography. Comparisons are made with seismic refraction (SR) and a dispersion-based multichannel analysis of surface waves (MASW) approach as more commonly used in geophysical subsurface investigations. The results highlight that FWI provides a superior estimate of top-of-rock topography than SR and MASW at a cost of a significant increase in the required computational resources and time.

Oct 1, 2021

By P. Kiruthika, A. Murali Krishna

Soil liquefaction is a dangerous phenomenon that involves huge damages during strong earthquake ground motion event. Stone columns (SCs) are widely used as liquefaction mitigation element which is expected to perform the improvements against liquefaction hazard by densifying, increasing the stiffness and rapid dissipation of excess pore water pressure in the surrounding soil. Although in the recent times few studies on the behaviour of stone columns in the seismic zone has evolved, the performance of SCs in the multi-layered soils is not extensively examined. This paper presents the numerical investigations on the performance of SCs installed in the multi-layered soils as a liquefaction mitigation measure against the seismic loading. The acceleration time histories, Excess Porewater Pressure (EPP), vertical displacement and stress ratio evaluated along different depths using PLAXIS 2D. With the installation of stone column there is a considerable reduction in the acceleration amplitude, which in turn reduces the EPP and vertical displacement at different locations and the amplitude of reduction depends on the soil stiffness levels at the depth.

Sep 1, 2022

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

Jan 1, 2016

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

Jan 1, 2015

By Sanjay Gupta, Sorabh Gupta, Ravi Sundaram

A geotechnical forensic evaluation of piles for an industrial facility in Haryana was performed to assess the quality of the piles and to evaluate piles installed using two different types of rigs. Low strain pile integrity tests were performed on all piles to assess the pile length and possible presence of structural defects. Coring was done through questionable piles for the clinching evidence of concrete quality and pile length. Probe holes adjoining piles helped confirm the bulging of piles at shallow depth. The paper highlights the importance of implementing a well-planned quality assurance program to confirm that all piles installed are of the desired quality.

Sep 1, 2022

By Padmavathi V, M. Najamuddin, M. R. Madhav

Granular piles are one of the leading ground improvement techniques, adopted for the betterment of bearing capacity and reduction in settlements of the foundations and also to accelerate consolidation of the surrounding soil. In the recent past, there has been extensive research on the settlement analysis and behavior of granular piles under varied soil conditions. The application of these theoretical solutions to practical problems requires a knowledge of representative values of the deformation parameters of the ground and the granular piles. However, very little information is available on these parameters. The paper presents a new method for the estimation of the modular ratio of granular piles and modulus of deformation of the surrounding in-situ soil from the compression load tests. The load - settlement response obtained from the compression test results are used in the back analysis for estimating the modulus of deformation of the ground. The presence of granular bed, under the rigid plate for load testing, has been given due consideration in quantifying the proportion of load transferred on to the stone column. Based on these considerations a new method is developed to estimate the modulus of deformation of the ground and the modular ratio of the granular pile.

Sep 1, 2022

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 Mark Koelling

This paper presents a case history of a ground improvement program conducted in a soft soil environment and seismically active region in the northwest corner of Washington State near the Canadian border. The program was performed over several years, and provided adequate soil bearing conditions for the construction of several structures. Completed development includes separate construction of four adjacent structures, each with unique total and differential settlement requirements and built at approximate two year intervals. Site soils consist of 45 feet of loose saturated sand and silt overlying 70 feet of very soft to stiff (N60 = 0 to 7) normally consolidated clay. Adding to the complexity of the site is the owner?s requirement that all existing structures remain open and in service during construction of each subsequent structure. The paper presents the site geotechnical information and the foundation design issues. Details of a combination of ground improvement methods is presented, including stone columns, wick drains, a preload surcharge, and staged construction to provide soil support for shallow foundation construction of all structures at this site. The soil test results and settlement observations are presented along with QA/QC measures. Lastly, a brief method sustainability comment will be made.

Jan 1, 2010

By Peter A. Thompson, Richard E. Prust

"The Bangkok Mass Rapid Transit (MRT} Chaleom Ratchamongkhon Line project is the first underground subway to be completed in Thailand. It consists of 22 km (14 miles) of twin-bored tunnels and 18 cut and cover stations constructed within the deltaic deposits that underlie the city. This paper describes the ground conditions, site investigation, including the use of the self-boring pressuremeter and the associated design issues for the construction of deep foundations. The paper also describes a selection of the various deep foundation solutions that were adopted to address particular constraints of the project and the ground conditions, including slurry walls for the cut and cover stations and foundations used for the underpinning of existing structures.INTRODUCTIONThe MRT Chaloem Ratchamongkhon Line Mass Transit Underground Railway comprises approximately 22 km (14 miles) of tunnels and 18 stations. The route is shown in Figure 1.The project was divided into two design and build contracts. The northern section was awarded to the ION joint venture, composed of Italian-Thai Development PLC, Obayashi Corporation and Nishimatsu Construction Co Ltd. Arup were contracted by ION for the design of the northern section. The section comprises 11 km (7 miles) of twin-bored tunnels, nine cut and cover station tunnels constructed within perimeter slurry walls using top down construction methods, and two cut and cover tunnel structures.The majority of the route of the northern contract follows existing highway Rights of Way. This results in the tunnel alignment passing through the foundations of existing highway bridge structures for which a variety of deep foundation solutions were adopted to underpin these structures.An 8-story park and ride building in the Lat Phrao area was also constructed using deep foundations."

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 Martin B. Hudson, Kenneth S. Hudson, Gwendolyn Arreguin

A twin high-rise project site in Century City posed several foundation engineering challenges for the design team. One portion of the twin high-rise project site was required to utilize top-down construction in order to allow a driveway to remain open during construction of the project’s 40-foot deep excavation. The challenge was compounded by the need to utilize a mat foundation to support the high-rise construction and yet have temporary drilled shafts through the mat foundation area that would not create excessive differential settlement. This was accomplished by constructing a deck supported by eight drilled end- bearing drilled shafts with Osterberg load cells and five 7-foot-diameter end-bearing drilled shafts. The Osterberg load cells served to verify the capacity of each of the drilled shafts and preload the soils at the drilled shaft tips. The 7-foot-diameter shafts were constructed with bond breakers to prevent skin friction but instead mobilize end bearing (for settlement compatibility with the surrounding mat foundation). After the drilled shafts were placed, then top-down construction began beneath the driveway, leaving the driveway supported on the drilled shafts. Construction challenges included drilling of the shafts through previously abandoned tieback anchors from an adjacent parking structure basement, as well as cemented layers within the rock materials. The paper describes the use of the various analytical methods used to calculate capacities and check settlement compatibility, the construction and testing methods utilized, and the construction challenges encountered. INTRODUCTION Wood Environment and Infrastructure Solutions, Inc. (hereafter referred to as Wood) performed a geotechnical investigation for the New Century Plaza currently being constructed in the Century City District of Los Angeles, California. The New Century Plaza project consists of the construction of two new towers (designated as North and South Buildings) and the rehabilitation of the existing Hyatt Regency Century Plaza Hotel. The existing hotel tower is 15 stories in height above the existing grade and is underlain by four subterranean basement parking levels. The new North and South Buildings will stand approximately 46 stories in height above the existing grade to accommodate residential use. The new towers are planned west of the existing hotel. The site was previously occupied by the existing hotel subterranean parking structure and overlying podium structure, and a loading dock in the southwest portion of the site. The former western portion of the podium and subterranean parking structure west of the existing hotel building western edge were demolished to allow for new subterranean levels, a new podium structure, and the new towers. The lowest floor of the proposed subterranean level required excavation on the order of 35 to 80 feet.

Jan 1, 2019

By Rich A. Lamb, Paul J. Axtell, Michael K. Muchard

"Since 2010, the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) has performed eight full-scale compressive load tests on large-diameter pipe piles at four different project locations across the state. All of the piles were 42-in diameter, open-ended pipes driven to practical refusal on sedimentary bedrock with D125-32 diesel hammers from three separate manufacturers. The rapid load test method in general accordance with ASTM D7383-10 (Statnamic method) was used along with high-strain dynamic testing and subsequent signal matching. Results of these tests indicate that the axial nominal resistance of these piles in compression is not controlled by geotechnical considerations when driven with an appropriately sized hammer and installation criterion. Rather, the predominantly elastic load-deflection behavior of the piles under compressive load suggests the axial nominal compressive resistance is controlled by the structural capacity of the pile. In all instances, the rapid load tests indicated a nominal resistance exceeding that produced by high-strain dynamic tests due to insufficient hammer energy to fully mobilize resistance. In all cases, the hammers used were able to easily install the piles through the soil overburden. Mobilizing a larger hammer simply to demonstrate high-strain dynamic resistance is not economical or practical. This paper presents the subsurface conditions at each location, the ensuing test results, and the ramifications for future projects in Minnesota utilizing large-diameter open-ended pipe piles.INTRODUCTIONThe Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) has recently performed eight full-scale compressive load tests on large-diameter pipe piles at four different project locations across the state. The four project locations described in this paper where pile load testing was performed are shown in Figure 1 and exist in the southeastern portion of Minnesota. The projects are all major bridges crossing the Mississippi River in three instances and the St. Croix River just above the Mississippi River in the other instance. The first project is the TH 61 Mississippi River crossing in Hasting, MN where two load tests were conducted. The second is the TH 36 St. Croix River crossing in Stillwater, MN where two load tests were performed. The third project is the I-90 Mississippi River crossing in Dresbach, MN where three load tests were conducted. The final project is the TH 43 Mississippi River crossing in Winona, MN where one load test was performed."

Jan 1, 2017

By Stephan A. Jefferis, Adrian H. Bath

"This paper draws together some themes on the durability of barrier systems, and particularly cementitious systems. For contaminated land and water retaining structures, durability can be poorly addressed at all stages of a project, from specification, to barrier material selection, barrier design including toe-in and through to performance assessment in operation. Permeability (hydraulic conductivity) is a dynamic property which will vary over time as reaction processes propagate through a barrier. However, laboratory testing, when undertaken, tends to be focused on short term tests with aggressive chemicals so that the effects of longer-term processes such as carbonation and leaching by permeating water are missed. For water retaining structures, carbonation and leaching actually may be the most significant processes affecting barrier performance as the groundwater adjacent to many water bodies can be otherwise rather benign (as regards bentonite and cementitious systems). These and other reaction processes have been modelled in the arena of nuclear waste repositories and procedures are well recognised. However, such procedures have yet to be widely adopted for the assessment of other barrier systems.INTRODUCTIONOver the last few decades there has been an enormous amount of laboratory research on the durability of barrier materials or more specifically papers reporting the results of permeability tests. Unfortunately there is a much smaller literature on scaling test results to barrier dimensions in the field or to required design lives. Although in the geotechnical industry durability research has been largely laboratory based, in the nuclear industry where relevant timescales are multi-millennia rather than decades, research has been heavily underpinned by geochemical modelling. A significant purpose of this paper is to examine the tools that may be used to analyse the results of tests on barrier materials used in geotechnical engineering, for example, for water retaining structures and contaminated land and draw the attention of the construction industry to the potential of the modelling procedures developed for nuclear repository assessments. Modelling can help to identify underlying processes and so augment information from laboratory testing focused on changes of physical properties such as permeability and strength."

Jan 1, 2016

By Ashirbad Satapathy, Sanket Rawat, Ramanand Shukla, Ravi Kant Mittal

Bearing capacity factor (Nq) and Adhesion factor (α) are the key parameters for analyzing the load carrying capacity of pile foundations embedded in cohesionless and cohesive soils respectively. Numerous models are available in the form of charts or equations for the computation of these parameters and hence, have been adopted by most of the International and National standards. Indian Standard for the Design and Construction of Concrete Pile Foundations, IS 2911–Part 1 (2010), also makes use of charts detailed in its Annexure B. However, the sources of these charts have not been specified clearly, making it difficult to back-refer to the actual models to assess their basis for resolving any critical scenarios encountered during design. The present study aims at acquiring a distinct understanding of the development of these charts in order to bring more clarity to the design process of pile foundations. The given charts have been compared with various models specified in existing literature and international standards for the calculation of Nq and α for both driven and bored piles and hence, the basis of Indian Standard charts has been identified. Moreover, it is evident that the use of these charts complicates the process of automation of analysis and design of pile foundations as well as the associated optimization studies. Additionally, the manual entry of data especially, from the logarithmic graph of Nq, escalates the chances of error thus, making it a critical concern for design offices. Therefore, this paper also presents a non-linear regression model for Nq and α, developed using NCSS software for both driven and bored piles. Through multiple iterations, the value of coefficient of determination for Nq and α has been found to reach greater than 0.995. The developed equations can be simplistically used for both manual and automated analysis of pile foundations.

Nov 1, 2022

By Alice Arana, David M. Cacoilo, Joel L. Volterra

"To make space for the new South Ferry Station in lower Manhattan, engineers and contractors carved out a new tunnel beneath three operating subway tunnels and tangentially to yet another tunnel. Creating the space required the design and construction of complex temporary excavation support and underpinning systems and the design and installation of real-time monitoring systems. Construction for the new station and tunnel was mainly cut-and cover in a mixed-face area of soil and rock approximately 2,000 linear ft long, 60 ft wide and up to 70 ft deep. Close coordination between the design/build team and the project owner, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA), was critical.With the construction of this $400 million project, the MTA and New York City Transit (NYCT) are correcting the numerous physical and operational deficiencies of the existing station and improving the lives of millions of commuters. Built in 1905, the original South Ferry Station is on the IRT Broadway–Seventh Avenue Line of the New York City Subway and is the southern terminal of the #1 subway service, which forms a loop to return uptown. The station has a sharply curved single platform on the outside of the outer track of a two track loop. This platform is short and does not allow the rear five cars of a normal 10-car subway train to load or unload. In addition, once the train stops at the station, commuters wait while retractable floor grates bridge the gap created between the platform and the subway car doors, and then they have only one exit from the station. Spray nozzles keep the tracks lubricated to reduce the train wheels’ friction caused by the tight curve. The sharp curvature of the loop and the inability to use half of the subway car doors slow train operation. With the new ADA-accessible station, 10-car trains will be able to open all doors, and additional entrances, escalators and elevators will greatly reduce travel times."

Jan 1, 2008