Search Documents

By P. Bermingham

A new approach to load testing of high capacity piles is presented. The method is mobile, inexpensive, repeatable and non-destructive allowing for multiple pile testing at a single site. A reaction mass is placed over a pressure chamber situated atop the pile to be tested. The test method is significant in that it can produce linearly increasing forces of high magnitude (over 5.0 MN) with durations of up to 80 milliseconds. This represents pulse durations an order of magnitude longer than achieved using a drop hammer. The accelerations the pile undergoes are less than one g, (conventional dynamic methods = 50 to 100 g). These effects combine to produce pile behaviour no longer dominated by the action of stress wave, instead the pile is under high levels of stress through its length during the force input. This is representative of the situation when static loads are applied, thus the method may be considered quasi-static. Further advances introduced with this method are that pile deflection and transmitted force are measured directly by means of a laser beam and load cell. This allows accurate correlation of event load displacement histories without the error associated with zero shift (acceleration integration) or non-homogeneous materials (strain measurement). The load displacement histories emulate those obtained for static load testing.

Jan 1, 1989

By Daniel L. Hanson

This paper presents a case history of the design, installation and performance of a tied-back tangent caisson retaining wall which was constructed as part of the Third Harbor Tunnel project currently underway in Boston, Massachusetts. The Third Harbor Tunnel project consists of a large multi-lane transportation tunnel which is being constructed by the sunken tube method. In this type of construction, the tunnel alignment, slopes and bedding are excavated and installed underwater and the tunnel sections floated over the proper alignment and sunk in place. The tangent caisson retaining wall discussed in this paper was constructed to provide support of the upper portions of the tunnel excavation at the East Boston Portal where the tunnel exited from below the harbor and continued underground on shore. A portion of the tangent caisson retaining wall was also utilized to provide earth support for the barge unloading facility where spoil from the tunnel excavation was transferred to surface vehicles for removal from the site. PROJECT BACKGROUND The tangent caisson retaining wall was constructed by The Millgard Corporation (TMC) as a subcontractor to the Boston Third Harbor Tunnel Contractors, a Joint Venture which consisted of the firms of Morrison-Knudsen Corporation, Interbeton Inc., and J.F. White Contracting Company. The entire project team is listed below on Table 1. The design of the tangent caisson wall system was performed by Hanson Engineering, P.C. (HE) acting as design consultant to TMC. The retaining wall system incorporated a single row of pressure injected earth anchors (tie-backs) as part of the design. The earth anchors were designed and installed by Drill Tech as a subcontractor to TMC.

Jan 1, 1994

By Richard T. Stain

"In 2001, a pile trial site was established at Limelette in Belgium consisting of 25 displacement screw piles and 5 driven pre-cast piles. Interested parties were invited to participate in a pile prediction event, whereby they would submit predicted static load test behaviour in the form of load settlement plots. These predictions could be based on soil investigation results supplied by the organizers, or dynamic load test measurements.Following the submission deadline, the organisers released the results of static load tests for comparison.Of all the six participants, including Statnamic, the SIMBAT method was independently accredited with achieving the best predictions.This paper examines at the differences between SIMBAT and other systems, and presents the correlations from the Limelette trial.INTRODUCTIONThe Belgian Building Research Institute (BBRI) initiated an ambitious research programme involving the construction and testing of some 60 trial piles spread between two sites, a clay site at Sint Kateline Waver and a sandy site at the BBRI headquarters at Limelette. The project was financed largely by the Belgian Ministry of Economic affairs. (ref 1.) This paper refers only to the second site.At Limelette, six different types of displacement pile were installed: one driven pre-cast and five cast in place screw piles - Atlas, DeWaal, Fundex, Olivier and Omega. A detailed site investigation was carried out including in-situ and laboratory tests.An international pile capacity prediction event was publicised, participants being invited to predict static pile behaviour. Predictions could be based on:"

Jan 1, 2005

By I. Stanculescu

The consolidation of thick and very compressible soil deposits by stone columns associated with cast-in-place plain concrete columns, has been performed for shallow foundations of some heavy industrial structures. The reduction of settlements and increase of soil bearing capacity were thus ensured as a result of soft soil interaction with stone and concrete columns. The results of model tests and in situ large scale applications are presented. A calculation procedure is also suggested for foundation bases improved by the proposed method.

Jan 1, 2010

By Roger Frank

"Abstract After noting the importance of standardization for piles, the European system is described (execution, tests and design, etc.). Some important aspects of Eurocode 7 are outlined (like the role of pile load tests). Finally, the calculation methods in the recent French standard for the design of piles following Eurocode 7 are shortly addressed.Importance of standardization for piles Like for other fields of geotechnical engineering, pile engineering is a complex art. For piles, the challenges are particularly numerous and many things must be mastered properly: - the soil investigation must be serious and adequate (for instance, deep enough!);- the choice of the pile type and the assumed behaviour must be assessed in order to reach a safe and economic design of the overall foundation;- the execution itself (construction and/or installation) deserves special attention and must follow strict state-of-the art rules.The geotechnical engineer, in charge of the design of a pile foundation, must have in mind the parameters linked to the variety of soils, of soil conditions and of pile types. A wide range of strong environmental issues are also to be considered: minimum disturbance during the execution processes, long-duration friendliness of the “inclusions” into the ground (to avoid pollution of the soils and waters, for instance) and respect of the neighbouring structures.Pile engineering plays in a world which is constantly moving and progressing: constructions expand in new difficult areas, actions on piles are more and more important, new execution techniques of piles are developed, research into the complex behaviour of pile foundations has no end, etc. Our views on how piles and group of piles really work are constantly evolving!"

Jan 1, 2014

By Andrew Malinak, William Perkins

Seattle’s Elliott Bay Seawall protects the 1½ miles of downtown waterfront between South Washington and Broad streets. The seawall supports the urban waterfront and infrastructure, including the Alaskan Way Viaduct and Alaskan Way, access to historic waterfront piers, and numerous essential buried utilities. Most of the original seawall was constructed between 1916 and 1936 over soft/loose non-engineered fill, estuary, and beach deposits. The majority of the original seawall was a pile-supported timber relieving platform that extended up to 60 feet behind the face of the wall (Figure 1). With maximum spacing between the timber piles of 3 to 5 feet, a virtual forest of timber piles were driven for the original wall.

Jan 1, 2018

By Giovanni A. Bonita

The United States Capitol Visitor Center (USCVC) is one of the largest underground structures ever constructed in the Washington, DC, metropolitan area. The 600,000 ft2 (55,750 m2) structure is entirely underground and immediately adjacent to the shallow foundations of the existing U.S. Capitol building. Interior building columns for the USCVC were supported on 186 drilled shafts that varied in diameter from 4 to 9 ft (1.2 to 2.9 m) and in length from 15 to 45 ft (4.6 to 13.7 m). The vast majority of the building utilities were located beneath the basement floor slab. It was decided at the onset of the project to proceed with construction prior to completion of the design drawings, and coordination between the underslab utilities and the drilled shafts had not yet been finalized at the onset of drilled shaft installation. Given depth and location restrictions of the outlets, relocation of the bulk of the utilities was not possible. Almost half of the drilled shafts were affected, leaving redesign as the most feasible remedial solution. The redesign involved adjustments to the shaft length, diameter, and bell. It took place on a case-by-case basis, sometimes only minutes before installation began. Coordination between the field and design team was excellent, and delay associated with the redesign efforts was minimal. In addition, the detailed, high-quality field records kept by both the contractor and field engineers allowed for accurate and fair estimations of the added drilled footage and concrete volumes placed. The additional service fee, which was minimal, was settled quick and fair.

Jan 1, 2006

By F. Castelli

A simplified non-linear method to predict the behaviour of a single pile and/or pile group under horizontal loads is presented in the paper. The evaluation of the non-linear lateral deflection is based on a procedure taking into account the decrease of the model stiffness with the increasing of the applied load. The solution derived firstly for the single pile, was extended to the case of a pile group introducing the p-multiplier (fm) concept proposed by Brown et al. (1988).

Jan 1, 2006

By Daniel J. Rider

In 1980 the Niagara Frontier Transportation Authority contracted for three miles of cut and cover box structure and station construction in Main Street, Buffalo, New York. Project depths ranged from 30 feet to 60 feet below street grade. Soils, Figure No. 1, consisted of loose to very compact sands and gravels. Ground water level was generally 20 feet below grade. Specifications required a soldier pile and timber lagging support system with external dewatering. Soldier piles were to be installed in prebored holes with bentonite slurry and lean concrete backfill. Conventional pile driving was not allowed due to concerns over excessive noise and vibrations and its effect on nearby historic structures and the surrounding population

Jan 1, 1987

By L. C. Reese

? Good construction and inspection presumed. ? Capacity-computation factors are independent of construction method. ? To account for variable or uncertain site conditions, anticipated construction problems, and/or minimal inspection, increase factor of safety. ? Conduct load tests and/or develop easily implemented design alternates (e.g., straight shaft in case bell can't be formed) to reduce factor of safety.

Jan 1, 1988

By M. D. Riegel, Brian T. Felber

"Construction of foundation elements in an urban environment is often complicated by multiple constraints such as existing foundations, utility conflicts, maintenance and protection of traffic on high volume roadways, low overhead clearances, and vibration and displacement monitoring to reduce risks of impact to existing facilities. Micropiles are commonly a preferred foundation alternative in an urban setting to mitigate some of these risks. This paper presents examples in which micropiles helped reduce risk in an urban setting on the two subject infrastructure improvement projects. The case studies presented include the Verrazano Narrows Bridge HOV and Bus Ramp Improvements in Brooklyn, NY and the Kosciuszko Bridge Replacement in Queens and Brooklyn, NY. The paper details the micropile design, how risks were mitigated, and the complications to each of these projects associated with the urban setting.INTRODUCTIONThe paper begins with background information about the Verrazano Narrows Bridge HOV and Bus Ramp Improvements Project, followed by background information for the Kosciuszko Bridge Replacement Project. This introductory background information is followed by discussion of the urban site constraints, which controlled the foundation type selection for both projects. In closing, the paper discusses the micropile design process, load testing, and construction.VERRAZANO NARROWS BRIDGE HOV & BUS RAMP IMPROVEMENTS BACKGROUNDProject ScopeThe project consists of two new ramps; one designated for HOV / Bus traffic between Staten Island and the Gowanus Expressway, and one to be utilized for storing the barrier transfer vehicle. Also included is the complete reconstruction of Ramps B and F to accommodate horizontal and vertical alignment clearances from the new ramps, removal of the median of the upper level to add one lane, utilities improvements, stormwater improvements, and miscellaneous structural repairs. The new HOV / Bus Ramp was designed for reversible traffic flow to accommodate the demand of the peak traffic direction by movable barrier.Geotechnical / Foundation Engineering ScopeThe geotechnical work included a desk study review of existing plans, geotechnical reports, and geologic maps. This data was subsequently supplemented with a subsurface exploration program. Once completed, foundation design was performed for 25 proposed bridge substructures. Four existing battered pilesupported foundations and two shallow foundations were evaluated for increased loading. Upon completion of the foundation design, foundation plans, specifications, and an engineer’s estimate were prepared. Foundation installation was observed on a part-time as needed basis."

Jan 1, 2016

By Reza Y. Khaksar

Presented is a rigorous solution for the three-dimensional stability analysis of vertical shafts (excavations) subjected to the self-weight of the soil based on the upper-bound theorem of limit analysis approach. A rigid-block translational collapse mechanism is assumed, with energy dissipation taking place along planar velocity discontinuities. This mechanism is optimized to obtain the critical failure mechanism giving the lowest factor of safety for stability of shafts. Based on comparisons with other solutions, the method is generally found to be accurate in predicting the stability of vertical cuts.

Jan 1, 2006

By Ke Yang

Drilled shafts are widely used as foundation system for sound walls to resist lateral loads. The design method based on the ultimate lateral capacity, such as Broms method, is often used for sound wall foundation design. Allowable Stress Design (ASD) is currently used for deep foundation design. However, by October 2007, all states Department of Transportations are required to use the Load Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) approach for the design of foundation in highway projects. There is a need to develop a calibrated resistance factor in LRFD lateral design of drilled shafts supporting sound barrier walls. This paper provides resistance factors for design of laterally loaded drilled shafts supporting sound walls using Broms method based on the study using reliability based method and fitting to ASD method. Additionally, the resistance factors for static lateral load tests are recommended. Furthermore, a methodology to update the resistance factors using Bayesian approach by incorporating the on-site full-scale lateral load test results is presented. To illustrate the Bayesian update methodology, two lateral load tests in Colorado were employed to develop the updated resistance factors.

Jan 1, 2007

By Van E. Komurka

This paper presents a cost comparison of the driven pile foundations for two large Wisconsin Department of Transportation (?WisDOT?) projects in Milwaukee, Wisconsin: the Marquette Interchange South Leg, and the Canal Street Viaduct. The projects? geology is fairly similar, but their methods/approaches to pile foundation design and installation differ. Although the Marquette Interchange South Leg had deeper poor soils, its pile design was more-cost-effective than the Canal Street Viaduct?s. Potential reasons for cost differences between the projects are identified, and the effect of the different design and construction approaches on economics is discussed.

Jan 1, 2009

By Mark X. Haley

Foundation design and construction in Boston has changed dramatically during the past 10 years. Prior to 1985, the primary foundation element in Boston, where deep foundations are required, was driven end-bearing piles. Since 1985, drilled or excavated high capacity foundation elements have been utilized more frequently. This paper will provide a historic perspective of their use and a summary of design parameters for elements installed and founded in the bedrock. TOPOGRAPHY Boston was founded in 1630 by the Massachusetts Bay Company of John Winthrop and his hearty band of Puritans. The settlement was chosen for: ? its safe harbor, ? abundant source of fresh water, and ? peninsula setting offering protection of the ocean on almost all sides with high ground for fortification. These three factors were a direct result of past geologic processes that created the Boston Basin by erosion of the soft bedrock underlying this area as compared to the harder granite rock to the north, west and south. As the glacial ice sheets melted and moved northward, various soil types were deposited. During ice sheet re-advancement the hills and islands of Boston took on their precolonial shapes. The Trimont, consisting of Beacon, Mt. Vernon and Pemberton Hill, rose to 150 ft above sea level with the smaller Copps and Fort Hill to the north and south.

Jan 1, 1994

By Christian Hoyme, Jochen Maurer

Most of the current foundation projects are suffering from disconnected information silos. In the first silo there is the planning of the project with corresponding data, presented by paper or digital drawings. Here will Building Information Modeling (BIM) be one of the trends for the future. We will see more and more projects leaving the “old way” of 2D drawings and moving into 3D planning including metadata of the foundations. But even with a perfect BIM model of a jobsite, we are not at final end of digitalization. While execution of the project at the jobsite, a second data silo is evolving. Data collected directly from construction equipment and manual measurements is currently undervalued in most projects. Paper is passed to the equipment operator and major data from measurements on site are noted on paper and digitized afterwards. Automatically collected data is not be used to create site progress reports or similar report. So, the real “data” just flows around without connection to any other data already existing in projects. And then the third silo arises: The documentation of the project. Data collected on paper es reentered to create some basic documentation of the work handed over to the client. Spreadsheet software is still the “tool-to-be-used” to create at least some documentation. Finally, the documentation is not connected to the data created while planning and not connected to the automatically collected data from the jobsite. A connected jobsite in the foundation industry must link these information silos and have to create a full data-workflow from the design through the execution to the as-built documentation. INTRODUCTION Building information modelling (BIM) is currently the most popular term of construction business in Germany and probably all over the world. But as often there are many different definitions out there and everyone has his own definition or at least understanding what BIM is about. But for sure it is the most relevant for the construction industry in the near future. Most popular is the digital twin for the upper structure of a building. In most cases the BIM models just shows the building itself, but there is more to be implemented. For example: projects where a special foundation is needed, BIM should include also the foundation elements with meta data. There are several advantages. Not only the clash detection of anchors, but also the possibilities to check the interaction with neighbor constructions, power lines and so on are a use case. For sure most of the special foundation elements are not relevant for the whole lifecycle of a building. But during construction and later the demolition the information about the hidden elements is important and gives a benefit to all stakeholders. In the future there will be not the question: “What is already in the ground?”. The risk for following construction projects on the same ground will be minimized.

Jan 1, 2019

By Issa S. Oweis

Limestone is a sedimentary rock composed primarily of calcite (calcium carbonate). In the presence of an aqueous solution of carbon dioxide (carbonic acid) bicarbonate radicals (2HCO3)- are produced that are highly soluble. The same type of reactions occur in terrains where dolomite (calcium magnesium bicarbonate) reacts with carbonic acid to produce highly soluble bicarbonates (4HCO3)-. The source of carbon dioxide is the small content in rainfall but to a large extent from the organics in the soil. The solution activity depends on many factors including the content of carbon in the rock, acidity of soil water, groundwater velocity and other factors. The resulting features are referred to in literature as sinkholes, solution channels, caves, karstic topography, and cavernous limestone. The presence of solution features affect the shafts in several ways: (a) the shaft resistance is affected by voids along the shaft, (b) concreting of the shaft should consider the presence of voids along the shaft, and (c) the shaft base may be in close proximity to a solution feature that may cause future collapse under structural loads. Methods to mitigate such effects include verification of rock to below the base (vertically and laterally). Cavities are stable by virtue of arching in the rock. Under the action of end bearing from a shaft, the arch may collapse depending on its proximity to the base of the shaft and the strength of the rock. This paper focuses on this issue. Finite Element analyses are conducted to relate shaft end load and bearing area that will produce failure based on given rock properties, size and location of cavity. Failure is defined as settlement of the base equivalent to 5% of shaft socket diameter. The software Plaxis is used for analysis. The rock is considered as c-f material derived based on Hoek-Brown failure criteria (2002 edition) that is based on Geological Strength Index (GSI).

Jan 1, 2009

By SungWon Park

The efficiency of the current design methods for computing pile resistances is evaluated using field load-settlement tests results. Twelve load-settlement test data for drilled shafts and bored piles were obtained from the literature. These load-test data were fitted using the ?t-z? method. Subsequently, the ultimate resistances were evaluated based upon the failure criteria from following methods: (1) the Davisson?s approach and (2) settlement corresponding to 5% or 10% shaft diameter approach. The ultimate resistances for these drilled shafts and bored piles were also predicted using methods based on the design code from North America (United States, Canada), Europe, and Asia (Japan). The pile resistances determined from field load-settlement tests were compared with those calculated using the design codes. The comparisons show that most design codes predict a conservative resistance for drilled shafts and bored piles. However, in the case of drilled shafts, we find that some of the design codes can over-predict the resistance and, therefore, should be applied cautiously. This research also shows that ?t-z? method can be successfully used to predict the ultimate resistance and the load transfer mechanism for a single pile.

Jan 1, 2009

By Robert Bittner

The following is a report on the development of two unique and separate cofferdam systems used in the construction of the marine foundations for the I-205 Columbia River Bridge at Portland, Oregon for the Oregon Department of Transportation. The first of these two systems utilized interlocking H-pile 100 ft long to form a cofferdam 145 ft by 58 ft in plan and 100 ft deep. The second system consisted of two immense bell shaped steel forms. The larger of the two forms was 83 ft by 66 ft in plan, 62 ft high and weighed 450 tons. This form was externally stiffened for a designed hydrostatic head of 54 ft. Both forms were designed, except for the top 14 ft, to be set and stripped in one solidly welded unit. The supporting geological formation for the bridge foundations is the Troutdale, a cemented sand and gravel. This formation is at the ground surface on the Washington Shore and slopes downward to a depth of 115 ft below normal high water at about mid-channel. In this area the Troutdale formation is covered with a layer of fine to medium sand 90 to 100 ft thick. It was the variable depth of the Troutdale which determined the two types of foundations and the corresponding to the two cofferdam systems.

Jan 1, 2013

By Chu E. Ho

Jet grout column formation at large depths are prone to several uncertainties, such as inaccuracy in setting out boreholes, drilling deviation, soil variability and reduced jetting energy at the nozzle. This would result in shorter cutting distance of the jet, with potential lack of interlock between grouted columns. A design strategy for mitigating the risk should include a soil investigation program aimed at discovering potential variability in soil conditions at the locations of jetting. Determination of soil strength profiles with depth would be useful for evaluation of jetting parameters and prediction of the achievable cutting distance at any depth. Selection of design column spacing should include allowance for setting out accuracy, verticality of the boreholes and the achievable jet cutting distance. For deep jet grouting operations, it would be necessary to take into account the energy losses at the nozzle inlet; however the increase in the presiding pressure at the nozzle outlet at depth is small relative to the range of jetting pressures commonly employed and would not affect the cutting distance to any significant degree. Design column spacing should not be so close as to cause problems with ?masking? which may lead to localized ungrouted zones of soil. For effective field control, boreholes should be cased up to the top elevation of the grouted zone so that the orientation of the borehole can be measured prior to grout injection. An analytical equation for calculating the cutting distance is proposed for adjusting jetting parameters where necessary to compensate for drilling deviation and changes in soil conditions. It is preferable that jet grouting trials be executed at elevations that correspond to the actual production jet grouting depths for accurate evaluation of jet cutting performance.

Jan 1, 2008