Search Documents

By Jr NeSmith

"Augered-cast-in-place (ACIP) pile installation technology has matured extensively since the first auger, pressure grouted pile was patented in 1959. The current technology allows for successful pile installation across a variety of stratigraphies to meet various project load resistance requirements. This paper presents an overview of current ACIP techniques by comparing a number of case histories in a variety of geologic settings from Eastern Pennsylvania, New York City and New Jersey to demonstrate ACIP pile constructability in soft soils as well as the penetration, and resulting significant loads resisted, of ACIP piles in dense soils and intermediate geo-materials. Geologic settings that will be discussed include the Piedmont and Coastal Plain geologic provinces as well as glacial till deposits. Keywords: Deep Foundations, Piles, Augercast, Augered-cast-in-place, Auger pressure grouted, ACIP, APGINTRODUCTIONThe author, along with two colleagues, published an article in Deep Foundations magazine (NeSmith et al, 2013) which described a number of the advances in equipment, techniques, installation monitoring and post-construction testing that have expanded the geologies in which Augered Cast-in-place (ACIP) piles are installed as well as increasing their efficiency in some traditional ACIP pile geologies. The author uses the term efficiency to refer to the load resisted by a pile of a certain diameter and the increased efficiency noted refers to increased allowable loads over those traditionally resisted by piles of certain diameter (or a reduction in pile diameter from that which was traditionally used to support a certain design load). The performance and installation of ACIP piles in a variety of geologies in the Northeastern U.S. are discussed herein.PIEDMONT PHYSIGRAPHIC PROVINCEThe Piedmont physiographic province stretches from Alabama to the east through Georgia and up the east coast, just west of the Coastal Plain to Pennsylvania and New York (Brown, 2002). It generally consists of soils weathered in place from the underlying bedrock, which is typically a combination of granite, schist and gneiss depending on the location within the province. The author’s experience in the Northeastern US has been on sites where alluvial or coastal plain soils overly the residual soils and partially weathered or intact rock of the Piedmont. The example presented here, from a site on Walnut St in Philadelphia PA, is representative of these projects."

Jan 1, 2016

By David Wilshaw

Continuous Surface Wave (CSW) testing has been the “next big thing” in ground characterization for the last 25 years. The technique uses surface geophones to measure the speed at which Rayleigh waves (generated by a vibratory source) travel through the ground over a range of frequencies. The velocity at which surface waves travel through the ground is directly related to ground stiffness; the velocity of shorter wavelengths is influenced by the stiffness of shallower soil layers, while the velocity of longer wavelengths is influenced by the stiffness of deeper layers. Measuring the surface wave velocity over a range of frequencies, therefore, allows a stiffness / depth profile to be produced. Using the small-strain stiffness data measured by the CSW technique greatly improves the accuracy of simple limit state analyses; the data are also of sufficient quality for use in Finite Element modelling. Nonetheless, the technique has suffered from a perception of high cost, low productivity, and poor repeatability. An improved Advanced Continuous Surface Wave (ACSW) testing system has been developed by Ground Stiffness Surveys in the United Kingdom, has been deployed there commercially for several years, and is now available in the United States. ACSW uses an automated electronic control system that generates vibrations (from a purpose designed and manufactured portable seismic “shaker”) at different frequencies, measured across a 3m (10-foot) array of geophones, linked to a robust data acquisition and analysis software package. The range of applications in geologic and geotechnical site characterization includes rapid preliminary non-intrusive site assessments (utilizing published soil correlations); stiffness profiling to detect discrete layers (such as a variation in rockhead); average stiffness profiling for earthwork or ground improvement control testing, Working Platform stability assessments, foundation settlement analysis, rock quality and rippability assessments, and void detection.

Oct 1, 2022

By Seth Robertson, Daniel Belardo, Travis Coleman

Thermal Integrity Profiling (TIP) is a non-destructive method used to evaluate drilled deep foundation integrity. This integrity testing method is specified more frequently, and is becoming an industry standard in the transportation and private construction sectors. This testing method utilizes heat generated during the concrete/grout curing process to assess deep foundation integrity over the evaluated length. With compilation of the measured temperature versus time and installation records, a model of the Effective Average Radius versus measurement depth is generated. The generated effective shaft model is highly dependent on specific construction details, subjective modeling parameters, and proper interpretation of concrete/soil heat dissipation characteristics. Key components of the TIP analysis include both qualitative and quantitative assessments. Qualitatively, variations or sharp reductions in temperature profiles may indicate potential anomalous regions. Quantitatively, a correlation is established between measured temperatures and estimated Effective Radii for subsequent integrity evaluation. Best practices in processing the TIP measurements are presented, including selecting the optimal time for analysis, normalizing the thermal profile, and proper interpretation of potential anomalous regions. Recommendations for implementing mitigation efforts and interpretation of the TIP results are presented.

Sep 8, 2021

By Robert Bachus, Jamey Rosen, Fabio Santillan, Georgette Hlepas

"A seepage barrier of length 4,800 feet and maximum depth 144 feet is being installed at Bolivar Dam in Ohio. This project is owned by the United States Army Corps of Engineers and contracted to Treviicos South. Many data types are being collected, synthesized and analyzed on a nearly real-time basis to monitor and track dam construction using several technologies including an enterprise relational database and web-based Geographical Information Systems. These data are being collected by both the owner and contractor and managed by the data subcontractor, Geosyntec Consultants. Each of the owner and contractor brings their own list of goals and desires to the data management program, and the subcontractor’s duty is to address these goals with minimal compromise by either party. The owner requires comprehensive, transparent and timely access to data in both “executive summary” and detailed formats. The contractor requires immediate analysis of disparate data to determine (for example) if a given excavation meets the specified tolerance and continuity requirements. This paper will describe the tools and methods used to store, analyze and visualize these data and discuss how each party’s needs were met in a collaborative system.INTRODUCTIONThe 4,800 foot long seepage barrier under construction at Bolivar Dam requires the collection, organization, and sharing of several types of data. These data include drawings and borehole logs that existed prior to construction; data collected during construction (seepage barrier panel composition and verticality data, slurry quality control and quality assurance data, grouting records, etc.); and instrumentation data collected and reviewed throughout and beyond construction. Each of these data streams require input and review from the Owner (United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), responsible for quality assurance and the ultimate consumer of the data), the Contractor (Treviicos South, responsible for the construction of the seepage barrier, its quality control and analysis of the data per the Contract Specifications), and the Data Management Subcontractor (Geosyntec Consultants, responsible for organizing and presenting the data to meet the needs of the Owner and Contractor). While all parties work with the same common goal, i.e.: producing a high quality product in an efficient manner making dam safety paramount during construction, and require immediate and comprehensive access to these data, the needs and desires of the parties differ. The challenge presented to the Data Management Subcontractor is to synthesize these data into a series of tools and reports that meet each of these needs."

Jan 1, 2017

By Ronaldo Luna, Donald Deardorff

"The use of load and resistance factor design (LRFD) is well documented since the 1960s for structural applications when it was first adopted into the American Concrete Institute Building Code in 1963 and was established for geotechnical applications by the Danish Geotechnical Institute about the same time under the name of Limit State Design (LSD).The Federal Highway Administration required all federally funded projects to use the LRFD method by 2007. Due to this funding requirement, recent LRFD research for geotechnical applications has focused on common bridge foundations (i.e., driven or drilled shafts), resulting in good documentation for design using these methods. Unfortunately, the practicing geotechnical engineer does not intuitively know how to create resistance factors for deep foundations systems that have design methodologies and installation techniques significantly different from driven or drilled shaft foundation systems.Helical anchors typically use semiempirical methods for preliminary capacity design and a torque correlation methodology during installation to verify required capacity. Here we provide basic information on the LRFD methodology for helical anchor design. Additionally, the First- Order Second Moment (FOSM) method is applied to a previous helical anchor study (Hoyt and Clemence 1989) to determine resistance factors for an ultimate tension capacity strength limit state.MethodologyThe concept of the LRFD method is to establish factors for both the load and resistance that account for uncertainties using probability theory. The factors increase the nominal load and/or decrease the nominal resistance such that the probability of failure is an acceptable value. LRFD also accounts for the effects of load combinations (dead, live, seismic, wind, etc.) by determining the probability of the combined occurrence. The general form of the LRFD equation used by American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) is:"

Jan 1, 2009

"1.0 DESCRIPTIONThis work consists of furnishing all necessary labor, equipment, and materials to install prefabricated vertical (wick) drains in the ground in accordance with the Plans and as specified herein.2.0 REFERENCED CODES AND STANDARDSASTM D4716-08 Standard Test Method for Determining the (In-plane) Flow Rate per Unit Width and Hydraulic Transmissivity of a Geosynthetic Using a Constant HeadASTM D4632-08 Standard Test Method for Grab Breaking Load and Elongation of GeotextilesASTM D4533-11 Standard Test Method for Trapezoid Tearing Strength of GeotextilesASTM D4491-99a Standard Test Methods for Water Permeability of Geotextiles by Permittivity (2009)ASTM D4751-04 Standard Test Method for Determining Apparent Opening Size (A.O.S.) of a GeotextileASTM 6918-09 Standard Test Method for Testing Vertical Strip Drains in the Crimped Condition3.0 QUALIFICATIONSThe Contractor shall have successfully completed a minimum of five wick drain installation projects in similar ground conditions, and installed not less than 5,000,000 linear feet (1,525,000 linear m) of wick drain in the past five years. The Contractor shall have a minimum of five continuous years of wick drain installation experience."

Jan 1, 2014

By Liiban A. Affi

The most difficult task of designing multilevel tieback walls for deep excavation support is the determination of lateral stresses. These lateral stresses act not only on the shored height, but also on the embedded portion of the soldier pile, all the way down to the pile tip. Examples of lateral stresses include uniform surcharge load (soil spoils or equipment), strip load surcharge from Cooper E80 (train loads), line load surcharge (exterior footing or retaining walls), and point loads (cell tower). In this paper we will discuss the various surcharges, do step by step example calculations and show how to take the total lateral stress output and present the design pressures for direct use by the substructural designer. Included is a case study from a project Anaheim Hills, California, USA.

Jan 1, 2010

By Brandon T. Buschmeier, Sonia S. Swift, Michael P. Walker, Frederic Masse

"Ground improvement has undoubtedly become a cost-efficient and effective solution to support the development of poor soil sites. Ground improvement elements, such as Controlled Modulus Columns (CMCs), replace piles by improving the subsurface soils and reducing settlement. As ground improvement becomes more popular, the applications become more creative and ground improvement is being used to control settlements under large structures with tight settlement tolerances.In this paper, we will discuss the use of CMCs to support two (2) large industrial warehouses where soil conditions would normally lead to the use of deep foundations and a structural slab, grade beams, and hung utilities to prevent excess settlement. Each of the sites we will discuss had poor soil conditions in the form of very soft or compressible soil, heterogeneous fill of varying thickness, and environmental contamination. At each site, we developed a design that would allow for the use of Controlled Modulus Columns (CMCs) with a Load Transfer Platform (LTP) in place of the previously-proposed deep foundations. The use of the CMCs also allowed for the use of spread footings and slab on grade construction. The benefits of this value-engineering approach include economy in the foundation system, risk mitigation by not disturbing contaminated soils requiring expensive removal, and ease of access for future sub-slab upgrades with new tenants. Additionally, the use of recycled concrete aggregate as an LTP is more environmentally friendly than placing structural slabs with heavy steel reinforcement.Designing for the settlement of large warehouses is challenging because it requires changing how we typically perform our designs. For most structures, the slab loads are relatively light when compared to the footing loads, whereas for warehouses, the slab is heavily loaded compared to the relatively light footing loads. Thus, it becomes essential to perform three-dimensional analyses to confirm that the proposed CMC layout will provide uniform support of the slab and footing across a variety of loading scenarios (loaded bays vs unloaded or travel bays). The complexity of the designs for these warehouses generated interest in conducting large area load tests over a grid of multiple columns. The performance of the area load tests provided invaluable information on the effectiveness of the LTP and CMC spacing. In this paper, we present a general description of CMC ground improvement, the differences between ground improvement and traditional pile foundations, our typical design methodology for CMC design, and the modifications to that methodology for warehouses."

Jan 1, 2017

By Renzo D. Verastegui, T. C. Michael Law, Sitotaw Y. Fantaye, Alfredas Daugiala

"When completed, 520 Park Avenue will amend the Manhattan skyline and be one of the most prestigious high rise towers in New York City. The 52-story condominium building is located on a 60 by 100 feet lot on East 60th Street between Park and Madison Avenues. The geographically complex site is bounded by two fragile 5-story masonry buildings on the east and west, a mid-rise building on the north, and a New York City subway tunnel on the south. To add to this complexity, the ambitious development required 70 to 80 feet of excavation, mostly below groundwater level in highly permeable rock, to accommodate four levels of cellars. The new building also cantilevers 24 feet over a five-story historic building on the east. The limited footprint of the building coupled with large compressive and tensile axial loads, considerable base shear and over-turning moments, and the required deep excavation, presented unique foundation challenges. This paper describes how the challenges were solved with an innovative combination of permanent secant pile walls and drilled shafts.INTRODUCTIONThe project site is located at 45 East 60th Street, on the block bounded by East 61st Street to the north, East 60th Street to the south, Park Avenue to the east, and Madison Avenue to the west. As shown in Fig. 1, the site is surrounded on three sides by buildings sensitive to differential settlement. In addition, a NYCT underground subway structure lies below East 60th Street approximately 13 feet south of the site. The base of the subway structure is approximately 42 feet below the street.The project consisted of constructing a 52-story tall building. A portion of the superstructure cantilevers 24 feet over an adjacent five-story historic building. The underground construction for the new building involved a four-level basement, extending about 60 feet below ground surface. The excavation subgrade is much deeper than both the subway structure and the adjacent shallowly-founded building foundations."

Jan 1, 2016

By Dominic Ammon, Mark Rothbauer, Paul Landers P. E.

Across the Potomac River from the location of the DFI47 Annual Conference (October 2022), in Alexandria, VA, two large permanent anchored walls with a decorative shotcrete face were recently constructed for the North Hill project, a new multi-family and townhome development. The project was executed with a design-build approach for the Fairfax County Redevelopment and Housing Authority with review by the Fairfax County Geotechnical Review Board. The project was constructed in highly variable Potomac group sediments that include high plasticity clay/silt terrace deposits overlying coarser grained materials. The soils were over consolidated and exhibited potential for slickensides from relief of horizontal stresses from past erosion. The wall system was designed to include deep soldier piles and permanent long strand anchors considering past slope instability in the area. As the construction progressed, problematic soil conditions and water issues required modifications to drilling methods. The two permanent walls spanned 800 and 1,000 feet long with a maximum height reaching 40 feet.

Oct 1, 2022

By Bengt H. Fellenius

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

Jan 1, 1991

By Michael Kynett, Francke Walberg, Richard Millet, Khaled Chowdhury, Mary Perlea

"Cutoff walls are the most common seepage improvement measure for levee flood control projects throughout California’s Central Valley. Cutoff walls are widely used because they can be implemented within an existing right of way in either heavily urbanized areas with limited access, or in high-value crop agricultural areas. The most commonly used seepage cutoff wall types are soil-bentonite (SB), soilcement- bentonite (SCB), and cement-bentonite (CB). Contract values for cutoff wall rehabilitation projects in the Central Valley range from several millions of dollars to hundreds of millions of dollars, and play a significant role in the reduction of flood risk in urban and rural areas. However, recentlycompleted construction of several levee improvement projects has shown limitations and inconsistencies among the commonly used technical specifications for construction of seepage cutoff walls. These limitations were evaluated by practicing engineers involved in different stages of cutoff wall design and construction. This paper describes the specification areas that typically generate design and construction issues. Recommended improvements to specifications are suggested to address these issues. The paper’s topics include: the applicability of the different types of cutoff wall materials and construction methods, quality control testing requirements, backfill gradation requirements, mixing procedures, and settlement criteria for backfill.INTRODUCTIONFlood control projects on the Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers in the Central Valley region of Northern California consist of a large system of reservoirs, bypasses, and levees. The thousands of miles of levees within the system were largely constructed and raised by local entities as need arose; this construction occurred prior to the development of modern design and construction techniques. The majority of these levees were initially constructed to protect land for agricultural development; however, a significant portion of these areas have become or will soon be urbanized. This urbanization has historically occurred in locations right up to the levee footprint. This expedient form of historical levee construction, when combined with adverse riverine geomorphology, urban development, and productive agricultural regions, has led to a levee systems with severe seepage performance issues in a real-estate-constrained setting."

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 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 Francisco A. Flores, José L. Aguirre, Héctor A. de la Fuente, Erika Bernal, Jorge Arroyo-Esquedla

This paper presents the analysis, design, and construction of soil improvement for storage tanks foundation support at a site in Tabasco, Mexico. A total of 980 Rammed Aggregate Piers of 12.5 m in length and 0.5 m in diameter were designed and constructed to support four storage tanks. The soil conditions at the site generally consist of loose to medium dense silty/clayey sand to about 8m depth, underlain by very loose to medium dense silty/clayey sand with seams of very soft clay. The use of Rammed Aggregate Piers induced densification of the soil to increase its stiffness and reduce the liquefaction potential to control both static and dynamic induced settlements. Standard Penetration Test (SPT) and Cone Penetration Test (CPTu) explorations were performed prior to and post soil improvement to compare the liquefaction potential and the Factors of Safety associated with the two conditions. Finally, the soil improvement installation rate is presented. Soil improvement using Rammed Aggregate Piers represented a suitable alternative to support storage tanks foundation in potentially liquefiable areas.

Oct 1, 2022

By A. R. Dover

The Richmond San Rafael Bridge (Figure 1) is a 4.3 mile long major toll bridge span across northern San Francisco Bay. Tutor-Saliba/Koch/Tidewater (TSKT) conducted a comprehensive seismic retrofit, which was at the time Caltrans? largest-ever construction contract at $484 million. The robust foundation retrofit design of 11 bridge piers included the installation of 26 new, large diameter (126 to 162 inch OD, wall thickness 1.5 to 2.25 inches) CIDH and CISS piles, with steel pipe piles installed to tip elevations of Elev. ?140 to -220 ft, in water depths up to 70 feet. The open-ended steel pipe piles had initial sections ranging from 71 to 172 feet long, with full lengths that extended to the bay bottom and then through 100 to 130 feet of marine sediments to top of bedrock. The marine soils of most interest consisted mainly of soft to firm Young Bay Mud (YBM), a silty, moderately-sensitive clay common to SF Bay. A key constructability issue was the prediction of pipe piles ?running? under self weight (198 to 625 kips in air) and pile driving hammer weight (IHC S-500 with total assembly weight of 322 kips). The term "pile running" is used to describe the penetration of the pile into the soil due to the self-weight of the pile only. This issue was critical because 1) there was limited head room under the bridge deck, and 2) if piles run too deep, the pile splicing on several piles would be problematic (the lowest desirable pile top elevation after running was +10 ft). While running measurements are sometimes made during marine/nearshore construction, there is little published data on predicted vs. actual running. This paper discusses the running prediction under self weight for 26 piles, and the methodology used in developing the predictions, which ranged from 15 to 94 ft of penetration below mudline. Pile running was recorded and compared with predicted values. The prediction methodology was quite good, and no significant constructability problems were encountered. The authors ?tweaked? the model to provide a slightly improved prediction method. The paper presents the model, predictions, observations, and discusses important lessons learned.

Jan 1, 2006

By Kiyotaka Ohno, Nobushige Yasuoka, Yosuke Hioki

"The diameter of improved columns adopted by the original DJM Method had been 1000 mm, however, in order to comply with the social need for construction cost reduction, the Expanded Dry Jet Mixing (EX-DJM) Method with maximum column diameter expanded to 1300 mm was developed between 1998 and 2001 and has been widely applied since then. From the first application of EX-DJM in January 2002 for a first construction project, the total volume of improved soil has reached 325,000 m3 in 17 projects up to September 2014. Because of the advantages of the EX-DJM such as reduction of construction costs and periods leading to reduction in the number of improved columns, adoption of this method is expected to increase in the future. This paper describes the advantages of the EX-DJM, its construction results and case examples including those applied to restoration projects after the Great East Japan Earthquake, 2011.1. BACKGROUND OF DEVELOPMENTThe Dry Jet Mixing (DJM) Method is a soil stabilization method in which a powdery or granular binder is pneumatically fed into and mixed with soft soil to induce chemical reactions that stabilize and strengthen the soil. It was developed by government - private collaboration in Japan between 1977 and 1979. Up to March 2014, the total volume of soil improved by DJM method reached 33,500,000 m3. The initial diameter of improved columns of the original DJM Method was 1000 mm. In order to comply with the social need for construction cost reduction, the Expanded Dry Jet Mixing (EX-DJM) Method with maximum column diameter 1300 mm was developed between 1998 and 2001.2. ADVANTAGES OF EX-DJMThe construction equipment for the EX-DJM consists of two major parts, which are DJM machine and binder plant are shown in Fig. 1.The construction machine is of double mixing-shaft type with its column diameter expanded to 1200mm or 1300mm. In association with the increase in the column diameter, the binder feeder has also increased its discharge rate by approximately 1.69 times. Same as the increase rate of the area of original diameter 1000mm to diameter 1300mm are shown in Fig. 4."

Jan 1, 2015

By Lassaad Hazzar

The ultimate lateral resistance of piles in cohesive soil is studied using the well-known finite difference code, FLAC2D. The Modified Cam Clay (MCC) constitutive relation is adopted in the analyses to model the cohesive soil behavior, whereas the structural pile model with three degree of freedoms, available in FLAC2D library, is adopted to model the piles. The reliability of Broms's method, still used in the current design practice of piles under lateral loads, is verified. Comparisons between the ultimate lateral resistances of piles and those deduced from the graphs proposed by Broms (1964) are presented in graphs. Different factors thought to affect the lateral resistance of piles in cohesive soil, not adequately considered in Broms's method, such as clay stiffness, pile length, pile diameter and axial load are parametrically studied. A special concern is devoted to elucidate the effects of over-consolidation ratio (OCR) on the ultimate lateral resistance of piles in cohesive soil.

Aug 1, 2013

By Eric Lindquist, John Compagnone, Gabriel Carvajal

"Condon-Johnson & Associates, Inc. (CJA) with the assistance of design consultant, Brierley Associates, designed and installed a water tight shoring system utilizing several ground improvement techniques jointly. Prior to the installation of the shoring system, a test program consisting of the installation and testing of 7 jet grout columns; 1 soil mix panel; 7 soil anchors and 3 tie downs was performed to verify design assumptions. State-of-the-art quality control measures were employed throughout the project.The shoring system consisted of:•,Deep Soil Mixing (DSM) wall utilizing triple axis tooling to install overlapping columns along the perimeter of the proposed excavation to a treatment depth of 54 feet.•,Installation of steel piles in DSM to provide rigidity to the wall.•,Installation of a jet grout bottom seal, installed from surface to a depth of 58 feet below existing grade.•,Installation of 153 soil anchors, 1-1/4” diameter and 47’-6” length, to tie the jet grout bottom seal to the native soil below to resist hydrostatic uplift, installed from existing grade to a depth of 91 feet.•,Installation of walers and pipe struts for internal bracing•,Installation and stressing of 117 tie downs, 1” diameter and 16 ft length, to tie the pump station mat slab to the jet grout bottom seal, installed from inside the excavated pit.Subsurface conditions at the site consist of uncontrolled fill materials to a depth of 20 feet comprised of sandy silt and clayey sand. The native soils underlying the fill generally consist of soft and compressible lean clay and silt with varying amounts of sands to a depth ranging from approximately 44 to 54 feet below ground surface, which in turn are underlain by dense to very dense silty sand. The groundwater elevation at the site is approximately 8 feet below ground surface.This paper covers the design aspects, construction, and quality control measures undertaken by the geotechnical contractor, with supporting figures.INTRODUCTIONThe owner, County Sanitation District No. 2 of Los Angeles County, designed upgrades to their existing Long Beach Main Pumping Plant Facility. The upgrades consist of a new pump station that includes a reinforced concrete below-grade wet well and dry well, a two-story operations building, two 78-inch diameter pipe inlets, two 42-inch diameter discharge pipelines connecting the existing manifold, two pipe junction structures, two insert-type junction structures, and electrical transformers. This paper focuses on the excavation shoring for the new pump station. The original shoring design concept for the pump station excavation illustrated on the contract plans consisted of pressed in sheet piles, a jet grouted bottom seal with soil anchors, 2 levels of internal bracing, and tie-down anchors to resist hydraulic uplift forces on the buried pump station."

Jan 1, 2017

By Harry Schnabel, Mitchell L. Fong, Douglas R. Jenevein, Thomas S. Lee

"The Warm Springs Extension (WSX) is one of a series of projects that will eventually extend the Bay Area Rapid Transit System (BART) from Fremont to San Jose, California. A cut and cover tunnel was used for a portion of the extension that runs through Fremont Central Park to minimize the impacts that an at-grade railway would have on the Park. A cement deep soil mix (CDSM) wall was selected by the engineer as the preferred method of providing structural support and groundwater cut-off for a portion of the tunnel where it passes through an important aquifer and near Lake Elizabeth. In addition to the CDSM wall, a jet grout plug was constructed at the base of the tunnel to provide a complete groundwater cut-off.This paper will discuss the unique quality assurance and quality control measures taken for the soil mix wall and jet grout plug as well as the methods used to repair leaks and mitigate water seepage through the exposed wall and grout plug.PROJECT DESCRIPTIONThe Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) Warm Springs Extension (WSX) project is located south of the existing Fremont BART station extending 8.9-km (5.4 miles) to Warm Springs District in Fremont, California. The WSX project has been divided into two contracts with different delivery methods. In order to minimize impacts to Fremont Central Park, a subway was selected at this portion of the alignment under a conventional design/bid/build contract.The Fremont Central Park Subway (FCPS) which begins on the south side of Walnut Ave and ends just north of Paseo Padre Parkway and is about 2.3-km (1.4 miles) long. Fig. 1 shows the entire WSX and the FCPS project. The FCPS contract consists of a cut-and-cover subway box, subway transition structures, ventilation structures and a section of which transverses Lake Elizabeth (a man-made lake). The geologic conditions consist of fill (sand, silt, clay and construction debris), Young Alluvium (clay and silt), Basin Deposits (clay, silt, and sand), and Older Alluvium (sand and gravel) as shown in Fig. 2.HYDROGEOLOGY OF THE PROJECT SITEThe FCPS is dominated by two geologic features - the Hayward Fault and the Above Hayward Fault (AHF) aquifer. The AHF aquifer provides a significant source and storage of water for the local water district. The underground subway will penetrate this aquifer and is up to 11m (36 ft) below the groundwater table. No groundwater was allowed to be pumped during construction of the subway box by Alameda County Water District (ACWD). To facilitate excavation for the subway box, temporary cut-off walls and a grout plug were designed to retain and resist high differential hydraulic pressure. The following section describes the selection of a deep soil mixing method for water cutoff. Design of the grout plug has been described in Lee, et al., 2011 and Fong and Lee, 2009, and is not the focus of this paper."

Jan 1, 2015