Search Documents

By Jörn M. Seitz

Dynamic load testing is employed with ever increasing frequency to estimate the strength and elastic settlement behavior of piles of all types. For dynamic loading ram masses up to 20 Mg have been used and pile resistance forces up to 30 MN have been activated. Strains and accelerations induced by the impact are measured near the pile top and a load-set curve is computed by the so-called CAPWAP method. This paper briefly describes both the necessary equipment and other details of the dynamic tests and the available analytical tools for data interpretation. Furthermore the need for further research and the current status of standardization will be discussed. This paper also presents the results from several static and dynamic correlation tests on cast-in-situ piles of up to 2 m diameter and 64 m length. The results demonstrate the economical and technical feasibility of this test method.

Jan 1, 1987

Jan 1, 1993

Jan 1, 1992

By Edmund J. Cardoza

WELCOME TO THE DEEP FOUNDATIONS INSTITUTE 26TH ANNUAL CONFERENCE AND WELCOME ESPECIALLY TO THIS SEMINAR ON NON-DESTRUCTIVE TESTING OF DRILLED SHAFTS, PRESENTED BY MEMBERS OF THE DFI DRILLED SHAFT COMMITTEE. MY NAME IS ED CARDOZA; I AM A VICE PRESIDENT WITH THE MILLGARD CORPORATION, A DRILLED SHAFT CONSTRUCTOR FOCUSING PRIMARLY IN THE EASTERN HALF OF THE UNITED STATES.

Jan 1, 2001

By Peter J. Nicholson

The methods of reinforcement to be discussed in this paper are all insitu methods, ones that can be used on the soil structure as it exists in the ground, and do not rely on excavation and replacement of the soil. Current practice in the United States, as well as new ideas and methods, will be discussed as they relate to slope stability, retaining walls, and to other uses such as control of mine or cavity related subsidence and to liquefaction control under existing structures. The method is based on the concept of "nailing" or reinforcing the soil in place, and thereby causing a mass of soil to act as a coherent unit. When performed properly, a true gravity structure can be constructed, one that will remain intact under both horizontal and vertical loadings and that will also resist vibrational and seismic loadings.

Jan 1, 1991

"1.0 INTRODUCTIONThese Guidelines reflect the state-of-the-practice of the Deep Mixing Method (DMM) in North America. DMM is an in situ mixing process that breaks down the soil structure; injects binders, fillers and reagents into the soil; and blends them with the soil. DMM is also commonly referred to as Soil Mixing. The final properties of the treated soil in situ are a function of the composition of the native soils and groundwater, the binders introduced, the mixing methods and energy, and the conditions and time of curing. Treated soils generally have increased strength and stiffness and/or reduced permeability relative to the native soils.This document addresses DMM performed by rotating single and multiple axis mixing tools, rotating cutter wheels at the end of a rigid kelly bar, or trench mixing using a rotating cutting/mixing chain around the perimeter of a rigid bar. Binder may be injected through low or high energy (velocity) jets.The treated soils created through wet DMM are heterogeneous mixtures of binder, water, soil, and groundwater. Treated soils produced by dry DMM techniques are a mixture of binder, soil, and the water already present in the native soil.DMM applications described in this document include•,Earth retention•,Liquefaction mitigation•,Groundwater seepage control and containment isolation•,Bearing capacity improvement•,Deep foundations•,Mass stabilization and contamination containment•,Embankment, levee and dam strengthening, and stabilization•,Casing replacementThis document was developed to address deep foundations applications. Use of deep mixing for seepage control is not specifically addressed. The reader is referred to documents prepared by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for additional information. Shallow soil mixing and the use of DMM for stabilization/solidification of contaminated soils performed at depths less than 10 feet (3 m) are mentioned briefly. Jet grouting is not covered by these guidelines."

Jan 1, 2016

Jan 1, 1985

By Gustavo E. Armijo

This job was done in Morristown, NJ, with mono fluid system jet grouting for the construction of a new bank building. After the demolition of the existing two story structures, an excavation in loose sandy fill materials was necessary in order to reach the new structure basement level. Due to this jet grouting was selected as a medium to provide both excavation support and permanent underpinning, minimizing the adjacent building settlements. These two adjacent buildings were partially underpinned with a "gravity wall" made with 2 and 3 rows of secant vertical and inclined jet grout columns. Besides the classical jet grouting control methods, during the jet grouting execution, all the drilling and grouting parameters were recorded by a proprietary system called "Slogger". Additionally, after the jet grouting execution, an innovative result control technique was used by means of the application of the same parameter recording system. Some of the production columns were re-drilled and a comparison was made between the obtained drilling parameters and those obtained for the same age test columns. Under the referred existing conditions and in comparison with the conventional underpinning techniques, this project demonstrated that jet grouting, with proper execution and result control, can be faster than them and can maintain the building structural stability and act, at the same time, as a retention system minimizing the existing building settlements.

Jan 1, 2002

Jan 1, 2001

This Workshop was held at the Doubletree Inn, Seattle, Washington from September 26 to 28, 1997. Run under the auspices of the Deep Foundations Institute (DFI), it was co-funded by the newly formed Japanese Association of Micropiles (JAMP), and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). The Workshop was jointly organized and facilitated by Fujita Research Corporation and ECO Geosystems, Inc., with close support by Donald B. Murphy Contractors, Inc. DFI kindly consented to publish these Proceedings. As is clear from the list of attendees, 42 specially invited engineers from all aspects of micropile technology were present, representing Japanese, European and American practice. This proved to be a most friendly and interactive group of people, who freely exchanged ideas, views and close comradeship, not only during the technical sessions, but (and especially!) during the numerous social events. Perhaps the best illustration of this came in Day 2 when the attendees were divided into five competing teams, each comprising representatives from the different geographic groupings. These teams had to quickly devise solutions to two technical problems (using standard data previously provided. A team of "referees" (who also acted as "coaches") later determined the most apposite response, based on constructability design concept, cost, schedule and so on. Not only were the winning team very liberal in distributing the prize (vintage California champagne) among themselves, but the whole Workshop soon benefited from their generous division of the spoils of victory.

Jan 1, 1997

By Za-Chieh Moh

This paper presents a summary of the current pile foundation practice in Taiwan. Constructions of driven piles, drilled shafts, and barrette foundations are reviewed. This paper also briefly summarizes the pile works of four major construction projects in Taiwan, namely, Hsin-Ta Power Plant, Taichung Power Plant, Taipei Transit Systems, and Taiwan High Speed Rail.

Jan 1, 1996

By David A. Hart, Barry P. Osborn, Richard J. Totty, Ana T. Carvalho, Max B. Elliott

This paper addresses the experience designing and installing bored piles for the King’s Cross area. This includes continuous flight auger and rotary bored piles, with a range of diameters between 600 mm and 1200 mm, reaching a maximum depth of 56 m below ground level. Existing Network Rail Thameslink twin bored running tunnels are located directly beneath the subject plots. These tunnels have an external diameter of 6.6 m and the crowns of the tunnels are very shallow, in some cases just 10 m below the existing ground level. Some plots needed piles to be installed in close proximity to the tunnels, which required additional control measures and contingency plans. Pile verticality was monitored as the tip of each pile advanced and in-tunnel monitoring readings were verified and are presented. Lessons learned from designing, installing and testing the piles and monitoring the tunnels are addressed in this paper.

May 1, 2022

Jan 1, 1995

Jan 1, 1988

Jan 1, 2001

By Mary Ellen Bruce Large

"In partnership with California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), and with support from International Association of Foundation Drilling (ADSC), Deep Foundations Institute (DFI) organized a workshop on quality assurance (QA) practices for acceptance of post-grouted drilled shafts in conjunction with DFI’s 40th Annual Conference on Deep Foundations. The 1½-day workshop was held on October 15-16, 2015 at the Oakland Marriott City Center in Oakland, CA.Post-grouting, in the context of this workshop and report, refers to the alternative design and construction of base-grouted drilled shafts wherein a grout distribution system is installed during construction and used to grout the base under pressure after the drilled shaft concrete has gained adequate strength, resulting in a stiffer axial-compression load-displacement relationship and additional possible ground improvement effects.The primary goals of the workshop were to•?Identify and summarize the state of the practice for design, construction, inspection, verification, acceptance criteria, reliability and performance of post-grouting.•?Identify gaps and needs in quality assurance that should be addressed for successful use of post-grouting.This report is structured to follow the workshop program: workshop presentations outlined the state of practice and views from owners, engineers and contractors on acceptance of post grouting methods for drilled shafts; and subsequent workshop discussions attended by a small invited group of participants focused on identifying areas of agreement and disagreement on post-grouting best practices, acceptance criteria, design and verification procedures, and inspection requirements. A partial list of attendees of the open and closed sessions is provided as Appendix A, and copies of presentations are included as Appendix B.FHWA and Caltrans are the primary audiences for this report, and its content will be used to develop a roadmap for deploying the findings into policy and practice. The secondary audience is the broader industry group, and the report content will be disseminated in a variety of formats."

Jan 1, 2016

By Mary Ellen Bruce Large

"INTRODUCTIONIn partnership with California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), and with support from International Association of Foundation Drilling (ADSC), Deep Foundations Institute (DFI) organized a workshop on quality assurance (QA) practices for acceptance of post-grouted drilled shafts in conjunction with DFI’s 40th Annual Conference on Deep Foundations. The 1½-day workshop was held on October 15-16, 2015 at the Oakland Marriott City Center in Oakland, CA.Post-grouting, in the context of this workshop and report, refers to the alternative design and construction of base-grouted drilled shafts wherein a grout distribution system is installed during construction and used to grout the base under pressure after the drilled shaft concrete has gained adequate strength, resulting in a stiffer axial-compression load-displacement relationship and additional possible ground improvement effects. The primary goals of the workshop were to•?Identify and summarize the state of the practice for design, construction, inspection, verification, acceptance criteria, reliability and performance of post-grouting.•?Identify gaps and needs in quality assurance that should be addressed for successful use of post-grouting.This report is structured to follow the workshop program: workshop presentations outlined the state of practice and views from owners, engineers and contractors on acceptance of post grouting methods for drilled shafts; and subsequent workshop discussions attended by a small invited group of participants focused on identifying areas of agreement and disagreement on post-grouting best practices, acceptance criteria, design and verification procedures, and inspection requirements. A partial list of attendees of the open and closed sessions is provided as Appendix A, and copies of presentations are included as Appendix B.FHWA and Caltrans are the primary audiences for this report, and its content will be used to develop a roadmap for deploying the findings into policy and practice. The secondary audience is the broader industry group, and the report content will be disseminated in a variety of formats."

Jan 1, 2016

Jan 1, 2002

By Stefan Larsson, Sebastian Adevik, Sadek Baker, Razvan Ignat

"Abstract Uncertain strength, deformation and flow properties in dry deep mixing columns often lead to conservative choices concerning design values where the design is regularly complemented with a surcharge fill. The surcharge not only leads to increased cost but also to logistical problems where the surcharge is a physical obstacle. The deformation properties of a ground improvement were studied by means of two small embankment load tests. The settlement measurements were also used in FEM analyses, where the effect of surcharge on creep settlements was investigated. Based on the results, the effects of the surcharge were considered negligible and could safely be ignored. The project is an example how the contractor can use a field test as an effective design approach.IntroductionGround improvement of soft soils with dry deep mixing columns, or lime-cement columns, is often combined with a surcharge fill. The main reason for using a surcharge is to force the primary settlement and some of the secondary settlement that would have occurred under the final embankment height alone, to take place under the surcharge loading. Another reason is to level out uneven settlements. Strength and deformation properties in improved soil cannot be sufficiently assessed in advance, before columns have been tested on-site, and this uncertainty often lead to conservative choices concerning design values. In order to compensate for a slow forecasted consolidation process, the design is regularly complemented with a surcharge. The surcharge not only leads to increased cost but also to logistical problems where the surcharge is a physical obstacle.Extensive research undertaken by Åhnberg (2006, 2007) shows, by means of triaxial and oedometer tests, that cementation processes and a load acting on the columns during hardening, makes the improved soil to behave as a heavily over-consolidated soil due to an increase in quasi pre-consolidation pressure. The effects of using a surcharge on the time for consolidation and creep properties are thus probably small, since the stress level does not normally exceed this quasi pre-consolidation pressure. A study presented by Venda Oliveira et al. (2013) shows that the stress level within small ranges has limited effect on the creep properties.This paper presents a case study where the deformation properties of a ground improvement using dry deep mixing columns was investigated by load tests on two small test embankments. The tests were performed at the Interchange Värtan project site, which is part of the Norra länken infrastructure project in Stockholm. The tests were not performed as a research project but simple load tests performed by the contractor with the purpose of rationalizing the design delivered by the client. One purpose of the load tests was to assess the deformations when the columns are loaded temporarily by overlaying concrete works. Another purpose was to provide some input data to a study of the effects of using surcharge on creep settlements. The analysis was conducted as finite element modeling using the commercial code PLAXIS, where creep settlements can be simulated using the built-in Soft Soil Creep model."

Jan 1, 2014

By Timothy C. Siegel

This report presents the results of a synthesis on the design and analysis of ground improvement for liquefaction mitigation. The synthesis included an industry survey concerning the practice of ground improvement for liquefaction mitigation. Participation in the survey was solicited by advertisements in several trade magazines and by e-mail for the DFI membership. The survey participants numbered 150. Their professional roles include consulting engineers, specialty contractors, design engineers, government engineers, and academicians. They represent a variety of geographical areas including North/Central/South America, United Kingdom, Middle East, Caribbean, Hawaii, Japan, India, Egypt, France, Australia and New Zealand. Upon completion of the survey, several professionals in the field of liquefaction and ground improvement were interviewed for them to elaborate on the survey results. The interviews are included in the Appendix of this report. Financial support for the project was provided by DFI and Dan Brown and Associates PC. The concept of the liquefaction mitigation synthesis was developed by DFI?s Ground Improvement Committee in recognition that: (a) The results of recent research and post-earthquake reconnaissance have challenged previously longheld beliefs about liquefaction and associated mitigation techniques, and; (b) The DFI membership and the engineering/construction industry are interested to know if and how engineers and designers are subsequently adjusting their practice in consideration of recent research and post-earthquake reconnaissance. For more detailed information on recent research and post-earthquake reconnaissance, presentations are available from the State-of-the-Art Forum: Liquefaction Consequences and Mitigation that was held in St. Louis in 2012. A commentary of the state-of-practice in ground improvement for liquefaction mitigation (prepared by DFI?s Ground Improvement Committee) is included in this issue of the DFI Journal. The author would like to thank the participants of the survey and especially Mr. Mike Jeffries, Dr. Les Youd, and Dr. Ikuo Towhata for their willingness to share their expertise in interviews. The author also acknowledges Mary Ellen Bruce of DFI, Billy Camp of S&ME, Inc., and Marty Taube of DGI Menard (and Chair of DFI?s Ground Improvement Committee) for their signifi cant contributions.

Aug 1, 2013