Search Documents

By Abhirami B., V. Balakumar

Piled raft foundation system is an intelligent geotechnical concept, developed towards reducing the settlement of the raft and the footings by providing pile elements below the raft or footings, as the case maybe. Although a large volume of works has been done on the behaviour of piled rafts by observational studies, the effect of construction methodologies such as deep excavations, the installation methodologies used for piling etc appear to have not been covered adequately. This paper discusses the effect of deep excavations, pile installation techniques and the effect of adding structural elements, based on the data available from published literatures. Based on this study, the performance of the piled raft monitored by the author has been revisited and the results of such a study are discussed.

Nov 1, 2022

By John D. Nelson

Foundation underpinning is a common component of remediation schemes for distressed foundations on expansive soils. For many applications in expansive soil, micropiles have distinct advantages over other techniques. This paper will concentrate on the design and construction of micropiles in expansive soil. It discusses the nature of building distress and the relationship between foundation movement and soil heave. It presents methods for determining the factors that are required for the design of micropiles. Such factors include calculation of expected free-field heave, depth of soil wetting, and prediction of pier movement. A finite element program developed by the authors and others to determine pier heave and internal forces is presented. The input parameters that are required for pier analysis are discussed, and the nature of the output and the sensitivity of the results to the output are described. A case example illustrates the advantages of micropiles over other methods.

Aug 1, 2013

By Nadir Ansari, Brian W. Wilson, Marina S. W. Li

"A hybrid shoring system consisting of cast-in-place soldier piles with Cutter Soil Mixing (CSM) infill panels was constructed for temporary support of a 19.8 m (65 ft) deep excavation in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. Deep Mixing (DM) was completed up to 9.7 m (32 ft) in fill, peat, wood waste and clayey silt with embedment in dense till, and soldier piles constructed through the dense till extending to below final excavation level. Two trial CSM panels were installed ahead of production to assist with developing the termination criteria of the CSM panels in the dense till. The constructed depth of the CSM panels was based on interpretation of real-time monitoring data obtained through the Bauer B-tronic system. Inclinometer monitoring data from two CSM panels and two soldier piles, as well as soldier pile survey target data was used to assess and monitor the performance of the hybrid shoring system throughout bulk excavation. The objectives of this paper are to provide an overview of the design and construction aspects of the hybrid DM shoring system and to present inclinometer and pile target data to demonstrate the lateral performance of the CSM infill panels and soldier piles. This paper also discusses the merits of using real-time monitoring data as part of the engineering decision-making process for validating CSM panel construction. BACKGROUND A hybrid DM shoring design was recently completed for a high-rise development in downtown Vancouver, British Columbia for temporary support of a five level basement excavation. Deep mixing was proposed by the excavation and shoring design-build team as the preferred method to construct infill panels between soldier piles because of the speed at which the shoring system could be constructed in variable fill, peat, wood waste and overburden compared with traditional secant piling methods. The development site is generally a truncated triangle in plan, with the longest side of the triangle being approximately 115.7 m (380 ft) long and the two shorter sides being approximately 71.6 m (235 ft) (Hybrid Shoring Wall 1) to 75.0 m (246 ft) (Hybrid Shoring Wall 2) long. The site is bounded by an existing bridge off-ramp structure along its longest side, and by city streets on the other two sides, as shown in Figure 1. The truncated section is approximately 16.8 m (55 ft) (Hybrid Shoring Wall 3) long. Due to project constraints, the hybrid DM and soldier pile shoring system was only proposed for the two shorter sides of the triangle and the truncated section. Traditional secant piles were installed for the longest side. This paper focusses on the hybrid shoring system. A typical detail showing the CSM infill panel with the soldier piles is presented in Figure 2."

Jan 1, 2017

By Abid Adekunte

Traditionally, designers and contractors provide additional external supports to retaining walls through the use of tie-back anchors or braces. Both approaches are known to have their shortcomings; braces limit working space within excavation areas, while tie-backs are seldom used in built-up areas where intrusion into adjacent property of non-cooperative owners has to be avoided or in situations where sensitive structures exist behind the wall. This paper focuses on the design, construction and monitoring of deep excavation support systems on two separate projects located in different ground conditions in the Republic of Ireland. On both projects, conventional ground anchorage and propping were inapplicable. This led to the development and application of two different novel solutions on both projects. Methods of wall performance monitoring on both sites also differ. Wall monitoring results show these innovative methods to be safe and effective. Advantages of the novel solutions over traditional approaches are highlighted.

Jan 1, 2010

By Ed Revoort, Robert Schippers

In Rotterdam in the Netherlands the project ‘De Zalmhaven’ is being developed. The project consists of the realization of houses, parking facilities, two residential towers of 70 m and a residential high rise of 215 m. An artist impression for the project is given in figure 1. For the high rise a new development in the use of large diameter, drilled piles with a steel casing has been successfully utilized. In this article the installation method of 65 m long steel drilled piles in two consecutive sections is presented. The settlements for the building (and the influence on its surroundings) have been analyzed in detail using 3D Finite Element calculations, which will also be discussed. Finally there is focus on the results of settlement measurements carried out during construction in relation to the settlement prognosis.

May 1, 2022

By Abhijit R. Sheth, Craig M. Benedict, John Brun, Ara G. Mouradian

"Amtrak recently replaced the 1907-era bascule two-track bridge over the Niantic River between East Lyme and Waterford, Connecticut. The project included new approach embankments, with approximately 2,500 lineal feet of retaining wall along the west approach and 780 lineal feet of retaining wall along the east approach. The paper focuses on the design and construction of the east approach retaining wall, whose alignment is directly adjacent to an existing wetland area which required protection. An anchored prestressed concrete sheet pile retaining wall was selected for the east approach. A combination of concrete anchor piles and ground anchors were used to support the wall. The design of the wall took into account two simultaneous train live loads, support of electric traction catenary structure foundations, and construction live load, while at the same time preventing permanent impacts to the adjacent wetlands. The design considered challenging subsurface conditions, shallow groundwater, the close proximity of the existing operating tracks, construction staging, and storm surge events in Long Island Sound.INTRODUCTION AND PROJECT HISTORYThe National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) recently replaced the 1907-era bascule two-track bridge (No. 116.74) over the Niantic River, between East Lyme and Waterford, Connecticut, along the heavily-traveled Northeast Corridor (NEC). The two NEC tracks, which carry over 50 trains per day, run east-west over a narrow spit of land known as “The Bar”, which separates the Niantic River’s marine estuary to the north from the Niantic Bay to the south, before crossing the river. The bay is an arm of Long Island Sound and is occasionally subject to storm surge from hurricanes.The 1907 bridge was built as a replacement for the previous 1891-era swing-span bridge, and was constructed parallel to, and 49 feet north of, the swing-span structure. The two-track 1907 bridge consisted of a single-leaf bascule span and four approach spans supported on stone masonry piers and abutments. The new bridge increases horizontal navigational clearance for marine traffic in the river from 45 feet to 100 feet, and vertical clearance from 11.5 feet to 16 feet above mean high water with the bridge in closed position. The new bridge, constructed 58 feet south of the 1907 structure, features a single-leaf bascule span of 141.5 feet, with an approach span on either side."

Jan 1, 2017

By Juan M. Pestana-Nascimento, Robert G. Bea, Hamed Hamedifar, Emery M. Roe

The current State-of-the-Practice is grounded heavily on deterministic characterization and assessment of the performance of civil engineering infrastructure. In particular, flood defense systems, such as levees, have been evaluated within the context of the Factor-of-Safety where the computed capacity of the system is compared with the code specified demand forces. Uncertainties associated with the capacity and demand forces render deterministic modeling incomplete. In particular, two structures with the same Factor of Safety can have vastly different probabilities of failure. While efforts have been made to assess levee vulnerability, results from traditional engineering approaches omit important factors because they do not account for uncertainties included in analytical modeling, and natural variabilities, or human and organization factors. This paper utilizes risk assessment methods to advance methods for quantifying the contribution of uncertainties to engineering analyses, and thereby provide additional information to help assess sustainability of geotechnically engineered systems. The probability of failure of a geotechnically engineered system is directly impacted by how well the system is understood, and how uncertainties are incorporated in development of understanding of the system. This paper presents methods to evaluate two types of uncertainties for three potential failure modes of flood protection levees: underseepage, slope (or levee) instability, and overtopping/erosion. These analyses account for two types of uncertainty: 1) Type I – inherent uncertainty, 2) Type II – analytical modeling uncertainty. Human and organizational task performance and information development and utilization uncertainties are not included in these analyses. This paper focuses on the behavior of the flood protection levee system for Sherman Island, a western island in California’s Delta. Sherman Island is of critical importance to California because of the very important infrastructure systems that pass under, on, over, and adjacent to Sherman Island, including: natural gas pipelines, regional and interregional electricity transmission lines and telecommunication facilities, two deepwater shipping channels; and State Highway 160, a link between major transportation expressways. The work evaluates current (year 2010) and future conditions (year 2100) and incorporates variations in capacity and demand arising from projected human response activities and global climate change.

Jan 1, 2017

By Louay Owaidat, Daniel Jabbour, Allan Frappier, Jose Gomez, Mark Stanley, Tino Maestas

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) is implementing a levee strengthening program along the Sacramento River East Levee (SREL) designed to correct 11 miles of deficient levees as identified by recent hydraulic and geotechnical investigations. The first project, the subject of this paper, completed in 2020 resulted in approximately 3.0 miles of improvements to the California Central Valley Flood Protection system. The project area lies along the east bank of the Sacramento River in Sacramento. The program consists of constructing cutoff walls through existing levee embankments to remediate levee through seepage and under-seepage. Key challenges included designing and constructing measures to remediate a 100-year-old legacy levee system, the presence of both industrial and residential properties immediately adjacent to the landside of the levee creating severe space and access limitations, and performing this work during the 2020 statewide mandate to shelter-in-place due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The project team of contractors, USACE, state and local agencies, and engineering firms partnered to bring this project to successful completion within budget and on schedule expending more than 60,000 man-hours with no lost time accidents. With the issuance of future planned contracts, the program will significantly reduce flood risk to the City of Sacramento.

Sep 8, 2021

By Robert Bachus, Nikolaos Machairasm, Allen Cadden

Data Interchange for Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Specialists (DIGGS) is a data transfer standard that is gaining widespread acceptance in the geotechnical and geoenvironmental communities. Originally developed using funding from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) to efficiently capture data related to geotechnical boring logs, cone penetration test (CPT) soundings, and lab testing results, the data transfer protocol is rapidly gaining traction. It has been shown to have beneficial impacts in other allied areas where disparate parties (i.e., consultants, contractors, vendors, etc.) routinely publish/submit data as part of project deliverables. The historic problem is that many of these submissions use paper copies (i.e., .pdf images) to transmit valuable data for the project… data that may extend beyond the “technical” aspects of the project (e.g., equipment operating conditions, construction production rates, project costs, etc.). These data could be used by multiple parties to assess project performance and safety, as well as to track productivity, etc. Currently, in the limited situations when actual data are compiled and transmitted, the data often are submitted as an author-specific (and often proprietary) software application and must then be re-entered into other software applications (e.g., analysis software, database, etc.) for use beyond simple data collection. An initiative undertaken by the Geo-Institute (G-I) of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) focuses on exploiting the full potential of DIGGS to geoprofessionals both within and outside of the transportation community. The deep foundations industry represents one community that could benefit significantly from using DIGGS. Data of interest to DFI members include production records, quality assurance information (e.g., verticality and alignment, concrete strength), and, importantly, load test results. When adopting DIGGS, users need not modify how they capture data, but rather will use DIGGS as a vehicle to transfer data to other applications in a standard format where it can be shared, used, stored, and retrieved. This paper and associated presentation will describe DIGGS and demonstrate how DIGGS can be used effectively within the deep foundations community.

Jan 1, 2019

By Alice Y. Tseng, Dan MacLean

"Corrosion protection of all deep foundation systems made of steel is THE issue when considering durability of the element in the long term. Protecting steel from corrosion and maintaining the steel tendon cross sectional area ensures a competent and durable system. The foundation of a building is usually difficult to repair and therefore high risk is taken when unknowingly choosing a non-adequate solution.Requirements according to EN 1990 (Eurocode 0 or EC 0) on construction durability requires a service life over 100 years. How can a service life over 100 years be achieved? How shall bare steel be protected in soil, which sometimes could be an aggressive environment to the steel? Which corrosion protection methods are commonly used in Europe and in North America?This paper will focus on hollow bars used as Micropiles, Anchor piles and Soil Nails. It gives an overview about the state of the practice in regards to corrosion protection (including head construction) and evaluates different options following the European Standards focusing on type of material and method of installation. Further the different corrosion protective methods such as thickness of grout body, coating types and sacrificial loss are listed with the pros and cons evaluated.Based not only on North American standards like FHWA “Micropile Design and Construction Guidelines”, FHWA Geotechnical Engineering Circular No. 7 for “Soil Nail Walls“ and Post-Tensioning Institute “Recommendations for Prestressed Rock and Soil Anchors”, but also European standards like EN 14199 “Execution of special geotechnical works – Micropiles”, EN 14490 “Execution of special geotechnical works - Soil nailing”, EN 1537 “Execution of special geotechnical work – Ground anchors“, and other relevant standards, all possibilities of protecting the hollow bars and the steel quality will be introduced, discussed and compared ."

Jan 1, 2017

By Kevin Kuhl

With the destruction of the US-90 Bridge spanning St. Louis Bay by Hurricane Katrina, the State of Mississippi awarded its first major design-build contract in order to have a completed four-lane bridge in a period of less than two years. The structure consists of 76 pre-cast concrete beam spans with a total bridge length from Bent 1 to Bent 77 of 11,124 ft (2.1 miles). All 77 bents are founded on pre-cast, pre-stressed concrete piles and consist of two foundation types: pile bents and water line footings. A total of 53 pile bents were utilized where the deck is less than 52 ft above the water. Further divided, 10 pile bents, supported by 24 in. square, solid piles, are located on land. The remainder of the pile bents are located within St. Louis Bay and supported by 36 in. square, voided piles. All the waterline footings are supported by 30 in. square, voided piles. In total, 138 -24 in., 437 -30 in., and 463 -36 in. piles support the structure. Production pile design was based upon information gathered from the subsurface investigation, design soil profile and 23 out-of-position test piles. Verification of the design was established by monitoring the first production pile driven at each bent using the Pile Driving Analyzer. Particular challenges included highly variable coastal deposits, loads in excess of 1600 kips per pile and a compressed construction schedule. Initial drive capacity of a portion of the production test piles was less than expected resulting in a minimum 14 day setup. Following the setup period, restrikes were necessary to verify capacity. Project production piles ranging from 50 ft in length to in excess of 160 ft in length were used to achieve the required resistance. This paper includes a brief overview of the foundation design and indicator test pile program. The main objective is to provide a summary of the quality control procedures including establishing the driving criteria for each bent and to present issues that arose during production pile driving and the solutions that followed.

May 11, 2007

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

Jan 1, 1991

By Abid Adekunte

"In recent years, developers have had to deal with complexities associated with numerous cases of deep basement construction in built-up areas. Design and construction of deep excavation support systems in urbanised zones come with many technical challenges. Restricted working spaces often render the use of temporary struts as wall restraint systems unpopular, as working space needs to be maximised. Also, tie-back anchors are often inapplicable due to the existence of adjacent structures. Therefore, developing alternative restraint systems for deep basement structures in builtup areas is becoming increasingly important to the present day basement engineer.This paper is centred on the design, construction and monitoring of enabling works for deep basement structures on three sites in the United Kingdom and Republic of Ireland. Traditional tieback anchorage and propping systems were inapplicable on the sites. As alternatives, separate novel wall restraint systems were developed and adopted, to enable excavation on each of the three sites.Performances of the novel wall restraint systems, as well as the responses of adjacent structures were monitored. Numerical modelling and field monitoring results show the three alternative wall restraint systems to be safe and effective. The paper also highlights the advantages of the novel solutions over conventional methods.INTRODUCTIONRecently, deep basement structures have become popular components of urban building developments. As pointed out by Pearlman et al., 2004, this could be attributed to the inadequacy of surface parking spaces in urbanised zones, while underground parking facilities are also believed to improve both aesthetic and commercial qualities of urban structures.However, while the incorporation of basement structure into new urban development appeals to developers and architects, the engineering design and construction aspects of basement works typically come against a whole lot of complexities and challenges. As highlighted by Wong, 2002, engineering problems associated with basement construction in built-up areas are numerous, some of these include; complicated sub-soil conditions, dealing with excessive active pressures, complex temporary works, proximity of sensitive adjacent structures, high level hazards to construction workmen and surrounding community, inadequate working space, etc."

Jan 1, 2015

By Brandon Buschmeier, Frederic Masse

"Inclusions are a type of ground improvement that provide an improvement of a soil mass by insertion of a material with better characteristics than the surrounding soils. There are primarily two types of inclusions: “Soft” inclusions which are constructed of granular material (Stone Columns, Rammed Aggregate Piers, VibroPiers...), and “rigid” inclusions which are constructed of grout inserted with or without pressure (VibroConcrete Columns, Controlled Modulus Columns, Soil Mixing Columns).While the central principle of the inclusions is similar (i.e., overall improvement of characteristics of the soil mass below the structure), the load transfer mechanism is radically different for each technique. Therefore, the applicable design methodology is specific to the type of inclusions and there exists no universal method of design which spans across all inclusions.This paper will present an in-depth comparison between the standard design methods used for “soft” granular-type inclusions (Priebe modified, Balaam & Booker, Goughnour & Bayuk...) and the methods used for “rigid” inclusions which mainly rely on finite element analysis. The paper will explain why the design for soft inclusion methods cannot be applied to rigid inclusions and vice-versa. Each design method will be reviewed in detail to better emphasize its limitations and advantages.Two case histories will also be presented; one for each type of inclusions in order to illustrate the concepts developed in the first part of the paper.1 INTRODUCTION1.1 GENERAL OVERVIEW OF GROUND IMPROVEMENT WITH INCLUSIONSThe use of ground improvement methods to provide the appropriate amount of foundation support is a growing and constantly evolving industry. Traditional structural foundation methods including ‘shallow’ and ‘deep’ foundations do not adequately address the wide range of settlement tolerances, soil conditions, and loading considerations inherent to each unique potential project. In some instances, ‘shallow’ foundation solutions are simply not feasible due to soil and loading constraints. Furthermore, ‘deep’ foundation solutions are used to ‘bridge’ the soft compressible soils, ensuring that the entirety of the load in the structure is transmitted through individual elements into competent layers below the ground surface (bedrock, dense residual soils). Highly concentrated structural loads are transferred into the individual elements by means of direct contact requiring the use of structurally rigid surficial components (structural slabs, grade beams, and pile caps).Ground improvement bridges the gap between these two traditional methods, offering adequate foundation support while using more costeffective techniques and design methodologies. Inclusions are a type of ground improvement used to provide a reinforcement of the soil mass through the vertical insertion of a material with better characteristics than the surrounding soils. Much like deep foundations, inclusions are installed through soil layers with high compressibility and/or low bearing capacity and terminated in a suitable bearing stratum. However, unlike deep foundations, ground improvement inclusions rely on a distribution of load between the soil and the inclusions. By doing so, some of the structural load is applied directly to the soil in a proportion equal to its bearing capacity and compressibility limits, while the rest of the load is shed into the vertical inclusions down to the bearing stratum. Load sharing is a critical aspect in the performance and design of the various ground improvement methods."

Jan 1, 2015

This manual is limited to Augered Cast-in-Place (ACIP) piles constructed using a hollow stem continuous flight auger. 1.1SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS The intent of this manual is to provide guidelines for observing and documenting the installation of ACIP piles. The manual may also serve as a guide for the training of inspection personnel. It is expected that the general guidelines and procedures described in this manual for the inspection and installation of ACIP piles will be supplemented by engineering judgment, local practice, and experience. ACIP pile construction procedures will vary depending on soil, rock, and groundwater conditions. This manual represents a wide range of possible applications in a variety of projects. It is not intended to be applicable in all situations nor replace engineering judgment for any given project. Therefore, an all-inclusive inspection manual is not considered practical or desirable. This manual should not be used to interpret or replace project specifications. It has, however, been prepared to complement the Augered Cast-in-Place (ACIP) Piles Manual model specification (DFI, 2003).

Jan 1, 2010

By Matthew E. Meyer

The intent of this manual is to provide guidelines for observing and documenting the installation of ACIP piles. The manual may also serve as a guide for the training of inspection personnel. It is expected that the general guidelines and procedures described in this manual for the inspection and installation of ACIP piles will be supplemented by engineering judgment, local practice, and experience. ACIP pile construction procedures will vary depending on soil, rock, and groundwater conditions. This manual represents a wide range of possible applications in a variety of projects. It is not intended to be applicable in all situations nor replace engineering judgment for any given project. Therefore, an all-inclusive inspection manual is not considered practical or desirable. This manual should not be used to interpret or replace project specifications. It has, however, been prepared to complement the Augered Castin- Place (ACIP) Piles Manual model specification (DFI, 2003).

Jan 1, 2010

By Ke Yang

Drilled shafts are widely adopted as the foundation for sound walls. However, there has been a lack of uniformity in design and analysis methods and design criteria, in terms of factor of safety against ultimate capacity failure as well as the allowable deflection. In order to establish a uniform design methodology for the drilled shafts supporting sound walls in cohesive and cohesionless soils, respectively, a database of full-scale lateral load tests on fully instrumented drilled shafts was collected. Based on the compiled database, existing design methods and design criteria of laterally loaded drilled shafts were evaluated. Broms method and COM624P (or LPILE) are suggested as the design methods for drilled shafts supporting sound walls in both cohesive and cohesionless soils. Additionally, the corresponding design criteria, including factor of safety and permissible deflection, for both design methods are recommended. Two full-scale lateral load tests on fully instrumented drilled shafts were subsequently conducted in Colorado to further verify the design recommendation. A comprehensive geotechnical investigation program was also carried out at the two new lateral load test sites that included pressuremeter test, SPT, as well as laboratory triaxial consolidated undrained tests and direct shear tests on the soil samples taken from the lateral load test sites. The test results obtained at these two load test sites were employed to validate the recommended geotechnical design and geotechnical testing methods for the drilled shafts supporting sound walls.

Jan 1, 2007

Jan 1, 1994

By Yogesh Prashar

Three conventional uplift tests and 12 Rapid Pile Load Tests (RLT) were performed on total of fifteen 16-inch square pre-cast concrete driven piles at a test site in Emeryville California in December of 2000. The uplift tests were performed in accordance with ASTM standards, and the RLTs were performed using a FUNDEX RLT. The RLT is carried out by dropping a mass of 25-tons on top of the pile, thereby inducing a force that is measured by a load cell. An optical lens records the vertical deflection of LED's that are mounted on the pile. Ultimate uplift and compression capacities of each of the fifteen piles were determined using the Davisson method. Soil parameters were calibrated by back-calculation (cohesion and internal angle of friction) using both the results of conventional uplift load versus deflection curve, as well as the results of the triaxial compression tests. A two-dimensional finite difference model including soil elements, and structural elements representing the test pile was setup using the computer program Fast Lagrangian Analysis of Continua (FLAC). FLAC was used to simulate both the uplift as well as the RLT. Strength increase of cohesive material was also accounted for in the analysis. Numerically simulated and theoretically computed pile capacity curves and axial deformation variation with applied load curves are in close agreement to the observed curve during the field test. Conclusions are made from this test site regarding the factors influencing results of RLT.

Jan 1, 2002