Search Documents

By Kevin Green, Iván Contreras, Aaron Grosser, Jon Ausdemore, Rachel Leier, Amr Ragy

"Construction of a new tailings dam was required to increase tailings storage capacity at a trona mine near Green River, Wyoming. The new dam was founded on overburden soils underlain by both fractured and competent bedrock. The stored tailings and water had high salt content, resulting in salty seepage water. To reduce the impact of the salty water on groundwater and the Green River, the design of the new tailings dam included a 257,260 SF (23,900 m2) seepage cutoff extending into competent rock.An extensive subsurface characterization was performed prior to completing the design and suitable seepage cutoff methods were evaluated. The approach selected was a full replacement panel using hydromill and clamshell for construction and self-hardening slurry (SHS) for the wall material. Laboratory testing was performed and ongoing monitoring has continued to evaluate the hydraulic conductivity and seepage cutoff performance in the briny environment.The paper includes project background, the collaborative approach and outcomes of the QA/QC program, and the monitoring results for the seepage cutoff wall.PROJECT BACKGROUNDCiner Wyoming, LLC (formerly OCI Wyoming, LLC) owns and operates the Big Island Mine facility near Green River, Wyoming. This underground trona mine has produced soda ash since 1962. The Greater Green River Basin covers much of southwestern Wyoming and extends into northeastern Utah and northwestern Colorado. The Ciner facility is located in the Green River Basin, which is part of the Wyoming Basin physiographic province. The Green River runs to the west and the south of the Ciner facility.Beginning in the early 1990s, Ciner primarily disposed tailings underground in mined-out panels. However, in recent years, underground storage has become limited and some disposal has transitioned to the ground surface. Long-term planning revealed a need to expand Ciner’s surface tailings disposal capabilities. Pond 2, a previously permitted disposal area, was identified as the most viable location for a storage facility. The Pond 2 site is directly north of the Ciner plant facilities, northwest of the active Upper Delta tailings storage facility, and northeast of the Green River (Fig 1)."

Jan 1, 2016

By Zia Zafir

"Levees in the central valley of California are primarily for flood control purposes and thus are subjected to infrequent hydraulic loading. The primary concern for these levees is their instability due to through and under seepage. Primary seepage control measures are seepage cutoff walls and/or seepage berms. The cutoff walls primarily consist of soil-bentonite (SB) slurry walls. The seepage berm could be a drainage blanket to allow the seepage with controlled exit gradient or an impervious layer to provide enough cover to protect any adverse effects of seepage in terms of sand boils. Although, Sacramento is an area of moderate seismic activity, levees protecting urban areas require assessment for the potential instability due to liquefaction and associated vertical and lateral deformations. In certain cases, the seismic deformations of the levee may not compromise the stability of the levees, but they may cause damage to the seepage control measures. Depending on the nature and extent of the damage, the mitigation measures may require limited or full replacement of the seepage control measures. This paper will provide a systematic assessment of these different types of seepage control measures under vertical and lateral deformations due to liquefaction and lateral spreading under seismic loadings.INTRODUCTIONThere are two broad categories of levees in Central California: levees that are subjected to continuous hydraulic loading such as delta levees and are called frequently loaded levees (FLL) and flood control levees that are subjected to seasonal or infrequent hydraulic loading, called infrequently loaded levees (ILL). This paper will focus on the seismic response of ILL. The probability of ILL experiencing an earthquake at the time of the design flood is very low. Therefore, consequences of seismic failure of flood control levees are only significant in terms of response time required to restore the level of flood protection provided by the levee before the next flood season. An example for this restoration is the restoration of the Pajaro River levees in Santa Cruz, California after the 1989 Loma Prieta Earthquake. Nevertheless, failure of flood control levees due to a seismic event could result in loss of the entire levee and/or loss of freeboard. In addition, some of the seismic failure of ILL levees may result in loss of seepage control measures such as the soil-bentonite wall.The State of California State approved Senate Bill (SB) 5 in 2007 that mandates for 200-year flood protection to be the minimum level of protection for urban and urbanizing areas in Central California (Sacramento-San Joaquin Valley) by the year 2025. This legislation also requires that urban and urbanizing areas protected by Federal project levees cannot use adequate progress as a condition to approve development after 2025. SB 5 requires that the urban level of flood protection be consistent with criteria used or developed by DWR (Government Code § 65007(k)). To avoid delaying urgently needed flood protection, Urban Levee Design Criteria (ULDC, 2012) was developed."

Jan 1, 2016

By M. Melih Demirkan, Jared Deible, Michael Rosenmeier, Mazen Elias Adib, Juan J. Gutierrez, Raghav Ramanathan

Dewatering and groundwater control is required frequently for construction projects and needs to be accounted for and dealt with care during design and construction to complete the project successfully. Dewatering can cause changes in porewater pressure, which changes the effective vertical stress in a soil mass. Dewatering can also cause changes in groundwater chemistry which in turn can cause changes in porewater pressure and also dissolution of soluble minerals in the soil and rock. The Guideline developed in this study addresses the engineering issues, approaches to lessen the potential risks associated with construction dewatering, and presents dewatering practices to support dewatering applications regulated by the Municipality of Abu Dhabi City (ADM) in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). The subsurface condition within the city presents significant geotechnical problems due to presence of shallow subsurface cavities and soluble minerals in the soil and rock. Therefore it is critical to develop standards for dewatering practices to provide information for local dewatering engineers and contractors with special emphasis to control and to eliminate the subsidence/collapse problems related to dewatering projects within the Abu Dhabi city. The ADM is also responsible for approval of permit applications for projects that involve dewatering. In order to minimize the risk related to subsidence/collapse problems due to dewatering, construction companies and dewatering contractors need to be informed about possible mitigative measures that can be employed to reduce risks. The guidelines were developed as part of this study based on detailed analysis of the local subsurface conditions. A set of rules and regulations are developed for geotechnical and hydrogeological investigations, dewatering design and monitoring criteria depending on the hazard zones, proximity of excavation to critical structures, excavation depth. The Guidelines include examples of permit application packages for three types of dewatering projects; one involving shallow dewatering, one involving intermediate depth dewatering, and one involving deep dewatering. These Guidelines are considered as living document and will be updated as required, as additional information is collected and additional local experience is gained.

Jan 1, 2016

By R. Lee Wooten, David R. Shields, Darren D. Clark

"Borehole permeability tests that measure flow or head changes in boreholes located within seepage barrier walls are commonly used to estimate the in situ permeabilities of those walls for quality control and assurance. The current state of practice for estimating permeabilities from these barrier wall borehole tests is to use equations published by M. J. Hvorslev in 1951. Hvorslev’s borehole test equations model an infinite stratum of uniform permeability, which is not the actual condition for a test performed in a low permeability barrier wall located within a high permeability stratum. We examine and develop alternative equations based on line source analytical models, which more closely match barrier wall test conditions. We describe how these alternate equations can be used to estimate barrier wall permeabilities from borehole tests and compare the results to those obtained from the Hvorslev models. We also provide recommendations that consider differing upstream and downstream water levels.Barrier Wall Permeability Tests - State Of PracticeThe installation of seepage barrier walls has become more common in a variety of applications ranging from dams and levees to contaminated sites requiring retardation of groundwater flow. The types of seepage barrier walls and installation methods include soil-bentonite, soil-cement-bentonite, concrete, self-hardening slurry, geomembranes, and sheet piles, installed with various soil mixing, slurry-supported trench, and driving methods.Owners and contractors have used a variety of methods to evaluate the permeability of these seepage barriers. The following table lists commonly used quality control/assurance tests for evaluating the permeability of a seepage barrier."

Jan 1, 2016

By Robert E. Schock, Eric J. Risberg

"Less than 20,000 years ago, the last of the glaciers retreated from the Chicago region. They left behind sheets of glacial clay till underlain by dense, over-consolidated till (“hardpan”) below which is the limestone bedrock, found about 100 ft (30.5 m) below street level. The most notable feature in this profile is the unusually soft clay till that has historically been called “Chicago Blue Clay.”But the founding fathers of Chicago really didn’t care about what was under the ground. They recognized the importance of the city’s location as a potential trade and transportation hub. With access to the East through the Great Lakes and access to the West through the Mississippi River system, the viability of the city was evident. Chicago’s population grew rapidly. The city continued to grow through the Civil War years, but was dealt a devastating blow in 1871 by the Great Chicago Fire, leaving the city in ruins. The Birth of the SkyscraperAfter the cleanup of the Great Fire came the first real building boom in Chicago’s history. During this era, buildings were generally founded on shallow footings bearing on sand or clay. Many multistory buildings were constructed between 1880 and 1890 on spread footings. The first tall buildings were constructed with load bearing masonry walls. These early tall buildings suffered significant settlement as the soft clay underwent consolidation.The Home Insurance Building, built in 1885, was 12-stories tall and is generally acknowledged to be the first “skyscraper” in the U.S. It was the first building constructed with an iron skeleton frame instead of load bearing masonry walls. Spread footings were used under the interior columns in an effort to better distribute the loads, but the building still experienced large settlements.Construction began for the Monadnock Building in 1891. The 17-story building was built using load bearing walls 7 ft (2.1 m) thick, supported on rail-grillage footing foundations. When completed in 1893, the Monadnock Building boasted the title “World’s Largest Office Building.” The total building settlement over the past 125 years has been measured at over 20 in (0.51 m). The engineering community in the late 19th century observed settlement, but did not yet understand the process of consolidation of the soft clay beneath the city. During this time, many of the new buildings required structural repairs during and after construction; the problem was especially acute in buildings where highrise towers joined lower podium structures."

Jan 1, 2016

By EFFC/DFI Concrete Task Group

Concrete technology continues to advance rapidly and modern mixes with five components – cement, additions, aggregates, (chemical) admixtures and water – often have characteristics which differ significantly from the older three component mixes – cement, aggregates and water. Recent trends have favoured higher strength classes and lower water/cement ratios, resulting in greater dependence on admixtures to compensate for reduced workability and to meet the (often competing) demands for workability in the fresh state and setting time. The application of testing methods which reflect the true rheological properties of the concrete has not developed at the same rate as the mixes themselves and it is still not uncommon for the slump or flow table test to be used as the only acceptance test for fresh concrete.A joint review of problems in bored piles (drilled shafts) and diaphragm walls cast using tremie methods by both the European Federation of Foundation Contractors (EFFC) and the Deep Foundations Institute in the United States (DFI) identified a common issue. The review determined that many of the problems were caused by (or in part due to) the use of inadequate concrete mixes with inadequate workability, or insufficient stability or robustness of the mixes. It further identified the primary causes as inadequate concrete specifications and inadequate testing procedures. The consequences of these problems are often significant and it has been recognised that spending more time and money on getting the concrete right is the most cost effective approach.A joint Concrete Task Group was set up by EFFC and DFI in 2014 to look at this issue and this guide is the output from that Task Group. A research and development project, funded by the Sponsors of this guide, is being carried out by the Technical University of Munich in conjunction with the Missouri University of Science and Technology. This project includes desk studies, laboratory testing, and onsite testing at worksites in Europe and the US. The research work will be completed during 2016.

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

By Jean Wehbe, Daniel C. Brahana

"The new Mercedes-Benz Stadium (MBS), home of the Atlanta Falcons, is part of a new era of stadium construction in the U.S. These new-age stadiums are larger and have more amenities than their predecessors. Many of the MBS’s features, including its innovative retractable roof, result in extraordinary structural loads. The roof structure is supported by a series of mega columns that bear on eight large caps, six of which are supported by drilled piers. Each of the pier caps contains between 8 and 16 drilled piers that bear in the underlying bedrock. The design pier diameters are 6 and 6.5 ft (1.8 m and 1.9 m). Augercast piles were used to support two of the mega column caps. Drilled piers, augercast piles, aggregate piers and spread footings were used to support the more lightly loaded portions of the structure.The focus of this article is the construction aspects of the drilled pier foundations. Initially, a fairly extensive drilled pier load test program was performed. Load testing included a Statnamic compression test, two Osterberg Cell tests and two lateral tests. Production pier installation included over 3,800 linear ft (1,158.2 m) of earth excavation and over 1,350 linear ft (411.4 m) of hard rock excavation. The piers contain more than 6,600 cu yd (4,587.3 cu m) of concrete and 1,100 tons (998 tonnes) of reinforcing steel. Drilled pier installation took about 4.5 months. ABE Enterprises was the specialty foundation subcontractor and Bauer-Pileco was the equipment provider.Site and Subsurface ConditionsThe project site is in downtown Atlanta and was originally occupied by residential buildings. A portion of the site was later developed as a rail yard, and other areas contained light manufacturing, warehouses and other relatively light structures. For the past 15 to 20 years the site had been used for surface parking.Beneath a surficial layer of manmade fill, soil test borings at the site generally encountered residual soil, partially weathered rock and the parent bedrock. The bedrock at the site is highly variable, both in elevation and in hardness/quality. The depth to rock is reasonably uniform within the western two-thirds of the site at about 20 to 50 ft (6 to 15.2 m), with a few exceptions. In the eastern third of the site, the rock drops off dramatically to the north and east. In one mega column cap, there was almost 80 ft (24.3 m) in elevation difference. In two borings in the cap that were 20 ft (6.1 m) apart, the top of rock varied in elevation by 34 ft (10.3 m)"

Jan 1, 2016

By Dale Berner, Michael O’Sullivan

"This article focuses on lessons learned from innovative designs including in-the-wet construction methodology and modified foundation conditions, for two United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) megaprojects. Olmsted Dam FoundationThe over $2 billion Olmsted Dam on the Ohio River is currently under construction 16 mi (29.6 km) upstream from the confluence with the Mississippi River. The project is under the jurisdiction of the Louisville District of the USACE. It will consist of an 800 ft (244 m) long tainter gate section, a 1,400 ft (427 m) navigable pass, two boat abutment sections, a fixed weir section, and upstream and downstream scour protection. The Olmsted Dam and its two 1,200 ft (366 m) locks, which were built in 2002, will eventually replace both Locks and Dam #52 and #53, both built in 1929, and thereby bring significant benefits to the Ohio River navigation system.In 2002, the Jacobs/COWI JV completed the design of the dam; which was an engineering challenge for several reasons. A significant consideration was its proximity to the New Madrid Fault, which could impose an 8.4 Richter scale seismic event on the structure, which is located in an area of potentially liquefiable alluvium. The extensive seismic analysis performed by the designer included a response spectra analyses, lateral pushover analyses of pile foundations, hydrodynamic added masses, pile group effects, and the development of kinematic motions as a result of the soil-pilestructure interaction."

Jan 1, 2016

By Dario Libano, Luis Carlos Tenuta, Juliano Penteado

"Subway Line Number 4 is one of the newest additions to the Rio de Janeiro subway network. Built for the 2016 Olympic Games, the 16 km (10 mi) subway line connects the south of the city, with the famous beaches Copacabana and Ipanema, to Barra da Tijuca, west of the city, where the Olympic Village and Park are located. This new line, which is estimated to cost USD 2.2 billion, is composed of six new stations: Jardim Oceanico, São Conrado, Gavea, Antero de Quintal, Jardim de Alah (JA) and Nossa Senhora da Paz Station.Brasfond participated in the construction of foundations and retaining structures for all the stations, and each presented unique challenges. This is not surprising considering the difficulties present in a highly-dense urban environment including utilities, nearby buildings, traffic limitations and noise.Of all the stations, JA Station was the most challenging to construct. It was located in the middle of an avenue between residential high rises supported on shallow foundations as well as below sea level in sands with high groundwater. The other five stations were located in small parks and squares, with no buildings in the immediate proximity.The interaction between designer, owner, and the general and foundation contractors during execution was key in safely reducing the construction schedule. This was significant given the unforeseen construction delays the client, Linha 4 Sul JV, faced due to permitting, utility and traffic relocation so that the owner could fulfill their final goal: making the line operational by the Olympic Games. The GeologyGeologically, the state of Rio de Janeiro is formed by Pre- Cambrian crystalline basement rock. Its geological formation is very old and comprises two major orogenic cycles, a Mid-Precambrian formation, called “Transamazonian” (Proterozoic Era), and an Upper-Precambrian to Cambrian called “Brasiliano” (Proterozoic-Paleozoic). The soil structure of the city of Rio de Janeiro is represented by a core of crystalline rocks, usually granite-gneiss, covered with a layer of residual soil and/or partially weathered rock.JA Station is located in a Rio de Janeiro neighborhood called Ipanema, between the Atlantic Ocean and Lagoon Rodrigo de Freitas. Local geology is composed of a superficial soil, consisting of medium to coarse grained sands. Top of rock varied significantly from 20 m (66 ft) deep on one side of the station to 33 m (108 ft) on the other. Water is at a depth of 3 m (10 ft)."

Jan 1, 2016

"1 INTRODUCTIONThe use of nondestructive testing (NDT) methods to evaluate the integrity of Augered Cast-in-Place (ACIP) and Drilled Displacement (DD) piles has been a subject of significant debate among engineers, contractors and NDT practitioners. This guideline document will illustrate the importance of reviewing all available information in conjunction with the NDT records. ACIP and DD piles have unique properties that must be considered when using a specific NDT method. Any evaluation of the integrity of an ACIP or DD pile must also include a thorough review of the detailed pile installation records and the site specific soil conditions. Long or theoretical descriptions of the methods have not been included in this publication. More detailed information about these NDT methods including their theoretical and historical backgrounds can be found in DFI’s Manual for Non Destructive Testing and Evaluation of Drilled Shafts (2004). Additional information can also be found in the more comprehensive textbook Nondestructive Testing of Deep Foundations by Hertlein and Davis (2006).1.1 PurposeThe intent of this guideline is to provide practical guidance for the proper interpretation of NDT results on ACIP and DD piles. Short descriptions of the main integrity methods available are provided along with several examples of how to use all of the information available to make sound engineering judgments about the results. This publication is a state-of-the-practice guideline to promote accurate engineering evaluations.For engineers inexperienced with NDT, these guidelines provide sufficient background information on NDT methods to help understand the limitations of the testing, assess the results presented to them, and formulate appropriate questions. This is particularly important for engineers charged with the responsibility to determine from those results what, if any, consequences there may be on the performance of the structure under construction."

Jan 1, 2016

By Terry Eldridge, Keith MacKay, David Siddle, Luke Moger

On August 4th, 2014, a breach occurred in the Perimeter Embankment of the Tailings Storage Facility (TSF) located at the Mount Polley Mine, releasing approximately 10.6 million m3 of supernatant water, 7.3 million m3 of tailings solids, 6.5 million m3 of tailings interstitial water and 0.6 million m3of construction materials. A Temporary Upstream Rockfill Berm was constructed between August 2014 and February 2015 within the area of the tailings dam failure in order to retain the remaining tailings solids during the low flows of the winter season. The Temporary Upstream Rockfill Berm was constructed as part of the initial response phase, with the primary objective to abate the flow of tailings into the receiving environment. A secondary objective of its construction was facilitating the required investigation works downstream of the tailings dam failure. The selection of the coarse grained material used in the construction of the Temporary Upstream Rockfill Berm was based on the availability of the material (timeliness of construction) and the non-water retaining design of this initial response phase. Consequently, an alternative method was required in order to prevent further loss of mine-affected water and tailings from the TSF, as well as to provide short-term contingency water storage, during high flow conditions expected in late spring. Golder Associates Ltd. designed the 2015 Freshet Management Embankment, a deep mixing cut-off wall, to meet these site requirements, which was constructed by Mount Polley Mining Corporation and Golder Construction Inc. between December 2015 and April 2015. The works included 132 soil cement panels constructed to depths of up to 27 meters. This aspect of the works was completed using an RG25S Bauer CSM rig on a 24 hour per day, 7 day per week schedule. The cut-off wall specifications included a target unconfined compressional strength (UCS) of between 1 and 2 MPa, a maximum hydraulic conductivity of 1x10-6 cm/s, and a ductility to enable the soil cement to undergo a minimum of 5% strain without a reduction in strength or increase in hydraulic conductivity. In order to control and assure the quality of the soil cement, 2553 wet grab specimens were retrieved from the fresh soil cement panels using a project-developed sampler. Four of the soil cement panels were cored with a mud-rotary drill rig and optical and acoustic televiewers were placed into the boreholes in order to log several relevant parameters, including image, texture, relative hardness, borehole-shape, and temperature.

Jan 1, 2016

"Guideline Augered Cast-In-Place (ACIP) Pile Specification and Commentary11.0 GENERAL1.1 SCOPEThe Pile Contractor shall furnish all labor, materials, tools and equipment necessary for furnishing, installing and testing Augered Cast-in-Place (ACIP) piles as shown on the Contract Drawings and as specified herein.ACIP piles are commonly referred to by several other names. Some of them are trademarks or service marks owned by Foundation Contractors and some are names that try to describe the installation process. The term “cast-inplace” is sometimes replaced with “cast-in-situ,” especially in Europe. Some common names are Auger Cast Piles, Intruded Mortar Piles, Augerpress Piles, Augered Pressure Grouted Piles, AugerPile Foundations, Continuous Flight Auger (CFA) Piles, Grouted Bored Piles, Augered Grout-Injected Piles, Drilled or Augered Uncased Piles, and Uncased Cast-in-Place Concrete Piles. To avoid confusion, ACIP pile will be used exclusively herein.1.2 PILE CONTRACTOR QUALIFICATIONSThe ACIP piles shall be installed by an experienced Pile Contractor who upon request of the Engineer shall submit evidence of successful ACIP pile installation under similar job and subsurface conditions, including a job supervisor who shall have a minimum of five years of method specific experience.The proper installation of the ACIP piles is dependent upon the procedures used by the Pile Contractor’s field representatives and equipment provided. The Pile Contractor’s personnel responsible for the installation should have relevant experience with the auguring and pumping equipment, experience placing piles under similar site conditions (including restricted headroom if appropriate), in similar subsurface conditions, as well as experience handling the special grout mixes, admixtures, etc."

Jan 1, 2016

By Sitotaw Y. Fantaye

"The first segment of the Second Avenue Subway extension is approaching construction completion. The new extension will operate along Second Avenue from 96th Street to 63rd Street, where it will divert west along the existing 63rd Street line, stopping at the Lexington Avenue/63rd Street Station. The new line will have stateof-the-art stations at 96th, 86th, 72nd and 63rd streets.Most of the two-track, twin-tunnel subway was constructed using bored tunnel methods (Figure 1), with a tunnel boring machine (TBM). The launch and retrieving box of the TBM was strategically located at the south end of the 96th Street Station where bedrock exists approximately 70 ft (21.3 m) below street level. The TBM launch box and the 96th Street Station (Figure 2), including the ancillary facilities adjacent to the station, were constructed by the cut-and-cover method. The cut-and-cover work required the contractor to design and implement a stiff, tightlybraced retaining wall, approximately 100 ft (30.5 m) long, to tie the existing tunnel constructed in the 1970s to the new station, temporary street decking over the entire excavation, and a wide range of excavation support systems at various locations.The cut-and-cover construction posed significant challenges including: installation of street decking on busy Second Avenue, relocation and suspension of the myriad utilities beneath the streets, and configuration of a lateral support system that would minimize movement of adjacent structures but not slow down excavation activities. This article describes the innovative solutions developed to manage and facilitate safe and efficient construction without disrupting Second Avenue, a major southbound one-way thoroughfare.The work was performed in several phases involving: (1) preconstruction condition survey of existing buildings, (2) installation of instrumentation and monitoring, (3) major utility relocation efforts to move vital utilities from within the alignment of the slurry wall on both the east and west sides of the avenue, (4) implementation of maintenance and protection of traffic plans, (5) installation of temporary street decking across the entire avenue and over the excavation to allow an orderly movement of traffic and pedestrians, (6) staged excavation and installation of an intricate temporary bracing system beneath the decking (7) step-by-step construction of the new subway station’s structure and (8) staged removal of the bracing as the structure gained sufficient strength to resist the lateral loads. The main focus in this article is the design and construction of the temporary street decking and lateral bracing systems; the utility suspension system and the north tie-in that allowed the daunting task of excavation and construction of a new subway station in bustling New York City, with minimal disruption to the community, businesses and everyday traffic."

Jan 1, 2016

By James M. Tantalla, Jr. Ellman

"Construction of the powerhouse for the Willow Island Hydroelectric Project, located at the Willow Island Lock and Dam, required a 120-ft deep temporary excavation inside the limits of a cellular cofferdam on the Ohio River side of the excavation and a soil-bentonite seepage cut-off wall on the landward side of the excavation. Stability analyses were performed for critical sections to evaluate the stability of the soil slopes and rock cuts using limit equilibrium, tension crack, and buckling analysis techniques. The stability analyses indicated adequate factors of safety through the landside embankment sections, and for the weighting berm soil slopes in front of the riverside cellular cofferdam. However, the results of deep-seated stability analyses through the rock supporting the riverside cellular cofferdam indicated marginal factors of safety for the 100-year flood condition. Consequently, the riverside portion of the excavation required enhanced stability measures, namely the installation of long, high-capacity rock anchors. Also, the dewatering system was modified to lower the site piezometric head to near the top of rock to improve the stability of the rock cuts.Thirty high-capacity rock anchors were installed on the upstream, riverside, and downstream sides of the cofferdam rock cut. The rock anchors consisted of multiple, seven-wire strands designed to provide the full-required design load at 60% of the strand capacity. Rock anchor loads varied from 1,968 to 2,074 kips. The maximum number of strands per anchor was 59. Bond lengths assumed an allowable bond stress of 100 psi based on the rock bond from pull-out tests.Project DescriptionAmerican Municipal Power, a nonprofit organization that owns and operates electric generation facilities for its member communities, has been in the process of constructing hydroelectric power plants adjacent to existing navigation locks and dams along the Ohio River. The Willow Island Hydroelectric Plant was recently completed on the West Virginia bank of the river adjacent to the US Army Corp of Engineers (USACE) Willow Island Lock and Dam. The plant is on the opposite river bank to the locks, and includes two turbine generating units with FERC rated capacity of 44MW at a 20-foot head differential. The Ruhlin Company of Sharon Center, Ohio was awarded contracts to construct both the cofferdam and the powerhouse. Construction began in mid-2011, and was completed in early 2016."

Jan 1, 2016

By Alison Savage, Michael Terry

"For decades, the International Market Place (IMP) has been an icon in the heart of Waikiki in Honolulu, Hawaii. It was famous for Duke Kahanamoku’s restaurant where people flocked to hear Don Ho sing in the ’60s and ’70s. Later, it was a bustling, open-air hub of small vendors who peddled everything from Hawaiian souvenirs and jewelry to food court meals and farmer’s market produce. Small buildings and shacks that housed the businesses were located on a curved tract of land — just one block off the beach — that stretches from Kalakaua Avenue to Kuhio Avenue. The entrance to the complex is dominated by a huge, old (circa 1850) Banyan tree. This tract is owned by the Queen Emma Land Company. Queen Emma was a Hawaiian Queen from the 1800s. Revenue from the land has supported the Queen’s Medical Center in Honolulu for decades.The reimagined IMP is owned by Taubman Centers, of Bloomfield Hills, Mich., and CoastWood Capital Group of San Francisco, Calif. The IMP will offer a distinctive collection of upscale fashion and lifestyle retailers, including Hawaii’s only Saks Fifth Avenue store, as well as ten sit-down restaurants, including concepts by award-winning chefs Michael Mina and Roy Yamaguchi. The mall features two large open-air courts, the first of which has the huge Banyan tree as its entryway centerpiece. The second open-air court, called Queen’s Court, includes a stage and mature monkeypod trees and a few palm trees. Foundation SelectionAfter a geotechnical exploration that was directed by SME, Plymouth, Mich., and performed by Geolabs, Honolulu, it was discovered that the historical site had hidden and challenging foundation conditions. The subsurface conditions included a very deep but now in-filled ancient river valley containing more than 180 ft (54.9 m) of lagoonal deposits consisting of normally consolidated plastic clayey silts and silty clays with blow counts mainly varying in N-value from 1 to 6. The silt was underlain by several soft coralline layers, some overconsolidated clays and various basalt layers. The static groundwater level on the site was at a depth of about 5 ft (1.5 m), closely matching sea level.Although driven piles had previously been used as the preferred deep foundation support for adjacent structures, this area of town is now fully developed and local noise ordinances preclude their use. Augercast piles were initially considered, but when the general contractor dck/FWF, Pittsburgh, Pa., asked for bids for the augercast piles, several foundation contractors offered alternate systems. The practical installation depth of augercast piles was limited and due to the depth of the in-filled alluvial valley, this system could likely have left soft silt below the tips of the piles over much of the site."

Jan 1, 2016

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

Jan 1, 2016

By Maria Flessas, Justin Ray, Danielle Steinmetz, Brian Zuckerman

"The Ventura County Medical Center Hospital Replacement Wing project consists of the construction of a 2- to 3-story building with a basement encompassing the entire footprint and two corridors connecting the new hospital wing to existing buildings. The site is located in the Ventura Basin where strong ground shaking has been observed during moderate to large earthquakes on nearby faults. The upper 90 feet of the soil consists of loose to medium dense finegrained sands and low plasticity silts that are potentially susceptible to liquefaction, seismic densification, and hydroconsolidation. Ground settlement associated with a large seismic event on a nearby fault is estimated at 20 to 26 inches. To account for the anticipated ground settlement, auger pressure grouted (APG) piles gaining support below the potentially liquefiable soil were selected for the support of the proposed structure. Challenges for pile design included the anticipated earthquake-induced ground settlement, high downdrag loads, low soil lateral capacity during strong ground shaking, and the effect of pile installation on the performance of the existing adjacent buildings and the installed shoring system. The replacement hospital is supported on over 600 APG piles, with lengths varying between 120 and 140 feet. Axial pile capacities were verified with an extensive indicator pile installation program and dynamic pile load testing.INTRODUCTIONThe Hospital Replacement Wing (HRW) project is at the Ventura County Medical Center (VCMC) in Ventura County, Southern California (Figure 1). The VCMC consists of three interconnected hospital buildings (Buildings 303, 304, and Fainer Building), the Medical Laboratory/Cafeteria Building, two mental health buildings, a medical office building, an emergency generator building, and surface parking lots. The HRW is near the center of the campus, adjacent to several existing buildings.The HRW is a 2- to 3-story structure, with a 15- to 20-foot-deep basement beneath the entire 95,000-square-foot building footprint. The HRW project includes a Loading Dock, a four-level corridor to the Fainer Building (Fainer connector), and a two-level corridor to the Medical Laboratory/Cafeteria Building (Café connector). The corridors are structurally separated from the existing buildings. Typical dead plus live load column loads for the HRW range from about 635 kips to 935 kips and total loads range from about 860 kips to 1,295 kips."

Jan 1, 2016

By Timothy Nelson, Simon Burnworth

"The Berkeley Art Museum and Pacific Film Archive (BAMPFA), which currently resides in a 1970s-era post-modern concrete structure just south of the University of California, Berkeley campus, was in need of a new home after an engineering evaluation revealed that the building possessed seismic deficiencies. Pressed for space, the University looked within its portfolio of properties and identified the site of the former University Printing Press facility as the place to build BAMPFA’s new home.The site was perfect; located one block east of bustling downtown Berkeley and its rapid transit station, and directly across the street from the western entrance to the UC Berkeley campus. Thousands of pedestrians pass by the site on a daily basis, thus granting BAMPFA the opportunity to reshape the corner of Center and Oxford Streets with a building that would not only welcome visitors to campus, but also serve as a creative hub for both the City of Berkeley and the UC Berkeley institution itself 1.The original museum plans, drawn up in the mid-2000s, called for complete demolition of the existing abandoned facility and replacement with a visually stunning structure designed by renowned Japanese architect Toyo Ito. Even at this point, the shoring and means and methods requirements of the project were identified as a challenging component, incorporating a shored excavation bounded on three sides by busy city streets and a fourth side by an operating bank and occupied apartment building. Furthermore, a sequenced demolition would be required for the printing press facility’s three-story Administration Building (also known as the Admin Block), one-story printing press warehouse (also known as the Press Building), and an adjacent parking structure. Degenkolb Engineers was retained at that time as the shoring engineer to design the shoring to facilitate this work."

Jan 1, 2016

By George Gazetas, Sissy Nikolaou, Fani Gelagoti, Irene Georgiou, Rallis Kourkoulis

"The need to shift geotechnical design from a “factor of safety” to a “performance based” design (PBD) approach has increased rapidly in the past years following examples from structural engineering. PBD supports sustainable engineered systems that target project-specific geotechnical behavior objectives and results in more rational and, in most cases, less conservative solutions. Resiliency, efficiency, risk optimization, and cost-effectiveness are key components of this approach. For design of retaining walls, the concept of mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) systems combines these attributes, while being environmentally friendly and adaptive to variable construction conditions. Natural hazards, such as earthquakes, may drive the design of MSE systems whose reliability depends on their performance under extreme events. In this paper, the authors compare the seismic response of an MSE steel-reinforced vs. concrete-reinforced retaining wall. The MSE system is composed of a grid of longitudinal and transverse ribs which internally enhances the capacity of the soil backfill. Results of fully non-linear twodimensional (2-D) numerical finite element analyses using two commercial programs with emphasis on the interface conditions are presented. The pull-out resistance of the grid used in the numerical simulation was evaluated from actual pull-out experiments. The results demonstrate a superior performance of the MSE system as compared to the concrete one, especially when subjected to strong seismic excitations.INTRODUCTIONThe idea of performance-based geotechnical engineering is not new, and has been evolving as our perception for ‘good’ performance has also evolved (Kramer, 2008). In early practice, the only criterion for achieving good performance was to avoid failure; designers had only to ensure that the available capacity of the geotechnical system is sufficiently higher than the expected demand (i.e. Load and Resistance Factor Methodologies). Yet, even when the key design requirements against collapse are satisfied, the system may still be placed into a condition in which the deformation constraints are not met (Bolton, 2012). To address these issues, geotechnical design has been developing into a predominantly performance-based approach that correlates deformation considerations to the severity of the experienced loading. As such, in earthquake-related problems, the definition of good performance of a geotechnical system is no more unique; for a low intensity earthquake the system should remain serviceable (i.e., the developed deformations should remain low), whilst for the design earthquake the maintenance of lifesafety is the single performance criterion."

Jan 1, 2016