Search Documents

Jan 1, 1995

By George G. Goble

In the middle of the nineteenth century, the dynamic formula appeared as a description of pile penetration during impact driving. The simplicity of use of the formula combined with the power of the energy concepts behind the formula caused it to be quickly accepted and integrated into practice. Dynamic formula had been in use for 100 years when the Wave Equation computer programs first appeared. With that long experience it is not surprising that the formula continued to be used and were only slowly abandoned. The Wave Equation offers many advantages over the various formula but it does not offer a clear sense of physical understanding of pile driving that is available with the formula. Large amounts of numbers are generated but often it is difficult or impossible to gain a physical understanding of the results or a feeling for the importance of the various parameters. The question that the Wave Equation user has is, "What will happen if I use a larger drive cap (or change any other item of equipment)?" In this paper, I will attempt to explain pile driving using elementary wave propagation theory. However, the presentation will not depend on any higher mathematics. With the use of wave mechanics, it is possible to explain driving characteristics that cannot be handled with the energy formula.

Jan 1, 1995

By Dan Brown

This paper presents a case study of a cyclic lateral pile load testing program performed on two 18-in square prestressed concrete piles (PSC) in Savannah, Georgia. The load test program was developed to simulate the lateral behavior of a single pile under seismic loading conditions for the design and construction of a large LNG storage tank. The lateral load tests included cyclic loading to measure possible degradation in soil response followed by static loading to large displacements (around 6 inches at the loading point). The lateral load was applied through a reciprocating jack positioned to push and pull the piles against each other. The test piles were instrumented with multiple displacement transducers, downhole inclinometer, and strain gauges. This paper provides an interpretation of the test results regarding the pile performance and soil response to monotonic and cyclic lateral loading. A backfitted computational model of the soil resistance was developed to match the test results using the LPILE computer program. The load-deflection and deflection/moment versus depth comparisons suggest that this model appears to capture the behavior relatively well within the general range of suitability for design purposes. New design curves were developed based on the soil parameters derived from the lateral load test results.

Jan 1, 2003

By Charles H. Dowding

Whenever piling vibrations are significant, construction activities associated with pile driving and/or excavation can produce permanent displacement. These permanent displacements are more detrimental to structural performance than the hair sized, cosmetic, plaster cracks that might be produced by slightly exceeding reasonable vibration controls. Case studies are presented which demonstrate the relative importance of permanent displacements compared to directly produced transient vibration displacement within a horizontal distance of one pile length. Special attention is paid to settlements produced by densification of liquefiable sands. SOURCES OF TRANSIENT AND PERMANENT DEFORMATION DURING CONSTRUCTION Confusion over multiple sources of facility deformation caused by adjacent construction complicates the discussion of the relative importance of vibration induced cracking. None of the recent scientific investigations of vibration induced cracking (Siskind et el, 1980), involved deformation other than that produced by ground vibration from rock blasting. Thus these studies carry the implicit assumption that no ground deformation occurred other than that produced by the transient vibration. In other words there is no permanent deformation other than that which is typical of the older residential structures investigated.

Jan 1, 1991

By John P. Turner

The behavior of tieback retaining walls depends on many factors, including soil properties, groundwater conditions, construction sequence, spacing and stiffness of tiebacks and soldier piles, tieback loads, and others. The primary design considerations for tieback walls are 1) adequate stability and 2) limiting wall movements. Traditional design methods rely on apparent earth pressure diagrams and experience to predict the forces which must be supported by the tiebacks to provide adequate stability. The required soil properties depend upon whether the soil is sand, soft clay, or stiff clay. Design to limit wall movements is more difficult and the usual approach is to design the wall with an adequate factor of safety for stability and then evaluate wall movements during construction through the use of load tests on individual tiebacks and monitoring of wall movements by optical surveying, slope indicators, and extensometers. If excessive movements are likely to occur, it is often not known until construction is well underway. This approach is reflected in the fact that few tieback walls fail due to a lack of adequate stability, while most litigation involving tieback wall performance is related to excessive movements. Much progress has been made in recent years in methods for predicting the movement of all types of insitu retaining walls (Clough et al. 1989, Clough and O'Rourke 1990). These methods are based upon both experience and analytical methods. This paper reviews the methods currently available for evaluating both the stability and movements of tieback retaining walls. Case histories involving excavations constructed in the downtown Seattle area are used to evaluate the applicability of the available methods to Seattle conditions and to illustrate the importance of soil behavior in tieback wall performance.

Jan 1, 1990

Jan 1, 1992

By Y. Z. Xu

This paper presents a new dynamic method called Resonant Pile Test (HPT) for evaluating bearing capacity of pile. The basic conception of RPT is given in brief and the measuring system is also introduced. In addition, the influences of the magnitude of exciting force and of the mass of pile cap on test results are discussed. Finally, comparisons between values of bearing capacity given by RPT and by static load tests for a variety of pile types are listed.

Jan 1, 2010

By Andrew Peterson

The Maine Department of Transportation offered this challenging design-build project for a new, 12-span, bridge over the Kennebec River in Bath, Maine. This structure would be built to replace the existing Carlton Bridge connecting the village of Bath, Maine to neighboring Woolwich, Maine. The design build team of Flatiron Structures, Inc., and Figg Engineers, Inc., elected to design and build a segmental concrete bridge. Site conditions dictated that this bridge would be supported primarily on deep foundations. Case Foundation Company joined the project team in the winter of 1997 to install twenty-two, eight foot diameter drilled shafts. The drilled shafts were designed with 8' diameter, permanently cased shaft sections and 7.5' diameter rock sockets. Shaft lengths ranged from 20' long near the river's edge to 100' deep in the middle of the river. Rock socket lengths ranged from 12' to 30' deep. Two Osterberg Cell load tests were conducted on production drilled shafts. Figg Engineers utilized the results of the load tests to "fine-tune" the rock socket design during construction of the drilled shafts. Construction of the drilled shafts proved to be very challenging and called on every member of the design-build team to work together throughout the project. One of the most challenging aspects of this project was in the installation of the 8' diameter permanent casing and drilling of the rock sockets. Early in the project, it became apparent that the top of bedrock was broken and unstable. This condition limited the advancement of the permanent casing and the affect of a "seal" at the top of rock socket. As a result, as the rock socket was advanced, loose material spilled into the hole and stopped progress of the socket. In order to resolve this problem, the design-build team developed a redesigned drilled shaft which included the installation of a steel sleeve to seal off the unstable rock formation. Following installation of the sleeve, the rock socket diameter was reduced to 7' diameter and advanced additional length to achieve required design capacity. All drilled shafts were installed with equipment supported on floating barges. Water access, along with the long shaft lengths and very hard bedrock required the use of cranes and drilling equipment that far exceeded the requirements of typical drilled shaft projects. This paper will discuss the relationship between design, construction, and equipment utilization on this challenging design-build project. [ ]

Jan 1, 1999

By W. J. Grose

The Embankment Place office development over the platforms of Charing Cross Railway Station in London has presented many interesting and unusual problems to the engineers involved with the project. The main structure is supported on widely-spaced columns which penetrate the station platforms and underlying vaults, calling for high capacity foundations built in severely restricted spaces. Hand-dug underreamed piles were chosen. Whilst a conventional design approach was taken to size the piles, a detailed appraisal of ground movements was made to explore the effects of the new building loads on the existing foundations, not only beyond the site perimeter but also those amongst the new foundations. Before construction of the pile proper could take place, it was necessary to sink a caisson through the upper unstable and water-bearing soils. This being identified as a high-risk item, a full-scale trial was carried out prior to embarking on the main works. The twenty-one hand-dug piles were 2.5m diameter, over 30m deep and belled out to between 4.5m and 6.6m.

Jan 1, 1989

By Scott C. Vollmer

This paper seeks to examine some of the technical factors influencing the deflection of Mechanically Stabilized Earth (MSE) retaining walls based on the authors' field observation of numerous structures. Excessive deflections can be unsightly and can be perceived as wall failure. Deflections can cause cracking or gapping of the facing units and general misalignment. Deflection of the reinforced backfill zone behind the wall face can result in settlement of the backfill zone and adjacent pavement cracking. Deflections can be the result of excessive movement external or internal to the reinforced soil structure. This paper only examines internal factors affecting wall deflections. External factors such as foundation settlement are not discussed.

Jan 1, 2003

By George J. Tamara

The urban environment presents special challenges for the design and construction of earth retention systems. Complications arising from difficult subsurface conditions are compounded by the presence of urban infrastructure and existing and prior construction. The proximity of adjacent structures as well as intense prior use can cause special concerns including the potential for archeological artifacts or contaminated ground or ground water. Utilities and structures may be particularly vulnerable to the effects of ground movement, dewatering and vibrations. Difficulty of access, congestion and limited work areas may severely restrict means and methods of construction. Dewatering may be limited or prohibited because of concerns for disposal of clean or contaminated water, depletion of aquifers, drawing of contaminants to the site or dewatering induced settlements.

Jan 1, 2003

A technical exhibition was held in conjunction with the 4th DFI International Conference on Piling and Deep Foundations, Stresa. The exhibition was located in the ground floor of the Conference Hall. It was open from 15.30 on Monday April 8 till 16.30 Thursday April 11, 1991. The following is an alphabetical list of firms who took part. 1) A.P. VAN DEN BERG MACHINENFABRIEK B.V. P.O. BOX 68 8440 AB HEERENVEEN The Netherlands Tel: +31 5130 31355 Fax: +31 5130 31212 Stand Executive: A. Duyfjies

Jan 1, 1994

By Romano J. Micciche

One of the largest scale uses of a multiple, high-strength steel bar tiedown system is described. Tiedowns were installed to resist hydrostatic uplift forces acting on a section of the Interstate Highway Route I-90 southern approach roadway to the Third Harbor Tunnel, in Boston, Massachusetts. Site specific information is discussed regarding design, testing, and installation of Tiedowns. Conclusions are presented regarding the overall performance of this system and the application of this type of tiedown system on future projects.

Jan 1, 1994

By David A. Jack

The Mission Valley Viaduct is located in San Diego, California. This structure is the intersection of Interstate 8 and 805. The project consists of the main viaduct, 8 connecting ramps, and one highway overpass. This job was originally built back in the 70's. After the Loma Prieta Earthquake in 1989, Caltrans began an aggressive program to seismic retrofit all of its bridges throughout the state. Most retrofit designs required major upgrades to the existing footings. These footing upgrades consisted of either driven or drilled shaft piling. The existing footings of the Mission Valley interchange were supported on driven H pile. The soils throughout the site were dense sands and gravels, cobbles, occasional boulders with a dense sandstone bearing strata, which varied through out the site. It was this sandstone strata that the engineers designed their pile tips around. High ground water in sandy soils created a high probability of liquefaction in all of the upper stratas.

Jan 1, 1998

By Masanoub R. Fujioka

A brief discussion of the methodologies involved in dewatering practices, particularly as used in Hawaii in coralline formations. A description of early dewatering practices includes a number of case histories; later dewatering practices also are detailed with case histories. There were disasters and some successes. Grouting generally was not successful. Deep wells are technically feasible and generally the economical solution to deep basement construction.

Jan 1, 1986

By Guo H. Lei

Over the last four decades, barrettes have been ever-increasingly adopted as the foundations for tall buildings and heavy infrastructure projects all over the world. Many findings have been gained from practical applications and theoretical researches. In this article, a collection of literature is reviewed on the installation effects and load-carrying behaviour of barrettes derived from field and laboratory tests and theoretical studies. It covers many aspects, such as the ground deformations and stress changes caused by the installation of barrettes, the shaft resistance mobilisation behaviour, the construction effects on the shaft resistance, and the effects of pile spacing, pile shape and pile group layout on the load-carrying behaviour of barrettes.

Jan 1, 2006

By Mohamad Hussein

Low strain dynamic tests are performed to evaluate the structural integrity of driven or cast-in-place concrete piles. This type of testing requires minimal pile preparation, and is simply performed by attaching an accelerometer to the pile head and striking the pile head with a hand held hammer. The measured data is processed by a dedicated system, inspected for wave reflections, and interpreted based on one dimensional wave propagation theory. Piles are normally tested shortly after installation so that problems can be identified early and corrective measures taken before construction of the superstructure. However, evaluation of existing foundations is occasionally required. Often, pile installation records are not available rendering impossible any rational foundation reanalysis. This paper discusses three case histories where low strain dynamic measurements allowed determination of pile lengths and structural integrity under existing structures where pile heads were not accessible.

Jan 1, 1992

By Richard J. Hartman

This presentation identifies some of the more common problems associated with cofferdam construction. After the various problems are identified, they are briefly explained and possible solutions and preventive measures are noted. Photographic slides used during the seminar illustrate the conditions. This discussion is limited to cofferdams which are braced structures excavated inside to allow access for construction. The common procedure is to drive sheet piling and then alternatively install bracing and excavate. They can be located either on land or in water. Loads are applied by soil, water, surcharge pres-sure, eccentricities, and impact loads. The loads are resisted by the sheet piling, the bracing, and the soil below the bottom of the excavation; each of these three components must be capable of resisting the applied loads.

Jan 1, 1987

By Rajesh Minda

160 numbers of double bulb underreamed piles were constructed based on the safe loads specified in IS code at Tripura. The pile load tests yielded a much lower capacity. A detailed investigation work was carried out to find out the reasons for anomaly. The work included soil exploration followed by extraction of two piles bearing numbers 72 and 151. It was seen that the bulbs were not formed as per specification. Some comments on IS Code have been made at the end.

Jan 1, 1996

By Patrick Bermingham

This report presents the results of six STATNAMIC loading tests that were carried out on four different pile types at the CALTRANS 280 Test Site (Bridge No. 34-46) in conjunction with the Tension Pile Test Program. The STATNAMIC testing was performed by Berminghammer Corporation at the request of the California Department of Transportation, Office of Geotechnical Engineering. Others performed the static tension (uplift) and compression loading tests which werecarried out on the piles tested using the STATNAMIC method. A summary of the STATNAMIC test results is presented and discussed, and the appropriate results are compared with the static test results

Jan 1, 1993