Search Documents

By Dean Abbondanza

"Below grade foundation design has construction issues that above grade foundations do not. These cost factors are dependent on soil conditions and vary by region, but for the most part, the process remains standard.An innovative design concept using steel sheet piles as the permanent wall element changes the traditional cost and schedule for below grade foundations. The sheet pile application reduces dewatering requirements, does not require waterproofing on the vertical walls and eliminates the cast in place concrete wall structure.Foremost, this versatile application affords both Contractor and Designer the choice of two methods of construction; conventional bottom up or top down. The top down method not only provides the savings of bottom up, but also eliminates the cost of anchors while taking the foundation out of the critical path in the early stages of construction. CONVENTIONAL FOUNDATIONSINTRODUCTIONUS construction for a conventional below grade (BG) foundation is fairly standard. Design and install the shoring system, followed by dewatering (if groundwater is present), then excavate in stages with installation of anchorage as work proceeds to final elevation. The site is graded for a waterproofing system to be placed at the base. Once the base slab is cast; forms are set for the vertical reinforced walls. After curing , waterproofing is applied to the back side. The remaining levels are constructed until ground elevation is reached. The site is backfilled and the ground floor is cast. The foundation is now complete and work on the superstructure can now begin."

Jan 1, 2005

By Ana Pereira, Naomi Norris, Donald Bruggers

The city of Christchurch, New Zealand is predominantly founded on alluvial sediments consisting of interbedded layers of loose to medium dense sand, soft to stiff silt and clay mixtures, and pockets of organics. These soil deposits have high liquefaction potential. Following the 2010/2011 Canterbury Earthquake Sequence several ground improvement trials were undertaken within Christchurch to understand the effectiveness of different types of ground improvement in these silty sand geological conditions. This paper presents a discussion of a stone column ground improvement trial undertaken at a Christchurch site with high fines content soils. Stone columns were installed using two types of installation methods and a range of Area Replacement Ratios (ARR) to assess the effectiveness of these ground improvement methods in high fines content soils as well as the influence on the type of installation method. Pre- and post-column installation CPTs, seismic Dilatometer Tests (sDMTs), cross-hole shear wave velocity tests, and plate load tests have been undertaken to assess the effectiveness of the ground improvement. Results of the testing are presented in this paper. INTRODUCTION This paper presents the results of a stone column ground improvement trial undertaken in Christchurch, New Zealand (Fig.1). In 2010 and 2011, four large earthquakes (greater than magnitude 5.9) and thousands of smaller aftershocks occurred in the greater Christchurch region. These events are referred to as the Canterbury Earthquake Sequence (CES). Liquefaction occurred across large portions of the city during the stronger earthquakes, particularly the February 2011 event. Following the CES a large amount of data was collected across the city including the location and volume of sand boils, and the location and magnitude of ground cracks. Additionally, data from thousands of ground investigations have been uploaded into a public database. As a result, there is clear evidence that silt and silty sands liquefy in addition clean sands. The CES and resulting liquefaction motivated a series of studies and trials from different organisations aiming to better understand the available technologies for liquefaction mitigation. The subject of this paper is a ground improvement trial undertaken by a local contractor specialising in deep foundations and ground improvement. They were interested in understanding the effectiveness of stone column ground improvement in high fines content (silty) soils using two different installation techniques, vibratory and non-vibratory. Different arrays and Area Replacement Ratios (ARRs) were used for each of the two methods of columns installation.

Jan 1, 2019

By Bernard B. Vannoy, Howard W. Gault, Ramesh Bobba

"Treviicos-Soletanche Joint Venture (JV) and the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) have installed a 3800-foot long, 275-foot deep and minimum 2-foot wide secant pile barrier wall at Wolf Creek Dam in Jamestown, KY. This paper describes the methodology employed by the JV and USACE to evaluate the overlap, thickness, and position of the barrier wall. It addresses the contractual requirements, positional uncertainty, and evaluation procedures.These procedures evolved over the course of the project as various issues were identified and procedures developed to evaluate these issues. During the project, it became clear that the JV and USACE could ascertain that the wall thickness and overlap requirements could be met if the overlap based upon Koden data was at least 0.7’ in the left-right direction. For a small number of piles with overlaps between 0.5’ and 0.7’, the piles are contractually compliant yet contain a minor degree of uncertainty in the overlap. Initially, the USACE assumption was that the amount of uncertainty of verticality measurements would require more than a 1-foot measured overlap in the left-right direction to confirm an actual, contractual 6-inch overlap. With time and experience, the limit of measured overlap was reduced in accordance with greater understanding of the equipment capabilities and tolerances. Other lessons learned include the need for Quality Control/Assurance personnel to collect data at the same starting point for every pile.For every pile the JV and USACE compared analog and digital data to provide confidence that the correct digital data was used for overlap calculations. Perhaps the most important lesson learned was the importance of the JV and USACE working together and sharing all data. Overlap analysis was performed by the JV’s Barrier Wall Specialist and a small number of USACE personnel. This resulted in a high level of experience and expertise within a small group.IntroductionThe Treviicos-Soletanche Joint Venture (JV) and the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) have installed a 3800-foot long, 275-foot deep, and minimum 2-foot wide secant pile barrier wall at Wolf Creek Dam in Jamestown, KY. The wall was installed through a 6-foot wide Protective Concrete Embankment Wall (PCEW) which was installed two feet into rock. The PCEW protects the embankment from erosion of drilling fluids during subsequent operations. Below the PCEW the piles were installed to a specified elevation (staggered at 475’ and 473’ below the 748.2’ work platform). The Ordovician limestone and shale bedrock is flat lying with few vertical fractures. These conditions facilitate the advancement of pilot holes with very low deviations (with considerable credit to the JV’s drillers and steering engineers). The pilot holes were spaced on 31.5-inch and 35-inch spacing. Subsequent enlargement of the pilot holes to 50’ resulted in a continuous wall. This paper addresses the requirements and procedures to assure that the wall was as wide, deep and continuous as specified."

Jan 1, 2015

By Lawrence F. Johnsen, Felix Ferrer, Dino Tomasetti, Cassandra A. Wetzel

"A 17 story building was constructed at the Brooklyn Navy Yard on a site with a long history of development. Most recently the site supported a dewatering well and craneway to service two adjacent drydocks. The subsurface conditions generally consist of the following strata and approximate depths: miscellaneous fill and debris to 20 ft., organic soils to 35 ft., liquefiable sand to 45 ft., varved clay to 65 ft., glacial till to 95 ft. and gneiss bedrock.Hollow core bar piles replaced 18 in. diameter caissons on a 1.67:1 basis. The resulting service loads on the hollow bar piles were 600 kips compression, 21 kips lateral, 180 kips tension and 450 inch-kips moment. The top 30 feet of the hollow bar was cased with a 16 in. x 0.375 in. Grade 50 steel pipe. The piles were socketed 6 feet into bedrock. An extensive load testing program confirmed the axial and lateral load capacities. The paper will also discuss some adjustments to the installation procedure based on the load test program.PROJECTThe hollow bar piles were installed to support a 95,000 sf footprint, 17-story office building at the Brooklyn Navy Yard. The Brooklyn Navy Yard was first developed in the late 1700’s to build merchant vessels. The federal government purchased the old docks and adjoining 40 acres in 1801. The site was an active U. S. Naval Shipyard from 1806 to its decommissioning in 1966. At its peak in World War II it employed 70,000 people, 24 hours a day. Since 1966 the property has been converted to private manufacturing and commercial activity.The site is located between Dry Docks 2 and 3. The adjacent drydocks extend 40 to 43 feet below grade. The drydock walls are restrained by tierods extending back to deadman anchors. The site is also underlain by piles that were installed to support rail lines and a craneway. The building footprint also covered an 85 ft. wide, 70 ft. deep dewatering well which had a thick slab. The structural engineer for the project, ARUP, designed the building to span over the dewatering well.SUBSURFACE CONDITIONSIn September 2014, Langan Engineering conducted a geotechnical engineering study for the project. Figure 1 provides a subsurface profile through the long axis of the site. The general soil profile was very erratic but generally consisted of miscellaneous fill and debris to 20 ft., organic soils to 35 ft., liquefiable sand to 45 ft., varved clay to 65 ft., glacial till to 95 ft. and gneiss bedrock. The fill contained numerous obstructions from the over 200 years of site development. The organic soils were mostly very weak and compressible organic silt. The depths and thicknesses of the varved clay, and sand varied"

Jan 1, 2017

By Lisheng Shao

Soil mixing and jet grouting have been widely used to support heavy structures such as tanks, cement silos, and storage buildings. Although the installation methods vary between soil mixing and jet grouting, the end product of soil-cement columns behaves similarly in supporting structure loads. In many cases, soil-cement mass treatment offers the owner savings over driven/drilled piles. This paper discusses the design methodology, production work, and quality control, with supporting figures, of a recent large complex tank farm project. The project consisted of constructing six above-ground steel storage tanks and an approximately 700-foot-long fill slope. The tank farm site is located in an industrial area of southern California, with highly variable subsurface conditions consisting of compressible soils and buried construction debris. The compressible soils necessitated that the new tanks be supported on deep foundations. A test pile program performed previously at the site showed that conventional driven concrete piles were not feasible because of buried construction debris, therefore a soilcrete system was proposed. Site design included evaluating the total and differential settlement and column group bearing capacity under both static and seismic loads. Extensive field and laboratory testing confirmed the design soil-cement strength and modulus of both the soil mixed and jet grouted soil-cement columns. The project operation and quality control programs are also included in this paper.

Jan 1, 2010

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

By Waddah Akili

This paper describes the steps taken in planning, developing, and executing a case study/ case history course in geotechnical/ foundation engineering at an international university. The paper sheds light on: how a “workable” format for the course was arrived at; the organization of the course; and the results of evaluating the effectiveness of this approach versus traditional lecturing. Problems and challenges that could arise when offering the course for the first time are also addressed. Embedded in this experience and its related protocols are: the emphases on engineering design and the practice, teamwork and leadership development, organizational management, and oral and written communication skills. The paper concludes by confirming that discussions, through an open forum, are judged to be superior to traditional lectures in improving critical thinking, cultivating desirable personal attributes, and acquiring problem-solving skills.

By Brian Koch

Michels installed 242 drilled shafts to support the piers for a new basket-handle, true-arch twin bridge across the Mississippi River from Moline, IL to Bettendorf, IA. The installation of the drilled shafts was completed with the simultaneous use of two Liebherr LB36 and one IMT 300 drill rigs. Utilizing barges, 233 drilled shafts were installed in the river. Michels crews also installed 7-ft to 10-ft permanent steel casing into the bedrock, and drilled to depths of 60 feet for each shaft. Despite working in strong currents, freezing temperatures and on rocking barges, Michels crews placed the shafts within 3 inches of plan position. Since the drilled shafts are the key piece in supporting the bridge structure, Michels provided cross-hole sonic logging to verify the integrity and strength of the concrete within the shafts and to add another level of quality control for the owner/customer. Extensive planning took place each day to ensure that tugboats, the linchpin of the project, were being efficiently utilized to shift the barges and materials daily. On any given day, Michels transported five concrete trucks by barge from shore to shaft sites to pour between 40 and 240 cubic yards of concrete. The Michels environmental team was diligent with preparing, discussing and implementing a water treatment plan that was accepted by all state and federal agencies and adhered to strict environmental regulations. Grain hopper barges were rented to control and treat the water that was used in the drilling operations. Another challenge crews ran into was the discovery of caverns when drilling into some parts of the bedrock. Michels worked with the engineer to develop a plan to construct the drilled shafts that encountered the caverns.

Jan 1, 2019

By Lois G. Schwarz

I did not make studies about this parameter but I can say that some researchers recommend using low C3A cements to repair masonry mortar in order to reduce a possible combination with sulphate that can be present in old mortars.

Feb 10, 2003

By Martin B. Hudson, Andrew K. Cho, Rolff B. Knobel, Les R. Chernauskas, Jonathan L. Ernst

ABSTRACT The Bruce Museum, located in Greenwich, Connecticut, is home to an extensive display of art and natural history exhibitions. A large addition was designed to be constructed adjacent to the museum requiring new spread footings to be installed up to 16.5 feet below the existing foundations. The soil conditions at the site consist of highly variable sand and gravel overlying weathered rock and sound bedrock. The Contract Documents called for traditional foundation underpinning. Traditional underpinning techniques, however, presented two major challenges on this Project; (1) deep underpinning pits would be required involving multiple levels and staging with tieback support and (2) the highly variable soil and bedrock composition and elevations presented uncertainty in the design and construction of the pits. In lieu of traditional underpinning, Geosciences Testing and Research, Inc. (GTR) proposed an “active” soil nail underpinning system. A major reason that the soil nail underpinning option was feasible, related to the fact that the soil nails and facing could be installed slightly in front of the existing footings rather than directly underneath the existing footings. The soil nail wall design involved one to four rows of soil nails with nail positions and wall depth able to be adjusted “on the fly” as excavation progressed depending on the field conditions encountered. To create the “active system,” the soil nails were pre-loaded to mitigate wall deformations that would be associated with a standard passive soil nail wall design. To evaluate the performance of the active soil nail wall and confirm design assumptions, an extensive automated monitoring, on-site testing and inspection program was proposed and executed by GTR to monitor deformations of the wall and the museum in real-time, evaluate and confirm bedrock and soil bond stresses and ensure that each soil nail was pre-loaded and locked off. Careful analysis, planning, and use of the observational method illustrates the importance of collaboration between design and construction personnel and applying engineering judgement throughout construction. The use of the observational method includes the potential for modifying design based on conditions observed. This paper presents a unique case study of the “active” soil nail underpinning system to support and protect sensitive structures, close collaboration between design and construction facilitated by real-time deformation monitoring, and its successful application as a safe and cost-effective alternative to traditional underpinning.

Oct 1, 2022

By Adnan A. Malik, Tadashi Maejima, Jiro Kuwano

"The use of steel screw piles has greatly increased in recent years because of the advancement in the installation mechanism and its performance under compressive, uplift and lateral loads. In a steel pile system, the strength of pile material limits the end bearing resistance of the pile due to strong subsurface conditions. The installation mechanism of screw pile can reduce the end bearing resistance due to the torque and axial force. However, if the installation mechanism does not reduce the bearing resistance of the pile, another important factor that can reduce its performance is the strength of the helix/wing plate. In this study, the effect of wing plate deformation on the performance of single helix/wing plate pile bearing resistance investigated. A model ground was used to investigate the effect of wing plate deformation. Dry Toyoura sand was used as a ground material and was compacted to denser states of 80% and 92%. The shaft and wing plate material of the pile was the same to actual piles that are used nowadays in Japan. A series of load tests were performed with different wing plate diameters and thicknesses. It was observed that deflection in the wing plate reduces the bearing resistance of the pile. The increase in the thickness of the wing plate was seen to restore the reduced pile resistance due to deflection. It was also observed from the experimental results that the ratio of wing plate diameter to shaft diameter (Dw/Ds) greatly affects the deformation of wing plates, which ultimately affects the end bearing resistance of the pile. The results obtained in this research suggest that the outstand length (Lw) of wing plate should be less than 5.6 times the thickness of wing plate for piles having a large Dw/Ds ratio under strong ground conditions.INTRODUCTIONThe first use of screw pile was almost 180 years ago by Alexander Mitchell. He patented his invention in 1833 with the name “Screw Pile”, and used it for ship moorings. The use of screw piles has since been adopted in various areas such as lighthouses, fencing for agriculture and marine structures. The use of screw piles in civil works started in 1985, after the invention of the hydraulic torque motor, as it eases the installation process. Nowadays, screw piles are used in the foundation of transmission towers, elevators, buildings and many other civil structures.Screw pile has an edge over other steel pile systems due to its high bearing, uplift and lateral resistance. The end bearing resistance of screw pile depends on installation, strength of subsurface material and the pile material. The screw pile is installed by applying torque and axial force. The pile torsional strength should be more than the applied torque and axial force to avoid deformation before reaching the final depth."

Jan 1, 2015

By Peter Iovino

Unfortunately, I don't know the unit cost per cubic yard of treatment. I reflected on that yesterday and I don't think that we considered the use of micropiles. They could have been an option. The challenge may have been picking up some of the lateral load but I think the micropiles could have been installed on a batter and perhaps extended to rock. We could have considered them, but I do not believe we explored micropiles as an option for this project.

Feb 10, 2003

By John Erikson, Alan J. Lutenegger, Nicholas Williams

"In order to evaluate the level of disturbance produced in clays during installation, a series of single-helix and multi-helix anchors were installed at a test site consisting of a stiff overconsolidated clay crust overlying softer near normally consolidated clay. Field vane tests were then conducted over the top of the helical plates at various depths to determine the undrained shear strength after installation and were compared with undrained shear strength measured in adjacent undisturbed ground. The tests represent the first time that the degree of installation disturbance has been evaluated directly and show that even with perfect installation practice the clay is disturbed as a result of rotation of the helices during installation. The results show that the soil is not completely remolded but that the strength is below the peak undrained strength of the adjacent undisturbed ground. Measurement of the installation torque and the rate of advance are used to define an “Installation Disturbance Factor” which may help to evaluate the quality of the installation by the Contractor and degree of soil disturbance. INTRODUCTIONAn important consideration in the design of Helical Anchors is the degree of disturbance to the soil during installation. This may be especially important for saturated fine-grained soils where the disturbance from installation may produce a reduction of the undrained shear strength. Even though this was recognized as early as 1950 by Skempton, soil disturbance is often ignored by engineers using current design procedures. Field investigations were performed to obtain both directs and indirect evaluation of the degree of disturbance produced by the installation of single-helix and multi-helix anchors in clay and the influence of disturbance on behavior. The investigations involved measurement of torque and advance during installation, load tests performed to determine load-displacement behavior and ultimate capacity and field vane tests performed over the helical anchors to evaluate changes in undrained shear strength as compared to adjacent undisturbed ground. The characteristics of the site and details of the installation are presented. Results of the field vane tests are shown for a number of helical anchor installations and results of load tests are presented. The results indicate that a reduction should be made to the undisturbed undrained shear strength for design and that the reduction may be related to the Sensitivity of the clay and quality of installation."

Jan 1, 2017

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

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

Jan 1, 2017

By Michael E. Ameel

The vibrated beam method of installing a vertical barrier wall is one of the least applied techniques, yet given certain site conditions and constraints, it is a cost-effective and proven method of controlling lateral groundwater flows. A recent full-scale application of this technique demonstrated its usefulness at an active manufacturing facility located in Northern Wisconsin. At this site, a 3,233 foot long cutoff wall was keyed into an underlying bedrock, which was located an average of 40 feet below the ground surface. Using a slag cement-clay based slurry, a 1E-7 cm/sec or less, nominal 4-inch wide cut-off wall was constructed using the vibrated beam method. Challenges included working around an active manufacturing facility with minimal access to the work area; installing the wall through a very dense glacial till; minimizing soil excavation volumes of potentially impacted soil; and, working around and adjacent to numerous active utility lines without impacting the facility operations. At utility locations, the vibrated beam wall was supplemented with a jet grout panel wall, without the need to bypass or otherwise interrupt any of the plant?s utilities. Quality control consisted of the monitoring and measuring of slurry parameters, survey control, and real-time monitoring and documentation of all critical barrier wall installation parameters. A vibration monitoring plan was also implemented to measure vibrations at utilities and adjacent facility structures. Proper equipment selection, significant up-front planning and close coordination with the facility resulted in a safe and successful project. The work was completed ahead of schedule during the 2009 construction season.

Jan 1, 2010

By Trent Dreese

For critical velocities in gravel units we use Bush-Luckner, Sichardt, other empirical equations, and equations derived from laboratory experiments too. On the base of these, we compiled critical velocity - permeability coefficient dependencies. Under the lower border of these dependencies sand particles can't be moved, and thus they are stable. For critical velocities in the fissures of flysh and volcanic rocks we use Ronzhin (1974) criteria derived from laboratory experiments in Russia. Maximal filtration velocities measured by tracer methods in gravel soils and in fissured rocks have smaller values then the critical ones.

Feb 10, 2003

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 Glen Mann, H. G. Vestberg, Robert D. Holtz

"Underpinning of residential and commercial structures is often accomplished using a number of driven-in-place small diameter steel pipe piles. These piles, at least in the Seattle area, are typically described as pin-piles and are driven with an air compressor operated jack hammer to a refusal criterion developed from an empirical basis. Over the past twenty years or so, the materials have improved in quality and strength, and the driving equipment has improved in efficiency and capability. These improvements have resulted in damage to the pin-piles during driving as well as to the driving equipment. The primary objectives of this load testing study were to develop a relationship between the driving penetration resistance of 2-inch diameter pin-piles and the ultimate bearing capacity when piles were driven at different penetration rates and, based on the load test results, to develop an opinion regarding an increase in the allowable axial load capacity [ultimate load capacity divided by a factor of safety] of a 2-inch diameter pin-pile over the currently used permissible load capacity of 4 kips in the Seattle area. Also, if feasible, a reduction in the present driving penetration rate was to be recommended to help reduce the rate and magnitude of pile and equipment damage whilst maintaining the allowable load capacity. The recorded ultimate bearing capacities were also compared with the Tagnent-line and the Davisson analytical methods in an effort to determine if either of these provided a reasonable determination of the pile load capacity.IntroductionThis paper describes the results of a series of load tests performed on small diameter, 2-inch, driven-in-place steel pin (pipe) piles and based on these results, provides the support for a modification to the presently used allowable axial pin-pile capacities.The intent of the load testing program was to determine how much influence the penetration resistance might have on the individual piles' ability to support the allowable axial load without undergoing any significant vertical deformation. For the purposes of this paper the ""allowable load capacity"" is considered to be the ultimate pile load capacity divided by a minimum factor of safety, typically considered to be 2.0 in this area. A pin (pipe) pile comprises an open or closed ended, schedule 80 steel tube which is driven-in-place, usually with an air compressor operated 90 pound pneumatic jack hammer. These jack hammers typically operate at a rate of about 1,200 blows per minute, (Haggard, Holtz and Mann, 2001 )."

Jan 1, 2005

Technically speaking, the concept of NDT sounds like the "magic bullet" when faced with a questionable drilled shaft. All the Contractor or Engineer needs to do is select an NDT method, apply it, understand the details and extent of the defect and determine whether it will impact the load carrying capacity of the shaft during it’s design life. Unfortunately, it is not that simple. NDT is a tool utilized to indirectly assess the condition of the completed drilled shaft. For the most effective interpretation, NDT data should be correlated with the subsurface information, visual observation, and detailed shaft installation records. The basis for acceptance or rejection of drilled shafts should not be solely based on NDT. The parties responsible for specifying, interpreting and using the NDT results must understand the capabilities and limitations of the method to be utilized, in conjunction with the relevant subsurface conditions of the site, before selecting and specifying a system and acting on the results. This is necessary so that an appropriate NDT method can be specified and contracted. In this manner the results and roles of the responsible parties can be clearly defined.

Jan 1, 2004

By Rick Deschamps

"Fountain Slide is located approximately 10 mi (16 km) northeast of Lillooet, British Columbia, Canada, within the Coastal Mountain Range, and has been locally active since the 1970s. The project site is located near the base of the relic Tunnel Mountain landslide. The progressive movements have posed a significant challenge to British Columbia (BC) 99, the main north-south highway in the region. The slide began affecting the British Columbia Railway Company (BCR) tracks in the 1990s. In 2004, the Canadian National Railway Company (CN) acquired BCR and, during the next 11 years, undertook measures to stabilize the rail bed. Some of the measures undertaken include numerous track realignments, a shotcrete and soil nail wall, an anchored soldier pile-and-lagging wall, and adding a row of anchors to the wall. For many years, the measures had proved successful until mid-2014 when it was observed that the slide retrogressed uphill of the tracks. Since that time, the slide movements typically ranged between 5/32 and 0.4 in (4 and 10 mm) per day, leading to extreme distortion of the earth retention system and the need for frequent track realignment.In the spring of 2016, CN issued a request for proposals (RFP) for a designbuild solution with the expectations of: (1) a safety factor greater than 1.2, (2) considering only the currently identified retrogressive blocks that extend to about 200 ft (61 m) above the track; and (3) minimizing activities outside the current easement. It was also communicated that there was a possibility that a portion of the line may have to be abandoned if the proposed remediation was cost prohibitive.The fact that the existing slide was a small fraction of the relic slide was intimidating. The relic slide extended for approximately 1.0 mi (1.6 km) above the uppermost retrogressive block that was now affecting the rail line. Other areas of concern included:"

Jan 1, 2017