Search Documents

By Michael W. Neill, O&apos

Drilling slurry has become an effective aid to the construction of drilled shafts in caving and/or waterbearing soils. Historically, drilling slurry made of bentonitic clay and water was first used in the US in water well drilling as early as 1889. In coastal Texas drilled shaft contractors began using slurry, often made of on-site clay mixed with potable water, in the years following World War II, on a relatively routine basis. This type of slurry was used to "process" boreholes, in which the borehole was drilled "in the dry" until water or unstable soil was encountered, after which water and on-site clay were introduced into the borehole and mixed in place with the auger or other drilling tool. Drilling then continued under a slurry consisting of the uncontrolled mixture of clay and water until the excavation had reached a relatively impermeable and cohesive material. At this point, a steel casing was dropped into the hole and sealed into the lower stratum of impermeable geomaterial (soil or rock). The slurry inside the casing was bailed or pumped out, drilling continued to plan depth in the dry, a reinforcing cage was set in the partially cased borehole, concrete was placed and the casing was withdrawn. Some soil-slurry was undoubtedly trapped between the casing and the borehole wall, but the quality of that slurry was usually of no concern, because engineers of the period usually viewed drilled shafts as nothing more than deeply buried footings. Any unejected slurry would only serve to lower side shearing resistance, not yet considered in design, but would have no effect on end bearing. In the 1960 's the effectiveness of soil-slurry came into question because it was often ineffective in maintaining borehole stability at marginal drilling sites and because the economy of using shaft resistance, in addition to end

Jan 1, 1991

By Masaki Kitazume

"Abstract The wet type and dry type of deep mixing methods have been developed and widely applied for on-land and marine constructions in Japan. The quality assurance (QA) of the methods has been usually carried out by unconfined compression test on field stabilized soil sampled by core boring in Japan. In some other countries, stabilized soil excavated by the wet grab sampling instead of core sampling is often subjected to unconfined compression test for quality assurance. There are several merits and demerits in each method, but few studies have been carried out to compare the stabilized soil strength of these two types of specimens to discuss their applicability to practical construction. The author has conducted a series of field and laboratory tests to compare the stabilized soil strength and discuss the applicability of wet grab sampling to QA for wet and dry types of deep mixing method.In this study, the wet grab sampling was carried out at two road embankment construction sites where the wet type and dry type of deep mixing were applied. The cement stabilized soil was excavated at the three depths by a wet grab sampler soon after the DM column construction. The test result is compared with the other test data in the previous study to discuss the applicability of the web grab sampling method for QA of cement stabilized soil.IntroductionThe Deep Mixing Method (DMM), an in-situ soil stabilization technique using cement and/or lime as a binder, is often employed to improve soft soils (Kitazume and Terashi, 2013). A variety of factors and their interactions affect the eventual strength of a deep-mixed column, while some of which are controllable (e.g. binder type and dose) by engineers while the others are not (e.g. soil types, ground temperature, etc.; Babasaki et al., 1997). In addition to laboratory mix tests, which in essence are a parametric study to estimate the influence of these factors on a particular soil’s strength, the quality assurance (QA) practice in Japan usually involves unconfined compression test on sampling cores from the stabilized columns after a given curing period. It has been recognized, however, that the ‘field strength’, or the strength of the retrieved core, quf is on average lower than the ‘laboratory strength’, qul, evaluated by laboratory mix test. Also allowing for the inevitable variability, existing guidelines (for example, PWRC, 2004 and CDIT, 2008) recommend the design quf /qul values of, for example, 0.5-1.0 for the CDM (Cement Deep Mixing; a wet-type technique, in which binder is added as slurry) and 0.2-0.33 for the DJM (Dry Jet Mixing; a dry-type technique, in which binder is added as powder)."

Jan 1, 2014

By Raymond J. Castelli

The paper provides a general overview of the numerous types of earth retaining systems currently available, and organizes these various systems by several classification methods. These classifications can be used as a guide in identifying the appropriate type wall or walls for any specific project application. As a further aid in sorting through the numerous wall alternatives for a specific design or construction project application, the paper suggests a systematic approach for wall selection, and presents helpful charts summarizing the general advantages and disadvantages, and typical limitations for the currently available wall systems.

Jan 1, 2003

By Patrick Bermingham

The advancement of hydraulic impact hammers has followed the general advancement of hydraulics. The construction industry has been revolutionized by the application of hydraulics in excavators, cranes and, of course, in the hydraulic vibratory driver/extractor, which has become a standard tool. The innate ability to move a large mass with a very small displaced volume has given hydraulic power the advantage over previous power mediums. Recent development of more specialized and complex seal configurations and compounds has greatly improved the reliability and permitted the use of higher pressures in hydraulic systems.

Jan 1, 1987

After the Loma Prieta Earthquake, which caused major damage to viaducts in the Bay Area, the California Department of Transportation set up a test programme for foundation piles. Funderingstechnieken Verstraeten B.V., beter known as Fundex, was approached, since one of the piling systems of Fundex, named Tubex, is extremely suitable in areas sensitive to earthquakes and we were very much interested to prove the capabilities of this piling system. Equipment For the installation of Tubex and Tubex grout-injection piles special piling equipment is required. Since our company is not only a contractor, but also a designer and manufacturer of piling equipment, all special equipment for our range of foundation techniques is designed and built by our own piling equipment department. For the installation of both Tubex piles and Tubex grout-injection piles for the Caltrans test programme, the following pieces of equipment were selected: a) Fundex F12 piling rig b) Drill table c) Hydraulic powerpack d) Grout mixing unit and high pressure pump

Jan 1, 1993

By Magnus Ruin

The dry deep mixing method for stabilization of soft soil has been used in the Scandinavian countries for 25 years. The typical application has been stabilization of soft inorganic clay. Today the method is used more frequently in organic soil with good results. The Limix System, introduced in the USA by Hercules Grundläggning AB and TREVIICOS Corporation, is a cost-effective dry deep mixing method used to stabilize most types of soft soil. This paper presents the general principles of stabilizing organic soil with the dry mix method and two case histories of soil stabilization projects in organic soil. Between October 2000 and June 2001 the Limix System was used in England to stabilize soft organic alluvium at the Channel Tunnel Rail Link, Contract 440. During year 2000 the Limix System was used in soft organic soil in Holland near the Groene Hart Tunnel entrance to support trench excavations for slurry walls and concrete barrettes.

Jan 1, 2001

By Mike Neill, O&apos

? Bypass soft soils near the surface ? Resist uplift loads ? Resist lateral loads ? Bypass scourable soils ? Bypass liquefyable soils ? Mitigate movement of expansive or frozen soils ? "Tune" foundations for vibrating machinery

Jan 1, 1998

By Fawad S. Niazi

Ever since the use of the cone penetration test (CPT) in geotechnical practice, attempts have been made to correlate CPT parameters with pile capacity components of unit end bearing (qb) and unit shaft resistance (fp), thus deriving multiple CPT-based pile design methods. These methods focus on "capacity" only without consideration to complete axial pile load-displacement (Q-w) response. Estimated capacities from these methods also exhibit considerable scatter without any consensus on their consistency. In addition, load-displacement curves obtained from axial load tests on highly expensive and extensively instrumented piles can exhibit different shapes. Nevertheless, a single value from the curve so obtained dictates the design capacity. Currently, there are at least 42 different criteria defining capacity with considerable variation in the values obtained thereof. The Randolph elastic solution, which provides a framework for analytical evaluation of pile load-displacement response, requires the profiles of soil stiffness. The fundamental soil stiffness defined by the small-strain shear modulus (Gmax) can be obtained from shear wave velocity (Vs) readings via seismic piezocone tests (SCPTu). The secant stiffness (G), which softens from Gmax corresponding to operational load levels, can be obtained by generating stiffness reduction curves from back analysis of load tests. Then, using appropriate G values, the Q-w curve can be defined for conditions similar to the database from the pseudo strain (w/d). Thus, a complete framework for optimal integration of SCPTu data, Randolph elastic solution and back-analysis of field operational stiffness can be established for complete axial pile foundation analysis.

Jan 1, 2011

GENERAL CONTRACTOR: ALEXANDER CONSTRUCTORS, INC. STRUCTURAL ENGINEER: CAGLEY & ASSOCIATES, INC. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER: F.T. KITLINSKI & ASSOCIATES, INC. PILE FOUNDATION CONTRACTOR: L.G. BARCUS AND SONS, INC. PROJECT PROFILE: 108-10 in. diameter AugerPiles installed to an approximate depth of 32 ft. Piles were installed through Stiff Clayey Fill and Medium-Dense Sands to Decomposed Shale. Piles were drilled to a refusal criteria of 1 ft. / 3 min. Piles were installed using a Barcus Mantis AugerPile rig which is large enough to install piles 25 to 50 ft. long outdoors. The Mantis is also ideal for indoor and low overhead installations. On top of being extremely versatile, the Mantis is also very economical to mobilize. The existing structure is supported on H-Piles. The AugerPiles were furnished and installed for less than the material price of the H-Piles. Design loads were under 40 tons which eliminated the need for a load test. AugerPiles were selected for minimal vibration, limited noise, and economy.

Jan 1, 2001

By Yukihiro Ishihara, Nanase Ogawa, Ming Lei

"Abstract In the Press-in Method, a static jacking force is used to install a prefabricated pile, while a reaction force is gained from previously installed piles. This piling technique has solved problems in urban piling construction such as noise and vibration associated with the piling work, restricted construction conditions due to the existing structures, and so on, since its emergence in 1975. Its applicability to hard ground conditions has been improved, with the development of press-in machines that involve augering or rotation. Besides, information such as time, penetration depth, jacking force and rotational (or augering) torque in piling work are automatically obtained. The concept of PPT, Pile Penetration Test, has been developed by the authors, to apply the obtained information to the processes of construction planning or foundation design. This paper highlights the technique to estimate SPT N value from data acquired in standard press-in (press-in without any auxiliary methods), press-in with augering and rotary press-in. The technique will be helpful in assuring the adequate embedment depth, re-selecting the adequate press-in machine or auxiliary method, and re-pricing the project objectively, particularly when a contractor encounters unexpected ground conditions.INTRODUCTIONThe Press-in Method is one of the piling techniques that use a static jacking load to install piles. It mitigates environmental problems of noise and vibration that have been associated with other conventional piling techniques.It is also featured by its spatial efficiency; since a ‘press-in’ piling machine gains a reaction force from the previously installed piles, there is no need of bulky weights that will occupy a large space. This feature is emphasized in the piling system in Figure 1, where a press-in machine and its related devices are all positioned and ‘walk’ on top of the pile wall.Its applicability to hard grounds has significantly been improved, with some newly developed piling machines that involve augering or that install tubular piles with teeth on the base by applying axial load and rotational torque at the same time."

Jan 1, 2014

By Nikolaus Schneider

"Abstract: The combination of failure in joints of diaphragm walls and their exposure to water pressure may have far reaching effects ranging from water leakage to the risk of catastrophic loss of stability for the retaining wall and civil structures behind it. Investigations of imperfect joints in diaphragm walls have led to the development and testing of a quality tool to monitor the joint integrity of diaphragm walls during construction. By applying independent mechanical sensors (“joint inspector”) to the steel frame of hydraulic or mechanical grabs, it is now possible to record the surface conditions of exposed primary joints during the construction of secondary panels. This allows for the implementation of corrective action during the construction process should joint quality not indicate a watertight connection to the adjacent panel. The joint inspector, used for different types of stop ends, was tested on a full scale test field at several construction sites. The implementation of this new quality tool drives a new quality standard for deep excavations in inner city areas.General introduction to diaphragm wallsDiaphragm walls are reinforced concrete elements constructed using bentonite slurry to temporarily support an open trench in the ground. They are used in two main fields of application in civil construction, as foundation elements for vertical and horizontal loads (barrettes) and as retaining walls for excavation pits.Particularly for deep excavation pits in inner city areas, diaphragm walls are used as temporary or permanent walls of retaining walls. Alternative retaining wall systems would be secant pile walls, sheet piles or soldier piles, but these have disadvantages in structural strength when compared to diaphragm walls. If the vertical load of existing buildings next to the excavation pit has to be accommodated, the most practical solution can be found using diaphragm walls supported by prestressed anchors, steel struts or slabs."

Jan 1, 2014

By Allan Sylvester

Construction of the Shot Tower Metro Station in Baltimore, Maryland was performed in two phases. In the first phase, a contractor was retained to excavate the station in order to construct twin tunnels from the Shot Tower Station to the John Hopkins Station. The retention system for this 70' deep excavation consisted of a Soldier Pile in Tremie Concrete (SPTC) wall supported by cross-lot bracing. In phase two, The Clark Construction Group, Inc. was retained to construct the station interior structure, two entrances, two station ancillary shaft structures and the track work for the station and tunnel. The excavation for the construction of the two entrances adjacent to the 70' deep station SPTC wall had to proceed prior to completion of the station structure due to the tight construction schedule. A system of overlapping secant piles was specified as a vertical support of excavation element for the West Entrance. The secant piles would have provided a watertight, rigid support to resist the load from the SPTC wall constructed in phase one. A watertight system was required in order to minimize the settlement of adjacent buildings supported on wood piles. Clark Construction was concerned with the constructability, cost and performance of the specified secant piles and looked for other innovative methods of providing a watertight and rigid system. Substitution of a reinforced slurry wall in lieu of the secant piles was cost prohibitive due to the additional cost of concrete placed under tremie. Clark, being familiar with cement-bentonite cut-off walls and slurry wall construction procedures, proposed the construction of a PSHG wall, in lieu of the secant piles. The PSHG wall construction consisted of trenching 30" wide by 20' long by 60' deep panels under a self-hardening slurry. Once the excavation for a panel was completed, a 60' deep prefabricated soldier beam and lagging panel was placed in the slurry. The slurry design mix then self-hardened within the cure time, allowing excavation for the structure to proceed This paper will discuss the design, details and construction methods used on the PSHG wall and will compare the advantages of the PSHG system to conventional support systems.

Jan 1, 1997

By G. Sauer

"More Skill is needed to avoid rather than to handle heavy ground loads." This finding, from a tunneling engineer of the nineteenth century, is still relevant today with all advanced sequential excavation and support methods available whether they are applied in the vertical or horizontal direction. Balanced contractual agreements and documents are important since they provide the spirit and climate at the site. This article aims to describe the means and measures for 'hand mined' shaft and tunnel support as they are available today. Some special construction elements and methods with a perspective in recent developments in order to avoid getting stuck in conservatism are presented as well. If we don't allow new methods, means and measures we may end up with the famous quote "Only women who have already proven they are able to give birth to a healthy baby are allowed to become pregnant!"

Jan 1, 2003

By Tracy Brettmann

Equipment ? Hollow Stem Auger ? Drill Bits ? Leads/Torque Arm ? Hydraulic Gearbox ? Hydraulic Power Unit ? Grout Pump ? Crawler Crane

Jan 1, 2004

By Philip Dubbeling

Conventional dynamic sheetpiling techniques are ill-suited to urban development because of the emission of excessive noise and ground vibrations. Drilled shafts and slurry walls alleviate some of these environmental concerns but add additional problems due to large bulky machines, reliance on dusty concrete plants and urban trucking grief. To solve these problems, pre-fabricated sheetpiles are hydraulically jacked-in by reaction principle using a compact and lightweight press-in machine, a so called the "Silent Piler". Through scientific analysis, definition and systemization of press-in machines and methods, new construction concepts such as the one-step approach, implant structures, functional design and life cycle design have been developed to comply with new basic construction principles.

Jan 1, 2006

By G. G. Goble

Dynamic pile testing is now over 20 years old as a routinely applied tool for evaluating driven pile installation. The first test on a cast-in-place pile was performed more that 15 years ago. The research that produced the method began almost 30 years ago. But, questions still arise regarding the appropriate use of this technique so some review is useful. Today a number of methods including dynamic testing all depending in some way on the application of dynamics are in routine use. First, Wave Equation analysis can be used to predict pile driveability before going to the field. The same approach can be used during driving to estimate the bearing capacity based on the blow count observed in the field. Dynamic measurements, on the other hand, can only be used after pile driving has begun. They offer predictions of pile capacity as well as measurements of hammer, driving system, and pile driving performance characteristics. The first part of this paper will be devoted to discussing how the foundation engineer can use these tools. First, a brief review of what dynamic methods actually do. In Wave Equation analysis a numerical model of the hammer, driving system, pile, and the soil is created by the engineer. The hammer is dropped on the pile and using a discrete, dynamic analysis the motion of the individual pile elements is calculated as a function of time. Of course, input information must be supplied by the program user to describe the hammer, driving system, pile, and soil. In the current state of development, the primary problem in input data is with the hammer performance (efficiency) and the soil description. Research may be able to do a better job with the soil data, but hammer performance will always vary from hammer to hammer and is dependent on the affectiveness of the inspection process. Prior to beginning pile driving the Wave Equation analysis supplies the best available estimate of what will happen when driving begins. It gives an estimate of blow count during driving, driving stresses, both tension and compression in the pile, and for diesel hammers, stroke. The selection of the driving system can be checked with the results of Wave Equation analysis and modifications can be made if required. For example, if the blow count at the required capacity was deemed excessive by the contractor a larger hammer could be tried or if driving stresses were too high changes could be made in the cushion or the hammer selection could be modified. All of these modifications are possible with only the cost of a computer run. The primary questions regarding the accuracy and reliability of Wave Equation analysis at this time is with regard to the assumptions made to represent the soil characteristics and the difficulty in predicting hammer performance.

Jan 1, 1993

By Walter E. Vanderpool

Full scale load tests are frequently performed immediately prior to deep foundation construction to verify the design assumptions. Occasionally, load tests are performed during design development and applied to the final design for critical and non-redundant structures. We believe that full scale load tests can be very valuable and economical for projects, especially in a geologic environment where the record of full scale load testing is very limited or non-existent. The load testing for the Utah Transit Authority?s Airport Light Rail Trax project provides an example of the advantages of a load test in design development. The savings realized by the owner was in excess of $800 thousand dollars.

Jan 1, 2011

By Joseph C. Gillen

This paper discusses the design, construction, and performance of the support of excavation system used at The Atlantic Building jobsite. The support of excavation system had to be adaptable to the different conditions surrounding the site. These conditions included support of four historic building façades, including the nine-story Atlantic Building, as well as support of three historic row-houses along two walls. Directly adjacent to the site is the historic Ford?s Theatre and townhouse. Across a 15? alley is the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) Building, and across a 30? alley is the Federal Election Commission Building and another ongoing excavation. Of historical note, these two alleys were the escape route for John Wilkes Booth following his assassination of President Lincoln. With the excavation being 53? to 58? deep, the system included driven and drilled soldier piles, drilled bracket piles, and two modified tangent walls. The bracing included tiebacks, corner braces, wales, cross lot struts, and a specially designed support system for the nine-story façade. The footprint of the excavation included 12 corners and all alleys and streets were to remain open during construction. The performance requirements for system movement at Ford?s Theatre and AILA Building were ½ inches in the horizontal direction. The modified tangent walls were used in these areas to provide stiffness. The soil conditions at the site were fill material on top of a shallow, sandy, silty, gravel layer on top of a deep layer of soft organic silt and clay. Below the silt and clay layer was fine sandy material at the subgrade.

Jan 1, 2006

By Roy A. Bell

A 200-foot diameter, 72-foot high petroleum storage tank was built in a hillside ravine where a portion of the site contained soft clay fill. Soil-cement piles, 40 inches in diameter and up to 38 feet long, were installed to support the tank shell and ringwall, and a portion of the tank floor by drilling into the stiff to hard underlying soils and weathered bedrock. The goal was to provide a strong enough foundation to resist the seismic tank shell loading and to minimize differential settlement of the tank shell to avoid out-of-round clearance problems between the shell and floating-roof. A cantilevered retaining wall up to 8 feet high was constructed around a portion of the tank perimeter by inserting steel H-beams into soil-cement piles. The cantilever soldier piles for the retaining wall were installed from a temporary earth embankment on the hillside directly over the top of the wall. The temporary embankment was then removed and the tank pad was cut to grade in front of the soldier piles. Some of the soil-cement piles for both the tank foundation and retaining wall could not be advanced to design depth because the drill/mixing tools could not penetrate to the required depth in the hard soils/bedrock. Smaller diameter borings (22 inches in diameter) were drilled through the centers of the short-of-design soil-cement piles to the design depth and then backfilled with concrete.

Jan 1, 1997

By Theodore R. Maynard

The history of foundation engineering in Chicago is a tale of innovation, made necessary in order to keep pace with structural technology which allowed taller buildings with heavier bearing loads, to accommodate a non-conducive geologic setting. The geology as it relates to foundation construction and underground construction in general is briefly described. A chronology of important events from the birth of Chicago to the present is presented. The impact of various construction techniques which were either initiated or refined to allow the growth of Chicago are discussed. Introduction The growth of Chicago resulting in today's high-rise high-density population center can be looked upon as a history of modern underground construction. The two major reasons which explain this are 1) It grew up during a period of rapid development in the Industrial Revolution and 2) Its natural geological setting needed a great deal of innovation for continuing growth.

Jan 1, 1991