Search Documents

By Moonkyung Chung

Static pile load tests were performed in order to evaluate bearing capacities and mechanical behaviors of three different pile types: (1) steel-concrete composite drilled shaft with rebar reinforcements inside the concrete, (2) steel-concrete composite drilled shaft without rebar, and (3) conventional drilled shaft (reinforcement concrete pile). The material elastic moduli obtained from pile load tests of steel-concrete composite drilled shafts with and without rebar reinforcement were found out to be similar. On the other hand, the elastic modulus of steel-concrete composite drilled shafts is almost twice as high as that of the conventional drilled shaft. The ultimate strengths of the steel-concrete composite drilled shaft with rebar, the steel-concrete composite drilled shaft without rebar, and the conventional drilled shaft were 9,810, 7,848, and 4,414kN, respectively. The results of these load tests reveal that the ultimate strengths of the steel-concrete composite drilled shaft with reinforcement and that without reinforcement are 2.22 times and 1.78 times greater that that of the drilled shaft. The structural failures of the steel-concrete composite drilled shafts occurred either at the boundary between tip of steel casing and rock-socketed concrete.

Jan 1, 2010

By William M. Camp

Construction-induced earthborn vibrations have long been recognized as a potential problem with respect to the constructed environment and various vibration criteria are in use to prevent damage. A special case of construction vibration control is the protection of early-age or ?green? concrete. Unlike limits for damage prevention to building stock, there is no rational, widely accepted limit for protection of early-age concrete. Numerous criteria have been proposed or reported in the literature and the most relevant and rational proposals are summarized herein. These findings are applied to a case history involving both bored and driven piles. Vibration measurements were made during pile driving activities and the vibration magnitude was evaluated with respect to the exposure of freshly-placed and curing concrete to the earthborn vibrations. The maximum vibration magnitude at the applicable distances from pile driving was on the order of 0.3 inches per second. Based on the most persuasive literature, threshold values of 0.8 inches per second or even 1 to 2 inches per second for the protection of green concrete appear to be well-supported. Consequently, it was concluded that the pile driving activities and bored pile construction could proceed simultaneously.

Jan 1, 2010

By X. M. Wu

The paper describes four different types of support for deep excavations, which are currently used in China. Local experiences were illustrated by presenting case histories for each type of support. For braced excavation in soft clays in Shanghai, the earth pressure against bracings were found to be in conformity with the trapizoidal estimation given by Terzaghi and Peck (1967). For tie-back support of excavations in Beijing and Shengyang, earth pressures were found to be much less than those predicted by ordinary rules. In the construction of a mining shaft in coarse sand below ground water level, high pressure jet grouting has been successfully used to form a circular impervious lining of the shaft. As an effective anti-slide measure, large diameter reinforced concrete piles constructed by open shaft method have been widely used with success.

Jan 1, 2010

By Jim Cook

Arsenal Football Club required the development of a new home stadium in north London, subsequently named the Emirates Stadium. The proposed development comprised a 60,000 seat stadium, with associated facilities and a sports training centre. Described are the foundation solutions and piling construction techniques used, which take into consideration the potential impacts on existing above and below ground railway infrastructure and underground water structures. Methods used by the piling contractor to improve aspects associated with health, safety and quality are also described.

Jan 1, 2008

By Don C. Warrington

This paper describes a new wave equation analysis program called ZWAVE, which is a program specifically for external combustion hammers. The program is de-scribed in detail, the discussion dealing with topics concerning the program such as 1) the numerical method the program uses to integrate the wave equation, which is different from most other wave equation programs; 2) the modelling process of both cushioned and cushionless hammers; 3) the automated generation of mass and spring values for both hammer and pile; 4) the method of dealing with plastic cushions; 5) the use of a recently developed model for computing shaft resistance during driving; 6) the computation and generation of values based on basic soil properties such as shear modulus, Poisson's Ratio and soil density; 7) the completely interactive method of feeding data to the program; 8) the method used to compute the anticipated rebound and the energy used to plastically deform the soil; and 9) the format of the inter-active input of the program and the program's output. Sample problems for the program, along with comparison of the program results with data gathered in the field, are presented.

Jan 1, 1988

By James S. Graham

Marine design and construction methods are presented on the caisson foundations for the tower piers at the Brooklyn, Ben Franklin, Delaware Memorial 1st, Tappan Zee, Walt Whitman, Throgs Neck, Verrazano Narrows, Delaware Memorial 2nd, and Newport Bridges. All of the bridges are founded on caissons, bearing on bedrock, soil, or piling. Caissons at the Tappan Zee Bridge are partially supported by piling and partially by buoyant forces. General subsurface conditions for each are provided. The purpose of this paper is inform engineers how bridge foundations using caissons were built over major waterways in the Northeastern USA in the past, anticipating a surge of new bridge construction in the near future.

Jan 1, 2005

By Abid Adekunte

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

Jan 1, 2010

By Todd Nottingham

Channel deepening of major ports is challenging designers to explore innovative solutions to ensure stability of bulkheads, such as for the Oakland Inner Harbor. This particular challenge was met with the use of the SPIN FIN® Tension Pile for restraint of an HZ combination wall along the Oakland Inner Harbor Shoreline in Oakland, California. A SPIN FIN pile is a pipe pile with welded plates at the pile tip that increase pile capacity. A brief history of the project will be provided as well as results of pile load tension tests, pile strain gauge, and wall deflection under construction loads. Tension pile load deflection results will be discussed with recommendations toward establishing deflection-based ultimate load criteria. A discussion of predicted wall loads and field observed wall loads will be provided.

Jan 1, 2008

By Nathan A. Ingraffea

The use of steel sheet pile walls and drilled shaft foundation elements to enable up-down construction methods has been used successfully on recent high-rise structures with multi-story below grade parking. The John Ross Tower and The 3720 Tower in Portland, Oregon each make use of this system and are discussed in-depth. Up-Down construction involves the simultaneous construction of the building levels above and below grade instead of the standard construction technique of excavating and shoring the below grade construction before being able to build upward from the base of the excavation. Advantages of the up-down system include a shortened overall construction schedule, permanent basement walls that double as the temporary shoring walls, elimination of the typical continuous wall footing or grade beam at the building perimeter, increased use of recycled material (steel) while maintaining an overall decrease in total materials, elimination of wall forming costs, decreases in forming costs for slabs, decreases in waterproofing costs for walls and elimination of pile caps and/or footings for the building columns. Lessons learned during the construction of both buildings include the need for more extensive geotechnical boring information, descriptive sheet pile and drilled shaft specifications, a clear understanding from the design team on finished appearance of sheet pile and shafts, and careful consideration of the connection between both slabs and the sheet pile wall and slabs and drilled shafts.

Jan 1, 2008

By Terence P. Holman

Micropiles are employed to retrofit existing foundations, including underpinning prior to future construction operations and resupport of existing structures that have experienced distortion and settlement. This paper presents analyses of the two case histories requiring the use of micropiles in these applications. The first case history involves micropiles used to resupport a settled pump station next to an excavation which had suffered basal failure and ground loss. A compression load test pile experienced plunging failure which, after analysis of the strain-gauge data acquired during the test, was attributable to a greater degree of disturbance to the subsoils beneath the site than anticipated. After construction of the micropiles around the pump chamber a synchronized jacking system was used to lift and right the 320 kip chamber structure, followed by resupporting it on the newly constructed piles. The second case history entails the use of micropiles for direct underpinning support of existing columns prior to a utility tunnel installation within an existing high-bay warehouse structure. The design constraint that most significantly affected the successful completion of this project was the desire to bond the new piles into the existing reinforced concrete foundations. As a result of the coring method through the footing, the ultimate bond stress measured during a pullout test was more than twice that assumed in the design. Monitoring of the underpinned columns during trench excavation indicated that the system performance was acceptable. These case histories reinforce the concept that lower capacity micropiles can provide a rapid means to underpin and retrofit existing structures.

Jan 1, 2007

By Scott M. Mackiewicz

This project includes replacement of the historic vertical-lift span Meridian Bridge (U.S. Highway 81 over the Missouri River) that connects Yankton, South Dakota with rural Cedar County, Nebraska. The new 76-foot wide, 1,590-foot long steel plate girder structure required the use of drilled shaft foundations that extended into the underlying Carlile Shale formation. Designers indicated that an individual drilled shaft capacity of about 2,000 kips will be needed at each of the river piers, and based on the subsurface information, 8 to 10-foot diameter drilled shafts extending to about 115-foot would be required for support of the bridge structure. An Osterberg Load Test was performed on one test shaft to determine the ultimate skin friction and end bearing of the Carlile Shale. This paper describes the design and installation of the load test drilled shaft as well as presents the load test results as compared with predicted design values determined using FHWA methods.

Jan 1, 2008

By Jon E. Bischoff

Construction of a secondary clarifier on the banks of Rainy River, Northern Minnesota, required the driving of H-piles 14HP102 to a sloping, very strong bedrock through thick deposits of soft and medium stiff soils. Pile toe protection, APF Hardbite HP 77750, was specified to prevent damage to the pile toe and to enable the pile toe to bite into the bedrock surface. The toe protection worked well for bedrock sloping less than 2H:1V. However, where the bedrock was steeper, the piles experienced damage and failed to reach bearing. In most cases, the also the replacement pile failed. Pile Driving Analyzer measurements showed that on encountering the bedrock, the pile toe reflection, which at first was sound, deteriorated indicating pile toe damage. Extraction for visual inspection showed that the failed piles were bent and had deformed pile shoes. In areas of steeply sloping bedrock and for replacement piles, an alternative shoe, the Scanpile Herkules rock shoe, was employed. This pile shoe proved to be able to secure the pile toe into the rock and to eliminate the problem. The costs of the Herkules rock shoe considering price, shipping, and attaching, were about equal with the Hardbite shoe.

Jan 1, 1993

By Sebastian Fischer, Rolf Katzenbach, Steffen Leppla

"The risk management in the case of liquefaction is one of the most serious and also difficult issues in geotechnical engineering because failure caused by liquefaction is always a sudden failure without ahead indication. For that reason ground improvement technologies for the prevention of liquefaction are necessary. The paper explains the responsible and effective risk management. Methods for the risk management and stabilizing the soil sustainably are described in detail.1. INTRODUCTIONDue to population growing more and more settlement area is needed, which is often including improper regions (e.g. mountain and coast regions) with raised risk of various kinds of disasters. But also in densely populated areas the risk of disasters like landslides can occur. One reason for the raising of risk in densely populated regions can be the opencast mining for raw material production. An essential element of the opencast mining is the loose deposition of the removed overburden, the so-called “overburden dump”. When an opencast mining is running out of the raw material, an opencast hollow remains in landscape. The slope areas of these hollows mostly consist of loose bedded material of the overburden dump. Due to the end of groundwater conservation these loose bedded slope areas are flooded. In consequence the slopes are in extreme danger of becoming liquefied. The result of a liquefaction in these slopes will unavoidably be a slope slide. Such a slope slide can extend up to several hundred meters into the landscape and can move several million cubic meters of material. An upsetting example for such a landslide is the slope failure in the German city of Nachterstedt on July, 18th 2009, which made necessitate remedial measures and also prevention works for the further utilisation of the region. The phenomena of liquefaction is not limited of slopes in series of opencast mining. Especially in regions with a highly appearance of earthquakes the phenomena of liquefaction is well known.2. RISK MANAGEMENTAn essential part for the stability assessment of slope systems is the investigation of sensitivity against liquefaction. In the case of given sensitivity against liquefaction there is no calculation method according to soil mechanics to determine the factor of safety against slope failure. Just for the case that sensitivity against liquefaction is not met, a comparison of the load (effect) E and the resistance R which is the traditional verification of stability against slope failure, can be calculated (Figure 1)."

Jan 1, 2015

By Julie Hampden, Tim Dardis, Per Reinhall

"Noise from impact pile driving can harm fish, marine mammals and other sensitive wildlife over large areas. Marine pile driving is highly regulated, and regulators require sound levels to be below certain thresholds to avoid harassment and injury to sensitive marine life. In many locations, timing restrictions, use of noise attenuation technologies and extensive monitoring for impacts to wildlife are also required. As a result, permitting can be laborious and time consuming, and project implementation and scheduling can be complicated. Underwater noise levels are measured with an underwater microphone (hydrophone), which converts noise pressure to voltage and is calibrated to express the noise pressure in Pascals (Pa). The pressure is often expressed using a logarithmic scale, in decibels (dB). Several specific metrics can be used to describe underwater noise. Three common metrics are the instantaneous peak sound pressure level (dBpeak), the root mean square pressure level (dBRMS) and the sound exposure level (dBSEL) referred to as the peak, RMS and SEL levels, respectively.During impact pile driving, the peak pressure represents the instantaneous maximum pressure, either overpressure or underpressure, observed during each pile strike. The RMS level is the square root of the mean of the square of the pressure during the duration of the impulse; it is the average pressure level of the pile strike from beginning to end. The cumulative SEL (SELcum) is calculated by summing the cumulative pressure squared and integrating over time of duration of the pile strike. SEL is used as an indication of the cumulative energy of a pile driving event, which may consist of one or many pile strikes.Regulatory agencies use these metrics to help characterize the noise pressure levels that can affect sensitive species. Some of the most frequently encountered biological thresholds in the Northwestern United States that are used by regulators to describe potential impacts to sensitive species are summarized in the following table. Agencies have defined thresholds for different types of injury, either hearing or bodily harm, and for temporary injury or disturbance."

Jan 1, 2017

By Vivian M. Troughton, Clifford J. Wren, Tony P. Suckling

"Secant pile walls are used for the construction of deep basement walls and earth retaining structures. Risk associated with secant pile walls is commonly perceived as being the safety of site personnel and the public during piling operations, or safety used in design. It is recognized that both of these are of paramount importance, but additional risks associated with the construction methods must also be considered to complete the risk management profile for any project. For the particular case of secant pile walls, if Clients take a ""back seat"" they may be unaware of the total risk package they are procuring. The authors argue that the piling contractor should be involved at the earliest stage giving input into the overall risk management process. Such early involvement within the professional team will maximise cost benefits to the Client and minimise the delays and cost increases sometimes associated with these works. A consistent methodology for identifying and then managing all the risks associated with secant pile walls is proposed. An example is used to demonstrate how this methodology should be employed. INTRODUCTIONThis paper discusses the value of a complete and integrated risk management process for structures with basements formed using a secant pile wall.The risk associated with any secant pile wall can be consicfered as comprising four components;1. Safety of people on site2. Safety of design or design methodology3. Construction risks4. Commercial risksAny risk management system needs to fully consider and integrate each of these four components to maximise the likelihood of a successful outcome for the basement.This paper concentrates on the construction risks for secant pile walls, as these are not often understood by the Client (in this paper the term ""Client"" also includes the main contractor, principal contractor, Engineer, Planning Supervisor, quantity surveyor and cost consultant)."

Jan 1, 2005

By David Miller

"The biggest concern about using soil mixing is the inability to observe physically the final product, which has led to a lack of confidence about what is in the ground. After all, you can’t see it and you can’t taste it and you can’t smell it, so are you sure it’s soil mixing? In addition, there are variations in techniques, tools and monitoring that have led to additional skepticism and the desire to “elevate” the product. This skepticism is why the industry is so scrutinized even when there are other technologies being used that do not experience nearly the same level of scrutiny. With other techniques, even with a slurry wall, you can see the backfill before it goes into the ground, and drilled piers have careful evaluation of the concrete mix even before placement into and verification of the open hole. Essentially, you get control over the final material. There is less control in soil mixing, and it’s very dependent on in-situ conditions. These factors make it difficult to rely solely upon installation parameters, quality control (QC) and verification tests. At some point, you may need to apply some engineering judgment.Start at the BeginningThe availability of sufficient and accurate geotechnical data (soil type, heterogeneity, shear strength parameters, variability, etc.) is important in establishing the material that will be drilled. This data will also help in determining the proper mix design to achieve the desired soil cement properties. Many factors must be considered when designing the mix and the mixing program, including any debris in the ground, different soil properties and varying moisture contents.Each of the various factors affect the final properties of the soil cement, so it really takes careful planning and evaluation of the mix design through iterations by looking at the soil types and adjusting the mixes. Clay is going to behave very differently than sand in both mixing efficiency and final properties. That is, the presence of clays results in more difficulty in achieving higher strengths and to physically mix the soil and the binder, whereas the presence of sands results in more difficulty controlling the final permeability."

Jan 1, 2017

By Franz-Werner Gerressen

In the changing construction environment clients are searching for new technology to complete their projects in shorter times. Manufacturers are therefore developing solutions to speed up established construction methods. The significant progress in recent years with the development of increasingly powerful drilling rigs is providing piling companies increase options for the execution of specialist foundation projects. The double rotary drilling methods are primarily used for the construction of pile walls as support for deep excavations. Typically these retaining walls are designed and installed as cased piles using the established Kelly drilling mode. However, more recently it is more popular to undertake these projects with the Cased Continuous Flight Auger (CCFA) system. This paper provides an overview of drilling with double rotary methods, in particular the monitoring during installation.

Jan 1, 2009

By Donald Deardorff

"Helical piles often rely on the final installation torque for ultimate capacity verification. When helical piles are designed using traditional bearing capacity equations for deep foundations and field monitored for a specified final installation torque, a factor of safety equal to 2 is often allowed for the design. One of the more common methods of determining torque during helical pile installation is by correlating the differential pressure across a hydraulic gear motor to a torque. Most drive head manufacturers provide multipliers to convert differential pressure to torque for different drive head models. These multipliers are based on theoretical torque equations and vary with the planetary gear ratio, hydraulic gear motor displacement and drive head efficiency. Drive head manufacturers show a linear fit between the differential pressure and output torque with no scaling effect. Previous drive head testing performed by the author has confirmed that the drive head differential pressure to torque relationship is generally linear however there is a scaling adjustment needed. This results in a variation of multipliers across the differential pressure range for a given drive head.Eight hydraulic drive heads from three manufacturers were field tested by Foundation Supportworks, Inc. to compare the torque versus differential pressure curves with varying installation equipment, hydraulic line sizes and hydraulic flow rates. Differential pressure was monitored using three methods including pressure gages, PT-Tracker and an Ashcroft AT-100. Flow and temperature was measured using a Webtech system analyzer. Torque was measured using a Pro-Dig in-line torque transducer, a TruTorque indicator and a Chance Mechanical Dial in-line torque indicator. The current testing indicates that a change in installation equipment and/or a change in hydraulic flow rate may affect the torque versus differential pressure curve of a given drive head. The results of this testing also show that some of the methods for determining torque during helical pile installations may be unconservative, thereby resulting in safety factors less than required."

Jan 1, 2017

By Robert B. Bittner

The new gated dam on the Monongahela River at Braddock, Pennsylvania, was built for the US Army Corps of Engineers using an innovative ?In-the-Wet? technology. A key feature of this technology involves construction of the foundations through the water and later mating the completed structure or a shell of the structure to the pre-installed foundation. This paper presents a description of the structure, its foundation, construction sequence and design details required to successfully implement this technology.

Jan 1, 2013

By Donald Deardorff

Helical piles often rely on the final installation torque for ultimate capacity verification. When helical piles are designed using traditional bearing capacity equations for deep foundations and field monitored for a specified final installation torque, a factor of safety equal to 2 is often allowed for the design. One of the more common methods of determining torque during helical pile installation is by correlating the differential pressure across a hydraulic gear motor to a torque. Most drive head manufacturers provide multipliers to convert differential pressure to torque for different drive head models. These multipliers are based on theoretical torque equations and vary with the planetary gear ratio, hydraulic gear motor displacement and drive head efficiency. Drive head manufacturers show a linear fit between the differential pressure and output torque with no scaling effect. Previous drive head testing performed by the author has confirmed that the drive head differential pressure to torque relationship is generally linear however there is a scaling adjustment needed. This results in a variation of multipliers across the differential pressure range for a given drive head. Eight hydraulic drive heads from three manufacturers were field tested by Foundation Supportworks, Inc. to compare the torque versus differential pressure curves with varying installation equipment, hydraulic line sizes and hydraulic flow rates. Differential pressure was monitored using three methods including pressure gages, PT-Tracker and an Ashcroft AT-100. Flow and temperature was measured using a Webtech system analyzer. Torque was measured using a Pro-Dig in-line torque transducer, a TruTorque indicator and a Chance Mechanical Dial in-line torque indicator. The current testing indicates that a change in installation equipment and/or a change in hydraulic flow rate may affect the torque versus differential pressure curve of a given drive head. The results of this testing also show that some of the methods for determining torque during helical pile installations may be unconservative, thereby resulting in safety factors less than required.