Search Documents

By Srijit Bandyopadhyay, Aniruddha Sengupta, G. R. Reddy, Raj Banerjee

The objective of the present endeavor is to compare the performance of a pile raft system in foundation sand subjected to lateral loads. To study the behavior of pile raft system in sand a laboratory test was conducted on small scale model foundation system. The raft and pile was modeled by square concrete foundation of 250 mm x 250 mm x 15 mm in length, breadth and thickness and 25mm diameter and 250mm long circular pile located at the center of the raft. The system was tested under static lateral loads of 6.25N, 12.5N, 18.75N and 25 N respectively resting on dry Kasai River sand. A vertical surcharge pressure of 1.5kPa (10 kg) was applied on top of the model raft for each case. The results of the model tests have been simulated by a general purpose 3-D finite element software and the model has been validated with experimental results. The moments of the pile obtained from the model tests and those predicted by the numerical analyses for all the lateral loads matches reasonably well. For matching the trend of bending moments obtained from experiments, validation with theoretical results have been done with the help of Matlock and Reese (1960) approach for a single value of lateral loading. Moreover, a parametric study has been conducted with 5mX5mX0.3m raft size with 0.5m diameter and 5 meter long pile with increasing number of piles namely 2, 5 and 9 respectively to study the response in terms of moment and lateral deformation under available earthquake loadings, like Loma Prieta (1989) and Darfield Christchurch (2010). Bending moments of piles and load deformation curves for lateral loading have been studied for each case in which it is observed that the bending moments of pile significantly reduces (around 4 times) as the number of pile is increased to two, but it decreases to a nearly constant value (it saturates) as the number of pile is increased to five and nine. Moreover, the lateral deformation of piled raft system drastically reduces (around 2.4 times) for two pile system, and it saturates to a constant value with five and nine pile system. All these results indicate the constancy of stiffness irrespective of the number of piles in the piled raft.

Jan 1, 2015

By George Moses K, Mahendran K

Grouting is performed in rock masses in order to increase its strength properties and also to reduce the seepage. In the design of underground structures such as tunnels or caverns located in weak rock masses, grouting plays an essential role. Grouting is a complex process demanding high degree of skill and knowledge in understanding of grout flow and requirements for certain geological conditions. This paper discusses the design process for grouting in rock masses adopted for a cavern project and the practical difficulties faced during the execution at site. The design parameters of grouting includes the injection pressure, grout material properties and stopping criteria. The paper also discusses the various tests performed at site to evaluate the efficacy of the grouting process which was initially defined based on the design and previous experiences. The final grouting scheme suiting to the present geological condition is arrived based on the test results. The practical difficulties faced during the execution and the measures taken to overcome these are discussed in detail. This work shows the importance of state of art in the development of a grouting process based on geological and hydrogeological conditions prevailing at site and can be helpful in grouting design for weak rock masses.

Nov 1, 2022

By Waddah Akili

The demand on pile installation in the offshore of the Arabian Gulf has, over the last two decades, experienced unprecedented boom, triggered by the construction of platforms, to help facilitate the production and transport of oil and gas. Available borehole data show that ground conditions for pile installation in the offshore is highly variable, resulting in misassessment of insitu conditions, leading to a huge discrepancy between ultimate pile capacities, based on design, and actual capacities after installation. The paper makes use of pile installation records derived from several platforms in the offshore of the state of Qatar, the Gulf Region. More specifically, the paper evaluates “as–installed” ultimate capacities and safety factors, recommends remedial installation procedures, and proposes a means for determining pile acceptability for piles meeting refusal short of design penetration. The paper offers what is believed to be relevant recommendations to guide the design and installation of future offshore structures; enabling the geotechnical community in the Region to solve their current offshore pile installation problems and gain an added margin of confidence regarding the ultimate capacity of installed piles.

By EFFC/DFI Concrete Task Group

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

Jan 1, 2016

By K Ilamparuthi, R. K. Madhumathi

"This paper presents the results of 1g model tests conducted on model piles both single and two pile groups embedded in sand by physically inducing lateral soil movement. From the test results it was found that the pile with higher L/D ratio exhibits higher deflection in case of pile embedded in medium dense sand whereas in loose sand the response is vice versa with higher deflection for the pile of lesser L/D ratio. The induced bending moment in piles is more for longer piles than shorter piles irrespective of the density of sand bed. It is also found that the pile head deflection and the bending moment are found to decrease exponentially with increasing distance between the pile and the wall. For pile group arranged in a row parallel and perpendicular to retaining wall, the deflection of single pile is more than the deflection of two pile group irrespective of the depth of excavation for spacing of piles tested. The influence of soil movement on the lateral response of pile is also analyzed through 3-dimensional finite element analysis. The numerical results thus obtained are validated with the results of experiments. The Mohr-Coulomb material model adopted to represent the soil behaviour predicts the response of pile reasonably and compares well with the experimentally observed response.INTRODUCTIONPile foundations are adopted to support structures such as foundations of high rise buildings, transmission towers, offshore platforms, bridge abutments etc., when good bearing stratum is not present at shallow depth to bear the loads of these structures. In the recent past particularly in the urbanized areas structures are built close to one another and nearby excavation will cause a reduction of lateral earth pressure and soil movement behind the retaining wall (Ong, 2004). The reduction in support stress will induce additional movement to the pile and leading to distress in pile foundations located adjacent to supported excavation. In these situations understanding the response of piles next to supported excavations becomes essential.The behavior of piles subjected to soil movement was studied by Poulos and Chen (1996 and1997) through tests on 1g models and the findings concluded that the maximum bending moment was found to decrease with decreasing pile diameter and decreasing pile spacing . Leung et al. (2000 and 2003) studied the effects of excavation induced soil movement on pile foundations in sand through centrifuge tests and established that the restraints on the pile head would cause additional shear force and/or bending moment at the pile head, although the restraints help to reduce the pile head deflection/rotation. In the theoretical studies of Poulos & Chen (1997), boundary element method (PALLAS) was used for analysing the pile subjected to lateral soil movement and charts were proposed for designing the piles. Pan et al. (2002) and Miao et al. (2006) analysed the passive pile behavior through three dimensional finite element analyses. However research works reported on piles subjected to lateral soil movement are limited."

Jan 1, 2015

By Dalia. R. Mohamed, Hisham H. Hafez, Marawan M. Shahien

"Construction activities in major projects that involve deep excavations necessitate the use of vertical walls surrounding the construction site to play an important role as earth retention system. The walls are usually partially penetrating impervious walls which can increase the efficiency of the ground water control system that usually consists of number of partially penetrating wells. The analysis and design of such system requires 3D numerical simulation. The aim of this study is to develop simplified semi-empirical approach to analyze and design such system. The analyzed model is a single well in a square site that is surrounded by impervious walls along the perimeter of the site in an unconfined aquifer. The results of the parametric analysis are presented in this paper aiming to assess and understand the factors that influence dewatering in terms of ground water or drawdown profile surrounding the well. The parametric analysis is carried out using the 3D finite difference software. The parametric analysis comprises with more than 550 cases calculated. The study involved the parameters; well penetration depth, impervious wall penetration depth, size of the construction pit, coefficient of permeability, well yield and well location or distance between well center to impervious wall edge.IntroductionThe presence of groundwater in a site may have impact on the construction processes involved during the course of project construction, especially those projects that involve deep excavations. Deep excavations, especially in urban areas, require the construction of supported walls all around the site perimeter to ensure the stability of the excavation. In most of cases, the constructed walls are relatively impervious. Depending on the ground and site conditions, the walls are not penetrating all the way down through to the bottom of the aquifer and thus the walls are partially penetrating walls. The presence of ground water necessitates the lowering of the groundwater to levels below the bottom of the excavation to ensure working in dry. This paper focuses on groundwater control systems that consist of deep wells inside square areas enclosed by impervious walls partially penetrating unconfined aquifers. The wells are partially penetrating the aquifer, as well. There are many factors or parameters that are related to the configurations of the components of the system that may influence the drawdown of a well in such groundwater control system. This paper is a part of a comprehensive study that aims to development of a simple method for estimating the drawdown of dewatering system of the described configuration. In order to achieve such a major goal, a 3D finite difference model is developed for the problem in hand. A comprehensive parametric analysis was then carried out to investigate the influence of all the parameters on the drawdown of a deep well in such groundwater control system. This paper describes the problem, the model, the parametric analysis including the involved parameters. The paper, then, demonstrate the results of the analysis showing the influence of the studied parameters on the drawdown of a single well."

Jan 1, 2016

By Ronnie X. Gu, Xing Zheng, Gem-Yeu Ma

Due to implementation of the rotator construction method from which a smooth shaft was anticipated, a full-scale pile load test (Osterberg Method) was performed at Pier 14 Pile 9 of the main span of the New Benicia-Martinez Bridge to confirm the design parameters of the rock sockets. Two levels of load cells were fabricated in the reinforced cage of the rock socket. Each level consisted of three 670-mm Osterberg load cells with a total testing capacity of more than 50 MN in both directions. In an attempt to separate side friction and end beari ng, a 75 mm thick compressible Styrofoam material was placed at the bottom of the cage. The pile load test was carried out in four stages. The multi-level multi stage pile load test data was interpreted for casing friction, side friction for two rock strata, end bearing, and residual side shear values under repeated loading in opposite directions. The side friction from the casing in soils at Stage 2 is approximately 9 MN. The end bearing at the tip of the rock socket at Stage 3 was calculated to be approximately 17 MN at a displacement of about 75 mm. The residual side shear resistance for the 10 m 50% RQD rock strata was calculated to be 9 MN or approximately 50% of initial values, after being pushed 0.3 mm upward in Stage 1, 71 mm downward in Stage 2, then 55.5 mm upward again in Stage 3, and finally 105.3 mm downward in Stage 4. The test results surprising ly indicate that the side shear resistances from both low RQD intensely weathered rock and higher RQD slightly weathered competent rock are about the same at approximately 19 MN. This pile load test provides very critical information for confirming deep shaft design and analyses.

Jan 1, 2005

By William B. Conway

This paper will describe the large caisson pier foundations for four of the bridges crossing the Mississippi River in the New Orleans area; and will discuss some of the unusual problems encountered during their sinking. Certain settlement phenomena experienced during their service life will also be related: The four bridges in order of their construction: The Huey P. Long Bridge, River Mile 106.1, completed in 1935 The Greater New Orleans Bridge No.1, River Mile 96.0, completed in 1958 The Hale Boggs Bridge, River Mile 121.6, completed in 1983 The Greater New Orleans Bridge No.2, River Mile 96.1, completed in 1988 Each of these bridges employed large open-dredged concrete caissons as foundations for one or more of the river piers, with the smallest being the 65ft by 102ft caissons for Piers I and II of the Huey P. Long Bridge and the largest being the 99ft by 214ft caisson for Pier II of the Greater New Orleans Bridge No.2. The Huey P. Long caissons are founded in a dense fine sand at -170 while all of the other bridge caissons are founded in hard preconsolidated clay at elevations varying from -150 to -185. The Huey P. Long Bridge is currently being widened without increasing the caisson foundations under any of the river piers; and the design reasoning that led to this decision is presented.

May 11, 2007

By Hee-suk Yun, Dae-jin Hwang, Jeong-woo Seok, Myoung-mo Kim

"In this paper, the accuracy of the data measured by a newly developed displacement measuring system, DPRMs (Digital Pile Penetration and Rebound Monitoring system) and its applicability as a quality control tool were verified by field measurements of pile penetration and rebound for pile driving performed at 3 construction sites and 1 test site. The DPRMs data were found to be much better than handwork data. A new dynamic formula for pile capacities is proposed uses the results of a pilot dynamic load test and the final pile penetration. The ratios of pile capacities obtained by the new formula to those by the dynamic load test were 94%±7.4% in the contrast with 123±28.3% by the 5S formula and 68±24.0% by Hiley's formula. This result shows the superiority of the new formula. The ratios of the maximum compressive stresses calculated by using DPRMs to those calculated by using PDA (Pile Driving Analyzer) were about 90-110±10%. This result confirms the applicability of DPRMs as an overdriving monitoring tool. Two sets of DPRMs were used to measure the 3-D displacement behavior of a pile head at the test site. The more the pile head moves laterally, the less the final set values were expected because of the loss of driving energy, but this trend was not obvious within the limited data obtained at the test site.INTRODUCTIONPile construction monitoring consists of two parts. In the first part, enough capacity of the pile is secured to stand the design load. In the other part, pile damage during driving is prevented. Although several methods can be applied to achieve the first part, PDA is nearly the only tool for measuring pile stress.Several methods such as a static load test, a dynamic load test, an Osterberg cell, and numerous driving equations can determine the pile capacity. Among them, the static load test and the dynamic load test are most widely used. The static load test is advantageous because it has the highest reliability. The disadvantages are as follows: it is costly and time-consuming. Also, the capacity of the pile under construction cannot be evaluated. The dynamic load test has lower reliability than the static load test, but it is cheaper than the static load test, is reliable enough to determine the pile capacity, can evaluate the capacity of a pile during construction, and can offer information about construction conditions such as the pile integrity and the pi le stress during driving. The dynamic load test takes a relatively short time and is low cost compared with the static load test. However, it is still costly, time-consuming, and unnecessary to apply to all piles in the field as a construction measurement tool. Therefore, driving resistance (blowcounts) is commonly measured to confirm the pile capacity at construction sites."

Jan 1, 2005

By Filippo Leoni, Wesley Schmutzler

"The LPV-111 East Back Levee Improvement Project lies along the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway (GIWW) in Orleans Parish of New Orleans, La., and is an essential component of the New Orleans Hurricane Protection System. The Hurricane Protection Office of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) attributed failure of the New Orleans East levees system to overtopping, erosion and subsequent breaching of LPV-111 along the GIWW, as well as other sections of flood protection during Hurricane Katrina in 2005. The existing levee suffered extensive damages from Hurricane Katrina, such that the USACE elected to provide earth stabilization and to rebuild the levee sections. Due to the adverse geotechnical properties of the foundation soils, the Corps deemed ground improvement necessary to stabilize the new levee and to limit its footprint. Wet Deep Mixing Method (DMM) was selected as the most suitable technology for this task.ChallengesDesign: This reach specifically protects East New Orleans and the Bayou Savage National Wildlife Refuge, the largest urban wildlife refuge in the U.S. and home to several threatened or endangered species of birds as well as many reptiles, amphibians and small mammals. The Corps chose DMM due to the sensitivity of the protected marshlands and because the method limits the footprint of the raised levees. The increase in the load bearing capacity of the treated soil significantly decreases the footprint necessary to attain the required height increase. This limitation required the new levee to have steep slopes, drastically increasing the surcharge on foundation soils characterized by overall poor geotechnical properties (soft clays and peats). The design also considered the increased horizontal stresses on the levees due to the extreme storm surges during a hurricane.The design of the 1.6 m diameter (5.25 ft) DMM elements called for overlapping them to form a double auger element that formed buttresses perpendicular to the levee alignment. The contractor installed the buttresses at a maximum on center spacing of 4.7 m (15.5 ft). One additional double auger DMM element was midway between consecutive buttresses at the centerline of the levee to further help prevent settlement (Figure 1)."

Jan 1, 2013

By George J. Tamaro

The design and construction of foundations in the New York City area are usually dictated by the widely varying geologic conditions encountered in the five boroughs, particularly along the spine of Manhattan Island. Rock extends well above sea level at the northern reaches and falls to depths in excess of 250 m at the barrier islands at the southern extremities. These highly variable geologic conditions, significantly affected by glacial activity, dictate different design and construction approaches throughout the five boroughs of New York City. Extensive rock removal is required at the north while long piling is dictated in the south. Similar changes can occur within a project site on Manhattan Island. This paper will describe these conditions in general, will identify the various solutions used to solve these problems and will summarize various foundation types used in the New York City area.

Jan 1, 2000

By Theodore von Rosenvinge

Large diameter (2.4 meter) drilled shaft foundations were installed to depths of over 62 meters through soil into Arkose bedrock for Connecticut?s Pearl Harbor Memorial Bridge (I-95 over New Haven Harbor). The project involved many ?firsts? including the first ?extradosed? cable-stayed bridge in the US, and for Connecticut, the deepest drilled shafts, the first use of a rotator to install shaft casing, and the first use of the Mini-Sid technology for rock socket bottom inspection. Design utilized both friction and end bearing for rock sockets. O-Cell testing was employed to maximize performance factors during design and to allow adjustments to socket lengths during construction. Favorable test results permitted a reduction in socket lengths and significant cost saving.

Jan 1, 2011

By Federico Pagliacci

"Many existing dams are subject to underwater seepage due to subsoil conditions, like deep alluvial deposits or pervious rocks or karst. Remedial works are necessary in order to install new cut-off walls to stop the water flow. In some cases the cut-off walls have to be executed at depths never reached so far, and difficult to reach with traditional foundation techniques. In many cases the Hydromill technology proved to be the best system to overpass rocky layers and ensure the required verticality. The maximum depth reached by the industry was in the range of 120-150 meters. This article describes the test performed to excavate and cast in place a 3.2x1.5 m panel to a depth of 250 m. The article will also describe the stratigraphy of the site down to 250 meters, as well as the technique adopted to achieve the said depth with deviations from verticality of 30 cm along the longitudinal axis (0.12%) and 20 cm along the transverse axis (0.10%), measured at the bottom of the excavation. The concreting of the panel, for about 1,100 m³, with plastic concrete in the lower portion and conventional concrete in the upper portion will be illustrated. Finally, the tests performed during the excavation and after concrete casting will be also described, with special attention to the continuous directional core drilling that was performed along the whole length of the panel to verify the results of the deviation from verticality, through the onboard instruments, and to control the quality of concrete at a depth never reached before. IntroductionMany existing dams are subject to underwater seepage due to subsoil conditions, like deep alluvial deposits or caves and cavities or acid solutions in the bedrock formations.Conventional remedial works generally consist in the construction of an additional cut-off wall throughout the dam body and the subsoil, in most cases being deeper than the original one. Today, many examples of successful remedial cut-off walls allow the engineers to design the most suitable solution according to the dam and subsoil characteristics and nature.The real difficulty stems from the depth at which the new cut-off wall has to be socketed in competent rock or soil, so as to eliminate underwater seepage. The maximum depth ever achieved with a cut-off wall is 122.5 m for the remedial work of Mud Mountain Dam, Washington, USA, in 1988-1990. This 0.85-1.0 m thick cut-off wall was realized by means of a Hydromill, by excavating single 2.8 m-wide secant panels."

Jan 1, 2017

By John P. Turner, Steven S. Dapp, Dan A. Brown

"The Goethals Bridge Replacement (GBR) spanning the Arthur Kill Waterway between Elizabeth, NJ and Staten Island, NY is supported on over 200 drilled shaft foundations ranging in diameter from 4.5 ft to 10 ft and socketed into Passaic Formation siltstone. Four drilled shafts, two on each side of the bridge (NJ and NY), were load tested using the bi-directional axial load method. Axial test results demonstrate that RQD, taken by itself, is not necessarily a reliable indicator of side or base resistance. High recovery with low RQD can be a function of horizontally bedded siltstone and shale where the individual pieces of core do not exceed four inches, but may still provide very high side and base resistance. Axial testing was followed by a lateral rapid-load test (Statnamic) on each of the same four shafts. In addition, one of the shafts was subjected to a static lateral load test to validate the rapid-load method as being representative of static loading conditions. Results of the axial load tests provide the basis of unit side and unit base resistances used in the LRFD design of the rock sockets for axial loading, while results of the static and Statnamic lateral load tests were used to calibrate p-y curve parameters used for design under lateral and moment loading. This paper describes implementation of the load testing program and its role in the design process.INTRODUCTIONDesign of drilled shaft foundations for the Goethals Bridge Replacement (GBR) required load testing in order to validate the parameters used for calculating geotechnical axial and lateral resistances. The bridge, including foundations, was designed in accordance with the AASHTO LRFD design specifications, 6th Edition (2012). The bridge owner is the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (PANYNJ). One of the PANYNJ project requirements was stated as follows:“Perform a minimum of two (2) separate axial compression load tests (one [1] in New York and one [1] in New Jersey) for each demonstration shaft of different size and construction methodology to verify the design assumptions and construction procedures. At a minimum, one (1) demonstration shaft is required to be representative of production shafts with a diameter within one (1) foot above or below the demonstration shaft diameter.Conduct a minimum of two (2) lateral load tests (one [1] in New York and one [1] in New Jersey) for each demonstration shaft of different size and construction methodology. At a minimum, one (1) demonstration shaft is required to be representative of production shafts with a diameter within one (1) foot above or below the demonstration shaft diameter.”"

Jan 1, 2016

By Yuji Yamashita, Kazuyoshi Kamimura, Tsuyoshi Takahashi, Naoya Matayoshi

"The CDM-LODIC method (cement deep mixing - low displacement and control) method enables ground displacement to be reduced by removing an amount of soil equivalent to that of injected cement slurry and the volume of the plunged mixing tool, which causes a certain degree of ground displacement. Since the CDM-LODIC method was developed in 1985, it has been applied to over 930 sites and the accumulated volume of stabilized soil has now reached 7.6 million cubic meters.In the CDM method, the number of blade rotations per unit depth in the ground when the mixing blades are withdrawn is considered a construction item. The blade rotation number depends on the degree of mixing between the cement slurry and the ground Some field tests were performed based on the degree of mixing between the cement slurry and the ground. In these tests, a new concept of evaluating the blade rotation number when the screw rod penetrates to a given depth without injecting cement slurry has contributed to the degree of mixing. Furthermore, a correlation exists between the coefficient of efficiency of soil removal and the cement slurry admixture rate. In this paper, we discus the data collected in those field tests and present some application examples.OUTLINE OF CDM-LODIC METHODThe injection of cement slurry may cause some ground displacement during Cement Deep Mixing (CDM). In recent years, due to an increased demand for ground improvement work in urban areas, there is increased concern that buildings near any CDM site may be adversely affected. The deep mixing method which reduces displacement due to mixing (CDM-LODIC method) enables ground displacement to be minimized by removing an amount of soil equivalent to the injected cement slurry and the volume of the mixing tool, which itself causes some ground displacement. When the construction site is near other structures, regardless of whether on or under the ground, the CDM-LODIC method can be used in order to minimize any ground displacement. There are considered to be two main causes of ground displacement as shown in Figure 1. Displacement A indicates ground displacement caused by the volume of the inserted mixing tool during the penetration stage and displacement B indicates ground displacement caused by the volume of the injected stabilizing agent. Thus, by removing soil equivalent to the volume of the inserted mixing tool and the injected stabilizing agent, ground displacement can theoretically be minimized. Figure 2 shows the amount of observed ground displacement in the cases of CDM and CDM-LODIC at an actual site. These case studies indicate that ground displacement can be reduced by removing the soil."

Jan 1, 2015

By Gerald Verbeek, Erick Baziw

Stone columns are used in geotechnical site remediation to increase load-bearing capacity and reduce settlement of foundations. Stone columns also improve slope stability and increase the shear strength of a soil. A very challenging problem is to characterize the in-situ shear wave velocities from data acquired from Downhole Seismic Testing (DST) after the insertion of stone columns. DST is an important geotechnical testing tool for site characterization that provides low strain (<10-5) in-situ interval compression and shear wave velocity estimates, but the postanalysis of seismic data acquired from DST in the presence of stone columns is very challenging due to the resulting complicated in-situ soil conditions. To obtain the right results it is necessary to use an algorithm that incorporates source wave raypath refraction. Starting with the Normal Moveout Seismic Cone Tomographic Testing (NMO-SCTT) algorithm developed some years ago, this paper outlines the modifications and additions made to this NMO-SCTT algorithm to facilitate stone column site characterization. To dramatically reduce the optimal solution space for the estimated interval velocities the paper also described a priori conditions that are applied based on the unique nature of the stone column site conditions.

By Shawna Munn, Sarah Speir

Cedarvale Station is one of 25 new Eglinton Crosstown light rail transit (ECLRT) stations along Eglinton Avenue in Toronto. It is an interchange station with the existing Toronto Transit Com- mission (TTC) University subway line and is located at the intersection of two major thoroughfares. The new LRT tunnels run below the existing Yonge Spadina subway line and required total excavation depths of 20 m (65 ft) to facili- tate construction of the new station.

Jan 1, 2023

By Monica Prezzi

"Auger cast-in-place (ACIP} piles and drilled displacement piles are being increasingly used as foundation elements for structures, particularly in projects requiring accelerated construction or involving the rehabilitation of foundations of existing, overstressed structures. Auger cast-in-place piles (also referred to as continuous-flight-auger piles) are widely used to construct the foundations of all types of structures. There are many different types of drilled displacement piles, with the installation methods varying according to the equipment used. Depending on the specific rotary piling technology used, responses ranging from those associated with non-displacement to those associated with full-displacement piles are obtained. Conventional pile design methods do not account for how the various construction techniques involved in auger piling change the soil state around the pile during installation and, hence, cannot accurately estimate the pile resistance in a consistent way. Research on this subject, identifying the different variables that must be accounted for in design and linking these variables to installation methods, is lacking. This paper describes the different piling methods available for auger cast-in-place and drilled displacement piles, the equipment used to install them and the quality control processes typically used. It also reviews some of the design methods currently used.IntroductionDeep foundations are extensively used in geotechnical engineering practice. The wide spectrum of piling methods results in a variety of pile types. Each type behaves differently, depending on the installation or construction methods. On one end of the spectrum are non-displacement piles, the classicql examples of which are bored piles or drilled · shafts. These piles are constructed by removing a cylinder of soil from the ground and replacing it with concrete and reinforcement. On the other end are full-displacement piles, such as closed-ended pipe piles or precast reinforced concrete piles, which are typically driven into the ground. Driven piles preload the materials below the toe of the pile and displace the soil surrounding the pile shaft laterally during the installation process. Therefore, displacement piles are, in general, more likely to have a stiffer response than non-displacement piles. This is true particularly in the case of sandy soils where displacement causes densification."

Jan 1, 2005

By Vivek Samu, Murthy Guddati

A new method called Effective Dispersion Analysis of Reflections (EDAR) was recently developed to effectively analyze the dispersive waves generated from lateral impact to piles. This paper presents the results of nondestructive length estimation of existing piles through EDAR. EDAR provides a new visualization method for analyzing wave reflections by transforming the response into the frequency domain thus eliminating the need to perform difficult peak picking in the time domain. In addition to being able to analyze dispersive waves, EDAR also incorporates the effects of radiation damping due to the surrounding soil leading to more accurate length estimates. Concrete filled steel tubes of different embedment depths were tested both in laboratory and field conditions. Length estimates obtained were within 10% error margins after careful analysis accounting for the presence of soil effects and effects from pile top reflection.

By James G. Ulinski, Sebastian Lobo-Guerrero, Vishal B. Patel

"Recently modified design equations used in the transportation industry to calculate side friction and end bearing capacity for drilled shafts are now providing more realistic estimations of capacities than did previous methods. Using multiple case studies and test results from various projects, a more realistic design approach was formulated by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), which resulted in greater values of ultimate capacity for side friction and end bearing and in a more efficient design overall.In 2010, the FHWA published GEC-10 – Drilled Shafts: Construction Procedures and LRFD Design Methods, which illustrates a different method of calculating side friction and end bearing resistance and results in greater values for design. In 2014, the Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) adopted the method put forth by FHWA, which was included in its LRFD Bridge Design th Specifications, 7 Edition. The Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT) recently adopted and incorporated the similar methodology as AASHTO for calculating side friction and end bearing for drilled shafts in rock, and these changes are reflected in the 2015 edition of the PennDOT Design Manual, Part 4 (DM-4). This article discusses the past and current design methodology along with a project case study with results from Osterberg Cell (O-cell) load testing, which presents a comparison between the design resistances of ultimate side friction and end bearing and the measured capacities at failure.The Old and the NewEditions of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Manual from 2012 and earlier estimated ultimate side resistance, qs, in rock using the following equation (modified from Horvath and Kenney, 1979):qs=0.65aEpa(qu/pa)0.5 < 7.8pa(f ’c/pa)0.5 where: qu is the uniaxial compressive strength of the rock in ksf; pa is the atmospheric pressure in ksf; aE is the reduction factor to account for jointing in rock; and f ’c is the compressive strength of the concrete in ksi. For intact rock, previous versions of the AASHTO manual required that the ultimate end bearing resistance, qp, was calculated using the following equation: qp=2.5qu."

Jan 1, 2017