Search Documents

By Rakam Lama Tamang, Michael J. Byle, Stephen Ernst

"For various reasons, dredging may become necessary in front of existing bulkhead walls, either for channel deepening or for environmental remediation of contaminated sediments. The removal of sediments at the base of bulkhead walls removes support for the toe of the wall that must be assessed. Evaluation of this impact can be problematic for aging bulkheads for which no design or construction records exist. This paper will address the steps that should be taken in investigation and analysis to assure proper assessment and means to address uncertainties and gaps in information. The steps include pre-investigation data review, field inspection, geotechnical and geophysical investigation tools, parametric analysis and design tools. Examples from several bulkhead assessment projects will be provided that include a variety of conditions and tools for application. The focus of the paper will be on the integration of technologies to assess bulkhead geometry, geotechnical properties and stability, structural safety and constructability issues with removal of support, and means of temporary and permanent stabilization for environmental applications.IntroductionBulkheads and quays have existed as long as there have been waterfront activities. Some of the earliest date back to 1200 B.C.E.(Raban, 1987), however in the United States few predate the eighteenth century. Most extant bulkhead structures, and all steel sheet pile bulkhead walls date from the early 20th century or later. These structures function to protect the shore from erosion, support landside activities, and serve as place to moor and offload vessels. Regardless of the age or usage of existing bulkheads, it is essential to assess and protect them if needed where removal of soils on the water side of the bulkheads is planned to dredging.Waterfront BulkheadsExisting bulkhead structures can be classified into two types: Cantilevered, and anchored. Cantilevered walls are completely supported by the soil on the water side, while anchored bulkheads are supported both by the soil on the water side and anchorage on the land side (Figure 1). Walls may be constructed of timber, steel, or concrete. Timber walls may be lagging with soldier piles, cribbing with soldier piles, or timber sheeted such as Wakefield walls (Figure 2). Steel bulkheads are most commonly constructed using sheet piling comprised of interlocking A or Z shapes, though some historic walls were constructed with flat sheets. Precast concrete sheet piling has also been used in construction of bulkhead walls. Anchorage may be provided by steel bars or tendons attached to deadmen, sheet piling, driven piles, or earth anchors."

Jan 1, 2017

By Waddah Akili

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

By Burt G. Look, David W. Lacey

"Certification of foundation capacity during the construction phase is often assessed by strength or weathering state descriptors based on visual observations. This case study used the Point Load Index (PLI) test as a quantitative tool in the construction certification of a pile’s design capacity. Construction phase tests were completed on irregular sized rock samples whilst comparable design phase testing was completed on intact rock core samples. Statistical comparisons were made to assess the repeatability between the PLI tests, with best-fit Probability Distribution Functions (PDFs) determined for both datasets. Pronounced differences were observed based on the PDF adopted to characterize the PLI dataset, the consequence of which would be a significant change to the pile’s design capacity. The adoption of the lower quartile value is shown to satisfy both design conservatism and construction simplicity requirements. The commonly held belief that rock samples produced during socket excavation may be biased towards the higher strength portion of the rock mass, is shown to be invalid for this site. As the central bridge piers were certified using Plate Load Tests (PLTs), the resultant load-settlement relationships were compared with the PLI strength assessments made for similar materials recovered from the adjacent abutment piles.INTRODUCTIONThe upgrade of the Foxwell Road Overpass across the Pacific Motorway in South East Queensland required the duplication of an existing four span bridge structure. The foundations of the new bridge included the installation of 1.2m diameter cast in place (bored) piles at the bridge abutments and 900mm diameter cast in place (bored) piles below a retaining wall to be constructed adjacent to the existing abutment.The site geology was dominated by the Palaeozoic Neranleigh–Fernvale Beds, predominantly comprised of argillite, sandstone and greywacke. Limited soil materials existed at the site, with Extremely Weathered (EW) rock typically encountered within metres of the existing ground surface. The exception to the existence of shallow rock were locations where existing filling of the site had occurred – i.e. approach embankments to existing bridge structure.Capacity of pile sockets is typically assessed onsite by descriptive rock strength or weathering assessment. Such descriptors encompass a wide range of values and lack precision. Due to the subjectivity of such assessment techniques – a factor of 3 is often observed in terms of strength assessment based on one’s interpretation of rock strength descriptors alone – uncertainty on site often occurs regardless of whether a lower bound, average or other characteristic design parameter applies."

Jan 1, 1900

By Mohsen Elsayed, Amr Sallam, Ahmad Mohamed, Xuebing Zheng, Mohamed Alrowaimi

The foundation is an essential component of the wind turbine that ensures continued operation under stable and safe conditions. Both shallow and deep foundations are utilized to support wind turbines including gravity spread foundation, anchor foundation, pier or drilled shaft foundation and pile and pile cap foundations. Conventional methods were typically utilized to design the wind turbine foundations. With the advances in numerical modeling in the geotechnical field, foundation designers may utilize numerical analysis to design wind turbine foundations. Geotechnical numerical packages allow modeling structural components and soil-structure interaction that is usually neglected in conventional methods. Furthermore, the subsoil conditions, geometries, stress-strain behavior, boundary conditions and load staging can be modeled, minimizing the assumptions and generalization. This results in better understanding of the stress strain behavior of the foundation leading to optimized foundation designs. This paper includes a brief review of current foundations used to support wind turbines with an emphasis on post tensioned single pier foundations. The current conventional foundation design methodologies and state-of-the-art foundation design utilizing numerical modeling of the single pier foundation will be discussed. Two case histories where the single pier foundation, designed using numerical modeling, were utilized to support the wind turbines will be presented. INTRODUCTION The foundation is an essential component of every wind turbine that ensures continued operation under stable and safe conditions. Turbine manufacturers provides load specifications for designers to be utilized for wind turbine foundations design. Loads include bending moments, torsional moments, lateral forces and vertical forces in both operational and extreme wind conditions. Essential specifications under seismic conditions might also be provided in seismic prone areas. Turbine manufacturers also include foundation design criteria including minimum rotational stiffness, minimum horizontal stiffness, maximum allowed inclination and maximum allowed lateral movement under both operational and extreme loads. Geotechnical explorations and evaluations are typically performed at early stages of the wind development projects. The field explorations usually include Standard Penetration Test (SPT) borings, Cone Penetration Test (CPT) Soundings, geophysical surveys, and laboratory tests to define soils stratification system and soil strength and compressibility characteristics. The most critical soil parameters for turbine foundation design are shear strength parameters (cohesion and friction), shear modulus, Poisson’s ratio, and unit weight. The depth to the groundwater table is also a crucial parameter in design. Advanced field explorations techniques such as Dilatometer Tests and Pressuremeter Tests may also be utilized. Laboratory tests for foundation design typically include index parameters, consolidation and triaxial tests.

Jan 1, 2019

By Ganesh Deepak K., Anjana R. K., Dr. Kumar Pitchumani N., Rajasekharam R. M. V. M. S. S.

The Phase 2 of Chennai Metro is being introduced in the city to ease the dependence on the existing transportation systems. Phase 2 is a combination of underground and elevated metro stretches comprising of three corridors. The current study focusses on the underground stretch of Corridor 3 which has a total of 29 underground stations. Construction of the underground cut and cover stations results in ground movements, which in turn impact the structures adjacent to the excavations. The greenfield ground settlement can be evaluated with the help of empirical approach or an approach requiring finite element modelling (FEM). The paper compares empirical and FEM approaches with regards to ground conditions in Chennai. Further, with the predicted ground settlements, building damage assessment is performed. The damage category of a building is defined based on the estimated tensile strains. This paper also compares the building damage assessment with empirical method and finite element modelling.

Nov 1, 2022

By Paolo Cavalcoli, Federico Pagliacci

"As opposed to the static functional recovery of existing structures, the construction of infrastructures in an urban environment, when combined with complex geological situations, often involves building foundation structures, whether circular or rectangular in section, through rock formations or chaotic strata (sand and gravel with cobbles). Until a few years ago, these formations or strata were sometimes an insurmountable constraint on traditional foundation installation techniques. The difficulty in overcoming these geological situations is sometimes added to the increasingly frequent need to reach depths that were unimaginable just a decade ago. These are real challenges for those carrying out these works and for those manufacturing the necessary equipment. There are two main methodological approaches to these problems, that can be summed up in the rhetorical figure of ""David and Goliath"": cunning versus force. In reference to the case studies in this article: the permanent retaining walls for the Copenhagen Metro, and the structural repairs to the Arapuni Dam in New Zealand and the Wolf Creek Dam in the U.S., we will describe the foundations constructed in presence of rock using combined small-diameter direction drilling solutions, associated with their enlargement up to the project’s size, at depths exceeding 300 feet. Finally, a case study will be presented on the implementation of a large cross-section of an excavation in the rock, at depths greater than 800 feet.IntroductionAs opposed to the functional recovery of existing structures, the construction of infrastructures in an urban environment, when combined with complex geological situations, often involves building foundation structures, whether circular or rectangular in section, through rock formations or chaotic strata (sand and gravel with cobbles).Until a few years ago, these formations or strata were sometimes an insurmountable constraint on traditional foundation installation techniques. The difficulty in overcoming these geological situations is sometimes added to the increasingly frequent need to reach depths that were unimaginable just a decade ago.These are real challenges for those building these works and for those manufacturing the necessary equipment. There are two main methodological approaches to these problems, that can be summed up in the biblical figures of ""David and Goliath"": cunning versus force. In the engineering field, the force is summarized in the use of ever-larger drilling equipment in terms of installed power, weight in working conditions, winch and rotary capacity."

Jan 1, 2015

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 Scott A. Walker, Gabriel J. Alcantar, Brian Zuckerman, Ramin Golesorkhi

"The stadium development consists of construction of a 68,500-seat, open-air NFL football stadium for the San Francisco 49ers. The main structure will consist of a 7-story above grade steel structure supported by over 3,000 piles. Berkel and Company Contractors, Inc. (Berkel) was selected as the design-build pile contractor who used their auger pressure grouted displacement (APGD) piles for this project. During an indicator pile installation and pile load test program, fifteen piles were tested to develop installation criteria to support demands of 150kips tension and 180 kips compression. Following the indicator pile program Berkel installed 3088 piles in 30 working days. Throughout pile installation data were collected with an automated data acquisition system (DAS). During pile installation field engineers from Treadwell & Rollo observed the pile installation as well as the real-time data from the DAS. Strategic staging and pre-production planning by Berkel along with consistent collaboration with the design team created an atmosphere for a successful and on schedule project completion.IntroductionThe new San Francisco 49ers Stadium in Santa Clara, California will be a 68,500-seat facility, a rendering of which is shown in Figure 1. The main structure will consist of a 7-story above grade steel structure supported by more than 3,000 piles. The north, east and south portions of the stadium are designed as an open seating bowl, while the western portion includes open seating at the lower levels and seven-story tower which houses over 150 suites.The stadium project includes the stadium structure, as well as elevated open pedestrian walkways, commercial community space, and three new pedestrian bridges spanning a nearby by creek. Sustainable designs and innovations such as a green roof, photovoltaic panels, a ground source geothermal system, stadium-wide Wi-Fi capability, and access to public transit are provided throughout the project. The stadium is designed as an open, light, and airy structure and is surrounded by an existing amusement park, office buildings, the Santa Clara Convention Center, and the training facility of the 49ers."

Jan 1, 2015

By George Piscsalko

Quality control of drilled shafts and ACIP piles is greatly dependent upon the practices of the site personnel. In many applications it is difficult to properly inspect the shaft prior to concreting, such as when the shaft is drilled under slurry. In other cases, such as ACIP piles, it is impossible to inspect the shaft in any manner prior to concreting. There are numerous methods currently available to assess the integrity of drilled shafts and ACIP piles. Each method has its advantages and limitations. This paper will compare the various available methods as well as introduce a new method for assessing integrity in drilled shafts and ACIP piles. This new method, known as Thermal Integrity Profiling, determines the integrity over 100% of the shaft both inside and outside the reinforcing cage by measuring the hydration temperature of the concrete along the length of the shaft. These temperature measurements can be made by either passing a thermal probe through a standard Cross Hole access tube typically 12 to 48 hours after concrete placement, or from embedding thermal wires within the shaft prior to concrete placement and monitoring them with unattended data collectors for 12 to 48 hours after concrete placement. This Thermal Integrity Profile method will be described in detail and several case histories will be presented. Additional testing methods which will be compared include low strain Pile Integrity Testing, and Cross Hole Sonic Logging. Advantages and limitations for each method will be discussed.

By Charles M. Wilk

"Solidification/stabilization (S/S) treatment is used to treat hazardous wastes for disposal and in the remediation/site restoration of contaminated land . SIS is also an increasingly popular technology for Brownfield (industrial property) redevelopment, since treated wastes can often be left on-site and to improve the soil for subsequent construction. This paper discusses the applicability of the technology to various wastes, basic cement chemistry relating to SIS, tests used to design treatability studies and to verify treatment, basics on implementation of the technology in the field , and examples of SIS use at brownfield sites, including a former wood preserving site, former manufactured gas plant sites, a former electric generating station, and a shopping mall development.INTRODUCTIONSolidification/Stabilization (S/S) is a widely used treatment for the management/disposal of a broad range of contaminated media and wastes; particularly those contaminated with substances classified as hazardous in the United States. The treatment involves mixing a binding reagent into the contaminated media or waste. The treatment protects human health and the environment by immobilizing contaminants within the treated material. Immobilization within the treated material prevents migration of the contaminants to human, animal and plant receptors. SIS treatment has been used to treat radioactive wastes since the 1950s and hazardous waste since the 1970's (Conner 1990). SIS continues as a cornerstone treatment technology for the management of radioactive waste, hazardous waste, and site remediation and Brownfield redevelopment."

Jan 1, 2005

By Steven E. Darnell, William W. Haasz, Brandon T. Buschmeier, Frederic Masse

"Landfills often cover expansive areas in locations where large building facilities or infrastructure is in high in demand after the land has been reclaimed. Most landfills have soil or fill properties that vary widely over small distances; combined with the strict guidelines and restrictions for the removal and treatment of soil or material that is on site, these projects can be a major challenge for any prospective developer. In order to make landfills suitable for the construction of any project it is necessary to conduct a detailed evaluation of the subsurface conditions. Ground improvement techniques are among the most typical methods for making reclaimed landfills suitable for the construction of any major project. The paper will discuss the approach that was taken to support a proposed warehouse in Elizabeth, New Jersey using Controlled Modulus Columns Rigid Inclusions (CMC Rigid Inclusions), which are grouted, auger-displacement elements. Additionally, we will discuss the use of Dynamic Compaction (DC) that was performed in areas outside the proposed warehouse footprint. Through the combination of CMC rigid inclusions and DC, the general contractor’s project schedule was expedited, the costs to support the warehouse were economized, and the anticipated settlement of the parking lot areas was drastically reduced. Furthermore, the paper will outline the benefits of using CMC rigid inclusions and DC methods in order to minimize the impact of working with contaminated soils from a landfill.OVERVIEW OF THE ELIZABETH WAREHOUSE PROJECTOver the past several decades the foundations industry has seen an increase in demand for the support of developments on reclaimed landfills; particularly, on the east coast where many landfills were capped before the 1980’s and steady population growth and city expansion have caused high demand for this now highly desired real estate. Unfortunately, these landfills, often as large as twenty (20) or more acres present tough geotechnical and environmental challenges for Owners planning to develop or build structures of any size on the reclaimed land. Consequently, the options for building on reclaimed landfills can quickly become cost prohibitive.Site SpecificSelected by a developer for the location of a future warehouse, the 29 acres (114,424 sq-meters) project site is located in Elizabeth, New Jersey and demonstrates the complexities of designing over a once reclaimed landfill. The landfill was used for municipal solid waste (MSW) consisting of trash, wood, metal, glass, plastic, brick, concrete fragments, and other types of debris. This landfill was capped in the 1960’s, and developed in the 1970’s for a warehouse. The new project included the demolition of the existing warehouse and the development of the site to be repurposed for a new 481,650 sq-ft single-story warehouse, surrounded by paved parking and truck loading areas. Figure 1 below, shows an overview of the project site layout."

Jan 1, 2017

By George Piscsalko

"Quality control of drilled shafts and ACIP piles is greatly dependent upon the practices of the site personnel. In many applications it is difficult to properly inspect the shaft prior to concreting, such as when the shaft is drilled under slurry. In other cases, such as ACIP piles, it is impossible to inspect the shaft in any manner prior to concreting. There are numerous methods currently available to assess the integrity of drilled shafts and ACIP piles. Each method has its advantages and limitations. This paper will compare the various available methods as well as introduce a new method for assessing integrity in drilled shafts and ACIP piles. This new method, known as Thermal Integrity Profiling, determines the integrity over 100% of the shaft both inside and outside the reinforcing cage by measuring the hydration temperature of the concrete along the length of the shaft. These temperature measurements can be made by either passing a thermal probe through a standard Cross Hole access tube typically 12 to 48 hours after concrete placement, or from embedding thermal wires within the shaft prior to concrete placement and monitoring them with unattended data collectors for 12 to 48 hours after concrete placement. This Thermal Integrity Profile method will be described in detail and several case histories will be presented. Additional testing methods which will be compared include low strain Pile Integrity Testing, and Cross Hole Sonic Logging. Advantages and limitations for each method will be discussed.IntroductionDrilled shafts and Augered Cast-in-Place (ACIP) piles have been increasingly used over the past several years due to several reasons including the reduced noise and vibration, speed of installation for ACIP piles, and the large axial and lateral capacities which are attainable for very large drilled shafts. ACIP piles are drilled and cast without any visual inspection. Drilled shafts can be cast in a dry hole which allows for inspection of the hole prior to casting, but the casting process is very difficult to nearly impossible to inspect with any accuracy. Drilled shafts are frequently cast under slurry as a means to stabilize the surrounding soils during the construction process. When casting a drilled shaft under slurry, it is very difficult to accurately inspect the hole prior to casting and it is equally difficult to inspect the shaft during the casting process. Many of the above mentioned processes are blind to inspection and therefore the chances increase for having defects present in the completed elements."

Jan 1, 2017

By Ronaldo Luna, Donald Deardorff

"The use of load and resistance factor design (LRFD) is well documented since the 1960s for structural applications when it was first adopted into the American Concrete Institute Building Code in 1963 and was established for geotechnical applications by the Danish Geotechnical Institute about the same time under the name of Limit State Design (LSD).The Federal Highway Administration required all federally funded projects to use the LRFD method by 2007. Due to this funding requirement, recent LRFD research for geotechnical applications has focused on common bridge foundations (i.e., driven or drilled shafts), resulting in good documentation for design using these methods. Unfortunately, the practicing geotechnical engineer does not intuitively know how to create resistance factors for deep foundations systems that have design methodologies and installation techniques significantly different from driven or drilled shaft foundation systems.Helical anchors typically use semiempirical methods for preliminary capacity design and a torque correlation methodology during installation to verify required capacity. Here we provide basic information on the LRFD methodology for helical anchor design. Additionally, the First- Order Second Moment (FOSM) method is applied to a previous helical anchor study (Hoyt and Clemence 1989) to determine resistance factors for an ultimate tension capacity strength limit state.MethodologyThe concept of the LRFD method is to establish factors for both the load and resistance that account for uncertainties using probability theory. The factors increase the nominal load and/or decrease the nominal resistance such that the probability of failure is an acceptable value. LRFD also accounts for the effects of load combinations (dead, live, seismic, wind, etc.) by determining the probability of the combined occurrence. The general form of the LRFD equation used by American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) is:"

Jan 1, 2009

By Sara Moshfeghi, Seyyed Majdeddin Mir Mohammad Hosseini, Abolfazl Eslami

"Due to variety of current pile bearing capacity methods based on the cone penetration test (CPT), for optimum design, it is necessary to evaluate the performance of such methods in different geotechnical conditions. Geotechnical databases including piling and in-situ testing records have been recognized as useful tools for analysis, design and economical construction. In order to evaluate pile bearing capacity methods, AUT-CPT&Pile database has been compiled including 450 full scale pile load tests and CPT sounding records. This database consists of different pile types with a relatively wide range of geometries and various soil conditions. Forty three records of piles driven in sand deposits were then employed to evaluate effects of ultimate capacity interpretation criteria from load displacement diagrams. The Davisson offset limit criterion, the Brinch Hansen 80% criterion and the load at the displacement of 10% of the pile diameter were compared to estimated capacities from ten CPT based design methods currently used in practice. The Brinch Hansen 80% criterion and the load at the displacement of 10% of the pile diameter lead to reasonable results, the Brinch Hansen 80% criterion showed less scatter. For evaluating the accuracy and the precision of CPT-based methods, the results were compared to estimated capacities. Results of comparison indicate that the CPT-based methods mainly predict the pile capacity withreasonable accuracy.INTRODUCTIONAmong the different approaches of estimating the pile bearing capacity, in-situ tests, especially, the cone penetration test (CPT) are favored due to the cone similarities with piles in modes of installation as well as fast and continuous profiling. This trend is practically well established where deep foundations are to be constructed in soft to medium subsoil deposits (Eslami and Fellenius, 1997; Mayne and Niazi, 2009).Employing different design methods results in a wide range of values which complicates the selection of an appropriate one to determine the pile bearing capacity. Several studies by Briuad and Tucker (1988), Eslami and Fellenius (1997), Abu Farsakh and Titi (2004), Schneider et al. (2008) and Eslami et al. (2011) confirm disparity of different design methods predictions. Thus, for optimum design, it is necessary to evaluate and compare the performance of current methods.Geotechnical databases are known as helpful tools in research and practical applications for optimizing analysis and design and are mainly used for management and interpretation of data, evaluation of design methods, calibrating LRFD or ASD design factors, etc. Pile lateral and axial load tests are examples of databases in geotechnical engineering. A summary of several CPT and pile load test databases is presented in Table 1."

Jan 1, 2017

By John D. Nelson

Foundation underpinning is a common component of remediation schemes for distressed foundations on expansive soils. For many applications in expansive soil, micropiles have distinct advantages over other techniques. This paper will concentrate on the design and construction of micropiles in expansive soil. It discusses the nature of building distress and the relationship between foundation movement and soil heave. It presents methods for determining the factors that are required for the design of micropiles. Such factors include calculation of expected free-field heave, depth of soil wetting, and prediction of pier movement. A finite element program developed by the authors and others to determine pier heave and internal forces is presented. The input parameters that are required for pier analysis are discussed, and the nature of the output and the sensitivity of the results to the output are described. A case example illustrates the advantages of micropiles over other methods.

Aug 1, 2013

By Derrick Dasenbrock

Two DFI committees independently organized two complimentary panel sessions for the recent American Society of Civil Engineers' (ASCE) Geo- Risk 2023 "Advances in Theory and Innovation in Practice" Conference in Arlington, Virginia, July 23-26. The Geo- Institute (GI) specialty conference welcomed more than 200 professionals and students interested in risk from around the world to the Washington, D.C., area for three full days of plenary keynote lectures, papers and no-paper sessions. The GI Risk Assessment and Management Technical Committee organized the event, which is the third in a series planned on a 6-year cycle. The previous two events were in 2011 in Atlanta and 2017 in Denver.

Sep 1, 2023

By Marcus Daubner, Karsten Beckhaus, Florian Bauer

The construction industry can and needs to contribute to a more sustainable world. Accordingly, geotechnical works potentially have a significant share. In this context, Bauer understands “sustainable products for geotechnical works” as those that may cause less emissions and increase the sustainability of construction activities. In order to structure the efforts and systematically pursue sustainable targets in the construction sector, and in the specialist foundation industry, the “17 sustainability goals” presented by the United Nations in their AGENDA 2030, can be used for general guidance and for continuous improvement. Benchmarks for relevant economic and social objectives, mainly with environmental aspects, are inevitable. The key parameter to sustainable products for geotechnical works in the focus of this paper is the optimisation of processes on site needed to fulfill the client’s building task, including the selection of technologies and construction methods with minimum environmental impact and minimum carbon footprint.

May 1, 2022

By David Wilshaw

Continuous Surface Wave (CSW) testing has been the “next big thing” in ground characterization for the last 25 years. The technique uses surface geophones to measure the speed at which Rayleigh waves (generated by a vibratory source) travel through the ground over a range of frequencies. The velocity at which surface waves travel through the ground is directly related to ground stiffness; the velocity of shorter wavelengths is influenced by the stiffness of shallower soil layers, while the velocity of longer wavelengths is influenced by the stiffness of deeper layers. Measuring the surface wave velocity over a range of frequencies, therefore, allows a stiffness / depth profile to be produced. Using the small-strain stiffness data measured by the CSW technique greatly improves the accuracy of simple limit state analyses; the data are also of sufficient quality for use in Finite Element modelling. Nonetheless, the technique has suffered from a perception of high cost, low productivity, and poor repeatability. An improved Advanced Continuous Surface Wave (ACSW) testing system has been developed by Ground Stiffness Surveys in the United Kingdom, has been deployed there commercially for several years, and is now available in the United States. ACSW uses an automated electronic control system that generates vibrations (from a purpose designed and manufactured portable seismic “shaker”) at different frequencies, measured across a 3m (10-foot) array of geophones, linked to a robust data acquisition and analysis software package. The range of applications in geologic and geotechnical site characterization includes rapid preliminary non-intrusive site assessments (utilizing published soil correlations); stiffness profiling to detect discrete layers (such as a variation in rockhead); average stiffness profiling for earthwork or ground improvement control testing, Working Platform stability assessments, foundation settlement analysis, rock quality and rippability assessments, and void detection.

Oct 1, 2022

By Damien Enright, Franz-Werner Gerressen

CFA/ACIP pile is the most used single pass drilling method for deep foundation installations. It is constructed by rotating and driving a Continuous Flight Auger (CFA) into the ground at a controlled speed to the specified pile depth. Concrete is then pumped under continuous positive pressure through the hollow stem of the auger to fill the borehole as the auger is withdrawn. CFA/ACIP piles are preferred due to their high daily production capacity when used in suitable soil conditions. CFA/ACIP piles have been installed in the United States for decades and the industry has seen a huge development in equipment, installation process, monitoring and more. Nowadays, CFA/ACIP piles are installed using fully computer monitored drill rigs rather than a bulky crane and lead setup. Because of the torque and crowd offered by these rigs, piles can be installed to depths of more than 100 feet and diameters up to 48 inches. New age crane-based equipment with leader systems are than welcome to substitute old fashioned bulky cranes These new age crane-based systems combine the benefits of sufficient hydraulic power, fully equipped software, etc. with the additional benefits that they can do single pass drilling without extension systems, even when drill depths of more than 100 feet are required. The paper will explain the construction process and will discuss some jobsite references and experiences made using the new age crane-based equipment.

Oct 1, 2022

By Frank J. Purcell

“Down The Hole” (DTH) hammer drilling is often necessary to advance the casing during pile construction where the test bores have determined difficult drilling conditions with obstructions such as boulders, cobble and glacial till. The use of compressed air to operate DTH hammers in foundation drilling has been a contentious point in many regions of the world due to its potential to disturb the ground around the pile being constructed. There are many examples of damage to adjacent building foundations where compressed air exiting the pile being drilled disturbed the subsurface around the building’s existing piles. This paper looks at the use of compressed air in DTH hammer foundation drilling and the move towards controlling the exhausted air to avoid over drilling the pile, causing potential damage to nearby piles. Simulated models of air flow penetration into the soil of different configurations of drill bits are discussed to highlight design changes employed to better control the air during the drilling process. A case study of the construction of a water-tight pipe pile wall for a building’s underground parking structure is studied to demonstrate the potential of DTH hammer foundation drilling where the air is fully controlled.

Nov 1, 2022