Search Documents

By Cory McElprang, Enamul Hoque, Aaron Thomas, Scott A. Jacobs

Crosshole Sonic Logging (CSL) only evaluates concrete on the inside of reinforcing cages leaving the outside unevaluated unless other types of testing are performed such as Perimeter Sonic Logging (PSL). While there have been some reports of PSL testing having accurately identified anomalies (e.g. Samtani et al 2005), experience by Case Foundation Company has indicated otherwise where false positives were determined with subsequent coring. Numerous cases of PSL false positives are presented as well as a study where a shaft was installed with both inside and outside tubes, and CSL and PSL data were compared. To date, there is very limited data published on perimeter sonic logging, or Gamma-Gamma Logging (GGL) with tubes on the exterior of drilled shafts. Several cases will be presented where false positives were experienced where PSL testing was performed. In addition, a direct comparison will also be presented where a shaft was installed with both tubes on the inside and outside where CSL and PSL data is compared. BRIEF HISTORY – CSL TESTING AND TUBES ON INSIDE The general procedure of Crosshole Sonic Logging (CSL) testing includes attaching tubes to the reinforcing cage to be able to send a transmitter in one tube and a receiver in another tube with which a sonic pulse is emitted from the transmitter and received in another tube. The time taken for the sonic pulse to travel between the tubes is measured and compared to expected values for the known distance between the tubes. Any increase in time from expected values indicates the sonic pulse traveled through a media other than homogeneous concrete such as objects in the path (spacer wheels, steel bracing, etc.), tube spacing, or soil inclusions. However, variations in arrival time can also result from differences in concrete density. The tubes have traditionally been placed on the interior of the reinforcing cage which protects them during hoisting and placement of the cage and reduces wave refraction caused by modulus of elasticity differences between steel and concrete. This allows the concrete within the interior of the reinforcing cage to be evaluated, but the concrete outside of the cage is excluded from traditional CSL testing. As a result, alternative integrity testing has been developed to not only provide different ways to evaluate the integrity of drilled shafts but to also address the issue of evaluating the concrete outside of the reinforcing cage. These alternative testing methods include Gamma-Gamma Logging (GGL), Thermal Integrity Profiling (TIP testing) and Perimeter Sonic Logging (PSL) which is similar to CSL testing but instead of the tubes placed inside the reinforcing cage, the tubes are placed on the outside of the reinforcing cage as shown in Fig. 1.

Jan 1, 2019

By A. Fisher

The use of thermal integrity testing to verify the quality of deep foundations has increased significantly in the UK and other world markets over the last 5 years. The introduction of distributed fibre optic sensing to this field has broadened the range of applications in which it can be deployed and the types of foundations which can be tested. This paper presents how fibre optic sensing technology can be successfully deployed in the construction environment the range of foundation techniques to which it can be applied. Alongside developments in the practical aspects of thermal testing, progress has been made in establishing assessment criteria which can be used to evaluate the results. This paper presents recent examples of comparative studies on foundations which include both thermal integrity testing, cross hole sonic logging and intrusive coring. The use of distributed strain measurement during pile load testing presents an alternative means to verify the assessment criteria used for integrity testing. This new approach can achieve comparable results to foundation exhumation or intrusive investigation and at a fraction of the cost. This paper presents the findings of several such studies, highlighting the benefits and opportunities for future improvement of the method.

Oct 1, 2022

By George J. Tamara

The urban environment presents special challenges for the design and construction of earth retention systems. Complications arising from difficult subsurface conditions are compounded by the presence of urban infrastructure and existing and prior construction. The proximity of adjacent structures as well as intense prior use can cause special concerns including the potential for archeological artifacts or contaminated ground or ground water. Utilities and structures may be particularly vulnerable to the effects of ground movement, dewatering and vibrations. Difficulty of access, congestion and limited work areas may severely restrict means and methods of construction. Dewatering may be limited or prohibited because of concerns for disposal of clean or contaminated water, depletion of aquifers, drawing of contaminants to the site or dewatering induced settlements.

Jan 1, 2003

By P. Kiruthika, A. Murali Krishna

Soil liquefaction is a dangerous phenomenon that involves huge damages during strong earthquake ground motion event. Stone columns (SCs) are widely used as liquefaction mitigation element which is expected to perform the improvements against liquefaction hazard by densifying, increasing the stiffness and rapid dissipation of excess pore water pressure in the surrounding soil. Although in the recent times few studies on the behaviour of stone columns in the seismic zone has evolved, the performance of SCs in the multi-layered soils is not extensively examined. This paper presents the numerical investigations on the performance of SCs installed in the multi-layered soils as a liquefaction mitigation measure against the seismic loading. The acceleration time histories, Excess Porewater Pressure (EPP), vertical displacement and stress ratio evaluated along different depths using PLAXIS 2D. With the installation of stone column there is a considerable reduction in the acceleration amplitude, which in turn reduces the EPP and vertical displacement at different locations and the amplitude of reduction depends on the soil stiffness levels at the depth.

Sep 1, 2022

By Rich A. Lamb, Paul J. Axtell, Michael K. Muchard

"Since 2010, the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) has performed eight full-scale compressive load tests on large-diameter pipe piles at four different project locations across the state. All of the piles were 42-in diameter, open-ended pipes driven to practical refusal on sedimentary bedrock with D125-32 diesel hammers from three separate manufacturers. The rapid load test method in general accordance with ASTM D7383-10 (Statnamic method) was used along with high-strain dynamic testing and subsequent signal matching. Results of these tests indicate that the axial nominal resistance of these piles in compression is not controlled by geotechnical considerations when driven with an appropriately sized hammer and installation criterion. Rather, the predominantly elastic load-deflection behavior of the piles under compressive load suggests the axial nominal compressive resistance is controlled by the structural capacity of the pile. In all instances, the rapid load tests indicated a nominal resistance exceeding that produced by high-strain dynamic tests due to insufficient hammer energy to fully mobilize resistance. In all cases, the hammers used were able to easily install the piles through the soil overburden. Mobilizing a larger hammer simply to demonstrate high-strain dynamic resistance is not economical or practical. This paper presents the subsurface conditions at each location, the ensuing test results, and the ramifications for future projects in Minnesota utilizing large-diameter open-ended pipe piles.INTRODUCTIONThe Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) has recently performed eight full-scale compressive load tests on large-diameter pipe piles at four different project locations across the state. The four project locations described in this paper where pile load testing was performed are shown in Figure 1 and exist in the southeastern portion of Minnesota. The projects are all major bridges crossing the Mississippi River in three instances and the St. Croix River just above the Mississippi River in the other instance. The first project is the TH 61 Mississippi River crossing in Hasting, MN where two load tests were conducted. The second is the TH 36 St. Croix River crossing in Stillwater, MN where two load tests were performed. The third project is the I-90 Mississippi River crossing in Dresbach, MN where three load tests were conducted. The final project is the TH 43 Mississippi River crossing in Winona, MN where one load test was performed."

Jan 1, 2017

By Gang Guo, Zhong Liu

"In response to an increasing demand of anchored structures for underground space and transportation infrastructure in China, an innovative underreamed ground anchorage system was created. The novel anchorage system has provided more efficient functions with higher capacity at lower cost, because of the enlarged cylindrical body (known as ECB) sealed in capsule at bottom of anchorage. This paper presents the detailed structure of innovative anchorage system and its special features. To investigate the bearing mechanism of new anchorage, we evaluate its performance and failure mode based on the experimental results, and also indicate its strain-hardening load-displacement relationship. Unlike the shaft anchorages, it is identified no overall failure to be found in soil surrounding the underreamed anchorage. More importantly, the anchorage capacity is governed by the base resistance, which takes more than 80% of total pullout capacity resulting from the contribution of ECB. Finally a case history of anti-floating project introduces the new combined construction approach and procedure, which has provided the contribution to the quality control and cost efficiency.INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUNDThe construction boom over two decades in China has resulted in an increasing demand for underground space and slope stability. The infrastructures market requires the more efficient anchorage systems for retaining structures, resisting uplift forces and slope protection. The major concern focuses on gaining higher capacity and lower cost resulted from perfecting anchorage systems. There are three main anchorage systems designed to achieve the above objectives: ? single bore multiple anchorage system (Barley 1997), ? regroutable anchorage system (Smoltczyk 1991), ? underreamed anchorage systems (Xanthakos 1991). Generally, the concept ? comparing with the other two, can be more competitive due to its distinct advantages. To improve the performance and durability of ground anchorages under the complex geological conditions and diversified engineering requirements, a number of different underreamed anchorage technologies had been used, which included cone - shape anchorage described by Liao, Wu and Shu (1997) in Taiwan, Soilex anchorage developed in Sweden (Massarsch et al. 1997), Soletanche anchorage proposed in France, blasting anchorage used in Czechoslovakia (Hobst and Zajic 1986), jet-grouting anchorage innovated in Europe (Anon 1988), as well as deep mixing anchorage created in Japan (Cheng et al. 2000).The underreamed anchorage systems have the remarkable advantages compared to the shaft anchorage system. However, there are also some weaknesses inherent in the underreamed systems. For instance, the mechanical underreamed anchorage is unsuitable in sand or waterbearing ground, because the enlarged hole is easy to collapse, and it is hard to ensure the quality of anchorages. On the other hand, relying on the blasting in deep hole, the geometrical space and dimension of enlarged hole is uncontrollable, meanwhile, the continuous blasting operations may easily cause the serious ground deformation and the negative effects to the completed anchorages."

Jan 1, 1900

By Padmavathi V, M. Najamuddin, M. R. Madhav

Granular piles are one of the leading ground improvement techniques, adopted for the betterment of bearing capacity and reduction in settlements of the foundations and also to accelerate consolidation of the surrounding soil. In the recent past, there has been extensive research on the settlement analysis and behavior of granular piles under varied soil conditions. The application of these theoretical solutions to practical problems requires a knowledge of representative values of the deformation parameters of the ground and the granular piles. However, very little information is available on these parameters. The paper presents a new method for the estimation of the modular ratio of granular piles and modulus of deformation of the surrounding in-situ soil from the compression load tests. The load - settlement response obtained from the compression test results are used in the back analysis for estimating the modulus of deformation of the ground. The presence of granular bed, under the rigid plate for load testing, has been given due consideration in quantifying the proportion of load transferred on to the stone column. Based on these considerations a new method is developed to estimate the modulus of deformation of the ground and the modular ratio of the granular pile.

Sep 1, 2022

By Bengt H. Fellenius

The design of pile foundations is much more commonly verified by means of a full-scale test, than is the design of other foundation units. The reason is not that our knowledge of pile behavior is more uncertain than our knowledge of other foundation types making the verification necessary, but more that the loads in a structure are more concentrated to single foundations in a structure founded on piles as opposed to structures on footings or mats. Therefore, should a pile cap fail or move, the adverse consequence of this is often drastic, as the piled structure has little freedom to transfer its need for support to other foundation units. Consequently, it becomes important to assure the design of piled foundations. In many, maybe in most instances, the static pile loading test is routine and geared toward determining an at least capacity, only. However, in these times there is an ever increasing liability of the professional, demands for increased economy of the foundation, and frequent lack of the involvement in the test of the experienced old-timer exercising good judgment. Furthermore, modern pile design is leaving the single, simple concept of capacity and requires more information from the test to assist in determining aspects of long-term behavior and settlement. Therefore, even the straight forward, routine static loading test requires improved planning, execution, and analysis.

Jan 1, 1990

By Ronnie Melker, Joel Webster, Daniel Belardo, Thomas Hyatt

Quality assurance of drilled shafts is highly dependent upon the construction practices used during the excavation and concrete placement process. When performed under slurry, challenges are presented in maintaining borehole stability and placing a uniform and continuous concrete column. An integral part of the construction operation is to evaluate the as-built integrity to verify the drilled shaft is capable of safely transferring the required loads to the subsurface. One such case is exemplified by a project involving the expansion of an existing public transit rail line. The expansion required the construction of a new bridge bent supported by seven 5-ft diameter drilled shafts of various lengths. The specifications for the project required both Cross-Hole Sonic Logging (CSL) and Thermal Integrity Profiling (TIP) for drilled shaft integrity evaluation. Both of these post-construction non-destructive tests (NDT) are designed to detect anomalies or the presence of regions with reduced concrete quality. However, the implementation and methodologies of performing each of these NDT methods are significantly different. Cross-Hole Sonic Logging uses ultrasonic signals emitted from a transmitter in one access tube to a receiver in another access tube. Thermal Integrity Profiling measures elevated concrete temperatures during the curing process using embedded thermal wires. Both test methods require different access details and therefore have different costs associated to the contractor or owner to perform. This paper provides a detailed comparison of these NDT methods as performed on these seven drilled shafts. The associated financial and time costs to perform each method are compared and the results are discussed in detail. INTRODUCTION Drilled shafts are a fundamental deep foundation element that can be designed to resist large bending moments as well as to transfer large compressive axial loads through weaker upper soils to competent soils or rock below. Often times when the upper soils are very soft, lateral support by casing or slurry, or a combination of both, may be used to hold back the softer soils from collapsing into the hole before concrete has been placed. Due to the blind nature of drilled shaft construction and the qualities issues that may arise during the placement process, it is essential for design engineers to specify non-destructive testing (NDT) to assess the quality of the as-built drilled shaft. CSL and TIP testing are two NDT methods designed to detect areas of lower quality concrete or soil inclusions throughout the length of the drilled shaft and determine its overall quality. Each method uses different technologies and methods to achieve the results required to determine the as-built condition of the drilled shaft.

Jan 1, 2019

By Sanjay Gupta, Sorabh Gupta, Ravi Sundaram

A geotechnical forensic evaluation of piles for an industrial facility in Haryana was performed to assess the quality of the piles and to evaluate piles installed using two different types of rigs. Low strain pile integrity tests were performed on all piles to assess the pile length and possible presence of structural defects. Coring was done through questionable piles for the clinching evidence of concrete quality and pile length. Probe holes adjoining piles helped confirm the bulging of piles at shallow depth. The paper highlights the importance of implementing a well-planned quality assurance program to confirm that all piles installed are of the desired quality.

Sep 1, 2022

By Ashirbad Satapathy, Sanket Rawat, Ramanand Shukla, Ravi Kant Mittal

Bearing capacity factor (Nq) and Adhesion factor (α) are the key parameters for analyzing the load carrying capacity of pile foundations embedded in cohesionless and cohesive soils respectively. Numerous models are available in the form of charts or equations for the computation of these parameters and hence, have been adopted by most of the International and National standards. Indian Standard for the Design and Construction of Concrete Pile Foundations, IS 2911–Part 1 (2010), also makes use of charts detailed in its Annexure B. However, the sources of these charts have not been specified clearly, making it difficult to back-refer to the actual models to assess their basis for resolving any critical scenarios encountered during design. The present study aims at acquiring a distinct understanding of the development of these charts in order to bring more clarity to the design process of pile foundations. The given charts have been compared with various models specified in existing literature and international standards for the calculation of Nq and α for both driven and bored piles and hence, the basis of Indian Standard charts has been identified. Moreover, it is evident that the use of these charts complicates the process of automation of analysis and design of pile foundations as well as the associated optimization studies. Additionally, the manual entry of data especially, from the logarithmic graph of Nq, escalates the chances of error thus, making it a critical concern for design offices. Therefore, this paper also presents a non-linear regression model for Nq and α, developed using NCSS software for both driven and bored piles. Through multiple iterations, the value of coefficient of determination for Nq and α has been found to reach greater than 0.995. The developed equations can be simplistically used for both manual and automated analysis of pile foundations.

Nov 1, 2022

By O. Craciun, C. A. Bridges, M. Cai, J. Sugawara

There are a number of methods that can be adopted for predicting the ultimate lateral resistance of a free-head rigid pile, from the conventional Brinch Hansen and Broms solutions to three-dimensional finite element analyses. Often these methods give rise to significantly different pile ultimate lateral capacities which could lead to either unsafe or too conservative designs. It is also well known that finding a rigorous and practical solution is challenging due to the complex three dimensional and nonlinear soil-structure interaction. This paper reviews some of the most common methods and produces results of pile ultimate lateral capacities embedded in cohesive or cohesionless soils. Subsequently, a finite element analysis is performed using PLAXIS 3D modelling under the same design conditions. Based on comparison of results, limitations and advantages are highlighted, and the most suitable method is proposed from a practical point of view.

Nov 1, 2022

By Michael Gebman, Jack Gerwick

"With the opening of the new San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge East Span, the former bridge and its caisson foundations are being demolished. Caisson foundations are in the path of a future shipping channel and therefore need removal down to the mudline 50 ft below water (MLLW). For the first caisson to be removed (E3) a mechanical demolition was performed above the waterline and an implosion was done for the remaining caisson down to mudline. Mechanical demolition consisted of excavators operating from either on top of the caisson, from work platforms or from barges. The demolition was implemented on a trial basis with a successful implosion on November 14, 2015. The work was conducted in an environmentally sensitive area, with measures taken to protect fish, marine mammals and birds. This demolition technique was cost effective, faster to execute, and had a better environmental impact then an alternative option. The demolition, measures implemented to protect the environment, outcome, and lessons learned are presented.INTRODUCTIONThe California Department of Transportation needed a cost effective and environmentally friendly solution for removal of the remaining San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge (former East Span) caisson foundations, starting with caisson E3. This was necessary to clear a future shipping channel. One option was to construct a steel cofferdam around the caisson to allow demolition in the dry down to the mudline. This option would take years to complete, be cost prohibitive, and its noise would disrupt aquatic life and birds throughout the cofferdam construction and demolition. An alternative option was implemented on a trial basis to conduct a mechanical demolition of the caisson above waterline along with an implosion of the remaining caisson down to mudline. This had the clear advantage as a cofferdam was not needed, and the demolition project duration would be approximately 6 months, instead of several years for the cofferdam option. The potential impact on aquatic life and birds from the implosion was a concern, as the location is environmentally sensitive; however, measures were implemented to minimize these impacts. As presented in this paper, this demolition option was implemented on a trial basis for Caisson E3. The technique succeeded and will now be used on the remaining caissons.BACKGROUND INFO ON CAISSON E3The reinforced concrete Caisson E3 is the largest caisson which supported the former East Span of the Bay Bridge. It was constructed in 1934, with the Bay Bridge opening in 1936. Figure 1 shows the project location. The caisson had a cell arrangement of 7 x 2 above the mudline. Below mudline, the caisson had a cell arrangement of 9 x 4. A structural transition was made between the 7 x 2 and 9 x 4 cell arrangements with buttress walls. All cells were flooded, as underwater openings were included in the original caisson walls to equalize the hydrostatic pressure. Figure 2 shows the caisson layout with limits for mechanical demolition and for the implosion."

Jan 1, 2016

By Daniel P. Stare, Lucian P. Spiteri, Christopher M. Hallahan, James C. Myers

Buckeye Lake Dam was substantially remediated between 2015 and 2018 as a result of unacceptable dam safety performance. A permanent seepage cutoff, consisting primarily of a soil mixed cutoff wall (SMCW) with occasional sections of steel sheet piling, was constructed along the dam alignment. Closures were required at the terminus of the soil mix elements with existing structures or coffer cells, and at locations where new sheet piling was constructed parallel to the new soil mixed cutoff wall, creating a short circuit seepage path. The original proposed design to construct these closures included permeation grouting methods with chemical grouts. However, a combination of multiple chemical grout types, multiple grout pipes, and an extensive post-grouting verification program was required to ensure the design intent was achieved. After award of the project, the specialty grouting contractor elected to evaluate jet grouting as an alternative closure construction method. The advantages of the jet grouting option offered potential schedule and cost savings to the project as well as a superior product for seepage reduction, given the mixed soil conditions at the site. This paper presents an examination of the site conditions and project goals for the construction of the proposed closure elements for the rehabilitation of Buckeye Lake Dam. Descriptions of the original and alternative treatment methods are provided, with expected performance results. A description of the relative strengths and deficiencies of each method, as well as the feasibility and constructability of each method is provided. The implementation of the jet grouting program is presented, including a discussion of the design elements, quality control test methods, movement monitoring, and verification test methods. This paper also examines the risks associated with jet grouting and how those risks were mitigated during the grouting operations. HISTORY Buckeye Lake is situated approximately 28 miles east of Columbus, Ohio and is managed and operated by the Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR) as part of the Ohio State Parks system. The lake is impounded by natural features that exist along the south and east banks of the reservoir, and by the embankment structure constructed along the north and west banks of the reservoir (see Fig. 1). The reservoir site was originally a natural swamp and the original purpose of the constructed dam and reservoir was to provide water to the Ohio and Erie Canal System. Several dam alignments and configurations were constructed during its early history; however, the original embankment is comprised of homogeneous earthen fill. The embankment is 15 ft (4.6 m) high and extends 4.1 miles (6.6 km) from the North Shore abutment along the east, continuing to the abutment at Lieb’s Island to the West. Several spillway and outlet structures exist along the embankment alignment. Most noteworthy are Seller’s Spillway and Amil Spillway. Fig. 2 is a Plan View of the embankment alignment and appurtenant structures at Buckeye Lake.

Jan 1, 2019

By Vijayakumar Viramuthu, Martin Heinrich

Tower of Lot L, L1 & M, Kuala Lumpur City Centre when completed would stand 700 m tall. This Mega tall Skyscraper would merely be less than 500 m away from the world tallest Twin Tower, the Petronas Twin Tower. From June 2018 to February 2020 BAUER (MALAYSIA) SDN. BHD. constructed 225 nos bored piles with diameters of 2.0 m and 2.5 m for this tower. To comply with the depth requirement of the initial design and the need to have the pile toe 2.0 m above competent bedrock, the drilling equipment was required to be able to achieve a maximum drilling depth of 150 m. Actual piles constructed on site were deeper than 120 m. These dimensions caused superlative challenges which included but were not limited to controlling the open borehole stability over time with polymer, installing 70 t heavy steel cages and pouring up to 550 m³ concrete continuously in conjunction with installation of 88 t heavy kingposts into workable fresh concrete. The piling works were executed with one BAUER BG 48 and one BG 72, the biggest drilling rig globally available.

May 1, 2022

By Eric P. Bregman

As part of an on-going effort to improve water quality and reduce discharge into Boston Harbor, the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority (MWRA) East Boston Branch Sewer Relief Project was designed under a Federal mandate from the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to upgrade the aging sewer system, increase system storage and greatly reduce the volume of combined sewer overflows into the Harbor. The project scope of work includes the installation of over 2 miles (11,800 linear feet) of 36-inch and 66-inch diameter sewer relief piping, twenty (20) temporary shafts and an approximate 100 foot open cut section, located within the densely populated neighborhood of East Boston, Massachusetts. This area is a former marshland backfilled in the early to mid 1800?s where busy commercial streets co-mingle with thickly settled residential houses. The subsurface conditions present within Boston?s complex geology include the presence of subsurface contamination as well as complex networks of underground utilities. Additional site limitations included low headroom, noise, and traffic restrictions. Together these limitations required the design of individual earth support systems, tailored for each shaft location. Moreover, challenging subsurface conditions identified during construction required design modifications to minimize cost and schedule impacts related to construction dewatering, treatment of contaminated groundwater, internal bracing, and utility relocations. This paper provides a case history of the Geo-structural design and performance of various earth support techniques utilized to construct jacking and receiving shafts designed to launch and receive two (2) micro-tunnel boring machines (MTBM) and to support the construction of new deep shaft structures in an urban coastal area.

By Eric P. Bregman, Franklin M. Grynkewicz, John E. Regan

"As part of an on-going effort to improve water quality and reduce discharge into Boston Harbor, the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority (MWRA) East Boston Branch Sewer Relief Project was designed under a Federal mandate from the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to upgrade the aging sewer system, increase system storage and greatly reduce the volume of combined sewer overflows into the Harbor. The project scope of work includes the installation of over 2 miles (11,800 linear feet) of 36-inch and 66-inch diameter sewer relief piping, twenty (20) temporary shafts and an approximate 100 foot open cut section, located within the densely populated neighborhood of East Boston, Massachusetts. This area is a former marshland backfilled in the early to mid 1800’s where busy commercial streets co-mingle with thickly settled residential houses.The subsurface conditions present within Boston’s complex geology include the presence of subsurface contamination as well as complex networks of underground utilities. Additional site limitations included low headroom, noise, and traffic restrictions. Together these limitations required the design of individual earth support systems, tailored for each shaft location. Moreover, challenging subsurface conditions identified during construction required design modifications to minimize cost and schedule impacts related to construction dewatering, treatment of contaminated groundwater, internal bracing, and utility relocations.This paper provides a case history of the Geo-structural design and performance of various earth support techniques utilized to construct jacking and receiving shafts designed to launch and receive two (2) micro-tunnel boring machines (MTBM) and to support the construction of new deep shaft structures in an urban coastal area."

Jan 1, 2017

By Dharmil S. Patel, Zoyav S. Benyaminov, Cassandra A. Wetzel

Rehabilitation of the Henry Hudson Bridge is nearing completion, connecting Spuyten Duyvil in the Bronx to Inwood Hill in Manhattan, New York. Constructed in 1936, the Henry Hudson Bridge spans 840 feet over the Hudson River. Challenging geotechnical aspects of this Project required a team of innovators to overcome. Rehabilitation of the existing bridge involved the replacement of sixteen bent pedestal substructures, two abutment pilasters and installation of new deep foundations at the skewbacks. However, the Bridge, roadways, adjacent Metro-North Railroad (MNR) structures and New York City (NYC) Parks land were to remain open to the public for use, with minimal disturbance. In addition to physical constraints, geologic site conditions varied widely across both sides of the River, with varying bedrock quality and depth, greatly impacting the proposed design and construction. Extensive analysis of bedrock conditions was conducted to locate areas of potential wedge failure. The implementation of anchors was used to reinforce rock stability where pedestals and pilasters were replaced. This paper describes several challenging technical and natural aspects overcome in the rehabilitation of the Henry Hudson bridge foundations, including varying geologic site conditions, access restrictions, construction limitations, project specifications and design requirements.

Sep 8, 2021

By Marc Raithel, Sven Schröer, Lilma Schimmel, Dimiter Alexiew

"The Geotextile Encased Columns (GEC) deep foundation system for embankments and dikes on soft soils was introduced some 20 years ago and is now considered State-of-the-art in Germany, Europe and, step by step, worldwide. The GECs consist of compacted non-cohesive granular fill similar e.g. to common gravel columns with one decisive difference: they are confined in a high-strength, high-modulus, flexible geotextile “cylinder” (encasement). This engineered element with parameters being adaptable in a wide range provides a decisive tool to control and optimize the behavior of the GEC foundation system. Consequently, the GECs work properly even in extremely soft soils, and a wide range of fills inclusive of sands can be used. In the meantime vast design and technological experience is available and codified design methods exist. Initially the paper briefly describes the general idea, the basics and specifics of design, construction technology, materials, restrictions and optimal application areas. Then it focuses on three informative case studies. They are briefly presented focusing for brevity only on the most important facts and experience inclusive of the most meaningful data of short- and long-term measurement programs.INTRODUCTIONWhen considering embankments on soft soils, generally two groups of solutions exist:Unsupported embankments; there are four main options:a) build up embankment extremely slowly waiting for sufficient consolidation after every stage;b) replace the soft soil partially or totally;c) install a high-strength basal reinforcement providing overall and local stability and allowing much faster embankment construction;d) combine c) with strip drains to accelerate consolidation and thus the construction process additionally (Fig. 1, left).Today, practically only option ""d"" is of practical relevance. Despite all the pros and cons, the common attribute of all non-supported options is that local and overall stability (Ultimate Limit State-ULS) can be achieved and controlled, but not the short- and long-term settlements (Serviceability Limit State-SLS). The latter can be significant, e.g. up to 30% of the nominal planned embankment height. Supported embankments (Fig. 1, right): the main common idea is to over-bridge the soft soil layers by supporting vertical elements of different types: rigid piles, trench walls etc. or by ""softer"" solutions of different column types (compacted, cemented, mixed-in-place etc.). Herein the borderlines between “piles”, ""pile-similar elements"" and ""soil improvement” are fluent and depend on country, traditions, codes etc. The common attribute of the “supported” schemes is a minimized settlement. Twenty years ago a new specific solution was launched: the Geotextile Encased Columns (GEC), which is discussed in more detail below."

Jan 1, 2017

By W. G. K. Fleming

The general history of piling is traced up to the present time with regard to the evolution of methods and materials. The processes have been strongly influenced by developments in basic equipment and industrial change. It is noticeable that in the twentieth century more progress has taken place than in the many previous centuries. It has been strongly influenced by the general development of Soil Mechanics. Test loading is probably the most effective way to assess the success of designs and many empirical relationships have been challenged through it. As we approach a new century it appears that it will be an age of rapid equipment development, with much enhancement of understanding of what has been done. Processes of automatic construction and testing will becoming commonplace. These changes will narrow the limits of conventional scatter that have come to be accepted and to a large extent will be driven by political efforts to curtail energy consumption, to raise standards of quality and reliability, and to conserve the environment. 1. Ancient history. Piling is an ancient art. Its first mention in history is from Herodotus, the first person to commit an account of his times to the written word in the years 557 to 479 BC. He evidently had a strong interest in engineering matters because he wrote of building, brick making, reinforced brickwork, river training, canal building, bridge construction, tunnelling and its acoustic detection and piling. The piling reference comes from Book 5 at paragraph 16.

Jan 1, 1999