Search Documents

By Joseph A. Sopko

There has been a trend in recent years in performing the initial formation freezing using liquid nitrogen (LIN) and then converting the system to circulating refrigerated brine. While proponents of this method state it decreases freezing time, it can also be considered an alternative to inadequate refrigeration capacity. This method was used on several small projects in the 1980s. Problems such as broken pipes, frozen brine, and unsafe work conditions caused contractors to re-think the method. This paper discusses these problems and also presents work schedules showing no schedule reduction. In fact, this method can lead to longer time as well as significantly higher costs. BACKGROUND Ground freezing as a method to provide groundwater control and temporary earth support for excavations is completed using a relatively simple process: drilling and installing refrigeration pipes around the perimeter of the excavation and introducing a coolant into these pipes. The coolant extracts heat from the ground, converting the pore water to ice and forming a strong, impermeable material. A typical ground freezing system is illustrated in Fig. 1. SYSTEMS There are two basic types of coolant systems: circulating and direct expansion. The circulating coolant system is made of two separate, closed systems. The medium circulating is the secondary coolant. It is cooled at a central refrigeration plant, circulated through the pipes, and warms as it extracts heat from the ground. It then circulates back to the plant where it is cooled. This coolant is chilled in a heat exchanger by the primary refrigeration system where a compressor system is charged with a refrigeration gas. The heat is ultimately extracted from the ground and expelled into the atmosphere by an evaporative condenser. Secondary coolants are usually a brine or glycol chemical while the primary refrigeration gas is anhydrous ammonia or another commercially available gas.

Jan 1, 2019

By Kevin Baumgartner, Steven Babcock

A landfill in Phoenix, AZ reached capacity and was graded over in the 1970s. The property was subdivided into lots in 2007 to create a business park. However, the challenging site conditions caused by the underlaying landfill put into question the feasibility of typical deep foundation systems. Several different foundation systems were evaluated to support the proposed development. The considered systems were: drilled concrete shaft, driven piles, drilled micropiles and helical piles. Soil stability, landfill decomposition, method of installation, flexibility of design, anticipated material, and equipment costs were considered. A system of helical piles with concrete pile caps and grade beams was selected. To mitigate unknown obstructions, holes were drilled through the landfill debris at pile locations and then backfilled with screened granular material. The helical piles were installed through these backfilled holes and advanced to bear in competent native material below the landfill. This method allowed for minimal disturbance of the landfill materials and provided a strong and adaptable foundation. Additional advantages of helical piles on this site include minimal installation vibration, no grout or concrete in the deep foundation, and capacity verification for each pile via torque correlation. Two load tests were performed to verify the design.

Sep 8, 2021

By Kozo Takeda, Arashi Shimano

"Dry Jet Mixing (DJM) method as the representative deep mixing technique has been demonstrating best practice on ground mitigation works coping with complicated soil condition and limited site space. This technique plays an important role in many projects to stabilize soft ground involving troubles like sliding failure, settlement, bearing capacity etc. Serious disasters caused larger earthquakes make great demand on the application of deep soil mixing these days. Special design and alignment of deep soil mixing has been established against to liquefaction and serious failure due to liquefaction. In this paper, representative example of liquefaction mitigation by DJM method is summarized. The paper also present result of surveillance of sites installed DJM col umns after attack by Tohoku Pacific Ocean Earthquake. Performance of DJM columns suffered the earthquake is demonstrated at several sites even with conventional column alignment.INTRODUCTIONThe DJM method is a representative deep soil mixing technique of dry mixing manner in Japan. DJM can successfully install soil mixing columns trough automatically controlled binder injection based on pneumatic feeding theory and cumulative experiences.This method was joint-developed in 1978 by private organization under initiative of the Public Works Research Institute of the Ministry of Construction as the optimum method for improving the Japanese soft ground. Figure 1 shows full view of the DJM construction system. Figure 2 illustrates DJM working system indicating Binder Feeding Plant side and Mixing Machine side respectively.As typical soil mitigation method, many projects related with rivers and roads and city development has required DJM technology. The total number of the projects applying DJM has exceeded 5,000 with the total treated soil volume more than 32,000,000 m3 by the end of fiscal year 2013."

Jan 1, 2015

By Abid Adekunte

"In recent years, developers have had to deal with complexities associated with numerous cases of deep basement construction in built-up areas. Design and construction of deep excavation support systems in urbanised zones come with many technical challenges. Restricted working spaces often render the use of temporary struts as wall restraint systems unpopular, as working space needs to be maximised. Also, tie-back anchors are often inapplicable due to the existence of adjacent structures. Therefore, developing alternative restraint systems for deep basement structures in builtup areas is becoming increasingly important to the present day basement engineer.This paper is centred on the design, construction and monitoring of enabling works for deep basement structures on three sites in the United Kingdom and Republic of Ireland. Traditional tieback anchorage and propping systems were inapplicable on the sites. As alternatives, separate novel wall restraint systems were developed and adopted, to enable excavation on each of the three sites.Performances of the novel wall restraint systems, as well as the responses of adjacent structures were monitored. Numerical modelling and field monitoring results show the three alternative wall restraint systems to be safe and effective. The paper also highlights the advantages of the novel solutions over conventional methods.INTRODUCTIONRecently, deep basement structures have become popular components of urban building developments. As pointed out by Pearlman et al., 2004, this could be attributed to the inadequacy of surface parking spaces in urbanised zones, while underground parking facilities are also believed to improve both aesthetic and commercial qualities of urban structures.However, while the incorporation of basement structure into new urban development appeals to developers and architects, the engineering design and construction aspects of basement works typically come against a whole lot of complexities and challenges. As highlighted by Wong, 2002, engineering problems associated with basement construction in built-up areas are numerous, some of these include; complicated sub-soil conditions, dealing with excessive active pressures, complex temporary works, proximity of sensitive adjacent structures, high level hazards to construction workmen and surrounding community, inadequate working space, etc."

Jan 1, 2015

By Seth H. Hamblin, John E. Regan, Dimitrios Palantzas

"Through reliability-based calibration of larger pile load test databases, recent developments of the Load Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) methods, which include geotechnical load and resistance factors for deep foundations design, have advanced the state of practice for geotechnical engineering. These load test databases upon which the current geotechnical load and resistance factors have been developed are limited, however, and do not provide sufficient data to support the development of resistance factors for uplift (tension) pile capacity. As such, some recommended resistance factors for uplift capacity estimation methods are simply derived by reducing the recommended resistance factors for piles in compression by a factor of 0.10.The results of three (3) tension loading tests performed to failure on 508 mm (20- in) square precast, prestressed concrete piles, driven though granular soil in southeastern Massachusetts, are presented and compared to static pile capacity calculations and dynamic analyses performed using the Pile Driving Analyzer (PDA) during installation. These results are presented along with current recommended LRFD resistance factors for driven piles under uplift (tension) loading conditions. These comparisons offer an assessment of the applicability and limitations of current resistance factors methods for piles under uplift loading and may be useful additions to the existing database for future calibrations of LRFD resistance factors for driven prestressed concrete piles in sand.IntroductionIn 2010, two (2) natural draft cooling towers were constructed by Kiewit (Kiewit) Construction Company of Woodcliff Lake, New Jersey at the Brayton Point Power Station in Somerset, Massachusetts. These massive 500 foot tall, 400 foot diameter cooling towers were designed to convert the existing “open loop” system into a “closed loop system” thereby dramatically reducing the thermal impact to Mt. Hope Bay.Based on design guidance from the German VBG Design Code and the Massachusetts State Building Code (MSBC), tension (i.e. uplift) and lateral loads due to wind loads and design seismic events represented the critical loading conditions.Weighing approximately 190,000 kips upon completion, the cooling tower loads are transferred to 44 foundation nodes (i.e. pile caps) evenly spaced along ring beams which run the circular perimeter of each tower base. Each pile cap node was designed to resist a 2,000 ton compression load, 200 tons in tension (i.e. uplift), and 600 tons in the lateral direction."

Jan 1, 2015

By John C. Niedzielski

The existing US-70 Bridge over the Gila River at Bylas, Arizona is planned to be replaced due to its current poor condition. The replacement bridge is planned to be a 15-span, 1,904-foot (580 meter) long bridge, the third-longest bridge in the state highway system. Within the Gila River floodplain, granular alluvial soil is underlain by cohesive lacustrine soil; bedrock was expected due to nearby terrain but not encountered within the geotechnical exploration depth of 166.5 feet (51 meters) or less. Based on the anticipated loading conditions, design scour depths and the soil conditions, the full structural loads are carried by large diameter drilled shafts; therefore accurately determining the axial capacity of the proposed drilled shafts has important practical and safety implications. The conventional methods for axial capacity determination may be overly conservative to use for design in the site?s layered granular and hard clay soils. An Osterberg cell load test was performed to obtain detailed information on the load transfer from the drilled shaft in side friction and base resistance to allow optimization of the bridge foundation design. The full-scale field test played a significant role in the design of the project?s deep foundations, notably, by incorporating the specific subsoil properties and consequently, an exact prediction of the load-settlement behavior under loading. This paper provides the results of the geotechnical site investigations, drilled shaft load testing procedures, and shaft load distribution from the load test results. Comparisons were developed between predicted axial capacities of drilled shafts using several design methodologies and the axial capacity measured from static load testing. The load test results showed that underestimation of the axial capacity is evident using conventional methodologies. The exact prediction of the load-settlement behavior under loading combined with a site-specific design approach, resulted in a substantial reduction of foundation costs due to reduced drilled shaft dimensions.

By Manasi Wijerathna, D. S. Liyanapathirana

"Deep cement mixing is a popular soft ground improving technology that improves the bearing capacity and settlement characteristics of natural soil. When Deep Cement Mixed (DCM) columns are installed attached to each other in a wall configuration, the walls are capable of resisting bending moments and shear forces in the direction transverse to the columns. Therefore, installing DCM walls beneath the embankment slope perpendicular to the alignment of the embankment is a proper solution to prevent excessive lateral deformations of the embankment. Previous research studies have shown that failure patterns of DCM column walls are different to failure patterns of individual DCM column rows, under lateral loads. This study investigates the failure patterns of embankments where DCM column walls are located beneath the slopes, with respect to DCM wall strength, DCM column wall width and the spacing between DCM walls. 2D and 3D numerical models developed using the ABAQUS/standard finite element programme, were used in this investigation. Results show that the DCM wall strength and width of the DCM wall have a significant influence on the failure mode and the critical failure surface of the embankment. 3D simulation results demonstrate that the failure due to soil extrusion between columns was less pronounced in embankments improved with DCM walls, due to the interaction between the DCM walls and the surrounding natural soil.INTRODUCTIONEmbankments constructed over soft ground are highly susceptible to global slope failure and excessive displacements due to combined effects of vertical and lateral loads beneath the embankment slope (Zheng et al., 2009, Han and Gabr, 2002). The overall stability of the embankment can be significantly improved by improving the soil beneath the slope of the embankment using Deep Cement Mixed (DCM) column rows or overlapped DCM column walls (Jamsawang et al., 2015, Larsson and Broms, 2000, Topolniki, 2004, Broms, 1999). According to the literature, the improved ground experience different failure modes other than shear failure, such as separation of columns, overturning, shear failure along the columns or dowel action (Broms, 1999). Some of the failure modes reported by Broms (1999) are shown in Fig. 1. The ultimate failure mode depends on the geometry and the strength of the improved ground (Jamsawang et al., 2015, Kitazume and Maruyama, 2006, Kitazume and Maruyama, 2007)."

Jan 1, 1900

By George Aristorenas, Carlos Englert, Jesús Gómez

"Laboratory test data of strain softening soils exhibit the development of a maximum (peak) shear strength followed by a decrease in the strength with continued straining. The rate of strength loss decreases such that an asymptotic minimum value, known as the residual strength, is approached. This paper presents an investigation of the evolution of strength degradation in excavation supported soils that exhibit strain softening behavior. The paper presents a numerical investigation of excavation support of slicken-sided clay, and results of shear testing on materials with similar strain softening behavior. A strain softening constitutive law is presented that can be used with the finite element computer software Plaxis for analysis of excavation support. A typical design section of a deep excavation support in stiff, fissured clay is presented that illustrates the limitations and conservatism of the residual strength approach for excavation support design. Finally, a discussion is presented on the impact of stiffer walls such as diaphragm walls, compared to less stiff systems such as sheet piles, on the design parameters.INTRODUCTIONIn the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area, the Potomac Formation is generally composed of stiff, fissured clays. Geotechnical engineers often associate the presence of slicken-sided planes within the formation as evidence that the soil cannot develop its peak strength. Although it is unclear how old and continuous these slicken-sided planes are, their occurrence, persistence and orientation appear to be somewhat random. Due to this uncertainty, the design of open cut slopes in these materials is often conservatively performed assuming residual shear strength values. This design approach may be justified for long-term open cuts when there is limited amount of geotechnical information and in view of back stability analyses of past slope failures. Furthermore, the lack of confinement in open cuts allows relatively high shear strains near the surface and toe throughout their existence, which promote mobilization of post-peak strength values and the ensuing progressive failure. Indeed, such behavior has been discussed in the past (Skempton, 1970; Schnabel et. al., 1982; Derrenbacher, 1998). A thorough study by Mesri et. al. (2003) of numerous slope failures concludes that the lower bound strength for stability analysis of non-failed slopes is the fully softened strength, which is intermediate between the peak and residual strengths, but that part of the slip surface may be in a residual condition prior to failure."

Jan 1, 2015

By Konstantin G. Ashkinadze

The paper considers performance of piles supporting transient pipe anchors in heavy industrial pipelines. Events such as pump trips or opening and closing of large valves produce short-term dynamic pulses in the pipeline with variable spectral characteristics. Their magnitude is large enough to cause major damage to the pipeline and its anchors, which face horizontal impact loads amounting to hundreds of kN. Design of pile foundations supporting these anchors is often governed by limitation of deflection of the support to prevent overstressing pipeline connections and equipment nozzles. The maximum deflection does not always correspond to the largest load because the stiffness of the soil surrounding the piles heavily depends on the rate of loading. Faster actions encounter stiffer soil response while loads of smaller magnitude applied slowly may be more critical for the deflection time history of the anchor. A typical transient action has both high- and low-frequency harmonics, which makes the response complex. Using load rate-dependent p-y curves published in literature, the paper develops methods of analysis of pile foundations for transient anchors. Pile displacement amplitude – input frequency – natural frequency correlations and time histories of pile response are constructed for typical profiles of transient actions, considering nonlinear soil response to large horizontal loads.

Jan 1, 2016

By Clayton A. Signor

Abstract: Expansive soils cause more damage to structures annually than a combination of other major natural disasters. Because of the cost to our society, all means and methods need to be fully explored to mitigate the problems associated with expansive soils. This study will present a foundation design approach that is underutilized in this application, driven piles. The main objective of the study is to present pile test results and analysis from four driven pile project sites in three types of expansive soils found in central Texas: Del Rio formation, Taylor/Navarro formation, and expansive alluvium. High strain dynamic pile tests were conducted on each of the four studies with rigorous signal matching analysis from the CAse Pile Wave Analysis Program (CAPWAP). Ultimate pile capacities ranged from 73 to 311 kips with an average of 61% of the total capacity coming from the pile shaft and were two to six times the structural capacity needed. Allowable loads calculated from Modified Gates dynamic formula best modeled allowable test results. Average unit skin frictions ranged from 0.50 to 4.71 ksf. Restrike pile tests of 1 to 17 days after initial driving reported 30 to 100% shaft capacity gain. All open-ended pipe piles driven produced soil plugs ranging from 4 to 14 feet thick. Small diameter, thick-walled, open-ended pipe piles reached penetration of twice the depth of designated zone of seasonal moisture change without problem. The observed production rate of the driven piles was on average 8 minutes, which implied daily production of 15 to 40 piles. Predrills or augered holes should be specified for underground obstructions found in soil investigation.

By Mikael Calando, Thomas Joussellin

"San Francisco's rapid growth has caused the city to plan for the Transbay Transit Center Project, a visionary transportation and housing project, that will transform downtown San Francisco and the San Francisco Bay Area’s regional transportation system by creating a “Grand Central Station of the West” in the heart of a new transit-friendly neighborhood that will be home to more than 20 new towers rising a high a 1,070 ft. This paper describes the specificities of using advanced diaphragm wall technology, tooling, equipment and installation practices for deep foundation and permanent underground structures. In particular, this paper will emphasize on the urban constraints, geotechnical conditions, and the novel approaches adopted for the construction challenges of the Transbay Transit Center’s Load Bearing Elements, or Barrette PilesPaperThe Transbay Transit Center Project consists of the construction of a new multimodal, five-story Transit Center located in the South of Market neighborhood near the Financial District in San Francisco. The future Transit Center will incorporate nearly 83,000 square feet of retail, a 5.4-acre rooftop park, an extensive public arts program and bus ramps that will connect the Transit Center to a new off-site bus storage facility and the San Francisco–Oakland Bay Bridge. The new facility will accommodate more than 100,000 passengers each weekday and up to 45 million per year. Additionally, the new Transbay Transit Center will replace the since-demolished San Francisco Transbay Terminal, and nearly 20 towers, such as Salesforce Tower, will take advantage of the height increases allowed through the Transit Center District Plan.The approximately $4.5 billion project features a new five-story structure (including two underground stories) and new bus ramps which include a cable-stay bridge. The deep foundations for the pylon of the bridge (Pylon 9) consist of two each 21 ft x 5 ft barrettes (also called Load Bearing Elements in the US) extending more than 180 feet below grade and 10 feet into the bedrock. The barrettes were chosen because of the combination of high loads, significant depth and small footprint. The barrettes are installed using the Diaphragm Wall technology. Nicholson Construction was contracted by Shimmick Construction to install the cable-stay bridge’s foundation elements."

Jan 1, 2016

By Andrew J. Ciancia

The construction of the Pennsylvania Station in Manhattan, the Beaux-Arts masterpiece, was completed in 1910. In financial ruin, the Pennsylvania Railroad Company sold the station in the 1960?s and the new Madison Square Garden and the Penn Plaza complex were constructed at the site. The demolition of Pennsylvania Station brought public awareness and outcry to protect historic structures and the Landmarks Preservation Commission (LPC) was subsequently established in 1965. In the 1960?s relatively little engineering data was available on the performance of historic structures during adjacent construction and thus, no published criteria were established by the LPC on allowable movements and vibrations. During the late 1970?s a commercial tower was planned adjacent to the landmark Fraunces Tavern Block (FTB) in lower Manhattan. Through negotiations between the LPC and the developer, Dr. M. I. Esrig and the author were retained to monitor the historic block during foundation construction. The monitoring data and building performance compiled from the project formed the basis of the published 1981 ASCE technical paper by Esrig and Ciancia entitled ?The Avoidance of Damage to Historic Structures Resulting from Adjacent Construction?. Based on the ASCE paper, the NYC Department of Buildings adopted Technical Policy and Procedure Notice #10/88 entitled ?Procedures for the Avoidance of Damage to Historic Structures Resulting from Adjacent Construction When Subject to Controlled Inspection by Section 27-724 and for Any Existing Structure Designated by the Commissioner?, June 1988. This paper describes the author?s recent experience during the installation of deep foundations within, or adjacent to, three Manhattan landmark structures. Discussions are provided on the foundation construction, monitoring programs and performances of the three structures.

Jan 1, 2008

By Julie Clarke

In 1939 Dr. Ralph Peck criticized the Civil Engineering community for taking a bifurcated approach to the prediction of building damage due to subsurface geo-technical works. Specifically, he observed that Geotechnical Engineers concerned themselves only with subsurface issues implying that their results were largely independent of the presence and condition of the structures above. He continued that Structural Engineers charged with risk assessment of buildings approached their work nearly in isolation of below ground activities. Seventy years later, although the state-of-the-art has enabled a better understanding of soil-structure interaction, the reality remains that risk assessment from subsurface construction, is not yet an integrated activity when done on a large-scale basis. To help move beyond this, this paper proposes a new, integrated methodology for preliminary assessment that considers a three-stage process that involves the following: (1) traditional empirical relationships for predicting ground movement from tunneling, (2) recent advances in condition assessments, and (3) architectural designators related to usage and historic preservation listings. The methodology is applied to a study area of nearly 260 buildings in the city center of Dublin Ireland, in an area slated for an upcoming metro. The results are com-pared to the Environmental Impact Statement issued for the official project. Al-though the test case is for tunneling, the approach may be adapted to other subsurface construction activities including excavation and piling.

Jan 1, 2009

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 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 Y. M. Ha, T. D. Nguyen, D. T. Nguyen, H. K. Choi

Conventionally, cement deep mixing (CDM) columns are designed to have constant diameters over the improved depth as this facilitates the construction procedures. However, this design pattern may be inefficient in cases of spread footings or shallow foundations. This paper first briefly introduces principles of an improved CDM method that can create head-enlarged CDM (termed PF) columns. A simple analysis approach was introduced to obtain optimal shape of PF columns that results in minimum settlement. The effectiveness of this improved method over the conventional CDM method was then illustrated by settlement analysis for an actual footing in a case study using two recommended analytical methods in the literature. Analysis results from the case indicated that by using the same amount of soil-cement mixed volumes, settlement from a footing on PF columns can reduce up to 10 % compared with that from the same footing on CDM columns. In addition, a material quantity comparison for the case indicated that to have the same settlement values the volume of each PF column can be reduced of around 10% compared with that of the CDM column. INTRODUCTION The cement deep mixing (CDM) method is one of the most popular methods in ground improvement works. Details on the method such as construction procedures, necessary equipment and recommendations are described in many references or manuals (e.g. Bruce et al. 2013, BS EN 2015, Kitazume and Terashi 2013). Conventionally, CDM columns are designed to have constant diameters over the improved depth as this facilitates the construction procedures. However, this design pattern is found inefficient in cases of spread footings or shallow foundations as the upper soil layers are naturally weaker than the deeper ones but are subjected to larger amount of induced stress from the superstructures.

Jan 1, 2019

By Michel Bustamante

The Arbre viaduct, 200 metres long, is the most important structure on the Belgian portion of the High Speed Train line between Paris and Brussels. The particular geotechnical conditions of the soil with carboniferous limestone affected by karstic phenomena, has prompted the designer to found the viaduct on systems of high capacity vertical and batter micropiles. The design of the working micropiles was validated by full scale tests performed on instrumented micropiles. The size of the structure and the deformation criteria to be met when HS trains are crossing the viaduct, together with the lack of references for such innovative structure, called for monitoring the movements of the piers as soon as the link was open to traffic. The authors report on the results of loading tests on micropiles and the results of settlement structure monitoring for a period of 4 years. Settlement of the foundation is estimated taking into account the group effect.

Jan 1, 2002

By Rob Jameson

"Although seismic retrofit is recognized as a key micropile application, widely-used reference documents do not clearly address design and testing recommendations for micropiles that are loaded primarily under seismic conditions. The principles of micropile design and construction and their application to seismic retrofit projects are well understood and executed by leaders in the field. As the micropiling market grows, a wider audience relies on the information presented by DFI and similar industry groups. State-of-practice updates appear periodically in conference proceedings, but examination of recent bid documents makes it clear that there are opportunities to improve the specification of load, deflection, testing and acceptance criteria on many seismic retrofit projects. Updates to the FHWA Manual or DFI Sample Specification that specifically address seismic retrofit cases would be useful tools to disseminate information and enhance the state of practice.Micropile Survey UnderwayAs one step in this process, I am distributing surveys to contractors and designers prior to DFI Super Pile ’09 (June 4-6, San Francisco) seeking recommendations for design and testing procedures applicable to seismically loaded micropiles. I am also requesting any existing references that could be promoted as a standard for these cases. Anyone interested in participating in this survey, should contact me at rjameson@malcolmdrilling.com. Seismic RetrofittingMicropiles are ideally suited to seismic retrofit applications. Their high-tensile and compressive capacity can sustain the large concentrated loads induced during seismic events. They can be installed within and around the access limitations of existing structures, and can be drilled through and grouted into the wide variety of soil and rock materials encountered in seismically active zones.Seismic retrofits have included micropiles since the early 1990s, and they are now widely specified in the Western U.S. In the San Francisco Bay Area alone, thousands of micropiles have been installed for seismic upgrades of highway and transit aerial structures, and retrofits of commercial, residential and public buildings. Micropile use is growing in both public and private sectors, with large-scale retrofit projects currently underway for both the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) system-wide upgrades and renovations at San Francisco Airport."

Jan 1, 2009

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 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