Search Documents

By Nikolas Schmitz

For today’s construction industry, large-diameter piles are common practice, as they are more competitive than drilling a larger number of smaller piles. More and more piles are installed by drilling rigs, replacing the installation by hammer, vibrators or caisson. Equipment capabilities and technics with rotary drill rigs are highly developed, but very costly and time-consuming when it comes to rock drilling, large diameters and deep foundations. Pile top drill rigs (PBA), based on reverse circulation drilling (RCD) technology, overcome these challenges and are an efficient solution for large diameter drilling (0.6 m to 8.0 m/19.7 ft to 26.3 ft) and drilling depths of up to 500 m (1,640 ft.)in various geological conditions onshore and offshore. The paper will explain benefits of RCD technology and prove this with figures from the Mumbai Trans Harbour Link project.

Nov 1, 2022

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 Caciola Jr. Joseph J., Nidal M. AbiSaab

"Thanks in great part to the geology of the New York City Metropolitan area, mini-caissons are a popular choice for deep foundations. These drilled elements are readily available, easy to install with minimal impact on adjacent structures, and can be designed with large compressive and tensile capacities. Despite the frequency with which they are employed, the engineering design community is divided over several of the underlying principles governing the design of mini-caissons. This paper seeks to draw attention to several of these issues in an effort to encourage further research and discussion, namely: (1) how the allowable stresses have changed for the NYC Building Code over time, (2) the inconsistent load transfer mechanisms considered for geotechnical capacity, and (3) the role of the permanent steel casing towards structural capacities of mini-caissons.INTRODUCTIONIn the local construction nomenclature, mini-caissons are drilled deep foundation elements which derive their capacity from a socket in rock. A permanent steel casing (commonly between 7- and 24-inches in diameter) aides the drilling through overburden soils to the top of bedrock. Afterwards, an uncased rock socket is drilled into the bedrock and the inside of the casing and rock socket is inspected by means of portable video equipment. After inspection, the interior of the socket and casing is filled with steel reinforcement and concrete or grout. The casing-soil interface is generally ignored for axial design purposes and the full geotechnical compressive or tensile capacity is assumed to be generated in the rock socket. Figure 1 shows a typical mini-caisson cross section.Mini-caissons have been used for decades in the New York City area for a number of reasons. They have historically been proven to develop high axial capacities in the city’s metamorphic rock (Tamaro et. al. 2000), often exceeding 300- to 500-tons. Additionally, their method of installation (drilling) is generally able to bypass layers of dense Glacial Till, boulders, and manmade fill which would interfere with the installation of other pile types (e.g. driven piles, auger cast piles). Further they are able to extend to depths exceeding 50-ft to reach bedrock underlying a site, making them a useful tool in areas where rock is relatively deep or varied in elevation. Drilled casing installation also results in fewer vibrations and disturbances to adjacent structures and can occur in areas of restricted access (a constant concern for any project in a dense urban environment such as NYC)."

Jan 1, 2016

By Brian Metcalfe, Kord Wissmann, Gianni Martinez

The Middle East consists of vast deserts that reach temperatures up to 50 degrees Celsius, with some areas characterized by endless sand dunes. When the project team selected the location for a large new transportation project, little did they know that the site would be characterized by soft, nearly normally consolidated silt and clay extending below a thin sand crust. Searching for solutions, the design team elected to reinforce the subsurface with Rammed Aggregate Pier® (RAP) ground improvement elements and desired verification that the novel method would stand the test of prolonged static loads. Because the concrete pavements would serve to spread the load, a “zone load test” was performed, consisting of applying a uniform bearing pressure of 150 kPa over a 7.5m square concrete footing. Unlike individual pier load tests, the zone test allowed the project engineers the opportunity to confirm design parameter values under large-loading area conditions, a situation not often available to most designers. This paper presents the results of the zone load test whose results may be interpreted to better understand design parameter values. This paper is of particular significance because it adds a value contribution to the relatively few numbers of “group load tests” available in the literature for ground improvement applications.

May 1, 2022

By Kazuyoshi Kamimura, Masaya Kawata

"It has been 30 years since the cement deep mixing (CDM) method developed in Japan. CDM method has been applied to many structures. While various technical improvements have been implemented in the meantime, the single-axial and double-axial technologies used at the time of its initial development are still prevalent.In response to the recent trend of reducing construction costs, we developed a triple-axial CDM method called the “Lemni 2/3 Method.” This method uses two lemniscate motions caused by newly developed auxiliary stirring devices and employs a double-axial injection method in which the cement slurry injection takes place only from the outer two axes. In this way, it is possible to create a stabilized body around the three axes. Moreover, this method does not require substantial equipment investment as conventional construction machine and facilities can be used without modification and large volume work is possible.With these technologies, this method can achieve a substantial reduction in the construction period and cost, while ensuring the same level of improvement quality as conventional methods. As a result, this method is being applied to ground improvement work in a variety of places.Lemni 2/3 Method was first put to practical use in 2004. Since then, the method has been used for ten projects. In this paper, we show some application examples of this method.OUTLINE OF TRIPLE-AXIAL CDM METHOD (LEMNI 2/3 METHOD)In the newly developed CDM method (Lemni 2/3 Method), work efficiency is improved by employing triple-axial stirring blades instead of the conventional single- or double-axial type. Existing conventional construction facilities for double-axial type can be used with only minor equipment additions, because the cement slurry injection takes place only from the outer two axes.Construction Machine and Construction MethodThe combination of major construction machines of the Lemni 2/3 Method differs little from the standard specifications of the double-axial type as shown in Fig. 1. Existing work control equipment can be used without modification, which is further evidence of the simplicity, convenience, and economy of the new method. The Fig. 2 photo shows a full view of the construction machine, and the Fig. 3 photo shows the stirring blades and the auxiliary stirring devices. The work procedure for the Lemni 2/3 Method is shown in Fig. 4."

Jan 1, 2015

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 George Gazetas, Sissy Nikolaou, Fani Gelagoti, Irene Georgiou, Rallis Kourkoulis

"The need to shift geotechnical design from a “factor of safety” to a “performance based” design (PBD) approach has increased rapidly in the past years following examples from structural engineering. PBD supports sustainable engineered systems that target project-specific geotechnical behavior objectives and results in more rational and, in most cases, less conservative solutions. Resiliency, efficiency, risk optimization, and cost-effectiveness are key components of this approach. For design of retaining walls, the concept of mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) systems combines these attributes, while being environmentally friendly and adaptive to variable construction conditions. Natural hazards, such as earthquakes, may drive the design of MSE systems whose reliability depends on their performance under extreme events. In this paper, the authors compare the seismic response of an MSE steel-reinforced vs. concrete-reinforced retaining wall. The MSE system is composed of a grid of longitudinal and transverse ribs which internally enhances the capacity of the soil backfill. Results of fully non-linear twodimensional (2-D) numerical finite element analyses using two commercial programs with emphasis on the interface conditions are presented. The pull-out resistance of the grid used in the numerical simulation was evaluated from actual pull-out experiments. The results demonstrate a superior performance of the MSE system as compared to the concrete one, especially when subjected to strong seismic excitations.INTRODUCTIONThe idea of performance-based geotechnical engineering is not new, and has been evolving as our perception for ‘good’ performance has also evolved (Kramer, 2008). In early practice, the only criterion for achieving good performance was to avoid failure; designers had only to ensure that the available capacity of the geotechnical system is sufficiently higher than the expected demand (i.e. Load and Resistance Factor Methodologies). Yet, even when the key design requirements against collapse are satisfied, the system may still be placed into a condition in which the deformation constraints are not met (Bolton, 2012). To address these issues, geotechnical design has been developing into a predominantly performance-based approach that correlates deformation considerations to the severity of the experienced loading. As such, in earthquake-related problems, the definition of good performance of a geotechnical system is no more unique; for a low intensity earthquake the system should remain serviceable (i.e., the developed deformations should remain low), whilst for the design earthquake the maintenance of lifesafety is the single performance criterion."

Jan 1, 2016

By Michael Perlow Jr

A modification of the original Davisson Offset Limit (DOL) is presented for drilled foundations using soil quake (QDOL) factors ranging from 2 to 6. A further modification of the Davisson Offset Limit has also been developed using helical pile soil quake values (HDOL) based upon helix diameter. In addition, the initial tangent slope (IS) of the pile load test displacement curve is used in lieu of the calculated elastic slope (ES) to eliminate many of the uncertainties associated with determining the drilled foundation pile elastic modulus. The QDOL and HDOL load test methods do not require any graphical interpolation and provide easy simple ultimate pile capacity interpretation methods where drilled foundation pile load tests are not carried to plunging failure. Drilled foundation and helical pile load test case studies are presented to demonstrate the use of the modified soil quake QDOL and HDOL Methods.

By Filippo Maria Leoni, Wesley Schmutzler, Matteo Bertoni

"Deep Mixing Method (DMM) for the Rio Puerto Nuevo Project (Project) in San Juan was chosen by the Corps of Engineers to improve the soils adjacent to a 92 inch ID forced sewer main relocation and to improve the soils for the base of a new drainage channel. The soils to be improved consisted of sandy fill, soft clays, organics and stiff, plastic clays. A pre-construction soil investigation campaign, followed by a Bench Scale Mixing Programme and a Full Scale Field Test were performed during the pre-construction stage to assess soil properties, select binder type and dosage, and disclose the most suitable combination of injection parameters to improve the different soil layers. Production started at the end of August 2012 and was completed in October 2013; over 3,000 DMM elements were installed to a maximum depth of 57 ft below ground for a total gross volume of approximately 125,000 cubic yard. Each element consisted of two 5.5 ft diameter overlapping columns installed simultaneously, and their layout was such to meet the 100% Area Replacement Ratio required by the design. The ground improvement was successfully completed despite some difficulties due to a considerable amount of obstructions. Wet grab sampling and UCS testing of the retrieved specimens were designed as the main QC/QA method for the verification of the quality of the ground improvement. Upon completion of production, approximately 3,000 specimens were cast. The contract also required continuous coring of at least 12 randomly selected DMM elements and the testing of 8 cored specimens per bore for strength assessment. This paper will illustrate means and methods used in the field to construct the designed ground improvement and the results of the QC/QA program, with a focus on the differences between wet grab and coring sampling methods.INTRODUCTIONThe Rio Puerto Nuevo project involved the stabilization of a major drainage channel using the Deep Mixing Method (DMM), and the relocation of a 92 inch ID forced main sanitary sewer outfall. Previously, in 2004, a 40 x 16 x 2,000 ft. box culvert was installed under a different contract to convey runoff waters to the ocean.However, the connection between this culvert and the upstream network of channels was not constructed due to the presence of the forced main sewer pipe. In order for the drainage system to be completed and function properly, the 92 inch ID forced main needed to be lowered about 20 ft to allow for proper drainage.DMM was chosen by the US Army Corps of Engineers to stabilize the drainage channel as well as improve the soil under the relocated sewer main. The DMM was arranged in different zones (A through E) with variable top and bottom design elevations as can be seen in the typical cross section for Zone A (deeper and with a higher strength requirement) and Zone B as an example (Figure 1)."

Jan 1, 2015

By Alice Y. Tseng, Dan MacLean

"Corrosion protection of all deep foundation systems made of steel is THE issue when considering durability of the element in the long term. Protecting steel from corrosion and maintaining the steel tendon cross sectional area ensures a competent and durable system. The foundation of a building is usually difficult to repair and therefore high risk is taken when unknowingly choosing a non-adequate solution.Requirements according to EN 1990 (Eurocode 0 or EC 0) on construction durability requires a service life over 100 years. How can a service life over 100 years be achieved? How shall bare steel be protected in soil, which sometimes could be an aggressive environment to the steel? Which corrosion protection methods are commonly used in Europe and in North America?This paper will focus on hollow bars used as Micropiles, Anchor piles and Soil Nails. It gives an overview about the state of the practice in regards to corrosion protection (including head construction) and evaluates different options following the European Standards focusing on type of material and method of installation. Further the different corrosion protective methods such as thickness of grout body, coating types and sacrificial loss are listed with the pros and cons evaluated.Based not only on North American standards like FHWA “Micropile Design and Construction Guidelines”, FHWA Geotechnical Engineering Circular No. 7 for “Soil Nail Walls“ and Post-Tensioning Institute “Recommendations for Prestressed Rock and Soil Anchors”, but also European standards like EN 14199 “Execution of special geotechnical works – Micropiles”, EN 14490 “Execution of special geotechnical works - Soil nailing”, EN 1537 “Execution of special geotechnical work – Ground anchors“, and other relevant standards, all possibilities of protecting the hollow bars and the steel quality will be introduced, discussed and compared ."

Jan 1, 2017

By Sherif Elfass, Gary Norris

Bi-directional load testing of drilled shafts has been widely adopted as a means to evaluate their load carrying capacity. However, in order to reach failure, most of these tests are carried out on sacrificial shafts using expensive sacrificial elements such as hydraulic jacks. A proposed low-cost bi-directional testing technique is discussed. It mechanically loads the end bearing soil below a drilled shaft, against its side shear resistance. The technique was originally established as an alternative to post-grouting to reliably account for the forfeited end bearing resistance. However, since it loads the shaft in a manner similar to conventional bi-directional tests, it can be used to not only load test sacrificial shafts, but production shafts as well. Furthermore, unlike conventional bi-directional load tests, the load is applied through surface jacks. These jacks, along with other load test components, are movable and can be reused to load test all the shafts of the project thus presenting an economic benefit. The concept of this technique has received favorable feedback from a few consulted departments of transportation, and while promising, has not been field tested to date. A U.S. patent was issued for the tip loading module and the loading technique described.

Sep 8, 2021

By Steven M. Henderson, Zachary D. Jones

The risk of allocation in construction contracts is a primary concern for all parties. For contracts involving subsurface construction the allocation of site condition risk is critical. In the past one hundred years technological advances fundamentally changed how that risk is allocated; yet another shift in this risk allocation may lie just over the horizon due to advances in geotechnical data management. Around the world initiatives are underway to make geotechnical datasets more open and accessible. In the United States some states like Kentucky have already made geotechnical data readily accessible. This proliferation of geotechnical data in the U.S. may impact the allocation of subsurface risk in construction contracts. Many construction contracts contain a differing site condition clause. That clause allows for a modification of the contract price or schedule if the ground conditions encountered by the contractor differ materially from either what was indicated in the contract documents or would be reasonably expected. A contractor, however, is typically not entitled to that modification if the contractor knew or should have known of the adverse conditions encountered. Courts have interpreted the “should have known” language as requiring contractors to make a reasonable site investigation prior to bidding the project. If geotechnical data is available and accessible and reveals the adverse condition the contractor encounters, courts could find that the contractor should have known of the condition and thus will not be entitled to a modification based on the differing site condition clause. Accordingly, the U.S. could be on the threshold of significant shifts in how the risk of differing site conditions is allocated in construction contracts.

Jan 1, 2017

By Akhila Manne, Prasad P. V S R

Storage tanks are heavily loaded thin-shelled structures that exert large loads on and require large foundations to support them. They are generally very sensitive to foundation settlements as it may hinder the performance of tanks resulting in significant commercial or social impacts. Selection of their foundation is dependent on availability of suitable ground and limitations imposed by design specifications. Design of the tank foundations is generally based on theoretical methods and validation by representative field tests. This paper reviews settlement criteria for storage tanks as per national and international standards, case studies of large to medium diameter tanks supported on deep foundation i.e., bored cast-in-situ piles and shallow foundations on improved ground and their performance during load tests & hydro-tests is discussed. Paper concludes that storage tanks can also be supported on shallow foundations resting on improved ground reducing the settlement, time and cost significantly depending on the sub-soil.

Nov 1, 2022

By Ihab Allam PE, Meeok Kim. PE. Ph. D

The wet weather equalization basin (EB) planned for Pacifica, CA is a 45 feet deep rectangular shaped underground water tank containing over 2.1 million gallons of water, and located only 500 feet away from the Pacific Ocean. The location and size of the water tank, and the geotechnical characteristics of the selected site presented many engineering and construction challenges. The engineering had to consider a structural system which can fit into the limited area of the site and yet need to meet the storage volume requirement. In addition, the system construction should meet the city’s tight budget and schedule.

By Wayne S. Smith, Erik James, Jose R. Gomez

"Soil mixed seepage cutoff walls are increasingly being used in levee and dam modification projects nationwide. An important aspect of their overall quality depends greatly on the language included in the specifications. Depending on the method (e.g. vertical axis auger mixing, cutter soil mixing, or trench mixing techniques) the specifications are a blend of prescriptive and performance based contract language with differences in element construction, element connections, quality control/quality assurance, and work area restrictions. Many of the existing specifications were initially developed by contractors in whole or in part, and can contain restrictive provisions favoring the authoring contractor. In response to these challenges, basic soil mixing fundamentals were revisited and recent lessons learned incorporated, resulting in the development of a new specification for soil mixed seepage cutoff walls that provides adaptability for the various construction methods. The new specification addresses quality control, quality assurance, equipment independence (elimination of restrictive contract language), rig instrumentation.INTRODUCTIONSoil mixing has been used in the construction of seepage barriers for over 30 years. Most soil mixed project primarily use the wet-rotary-shaft, wet-rotary-end or wet-vertical panel methods (reference FHWA Deem Mixing Manual Figure 137). One of the first major soil mixing seepage barriers was constructed in the Jackson Dam in Wyoming. Since then the use of soil mixing for seepage barriers has increased significantly and this specialized domain of construction which was solely procured by RFP methods, is now increasingly being specified in projects issued for bid. The Bid documents require more careful specification writing than RFP methods because the RFP methods allowed detailed proposals by the contractor. Therefore the development of soil mixing specifications began with contractors preparing the specifications. This paper addressed some of these issues, and proposes methods to address these resulting concerns. The resolution of these issues considers several aspects: 1) Assessment of binder injection, 2) Evaluation of mixing index, and 3) Verification testing."

Jan 1, 2016

By Shahid Islam, Lucian Bogdan

"The maintenance of infrastructures has been of particular concern to the engineering community. As the world’s infrastructure expands and existing infrastructure ages, monitoring and evaluation of the structures have become more critical than ever. A large number of retaining walls, tie backs, slope stabilizations and piles are designed using pre-stressing steel. Many piles and drilled shafts are designed using reinforcing steel. There are few testing methods available to assess these tension and compressive forces. High cost, complicated equipment and limitation of space often prevent these methods from being implemented. DYWIDAG-Systems International (DSI) has been involved in the development, testing and utilization of DYNA Force® sensors to measure the force in the anchors during construction and at any time during the lifetime of the structure. They can be used for bare, epoxy-coated, galvanized and greased-sheathed steel in the bonded, un-bonded, grouted or un-grouted length of the anchor. The sensor is robust and requires no maintenance. Sensors have received attention in terms of accuracy, performance, ease in installation, durability, and cost effectiveness. This paper describes its application in tie-back and anchor force monitoring of retaining walls and bridge abutment and compression forces in drilled shaft reinforcing steel where the data were collected manually, automated and remotely.INTRODUCTIONOur infrastructure is expanding and the existing infrastructure is aging. Some structures are expensive to maintain and some occasionally fail. There is a large demand for implementing health monitoring of structures. Many tie-backs, retaining walls, dams and other geotechnical structures are post-tensioned and many of them need repair using a post-tensioned system. On many occasions during construction and service life of the structure, it is useful to know the force in the post-tensioning and anchor system. Many piles and drilled shafts are designed using reinforcing steel and the compressive forces in reinforcement are unknown. Although there are many methods to measure the tendon force, most of them are cumbersome, expensive, and the accuracy varies depending on the method used.The elasto-magnetic (EM) technology is a novel approach to monitor forces in steel elements. The DYNA Force sensor is built based on EM technology (See Fig. 1). It is composed of a primary coil and a secondary coil (sensing coil). By passing current through the primary coil, ferromagnetic material is magnetized. The sensing coil picks up induced electromotive force that is proportional to change rate of applied magnetic flux (Faraday's law) and relative permeability. As permeability of core changes, output voltage changes. The output voltage is calibrated to measure the force. A readout unit is designed to magnetically energize the steel through the sensor and measure the response of the steel to the process. The readout unit then converts the response into a direct force reading. The sensor has an embedded thermistor which allows for temperature compensation. Due to the diversity of the magnetic property of steel, calibration is done for each type of steel allowing the sensors to perform at their highest accuracy."

Jan 1, 2017

By Alexander Ciccone, John H. Gill

Jet grouting is a highly versatile ground modification technique that can offer significant commercial and technical advantages over traditional concrete pit underpinning applications. Despite these advantages, jet grouting remains an underutilized technique in the construction industry due to its perceived complexity, cost, and risk. When performed thoughtfully, underpinning by jet grouting offers significant safety and schedule advantages over traditional underpinning approaches. The New England construction market has seen a recent acceptance in the use of jet grout underpinning on congested project sites across a variety of subsurface conditions. The reduction of the cement batch plant footprint due to equipment advances has allowed the use of this technique in urban sites where its use would be previously infeasible. Furthermore, jet grout underpinning has been utilized for support of historic and sensitive structures with generally lower tolerance to settlement than is typically feasible with conventional pit underpinning. Robust, real-time geotechnical instrumentation monitoring systems have helped reduce the uncertainty and further expand the feasibility of jet grout underpinning applications. When properly designed and constructed by qualified and experienced jet grouting contractors, the flexibility of soilcrete for design and construction may be utilized to overcome the many inherent challenges which complicate underpinning and earth retention systems. INTRODUCTION The construction of buildings and infrastructure in our increasingly dense urban spaces often requires excavations below the elevation of existing structures immediately adjacent to the proposed work. Where a proposed excavation system encroaches into an existing structure’s zone of influence, additional measures, such as the construction of an underpinning or excavation support system, are required to safely excavate and minimize the impacts on the adjacent structures. Jet grouting is one method of underpinning that offers significant commercial and technical advantages over many other techniques. Though it was first used to the United States in the 1980s and has grown in popularity elsewhere, jet grout underpinning remains underutilized domestically due to its perceived cost and risk premium. Jet grouting has significant technical advantages over other underpinning methods due to its applicability in a wide range of soil types and its flexibility of design and installation. The jet grouting process is capable of limiting the movement of foundations during construction and excavation to lower thresholds than most traditional underpinning methods (Droof, Furth, & Scarborough, 1995). Its use for underpinning historic and sensitive structures with lower settlement criteria provides additional evidence to its technical utility. Through thoughtful design, adequate planning, and experienced installation, jet grouting can be an appropriate underpinning solution that can provide significant cost and schedule savings.

Jan 1, 2019

By Jeffrey Goodwin P. E., Melih Demirkan Ph. D. P. E., Kevin Tehansky P. E.

Just an hour drive down MD 301 from National Harbor, construction to replace the Governor Harry W. Nice Memorial/Senator Thomas ‘Mac’ Middleton Bridge (HNB) began in spring of 2020. The Maryland Transportation Authority (MDTA) contracted with Skanska-Corman-McLean (SCM) to deliver a new US 301 bridge spanning 1.9 miles from Maryland to Virginia over the Potomac River aiming to improve capacity, safety, and access of the roadway. The project area presented a geotechnical design challenge due to the installation of new bridge foundations in the problematic soils of the Atlantic Coastal Plain alluvial deposits. With the existing bridge remaining in service during construction, and the site’s logistical constraints placing new pile driving operations near existing abutments and piers, a complex instrumentation and monitoring plan was developed to ensure public safety throughout the project. This paper discusses the geological conditions of the project area, the collaborative approach of various design team members to develop an appropriate monitoring plan utilizing various instrumentation, an understanding of baseline conditional movements of the existing bridge, and impact response of adjacent construction activity to help deliver effective new bridge foundations while protecting the old ones.

Oct 1, 2022

"What can we do in ground engineering to reduce damage to the environment, to repair historic pollution, to reduce our demand on basic resources and to reduce the carbon footprint of our industry? Some developments in geotechnical engineering are already heading in the right direction. These include reductions of ground pollution from grouting, improved dewatering procedures and advances in mix-in-place processes, ground improvement and jet grouting.There is increased interest in certain promising technologies (for example, drilled partial or full displacement piles), but this approach remains for the moment somewhat avant-garde. These piles require substantially greater power to install, and the overall sustainability balance for general application has yet to be shown to be in their favour. They are particularly suited to polluted sites where the problem of dealing with spoil would be costly and where, in the past, driven cast in-situ piles would have been employed. Drilled displacement piles offer some environmental benefit over driven piles in that they cause far less drawdown of potentially contaminated near-surface ground into sensitive, underlying aquifers.There is also great interest in various means of increasing the frictional capacity of bored piles, both conventional auger and continuous flight auger (CFA) piles, by threading or ribbing the soil/pile interface. The increase in adhesion capacity allows reduction in the pile dimensions necessary for a specific load. This obviously leads to less construction waste, but also to less permanent material consumption in the piles and also in the pile caps.The role of ground improvement remains significant for brown land sites and lower capacity foundations. Information technology (IT) has improved the quality assurance of stone column construction, for example. From the sustainability point of view, this is a good news method; here is no cement, no pollution and little obstruction to future redevelopment. We now need to introduce recycled crushed materials instead of natural aggregate as general practice and the technique’s green credentials will be really compelling."

Jan 1, 2009

By Marco Fellin, Van E. Komurka

Significant cost and construction benefits were obtained from performing a bi-directional static load test prior to construction on the Russell Street Bridge Replacement project in Missoula, Montana. The project utilized 24 drilled shafts to support two three-span bridges across the Clark Fork River. A bi-directional static load test (“BDSLT”) was performed on a large-diameter production shaft to demonstrate construction methods and confirm design assumptions. Subsurface conditions consisted of gravel with sand to a depth of 20 feet (6.1 m), underlain by gravel with sand, silt, cobbles, and occasional boulders. The test shaft had a nominal diameter of 5.9 feet (1.8 m), and an embedded length of 75.5 feet (23.0 m). The geotechnical engineer of record and the BDSLT test engineer collaborated to optimize the BDSLT jack assembly location within the test shaft, determine appropriate instrumentation locations, and plan the test protocol. The maximum applied test load was 10,707 kips (47.6 kN). Significant benefits were obtained from performing the BDSLT test, including 1) reducing each production shaft’s length by using a higher LRFD resistance factor allowed by having performed the testing, 2) using test-determined unit shaft resistances to evaluate and accept two production shafts that may have otherwise required remediation, and 3) providing the Montana Department of Transportation (and other designers) with increased presumptive unit resistance values in the gravel/cobble/boulder deposits. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project was constructed in Missoula, Montana for the Montana Department of Transportation (“MDT”). The original bridge was approximately 60 years old, and consisted of a two-lane, 420-foot-long (128-m), four-span, riveted steel plate girder design spanning the Clark Fork River. The bridge was due for replacement owing to its deteriorated state, and the need for increased traffic volume capability afforded by a four-lane structure. HDR was the structural engineer. The preferred bridge alternate was a 459-foot- long (140-m), three-span, welded steel plate girder design. The new bridge was designed to meet current standards in accordance with MDT bridge design and AASHTO LRFD criteria. The new bridge was constructed in phases to keep traffic open during construction.

Jan 1, 2019