Search Documents

By Venugopal B, M Kumaran, Thomas John, Vetriselvan A

The initial pile load tests are conducted to ensure the geotechnical capacity of the pile in a particular site condition. Normally kentledge method is adopted for the compression pile load tests. In this method the entire kentledge load is loaded above secondary beams which are supported by concrete blocks above the Natural Ground Level. So, it is important to ensure the SBC (for shear and settlement) of the natural ground. In one of our projects initially it was decided to go with kentledge system for initial compression load test on 56m long 1200mm diameter BCIS pile. The test load and total kentledge load were 2160t and 2700t, respectively. The soil strata mainly consisted of clay with low SPT N value and water table almost at ground level. It was suggested to replace top soil using Granular Sub-base (GSB) with good compaction in order to avoid excessive settlement of concrete blocks placed to support the kentledge weight. When the kentledge loading started, even before reaching 10% of total kentledge load, excessive settlement on the GSB layer was observed. This paper describes the problems faced during normal kentledge method and how it was overcome using the liner pile system for initial compression load tests in this particular site condition for higher test load.

Nov 1, 2022

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 Ground Improvement Committee

The evaluation of earthquake-induced liquefaction has become a routine part of geotechnical engineering design. For a given project, if an analysis identifies a potential for liquefaction and the consequences of liquefaction are deemed unacceptable, then some form of hazard mitigation is required. Mitigation efforts may consist of removing the liquefiable soils, bypassing the liquefiable soils with deep foundations, structurally accommodating the deformations or strength loss caused by liquefaction, or preventing the onset of liquefaction through ground improvement. The fundamental ground improvement mechanisms for liquefaction mitigation include densification, drainage, and reinforcement. When evaluating, recommending and specifying various ground improvement methods for liquefaction mitigation, practitioners should understand the fundamental mechanics involved and applicability and limitations of the various methods. The DFI Ground Improvement Committee offers a review of the fundamental mechanics and commentary on the applicability and limitations of each method to provide clarity and guidance on the issues related to ground improvement for liquefaction mitigation.

Aug 1, 2013

By Paul J. Sabatini, Robert C. Bachus, Terence P. Holman, Panos Andonyadis

A recent landslide comprising approximately 12 acres (4.86 hectare) and a displaced volume of more than 500,000 cy (382,000 m3) caused the shutdown of a four-lane state highway and two high-capacity freight railway lines. After completion of immediate landslide stabilization activities, various long-term slope stabilization measures were implemented that focused primarily on gradual slope unloading in areas near and upslope from the scarp of the landslide. Near the completion of the upslope excavation, an anchored soldier beam and lagging wall was constructed to allow for the temporary unloading of the toe of the main landslide area to facilitate installation of a permanent underdrain. The design of the anchored wall utilized information collected during the rehabilitation construction and included inclinometer data, site survey results, piezometer data, and field construction observations. Using the history of site-specific movements, results of back-analysis calculations from the landslide, and geometry/performance of the post-construction slope configurations, the fully softened and residual shear strengths along two potentially critical sliding surfaces were calculated. Owing to the high confidence in the values of shear strength as afforded by this information, the confidence in local groundwater conditions, and control of the loads, the designers selected a relatively low, calculated short-term factor of safety (FS) (i.e., FS ˜ 1.1 to 1.2) for the most critical unloading step. Long term calculated FS values on the order of 1.2 to 1.3 were anticipated. This paper describes the detailed evaluation of the landslide slope movement data associated with the shallow and deep potentially critical failure surfaces and selection of the associated values of design shear strength for these potentially critical surfaces. A description is presented of the analyses and design of the anchored wall, measures implemented during construction to minimize slope movements, and post-construction monitoring results during the unloading and subsequent installation of the underdrain.

Jan 1, 2017

By Tony D. Canale, Anthony Mazzo

"Times Square, arguably one of the best-known destinations in the world, has undergone and continues to undergo a re-development aimed at attracting corporate tenants to the area. Mueser Rutledge Consulting Engineers (MRCE) was involved with the planning, design and construction of the foundations for the Conde Nast and 5 Times Square sites, as well as Times Square Tower. These sites are pictured in Figure 1.This paper will focus on the design and construction of the deep foundations for Times Square Tower that was developed by Boston Properties. PROJECT DESCRIPTIONTimes Square Tower is 47 stories tall, with no setbacks and an overall height to top of crown of 730 feet (222.5m). It has two basement levels extending 30 feet (9m) below grade over the full site. As shown in Figure 1, the structure occupies the entire site and has a footprint of 22,000 square feet (2,044 m2), with a total rentable area of about 1.2 million square feet (111,480 m2). The planned use for the building is office space with retail at the ground level. When completed, Times Square Tower was the final building constructed as part of the Revitalization of Times Square. Due to the site constraints, designing and constructing the foundations was akin to placing the final piece of a puzzle.Times Square Tower provided numerous design and construction challenges that were a result of tight working conditions, heavy column loads, and a compressed schedule.GEOLOGIC SETTING AND SITE HISTORYThe Times Square area is part of the Manhattan Prong called the Manhattan Ridge, a formation of old and durable metamorphosed and folded bedrock, now termed the Hartland Formation. The bedrock generally has a thin soil cover and uneven surface overlain in some areas with a thin mantle of decomposed and/or weathered rock. Overburden soils include glacial and post-glacial deposits and recent fills.Transit improvements have been made in and around the Times Square area since the early 1900’s. The 1, 2 and 3 Subway Lines that run below 7th Avenue were constructed circa 1915 using cut and cover techniques and extend about 28 feet (8.5m) below grade. The N, R, Q & W Subway Lines that run below Broadway were also constructed in 1915 using cut and cover techniques and extend about 38 feet (11.6m) below grade. The 7 Line that runs below 41st Street was constructed later, using both cut-and-cover and tunneling methods as it runs below the other subway structures at a depth of about 55 feet (16.8m) below grade."

Jan 1, 2005

By Charles M. Wilk

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

Jan 1, 2005

By Jon Huff, Jeffrey Donville, Hannah Iezzoni, Dan Stevenson

Occasionally, in the design of deep foundations for a structure, a single deep foundation element may be used to support a building column. The most common type of element used in such cases is a drilled shaft (also referred to as a drilled pier, caisson, or bored pile). However, as installation capabilities have improved, large diameter augercast piles are increasingly more common. While drilled shafts and augercast piles differ significantly in construction methods, in the eyes of the International Building Code (IBC), both are treated as cast-in-place deep foundations and must comply with many of the same code provisions. Deep foundations are required to be braced such that lateral stability is provided in all directions, however isolated, cast-in-place elements that have a diameter (D) of at least 2-feet and a length (L) not more than 12 times the diameter can be an exception. In response to the concerns raised by some member professionals, the Deep Foundations Institute’s (DFI) Augered Cast-in-Place Pile and Drilled Displacement Pile Committee took a closer look at the code and its applications, the historical development of the code language through the years and performed analytical modeling to evaluate the impact of this ratio on a pile’s stability. The question is whether the limiting ratio included in the IBC 2018 code provisions is justified, or whether different criteria should be used to determine when isolated deep foundation members are allowed.

Sep 8, 2021

By Marcel Bielefeld, Joost Bakker, Rob van Dorp

Pile load testing can be performed by a static, rapid or high strain dynamic (generally designated as dynamic) testing method. The static load test is often considered the “gold standard” of testing with the other methods merely ‘alternatives’. However, the rapid load test, as a quasi-static test, has all the positive elements of the static alternative: the direct measurement of loads and displacements. Moreover as stress wave phenomena have no influence, the interpretation of rapid load test results is more straightforward than that of dynamic testing, and also independent of the person performing the interpretation. This paper will explore the Rapid Load Testing method and illustrate the advantages and limitations through a case study in Rostock, Germany

May 1, 2022

"The Morris Island Lighthouse (MIL) is located between the jetties leading to the Charleston Harbor and Folly Beach, S.C. The present structure is the third lighthouse to occupy this location. The first navigational aid was erected in 1673, and consisted of a raised pan filled with pitch, which was set afire at night to guide early ships. The next structure was built in 1767, and constituted the first real lighthouse, standing 42 ft (12.8 m) in height. In 1838, a second lighthouse was built on the site, and it measured 102 ft (31 m) in height and featured a revolving light. This structure lasted until 1862 when Confederate troops, during the Civil War, destroyed it to deny its use to Union troops.Navigators steered these waters without a lighthouse for nearly a decade until 1876, when the current structure was built under the direction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). In 1886, the Charleston area suffered a M7.6 earthquake. Significant damage was caused throughout much of the area, including a slight “list” of the lighthouse to the northeast. As a result, the cast of the beacon was reduced from 18 mi (29 km) to about 6 mi (9.7 km), causing much distress to navigators until the beacon platform was releveled and remains at this list to the present day.Conditions for ConcernThe current lighthouse was originally constructed about 1,200 ft (366 m) from the shoreline. Over the years, USACE has undertaken several programs to meet the increased shipping and navigation demands in the Charleston Harbor. Around the turn of the last century, two jetties were constructed, which drastically changed the approach direction for ships entering the harbor. In subsequent years, the harbor began to experience accelerated siltation."

Jan 1, 2017

By William F. Starke

"The Ontario College of Art & Design (OCAD) located in Toronto, Ontario, found itself in dire need of space due to increased enrollment, leading them to embark on a major expansion and redevelopment on campus. The expansion entailed an additional 115,000 sq.ft. (10,700 m2) and a new major structure was required, as well as extensive redevelopment of existing buildings. The new Sharp Centre for Design was designed by acclaimed British Architect Will Alsop, of Alsop Architects, in a joint venture with Toronto-based Robbie/Young + Wright Architects. The OCAD campus is cramped for space and the design selected was a structure built over top of existing structures. The building has been described as resembling a “shoebox in the sky”, supported on raked columns transmitting high lateral forces as well as compression load to the foundations. There are 12 such supports, each supported by an individual caisson. In addition, the project entailed installation of other caissons in the courtyard area with the construction work accomplished under very confined conditions among the existing structures. The remarkable design for the new Ontario College of Arts will surely make it another of Toronto’s architectural landmarks. Several things make this project stand out as a unique deep foundations project.First is the architectural design. Words cannot do it justice: the picture is the only effective way to start to describe it. This is a big two-story box, built over the top of a fragile existing building. The underside of the box is 86 ft (26m) above street level. Students remained still inside the old building while construction was going on around and above them. There were serious concerns about vibration – not only its effects on the academic life; but more significantly, upon the stability and safety of the old building, which rests somewhat shakily on shallow spread footings.Steel stilts that look like toothpicks when scaled against the new and existing structures support the box. The stilts are much sturdier than they appear from the pictures, but it is easy to visualize the complexity of the loads they transfer to the foundations below."

Jan 1, 2004

By A. Paviani

The subject of this session is "Equipment Installa­tion, Recent Developments". This is a subject which is not usually addressed at conferences of Foundation Engineering. It is rare to find sessions dealing with the technological side of deep foundations, a subject which only recently seems to have aroused sufficient interest at national and international conferences. It is therefore natural for the subject of "Equipment", or the tools used to implement the various "technologies", to be over­looked or mentioned only occasionally during the discussion of other issues. At conferences, most of the attention is attached to research and to the theoretical interpretation of the performance and behaviour of deep foundations, as well as to establishing the most suitable calculation algorithms and approaches for the study, design and control of foundation structures. It is almost as if the subject of equipment is felt to be less important or, perhaps, that it is considered to belong more strictly to mechanical engineering than to civil engineering.

Jan 1, 1994

By Monica Prezzi

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

Jan 1, 2005

By Lee S. Vanzler

Atlantic Wharf involved the construction of a six-level underground parking garage and a 32-story high rise tower along the historic Boston Harbor waterfront. The site, historically known as ?Russia Wharf,? consisted of filled land initially created in the late 1800s by extending the shoreline toward the harbor as the urban population and land needs grew to support expansion of commerce and trade. Redevelopment required solutions to address relics of waterfront structures (granite block seawalls, piles, and piers), weak subsurface soil conditions, tidal groundwater levels, and contaminated soils resulting from previous site usage and filling. The foundation system, consisting of drilled shafts with column loads up to 14,000 kips (62,272 kN), concrete diaphragm wall (slurry wall), and up-down construction methodology, was chosen to address these factors. As a prerequisite for development, selected portions of the façades of the former historic buildings were required to be preserved, protected, and incorporated into the final building configuration. The historic façades were temporarily braced and supported prior to the demolition of the buildings and commencement of below-grade construction. This paper will describe the considerations in the selection of up-down construction methodology along with a discussion of the design and performance of the concrete diaphragm wall and drilled shaft foundations. Up-down construction methodology shortened the overall construction schedule while addressing the lateral bracing requirements for the concrete diaphragm wall and restrictive ground movement tolerances to protect adjacent structures. Below-grade construction was completed in March 2010, and the building was opened for tenant occupancy in January 2011.

Jan 1, 2011

By Cheng Lin, Guoming Lin

"This paper presents a case history for the design, construction and long-term performance monitoring of a driven prestressed concrete (PSC) piled foundation supporting a large liquefied natural gas (LNG) tank in Savannah, Georgia, USA. Following a geotechnical investigation, a design stage pile test program was performed with three objectives: to study the densification effect from pile driving on the liquefaction resistance, to test axial and lateral pile capacities, and pile behavior under lateral loads. The test program comprised five piles driven on a test pad constructed adjacent to the tank foundation. Cone penetration testing (CPT) was performed before and after pile installation to test soil densification effects from the pile driving and liquefaction potential was re-evaluated based on the soil densities after pile installation. The axial load tests involved static load testing, high strain dynamic testing, and Statnamic testing. This paper presents the findings of the densification effects, compares results from different axial testing methods and discusses the procedures to use the load test results in the pile design. The paper also comments on the construction issues and presents performance data with 10 years of monitoring.1. IntroductionThe project site is located at the Kinder Morgan’s Elba Island LNG Terminal on the Savannah River which is three miles downstream of the downtown Savannah, Georgia. This LNG terminal was initially developed in the 1970s as an LNG import terminal. The facility includes five LNG storage tanks with two larger tanks which were constructed in 2003 and 2006, respectively. The terminal is currently being converted into a liquefaction and export facility. This paper discusses pile foundations for Tank D4 which is a double walled insulated steel tank built to hold one million barrels of LNG in 2003. This tank has an outer tank diameter of 258 feet, an inner diameter of 252 feet, and liquid height of 113 feet. A number of geotechnical challenges were present in the foundation design and construction.??The site is a typical coastal deposit site featuring a thick layer of very soft under-consolidated clay (up to 40 feet in thickness);??The bedrock is a couple of thousand feet deep;??There is a sand layer that is liquefiable under a high seismic design category (0.5% possibility of exceedance in 50 years)."

Jan 1, 1900

By William G. Ryan, David S. Graham, Dan A. Brown, Rich A. Lamb, Paul J. Axtell

"The St. Croix River Crossing project on the Minnesota-Wisconsin border has been in the process of planning and public debate for two decades, with several changes in alignment. During the course of the earlier planning process in 1995, a drilled shaft load test was performed to obtain preliminary design information. There were some difficulties in maintaining stability within the weak sandstone bearing formation, and the measured axial resistance was relatively low. Subsequent experience by the Minnesota Department of Transportation with similar weak sandstones on the I-35W project suggests that improved construction techniques using modern drilling fluids may offer opportunities for improved performance. During final design in 2012 a second load test program was performed of a full scale test shaft constructed using polymer drilling fluids. The stability of the socket excavation in the weak sandstone appeared to be greatly improved and the measured axial resistance significantly higher.This case history illustrates the excellent performance that drilled shafts can provide in even relatively weak sandstone bedrock as well as the profound influence on axial resistance associated with the construction techniques used. The improved resistance values obtained by the new load test with more recent construction technology allowed the foundation scheme to be substantially optimized with respect to the number and size of required drilled shafts, reducing the size, cost, and risk of the coffercells and footings.IntroductionThe Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) has awarded the first phase of a bridge construction project that will cross the St. Croix River between Oak Park Heights, MN and St Joseph, WI. The first phase construction contract involves building the river pier substructures including groups of drilled shafts beneath each tower leg. A general location of the bridge project is provided in Figure 1.Prior to award of the construction contract, two separate design-phase axial load tests were performed on non-production drilled shafts with rock sockets. Both tests were static, bottom-up tests using the Osterberg Cell (O-cell). The first test was performed in 1995 when final design and construction was thought to be imminent. After years of public debate and literally, an act of Congress, design of the project was finally restarted and a second load test performed in 2012. The 1995 test was conducted on the Minnesota bank approximately 900 ft southwest of the St. Croix River bank. The 2012 test was conducted in the river about 2,100 ft northeast of the1995 test location. A plan-view of the project indicating the test program locations relative to the bridge alignment is provided in Figure 2."

Jan 1, 2015

By Brian Wilson, John Scholte, Megan Atkinson

"In November 2004, the residents of the City of Nanaimo, B.C., Canada voted to approve a new conference centre as the centrepiece of a proposed revitalization project for the city’s historic downtown core. The proposal goal was to replace a cluster of derelict buildings with a dynamic and modern complex that would connect existing city facilities to a new conference facility, the Vancouver Island Conference Centre (VICC). The conference centre is expected to create 150 full-time jobs, attract visitors/ delegates from across North America and generate new economic opportunities for local businesses.However, the proposed site posed a number of geotechnical and geoenvironmental challenges. As is often the case with coastal cities, historic growth of the Nanaimo downtown and harbour area was achieved through reclamation of former waterfront areas and inlets. These areas were often infilled with random fills and even wastes, leaving a legacy of variable density heterogeneous fills contaminated with a variety of pollutants. Preliminary assessment of the site indicated a high likelihood of a requirement for deep foundations, a high risk of liquefaction in the event of an earthquake and the presence of both soil and groundwater contamination. Construction would be further complicated by the requirement for two levels of basement parking and the proximity of adjacent buildings and major roadways to the work area.With a limited budget (fixed by the referendum) and timeframe, the city needed a cost-effective solution to proceed with construction. A number of options were considered, but an innovative design using leading-edge Cutter Soil Mixer (CSM) technology best met the geotechnical and budgetary requirements of the site. The CSM approach also addressed the environmental concerns of contaminated soils and groundwater. Golder Associates Innovative Applications (GAIA) Inc., in association with the designers of their parent company Golder Associates Ltd. (Golder), proposed the CSM technology — at the time the first North American application."

Jan 1, 2008

By Orestis Zarzouras, Amalia Giannakou, Jacob Chacko

"When designing structures in seismically active areas, foundations of critical structures are typically located away from known faults. Indeed many seismic codes prohibit construction in the immediate vicinity of seismically active faults establishing minimum setbacks from the faults. However, for long structures such as bridges, tunnels and pipelines, a fault maybe unavoidable, and fault rupture risk impossible to preclude. This paper presents a case study of a bridge foundation design that incorporates the consequences of fault deformations passing through the foundation. A series of site surveys were conducted to characterize the fault environment, and fault displacement hazard analyses were conducted to develop design displacement demands. Subsequently, numerical analyses were performed to evaluate the fault rupture-induced demands on a pier foundation in terms of displacements and rotations. Initially, analyses were performed that model the free field fault rupture propagation to the ground surface of the fault to ensure that the basic site characteristics are captured. Subsequently, the foundation elements were introduced in the model and the fault rupture is simulated again. The interaction and influence of the foundation on the fault rupture propagation is calculated, and the consequent demands and distortions of the foundation block provide a basis for structural engineers to design the bridge.IntroductionThe Izmit Bay bridge, a 3-km-long suspension bridge that crosses Izmit Bay in Turkey, is planned to be constructed in one of the most seismically active places in the world. The south approach structures for the Izmit Bay Bridge along the western side of the Hersek peninsula bring the bridge down from on the order of El. 60 meters at the South Anchorage to an elevated embankment approximately 1.3 km farther south (Figure 1). The south approach structures are located within a zone of secondary deformation around the primary trace of the North Anatolian Fault. The concept design team has developed a concept design for a “viaduct” structure that consists of 10 spans with lengths varying between 136 m and 100 m and two back spans one of 125 m, attached to the main bridge and the other of 74 m attached to the south embankment."

Jan 1, 2017

By Amalia Giannakou

When designing structures in seismically active areas, foundations of critical structures are typically located away from known faults. Indeed many seismic codes prohibit construction in the immediate vicinity of seismically active faults establishing minimum setbacks from the faults. However, for long structures such as bridges, tunnels and pipelines, a fault maybe unavoidable, and fault rupture risk impossible to preclude. This paper presents a case study of a bridge foundation design that incorporates the consequences of fault deformations passing through the foundation. A series of site surveys were conducted to characterize the fault environment, and fault displacement hazard analyses were conducted to develop design displacement demands. Subsequently, numerical analyses were performed to evaluate the fault rupture-induced demands on a pier foundation in terms of displacements and rotations. Initially, analyses were performed that model the free field fault rupture propagation to the ground surface of the fault to ensure that the basic site characteristics are captured. Subsequently, the foundation elements were introduced in the model and the fault rupture is simulated again. The interaction and influence of the foundation on the fault rupture propagation is calculated, and the consequent demands and distortions of the foundation block provide a basis for structural engineers to design the bridge.

By Gerald Verbeek, Erick Baziw

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

By 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.