Search Documents

By Julie H. N. Hampden, Per G. Reinhall

"Executive summary: Impact pile driving of steel piles is a common construction practice in freshwater and marine environments for the building of structures and foundations. This practice produces extremely high sound levels underwater that have proven injurious to aquatic fish and wildlife. To limit impacts to sensitive species, resource management agencies employ a variety of different strategies including timing restrictions to limit in-water construction windows to those months when there are low flow conditions in lakes or rivers, to those hours when tides are low, or to periods of the year when species of concern are least likely to be present in the project vicinity. In addition, permitting agencies have identified noise thresholds above which sensitive species could be injured, resulting in additional project conditions to curtail the extent of project noise impacts including: limiting the number of piles or pile strikes per day, requiring biological monitoring, and mandating the use of noise attenuation techniques, such as bubble curtains and cofferdams. Numerous studies have shown current noise attenuation techniques are costly and provide limited or variable noise reduction [1-3]. This is because the noise from pile driving is not only transmitted through the water column, it is also transmitted through the sediment back into the water column [1, 4-8]. Though these protective measures may help to reduce project impacts, they also result in additional complexity, expense, and potential risk for project delivery. Marine Construction Technologies, a Public Benefit Corporation, in collaboration with University of Washington and Washington State Department of Transportation, has developed a pile that can be installed with standard pile driving technologies (vibratory or impact hammers) and consistently decreases the total noise transmitted into the water. The double-walled pile is relatively quiet in comparison to unattenuated piles or existing noise attenuation techniques. This technology not only reduces the risk to sensitive species by minimizing the extent of potential impacts, it also reduces potential risks to project delivery by limiting the size of monitoring areas, minimizing the need to cap daily production rates, and eliminating the need for deployment of additional noise attenuation devices. Results from finite element modeling of the pile, scaled prototype testing, and full scale field testing in Commencement Bay (October 2014) and Vashon Island (October 2015) in Puget Sound, Washington indicate a reduction the peak sound pressure between 14 and 20 dB relative to single walled piles at a range of approximately 10 meters. These tests also confirm that the double-walled piles provide drivability similar to standard steel piles. In addition, preliminary calculations for capacity and structural characteristics demonstrate that double-walled piles provide equivalent or better performance than same-sized standard piles."

Jan 1, 2017

By Sanjay Gupta, Sorabh Gupta, Ravi Sundaram, Abraham Varghese

"Geotechnical investigation for the Kochi Metro revealed a critical section of the Viaduct near Ernakulam Junction Railway Station. Four piers, located over a 220 m stretch, were passing through an area with substantial thickness of soft clay. The scope of the geotechnical investigation included two boreholes and a static cone penetration test at each pier location. In the boreholes, field vane shear test was conducted at different depths in addition to the routine SPT. The design of heavily loaded piles in such strata is a challenge due to the liquefaction of the shallow sands and negative skin friction / down-drag in the soft under-consolidated clay. Bored cast-in-situ piles of 1500 mm diameter extending to 50-60 m depth were used to carry 500-600 tonnes load.INTRODUCTIONThe first phase of the rapid transit system at Kochi, Kerala (See Fig. 1) whose elevated route spans from Aluva to Thripunithura covers a total distance of about 25 kilometers. One of the more critical sections of the viaduct exists near the Ernakulam Junction Railway station where the alignment takes a sharp curve to move towards Vyttila, crossing the railway tracks and running partially over the approach of South over-bridge.In this section, four piers located on either side of the railway tracks near the Route Relay Cabin of Ernakulam Junction Railway Station pass through an area with substantial thickness of soft underconsolidated clay.The alignment is geotechincally challenging due to the presence of loose liquefiable sand and soft underconsolidated and sensitive clay.Initial investigations by the owner based on limited boreholes only yielded conservative and inconclusive pile capacities. For a thorough understanding of the soil behaviour, a detailed geotechnical investigation was carried out to assess the engineering behaviour of the soil strata.The scope of the geotechnical investigation included two boreholes and a static cone penetration test at each pier location. In the boreholes, field vane shear tests were conducted at different depths in addition to the routine SPT."

Jan 1, 2015

By Donald Deardorff

Helical piles often rely on the final installation torque for ultimate capacity verification. When helical piles are designed using traditional bearing capacity equations for deep foundations and field monitored for a specified final installation torque, a factor of safety equal to 2 is often allowed for the design. One of the more common methods of determining torque during helical pile installation is by correlating the differential pressure across a hydraulic gear motor to a torque. Most drive head manufacturers provide multipliers to convert differential pressure to torque for different drive head models. These multipliers are based on theoretical torque equations and vary with the planetary gear ratio, hydraulic gear motor displacement and drive head efficiency. Drive head manufacturers show a linear fit between the differential pressure and output torque with no scaling effect. Previous drive head testing performed by the author has confirmed that the drive head differential pressure to torque relationship is generally linear however there is a scaling adjustment needed. This results in a variation of multipliers across the differential pressure range for a given drive head. Eight hydraulic drive heads from three manufacturers were field tested by Foundation Supportworks, Inc. to compare the torque versus differential pressure curves with varying installation equipment, hydraulic line sizes and hydraulic flow rates. Differential pressure was monitored using three methods including pressure gages, PT-Tracker and an Ashcroft AT-100. Flow and temperature was measured using a Webtech system analyzer. Torque was measured using a Pro-Dig in-line torque transducer, a TruTorque indicator and a Chance Mechanical Dial in-line torque indicator. The current testing indicates that a change in installation equipment and/or a change in hydraulic flow rate may affect the torque versus differential pressure curve of a given drive head. The results of this testing also show that some of the methods for determining torque during helical pile installations may be unconservative, thereby resulting in safety factors less than required.

By Donald Deardorff

"Helical piles often rely on the final installation torque for ultimate capacity verification. When helical piles are designed using traditional bearing capacity equations for deep foundations and field monitored for a specified final installation torque, a factor of safety equal to 2 is often allowed for the design. One of the more common methods of determining torque during helical pile installation is by correlating the differential pressure across a hydraulic gear motor to a torque. Most drive head manufacturers provide multipliers to convert differential pressure to torque for different drive head models. These multipliers are based on theoretical torque equations and vary with the planetary gear ratio, hydraulic gear motor displacement and drive head efficiency. Drive head manufacturers show a linear fit between the differential pressure and output torque with no scaling effect. Previous drive head testing performed by the author has confirmed that the drive head differential pressure to torque relationship is generally linear however there is a scaling adjustment needed. This results in a variation of multipliers across the differential pressure range for a given drive head.Eight hydraulic drive heads from three manufacturers were field tested by Foundation Supportworks, Inc. to compare the torque versus differential pressure curves with varying installation equipment, hydraulic line sizes and hydraulic flow rates. Differential pressure was monitored using three methods including pressure gages, PT-Tracker and an Ashcroft AT-100. Flow and temperature was measured using a Webtech system analyzer. Torque was measured using a Pro-Dig in-line torque transducer, a TruTorque indicator and a Chance Mechanical Dial in-line torque indicator. The current testing indicates that a change in installation equipment and/or a change in hydraulic flow rate may affect the torque versus differential pressure curve of a given drive head. The results of this testing also show that some of the methods for determining torque during helical pile installations may be unconservative, thereby resulting in safety factors less than required."

Jan 1, 2017

By Yoshinori Kurumada, Tatsuo Nagatsu, Keiji Uchida

"Cement deep mixing method has been utilized in the process of construction of an underwater tunnel in Singapore. The soil was improved by this method to prevent undesirable heaving of the soil below the excavated area. Quality control experiments approved the effectiveness of CDM method in increasing the strength of the soil and prevention of undesired heave of the ground. The process of the construction of this project and the quality control experiments results are discussed in this paper.INTRODUCTIONThe Marina Coastal Expressway is a 5.3 km long underwater highway tunnel with five lanes in each direction. It mostly comprises a twin box culvert structure (53.3 m exterior width and 10.89 m height) and was opened by the Land Transport Authority of Singapore (LTA).The contract zone C485 was the most challenging area of the construction; it involved a 700 m long underwater tunnel of which 400 m was built beneath the seabed at the mouth of the Singapore River. A double steel pipe sheet pile wall was built as a temporary cofferdam to keep water out of the excavation site, and the cut-and-cover method was used for excavation. In order to ensure a sufficient cross-sectional area for the flow of the Singapore River, the construction was divided into two phases focused on the left bank (Stage 1) and right bank (Stage 2).The Cement Deep Mixing (CDM) method was used to improve the ground, which comprised soft marine clay, to ensure safety during the excavation. The efficiency of this method in increasing the soil’s strength was approved previously. The design standard strength was quck = 800 kPa. Based on the study conducted after the construction, the average the Unconfined Compression Strength (UCS) of the soil stabilized by the CDM method was quf =3,000 kPa. This paper discusses the effect of the CDM soil improvement construction on the reduced displacement from the excavation and the quality control of the soil improvement."

Jan 1, 2015

By Karl A. Higgins, Michael D. Venezia

The South Capitol Street Corridor Project is one of the District Department of Transportation’s (DDOT) largest projects, and is currently under construction. This case study will focus on the design of the foundation piles for the main spans of the iconic Frederick Douglass Memorial (FDM) Bridge, and will include a discussion of the foundation design evolution from an originally designed alternative foundation system (i.e. coffer dams and drilled shafts), to the current use of driven Large Diameter Open End Pipe (LDOEP) Piles. The paper will provide a discussion of the design methodology used during preliminary engineering and final design, and will highlight insight gained from the extensive load testing program completed to date. The load testing program consists of a combination of high strain dynamic testing (PDA), as well as Statnamic Load Testing on select sacrificial, pre-production test piles. Specifically, data gathered during the nearly-completed load testing program suggests the development of significant internal shaft frictional resistance within the tested LDOEP Piles. This paper will also discuss limitations of currently accepted industry design methods for predicting the capacity of LDOEP piles, a subject that is also currently being researched by FHWA. The data from this test pile program will help design assumptions for future projects. INTRODUCTION The Frederick Douglass Memorial (FDM) Bridge carries South Capitol Street across the Anacostia River in Southeast/Southwest, Washington, DC, and is owned and maintained by the District Department of Transportation (DDOT). The existing FDM Bridge is nearly 70 years old, serves as a major artery into the city, and has been classified as functionally obsolete. As a result of the condition, age and limitations of the existing bridge structure, DDOT deemed it necessary for complete replacement of the bridge. The replacement project consists of the construction of a new bridge traversing the Anacostia River, as well as the reconfiguration of the Suitland Parkway and I-295 interchanges located at the eastern terminus of the FDM Bridge. Final design and construction services for the replacement project were procured by DDOT through a Design-Build contract. This paper will focus on the driven Large Diameter Open End Pipe (LDOEP) Piles used for support of the main span of the new FDM Bridge which is currently under construction. Discussion regarding the LDOEP Pile design methodology has been included, along with commentary regarding currently available industry guidance related to design and construction of LDOEP Piles. Much insight has been gained during the mostly-completed and extensive load testing program which consists of a combination of high strain dynamic testing (PDA), as well as Statnamic Load Testing on select sacrificial, pre- production test piles. Specifically, data gathered during the mostly-completed load testing program suggests the development of significant internal shaft frictional resistance within the tested LDOEP Piles.

Jan 1, 2019

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 Jonathan G. Cannon

"This paper will describe dynamic pile testing conducted during installation of driven octagonal precast prestressed concrete piles used as the foundation for this bridge. The piles were long and hence spliced. A number of the piles showed damage near the splices and the damage location was near the ground surface so that the damage could be verified using visual inspection. The piles and splice configuration are still in use today without modification. Further WEAP driveability analysis has been conducted which demonstrates the effect of the splice on pile stresses and a likely failure mode. A slight modification is proposed to the splice that should prevent the damage on future projects.INTRODUCTIONThe bridge site is located on the Olympic Way, Route 41, about 20km north of the regional centre of Albury, NSW. For a long distance north of the site the Olympic Way ""shadows"" the main Melbourne to Sydney rail line and is located on the Western side and in close proximity. At the bridge site there was previously a sharp dog-leg in the road and a right angle level crossing with the road changing to the Eastern side of the rail line, eventually joining up with the Hume Highway, which in turn now becomes a ring-road through the eastern outskirts of Albury. The dog-leg and rail crossing had warning signs and bells, speed restrictions and rumble strips to warn approaching motorists to reduce speed. Site distance was exceptionally good.Approximately 2years before construction a group of five ""high spirited"" young men from the local area were driving south on the Olympic Way adjacent to a south-bound train. It is understood they interacted with the train crew for a period of time. Unfortunately the car and train collided at the level crossing and all of the young men were killed. There were outpourings of grief in the local community and a decision was made to replace the level crossing with a road-over-rail bridge.The bridge was highly skewed with two piers and two high level abutments with fill embankments on both approaches.GROUND CONDITIONSThe site is open grazing country with approximately level ground at the site with surrounding low hills. The geology was unremarkable with consistent stiff clays for a considerable depth.The design required driven precast prestressed pile foundations with the piles to be driven to a considerable depth.Hard driving with high tension stresses were evident from the start of driving and a variety of different pre-bore lengths were adopted in an attempt to minimise driving and potential for damage. At the abutments the pile locations were predrilled for at least the full embankment depth.PILESThe piles were 550mm octagonal prestressed concrete with the pier piles being single piece and the longer abutment piles being two-piece with a ""standard"" epoxy glued box splice. Pier piles and the initial length of the abutment piles were 24m. The add-on piece used at the abutments was 12m. Pile concrete was grade 50MPa."

Jan 1, 1900

By James M. Tantalla, Roderic A. Ellman, W. Allen Marr, Scott R. Bamford

"Construction of the powerhouse for the Willow Island Hydroelectric Project required a 100-ft deep excavation inside the limits of a cofferdam and embankment-seepage cut-off wall through soil and rock adjacent to the Ohio River. Portions of the rock had preexisting weak plans and slickensided surfaces with low frictional strength. Stability analyses were performed for critical sections of the excavation to evaluate the stability of the soil slopes and rock cuts using buckling, tension crack, and limit equilibrium analysis techniques. Loading conditions included the 100-yr and intermediate floods, normal pool, sudden drawdown, and seismic design conditions.Stability analyses indicated adequate factors of safety for soil slopes and for rock cuts through the landside embankment sections. However, the results of deep-seated stability analyses through the rock supporting the riverside cellular cofferdam indicated unacceptable factors of safety. Consequently, the riverside portion of the excavation required measures to increase stability. Long, high-capacity rock anchors and deep dewatering wells to lower the site piezometric head were chosen for this purpose.Thirty high-capacity rock anchors were installed on the upstream, riverside, and downstream sides of the cofferdam rock cut. Required rock anchor loads varied from 1,968 to 2,074 kips. The designed anchors consisted of multiple, seven–wire strands with up to 59 strands per anchor. Bond lengths used an allowable bond stress of 100 psi based on the rock bond measured with pull-out tests. Maximum bond and anchor lengths were 50 ft and 140 ft, respectively. Measurements of forces in selected strands and displacements of the excavation showed excellent performance."

Jan 1, 2017

By Mary Ellen Bruce

Let me first address the issue of the wet grab samples. The wet grab samples that were attempted to take on the Central Artery were hindered by the fact that the way the mixing was being done was only by injecting grout on the way out, during withdrawal of the mixing tools. They would auger down to the required depth (usually with some water being injected), which took anywhere from 45 minutes to an hour, and then when coming out, the grout would be injected with grout. That was leaving a column of grout in the center where the shaft had been (i.e. inside of the blades of the mixing tools), which would end up being something like a foot in diameter because the pipe that was used for the drill shaft was a foot in diameter. So we had 10 inches to a foot of almost pure grout in the middle of our column and then we had 2 feet on either side that was mixed soil cement. So when they went down with the wet grab sampler not knowing where that was in the column sometimes they/we were getting strengths of 1500 psi, and sometimes they/we were getting strength of 500 psi or 100 psi. So what was it that we were taking into the wet grab sampler? In those cases you don't really know, but it wasn't representative of the core samples we were taking. We were purposely not coring in the center because we knew that was going to be high cement content, almost pure grout. So the issue of wet grab sampling particularly on this project, the Central Artery Project, was that we didn't really know what we were sampling. What becomes an issue with wet grab sampling in other projects is that you have to have another device (machine) in most cases, a cherry picker crane or something similar that can raise and lower with a beam that is used to forces the sampler down into the freshly mixed soil-cement. And regarding economics, is it more economical to have that crane standing by with its operator or to have a drill rig to come along later and do the coring and take the material out that's fairly identical to what you're finding in situ? The complaint of micro-fracturing in the core samples as you're taking the cores was raised by Seiko as causing large strength reductions. But, if you're doing it carefully, then I don't think that's much of an issue anymore, on research basis perhaps but not on a practical level.

Feb 10, 2003

By David S. Graham, Joseph D. Bailey, Paul J. Axtell, Michael K. Muchard

"Two instrumented test piles were simultaneously subjected to a static lateral load test by jacking the piles apart. One of the piles was loaded in axial compression via kentledge during the lateral load test. Both piles were constructed in an identical manner. These piles were constructed and tested as part of a construction-phase load test program for a floodwall improvement project along the Missouri River in Kansas City, Kansas. Details of the subsurface conditions, drilled pile construction, instrumentation, and load testing procedures are described. Data collected during testing of the piles are presented and compared. Potential effects of the axial compressive load related to observed differences in pile lateral response are discussed.INTRODUCTIONTwo instrumented test piles were simultaneously subjected to a static lateral load with one of the piles also subject to a combined axial load during testing. The load test program was part of a floodwall improvement project in Kansas City, Kansas. Known as the BPU floodwall, the floodwall runs along the south bank of the Missouri River at a Kansas City Board of Public Utilities power generation and water treatment facility. The project location is shown in Fig. 1.Drilled, 2-ft (610-mm) diameter piles were designated by the designer, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE), as the foundation type for supporting extended floodwall footings. The drilled piles are fully cased, cast-in-place concrete, reinforced with a steel 12x74 (310x110) H-pile. In order to test soil lateral response and pile structural response under combined loading, the COE required that both a lateral test and combined lateral and axial test pile be constructed and tested. In order to most efficiently test both piles and to allow for simpler comparison, the two piles were simultaneously laterally loaded by jacking the piles apart, applying a maximum lateral load of 195 kips (867 kN). A constant axial load was applied to the combined test pile by kentledge prior to lateral loading and was maintained for the duration of the lateral load test. The total weight of the kentledge was 61.5 kips (274 kN). Fig. 2 shows the test setup."

Jan 1, 2017

By Joe Harris

Large structures, such as a multistory office building or a large storage tank, are constructed the most economical way possible, which may involve a shallow foundation system placed on native soil or compacted fill material. Over the life of the structure, the foundation system may not perform as originally anticipated, leading to differential settlement. Minor differ- ential settlement is expected; however, settlement that exceeds allotted tolerance can render the structure inoperable. Compaction grouting is a well-known and accepted ground improvement technique that can be used to not only stabilize but relevel multistory buildings and large dia- meter storage tanks. Two projects, each with differing types of structures, were successfully remediated utilizing com- paction grouting as the primary method to remedy settlement.

Sep 1, 2023

By Jim Slatter, Ben Collingwood

"It is well known that the adoption of an appropriate construction methodology is critical to quality outcomes for bored piles (drilled shafts). Many case studies have been published documenting quality issues that have arisen due to a range of causes involving ground conditions, ground support, drilling and cleaning techniques, groundwater, concrete properties and concreting methods, amongst other things. Despite the body of published information, pile defects remain common in practice. The authors share over 40 years’ experience in the Australian piling industry and have participated in many hundreds of projects involving bored piles in design, construction and testing roles. It is the authors’ experience that many defects are caused by conditions or practices that are known to be problematic, but that are often not recognised or addressed at the time of the works. This paper provides an overview of industry practices and key factors relevant to quality outcomes. The authors draw upon their own construction experience, published case studies and guidelines, and observations from independent pile testing activities they have been involved in across the Australian piling industry. The intent of the paper is to provide a consolidated review of typical industry practices and to highlight key areas in which construction quality can be enhanced.INTRODUCTIONThere are many published studies of cases where bored piles have been constructed and found to have concrete defects. The authors have had personal involvement in many cases where the outcomes and learnings are not publically available. The nature and cause of defects is always dependent on site and project specific factors, and therefore methodologies and materials that produce satisfactory outcomes in certain circumstances may be problematic elsewhere. The process of bored pile construction encompasses the following key areas:??excavation and ground support;??pile preparation and cleaning;??pile reinforcement and fitments.??concrete supply and mix performance;??concrete placement methodology;Each of these elements is equally important and can influence construction quality in completed piles. In the authors’ experience, it is often a combination of seemingly minor issues that leads to significant defects in piles. Conversely, attention to detail in all aspects of bored pile construction is required to produce outcomes of a consistently high standard."

Jan 1, 1900

By Takeo Asanuma, Sachihiko Tokunaga, Hirofumi Taguchi, Yasuhiro Ootsuka, Yosuke Tanaka

The Cement Deep Mixing Method (CDM Method) is a ground improving method that has been used for mainly offshore sites to strengthen the soft ground below the sea bottom by injecting and adequately mixing cement slurry with soft soil into the ground to form a ground-improving column. In recent years, the CDM Method has increasingly been adopted for ground- improving work as part of liquefaction countermeasures and earthquake-resistant reinforcement in the shallow waters of river mouths and inland waters. In consequence of that, a pontoon-mounted CDM Method (CDM- FLOAT Method) has been developed for shallow waters, which is equipped with a land-type mixing machine combined with system management equipment and a tide level-based control function. This CDM-FLOAT Method can be deployed at work sites where the conventional offshore-use CDM barge cannot be employed. This report describes the CDM-FLOAT Method and the scope of applications together with construction work procedures, and a representative case of use of the CDM-FLOAT Method is introduced as an example of earthquake-resistant reinforcement of the existing embankment of a canal.

Jan 1, 2015

By Rangaswamy. K, Naga Sivaji

A stone column is one of the most commonly employed methods of ground improvement techniques. This method used to increase the strength, decrease the compressibility of loose granular and finegrained soils. Also, it accelerates the consolidation in clays and reduces the liquefaction potential of sands and silt soils. In general, the stone column contains 15 to 75mm stone aggregates. In reality, it is not easy to avail the natural stone aggregates due to unavailability in locally nearby places. Present work aims to replace the stones partially or entirely by scrap tyre chips as an alternative material. The utilisation of recycled tyre chips in ground improvement is an environmentally friendly solution and avoid the disposal of tyre chip waste in large pits. Model tests conducted on marine clay with encased end bearing stone columns (ESC) constructed with a mixture of stone aggregate and tyre chips with sizes 4.75 to 10mm. The column diameter is 75 mm, L/d ratio maintained to 5.3. Non-woven geotextile wrapped encased stone column has introduced in the soft marine clay model. Encasement prevents the lateral squeezing of aggregates into the surrounding clay and protects the drainage function of the stone column. A set of load-settlement tests were conducted on both the clay model and clay model treated with the stones-tyre chips column. The model was loaded by the tri-axial loading frame. Shear strength parameters of stones and tyre chips were determined by large size direct shear tests. Model test results are concluding that the load-carrying capacity of the clay is improved significantly after installing the stone column in it. The encasement increases the load-carrying capacity and stiffness of the ordinary stone column. It is also proved that the stone aggregate could be replaced partially by tyre chips up to 60% without a significant reduction in its performance.

Nov 1, 2022

By Dr. Anup Kumar Mandal, Partha Roy, Shuvranshu Kumar Rout, Dipak Mandal, Biswajit Das

Installation of a new scalping station with bunker, apron feeder, scalping screen, ramp -retaining wall and approach bridge was planned in an existing integrated complex of phosphate fertilizer at a remote place in West Africa. Rock phosphate ROM, transported from mines by a combination of 100 Ton and 150 Ton dumper, would be fed to a steel bunker having capacity of 180 m3. Different options were studied for retaining wall at the junction of ramp and approach bridge. Initially options with conventional RCC Retaining Wall, Gravity Retaining Wall with Precast Concrete Blocks and Reinforced Earth walls were studied. Option with Reinforced Earth was selected as this option was much more cost effective compared to other options. But real engineering challenges cropped up when competent execution contractors were not available nearby the site. To minimize the cost, an innovative option with Stepped Retaining wall was then studied. Geotechnical parameters of native soils, selected for the construction of the approach ramp were determined and it was found that with available poor geotechnical parameters of the native soils, design of stepped retaining wall would not be feasible with respect to available bearing capacity, subjected dead load, live load, operational load and earth pressure. A conscious effort was then made to make the design feasible by improving the geotechnical parameters of the retained earth of ramp near the retaining wall. In view of that, mix design with locally available materials like Silexite, Sand, Laterite, Gravel and Silt at different proportions was made and samples were tested in the laboratory to determine relevant geotechnical parameters. Based on the test results, a suitable mix was selected that had high shear strength, enhanced bearing capacity and improved coefficient of earth pressures. Design of stepped retaining wall was then made with the selected construction materials and construction completed. The plant was successfully commissioned in December. 2021.

Sep 1, 2022

By Leo Panian

Over the last decade, drilled and post-grouted micropile foundations have come to be increasingly relied upon for resisting seismic loads in building foundations on the West Coast. Micropiles have been successfully deployed in a range of soil conditions, in vertical as well as battered configurations, to support a variety of structural systems difficult soils. Their high load capacity in tension as well as in compression, their ability to be installed in confined spaces with minimal overhead clearance, and their ability to be directly tested in an installation have made them indispensable for seismic strengthening of existing structures. More recently, growing industry experience along with improvements in design guidelines have led to wider acceptance of micropiles among engineers and building officials. The increasing availability of the specialized materials, coupled with growing familiarity with drilling technologies among design-build contractors has made micropiles more cost-effective and competitive. For the first time, micropiles are finding applications in the construction of new buildings, where they are combined with shallow footings in hybrid foundations to efficiently resist seismic loads. These new applications rely on more intensive engineering analyses to evaluate the performance of micropile foundation systems and develop detailed requirements for design and construction. This paper describes the design approaches and the analytical methods for the seismic design of hybrid micropile foundations, and provides examples of recent construction projects that demonstrate the application.

Jan 1, 2010

By Patrick J. Hannigan, Seth Robertson, Frank Rausche, Rozbeh B. Moghaddam

The Top-Loaded Bi-Directional Test (“TLBT”) and the conventional Bi-Directional Load Test (“BDLT”) are full-scale load tests where loads are applied bi-directionally to the foundation element. The BDLT uses an embedded loading source consisting of a jack assembly with one or multiple hydraulic jacks located between two steel bearing plates. As the jack(s) within the jack assembly is/are pressurized, the plates receive the load from the jack(s) and transfer these loads to the foundation element. In the case of the TLBT, the loads are also applied bi-directionally to the foundation element. However, in the TLBT case, the loading source is located above the foundation head. With the TLBT’s non-embedded and reusable load assembly, the loads are applied to the foundation using the steel shaft bearing and base bearing plates cast within the foundation. These plates are connected to the load assembly at the foundation head via Grade 75 or Grade 150, threaded, steel bars. This paper presents comparison results from a full-scale load test performed by both bi-directional load testing methods on adjacent test shafts. Details regarding subsurface conditions as well as test shaft construction and installation are included for the comparison tests. Test results and corresponding analyses are presented and discussed in detail.

Sep 8, 2021

"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 George Burke

Of the three projects, particularly the extensive Nimitz II (downtown) project, a single system, which was part of the operation, was used to control the spoil. Spoil control was continuous with the work since a vacuum truck and crew was used to suck up the spoils as they came out of the borehole. So, the whole job was kept clean both during operations and at the end of the shifts. On the Sand Island project, a double system was used. Larger spoil quantities were contained within the shaft limits during the work and the cleanup or disposal of the spoils was performed during excavation.

Feb 10, 2003