Search Documents

By Tony Brunger, Abid O. Adekunte, George Munteanu, David Greentree

A number of novel solutions have been proposed in recent years as alternatives to props and tie-backs in deep excavation support e.g. Adekunte (2008), Deschamps et. al. (2008), Adekunte et al. (2010) and Adekunte (2014). A number of these non-standard restraining solutions involve the construction of permanent or temporary vertical or raking buttress piles that are rigidly connected to the excavation support wall at regular intervals along the wall run. This paper chiefly focuses on the design and construction of twin-vertical buttress piles as restraining systems behind or in front of embedded retaining walls. The system essentially relies on the push-pull mechanism that develops between the twin piles, to maintain the overall stability of the excavation support. The paper’s main areas of concentration include; finite element modelling, geostructural design, construction procedure, instrumentation and monitoring that are associated with the application of twin- buttress pile systems. These are supported with project details of three recently completed high-end luxurious residential developments in Greater London, England, on which the twin-buttress pile system was used to restrain the excavation support walls for the basements on the sites. The mode of application of the system varies across the three sites. While the system was adopted as a long term solution behind the retaining wall on one of the sites, it was designed and constructed for temporary use in front of the retaining walls on the other two sites. Instrumentation and monitoring results from all the sites show the non-traditional system to be safe and effective, whilst having significant beneficial effects on construction programme, sequence of works and project cost.

Jan 1, 2018

By D. Arentsen

Changing environmental laws, new operating requirements and the increasing accuracy with which the bearing capacity of driven piles can be calculated have all led to the development of hydraulic piling hammers, some very primitive, others very advanced. Users find it difficult to decide which model is the most suitable, because the specifications are neither uniform nor unamiguous. There are no standard specifications and, moreover, the majority of hammers are suitable only for a limited range of applications. For the user, however, it is important to choose a hammer which will meet future as well as current requirements and will not quickly become obsolete or be unsuitable for a particular job.

Jan 1, 1987

By Larry Stearns, Lori Tiefenthaler

Remediation of contaminated soil represents a significant market for application of Deep Soil Mixing (DSM). Eighty-one percent of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Superfund Program’s site remedies have involved contaminated soil. Contaminated soil is frequently treated by In-situ Solidification/Stabilization (ISS). ISS treatment of contaminated soil involves mixing binding agents into soil using DSM techniques. DSM is a core business for many DFI members. Members may improve and broaden their services to clients by learning about the recent ISS treatment of contaminated soil at a Superfund site. ISS treatment is part of the EPA-selected remedy for a Superfund Site in the metro New York City area. The property has seen heavy industrial use for more than a century. Soil at the site is contaminated with a variety of volatile organic compounds (VOCs), polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) including coal tars and heavy metals, principally arsenic and lead. Beginning in 2017 and continuing through 2018, approximately 150,000 cubic yards (115,000 cubic meters) of soil will be treated by ISS at the case study site. Portland cement and slag cement are mixed into the soil by DSM techniques using GPS guided excavators to immobilize the hazardous constituents within the treated soil. ISS treatment by DSM will contribute to redevelopment of this valuable property. This paper will describe ISS constructability and performance, case study grout mix design with geotechnical results for strength and permeability, and deep soil mixing techniques. INTRODUCTION In-situ solidification and stabilization (ISS) is a deep soil mixing (DSM) technique applied in the environmental remediation field to physically encapsulate, or chemically bind, contaminates of concern such that the impacts to human health and the environment are mitigated. Common remediation applications of ISS include mixing cementitious reagents into contaminated soils to form a monolithic mass with desired performance characteristics, and the installation of vertical subsurface walls designed to control groundwater movement. A key characteristic of ISS is that the contaminated soils are treated in their existing location at the project site and then are left in place after treatment. Typical performance characteristics of the ISS treated soils include improved unconfined compressive strength (UCS), reduced hydraulic conductivity (HC), and reduced leaching potential of soil contaminants. Increased shear resistance of the treated soil may also be a performance requirement where seismic loading is a concern.

Jan 1, 2018

By Donald Bruce, Mark Harris, Wesley Schmutzler, James Sanders

"This paper evaluates the history, construction and most importantly the performance of two remedial seepage cutoff walls installed in two major dams in the United States. Beaver Dam, on the White River in northwest Arkansas, was completed in 1966 and seepage through the karstic limestone under the embankment was apparent almost immediately upon filling of the reservoir. Several attempts to stop the seepage by grouting were unsuccessful. In 1994 a cutoff wall consisting of secant piles drilled with 32"" diameter down-the-hole hammers to a maximum depth of 185'?was completed and the seepage was reduced to a negligible amount. It has been over 20 years since the completion of the cutoff wall, and all indications are that the cutoff wall is performing as expected. Walter F. George Lock and Dam on the Chattahoochee River near Fort Gaines, Georgia, was completed in 1963 and suffered the same problem as Beaver Dam due to the limestone on which the dam was founded. Cutoff walls were installed in both embankments (1980s) and solved the problem in these areas, but under-seepage at the concrete lock, dam and spillway structures increased to the point that remediation was essential. The cutoff wall had to be installed through 110'?of water and another 100'?into rock upstream of an active dam that continued to generate electricity during the construction of the cutoff wall. A secant pile wall, in combination with a diaphragm wall, was completed in front of these structures in 2004. It has been over 10 years since the completion this cutoff wall and, again, the cutoff wall is performing as expected. The paper describes the construction of these cutoffs, but focuses on the long-term performance in terms of controlling seepage and piezometric levels.BEAVER DAMBeaver Dam is located on the White River, 609 miles above its mouth, in Carroll County, Northwest Arkansas. The construction of the dam and Beaver Reservoir was authorized on September 1954 by the Congressional Flood Control Act for purposes of water supply, flood control and hydroelectric power generation. The dam site was selected in 1957: construction began in November 1960 and was completed in June 1966. (FIG. 1)"

Jan 1, 2017

By A. M. Hanna

This paper presents the experimental investigation on the ultimate skin friction of batter piles. The model piles were pushed in medium dense sand deposits at different inclinations up to 30 with respect to the vertical and tested under axial compression loads. The decrease in the total skin resistance with increasing pile inclination can be explained in terms of the reduction of the ave­rage mobilized angle of friction between the pile shaft and sand. The analysis, which takes into account asymmetrical earth pressure distributions around the pile shaft, showed good agreement with experimental results.

Jan 1, 2010

By John B. Tieder

Arbitration is a legally recognized alternate litigation for the resolution of civil disputes. The parties agree, either before or after a dispute arises, to submit that dispute to an independent third party for resolution. The decision of that third party is binding on the parties. A decision of an arbitral tribunal, typically referred to as an "award," cannot be reviewed by a court except on very limited grounds, such as fraud. See, e.g., Va. Code 8.01-581.010. Indeed, an arbitral award is typically less subject to judicial review than the decision of a trial court, whose decisions are almost always subject to appellate review as a matter of right. Arbitration is typically the result of a contractual agreement between the parties to submit disputes to arbitration. On occasion, arbitration can be required by statute. For example, the California Department of Transportation requires the arbitration of all disputes arising under its contracts. Public Contract Code, Article 7.1 (§§10240-10240.13). There may be a question whether statutorily required arbitration is truly arbitration or an administrative law disputes resolution procedure. The significance of the difference is that the decisions of administrative law bodies are typically reviewable by a court of law as a matter of right while, as set forth above, arbitral awards are almost never reviewable.

Jan 1, 1988

By D. Kolymbas

A simple formula is introduced which allows the evaluation of dynamic pile tests. The following case is considered: The pile top is dynamically loaded by an impact. The velocity v of the pile top is recorded over the time. Let v1 and v2 be the first and the second maximum of this curve. Then, the pile bearing capacity (resulting from ideally plastic resistance at the pile wall and at the tip) can be set approximately equal to Z(v1- ½ v2), where Z is the impedance of the pile cross section. Due to the assumption of ideal plastic resistances, radiation damping needs not be taken into account. Material damping may be important in rate sensitive soils (such as clay, even if it is highly overconsolidated). A simple correction procedure for material damping is proposed.

Jan 1, 1989

By A. R. Gaba

Phase I of the Canary Wharf development in London's docklands involves the construction of six fifteen storey buildings located predominantly over water of the West India Docks. The buildings are supported on some 1000 No., 25m long, open ended steel tubular piles driven through 10m of dock water to found in dense sand at a depth of about 15m below dock bed level. The piles are of composite section with reinforced concrete within the upper 17m of the steel tube. Three trial piles were installed in the dock to investigate the driveability and performance of the driven steel tubular piles. The piles were subjected to dynamic and static load testing. Loads were applied in both vertical and horizontal directions. Vibrating wire strain gauges were installed on the inside of the steel piles, on the reinforcement and in the concrete to determine the relative proportions of the applied load carried by the steel tube and concrete infill and to establish how these proportions varied along the length of the piles. Inclinometers were also installed to monitor the lateral deflection of the piles. This paper describes the driving, construction and testing of the three trial piles. The results of the vertical and horizontal loading tests are discussed and comparisons are made between dynamic and static tests carried out on the piles.

Jan 1, 1989

By Derek J. Lennon

Ground conditions in central Glasgow generally comprise loose granular deposits overlying stiffer soils. CFA piling would normally be preferred for urban sites in these ground conditions, but flighting of the superficial deposits has on occasions resulted in building damage. Over the last five years rotary bored piling with vinyl polymer support fluid has proved to be an economic alternative to bentonite slurry. Two case histories in central Glasgow are described in this paper, one for piles founding in granular soils and one for piles founding into bedrock. A comparison is made between the methods required for disposal of the liquid waste from bentonite and vinyl polymer slurries.

Jan 1, 2006

By Bengt H. Fellenius

The bearing capacity equation?"the triple N formula"? is now about 50 years old. It was developed from theory of plastic resistance of metal to a cone being pressed into the surface of the metal, superpositioned by resistance due to shear in an interparticulate medium (soil; note, we are not dealing with metallurgy), and tempered by work necessary to move the footing into the medium. The equation (and its coefficients) was "confirmed" by tests on small footings placed at or near the surface of the soil. The equation is a basic tenet of every geotechnical textbook, manual, and code. Over the years, innumerable variations of the N-coefficients and adjustments to the equation have been published. The main assumption behind the bearing capacity equation is that a shear plane develops between two essentially otherwise unaffected bodies: the main soil body and a body comprised of the footing with some soil. Moreover, the notion is that a model footing placed at or near the surface of a soil would behave proportionally or similarly to a full-scale footing, or to even a same size footing (pile toe) placed at some depth in the ground. This is not in agreement with factual observations. It is suggested that the behavior of a small or large diameter footing as well as a pile toe is governed by compression of the soil below the footing or pile toe and not by "bearing capacity".

Jan 1, 1999

By G. Sauer

"More Skill is needed to avoid rather than to handle heavy ground loads." This finding, from a tunneling engineer of the nineteenth century, is still relevant today with all advanced sequential excavation and support methods available whether they are applied in the vertical or horizontal direction. Balanced contractual agreements and documents are important since they provide the spirit and climate at the site. This article aims to describe the means and measures for 'hand mined' shaft and tunnel support as they are available today. Some special construction elements and methods with a perspective in recent developments in order to avoid getting stuck in conservatism are presented as well. If we don't allow new methods, means and measures we may end up with the famous quote "Only women who have already proven they are able to give birth to a healthy baby are allowed to become pregnant!"

Jan 1, 2003

By Frank Rausche

Without doubt, driven piles are the most economical deep foundation element for a nearshore environment, providing for high bearing capacities and stiffness, quick installation times, assured quality by simple monitoring and inexpensive dynamic load testing during restrike testing. However, when the pile top elevation is several meters below water surface, questions often arise as to the most reliable and economical pile installation method. Frequently encountered, yet relatively expensive, solutions include driving inside a dewatered cofferdam, driving long piles that are later cut off below water surface, or using an underwater hammer. Arguably, the most economical solution is driving the piles with a follower or chaser. However, many foundation engineers shy away from this solution because of the uncertainty associated with the transfer of energy through the interface between follower and pile, the associated potential driveability problems and maybe the limited fatigue life of the follower. This paper will demonstrate how the driveability of a hammer-follower-pile-soil system should be analyzed prior to installation and how to model the pile-follower interface both for steel and concrete piles. As an example, results will be presented which were obtained for both steel pipe piles and precast concrete piles, driven by a single-acting diesel hammer through a steel follower for a pre-construction test pile program in Venice, Italy. While analysis of the steel pile-follower system was straightforward, for the concrete piles, the presence of a soft cushion material whose material properties changed continuously posed some difficulty. Pile Driving Analyzer® measurements and CAPWAP® analysis yielded not only realistic stresses and transferred energy values in the pile, but also reasonable model parameters for further use in a pure wave equation analysis. As a side note for clarity, the dynamic measurements and analysis results herein presented are based on the GRLWEAP and CAPWAP software. GRLWEAP is commonly used all around the world for the preparation of pile driving jobs. The program either yields a bearing graph that relates bearing capacity and pile stresses to blow count or set per blow or it predicts blow counts and pile stresses as a function of pile penetration. These results allow the contractor to estimate driving time and select an economical hammer and driving system for a safe and efficient installation. CAPWAP on the other hand is the analysis of choice once a pile has been installed and records of pile top force and velocity have been acquired during installation or during a restrike test. CAPWAP is a signal matching program which calculates for one particular impact (for example at the end of driving) the static and dynamic soil parameters. Its final results include the calculated resistance distribution, the complete stress history in the pile and also a simulated load set curve. The CAPWAP calculated dynamic soil parameters can also be used in a Refined GRLWEAP analysis to generate a calibrated bearing graph."

Jan 1, 2006

By T. Iwanowski

Stress wave measurements and calculations are often used to make a safe determination of the bearing capacity and the integrity of driven piles. Some applications to the restoration of old buildings in the Old Town of Stockholm are referred to and especially analyses of measurements combined with simulations are discussed here.

Jan 1, 1991

After the Loma Prieta Earthquake, which caused major damage to viaducts in the Bay Area, the California Department of Transportation set up a test programme for foundation piles. Funderingstechnieken Verstraeten B.V., beter known as Fundex, was approached, since one of the piling systems of Fundex, named Tubex, is extremely suitable in areas sensitive to earthquakes and we were very much interested to prove the capabilities of this piling system. Equipment For the installation of Tubex and Tubex grout-injection piles special piling equipment is required. Since our company is not only a contractor, but also a designer and manufacturer of piling equipment, all special equipment for our range of foundation techniques is designed and built by our own piling equipment department. For the installation of both Tubex piles and Tubex grout-injection piles for the Caltrans test programme, the following pieces of equipment were selected: a) Fundex F12 piling rig b) Drill table c) Hydraulic powerpack d) Grout mixing unit and high pressure pump

Jan 1, 1993

By M. Mets

Pile foundations have been used in Estonia since the beginning of 1960's. To evaluate the capacity of piles nearly 2,500 pile tests and 1,800 pile loading tests Have been carried out. The pile foundations of nearly 150 houses are under settlement observations.

Jan 1, 2000

By M. Tominaga

An industrial port complex was constructed on the west coast of Leyte Island The work was started in December 1981 and completed in May 1984. This port complex includes a 665 m long wharf and can accommodate vessels ranging from a 60,000 DWT ore carrier to a 4 000 DWT general cargo ship. It now handles materials for and products from a copper smelter with an annual capacity of 130,000 t and a fertilizer plant with an annual capacity of 900,000 t. The Wharf structures consist mainly of interlocked steel pipe piles, steel sheet piles and steel pipe Piles. Material handling equipment such as unloaders, shiploaders, etc. were installed on the wharf. Site survey, planning, engineering design and construction aspects of the port development are discussed in this paper with particular emphasis on the wharf structure.

Jan 1, 2010

By John S. Pack

The last 25 years have seen rapid expansion in the use of helical screw pile foundations and tiebacks for new and retrofit construction of buildings and earth retention structures. An estimated $100 million was spent in 2002 on helical foundations and tiebacks in the United States alone. While design information is available in the literature, information regarding quality control, inspection and performance monitoring is lacking. Recognition of at least one manufacturer's helical foundation material by the Uniform Building Code, Standard Building Code, and BOCA (all three codes now combined into the ICC International Building Code) has given added urgency to the dissemination of reliable and practical quality control, inspection and performance monitoring procedures. This paper describes a set of such procedures that have been followed for 17 years by engineers experienced in the industry who have directly installed or been involved in the installation of over 140,000 helical foundations and tiebacks in divers soil conditions for various types of structures, including earth retention structures. Topics covered include design responsibility, building code listings and requirements, manufacturer ISO certification, manufacturing process, material and installation specifications, installation contractor certification, field placement, installation procedures, field inspection, building code inspection and performance monitoring. The paper concludes with a step by step example of practical quality control, inspection and performance monitoring procedures on a typical helical foundation project.

Jan 1, 2003

By Dennis J. Riley

A. This outline addresses what a sub-contractor, or a subsub-contractor should do to get paid in the event the general contractor or building owner files for bankruptcy. B. Negotiating payment terms. Progress payments vs. "pay when paid". How a sub or subsub can avoid financing the contract. C. Court interpretation of "pay when paid" clauses allow postponement not excusal of payment. See, e.g., Seal Tite Corporation v. Ehret. Inc., 589 F. Supp. 701 (D.N.J. 1984) (where the court held that the general contractor could not delay payment indefinitely to the subcontractor in the event of non-payment from the owner); United Plate Glass Co. v. Metal Industries. Inc., 525 A.2d 468 (Commw. Ct. Pa. 1987) (where the court held that payment from owner was not a condition precedent to paying subcontractor but instead a timing mechanism indicating when payment should be made); But see. Straham v. Landis Construction Co., 499 So. 2d 417 (La. App. 4 Cir. 1986) (where the court strictly interpreted the "pay when paid" clause).

Jan 1, 1991

By Gray Mullins

A post grouted drilled shaft foundation system was successfully used in place of the specified driven pile foundation system as a Value Engineering Cost Proposal (VECP) for the new PGA Boulevard Grade Separation Project. Pressure grouting the cohesionless sandy soils at the drilled shaft base significantly increased the end bearing capacity and stiffness allowing drilled shafts to be the more cost effective foundation system. The post grouted drilled shaft option also provided other benefits including reducing owners risk normally associated with pile driving vibrations and offered a high level of quality assurance for the drilled shafts. This paper discusses the implementation of post grouted drilled shafts from design to completion of construction. A design procedure for post grouted drilled shafts developed by the University of South Florida was used for initial VECP evaluation. Prior to construction, two instrumented test shafts were installed and load tested, one of which was post grouted. Therein, the design procedure was calibrated, tip elevations for production shafts were refined, drilled shaft construction and grouting procedures were demonstrated, and a grouting criteria was developed for the project.

Jan 1, 2003

By James J. Cahill

Contractor's working in an urban environment face a multitude of working conditions. There is no typical "Downtown" job site. From afar we just see the skyline, or up close a specific building. This, of course, does not give us a clue as to the site conditions the foundation contractor faced in doing his work. The open, downtown building site is still available on some projects, but they are becoming rare as our cities are becoming more developed. A typical site today might include any one or several of the following problems: A. Deep pit with no ramp access B. Multi-type known or unknown obstructions C. Height limitations D. Load restrictions E. Existing adjacent building founded on shallow foundation F. Existing foundations G. Existing tunnels, utilities or subways

Jan 1, 1991