Search Documents

By Brian H. Greene

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Pittsburgh District, is in the final phases of modernizing the locks and dams on the Monongahela River. One facet of this modernization is to replace the existing Locks 4 located on the Monongahela River approximately 40 river miles upstream from Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. The existing locks consist of a 56-foot x 720-foot main chamber and a riverside 56-foot x 360-foot auxiliary chamber built in the 1930s. Two new lock chambers, each 84-foot wide by 720-foot long, will be constructed at the location of existing Locks 4 and will be named Charleroi Locks. The purpose of the new project is to facilitate navigation on the lower Monongahela River. Pittsburgh is currently the second largest inland waterway port in the nation, and the new locks will be an important component of the navigational infrastructure. The existing lock walls are of mass concrete construction and are founded on wooden timber piles driven to rock through alluvial sands and gravels. The new lock walls were designed to be supported by approximately 300 reinforced concrete drilled shafts, varying in diameter from 4 to 6 feet. To handle axial loads, the drilled shafts were designed for end bearing, with some skin friction. The tips of the shafts will be founded within competent rock. Since the walls will undergo lateral loads, the drilled shaft design also had to consider this loading condition. Some of the drilled shafts will be installed within coffer boxes, which will incorporate a tremie concrete seal down to top of rock. Complicating the design even further was the fact that some portions of the new walls will be supported by shafts that extend some 9 feet above top of rock through alluvial soils, producing a cantilever effect. The first phase of the new lock construction was initiated in the summer of 2005 with a contract awarded to replace the river wall. This required shutting down the existing riverside lock chamber and diverting all river traffic to the longer existing land chamber. The foundation of the new river wall will use 144 drilled shafts. To optimize the design embedment of drilled shafts in rock for the river wall, an exploratory drilling program was conducted by the contractor in July and August, 2005. Based on the quality of the sedimentary bedrock, the shafts will be embedded in rock from 31 to 38 feet. To achieve adequate end bearing resistance, the tips of each shaft will extend through predominantly claystones into a more competent siltstone unit for a minimum embedment of one foot. The contractor also performed an exploratory pile driving program to aid in the construction of the drilled shaft casing and the cut off walls that will encapsulate the river wall. Two demonstration drilled shafts located outside the footprint of the new river wall, will be constructed prior to the drilling of any production shafts. The demonstration drilled shafts will verify that the contractor is able to meet the design criteria and quality requirements of the contract. The river wall contract is currently underway and is scheduled to be completed in 2010.

Jan 1, 2006

By Tobias Hansson

The quality of Lime Cement (L/C) columns is to a great extent dependent on the installation procedure. At a site in the south of Sweden, the client reported problems with the installed columns. To evaluate the operator and equipment dependent part of the installation, Hercules Grundläggning AB was appointed as a competitor to the site contractor. The purpose was to install a number of L/C columns with equal installation parameters for both contractors. A total of 65 test columns were installed in June 1999. The geology is a typical Swedish organic soil profile with a top layer of peat overlying gyttja and clay. Two different binders were used in the comparison; blast furnace slag with cement and lime with cement. After installation, the quality of the columns was monitored by penetration tests and a column sampler for extracting whole columns. The column penetration test were performed 28 and 134 days after installation and extraction 134 days after installation. Inspection and tests of the extracted columns showed that by using a fully computer controlled procedure, the contractor produces columns of superior quality and homogeneity.

Jan 1, 2000

By J. Matos e Silva

The paper refers five examples of executed diaphragm walls with one to five levels of anchorages. For each example a comparison is made between the results of the design using the traditional criteria and the Eurocode 7 recommendations. A comparison is also made with the behaviour of the diaphragm walls during the construction phase. From the referred examples the author presents his conclusions.

Jan 1, 2002

By Michael W. Oakland

Deer Island is the site of the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority (MWRA) wastewater treatment plant which, when completed in 1999, will serve 43 cities and towns in central eastern Massachusetts. Deer Island is located in the Boston Harbor, as shown on Figure 1. The existing wastewater treatment plant on Deer Island is being upgraded to include secondary treatment to comply with Federal require­ments. The new treatment facilities will process an average of 455 million gallons of sewage per day; total capacity will be about one billion gallons per day. The new treatment facilities will cover virtually the entire island. [ ]

Jan 1, 1994

By Clyde Baker

Drilled shafts for many situations offer an economical alternative to driven piles. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has spent considerable time and money in research and developing design and construction guidelines for drilled shafts. However, the full potential of the technology may not be realized because of the uncertainty of the effects of construction on the actual service behavior and the lack of either reliable quality control tests to check for or evaluate defects, or inexpensive load test procedures. Static load testing is very expensive and it is not feasible to load test each shaft on a project. Therefore, other means are necessary to confirm or evaluate the integrity of the completed drilled shaft or to determine the capacity of the completed shaft.

Jan 1, 1989

By J. Tanner Blackburn, James R. Gingery, Lisheng Shao

Rigid inclusions consist of grout columns installed using displacement auger or vibrated tooling. The columns are typically installed in an array to provide support for footings, mats, or embankments. Due to the relative small column diameter and low replacement ratio, the surrounding soils typically have minimal densification or improvement. A gravel load transfer platform is commonly used above the rigid inclusion head to distribute stresses more broadly to the supported structure. The axial stiffness and geotechnical engineering mechanics of rigid inclusion design are similar to those of deep foundation systems, but they are typically only lightly- or un-reinforced and are not structurally connected to the above-grade structure. The popularity of rigid inclusions is increasing in the Western U.S., where many urban areas are subject to moderate to high seismic hazard levels. However, the performance of rigid inclusions under seismic loading is poorly understood, and seldom addressed in current designs. The elements are brittle, with limited or no ductility and relatively low moment capacity, and therefore may be prone to damage under seismic loading. Three modes of seismic loading should be considered: inertial loading from the structure, kinematic loading from vertically propagating shear waves, and kinematic loading from ground failure- related permanent ground deformation. This paper focuses on the first two modes. A simplified procedure for evaluating kinematic and inertial loading of rigid inclusions is described, and its use is illustrated through application to a site in Southern California. The results show that moderate to severe kinematic loading can generate plastic hinges in the rigid inclusions. Engineering consequences of this hinging could include settlement or bearing failure. INTRODUCTION In this paper the term ‘rigid inclusion’ (RI) refers to grout or grouted aggregate columns that are installed using either drilled or vibration displacement techniques. They are commonly installed in arrays to support vertical loads from footings, mats, or embankments. RIs are not structurally connected to footings they support. Rather, it is typical for a dense gravel load transfer platform (LTP) to be installed as a cushion between the RI head and supported footing or new fill. In cases of RI support of fill embankments, the LTP may be reinforced with horizontal layers of geogrid.

Jan 1, 2018

By Prasenjit Basu

Drilled displacement piles are being increasingly used as foundation elements, particularly in projects requiring fast construction. Different types of drilled displacement (DD) piles are available in practice. DD piles are classified according to the drilling tool design and installation method. The capacity of a DD pile, depending on its type, is between the capacities of geometrically similar nondisplacement and full-displacement piles installed in the same soil profile. This paper provides an overview of the different types of DD piles and their installation techniques and describes three design methods used in practice. It also compares DD pile capacities obtained with these design methods for two different sites.

Jan 1, 2010

By L. F. Miao

Studies were carried out to investigate the ultimate soil pressure acting on pile(s) undergoing lateral soil movement in soft clay. A special apparatus has been designed to apply a uniform rectangular profile of lateral soil movement on the rigid pile(s) with pinned head and tip conditions to obtain the ultimate soil pressure. The piles were 16 mm (5/8 in) in diameter. For the pile group tests, the behavior of different number of piles (2, 3, 4, 6 and 9), pile arrangements and center-to-center spacings (3 and 6 diameters) were investigated. In this paper, the group factors of 11 combinations of number of piles, pile arrangements and pile spacings are presented. The group factors are given for individual piles in a pile group as well as for the entire group. Generally, the group factors of individual piles in a group varied significantly according to pile spacing in both directions, and pile arrangement; the group factor of the whole group reduced with an increasing number of piles, and increased with increasing pile spacing. For a pile group with the same number of piles but different pile arrangement, no significant difference was found in the group factors for the entire group.

Jan 1, 2008

By S. K. V. Avasarala

This paper presents a case history of design, prediction, probe and production pile driving monitoring, loading tests and installation of over 3,300 prestressed concrete piles for a building complex consisting of 12, 5- and 6-story over parking buildings. The project was recently completed in three-phases over a span of 4 years. The subsoil conditions were explored by performing 25, Standard Penetration Test (SPT) borings throughout the site. Various types of driven pile foundations were considered and following an evaluation of high structural loads and site-specific constraints such as variable depth of bearing layer of Florida limestone and quality of clay and limestone layers, a prestressed concrete pile support system was selected as the most economical and effective foundation approach. The building foundations were designed for a pile capacity of 353 kN (40 tons) in compression, 45 kN (5 tons) in lateral capacity for a deflection of 0.64 cm (0.25 in.), and 133 kN (15 tons) in uplift capacity. The axial and lateral allowable pile capacity and lengths were predicted using SPT91 and LPILE computer programs, which are generally used in Florida. The validation of these capacities was derived from 144 probe piles and performance of 12 pile loading tests on selected probe piles. Prior to installation of probe or production piles, a termination criterion was established using 1-dimensional wave equation analyses in addition to the design pile embedment requirement. The predicted pile capacities compared very well with the capacities from the loading tests on probe piles. This information was effectively utilized as part of the overall quality control program to install a total of 4,186 prestressed concrete piles (including 144 probe piles) in different building areas across the project site to depths ranging from 8 to 21 m (25 to 90 ft) below existing ground elevation as part of foundation support system. This engineered, monitored, and tested foundation solution provided an effective and satisfactory basis for completion and approval of the foundation work for this 12, 5- and 6-story over parking building complex. A recent reconnaissance has indicated that all the building foundations are performing satisfactorily.

Jan 1, 1995

By Carlos A. Prato, Federico Pinto

"ABSTRACTThe design of drilled shafts often incorporates large factors of safety, for which settlements under service loads are highly influenced by the initial elastic stiffness. In the case of groups of drilled shafts with typical spacing, the elastic shaft-soil-shaft interaction dominates the behavior even for loads close to the bearing capacity, for which the initial stiffness is a key parameter in the design. This paper describes typical trends in results obtained by means of different approaches currently available in the literature for the evaluation of the initial stiffness of a single shaft. An experimental technique that provides a rapid and inexpensive means for the evaluation of the initial stiffness is described, and the results obtained for typical cases are compared with analytical predictions.IntroductionThe behavior of drilled shafts under axial loads is generally governed by the initial stiffness, as the factors of safety considered in design are often large, due to a superposition of conservative assumptions on soil properties and expected loads. In the case of shaft groups, the initial elastic stiffness plays a major role together with the elastic group effects, as nonlinearities tend to localize around the shafts and have a lesser effect than elastic deformations on adjacent elements (e.g., Leung et al., 2010). An accurate characterization of the initial stiffness is thus warranted for the analysis of drilled shafts and shaft groups under service loads.Initial stiffness of shafts may be estimated on the basis of soil stiffness and structural properties of the element by means of numerical methods (e.g., Pinto and Prato, 2006), as well as analytical methods (e.g., Randolph and Wroth, 1978). The soil stiffness may be determined by means of geophysical tests (e.g., Spectral Analysis of Surface Waves, SASW, Stokoe et al., 1994), or correlations with Standar Penetration Test (SPT) blowcounts or Cone Penetration Test (CPT) resistances (e.g., Sabatini et al., 2002).The initial stiffness may also be measured on drilled shafts by means of load tests. Static load tests (SLT), however, have some limitations on measuring small deflections, for which the initial stiffness is often extrapolated by means of large strain measurements (e.g., Chin, 1970), where the SLT measurements are more accurate."

Jan 1, 2014

By Donald A. Bruce

"Abstract The Deep Mixing Methods (DMM), in their current forms, have been employed in the United States since 1986, although an earlier version had seen service from 1954. The earlier developments were strongly influenced by practices in the Nordic countries and Japan, while by the late 1980’s several DMM systems had been developed in the U.S. itself. Since then, DMM has continued its evolution, principally via the challenges of a series of large, landmark projects, but also via distinct, significant technological advances. This paper highlights the key points in the history of DMM in the U.S., and provides an overview of the different methods currently in use.In the BeginningIt is a common misconception that the history of applications of the Deep Mixing Methods (DMM) in the United States dates from 1986 when SMW Seiko Inc. — a subsidiary of Japan’s Seiko Kogyo Company — was established in the Bay Area. However, the author believes that Intrusion Prepakt Co.’s patented MIP (Mixed in Place) system had been used, albeit sporadically (about 30 projects are recorded), since 1954 (FHWA 2000, 2001). Ironically, by 1961 this single auger method had been extensively used under license in Japan for excavation support and groundwater control — by the Seiko Kogyo Company. By 1972, the original MIP technique had been succeeded by more advanced Japanese methods, involving multiple augers. Intrusion Prepakt have long since become defunct.The first systematic studies of contemporary Deep Mixing Methods in Japan began in 1967 when the Port and Harbor Research Institute of the Ministry of Transportation began laboratory testing using granular and powdered lime for treating soft marine soils. Fundamental studies continued through the early 1970’s, by which time the development of industrial scale equipment was well advanced, having its first application on a marine trial near Haneda Airport. Coincidentally, laboratory and field research also began in 1967 in Sweden (“Swedish Lime Column Method”) for treating soft clays using unslaked lime. Reportedly the progenitor was a Norwegian, Kjeld Paus, who had made observations on fluid lime columns in the U.S. It would seem that developments in Japan and the Nordic countries proceeded independently until 1975 when the technology leaders from each group (Broms and Boman; and Okumura and Terashi, respectively) presented their — very similar — findings at a conference in Bangalore, India. Limited technical exchanges ensued thereafter.Whereas the Nordic developments continued to focus on the use of dry reagents (cement and lime) and relatively light equipment compatible with operating on and in very soft clays and organics, the Japanese progressed into the use of fluid reagents (cement-based grouts) and heavier equipment for both marine and land-based projects. Thus, by 1986, there were a large number of proprietary (wet and dry) DMM systems in Japan, and a rapidly growing market already by then accounting for over 12,000,000 m3 of ground treatment."

Jan 1, 2014

By James V. Errico

On October 1, 1993 the regulations for assessing and cleaning up contaminated soil and groundwater in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts were revised. These new regulations, known as the Massachusetts Contingency Plan (MCP) 310 CMR 40.0000, were developed to keep routine releases out of the regulatory system and rely on private parties to handle most releases without Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) oversight. An integral part of the new MCP is the Licensed Site Professional (LSP). An LSP is required to handle activities and render opinions once a site enters the MCP. These regulations must be adhered to where ever a release has occurred, including construction sites. A brief overview of the new MCP is given below; see attached MCP Flowchart for graphical summary. Entering the MCP Process A release of oil or hazardous material (OHM) to the soil or groundwater above applicable reportable quantities (RQ's) or reportable concentrations (RC's) will require notification to the DEP and compliance with applicable provisions of the MCP. RQ's and RC's are listed in the MCP (310 CMR 40.1600) for most compounds that are typically encountered. For each compound there are two RC's for soil (S-1 and S-2) and two for groundwater (GW-1 and GW-2). The S-1 and GW-1 RC's apply to sites that are environmentally more sensitive, as a result they are lower than the S-2 and GW-2 RC's.

Jan 1, 1994

By P. A. Neill, O&apos

The caisson foundation for Vent Building No. 6, at the southern landfall of Boston's Third Harbor Tunnel, was installed inside an unbraced concrete cofferdam 250 feet in diameter and about 70 feet deep. As a spectacular engineering feat, the cofferdam itself certainly ranks first. However, the foundation work within was no routine caisson job and made its own contribution to the state of the art. Comprised of 5 ft. diameter caissons socketed 10 to 16 feet in sound rock, it posed serious challenges in logistics, space limitations and time, requiring development of unique, purpose-made equipment. The unexpected discovery of significant depths of shattered rock overlying acceptable sound rock, along with other surprises of lesser import, compounded the problems. How these challenges were planned for, met and overcome is the subject of this paper.

Jan 1, 1994

By Moi Arzamendi, Jose Ramirez, Kenneth Kniss, Sunil Arora, James Gingery

Construction of a new approach embankment for a railroad bridge over a river in Southern California required placing up to 12 ft of fill over soft to medium stiff silts and clays along an approximate 1,500-ft long stretch. The embankment, situated within a narrow railroad right-of-way between an existing live track and existing buildings, would have been susceptible to excessive settlement that could damage existing buildings and numerous underground utilities if regular weight soil fill had been placed over the unimproved ground. To limit total and differential static settlements to tolerable levels, a design was developed using a combination of mechanically stabilized earth wall with lightweight cellular concrete fill and rigid inclusions ground improvement. This paper describes the design of the ground improvement system, construction methods used, and challenges of working next to live railroad traffic. Ground improvement quality control and assurance measures, and verification of performance by settlement monitoring are also addressed. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND The 0.9-mile San Diego River Double Track (SDRDT) project is located on the Los Angeles-San Diego- San Luis Obispo (LOSSAN) Corridor in San Diego, California. The project includes the replacement of the existing 900-ft long single track railroad bridge over the San Diego River with twin double track structures. Construction of the project is phased and closely coordinated with the associated Mid-Coast light rail project (San Diego Trolley Blue Line Extension). The new bridge is a 7-span, twin steel, through girder structure supported by six cast-in-place reinforced concrete pier caps and two abutments. The large diameter cast-in-drilled-hole (CIDH) foundations are up to 9 ft in diameter, with upper portions encased in a 1.5-in.-thick permanent steel casing. The north abutment approach embankment includes a mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) retaining wall up to approximately 10 ft high and 1,520 ft long. This paper focuses on the design and construction of the north approach embankment. The project site is characterized by challenging geotechnical and seismic conditions. The site contains liquefiable soils interbedded with soft cohesive soils, underlain by competent layers of sand/gravel/cobble and other sedimentary formations. Static settlement of the new railroad, crossing utilities and adjacent buildings was a primary design concern for the north approach embankment.

Jan 1, 2018

By James W. Weaver

The 2,120-foot long cable stayed Penobscot Narrows Bridge that carries US Route 1 over the Penobscot River between Verona Island and Prospect, Maine is supported on four foundation units, one below each pylon and one at each abutment. Due to varying subsurface conditions along the bridge alignment, the structure was designed to be supported on foundations consisting of high-capacity steel H-section piles (Verona Pylon), a mat bearing on a prepared bedrock surface (Prospect Pylon) and spread footings bearing on compacted rockfill (abutments). The 70-foot by 80-foot (plan area) Verona Pylon foundation was designed to be supported by 288, 430-kip design capacity steel H-section piles (HP14x117, 50 ksi steel) driven through up to 100 feet of dense glacial till deposits containing cobbles and boulders up to 3 feet in diameter. The piles were installed using a single-acting diesel hammer (Delmag D62-22) with a maximum rated energy of 165 kip-ft. Thirteen representative piles were selected for dynamic testing (ASTM D-4945) to verify pile capacity, hammer efficiency and pile stresses. Dynamic testing determined that four different pile driving criteria were needed across the site due to variation in the bedrock and soil resistance below the footing plan area. Approximately 4 percent of the production piles were damaged/rejected due to misalignment and/or damage as a result of encountering the cobbles and boulders embedded in the glacial till. The rejected piles were located randomly throughout the plan limits of the foundation mat. Subsequent structural analyses indicated that the foundation was capable of safely supporting the design loads without the need for installing replacement piles. Evaluation of dynamic testing results with signal matching and pile driving records provided valuable information on pile side and tip resistance. Evaluations were made regarding predicted versus actual pile lengths, pile bearing material, distribution of skin friction and end bearing capacities.

Jan 1, 2011

By Rolf Katzenbach

Construction of drilled shaft foundations with the use of hydraulic oscillators and rotators to install temporary casing over the full depth of the shaft is described. The equipment and techniques were developed in the 1960?s in Germany and full-depth casing is now the predominant method of construction in Europe. Its use in North America is increasing. This paper presents an overview of full-depth casing methods and a summary of available load test data evaluated by the authors to compare the load transfer and capacity performance of shafts installed by various construction methods. Results demonstrate that load transfer and capacity of full-depth casing shafts are equal to or exceed that of shafts constructed by dry or slurry methods and that measured capacities are consistent with generally accepted design equations. The principal advantage of full-depth casing methods over other installation techniques is that the risk of defects in the shaft is minimized. Casing is able to penetrate into the ground under any geologic or groundwater condition when this technique is applied. Potential delays and cost overruns can thus be avoided and a safe, economical foundation element is created.

Jan 1, 2007

By Shahid Islam, Lucian Bogdan

Deep and large diameter drilled shafts use mostly bundles of Grade 60 (415 MPa) reinforcing bars as longitudinal reinforcement with rebar splices to make it longer. Lower Grade steel requires large number of bars which result in rebar congestion and difficulty in placing concrete. This leads to increased labor cost for fabrication and installation. By utilizing larger size and higher strength threadbar, the congestion of rebar can be reduced significantly and bundling of bars can be avoided. The lap splices are replaced with simple threaded couplers and end hooks are replaced with end terminators. Threadbar conforms to ASTM A615-15 and can be epoxy coated if required for corrosion protection. This paper describes an attractive value engineering of replacing Grade 60 (415 MPa) bundle of rebars with larger diameter Grade 75 (515 MPa), Grade 80 (550 MPa) and Grade 100 (690 MPa) threaded bars and threaded couplers in some specific drilled shaft projects in the USA. INTRODUCTION A drilled shaft which may also be referred to as drilled piers, caissons, cast-in-drilled-hole piles and bored piles is the key element to the foundation of massive structure. They are used for tall buildings, bridges and foundations for other applications such as retaining walls, sound walls, signs, or high mast lighting. Drilled shaft foundations are typically 3 to 12 feet (0.9m to 3.7m) in diameter cast-in-place deep foundation elements constructed in a drilled hole that is stabilized to allow controlled placement of reinforcing steel and concrete. Drilled shafts for transportation structures are commonly used to depths of up to 200 ft (61m) in the USA. Drilled shafts can be installed in a variety of soil and rock profiles, and are most efficiently utilized where a strong bearing layer is present. The reinforcing cage is typically lowered into position within the hole and then concrete placed through the center of the shaft, flowing from bottom to top through the reinforcement to fill the hole.

Jan 1, 2018

By A. Frits van Tol, Rodriaan Spruit, Jan H. van Dalen

"Abstract In recent years, there have been major problems with deep excavations in urban areas supported by diaphragm walls. In some cases, like the fatal Nicoll Highway collapse in Singapore the quality of the D-walls was not the cause. However in other projects, like the problems with the major leak in the walls of the Boston Big Dig and with leakage in a few projects in Belgium and The Netherlands was related to poor D-wall quality. Leakage through the D-walls at the joints in deep excavations led in these cases to very serious settlement behind the walls, in the case of the North- South line in Amsterdam, there was severe damage to historical buildings. This paper describes ongoing research that focusses i on acquiring more knowledge on and improvement of D-wall installation, in particular the flow process prior and during casting ii on the detection of anomalies prior to excavation and iii on the composition of the concrete mixture in view of a better and more sustainable concrete quality of D-walls.INTRODUCTIONIn the case of deep excavations in urban areas close to neighbouring buildings, diaphragm walls are one of the best feasible solutions for the retaining structure. Although the costs of D-walls generally exceed the costs of alternative wall solutions, the advantages are decisive in many situations. The main advantages of D-walls are the limited impact of the installation on the built environment, the high stiffness and bearing capacity and the retention of water, even at considerable depths. This makes Dwalls often the preferred solution for deep excavations Sometimes the D-walls are the temporary support while for the final stage a complete concrete box is constructed in the excavation. In many other cases the D-wall has the permanent function of retaining soil as well as groundwater.In the last ten years, there have been major problems with deep excavations in urban areas supported by diaphragm walls. In some cases, like the fatal Nicoll Highway collapse, 2004 , the quality of the Dwalls was not the cause. In other important failures like the collapse of the Archives in Cologne, 2008 and Dubai Infinity Tower Flooding, 2007 a combination of design and quality issues played a role. However, the major leak in the walls of the Boston Big Dig was related to poor D-wall quality (McNichol, 2000). Van Tol et al, (2010) describe a number of case studies in Belgium and the Netherlands, with leakage through the D-walls at stop end joints. In several cases with deep excavations these leakage caused serious surface settlements behind the walls. In the case of the North-South line in Amsterdam, there was severe damage to historical buildings. All these cases have generated considerable additional costs and delays, and subsequently public and political concern. Van Tol et al. (2010) present several possibilities to improve the quality of D-walls.Other disputes related to D-walls deal with the quality of the concrete and the sustainability of D-walls applied as a permanent wall. In particular the porosity of the concrete cover is sometimes problematic."

Jan 1, 2014

By L. F. Albert

The paper describes solutions given to foundation problems during the reconstruction of a power plant set on fire, located adjacent to several still Working Units. After a detailed site and laboratory investigation, it was decided that it could be possible to include within the new foundations the preexisting cast in situ driven piles with enlarged base 50 cm in diameter and let them work with new 41 cm driven, cast in situ piles without enlarged base. Demolition of existing caps was carried out with expansive mortar in order to avoid any possible damage to piles, whose actual conditions were checked by several load tests. New piles were designed to support service load by shaft resistance, in order to limit total and differential settlement. When piles had to be driven adjacent to nearby structures, measurements of peak soil particles velocity were carried out while driving piles at decreasing distance from critical locations. By preboring most of the upper clay layer it was possible to reduce within safe limits for structures the induced vibrations.

Jan 1, 1989

By Walter Ensinger

Special foundation works is one of the most innovative sectors in civil engineering and construction. Both engineering techniques and construction machinery are undergoing continu­ous further development. These developments are providing ways to meeting the world-wide requirement for special geotechnical works even faster, even better and more efficiently. Unfortunately, accident prevention organisations have had to realise that the figures on in­dustrial accidents in special foundation works are still above average in number. The Safety & Environmental Working Group of the EFFC thereupon started to carry out a survey on acci­dents occurring in this sector and used this information as a basis for the preparation of acci­dent statistics and an accident analysis. The objective of this undertaking is to determine key accident occurrences and their causes and to consequently determine measures for improved health and industrial safety.

Jan 1, 2002