Search Documents

By Gary L. Seider

Chance, a Division of Hubbell Power Systems, Inc., in conjunction with Sailors Engineering, Inc. has updated its Helical Design Capacity Software. This latest version, ?HeliCAP® v2.0?, is a state-of-the-art helical anchor and pile capacity program designed to operate in the Microsoft® environment. The program calculates the tension and compression capacity along with the frictional capacity, if applicable, of CHANCE® Civil Construction helical anchors and piles using design theories and methods adopted by Chance. This paper details the current state of practice employed by the software in the design methods and installation methodologies of helical anchors and piles.

Jan 1, 2007

By Graeme Smart, Thomas Fiala

"Yorkville Plaza II, a 40-storey signature condominium residence, is scheduled to open on Avenue Road in Toronto’s prestigious Bloor-Yorkville neighbourhood in spring 2017. In close proximity to Toronto’s subway system, the new tower requires six levels of underground parking, founded in wet, silty sand.Isherwood Geostructural Engineers (Isherwood) was retained in April 2012 by developer Camrost-Felcorp to provide a shoring and excavation solution to address the challenging site conditions. A 31-storey upscale residential building under renovation with three levels of parking, owned by Camrost-Felcorp, flanks the site on the north. Situated on the eastern border is a 7-storey building with three levels of parking. Avenue Road, a four-lane arterial road that brings heavy commuter traffic into downtown Toronto, runs along the western border, and on the southern border of the site is a busy City road that brings traffic into the popular Yorkville area. The tunnel for the Toronto Transit Commission’s (TTC) overburdened east-west subway is located 14.5 m to the south, running below an existing 26-storey neighbouring building. Electrical and communication utilities (Bell) are closely located along the southern side. Non-documented existing excavation shoring, installed in the early 1970s, on the southern and western sides compounded the difficulties presented by the TTC tunnel.This paper presents the unique, non-conventional hybrid shoring solutions Isherwood developed to address the challenges presented by the site, as well as other complications that surfaced during the project: non-encroachment requirements (no tiebacks) beneath uncooperative neighbours, tight geometry to install shoring, and Toronto’s two coldest winters in decades.THE PROJECTBecause of circumstances associated with this site, for this project Isherwood designed two unique shoring walls which drew on their experience and expertise they had gained over the last 40 years. The following is the story of this site:Yorkville is an affluent neighbourhood in the heart of Toronto with a vibrant mix of high-rise towers, residential homes, tony restaurants and flagship shops. The development requires six levels of underground parking (a 20m deep excavation), with three levels undermining the high-rise buildings to the north and east and extending into wet, silty sand.Isherwood was retained in the spring of 2012 to design the excavation shoring. Isherwood’s scope also included field support, design, verification and monitoring. Finite Element Analysis was employed to confirm Isherwood’s design and anticipated movement of the south shoring wall and the TTC subway tunnel.The existing site was severed in two, with the proposed condominium tower slated for the southern portion. On the north half of the site stands a 31-storey building (Yorkville Plaza I at 21 Avenue Road), with three levels of underground parking, sitting on belled caissons which were one foot from the back of the proposed shoring wall so this would have to be considered in relation to the design and drilling methods. Constructed in the early 1970s, Yorkville Plaza I is currently being converted from the Four Seasons hotel to luxury condominiums by Camrost-Felcorp. To the east, directly adjacent to the proposed shoring, stands a 7-storey building (164 Cumberland Road) with three levels of parking, supported on spread footings founded on stiff clayey silt. The tunnel for the TTC’s busy east-west subway, a double box structure built by cut-and-cover in the 1960s, is located 14.5 m to the south, 9 m below grade, and running below an existing 26-storey building. Bell fibre optic communication cables and electrical lines, along with storm and sanitary sewers, are situated on the south and west sides of the site, leaving limited room to install shoring. Due to the heavy volume of commuter traffic on the four-lane arterial road (Avenue Road) to the west, site access and lane closure were not permitted here."

Jan 1, 2015

By Paul Thurlow, Richard K. Lipscombe

The measurement of deflection of designed diaphragm walls is critical for near real time information to assess wall and soil behaviour as the internal area is excavated in a controlled manner. Data enables the site team and designers to check performance of the design, which is linked to safeguarding the site and the external stakeholders.This paper documents the use of Shape Accel Arrays at the Tottenham Court Road Western Ticket Hall during excavation and propping within the diaphragm wall for the Crossrail project. It shows how the data obtained was used within the site settlement management plan to assist in the control of the works and the information used for Value Engineering purposes that benefitted the project.The use of Shape Accel Arrays for measuring the deflection of retaining walls is not commonplace in the UK construction industry, with the Tottenham Court Road Western Ticket Hall being one of the first times they have been used in such a way. A detailed analysis of the data obtained from the instruments has been undertaken, and compared to the results obtained from the manual inclinometers that were read next to the SAAs. The advantages of the relatively new SAAs have been discussed, as well as other applications of the instrument.

Jan 1, 2017

By Jin-Wei Huang, Bradley J. Fleming, Sri Sritharan

"Although soil improvement and its application to deep foundations is gaining popularity in the engineering community, this technique is not widely used in high seismic regions due to lack of fundamental understanding of both the behavior of improved soils under high-strain cyclic loading and the interactions between the pile, improved soil, and unimproved soil. This paper describes part of an ongoing Network for Earthquake Engineering Simulation (NEES) project, where two identical full-scale steel pipe piles were driven at a soft clay site in Oklahoma. The soil surrounding one of these piles was improved using the cement deep soil mixing technique in order to enhance its lateral load behavior. Both piles were tested for seismic resistance using dynamic and quasi-static loading.The pile in unimproved soil provided larger displacements with limited lateral force resistance. This pile was subjected to lateral displacements of up to 400 mm, but experienced minimum inelastic actions. On the other hand, the pile in improved soil reached its lateral capacity at a displacement of 100 mm, at which point the critical region at the base of the pile just above the improved ground experienced buckling and fractured due to low cycle fatigue. Compared to the pile in unimproved soil, the improved ground increased the system strength by 42%. Although the soil was improved over 2900 mm, the effective improvement depth was approximately 1300 mm below the ground surface.In this paper, it is demonstrated that the effects of block type soil improvement of limited horizontal and vertical dimensions can be described using a simplified theoretical approach involving a modification to the well-known p-y representation of soil response. An example using this method is presented and shown to give adequate support to a standard 12-inch diameter steel pipe pile embedded in soft soil,IntroductionPilings are the preferred foundation support for many civil engineering structures including highway bridges, railroad bridges, and port wharves. These structures and their foundations are subjected to forces created by earthquakes, wind, waves, water current, vessel impact, ice, and gravity. All loads applied to the superstructure must be transmitted to the foundation where they are resisted by the surrounding soil. With significant lateral loads, use of pile foundations may be the only solution to transmit large structural loads to competent soils. Piles supported by competent soils are relatively easy to design and costs are often attainable. However, thick layers of weak soils such as soft clays are widespread in high seismic areas (e.g., San Francisco, southern Nevada, Washington, Eastern Missouri, and Arkansas), exacerbating design challenges. Soft clays reduce the lateral resistance of the pile-soil system, making the pile foundation less cost effective. In this case, the current design practice is to use an increased number of larger diameter piles, which is a costly alternative (see SDC, Caltrans 2010). An innovative and more cost-efficient solution to this problem is to improve the soil within a short depth surrounding the foundation, thereby increasing its lateral stiffness. Some well-known methods for improving soil include deep soil mixing, stone columns, and simple soft soil replacement with select granular material."

Jan 1, 2017

By Bradley J. Fleming

Although soil improvement and its application to deep foundations is gaining popularity in the engineering community, this technique is not widely used in high seismic regions due to lack of fundamental understanding of both the behavior of improved soils under high-strain cyclic loading and the interactions between the pile, improved soil, and unimproved soil. This paper describes part of an ongoing Network for Earthquake Engineering Simulation (NEES) project, where two identical full-scale steel pipe piles were driven at a soft clay site in Oklahoma. The soil surrounding one of these piles was improved using the cement deep soil mixing technique in order to enhance its lateral load behavior. Both piles were tested for seismic resistance using dynamic and quasi-static loading. The pile in unimproved soil provided larger displacements with limited lateral force resistance. This pile was subjected to lateral displacements of up to 400 mm, but experienced minimum inelastic actions. On the other hand, the pile in improved soil reached its lateral capacity at a displacement of 100 mm, at which point the critical region at the base of the pile just above the improved ground experienced buckling and fractured due to low cycle fatigue. Compared to the pile in unimproved soil, the improved ground increased the system strength by 42%. Although the soil was improved over 2900 mm, the effective improvement depth was approximately 1300 mm below the ground surface. In this paper, it is demonstrated that the effects of block type soil improvement of limited horizontal and vertical dimensions can be described using a simplified theoretical approach involving a modification to the well-known p-y representation of soil response. An example using this method is presented and shown to give adequate support to a standard 12-inch diameter steel pipe pile embedded in soft soil.

By Mark R. Svinkin

"Construction equipment and operations usually produce soil and structural vibrations which may harmfully affect various structures and also the content of buildings and houses. The level of structural vibrations depends on a number of factors such as characterized sources of vibrations, soil conditions, and susceptibility of structures. There are certain knowledge and experience for managing the effects of construction vibrations which require implementation of condition survey of structures, information on construction dynamic sources and soil conditions at a site, evaluation of possible vibration effects on structure, calculation of ground vibrations before construction, use mitigation measures to decrease vibrations, and a choice of appropriate vibration limits. The paper presents the application of known concepts for assessment of vibration effects on structures from bridge constructions.INTRODUCTIONVibrations producing by construction activities such as pile driving, dynamic compaction of loose soils, demolition work, heavy construction equipment and trucks can affect adjacent and remote structures. Vibration effects on structures, sensitive devices and processes may create significant practical problems. Legal actions are often required for solutions of vibration consequences. The level of construction vibrations depends on dynamic sources, soil conditions at a site in particularly availability of soils with settlement potential, distances from the sources, parameters of waves propagating at a site and susceptibility rating of adjacent and remote structures. It is likely that intolerable structural vibrations from direct vibration effects of impact pile driving and resonant floor vibrations from vibratory pile driving may be induced in adjacent structures to construction sites.Foundation settlements resulting from soil vibrations in loose soils usually occur in the proximity of dynamic sources, but it is important that dynamic settlement may happen at various distances from the source. There are such examples. First, Kaminetzky (1991) mentioned a case history of building settlements developed at a distance of about 305 m (1000 ft) away from a pile driving site. Foundations of the buildings were underpinned on piles down to the tip elevation of the new driven piles to prevent building settlements. Second, Lacy and Gould (1985) shows that the peak particle velocity (PPV) of 2.5 mm/s (0.1 in/s) of ground vibrations could trigger dynamic settlements at distances up to 30.5 m (100 ft) from driven piles."

Jan 1, 2016

By Steven M. Henderson, Zachary D. Jones

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

Jan 1, 2017

By Ground Improvement Committee

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

Aug 1, 2013

By Lawrence F. Johnsen, Felix Ferrer, Dino Tomasetti, Cassandra A. Wetzel

"A 17 story building was constructed at the Brooklyn Navy Yard on a site with a long history of development. Most recently the site supported a dewatering well and craneway to service two adjacent drydocks. The subsurface conditions generally consist of the following strata and approximate depths: miscellaneous fill and debris to 20 ft., organic soils to 35 ft., liquefiable sand to 45 ft., varved clay to 65 ft., glacial till to 95 ft. and gneiss bedrock.Hollow core bar piles replaced 18 in. diameter caissons on a 1.67:1 basis. The resulting service loads on the hollow bar piles were 600 kips compression, 21 kips lateral, 180 kips tension and 450 inch-kips moment. The top 30 feet of the hollow bar was cased with a 16 in. x 0.375 in. Grade 50 steel pipe. The piles were socketed 6 feet into bedrock. An extensive load testing program confirmed the axial and lateral load capacities. The paper will also discuss some adjustments to the installation procedure based on the load test program.PROJECTThe hollow bar piles were installed to support a 95,000 sf footprint, 17-story office building at the Brooklyn Navy Yard. The Brooklyn Navy Yard was first developed in the late 1700’s to build merchant vessels. The federal government purchased the old docks and adjoining 40 acres in 1801. The site was an active U. S. Naval Shipyard from 1806 to its decommissioning in 1966. At its peak in World War II it employed 70,000 people, 24 hours a day. Since 1966 the property has been converted to private manufacturing and commercial activity.The site is located between Dry Docks 2 and 3. The adjacent drydocks extend 40 to 43 feet below grade. The drydock walls are restrained by tierods extending back to deadman anchors. The site is also underlain by piles that were installed to support rail lines and a craneway. The building footprint also covered an 85 ft. wide, 70 ft. deep dewatering well which had a thick slab. The structural engineer for the project, ARUP, designed the building to span over the dewatering well.SUBSURFACE CONDITIONSIn September 2014, Langan Engineering conducted a geotechnical engineering study for the project. Figure 1 provides a subsurface profile through the long axis of the site. The general soil profile was very erratic but generally consisted of miscellaneous fill and debris to 20 ft., organic soils to 35 ft., liquefiable sand to 45 ft., varved clay to 65 ft., glacial till to 95 ft. and gneiss bedrock. The fill contained numerous obstructions from the over 200 years of site development. The organic soils were mostly very weak and compressible organic silt. The depths and thicknesses of the varved clay, and sand varied"

Jan 1, 2017

By Monique Nykamp

"INTRODUCTIONTerminal 46 is located just south of downtown Seattle, and is one of the Port of Seattle’s busiest container terminals. The Terminal 46 Redevelopment Project was undertaken to replace the existing 15-m-wide (50 ft) cranes along the apron with 30-m-wide (100 ft) cranes, which can unload larger, post- Panamax ships. The project included upgrading the existing waterside crane rail with new piles and constructing a new land-side rail behind the sheetpile bulkhead. The new piles had to be installed adjacent to the existing apron without causing damage, which was a signifi cant geotechnical challenge due to the soft soil conditions at the site. An instrumentation program performed during the test pile program evaluated this challenge and allowed for the development of specifi c production pile installation procedures that had the least possible effect on construction costs and schedule. SITE HISTORYThe site lies along the west side of Elliott Bay, north of the mouth of the Duwamish Waterway. Prior to development, this area was part of the tide fl ats where the Duwamish River drained into Elliott Bay. Prior to 1970, there were several existing timber piers and structures in the area. In the 1970s, the Port of Seattle constructed a 900-m-long (3,000 ft), 30- m-wide (100 ft) apron to support fi ve, 15-m-wide (50 ft) container cranes. The contained backland area was then fi lled with dredged spoils (sand and silt with organics) and the upper 5 to 20 m (16 to 65 ft) backfi lled with sand and gravel.The existing apron was constructed using 0.4 m (16 in) octagonal prestressed concrete piles to support the precast concrete deck and crane rails. The pile-supported bents were spaced at 6.1 m (20 ft), center-to-center, along the longitudinal direction. Pile lengths typically varied from about 20 to 40 m (65 to 130 ft) with 15 to 26 m penetration below mudline (50 to 85 ft penetration). The slope below the apron was constructed at about 1.75 horizontal to 1 vertical to allow for suffi cient water depth for cargo ships. In most areas, a riprap buttress was placed at the toe of the slope. A typical cross section of the apron is shown on Figure 2.Several stability, settlement and pile driving issues arose during the original construction of T-46 (Pita, 1983). Reportedly, movement of the submarine slope occurred during pile driving, resulting in settlement behind the bulkhead. Pile driving reportedly caused settlement of adjacent piles. In addition, some piles were “running” (dropping quickly under one hammer blow) during installation."

Jan 1, 2007

By Monique Nykamp

"INTRODUCTIONTerminal 46 is located just south of downtown Seattle, and is one of the Port of Seattle’s busiest container terminals. The Terminal 46 Redevelopment Project was undertaken to replace the existing 15-m-wide (50 ft) cranes along the apron with 30-m-wide (100 ft) cranes, which can unload larger, post- Panamax ships. The project included upgrading the existing waterside crane rail with new piles and constructing a new land-side rail behind the sheetpile bulkhead. The new piles had to be installed adjacent to the existing apron without causing damage, which was a signifi cant geotechnical challenge due to the soft soil conditions at the site. An instrumentation program performed during the test pile program evaluated this challenge and allowed for the development of specifi c production pile installation procedures that had the least possible effect on construction costs and schedule.SITE HISTORYThe site lies along the west side of Elliott Bay, north of the mouth of the Duwamish Waterway. Prior to development, this area was part of the tide fl ats where the Duwamish River drained into Elliott Bay. Prior to 1970, there were several existing timber piers and structures in the area. In the 1970s, the Port of Seattle constructed a 900-m-long (3,000 ft), 30- m-wide (100 ft) apron to support fi ve, 15-m-wide (50 ft) container cranes. The contained backland area was then fi lled with dredged spoils (sand and silt with organics) and the upper 5 to 20 m (16 to 65 ft) backfi lled with sand and gravel.The existing apron was constructed using 0.4 m (16 in) octagonal prestressed concrete piles to support the precast concrete deck and crane rails. The pile-supported bents were spaced at 6.1 m (20 ft), center-to-center, along the longitudinal direction. Pile lengths typically varied from about 20 to 40 m (65 to 130 ft) with 15 to 26 m penetration below mudline (50 to 85 ft penetration). The slope below the apron was constructed at about 1.75 horizontal to 1 vertical to allow for suffi cient water depth for cargo ships. In most areas, a riprap buttress was placed at the toe of the slope. A typical cross section of the apron is shown on Figure 2.Several stability, settlement and pile driving issues arose during the original construction of T-46 (Pita, 1983). Reportedly, movement of the submarine slope occurred during pile driving, resulting in settlement behind the bulkhead. Pile driving reportedly caused settlement of adjacent piles. In addition, some piles were “running” (dropping quickly under one hammer blow) during installation."

Jan 1, 2007

By Renato P. Cunha

The paper explores a parametric analysis of a four-pile group in contact (hence piled raft) and without contact (hence standard pile group) with the superficial soil layer, under a combined set of loadings (moment M, vertical V and horizontal H forces). The major design parameters of interest, as total and differential settlements, and raft bending moments and shear stresses are assessed under aforementioned distinct conditions. The slenderness ratio of the piles is also varied along the analyses, allowing the establishment of its influence on the derived parameters.

Jan 1, 2006

By Brian Isherwood, Tara Brown, Paul Kreycir, Jenny Earle

"The Shangri-La hotel and luxury condominium tower, recently opened on University Avenue in downtown Toronto, required eight levels of underground structure, four extending into the shale bedrock.Isherwood Geostructural Engineers was retained in 2007 by Anchor Shoring Limited to provide an alternative design-build solution to better address serious foundation risks. The site, bounded on three sides by City streets, abuts an existing 1957 14-storey building with five underground levels to the north. Sitting on the rock surface along the east perimeter under University Avenue runs the existing Toronto Transit Commission’s University Subway Line built by cut-and-cover in the 1950’s and which was believed to lie very near the property boundary at the southeast corner of the site.The bedrock under Toronto is known to contain very high locked-in horizontal stresses, much higher than can be resisted by shoring techniques, which result in inevitable wall movement when excavating deep into the rock. The strategy adopted to control the risk to the Subway, adjacent building, and major utilities is described in the paper, along with the comprehensive monitoring of movements, and their comparison to predictions.The ProjectThe 66-storey Shangri-La hotel and luxury condominium tower, recently constructed on University Avenue in downtown Toronto, houses 222 hotel rooms in floors 1-17; 287 residences on floors 18-49; and private estates including two 2-storey penthouses on floors 50-66. These comprise 873,000 square feet of development. Eight levels of underground basement are required to provide parking and other amenities, the lower four extending into the shale bedrock."

Jan 1, 2015

By Charles M. Wilk

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

Jan 1, 2005

By Alexandra Weidle, Seffen Leppla, Rolf Katzenbach, Matthias Seip

"A lot of different deep mixing systems have been developed in the last decades for a wide spectrum of applications, e.g. retaining and foundations systems, soil improvement, sealing of toxic substances or dyke strengthening. The paper will deal with special aspects of constructions with deep mixing systems for infrastructures like soil improvement for cyclic loadings and underpinnings in difficult soil conditions by presenting cases from engineering practice.1. DEEP DRY SOIL MIXING FOR SOIL IMPROVEMENT OF RAILWAY TRACKS IN VERY SOFT SOILS1.1 IntroductionRailway tracks are set into vibrations by train passing. In very soft soil this leads to long-term deformations which lead to speed limits, temporary closings and big maintenance efforts. The energy of the dynamic loading is transmitted into the soil by compression and shear waves and at the surface by rayleigh waves (Wood 1968). The expansion of the waves are influenced by•,thickness of the soft soil layer•,density of the soft soil layer•,stiffness of the soft soil layer•,saturation of the soft soil layer•,frequency of the dynamic loadingThe frequency of the dynamic loading depends on the train velocity and the distance of the wheels and wheel sets. If the frequency of the dynamic loading is in the range of the natural frequency of the soft soil layer the vibrations increase extremely (Lieberenz et al. 2003). As a result the long-term deformations will increase as well.To avoid these long-term deformations and the resulting operation restrictions and maintenance efforts an adequate soil improvement is necessary. For the optimization of the soil improvement field tests have been carried out.1.2 Experimental field testsThe field tests have been carried out at a 300 m long test track with five different setups, each 30 m long:•,test track TS 0: no soil improvement•,test track TS 1: soil improvement with single lime-cement-columns 5.9 m deep (Figure 1a)•,test track TS 2: soil improvement with single lime-cement-columns 5.9 m and 10.4 m deep (Figure 1b)"

Jan 1, 2015

By James S. Graham

Research at the University of Colorado on southern pine and Douglas-fir piling has determined that the existing building code design stress values of 1200 psi and 1250 psi, as determined by ASTM D-2899, are substantiated; but testing procedures should be revised. All full size piling tests should be standardized at 1/d ratios of 2:1, or confined tests performed. Also, it has been determined that theoretical design values for timber piling should not be based on the lumber criteria of D-245 and D-2555, but instead should follow the pattern set by engineers in the utility industry for timber poles, in accordance with ANSI 05.1.

Jan 1, 1986

By Kirk Ellison, Sherif Elfass, Ramin Motamed, Kevin V. Stanton

"The determination of accurate load transfer curves are essential for estimating deep foundation loadsettlement response using t-z style analyses. While recently developed semi-empirical methods from Ashour et al. (2010) and Ashour & Helal (2012) have shown promise in preliminary studies, they have not yet been thoroughly benchmarked against a more widely accepted approach. To address this issue, these recent procedures are implemented in the computer program CGI-DFSAP to predict the results of four Osterberg-cell (O-Cell) load tests. These predictions are compared to outcomes obtained following the recommendations from Reese & O’Neill (1988) for t-z analyses of drilled shafts in sand and clay which are carried out with the program TZ-PILE. Overall, the results suggest that the new approach offers improved accuracy regarding predictions of drilled shaft response to axial loading.INTRODUCTIONThe behavior of axially loaded deep foundations is often analyzed using a technique known as the t-z method. In this method, deep foundation elements are broken into multiple segments which are supported by discrete nonlinear springs to capture the contribution of both side-friction (t-z springs) and end-bearing (Q-z springs). Hence, the t-z and Q-z relationships dictate the predicted load-settlement response. A number of different approaches have been developed to estimate load-transfer curves with some relying solely on empirical data from laboratory and field experiments (i.e. Coyle & Reese, 1966; Vijayvergiya, 1977) and others based mainly on analytical frameworks (i.e. Kraft et al., 1981; Randolph, 1994). Reese & O’Neill (1988) provide recommendations which are widely used for developing t-z and Q-z curves for analyzing drilled shafts. This method is hereafter referred to as Method 1 (M1). It should be noted that these empirically derived relationships are only applicable for problems associated with drilled shafts and are therefore not appropriate for developing load-transfer curves for other types of deep foundations (i.e. driven piles). This is because of the difference in the frictional resistance which can be developed between a circular concrete-soil interface as opposed to that of other materials (i.e. steel) and/or different cross sectional geometries.The M1 load-transfer curves form the basis for the t-z analysis of drilled shafts implemented in the computer program TZ-PILE (Ensoft, 2014). In light of this, TZ-PILE is employed herein as a reference to compare against the capabilities of another method of implementing t-z style analyses. This method is based on a semi-empirical framework for soil behavior developed by Norris (1986) and is implemented using the program CGI-DFSAP (Computers & GeoEngineering Inc., 2011). More information concerning this approach, hereafter referred to as Method 2 (M2), is given in subsequent sections."

Jan 1, 2017

By Aditya Ayithi, William G. Ryan, Dean Herbst

"For rock socketed drilled shafts, it is a common practice not to include the frictional resistance of overburden soils into the nominal capacity estimation. The primary reason often being cited is “overburden soils resistance is negligible compared to that of rock socket resistance.” However, in certain geological conditions, where the rock layer is located at greater depths, friction resistance from overburden layers can be significant. In addition, at such great depths, shaft drilling becomes very complicated and expensive. In these situations, considering the resistance of the overburden layers can be an economic alternative.This paper presents a case study of an Osterberg cell (O-cell) load test conducted on a 161.8 feet long and 78-inch diameter instrumented test shaft. Based on initial designs, a 72-inch diameter rock socket of lengths 23 and 26 feet was required to provide a LRFD factored friction resistance of 3,200 kips. The load test results revealed that the material in the 72-inch diameter socket does not represent a true rock. However, the test results also proved that the factored friction resistance of overburden layers is greater than the required design resistance. Based on the load test results, it was decided to allow the overburden soils frictional resistance to be considered in the shaft design, resulting in significant economic savings.INTRODUCTIONRock socketed drill shaft design guidelines of various State Department of Transportation (DOTs) agencies allow friction and/or end bearing resistance of only the rock socket portion into the design capacity estimation. It is typical to neglect the frictional resistance of overburden soils. However, in certain geological conditions where the rock layer is at greater depths, friction resistance of the overburden soils can be significant. In this case the friction resistance of overburden soils was verified via the specified instrumented O-cell test program and then used as part of the design capacity.PROJECT DESCRIPTIONAs part of I-29 improvement project, Iowa Department of Transportation (Iowa DOT) planned to replace the dual four lane bridges that cross the Floyd River in Sioux City, Iowa with dual six lane bridges (Fig. 1). Expected benefits from this improvement include improved safety, traffic operations and roadway infrastructure conditions.BRIDGE SUBSTRUCTUREThe project consists of two individual bridges; a new south bound bridge and a new north bound bridge. The south bound bridge is 646-ft long and the north bound bridge is 644-ft long. Both are six-span, pretensioned and pre-stressed concrete beam bridges of varying width. Bridge foundations were designed such that the abutments of both bridges will be supported on driven steel piles and the bridge piers will be on drilled shaft foundations."

Jan 1, 2016

By Karen J. Dawson, Francisco Johnson

"Pressure-grouted high strength helical displacement piles are a recently developed pile type that can be useful in conditions where noise or vibrations must be low or where access or clearance is limited. However, there is no information in the literature that can be used to estimate the soil resistance of these piles or production rates. To fill this information need, this paper presents a New Jersey installation case history and the results of static axial and lateral load tests on both pressure-grouted and ungrouted high strength helical piles at the case history site and trial installation locations in New Jersey and Washington State. Piles between 25 and 50 feet long comprised of steel shaft diameters of 4.5, 5.5, and 7 inches with equivalent grout column diameters ranging from 12 to 22 inches were tested. Lateral loads of up to 100 kips and axial compression loads of up to 700 kips were applied. The results of the load tests are compared to predictions of lateral deformation and axial resistance.INTRODUCTIONHelical piles have long been recognized as a useful foundation type in situations where noise and vibrations must be limited, or where there are access or clearance restrictions. Relatively well-documented design methods and torque to capacity correlations have been developed for the most commonly used helical piles, which are relatively small (typically shafts of 6 inches or less) with corresponding low load carrying resistance.With the increased need to construct in congested urban environments, there is incentive to develop helical piles with higher axial resistance. Seismic and other loading conditions also require lateral resistance, which is low for the typically small helical pile shafts. One method of increasing the soil resistance, both axially and laterally and at relatively low cost, is to place grout around the shaft. Injecting the grout under pressure through the hollow helical pipe section and out a grout port or ports located near the toe of the pile has the potential to increase the pile resistance significantly above that which can be achieve by gravity grouting. Not only does the pressurized grout push out against the surrounding soil, but the rotating helix helps to distribute the grout laterally. Unfortunately, little information is available in the literature to help designers estimate the resistance of grouted helical piles in general and none is available regarding pressuregrouted helical piles."

Jan 1, 2016

By Shahriar Vahdani, Andy Herlache, Andrew Bro, Wei-Yu Chen

"The Presidio Parkway Project will reconstruct approximately 1.6 miles of highway, including seven bridges, three cut-and-cover tunnels, and an undercrossing connecting the Golden Gate Bridge to the City of San Francisco, California. The project site is approximately 5.6 miles from the San Andreas Fault, which is capable of producing magnitude 8 earthquakes. Seismic hazards include strong ground shaking, soil liquefaction, ground settlement, and lateral spreading. At the Tennessee Hollow bridge section up to 30 feet of loose sands and soft clays are present. Concerns are raised that standalone drilled piers will experience excessive lateral soil loads from liquefaction-induced lateral spreading pressure resulting in excessive pier head displacement of up to 8 inches. Ground improvement by Cement Deep Soil Mixing (CDSM) is proposed to provide additional foundation stiffness. This paper presents the methodology to: 1) assess the effectiveness of the ground improvement in resisting lateral spreading, and 2) optimize ground improvement design at individual bridge bents based on local site condition. A series of 3-D numerical analyses are conducted and the results show that drilled piers with CDSM ground improvement are capable of withstanding seismic demands from lateral spreading and the lateral pier head displacement is reduced to less than 2 inches. The adopted analytical approach is efficient at modifying design for individual bents and can be considered for future pier foundation design in seismically active areas. IntroductionThe Tennessee Hollow bridge section (Low Viaduct) is an integral component of the Presidio Parkway project which will replace the existing facility with a new multi-lane roadway between the Golden Gate Bridge and the City of San Francisco. As shown on Figure 1, the project site is located about 5.6 miles east of the San Andreas Fault and 12.5 miles west of the Hayward Fault. The Low Viaduct will span over a future wetland habitat subject to tidal fluctuations and potential scouring."

Jan 1, 2014