Search Documents

By James G. Ulinski, Sebastian Lobo-Guerrero, Vishal B. Patel

"Recently modified design equations used in the transportation industry to calculate side friction and end bearing capacity for drilled shafts are now providing more realistic estimations of capacities than did previous methods. Using multiple case studies and test results from various projects, a more realistic design approach was formulated by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), which resulted in greater values of ultimate capacity for side friction and end bearing and in a more efficient design overall.In 2010, the FHWA published GEC-10 – Drilled Shafts: Construction Procedures and LRFD Design Methods, which illustrates a different method of calculating side friction and end bearing resistance and results in greater values for design. In 2014, the Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) adopted the method put forth by FHWA, which was included in its LRFD Bridge Design th Specifications, 7 Edition. The Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT) recently adopted and incorporated the similar methodology as AASHTO for calculating side friction and end bearing for drilled shafts in rock, and these changes are reflected in the 2015 edition of the PennDOT Design Manual, Part 4 (DM-4). This article discusses the past and current design methodology along with a project case study with results from Osterberg Cell (O-cell) load testing, which presents a comparison between the design resistances of ultimate side friction and end bearing and the measured capacities at failure.The Old and the NewEditions of the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Manual from 2012 and earlier estimated ultimate side resistance, qs, in rock using the following equation (modified from Horvath and Kenney, 1979):qs=0.65aEpa(qu/pa)0.5 < 7.8pa(f ’c/pa)0.5 where: qu is the uniaxial compressive strength of the rock in ksf; pa is the atmospheric pressure in ksf; aE is the reduction factor to account for jointing in rock; and f ’c is the compressive strength of the concrete in ksi. For intact rock, previous versions of the AASHTO manual required that the ultimate end bearing resistance, qp, was calculated using the following equation: qp=2.5qu."

Jan 1, 2017

By Paolo Cavalcoli, Federico Pagliacci

"As opposed to the static functional recovery of existing structures, the construction of infrastructures in an urban environment, when combined with complex geological situations, often involves building foundation structures, whether circular or rectangular in section, through rock formations or chaotic strata (sand and gravel with cobbles). Until a few years ago, these formations or strata were sometimes an insurmountable constraint on traditional foundation installation techniques. The difficulty in overcoming these geological situations is sometimes added to the increasingly frequent need to reach depths that were unimaginable just a decade ago. These are real challenges for those carrying out these works and for those manufacturing the necessary equipment. There are two main methodological approaches to these problems, that can be summed up in the rhetorical figure of ""David and Goliath"": cunning versus force. In reference to the case studies in this article: the permanent retaining walls for the Copenhagen Metro, and the structural repairs to the Arapuni Dam in New Zealand and the Wolf Creek Dam in the U.S., we will describe the foundations constructed in presence of rock using combined small-diameter direction drilling solutions, associated with their enlargement up to the project’s size, at depths exceeding 300 feet. Finally, a case study will be presented on the implementation of a large cross-section of an excavation in the rock, at depths greater than 800 feet.IntroductionAs opposed to the functional recovery of existing structures, the construction of infrastructures in an urban environment, when combined with complex geological situations, often involves building foundation structures, whether circular or rectangular in section, through rock formations or chaotic strata (sand and gravel with cobbles).Until a few years ago, these formations or strata were sometimes an insurmountable constraint on traditional foundation installation techniques. The difficulty in overcoming these geological situations is sometimes added to the increasingly frequent need to reach depths that were unimaginable just a decade ago.These are real challenges for those building these works and for those manufacturing the necessary equipment. There are two main methodological approaches to these problems, that can be summed up in the biblical figures of ""David and Goliath"": cunning versus force. In the engineering field, the force is summarized in the use of ever-larger drilling equipment in terms of installed power, weight in working conditions, winch and rotary capacity."

Jan 1, 2015

By Cheng Lin, Guoming Lin

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

Jan 1, 1900

By Evangelia Ieronymaki

Civil engineering education relies on traditional methods of teaching, comprising mostly of deductive instruction by presenting the theory, followed by applications. This paper presents an alternative way for teaching foundation design to senior students, introducing a more inductive approach. The students are presented with a project/game adapted to a real-world problem at the beginning of the course. They are asked to identify the correct steps and methods throughout the lectures, for reaching an appropriate solution that they document and present at the end of the course. To make the project more enjoyable, the project has the format of a game where the students compete with each other on completing the task faster and more efficiently. The goal of this teaching approach is to enhance the ability of the students for problem solving and the engineering way of thinking, while playing a game. In the end, the students were requested to respond to a survey regarding the efficiency of this project/game on their learning. The results showed that students prefer more inductive methods for a design course, feeling that this project made them think more like engineers, while the ‘game’ twist of it made the whole course more fun. INTRODUCTION Most civil engineering courses are taught in 2019 the same way they used to be taught 40 years ago in the 80s. Classic methods are mostly deductive, where the instructor presents the theory first and then applications of that theory follow. Little or no attention is given initially to why the theory was developed or what are the problems it solves. The applications of the theory, and thus the purpose it serves, come only in the end and after methodologies have been presented, leading the students to show low interest in the material. As Albanese and Mitchell (1993) have reported, people are mostly motivated to learn things when they clearly see the need to know them. This explains the students’ little motivation that, if any, comes mainly from the fact that the material may be useful either in other courses or in their future careers. On the other hand, there are alternative inductive methods of teaching, where the role of the students is more active. A lot of researchers have highlighted the benefits of inductive methods in teaching engineering courses. Based on Prince and Fedler (2006), inductive methods include; a) inquiry-learning, b) discovery learning, c) problem and project-based learning (PBL), d) case-based teaching, and e) just-in-time learning. Inquiry-learning is maybe the most traditional method of inductive teaching/learning methods, where the instructor asks questions or poses problems and the students need to apply the theory they have learnt in order to find the solution (Bateman 1990; Prince 2004; Lee 2012). Similar to inquire-learning is the discovery learning, where students have to find the solution to a problem or answer to a question, while the instructor simply provides feedback to the students without guiding their efforts (Leonard 1988; Westbrook and Rogers 1994).

Jan 1, 2019

By George J. Tamaro

The design and construction of foundations in the New York City area are usually dictated by the widely varying geologic conditions encountered in the five boroughs, particularly along the spine of Manhattan Island. Rock extends well above sea level at the northern reaches and falls to depths in excess of 250 m at the barrier islands at the southern extremities. These highly variable geologic conditions, significantly affected by glacial activity, dictate different design and construction approaches throughout the five boroughs of New York City. Extensive rock removal is required at the north while long piling is dictated in the south. Similar changes can occur within a project site on Manhattan Island. This paper will describe these conditions in general, will identify the various solutions used to solve these problems and will summarize various foundation types used in the New York City area.

Jan 1, 2000

By 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 Arash Saeidi-Rashk-Olia, Dunja Peric

Energy piles are gaining increased popularity due to a growing demand for clean energy. To further advance the understanding of soil-structure interaction in energy piles, recently-derived analytical solutions have been implemented to investigate the impact of stratigraphy on the soil-structure interaction. This was accomplished by comparing the measured and predicted head displacements, axial strains and stresses in an energy pile embedded in the actual homogeneous and layered soil profiles, as well as into synthetic homogeneous soil profiles. The analytical solutions for homogeneous soil profile captured the smooth experimentally observed response versus depth very well. In the case of a layered soil profile, the corresponding analytical model was capable of capturing nuances in trends of axial stress and strain versus depth at the interface of different layers. The analytical predictions for the layered profile appear to be slightly less accurate than for the homogenous profile. The experimental data obtained from the layered profile appear to be a bit more scattered than those from the homogeneous profile. In the former case, the interplay of the individual soil layers with the pile occurs while maintaining the continuity of the pile stress and displacement at the interface of different layers. The response throughout each layer of the layered profile is quantitatively different than the corresponding homogeneous response. Nevertheless, qualitatively the response throughout each layer of the layered profile is similar to the response of the pile embedded in the corresponding homogeneous layer.

Sep 8, 2021

By Mohammed Faizal, Abdelmalek Bouazza

"The operation of ground source heat pumps combined with foundation piles can have an effect on the thermal behaviour of the pile and the surrounding soil. This paper presents the effects of continuous heating, continuous cooling, and alternate heating and cooling operations on ground and pile temperatures as well as the thermo-mechanical behaviour of a field scale energy pile. The effect of pile operation on the ground temperatures is highest near the pile and reduces with increasing radial distance. The results of the present studies generally showed that the thermal elasticity of the pile is not affected.INTRODUCTIONGeothermal energy piles are foundation piles used as underground heat exchangers to maintain thermal comfort in buildings, via the use of ground source heat pumps (GSHPs). Ground source heat pumps are more economical and environmental friendly compared to conventional heat pumps. Energy piles can be combined with supplemental surface heaters or coolers, known as hybrid systems, for forcefully recharging the ground during non-operational times of the GSHP. Alternative heating and cooling of the GSHP improves geothermal energy usage and alleviates heat build-up in the ground and provides a balance of ground temperatures around the heat exchanger (Jalaluddin and Miyara, 2012).The temperatures induced in the piles during GSHP operation can lead to a complex response of thermal strains and stresses in the pile concrete. An assessment of the thermo-mechanical response of energy piles for various thermal loads may assist engineers in the design process. Furthermore, an assessment of ground temperatures will also highlight any potential thermal interactions with other energy piles in actual building operations.At present, the thermal strain and stress distribution in field scale energy piles has mostly been studied for continuous operation (Laloui et al., 2006; Bourne-Webb et al., 2009; McCartney and Murphy, 2012; Akrouch et al., 2014; Mimouni, 2014; Murphy and McCartney, 2014; Murphy et al., 2014; Wang et al., 2015). These studies have contributed considerably to the understanding of the axial thermal strain and stress distributions in the piles and have shown that pile thermal behaviour is mostly thermo-elastic without inducing major structural concerns.The present paper adds to the current knowledge by assessing the pile thermo-mechanical and ground thermal response for continuous and alternating thermal loads of a field scale energy pile. The operation modes studied are 24 hours continuous cooling (Faizal et al., 2015), 24 hours continuous heating, (Wang et al., 2015) and alternate heating and cooling operation (Faizal and Bouazza, 2016). The forced ground thermal recharging is done during the non-operating times of the cooling unit, simulating a solar hybrid GSHP system for a scheduled intermittent mode of operation."

Jan 1, 1900

By Rick Deschamps

A reoccurring problem with support of excavations in urban areas involves the placement of external support components like anchors or nails in right-a-ways, subway and utility setbacks, in areas occupied by adjacent structures, and within the property of non cooperative neighbors. Such a situation occurred for a project in Arlington, Virginia, which ultimately resulted in the preliminary design of a large footing supported cantilever retaining wall that was extremely costly and impractical to build. An innovative design alternate consisting of a series of vertical concrete elements (VCEs) supported by post tensioned tiedowns was proposed to the General Contractor and accepted by the owner. The VCEs were designed to serve as the main structural elements for both the temporary support of excavation system and the permanent wall. The VCE?s were constructed using single bite diaphragm wall panels oriented perpendicular to the excavation face including a rebar cage and tremie concrete. Threaded inserts were placed within the rebar cage to attach the cast in place exterior wall. Overall stability and lateral movement of the VCEs were controlled by high capacity vertical anchors embedded within the VCE. A detailed instrumentation program was installed to monitor the movements of the VCEs with relation to the excavation depth. The paper present the project case history by discussing the design concepts of the VCE, the construction approaches used to install them, the construction challenges encountered, and the performance of the unique system.

Jan 1, 2008

By John P. Turner, Steven S. Dapp, Dan A. Brown

"The Goethals Bridge Replacement (GBR) spanning the Arthur Kill Waterway between Elizabeth, NJ and Staten Island, NY is supported on over 200 drilled shaft foundations ranging in diameter from 4.5 ft to 10 ft and socketed into Passaic Formation siltstone. Four drilled shafts, two on each side of the bridge (NJ and NY), were load tested using the bi-directional axial load method. Axial test results demonstrate that RQD, taken by itself, is not necessarily a reliable indicator of side or base resistance. High recovery with low RQD can be a function of horizontally bedded siltstone and shale where the individual pieces of core do not exceed four inches, but may still provide very high side and base resistance. Axial testing was followed by a lateral rapid-load test (Statnamic) on each of the same four shafts. In addition, one of the shafts was subjected to a static lateral load test to validate the rapid-load method as being representative of static loading conditions. Results of the axial load tests provide the basis of unit side and unit base resistances used in the LRFD design of the rock sockets for axial loading, while results of the static and Statnamic lateral load tests were used to calibrate p-y curve parameters used for design under lateral and moment loading. This paper describes implementation of the load testing program and its role in the design process.INTRODUCTIONDesign of drilled shaft foundations for the Goethals Bridge Replacement (GBR) required load testing in order to validate the parameters used for calculating geotechnical axial and lateral resistances. The bridge, including foundations, was designed in accordance with the AASHTO LRFD design specifications, 6th Edition (2012). The bridge owner is the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (PANYNJ). One of the PANYNJ project requirements was stated as follows:“Perform a minimum of two (2) separate axial compression load tests (one [1] in New York and one [1] in New Jersey) for each demonstration shaft of different size and construction methodology to verify the design assumptions and construction procedures. At a minimum, one (1) demonstration shaft is required to be representative of production shafts with a diameter within one (1) foot above or below the demonstration shaft diameter.Conduct a minimum of two (2) lateral load tests (one [1] in New York and one [1] in New Jersey) for each demonstration shaft of different size and construction methodology. At a minimum, one (1) demonstration shaft is required to be representative of production shafts with a diameter within one (1) foot above or below the demonstration shaft diameter.”"

Jan 1, 2016

By Abu B. Siddique, Anthony S. Crincoli

"The New Jersey Turnpike Section 2 widening program consisted of widening between Interchange 6 in Mansfield Township, Burlington County and Interchange 9 in East Brunswick Township, Middlesex County. To accommodate large volume of traffic the roadway was widened from 6 to 12 lanes with major modifications performed at four interchanges. The Section 2, NJTA Interchange 6 to 9 Widening Program is a 4.2-mile section of Turnpike roadway which included a total of 12 new or modified structures. In order to facilitate the construction process Section 2 was divided into three construction contract packages. This paper will cover the last and final Contract T869.120.203 which is 1.7 miles in length. The work generally consisted of eight new ramps connection to and from the toll plaza to the new inner and outer roadways. New mainline bridges were constructed over several ramps. A new bridge was constructed to take northbound outer lanes traffic over two ramps along with new mainline bridges over Black’s Creek, Georgetown Road, and Laurel Run. In addition, a new bridge was constructed to take a ramp over Laurel Run and the existing U-turn Bridge was replaced with a new one.For Contract T869.120.203 a total of 74 five-foot diameter drilled shafts has been constructed to support all pier foundations for bridges. Three drilled shafts were tested using Osterberg Load Cells to verify the estimated shaft resistance during design phase. One Osterberg Load Cell test was performed on a demonstration (sacrificial) shaft and the other two Osterberg Load Cell tests were performed on production shafts. This paper compares the estimated total, side and tip resistances with corresponding measured total, side and tip resistances and provided recommendations for future design purpose.INTRODUCTIONTo accommodate large volume of traffic the New Jersey Turnpike Authority (NJTA) decided to widen Section 2, which included Interchange 6 through Interchange 9. The Section 2, a 4.2-mile section of Turnpike roadway that was widened from 6 to 12 lanes with major modifications performed at four interchanges.The New Jersey Turnpike Authority (NJTA) procured AECOM to perform engineering services for the final design of Section 2, NJTA Interchange 6 to 9 Widening Program. Section 2 is a 4.2-mile section of Turnpike roadway that will widen from 6 to 12 lanes and will include a total of 12 new or modified structures. It encompasses modifications of the existing and the design of four new ramps at Interchange 7. The project also includes the modification of two local roads over the mainline, two local roads under the mainline, two maintenance U-turns, and retaining walls. In addition, the project consists of the design of noise walls, sign structures, storm water management basins and the more typical drainage, utilities, lighting, roadway, ROW, and signing and striping design."

Jan 1, 2015

By Theodore von Rosenvinge

Large diameter (2.4 meter) drilled shaft foundations were installed to depths of over 62 meters through soil into Arkose bedrock for Connecticut?s Pearl Harbor Memorial Bridge (I-95 over New Haven Harbor). The project involved many ?firsts? including the first ?extradosed? cable-stayed bridge in the US, and for Connecticut, the deepest drilled shafts, the first use of a rotator to install shaft casing, and the first use of the Mini-Sid technology for rock socket bottom inspection. Design utilized both friction and end bearing for rock sockets. O-Cell testing was employed to maximize performance factors during design and to allow adjustments to socket lengths during construction. Favorable test results permitted a reduction in socket lengths and significant cost saving.

Jan 1, 2011

By Albert Neumann, Franz-Werner Gerressen, Giancarlo Santarelli

"Diaphragm walls are known as underground structural elements commonly used for retention systems and permanent foundation walls or elements. In addition they are also quite often used as deep groundwater barriers, named Cut-Off-Walls (COW). Due to the requirements of each particular job site, e.g. the need for carrying high loads or as seepage barriers, there is an increasing industry demand for efficiently cutting into rock. Besides the removal of boulders, cutting through rock, is always the most difficult part of the excavation process of a diaphragm wall or COW.There are a number of influencing factors which have an impact on the rock cutting performance. Besides the influence of the rock characteristics itself, which is not always the same, there are other factors related to equipment, tooling as well as the operating staff. In addition to RQD, the most commonly available rock property found in geotechnical reports is the Unconfined Compressive Strength (UCS) value. There are however some other related properties, such as weathering, bedding, inclination, abrasiveness, etc.,which can have a major impact on the achievable cutting performance. This paper will discuss the various parameters, and how they can be considered for performance estimation. Based on experiences gained on over 100 projects, a performance estimation chart was developed to allow for a better approach to these kinds of projects. This paper also explains the general installation process in as well as some specific features related to specific site conditions. In addition, some job site references will give more detailed information about such type of site conditions and how to deal with them.Keywords: Diaphragm wall, Cut-Off-Wall, Trench Cutter, RockINTRODUCTIONDiaphragm walls are known as underground structural elements commonly used as retention systems for excavation pits, shafts, permanent foundation walls and load bearing elements.It can be anticipated that, with the increasing trend of utilizing more and more underground space to accommodate environmental considerations and urban/suburban development, there will be an increasing requirement for diaphragm wall usage in even more difficult conditions.In addition diaphragm walls can also be used as deep groundwater barriers (Cut-Off-Walls). This market has demonstrated that the demand for these types of walls is reaching ever more difficult soil conditions and greater depths which are surpassing the current industry standards. The trench cutter is the most important tool for performing this type of work."

Jan 1, 2016

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

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

Jan 1, 2015

By Lassaad Hazzar

The ultimate lateral resistance of piles in cohesive soil is studied using the well-known finite difference code, FLAC2D. The Modified Cam Clay (MCC) constitutive relation is adopted in the analyses to model the cohesive soil behavior, whereas the structural pile model with three degree of freedoms, available in FLAC2D library, is adopted to model the piles. The reliability of Broms&apos;s method, still used in the current design practice of piles under lateral loads, is verified. Comparisons between the ultimate lateral resistances of piles and those deduced from the graphs proposed by Broms (1964) are presented in graphs. Different factors thought to affect the lateral resistance of piles in cohesive soil, not adequately considered in Broms&apos;s method, such as clay stiffness, pile length, pile diameter and axial load are parametrically studied. A special concern is devoted to elucidate the effects of over-consolidation ratio (OCR) on the ultimate lateral resistance of piles in cohesive soil.

Aug 1, 2013

By Michael W. Driller, Wen Yan (Grace) Chen, Steven J. Friesen

"Remediation for Perris Dam has been proposed in response to deficiencies identified in a seismic stability study prepared by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) in 2005. Lenses of potentially liquefiable soil have been identified within the dam foundation which may lose strength during a seismic event. The remediation was designed primarily to limit deformation of the dam. Nineteen construction methods were compared and evaluated for the remediation. The final decision was to use cement deep soil mixing (CDSM) to strengthen the foundation and to construct a downstream berm to stabilize the dam. The entire CDSM treatment will cover over 4,000 linear feet of the downstream toe of the dam. Over 300,000 cubic yards of CDSM will be used to strengthen the foundation. The construction of the project started in Fall 2014 and is anticipated to take approximately 3 years. This paper describes the design aspects of using CDSM to treat the foundation, including laboratory testing, investigation of overstressing/cracking, extent of treatment, effect of CDSM on pore pressures under the dam, and the results of a full-scale CDSM test section.INTRODUCTIONPerris Dam is a zoned earthfill dam with a length of 2.2 miles, a maximum height of 128 feet, and a capacity of 131,450 acre-ft of water. The dam is located in Riverside County, California at the terminus of the East Branch of the State Water Project. The embankment was constructed between 1971 and 1973 over an alluvial deposit between the Bernasconi Hills to the South and Russell Mountains to the North. A rock outcrop divides the dam into left and right reaches when viewed from the reservoir looking downstream. The embankment soil was obtained from a borrow source at the North end of the reservoir. The dam has a sloping sandy clay core (Zone 1) with a 10-foot deep cutoff trench and a silty sand shell (Zone 2) with a downstream chimney and blanket drain (Zone 3 and Zone 4) as shown in Figure 1."

Jan 1, 2015

By Sara Moshfeghi, Seyyed Majdeddin Mir Mohammad Hosseini, Abolfazl Eslami

"Due to variety of current pile bearing capacity methods based on the cone penetration test (CPT), for optimum design, it is necessary to evaluate the performance of such methods in different geotechnical conditions. Geotechnical databases including piling and in-situ testing records have been recognized as useful tools for analysis, design and economical construction. In order to evaluate pile bearing capacity methods, AUT-CPT&Pile database has been compiled including 450 full scale pile load tests and CPT sounding records. This database consists of different pile types with a relatively wide range of geometries and various soil conditions. Forty three records of piles driven in sand deposits were then employed to evaluate effects of ultimate capacity interpretation criteria from load displacement diagrams. The Davisson offset limit criterion, the Brinch Hansen 80% criterion and the load at the displacement of 10% of the pile diameter were compared to estimated capacities from ten CPT based design methods currently used in practice. The Brinch Hansen 80% criterion and the load at the displacement of 10% of the pile diameter lead to reasonable results, the Brinch Hansen 80% criterion showed less scatter. For evaluating the accuracy and the precision of CPT-based methods, the results were compared to estimated capacities. Results of comparison indicate that the CPT-based methods mainly predict the pile capacity withreasonable accuracy.INTRODUCTIONAmong the different approaches of estimating the pile bearing capacity, in-situ tests, especially, the cone penetration test (CPT) are favored due to the cone similarities with piles in modes of installation as well as fast and continuous profiling. This trend is practically well established where deep foundations are to be constructed in soft to medium subsoil deposits (Eslami and Fellenius, 1997; Mayne and Niazi, 2009).Employing different design methods results in a wide range of values which complicates the selection of an appropriate one to determine the pile bearing capacity. Several studies by Briuad and Tucker (1988), Eslami and Fellenius (1997), Abu Farsakh and Titi (2004), Schneider et al. (2008) and Eslami et al. (2011) confirm disparity of different design methods predictions. Thus, for optimum design, it is necessary to evaluate and compare the performance of current methods.Geotechnical databases are known as helpful tools in research and practical applications for optimizing analysis and design and are mainly used for management and interpretation of data, evaluation of design methods, calibrating LRFD or ASD design factors, etc. Pile lateral and axial load tests are examples of databases in geotechnical engineering. A summary of several CPT and pile load test databases is presented in Table 1."

Jan 1, 2017

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

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

Jan 1, 2017

By Emre Biringen

"Results from a small-scale laboratory experimental program show the changes in the vertical stiffness and strength of a soft clayey soil adjacent to the shaft of an inserted pile (i.e. expansion of a cylindrical cavity). The experimental program provides a realistic axi-symmetric physical model of an element of a cylindrical pile and the surrounding soil. The study interprets the improvement and assesses its magnitude in vertical stress-strain-strength properties of a normally consolidated soft cohesive soil in response to preloading impact in the radial direction. The results verify that insertion of a cylindrical pile causes densification of surrounding soil in a radial direction due to change in stress state around the pile, and thus consolidating and stiffening of the soil.The test results indicate that most improvement in modulus and strength takes place within a distance of 4 times the radius of a pile, though significant improvement is realized to a distance of 8-10 times the radius, beyond where there is negligible effect. Settlement characteristics of the surrounding soil in a zone of 12 times the pile radius improve significantly after the formation of a cylindrical cavity. The miniature vane shear strength tests show a 1.5 times increase in a zone of 4 times the pile radius compared to the strength at 10 pile radii. The results also imply that the spacing of cylindrical piles should not be more than 4 to 10 times pile radius, so that the surrounding soil matrix may improve the vertical bearing capacity under any foundation or embankment loading.INTRODUCTIONThe engineering community is familiar with different techniques to improve the bearing capacity and settlement characteristics of weak cohesive and organic soils. Some of the in situ techniques to improve the properties of soft ground (e.g. soft clays) prior to placement of foundations are vertical preloading, deep cemenUlime mixing, stone columns, and grouting (Henn 1996; Moseley 1993). In addition to these methods, researchers have recently showed interest in achieving soft ground improvement by means of applying radial compression method for which different names exist including expanding pile (Kelleher et al. 2001 ), Preload™ Pier (Biringen and Edil 2003), and sand compaction pile (Lee et al. 2004). Handy (2001) has described how preloading can also be achieved by imposition of radial loading in soft ground with an expected improvement in stiffness. The idea behind the latter method is densification and consolidation of soft soil in the radial direction by controlled displacement for which the process can be viewed as a cavity expansion problem (Vesic 1972)."

Jan 1, 2005

By Jun Ohbayashi, Yoshiyuki Yagiura, Hiroaki Miyatake, Masuo Kondoh, Naotoshi Shinkawa

"Reducing the improvement ratio of ground improvement is an extremely efficient way to reduce the construction cost and construction period of mitigation measures for soft ground. The Arch Action Low Improvement Ratio Cement Column (ALiCC Method) is one method for this, and it is being increasingly applied to sites. This method enables us to rationally evaluate the embankment loads that are acting on cement improved soil columns and unimproved ground, by considering the arch action generated in the embankments and from there thusly allocate improved soil columns in spans of a greater distance than those needed for conventional methods. As a result, it serves to reduce construction costs and the construction period, while also minimizing the settling of the embankment and differential settlement, by placing numerous improved soil columns in the ground immediately beneath the embankment at equidistant intervals. In this report, we give a basic overview of the ALiCC Method, report typical construction results from real life cases that have been carried out, and make comparisons with other construction methods in order to report on the effectiveness of this design method.OVERVIEW OF ARCH ACTION LOW IMPROVEMENT RATIO CEMENT COLUMN (ALiCC) METHODIn the area of mitigation measures for soft ground, a significant role is played by ground improvements using improved materials such as cement. For this reason, a reduction in construction costs and construction period required for ground improvements has become of greater importance. The Public Works Research Institute carried out joint research with Kiso-Jiban Consultants Co. Ltd., Kitac Co. Ltd., and Fudo Tetra Co. Ltd. over a period from 1998 through 2002, and, from that, developed the ""Arch Action Low Improvement Ratio Cement Column Method"" (hereinafter referred to as the ""ALiCC Method"") that enables ground improvement with a lower improvement ratio (the improved area ratio is approx. 10% to 30%) than is required for conventional methods, while also ensuring stabilization and minimizing the settling of embankments.In the area of mitigation methods for soft ground by deep mixing, the dominant method until now has been that (50% or more of improvement ratio) shown in Fig. 1. This method comprehensively improves the area under the face of the slopes of both sides of the embankment. This is based on the calculated stability against rotational slip, which states, ""the most effective way to ensure the stabilization of the embankment environment is to carry out improvements of the area under the face of the slope."" Therefore, for the area under the face of the slope, ground improvement by deep mixing was done, and for the soft ground in the area under the middle part of the embankment, accelerated consolidation methods (hereinafter referred to as ""conventional method"") such as sand draining method and paper draining method were used. Mitigation measures that combine these improvement methods have also been mainstream for a long period of time and are used to prevent side deformation around the embankment. However, there have been some problems that have occurred, such as a situation where consolidation settling occurs in the center area under the embankment where no improvement had been carried out. This phenomenon leads to a situation in which the improved soil columns in the area under the face the of slope are pushed to the outside, which results in side deformation occurring around the area of the embankment, and additionally the occurrence of a step due to a situation of differential settlement between the improved ground and the consolidation advancing part, which results in cracks in the embankment."

Jan 1, 2015