Search Documents

By Adam Zagorski, Rusty Lucido, Curt Scheyhing

"The current California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) practice based on AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications is to use the O’Neill and Reese method (FHWA, 1999) for calculating the side resistance and base resistance of Cast-in-Drilled-Hole (CIDH) piles / drilled shafts. In this calculation, end bearing is typically neglected for piles constructed using a wet method due to questionable reliability of end bearing resulting from soil disturbance and inadequate cleaning of the base. Pressure grouting below the tips of drilled shafts in cohesionless soils has long been used worldwide to provide reliable end bearing capacity, but for decades it was relatively unused in this country. It has been used increasingly in the United States over the last decade. Before this project tip grouting has not been utilized on or accepted by Caltrans to maximize piles end bearing capacity. This project proved that tip grouting to mobilize reliable base resistance can be successfully implemented on a full-scale bridge project requiring over 350 large diameter shafts.For the Gerald Desmond Bridge Replacement Project, Shimmick/FCC/Impregilo, JV utilized a temporary Oscillator casing to the full depth to install CIDH piles. Piles were constructed by the wet method and then pressure grouted below the pile tip. A tip grouting procedure for these large diameter shafts was developed and tested to specifically address the geology and constraints of the project. This procedure was then proven during the Load Testing of test piles during the Test Shaft construction phase of the project. Tests showed a minimum reliable base resistance of 150 ksf could be mobilized in very dense sand at a downward movement of 5% of the pile diameter for piles ranging from 4.9 to 8.2 feet in diameter. By tip grouting, the length and diameter of the piles were significantly reduced."

Jan 1, 2017

By Brian M. Fraley

"Portions of the Catholic Total Abstinence Fountain in Fairmount Park in Philadelphia, Pa., were in “imminent danger,” according to a restoration services request for proposals (RFP) issued by the City of Philadelphia in August 2014. Open voids in the subsurface beneath the foundation were causing ongoing settlement of the fountain.The fountain was unveiled in 1876 as an ornamental drinking fountain for the Centennial International Exhibition, which celebrated the signing of the Declaration of Independence. Its creation was commissioned by the Catholic Total Abstinence Union of America, an Irish temperance organization that advocated for total abstinence from alcohol. Ironically, the fountain ran dry decades ago.The now-defunct fountain features a 100 ft (30.5 m) wide granite base with three steps in the shape of a Maltese cross. The centerpiece — enclosed by a 40 ft (12.2 m) diameter basin — is a 15 ft (4.6 m) tall statue of Moses perched atop an iglooshaped marble mound. Four subsidiary statues rise from granite pedestals at the tips of each arm of the cross, including Archbishop John Carroll, Charles Carroll of Carrollton, Father Theobald Mathew and Commodore John Barry.Natural and Man-Made DamageThe City of Philadelphia’s RFP called attention to three “high priority structural areas.” It was noted that Moses, Father Mathew and the steps surrounding the fountain had been documented as public hazards. The long-term effects of water infiltration had set in, eroding mortar joints and causing some stones to jut out. Furthermore, the stone base supporting the 16 ton (14.5 tonne) statue of Moses was in danger of collapsing. The statue of Father Mathew had been struck by lightning in 1910 and was repaired with an iron and metal pin anchor system, which had succumbed to corrosion. The city considered the statue of Father Mathew as the most threatened of the statues. Mike Miluski, P.E., vice president of Compaction Grouting Services (CGS), recalled “the fountain was in pretty bad shape” as he walked onto the site in August 2016 and immediately recognized the challenges ahead."

Jan 1, 2017

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 Herbert F. ?Buck? Darling

A bridge replacement project in Rochester, NY, encountered difficulties when it was determined that rock below one pier was sloping downward toward the river at an angle of 42 degrees versus anticipated 12 degrees. Cofferdam design and construction became very difficult. The unanticipated subsurface conditions delayed the project by eighteen months and increased the cofferdam cost by almost $3.0 million ($US) when direct costs and associated delays were taken into account. The initial approach after discovery of the problem was to use the same type pier design and modify the cofferdam accordingly. This resulted in a cofferdam 12 meters (39.4 feet) deep on the shore side and 18 meters (59.0 feet) deep on the water side. The design used a master pile system to attain required wall strength and used rock anchors to prevent the cofferdam from moving toward the river. The pier foundation was then redesigned by the owner using revised seismic parameters. The original stepped footing carved into rock was replaced by caissons socketed into the rock beneath a large tremie concrete placement. The revised pier and cofferdam designs caused a shift from a mostly land based cofferdam, excavation, and rock removal project into an almost entirely water based cofferdam, caisson drilling, and tremie construction project. These design changes resulted in a reliable, safe, and unusual cofferdam and construction method. All of this was accomplished within a very narrow worksite with a railroad on one side, and the river with its public and commercial freighter traffic on the other. In addition, the existing two-leaf drawbridge was to be maintained in place which put further limitations on the water borne equipment. The engineering and construction considerations, problems, and solutions related to these cofferdams and pier foundations are presented.

Jan 1, 2013

By Brian Wilson, Franz-Werner Gerressen

"Cutter Soil Mixing, also known as CSM, was developed in Europe as an alternate method of Deep Mixing to the more traditional single and multiple auger techniques, and brought to market by Bauer Maschinen GmbH (Bauer), towards the end of 2003. Initial development of the technique had been completed in a joint venture between Bauer and Bachy Soletanche. In 2004 the concept was introduced to the North American market. Continued development of the method and demonstration of its versatility, both in terms of applications and applicable soil types has seen a steady growth in the number of designs incorporating the approach, and contractors offering the technique. This paper provides a brief overview of the variety and size of projects and applications where the method has been adopted, discusses some lessons learned with respect to equipment operation as well as the improvements that have been introduced to the equipment, and briefly reviews the current state of practice, as well as some of the associated on-going research and development.BACKGROUNDCutter Soil Mixing (CSM) is a technique for deep soil mixing that was initially developed as a collaborative effort between Bauer Maschinen (Bauer) and Bachy Soletanche, but which ultimately resulted in the separate development of two somewhat different brands of CSM tool. The Bauer brand of CSM entered the European market in 2004, and was first promoted in the North American market in late 2004, with the first project starting in 2005. The Bachy Soletanche brand, sometimes referred to as “Geomix” was first marketed in Europe in 2005 and the first model introduced in North America in 2007.The development of the Cutter Soil Mixing technique utilized the experiences gained from Trench Cutter/Hydrofraise equipment, developing a technique that incorporates two cutting wheels rotating about a horizontal axis as opposed to the more conventional deep soil mixing approach which utilizes augers and mixing paddles rotating about vertical axes. Whereas the Trench Cutter/Hydrofraise technique excavates the soil from within a panel, and supports the open hole using a bentonite slurry, the CSM technique cuts and displaces the soil whilst pumping a slurry/grout directly into the soil through a port located between the wheels. The combination of cutting the soil while introducing an appropriate volume of slurry effectively fluidizes the column of soil around and above the cutter head. While this process achieves a high degree of mixing, even on the downward cutting stroke, thorough in-situ mixing typically occurs on the withdrawal stroke, when most of the slurry is added."

Jan 1, 2015

By Michael Hughes, Selva Selvamohan, Ray Costa

"Cutoff walls are commonly used to mitigate underseepage problems for levee remediation projects. At abrupt changes in seepage cutoff wall depths there is a potential for water to flow around the back of the deeper cutoff wall leading to elevated seepage pressures on the landside that could result in exit gradients exceeding design criteria. This condition is referred to as end-around-effects and is a complex problem that requires detailed and time consuming 3-D numerical modeling to represent accurately. This paper presents a simple approach for assessing end-around-effects using the results of 2- D seepage analysis to determine if lateral extension of the deeper portion of the cutoff wall is required. This simplified approach provides a pragmatic solution to a complex 3-D problem. The presented procedure was used as part of the Feather River West Levee Project in Yuba City, California, to assess end-around-effects at 26 locations. The results showed that wall extensions of up to 100 feet were needed at only 2 locations.INTRODUCTIONAs the lead geotechnical consultant for the Feather River West Levee Project, AECOM were responsible for designing levee remediation works for approximately 35 miles of levee protecting the area around Yuba City, California, and communities to the north and south. Due to land use constraints, seepage cutoff walls were the main remediation alternative selected to address underseepage issues for the project.As part of the design review process, the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) requested AECOM to look at 26 locations along the levee alignment where the depth of cutoff wall changed abruptly from shallow to deep, or vice versa. At these locations there was the potential for seepage pressures to pass behind the deeper section of cutoff wall and stress the blanket layer landward of the cutoff wall. A condition referred to as end-around-effects.End-around-effects involve complex 3-D ground conditions that have traditionally been addressed by laterally extending the deeper section of cutoff wall an arbitrary distance based solely on engineering judgment. In discussions with DWR, AECOM developed a simple procedure to provide a more objective assessment of end-around-effects without the need for detailed and time consuming analysis. This procedure allows the engineer to make an informed decision of whether end-around-effects are a problem at the location of a cutoff wall transition rather than laterally extending the deeper section of cutoff wall an arbitrary distance based on engineering judgment alone."

Jan 1, 2015

By Stuart Coutts

"This paper presents an overview of the author’s experience related to the assessment of the base capacity of straight shafted and enlarged-base bored piles in sand. A design approach based on CPT qc is described which has been calibrated using a database of load tests. The importance of correct installation techniques with instrumentation are illustrated and a discussion is presented on the current use of high strain dynamic testing to validate compliance with design. An example of a recent project with high quality instrumented load test data illustrates the close match to the proposed best practice approach and also highlights the importance for consideration of the effects of stress relief for deep foundations installed in deep excavations.1 INTRODUCTIONContinuous Flight Auger (CFA) piles are the bored foundation pile of choice for sand deposits across Australia. The evolution of the determination of the base resistance of CFA piles has been shaped by available investigative techniques, calculation methods, and calibration of designs with laboratory and field testing. The Cone Penetration Test (CPT) has been widely used in Western Australia (WA) where the test has been commercially available via multiple contractors for more than 25 years. On the East coast, the adoption of CPT testing has been slower with a transition from traditional Standard Penetration Testing (SPT) still occurring. Dynamic pile load tests are often used to derive parameters. The influence of pile installation on performance is commonly misunderstood and is an important element on any discussion of pile capacity for CFA pile types. The interface between the base of the constructed pile and the in-situ soil has an influence on capacity such that a poorly constructed pile base will have limited (if any) contribution to pile performance within the normal working range, generally within a 10 mm movement. The research presented in this paper pertains to CFA piles (no drilling fluids) and enlarged base piles constructed using CFA techniques under drilling fluids such that clean pile/base interface is targeted. Developments in modern piling equipment and instrumentation allow the pressure and volume of delivered concrete/grout to piles to be accurately monitored at various stages of installation such that repeatable ‘best practice’ can be achieved. The changes in soil conditions that occur due to the disturbance of the install technique are also important.Although the results of this research are likely applicable to bored piles, the interface between the pile and in-situ soil (shaft and base) need to be considered for various installation techniques. The effects of stress relaxation (due to removal of soil above pile base and adjacent shaft), time to concreting, and the zone of disturbed soil around the pile shaft are paramount.2 INSTALLATION CONSIDERATIONS The pile mix (concrete/grout) and interface with the in-situ soil are also an important consideration. For example, coarse grained, poorly graded, dry, clean sand will be partially permeated by most pile mixes; such that the influenced soil will be enhanced and in instances the overall effective pile dimensions increased. Permeation of the disturbed zone of a pile or anchor shaft along with scale effects (Lehane 2009) can have significant effect on shaft capacity and shaft frictions significantly exceeding expected are not uncommon based on ‘theoretical’ dimensions. Advancements in mix technology and mix techniques also have a large influence on the pile/soil interface. The ability of the piling rig and augers to excavate a plumb and gauge hole can also have a large influence on the zone of soil disturbed adjacent the constructed pile with a resulting influence on capacity."

Jan 1, 1900

By William F. Starke

"The Ontario College of Art & Design (OCAD) located in Toronto, Ontario, found itself in dire need of space due to increased enrollment, leading them to embark on a major expansion and redevelopment on campus. The expansion entailed an additional 115,000 sq.ft. (10,700 m2) and a new major structure was required, as well as extensive redevelopment of existing buildings. The new Sharp Centre for Design was designed by acclaimed British Architect Will Alsop, of Alsop Architects, in a joint venture with Toronto-based Robbie/Young + Wright Architects. The OCAD campus is cramped for space and the design selected was a structure built over top of existing structures. The building has been described as resembling a “shoebox in the sky”, supported on raked columns transmitting high lateral forces as well as compression load to the foundations. There are 12 such supports, each supported by an individual caisson. In addition, the project entailed installation of other caissons in the courtyard area with the construction work accomplished under very confined conditions among the existing structures. The remarkable design for the new Ontario College of Arts will surely make it another of Toronto’s architectural landmarks. Several things make this project stand out as a unique deep foundations project.First is the architectural design. Words cannot do it justice: the picture is the only effective way to start to describe it. This is a big two-story box, built over the top of a fragile existing building. The underside of the box is 86 ft (26m) above street level. Students remained still inside the old building while construction was going on around and above them. There were serious concerns about vibration – not only its effects on the academic life; but more significantly, upon the stability and safety of the old building, which rests somewhat shakily on shallow spread footings.Steel stilts that look like toothpicks when scaled against the new and existing structures support the box. The stilts are much sturdier than they appear from the pictures, but it is easy to visualize the complexity of the loads they transfer to the foundations below."

Jan 1, 2004

By Donald A. Bruce

"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, 2015

By Kyle Kershaw

Micropiles are routinely used in the United States for foundation support and stabilization of slopes. In recent years, several retaining walls have been constructed using micropiles in an A-frame type configuration to support temporary and permanent excavations at sites with limited access and limited right-of-way. Typical A-frame micropile walls consist of a row of vertical micropiles at the face of the wall and a row of battered micropiles extending into the soil or rock to be retained. The two rows are then tied together with a pile cap such that the front pile acts primarily in bending and the back pile acts primarily in tension. Because of tight right-of-way constraints at a residential site in Aspen, Colorado, it was not possible to construct the wall using conventional shoring systems or micropiles in the typical A-frame configuration. Rather, the wall was designed such that the row of battered piles was installed at the wall face and the row of vertical piles was installed adjacent to the property line behind the wall. As a result of the reverse configuration of the A-frame wall, FLAC, a two-dimensional, finite difference software program, was used to model the soil-structure interaction. The final wall design consisted of both temporary and permanent retaining wall sections with maximum heights of 26 feet. Inclinometers were installed in several piles to monitor the behavior of the retaining walls during and after excavation. This paper presents an overview of the design method, a discussion of construction techniques, and a comparison between the FLAC model and the measured behavior of the wall in the field.

Jan 1, 2007

By Peter J. Nicholson

"IntroductionDuring my more than 40 years in the practice of underground construction and engineering, the industry has seen progress from the dig down to rock or hardpan or alternatively drive concrete or steel into the ground and count the blows; then you can be sure of you have a solid foundation; to the modern day, I’m willing to try anything to save money. Of course these are both exaggerations, but not gross ones. After getting bored being supervision on jobs counting blows, I struck out into the new field of “tie-backs” as they were called in the United States, or “ground anchors” as they were then termed in the United Kingdom. After installing some of the first permanent ground anchors for the Corps of Engineers on Lake Michigan as well as the highest loaded rock anchors of the time at two dams on the Ohio River, we were at the top of our game in the 1970’s. Subsequently in the 1980’s when my view of the future of ground anchors saw their installation becoming a commodity item, we branched out into “Pin Piles” now known as Micro Piles, high capacity, steel tube encased, small diameter (5-12” or so), high capacity (100-500 tons) piling. Next came soil nailing, both temporary and permanent retaining walls, as at Cumberland Gap Kentucky. My next morph was into “Cement Deep Soil Mixing” earlier on, known simply as “soil mixing”. For this education I traveled to Japan several times and established a long-term, Joint Venture, relationship with one of the better known Japanese specialty ground modification companies. In Boston at the “Big Dig” we established the then record size soil mixing project, 500,000 or so cubic meters of CDSM concluding in the year 2000. Since then I’ve been involved as a consultant mainly for dams and levees. Below is the story of how I came to be at this place in the road to innovation in Geotechnical processes."

Jan 1, 2017

By Gerald Verbeek, Erick Baziw

"Downhole Seismic Testing (DST) is an important geotechnical testing technique for site characterization as it provides low strain (<10-5) in-situ interval compression (Vp) and shear (Vs) wave velocity estimates. These velocities are determined by obtaining relative arrival times of source waves as they travel through the stratigraphy and are recorded by one or more vertically offset seismic sensors. A challenging aspect of this process is to characterize the seismic data sets to determine the analysis method that will result in the most accurate interval velocity values. This paper introduces an assessment technique which utilizes linearity estimates (i.e., hodograms fitting straight lines) from the polarization analysis in conjunction with crosscorrelation coefficient calculations of the full waveforms as well as the deviation of the source wave frequency spectrum from a desirable bell-shaped curve. The paper will provide an overview of the technique and include some examples of actual data sets where the technique was applied to analyze those data sets.1. INTRODUCTIONIn general terms, Downhole Seismic Testing (DST) such as Seismic Cone Penetration Testing (SCPT) is a geotechnical technique for measuring in-situ shear and compression wave velocities (VS and VP respectively). The main goal in DST is to obtain arrival times as the source wave travels through the soil profile of interest, and from these arrival times the velocities are then calculated. Figure 1 shows a schematic of the typical DST configuration: a seismic source is used to generate a seismic wave train at the ground surface. One or more downhole seismic receivers are used to record the seismic wave train at predefined depth increments. The downhole receiver(s) may be positioned at selected test depths in a borehole or advanced as part of an instrumentation package as in the case of SCPT. When triggered by the seismic source a data recording system records the response of the downhole receiver(s)."

Jan 1, 2017

By Peter J. Nicholson

During my more than 40 years in the practice of underground construction and engineering, the industry has seen progress from the dig down to rock or hardpan or alternatively drive concrete or steel into the ground and count the blows; then you can be sure of you have a solid foundation; to the modern day, I?m willing to try anything to save money. Of course these are both exaggerations, but not gross ones. After getting bored being supervision on jobs counting blows, I struck out into the new field of ?tie-backs? as they were called in the United States, or ?ground anchors? as they were then termed in the United Kingdom. After installing some of the first permanent ground anchors for the Corps of Engineers on Lake Michigan as well as the highest loaded rock anchors of the time at two dams on the Ohio River, we were at the top of our game in the 1970?s. Subsequently in the 1980?s when my view of the future of ground anchors saw their installation becoming a commodity item, we branched out into ?Pin Piles? now known as Micro Piles, high capacity, steel tube encased, small diameter (5-12? or so), high capacity (100-500 tons) piling. Next came soil nailing, both temporary and permanent retaining walls, as at Cumberland Gap Kentucky. My next morph was into ?Cement Deep Soil Mixing? earlier on, known simply as ?soil mixing?. For this education I traveled to Japan several times and established a long-term, Joint Venture, relationship with one of the better known Japanese specialty ground modification companies. In Boston at the ?Big Dig? we established the then record size soil mixing project, 500,000 or so cubic meters of CDSM concluding in the year 2000. Since then I?ve been involved as a consultant mainly for dams and levees. Below is the story of how I came to be at this place in the road to innovation in Geotechnical processes.

By Claudio Asioli

"The project’s goal was to construct the Al Ghazala Intercontinental, a multi-use development in the bay area of Tripoli overlooking the Mediterranean Sea. The site of the project is located approximately 500 ft (150 m) from the Mediterranean coast, near the Al Ghazala roundabout in the town center of Tripoli, Libya. The investor of the project was Magna Properties Group, Ltd. – Libya, the main contractor was Man Enterprise S.A.L., and the design and construction management was performed by Dar Al-Handasah Engineering. Trevi S.p.A. was contracted to perform the design and construction of the anchored diaphragm walls and dewatering systems for the excavation of a two-level basement car park, which extends across the full footprint of the site.The site was approximately 640 ft by 230 ft (195 m by 70 m) in plan and nearly flat. The groundwater level typically varies from about 11 ft to 23 ft (3.4 m to 7.0 m) above mean sea level. To construct the required raft foundation, it was necessary to excavate the area down to El. -15.7 ft to -26.3 ft (-4.8 m to -8.0 m), which resulted in an excavation depth ranging from about 27 ft to 39 ft (8.3 m to 12.0 m) below the existing ground surface. Subsurface ConditionsThe subsurface site investigation was performed in three phases by Al-Tamier Engineering Consulting Bureau. During Phase 1, a preliminary investigation was undertaken during the early stages of the project to obtain information about the general stratigraphy and groundwater level at the site. Phase 2 was performed to obtain subsurface information and design parameters, and Phase 3 was performed as a supplementary ground investigation to investigate unexpected ground conditions identified during Phase 2. In total, 14 boreholes were drilled to depths ranging from about 80 ft to 180 ft (24 to 55 m). The generalized subsurface profile is quite heterogeneous, and is predominantly composed of sand with silt and gravel that is underlain by limestone, calcarenite and claystone."

Jan 1, 2017

By Claudio Asioli

"The project’s goal was to construct the Al Ghazala Intercontinental, a multi-use development in the bay area of Tripoli overlooking the Mediterranean Sea. The site of the project is located approximately 500 ft (150 m) from the Mediterranean coast, near the Al Ghazala roundabout in the town center of Tripoli, Libya. The investor of the project was Magna Properties Group, Ltd. – Libya, the main contractor was Man Enterprise S.A.L., and the design and construction management was performed by Dar Al-Handasah Engineering. Trevi S.p.A. was contracted to perform the design and construction of the anchored diaphragm walls and dewatering systems for the excavation of a two-level basement car park, which extends across the full footprint of the site.The site was approximately 640 ft by 230 ft (195 m by 70 m) in plan and nearly flat. The groundwater level typically varies from about 11 ft to 23 ft (3.4 m to 7.0 m) above mean sea level. To construct the required raft foundation, it was necessary to excavate the area down to El. -15.7 ft to -26.3 ft (-4.8 m to -8.0 m), which resulted in an excavation depth ranging from about 27 ft to 39 ft (8.3 m to 12.0 m) below the existing ground surface.Subsurface ConditionsThe subsurface site investigation was performed in three phases by Al-Tamier Engineering Consulting Bureau. During Phase 1, a preliminary investigation was undertaken during the early stages of the project to obtain information about the general stratigraphy and groundwater level at the site. Phase 2 was performed to obtain subsurface information and design parameters, and Phase 3 was performed as a supplementary ground investigation to investigate unexpected ground conditions identified during Phase 2. In total, 14 boreholes were drilled to depths ranging from about 80 ft to 180 ft (24 to 55 m). The generalized subsurface profile is quite heterogeneous, and is predominantly composed of sand with silt and gravel that is underlain by limestone, calcarenite and claystone"

Jan 1, 2017

By Shawna Munn, Nadir Ansari, Allison Bennett

"This paper outlines how specification driven design has made Toronto Area transit infrastructure projects more expensive than similar private projects, and provides a case study of the results of an excavation at Launch Shaft 1 (LS1) for the Eglinton Crosstown Light Rail Transit project in Toronto, Ontario. The paper will describe the impact specification driven design parameters can have on design economy, constructability, and schedule and will suggest an alternative approach utilizing the Observational Method. As a result of the initial specification based design, Isherwood was retained by both the General Contractor and the Specialty Excavation Shoring Contractor to provide value engineering leveraging the Observational Method to improve constructability and construction schedule. By using well known, accepted design methods coupled with local experience in lieu of the specified design pressures and parameters, the redesigned bracing scheme reduced construction cost and schedule. This excavation case history can be a lesson learned for future transit projects.The City of Toronto has been developing its transportation network since the mid 1800’s. “Canada’s First Subway” along Yonge Street opened in March 1954 (TTC 1954), with a few additions to the subway network through to the 1980’s. The following two decades marked a long period of slow development due to recessions, budget cuts, and politics along with several cancelled projects. To fill the gap left by years of underfunding, several new transit projects are now under construction in the city as a part of Metrolinx’s $50B, 25 year, “The Big Move” initiative (Metrolinx 2013). The work on these types of infrastructure projects is highlighting a different and developing challenge within the tendering and design specification structure we will call Prescriptive Specification Design (PSD).PSD is a method used within contract specifications to control design risk on a project by applying conservative design methods, factors of safety, or other parameters to make a “fool proof” design. It is akin to requesting a colouring by numbers approach from a painter. There are inherent risks of using this method of tendering a project including increased project costs, longer construction schedules, and decrease of overall project economy. In PSD, the Owner “owns” all of the design risk on a project, including any additional costs due to changed site conditions. However, the Contractor commonly “owns” the risk of any deviations from the design specification they pursue, therefore making any improvements to the design, cost, or schedule less desirable from the Contractor’s point of view. The impact of this type of strict specified approach to design has been seen in transit infrastructure projects in the Toronto area. Figure 1 outlines the range of specified AEPD design pressures as a function of excavation height (H) specified for use in Toronto underground transit projects since the 1970’s to present day. A clear trend can be seen with respect to increased design pressures specified. The ranges shown for each project are intended to account for the potential differences in soil conditions for the highly overconsolidated glaciated soils in the Toronto area. The graph also highlights the typical range, in blue, for the industry practice in Toronto for comparison."

Jan 1, 2017

By Stephan A. Jefferis, Adrian H. Bath

"This paper draws together some themes on the durability of barrier systems, and particularly cementitious systems. For contaminated land and water retaining structures, durability can be poorly addressed at all stages of a project, from specification, to barrier material selection, barrier design including toe-in and through to performance assessment in operation. Permeability (hydraulic conductivity) is a dynamic property which will vary over time as reaction processes propagate through a barrier. However, laboratory testing, when undertaken, tends to be focused on short term tests with aggressive chemicals so that the effects of longer-term processes such as carbonation and leaching by permeating water are missed. For water retaining structures, carbonation and leaching actually may be the most significant processes affecting barrier performance as the groundwater adjacent to many water bodies can be otherwise rather benign (as regards bentonite and cementitious systems). These and other reaction processes have been modelled in the arena of nuclear waste repositories and procedures are well recognised. However, such procedures have yet to be widely adopted for the assessment of other barrier systems.INTRODUCTIONOver the last few decades there has been an enormous amount of laboratory research on the durability of barrier materials or more specifically papers reporting the results of permeability tests. Unfortunately there is a much smaller literature on scaling test results to barrier dimensions in the field or to required design lives. Although in the geotechnical industry durability research has been largely laboratory based, in the nuclear industry where relevant timescales are multi-millennia rather than decades, research has been heavily underpinned by geochemical modelling. A significant purpose of this paper is to examine the tools that may be used to analyse the results of tests on barrier materials used in geotechnical engineering, for example, for water retaining structures and contaminated land and draw the attention of the construction industry to the potential of the modelling procedures developed for nuclear repository assessments. Modelling can help to identify underlying processes and so augment information from laboratory testing focused on changes of physical properties such as permeability and strength."

Jan 1, 2016

By Fabio Santillan, Lyndon Bedford

"This paper presents the main features of the Wolf Creek Dam Foundation Remediation Project, highlighting the innovative construction approach and stressing on how the collaboration between the contractor and the owner became a key element for the success of this project.The main rehabilitation contract, $341 M, was awarded in 2008 for the construction of a 980,000 sqft concrete barrier. Most of this 2ft-wide concrete barrier wall is being built to depths reaching 277 ft using innovative construction techniques proposed by the contractor and under quality control measures that exceed by far the industry standards.The construction of the barrier wall entails the use of nine different foundation techniques which run concurrently following very stringent requirements in terms of verticality, distance between open elements, strength, permeability and dimensions that control the installation sequence of each barrier wall element.The innovative construction approach by the contractor and the collaborative efforts by the contractor and the USACE (“US Army Corps of Engineers”) have brought this unique and very difficult project to a successful completion, setting new standards in the dam foundation industry and nine months ahead of scheduleINTRODUCTIONWolf Creek Dam is on the Cumberland River in south central Kentucky. It provides hydropower, flood control, water supply, and water quality benefits for the Cumberland River system and surrounding region. The lake is a source of recreation that has attracted more visitors (4.89 million) than Yellowstone National Park (2.87 million).The dam and its adjacent reservoir reside upon a heavily Karst bedrock foundation. In late January 2007, the USACE placed the dam under a 'high risk' for failure designation. As a temporary measure, the pool elevation was lowered to 680 ft Above Main Sea Level (“AMSL”), 80 ft below its maximum capacity, with huge impacts to the local economy while the major, and ambitious, $ 594 million remediation program to bring the dam back to its full operating condition was carried out.The main rehabilitation contract of $341 million was awarded in 2008 for the construction of a 980,000 sqft concrete cut-off barrier. Most of this 2ft-wide concrete barrier wall has been built to depths reaching 277 ft using innovative construction techniques under quality control measures that far exceed the industry standards."

Jan 1, 2015

By Larry Rayburn

Augercast piles evolved in the late forties from the process of pressure grouting open holes backfilled with stone. In 1956, a patent was issued for a cast in situ pile by pumping high pressure grout through hollow-stem, continuous flight auger as the auger is gradually withdrawn from the ground. The patent rights expired in 1973 and the use of auger-cast piles greatly expanded with most large deep foundation contractors now installing augercast piles. At one time augercast piles had a bad reputation, partly because of not having a blow count to give some engineers a confidence factor and there were some quality issues. Over the years the quality issues have been eliminated and I am sure the augercast is the most installed pile in private industry and is now being used by some State Agencies.

Jan 1, 2005

By Fawad S. Niazi

Analysis of deep foundations in terms of axial capacity has been a topic of great interest in the soil-structure interaction problems. Soil behavior is governed by a series of complex stress-strain changes that occur during pile installation and subsequent loading. Owing to the difficulties and uncertainties on the basis of the soil strength-deformation characteristics, one of the most frequently followed design practice is to refer to the formulae correlating directly the pile axial capacity components of unit base resistance (qb) and unit shaft resistance (fp) to the data collected from cone penetration test (CPT), i.e. to the tip stress (qc or more proper qt), sleeve friction (fs), and shoulder pore water pressure (u2). The elementary basis for such formulations has been the idea of considering cone penetrometer as a mini-pile foundation. This has resulted in plethora of correlative relationships in the past over 60 years. Such correlations, although empirical, have been worked out on the basis of load test results from both instrumented and un-instrumented full scale piles and are able to accommodate many important variables. A quick review of the evolution process and development of such design formulations is presented with a view to propose recommendations for future research directions, where the latest version of CPT i.e. seismic piezocone test (SCPTu) can be used to advance from capacitysingularity to the complete axial pile load–displacement (Q–w) response.

Jan 1, 2013