Search Documents

By Rick Ellman, Ian Chaney

"The Hampton Roads area encompassing the Norfolk, Virginia Beach and Newport News metropolitan region experiences some of the worst traffic congestion in Virginia. With continued growth of the ports and increasing demand, the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) initiated the Downtown Tunnel/Midtown Tunnel/MLK Expressway Project, a complex undertaking critical to addressing the Hampton Roads area’s transportation needs. The project is a $2.1 billion Design/Build/Finance/Operate (DBFO) endeavor most notably involving the construction of a new two-lane vehicular tunnel utilizing the Immersed Tube Tunnel (ITT) method. The tunnel will pass under the Elizabeth River parallel to the existing Midtown Tunnel between Norfolk and Portsmouth, Va. It will be the largest design-build project constructed in the history of the Hampton Roads District.The New Midtown Tunnel will extend approximately 6,450 ft (1,966 m) along the north side of the existing tunnel where it ties into the existing Midtown Tunnel approaches in Norfolk and Portsmouth. It is being installed in a pre-excavated trench of which approximately 2,250 ft (686 m) required bracing on the Portsmouth side and approximately 1,000 ft (305 m) required bracing on the Norfolk side. The remaining 3,200 ft (975 m) of trench excavation was open cut dredging with laid back side slopes, optimized to reduce dredging, disposal and backfill quantities while also reducing the risk to the existing tunnel. The braced excavation portions of the tunnel alignment were divided into distinct segments which include: Portsmouth Approach Boat Section, Portsmouth Approach Cut-and-Cover Section, Portsmouth Dredge Section, Norfolk Dredge Section, Norfolk Approach Cut-and- Cover Section and the Norfolk Approach Boat Section. All “approach” excavations were performed in the dry and all “dredge” excavations were performed in the wet. Eleven ITT segments are being fabricated in the Sparrows Point Dry Dock facility in Baltimore, Md., and each 14,000 ton (12,700 tonne) segment is being towed approximately 220 mi (354 km) to the site. The ITT segments will extend under the Elizabeth River, with the deepest crossing 90 ft (27 m) at the Federal Navigation Channel. Once beyond the channel limits the ITT rises at an approximate 4.5% slope. Controlled screeding and element lowering operations will be performed primarily from floating barges."

Jan 1, 2014

By Terrence M. Carroll, Chu E. Ho, Dimitrios Niarchos

"Construction of the new extension to Terminal 4 at John F Kennedy International Airport in Queens, New York involved the application of tapered piles for foundation support. Initial design based on past load testing experience had indicated that a pile depth of 65 feet was necessary to achieve a capacity of 394 tons. However, piles with a single length of 62 feet were ordered and installed, which led to marginal performance of the piles. This paper presents the technical considerations for mitigating the situation based on a systematic review of three preliminary pile load tests and dynamic capacity measurements on the shorter piles. Consideration was given to the long term gain in capacity of tapered piles due to set up in the Glacial Sand. The observational approach to the evaluation of piling performance adopted on this project resulted in salvaging many piles which failed to comply with the specified driving criteria. It was acknowledged that a more prudent course of action was for the Contractor to have ordered more appropriate pile lengths that allowed for potential variation in soil conditions across the site. The 4.6% saving in pile material did not warrant the effort that was required to mitigate the 39% of installed piles that did not meet the specified driving criterion.INTRODUCTIONAn expansion project at John F. Kennedy International Airport in Queens, New York involved the Phase 2 extension of Concourse B at Terminal 4. The site consists of 4 to 5 feet of pavement over about 10 feet of hydraulically placed sandy fill. Below this is a layer of marsh deposit, comprising of soft organic clay and peat, up to about 11 feet thick. Beneath the marsh deposits is a deep layer of glacial sand which extends to well over 100 feet below ground. Figure 1 shows the typical subsurface profile at the site. The new structures were supported on 223 steel tapered piles. The piles consisted of a straight steel pipe 18 inches in diameter and 0.375 inches thick, with a 25 feet long tapered bottom section (diameter varying from 18 inches down to 8 inches at the pile toe). The piles were first driven to the founding depth and subsequently in-filled with concrete. The concrete strength (fc) specified was 4,500 psi and the yield strength of the steel piles (fy) was 50 ksi. Initial pile design, based on earlier experience with static pile load testing for Phase 1 development at the same terminal, indicated that a pile length of 65 feet was necessary. However, piles with a single length of 62 feet were ordered and installed by the Contractor, leading to marginal performance of the piles. This paper presents the technical considerations for the adoption of alternative pile driving criteria, based on a systematic review of the preliminary static load test results for the present site and PDA measurements obtained during pile installation, in order to accommodate the capacity of the shorter piles."

Jan 1, 2017

By O. Craciun, C. A. Bridges, M. Cai, J. Sugawara

There are a number of methods that can be adopted for predicting the ultimate lateral resistance of a free-head rigid pile, from the conventional Brinch Hansen and Broms solutions to three-dimensional finite element analyses. Often these methods give rise to significantly different pile ultimate lateral capacities which could lead to either unsafe or too conservative designs. It is also well known that finding a rigorous and practical solution is challenging due to the complex three dimensional and nonlinear soil-structure interaction. This paper reviews some of the most common methods and produces results of pile ultimate lateral capacities embedded in cohesive or cohesionless soils. Subsequently, a finite element analysis is performed using PLAXIS 3D modelling under the same design conditions. Based on comparison of results, limitations and advantages are highlighted, and the most suitable method is proposed from a practical point of view.

Nov 1, 2022

By Zhang Yaonian

This paper describes full-scale tests on ten large bored piles with grouted end conducted for three projects in the urban area of Fuzhou city. Test program included site investigation, pile installation and end grouting. The piles were instrumented with strain gages and load cells to determine load distribution in the piles. Test results showed that end grouting improves load-settlement performance of bored pile. End grouting significantly increases the shaft resistance near the pile end. The better the end condition, the greater the shaft resistance. The average shaft resistance of the bored piles with grouted end is much higher than that of piles without grouting.

Jan 1, 2004

Jan 1, 1997

Jan 1, 2001

By Willie M. NeSmith

Cast-in-place piling are a staple of the deep foundation industry, and are used (in various forms) worldwide. In assessing the application of cast-in-place piles, it is of value to reflect on the development of the various systems, in order to understand how the current processes and equipment came to be. This paper traces the evolution of the cast-in-place industry. Emphasis is on developments in the United States; however, since there has been a substantial fusion of US and European processes, notable European developments are also discussed.

Jan 1, 2006

The intent of this manual is to provide guidelines for inspectors of drilled shaft construction otherwise referred to as drilled piers, caissons or bored piles. It should also be helpful to train beginning geotechnical engineers with limited first hand experience or for geotechnical engineers who are training inspectors. It is expected that the general guidelines and procedures described here will be supplemented by local geotechnical engineers working in a particular region based on local practice and experience. Since drilled shaft construction procedures vary widely based on local geology and size of project, an all-inclusive manual is not considered practical. This manual focuses on traditional topside inspection for routine drilled shaft construction. Other inspection and evaluation methods that rely on electronic equipment are available, but these methods require extensive training and experience in the interpretation of results. These more sophisticated methods of drilled shaft inspection and evaluation are common in construction, but they are usually provided by specialty subconsultants. The subconsultant will typically submit a report for each shaft, which will be reviewed by the geotechnical engineer. Other manuals are available to describe the electronic methods of drilled shaft inspection.

Jan 1, 2004

By Dr Karsten Galipp, Kai-Julian I. Hendler, Prof. Manuel G. Pinheiro, Dr Peter J. Bourne-Webb

With a share of approximately 11% of global greenhouse gas emissions, the construction industry contributes significantly towards climate change. This is why construction projects should not only be assessed on costs and technical solutions, but also on their carbon emissions. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is a tool which can quantify the environmental impacts of a construction project over its entire lifetime. The objective of this study was to determine the carbon footprint of three types of quay wall structures, namely sheet pile combi-walls, open piled decks and caissons using an LCA approach. Each of these quay walls were studied under the same boundary conditions, such as design life, ground conditions, dimensions, location and so on. The analysis showed that the sheet pile wall has the lowest carbon footprint whereas the open piled structure has the highest. Furthermore, it could be shown that the largest share of greenhouse gases (approximately 80%) is emitted during the production of construction materials. The transportation of materials and construction activities each contributed under 12% to total emissions. The sensitivity analysis showed that with innovative approaches, such as adapting the concrete mix design, the carbon footprint could be reduced by 26% to 40%.

May 1, 2022

By Don Deardorff, Ke Yang, Yingcai Han, Ken Sorensen, Robert Kruger, Mark Petersen, Diane Fiorelli, Larry Goldfarb, Kathryn Petek, Kwabena Ofori-Awuah

Design of deep foundations for lateral loads requires an understanding of soil-foundation-structure response during loading. Lateral loads on a deep foundation (piles) could be due to earthquakes, winds, waves, and/or machine vibrations. Over the years, analysis of response of piles due to lateral loads evolved from closed-form solutions to p-y methods to strain wedge to finite element/finite difference modeling. Although analysis of lateral response of piles and shafts is routinely performed, there is no single guidance document and/or standard for design and testing. Several different analytical methods are available for the analysis, and the resulting design can result in significantly different responses which can create confusion. This is especially true for analyzing and designing piles in potentially liquefiable soils with lateral spread issues under seismic conditions.This guidance document is intended to assist geotechnical engineers, pile designers, and contractors in analysis, design, and testing of piles and drilled shafts for lateral loads. This document discusses the background of different analytical and testing procedures and presents the recommended methods for analysis, design and testing of piles for lateral loads.Chapter 1 defines the different kinds of lateral loads to which a single pile or pile group may be subjected. This first chapter also presents different types of piles used to resist lateral loads.Chapter 2 discusses geotechnical issues related to lateral pile design such as liquefaction and lateral spreading and other non-seismic issues. Also addressed in Chapter 2 is geotechnical site characterization (as related to lateral loads) in terms of site investigation, in-situ testing, geophysical testing, laboratory testing, and estimation of soil/rock properties.Chapter 3 discusses the background and available analytical methods and tools for the analysis and design of single piles and drilled shafts. Several methods of analyses from closed-form elastic solutions to the finite element/finite difference solutions and their applicability are discussed. Available commercial computer software packages for analyzing single piles and drilled shafts are also presented.Chapter 4 expands the discussion of single piles and drilled shafts into the analysis and design of pile groups. In addition, group effects, resistance of pile caps, results of previous experimental and analytical studies, and available analysis tools and software for pile groups are discussed.Chapter 5 presents the issue of lateral resistance of piles and drilled shafts as discussed in different national and international building and non-building codes. A summary of extensive research on several codes are presented to facilitate the compliance with different codes.Chapter 6 discusses structural design issues of individual piles and drilled shafts such as depth of fixity.Chapter 7 discusses soil structure interaction issues related to kinematic and inertial effects due to seismic loading and available methods of analyses.Chapter 8 discusses and presents the typical procedures for the lateral load testing of piles. This guideline was developed as an aid to the practicing engineer in providing information, direction and commentary on the lateral design of deep foundations. Although all reasonable effort has been made to accurately compile the material and information contained herein, no warranty is made with regard to any such material or information and the Deep Foundation Institute assumes no responsibility for any possible errors or any direct or indirect result of the use of any such material or information. It is not intended that this document address every factor affecting lateral design for every situation. Therefore it is the responsibility of the person utilizing information from this document to confirm that it is appropriate and correct for their situation as well as to understand and properly apply

Jan 1, 2012

Jan 1, 2001

Jan 1, 1985

Jan 1, 1986

By Matthew E. Meyer

The intent of this manual is to provide guidelines for observing and documenting the installation of ACIP piles. The manual may also serve as a guide for the training of inspection personnel. It is expected that the general guidelines and procedures described in this manual for the inspection and installation of ACIP piles will be supplemented by engineering judgment, local practice, and experience. ACIP pile construction procedures will vary depending on soil, rock, and groundwater conditions. This manual represents a wide range of possible applications in a variety of projects. It is not intended to be applicable in all situations nor replace engineering judgment for any given project. Therefore, an all-inclusive inspection manual is not considered practical or desirable. This manual should not be used to interpret or replace project specifications. It has, however, been prepared to complement the Augered Castin- Place (ACIP) Piles Manual model specification (DFI, 2003).

Jan 1, 2010

This manual is limited to Augered Cast-in-Place (ACIP) piles constructed using a hollow stem continuous flight auger. 1.1SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS The intent of this manual is to provide guidelines for observing and documenting the installation of ACIP piles. The manual may also serve as a guide for the training of inspection personnel. It is expected that the general guidelines and procedures described in this manual for the inspection and installation of ACIP piles will be supplemented by engineering judgment, local practice, and experience. ACIP pile construction procedures will vary depending on soil, rock, and groundwater conditions. This manual represents a wide range of possible applications in a variety of projects. It is not intended to be applicable in all situations nor replace engineering judgment for any given project. Therefore, an all-inclusive inspection manual is not considered practical or desirable. This manual should not be used to interpret or replace project specifications. It has, however, been prepared to complement the Augered Cast-in-Place (ACIP) Piles Manual model specification (DFI, 2003).

Jan 1, 2010

By Paikowsky, Samuel G.

"Due to the way drilled deep foundations are being constructed, their structural integrity and geotechnical capacity are highly variable. Drop weight systems are increasingly being used to dynamically test the capacity and integrity of drilled deep foundations. Conventional pile driving hammers are often either inadequate or not economical to test these foundations and drop weight systems have therefore been developed to allow for dynamic testing.The advantages of the tests include high mobility, short testing time, low cost relative to static load tests (allowing multiple tests at a single site), and integrity/construction quality evaluation concurrent with capacity determination. The dynamic testing method for drilled deep foundations encounter several difficulties including: the need for a pre-testing analysis for matching pile, soil and testing system, adequate mass and drop height to reflect the mobilized capacity without structural damage, test interpretations for irregularly shaped and/or non-uniform piles, need for reliable dynamic measurements depending on the impact and the distance between the impact and the measuring point, and limited knowledge about the accuracy of the predictions.The principles of the tests are presented using simplified models and demonstrated via a case history. Drop weight systems are reviewed. Dynamic measurement principles are explained and the construction and testing quality effects are outlined and demonstrated via numerical modeling and case histories. A comparison of dynamic and static tests is presented via a database, case histories and finally a short review of relevant codes is provided.1 IntroductionTraditional static axial load test is performed by a slow application of a force produced against independent reaction, imitating structural loading. It is the most reliable method to determine the pile’s performance as commonly required under typical service conditions. The major limitations of this testing are: (i) high cost associated with set-up, test duration, interpretation and construction delays, and (ii) inability to obtain information about the pile-soil interaction along the pile without additional testing means (e.g. tell tales, strain gauges, etc.). These limitations are acute when high capacity foundations are involved."

Jan 1, 2015

Jan 1, 1987

By Chris L. Powell, Russell J. Denny

"The remotely located Cockatoo Island iron ore mine off the Kimberley coast in the northwest of Western Australia has been in operation since 1951. The mine was recently expanded up to about 50 m (165 ft) below sea level using staged construction to create a rockfill seawall around the open cut mining operation. Late in 2013, to allow expansion of subsea iron ore mining operations, Wagstaff Piling was engaged to install a seepage barrier through the rockfill seawall and into the underlying seabed sediments.Earlier stages of seawall construction had used a variety of different construction techniques with varied success, and the history of subsea mining on the island had been plagued with failures, including failures in the slope of the seawall itself, hanging wall failure underneath and inside the seawall, and footwall failures as the ore was mined leaving the rock face inclined at 55 degrees, parallel to the bedding. The current expansion, known as the Stage 4 expansion, was more tightly constrained by the pit geometry and available materials than previous seawall expansions that adopted clay core and sheet pile seepage barrier solutions. In Stage 4, an innovative seepage barrier solution using a grout curtain was selected to provide the necessary cutoff to allow access to highgrade ore, while protecting the mine from inundation by the sea.Seawall ConceptThe open cut subsea mining operation consisted of a 3 km (1.9 mi) long narrow pit along the south side of Cockatoo Island that extended to depths of about 50 m (165 ft) below sea level, and were exposed to the open sea on the south side of the pit. Massive tidal variations of more than 10.5 m (34.5 ft) required a seawall founded on the seabed, extending upwards to RL+13, to safely protect the pit from the high tide level rising to above RL+10."

Jan 1, 2017

By Chris L. Powell, Russell J. Denny

"The remotely located Cockatoo Island iron ore mine off the Kimberley coast in the northwest of Western Australia has been in operation since 1951. The mine was recently expanded up to about 50 m (165 ft) below sea level using staged construction to create a rockfill seawall around the open cut mining operation. Late in 2013, to allow expansion of subsea iron ore mining operations, Wagstaff Piling was engaged to install a seepage barrier through the rockfill seawall and into the underlying seabed sediments.Earlier stages of seawall construction had used a variety of different construction techniques with varied success, and the history of subsea mining on the island had been plagued with failures, including failures in the slope of the seawall itself, hanging wall failure underneath and inside the seawall, and footwall failures as the ore was mined leaving the rock face inclined at 55 degrees, parallel to the bedding. The current expansion, known as the Stage 4 expansion, was more tightly constrained by the pit geometry and available materials than previous seawall expansions that adopted clay core and sheet pile seepage barrier solutions. In Stage 4, an innovative seepage barrier solution using a grout curtain was selected to provide the necessary cutoff to allow access to high-grade ore, while protecting the mine from inundation by the sea.Seawall ConceptThe open cut subsea mining operation consisted of a 3 km (1.9 mi) long narrow pit along the south side of Cockatoo Island that extended to depths of about 50 m (165 ft) below sea level, and were exposed to the open sea on the south side of the pit. Massive tidal variations of more than 10.5 m (34.5 ft) required a seawall founded on the seabed, extending upwards to RL+13, to safely protect the pit from the high tide level rising to above RL+10."

Jan 1, 2017

By Pete Howell, Patrick Granitzki, Alicia Plinio, Janitha Batagoda

The New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA) Red Hook Houses was subjected to damage during Superstorm Sandy. As a result, the NYCHA has an ongoing project known as Restoration Associated with Sandy Recovery Program to improve the resistance against future storms. The specific project included 28 residential buildings and several service buildings within the Red Hook Development. The subsurface conditions within the eastern portion of the site included existing fill material underlain by varying stratums of very loose, loose and medium dense silty sands followed by very soft to medium stiff clay or dense silty sands. The western portion of the site included existing fill material, very loose to medium dense silty sands and organic clayey silts underlain by very soft to medium stiff sandy silts. Based on the geotechnical report, a conventional driven steel pile system was specified containing two pile depths. As part of the project bidding, an alternative pile type was recommended and analyzed to provide quicker installation, reduce vibrations, reduce noise, and provide relatively large cost savings. Due to relatively high lateral loading, an innovative double steel casing drilled displacement piles was proposed as the alternative pile option. Field testing proved the piles capable of the required project capacities and the use of drilled displacement piles as the best alternative for the project and accepted by the NYCHA.

Oct 1, 2022