Search Documents

Jan 1, 1997

By Michael Arnold, Bob Faulhaber, Joe Nichols

"Center Hill Dam is a critical part of the infrastructure controlling floods at the Caney Fork River and reducing flood levels at the Cumberland, lower Ohio and Mississippi Rivers. The Center Hill Dam Foundation Remediation Project was necessary to address Karst features in the foundation rocks and observed signs of distress of the dam. From 2011 to 2014 BAUER Foundation Corp. (BFC) performed deep foundation works for this project. The executed features of work include the installation of two walls. The first wall extends throughout the clay embankment into the underlying rock to provide encasement during the construction of the second wall. Its width of 7.4 feet makes it the widest diaphragm wall ever installed. The second wall is the actual seepage barrier and provides a continuous 2- feet wide wall. It extends through the first wall into the underlying rock and is up to 300 feet deep. The paper introduces the project, the requirements specified by United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) for encasement and barrier wall and the approaches taken by BFC. It discusses the ground conditions and describes the excavation equipment as well as the excavation methods used. A special focus is put on the steering capabilities of the hydrocutter equipment and the verticality performance.PROJECTBeginning in 2011, BFC was tasked by the USACE with the installation of a seepage barrier/cutoff wall at the Center Hill Dam Foundation Remediation project under a partially performance based specification. The remediation was necessary due to karst features in the foundation rocks and observed signs of distress, which led USACE to rate the dam with the most critical dam safety action classification (DSAC I). The executed features of work include the installation of two walls. The first wall, an encasement wall, extends vertically through the clay embankment and is embedded minimally into the underlying bedrock to provide embankment stability during the construction of the second wall, the barrier wall. The encasement wall is constructed of overlapping panels 7.4 feet (2.25 m) wide, which is the widest diaphragm wall ever installed, and up to 210 feet (64 m) deep. The second wall is the seepage barrier and provides a continuous 2 feet (0.6 m) wide wall consisting of overlapping panels. It extends through the encasement wall into the underlying bedrock and is up to 307 feet (93 m) deep. BAUER BC40 and BC50 hydrocutters mounted on MC96 and MC128 foundation cranes were used to perform the majority of the works (Figure 1). Excavations were performed under bentonite slurry (encasement wall) and water (barrier wall) and concrete was poured with the tremie method. Adding to the challenges, the project had to be executed in an environmentally sensitive area. Based on the high risk, a special focus was put on monitoring, quality control and geometric accuracy. The WallTracker information management system was used to share all relevant data between BFC and USACE (Roff et al. 2014)."

Jan 1, 2017

By Jeremiah M. Jezerski, Russell H. Lutch

The Mount Olivet Road Drop Shaft (MOR-DS) support of excavation (SOE) is a circular unreinforced concrete shaft with an inside diameter of a 30.5 ft (9.3 m) and depth of 120.5 ft (36.7 m), constructed using slurry wall methods. The SOE for the adjacent Mount Olivet Road Approach Channel (MOR-AC) and Mount Olivet Road Ventilation Vault (MOR-VV) near surface structures (NSS) consists of lean mix concrete walls and cement-bentonite walls, respectively, both constructed using slurry wall techniques and reinforced with embedded soldier piles. NSS SOE required multiple levels of preloaded internal bracing, with excavation depths of up to 75 ft (22.9 m). The original design construction sequence for the shaft and NSS SOE required that the MOR-DS be constructed in its entirety and backfilled to ground surface prior to excavation of the adjacent NSS SOE. After installation of the drop shaft and NSS SOE an accelerated construction sequence was implemented requiring the analysis of the excavation support systems to determine if the excavations could be open concurrently without adversely impacting the partially constructed permanent MOR-DS structure. The MOR-DS was analyzed using the finite element analysis (FEA) software, MIDAS GTS, to demonstrate that the unbalanced loads applied to the MOR-DS composite structure due to the revised sequence would not exceed the strength and serviceability requirements per ACI-350 or superseded by the more stringent project requirements. The results of the FEA were used to set limits for geotechnical instrumentation consisting of strain gauges located on the brace levels of the NSS SOE. A comparison of the SOE design hand calculations, FEA model results and instrumentation data is presented.

Oct 1, 2022

By Glen R. Andersen

"Two of the greatest challenges we face in managing our aging infrastructure are to perform accurate condition assessments and to realistically predict the risk of non-action. The aim of this paper is to discuss common pitfalls we face in performing accurate condition assessments of our aging infrastructure using the case history of a recent near miss at the Lake Manatee Dam in Central Florida. The dam was placed into service in 1967 and was inspected every couple of years by dam safety engineers beginning in 1978. Although there was substantial and repeated evidence of a serious piping and internal erosion problem in each of these inspections, the problem was overlooked by most of the inspection teams. In 2012, the inspection team concluded that: “the Lake Manatee Reservoir Dam is well maintained and is in very good overall condition.” However, in 2013 a new team inspected the dam from an entirely different perspective, identified potentially serious conditions, performed an integration of the historical inspection data and concluded that: 1) the Lake Manatee Dam was in a severely distressed state; and, 2) without an immediate intervention there was a high risk of an uncontrolled release of the reservoir most likely following a large rainfall event and prolonged opening of the service spillway. This case history highlights human factors contributing to the near miss including group think and focusing on changes from prior inspections. The integration of historical inspection data is recommended for managing our aging infrastructure.INTRODUCTIONThe engineering analytical techniques most appropriate for assessing an aging infrastructure can be distinct from those used for the original design. To adequately manage our aging infrastructure it is necessary to change our perspective from anticipating failure mechanisms and designing to prevent them to assessing condition, detecting the presence of potential failure mechanisms, and assessing the potential risks. In many circumstances the failure mechanisms currently active may not have been anticipated by the original design team.We have developed a substantial body of experience in the design of our infrastructure. Full scale and laboratory testing coupled with the application of scientific principles to model behavior has led to many powerful design tools. The continued serviceability of our infrastructure as its elements reach their design lives stands as a legacy to our profession. However, under the sustained effect of limited resources for maintenance and rehabilitation parts of our infrastructure are in a highly deteriorated state. Unfortunately, the condition of some of these has not been properly assessed. This paper focuses on the Lake Manatee Dam in Central Florida and the process used to clearly identify its highly deteriorated state. While there are many factors that contributed to the lack of a proper assessment of its condition, the focus herein will be on human factors and in particular how “Group Think”, “Aversion to Bad News”, and “Condition Assessments Based on Changes to Prior Condition” may have contributed to not properly identifying the development of a serious failure mechanism."

Jan 1, 2017

Jan 1, 1993

By Philip J. H. Ball

The new application and development of grout jacking processes has combined, over the last decade in particular, to provide a method by which the effects of new underground construction on superficial structures can be controlled to acceptable levels. This paper sets out the basic principles, processes and limitations of compensation grouting. It describes key elements of the philosophy and design and details the control systems required to perform satisfactorily. To illustrate the application, a case history is described for the construction of a shaft and tunnel within and beneath the prestigious structure of Harrods in London.

Jan 1, 2000

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

By Helen D. Robinson

The seawalls that surround Ellis Island were constructed in the early 1900s and now show varying degrees of deterioration. An innovative approach to the structural repair of the seawalls was developed, which consisted of the use of micropiles for stabilization of vertical and horizontal seawall movements. The micropiles were installed through the existing seawalls and penetrated through a thick overburden, consisting of soft alluvial deposits and relatively hard glacial till, and were bonded into Manhattan Schist. Drilling of the micropiles often encountered timber and other obstructions. The selection of micropiles for stabilization of the seawalls offered significant advantages over other foundation systems and over alternative soil improvement techniques. They allowed drilling through a variety of materials without the need for significant retooling or changes to the drilling procedure. This reduced the impact of foundation construction on the sensitive historical landscape and structures, and prevented the need for significant foundation work from the water side of the seawalls. In addition, micropiles offered relatively high installation rates and flexibility to adapt to the varying conditions along the seawalls.

Jan 1, 2008

By Gordon Demetrick

3900 Yonge St. was not a typical site on which to build a condominium apartment. A steep hill covered the majority of the site. In order to use as much of this site as possible, the rear of the building was to have nine stores cut into the face of the hill. A permanent shoring system was required as the building structure was not designed to provide sufficient stabilizing elements to support the total earth pressure. The total excavation depth required was 36 m (120'-0") with the upper 12 m (40'-0") to be backsloped. The vertical face of soil to be supported was 24 m (80'-0'). The shoring system originally designed by the Structural Engineer was to support this face by installing soldier piles and inclined earth anchors. During bid preparation it became evident to us that the system as designed would be difficult and expensive to install due to wet soil conditions. An innovative design was required to overcome these problems. Anchor Shoring hired John Stephenson Consultants Ltd. to aid them in accomplishing this goal. After extensive investigation together with The Trow Group, a unique design was proposed which provided a practical solution to the shoring problem.

Jan 1, 1987

By Jeffrey C. Schuh, Logan Bloemer, Daniel P. Dietzler

Over the past 30 years, the authors have encountered numerous projects where recognizing the geology, soil properties and groundwater conditions, and considering alternative construction techniques have promoted efficient and cost-saving construction. The construction documents for these projects, produced by various engineering firms, provided basic information on geotechnical conditions. The authors became involved in each project either because there was a problem during design or construction or, as a contractor, won the project because they saw a value engineering opportunity to take advantage of the geologic setting of the project to design and build alternatives to what the designer depicted. Understanding the geologic setting is critical before planning and designing begins. Being able to work with the geology and the materials on site is preferred before specifying more costly and complex solutions, which often require the importing of materials and adherence to unnecessary and/or inappropriate specifications. Failing to understand the geology or not knowing all the techniques available for construction can lead designers to develop solutions that could be inappropriate. This paper presents several examples of value engineering and project performance enhancements developed through knowledge of basic soil mechanics and implementing innovative solutions. History and Background Most people attend DFI meetings, present their experiences, listen to others, and read articles and papers with the hope they can learn from others. Geotechnical engineers and contractors often interface with others in the execution of projects who have, at best, a rudimentary knowledge of geology and soil mechanics. Of course, there is a need for architects, bankers, and regulators, etc., but they typically do not have much interest in the nuances of geotechnical engineering, which relies on both art and science. Thus, significant time is spent educating counterparts in the need for comprehensive subsurface investigation programs and the intricacies of construction in the “dirt,” as they typically refer to soil and rock.

Jan 1, 2019

By Roy H. Borde

The design of foundations to support overhead signs is primarily based on providing adequate resistance against horizontal wind loads. The typically used subgrade reaction model for the load-deflection analysis of laterally loaded piles and shafts has been found to underpredict the capacity of shafts with length to diameter ratios less than five. The general applicability of an improved model incorporating the influence of shear and moment resistance at the shaft base is demonstrated. The detrimental effect of ground surface slope angle on the ultimate capacity is discussed, and a design chart for estimating the magnitude of the reduction in capacity is presented. A comparison between the predicted and measured responses of nine full-scale load tests performed within this study and sixteen external tests is presented. The models described are implemented in the computer program "LTBASE".

Jan 1, 1988

By Jason Herron, Joseph Brown

The common couplings for joining sections of helical piles with an outside diameter of 6.625 inches and 8.625 inches are square on square, flange to flange, external pipe sleeve, internal pipe sleeve, and welded joint. Each coupling type has advantages and disadvantages in efficiency, capacity, installation, and economics of the installed pile. All these coupling types have been used in the helical pile market in North America for various applications and designs. Many of these applications require on-site testing, but test records are not typically shared with the helical pile industry. Due to the lack of information available for square on square and flange to flange couplings, testing was done to compare the efficiency of installation, load to deflection response, and torque to capacity ratios of external pipe sleeve, square on square, and flange to flange couplings. Field installations and tension tests were performed in non-cohesive (sand type) soil near Caseyville, IL and in cohesive (clay type) soil in Centralia, MO. The data collected during these tests included rotations per foot during installation, installation torque, applied pressure, and deflection. The results of this testing are analyzed and discussed within this paper. The results indicate that the square to square coupling is the most efficient of the designs tested, but this conclusion cannot be fully justified without further testing due to the variability in the data gathered and the small number of piles tested. INTRODUCTION A helical pile is typically assumed to be a medium-displacement pile when its outside diameter is between 4.5 inches and 8 inches and a high-displacement pile when its outside diameter is greater than 8 inches. A helical pile designer has multiple options when selecting a coupling type for medium- to high-displacement helical piles. Each type of coupling has advantages and disadvantages and must be analyzed on the bases of efficiency, capacity, installation, and economics of a project. Typical couplings that are chosen by designers include square on square, flange to flange, external pipe sleeve, internal pipe sleeve, and welded joint. A helical pile must transfer axial, lateral, bending moment, and torsional loads, and the coupling must be designed to effectively and efficiently transfer each type of load. During the installation of a helical pile, the rate of penetration and the disturbance of soil layers play a critical role in the efficiency and torque to capacity ratio (Kt) of the pile. It is common for a coupling to protrude beyond the outside diameter of the pipe section being used. This is necessary for the function of certain coupling types and can facilitate the connection of couplings. However, it causes increased soil disturbance and reduce the rate of penetration due to soil bearing against the protruding portion of the coupling. A helical pile designer typically will work to minimize the coupling protrusion and create a pile with optimal installation efficiency but may choose a design with lower installation efficiency if it offers sufficient economic advantage.

Jan 1, 2019

By D. V. Roberts

Approximately 800 private consulting engineering firms in America specialize in geotechnical engineering. The gross income from these firms totals about $500 to $600 million per year. Sixty-five to seventy-five percent of this geotechnical work is per­formed by consulting engineers that belong to the Association of Soil and Foundation Engineers (ASFE). This paper presents statistics concerning the business activities and functions provided by ASFE member firms. The procedures used in typical projects are described. The paper concludes with a summary of major trends which are impacting the American geotechnical practice today.

Jan 1, 2010

By Rakam Lama Tamang, Michael J. Byle, Stephen Ernst

"For various reasons, dredging may become necessary in front of existing bulkhead walls, either for channel deepening or for environmental remediation of contaminated sediments. The removal of sediments at the base of bulkhead walls removes support for the toe of the wall that must be assessed. Evaluation of this impact can be problematic for aging bulkheads for which no design or construction records exist. This paper will address the steps that should be taken in investigation and analysis to assure proper assessment and means to address uncertainties and gaps in information. The steps include pre-investigation data review, field inspection, geotechnical and geophysical investigation tools, parametric analysis and design tools. Examples from several bulkhead assessment projects will be provided that include a variety of conditions and tools for application. The focus of the paper will be on the integration of technologies to assess bulkhead geometry, geotechnical properties and stability, structural safety and constructability issues with removal of support, and means of temporary and permanent stabilization for environmental applications.IntroductionBulkheads and quays have existed as long as there have been waterfront activities. Some of the earliest date back to 1200 B.C.E.(Raban, 1987), however in the United States few predate the eighteenth century. Most extant bulkhead structures, and all steel sheet pile bulkhead walls date from the early 20th century or later. These structures function to protect the shore from erosion, support landside activities, and serve as place to moor and offload vessels. Regardless of the age or usage of existing bulkheads, it is essential to assess and protect them if needed where removal of soils on the water side of the bulkheads is planned to dredging.Waterfront BulkheadsExisting bulkhead structures can be classified into two types: Cantilevered, and anchored. Cantilevered walls are completely supported by the soil on the water side, while anchored bulkheads are supported both by the soil on the water side and anchorage on the land side (Figure 1). Walls may be constructed of timber, steel, or concrete. Timber walls may be lagging with soldier piles, cribbing with soldier piles, or timber sheeted such as Wakefield walls (Figure 2). Steel bulkheads are most commonly constructed using sheet piling comprised of interlocking A or Z shapes, though some historic walls were constructed with flat sheets. Precast concrete sheet piling has also been used in construction of bulkhead walls. Anchorage may be provided by steel bars or tendons attached to deadmen, sheet piling, driven piles, or earth anchors."

Jan 1, 2017

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

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

Jan 1, 2014

By Patrick J. Hannigan, Geir Veslegard, Frank Rausche, Rozbeh B. Moghaddam

A common type of deep foundation used in Norway to support bridge structures is the drilled pipe piles (piles) filled with concrete reinforcement after installation. The standard installation practice is the use of down-hole hammers. Complex geology and difficult subsoil conditions in Norway causes a high variability of soil and rock layers which in turn make for differences between actual subsurface conditions and those expected from geotechnical exploratory borings. This situation is strongly noted when the foundations are not fully socketed, and the rock layer is sloped. In this particular case, special testing procedures are required to assess the drilled pile base material and evaluate the rock-socket to ensure full contact between the foundation base and the rock surface. The local standard practice to verify the latter condition, consists of coring and visually evaluating the material recovered at the bottom of the drilled pile. This paper presents a case where the coring and visual inspection were not possible and alternatively the geological material encountered at the base of the deep foundations was evaluated using force-displacement measurements. Two 1016-mm (40in) diameter open-end drilled piles identified as P02-04 and P02-05 were tested and evaluated using in-situ force-displacement data prior to filling the piles with concrete. Test results showed an average displacement of 7mm (0.28in) corresponding to 35MPa (5.1ksi) stress level for P02-04, and 7.2mm (0.28in) corresponding to a stress level of 38MPa (5.5ksi). Based on testing results, both drilled piles were within the established material assessment criterion presented by the local authorities. INTRODUCTION This paper presents a case study in Norway where the material encountered at the base of an open- end drilled pipe pile (pile) was evaluated using force-displacement data. In the deep foundation industry in Norway, it is a common practice to install piles to support transportation structures. Once the piles reach the embedment elevation, and the pile base is assessed, these are filled with concrete. In projects where sloping rock is the supporting layer, and all nominal loads are supported by the pile base resistance, assessing the material encountered at the pile base to ensure full contact with the rock becomes critical. The local practice to make this assessment consists of the use of weighted tape, coring, or inspection cameras. However, similar to any other testing and evaluation methods, these come with their own limitations. The variability associated with the use of the weighted tape, accessibility for the coring equipment to complete a coring process, or the conditions at the foundation base such as murky water or thick drilling fluids could significantly impact the photo or video quality taken at the pile base. In such conditions, it is important to consider alternate testing methods to evaluate the material at the foundation base.

Jan 1, 2018

By Clyde N. Baker

The paper describes procedures used to predict the settlement performance of drilled shafts constructed under slurry through water bearing deposits to a dense bearing strata, considering both side resistance and end bearing. A full scale instrumented drilled shaft load test on a Jersey City, New Jersey highrise project is used as a case history to compare with prediction.

Jan 1, 1991

By Paul Morrison

The paper describes the design process, trial testing and contract pile installation of 772 pre­cast concrete piles at a site in Surrey, South East England. Recommendations on how to improve the design, construction trials and main contract piling phases of the project are made. The building layout is shown in Figure 1 and is comprised of a central circulation area with five office wings radiating out from its southern side (only three of these wings were constructed in Phase 1 of the project). Approximately 60% of the circulation area and one office wing were built with a single level basement. The basement was constructed "bottom-up" in open cut with the void between the basement walls and the cut slope being back-filled with compacted site won soil above a perimeter drainage system at basement slab level. The building has up to 3 stories above basement level and is a reinforced concrete structure. The client for the project is Pfizer Ltd. Pfizer Ltd was represented on site by Laing Project Management (Laing). The consulting engineer was Ove Arup and Partners (Arup) while the piling contractor was Roger Bullivant Ltd (RBL).

Jan 1, 2000

By Bengt H. Fellenius

It is a truism that in the design of pile foundations one must consider both capacity and settlement. As to capacity, most basic text books contain simple methods of design of capacity of single pile. More sophisticated methods are the subject of many journal papers. However, methods for design considering settlement of pile foundations are scarce. (Most confuse settlement with the movement due to load-transfer?the transfer of load from the pile to the soil). Furthermore, for both capacity and settlement, most methods include several simplifying assumptions regarding soil layering and neglect the effect of the frequently occurring fill and excavations, as well as changes of the groundwater table and pore pressure distribution. Therefore, the methods may provide qualitative results, but not quantitative. Because of this situation, pile design often appears as somewhat of a guessing game and a very subjective?and risky?occupation. This need not be. Pile foundation design is controlled by three factors: capacity, strength, and settlement requirements and these have been combined in a method called "the unified design of piles and pile groups considering capacity, settlement, and negative skin friction" (Fellenius, 1984; 1989), which method is summarized in this guide.

Jan 1, 1991

By Madan Kumar Annam, Hari Krishna Y

"Basement construction is one of the challenging geotechnical concerns in the urban environment. Several types of retention systems are practiced to support the earth which is suitable for restricted access, rapid mobilization, fast excavation and cost-effective designs. A thorough understanding of geotechnical engineering as well as the structural mechanics is important for the earth retention systems. This paper discusses a project with various types of foundation solutions including monitoring of deflections during excavation stage of a retention system.A multi storeyed residential building (3B+Stilt+18F) in Chennai having structure foot print area of 1500 m2 has to be constructed on large diameter pile foundations and also to support the proposed basement excavation. Ground water table was encountered at about 6m below the existing ground level (EGL). In order to support heavy structural loads, large diameter bored cast-in-situ piles were chosen and installed. Further, complete retention system was economically designed and built, which includes installation of Contiguous Bored Piles (CBP) in combination of vertical grout columns behind CBP wall to seal the gap between the CB Piles, installation of inclined ground anchors, construction of capping beam, stressing and locking of installed ground anchors. A detailed monitoring program was in place and continuous monitoring of wall deflections is being measured at the time of publishing this paper. This paper describes the design and construction aspects adopted for foundation and retention system including the monitoring results during excavation stage of the project.INTRODUCTIONIn general, stage wise open excavation will be opted for basement construction where plenty of space is available. Due to urbanization and restricted space, open excavation became a difficult task nowadays. To overcome this problem, suitable retention system need to be selected to retain the soil mass. Selection of suitable retention system for multi-level basement excavation is a great challenge in geotechnical industry, especially when the proposed site is located within the minimum set back distance from the existing structures. This in turn calls for the advanced and innovative methods of retention system.Several earth retention systems such as Diaphragm Walls, Secant Pile Walls, CBP system, Soldier Pile Walls, Sheet Piles, Deep Soil Mixing (block walls) etc. with or without inclined ground anchors are being practiced worldwide. Considering the advantages and disadvantages of the available retention systems in practice locally and keeping in view of present site conditions, the developer has chosen CBP system with inclined ground anchors so that all foundation related works of the project will be handled in a single package. The main advantage of such packaged solution will ease the coordination between design consultants and foundation contractor resulting in faster construction of foundation works which in turn reflect savings in time and cost."

Jan 1, 2015