Search Documents

By Karl A. Higgins

In August 2004, the long-awaited National Harbor project in the DC metro area sprang to life with the design of Gaylord National Resort and Convention Center. When the project was in its final stages of construction in 2007, it was noted as largest building development of the east Coast and the 4th largest Building project in the U.S. The final construction costs were above $900M and it served as the catalyst for the overall National Harbor development which added another $1B in construction costs over the next few years. The Gaylord Hotel is supported by approximately 150,000 linear-feet of driven precast concrete piling, one of a handful of major DC area projects in the early 2000s that were supported by this pile type. The project overall was a success, but the fast-paced construction schedule created significant challenges to the designers and contractors. Piling installation was the first major building construction task, and it did not start out well. While the test piles were installed without damage, when production pile driving began in the summer of 2005, pile head and body breakage soon became evident. Typical of most highprofile projects, there are many stakeholders involved and an equal number of opinions on why the piles were breaking. The financial and contractual implications of starting the project off awkwardly were evident to all. The pile driving criteria was scrutinized by the contractor, and the engineer’s had reservations about the size and type of the hammers used for pile driving. Ultimately, it was proven the leading cause of pile breakage was neither the pile driving criteria nor equipment, rather the pile materials themselves. The author of this paper is also the Geotechnical Engineer of Record for Gaylord National and many of the adjacent National Harbor buildings including the recently completed MGM casino. About 100 piles were damaged during Gaylord’s construction some requiring multiple piles for replacements. Over the past decade or so, rumors on the causes of the pile breakage have spread in the market, with some alleging this pile type is not compatible with the geologic setting. I have purposely avoided writing this case-study due to the controversy surrounding the subject, but now some 15 years later it seems appropriate to do so considering DFI’s annual conference location. This will be a fact-based assessment of pile breakage at Gaylord and will also include a comparison to the neighboring buildings where far fewer driven piles were damaged, once a more appropriate concrete mix design was required. The pre-cast supplier is no longer in business.

By Rajasekar Subbian, Jessica Oudhof

In the Netherlands pile foundation design is done using CPTs in accordance with EC7 national annexure. The capacity per tip level is calculated for every CPT followed by zonation to find the tip level per zone. The correlation factors are used to take into account the variability in ground across the zone and they depend upon the number CPTs within the zone. The CPTs and pile tip levels selection for zoning is an iterative process that can demand significant manual effort to produce an economical pile plan. This often leads to the use of conservative correlation factors in order to accelerate the design process. Thus, it has been automated in a tool with CPTs, pile location and loads, and capacities as input. The tool has also been employed in two case studies and the results are compared to the current design practise.

May 1, 2022

By S. L. Karunakaran

Selection of an appropriate foundation system requires great skill and ingenuity on the part of the designer. Certain guidelines for choosing between a pile and raft foundation are presented. A number of methods are available for estimating the capacity of piles, giving a wide range of values for the theoretical load carrying capacity. A few aspects to be taken into account while arriving at an appropriate theoretical capacity are discussed. The effect of fluctuation of water table level on the pile capacity and method of accounting for this factor on the pile capacity obtained through initial load test are also discussed. A case study presents a comparison between the estimated values of capacity of piles and the values obtained through the initial load test.

Jan 1, 1996

By Monique Nykamp

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

Jan 1, 2007

By Monique Nykamp

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

Jan 1, 2007

By Donald Bruce, Alex Reeb, George Filz, Wesley Schmutzler, Mitsuo Nozu

"One million seven-hundred thousand cubic yards of deep mixing were installed to support an elevation raise of an earthen levee known as LPV 111, which is located in east New Orleans. The deep mixing was done by two contractors using somewhat different technologies, but producing elements of the same size. As part of the quality control and quality assurance program, 507 deep-mixed elements were cored and 5,082 specimens were strength tested in unconfined compression. This paper presents data from the coring and testing program. Very high percentages of the core run lengths were recovered, except during one period for one mixing technology. The coring methods are described, and reasons for the isolated episode of low recovery are discussed. The strength data show that the specification acceptance criteria were satisfied. Statistical parameters of the strength data are provided, and trends between strength and the following factors are discussed: depth, soil type, binder factor, and project-specific experience. Photographs of longitudinal cuts of core specimens are presented. Important lessons learned from this unusually large project are described.INTRODUCTIONThe Lake Pontchartrain and Vicinity Hurricane Protection system included a project known as LPV 111, which is an approximately 5-mile long segment of levee and floodwall located in east New Orleans along the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway and adjacent to Bayou Sauvage National Wildlife Refuge (Cali et al. 2012). The majority of the project consisted of a raise of an existing earthen levee from an existing crest elevation of about 18 ft to a new crest elevation of about 28 ft. The underlying soils were weak and compressible, providing inadequate support for the raised levee. Ground improvement in the form of deep mixing was selected to provide the necessary stability and settlement control for the raised levee.The US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), New Orleans District, was the governmental agency in responsible charge of the project, including approval of design, construction, and payment. The lead designer was URS Corporation, and the general contractor was Archer-Western-Alberici (AWA), working in alliance with TREVIICOS South (Trevi), who, together with Fudo Construction (Fudo), performed the deep mixing.As part of the quality control and quality assurance program, over 500 production deep-mixed elements were cored, the cores were carefully logged, and over 5,000 unconfined compression tests were performed. In addition, selected specimens were carefully photographed before and after longitudinal saw cuts to expose the interior of the specimens. This paper provides a summary of the coring and testing performed on the production deep-mixed elements."

Jan 1, 2015

By Padmavathi V. Sagi

In this paper, effect of cyclic loading on the behavior of a long, flexible, unrestrained vertical pile loaded laterally in soft clay is examined. For cyclic loading, the analysis is carried out using a new method for the construction of p-y curves and for static loading conditions, p-y curves proposed by Dewaikar and Poonam (2005) are used. An iterative analysis is employed with secant modulus approach using a matrix method known as moment area method developed by Sawant et al. (1994). For pile top deflection of 20% of pile diameter, the load values are computed for both static and cyclic conditions. The comparison of results with the field test results reported by Matlock (1970) shows a good agreement. A parametric study is further carried out to examine the effect of load eccentricity, pile embedment length, diameter and the number of cycles on the pile response. The results of this study are discussed in the paper.

Jan 1, 2006

By Timothy C. Siegel

A piled raft refers to a shallow foundation that is structurally connected to the piles, while composite ground refers to a soil-pile matrix where the piles are not structurally connected. The design objectives for both a piled raft and composite ground are (excluding special considerations such as expansive soil): (1) to provide a sufficient ultimate resistance and (2) to distribute the load into the soil-pile matrix so that the settlement experienced by the shallow foundation is within tolerable limits. A simplified model is proposed for a shallow foundation on composite ground where the foundation settlement is estimated as the sum of the downward movement of the piles plus the downward movement of the shallow foundation relative to the pile head. The proposed simplified model is applied using conventional geotechnical analyses for two hypothetical examples of shallow foundations undergoing compression settlement.

Jan 1, 2011

By Vasileios A. Drosos

The response of pile foundations to lateral loads is an important factor for the successful performance of several critical structures. A new numerical code for the analysis of single piles under lateral load is outlined. The code can simulate (through appropriately chosen parameter values) not only the non-linear behavior of soil, but also the inelastic structural response of the pile itself under lateral load. Emphasis is given on the calibration of model parameters and the verification of the code. For the calibration of the parameters, data is used (a) from the well documented in the literature p-y curves, and (b) from experiments conducted either in full scale or in the centrifuge. Results are compared to those of well known published codes for inelastic analysis of single piles under lateral load.

Jan 1, 2006

By Bin Zhang

Drilled shafts are a popular type of foundation for transportation applications. They feature the advantages of providing high bearing capacity and generating low construction noise. Advancements in construction technology make it possible to construct drilled shaft with large diameters. In some transportation projects, the full structural loads are carried by a single large diameter drilled shaft; therefore accurately determining the bearing capacity of drilled shafts has important practical and safety implications. The increase of drilled shaft diameter combined with the structure properties of the surrounding soil play in an important role in their bearing capacity. The conventional methods for bearing capacity determination, which mostly come from experience with small diameter drilled shafts, may not work satisfactorily. This paper studies the influence of diameter on the bearing capacity of laterally loaded drilled shafts. Numerical simulations are conducted to investigate the effects of pile diameter on the lateral bearing capacity, especially the influence of shaft diameter and its structural contributions.

Jan 1, 2007

1.1 The parties agree to submit all claims, disputes or controversies arising out of, or in relation to, the interpretation, application or enforcement of this agreement, including dispute resolution procedures, to sequential mandatory discussion, mediation and arbitration for resolution of all disputes before, and as a condition precedent, to self-help, arbitration, judicial action or other remedies. This mandatory procedure will resolve each dispute within one-hundred (100) calendar days. Any deadline falling on a federal holiday or weekend will be the next working day. Breach of this disputes process shall constitute a material breach of contract for which the aggrieved party may recover all costs, including attorneys fees, interest and other expenses necessary to resolve the dispute through litigation. The obligation to discuss and then mediate and arbitrate covers all disputes arising from every aspect of the Project to be built by the owner, including, but not limited to, design, engineering, bonding, indemnification, labor, material and services, and the acts or omissions of any related party for whom a party to this agreement may stand responsible.

Jan 1, 1994

By M. R. Madhav

The ultimate pullout capacity of single batter piles has been presented in literature in three contradictory trends. These trends are: the pullout capacity of a single batter pile increases, remain almost constant, or decrease with increasing the inclination angle of the pile. The present paper presents a theoretical study which explained these trends in terms of existing initial stress condition and the earth pressure coefficient at rest. The paper also presents a form of guideline for predicting the pullout capacity of inclined piles based on simple field and/or laboratory tests.

Jan 1, 2010

By Brian Langdon

The DRIVEN GROUT PILE was developed in 1989 by DeWitt Construction, Incorporated. This piling essentially consists of a cost-in-place concrete piling that reacts on a steel boot that is driven to bearing. This report will describe the driven grout pile, its background and its installation. The advantages and disadvantages of this system are also discussed. Finally, the results of actual field installations are presented and discussed. BACKGROUND The DRIVEN GROUT PILE was developed out of a need for a low-cost high capacity piling (100 ton) that could be installed with ordinary pile driving equipment. This search was motivated by attempting to incorporate the material economy of an auger-cast piling with the "empirical load test" of a driven pile. Typically, the least cost material for piling in the 100 ton range is concrete (grout). A grout shaft with minimal reinforcement can withstand a compressive load of 100 tons for a material cost in the range of $6.00 to $8.00 per lineal foot. A pipe piling with a capacity of 100 tons has a unit material cost ranging to $13.00 per lineal foot. The marriage of these two advantages resulted in the DRIVEN GROUT PILE. A pile that utilizes the economy of a reinforced grout shaft and has the loading confidence of a driven pile.

Jan 1, 1990

By Masanoub R. Fujioka

A brief discussion of the methodologies involved in dewatering practices, particularly as used in Hawaii in coralline formations. A description of early dewatering practices includes a number of case histories; later dewatering practices also are detailed with case histories. There were disasters and some successes. Grouting generally was not successful. Deep wells are technically feasible and generally the economical solution to deep basement construction.

Jan 1, 1986

By Andrew Malinak, William Perkins

Seattle’s Elliott Bay Seawall protects the 1½ miles of downtown waterfront between South Washington and Broad streets. The seawall supports the urban waterfront and infrastructure, including the Alaskan Way Viaduct and Alaskan Way, access to historic waterfront piers, and numerous essential buried utilities. Most of the original seawall was constructed between 1916 and 1936 over soft/loose non-engineered fill, estuary, and beach deposits. The majority of the original seawall was a pile-supported timber relieving platform that extended up to 60 feet behind the face of the wall (Figure 1). With maximum spacing between the timber piles of 3 to 5 feet, a virtual forest of timber piles were driven for the original wall.

Jan 1, 2018

By Trevor L. L. Orr

"AbstractThe background to the harmonization of geotechnical standards that has taken place in recent years in Europe has been the move to more economic and political integration following World War II that has led to the formation of the European Union. Prior to 2010 the standards used in the European countries for geotechnical design, investigation and testing and for the carrying out geotechnical work, such as the installation of piles, were the different national standards, which were not harmonized. The harmonization of geotechnical standards in Europe started in 1981 with work on a model Eurocode 7 for geotechnical design that led eventually to publication by CEN, the European Committee for Standardization, of the European Standard version of Eurocode 7 in 2004. In parallel with the work on Eurocode 7, a large number of associated harmonized standards have been, and are being, prepared by CEN and by the International Standards Organization (ISO) for geotechnical investigation and testing and for the execution of geotechnical works. Standards published by CEN must be adopted by the CEN member countries and all conflicting standards withdrawn. Hence all the CEN countries have adopted the same the harmonized text of Eurocode 7, but with National Annexes that allow national choice with regard to Design Approach and partial factor values. The adoption of Eurocode 7 and its associated geotechnical standards has removed the barriers to geotechnical activity in Europe due to the presence of different national standards. It has also enhanced the ability of EU firms to compete in the global market.Background to harmonization of geotechnical standards in EuropeThe initial moves towards the harmonization of geotechnical standards in Europe can be related to the economic and political developments that took place in the period immediately following World War II to revive the economies of Western Europe. Europe at that time was divided by a political and, in many places, a physical barrier, known as the Iron Curtain, into two very different and separate zones: communist in the east and non-communist in the west. In 1952 the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) was formed, linking 6 countries: Belgium, West Germany, France, Italy, Luxembourg and the Netherlands, and establishing a common market in coal and steel. The ECSC was the first international organization to be established on the basis of supranational principles whereby negotiated power is delegated to an authority by the governments of the member states. In 1957 the ECSC became the European Economic Community (EEC), also known as the Common Market in the English-speaking world, with the aim to bring about economic integration. With the addition of Denmark, Ireland and the UK in 1973 and Greece in 1981, followed by Portugal and Spain in 1986, this led to the formation of the European Union (EU) in 1993. East and West Germany were reunified in 1990, following the fall of the Iron Curtain in 1989. In 1995, Austria, Finland and Sweden joined the EU, and since then the numbers of countries in the EU has increased to 28, many of which are countries that were formerly behind the Iron Curtain."

Jan 1, 2014

Jan 1, 1997

By Patrick J. Lydon, Gregory A. Terri

"The recently opened Mansueto Library at the University of Chicago campus was a 2012 OPA runner-up. The dramatic elliptical shaped dome of this structure tells only part of this structure’s story. The underground automated storage and book retrieval system below ground required excavations as deep as 55 ft (17 m). The system that allows the University to store many of its publications well below grade also required an approximately 50 ft (15 m) clear span for the perimeter walls between the lower level and street level slabs. The latter requirement allows the conveyors to operate freely to retrieve and transport publications up to the lobby level. The design-assist-build team worked together to develop the most cost-effective solution for below-grade work in this challenging urban and geologic environment.The perimeter of the new oval-shaped library is over 620 ft (189 m) long and sits in a central location on campus—adjacent to the Regenstein Library and two city streets and the Henry Moore sculpture, which commemorates the location of the first self-sustaining controlled nuclear reaction. The new library construction not only had to meet challenging structural and geotechnical requirements, but also had to be sensitive to its active and historic surroundings. The soils at the site consist of about 25 ft (7.6 m) of sand, followed by lean clay, generally increasing in stiffness to the top of the dolomitic limestone. Five to 10 ft (1.5 to 3 m) pockets of saturated sand also lie on the north side of the site at about 45 ft (13.7 m) below grade. The top of weathered rock varies in elevation from 59 ft (18 m) below grade in the south to 69 ft (21 m) in the north. There is 1 to 2 ft (30 to 60 cm) of weathered rock. Groundwater at the site is about 7 ft (2 m) below grade.The new structure would extend 55 ft (17 m) below grade through saturated sand strata and into weathered rock for part of the structure’s footprint, so it was critical that the new permanent retention system minimize groundwater seepage laterally through the structure’s wall as well as piping through the weathered rock below the structure. The perimeter walls had to be very stiff to minimize ground movement around the structure’s perimeter due to the significant clear span between slabs."

Jan 1, 2013

By Paul J. Axtell

Two new railroad bridges in Kansas City, Missouri are founded on drilled shafts embedded into the soil and underlying shale. The uncertainty arising from the non-homogeneous, anisotropic nature of most shales, and the variability of shales across the U.S., makes it a difficult material to assign appropriate design properties. As was the case on this project, the uncertainty of foundation performance in shale can lead to overly conservative designs, particularly with drilled shaft foundations. An extensive Statnamic axial testing program was performed to verify that the load-settlement behavior of the drilled shafts would be acceptable for the intended railroad traffic. Axial Statnamic testing was applied in three increasing cycles of 927 kips, 1007 kips, and 3177 kips, respectively. The maximum movements recorded at the shaft head during each of the loadings were 0.052 inches, 0.062 inches, and 0.257 inches, respectively. The loads applied in each of the respective Statnamic tests were not sufficient to reach the capacity of the shaft; so direct comparison of measured and calculated capacities is not possible. However, evaluation of the estimated design capacity can be accomplished based on results from the Statnamic testing program by utilizing normalized load transfer relations presented by O?Neill and Reese (1999). Such comparisons necessarily require extrapolation of the data measured in the Statnamic tests following typical load-displacement response. Results indicate the Kulhawy and Phoon (1993) method for estimating side resistance in Pleasanton shale rock sockets, assuming a smooth socket, appears to agree well with observed behavior during Statnamic testing. Accordingly, the O?Neill and Reese (1999) method for estimating the toe resistance in intermediate geomaterials, assuming cohesive rock with Rock Quality Designation (RQD) between 70 and 100, appears to agree well with observed behavior during Statnamic testing. Finally, based on Statnamic testing at varying load magnitudes and normalized curves developed by O?Neill and Reese (1999), the contribution of side resistance to the capacity of a deep foundation can be determined assuming no load is transferred to the base of the foundation during lower magnitude testing. Furthermore, higher magnitude testing can provide a means to evaluate the accuracy of design end bearing calculations.

Jan 1, 2006

By Cory J. E. Yacyshyn

Anchored steel pipe piles are being used more frequently in British Columbia for shoreline projects such as public ferries, cruise ship docks, containership terminals and locally in the expansion of the Vancouver waterfront convention center. While a 36? diameter driven pile may provide adequate compression loads it will not always achieve enough penetration to provide the required tension loading. That is why bundles of threaded anchors or strands are drilled through the center, past the pile tip, and anchored into the underlying strata. Drilling up to 250 feet deep through the piles in variable water bearing strata presents challenges. Southwest Contacting Ltd. (SWC) recently completed the three largest anchored pile projects in BC; Vancouver Port and Convention Center Expansion, Vanterm Container Terminal and the new Prince Rupert Cruise Ship Terminal. This paper will present the separate challenges encountered drilling the anchors. At Prince Rupert, the recently completed Northland Cruise Ship Dock ultimately required a cased system to drill and install triple thread bar anchors. When 200 foot long steel pipe piling was unable to penetrate the highly fractured gneiss/schist bedrock to obtain a seal and consolidation grouting was unsuccessful, a modified cased system was advanced deep enough into the rock to eventually seal. The 3-#20 bars were changed to 12-strands since the bars wouldn?t fit through the smaller cased hole. The options were limited because each dolphin only had enough room for a small hydraulic drill rig that wouldn?t have the power to fully case the holes. The Canada Place Pier Extension in Vancouver?s Harbor led to the development of an innovative tip design used later at Vanterm. The 36? diameter steel pipe piles were driven closed end but modified to permit drilling through a concrete plug at the base. The driving of the piles at Canada Place often knocked out the plug so we were faced with 50 feet of sand up inside the pile when the drilling started. This led to discussions on how to safely remove the sand, solidify the tip, and continue drilling to get past the tip without undermining the pile. Finally, Vanterm Berth Extension was completed with a unique drilling system because the pile tips stopped in hydraulic sands, as opposed to the native till. We were faced with advancing the casing to the till without undermining the base of the pile. With 100 psi water pressure at the pile base after we broke through the concrete plug, the trick was to prevent charging the sand with our 250 psi air which liquefies it and forced it up our drill casing. And of course, it has to happen just before Christmas holidays!

Jan 1, 2004