Search Documents

By Kanchan K. Sen

The North Shore Connector (NSC) project will extend the Allegheny County Port Authority?s Light Rail Transit System from downtown Pittsburgh below the Allegheny River to the North Shore via twin bore tunnels. Jet grouting, diaphragm walls, and soil mixing were selected as cost-effective technically viable ground improvement and support of excavation techniques. Jet grouting was specified to provide break-out (egress) and break-in (ingress) block sections at the tunnel boring machine (TBM) launching and receiving pits. Jet grout treatment was also used adjacent to buildings with shallow foundations and below retaining walls along the tunnel alignment. A new method for measuring jet grout column diameter based on electrical resistivity was employed on the project. New equipment was introduced in the U.S for constructing soil mix temporary support of excavation using a soil-mix technique termed Cutter Soil Mixing (CSM) due to the use of two vertical cutting wheels that have evolved from diaphragm wall trench cutter technology. The system allows for continuous water tight soil mix panel construction including steel beams. This paper highlights some applications of jet grouting and various support of excavation systems (e.g. slurry walls, cement bentonite walls and CSM walls), including new innovative techniques (e.g. Cyljet and CSM) used under the constraints of an urban environment.

Jan 1, 2010

By George Moses K, Mahendran K

Grouting is performed in rock masses in order to increase its strength properties and also to reduce the seepage. In the design of underground structures such as tunnels or caverns located in weak rock masses, grouting plays an essential role. Grouting is a complex process demanding high degree of skill and knowledge in understanding of grout flow and requirements for certain geological conditions. This paper discusses the design process for grouting in rock masses adopted for a cavern project and the practical difficulties faced during the execution at site. The design parameters of grouting includes the injection pressure, grout material properties and stopping criteria. The paper also discusses the various tests performed at site to evaluate the efficacy of the grouting process which was initially defined based on the design and previous experiences. The final grouting scheme suiting to the present geological condition is arrived based on the test results. The practical difficulties faced during the execution and the measures taken to overcome these are discussed in detail. This work shows the importance of state of art in the development of a grouting process based on geological and hydrogeological conditions prevailing at site and can be helpful in grouting design for weak rock masses.

Nov 1, 2022

By Brandon Buschmeier, Frederic Masse

"Inclusions are a type of ground improvement that provide an improvement of a soil mass by insertion of a material with better characteristics than the surrounding soils. There are primarily two types of inclusions: “Soft” inclusions which are constructed of granular material (Stone Columns, Rammed Aggregate Piers, VibroPiers...), and “rigid” inclusions which are constructed of grout inserted with or without pressure (VibroConcrete Columns, Controlled Modulus Columns, Soil Mixing Columns).While the central principle of the inclusions is similar (i.e., overall improvement of characteristics of the soil mass below the structure), the load transfer mechanism is radically different for each technique. Therefore, the applicable design methodology is specific to the type of inclusions and there exists no universal method of design which spans across all inclusions.This paper will present an in-depth comparison between the standard design methods used for “soft” granular-type inclusions (Priebe modified, Balaam & Booker, Goughnour & Bayuk...) and the methods used for “rigid” inclusions which mainly rely on finite element analysis. The paper will explain why the design for soft inclusion methods cannot be applied to rigid inclusions and vice-versa. Each design method will be reviewed in detail to better emphasize its limitations and advantages.Two case histories will also be presented; one for each type of inclusions in order to illustrate the concepts developed in the first part of the paper.1 INTRODUCTION1.1 GENERAL OVERVIEW OF GROUND IMPROVEMENT WITH INCLUSIONSThe use of ground improvement methods to provide the appropriate amount of foundation support is a growing and constantly evolving industry. Traditional structural foundation methods including ‘shallow’ and ‘deep’ foundations do not adequately address the wide range of settlement tolerances, soil conditions, and loading considerations inherent to each unique potential project. In some instances, ‘shallow’ foundation solutions are simply not feasible due to soil and loading constraints. Furthermore, ‘deep’ foundation solutions are used to ‘bridge’ the soft compressible soils, ensuring that the entirety of the load in the structure is transmitted through individual elements into competent layers below the ground surface (bedrock, dense residual soils). Highly concentrated structural loads are transferred into the individual elements by means of direct contact requiring the use of structurally rigid surficial components (structural slabs, grade beams, and pile caps).Ground improvement bridges the gap between these two traditional methods, offering adequate foundation support while using more costeffective techniques and design methodologies. Inclusions are a type of ground improvement used to provide a reinforcement of the soil mass through the vertical insertion of a material with better characteristics than the surrounding soils. Much like deep foundations, inclusions are installed through soil layers with high compressibility and/or low bearing capacity and terminated in a suitable bearing stratum. However, unlike deep foundations, ground improvement inclusions rely on a distribution of load between the soil and the inclusions. By doing so, some of the structural load is applied directly to the soil in a proportion equal to its bearing capacity and compressibility limits, while the rest of the load is shed into the vertical inclusions down to the bearing stratum. Load sharing is a critical aspect in the performance and design of the various ground improvement methods."

Jan 1, 2015

By Rajesh Minda

160 numbers of double bulb underreamed piles were constructed based on the safe loads specified in IS code at Tripura. The pile load tests yielded a much lower capacity. A detailed investigation work was carried out to find out the reasons for anomaly. The work included soil exploration followed by extraction of two piles bearing numbers 72 and 151. It was seen that the bulbs were not formed as per specification. Some comments on IS Code have been made at the end.

Jan 1, 1996

By Arash Khosravifar

The seismic design of extended pile shafts for the combined effects of dynamic shaking and liquefaction-induced lateral spreading is investigated using nonlinear dynamic finite element analyses (NDA). Results of NDA parameter studies are used to illustrate how inertia and lateral spreading loads combine during shaking. The NDA results are used to evaluate equivalent static analysis (ESA) methods. Implications for design practice are discussed.

Jan 1, 2010

By Timothy C. Siegel

This report presents the results of a synthesis on the design and analysis of ground improvement for liquefaction mitigation. The synthesis included an industry survey concerning the practice of ground improvement for liquefaction mitigation. Participation in the survey was solicited by advertisements in several trade magazines and by e-mail for the DFI membership. The survey participants numbered 150. Their professional roles include consulting engineers, specialty contractors, design engineers, government engineers, and academicians. They represent a variety of geographical areas including North/Central/South America, United Kingdom, Middle East, Caribbean, Hawaii, Japan, India, Egypt, France, Australia and New Zealand. Upon completion of the survey, several professionals in the field of liquefaction and ground improvement were interviewed for them to elaborate on the survey results. The interviews are included in the Appendix of this report. Financial support for the project was provided by DFI and Dan Brown and Associates PC. The concept of the liquefaction mitigation synthesis was developed by DFI?s Ground Improvement Committee in recognition that: (a) The results of recent research and post-earthquake reconnaissance have challenged previously longheld beliefs about liquefaction and associated mitigation techniques, and; (b) The DFI membership and the engineering/construction industry are interested to know if and how engineers and designers are subsequently adjusting their practice in consideration of recent research and post-earthquake reconnaissance. For more detailed information on recent research and post-earthquake reconnaissance, presentations are available from the State-of-the-Art Forum: Liquefaction Consequences and Mitigation that was held in St. Louis in 2012. A commentary of the state-of-practice in ground improvement for liquefaction mitigation (prepared by DFI?s Ground Improvement Committee) is included in this issue of the DFI Journal. The author would like to thank the participants of the survey and especially Mr. Mike Jeffries, Dr. Les Youd, and Dr. Ikuo Towhata for their willingness to share their expertise in interviews. The author also acknowledges Mary Ellen Bruce of DFI, Billy Camp of S&ME, Inc., and Marty Taube of DGI Menard (and Chair of DFI?s Ground Improvement Committee) for their signifi cant contributions.

Aug 1, 2013

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 Andy Boeckmann

Engineers and owners widely recognize the benefits of foundation reuse - cost savings, reduced construction schedules and reduced environmental impacts, among others. Yet for many projects with existing foundations identified as reusable, reuse is an idea that is discussed at length before cold feet prevail. To address this disconnect, Deep Foundations Institute (DFI) formed the Foundation Reuse Task Force in 2021, which intends to promote reuse, leveraging experience among DFI members and collaborating across pertinent committees. Indeed, the task force includes about 40 members drawn from the Subsurface Characterization for Deep Foundations, Sustainability and Testing and Evaluation committees. One of the first orders of business for the task force was to create a database of successful reuse projects, developing short summary documents highlighting the database projects and recruiting reuse-focused presentations for the ITS Money program. Solid progress has been made on each front: the case history database includes 12 cases so far; the first three summary documents were recently published to DFI's website and foundation reuse projects have been well represented among the past year's ITS Money program. The reuse case history summary documents are available at www.dfi.org/foundation-reuse- case-histories; each of the three is also discussed below. The summary documents demonstrate the feasibility and benefits of foundation reuse. The documents are therefore a useful tool for foundation engineers to share with owners, structural engineers and anyone else who may be hesitant to pursue foundation reuse. The task force continues to welcome new members and anyone interested in joining can contact Andy Boeckmann. The task force is also eager to highlight additional reuse success stories. Anyone with case history information to share is also encouraged to contact Boeckmann.

Jul 1, 2022

Jan 1, 1991

By Ronaldo Luna, Donald Deardorff

"The use of load and resistance factor design (LRFD) is well documented since the 1960s for structural applications when it was first adopted into the American Concrete Institute Building Code in 1963 and was established for geotechnical applications by the Danish Geotechnical Institute about the same time under the name of Limit State Design (LSD).The Federal Highway Administration required all federally funded projects to use the LRFD method by 2007. Due to this funding requirement, recent LRFD research for geotechnical applications has focused on common bridge foundations (i.e., driven or drilled shafts), resulting in good documentation for design using these methods. Unfortunately, the practicing geotechnical engineer does not intuitively know how to create resistance factors for deep foundations systems that have design methodologies and installation techniques significantly different from driven or drilled shaft foundation systems.Helical anchors typically use semiempirical methods for preliminary capacity design and a torque correlation methodology during installation to verify required capacity. Here we provide basic information on the LRFD methodology for helical anchor design. Additionally, the First- Order Second Moment (FOSM) method is applied to a previous helical anchor study (Hoyt and Clemence 1989) to determine resistance factors for an ultimate tension capacity strength limit state.MethodologyThe concept of the LRFD method is to establish factors for both the load and resistance that account for uncertainties using probability theory. The factors increase the nominal load and/or decrease the nominal resistance such that the probability of failure is an acceptable value. LRFD also accounts for the effects of load combinations (dead, live, seismic, wind, etc.) by determining the probability of the combined occurrence. The general form of the LRFD equation used by American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) is:"

Jan 1, 2009

By James P. Hambleton, Anastasia Nally

This work focuses on the numerical simulation of multi-plate anchor systems (e.g., helical anchors) in sand subjected to vertical loading. In assessing the stiffness and capacity of these multi-plate anchor systems, full awareness of the abilities and limitations of the various analysis methods must be understood. This work first summarizes studies completed by others and then goes on to assess the failure mechanisms of multi-plate anchors in sand and the influence of (1) plate width-to-depth ratio, (2) number of plates, and (3) relative positioning of plates. The analysis makes use of (1) conventional limit analysis, (2) so-called modified limit analysis that employs reduced strength parameters to account for the influence of soil dilatancy, and (3) the displacement-based finite element method, which considers elastic as well as plastic deformation leading to failure. The work critically reflects on limitations in the current analysis methods for helical ground anchors. INTRODUCTION Helical anchors are a relatively low cost foundation type, typically consisting of a steel rod and single or multiple plate attachments. In recent decades, they have seen rapid growth, and as outlined by Merifield and Sloan (2006) and Hambleton et al. (2014). Design techniques for helical anchors have previously been predominately empirical, as much of the past research in this field is experimentally based. It is common practice for helical anchors to be modeled as horizontally oriented plate anchors in both numerical and experimental analysis. This work focuses on analysis based on the finite element method, including so-called finite element limit analysis and the conventional displacement-based finite element method, with some comparisons made to experimental studies. Numerical simulation of anchor pull-out capacity in cohesionless soils is stunted by the many difficulties faced when using numerical analysis with cohesionless soils. Additional variations can be seen when comparing the serviceability based load capacities to the ultimate load. In this work, both the force-displacement response (stiffness) and the ultimate anchor capacity are assessed, with more focus on the latter. This work focuses only on analysis techniques for multi-plate anchors with vertical loading in cohesionless soils. Many studies have been completed in this area, some of which assume a rectangular plate in a plain strain model (Rowe & Davis, 1982; Merifield & Sloan, 2006; Cerfontaine et al., 2019). Whereas others use axisymmetric conditions (Baker and Kondner, 1966; Saeedy, 1987; Murray & Geddes, 1987; Ghaly & Hanna, 1994; Sakai & Tanaka, 1998; Merifield et al., 2006;) and minimal studies considered both axisymmetric and plane strain in the one study (Vesic, 1971; Tagaya et al., 1988; Murray & Geddes, 1987; Sarac, 1989).

Jan 1, 2019

By Suthan Pooranampillai

This paper presents a case study of the use of single axis cement deep soil mixing (CDSM) to deal with static settlement and seismic stability of the foundation soils under a reinforced soil slope (RSS) embankment up to 50 feet high. As part of the widening of Interstate 5 (I-5) to allow High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes in Tacoma, Washington, a new approach and span over the Puyallup River will be constructed. During the soils investigation and design phase of the project, low plasticity silts (ML) inter-bedded with silty sand layers and organic silt where identified as being potentially liquefiable. CDSM was selected to address the embankment foundation concerns and allow for future trenchless installation of utility lines beneath the embankment. The presence of a confined, artesian aquifer within the design depth of the CDSM led to the installation of a depressurization system to avoid an upward gradient through the wet soil-cement. In addition to addressing the design approach, the paper discusses the challenges associated with quality assurance of CDSM within the time constraints of an ongoing project. The limited recovery rate of conventional triple tube coring in the soil-cement and double tube wet sampling led to the use of sonic coring to provide a near continuous core of the soil-cement.

By Dominic Parmantier, Karen Dawson, Suthan Pooranampillai, Seungcheol Shin

"This paper presents a case study of the use of single axis cement deep soil mixing (CDSM) to deal with static settlement and seismic stability of the foundation soils under a reinforced soil slope (RSS) embankment up to 50 feet high. As part of the widening of Interstate 5 (I-5) to allow High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes in Tacoma, Washington, a new approach and span over the Puyallup River will be constructed. During the soils investigation and design phase of the project, low plasticity silts (ML) inter-bedded with silty sand layers and organic silt where identified as being potentially liquefiable. CDSM was selected to address the embankment foundation concerns and allow for future trenchless installation of utility lines beneath the embankment. The presence of a confined, artesian aquifer within the design depth of the CDSM led to the installation of a depressurization system to avoid an upward gradient through the wet soil-cement. In addition to addressing the design approach, the paper discusses the challenges associated with quality assurance of CDSM within the time constraints of an ongoing project. The limited recovery rate of conventional triple tube coring in the soil-cement and double tube wet sampling led to the use of sonic coring to provide a near continuous core of the soil-cement.IntroductionCement deep soil mixing (CDSM) was used as a replacement for stone column ground improvement in a corridor which the owner, the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) wanted to reserve for future trenchless crossings beneath reinforced soil embankments within a freeway interchange. The work was part of HOV improvements to I-5 in Tacoma, Washington. The CDSM construction occurred in late 2010 and early 2011.Approximately 14,500 cubic yards of soil cement columns were placed by CDSM. The soil cement improved ground supports permanent geosynthetic reinforced slopes up to 50 feet high. The ground improvement was designed primarily to provide global stability of the reinforced slopes during seismic loading, but it was also utilized to reduce the time and total amount of settlement following construction of the embankments.This paper presents a discussion of the design approach and challenges associated with quality assurance of a relatively small volume of CDSM within the time constraints of an ongoing project. The challenges associated with attempts at collecting cores of the cured soil-cement mix cured by triple tube coring and pushing a double tube into the wet mix and allowing it to cure insitu are discussed, along with the eventual adoption of sonic coring combined with reliance on laboratory testing of wet mix samples collected daily."

Jan 1, 2017

By N. Aarthi, G. R. Dodagoudar

The improvement of soft clay deposits using stone columns is a well-established ground improvement technique in the western world. This technique has been well documented and has proper design codes for precise execution in the field. The sand compaction pile (SCP) method is a contemporary technique to stone columns and has limited literature related to the strength characteristics of the loose to medium dense sand deposits treated with SCP. The available studies on the SCPs installed in cohesionless deposits focused on the improvement by indirectly assessing the SPT-N values pre- and post-installation of the SCPs. The widespread implementation of the SCP technique in recent years has increased the need for a more direct evaluation of the improvement. Earlier studies in this regard have revealed that the available design solutions are based on the type of installation equipment, their working efficiency, and accumulated field data. However, it is found that there are no generic design codes for the direct estimation of the ultimate bearing capacity of the SCP improved cohesionless deposits. To meet the design requirement for the SCP treated ground, a series of experimental and numerical investigations are performed in the present study to arrive at a direct framework in the form of design charts based on the pressure-settlement response of the treated ground. The developed design charts give the ultimate bearing capacity (UBC) of the treated sand deposit for the known initial relative density (RD) of the deposit, spacing and diameter of the SCPs, size of the footing, and for the specified target unit weight required for the intended application. It is concluded that the design charts will be of preliminary use to the design engineers to directly evaluate the UBC of the SCP improved loose to medium dense cohesionless deposits as part of the SCP method of ground improvement. It is expected to have more field-scale experiments and in-depth analysis before implementing these charts for actual field execution.

Nov 1, 2022

By Wu Jian-tao, LI Guo-wei

"The Cement Mixing Pile (CMP) quality assurance assessment is an important programme in evaluating the efficiency of foundation improvement. Coring is the current specified method of quality assessment in China which has the shortcomings of long cycle, high cost and low efficiency. The field and laboratory test show that the regular cone penetration test can only detect maximum of 4m of effective detection depth in CMP. In contrast, the method of cone penetration test in the reserved hole can detect the quality continuously along the pile at any depth. The tip resistance of reserved hole penetration in the 7th day has good linear relationship with unconfined compressive strength in the 28th day. The slope of linear relationship decreases with the increasing of clay particles content.INTRODUCTIONThe method of Cement Mixing Pile (CMP) is often used to improve soft soil foundation in highway construction, with the major purpose of reducing settlements under embankments (Bruce et al., 2000),which is a form of what is known as the Deep Mixing Method (Bruce et al., 2013). The CMP technology spread quickly in China in the 1980s. CMP quality assurance assessment is an important programme in evaluating the efficiency of foundation improvement. Coring is the current specified method of quality assessment in China (China Academy Of Building Research, 2002). The method of Coring is perceived in some quarters that samples will provide lower strengths given the distress caused to the core during drilling and extraction (Bruce et al., 2002).The cone penetration test CPT can provide continuous measurements of the penetration resistance, sleeve friction at the tip of the probe, which has advantages of simple operation, low cost and high efficiency compared with coring. However, CPT tests have not been established to assess CMP in Sweden because of difficulties in maintaining verticality (Larsson, 2005). In Finland and Norway, however, CPT tests are commonly used (Halkola, 1999). One of the disadvantages of CPT is the tendency of the cone to steer out of the column (Porbaha et al., 2003). Darya Mokrousova (2010) states this tendency to deviate can be overcome by pre-boring and starting the penetration test from the base of the pre-bored hole. Sheng Haiyang (1999) found that probes may be deflected out, sometimes even at small penetration depths, and may not give a complete inspection of the pile. Liu Songyu et al. (2003) suggested that the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) is an effective way to evaluate the strength and quality of stabilized soil-cement columns. In general, Regular CPT can’t test the full length of CMP, and SPT still needed drilling which causes discontinuous detection. From the existing standard of China, core sampling compressive strength test is the main method, evidently, coring displays a longer test cycle, high cost and low efficiency. Therefore, an improvement of CMP quality assessment, by conjuring a fast and reliable detection and evaluation method, is necessary. The aim of this paper is to research the feasibility of using CPT in assessing the quality of CMP and presents an improved CPT method."

Jan 1, 2015

By Thomas Trochalides

Newtown Creek Water Pollution Control Plant in Brooklyn, NY is the largest of 14 Water Pollution Control Plants in New York City. It services over 1 million people with a current processing capacity of 310 million gallons daily. Upgrades to the plant have been underway since 1998. This paper details the foundation elements installed in three separate contracts during 2009: NC-41F, NC-36G, and NC-47G. The elements are Concrete-Filled Pipe Piles, H-Piles, Steel Sheet Piling, Secant Walls, Drilled Caissons, and High Capacity Micropiles. Soils on the site consist of fill over organic silty clay and silty sand. Beneath the organic layers lie lake sand and varved silt and clay, sitting atop glacial till and rock. Due to Federal Mandates, certain plant capacity and secondary treatment requirements had to be met by specific dates. Failure to meet the requirements would have an adverse affect on the NYC areas being serviced. Further complicating the project, the existing plant operations had to be maintained throughout the entire construction phase. To accommodate the constraints of the project, new specialty equipment and several key redesigns were used to maintain construction schedules

Jan 1, 2010

By C. Guney Olgun, Mohammad Khosravi, Daniel W. Wilson, Deepak Rayamajhi, Scott A. Ashford, Shuji Tamura, Ross W. Boulanger

"Dynamic centrifuge tests were performed on unimproved and improved soil with soil-cement column models. The reinforcing effect of isolated soil-cement columns for reducing liquefaction potential and ground deformation in improved soil were investigated. This paper presents the observed acceleration, pore pressure, and settlement responses under an earthquake base motion for both unimproved and improved soil models. In addition, lateral reinforcing effects of soil-cement columns were also investigated in terms of site stiffening effects and the increasing natural frequency of improved soil. The test results show that the soil-cement columns were rather ineffective in preventing liquefaction triggering in improved soil and in significantly reducing the magnitude of the resulting soil settlement compared to the model with unimproved soil profile. Furthermore, the predicted natural frequency of the improved soil profile estimated using existing design equations is shown to be significantly higher than the observed natural frequency inferred from centrifuge tests results. These design equations assume shear strain compatibility between the columns and the surrounding soil. On the other hand, revised design equations that account for shear strain incompatibility between column and surrounding soil are shown to give reasonable estimates compared to the observed natural frequency of the improved soil model.INTRODUCTIONGround improvement using stiff columns (e.g., stone columns, deep-soil-mixing columns, and jet-grout columns), are often used in practice to reduce liquefaction potential (and associated deformations) in loose soil sites. Typically, saturated silty soils are difficult to densify or drain rapidly due to their lower hydraulic conductivity, so densification and drainage techniques of improvement are often found to be ineffective. Instead, the shear reinforcing mechanisms of stiff columns are considered effective for reducing the seismic stresses and strains, and thereby reducing liquefaction potential in the enclosed saturated silty soils (Baez 1995, Adalier and Elgamal 2004, Mitchell 2008)."

Jan 1, 2015

By Filippo Mira-Cattò, Andrea M. R. Pettinaroli, Elena Rovetto

"The construction of Powisle station of Metro Warsaw Line 2, in Poland, required the execution of two shafts next to an urban road tunnel adjacent to the Vistula River. The shafts were linked by three conventionally mined tunnels to be excavated 10 m below the water table level, into an upper sandy and sandy silty layer and a lower stiff clayey stratum. After a failed dig attempt under the protection of jet grouting and forepoling, it was decided to deal with the tunnels excavation problem by using the ground freezing technique as a temporary, non-polluting geotechnical treatment, keeping in service the upper road tunnel. The planning of the activities and the executive phases had a significant importance for the success of the work. For work scheduling reasons the mixed system was adopted, i.e. using both the liquid nitrogen system and the brine freezing method. The freezing process management, with a real time evaluation of the soil temperature measured by thermometric strings and an accurate monitoring of the overlying road tunnel structure, allowed the tunnel excavation and lining stages to be performed under difficult conditions, without water leaking from the frozen ground shell, within the expected times and saving extra costs.INTRODUCTIONThe new Underground Line 2 in Warsaw connects the eastern and western part of the town. One of the most critical interferences was the under passing of the Vistula river and of the Wislostrada motorway tunnel, a very congested motorway along the western bank of the river, with the construction of the new station Powisle. The construction of the station required the excavation of two shafts, using the top-down system with the creation of intermediate slabs while deepening the excavation.The shafts were used for the extraction of four Tunnel Boring Machines (TBMs), two approaching from the Vistula river side (east-side) and two approaching from downtown (west-side); in order to connect the two shafts was foreseen the realization of three tunnels, two for the underground lines and the central one for the exchanging passenger platform. These tunnels were underpassing the “Wislostrada Road Tunnel” and interfered with this tunnel foundation, which consisted of diaphragm walls (DW), the “barrettes” (Figure 1).Due to the variable geological conditions at the site, the first excavation stage, with a temporary underground support constructed of horizontal jet grouting columns and forepoling, caused the North tunnel face failure, that required an immediate filling of the empty cavities with lean mix concrete under the Wislostrada tunnel slabs. Thereafter, the recovering attempt with the grout injections could not be completed because of the development of heaves induced on the tunnel structures (Bringiotti et al. 2016). In those conditions the tunnel excavation with traditional technologies appeared to be very problematic, with high risk for the structural safety of the Wislostrada tunnel. This would have meant longer duration for the works and higher costs for the General Contractor as well as for the city Council."

Jan 1, 2015

By Jakub Szary

Excavation and shoring adjacent to the above-grade Gilmore train station and elevated guideway was undertaken in 2019. A perimeter secant pile cut-off wall was constructed to a depth 37 m (121 ft) below ground surface consisting of 1.0 m (3.3 ft) diameter drilled piles spaced 750 mm (2.5 ft) on-center, tied back with soil anchors, and reinforced with W610 steel sections every 4th pile. A bracing/jacking system was also constructed to support 3 free-standing guideway caissons within the excavation. An automated instrumentation program was installed to monitor movements of shoring walls and train infrastructure in real time and consisted of a robotic total station, inclinometers, tiltmeters, strain gauges, extensometers, and anchor load cells. Baseline monitoring was able to establish diurnal and seasonal movements within the structure, strongly correlated with temperature. The system actively monitored various shoring elements and train infrastructure in real time and alerted the project team when values exceeded predetermined threshold values. Remote reconfiguration of the automated system allowed for more frequent monitoring during jacking of Pier 29 in March 2022. Monitoring data was in agreeance with on-site manual surveying results and jacking dial gauges, and proved to be a reliable monitoring system for construction applications.

Sep 1, 2022

By Marc Raithel, Sven Schröer, Lilma Schimmel, Dimiter Alexiew

"The Geotextile Encased Columns (GEC) deep foundation system for embankments and dikes on soft soils was introduced some 20 years ago and is now considered State-of-the-art in Germany, Europe and, step by step, worldwide. The GECs consist of compacted non-cohesive granular fill similar e.g. to common gravel columns with one decisive difference: they are confined in a high-strength, high-modulus, flexible geotextile “cylinder” (encasement). This engineered element with parameters being adaptable in a wide range provides a decisive tool to control and optimize the behavior of the GEC foundation system. Consequently, the GECs work properly even in extremely soft soils, and a wide range of fills inclusive of sands can be used. In the meantime vast design and technological experience is available and codified design methods exist. Initially the paper briefly describes the general idea, the basics and specifics of design, construction technology, materials, restrictions and optimal application areas. Then it focuses on three informative case studies. They are briefly presented focusing for brevity only on the most important facts and experience inclusive of the most meaningful data of short- and long-term measurement programs.INTRODUCTIONWhen considering embankments on soft soils, generally two groups of solutions exist:Unsupported embankments; there are four main options:a) build up embankment extremely slowly waiting for sufficient consolidation after every stage;b) replace the soft soil partially or totally;c) install a high-strength basal reinforcement providing overall and local stability and allowing much faster embankment construction;d) combine c) with strip drains to accelerate consolidation and thus the construction process additionally (Fig. 1, left).Today, practically only option ""d"" is of practical relevance. Despite all the pros and cons, the common attribute of all non-supported options is that local and overall stability (Ultimate Limit State-ULS) can be achieved and controlled, but not the short- and long-term settlements (Serviceability Limit State-SLS). The latter can be significant, e.g. up to 30% of the nominal planned embankment height. Supported embankments (Fig. 1, right): the main common idea is to over-bridge the soft soil layers by supporting vertical elements of different types: rigid piles, trench walls etc. or by ""softer"" solutions of different column types (compacted, cemented, mixed-in-place etc.). Herein the borderlines between “piles”, ""pile-similar elements"" and ""soil improvement” are fluent and depend on country, traditions, codes etc. The common attribute of the “supported” schemes is a minimized settlement. Twenty years ago a new specific solution was launched: the Geotextile Encased Columns (GEC), which is discussed in more detail below."

Jan 1, 2017