Search Documents

GENERAL CONTRACTOR: ALEXANDER CONSTRUCTORS, INC. STRUCTURAL ENGINEER: CAGLEY & ASSOCIATES, INC. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER: F.T. KITLINSKI & ASSOCIATES, INC. PILE FOUNDATION CONTRACTOR: L.G. BARCUS AND SONS, INC. PROJECT PROFILE: 108-10 in. diameter AugerPiles installed to an approximate depth of 32 ft. Piles were installed through Stiff Clayey Fill and Medium-Dense Sands to Decomposed Shale. Piles were drilled to a refusal criteria of 1 ft. / 3 min. Piles were installed using a Barcus Mantis AugerPile rig which is large enough to install piles 25 to 50 ft. long outdoors. The Mantis is also ideal for indoor and low overhead installations. On top of being extremely versatile, the Mantis is also very economical to mobilize. The existing structure is supported on H-Piles. The AugerPiles were furnished and installed for less than the material price of the H-Piles. Design loads were under 40 tons which eliminated the need for a load test. AugerPiles were selected for minimal vibration, limited noise, and economy.

Jan 1, 2001

By Ray. K. Filip

The concept of installing a steel sheet pile retaining wall into the ground by "pressing" has resulted in the development of various equipment solutions over the last thirty years e.g. Taylor Woodrow ?Pile Master', Giken 'Silent Piler" & Tosa 'Still Worker?. Dawson Construction Plant Ltd (DCP), have recently advanced the pile pressing concept with the introduction of their 'Push-Pull' system. This advancement offers significant improvements in the quality of installation compared with traditional pressing solutions but also greater versatility, higher productivity and, most importantly, generates new opportunities through a wider range of applications for "silent piling'. This paper will focus primarily on the use of the Push-Pull concept in the construction of a unique "integral" bridge in Milton Keynes, England. Finally, the paper touches on the development of quiet, vibration-less pile extraction equipment, which allows steel to be considered the foundation material of choice for truly sustainable construction. It is no longer acceptable to leave unwanted piles in the ground.

Jan 1, 2006

By Sebastian Fischer, Rolf Katzenbach, Steffen Leppla

"The risk management in the case of liquefaction is one of the most serious and also difficult issues in geotechnical engineering because failure caused by liquefaction is always a sudden failure without ahead indication. For that reason ground improvement technologies for the prevention of liquefaction are necessary. The paper explains the responsible and effective risk management. Methods for the risk management and stabilizing the soil sustainably are described in detail.1. INTRODUCTIONDue to population growing more and more settlement area is needed, which is often including improper regions (e.g. mountain and coast regions) with raised risk of various kinds of disasters. But also in densely populated areas the risk of disasters like landslides can occur. One reason for the raising of risk in densely populated regions can be the opencast mining for raw material production. An essential element of the opencast mining is the loose deposition of the removed overburden, the so-called “overburden dump”. When an opencast mining is running out of the raw material, an opencast hollow remains in landscape. The slope areas of these hollows mostly consist of loose bedded material of the overburden dump. Due to the end of groundwater conservation these loose bedded slope areas are flooded. In consequence the slopes are in extreme danger of becoming liquefied. The result of a liquefaction in these slopes will unavoidably be a slope slide. Such a slope slide can extend up to several hundred meters into the landscape and can move several million cubic meters of material. An upsetting example for such a landslide is the slope failure in the German city of Nachterstedt on July, 18th 2009, which made necessitate remedial measures and also prevention works for the further utilisation of the region. The phenomena of liquefaction is not limited of slopes in series of opencast mining. Especially in regions with a highly appearance of earthquakes the phenomena of liquefaction is well known.2. RISK MANAGEMENTAn essential part for the stability assessment of slope systems is the investigation of sensitivity against liquefaction. In the case of given sensitivity against liquefaction there is no calculation method according to soil mechanics to determine the factor of safety against slope failure. Just for the case that sensitivity against liquefaction is not met, a comparison of the load (effect) E and the resistance R which is the traditional verification of stability against slope failure, can be calculated (Figure 1)."

Jan 1, 2015

By Ricardo Dobry, Alain Pecker, George E. Leventis, Ralph B. Peck

"This year’s DFI Outstanding Project Award is for the design and construction of the foundation scheme for the largest cable-stayed bridge in the world. In 1993, Gefyra, SA (a French/Greek consortium led by VINCI of Paris, France) was awarded a €750 million ($1billion+ USD) Concession Contract to design, build, fi nance, operate and maintain a three-span cable-stayed suspension bridge connecting the Peloponnese, Greece’s southernmost peninsula, with the mainland across the Gulf of Corinth. The contract extends over a 42-year period, 7 years for design and construction and 35 years for operation. The project was fi nanced through a combination of public funds, private equity and bank loans. Alternative foundation concepts that were considered included traditional driven piles, deeply embedded caissons and soil improvement. PROJECT CHALLENGESThe extreme technical challenges faced included:??Weak foundation soils composed of soft alluvial deposits consisting of interbedded layers of granular and cohesive materials with thin layers and lenses of gravel and liquefi able sand pockets; rock is believed to be at a depth of 1,000 m (3,500 ft) or more.??A very deep seabed exceeding 60 m (200 ft).??The requirement to withstand the collision of 180,000-ton tankers traveling at 16 knots.??Maximum wind forces of 250 km/hour (155 mi/hour).??Design seismic forces corresponding to Richter magnitudes of 7.0+ with peak ground accelerations of 0.48 g at seabed.??Design tectonic movements of 2 m (7 ft) in any direction between any two adjacent bridge pier foundations/pylons.Considering subsurface conditions and local seismicity and water depths, foundation design and construction methods were the key drivers for this project. In large part, the success of the project is owed to the unprecedented partnering and collaboration between all partners involved fostered under the leadership of Jean Paul Teyssandier and Gilles De Maublanc of VINCI Group (France) who served as lead Concessionaire and General Contractor. The joint venture’s lead Greek partners were Elliniki Technodomiki/AKTOR and J&P/AVAX. Alain Pecker of Geodynamique et Structure (France) served as lead Geotechnical Consultant/ Designer while Buckland and Taylor (Canada) served as Design Checkers with Ralph Peck and Ricardo Dobry (U.S.) as Special Advisors on foundation issues, Langan International/Langan Engineering and Environmental Services P.C. (George E. Leventis, Gregory Biesiadecki and Diane Fiorelli) served as Technical Advisor on geotechnical, geodynamic and foundation/marine construction issues."

Jan 1, 2007

By Andrew J. Brennan, Jonathan A. Knappett, Lewis Hamilton, Michael J. Brown

"Abstract This paper investigates the compressive behaviour of screw piles in sands and the key design parameters which control this. These types of foundation elements have typically been used as screw anchors onshore (i.e. for their tensile capacity), but there is increasing interest in their potential use as compression piles for supporting offshore marine renewable energy (MRE) devices (e.g. wind and tidal turbines) in deeper water. For such foundation applications, the compressive capacity is as important as the tensile capacity and is not well understood, particularly in cohesionless soils which are a likely seabed condition in MRE applications. A 1-g laboratory study was initially conducted on small scale model screw piles in sand beds of various relative density between 25 – 88%. These experiments were used to validate a Finite Element (FE) model having a stress-dependent constitutive model, making it useful for future up-scaling of the pile size for field applications. Following validation, the FE model was used to conduct a parametric study on the effects of flange spacing ratio (s/Dflange) and flange to shaft diameter ratio (Dflange/Dshaft). By using a validated FE model for this study, it was possible to observe the failure mechanisms (through the shear strain distribution) within the soil and correlate these with the pile capacity. This information was then used to comment on the most optimal (cost-effective) pile design for supporting compressive loads. This study represents a key step towards producing design tools appropriate for the design of screw piles in MREapplications.IntroductionAs defined in this paper, screw piles consist of a central small diameter hollow steel shaft, around which thin circular steel flanges run. Their principle of operation is that the flanges are spaced so as to trap the soil between them, thereby acting as an equivalent solid pile of the outer flange diameter, with a fully-rough ‘shaft’ interface (as shearing is soil-soil). One of the most important design decisions relates to the spacing of the flanges – if the flanges are spaced too far apart, then the soil will not be effectively trapped and the pile have a lower axial capacity and stiffness (controlled by the shaft friction along the central shaft and the bearing resistance arising from the individual flanges; If the flanges are spaced too close together, then there are potentially flanges which are not contributing to the pile capacity, therefore making the pile more expensive than it needs to be."

Jan 1, 2014

By William (Bill) H. Walton

"I arrived in Chicago in 1993 with Dr. Ralph Peck’s University of Illinois bulletin titled Engineering Properties of Chicago Subsoils (Bulletin 429), which he published in 1954 with William Reed. Being an outsider, I wanted to learn from Chicago geotechnical practice leaders that included Clyde Baker, Jr., John Gnaedinger, Charles Pfingsten, Dr. Safdar Gill, Robert Lukas and Dr. Jorj Osterberg, who have influenced foundation designs for the structures that make up the contemporary Chicago skyline. One of my immediate goals was to get the Illinois Structural Engineering license to be on par with the likes of Eli Cohen, Mike Tylk, Stan Korista, Bob Halverson, Joe Burns, Ron Johnson, Bill Baker, Bob Sinn, Chuck Anderson and Dave Eckmann, who have led their structural firms in the design of the skeletal core and frames of many of Chicago’s iconic buildings (and for many other buildings around the world). From my time with GEI Consultants (GEI), then on with STS Consultants (STS, and now AECOM), and now back with GEI, I have had the opportunity to analyze and design foundations and, with the help of many skilled foundations and building constructors, to verify that predicted foundation performance matches actual movement data. The theme of Chicago’s foundation design practice is to assume and verify. In 1948, Peck published the History of Building Foundations in Chicago (Bulletin 373) that was updated in 1998 by Baker, Pfingsten and Gnaedinger, who meticulously documented hundreds of Chicago’s foundations, and have shown the value of advanced analyses and testing to advance the deep foundation design practice that includes a variety of high-capacity driven and drilled deep foundations. Mehmet Uyanik, Peck and Baker have made Chicago’s subsurface into a full-scale foundation test laboratory. They confirmed soil mechanics principles like Terzaghi’s 1-D consolidation theory when early foundations bearing on sand-clay crust over soft to medium silty clays (e.g., Auditorium, Masonic Temple, Monadnock Block and Old Board of Trade buildings) took 40 to 60 years to consolidate clay 1 to 2 ft (0.3 to 0.6 m). They also confirmed proven increases in bearing pressures based on measured performance of deep foundations bearing on the glacially derived hardpan clay till and in solid dolomite that underlies Chicago."

Jan 1, 2017

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

By Diego Bellato

Production data recorded by special foundation rigs during construction activities at the site are commonly used for quality assurance / quality control procedures and, in particular, to prove that the installed foundation elements comply with the geometrical and quality requirements defined in the design specifications. Parameters such as crowd force, penetration/withdrawal rate, rotational speed etc. are usually presented in reports in the form of depth and/or time profiles. This type of protocols are already standard QA/QC solutions for ground improvement methods like deep soil mixing or jet-grouting, but they are quite rarely applied in combination with other techniques like diaphragm walls or Kelly drilling. In the latter cases, one of the main reasons behind this lack of site documentation is related to the difficulty in interpreting huge amount of data collected during the creation of single elements, which, in some cases, can last several days (not always in a row). In addition, the building sequence is often characterized by many alternated operations involving different movements of the rig and the use of different tools. In this context, the identification of specific construction activities based only on the mere exam of the time profiles of the recorded production parameters is extremely difficult. In this paper, the time profiles of production parameters obtained from a fully-cased Kelly drilling rig employed on a site in Karlsruhe (Germany) have been investigated and compared with a detailed series of activities deduced from a video filmed during installation. Typical time profile patterns associated to specific procedures have been identified by combining the different information available. The outcome of this study helped project engineers to automatize the recognition of activities directly from production data and led to an overall understanding and optimization of the construction process. INTRODUCTION The special foundation industry is characterized by the use of highly sophisticated machinery for the realization of geotechnical systems such as piled rafts, retaining walls and slabs for excavation pits, cut-off walls for levees and embankments or ground improvement solutions. Rigs can vary in size, weight, and power and can be provided with several drilling tools to cope with the different soil conditions (e.g. clay, sand, rock) and the different geometries of the elements to be built at the site (e.g. micro-piles, large- diameter bored piles, diaphragm walls, anchors). Due to the challenging construction procedures, various types of sensors have started to be mounted on the equipment in the last decades to monitor the behavior of some important machine parameters and to inform rig operators about the on-going process and the status of their devices.

Jan 1, 2019

By Amy B. Cerato

The application of this study is to use helical anchors as a foundation system for small wind tower (1 ? 10 kW) guyed cables. Helical anchors are currently used to anchor guyed cables of telecommunication and electric towers. However, the increased dynamic vibrations a wind turbine adds to the tower and foundation system under working loads, as well as extreme environmental conditions (e.g., straight line winds, ice load or sudden furling shocks), require additional knowledge about the behavior of helical anchors. These field conditions were simulated in this study by instrumenting a working tower with load cells and 3-axis accelerometers to gather data on wind speed and tower response. These tower responses were then transmitted to the helical anchors through an extensive, large-scale testing program that included monitoring the performance of the helical anchor foundation under dynamic loads, subject to natural variations in both wind regimes, precipitation (water level) and variations in helical anchor geometry. This paper specifically discusses the effects of helical anchor geometry on helical anchor performance under long-term dynamic loads.

Jan 1, 2008

By James P. Hambleton, Sam A. Stanier

A perceived advantage of screw-type foundations is the ability infer aspects of foundation performance from quantities measured or observed during installation, especially the installation torque. A particular concept widely used in practice is to correlate installation torque to ultimate capacity. This notion has proven useful as a field verification technique despite the absence of validated models that relate key variables of interest, such as installation torque, axial (crowd) force, geometrical parameters, and soil strength. This paper considers previous work by the co-authors and collaborators on analytical, numerical, and physical modelling of screw piles to relate the quantities measured or controlled during installation (e.g., installation torque) to the ultimate capacity and soil strength. Attention is given to saturated clay as a particular soil type amenable to simplified analysis. An analytical model for a single-helix pile is considered as a means of directly relating the ultimate capacity and undrained shear strength to the installation torque, crowd force, plate pitch, plate diameter, shaft diameter, installation depth, and surface roughness. The connection between the installation variables and ultimate capacity—and the sensitivity to crowd force in particular, a quantity that is typically not measured during field installations—is also discussed. The theoretical predictions are compared against data obtained from small-scale laboratory experiments that suggest the installation torque relates to the remolded strength of the soil. INTRODUCTION Screw piles are deep foundations that are twisted into the ground through an applied torque. Advantages over driven piles or drilled foundations include the relative silence of the installation, with low ground vibrations, and the possibility of being easily decommissioned by reversing the direction of twisting. Screw piles are now routinely encountered as a flexible, low-cost solution for numerous applications (Figs. 1 and 2), and they are also being considered for applications in offshore energy production due to limitations being imposed with respect to decommissioning and underwater noise. Also known as “screw anchors,” “helical piles”, or “helical anchors,” screw piles consist of helices or helical plate elements attached to a central shaft. Figure 3a shows the components of a single-helix pile and key variables. The diameters of the shaft and helix are denoted by d and D, respectively, and p is the pitch of the helix. Variable H denotes depth of the helical plate, and T and N denote the torque and axial (crowd) force applied during installation. In typical applications, the pile includes multiple helical plates, and the shaft is composed of segments that allow for it to extend to large depths into the soil.

Jan 1, 2019

By Caciola Jr. Joseph J., Nidal M. AbiSaab

"Thanks in great part to the geology of the New York City Metropolitan area, mini-caissons are a popular choice for deep foundations. These drilled elements are readily available, easy to install with minimal impact on adjacent structures, and can be designed with large compressive and tensile capacities. Despite the frequency with which they are employed, the engineering design community is divided over several of the underlying principles governing the design of mini-caissons. This paper seeks to draw attention to several of these issues in an effort to encourage further research and discussion, namely: (1) how the allowable stresses have changed for the NYC Building Code over time, (2) the inconsistent load transfer mechanisms considered for geotechnical capacity, and (3) the role of the permanent steel casing towards structural capacities of mini-caissons.INTRODUCTIONIn the local construction nomenclature, mini-caissons are drilled deep foundation elements which derive their capacity from a socket in rock. A permanent steel casing (commonly between 7- and 24-inches in diameter) aides the drilling through overburden soils to the top of bedrock. Afterwards, an uncased rock socket is drilled into the bedrock and the inside of the casing and rock socket is inspected by means of portable video equipment. After inspection, the interior of the socket and casing is filled with steel reinforcement and concrete or grout. The casing-soil interface is generally ignored for axial design purposes and the full geotechnical compressive or tensile capacity is assumed to be generated in the rock socket. Figure 1 shows a typical mini-caisson cross section.Mini-caissons have been used for decades in the New York City area for a number of reasons. They have historically been proven to develop high axial capacities in the city’s metamorphic rock (Tamaro et. al. 2000), often exceeding 300- to 500-tons. Additionally, their method of installation (drilling) is generally able to bypass layers of dense Glacial Till, boulders, and manmade fill which would interfere with the installation of other pile types (e.g. driven piles, auger cast piles). Further they are able to extend to depths exceeding 50-ft to reach bedrock underlying a site, making them a useful tool in areas where rock is relatively deep or varied in elevation. Drilled casing installation also results in fewer vibrations and disturbances to adjacent structures and can occur in areas of restricted access (a constant concern for any project in a dense urban environment such as NYC)."

Jan 1, 2016

By Johannes Labenski, Christian Moormann, Johannes Aschrafi

"Open steel pipe piles are used for various applications in costal engineering, port structures and increasingly important for offshore structures. During the installation of open steel pipe piles the formation of a plug has an influence on the installation process of the pile and also on the final bearing capacity. The formation of the plug depends on different factors, e.g. the pile diameter and the installation method. This paper starts with a structured overview about analytical methods (API, EAP-EAU, UWA-05, HKU-12, Modified API) to calculate the axial bearing capacity of open steel pipe piles. The numerical simulation of the installation process of open steel pipe piles has to fulfill high demands, i.e. to accurately represent the penetration of the pile inside the soil, the formation of the plug and also the stresses and strains during the installation. A numerical back analysis of a comprehensive field test, using the Coupled Eulerian-Lagrangian (CEL) method and a hypoplastic constitutive model for sand, reveals the stresses and displacements of the soil and of the piles. The analysis provides a comprehensive understanding of soilpile interaction.INTRODRUCTIONThe particular difficulty in the numerical simulation of plug formation, is that the effect of plugging inside open ended steel pipe piles has not been fully investigated. In scientific papers different approaches are documented to explain this phenomenon. Some are based on in-situ tests and others are based on numerical simulations. One of the challenges is to determine the end bearing capacity and shaft friction of the steel pipe pile. Different approaches have been developed over the years to determine them e.g. from Randolph et. al. (1991, 1994) and Paik et. al. (2003). Recent approaches are the ICP-05 Method (Jardine 2005), the UWA-05 Method (Lehane 2005) and the HKU-12 Method (Yu & Yang 2012a). A comparison of some methods can be found in Schneider et al. (2010). A plug inside an open steel pipe pile can be visualized as a spatial bracing of soil between the inner surfaces of the pile, cf. Lüking (2010).. However according to Lüking & Kempfert (2012) this bracing only exists for the height in the end of the pile equal to twice its diameter.To identify a plug inside a pile, there are different measurable parameters. One parameter is the development of stresses around the pile during and after its installation. Henke (2013) measured the inand outside horizontal stresses at the pile tip during the installation. The results showed higher stresses on the inside compared to the outside. To validate his measurements he performed a numerical back-analysis of the measured installation process and got matching results."

Jan 1, 2017

By L. P. Weber

During the years 1983-1987, a research programme, jointly performed by the steel producers ARBED, British Steel Corporation, Peine-Salzgitter, Unimetal, and co-sponsored by the European Community for Steel and Coal (ECSC), has been carried out on steel H-piles of different shapes. The initial aim of the testing programme has been the improvement of bearing capacity, both in sandy and clayey soils. At two test sites, standard H-beams are compared to H-piles with different types of laggings or to H-piles grouted both under low and high pressure. In this paper and in view of the open european market in 1992, the H-pile capacities and their corresponding allowable loads, determined from codes, recommendations and computation procedures in use in Belgium/Luxembourg (B/L), France (F), Federal Republic of Germany (G), and the United Kingdom (UK) as well as their evaluation from dynamic CAPWAP and Case methods are compared to the static capacities measured in-situ. In addition, procedures for estimating the load/movement behaviour of H-piles from CPT, pressuremeter, and CAPWAP are compared to the measured curves.

Jan 1, 1991

By Alex Grenoble, Alex Reeb, George Filz, Farzad Abedzadeh

"This paper summarizes available information on the characteristics and properties of deep-mixed soilcement produced by the wet method. The topics covered in this paper include: unit weight, unconfined compressive strength, strength variability for field mixed materials, influence of curing time, influence of consolidation pressure, Young’s modulus, differences in strength and stiffness between small and large samples, creep deformations, Poisson’s ratio, and tensile strength. In addition, this paper discusses the development of design considerations and recommended property values for a project that uses soilcement to protect an existing dam penstock from loads applied by an overlying stability berm. Some of the key recommendations for the deep-mixed soil-cement to be used in this project are that (1) a curved strength envelope that includes tensile strength can be used in the analysis, (2) the stress-strain and strength properties can be characterized using Duncan and Chang's (1970) hyperbolic model, and (3) a specification based on the median unconfined compressive strength value is appropriate.INTRODUCTIONFor many projects, including foundation and embankment support, deep mixing can be designed based on simplified procedures and following standardized guidelines (e.g., FHWA 2013). However for unusually complex or critical projects, it is often necessary to perform numerical analyses, and in order to perform these numerical analyses well, a thorough understanding of the material properties is needed.This paper summarizes information on the characteristics and properties of deep-mixed soil-cement produced by the wet method, and it discusses the development of design considerations and recommended property values for a specific project, herein referred to as the penstock project, that requires numerical analyses. For the penstock project, a horseshoe-shaped enclosure of soil-cement is being considered beside and above an existing dam penstock to protect it from loads applied by an overlying stability berm that will be constructed for seismic remediation. The concept is to use soilcement created by the deep mixing method along the sides of the penstock and to use compacted soilcement above the deep mixing to create the crown of the protective soil-cement zone around the penstock. For this application, the soil-cement stiffness, rather than its strength, is the controlling design parameter. To achieve the necessary soil-cement stiffness, the strength will be high enough that the factor-of-safety values against instability along potential failure surfaces passing through the soil-cement are high. Following conventional practice, the soil-cement acceptance criteria will be based on the unconfined compressive strength, and the specified strength will be selected to produce the desired modulus value."

Jan 1, 2015

By M. Hesham El Naggar, Yasser Abdelghany

"ABSTRACT: The axial and lateral monotonic and cyclic behavior of helical pile foundations was investigated and new innovative helical screw systems suitable for seismic loadings were developed and patented. More than one hundred full scale field load tests were conducted on instrumented helical screw piles installed in cohesive soil. The piles included: plain helical screw piles (P-HSP); grouted (G-HSPs); fiber reinforced polymer FRP-G-HSPs; and reinforced grouted RG-HSPs. The RG-HSP piles axial capacity was more than twice that for P-HSP, with minimal reduction after cyclic loading, and their lateral capacity was more than 3 times the P-HSPs capacity. A 3-D finite element model was established. The results of 3-D finite element modeling were used to establish the load transfer mechanism and a design methodology for the considered piles.INTRODUCTION AND LITERATURE REVIEWHelical (screw) anchors have been utilized in tension loading and have gained popularity for bearing load applications. Helical piles represent an overall cost effective alternative to conventional piles for new construction and repair applications. The helical piles speed and ease of installation, less noise during installation added advantage with regards to their efficiency and reliability for underpinning including re-support and reconstruction of distressed and damaged foundations for either stabilization or rehabilitation. The “square shaft” SS175 pile is a segmented deep foundation system with helical steel bearing plates (helices) welded to a central steel shaft. Load is transferred from the shaft to the surrounding soil through these bearing plates. Segments or sections are joined with bolted couplings. Practically installed depth is limited only by soil resistance and economics. A helical bearing plate or helix is one pitch of a screw thread. All helices regardless of their diameter have a standard 75 mm pitch (Figure.1). The performance of single helical anchors and group action were studied experimentally and theoretically by several researchers, the researches focuses on the installation torque and uplift resistance. Some researches focus on the load carrying capacity with little pile response to cyclic loading effects or to instrumented full scale field testing. Helical piles axial compressive or lateral loading still is not well characterized and needs more analyses and their seismic performance was not investigated. For such this research was initiated to investigate the helical piles monotonic and cyclic performances under axial and lateral loadings to consider their usage in different applications in seismic zones. Among the several researchers, Clemence (1983); Mooney et al. (1985) conducted field and laboratory testing; Hoyt (1989), Hoyt et al. (1995), and Ghaly and Clemence (1998) conducted theoretical and experimental testing, Puri and Vijay (1984), Huang et al. (1995), Perko (2000), and Pack (2000) conducted theoretical analyses. Rao and Prasad (1993), Prasad and Rao (1994), conducted experimental testing; Vickars and Clemence (2000) studied the performance of helical piles with grouted shafts."

Jan 1, 2014

By N. Schmitz

This paper explains how new digital solutions improve reverse circulation drilling operations. Upgrading field-proven reverse circulation drilling (RCD) rigs with new digital technologies enables semiautomated drilling, with upgrade options for fully automated & remote drilling. Key elements of the improvements are electrically controlled valve systems, process instrumentations, a state of the art machine controller and drilling operation via a touch control panel. Automation of core processes, such as adding drill pipes, reduces set-up times, increases machine uptime for drilling and as a result efficiency. While drilling, sensors provide continuous feedback, which is used to automatically adjust e.g. the weight on bit to the optimum; resulting in an increased rate of penetration and less wear and tear. While in the past hydraulic power packs (HPU) have typically been operated at a constant high-performance level with related high fuel consumption, a new interface between the machine controller and the power unit regulates the HPU performance exactly according to the actual drilling operation needs. This leads to significant fuel consumption reduction. The safety benefits of the digital improvements are the ability to remotely operate the rig in challenging site conditions via a mobile operator panel.

Sep 8, 2021

By Sam Warren, Antonio Marinucci, Genesis Z. Figueroa, Anne Lemnitzer

Drilled Displacement Piles (DDP) provide an ideal deep foundation solution that combines the benefits of ground improvement with traditional advantages of piling systems. This paper consolidates data from 20 construction projects in which more than 30 DDPs were installed and tested axially. High quality site exploration data (e.g., Cone Penetration Test and Standard Penetration Test) were evaluated to derive geotechnical analysis parameters. The test sites consisted of mostly mixed soil types with strongly stratified layers of sand, silt, and clay. Pile diameters ranged between 40 cm and 61 cm. Test results were compared with predictive methods developed specifically for DDPs as well as methods used in general geotechnical practice. The accuracy of the empirical methods is presented in terms of total pile capacity, pile length/diameter, and soil type. The large majority of all examined methods underpredict the in-situ pile capacities. It was also found that the difference between the tested and predicted capacity is strongly related to the level of improvement in the surrounding soil due to the piles’ installation. A general comparison between predictive axial accuracy and the observed level of ground improvement upon installation is also discussed.

May 1, 2022

By Alexander Filotti, Richard Kalson

"1. INTRODUCTION- WHAT IS P3 OR PPP ?The Public Private Partnership (PPP or 3P) is a project delivery scheme based on the government providing land and/or a concession agreement, and on a private entity providing the design, construction, financing, operation and maintenance of the project for an extensive duration of time (up to thirty years). At the end of the operation-maintenance period, the project is turned over to the public entity, which fully owns the project at all times. While there are many PPP delivery schemes used around the world, for the present paper, we are going to analyze the impact of the Design-Build-Finance-Operate-Maintain (DBFOM) scheme on the deep foundation specialty subcontractor. There are couple of reasons that the PPP delivery system started to be used and implemented not only by developed nations (e.g. United Kingdom, USA etc.), but also by the International Development Bank for delivering major infrastructure projects in developing nations. From the point of view of government agencies, some of the reasons to use PPP are the following:??The primary use of private capital in an era where borrowing and/or supplemental taxation represents too much of a political risk. Budget deficits and taxation limits are extremely hot topics in every election (national or local) and the level of education of the electorate in this area is making it more and more difficult for politicians to use borrowed funds and additional taxation finance sources for public projects. At the same time, we see an increase in the social expenditures of the government in parallel with a needed increase in expenditures on infrastructure due to aging and neglect.??Bundling the construction risks with the operational and maintenance risks naturally pushes the private entity to increase the level of innovation and communications in the primary phase ( the construction phase) in order to develop future process based upon the innovation and communications utilized in the operation and maintenance phase of the project. This is true if contractual incentives are properly structured because “all revolves around incentives. In a world of ‘incomplete’ contracts, where it is difficult to foresee and contract about uncertain future events, it is important to get the incentive structure right” (Grimsey and Lewis, 2004).??The transfer of very expensive risks such as differing site conditions, schedule, design, construction, maintenance and operation costs from the public authority to the private entity.??The timespan of development and construction of a PPP project is usually shorter than the traditional procurement process (e.g. “ the I-595 P3 provided capacity improvements fifteen years sooner than a conventional plan would have offered. In Maryland, an innovative expansion of the Seagirt Marine Terminal in the Port of Baltimore was completed two years ahead of schedule due to the P3 model. As a result, the Port of Baltimore is only the second port on the US East Coast to have unrestricted access to both a fully functioning 50-foot channel and 50-foot berth.”)"

Jan 1, 2017

By Negin Khalili-Motlagh-Kasmaei, Paul O'Leary, Christopher J. Rothsiedl, Dimitar Ninesvski, Alexander Zöhrer, Vincent Winter

This paper presents the implementation of a digital twin for the vibro-replacement ground improvement process, as part of a digital construction site. The goal is to implement an evidence-based quality assurance for each produced element (column or point). The system uses a combination of planning data and real-time machine data collected automatically from construction equipment. In addition to the quality assurance, feedback is provided in a number of areas, e.g., condition monitoring of the equipment. The digital twin builds upon the real-time sensor and machine data, fused with metadata, to implement a digital model for the process. A hierarchical data evaluation, using rule-based Key Performance Indicators (KPIs), permits viewing of the spatial variation of data over the construction site. This permits the modelling of systematic variations in subsurface properties across the site, enabling the detection of anomalous individual elements, the diagnosis of their cause and the prediction of properties as construction proceeds over the site. All time-series data and KPIs are represented by standard classes of objects, leading to a generic coding of the data analysis; this minimizes the effort required to add additional sites and/or new KPIs. Examples are presented for a number of sites, where the system was used to identify anomalous columns.

May 1, 2022

By Torsten Wichtmann, Jan Macheck, Frederik Broz, Patrick Staubach, Hauke Zachert

The majority of heavy or strongly loaded structures, for instance high-rise buildings, large span bridges or gas storage tanks are founded on pile groups. However, current design codes and guidelines do not provide a standard procedure for their design under lateral dynamic and high-cyclic loading arising from e.g. wind, temperature or earthquake loads. To establish appropriate design strategies, a better understanding of the pile-soil, pile-pile and pile-cap interaction is required. This paper is focused on finite element backcalculations of centrifuge tests on single piles and pile groups subjected to up to 500 lateral load cycles. For the finite element simulations, a special calculation procedure is applied, combining two kinds of constitutive models, a conventional (Hypoplasticity with Intergranular Strain extension) and a special highcycle accumulation (HCA) model. The parameters of the constitutive models are calibrated based on static and cyclic laboratory tests on the sand used in the centrifuge tests. The performance of the applied numerical procedure is evaluated based on a detailed comparison of the simulation results with the measured data from the centrifuge tests. Overall the applicability of the used numerical strategy for simulating the behavior of pile groups subjected to high-cyclic loading is shown.

May 1, 2022