Search Documents

By Scott D. Neely, Donald R. Clark

"An existing landslide located at the southeast corner of the Telluride Regional Airport has been in an active state of failure for several years. The presence of the landslide has represented an on-going liability for the Airport, the Federal Aviation Administration and the Colorado Department of Transportation. A catastrophic failure of this landslide occurring in a manner similar to that which occurred at the Airport in 1987 has posed an on-going threat to closing Colorado State Highway 145 south and below the slide area. The existing landslide has been characterized as a series of multiple failed block areas located downhill of the airport runway that have occurred in severely weathered Mancos Shale.A total of 12 alternatives were evaluated to mitigate the landslide, including the preferred alternatives of either partial or total landslide removal. However, prior development has left essentially no place on the airport property that would allow for the disposal of the landslide debris for either the total or partial removal alternatives, and the closest off-site disposal area was approximately 40 miles from the site. As a result, in-situ stabilization of the landslide, including a primary system of isolated tie-back anchor plates with strand anchors, and a secondary system of high strength steel mesh and intermediate anchors was selected for the ultimate design of the project to stabilize the landslide in place.For design purposes, geotechnical characterization of the slide area was accomplished through geological mapping, conventional borehole exploration and geophysics using multiple electrical resistivity. The paper discusses the design process utilized and the unique challenges faced one-third of the way through construction when discovery of a survey error required redesign of the entire landslide mass stabilization system using the prefabricated anchors that had already been delivered to the project.INTRODUCTIONTelluride Colorado is located at the toe of the Colorado Rocky Mountains on the western slope. The Telluride Regional Airport is located on Deep Creek Mesa about 5 miles west of the town of Telluride.The landslide is located at the southeast corner of the airport just below an abandoned portion of the quarry access road on a south facing slope. The quarry access road is located below the elevation of the runway and outside the elk fence that surrounds the air traffic area of the airport property. Since the reconstruction of the runway, the access road to the quarry and the construction access road for the reconstruction of the airport runway and safety area were rerouted to stable ground north of the previous access road location and off of the head scarp of the landslide."

Jan 1, 2015

By John Vickers, William H. Hover, Paul C. Schmall

"Any sudden subsurface issue that threatens the stability of existing buildings or infrastructure is cause for immediate investigation and prompt remedial action. Nowhere is this more true than the nation’s dams and levees. A breach of any kind, no matter how small initially, has the potential to be catastrophic and impact a wide downstream area. Addressing the problem quickly and effectively is therefore critical. When a turbid water discharge developed from a rock drainage embankment at the toe of the earthen dam impounding Cannonsville Reservoir, near Deposit, NY, the source of the problem was quickly identified as resulting from an artesian water release from an underlying permeable silty sand and gravel formation during drilling of three exploratory boreholes in preparation for construction of a hydroelectric plant at the downstream toe area of the dam facility. Work was halted, intense 24-hour monitoring was implemented, and as a risk reduction measure NYCDEP began to draw down the reservoir’s total storage at a rate of a billion gallons per day. Input sought from contractors within the geotechnical community helped result in the design and development of a deep well system to control the artesian pressure. Once this primary objective was accomplished, modified compaction grouting was performed at the borehole locations to densify loosened soils, fill any voids created by the discharge activity, and seal off the permeable aquifer. This paper discusses the dewatering program, specialized drilling techniques required, monitoring and verification of pressures within the dam, and the grouting program.BackgroundCannonsville Dam, owned and operated by the New York City Department of Environmental Protection (NYCDEP), is located in Deposit, New York on the West Branch of the Delaware River and impounds the Cannonsville Reservoir. Built between 1959 and 1964, the dam has an impervious central and upstream core zone keyed into the glacial till foundation, a semi-pervious downstream embankment zone, and a rockfill toe and is approximately 2,800 ft (853.4 m) long and 175 ft (53.3 m) high. The dam is formed by two embankment sections. The left section forms the main embankment blocking the main river channel, while the right section is constructed over a topographic saddle or low ridge. Reservoir level is actively influenced by withdrawals through the West Delaware Tunnel, based on water supply need. Under normal circumstances, water is continuously discharged downstream to the Delaware River."

Jan 1, 2016

By John P. Turner, Benjamin J. Turner

"Non-destructive testing and evaluation (NDT/NDE) methods have become standard tools as part of the post-construction quality assurance of drilled shaft foundations. In responding to anomalies, foundation designers, owners, and contractors face a number of choices, including: (i) acceptance of a shaft with known anomalies, (ii) further investigations of integrity (e.g., concrete coring), (iii) repair schemes, and (iv) reject and replace. To assist in selecting the best option, analyses are often performed that involve assessing the structural performance of reinforced concrete shafts that may include defective concrete or voids. Currently, the analytical tools for predicting the flexural strength and stiffness of drilled shafts with defective concrete located in discrete regions of the cross section are limited. This paper presents a robust moment-curvature analysis tool for drilled shafts based on the fiber-element discretization method. The tool allows for consideration of anomalous or defective concrete regions in the shape and location that they are believed to exist in the shaft while considering explicitly the nonlinear material behavior of the intact regions based on expected material properties. A case study is used to illustrate the practical application of the analysis to drilled shaft projects.INTRODUCTIONImperfections such as defective concrete or accidental eccentricity of reinforcing cages are an inherent part of the drilled shaft construction process that will occur occasionally even when construction best-practices are followed. Petek et al. (2002), O’Neill and Sarhan (2004), Poulos (2005), and others have described the effects that construction defects can have on the axial and lateral performance of drilled shafts. Our industry has seen rapid progress in recent years in the development and improvement of tools for detecting drilled shaft anomalies, such as gamma-gamma and crosshole-sonic logging, sonic-echo testing, thermal integrity profiling, and even visual inspection with invasive video cameras. Nonetheless, in most cases the wealth of data from these tests is used by foundation engineers to make a fairly “black or white” decision—should the defects be repaired, or should the shaft be rejected? A third option that is not typically considered is to directly analyze the section, including anomalies, and compare the reduced strength and/or ductility to the actual project demands. This option takes full advantage of the data collected during integrity testing, and may provide a justifiable means for avoiding further construction costs and delays, whether for repair or replacement."

Jan 1, 2016

By Arash Khosravifar Ph. D. P. E., Thomas Torkelson P. E., Milad Souri Ph. D. P. E.

Kinematic demands from lateral ground deformations can be a major cause of damage to maritime and highway transportation structures such as wharves, piers, and bridges. These kinematic demands are different from the ground deformations in the free field in that the resisting forces from piles will reduce the ground deformations to some extent (i.e., pile pinning effect). Current design codes for wharf structures allow the beneficial resisting forces from pile pinning effects to be incorporated in pseudostatic slope stability analysis (e.g., ASCE/COPRI 61-14). While design guidelines that are specifically developed for bridge foundations provide recommendations on how to incorporate the pile pinning effects (e.g., Caltrans 2012), their applicability to wharf structures need to be evaluated. This study uses the results of a large-scale centrifuge test on a pile-supported wharf structure to evaluate the accuracy of available Newmark sliding block analysis in estimating the lateral ground deformations. Pile pinning effects are incorporated based on the approach outlined by Caltrans. The results of this study support the use of existing pile pinning methods that were primarily developed for bridge foundations in maritime structures (e.g., wharves and piers). It was found that median Newmark displacements provide a good estimate of the permanent end-of-shaking displacements and that the median plus 1 standard deviation Newmark displacements provide a good estimate of the peak transient displacements. Design considerations for use in the Newmark sliding block analysis to estimate the kinematic demands on piles are discussed.

Oct 1, 2022

By Masaru Sakakibara, Ngo Tuan Anh, Mitsuo Nozu

"In the southern region of Vietnam and the southern United States, numbers of Deep Mixing (DM) columns have been installed to increase the stability of slopes and mitigate ground settlement. However, in some cases, there were some quality problems for in-situ cement mixing such as inclusion of unmixed lumps. According to the investigations by the X-ray diffraction analyses, electrical conductivity (EC) test, and careful observations of in-situ mixing quality, it has been observed that the existence of expansive soil and its high EC value cause the insufficient in-situ mixing. The countermeasures to address these problems have been taken.INTRODUCTIONIn South Vietnam, under the guidance of numbers of references and standards (Miki, 1998, JGS, 2000, Kitazume et.al., 2001, BS 2005), Deep Mixing (DM) has been used in recent years for soft clay improvement to increase the stability of slopes and to reduce consolidation settlement (Nozu 2005, Tung et.al., 2009, S. T. G. Peng et.al, 2009). However, at the initial phase of the DM operation, the authors have encountered some unusual phenomena such as (1) lower strength and inclusion of unmixed lumps (Figure 1), (2) less amount of up-heaved soil, and (3) sticking of large lumps of clay to the mixing blades. In regard to the above (3), Photo 1 shows one of the countermeasures against the sticking. By means of the placement of additional plates, the stuck clay has been reduced significantly.Subsequently, we have noticed that the quality of DM columns has not been so good, which meant that there have been some unmixed lumps in the column despite high cement dosage such as more than 300kg/m3. The authors also have encountered the similar incidents in Vietnam and United States during the deep soil mixing work. For example, Photo 2 is the core samples taken from the DM test column in northern Vietnam adopting cement injection during penetration (CIDP) procedure. To solve this problem, various tests and investigations have been performed so far (Nozu 2010, 2012)."

Jan 1, 2015

By George Filz, Morales, Carlos, Bertero, Filippo Maria, Alessandro, Leoni

"The Deep Mixing Method (DMM) represents a viable solution to improve adverse geotechnical properties of foundation soils for many practical applications. A pre-construction soil investigation campaign is necessary to assess soil properties and to retrieve samples of different soil layers for a laboratory Bench Scale Testing program (BST). The BST has to be designed using various binder types, binder contents, and water/cement ratios in each of the soil types. Following the laboratory program, a full scale Field Test (FT) is typically necessary to verify the results of the BST. This paper will highlight the differences and the importance of performing both pre-construction laboratory tests and field tests to ascertain the proper mixing parameters in the different soil layers. Comparative analyses and interpretations between the lab and field stages, along with accumulated information about soil properties and quality control (QC) results, allow fine-tuning the production parameters throughout a project. Three Deep Mixing Method projects, where both laboratory and field tests were executed, are illustrated: (1) The LPV 111 Project (New Orleans, LA, USA): DMM was used for ground improvement/foundation strengthening to stabilize and support the burden of a new levee raise; (2) The Rio Puerto Nuevo Project (San Juan, PR, USA): DMM was applied to improve the soils adjacent to a 90"" forced sewer main relocation and to improve the soils for the base of a new drainage channel; and (3) State Road 83 (US 331) over Choctawhatchee Bay project (Walton County, FL, USA): DMM was applied to stabilize the causeway sections of the bridge enhancement project. Data recorded during laboratory and field tests for these projects were analyzed and interpreted to select the most appropriate construction parameters to provide a final high-quality product.INTRODUCTIONThe Deep Mixing Method (DMM) represents a viable solution to improve adverse geotechnical properties of foundation soils in many situations. The effectiveness of working parameters depends largely on the physical and mechanical properties of the soil to be treated. Therefore, well designed laboratory and field test programs, aimed to disclose the interaction between the site-specific soils and the mixing parameters, are essential to achieve the desired end product.Generally a pre-construction soil investigation campaign has to be performed to assess soil properties and to retrieve samples of different soil layers for the laboratory Bench Scale Testing programme (BST). The BST has to be designed using various binder types, binder contents (or cement factors - CF), and grout water/cement ratios (W/C) in each of the soil types; the selection of the different combinations and dosages for the BST is based on past extensive experiences on similar materials. Following the laboratory programme results, a full scale Field Test (FT) has to be designed and executed, installing several DMM elements to verify the results of the BST and fine tune the construction parameters, with the appropriate binder type and dosage and the most effective equipment and tool configuration."

Jan 1, 2015

By Howard A. Perko, Melinda J. Hummel

"Hydraulically jacked piles, herein referred to as jacked piles, are commonly used for underpinning existing structures to arrest settlement or augment an existing foundation for higher loads. They consist of steel pipe segments coupled together and jacked into the ground using a hydraulic ram. Pipe sections can vary in size from 3"" diameter to 18"" diameter or larger. Jacking resistance is typically provided by dead loads of existing structures. This type of piling system has been utilized for foundation underpinning, repair, and augmentation for more than 120 years, yet little has been published on the capacity, installation standards, and reliability of these systems. Pile load tests from a number of projects are presented and analysed. The data show that previous methods of jacked pile capacity and depth prediction are crude at best. Empirical relationships between capacity, depth, soil type, and standard penetration resistance blow count contain a high degree of scatter. Scatter in the data indicate capacity prediction for jacked piles needs further research and refinement.INTRODUCTIONPush pier, resistance pile, steel pier, and jacked pile are some of the names often applied to hydraulically jacked piles used for underpinning. The term ‘jacked pile’ is more common in building codes and will be used herein. Although jacked piles can be installed for new construction, this paper is focused on piles used for support of existing structures.Jacked piles consist of short segments of pipe or structural steel tube that are coupled together and forced into the ground using a hydraulic ram fastened to or beneath a footing, stem wall, or grade beam of an existing structure. In this way, the weight of the structure provides the resistance necessary to force the pile into the ground. A factor of safety can be achieved in design by redundancy, which is consecutively installing more than one jacked pile to support the same portion of foundation. Installing jacked piles consecutively using the same dead load and then releasing the load after each pile installation allows one to continue adding piles to the same general area until a total aggregate capacity is achieved to account for anticipated dead plus live loads and a desired factor of safety for that area.An engineering schematic of an example jacked pile connected to a footing foundation is shown in Figure 1. Modern jacked piles typically incorporate a steel bracket. There are many sizes and styles of brackets available. Some categories include plate brackets that bolt to the outside of an existing foundation wall, wide and narrow angle brackets that extend under existing footings, pin brackets for attachment to structural steel, and reverse angle brackets for attachment to footing and wall. Table 1 lists example brackets and their benefits."

Jan 1, 2017

By S. P. Mukherjee, Smita Tung

"Piles are generally subjected to uplift in case of under ground and water front structures. Sometimes piles are also to resist uplift loads in transmission towers, dry rock, and so on. Experimental investigations of single piles and pile groups have been carried out using model hollow circular aluminum piles, having 25.4 mm outer diameter and lengths of 600 mm, 750 mm and 900 mm. Pile groups of 2?1 and 2?2 arrangements have been used in the experimental investigations. L/d ratio has been kept equal to 24, 30 and 36 in all the cases. All the single piles and pile groups have been tested under vertical uplift. Spacing between two piles in a group has been varied with respect to pile diameter such that spacing to diameter ratios of pile are 3, 4 and 5 in case of pile groups. An attempt has also been made to analyze those models of single piles and pile groups under vertical uplift by PLAXIS 3D software. Good analogy has been observed between the results of experimental and numerical studies. A parametric study has been carried out to observe the variation of ultimate uplift capacity of pile groups with spacing and depth of embedment. It is observed that for a particular embedment length of pile and a particular group arrangement the ultimate uplift capacity increases with increase of spacing. It is also investigated that for a particular spacing and particular group arrangement, the ultimate uplift capacity increases with increase of embedment depth. Those variations have also been presented with graphs which are generated considering non dimensional forms of parameters. The paper brings out change in pullout capacity of pile groups with spacing and embedment depth of piles.1. INTRODUCTIONPrediction of uplift capacity of single piles and especially of pile groups is one of the most interesting areas of research in geotechnical engineering. Pile foundations are frequently used to transmit the superstructure loads to deeper strata if the subsurface soil is of inadequate strength. The worst possible case may be considered to occur when all the piles in a group subjected to uplift. In cohesionless soils, the shaft resistance is an important source of pile capacity under axial loading, especially when the pile is subjected to uplift loading. Poulos and Davis (1980) recommended estimating the uplift capacity of piles as 2/3 of the downward shaft resistance. Later Ramasamy et al. (2004) indicated that the upward shaft resistance is significantly less than the downward shaft resistance. Some studies were conducted on the behavior of a single pile under uplift loads, such as those by Sowa (1970), Vesic (1970), Das and Seeley (1976), Levacher and Sieffert (1984), Rao and Venkatesh (1985), Chattopadhyay and Pise (1986), and Shanker et al. (2007). Das et al. (1976) conducted a model study to test the uplift capacity of single piles and pile groups buried in sand, and they also determined a relationship between the efficiency of a pile group and its spacing. Chattopadhyay and Pise (1986) proposed an analytical method for predicting the uplift capacity of piles embedded in sand and obtained reasonable agreement between experimental and theoretical results. Gaaver (2013) investigated experimentally that an upward displacement of about 1.4–2.5% of the pile diameter is required to attain the net uplift capacity for both single piles and pile groups. The uplift resistance of pile groups depends on the several variables like group size, shape, spacing to diameter ratio of piles, embedment depth to diameter ratio of piles, soil type and its density and soil-pile friction angle."

Jan 1, 2015

By Jeffrey Goodwin P. E., Melih Demirkan Ph. D. P. E., Kevin Tehansky P. E.

Just an hour drive down MD 301 from National Harbor, construction to replace the Governor Harry W. Nice Memorial/Senator Thomas ‘Mac’ Middleton Bridge (HNB) began in spring of 2020. The Maryland Transportation Authority (MDTA) contracted with Skanska-Corman-McLean (SCM) to deliver a new US 301 bridge spanning 1.9 miles from Maryland to Virginia over the Potomac River aiming to improve capacity, safety, and access of the roadway. The project area presented a geotechnical design challenge due to the installation of new bridge foundations in the problematic soils of the Atlantic Coastal Plain alluvial deposits. With the existing bridge remaining in service during construction, and the site’s logistical constraints placing new pile driving operations near existing abutments and piers, a complex instrumentation and monitoring plan was developed to ensure public safety throughout the project. This paper discusses the geological conditions of the project area, the collaborative approach of various design team members to develop an appropriate monitoring plan utilizing various instrumentation, an understanding of baseline conditional movements of the existing bridge, and impact response of adjacent construction activity to help deliver effective new bridge foundations while protecting the old ones.

Oct 1, 2022

By Stuart Coutts

"This paper presents an overview of the author’s experience related to the assessment of the base capacity of straight shafted and enlarged-base bored piles in sand. A design approach based on CPT qc is described which has been calibrated using a database of load tests. The importance of correct installation techniques with instrumentation are illustrated and a discussion is presented on the current use of high strain dynamic testing to validate compliance with design. An example of a recent project with high quality instrumented load test data illustrates the close match to the proposed best practice approach and also highlights the importance for consideration of the effects of stress relief for deep foundations installed in deep excavations.1 INTRODUCTIONContinuous Flight Auger (CFA) piles are the bored foundation pile of choice for sand deposits across Australia. The evolution of the determination of the base resistance of CFA piles has been shaped by available investigative techniques, calculation methods, and calibration of designs with laboratory and field testing. The Cone Penetration Test (CPT) has been widely used in Western Australia (WA) where the test has been commercially available via multiple contractors for more than 25 years. On the East coast, the adoption of CPT testing has been slower with a transition from traditional Standard Penetration Testing (SPT) still occurring. Dynamic pile load tests are often used to derive parameters. The influence of pile installation on performance is commonly misunderstood and is an important element on any discussion of pile capacity for CFA pile types. The interface between the base of the constructed pile and the in-situ soil has an influence on capacity such that a poorly constructed pile base will have limited (if any) contribution to pile performance within the normal working range, generally within a 10 mm movement. The research presented in this paper pertains to CFA piles (no drilling fluids) and enlarged base piles constructed using CFA techniques under drilling fluids such that clean pile/base interface is targeted. Developments in modern piling equipment and instrumentation allow the pressure and volume of delivered concrete/grout to piles to be accurately monitored at various stages of installation such that repeatable ‘best practice’ can be achieved. The changes in soil conditions that occur due to the disturbance of the install technique are also important.Although the results of this research are likely applicable to bored piles, the interface between the pile and in-situ soil (shaft and base) need to be considered for various installation techniques. The effects of stress relaxation (due to removal of soil above pile base and adjacent shaft), time to concreting, and the zone of disturbed soil around the pile shaft are paramount.2 INSTALLATION CONSIDERATIONS The pile mix (concrete/grout) and interface with the in-situ soil are also an important consideration. For example, coarse grained, poorly graded, dry, clean sand will be partially permeated by most pile mixes; such that the influenced soil will be enhanced and in instances the overall effective pile dimensions increased. Permeation of the disturbed zone of a pile or anchor shaft along with scale effects (Lehane 2009) can have significant effect on shaft capacity and shaft frictions significantly exceeding expected are not uncommon based on ‘theoretical’ dimensions. Advancements in mix technology and mix techniques also have a large influence on the pile/soil interface. The ability of the piling rig and augers to excavate a plumb and gauge hole can also have a large influence on the zone of soil disturbed adjacent the constructed pile with a resulting influence on capacity."

Jan 1, 1900

By Nagarajan. D, Raja Rajan. K, Vijayakumar. T

Major bridges crossing mighty rivers must be constructed in flowing water. Constructing the sub-structure in water has been a challenging job for contractor. Special construction techniques with marine fleets to be adopted for waterfront construction. Enabling works like temporary piling platform and cofferdam used for pile and pile cap construction. Apart from this, enabling works like load out jetty to transport the materials from land to water; temporary walkway for access of workman to work location; temporary access bridge for construction vehicles movement; temporary liners for tower crane foundation; Concrete block to act as dead man anchor for barge movements were all required by the contractor for smooth functioning of site as per construction schedule. Investment in enabling works by contractor plays a significant role on profit margin of the project and of course with utmost safety. Design of enabling works for waterfront structures involves hydrological data like afflux, bathymetry survey, current force, scour depth and wave force to be taken cautiously for safe and economic design. Type of foundation and pile/well cap top level corresponding to water levels shall influence the construction scheme. Usage of geotechnical software like Wallap and Plaxis required for enabling work design to enhance the safety of the structure. Bathymetry and soil condition play a critical role in design and construction of enabling works. Water Discharge quantity in river along with water levels like low water level, high flood level, seasonal fluctuation of water levels has a great impact on design of enabling works. Establishing enabling works for waterfront construction near to an existing bridge is an additional challenge for the contractor. Along with design, constructing the enabling works in water requires special construction methodology and sequence of work. This paper shall provide insights on overview of design and construction of enabling works for waterfront construction.

Nov 1, 2022

By Kirk Ellison, Sherif Elfass, Ramin Motamed, Kevin V. Stanton

"The determination of accurate load transfer curves are essential for estimating deep foundation loadsettlement response using t-z style analyses. While recently developed semi-empirical methods from Ashour et al. (2010) and Ashour & Helal (2012) have shown promise in preliminary studies, they have not yet been thoroughly benchmarked against a more widely accepted approach. To address this issue, these recent procedures are implemented in the computer program CGI-DFSAP to predict the results of four Osterberg-cell (O-Cell) load tests. These predictions are compared to outcomes obtained following the recommendations from Reese & O’Neill (1988) for t-z analyses of drilled shafts in sand and clay which are carried out with the program TZ-PILE. Overall, the results suggest that the new approach offers improved accuracy regarding predictions of drilled shaft response to axial loading.INTRODUCTIONThe behavior of axially loaded deep foundations is often analyzed using a technique known as the t-z method. In this method, deep foundation elements are broken into multiple segments which are supported by discrete nonlinear springs to capture the contribution of both side-friction (t-z springs) and end-bearing (Q-z springs). Hence, the t-z and Q-z relationships dictate the predicted load-settlement response. A number of different approaches have been developed to estimate load-transfer curves with some relying solely on empirical data from laboratory and field experiments (i.e. Coyle & Reese, 1966; Vijayvergiya, 1977) and others based mainly on analytical frameworks (i.e. Kraft et al., 1981; Randolph, 1994). Reese & O’Neill (1988) provide recommendations which are widely used for developing t-z and Q-z curves for analyzing drilled shafts. This method is hereafter referred to as Method 1 (M1). It should be noted that these empirically derived relationships are only applicable for problems associated with drilled shafts and are therefore not appropriate for developing load-transfer curves for other types of deep foundations (i.e. driven piles). This is because of the difference in the frictional resistance which can be developed between a circular concrete-soil interface as opposed to that of other materials (i.e. steel) and/or different cross sectional geometries.The M1 load-transfer curves form the basis for the t-z analysis of drilled shafts implemented in the computer program TZ-PILE (Ensoft, 2014). In light of this, TZ-PILE is employed herein as a reference to compare against the capabilities of another method of implementing t-z style analyses. This method is based on a semi-empirical framework for soil behavior developed by Norris (1986) and is implemented using the program CGI-DFSAP (Computers & GeoEngineering Inc., 2011). More information concerning this approach, hereafter referred to as Method 2 (M2), is given in subsequent sections."

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 Hayel M. El-Naggar, Marawan M. Shahien

"Large capacity piles are important type of foundation elements that are needed in case of high column loads such as in tall buildings with large span between columns. In many projects, especially if the designer uses the concept of one pile supporting one column (Hamza, 2003a & b). The axial capacity of the large bored deep foundations can be further increased by grouting the shaft skin and the base of the pile. The increase in the capacity of the piles due to grouting can be tremendous. Thus grouting appears as an ideal solution for achieving more reliable foundation and greater savings (Littlechild et al., 2000). A data base of pile load tests of instrumented grouted piles is under development in a major study aiming to propose a simple method to estimate the axial capacity of large bored grouted piles. The data base include pile load tests from projects constructed in Egypt and abroad. The main goal of this paper is to analyze pile load test(s) from one project. The tested deep foundations included 1.2 m diameter and 1.5 m diameter piles and a barrette of size 1.0mx2.8m. The instrumentation of the tested piles and barrette allowed for the separation of skin friction and base contributions to the axial load. Further, the contribution of the skin friction of every layer along the pile shaft could be identified. The results of the analysis clarified how base and shaft grouting increased the axial capacity of the pile and decreased the settlements for certain load level compared to conventional un-grouted piles installed under similar conditions.INTRODUCTIONIn recent years, significant research has been carried out to develop new techniques which are suitable to withstand problems in major projects such as high applied loads in high rise building, large spans structures projects and structures designed using the concept one pile supporting one column (Hamza, 2003a & b). Base and shaft grouting of piles are one of these new techniques which aim at decreasing the settlements and increasing the capacity of the pile under axial load that became major requirements in large projects (Stocker, 1983; Mullins et al., 2001; and Hamza, 2015).Base grouting consists of injection grout under pressure at the base of the pile after the concrete is sufficiently hard. Field evidences showed that the ultimate end bearing of base-grouted piles could be as high as 1.5 that of non-base-grouted bored piles (Suckling and Eager, 2001). Further, field evidences was provided by Shahien and El-Naggar (2015) that showed an increase in end bearing resistance due to base grouting reached to 2 to 3 times that of non-base-grouted bored pile. On the other hand, shaft-grouting causes increase in the soil density in the zone which had been disturbed by the pile construction and thereby improves the shaft resistance of the pile. Field measurements by Gouvenot and Gabaix (1975), Stocker (1983), Robson and Wahby (1994), Troughton and Stocker (1996), Byrne et al. (1998), Joer and Randolph (1998), Hamza and Leoni (1998), Littlechild et al. (2000), Hamza and Ibrahim (2002), Hamza (2003 a&b), Hamza (2015) and Shahien and El-Naggar (2015) showed that the shaft resistance of grouted piles could be nearly 1.5 to 5 times that of non-grouted piles."

Jan 1, 2017

By Leo Panian, Ryan Nagle, Priyanshu Singh, Gina Carlson, Wayne Magnusen

"This case study presents the design and construction of an integrated foundation and ground improvement solution utilizing deep soil mixing (DSM) and micropiles. 270 Brannan is a midrise office building in San Francisco that straddles the historic shoreline that was reclaimed in the 19th century. Subsurface conditions include shallow bedrock inland of the historic shoreline, and steeply dipping bedrock overlain by 60 feet of compressible deposits and liquefiable fill on the bay side. Project challenges included mitigating the liquefaction and lateral spreading hazards, addressing settlement concerns in the fill and the bay deposits, developing a cost-effective foundation support solution, assuring satisfactory seismic performance, and addressing construction restrictions with existing adjacent structures.DSM combined with micropiles was identified as the most cost-effective solution for the ground conditions. The DSM panels act both as a liquefaction mitigation mechanism and a foundation support system. Resistance to seismic overturning is provided by uplift-resisting micropiles. The DSM-micropile solution allows the use of efficient conventional spread footing foundations, integrating isolated micropile groups to anchor the shear walls. Successful installation of the system relied on a program of field testing to validate the design and conformance with the design criteria.INTRODUCTIONThe regular grid of surface streets within San Francisco’s South of Market (SOMA) district provides little evidence of the geotechnical complexities that lie below. In the late 1800s, sand dunes, bedrock hills, cliffs, marshes, and mud flats were flattened and filled, concealing their locations and characteristics. The 1906 San Francisco earthquake and fire leveled many buildings in SOMA; new buildings were built after 1906 – often on top of rubble and debris from the structures that came before. Locally, the combination of natural geology and historical interventions can produce complex subsurface conditions that vary dramatically over short distances. This is particularly true at locations where tidal mudflats once met bedrock hills at the shore of San Francisco Bay.This case study describes an integrated foundation and ground improvement system implemented for a multistory “Class A” office building at a complex SOMA urban infill site. The system utilizes cement deep soil mixing (DSM) in combination with spread footings and micropiles to address a range of design and construction issues, including liquefaction and lateral spreading mitigation; consistency of earthquake ground motions; shallow foundation support; seismic uplift resistance; and avoidance of loading adjacent basement walls. The system was implemented by a technically-sophisticated owner through a process that included constructive collaborations between the project geotechnical engineer, structural engineer, general contractor, and specialty foundation and ground improvement contractor(s). The system is designed to cost-effectively provide a high level of seismic performance."

Jan 1, 2017

By A. Ortigão, M. Felix, E. Falk, T. Koehler

"Ground improvement techniques such as vibro-replacement or deep soil mixing are fairly young products in the Brazilian geotechnical market. Soft soils in this country are deep, very soft, have low sensitivity and are challenging. In general, ground improvement techniques are increasingly selected as more costefficient and flexible solutions on infrastructure projects compared to the conventionall technologies such as piled embankments, wickdrains with surcharge or jet-grouting. The geotechnical challenge expansion project for the Porto Alegre Airport, South Brazil, involved a taxiway area of five ha of 8 to 10 m of soft clay deposit. The deep soil mixing (DSM) technique was selected as a cost-effective solution to reduce settlements. As part of the design, an extensive soil investigation programme includ ing laboratory and field trials was carried out to define the most economical slurry-recipe, DSM installation patterns and quality control specs. This paper gives details of the field and laboratory trials and present results.INTRODUCTIONThe International Airport of Porto Alegre in the state of Rio Grande do Sul in Brazil is located in an area with extensive sediments near to Guaíba Bay. During the different construction phases of the airport over the last decades, the soft clay deposits have been a challenge for the local geotechnical community as well as for the specialized contractors (Schnaid et al, 2001). As part of the most recent expansion scheme, a cargo-terminal with a five ha airplane tarmac area will be constructed."

Jan 1, 2015

By Silas C. Nichols, Jennifer E. Nicks

"Limit states design (LSD), or load and resistance factor design (LRFD), is a method to account for the uncertainty in loads and resistance through a reliability calibration that requires all applicable limit states (strength, service and extreme) to be checked during foundation design. LRFD has been in use internationally for several decades; however it wasn’t until recently that engineers working on highway projects were required to use the method for the design of highway bridges and other appurtenances. Although the bridge community has been using a form of limit states design for structural components since the early 1970s, the design of foundations for bridges, walls and other geotechnical features had long been performed using allowable stress design (ASD), whereby all uncertainty in loads and material resistance is combined in a single factor of safety. While the move to LRFD was viewed as a more rational approach for the design of bridges and structures, the transition to its use for geotechnical engineering has been met by many with confusion and difficulties in application. This article will revisit the history of transition from ASD to LRFD for geotechnical engineering, summarize the status of the transition and issues with its use, and briefly discuss some emerging research opportunities for improving and advancing the design platform.Background and HistoryUntil about a decade ago, foundations and substructures for bridges were traditionally designed using ASD, while the superstructure was designed using load factor design (LFD), a precursor to LRFD that incorporated factored design loads but no risk assessment. This combination led to uncertain and incompatible safety margins in design for the various bridge components. In 1986, the American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Subcommittee on Bridges and Structures (SCOBS) concluded that the standard bridge specifications in use at the time for U.S. transportation projects had significant inconsistencies and gaps, wasn’t up to date with emerging technology and that the development of new specifications was warranted. The proposed solution by the subcommittee was to transition to a more coherent method of design where applicable failure and serviceability conditions could be evaluated considering the uncertainties associated with loads and resistance."

Jan 1, 2015

By Steven M. Henderson, Zachary D. Jones

The risk of allocation in construction contracts is a primary concern for all parties. For contracts involving subsurface construction the allocation of site condition risk is critical. In the past one hundred years technological advances fundamentally changed how that risk is allocated; yet another shift in this risk allocation may lie just over the horizon due to advances in geotechnical data management. Around the world initiatives are underway to make geotechnical datasets more open and accessible. In the United States some states like Kentucky have already made geotechnical data readily accessible. This proliferation of geotechnical data in the U.S. may impact the allocation of subsurface risk in construction contracts. Many construction contracts contain a differing site condition clause. That clause allows for a modification of the contract price or schedule if the ground conditions encountered by the contractor differ materially from either what was indicated in the contract documents or would be reasonably expected. A contractor, however, is typically not entitled to that modification if the contractor knew or should have known of the adverse conditions encountered. Courts have interpreted the “should have known” language as requiring contractors to make a reasonable site investigation prior to bidding the project. If geotechnical data is available and accessible and reveals the adverse condition the contractor encounters, courts could find that the contractor should have known of the condition and thus will not be entitled to a modification based on the differing site condition clause. Accordingly, the U.S. could be on the threshold of significant shifts in how the risk of differing site conditions is allocated in construction contracts.

Jan 1, 2017

By Hubert Law, Dan A. Brown, Kyle M. Rollins

"Soil mixing and jet grouting provide a means to significantly increase the lateral resistance of pile group foundations with relatively little investment of time, effort, and expense compared to the cost for additional piles necessary to produce the same increased resistance. Comparative field testing conducted on full-scale pile groups before and after treatment of small soil volumes showed significant improvement in lateral resistance. The lateral resistance of the pile group increased by 60% due to soil mixing and by 180% due to jet grouting. To provide additional understanding regarding the influence of the soil mix strength, depth of improvement and width of improvement, a series of parametric studies were performed using a 3D finite element model. This set of “virtual load tests” was then combined with the results from the actual field tests to help develop a simplified model to account for observed behavior. In general, the testing and analysis indicate the pile group and the surrounding improved soil block generally act as an equivalent “super pile”. The passive force, side shear and base shear on the improved soil surrounding the pile group itself increased lateral resistance. This increase in resistance from the soil block can be added to the lateral resistance of the pile group.INTRODUCTIONThe lateral resistance of pile groups is often critical to the design of bridges and high-rise structures subject to seismic, wind, wave and landslide forces. Typically, when analyses indicate that the lateral resistance of a foundation is inadequate, additional piles, drilled shafts or micro-piles are added to increase the lateral resistance. Furthermore, an expanded pile cap or connecting beam is often required to structurally connect the new piles to the existing pile group. While this approach provides the required lateral resistance, it may also be relatively expensive and time consuming. An alternative approach is to use soil improvement techniques to increase the strength and stiffness of the surrounding soil and thereby increase the lateral resistance of the pile group. The improved zone could potentially be relatively shallow because the lateral resistance of piles is typically transferred within 5 to 10 pile diameters. For example, the soil around the periphery of the foundation could be relatively easily improved for an existing foundation as illustrated in Fig. 1(a) using a variety of soil improvement techniques. Alternatively, the soil under the foundation could be improved for a new foundation or even for an existing foundation with a technique such as jet grouting (see Fig. 1(b)). Improving the soil under the foundation would have the potential for producing greater increases in lateral resistance because the improvement would reach interior piles. In addition, the process of creating a cemented “soilcrete” zone around pile foundations could potentially produce a zone which would behave like a reinforced “superpile” with increased structural stiffness."

Jan 1, 2015

By Brandon Smith, William Bohlen

Riverbank erosion along the Brazos River has modified the structural support conditions for an existing bridge structure in Southeast Texas. The 8-span, 1,200-foot long bridge was completed in 1992 along Highway 99, a key corridor for the Houston area. Foundation support conditions have been altered due to natural, ongoing river morphology for three bents on the affected riverbank. Recent events include three storms within a three-year period that each exceeded the 500-year return probability. This resulted in accelerated erosion along the northern riverbank. Over forty vertical feet of soil has been removed in some locations. Drilled shaft foundations are now functioning as columns. This review considers the behavior of columns and deep foundation elements due to the modified support conditions. The review ultimately presents a rational methodology for the review of the present and anticipated future bridge configuration with respect to current strength, service, and extreme event limits, with corresponding safety factors for the design. Introduction and Background The Fort Bend Grand Parkway Toll Road Authority (Owner) oversees the State Highway 99 Judge Jodie Stavinoha Bridge over the Brazos River. The 8-span, 1,200-foot long bridge was originally designed with four southern approach spans of 115 feet; a three-span continuous river crossing with span lengths of 195 feet-235 feet-195 feet; and a single northern approach span of 115 feet. Figure 1 provides an overview of the northern portion of the bridge. Table 1 provides a summary of the original bridge substructure configuration. When the bridge was completed, the centerline of the Brazos River was located at midpsan of the main span and the northern high bank was originally located at Bent 7. Erosion process has forced the northern high bank to Abutment 9 (also called Bent 9), and the river centerline during normal flow conditions is located south of Bent 8. The overall estimated river excursion at present day is approximately 270 feet to the north from its original location. An erosion wall that was installed in 2017 limits further erosion of the north river bank within the 300-foot width of the roadway corridor right-of-way. This study was developed to better understand the existing conditions, and to forecast the need, nature, and criteria for potential future improvements.

Jan 1, 2019