Search Documents

By Filippo Leoni, Wesley Schmutzler

"The LPV-111 East Back Levee Improvement Project lies along the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway (GIWW) in Orleans Parish of New Orleans, La., and is an essential component of the New Orleans Hurricane Protection System. The Hurricane Protection Office of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) attributed failure of the New Orleans East levees system to overtopping, erosion and subsequent breaching of LPV-111 along the GIWW, as well as other sections of flood protection during Hurricane Katrina in 2005. The existing levee suffered extensive damages from Hurricane Katrina, such that the USACE elected to provide earth stabilization and to rebuild the levee sections. Due to the adverse geotechnical properties of the foundation soils, the Corps deemed ground improvement necessary to stabilize the new levee and to limit its footprint. Wet Deep Mixing Method (DMM) was selected as the most suitable technology for this task.ChallengesDesign: This reach specifically protects East New Orleans and the Bayou Savage National Wildlife Refuge, the largest urban wildlife refuge in the U.S. and home to several threatened or endangered species of birds as well as many reptiles, amphibians and small mammals. The Corps chose DMM due to the sensitivity of the protected marshlands and because the method limits the footprint of the raised levees. The increase in the load bearing capacity of the treated soil significantly decreases the footprint necessary to attain the required height increase. This limitation required the new levee to have steep slopes, drastically increasing the surcharge on foundation soils characterized by overall poor geotechnical properties (soft clays and peats). The design also considered the increased horizontal stresses on the levees due to the extreme storm surges during a hurricane.The design of the 1.6 m diameter (5.25 ft) DMM elements called for overlapping them to form a double auger element that formed buttresses perpendicular to the levee alignment. The contractor installed the buttresses at a maximum on center spacing of 4.7 m (15.5 ft). One additional double auger DMM element was midway between consecutive buttresses at the centerline of the levee to further help prevent settlement (Figure 1)."

Jan 1, 2013

By Michael W. Driller, Wen Yan (Grace) Chen, Steven J. Friesen

"Remediation for Perris Dam has been proposed in response to deficiencies identified in a seismic stability study prepared by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) in 2005. Lenses of potentially liquefiable soil have been identified within the dam foundation which may lose strength during a seismic event. The remediation was designed primarily to limit deformation of the dam. Nineteen construction methods were compared and evaluated for the remediation. The final decision was to use cement deep soil mixing (CDSM) to strengthen the foundation and to construct a downstream berm to stabilize the dam. The entire CDSM treatment will cover over 4,000 linear feet of the downstream toe of the dam. Over 300,000 cubic yards of CDSM will be used to strengthen the foundation. The construction of the project started in Fall 2014 and is anticipated to take approximately 3 years. This paper describes the design aspects of using CDSM to treat the foundation, including laboratory testing, investigation of overstressing/cracking, extent of treatment, effect of CDSM on pore pressures under the dam, and the results of a full-scale CDSM test section.INTRODUCTIONPerris Dam is a zoned earthfill dam with a length of 2.2 miles, a maximum height of 128 feet, and a capacity of 131,450 acre-ft of water. The dam is located in Riverside County, California at the terminus of the East Branch of the State Water Project. The embankment was constructed between 1971 and 1973 over an alluvial deposit between the Bernasconi Hills to the South and Russell Mountains to the North. A rock outcrop divides the dam into left and right reaches when viewed from the reservoir looking downstream. The embankment soil was obtained from a borrow source at the North end of the reservoir. The dam has a sloping sandy clay core (Zone 1) with a 10-foot deep cutoff trench and a silty sand shell (Zone 2) with a downstream chimney and blanket drain (Zone 3 and Zone 4) as shown in Figure 1."

Jan 1, 2015

By William B. Conway

This paper will describe the large caisson pier foundations for four of the bridges crossing the Mississippi River in the New Orleans area; and will discuss some of the unusual problems encountered during their sinking. Certain settlement phenomena experienced during their service life will also be related: The four bridges in order of their construction: The Huey P. Long Bridge, River Mile 106.1, completed in 1935 The Greater New Orleans Bridge No.1, River Mile 96.0, completed in 1958 The Hale Boggs Bridge, River Mile 121.6, completed in 1983 The Greater New Orleans Bridge No.2, River Mile 96.1, completed in 1988 Each of these bridges employed large open-dredged concrete caissons as foundations for one or more of the river piers, with the smallest being the 65ft by 102ft caissons for Piers I and II of the Huey P. Long Bridge and the largest being the 99ft by 214ft caisson for Pier II of the Greater New Orleans Bridge No.2. The Huey P. Long caissons are founded in a dense fine sand at -170 while all of the other bridge caissons are founded in hard preconsolidated clay at elevations varying from -150 to -185. The Huey P. Long Bridge is currently being widened without increasing the caisson foundations under any of the river piers; and the design reasoning that led to this decision is presented.

May 11, 2007

By David S. Graham, Benjamin Turner, Paul J. Axtell

Seismic challenges were at the forefront of design for two parallel replacement bridge structures over the Arkansas River as part of the I-30 Crossing Project in Little Rock, Arkansas. Although not an area of the country typically associated with high seismicity, proximity to the New Madrid Fault Zone resulted in design ground motions sufficient to trigger liquefaction in alluvial channel and point bar deposits. A detailed post-award subsurface investigation program utilized CPT with complimentary borings to obtain samples for laboratory testing to assess the continuity of potentially liquefiable layers, from which we concluded that continuous zones of liquefaction across the extent of the north approach could lead to lateral spreading towards the river. An overview of the foundation and superstructure design to resist lateral spreading forces in accordance with the latest published design guidelines and research is presented. Other seismic aspects of the design are covered including timber pile ground improvement to mitigate liquefaction at the north approach embankment and foundation input motions that differ from code-based ground surface motions due to foundation stiffness, strength, and geometry. The project showcases an example of successful collaboration between geotechnical and structural designers with contractor input to address seismic challenges in the South Central US. Furthermore, the importance of considering kinematic demands on columns and other superstructure components – not just foundations – is highlighted.

Sep 8, 2021

By Mary Ellen Bruce

Let me first address the issue of the wet grab samples. The wet grab samples that were attempted to take on the Central Artery were hindered by the fact that the way the mixing was being done was only by injecting grout on the way out, during withdrawal of the mixing tools. They would auger down to the required depth (usually with some water being injected), which took anywhere from 45 minutes to an hour, and then when coming out, the grout would be injected with grout. That was leaving a column of grout in the center where the shaft had been (i.e. inside of the blades of the mixing tools), which would end up being something like a foot in diameter because the pipe that was used for the drill shaft was a foot in diameter. So we had 10 inches to a foot of almost pure grout in the middle of our column and then we had 2 feet on either side that was mixed soil cement. So when they went down with the wet grab sampler not knowing where that was in the column sometimes they/we were getting strengths of 1500 psi, and sometimes they/we were getting strength of 500 psi or 100 psi. So what was it that we were taking into the wet grab sampler? In those cases you don't really know, but it wasn't representative of the core samples we were taking. We were purposely not coring in the center because we knew that was going to be high cement content, almost pure grout. So the issue of wet grab sampling particularly on this project, the Central Artery Project, was that we didn't really know what we were sampling. What becomes an issue with wet grab sampling in other projects is that you have to have another device (machine) in most cases, a cherry picker crane or something similar that can raise and lower with a beam that is used to forces the sampler down into the freshly mixed soil-cement. And regarding economics, is it more economical to have that crane standing by with its operator or to have a drill rig to come along later and do the coring and take the material out that's fairly identical to what you're finding in situ? The complaint of micro-fracturing in the core samples as you're taking the cores was raised by Seiko as causing large strength reductions. But, if you're doing it carefully, then I don't think that's much of an issue anymore, on research basis perhaps but not on a practical level.

Feb 10, 2003

By Tracy Brettmann, Shailendra Endley, Jason Leary, Shashank Valluru

"Augered Cast-in-Place (ACIP) piles have long been used for deep foundation support in sands due to their high capacity and speed of installation. Very little information exists on the effects on capacity if the auger needs to be withdrawn from the hole prior to grouting. This condition can occur due to various reasons including grout plug ups, equipment issues, and grout supply delivery problems. It can become a major problem for the project team if this happens during production because the capacity of that pile is then in question, potentially resulting in re-design, installation of replacement piles and/or schedule delays. This paper compares the results of two high capacity test piles installed into a dense sand where one test pile was installed by first completely withdrawing the auger from the hole after drilling to the pile tip depth and the other test pile was installed utilizing conventional industry standard methods. Identical load tests were then performed on both piles to compare the effects of the two different installation procedures. The load test results were surprisingly similar in this case although the grout take required for the test pile installed in the pre-drilled hole was significantly higher to produce a similar grout return depth.IntroductionAugered Cast-in-Place (ACIP) piles are used extensively along the Texas Gulf Coast due to their combination of high capacity and speed of installation resulting in one of the most cost effective deep foundation systems relative to other options. Soil conditions in this region typically consist of alternating layers of sand and clay in the upper several hundred feet. ACIP piles are routinely installed to depths of over 100-ft to achieve the required capacity depending on the site specific soil conditions and therefore typically extend through and tip into sand layers. Occasionally, due to various reasons like equipment issues and plug-ups, the auger is withdrawn from the hole without grouting. Significant sand in the soil profile could lead to questions about the effect of the auger withdrawal on the pile capacity and load deflection relationship.This paper summarizes the results of two identical pile load tests performed on adjacent piles of the same length with the main difference being one was installed using the standard installation procedure and the other was installed by first completely withdrawing the auger from the hole after drilling to the pile tip depth. The load test results were then evaluated using load transfer analyses to estimate the effect of the withdrawal of the auger on the load-deflection characteristics and capacity."

Jan 1, 2017

By Lee S. Vanzler

Atlantic Wharf involved the construction of a six-level underground parking garage and a 32-story high rise tower along the historic Boston Harbor waterfront. The site, historically known as ?Russia Wharf,? consisted of filled land initially created in the late 1800s by extending the shoreline toward the harbor as the urban population and land needs grew to support expansion of commerce and trade. Redevelopment required solutions to address relics of waterfront structures (granite block seawalls, piles, and piers), weak subsurface soil conditions, tidal groundwater levels, and contaminated soils resulting from previous site usage and filling. The foundation system, consisting of drilled shafts with column loads up to 14,000 kips (62,272 kN), concrete diaphragm wall (slurry wall), and up-down construction methodology, was chosen to address these factors. As a prerequisite for development, selected portions of the façades of the former historic buildings were required to be preserved, protected, and incorporated into the final building configuration. The historic façades were temporarily braced and supported prior to the demolition of the buildings and commencement of below-grade construction. This paper will describe the considerations in the selection of up-down construction methodology along with a discussion of the design and performance of the concrete diaphragm wall and drilled shaft foundations. Up-down construction methodology shortened the overall construction schedule while addressing the lateral bracing requirements for the concrete diaphragm wall and restrictive ground movement tolerances to protect adjacent structures. Below-grade construction was completed in March 2010, and the building was opened for tenant occupancy in January 2011.

Jan 1, 2011

By Mark R. Svinkin

"Construction equipment and operations usually produce soil and structural vibrations which may harmfully affect various structures and also the content of buildings and houses. The level of structural vibrations depends on a number of factors such as characterized sources of vibrations, soil conditions, and susceptibility of structures. There are certain knowledge and experience for managing the effects of construction vibrations which require implementation of condition survey of structures, information on construction dynamic sources and soil conditions at a site, evaluation of possible vibration effects on structure, calculation of ground vibrations before construction, use mitigation measures to decrease vibrations, and a choice of appropriate vibration limits. The paper presents the application of known concepts for assessment of vibration effects on structures from bridge constructions.INTRODUCTIONVibrations producing by construction activities such as pile driving, dynamic compaction of loose soils, demolition work, heavy construction equipment and trucks can affect adjacent and remote structures. Vibration effects on structures, sensitive devices and processes may create significant practical problems. Legal actions are often required for solutions of vibration consequences. The level of construction vibrations depends on dynamic sources, soil conditions at a site in particularly availability of soils with settlement potential, distances from the sources, parameters of waves propagating at a site and susceptibility rating of adjacent and remote structures. It is likely that intolerable structural vibrations from direct vibration effects of impact pile driving and resonant floor vibrations from vibratory pile driving may be induced in adjacent structures to construction sites.Foundation settlements resulting from soil vibrations in loose soils usually occur in the proximity of dynamic sources, but it is important that dynamic settlement may happen at various distances from the source. There are such examples. First, Kaminetzky (1991) mentioned a case history of building settlements developed at a distance of about 305 m (1000 ft) away from a pile driving site. Foundations of the buildings were underpinned on piles down to the tip elevation of the new driven piles to prevent building settlements. Second, Lacy and Gould (1985) shows that the peak particle velocity (PPV) of 2.5 mm/s (0.1 in/s) of ground vibrations could trigger dynamic settlements at distances up to 30.5 m (100 ft) from driven piles."

Jan 1, 2016

By Vijaya Bhushan Rao, Jason Redgers

A substantial lifestyle destination in the United Arab Emirates, in the Emirate of Abu Dhabi comprising of 1315 villas, town houses and non-residential leisure facilities is built over an area of 280 hectares of former mangrove areas, natural sands and reclaimed lands. Large-scale subsoil investigations including field and laboratory testing carried out dividing the entire site in to 7 clusters. This investigation revealed alternating layers of loose sands and silty clays within the load influence zone of planned foundations, showing susceptibility to excessive settlements. Therefore, ground improvement works were undertaken using a combination of stone columns, Rapid Impact Compaction (RIC) and excavation and replacement of soils plus a 0.4m thick load transfer platform. This was necessary to limit the settlements, increase-bearing capacity and prevent long-term settlements. 30 no’s of full-scale Zone Load Tests, ZLT were carried out each for a duration of 30 days in order to ascertain the anticipated long-term settlements in the clay layers. In addition, further testing of electrical cone penetration tests, CPT, and Plate Load Tests, PLT. The use of Priebe and Asaoka’s observational procedure were applied to predict the final settlements and the use of back-analysis from the 30 days Zone Load Tests, ZLT results to establish the site-specific consolidation parameters in clay layers to optimize the design and ground improvement works.

Sep 8, 2021

"Standing 92 stories high and just over 1,362 ft tall, Chicago’s Trump International Hotel and Tower is perfectly positioned at the center of one of the world’s most impressive skylines.The Tower serves as a link between its famous predecessors, Willis Tower (formerly, the Sears Tower) to the south and the John Hancock Building to the north. Originally planned to be the world’s tallest building, the project was scaled back when the developers started questioning the need for super-tall buildings after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. In its River North neighborhood, Trump Tower dominates the skyline as a symbol of Chicago’s last great building boom, standing triumphantly over other high-profile projects that have been postponed due to current economic realities.It is often said that the three most important factors in real estate are location, location and location. This maxim was not forgotten by The Trump Organization when the site was selected for the International Hotel and Tower. Located two blocks west of Michigan Avenue and Chicago’s famed Magnificent Mile, the site is bound by the historic Wrigley Building to the east, Wabash Avenue to the north and west, and the Chicago River to the south. The building’s position along a bend in the Chicago River allows visitors and residents unobstructed views to the mouth of the Chicago River and Lake Michigan. Site ChallengesUnderneath the site there are approximately 10 to 20 ft of sand and urban fill underlain by soft Chicago blue clay. At 75 ft in depth, the soft clay transitions into Chicago hardpan, a very hard till that was consolidated by the glaciers over 10,000 years ago. Below the hardpan, the till turns granular with cobbles, boulders and water under pressure. Bedrock is about 100 ft below existing grade and has a weathered surface with fractures and clay seams. Unweathered limestone bedrock is sound and hard with unconfined compressive strengths of 10,000 to 20,000 psi."

Jan 1, 2009

By Esam Abraham

A 13.6 mile portion of the 500 kV Tehachapi Renewable Transmission Project crosses the mountains of the Angeles National Forest. Access and environmental constraints precluded road development for most transmission tower foundations, tower erection and conductor stringing operations. Because of the access constraints, helicopter-supported micropile foundation construction was used for this steep and environmentally sensitive portion of the project. The general methodologies incorporated on the project represent innovative implementations of micropile design criteria, preconstruction micropile installation and verification testing, on-site geotechnical characterization, micropile and pile cap installation, and proof load testing. Challenges in constructing the 224 foundations for 56 transmission towers provide lessons learned related to transmission lattice steel tower specific design constraints, construction challenges (environmental and geotechnical), and construction schedule.

Jan 1, 2010

By Michel Bustamante

The Arbre viaduct, 200 metres long, is the most important structure on the Belgian portion of the High Speed Train line between Paris and Brussels. The particular geotechnical conditions of the soil with carboniferous limestone affected by karstic phenomena, has prompted the designer to found the viaduct on systems of high capacity vertical and batter micropiles. The design of the working micropiles was validated by full scale tests performed on instrumented micropiles. The size of the structure and the deformation criteria to be met when HS trains are crossing the viaduct, together with the lack of references for such innovative structure, called for monitoring the movements of the piers as soon as the link was open to traffic. The authors report on the results of loading tests on micropiles and the results of settlement structure monitoring for a period of 4 years. Settlement of the foundation is estimated taking into account the group effect.

Jan 1, 2002

By Waddah Akili

At an offshore site along the Red Sea coast of Saudi Arabia, marine structures were supported on tubular steel piles driven into coral and coral contaminated sands and silts. Surprises and disappointments faced during the installation of the piled foundation were, to a large measure, due to inappropriate design methodology and absence of proper soil information. The paper describes the design evolution process, highlights the static pile test program conducted to verify design parameters, and amplifies the need to prepare for worst possible scenario when coral deposits are encountered. Despite corrections made to the design, based on site-specific insitu parameters (skin friction, end bearing) perceived from load tests conducted on site; the final design adopted overestimated capacities in over 50 percent of total piles driven. The paper describes the changes introduced to the design during the execution of the project, highlights the pile test program conducted to verify the design, and compares pile design penetration with actual penetration depth. The unpredictable and erratic pile behavior observed, ascertains the need for more appropriate pile design and installation guidelines for driven piles in coral and coral contaminated formations.

By Matthias Pulsfort, Hanna Nissen, Markus Herten

An insufficient integrity of cast in-situ bored piles can lead to a reduction of the load bearing capacity and may require cost intensive repairs. Reasons for an insufficient pile integrity are linked to the construction process, mainly to poor concrete quality leading to bleeding and segregation of the fresh concrete. Moreover, the entrapment of soil and an insufficient concrete cover can pose a problem. Knowledge about the time-dependent development of the fresh concrete pressure during the construction process of bored piles is needed for a better understanding of the underlying processes causing these defects. Therefore, pressure measurements were carried out on different construction sites with pressure cells being installed at different depths along the reinforcement cage. The measurements revealed the maximum pressure acting on the surrounding soil. The achievement is a better understanding of the effects of the concrete placement specifically and the construction process in general on the surrounding soil to reduce the risk of pile imperfections.

Sep 8, 2021

By Andrew J. Ciancia

The construction of the Pennsylvania Station in Manhattan, the Beaux-Arts masterpiece, was completed in 1910. In financial ruin, the Pennsylvania Railroad Company sold the station in the 1960?s and the new Madison Square Garden and the Penn Plaza complex were constructed at the site. The demolition of Pennsylvania Station brought public awareness and outcry to protect historic structures and the Landmarks Preservation Commission (LPC) was subsequently established in 1965. In the 1960?s relatively little engineering data was available on the performance of historic structures during adjacent construction and thus, no published criteria were established by the LPC on allowable movements and vibrations. During the late 1970?s a commercial tower was planned adjacent to the landmark Fraunces Tavern Block (FTB) in lower Manhattan. Through negotiations between the LPC and the developer, Dr. M. I. Esrig and the author were retained to monitor the historic block during foundation construction. The monitoring data and building performance compiled from the project formed the basis of the published 1981 ASCE technical paper by Esrig and Ciancia entitled ?The Avoidance of Damage to Historic Structures Resulting from Adjacent Construction?. Based on the ASCE paper, the NYC Department of Buildings adopted Technical Policy and Procedure Notice #10/88 entitled ?Procedures for the Avoidance of Damage to Historic Structures Resulting from Adjacent Construction When Subject to Controlled Inspection by Section 27-724 and for Any Existing Structure Designated by the Commissioner?, June 1988. This paper describes the author?s recent experience during the installation of deep foundations within, or adjacent to, three Manhattan landmark structures. Discussions are provided on the foundation construction, monitoring programs and performances of the three structures.

Jan 1, 2008

By Abid O. Adekunte, David Greentree, David Hilton

"The construction industry is witnessing an upsurge in demand by property developers to have basements incorporated into their residential and commercial development schemes. This is attributable to perceived improvement to aesthetic and commercial values of buildings by underground space, amongst property owners. This trend is compelling more owners of buildings with no basements to explore the possibility of creating underground additional space beneath their existing buildings. The creation of a basement beneath an existing building entails the installation of a reinforced concrete (RC) underpinning system, temporary works, bulk excavation to basement formation level and construction of the basement structure, with associated aesthetic finishes.The L-shaped segmental RC underpins are a common system of choice for such underpinning works. They are multi-functional; providing vertical support to the existing superstructure, providing lateral support to earth and groundwater, supporting temporary and permanent surcharge loads from adjacent structures and services, whilst also forming part of the basement slab. This paper focuses on the first function of the Lshaped RC underpins; capacity under vertical compressive loading from the superstructure. The most common industry approach for the prediction of vertical capacities of L-shaped underpins is the oldfashioned Meyerhof’s (1953, 1963) effective width method, which is based on the traditional bearing capacity theory, whilst accounting for correction factors for eccentricity and foundation depth.The traditional bearing capacity formula is surrounded by a significant degree of uncertainty; estimates are highly user-dependent, as capacity prediction is sensitive to the chosen angle of shearing resistance (?), while there are difficulties in accurately measuring the in-situ ??value of cohesionless soils. In addition, the effective width approach has been shown to be very conservative by many research workers. The segmental RC underpins presented in this paper have been designed with an alternative less conservative method, which involves the use of a recently proposed consistent work-hardening plasticity model calibrated with field-based tests on footings of various aspect ratios and relative embedment in sand. The paper highlights the principles behind underpinning works for urban basement construction, the design of L-shaped RC underpins with the recently proposed plasticity model and the advantages of the method over traditional bearing capacity solutions and pre-existing plasticity models."

Jan 1, 2016

By J. Erik Loehr, Minh Uong, Andrew Z. Boeckmann, Sarah G. Myers

"The University of Missouri performed a lateral load test program involving 32 drilled shaft load tests for the Missouri Department of Transportation (MoDOT). Tests were performed at two MoDOT geotechnical research sites, and all shafts were founded in shale. Shafts were instrumented to measure the displacement of the shaft head, and the structural response of each shaft was interpreted from strain gage data and from ShapeAccelArray (SAA) data. The SAA is a chain of rigid segments with sensors that use MEMS (microelectromechanical systems) technology to measure the tilt of each segment/joint. The measuring principle of the SAA is therefore similar to that of an inclinometer. The SAA device was placed in a casing installed in the center of each test shaft to provide a continuous record of deflection along the length of the shaft throughout each test.Bending moment profiles were calculated from strain gage data and from SAA data. Interpretation of bending moments from measurements of strain (via strain gages) and displacement (via SAA) is a nontrivial exercise, primarily because the bending stiffness, EI, is nonlinear and greatly influenced by concrete cracking, which is difficult to predict. The procedure used for this work predicted values of bending stiffness along the length of the shaft as a function of the bending curvature, which was interpreted from the SAA data. Values for bending stiffness as a function of curvature were computed using Ensoft LPile v2012. Bending moment profiles from SAA data were typically similar to those from strain gage data. The SAA bending moment profiles were often “noisier” than the strain gage bending moment profiles, but the SAA bending moment profiles had more data points since the SAA chain was continuous from the top to the bottom of each shaft."

Jan 1, 2017

By Krishna R. Reddy, Jyoti K. Chetri, Girish Kumar

Geotechnical engineering encompasses a major portion of the civil and infrastructure projects. The large amounts of energy and resources typically used in these projects leads to undesirable emissions and wastes which contribute substantially towards global environmental impacts (e.g., global climate change). This could further include secondary economic and societal issues which are often unaccounted in traditional engineering design of the geotechnical projects. In order to address this issue, it is imperative to integrate the broader environmental, economic and social implications into decisions of a geotechnical project. Recent years have seen a major impetus on life cycle assessment to evaluate the environmental sustainability of the geotechnical designs. However, there are no tools that can quantify the life cycle triple bottom line sustainability of potential design alternatives in a project with holistic considerations towards broader economic (indirect costs and benefits) and social impacts (stakeholder preferences, socio-environmental and socio-economic impacts). This study presents a new framework for quantitative assessment of life-cycle sustainability (QUALICS) for alternative designs in engineering projects. The framework integrates two multi-criteria decision analysis methods namely, the Integrated Value Model for Sustainable Assessment (MIVES) and Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), to support decision making on the potential design alternatives. In this study, a brief overview of the framework is presented. A case study demonstrating the use of QUALICS framework is discussed with its application to the sustainability assessment of two deep foundation systems, caissons and piles, over their design life. The technical designs of both systems are developed based on bearing capacity, both primary and secondary settlements, and structural integrity. The results from the sustainability assessment of the two deep foundation systems are discussed, and the most sustainable option based on different stakeholder preferences and site-specific conditions are identified.

Jan 1, 2019

By Paul Doherty

It is known that the axial capacity of a displacement piles installed in clay varies with time. Consolidation theory suggests that dissipation of porewater pressure set-up during pile installation would lead to increased effective stress and hence higher pile resistance. In recent years a number of case histories have reported time dependent capacity increases for piles installed in sand. Although there is some debate regarding the physical mechanisms controlling this phenomenon, known as ageing, it is unrelated to pore pressure dissipation as piles in sand are installed in primarily drained conditions. A series of field tests designed to investigate ageing effects in soft clay are presented in this paper. Full-scale load tests on 6m long 250 mm square concrete piles, which were driven into soft clay are described. The piles were first tested approximately 100 days after installation, at which stage full equalization of the excess pore pressures had occurred. Static load tests were then performed up to 10 years after pile installation. The piles exhibited significant ageing, with their shaft resistance increasing by up to 66% over a 10 year period. Possible mechanisms for such aging characteristics are explored.

Jan 1, 2011

By Brian Isherwood, Tara Brown, Paul Kreycir, Jenny Earle

"The Shangri-La hotel and luxury condominium tower, recently opened on University Avenue in downtown Toronto, required eight levels of underground structure, four extending into the shale bedrock.Isherwood Geostructural Engineers was retained in 2007 by Anchor Shoring Limited to provide an alternative design-build solution to better address serious foundation risks. The site, bounded on three sides by City streets, abuts an existing 1957 14-storey building with five underground levels to the north. Sitting on the rock surface along the east perimeter under University Avenue runs the existing Toronto Transit Commission’s University Subway Line built by cut-and-cover in the 1950’s and which was believed to lie very near the property boundary at the southeast corner of the site.The bedrock under Toronto is known to contain very high locked-in horizontal stresses, much higher than can be resisted by shoring techniques, which result in inevitable wall movement when excavating deep into the rock. The strategy adopted to control the risk to the Subway, adjacent building, and major utilities is described in the paper, along with the comprehensive monitoring of movements, and their comparison to predictions.The ProjectThe 66-storey Shangri-La hotel and luxury condominium tower, recently constructed on University Avenue in downtown Toronto, houses 222 hotel rooms in floors 1-17; 287 residences on floors 18-49; and private estates including two 2-storey penthouses on floors 50-66. These comprise 873,000 square feet of development. Eight levels of underground basement are required to provide parking and other amenities, the lower four extending into the shale bedrock."

Jan 1, 2015