Search Documents

By Timothy L. Roberts

For many years practicing geotechnical and structural engineers in Texas and Louisiana were reluctant to include augered cast-in-place (ACIP) piles as a viable deep foundation alternate. Three primary concerns were the lack of a final driving resistance to confirm adequate capacity, the inability to inspect ACIP piles prior to installation, and the fact that pile integrity is highly dependent on the skill of the ACIP pile contractor's field personnel. The Deep Foundations Institute (DFI) Committee on Augered Cast-In-Place Piles has responded to these quality control concerns by establishing standards of practice for ACIP pile installation and ACIP pile inspection. Regional areas of the country have different subsurface soil and rock conditions and many times this will influence local installation and inspection requirements. The best way structural and geotechnical engineers can address quality control concerns is to be familiar with the DFI standards of practice, to know the special requirements for a particular project site, and to incorporate them into a well-written ACIP pile specification. The purposes of this paper are to: 1) review the main fundamentals of a successful quality control program, 2) describe how these fundamentals can be applied to the installation of ACIP piles, and 3) add personal experiences from ACIP pile projects in Texas and Louisiana. Nondestructive test methods are frequently used as a quality control tool to evaluate questionable piles. An additional brief discussion of two nondestructive test methods is presented to complete the paper.

Jan 1, 1998

By Julie Shang, Tim Evans, Michael McDonald, Yu Guo, Bingfeng Xue

Effective chemical grouting represents a technical and economic solution to many challenges related to soil stabilization and blocking the flow of water. Chemical grouts are facing increasing demands in durability, environmental impact and value. To better meet these challenges, a novel and cost effective process was developed to produce a sodium silicate that increases the ratio (i.e. silica to alkali) beyond what has been used in traditional silicate-based grouts. The move to a lower sodium form of silicate was anticipated to have two desirable performance enhancements; a reduction in leachable sodium and improvement in the durability of the silicate grout. An in-depth study was performed at the University of Western Ontario Geotechnical Research Centre to quantify improvement in durability as well as other performance properties such as compressive strength. The study began by first modelling the gelation time and reaction kinetics of the high ratio sodium silicate over a range of silicate concentrations using two different setting agents as well as with/without a hardener. As expected, reducing the level of sodium produced a much more water resistant grout. These same formulations also showed a four order magnitude reduction in permeability. Somewhat surprising, test results showed the higher ratio silicate having much higher compressive strength. At the time of this abstract, the high ratio silicate was moving to the trial stage for geotechnical applications while the petroleum industry was further along with several successful field trials for water blocking as well as cement remediation. This paper will review the chemistry, testing and features of this next generation form of sodium silicate. Introduction Sodium silicate based grouts have been used for decades for soil stabilization and water control. Over the years, several silicate-based systems have been tailored for specific application conditions to maximize performance and reduce cost. Past research has also focused on the selection of setting agents and hardeners for silicate grouts. A constant in the development effort has been the grade of sodium silicate. The vast majority of chemical grouts have been formulated using a ~3.2 ratio sodium silicate. As a very brief overview on the meaning of “ratio” and why it is so important to performance properties. The ratio describes the proportion of sand to alkali or SiO2:Na2O used to make different grades of sodium silicate. Comparing a 2.2 ratio to a 3.2 ratio, it is easier to polymerize and set the 3.2 ratio. Upon setting and forming a silica gel, the system has higher compressive strength values and improved durability with a reduced level of syneresis (i.e. shrinkage). This leads to the question if 3.2 is better than 2.2 why not go to 4.2 or higher?

Jan 1, 2018

By John P. Turner

The behavior of tieback retaining walls depends on many factors, including soil properties, groundwater conditions, construction sequence, spacing and stiffness of tiebacks and soldier piles, tieback loads, and others. The primary design considerations for tieback walls are 1) adequate stability and 2) limiting wall movements. Traditional design methods rely on apparent earth pressure diagrams and experience to predict the forces which must be supported by the tiebacks to provide adequate stability. The required soil properties depend upon whether the soil is sand, soft clay, or stiff clay. Design to limit wall movements is more difficult and the usual approach is to design the wall with an adequate factor of safety for stability and then evaluate wall movements during construction through the use of load tests on individual tiebacks and monitoring of wall movements by optical surveying, slope indicators, and extensometers. If excessive movements are likely to occur, it is often not known until construction is well underway. This approach is reflected in the fact that few tieback walls fail due to a lack of adequate stability, while most litigation involving tieback wall performance is related to excessive movements. Much progress has been made in recent years in methods for predicting the movement of all types of insitu retaining walls (Clough et al. 1989, Clough and O'Rourke 1990). These methods are based upon both experience and analytical methods. This paper reviews the methods currently available for evaluating both the stability and movements of tieback retaining walls. Case histories involving excavations constructed in the downtown Seattle area are used to evaluate the applicability of the available methods to Seattle conditions and to illustrate the importance of soil behavior in tieback wall performance.

Jan 1, 1990

By Gray Mullins

A post grouted drilled shaft foundation system was successfully used in place of the specified driven pile foundation system as a Value Engineering Cost Proposal (VECP) for the new PGA Boulevard Grade Separation Project. Pressure grouting the cohesionless sandy soils at the drilled shaft base significantly increased the end bearing capacity and stiffness allowing drilled shafts to be the more cost effective foundation system. The post grouted drilled shaft option also provided other benefits including reducing owners risk normally associated with pile driving vibrations and offered a high level of quality assurance for the drilled shafts. This paper discusses the implementation of post grouted drilled shafts from design to completion of construction. A design procedure for post grouted drilled shafts developed by the University of South Florida was used for initial VECP evaluation. Prior to construction, two instrumented test shafts were installed and load tested, one of which was post grouted. Therein, the design procedure was calibrated, tip elevations for production shafts were refined, drilled shaft construction and grouting procedures were demonstrated, and a grouting criteria was developed for the project.

Jan 1, 2003

By George K. Burke

Jet grouting was first introduced into North America in the late 1970's, soon after the conception of the system in Japan. However, it was not until the mid-1980's that the technique began to gain acceptance through the renewed interest and efforts of specialist U.S. geotechnical contractors. Since this time, innovations by both American users and other users worldwide have further advanced the technology, with a corresponding increase in the range of practical applications. This paper discusses the evolution of jet grouting in North America, from simple single-fluid methods to more complex triple-fluid methods, to the energy-intensive double-fluid and SuperJet methods. Case histories, illustrating a variety of jet grouting methods and applications, are cited to support the newest United States applications.

Jan 1, 2002

By Colin Curtis

In recent years, Manchester Airport has undergone expansion including the construction of a second runway, a new terminal building (Terminal 3) and extensions to the existing Terminal 1. Manchester is Britains third largest airport and ranked 20th in the world for international traffic. Arup (Manchester) was engaged as consulting engineer in a multi-disciplinary role for the terminal works. Part of this was a geotechnical commission including site investigation and pile design followed by supervision. This paper reviews the piling for the old, new and terminal extensions. In total, five pile types have been utilised over the years. The original 1950's Terminal 1 was founded on driven cast in situ piles, with a later 1970's extension utilising rotary augured piles. The recent piling comprised continuous flight auger piles (CFA), driven steel tube and tripod bored; the latter in areas of restricted access or low headroom. The ground conditions are Made Ground over thin Alluvial and Glacial drift, in turn, over a generally weak to moderately weak gypsiferous mudstone. All the piles were socketed into the mudstone. In terms of the new CFA piles, quality control using the instrumentation monitoring was problematical, but a substantial static load and integrity test programme resolved pile performance. Part of the work is matching new pile performance with previously installed piles and the continued use of older piles with new loads. Research provided some data on the older piles, including some static load test data, which enabled back analyses of their design and likely behaviour. Differences in design methods, installation techniques and pile behaviour based on load tests will be discussed.

Jan 1, 2001

By Osama Safaqah

The new Cooper River Bridge will replace two existing bridges along U.S. Highway 17. The cable-stayed bridge will be one of the largest in the U.S and will connect the City of Charleston and the town of Mount Pleasant, South Carolina. The 1,546-foot long main span over Cooper River is supported by two diamond-shaped towers and will allow for 1000-foot wide navigation channel. The Charleston high-level approach is approximately 4351-foot long and will provide 250-foot wide navigation channel over Town Creek, while the Mount Pleasant high-level approach is 2090-foot long. Due to the high seismicity in the region, potential vessel impact, and hurricanes, large lateral loads are expected. Among various types of foundations, 10-foot diameter drilled shafts were selected for their high capacity against lateral loading. The shafts are founded on a stiff to very stiff lightly cemented calcareous sandy clay or sandy silt layer, called Cooper Marl, which underlies coastal sediments of interbedded clays and sands. The main towers will be supported on a group of 11 shafts and protected from ship collision by a rock island. The High Level Approach piers will be supported on a pair of 2 shafts. The shaft tip elevation is up to 230 feet below water line. An elaborate geotechnical investigation has been conducted on the site including a load test program on full-scale shafts under axial and lateral loads. The results of the tests were used to calibrate the lateral and axial soil resistance. The objective of this paper is to present the different aspects of the bridge foundation design.

Jan 1, 2005

By Shinji Sassa, Naoki Takahashi, Eiji Kohama, Wakaki Tsuda, Hidenori Takahashi, Ikuo Towhata, Yoshiyuki Morikawa

"Abstract Deep mixing method has been employed increasingly in recent years as a countermeasure against subsoil liquefaction. Column-type solidification, however, has been thought to have little effect as a liquefaction countermeasure, because the shear deformation of unimproved soil between the columns cannot be reduced. In recent years, experimental results have been reported that imply that solidified columns can reduce the shear deformation of unimproved soil around them. A new arrangement has been proposed to mitigate lateral flow induced by liquefaction. In this study, a series of dynamic centrifuge model tests was conducted to verify the lateral flow resistance of stabilized columns. The results indicate that stabilized columns can reduce the lateral flow of liquefied ground if the column displacement and the column head rotation are restricted. This paper concludes that it is important to restrict the displacement and the rotation of the column head by surface improvement to mitigate the lateral flow of liquefied ground.INTRODUCTIONDeep mixing method has been employed increasingly in recent years as a countermeasure against subsoil liquefaction. The solidified body formed by the deep mixing method is usually block or lattice shape, composed of solidified columns that overlap each other horizontally. Lattice-type solidification has been shown to be effective as a liquefaction countermeasure despite the presence of unimproved soil inside the lattice wall, because the shear deformation of the interior soil is restrained by the wall (Suzuki et al., 1989). On the other hand, it has been thought that column-type solidification cannot reduce shear deformation of unimproved soil around columns, because the displacement of a solidified column is less restricted than that of a lattice wall. Column-type solidification has been reported to have little effect as a liquefaction countermeasure, but to be superior in terms of construction cost and applicability around existing underground structures (Koga et al., 1986). However, there are experimental results implying that solidified columns have reduced the shear deformation of unimproved soil and mitigated its liquefaction (Yasuda et al., 2003; Tanaka et al., 2003). Yamamoto et al. (2006) conducted dynamic analyses of ground improved with lattice- and column-type solidification. Their results showed that column-type solidification with an improvement ratio of more than 35% reduces excess pore water pressure generated by earthquakes. Furthermore, the new column arrangement shown in Figure 1(a) has been proposed to mitigate lateral flow induced by liquefaction. It was developed and has been verified using dynamic model testing in a 1 g field (Takahashi et al., 2010a; 2010b; 2013; Towhata et al., 2010). The stabilized columns in this configuration interrupt lateral flow in any direction, unlike those placed in square and triangular arrangements."

Jan 1, 2014

By George Piscsalko

"Quality control of drilled shafts and CFA piles is greatly dependent upon the practices of the site personnel. In many applications it is difficult or not possible to fully inspect the shaft prior to concreting, such as when the shaft is drilled under slurry. CFA piles are cast with no ability to inspect the shaft prior to concreting. There are numerous methods currently available to assess the integrity of drilled shafts and CFA piles. This paper will compare evaluations by three existing non-destructive test (NDT) methods with a new method of Thermal Integrity Profiling for assessing integrity in drilled shafts and CFA piles. This Thermal Integrity Profiling method determines the integrity over 100% of the shaft cross section, both inside and outside the reinforcing cage, by measuring the hydration temperature of the concrete along the length of the shaft. These temperature measurements are made typically only 12 to 48 hours after concrete placement, thus accelerating the construction process. Thermal Integrity Profiling will be described in detail and the Thermal Integrity Profile (TIP) results from several shafts with purpose built defects will be discussed along with several case histories from drilled shafts and CFA piles where Thermal Integrity Profiling was used. The case histories will compare TIP with various other NDT tests utilized on these particular piles including comparisons with Low Strain Integrity Testing and Cross Hole Sonic Logging. Test results for the various methods will be discussed and the excavation of the upper portion of one drilled shaft will be shown and discussed. IntroductionDrilled shafts can be a desirable foundation element in many applications due to the large axial and lateral capacities which are attainable for very large drilled shafts. Drilled shafts can be cast in a dry hole which allows for inspection of the hole prior to casting, but the casting process is very difficult to nearly impossible to inspect with any accuracy. Drilled shafts are frequently cast under slurry as a means to stabilize the surrounding soils during the construction process. When casting a drilled shaft under slurry, it is very difficult to accurately inspect the hole prior to casting and it is equally difficult to inspect the shaft during the casting process. CFA piles are another popular choice for their relative ease and speed of installation. The trend has been larger CFA piles carrying greater loads, which makes quality control critical for these piles. Many of the above mentioned processes are blind to inspection and therefore the chances increase for having defects present in the completed elements."

Jan 1, 2014

By John S. Pack

The last 25 years have seen rapid expansion in the use of helical screw pile foundations and tiebacks for new and retrofit construction of buildings and earth retention structures. An estimated $100 million was spent in 2002 on helical foundations and tiebacks in the United States alone. While design information is available in the literature, information regarding quality control, inspection and performance monitoring is lacking. Recognition of at least one manufacturer's helical foundation material by the Uniform Building Code, Standard Building Code, and BOCA (all three codes now combined into the ICC International Building Code) has given added urgency to the dissemination of reliable and practical quality control, inspection and performance monitoring procedures. This paper describes a set of such procedures that have been followed for 17 years by engineers experienced in the industry who have directly installed or been involved in the installation of over 140,000 helical foundations and tiebacks in divers soil conditions for various types of structures, including earth retention structures. Topics covered include design responsibility, building code listings and requirements, manufacturer ISO certification, manufacturing process, material and installation specifications, installation contractor certification, field placement, installation procedures, field inspection, building code inspection and performance monitoring. The paper concludes with a step by step example of practical quality control, inspection and performance monitoring procedures on a typical helical foundation project.

Jan 1, 2003

By Derrick D. Dasenbrock

Three piers of a new river bridge are supported on 1.067 m diameter open-end steel pipe piles. At time of drive, and after pile re-strikes, high-strain dynamic capacity values at plan tip elevations, were as low as 23% of design requirements. Pile lengths were extended 20% to 40% deeper than planned at two piers, driving to rock, impacting both the project cost and schedule. The significant discrepancy between predicted and observed capacity was investigated through a series of coordinated dynamic tests; a full-scale test pile was installed and monitored over 221 days by both dynamic and quasi-static methods. Unusually slow strength gains were observed by dynamic monitoring on all piles installed at the site. CPT soundings were advanced at the test pile and through the pile interior to investigate the soil plug. High-strain dynamic methods were found to have significant limitations in properly assessing the long-term capacity of large-diameter open-end pipe piles during driving and short-term pile re-strikes. As the benefits of large diameter high-capacity open-end pipe piles are numerous, the geotechnical community needs to address appropriate construction monitoring and control of these foundation types to take full advantage of these systems. An improved understanding of the physical effects of pile installation and the impact on soil strength assessment while driving and long term soil strength gain should be developed and incorporated into both design and monitoring procedures to avoid either unsafe or needlessly costly designs.

Jan 1, 2006

By Gerry Houlahan

The east span of the 3.5 km long SF-Oakland Bay Bridge is supported by different types of foundations along its span. Starting from the west, its first 460 m section comprising twin concrete box-girders is supported by sands and rock on Yerba Buena Island. A 620 m long steel suspension span then bridges a 25 m deep channel that is formed in sediments overlying rock. Twin concrete box girder structures, each 2.4 km long, complete the stretch over the remainder of San Francisco Bay to the engineered earth fill landing at its east end. For most of its length, the Skyway bridges water 3 to 10 m deep over soft surficial Young Bay Mud. The foundation types include spread footings with hold-downs, steel and concrete piles that are set in drilled rock sockets up to 3 m in diameter and 2.5 m diameter steel tubular piles driven to penetrations of up to 100 m. The design and construction-related considerations are presented. The different foundation types, influences of the site geology and earthquake demands on the substructures are discussed. The seismic motions of the bridge superstructures and substructures, as well as the depth-varying soil motions, influenced the foundation design. Together with performance-based design criteria, including post-earthquake footing displacement limits, these seismic demands influenced various aspects of the foundation design, including the use of battered and vertical piles.

Jan 1, 2005

By Robert A. Field

Static-Load Piledriving systems utilize hydraulic push to advance piles into the ground. Dynamic systems (ie. hammers and vibratory equipment) utilize impact, or vibration, to advance the piles. Static-Load systems are most commonly utilized in situations where noise or vibration would adversely affect the people, structures or equipment located near the site. Static-Load technology is most advantageous in situations where vibration, noise or access constraints make it difficult, risky or disruptive to utilize conventional piledriving systems.

Jan 1, 1995

By W. Y. Xu

In comparison with shallow foundation, usually higher bearing capacity, smaller average settlement and better stability are the engineering characteristics of pile foundation. Besides, a smaller differential settlement and a lower settlement rate which will converge quickly are more important characteristics. The superstructure of the building with pile foundation may not meet with significant differential settlement. In this paper, settlement records and other data of different kinds of buildings are chosen to illustrate the characteristics of pile foundation. Moreover, some technical problems in connection with foundation engineering solved in consideration of the above mentioned characteristics of pile foundation are also introduced.

Jan 1, 2010

By Lance A. Roberts

Micropiles are commonly utilized for applications other than foundation retrofit. In bridges, for example, micropiles can serve as the permanent foundation elements or can be used in temporary support applications. In this paper, a case study on the use of micropiles for the 18th Street Expressway Bridge rehabilitation/repair project in Kansas City, Kansas is presented. In the project, micropiles were utilized for support of six temporary jacking structures, which allowed the bridge to be lifted while repairs were completed. A group of six micropiles was required to support each jacking structure. The required compressive service load per micropile was approximately 300 kips (1300 kN) and the settlement of the micropiles under the service load was to be limited to 0.5 in. (12.7 mm). Two field compression tests were conducted as part of the project. The field load test data was integrated within a soil-structure interaction capacity approach in order to analyze and permit the shortening of the design bond length for the production micropiles.

Jan 1, 2009

By Patrick J. Hannigan

A comparison of 40 statically and dynamically load tested piles was performed to evaluate the variation between testing methods. This evaluation indicated an agreement of 10% to 15% could be obtained when the available static resistance is fully mobilized by both methods and when time dependent capacity changes are minimized. Dynamic pile testing recommendations for minimum induced impact force, ram weight to pile weight ratio, and considerations for time dependent capacity changes are presented.

Jan 1, 1987

By Jim Bruce

The Transformation AGO project, constructed between 2005 and 2008, featured a foundation trade contract that included design of pile caps and grade beams and construction of 138 permanent micropiles. The new foundation works were constructed within seven different settings ? each featuring a host of attributes challenging to constructability ? inside and outside the existing Art Gallery of Ontario, all while the gallery remained open for business. Transformation AGO resulted in several firsts for micropiles in the Toronto construction market: this was the first micropile trade contract with a multimillion dollar contract value; it featured the first static compressive load test performed beyond 7000 kN on a single micropile; the first static compressive load test beyond 8000 kN on an experimental pile cap supported by two test micropiles; and it was the first publicly funded project to go to tender with micropiles listed as the preferred foundation option. This paper outlines the successful application of micropiles at the landmark Transformation AGO project.

Jan 1, 2011

By David C. Kraft

Helical piles and ground anchors were used to meet critical design and constructability requirements for an urban forest Canopy Walk at the Atlanta Botanical Garden, Atlanta, GA. The 12-foot wide pedestrian walkway path was to be nestled among the treetops of a forest, extending to 600 ft. in length, and soaring 40 ft. high above the forest floor. Of particular concern during construction was that the foundation system for the temporary steel shoring system had to be non-invasive to the subsoil, could not damage the forest floor, trees, root systems, or foliage, and upon completion of the concrete walkway pour, could be removed, again without disturbing the subsoil. Accubrace, Inc. designed and installed all the helical foundation types, as well as provided steel braces, typically used in Tilt-Up building construction, for the walkway project. The braces, some extending to 43 ft. in length, were used to provide lateral support against wind loads for the walkway form. In addition, the braces acted as secondary support for lateral loads during the placement of wet concrete along the 600 ft. length of the walkway. Helical foundation products installed included vertical compression piles, ground anchors for tension rods, and ground anchors for the braces. The installation of the piles and anchors was particularly challenging since the forest floor elevation varied as much as 50 ft. due to the presence of a ravine. Information is provided on the subsoil conditions, required loads, design, installation, and acceptance criteria for each helical product type installed for the project. The results of vertical and lateral load tests on the helical piles in the pre-construction phase, conducted in conformance to project specifications are presented. Photographs to illustrate the nature and complexity of the project are included. The concrete pour for the walkway was successfully completed on December 12, 2009, and the walkway was opened for visitors in May, 2010.

Jan 1, 2011

By Martin B. Hudson, Daniel Brescia, Zhangwei Ning

Due to the complexity and sensitivity of surrounding environments, instrumentation and monitoring (I&M) is critical for many urban deep excavations. The objects to be monitored include shoring bulkheads, retained embankments, adjacent buildings and roads as well as underground utilities. However, there are also plenty of constraints on the implementation of I&M such as: congested site space, difficult access to instruments, coordination among multiple contractors, and installation permits for private or public properties. Because of these constraints, sometimes the implementation of the initially planned I&M is delayed, its scope is reduced, and/or the continuity of monitoring is interrupted. For these reasons, it is important to implement the I&M with robust and redundant capabilities while providing minimal interference to the project construction and schedule. This paper describes state-of-the-art I&M technologies including automatic motorized total station (AMTS) with camera and automatic leveling device, reflectorless AMTS and IoT- based wireless sensors based on a case study of an on-going deep excavation project. INTRODUCTION In urban environments, deep excavations requiring the construction of temporary shoring bulkheads are becoming increasingly common, with the associated need to provide protection of the surrounding built environment during construction. Protection of the surrounding environment requires planning, engineering, construction, monitoring, and excessive shoring movement mitigation. The I&M is a vital component of the deep shoring implementation. In public projects, geotechnical I&M is often placed within the general contractor’s scope, whereas the majority of deep excavations are privately undertaken. For those private developments, sometimes the developer contracts the geotechnical I&M directly with the project geotechnical engineer or by a geotechnical I&M specialist hired by the project geotechnical engineer. In either the public project or private development case, the effective deployment of the I&M system relies heavily on coordination and collaboration with the project contractor.

Jan 1, 2018

By J. A. Elliot

Deep Mix-in-Place soil stabilisation is achieved by forming columns of soil/cement arranged to overlap by secant intersection. Alternate columns are constructed initially and infilled. The cementitious material injected is designed to retard the strength of the resulting mix thereby allowing satisfactory overlapping. Columns are constructed using a designed large diameter mixing auger mounted on a smaller diameter auger stem. This is firstly screwed to the design depth removing only such spoil as to enable penetration of the auger, and subsequently counter rotated and extracted in a predetermined mixing pattern and grout injection rate to ensure continuous and homogeneous treatment through each successive level. The process is performed whilst monitoring auger depth, grout flow and pressure. Cementation Piling and Foundations Limited used this technique to stabilise allu­vium and to facilitate the construction, by conventional techniques, of a circular pumping station pit of 10M diameter to 10M below ground level. The work was carried out within 3M of adjacent domestic properties, and on a very restricted site in Elland, West Yorkshire. Ground conditions consist of 2M of cohesive alluvium becoming water bearing and increasingly sandy and gravelly with cobbles which overlies the mudstones at 10.0m depth. Sandstones beneath formed an aquiclude to artesian ground water with the underside of the open excavation approxi­mately 1.0M from the top of this material. Peripheral treatment into the mudstone, coupled with pressure relief wells, proved successful and final excavation depth was achieved in "the dry".

Jan 1, 1989