Search Documents

By I. K. Ozaydin

Analysis of piles groups loaded with large bending moments and both vertical and batter piles can be best performed by matrix analysis. In this paper, a case history about a tall marine control tower is presented. The soil conditions at the site and the results of the computer analysis of the piled foundation are summarized. It is shown that the pile loads are indeed less than the allowable load for a single pile. Pile head loads and moments are used in the analysis of the raft foundation.

Jan 1, 2010

By Alp Gokalp

The aim of this article is to present an application of jet grouting technique in stiff clays for foundations of the natural gas combined cycle power plant, under construction in Aliaga, Turkey. The plant site is in the Aegean coastal region and 60 km north of Izmir. The foundation soil is composed of quaternary alluviums on top and tuff base rock. The thickness of the alluvium varies between 16 m to 30 m. Groundwater was observed 2.5 m below the ground level. At the design stage, settlement analyses were carried out for the various buildings and facilities in the power plant. Based on the analyses, it was predicted that total and differential settlements are not tolerable, thus jet grouting is implemented as a ground improvement under the majority of the foundations of the power plant. This paper also describes the selection of jet grouting technique, application type and details of the process parameters such as injection pressure, number and size of nozzles, lifting and rotation speeds. Prior to the commencement of the jet grouting works, a number of preliminary parameter tests and preliminary pull-out tests were carried out throughout the site in order to define and verify the jet grouting process parameters to achieve the required diameter of 600 mm and minimum jet grout strength of 3.2 MPa. Moreover as part of the comprehensive quality control and quality assurance program pursued in the project, a number of tests; such as continuous coring, integrity testing, installation of confirmatory jet grout columns, were carried out during the production of jet grout columns.

Jan 1, 2002

By Glen Mann, H. G. Vestberg, Robert D. Holtz

"Underpinning of residential and commercial structures is often accomplished using a number of driven-in-place small diameter steel pipe piles. These piles, at least in the Seattle area, are typically described as pin-piles and are driven with an air compressor operated jack hammer to a refusal criterion developed from an empirical basis. Over the past twenty years or so, the materials have improved in quality and strength, and the driving equipment has improved in efficiency and capability. These improvements have resulted in damage to the pin-piles during driving as well as to the driving equipment. The primary objectives of this load testing study were to develop a relationship between the driving penetration resistance of 2-inch diameter pin-piles and the ultimate bearing capacity when piles were driven at different penetration rates and, based on the load test results, to develop an opinion regarding an increase in the allowable axial load capacity [ultimate load capacity divided by a factor of safety] of a 2-inch diameter pin-pile over the currently used permissible load capacity of 4 kips in the Seattle area. Also, if feasible, a reduction in the present driving penetration rate was to be recommended to help reduce the rate and magnitude of pile and equipment damage whilst maintaining the allowable load capacity. The recorded ultimate bearing capacities were also compared with the Tagnent-line and the Davisson analytical methods in an effort to determine if either of these provided a reasonable determination of the pile load capacity.IntroductionThis paper describes the results of a series of load tests performed on small diameter, 2-inch, driven-in-place steel pin (pipe) piles and based on these results, provides the support for a modification to the presently used allowable axial pin-pile capacities.The intent of the load testing program was to determine how much influence the penetration resistance might have on the individual piles' ability to support the allowable axial load without undergoing any significant vertical deformation. For the purposes of this paper the ""allowable load capacity"" is considered to be the ultimate pile load capacity divided by a minimum factor of safety, typically considered to be 2.0 in this area. A pin (pipe) pile comprises an open or closed ended, schedule 80 steel tube which is driven-in-place, usually with an air compressor operated 90 pound pneumatic jack hammer. These jack hammers typically operate at a rate of about 1,200 blows per minute, (Haggard, Holtz and Mann, 2001 )."

Jan 1, 2005

By Brian J. Olson, Kevin Haiar

Originally constructed between 1939 and 1941 as part of Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal programs, the Bonneville to Hood River 115 kV Transmission Line required an infrastructure upgrade to remain reliable and in-service. The line traverses the rugged landscape of the Columbia River Gorge on the Oregon- Washington border, featuring steep, talus slopes; uneven, rocky terrain; and a variety of environmental sensitivities. This paper details the design and construction of 27 micropile foundations for new, fire- hardening steel poles through a particularly challenging stretch of the alignment. The difficult access and environmental constraints at these sites designated them as helicopter-accessible and precluded the collection of detailed geotechnical information prior to construction. Micropiles provided a viable foundation alternative due to their portability and flexibility during construction. Detail will be provided on the extensive preliminary desktop study performed, as well as the process of developing engineering designs to successfully accommodate for variability and unknowns in complex geological conditions. With an increasing number of electric power projects traversing challenging terrain and facing similar obstacles, this project stands to provide valuable lessons learned to the industry.

Sep 8, 2021

By Marcus Daubner, Karsten Beckhaus, Florian Bauer

The construction industry can and needs to contribute to a more sustainable world. Accordingly, geotechnical works potentially have a significant share. In this context, Bauer understands “sustainable products for geotechnical works” as those that may cause less emissions and increase the sustainability of construction activities. In order to structure the efforts and systematically pursue sustainable targets in the construction sector, and in the specialist foundation industry, the “17 sustainability goals” presented by the United Nations in their AGENDA 2030, can be used for general guidance and for continuous improvement. Benchmarks for relevant economic and social objectives, mainly with environmental aspects, are inevitable. The key parameter to sustainable products for geotechnical works in the focus of this paper is the optimisation of processes on site needed to fulfill the client’s building task, including the selection of technologies and construction methods with minimum environmental impact and minimum carbon footprint.

May 1, 2022

Jan 1, 1985

By Randy R. Williams, Roberto R. Olivera, Brian W. Wilson, Marina S. W. Li

"An extensive, deep mixing (DM) ground improvement program using the Cutter Soil Mixing (CSM) technique was designed and constructed in 2013 to support up to 20 m (66 ft) high Mechanically Stabilized Earth (MSE) walls and bulk earthworks for the development of the Kitimat Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) facility at Bish Cove, British Columbia. The deep mixing program consisted of overlapping rectangular panels of in situ cement treated soils, constructed using the CSM technique, to form barrettes covering an area of approximately 12,900 m2 (15,428 yd2) and providing suitable static and seismic stability of foundation soils for support of the proposed MSE walls, which would in turn support LNG facilities. The deep mixing program comprised of 1645 CSM panels that were constructed through varying thicknesses and discontinuous layers of very soft fine-grained marine deposits and/or loose sandy silt to silty sand deposits, embedding typically 2 m ( 6.6 ft) into dense silty sand to sand and gravel. CSM panel depths ranged from 5 m (16 ft) to 30 m (98 ft) and were constructed by treating approximately 73,900 m3 (96,658 yd3) of soil yielding average unconfined compressive strengths exceeding 2.5MPa (363 psi).This paper outlines the approach adopted for the design of the CSM ground improvement program in the highly variable subsurface conditions present at the site. A phased sitespecific investigation consisting of boreholes, test pits, Cone Penetration Tests, piston tube sampling, advanced laboratory testing and groundwater monitoring was implemented. In addition, soil-cement bench scale testing was completed, followed by installation of 8 CSM panels for field trial purposes. Extensive geotechnical static and seismic analyses including Limit Equilibrium stability analyses, liquefaction assessments, and advanced numerical modeling were undertaken to optimize the design and meet the project-specific design performance criteria. The Design-Build team worked closely to develop and implement Quality Assurance and Quality Control plans and managed significant construction challenges while achieving suitable panel termination depths."

Jan 1, 2017

Jan 1, 1989

By Don Deardorff, Ke Yang, Yingcai Han, Ken Sorensen, Robert Kruger, Mark Petersen, Diane Fiorelli, Larry Goldfarb, Kathryn Petek, Kwabena Ofori-Awuah

Design of deep foundations for lateral loads requires an understanding of soil-foundation-structure response during loading. Lateral loads on a deep foundation (piles) could be due to earthquakes, winds, waves, and/or machine vibrations. Over the years, analysis of response of piles due to lateral loads evolved from closed-form solutions to p-y methods to strain wedge to finite element/finite difference modeling. Although analysis of lateral response of piles and shafts is routinely performed, there is no single guidance document and/or standard for design and testing. Several different analytical methods are available for the analysis, and the resulting design can result in significantly different responses which can create confusion. This is especially true for analyzing and designing piles in potentially liquefiable soils with lateral spread issues under seismic conditions.This guidance document is intended to assist geotechnical engineers, pile designers, and contractors in analysis, design, and testing of piles and drilled shafts for lateral loads. This document discusses the background of different analytical and testing procedures and presents the recommended methods for analysis, design and testing of piles for lateral loads.Chapter 1 defines the different kinds of lateral loads to which a single pile or pile group may be subjected. This first chapter also presents different types of piles used to resist lateral loads.Chapter 2 discusses geotechnical issues related to lateral pile design such as liquefaction and lateral spreading and other non-seismic issues. Also addressed in Chapter 2 is geotechnical site characterization (as related to lateral loads) in terms of site investigation, in-situ testing, geophysical testing, laboratory testing, and estimation of soil/rock properties.Chapter 3 discusses the background and available analytical methods and tools for the analysis and design of single piles and drilled shafts. Several methods of analyses from closed-form elastic solutions to the finite element/finite difference solutions and their applicability are discussed. Available commercial computer software packages for analyzing single piles and drilled shafts are also presented.Chapter 4 expands the discussion of single piles and drilled shafts into the analysis and design of pile groups. In addition, group effects, resistance of pile caps, results of previous experimental and analytical studies, and available analysis tools and software for pile groups are discussed.Chapter 5 presents the issue of lateral resistance of piles and drilled shafts as discussed in different national and international building and non-building codes. A summary of extensive research on several codes are presented to facilitate the compliance with different codes.Chapter 6 discusses structural design issues of individual piles and drilled shafts such as depth of fixity.Chapter 7 discusses soil structure interaction issues related to kinematic and inertial effects due to seismic loading and available methods of analyses.Chapter 8 discusses and presents the typical procedures for the lateral load testing of piles. This guideline was developed as an aid to the practicing engineer in providing information, direction and commentary on the lateral design of deep foundations. Although all reasonable effort has been made to accurately compile the material and information contained herein, no warranty is made with regard to any such material or information and the Deep Foundation Institute assumes no responsibility for any possible errors or any direct or indirect result of the use of any such material or information. It is not intended that this document address every factor affecting lateral design for every situation. Therefore it is the responsibility of the person utilizing information from this document to confirm that it is appropriate and correct for their situation as well as to understand and properly apply

Jan 1, 2012

Jan 1, 1997

Jan 1, 1990

By Yu Zhenquan

At the construction site of Bao Shan Iron &. Steel Mill in Shanghai, lots of RC driven piles with length of 50 to 60m were applied. The most unfavourable distribution of stress along the pile shaft was known by measuring the compressive and tensive stresses. With analysing the test results a phenomenon of impact fatigue of RC pile was discovered, the range of impact fatigue and its critical zone can be distinguished. Finally some countermeasures are presented to avoid the impact fatigue of RC long pile.

Jan 1, 1991

Jan 1, 1996

By Craig M. Shillaber, Joseph E. Dove, James K. Mitchell

"This paper addresses two primary factors affecting the sustainability of Deep Mixing Methods (DMMs): construction materials and handling of the spoil from wet mixing methods. We examine these factors within a life-cycle embodied energy (EE) and carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions accounting framework, using the LPV 111 project in New Orleans, LA as a case history. The underlying assumption is that project planning and preliminary design have determined that a DMM is the best ground improvement alternative for achieving the broader aims of sustainable development. While EE and CO2 emissions are direct measurements of environmental impact alone, we illustrate how their minimization can also influence the social and economic consequences of the project. It is recommended that DMMs use lower energy and carbon material alternatives to Portland cement and lime in the binder whenever possible, with preference given to locally sourced materials. Currently available alternative cementitious materials include fly ash and slag, which are waste products from other processes. In addition, recycling the spoil material from wet mix methods on site is recommended. If the material cannot be recycled on site, transporting it to a processing and recycling center for later use as fill is preferred over landfilling. INTRODUCTIONWithin the geotechnical community there is an increased appreciation for sustainability considerations, which are an important component of the planning, design, construction, operation and maintenance of projects. An assessment of project sustainability includes holistic life cycle thinking, systems analysis, environmental impact assessment, use of safe and benign materials, awareness of local societies and cultures, social equity, protecting human health and well-being, and monetary costs (Abraham, 2006). Since ground improvement is a principal practice domain of geotechnical engineers, it is important that geo-professionals play a role in addressing the sustainability for these projects. In this paper, we illustrate by case history how different materials and methods associated with deep mixing projects can impact overall project sustainability through quantifying project embodied energy (EE) and carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. EE is defined as all energy consumed to bring something into its present state (Chau et al., 2008; Inui et al., 2011; Soga et al., 2011; Chau et al., 2012). Recommendations are then made for how adverse environmental impacts of Deep Mixing Methods (DMMs) may be minimized, leading to more sustainable geotechnical construction."

Jan 1, 2015

By Keith MacKay, John Carter, David Siddle, Fernando Faminia

"The River Green Residential development, is located in the municipality of Richmond, BC adjacent to the Fraser River. Ground conditions at the site consisted of medium to fine grained alluvial sands and a high groundwater elevation. A temporary low permeability retaining wall was required in order to facilitate the construction of an underground parking structure without inducing settlement of adjacent structures, which include the Richmond Olympic Oval; part of the legacy of the Vancouver 2010 Winter Olympics. Golder Associates Ltd. and GeoPacific Consultants Ltd. utilized Cutter Soil Mixing (CSM) technology to enable construction of a continuous combined low permeability cut-off and retaining wall around the perimeter of the property. The 350m long wall was keyed into marine clay at a depth of 28m below ground surface, and contained H-Pile reinforcement installed at regular intervals. The CSM technology provided many benefits for this project, allowing the combined cut-off and retaining wall to be constructed within a very narrow footprint (650mm width). The low noise impact and near vibration free construction of the CSM equipment provided minimal inconvenience to nearby stakeholders during construction. To reduce dewatering volumes during excavation and prevent significant water-table drawdown the Hydraulic Conductivity requirements for the wall were 1 x 10-7 cm/s or less. Project specifications called for a different strength requirement for upper and lower portions of the wall. The top 13 meters of the wall required an Unconfined Compressive Strength (UCS) of 4MPa to act as a retaining and cut-off wall, whereas the bottom 15 meters of the wall required a UCS of only 0.5 MPa to act only as a cut-off wall. Wet-grab and core samples were obtained from the panels to confirm the UCS and Hydraulic Conductivity specifications were met.INTRODUCTIONGolder Construction Inc. and GeoPacific Consultants Ltd. conducted the design and construction of a deep soil mixed cut-off and retaining wall system. The “dry-box” solution was used to surround the excavation of an underground parkade and prevent flows of groundwater into the excavation."

Jan 1, 2016

Jan 1, 2002

By Jesús E. Gómez

Verification and production testing of soil nails requires debonding the upper section of the soil nail to isolate the portion of the soil nail intended for testing within a specific ground type. In pre-drilled soil nails, debonding can be accomplished relatively easily because the bar can be fitted with a debonding sheath before its installation. However, debonding of hollow core bar soil nails requires special procedures to achieve the intended result. This paper is a summary of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Hollow Bar Soil Nail (HBSN) Test Program, which is described in detail in FHWA-CFL/TD-10-001. The program was developed to establish a suitable debonding procedure to test hollow core bars in soil nailing applications, and to initiate a database on typical bond values of HBSNs. The investigation showed that it is possible to debond hollow core bars for testing. It was also found that hollow core bars installed in granular soils may present ultimate bond values that are significantly higher than those typically used for design of conventional pre-drilled soil nails.

Jan 1, 2011

By Adam Pickles, Duncan Nicholson, Richard E. Prust, Hoe C. Yeow

"Moorhouse is founded on what at the time of construction were the deepest base grouted piles ever installed in London, specifically designed to accommodate settlement from the proposed development of Crossrail. This paper describes design and construction issues associated with this project with special emphasis on the construction aspects of installing these piles in a heavily congested site in Central London.INTRODUCTIONConstruction of the deepest base grouted bored piles in a congested site in Central London in 2002 posed a number of design and construction problems. To add to the complication, the new structure's footprint is within the safeguarded zone of the proposed new cross London rail link, Crossrail. Therefore the piles were required to be designed to allow for the effects of construction of the proposed Crossrail's tunnels and a new station at Moorgate. The design and construction issues associated with this project are described in this paper and methods used to address such issues are presented.MOORHOUSE DEVELOPMENTThe new nineteen storey high Moorhouse building was commissioned by Moor House Limited Partnership and will form another new Central London landmark building by the British architect Foster and Partners. Two of the four facades feature complex geometry to fulfill the city's planning requirements. The building is a steel frame structure stabilised by a reinforced concrete core. Floor plates span between the core and the perimeter with two rows of internal columns.The complex geometry of the superstructure requires a diagonal ""bandolier"" to transfer floor loads to certain perimeter columns. Another salient feature of the superstructure is the ribs that are provided to act as sloping columns to carry the loads down to the foundations."

Jan 1, 2005

Jan 1, 1988

By Za-Chieh Moh

This paper presents a summary of the current pile foundation practice in Taiwan. Constructions of driven piles, drilled shafts, and barrette foundations are reviewed. This paper also briefly summarizes the pile works of four major construction projects in Taiwan, namely, Hsin-Ta Power Plant, Taichung Power Plant, Taipei Transit Systems, and Taiwan High Speed Rail.

Jan 1, 1996