Search Documents

By John P. Turner, Steven S. Dapp, Dan A. Brown

"The Goethals Bridge Replacement (GBR) spanning the Arthur Kill Waterway between Elizabeth, NJ and Staten Island, NY consists of a dual-span 1,982.5-ft long cable-stayed bridge with approach spans of 2,545 ft on the NJ side and 2,788 ft on the NY side. The bridge is supported on over 200 drilled shaft foundations ranging in diameter from 4.5 ft to 10 ft and socketed into Passaic Formation siltstone. Drilled shaft resistances for design were based on load tests as described in a companion paper (Dapp et al. 2016). This paper presents the main foundation design considerations and challenges. The approach to construction of the rock sockets, with a focus on quality in order to support the use of high nominal values of side and base resistance, is described. Lessons learned from this project and their application to future similar projects are presented.INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUNDThe Goethals Bridge Replacement (GBR) project is a Public-Private Partnership (P3) that represents a major milestone for the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (PANYNJ) in its distinguished history of bridge building in the greater New York City metropolitan area. The new bridge will replace the existing Goethals Bridge, named after Major General George W. Goethals, Chief Engineer of the Panama Canal and the first consulting engineer for the Port Authority. The existing Goethals Bridge along with the Outerbridge Crossing and the Bayonne Bridge comprise the three Port Authority bridges connecting Staten Island with New Jersey. The existing Goethals Bridge and the Outerbridge Crossing are cantilever truss structures and both opened on the same day in 1928. They were designed by J.A.L. Waddell under the supervision of the eminent engineer Othmar H. Ammann (1879-1965), who was the designer of many other iconic bridges in the NY City area including the Bayonne Bridge (1931), the George Washington Bridge (1931), and the Verrazano Narrows Bridge (1964). The designer of record for the replacement Goethals Bridge is Parsons Corporation, which is the successor firm of Robinson & Steinman, whose principal David B. Steinman was also a notable NY area bridge designer and a contemporary and rival of O.H. Ammann.The replacement Goethals Bridge is supported on over 200 rock-socketed drilled shaft foundations. Each main pylon tower is supported on a group of six 9-ft diameter drilled shafts and each anchor pier is supported by two 10-ft diameter shafts. Each approach pier consists of a two-column bent with each column supported on a rock-socketed drilled shaft. A rendering of the Main Bridge crossing the Arthur Kill is shown in Fig. 1."

Jan 1, 2016

By Hiren J. Shah

Across much of New York City, the geology of glacially deposited soils follows a common sequence. Outwash sands generally overlie varved silts and clays, which lie above a basal till deposit underlain by the bedrock. Pile foundations at projects with such typical stratigraphy generally develop their axial capacities by extending below the fine-grained deposits into the till or the bedrock. Contrastingly, at a project site on the Brooklyn waterfront, high capacity piles were efficiently and economically installed by driving them into the relatively shallow glacial drift and till deposits which lay above thick fine-grained compressible glacial lake deposits. An unusual aspect about the foundation design at the Brooklyn project site is that, relatively short and high capacity piles were driven into the shallow glacial drift and till deposits, overlying the thick fine-grained glacial lake deposits. In order for this unusual foundation scheme to be feasible and economical, the piles needed to achieve their driving criteria in the upper strata. Consolidation settlements in the lower stiff and over-consolidated glacial lake deposits below the pile tips had to be relatively small. The paper discusses the unusual stratigraphy in this area of Brooklyn in greater detail with geologic profiles and engineering characteristics of the glacial strata. It also discusses the design aspects of the pile foundations, settlement estimates, a pile drive test program during design, results of the static load test program during construction, and production pile installation results.

Jan 1, 2008

By Matthew D. Marks

"The Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency initiated the Natomas Levee Improvement Program in 2006 which would bring the entire 42 mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system into compliance with applicable Federal and State standards for levee protecting urban areas. The soil-bentonite slurry cutoff has been utilized as the primary construction method for addressing the under seepage deficiencies. To date, a combined total of over 4,500,000 square feet of slurry cutoff wall have been constructed utilizing excavation methods to a maximum depth of 75 feet and deep soil mixing methods to a depth of 90 feet. The construction of these cutoff walls has required the use of newly designed and custom built long boom and stick attachments for large hydraulic excavators and additional resource will be required to complete future phases. Key components of the NLIP program have included advancements in the development of soil-bentonite backfill mix designs, specified ranges on the soil backfill gradation to address concerns of long term consolidation of the backfill material, evaluation of the trench slurry filtrate loss with regard to cutoff wall acceptance, maintenance high slurry densities to provide greater trench stability, and continued development of backfill mixing procedures.IntroductionThe Natomas Levee Improvement Program (NLIP) was initiated by the Sacramento Flood Control Agency (SAFCA) in 2006. The long term objective of the NLIP is to provide 200-year level flood protection to the basin. To date, approximately 21 of the 42 mile Natomas Basin perimeter levee system has been completed, totaling over $100,000,000 in construction contracts, of which slurry cutoff walls make up approximately $25,000,000. Other construction elements include excavation and removal of unsuitable levee materials, raising or widening existing levees, construction of landside seepage berms, drainage canals, and miscellaneous structures.Although each construction phase of the NLIP includes various construction elements of levee restoration program, the slurry cutoff wall is the primary construction element for addressing the under seepage deficiencies. To date, approximately 4,500,000 square feet of slurry cutoff walls have been installed using excavation and deep soil mixing (DSM) methods. This includes approximately 2,000,000 square feet of slurry cutoff wall along 5 miles of the NCC South Levee and 2,500,000 square feet of slurry cutoff wall along 16 miles of the Sacramento River East Levee (SREL). The work has been completed under 8 separate contracts, through SAFCA, and performed between September 2007 and December 2012. A summary of the contract phases and associated cutoff wall square footage is provided in Table 1. Most of the work has been performed within the seasonal dry weather period in the Sacramento valley, which occurs between April and October. This has required much of the work to be performed on an aggressive construction schedule, year after year."

Jan 1, 2017

By Brian W. Wilson

A case study is presented that describes the design and implementation of a combined blast densification and deep dynamic compaction program which was undertaken to improve the foundation soils for a proposed tailings dam raise in Ontario, Canada. Based on the results of the geotechnical investigation it was determined that the foundation of the dam would be situated on tailings of both variable thickness and density, much of which would be susceptible to liquefaction under the design earthquake for the region and type of facility. Blast densification trials were completed by the owner and the results of these made available to prospective tenderers in response to a call for a fixed price contract for the design and implementation of a densification program for approximately 800,000 m3 of foundation tailings. The variation in tailings gradation and the impacts of such on the ground improvement program are discussed, as are details of both the additional blast densification field trials completed by the contractor, and the selected blast pattern and explosive charging used for production blasting. The applicability of the various ground improvement techniques to the actual conditions encountered, and the results obtained are also discussed.

Jan 1, 2010

By Abid Adekunte

Traditionally, designers and contractors provide additional external supports to retaining walls through the use of tie-back anchors or braces. Both approaches are known to have their shortcomings; braces limit working space within excavation areas, while tie-backs are seldom used in built-up areas where intrusion into adjacent property of non-cooperative owners has to be avoided or in situations where sensitive structures exist behind the wall. This paper focuses on the design, construction and monitoring of deep excavation support systems on two separate projects located in different ground conditions in the Republic of Ireland. On both projects, conventional ground anchorage and propping were inapplicable. This led to the development and application of two different novel solutions on both projects. Methods of wall performance monitoring on both sites also differ. Wall monitoring results show these innovative methods to be safe and effective. Advantages of the novel solutions over traditional approaches are highlighted.

Jan 1, 2010

By Abhijit R. Sheth, Craig M. Benedict, John Brun, Ara G. Mouradian

"Amtrak recently replaced the 1907-era bascule two-track bridge over the Niantic River between East Lyme and Waterford, Connecticut. The project included new approach embankments, with approximately 2,500 lineal feet of retaining wall along the west approach and 780 lineal feet of retaining wall along the east approach. The paper focuses on the design and construction of the east approach retaining wall, whose alignment is directly adjacent to an existing wetland area which required protection. An anchored prestressed concrete sheet pile retaining wall was selected for the east approach. A combination of concrete anchor piles and ground anchors were used to support the wall. The design of the wall took into account two simultaneous train live loads, support of electric traction catenary structure foundations, and construction live load, while at the same time preventing permanent impacts to the adjacent wetlands. The design considered challenging subsurface conditions, shallow groundwater, the close proximity of the existing operating tracks, construction staging, and storm surge events in Long Island Sound.INTRODUCTION AND PROJECT HISTORYThe National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) recently replaced the 1907-era bascule two-track bridge (No. 116.74) over the Niantic River, between East Lyme and Waterford, Connecticut, along the heavily-traveled Northeast Corridor (NEC). The two NEC tracks, which carry over 50 trains per day, run east-west over a narrow spit of land known as “The Bar”, which separates the Niantic River’s marine estuary to the north from the Niantic Bay to the south, before crossing the river. The bay is an arm of Long Island Sound and is occasionally subject to storm surge from hurricanes.The 1907 bridge was built as a replacement for the previous 1891-era swing-span bridge, and was constructed parallel to, and 49 feet north of, the swing-span structure. The two-track 1907 bridge consisted of a single-leaf bascule span and four approach spans supported on stone masonry piers and abutments. The new bridge increases horizontal navigational clearance for marine traffic in the river from 45 feet to 100 feet, and vertical clearance from 11.5 feet to 16 feet above mean high water with the bridge in closed position. The new bridge, constructed 58 feet south of the 1907 structure, features a single-leaf bascule span of 141.5 feet, with an approach span on either side."

Jan 1, 2017