Search Documents

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, 2002

By R. D. Short

Environmental regulations for noise and air pollution are directly affecting the type of equipment and construction techniques being utilized for pile driving construction using diesel hammers in California and elsewhere. Consequently, the cost of construction is increasing and in some cases, the use of diesel pile hammers has been prohibited. Based on the trend in California and elsewhere in the world, environmental constraints are spreading and becoming more restrictive. The City of Tokyo, Japan, for example has banned the use of diesel hammers. Environmental restrictions on diesel hammers can be satisfied by using modern hammers, clean burning fuels, synthetic lubricants and pre-excavation techniques.

Jan 1, 1989

Jan 1, 1998

Jan 1, 1991

By Richard J. Hartman

This presentation identifies some of the more common problems associated with cofferdam construction. After the various problems are identified, they are briefly explained and possible solutions and preventive measures are noted. Photographic slides used during the seminar illustrate the conditions. This discussion is limited to cofferdams which are braced structures excavated inside to allow access for construction. The common procedure is to drive sheet piling and then alternatively install bracing and excavate. They can be located either on land or in water. Loads are applied by soil, water, surcharge pres-sure, eccentricities, and impact loads. The loads are resisted by the sheet piling, the bracing, and the soil below the bottom of the excavation; each of these three components must be capable of resisting the applied loads.

Jan 1, 1987

By Reza Y. Khaksar

Presented is a rigorous solution for the three-dimensional stability analysis of vertical shafts (excavations) subjected to the self-weight of the soil based on the upper-bound theorem of limit analysis approach. A rigid-block translational collapse mechanism is assumed, with energy dissipation taking place along planar velocity discontinuities. This mechanism is optimized to obtain the critical failure mechanism giving the lowest factor of safety for stability of shafts. Based on comparisons with other solutions, the method is generally found to be accurate in predicting the stability of vertical cuts.

Jan 1, 2006

Jan 1, 1995

Jan 1, 2001

By Jean-Louis Briaud

The following is a summary of a very recent report prepared at Texas A&M University for the National Cooperative Highway Research Program and entitled "Downdrag on Bitumen Coated Piles". Anytime the soil settles more than the pile, downdrag or negative skin friction will develop. The load in the pile increases with depth up to a certain point and then decreases down to the pile point. This phenomenon has been quoted as being the number one culprit for deep foundation failures. In Chapter 1, an introduction to downdrag is given. The most common criterion for downdrag is to consider it in design as soon as the settlement of the soil surface after pile driving exceeds 0.5 in. Coating piles with bitumen is an effective way of reducing downdrag forces and therefore allows to use smaller piles for the same load. This results in cost savings. Coating piles with bitumen increase the cost of piles by about 33% and therefore the decision to use bitumen is generally based on economic considerations.

Jan 1, 1989

Jan 1, 1991

By Rick Ellman, Ian Chaney

"The Hampton Roads area encompassing the Norfolk, Virginia Beach and Newport News metropolitan region experiences some of the worst traffic congestion in Virginia. With continued growth of the ports and increasing demand, the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) initiated the Downtown Tunnel/Midtown Tunnel/MLK Expressway Project, a complex undertaking critical to addressing the Hampton Roads area’s transportation needs. The project is a $2.1 billion Design/Build/Finance/Operate (DBFO) endeavor most notably involving the construction of a new two-lane vehicular tunnel utilizing the Immersed Tube Tunnel (ITT) method. The tunnel will pass under the Elizabeth River parallel to the existing Midtown Tunnel between Norfolk and Portsmouth, Va. It will be the largest design-build project constructed in the history of the Hampton Roads District.The New Midtown Tunnel will extend approximately 6,450 ft (1,966 m) along the north side of the existing tunnel where it ties into the existing Midtown Tunnel approaches in Norfolk and Portsmouth. It is being installed in a pre-excavated trench of which approximately 2,250 ft (686 m) required bracing on the Portsmouth side and approximately 1,000 ft (305 m) required bracing on the Norfolk side. The remaining 3,200 ft (975 m) of trench excavation was open cut dredging with laid back side slopes, optimized to reduce dredging, disposal and backfill quantities while also reducing the risk to the existing tunnel. The braced excavation portions of the tunnel alignment were divided into distinct segments which include: Portsmouth Approach Boat Section, Portsmouth Approach Cut-and-Cover Section, Portsmouth Dredge Section, Norfolk Dredge Section, Norfolk Approach Cut-and- Cover Section and the Norfolk Approach Boat Section. All “approach” excavations were performed in the dry and all “dredge” excavations were performed in the wet. Eleven ITT segments are being fabricated in the Sparrows Point Dry Dock facility in Baltimore, Md., and each 14,000 ton (12,700 tonne) segment is being towed approximately 220 mi (354 km) to the site. The ITT segments will extend under the Elizabeth River, with the deepest crossing 90 ft (27 m) at the Federal Navigation Channel. Once beyond the channel limits the ITT rises at an approximate 4.5% slope. Controlled screeding and element lowering operations will be performed primarily from floating barges."

Jan 1, 2014

By Roger A. Bullivant

The introduction of this size and type of piling rig is intended to address a multipurpose foundation activity. The 8000 denotes the size of equipment that is attached to the mast, namely 8000 Kg. Larger equipment can be carried subject to adjustment of rig geometry. The 8000 series rig will easily accept hydraulic piling hammers and CFA equipment, but for the purpose of this discussion it will be equipped with an auxiliary power pack that is matched to twin vibrators. The design of the siamesed vibrators allows long tube equipment or piles to be driven with a short mast configuration that provides a lower overturning risk. It is easily adapted within minutes to carry out other foundation requirements that are required on the same contract. The piling and ground consolidation activities that can be undertaken by the 800 series machine are:-

Jan 1, 1995

Jan 1, 2001

Jan 1, 2002

Jan 1, 1989

By Brandon Buschmeier, Frederic Masse

"Inclusions are a type of ground improvement that provide an improvement of a soil mass by insertion of a material with better characteristics than the surrounding soils. There are primarily two types of inclusions: “Soft” inclusions which are constructed of granular material (Stone Columns, Rammed Aggregate Piers, VibroPiers...), and “rigid” inclusions which are constructed of grout inserted with or without pressure (VibroConcrete Columns, Controlled Modulus Columns, Soil Mixing Columns).While the central principle of the inclusions is similar (i.e., overall improvement of characteristics of the soil mass below the structure), the load transfer mechanism is radically different for each technique. Therefore, the applicable design methodology is specific to the type of inclusions and there exists no universal method of design which spans across all inclusions.This paper will present an in-depth comparison between the standard design methods used for “soft” granular-type inclusions (Priebe modified, Balaam & Booker, Goughnour & Bayuk...) and the methods used for “rigid” inclusions which mainly rely on finite element analysis. The paper will explain why the design for soft inclusion methods cannot be applied to rigid inclusions and vice-versa. Each design method will be reviewed in detail to better emphasize its limitations and advantages.Two case histories will also be presented; one for each type of inclusions in order to illustrate the concepts developed in the first part of the paper.1 INTRODUCTION1.1 GENERAL OVERVIEW OF GROUND IMPROVEMENT WITH INCLUSIONSThe use of ground improvement methods to provide the appropriate amount of foundation support is a growing and constantly evolving industry. Traditional structural foundation methods including ‘shallow’ and ‘deep’ foundations do not adequately address the wide range of settlement tolerances, soil conditions, and loading considerations inherent to each unique potential project. In some instances, ‘shallow’ foundation solutions are simply not feasible due to soil and loading constraints. Furthermore, ‘deep’ foundation solutions are used to ‘bridge’ the soft compressible soils, ensuring that the entirety of the load in the structure is transmitted through individual elements into competent layers below the ground surface (bedrock, dense residual soils). Highly concentrated structural loads are transferred into the individual elements by means of direct contact requiring the use of structurally rigid surficial components (structural slabs, grade beams, and pile caps).Ground improvement bridges the gap between these two traditional methods, offering adequate foundation support while using more costeffective techniques and design methodologies. Inclusions are a type of ground improvement used to provide a reinforcement of the soil mass through the vertical insertion of a material with better characteristics than the surrounding soils. Much like deep foundations, inclusions are installed through soil layers with high compressibility and/or low bearing capacity and terminated in a suitable bearing stratum. However, unlike deep foundations, ground improvement inclusions rely on a distribution of load between the soil and the inclusions. By doing so, some of the structural load is applied directly to the soil in a proportion equal to its bearing capacity and compressibility limits, while the rest of the load is shed into the vertical inclusions down to the bearing stratum. Load sharing is a critical aspect in the performance and design of the various ground improvement methods."

Jan 1, 2015

By Brian FitzPatrick, Michael J. Weaver

Everyone has a role in site safety, even consultants. This paper presents a summary of how a geotechnical and environmental consulting firm, with field staff on construction and subsurface explorations sites, engaged their staff and leveraged relationships with contractors to assess the construction related risks to which its staff members are exposed. These findings were then integrated into their technical training materials for both new staff and those needing a refresher, so that safety is discussed at the same time as the technical work and not treated as a separate topic. The paper outlines the process of identifying and evaluating the construction related risks that staff members face and presents examples of how the consultant can engage contractors in the process. By doing this, knowledge can be shared and there is a better mutual understanding of the risks associated with common construction and exploration related field tasks. The work resulted in an increase in staff engagement in safety, a better understanding of the true risks that staff face in the field, better relationships with contractors, and lower safety metrics. HISTORY At Haley & Aldrich, Inc., we renewed our safety journey in May 2012. Like many others, we had concerns over injuries our staff experienced in the three previous years, and a potentially significant utility strike we experienced while excavating a trench. In 2009, 2010 and 2011 we experienced an increase in recordable injuries, including two significant injuries, which caused our Experience Modification Rate (EMR) (see note below), Total Recordable Incident Rate (TRIR), and Days Away-Restricted, and Transferred Rate (DART) to rise significantly. See Fig. 1 for details. This caused us to step back and review our approach to safety, and our “safety culture”. The rise in reportable incidents and injuries also corresponded to the beginning of a growth period for the company.

Jan 1, 2019

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, 1990