Search Documents

By David Gatto, Nicolas A. Willig-Friedrich, Jeff A. Segar

"With the increasing demand for electricity, and requirements to generate this power cleanly, more producers are turning towards hydroelectric power. A project in Iowa currently under construction will retrofit an existing Army Corps of Engineers Dam with a hydroelectric generating facility. The design of the intake structure requires the construction of a diaphragm retaining wall. The T-shaped diaphragm wall elements retain an unbalanced fill height up to 21.3 meters (70 feet). The design required a single production element be constructed, tested, and instrumented prior to beginning construction of the rest of the elements. The testing included extensive concrete mix design development, coring, and Cross Hole Sonic Logging. Installed in the other production elements are 10 inclinometers, 4 pressure cells, 4 piezometers, and multiple survey monuments. Some of these instruments require manual readings while most are monitored by an automatic data acquisition system and instantly transferred to a website providing real-time graphical display of the data. This paper will discuss the construction of the diaphragm wall from the contractor’s perspective when working on a site only large enough for two service cranes and a Hydromill excavation unit, without any storage area on the construction pad, describe the testing performed and the quality control procedures employed, and investigate the information gained from the automated instruments providing real time measurement readings.INTRODUCTIONIn 1964 the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) constructed a dam by raising the surface grade approximately 34.7 meters (114 feet) above the natural ground line using a combination of fill types. This earthen dam stretched slightly longer than a mile intersecting the flow of the existing Des Moines River. The center of the dam is a concrete spillway consisting of 12 monolith sections. On each end, three of the sections extend 42.6 meters (140 feet) from the spillway to transition from the concrete dam sections to the earthen dam section. Adjacent to these three sections on the East end is where the contractor is actively working, for a private developer under a lease agreement with USACE, on this site to convert it to a Hydroelectric facility licensed for an output of 36.4 megawatts, enough power to meet the needs of about 18,000 homes. To create this, a powerhouse structure, housing two vertical Kaplan turbines is being added to the downstream side of the existing dam. From the power house, two penstock pipes will be cored through the existing concrete monolith sections and connect to the Intake structure on the upstream side of the dam. Protecting and reinforcing the dam adjacent to the intake structure is a new diaphragm wall. This wall is constructed using T-shaped diaphragm elements, acting as a cantilever retaining wall for the intake platform. Figure 1 shows a diagram of the upstream features of the construction."

Jan 1, 2016

By Cory McElprang, Enamul Hoque, Aaron Thomas, Scott A. Jacobs

Crosshole Sonic Logging (CSL) only evaluates concrete on the inside of reinforcing cages leaving the outside unevaluated unless other types of testing are performed such as Perimeter Sonic Logging (PSL). While there have been some reports of PSL testing having accurately identified anomalies (e.g. Samtani et al 2005), experience by Case Foundation Company has indicated otherwise where false positives were determined with subsequent coring. Numerous cases of PSL false positives are presented as well as a study where a shaft was installed with both inside and outside tubes, and CSL and PSL data were compared. To date, there is very limited data published on perimeter sonic logging, or Gamma-Gamma Logging (GGL) with tubes on the exterior of drilled shafts. Several cases will be presented where false positives were experienced where PSL testing was performed. In addition, a direct comparison will also be presented where a shaft was installed with both tubes on the inside and outside where CSL and PSL data is compared. BRIEF HISTORY – CSL TESTING AND TUBES ON INSIDE The general procedure of Crosshole Sonic Logging (CSL) testing includes attaching tubes to the reinforcing cage to be able to send a transmitter in one tube and a receiver in another tube with which a sonic pulse is emitted from the transmitter and received in another tube. The time taken for the sonic pulse to travel between the tubes is measured and compared to expected values for the known distance between the tubes. Any increase in time from expected values indicates the sonic pulse traveled through a media other than homogeneous concrete such as objects in the path (spacer wheels, steel bracing, etc.), tube spacing, or soil inclusions. However, variations in arrival time can also result from differences in concrete density. The tubes have traditionally been placed on the interior of the reinforcing cage which protects them during hoisting and placement of the cage and reduces wave refraction caused by modulus of elasticity differences between steel and concrete. This allows the concrete within the interior of the reinforcing cage to be evaluated, but the concrete outside of the cage is excluded from traditional CSL testing. As a result, alternative integrity testing has been developed to not only provide different ways to evaluate the integrity of drilled shafts but to also address the issue of evaluating the concrete outside of the reinforcing cage. These alternative testing methods include Gamma-Gamma Logging (GGL), Thermal Integrity Profiling (TIP testing) and Perimeter Sonic Logging (PSL) which is similar to CSL testing but instead of the tubes placed inside the reinforcing cage, the tubes are placed on the outside of the reinforcing cage as shown in Fig. 1.

Jan 1, 2019

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 Aditya Ayithi, William G. Ryan, Dean Herbst

"For rock socketed drilled shafts, it is a common practice not to include the frictional resistance of overburden soils into the nominal capacity estimation. The primary reason often being cited is “overburden soils resistance is negligible compared to that of rock socket resistance.” However, in certain geological conditions, where the rock layer is located at greater depths, friction resistance from overburden layers can be significant. In addition, at such great depths, shaft drilling becomes very complicated and expensive. In these situations, considering the resistance of the overburden layers can be an economic alternative.This paper presents a case study of an Osterberg cell (O-cell) load test conducted on a 161.8 feet long and 78-inch diameter instrumented test shaft. Based on initial designs, a 72-inch diameter rock socket of lengths 23 and 26 feet was required to provide a LRFD factored friction resistance of 3,200 kips. The load test results revealed that the material in the 72-inch diameter socket does not represent a true rock. However, the test results also proved that the factored friction resistance of overburden layers is greater than the required design resistance. Based on the load test results, it was decided to allow the overburden soils frictional resistance to be considered in the shaft design, resulting in significant economic savings.INTRODUCTIONRock socketed drill shaft design guidelines of various State Department of Transportation (DOTs) agencies allow friction and/or end bearing resistance of only the rock socket portion into the design capacity estimation. It is typical to neglect the frictional resistance of overburden soils. However, in certain geological conditions where the rock layer is at greater depths, friction resistance of the overburden soils can be significant. In this case the friction resistance of overburden soils was verified via the specified instrumented O-cell test program and then used as part of the design capacity.PROJECT DESCRIPTIONAs part of I-29 improvement project, Iowa Department of Transportation (Iowa DOT) planned to replace the dual four lane bridges that cross the Floyd River in Sioux City, Iowa with dual six lane bridges (Fig. 1). Expected benefits from this improvement include improved safety, traffic operations and roadway infrastructure conditions.BRIDGE SUBSTRUCTUREThe project consists of two individual bridges; a new south bound bridge and a new north bound bridge. The south bound bridge is 646-ft long and the north bound bridge is 644-ft long. Both are six-span, pretensioned and pre-stressed concrete beam bridges of varying width. Bridge foundations were designed such that the abutments of both bridges will be supported on driven steel piles and the bridge piers will be on drilled shaft foundations."

Jan 1, 2016

By Maurice Bottiau

"Abstract When addressing the performance of deep foundations, many parameters play a role, from adequate soil investigation to performance monitoring and testing. The correct understanding of pile construction, though, remains crucial. After a long period of empirical design and regulations, the last decades have been the ones of theoretical considerations and extensive codes writing. The interaction between technology and design, however, still plays a determinant role. The introduction of hydraulics and the exponential increase in available power on one hand, the miniaturization and the introduction of electronics in control and monitoring systems on the other hand have exerted a major influence on new foundation systems or the evolution and control of existing systems. It appears important to try to take execution related parameters and their control during execution more deeply into account when assessing the final result of the deep foundations and the achieved level of safety and reliability. In this contribution, we will try to analyze how systems, equipment and pile production monitoring and testing can influence the pile performance, and if/how this influence could/should be translated in adapted safety or installation factors. This analysis will run through different categories of piles: driven, augercast and displacement auger piles and bored piles. INTRODUCTIONThe global performance of a deep foundation depends on different aspects (Poulos, 2003):1. Ground investigation2. Design and analysis3. Construction4. Testing5. Performance monitoring6. Remediation and performance enhancementThis paper intends to address the importance of pile construction and the control of it on the final performance of the pile-group of piles. There has been an increasing interest for theoretical analysis over the last 20 years, followed by an increasing impact of regulation and codes. Without denying the importance of the latter, the author wants to point out how installation procedure and project specific parameters can largely influence the reliability of the deep foundation. In this context, detailed and prescriptive standards can miss their objective of intended improvement of accuracy and reliability, but even worse they can adversely impact engineering judgment. In today’s construction world, it is possible to gather installation information which can be of outmost importance for the final deep foundations performance. Therefore, the increase or decrease of installation reliability through adequate pile testing and performance monitoring should be emphasized and should be taken into account in the codes. This is the case already in most advanced codes, but in a limited and insufficiently refined way. After reviewing how codes deal with this issue today, we will show some recent examples of unexpected results due to pile installation. We will try to put these examples into a broader perspective by highlighting some reference and/or recent literature considerations. Finally we will try to summarize how pile testing and installation documentation can increase reliability and attempt to open the debate on how codes could/should allow for more engineering judgment."

Jan 1, 2014

By Patrick J. Hannigan, Geir Veslegard, Frank Rausche, Rozbeh B. Moghaddam

A common type of deep foundation used in Norway to support bridge structures is the drilled pipe piles (piles) filled with concrete reinforcement after installation. The standard installation practice is the use of down-hole hammers. Complex geology and difficult subsoil conditions in Norway causes a high variability of soil and rock layers which in turn make for differences between actual subsurface conditions and those expected from geotechnical exploratory borings. This situation is strongly noted when the foundations are not fully socketed, and the rock layer is sloped. In this particular case, special testing procedures are required to assess the drilled pile base material and evaluate the rock-socket to ensure full contact between the foundation base and the rock surface. The local standard practice to verify the latter condition, consists of coring and visually evaluating the material recovered at the bottom of the drilled pile. This paper presents a case where the coring and visual inspection were not possible and alternatively the geological material encountered at the base of the deep foundations was evaluated using force-displacement measurements. Two 1016-mm (40in) diameter open-end drilled piles identified as P02-04 and P02-05 were tested and evaluated using in-situ force-displacement data prior to filling the piles with concrete. Test results showed an average displacement of 7mm (0.28in) corresponding to 35MPa (5.1ksi) stress level for P02-04, and 7.2mm (0.28in) corresponding to a stress level of 38MPa (5.5ksi). Based on testing results, both drilled piles were within the established material assessment criterion presented by the local authorities. INTRODUCTION This paper presents a case study in Norway where the material encountered at the base of an open- end drilled pipe pile (pile) was evaluated using force-displacement data. In the deep foundation industry in Norway, it is a common practice to install piles to support transportation structures. Once the piles reach the embedment elevation, and the pile base is assessed, these are filled with concrete. In projects where sloping rock is the supporting layer, and all nominal loads are supported by the pile base resistance, assessing the material encountered at the pile base to ensure full contact with the rock becomes critical. The local practice to make this assessment consists of the use of weighted tape, coring, or inspection cameras. However, similar to any other testing and evaluation methods, these come with their own limitations. The variability associated with the use of the weighted tape, accessibility for the coring equipment to complete a coring process, or the conditions at the foundation base such as murky water or thick drilling fluids could significantly impact the photo or video quality taken at the pile base. In such conditions, it is important to consider alternate testing methods to evaluate the material at the foundation base.

Jan 1, 2018

By Patrick O. Shires, Harry W. Schnabel

With stable building sites becoming scarce in the greater San Francisco Bay Area, the new Summit Senior Care Facility is being built into the side of an unstable hillside adjacent to the San Ramon Regional Medical Center in San Ramon, California. This hillside has had a long history of instability and the site of the new Senior Care Facility required excavation into both a historic old landslide and a more recent active landslide. After a thorough geotechnical study, it was concluded that the best way to build the new facility would be to construct a tied-back retaining wall in the area of the old landslide, since it extended off-site onto two adjacent properties, and remove the active landslide and replace it with compacted fill before cutting into its toe area with an additional tied-back retaining wall. The design was further complicated by the proximity of the site to several active faults. In the area of the old landslide, the combination of an ascending slope behind the wall, landslide forces and seismic forces resulted in total design pressures between 365 to 4,575 PSF for a wall with a maximum height of 30 feet. The wall for the old landslide was constructed by first drilling and placing steel soldier piles in concrete. The tip of the soldier piles extended a minimum of 12 feet below the landslide plane that was up to 36 feet below the bottom of the wall. Permanent double corrosion protected tiebacks were then installed through the soldier beams and anchored below the slide plane. A shotcrete facing was then installed on the face of the wall. BACKGROUND The site of the Summit Senior Care Facility is located on the southwest flank of Mount Diablo adjacent to San Ramon Valley which is characterized by gently rolling hills. The San Ramon Valley Regional Medical Center, which opened in 1990, is located to the north and an existing church is located to the southwest. There are also private residences located to the southeast. The site is shown in Figure 1. Numerous faults run close to the site, the most significant of which are the Calaveras and Pleasanton faults. The site has also had a long history of slope instability and has been the subject of numerous investigations. Studies conducted in 1979 and 1984 concluded that there was a landslide in the area and recommended that a buttress shear key be constructed between the subject site and the existing church for a sewer main as well as removal and replacement of the head area of the old landslide to stabilize the hospital site. While two previous geotechnical studies in 2008 and 2016 identified slope instability, they did not recognize the genesis and limits of the old landslide on the western portion of the site or the limits of the active landslide on the eastern portion of the site.

Jan 1, 2018

By Ramin Motamed, Joseph A. W. Toth

Evaluation of the capacity of large-diameter drilled shafts using current load test methods present challenges when considering the magnitude of loads required to fully mobilize their capacities. Often, these full scale tests do not fully mobilize the capacity through side resistance. Therefore, the need for innovative solutions to extrapolate side resistance and interpret nominal capacity are of key interest. In this study, we evaluate three methodologies for extrapolating unit side resistance based on bi-directional load test data. Fellenius (2001) presented these methods for interpretation of pile capacity using static load tests. Our interpretations are based on the evaluation of 116 load tests. Unit side resistance was calculated and reviewed for each load test and categorized using three criteria of mobilization; (A) full, (B) partial and (C) linear. This study specifically focuses on load tests that showed fully mobilized unit side resistance behavior (Criteria A). The three methodologies were applied assuming Criteria (A) load tests were mobilized to 50% of their measured values. Subsequent comparisons of each extrapolation were then compared against the full measured values for each test and generally showed good agreement. INTRODUCTION It is widely accepted that conducting load tests such as standard top-down tests or bi-directional (i.e. O- cell) tests can help designers understand load-settlement behavior and the nominal resistance of drilled shaft foundations. These load testing methods provide the advantage of confirming design assumptions as well as improving the reliability of the foundation design. The potential cost savings from the application of these methods for mid to large size projects is self-evident. For example, in a recent project in Northern Nevada, an O-cell test on a 6.9 ft diameter, 114.8 ft length drilled shaft imposed an initial cost of $125k to the project, resulting in a 15% reduction on the total foundation cost; equivalent to $1.3 million in overall savings (Pease, 2014). However, the costs of implementing such methods on smaller projects can be prohibitively expensive (Hagerty et al, 2016). Despite the clear advantages of drilled shaft load testing, the current practice is not without limitations. Performing load tests on large-diameter drilled shafts with high capacities is a challenge considering the significant loads required to fully mobilize the capacity of such foundations. In some cases, the feasibility of these tests is impractical because the associated initial cost is not guaranteed to outweigh the final savings. As a result, large scale load tests are sometimes ruled out from the design phase of projects. Furthermore, in the majority of load tests the magnitude of loads applied are specifically selected to not approach failure, so the shafts can be used in the future foundation system (i.e. production shafts). This practice of field testing restricts our knowledge of the true capacity of the drilled shaft at failure; hence the nominal resistance remains unknown.

Jan 1, 2018

By Nuno Cruz, Saúl Rodríguez

"When executing offshore bored piles there are several specific factors and problems to consider in order to guarantee excavation stability. One of the methods employed to carry out this type of work consists in setting up a floating work platform, typically a barge, and implementing a soil stabilization system that combines a partial steel guiding casing with third generation polymeric drilling fluids. The main aspects to take into consideration when performing offshore pile boring works are soil stabilization, project design, work methodology and operational aspects. An example of a work methodology problem arises before any pile boring work takes place as the steel guiding casing contains water, sometimes salt water. What to do with this water in order to replace it by an adequate polymer fluid will determine the stabilization capacity as soon as the shaft advances below the protection of the casing. Another example of operational problem may derive from barge movements while executing boring activities. This study is the result of extensive field data collection and concrete logging analysis from marine projects using polymers in different continents. The bored pile stability target was set ranging between 2% to 15% of concrete overbreak. Values above 15% or below 2% mean that there is a stability problem. Then the off-target pile’s data is collected, analyzed and classified under categories. Thus, a direct correlation is established between the problem category and the final results. Modifying steps in the pre-established construction methods or operational variables guarantees target results without the need to replace the approved construction methods. As a general conclusion, the worldwide experience in large diameter marine works, allows to provide truthful information and solutions for these problems. In knowing how to follow a logical sequence of work and applying adequate work methodology will be the key for success.GENERALBackgroundTo carry out the drilling process of offshore bored piles there are two main options to take into consideration: drilling the pile by using full guiding casing until final depth; or using a combined system of partial steel guiding casing and support drilling fluids.The knowledge and situations described in this paper come from the experience acquired in different projects where the second method was employed. This construction method consists in installing a steel guiding casing by vibration and thus covering the water table and further stabilizing the soil below it with polymeric fluids until reaching the pile’s final depth. The Fig. 1 schematic shows an example of this method where H corresponds to the length of the steel guiding casing whereas the remainder of the shaft’s length is stabilized by polymer fluid. The entire bored length is full of slurry up to top of casing.In most cases this kind of civil works results from the need to build a bridge or executing port structures in places where the creation of temporary artificial peninsulas with fill material is impracticable or not allowed. Hence the need to use floating work platforms, commonly referred to as barges."

Jan 1, 2017

By Aaron S. Bradshaw, Ryan M. Coulson

The offshore wind industry in the United States is slowly emerging with the recent construction of the first offshore wind farm located off the coast of Rhode Island. The turbines at the Block Island wind farm are supported by piled jacket structures, which historically have been used for much heavier oil and gas platforms. Offshore wind turbines have unique design requirements and the axial behavior of the supporting piles under cyclic loading is important to design. Cyclic degradation along the pile shaft can affect the capacity, deformation, and stiffness performance of the foundation and of the structure as a whole. This paper proposes a strain-based approach to estimate the fatigue (or endurance) limit of a cyclically loaded pile that may be applicable to long-term service loading. The method is applied to an existing load test dataset and the analysis results appear consistent with the observed pile response. INTRODUCTION The demand for renewable energy has been increasing in recent decades and wind power has seen a dramatic increase in popularity. In Europe, as of 2017 there were 4,149 grid-connected offshore wind turbines across 11 countries (windeurope.org), many of which are supported on monopile foundations. It wasn’t until recently (2016) that the first offshore wind farm was constructed in the United States off the coast of Block Island, Rhode Island. The project included 5 piled jacket structures founded in terminal moraine deposits. Future offshore wind development along the U.S. eastern seaboard could possibly utilize jacket structures in granular foundation soils. Loads from wave, wind, and turbine rotation induce cyclic loads on the foundation that have on the order of 108 loading cycles over the service life on the structure (Schneider and Senders 2010). Turbines located along the U.S. east coast have the added risk of hurricanes. As shown in Figure 1a, the lateral loads on a jacket structure are transferred primarily as axial compressive and possibly tensile loads on the supporting piles depending on the weight of the structure. The friction along the shaft of the pile can be prone to cyclic degradation, leading to reduced pile capacity and stiffness, and increased deformations. An offshore wind turbine foundation must be designed for a variety of limit states including ultimate, serviceability, and fatigue limit states. For a jacket structure this would include an analysis of the ultimate axial pile capacity, axial stiffness, and axial deformations, all of which can be affected by cyclic loading both under extreme (i.e. storm) conditions as well as long-term service conditions. Axial pile stiffness is needed, for example, to estimate the natural frequencies of the structure as a whole and to assess dynamic and fatigue loads. The structure must be designed such that its natural frequency remains outside the loading frequencies of the waves and turbine blade passing frequencies to avoid resonance. Therefore, prediction of the axial response of the piles is important to the design of these structures.

Jan 1, 2018

By K. Rainer Massarsch, Bengt H. Fellenius

"Abstract Vibrations generated during the driving of piles or sheet piles can affect buildings or installations in the ground. However, observed building damage is not always caused directly by dynamic effects, but can also be related to foundation conditions. The importance of geotechnical conditions is usually not taken into consideration in most vibration standards. This paper describes how building foundations, and in particular mixed foundation types, are especially sensitive to ground vibrations. A method is presented for assessing the risk of settlement due to vibrations in granular soils. Also, a simple concept is proposed for estimating settlements in the vicinity of driven piles.1. INTRODUCTIONUnder unfavorable conditions, the installation of piles or sheet piles can cause damage to buildings or other structures on the ground. Frequently, such damage is attributed to vibrations of the building itself. In many countries, national or international standards are used to assess the risk of vibration damage to buildings. As such standards are often prepared by engineers with little or no geotechnical knowledge, the effects of ground conditions on vibration propagation and damage to building foundations are generally not recognized, and damage criteria based solely on the dynamic response of buildings neglect the importance of damage mechanisms governed by geotechnical conditions. One potentially important damage mechanism is differential settlement below buildings, especially when these are founded on loose granular soils. When seeking guidance in the literature, little or no information can be found regarding methods to assess permissible levels of ground vibrations with respect to risk for settlement.This paper focuses on building damage that can be attributed to foundation conditions. In the case of ground vibrations due to pile and sheet pile driving, differential settlements are of particular importance as the ground vibrations attenuate relatively rapidly from the source. Consequently, settlement below part of the building, which is located close to the vibration source, can be significantly larger than at a distance further away.Piles are often a cost-effective foundation solution for buildings on loose and compressible soil, frequently located in urbanized areas. Sheet piles are commonly used as support for deep excavations. While impact driving is most commonly used to install piles, vibrators are frequently used for driving (and extraction) of sheet piles. It is important to recognize the fundamental differences between impact and vibratory driving. During impact driving, the pile is subjected to stress waves of short duration. The driving process creates vibrations, which radiate from the shaft and/or the toe of the pile into the soil. The larger the intensity of the stress wave, the larger the dynamic force and the intensity of ground vibrations. In addition to the vibration intensity, which often is expressed in terms of particle velocity, also the vibration frequency is important. When the dominant frequencies of the generated vibrations harmonize with the resonance frequency of buildings or building elements, the risk of building damage increases."

Jan 1, 2014

By Eric C. Halpin

"1. Introduction and Backgrounda. In its fundamental form, risk is simply the likelihood of an adverse impact. Expanding on this theme, the Corps of Engineers has broadly defined risk associated with infrastructure as a factor of three distinct elements: a probabilistic assessment of a hazard such as a flood or earthquake; a probabilistic assessment of how the infrastructure performs in the face of this hazard; and a measure of the likely consequences – loss of life, economic damage, environmental impacts – associated with the resulting inundation scenarios.b. The lessons and observations described herein relate to the Corps of Engineers experiences in implementing risk concepts for infrastructure management during the period 2005 through 2013. The Corps of Engineers is a large, decentrally operated and centrally led federal agency that plans, designs, constructs, operates, maintains, and/or manages a portfolio of over 3,000 built dam and levee systems within the United States. The infrastructure in this portfolio is 55 years old on average, and although much of the structures provide for flood risk management benefits, many of the dams deliver multi-purpose benefits. Scale matters – where scale and uncertainty are large, risk concepts provide great opportunity and arrangement for application.c. The amount of organizational change that is demanded for the implementation of risk concepts is considerable and should not be under estimated, but need not be feared if the path others have taken is considered. This paper is, in many ways, an opportunity to step back from the last seven years of implementing risk informed management, check our own azimuth and maturation, and share the purpose and energy behind our own continuing actions. Hopefully, this azimuth check is also beneficial to those that are either considering the use of risk or are in the process of implementing risk concepts.d. Success at managing the massive change related to incorporation of risk concepts will directly affect success of the infrastructure program. The three key organizational elements to consider –human systems such as governance and competencies; policies that outline the who, when, and why of decisions and management; and the processes and technology that outline how work is to be performed - are changed fundamentally. From senior leaders to project team members and all of the people in between, there is a need to discuss, confront, and vet the change and the role people and organizations have in the process. For the Corps of Engineers, with a history of over two centuries, deeply embedded beliefs about infrastructure aren’t transformed over night - the change process is decadal in scope. Given our self imposed “project execution” mantra and corporate objective, risk seemed threatening at first to the cost and schedule of delivering infrastructure projects. In reality, risk concepts have been responsible for savings and cost avoidance of nearly $6 billion over the last three years alone while at the same time justifying increased investment by several fold for the highest risk needs."

Jan 1, 2014

By Abhijit Saha

"The stone columns improve the performance of foundations on soft and loose soil due to the ability of composite ground to sustain increased structural loads under reduced settlements. The interaction between the two basic elements: the ambient subsoil and installed column, present a complexity of behaviour, both in terms of applied stresses and resulting strains. Moreover, as the same is provided in-group in a regular array beneath foundations, the performance of an individual column is likely to be influenced by the presence of neighbouring columns. The present paper addresses this very issue. Analysis of reported field hydro-test data of large diameter oil storage tanks in soft ground in reference to some existing theories led to the development of the stone-column ‘group efficiency factor’. In order that such factor is of general use, it was felt necessary to examine the applicability of the factor to different sizes of groups under varied subsoil conditions. With this in view, some model test results reported in literature of single and group of columns have been analysed and in the process an explicit relationship regarding the stone-column ‘groupeffect’ could be established.INTRODUCTIONThe field application of the stone column technology has gained momentum than the intricate design methodology due to its simplicity in installation and intuitive performance. The ground improvement is due to the complex interaction within the ‘unit-cell’ comprised of the installed column in ambient ground under sustained vertical stress; in association with the interdependence of problem geometry and material properties of the two different soils-one 'native' and the other 'back-filled'. The beneficial effects are increased load capacity, reduction in total and differential settlements, minimization of post construction settlements effected by accelerating consolidation, reduced risk of soil liquefaction, aiding in improvement of slope stability of embankments and natural slopes and effecting changes in the dynamic response. The ‘unit-cell’ concept of a tributary soil cylinder encapsulating an installed column with some reasonable assumptions and boundary conditions (Aboshi et al, 1979; Balaam & Booker, 1981; Van Impe & De Beer, 1983; Priebe, 1976; Saha & De, 1994; Saha; 2005, 2006, 2007, 2011, Saha & Das; 2007) deals with the load-settlement behaviour of the composite system. The present investigation is based on published field data from literature & validated with experimental study reported in literature. The study addresses the effect of group interaction of stone columns beneath a large area loading on ground settlement. The hydrotest load-settlement data of 12 large diameter oil storage tanks founded on stone column reinforced soil at Haldia1 and Kandla2 refinery sites in India; reported by Som (1997), has been analysed to quantify the group efficiency. The results as obtained are compared with experimental study on 2, 3 and 4 stone column groups at different spacing-diameter ratios in soft clay3 reported by Rao et al (1997) to validate the above analysis. A unique relationship between the column spacing and group efficiency has been obtained."

Jan 1, 2015

By Hee-suk Yun, Dae-jin Hwang, Jeong-woo Seok, Myoung-mo Kim

"In this paper, the accuracy of the data measured by a newly developed displacement measuring system, DPRMs (Digital Pile Penetration and Rebound Monitoring system) and its applicability as a quality control tool were verified by field measurements of pile penetration and rebound for pile driving performed at 3 construction sites and 1 test site. The DPRMs data were found to be much better than handwork data. A new dynamic formula for pile capacities is proposed uses the results of a pilot dynamic load test and the final pile penetration. The ratios of pile capacities obtained by the new formula to those by the dynamic load test were 94%±7.4% in the contrast with 123±28.3% by the 5S formula and 68±24.0% by Hiley's formula. This result shows the superiority of the new formula. The ratios of the maximum compressive stresses calculated by using DPRMs to those calculated by using PDA (Pile Driving Analyzer) were about 90-110±10%. This result confirms the applicability of DPRMs as an overdriving monitoring tool. Two sets of DPRMs were used to measure the 3-D displacement behavior of a pile head at the test site. The more the pile head moves laterally, the less the final set values were expected because of the loss of driving energy, but this trend was not obvious within the limited data obtained at the test site.INTRODUCTIONPile construction monitoring consists of two parts. In the first part, enough capacity of the pile is secured to stand the design load. In the other part, pile damage during driving is prevented. Although several methods can be applied to achieve the first part, PDA is nearly the only tool for measuring pile stress.Several methods such as a static load test, a dynamic load test, an Osterberg cell, and numerous driving equations can determine the pile capacity. Among them, the static load test and the dynamic load test are most widely used. The static load test is advantageous because it has the highest reliability. The disadvantages are as follows: it is costly and time-consuming. Also, the capacity of the pile under construction cannot be evaluated. The dynamic load test has lower reliability than the static load test, but it is cheaper than the static load test, is reliable enough to determine the pile capacity, can evaluate the capacity of a pile during construction, and can offer information about construction conditions such as the pile integrity and the pi le stress during driving. The dynamic load test takes a relatively short time and is low cost compared with the static load test. However, it is still costly, time-consuming, and unnecessary to apply to all piles in the field as a construction measurement tool. Therefore, driving resistance (blowcounts) is commonly measured to confirm the pile capacity at construction sites."

Jan 1, 2005

By George Filz, Morales, Carlos, Bertero, Filippo Maria, Alessandro, Leoni

"The Deep Mixing Method (DMM) represents a viable solution to improve adverse geotechnical properties of foundation soils for many practical applications. A pre-construction soil investigation campaign is necessary to assess soil properties and to retrieve samples of different soil layers for a laboratory Bench Scale Testing program (BST). The BST has to be designed using various binder types, binder contents, and water/cement ratios in each of the soil types. Following the laboratory program, a full scale Field Test (FT) is typically necessary to verify the results of the BST. This paper will highlight the differences and the importance of performing both pre-construction laboratory tests and field tests to ascertain the proper mixing parameters in the different soil layers. Comparative analyses and interpretations between the lab and field stages, along with accumulated information about soil properties and quality control (QC) results, allow fine-tuning the production parameters throughout a project. Three Deep Mixing Method projects, where both laboratory and field tests were executed, are illustrated: (1) The LPV 111 Project (New Orleans, LA, USA): DMM was used for ground improvement/foundation strengthening to stabilize and support the burden of a new levee raise; (2) The Rio Puerto Nuevo Project (San Juan, PR, USA): DMM was applied to improve the soils adjacent to a 90"" forced sewer main relocation and to improve the soils for the base of a new drainage channel; and (3) State Road 83 (US 331) over Choctawhatchee Bay project (Walton County, FL, USA): DMM was applied to stabilize the causeway sections of the bridge enhancement project. Data recorded during laboratory and field tests for these projects were analyzed and interpreted to select the most appropriate construction parameters to provide a final high-quality product.INTRODUCTIONThe Deep Mixing Method (DMM) represents a viable solution to improve adverse geotechnical properties of foundation soils in many situations. The effectiveness of working parameters depends largely on the physical and mechanical properties of the soil to be treated. Therefore, well designed laboratory and field test programs, aimed to disclose the interaction between the site-specific soils and the mixing parameters, are essential to achieve the desired end product.Generally a pre-construction soil investigation campaign has to be performed to assess soil properties and to retrieve samples of different soil layers for the laboratory Bench Scale Testing programme (BST). The BST has to be designed using various binder types, binder contents (or cement factors - CF), and grout water/cement ratios (W/C) in each of the soil types; the selection of the different combinations and dosages for the BST is based on past extensive experiences on similar materials. Following the laboratory programme results, a full scale Field Test (FT) has to be designed and executed, installing several DMM elements to verify the results of the BST and fine tune the construction parameters, with the appropriate binder type and dosage and the most effective equipment and tool configuration."

Jan 1, 2015

By Susan Rafalko, Mike Walker, John Sankey, Sherif Aziz, Alex Potter-Weight, Mary Nodine, Frederic Masse

"After several successful projects on the Garden State Parkway and New Jersey Turnpike for support of single-stage MSE (Mechanically Stabilized Earth) walls using rigid inclusions (Controlled Modulus Columns) as an alternate to two-stage MSE walls and surcharge, the Bass River Bridge Widening project presented additional challenges in terms of soil conditions and height of embankment that created opportunities for the design-build ground improvement contractor and its MSE wall-designing partner to enhance their design and construction methods. The specialist contractor decided, in association with the wall system supplier, to perform an independent large scale instrumented test area on the project to demonstrate the ability of the design techniques to model the behavior of the system, as well as the capacity of the rigid inclusions to provide the necessary bearing capacity and settlement control to allow the construction of the highway without any consolidation period. This paper presents a detailed description of the design of the ground improvement system and MSE wall system, as well as the results and conclusions of the monitoring data gathered on the large scale test program. The combination of rigid inclusion ground improvement technologies, such as the CMC system, together with an MSE wall system allows for the rapid and economical construction of high embankment without waiting for a surcharge and consolidation period or the necessity to use a two-stage wall system. In-depth understanding of the design techniques and advantages of this combination will be provided and should be beneficial for any geotechnical engineer or owner looking for innovative solutions to save both time and cost on their projects.1. IntroductionAs development continues on sites with poor ground conditions throughout the world, conventional MSE walls remain a flexible design solution; however, construction of MSE walls in combination with ground improvement is becoming more frequent where extreme differential and/or total settlement prevail due to soft ground conditions. Various techniques have been used in the past in such conditions (e.g. conventional surcharge, staged construction, or two-stage MSE walls), even though these design solutions have typically involved longer waiting times for settlement to occur. As a result, conventional MSE wall design has been combined with a variety of ground improvement techniques consisting of rigid inclusions for an economical and efficient solution with the potential to accelerate construction and limit long term settlement. For the particular subject of this paper, the specialist contractor (Menard) proposed to use CMCs (Controlled Modulus Columns) to support the highest part of the MSE wall. CMCs are grouted displacement rigid inclusions installed in a grid-like pattern using a displacement auger. Before the CMCs are installed, a working platform may first need to be placed to allow equipment to move around the site depending on the ground conditions. Following the CMC ground improvement, an LTP (Load Transfer Platform) is installed prior to the construction of the MSE wall."

Jan 1, 2015

By Filippo Maria Leoni, Wesley Schmutzler, Matteo Bertoni

"Deep Mixing Method (DMM) for the Rio Puerto Nuevo Project (Project) in San Juan was chosen by the Corps of Engineers to improve the soils adjacent to a 92 inch ID forced sewer main relocation and to improve the soils for the base of a new drainage channel. The soils to be improved consisted of sandy fill, soft clays, organics and stiff, plastic clays. A pre-construction soil investigation campaign, followed by a Bench Scale Mixing Programme and a Full Scale Field Test were performed during the pre-construction stage to assess soil properties, select binder type and dosage, and disclose the most suitable combination of injection parameters to improve the different soil layers. Production started at the end of August 2012 and was completed in October 2013; over 3,000 DMM elements were installed to a maximum depth of 57 ft below ground for a total gross volume of approximately 125,000 cubic yard. Each element consisted of two 5.5 ft diameter overlapping columns installed simultaneously, and their layout was such to meet the 100% Area Replacement Ratio required by the design. The ground improvement was successfully completed despite some difficulties due to a considerable amount of obstructions. Wet grab sampling and UCS testing of the retrieved specimens were designed as the main QC/QA method for the verification of the quality of the ground improvement. Upon completion of production, approximately 3,000 specimens were cast. The contract also required continuous coring of at least 12 randomly selected DMM elements and the testing of 8 cored specimens per bore for strength assessment. This paper will illustrate means and methods used in the field to construct the designed ground improvement and the results of the QC/QA program, with a focus on the differences between wet grab and coring sampling methods.INTRODUCTIONThe Rio Puerto Nuevo project involved the stabilization of a major drainage channel using the Deep Mixing Method (DMM), and the relocation of a 92 inch ID forced main sanitary sewer outfall. Previously, in 2004, a 40 x 16 x 2,000 ft. box culvert was installed under a different contract to convey runoff waters to the ocean.However, the connection between this culvert and the upstream network of channels was not constructed due to the presence of the forced main sewer pipe. In order for the drainage system to be completed and function properly, the 92 inch ID forced main needed to be lowered about 20 ft to allow for proper drainage.DMM was chosen by the US Army Corps of Engineers to stabilize the drainage channel as well as improve the soil under the relocated sewer main. The DMM was arranged in different zones (A through E) with variable top and bottom design elevations as can be seen in the typical cross section for Zone A (deeper and with a higher strength requirement) and Zone B as an example (Figure 1)."

Jan 1, 2015

By Filippo Maria Leoni, Wesley Schmutzler

"Deep Mixing Method (DMM) for the Rio Puerto Nuevo Project in San Juan was chosen by the Corps of Engineers to improve the soils adjacent to a 90 inch forced sewer main relocation and to improve the soils for the base of a new drainage channel. The project is located just east of San Juan and south of the Horizon Port. The soils to be improved consisted of fill, marine clay, organics (peat) and the foundation clay layer. A preconstruction soil investigation campaign was performed to assess soil properties and to retrieve samples of the different soil layers for the laboratory Bench Scale Testing program (BST). The BST was conducted using various binder contents and water/cement ratios in each of the soil types; the selection of the different combinations and dosages was based on past extensive experiences on similar materials. Following the laboratory program, a full scale Field Test (FT) was done installing several DMM elements to verify the results of the BST and fine tune the construction parameters. Each element consisted of two 5.5 feet diameter overlapping mixing augers installed simultaneously to a depth of approximately 60 feet using a SOILMEC SR-90 dual axis drilling rig. The FT construction and post-construction coring results showed significant differences between the lab study and the actual field conditions. This paper will highlight these differences and the importance of performing both pre-construction laboratory and field tests in order to ascertain the proper mixing parameters in the different soil layers.IntroductionThe Puerto Nuevo project consists of the stabilization of a major drainage channel using Deep Mixing Method (DMM) and the relocation of a 90 inch forced main sanitary sewer outfall. The first portion of this project was a 40 x 16 x 2,000 foot box culvert installed in 2004. In order for the drainage system to be completed and function properly, the 90 inch forced main needed to be lowered about 20 feet to allow for proper drainage.DMM was chosen by the US Army corps of Engineers to stabilize the drainage channel as well as improve the soil under the relocated sewer main. The overall layout of the project is shown in Figure 1. The DMM is arranged in different zones (A through E) with variable top and bottom design elevations as can be seen in the typical cross section for ZONE A and B as an example. (Figure 2) The total amount of soils to be treated by DMM is approximately 84,000 cubic yards up to a maximum depth of 57 feet from ground surface and an Area Replacement Ratio of 100%.The equipment used to perform the DMM is a Soilmec SR90 twin-shaft jet assisted deep mixing rig (Figure 3) coupled with a LODOS 30 grout plant and two Soilmec 7T-500J high pressure pumps."

Jan 1, 2015

By Shahid Islam, Lucian Bogdan

"The maintenance of infrastructures has been of particular concern to the engineering community. As the world’s infrastructure expands and existing infrastructure ages, monitoring and evaluation of the structures have become more critical than ever. A large number of retaining walls, tie backs, slope stabilizations and piles are designed using pre-stressing steel. Many piles and drilled shafts are designed using reinforcing steel. There are few testing methods available to assess these tension and compressive forces. High cost, complicated equipment and limitation of space often prevent these methods from being implemented. DYWIDAG-Systems International (DSI) has been involved in the development, testing and utilization of DYNA Force® sensors to measure the force in the anchors during construction and at any time during the lifetime of the structure. They can be used for bare, epoxy-coated, galvanized and greased-sheathed steel in the bonded, un-bonded, grouted or un-grouted length of the anchor. The sensor is robust and requires no maintenance. Sensors have received attention in terms of accuracy, performance, ease in installation, durability, and cost effectiveness. This paper describes its application in tie-back and anchor force monitoring of retaining walls and bridge abutment and compression forces in drilled shaft reinforcing steel where the data were collected manually, automated and remotely.INTRODUCTIONOur infrastructure is expanding and the existing infrastructure is aging. Some structures are expensive to maintain and some occasionally fail. There is a large demand for implementing health monitoring of structures. Many tie-backs, retaining walls, dams and other geotechnical structures are post-tensioned and many of them need repair using a post-tensioned system. On many occasions during construction and service life of the structure, it is useful to know the force in the post-tensioning and anchor system. Many piles and drilled shafts are designed using reinforcing steel and the compressive forces in reinforcement are unknown. Although there are many methods to measure the tendon force, most of them are cumbersome, expensive, and the accuracy varies depending on the method used.The elasto-magnetic (EM) technology is a novel approach to monitor forces in steel elements. The DYNA Force sensor is built based on EM technology (See Fig. 1). It is composed of a primary coil and a secondary coil (sensing coil). By passing current through the primary coil, ferromagnetic material is magnetized. The sensing coil picks up induced electromotive force that is proportional to change rate of applied magnetic flux (Faraday's law) and relative permeability. As permeability of core changes, output voltage changes. The output voltage is calibrated to measure the force. A readout unit is designed to magnetically energize the steel through the sensor and measure the response of the steel to the process. The readout unit then converts the response into a direct force reading. The sensor has an embedded thermistor which allows for temperature compensation. Due to the diversity of the magnetic property of steel, calibration is done for each type of steel allowing the sensors to perform at their highest accuracy."

Jan 1, 2017

By Nino Catalano, Meeok Kim, Gordon Chen

"The design of the below grade structure of Brigham Building for the Future (BBF) included three different areas to provide power generation and medical facilities as well as a parking garage. The three areas are divided and bounded by 3 foot thick slurry walls. Because each area has different depths and functions, the excavation and construction of the below grade structure presented considerable design challenges. The intricate sequence of excavation and construction between the areas was numerically simulated using a finite element analysis to assess the behavior of the slurry wall and the retained soil. The slurry wall and the related bracing system were modeled as a linear elastic beam and truss element respectively while the soil behavior was simulated using a hardening soil model. The interaction between slurry wall and soil was facilitated by the implementation of an interface element in the numerical model. The design of bracing system to adequately support the slurry walls during the excavation was done based on the envelope of the numerical responses in stage analysis. Predicted lateral displacements of slurry walls were later compared with the field measuring data. The comparison indicated a close agreement.INTRODUCTIONBrigham Building for the Future (BBF) is located in the Brigham and Women’s Longwood medical campus of Boston. The building will serve, once completed, as a biomedical research center and clinical facility to carry out a commitment by Brigham and Women’s Hospital to be the most technologically advanced facility in the country.The 11 story building will also feature a roof garden. The below grade portion of the building has a footprint of 265 feet wide and 210 feet long and is divided into three areas, a 6 stories garage, a cogeneration plant, and an imaging center. BBF was designed and constructed to achieve LEED Gold certification and will have high efficiency and improved sustainability as a medical facility. Ground breaking was in May, 2013. Below grade construction was completed in April, 2014 and the entire building will be finished in late 2016.As shown in Figure 1, the garage area has the largest foot print, 265 feet wide and 125 feet long. The lowest floor of the garage is located about 70 feet below grade. The co-generation plant is about 190 feet wide and 85 long and 50 feet deep. The imagining center is the smallest among three areas. It is 75 feet wide and 85 feet long and 22 feet deep. The areas are separated and bounded by 3 feet thick slurry walls.The perimeter and inner slurry walls were designed to support column loads from the above grade structures, lateral soil pressures and earthquake loads as per the building’s permanent condition and requirement. However the contractor was required to design the temporary bracing and the reinforcement for the slurry walls to resist construction stage loadings."

Jan 1, 2017