Search Documents

By George C. Webb

A wide variety and variable depth (up to 40 ft.) of compressible, uncontrolled fill (including construction debris and a perched water condition) was present at a proposed Kroger construction site in Dent, Ohio. An innovative solution using a combination of an ACIP foundation system with a Tensar geogrid reinforced load distribution platform was used to provide a high quality building pad. This system allowed the use of conventional shallow foundations for structure support. This system was used in lieu of more costly solutions, such as complete undercutting of the entire existing fill and replacement with engineered fill or a deep foundation/ structural slab system. The selected ground modification included a system of augercast piles bearing on shale bedrock, which were installed on a grid pattern over the entire building footprint. Then, three layers of Tensar polyproplene biaxial geogrid were used to create a reinforced soil mat, which was supported on the augercast piles. An eight-foot blanket of engineered fill was placed above the geogrid-reinforced mattress fill to establish the building subgrade elevation. Standard shallow footings and slab-on-grade construction methods were then used to support the 26-ft. tall masonry block building. A small-scale instrumentation program included monitoring the geogrid reinforced mat settlement, geogrid strain and earth pressure distribution under the reinforced mat to evaluate design assumptions and theoretical analyses. This case history describes the first application of a pile supported geogrid reinforced mat for structure support which has been documented in the United States.

Jan 1, 2003

By George C. Webb

A wide variety and variable depth (up to 40 ft.) of compressible, uncontrolled fill (including construction debris and a perched water condition) was present at a proposed Kroger construction site in Dent, Ohio. An innovative solution using a combination of an ACIP foundation system with a Tensar geogrid reinforced load distribution platform was used to provide a high quality building pad. This system allowed the use of conventional shallow foundations for structure support. This system was used in lieu of more costly solutions, such as complete undercutting of the entire existing fill and replacement with engineered fill or a deep foundation/ structural slab system. The selected ground modification included a system of augercast piles bearing on shale bedrock, which were installed on a grid pattern over the entire building footprint. Then, three layers of Tensar polypropylene biaxial geogrid were used to create a reinforced soil mat, which was supported on the augercast piles. An eight-foot blanket of engineered fill was placed above the geogrid-reinforced mattress fill to establish the building subgrade elevation. Standard shallow footings and slab-on-grade construction methods were then used to support the 26-ft. tall masonry block building. A small-scale instrumentation program included monitoring the geogrid reinforced mat settlement, geogrid strain and earth pressure distribution under the reinforced mat to evaluate design assumptions and theoretical analyses. This case history describes the first application of a pile supported geogrid reinforced mat for structure support which has been documented in the United States.

Jan 1, 2005

By James P. Hambleton, Anastasia Nally

This work focuses on the numerical simulation of multi-plate anchor systems (e.g., helical anchors) in sand subjected to vertical loading. In assessing the stiffness and capacity of these multi-plate anchor systems, full awareness of the abilities and limitations of the various analysis methods must be understood. This work first summarizes studies completed by others and then goes on to assess the failure mechanisms of multi-plate anchors in sand and the influence of (1) plate width-to-depth ratio, (2) number of plates, and (3) relative positioning of plates. The analysis makes use of (1) conventional limit analysis, (2) so-called modified limit analysis that employs reduced strength parameters to account for the influence of soil dilatancy, and (3) the displacement-based finite element method, which considers elastic as well as plastic deformation leading to failure. The work critically reflects on limitations in the current analysis methods for helical ground anchors. INTRODUCTION Helical anchors are a relatively low cost foundation type, typically consisting of a steel rod and single or multiple plate attachments. In recent decades, they have seen rapid growth, and as outlined by Merifield and Sloan (2006) and Hambleton et al. (2014). Design techniques for helical anchors have previously been predominately empirical, as much of the past research in this field is experimentally based. It is common practice for helical anchors to be modeled as horizontally oriented plate anchors in both numerical and experimental analysis. This work focuses on analysis based on the finite element method, including so-called finite element limit analysis and the conventional displacement-based finite element method, with some comparisons made to experimental studies. Numerical simulation of anchor pull-out capacity in cohesionless soils is stunted by the many difficulties faced when using numerical analysis with cohesionless soils. Additional variations can be seen when comparing the serviceability based load capacities to the ultimate load. In this work, both the force-displacement response (stiffness) and the ultimate anchor capacity are assessed, with more focus on the latter. This work focuses only on analysis techniques for multi-plate anchors with vertical loading in cohesionless soils. Many studies have been completed in this area, some of which assume a rectangular plate in a plain strain model (Rowe & Davis, 1982; Merifield & Sloan, 2006; Cerfontaine et al., 2019). Whereas others use axisymmetric conditions (Baker and Kondner, 1966; Saeedy, 1987; Murray & Geddes, 1987; Ghaly & Hanna, 1994; Sakai & Tanaka, 1998; Merifield et al., 2006;) and minimal studies considered both axisymmetric and plane strain in the one study (Vesic, 1971; Tagaya et al., 1988; Murray & Geddes, 1987; Sarac, 1989).

Jan 1, 2019

By Jeongbok Seo

This paper describes successful application of driven tapered-steel-pipe piles for two large-scale projects in the New York metropolitan area: Rego Park Mall, Rego Park, N.Y. and 164 Kent Avenue, Brooklyn, N.Y. The combination of side friction and end bearing resistance produced by tapered-steel-pipe piles has been well-recognized as greater than the side friction and end bearing resistance by pipe piles. Forty-four tapered piles were driven and tested at these two sites. Design pile load for the two sites was 260 kips for Rego Park Mall and 400 kips and 300 kips for 164 Kent Avenue. To measure the pile-drive hammer efficiency, the compressive stress in the pile, and to estimate the ultimate bearing capacity of the pile, dynamic load testing using a Pile Driving Analyzer (PDA) was conducted on index piles at the sites. Subsequent to the field testing, data analysis using the Case Pile Wave Analysis Program (CAPWAP) was conducted. Restrike PDA analysis and full-scale static load tests were performed on the selected test piles. Test piles at the project sites exhibited significant time-dependent increases in bearing capacity caused by the effects of "set-up" or "soil freeze." The dissipation of excess pore-water pressure in the soil, which had been disturbed and remolded by driven pile, was generally considered the primary cause of set-up. The increase at the subject sites ranged from 100 to 300 percent of the capacity measured at the initial driving. This paper discusses the results of various types of load testing on tapered piles and the set-up effects by comparing PDA test results acquired during and after pile driving. Finally, an empirical relationship for the New York metropolitan area has been offered for quantifying set-up.

Jan 1, 2008

By Huw Williams

"Power companies are always looking to increase the carrying capacity of existing transmission lines, and the preferred method is to string heavier capacity conductor lines. However this results in higher wind loading and the potential for towers overturning, if the existing foundations do not have the tensile capacity. On older lines, there is often a lack of information on construction type and dimensions and in practice the as-built foundation can differ considerably from design drawings, due to unforeseen ground conditions along the line route, and no record of the resulting change in design being made.Following successful trials in New Zealand, integrity testing with Frequency Response and impedance profiling techniques is now being used in the region to check concrete foundation properties in-situ and are enabling power companies to get the most out of their assets. INTRODUCTIONIn most regions of the globe, the US included, there is generally a requirement to upgrade transmission line capacities, to cope with increasing power consumption. Problems with under capacity only come to light for the public when blackouts occur, even in developed countries.A large number of transmission line towers are designed with a certain capacity redundancy and will be able to carry greater loads than originally designed for. Power companies are therefore looking for ways to assess their assets and to minimize the costs of upgrade work.Re-assessment of tower foundation capacities using design drawings may not be valid , as constructed foundations may differ considerably from design drawings, to accommodate local difficulties and in some instanced, particularly with earlier lines, there is no information whatsoever. This complicates efforts to determine the capacity of foundations considerably."

Jan 1, 2005

By Rudolph P. Frizzi

Structures supported on ACIP and DD piles perform successfully when quality control is maintained from the initial site subsurface investigation through pile design, bidding, and construction. The four stages of ACIP / DD pile construction are: preparation, augering the pile, grout / concrete placement, and reinforcement installation. During all four stages, careful observations and communication between the contractor and the owner's engineering inspection personnel are vital to successful pile completion. Automated monitoring equipment (AME) exists to supplement, but not replace, the field personnel's observations during the pile augering and grouting operations. Full-scale field load testing is done to verify the pile's geotechnical and structural design, and the contractor's pile installation means and methods, using several procedures including: conventional top loading, high-strain dynamic, rapid axial compression (i.e. Fundex PLT and Statnamic), and Osterberg Cell. Non-destructive sonic testing is performed to investigate the below-grade sectional properties of the completed pile; such methods include: low-strain impulse testing, and single-hole and cross-hole sonic logging. Post-construction observations are necessary to verify pile location and top properties prior to overlying cap construction.

Jan 1, 2005

By Mary Ellen Bruce

Let me first address the issue of the wet grab samples. The wet grab samples that were attempted to take on the Central Artery were hindered by the fact that the way the mixing was being done was only by injecting grout on the way out, during withdrawal of the mixing tools. They would auger down to the required depth (usually with some water being injected), which took anywhere from 45 minutes to an hour, and then when coming out, the grout would be injected with grout. That was leaving a column of grout in the center where the shaft had been (i.e. inside of the blades of the mixing tools), which would end up being something like a foot in diameter because the pipe that was used for the drill shaft was a foot in diameter. So we had 10 inches to a foot of almost pure grout in the middle of our column and then we had 2 feet on either side that was mixed soil cement. So when they went down with the wet grab sampler not knowing where that was in the column sometimes they/we were getting strengths of 1500 psi, and sometimes they/we were getting strength of 500 psi or 100 psi. So what was it that we were taking into the wet grab sampler? In those cases you don't really know, but it wasn't representative of the core samples we were taking. We were purposely not coring in the center because we knew that was going to be high cement content, almost pure grout. So the issue of wet grab sampling particularly on this project, the Central Artery Project, was that we didn't really know what we were sampling. What becomes an issue with wet grab sampling in other projects is that you have to have another device (machine) in most cases, a cherry picker crane or something similar that can raise and lower with a beam that is used to forces the sampler down into the freshly mixed soil-cement. And regarding economics, is it more economical to have that crane standing by with its operator or to have a drill rig to come along later and do the coring and take the material out that's fairly identical to what you're finding in situ? The complaint of micro-fracturing in the core samples as you're taking the cores was raised by Seiko as causing large strength reductions. But, if you're doing it carefully, then I don't think that's much of an issue anymore, on research basis perhaps but not on a practical level.

Feb 10, 2003

By Nick O’Riordan, Kaitlyn L. Fleming, Michael Riemer, Youssef M. A. Hashash, Stephen McLandrich, Mohamad Jammoul, Pierre Gouvin, Andrew Yeskoo

"To accommodate urbanization, cities are developing more underground space as a means to house public transportation systems and other entities. Underground developments often require construction of deep excavations in an environment dense with infrastructure. The success of such a project is related to the amount of impact imposed on adjacent structures and economic activity; impact should be limited to insignificant amounts in order to mitigate damage and disruption. Thus, large-scale urban construction projects require extensive monitoring of ground movements and installed support performance to facilitate informed decisions for adjustment of construction activities and support design when necessary.In downtown San Francisco, a unique large-scale excavation in saturated soft soils was constructed for the Transbay Transit Center (TTC). Construction of the excavation began in April 2012 and was completed almost two years later in February 2014. To monitor ground and structure response to construction, the project team used an extensive instrumentation network that included automatic inclinometers, piezometers, strain gages and total stations paired with survey markers. Innovative imaging techniques developed a record of construction in order to relate measured deformations to construction activity.Transbay Transit CenterThe Transbay Transit Center (TTC) is being constructed as a modern day transportation hub in downtown San Francisco to replace the former Transbay Terminal. The project is located in the South of Market area, less than half a mile from the San Francisco Bay. The final center will connect eight counties in the Bay Area through 11 different transportation systems, some of which will be housed in the TTC including Caltrain, Golden Gate Transit and California High Speed Rail. The aboveground structure will consist of two levels for retail and a third level with a bus terminal beneath a rooftop garden. There will be two subgrade levels to serve as a lower concourse and the train platforms. This structure required construction of a deep excavation closely surrounded by buildings and roads in an area thriving with economic activity."

Jan 1, 2015

By Tony Amis, Marco Barla, Alice Di Donna

"Energy geostructures are becoming an increasingly popular solution around the world for Developers looking to reduce CO2 and system running costs. Energy geostructures are geotechnical structures that provide both the important role of structural stability while also acting as a heat exchanger with the ground, enabling the supported buildings and or infrastructure to be heated and cooled using the principle of low enthalpy geothermal systems. The main advantage of this innovative technology with respect to standard geothermal plant is the reduction of the initial installation costs and construction schedule benefits, compared to installing conventional geothermal solutions, largely due to the additional use of structures which would be constructed in any case. However, it is important with respect to energy geostructures that additional aspects need careful consideration. For this very reason, several research studies have been carried out over the last decade on this subject and a number of real case studies have been monitored and analysed. The key difference with respect to conventional shallow geothermal systems are mainly related to the geometry, which is imposed by the geotechnical project, and the need to ensure that the primary structural role is always guaranteed. Special boundary conditions, the reduced depth, the influence of atmospheric external temperature can also play an important role for energy geostructures. They can affect, both energy efficiency and, the geotechnical behaviour because of the possible thermal induced mechanical effects. This paper presents a picture of the current situation regarding energy geostructures and their peculiar features, and collects available data to provide a reference framework. Data has been collected from literature and personal communications and then processed to provide easy-to-read charts useful for practical consultation at a glance. This paper provides, an indication of the distribution of such systems worldwide, their spread in time, and a global view of their actual efficiency from the structural, energy, economic and environmental point of view.1. IntroductionEnergy geostructures are becoming an increasingly popular consideration around the world. Energy geostructures are geotechnical structures with a dual role of providing structural stability and the ability to exchange heat with the ground, to provide low carbon heat and coolth to supporting and or adjacent buildings and infrastructure, using the principle of low enthalpy geothermal systems (Barla and Di Donna, 2016; Laloui and Di Donna, 2013). A closed circuit of high density polyethylene (HDPE) pipes is embedded in the concrete, and a heat carrier fluid circulates through them exchanging heat with the ground. The HDPE pipework circuit inside the geostructure is linked to one of the above buildings or infrastructure through a heat pump, which adapts the temperature of the circulating fluid to the heating (winter mode) and cooling (summer mode) needs. In this way, heat can be injected into the ground during summer and extracted from it during winter. In principle, all structures in contact with the ground can be used as energy geostructures. The first examples of energy geostructures date back to the eighties in Austria and were mainly piles and shallow foundations. A decade later, Henderson et al. (1999) reported on what would appear to be the first successful use of geothermal energy piles in the US, with loops incorporated into the foundation for a hotel in Geneva, New York. As was their use in this New York case history, the typical geothermal energy pile application is used in conjunction with additional closed loop boreholes to provide the required energy capacity for a structure. Interestingly the report concludes that the geothermal energy piles had a better heat transfer performance than the borehole field. The first energy walls appeared slightly later, while still today only a few experimental cas"

Jan 1, 2017

By Juan M. Pestana-Nascimento, Robert G. Bea, Hamed Hamedifar, Emery M. Roe

The current State-of-the-Practice is grounded heavily on deterministic characterization and assessment of the performance of civil engineering infrastructure. In particular, flood defense systems, such as levees, have been evaluated within the context of the Factor-of-Safety where the computed capacity of the system is compared with the code specified demand forces. Uncertainties associated with the capacity and demand forces render deterministic modeling incomplete. In particular, two structures with the same Factor of Safety can have vastly different probabilities of failure. While efforts have been made to assess levee vulnerability, results from traditional engineering approaches omit important factors because they do not account for uncertainties included in analytical modeling, and natural variabilities, or human and organization factors. This paper utilizes risk assessment methods to advance methods for quantifying the contribution of uncertainties to engineering analyses, and thereby provide additional information to help assess sustainability of geotechnically engineered systems. The probability of failure of a geotechnically engineered system is directly impacted by how well the system is understood, and how uncertainties are incorporated in development of understanding of the system. This paper presents methods to evaluate two types of uncertainties for three potential failure modes of flood protection levees: underseepage, slope (or levee) instability, and overtopping/erosion. These analyses account for two types of uncertainty: 1) Type I – inherent uncertainty, 2) Type II – analytical modeling uncertainty. Human and organizational task performance and information development and utilization uncertainties are not included in these analyses. This paper focuses on the behavior of the flood protection levee system for Sherman Island, a western island in California’s Delta. Sherman Island is of critical importance to California because of the very important infrastructure systems that pass under, on, over, and adjacent to Sherman Island, including: natural gas pipelines, regional and interregional electricity transmission lines and telecommunication facilities, two deepwater shipping channels; and State Highway 160, a link between major transportation expressways. The work evaluates current (year 2010) and future conditions (year 2100) and incorporates variations in capacity and demand arising from projected human response activities and global climate change.

Jan 1, 2017

By Peter Cali

There is one organization in Sweden, The Swedish Deep Stabilization Research Centre, which has been working with these questions and there is also a project, Eurosoilstab, within European Union to take a manual for deep stabilization.

Feb 10, 2003

By Peter Deming

"PART 2 OF 2 (CONTINUED FROM SUMMER 2006 EDITION) CONSTRUCTION ISSUES (cont’d) The Influence of Ground Conditions on Collapse Sand and gravel strata provide frictional resistance to support active earth pressure. The angle of internal friction has only slight influence on computed stability. Sand and gravel material design parameters can be defined with SPT N-values. Silt strata should be analyzed using internal friction. Definition of soil parameters should be performed by laboratory testing. Cohesive materials, especially soft clay and peat, require careful definition for design. Shear strength should be determined by laboratory testing. Work platforms constructed over granular strata improve the ground resistance by increasing confining pressure. However, temporarily increasing overburden stress on cohesive ground reduces trench stability. If the ground contains soft cohesive deposits which are not normally consolidated to the construction overburden, these must be stabilized before attempting trench construction. Use of wick drains and surcharge fill to improve the ground is recommended. Ground stabilization work requires time, and should be performed by the Owner prior to trench excavation. The addition of cement, stone columns, or other measures to support trench excavation equipment is typically determined to be more expensive and less dependable than ground improvement. Excavation through peat can be especially problematic. Peat materials rapidly compress when earth pressures exceed preconsolidation stresses. Backfill materials provide a horizontal stress on the trench wall which can exceed the bearing capacity of peat. As the peat compresses, the trench becomes wider, and slurry levels drop and trench stability can rapidly deteriorate. If the peat is the closure layer, a shallow key is recommended. If peat is present on the trench wall, preconsolidation with surcharge is recommended. Bottom preparation and Backfill Placement Trench wall stability is a temporary condition which must be controlled by proper design and construction of work platforms and slurry features which influence ground support. Backfill materials and intimate contact of the backfill with the closure layer are permanent conditions which are the end goal of the work. The most common reason slurry trenches fail to provide working barriers is improper bottom closure. Either the closure layer is not engaged, or the backfill is not in intimate contact with the closure layer. This can result from construction problems associated with sidewall collapse described above, slurry performance and/or degradation, backfill placement methods, and failure to maintain the trench bottom clear of sediment prior to placing backfill."

Jan 1, 2006

By Jason N. Scott

It is now possible using low-cost wireless technology and rugged hand-held devices to record data on site electronically and for that data to be instantly available to others. This could potentially eliminate many problems that traditionally lead to remedial work, such as poor communication and the late detection of non­conformances. However, determining how best to implement such a system and integrate it with the rest of the business process is far from simple. This paper looks at Stent's experience of these issues by way of a case study of the SHERPA system. This is a wireless site data collection system developed for use with rotary bored piling.

Jan 1, 2006

By Alexander Blatt, Franz-Werner Gerressen

Power Point Presetation at DFI 2022

Sep 1, 2022

By Ørjan Nerland, Torgeir Haugen, Astri Eggen, Kjell Karlsrud

"Ground improvement by the deep dry mixing (DDM) method is used in Norway since the late 1970's. A brief review is given of the Norwegian guideline for ground improvement with DDM issued in 2012, but focus is on practical examples and experiences related to improving the stability of excavations and natural slopes in soft clays. Two examples deal with experiences from 10 to 18 m deep excavations in soft and partly highly sensitive clays, where DDM panels and block stabilization were used to both give sufficient stability against bottom heave and to limit lateral wall displacements. A third case deals with improving the stability of a natural slope in quick clay by installing DDM panels near the crest of the slope. To limit disturbance and excess pore pressures generated during the DDM works, vertical drains were installed in advance in between the DDM panels. This ensured that the excess pore pressures generated by the DDM works (up to 150 kPA) dissipated quickly, which was instrumental to avoid triggering a landslide during the stabilizing works.INTRODUCTIONThe lime column (LC) method developed in Sweden and Japan in the mid 1970's (e.g. Broms and Boman, 1977). Since then, there have been significant developments in Scandinavia and around the world in terms of rigs, mixing machinery and tools, and type of binders used. The method, presently named the ""Dry Deep Mixing"" (DDM) method in contrast to the wet deep mixing methods (WDM) that also have developed significantly over the past decades, e.g. Kitazume and Terashi (2013). The first application of the DDM method in Norway was in the late 1970's to improve the stability of an excavation in quick-clay, then using only lime as binder. Most DDM applications in Norway have also thereafter been to improve the stability of cuts, supported excavations or natural slopes in soft clays. The Norwegian Geotechnical Society (2012) issued in 2012 “Guidelines for design of ground improvement with DDM methods"". The following highlights design issues dealt with. The paper focuses however, on some practical cases where DDM has been used to improve stability of deep excavations and a natural slope in soft and partly highly sensitive clays."

Jan 1, 2015

By Renzo D. Verastegui, Michael Law, Sitotaw Y. Fantaye, Alfredas Daugiala

"When completed, 520 Park Avenue will amend the Manhattan skyline and be one of the most prestigious high-rise towers in New York City. The 52-story condominium building is located on a 60 ft by 100 ft lot (18.3 m by 30.5 m) on East 60th Street between Park Avenue and Madison Avenue. The geographically complex site is bounded by two fragile five-story masonry buildings on the east and west, a mid-rise building on the north, and a New York City Transit (NYCT) subway tunnel on the south. To add to this complexity, the ambitious development required an excavation between 70 and 80 ft (21.3 and 24.4 m) deep, mostly below groundwater level in highly-permeable rock, to accommodate four levels of cellars. The new building also cantilevers 24 ft (7.3 m) over a five-story historic building on the east. The limited footprint of the building coupled with large compressive and tensile axial loads, considerable base shear and over-turning moments, and the required deep excavation, presented unique foundation challenges. This article describes how the challenges were solved with an innovative combination of permanent secant pile walls and drilled shafts.Site GeologyThe 1865 Viele Map provides the site topographic conditions prior to development in the area, and indicates that the site was at the eastern edge of a historic marshland, which was approximately west of Park Avenue and north of 58th Street. A historic stream, which ran alongside the eastern edge of the site, was part of a larger stream network that traversed the surrounding area. This stream network is also visible in the 1865 Viele map. In addition, the bedrock beneath the site lies in a highly weathered zone due to a couple of ancient faulted zones that transect the site. These indicate that a zone of highly weathered rock is expected."

Jan 1, 2017

By Jerold Bishop

The application of the ?electro-hydrodynamic effect? (EHDE) to civil engineering has been made in the construction of drilled piles. Equipment for the commercial application of this process was developed in Russia in the late 1980's. The process is approved for general use by the Russian Federation building code and numerous projects have been successfully completed with this technique. EHDE is a process by which a moderately powerful shockwave is released in the bottom of a drill hole filled wet concrete slurry. The energy is carried outward through the fluid with minimal loss because it is an incompressible medium. Repetitive discharges provides a series of energy pulses which will compact the soil along the pile shaft and at base of the pile. The process is analogous to repeated applications of low energy blast densification or to dynamic compaction. In general, the process is not depth dependent. Repeated application of this treatment in a drilled pile hole can increase soil density at the base and along the shaft of the pile, as desired. The overall result is that the geotechnical capacity can be improved significantly. Test results documenting improvements are presented and other applications considered.

Jan 1, 2007

By Jim Bruce

No answer required. From the drilling equipment suppliers, but the specifications must be tailored to be project-specific. Yes, the sonic technique is very interesting as we said, and it is not so much as an issue of the magnitude of power, it's about the efficient use of the power. The efficiency of the machine is not necessarily related to size so it is best to talk to the two contractors that supply the service about that. I think it can be scaled down but it is quite a big head, so therefore there are practical limitations on the size of the door it can walk through and also the size of the casings and rods that it can use. You might defeat the economic advantages if you were to use too short casing lengths. Boart Longyear have a low head room machine that can work within an 8 foot verical clearance.

Feb 10, 2003

By David P. Sauls

Design-build contract delivery provides unique opportunities for efficiencies in pile foundation design and installation. The Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development (LADOTD) US Highway 90 at Louisiana State Highway 85 (US90/LA85) intersection was contracted under the design-build delivery system, in part to take advantage of these efficiencies. As one of five projects recognized by the Design Build Institute of America (DBIA) when it honored LADOTD as its 2011 Transportation Owner of the Year in the highway/bridges category, the design-build method provided a way for this project to be ?shovel-ready?, which enabled the LADOTD to secure American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funding. This paper describes the benefits this project gleaned from the design-build process, which included synergy, schedule, design and construction efficiencies, and team building. Interlaced with design and construction of precast prestressed concrete (PPC) piling in compressible southern Louisiana soils, the design-build process rapidly translated computations to cost and schedule savings. A robust quality assurance program using Pile Driving Analyzer (PDA) equipment to evaluate pile set-up provided expedited acceptance of bridge bents and advanced construction schedule. Data evaluation includes analyses of PDA data obtained from 1-hour, 24-hour, 7-day, 14-day and 6-month restrikes of the project test pile.

By John L. Walkinshaw

It is obviously not possible in the time given me today to review in great detail all the research of the past 20 years that the (FHWA) has sponsored or participated in. In this presentation I will highlight some of the principal programs that I am familiar with. This handout lists practically all the reports prepared for the FHWA involving deep foundations and some related work involving the same structural elements (piles, shafts, ground anchors).

Jan 1, 1993