Search Documents

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 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 L. D. Johnson

12 groups of 12 precast prestressed (PCPS) piles were driven in the lagoon of Kwajalein Island to support a dry dock. Pre-construction investigation of the calcareous coral sands and static pile loeid tests were performed to determine if the 7.9 by 7.9 cm (20 by 20 inches) by 26 m (85 ft) long PCPS piles embedded to a depth of 16 m (53 ft) would adequately support the dry dock. Driving records for production piles indicated that the blowcounts of the piles at the fincil embedment depth became substantially less than expected as piles wssre driven further toward the lagoon end of the dry dock and decreased to as low as 2 blows/ft. A supplemental investigation that included a static load test on a production pile, the driving of an indicator pile, and restrikes indicated that the pile foundation has adequate bearing capacity. The observed bearing capacity appears to be effected by several mechanisms including breakdown of cementation between sand particles, densification of the sands during driving, and dissipation of excess pore pressures and recementation after driving.

Jan 1, 1993

By Jesús E. Gómez

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

Jan 1, 2011

Jan 1, 1984

By Gary L. Seider

Chance, a Division of Hubbell Power Systems, Inc., in conjunction with Sailors Engineering, Inc. has updated its Helical Design Capacity Software. This latest version, ?HeliCAP® v2.0?, is a state-of-the-art helical anchor and pile capacity program designed to operate in the Microsoft® environment. The program calculates the tension and compression capacity along with the frictional capacity, if applicable, of CHANCE® Civil Construction helical anchors and piles using design theories and methods adopted by Chance. This paper details the current state of practice employed by the software in the design methods and installation methodologies of helical anchors and piles.

Jan 1, 2007

By Peter J. Nicholson

During my more than 40 years in the practice of underground construction and engineering, the industry has seen progress from the dig down to rock or hardpan or alternatively drive concrete or steel into the ground and count the blows; then you can be sure of you have a solid foundation; to the modern day, I?m willing to try anything to save money. Of course these are both exaggerations, but not gross ones. After getting bored being supervision on jobs counting blows, I struck out into the new field of ?tie-backs? as they were called in the United States, or ?ground anchors? as they were then termed in the United Kingdom. After installing some of the first permanent ground anchors for the Corps of Engineers on Lake Michigan as well as the highest loaded rock anchors of the time at two dams on the Ohio River, we were at the top of our game in the 1970?s. Subsequently in the 1980?s when my view of the future of ground anchors saw their installation becoming a commodity item, we branched out into ?Pin Piles? now known as Micro Piles, high capacity, steel tube encased, small diameter (5-12? or so), high capacity (100-500 tons) piling. Next came soil nailing, both temporary and permanent retaining walls, as at Cumberland Gap Kentucky. My next morph was into ?Cement Deep Soil Mixing? earlier on, known simply as ?soil mixing?. For this education I traveled to Japan several times and established a long-term, Joint Venture, relationship with one of the better known Japanese specialty ground modification companies. In Boston at the ?Big Dig? we established the then record size soil mixing project, 500,000 or so cubic meters of CDSM concluding in the year 2000. Since then I?ve been involved as a consultant mainly for dams and levees. Below is the story of how I came to be at this place in the road to innovation in Geotechnical processes.

By Adnan A. Malik, Tadashi Maejima, Jiro Kuwano

"Previous studies revealed that the helix deflection reduced the end bearing capacity of screw pile in dense ground even if the installation process is completed with minimal soil disturbance. The ultimate end bearing capacity in dense ground is difficult to achieve during the full-scale pile load test due to the limitation of the loading system. Therefore, in the present study, model scale of testing is selected to investigate the effect of helix deflection on load settlement behavior of single helix screw pile under increasing stress level. It is observed from the test results that the applied surcharge pressure, which is used to simulate the effect of stress level, is decreased with increase in model ground thickness. This decrease in the stress level is due to the frictional resistance between the container wall and sand. It is also observed that the end bearing capacity of screw pile increases with the increase in stress level but at gradually decreasing rate. The test results indicated that the helix deflection during the pile load test should not be more than critical deflection (0.72 mm average) of the helix to avoid any reduction in the end bearing capacity of screw pile. The helix deflection, which is measured after the pile load tests are also compared with the equations of flat circular plate having uniformly distributed load over the plate with simply supported and fixed inner edges.INTRODUCTIONThe screw pile consists of a central steel shaft with one or more helices attached at different location on the central shaft. The installation mechanism of screw pile consists of torque and pushing force. The screw pile installation mechanism can affect the unit weight of the ground during its installation. This effect is small in cohesive soils but it is quite noticeable in loose to medium dense sands (Adams 2011; Santos et al. 2013). The pushing force should be controlled in such a manner that pile penetration should be at least 80% of the pitch of the helix, during each revolution (Perko, 2009)."

Jan 1, 2017

By Sowmiyaa. V. S., Tiruvengala Padma

Axial compression capacities of bored cast in situ piles as per Indian and International Standards are compared in this paper. Bored cast in-situ piles resting on soil and rock are considered for capacity assessment comparison. The standards considered for comparison are Indian Standards namely IS 2911-Part 1-Sec 2:2010 and IRC 78, International Standards like AASHTO LRFD Design-2017, API 2A WSD, BS 8004:2015 & EN 1997: Part 1:2014. The end bearing mobilization limits as proposed by various standards and their influence on longer piles in cohesive and cohesionless soils are discussed.

Sep 1, 2022

By Prodyot Kumar Ray, Sudip Kumar Koley, Aminul Islam, Somnath Banerjee

One of the most important topics in the construction industry is the building of railway embankments. Being such a delicate and significant structure, it is crucial to properly design the embankment and build it while adhering to all statutory criteria and design guidelines. A railway embankment's subsoil condition and fill material, groundwater table, dynamic and static loads during operation, and embankment geometry are some of its most crucial design considerations. This paper discusses the likely causes of the collapse of a railway embankment in eastern India as well as the suggested rehabilitation scheme. It was observed that an embankment collapsed in the aforementioned area during a inccesent rain. Along with the side shifting of a cantilever retaining wall that was positioned at the bottom of the embankment, the embankment next to the railroad track settled vertically. According to the available geotechnical report, the sub soil strata in half of the area adjacent to the embankment profile, where the embankment height gradually decreases from maximum height, is stiff to hard clay with an undrained cohesion value of around 50 kpa followed by dense sand, and the sub soil strata in the other half is soft clay with an undrained strength of 15 kpa. As a result, in the rainy season due to the sudden increase in the water table, the self-weight of the embankment increased and further caused the under-laying soft clay to get squeezed away and settle. Due to this squeeze/settlement effect of the soft clay layer, the retaining wall got disturbed along with the generation of an undulated embankment top profile. As a remedial measure, it is proposed to construct a contiguous bored pile wall at the toe of the embankment to stabilize the slope, and additionally, compaction grouting is recommended beneath the embankment to improve the soft clay. In order to carry out the analysis, certain commercial geotechnical software like Slide, Wallap, and Plaxis 2D are used. The factor of safety of the embankment slope considering the above restoration scheme is adequate under static and seismic conditions.

Sep 1, 2022

By Yazen Khasawneh, Yao Zhang

Upgrading and maintenance programs were proposed at a power generating plant in Indiana. To perform construction activities associated with the proposed upgrading and maintenance, a LR11350 crawler crane with a dead load of 1,500 ton was required in the vicinity of existing plant structures. The contact pressure from the crane tracks for the heaviest lift, maximum reach and angle (worst loading condition) were estimated by the rigging engineer to be on the order of 84 psi. Several concerns were raised regarding the total and differential settlements while the crane is in operation and the induced stresses on existing underground utilities due to crane loads. Three-dimensional finite element simulations were conducted using hardening soil model for the subsurface soils and elastic model for the other structural elements (underground utilities and crane mats) to optimize the configuration of the proposed crane foundation. It was found 1-foot thick engineered steel mats underlain by a 1.5-foot thick crushed stone pad will provide enough support to the crane. It will also control the settlement to the allowable limit and maintain the stresses in the underground utilities within tolerance. INTRODUCTION A LR11350 heavy lift crawler crane was proposed as part of an upgrade program at an existing power plant in the state of Indiana. The proposed crane will be sitting on an open ground in the vicinity of existing plant facilities, with multiple underground utilities going beneath the proposed footprint of the new crane pad. The existing utilities are of diverse kinds, including sanitary sewer corrugated metal pipes, electrical conduits and variable steel water/oil drain pipes. The safety and functionality of these underground utilities are critical to maintain the proper operation of the power plant. Therefore, the design of the new crane pad foundation system is of essential to control the ground settlement and the imposed stresses to the existing utilities (Davie et al., 1998, Scott 2017). To ensure all utility locations and depths are identified, the proposed footprint was thoroughly surveyed. Information in regard to each identified utility was provided by the owner. Subsurface explorations were conducted using geotechnical soil borings and soundings to evaluate the ground conditions and generate soil profiles. Numerical simulation and analysis utilizing finite element method were performed to design the crane pad foundation system and evaluate the responses of the utilities. This paper summarizes project information, geotechnical conditions and then focuses on the finite element analysis in assisting the design of crane pad and the utilities evaluation.

Jan 1, 2019

By Yuji Yamashita, Kazuyoshi Kamimura, Tsuyoshi Takahashi, Naoya Matayoshi

"The CDM-LODIC method (cement deep mixing - low displacement and control) method enables ground displacement to be reduced by removing an amount of soil equivalent to that of injected cement slurry and the volume of the plunged mixing tool, which causes a certain degree of ground displacement. Since the CDM-LODIC method was developed in 1985, it has been applied to over 930 sites and the accumulated volume of stabilized soil has now reached 7.6 million cubic meters.In the CDM method, the number of blade rotations per unit depth in the ground when the mixing blades are withdrawn is considered a construction item. The blade rotation number depends on the degree of mixing between the cement slurry and the ground Some field tests were performed based on the degree of mixing between the cement slurry and the ground. In these tests, a new concept of evaluating the blade rotation number when the screw rod penetrates to a given depth without injecting cement slurry has contributed to the degree of mixing. Furthermore, a correlation exists between the coefficient of efficiency of soil removal and the cement slurry admixture rate. In this paper, we discus the data collected in those field tests and present some application examples.OUTLINE OF CDM-LODIC METHODThe injection of cement slurry may cause some ground displacement during Cement Deep Mixing (CDM). In recent years, due to an increased demand for ground improvement work in urban areas, there is increased concern that buildings near any CDM site may be adversely affected. The deep mixing method which reduces displacement due to mixing (CDM-LODIC method) enables ground displacement to be minimized by removing an amount of soil equivalent to the injected cement slurry and the volume of the mixing tool, which itself causes some ground displacement. When the construction site is near other structures, regardless of whether on or under the ground, the CDM-LODIC method can be used in order to minimize any ground displacement. There are considered to be two main causes of ground displacement as shown in Figure 1. Displacement A indicates ground displacement caused by the volume of the inserted mixing tool during the penetration stage and displacement B indicates ground displacement caused by the volume of the injected stabilizing agent. Thus, by removing soil equivalent to the volume of the inserted mixing tool and the injected stabilizing agent, ground displacement can theoretically be minimized. Figure 2 shows the amount of observed ground displacement in the cases of CDM and CDM-LODIC at an actual site. These case studies indicate that ground displacement can be reduced by removing the soil."

Jan 1, 2015

By Suthan Pooranampillai

Verification of drilled shaft resistance is primarily obtained through the use of different load testing methods. Procedures utilized include conventional top down static loading, the Osterberg load cell (O-cell) test and dynamic tests such as the Statnamic method. The O-cell test provides a means of obtaining separately the base and side shear resistance behavior of drilled shafts (cast-in-drilled-hole). Alternatively, the Statnamic load test method enables the engineer to derive base and side shear behavior separately, based on measurements of load, accelerations and strains along the length of the shaft. However, due to time and cost constraints these tests can only be performed on selected shafts within a project. Post grouting of a drilled shaft base embedded within a cohesionless material, with a low mobility compaction grout, will essentially pre-load the shaft base soil against the side shear and self-weight in much the same manner as an O-cell load test (when the load cell is placed within the base vicinity). Therefore, successful post grouting of a drilled shaft would enable verification of both shaft side shear and base resistance simultaneously on each and every shaft it is carried out on. Additionally, such post grouted shafts display stiffer load-displacement response during subsequent downward, superstructure induced, loading compared to ungrouted shafts. Verification of resistance on each and every shaft through the use of post grouting will allow an increase in resistance factors (reduction in safety factor) used in the design. Two 6 ft. diameter drilled shafts were constructed in Fredonia, WA, for WSDOT, each with an approximate length of 52 ft. The shafts were terminated within medium dense poorly graded silty sand. Statnamic load testing of the shafts indicated maximum derived static side shear and base resistances of 2545 kips and 507 kips (1.6 in. displacement) for shaft One and 2466 kips and 212 kips (1.4 in. displacement) for shaft Two. Shaft Two was subsequently grouted, with a low mobility compaction grout. Shaft base mounted total earth pressure cells measured a maximum sustained pressure of 55.44 ksf during the compaction grouting operation. Shaft displacement reached 0.65 inches in the upward direction at termination of grouting. Comparison of grouting data with initial load test information indicates that properly instrumented post grouting verifies shaft base and side shear resistance. In addition, these grouting induced resistances were much higher than design values supplied by the engineer using conventional resistance factor design. Large scale laboratory testing also shows that base grouting verifies higher soil resistances than permissible in conventional design.

Jan 1, 2010

By Bruno Vingiani, Alessandro Bertero

"The use of Artificial Ground Freezing (AGF) for temporary soil strengthening and seepage control is an effective alternative to grouting when dealing with soils whose degree of finesses would imply the use of highly expensive chemical grouts. However, compared to grouting, the application of this improvement technique usually needs a more accurate preliminary soil investigation campaign and a design assisted by specific calculation software. Besides a general description of the main features of this technique, the paper will describe a recent application of AGF carried out in Rome to underpass an existing metro station.INTRODUCTIONNatural ground freezing occurs seasonally or permanently (permafrost) in some areas of the globe close to the poles and can negatively affect the engineering performance of underground structures. On the other hand, Artificial Ground Freezing (AGF) is man-made controllable freezing process that can be used in foundation engineering to temporarily strengthen the ground and create a barrier to the passage of groundwater. During the process, the heat is extracted from the soil in a cylindrical shape around a number of freezing pipes installed into the ground. This action produces columns of frozen soil, which expand gradually till they merge and create continuous frozen wall. The thickness of this barrier can be regulated according to the specific project requirements. Nowadays, AGF technique is applied to a wide range of foundation engineering problems where soil stability and groundwater flows are an issue (Pimentel et al. 2011, Haß and Schäfers, 2013). Typical applications include the temporary stabilization and waterproof of the ground around the excavation profile of mined tunnels until the construction of the final lining (Figure 1).The case history described in this paper deals with a recent application of AGF carried out during the construction of metro Line “C” in Rome. Specifically, this technique has been applied to allow the construction of two single-track mined tunnels running underneath an existing metro station belonging to Line “A”. In that case, the AGF has been evaluated by the Designers as the only possible solution for improving the mechanical and hydraulic characteristics"

Jan 1, 1900

By Leykam Chris J., Jacobs Scott. A.

"Construction of the New NY Bridge over the Hudson River 25 miles north of New York City is one of the largest civil infrastructure projects presently underway in the United States (formerly Tappan Zee Hudson River Crossing). The $3.14 billion Design-Build contract is also the largest ever awarded by the state of New York using an Alternative Project Delivery method, and the first major public project to use Design-Build. The new 3.1 mile long bridge will replace the existing Governor Malcolm Wilson Tappan Zee Bridge with a modern twin crossing featuring: Iconic side by side cable stay main spans; significant deck widths accommodating eight lanes of regular traffic, wide shoulders, and a shared use pedestrian and bike path; foundation with excess capacity to fully support a future rail bridge; more than 1,000 large diameter pipe piles driven in deep glacial deposits; drilled shafts installed through steep blast-rock slopes on the east shore landings. Geotechnical challenges included varied bedrock and glacial till surfaces with steep slopes and depths in excess of 750 ft.The purpose of this paper is to highlight major features of the New NY Bridge project with specific focus on the design and construction of the foundations supporting the approach and main span structures from abutment to abutment, provide background on alternative project delivery in NY, as well as provide an overview of the design-build process as it was applied to foundation delivery.The 3.1 mile Governor Malcolm Wilson Tappan Zee Bridge was constructed across the Hudson River connecting Nyack and Tarrytown (Rockland and Westchester Counties). Construction started in March 1952 and was completed in 1955 for a cost of $81 million. The seven lane crossing first opened to traffic on December 15, 1955 and coincided with the opening of a 28 mile segment of highway I-87 / I-287 between Suffern NY and Yonkers NY. The bridge is part of the extensive 574 mile New York State Thruway road system owned and operated by the New York State Thruway Authority (NYSTA)."

Jan 1, 2016

By Mark S. Greenleaf, Alec D. Smith, Mary Vittoria-Bertrand, Heather B. Scranton, Jean Louis Z. Locsin

"Rhode Island’s new $163.7 million, 2,265 ft (690 m) long, four-lane Sakonnet River Bridge sits just south of the existing bridge in Portsmouth/Tiverton. The bridge, a critical transportation system link between Massachusetts and Rhode Island, has a steel I-girder main span and concrete New England Bulb Tee approach spans. The foundation work was done between October 2009 and July 2010, and the bridge was completed in February 2014.Foundation design and construction challenges make the project noteworthy. There were thick layers of silty glacial soils with bedrock as deep as 400 ft (122 m) below the waterline, coupled with high foundation capacity demands at the river piers in 50 ft (15 m) of water. The Sakonnet was one of the first major bridge projects in the country to incorporate AASHTO Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) guidelines for foundation design and construction. Because of these and other challenges, the engineers conducted two design-phase load test programs on several foundation elements. These programs were successful and allowed the engineers to adjust the final foundation design prior to the start of construction. During construction, the contractors drove thirty 6 ft (1.8 m) diameter steel pipe piles, each with a novel recessed steel plate insert, to depths of 130 to 200 ft (40 to 61 m) at the three river piers. The insert provided increased resistance of the steel pipe piles and saved about $9 million. Also, 457 14x117 en bearing or friction H-section piles were driven to between 50 and 190 ft (15 to 58 m) at five land piers. All piles were driven relatively close to the existing bridge, which remained in service during construction, due to the project team’s precautionary use of instrumentation and the installation of a jacking system.Area GeologyThe Sakonnet River is up to 60 ft (18 m) deep along the bridge alignment and is underlain by a deep bedrock valley. The bedrock valley is buried by at least 350 ft (107 m) of soil, which includes a complex sequence of interbedded glacial soils (glacial till, glaciolacustrine deposits and glaciofluvial deposits), overlain by geologically recent estuarine deposits. The soils having the greatest impact on the foundation resistance are the glaciolacustrine (fine sandy silt or silt) and glaciofluvial (silty sand with gravel, cobbles, and occasional boulders less than about 2.5 ft [0.8 m] in size). The soil overburden decreases toward the east and west banks of the river, as the bedrock surface rises."

Jan 1, 2015

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

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

Jan 1, 2015

By Chu E. Ho, Paul Napoli

A new waterfront park was developed on Long Island in close proximity to the East River and Newtown Creek. The existing ground consisted of fill over soft organic clay, medium dense silty sand, glacial till and schist bedrock. The ground was initially raised to preload the underlying soft soils to stabilize the ground in preparation for site development. The ground was subsequently cut down to temporary grades for installation of foundation piles for the overlook structures and construction of reinforced concrete cantilever retaining walls forming pathways located adjacent to the water bodies. The retaining walls were located in two rows at different elevations along the sides of a steep embankment. Where the pathways converge, some of the walls were too close to each other, and were redesigned as a combined U-wall with a common base slab. The individual retaining walls were designed for adequate bearing, sliding and overturning resistance. Ground anchors were installed to enhance global stability of the retaining walls. This paper presents the design considerations for the retaining walls for various loading conditions, and evaluation of the trial and proof tests for the anchors. INTRODUCTION The New York City Master Plan included the transformation of an approximately 30-acre parcel of land in Long Island City, Queens, New York from a former manufacturing zone into a residential, commercial and recreational zone for middle-income community. The site was located at Hunters Point South along the eastern shoreline of the East River and Newtown Creek (Figure 1). The development included low to high- rise residential buildings, a public school, and retail structures. Open spaces were provided along the East River and Newtown Creek waterfronts in the form of a continuous park providing for recreational and community-related activities. Waterfront structures included small park buildings, walkways and viewing platforms. The shoreline was surrounded by revetments as part of the flood mitigation strategy. The project involved extensive site re-grading and several retaining walls were constructed. The earthwork volume amounted to approximately 47,000 cubic yard of imported fill and 93,000 cubic yard of cut. The exposed height of the retaining walls ranged from 3 to 15 feet. This paper focuses on the design and construction of the retaining walls for the project.

Jan 1, 2019

By Mahdi Soudkhah, Akhter Hossain

Vertical micropiles are generally considered to be low in lateral resistance. Therefore, battered micropiles are often used when additional lateral load carrying capacity is required. However, battering of micropiles can sometimes be restricted due to existing adjacent structures or utilities, especially in highly urbanized areas. For example, presented in this paper are lateral load test data from a 43-story building project in New York City where vertical micropiles were used due to proximity to adjacent structures. Three static lateral load tests were conducted on micropiles consisting of 13.375-in-outside diameter and 25- to 51-ft-long casings, and socketed 10 to 12.6 ft into the bedrock (gneissic schist). The subsurface profile above the bedrock consists of loose to very dense, mostly sandy and silty soils. The design load for the three test piles was 14,000 lb and the maximum load applied during the tests was 200% of the design load. Lateral load- displacement behavior of the free pile heads from the load tests are compared with the results of p-y analyses based on a widely used p-y method for sandy soils and using a lower and an upper bound estimates of soil index properties and strength parameters. Since the existing p-y curves were formulated for larger diameter driven piles at a specific geographic location, major differences are observed between the results of the load tests and the p-y analyses. In general, the lateral displacements estimated based on the p-y analyses using upper bound soil parameters are relatively closer to the results of the field load testing. Modified p-y curves specific to the sandy and silty soils representative of the general subsurface conditions of New York City matched with the lateral load tests are presented in this paper. INTRODUCTION Micropiles generally are limited in lateral load carrying capacities due to their relatively higher slenderness ratios (ratio of depth to diameter) compared to more conventional deep foundation alternatives, such as driven piles and drilled shafts. So, micropiles are not typically considered as deep foundation solutions when significantly high lateral loads are expected on the substructures. Various means to increase the lateral resistance of micropiles include battering and installing an oversized casing in the top portion of the piles (FHWA 2005; and Richard and Rothbauer 2004). However, it is often not possible to install micropiles in a battered position in highly urbanized areas due to existing adjacent structures or utilities. Installation of oversized casing is often restricted by limited space availability and concerns of losing lateral capacities due to closely spaced group of piles. Thus, estimation of lateral resistance of vertical micropiles can become highly important for geotechnical engineering projects in urban areas when a small to moderate amount of lateral resistances are expected from the substructures, often to withstand seismic and wind loads.

Jan 1, 2019

By Eric P. Bregman

As part of an on-going effort to improve water quality and reduce discharge into Boston Harbor, the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority (MWRA) East Boston Branch Sewer Relief Project was designed under a Federal mandate from the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to upgrade the aging sewer system, increase system storage and greatly reduce the volume of combined sewer overflows into the Harbor. The project scope of work includes the installation of over 2 miles (11,800 linear feet) of 36-inch and 66-inch diameter sewer relief piping, twenty (20) temporary shafts and an approximate 100 foot open cut section, located within the densely populated neighborhood of East Boston, Massachusetts. This area is a former marshland backfilled in the early to mid 1800?s where busy commercial streets co-mingle with thickly settled residential houses. The subsurface conditions present within Boston?s complex geology include the presence of subsurface contamination as well as complex networks of underground utilities. Additional site limitations included low headroom, noise, and traffic restrictions. Together these limitations required the design of individual earth support systems, tailored for each shaft location. Moreover, challenging subsurface conditions identified during construction required design modifications to minimize cost and schedule impacts related to construction dewatering, treatment of contaminated groundwater, internal bracing, and utility relocations. This paper provides a case history of the Geo-structural design and performance of various earth support techniques utilized to construct jacking and receiving shafts designed to launch and receive two (2) micro-tunnel boring machines (MTBM) and to support the construction of new deep shaft structures in an urban coastal area.