"In the spring of 2005 Schnabel Foundation Company completed a $15.2 million Design/Build subcontract to underpin 11 structures, and provide 202,800 square feet of earth retention for the Reno Transportation Rail Access Corridor (ReTRAC) project in Reno, Nevada. Schnabel’s work was part of a Design/Build contract to depress a railroad alignment through downtown Reno. The depressed section was 2.2 miles long, 54 ft wide, and up to 35 ft deep (3.5 km long, 16.5m wide and up to 10.7m deep). The trench structure was required to be watertight. SUBCONTRACT WORK OVERVIEWEleven buildings along the track alignment required underpinning. Three types of underpinning were used, designated Type 1, Type 2 and Type 3.At four buildings the trench retaining walls were to be located directly under the exterior footings. This alignment eliminated traditional underpinning and cut-off wall techniques that could normally be used to support structures. Type 1 underpinning was used at these buildings. This underpinning system consisted of a combination of permeation grouting, hand-dug piers, and permanent tiebacks. This underpinning system became the new watertight trench walls.Five buildings were located a few feet behind the trench walls, and their exterior walls were supported by continuous footings. Type 2 micropile/pile cap underpinning (patent pending) was used to support these buildings.The remaining two buildings were also located a few feet behind the trench walls, but they had column footings along the exterior walls. At these structures traditional micropile underpinning was provided through the existing footings. This is described as Type 3 underpinning.Temporary earth retention was required on both sides of the trench along most of the alignment. This shoring supported frontage roads, private property and surcharge from the temporary railroad shoofly running parallel to one side of the trench.SUBSURFACE CONDITIONSThe soil along the trench alignment consisted of river outwash deposits. The top 2 to 18 feet (0.6m to 5.5m) generally consisted of flood plain silt and sand deposits, or fine-grained fills. These fine-grained soils are underlain by the Tahoe Outwash Formation which consists of interbedded layers of sand; sand and gravel; and sand, gravel, cobbles and boulders. Some of these layers encountered during construction consisted of 30 to 50 percent cobbles and boulders, with some boulders up to eight feet in diameter.A major challenge to the design and construction of the trench structures and the underpinning was the ground water table which was 10 feet (3m) above subgrade in the deepest portions of the trench. Based on specification restrictions, temporary and permanent dewatering was not feasible. As a result, the selected design and construction methods had to consider three water conditions: the anticipated groundwater level during construction (CGW), the groundwater level for permanent design (DGW), and an additional special design condition with water at street grade."
"INTRODUCTIONNo. 1 Queens Rd was an existing 10-storey office building founded on large pad footings. This project involved the construction of a 6-level, 15m (50-ft.) deep basement excavated immediately adjacent to the existing building and also beneath the existing footprint of the Southern end of the building. The total perimeter of the new basement was to be approximately 200m (656 ft.) all with a retained height of 15m (50 ft.). It was also proposed to add a further 5 storeys to the building. Approximately 18 of the existing columns supporting the 10-storey building were to have the applied column load diverted from the existing foundations at ground level onto the new piles or basement raft 15m (50 ft.) below.The geotechnical profile consisted of fill for the top 1.5m predominately comprising of clayey sand with a high gravel content from 1.5m to 9m (5 to 30 ft.), a medium dense to dense clayey sand and then below was a sandy clay extending to 15m (50 ft.) ranging from stiff to very stiff. From 15m on completely to extremely weathered siltstone was encountered. The groundwater was measured at 9.5m (31 ft.) below the natural ground surface.DESIGN BRIEFThe existing building columns were founded on large pad foundations up to 4.4m (14.5 ft.) square, founded on the dense clayey sand. These pads would require temporary support to enable the excavation to proceed beneath them. Upon completion of the excavation under the pads new columns were to be constructed joining into the existing columns to transfer the load onto the new raft slab, 15m (50 ft.) below. The existing 10 floors were to be refurbished. It was planned to undertake all the temporary support and transferring of loads while the structure above was only able to provide a dead load. It was decided that any movement of the building would have minimum impact on a skeleton structure. During the temporary support of the columns, movements due to construction activities had to be monitored to understand any potential stresses in the structure above.The original design required beams to be installed under the pads and supported at either end by temporary piles that were to be founded below the level of the proposed excavation. (Refer to sketch 1). Wagstaff Piling considered that this methodology had difficulties in construction at all stages and did not provide facility for transfer of the load without significant movement of the structure above. Wagstaff Piling revised the design to attach beams to the columns above the pads using shear collars. (Refer to sketch 2). These beams supported on the temporary piles could then be jacked upwards to remove loads off the pads. This would enable removal of the pads with minimal movement of the 10-storey building above. (Refer to photo 1 and back cover photo)."
One of our research thrusts at Portland State University (PSU) centers on developing design guidelines for pile foundations in liquefiable, laterally spreading grounds. This research has been primarily sponsored by the DFI Committee Project Fund (CPF) program through four awards, totaling nearly $240,000 in financial support. DFI contributed half of this financial support, while the other half was contributed in-kind by PSU and DFI Project Advisory Board members. Leveraging the CPF funds, we secured an additional $550,000 in financial support from the National Science. Foundation (NSF), which has enabled our research group to continue exploring this topic and contributing to the broader engineering community's understanding of the behavior of pile foundations in liquefiable soils.
The CPF funds have fostered collaborations with practitioners and researchers beyond PSU. Notable examples include collaborative research involving data from five large-scale centrifuge tests on pile-supported wharves by Steve Dickenson, Ph.D., New Albion Geotechnical; Nason McCullough, Ph.D., Jacobs Engineering and Scott Schlechter, Geotechnical Resources, as well as 1-g shake table tests of bridge pile shafts conducted by Professors Ahmed Elgamal, Ph.D., and Ahmed Ebeido, Ph.D., of the University of California, San Diego. In addition to these collaborations, our research has benefited from industry-university partnerships formed through the involvement of DFI Project Advisory Board members. Their support and feedback ensure that our research products are practical and imple- mentable in real-world projects.
The impact of the CPF funds extends to supporting graduate students' theses, which were the basis for 17 technical publications. Some of these publications are expected to have a significant impact on the industry. For instance, our 2018 DFI Journal paper, co-authored by former master's student Jonathan Nasr, cur- rently with the Army Corps of Engineers, has been cited in the 2022 British Columbia Supplement to Canadian Highway Bridge Design Code S6:19. A noteworthy product of our study is a step-by-step design procedure for pile- supported wharf structures subjected to the combined effects of lateral spreading and inertial loads, outlined in a 2022 American Society of Civil Engineers' (ASCE) Journal of Geotechnical and Geo- environmental Engineering paper co- authored by former doctoral student Milad Souri, Ph.D., PE, Geotechnical Resources.
Underpinning and Temporary Earth Retention for the ReTRAC Trench in Reno