Search Documents

By Paikowsky, Samuel G.

"Due to the way drilled deep foundations are being constructed, their structural integrity and geotechnical capacity are highly variable. Drop weight systems are increasingly being used to dynamically test the capacity and integrity of drilled deep foundations. Conventional pile driving hammers are often either inadequate or not economical to test these foundations and drop weight systems have therefore been developed to allow for dynamic testing.The advantages of the tests include high mobility, short testing time, low cost relative to static load tests (allowing multiple tests at a single site), and integrity/construction quality evaluation concurrent with capacity determination. The dynamic testing method for drilled deep foundations encounter several difficulties including: the need for a pre-testing analysis for matching pile, soil and testing system, adequate mass and drop height to reflect the mobilized capacity without structural damage, test interpretations for irregularly shaped and/or non-uniform piles, need for reliable dynamic measurements depending on the impact and the distance between the impact and the measuring point, and limited knowledge about the accuracy of the predictions.The principles of the tests are presented using simplified models and demonstrated via a case history. Drop weight systems are reviewed. Dynamic measurement principles are explained and the construction and testing quality effects are outlined and demonstrated via numerical modeling and case histories. A comparison of dynamic and static tests is presented via a database, case histories and finally a short review of relevant codes is provided.1 IntroductionTraditional static axial load test is performed by a slow application of a force produced against independent reaction, imitating structural loading. It is the most reliable method to determine the pile’s performance as commonly required under typical service conditions. The major limitations of this testing are: (i) high cost associated with set-up, test duration, interpretation and construction delays, and (ii) inability to obtain information about the pile-soil interaction along the pile without additional testing means (e.g. tell tales, strain gauges, etc.). These limitations are acute when high capacity foundations are involved."

Jan 1, 2015

By Don Deardorff, Ke Yang, Yingcai Han, Ken Sorensen, Robert Kruger, Mark Petersen, Diane Fiorelli, Larry Goldfarb, Kathryn Petek, Kwabena Ofori-Awuah

Design of deep foundations for lateral loads requires an understanding of soil-foundation-structure response during loading. Lateral loads on a deep foundation (piles) could be due to earthquakes, winds, waves, and/or machine vibrations. Over the years, analysis of response of piles due to lateral loads evolved from closed-form solutions to p-y methods to strain wedge to finite element/finite difference modeling. Although analysis of lateral response of piles and shafts is routinely performed, there is no single guidance document and/or standard for design and testing. Several different analytical methods are available for the analysis, and the resulting design can result in significantly different responses which can create confusion. This is especially true for analyzing and designing piles in potentially liquefiable soils with lateral spread issues under seismic conditions.This guidance document is intended to assist geotechnical engineers, pile designers, and contractors in analysis, design, and testing of piles and drilled shafts for lateral loads. This document discusses the background of different analytical and testing procedures and presents the recommended methods for analysis, design and testing of piles for lateral loads.Chapter 1 defines the different kinds of lateral loads to which a single pile or pile group may be subjected. This first chapter also presents different types of piles used to resist lateral loads.Chapter 2 discusses geotechnical issues related to lateral pile design such as liquefaction and lateral spreading and other non-seismic issues. Also addressed in Chapter 2 is geotechnical site characterization (as related to lateral loads) in terms of site investigation, in-situ testing, geophysical testing, laboratory testing, and estimation of soil/rock properties.Chapter 3 discusses the background and available analytical methods and tools for the analysis and design of single piles and drilled shafts. Several methods of analyses from closed-form elastic solutions to the finite element/finite difference solutions and their applicability are discussed. Available commercial computer software packages for analyzing single piles and drilled shafts are also presented.Chapter 4 expands the discussion of single piles and drilled shafts into the analysis and design of pile groups. In addition, group effects, resistance of pile caps, results of previous experimental and analytical studies, and available analysis tools and software for pile groups are discussed.Chapter 5 presents the issue of lateral resistance of piles and drilled shafts as discussed in different national and international building and non-building codes. A summary of extensive research on several codes are presented to facilitate the compliance with different codes.Chapter 6 discusses structural design issues of individual piles and drilled shafts such as depth of fixity.Chapter 7 discusses soil structure interaction issues related to kinematic and inertial effects due to seismic loading and available methods of analyses.Chapter 8 discusses and presents the typical procedures for the lateral load testing of piles. This guideline was developed as an aid to the practicing engineer in providing information, direction and commentary on the lateral design of deep foundations. Although all reasonable effort has been made to accurately compile the material and information contained herein, no warranty is made with regard to any such material or information and the Deep Foundation Institute assumes no responsibility for any possible errors or any direct or indirect result of the use of any such material or information. It is not intended that this document address every factor affecting lateral design for every situation. Therefore it is the responsibility of the person utilizing information from this document to confirm that it is appropriate and correct for their situation as well as to understand and properly apply

Jan 1, 2012

Jan 1, 2002

This manual provides basic practical instruction on the inspection of driven piles. It covers the essential components of pile driving, such as the pile driving hammer, hammer accessories, the pile and soil, and frequently encountered test methods in an uncomplicated, yet knowledgeable, and practical manner. Insight is given into the methods of installing the foundation, dealing with the cranes which do the lifting, the hammers which do the driving, the leads that guide the hammer and pile, the compressors which provide the external power when required, and finally prevalent analysis tools and testing instrumentation and procedures which enable you, the Inspector, to do your job. This DFI Inspector's Manual for Pile Foundations will help the Pile Inspector who has limited knowledge of pile foundations. Perhaps this Inspector has been pressed into service at a moments notice; a few helpful hints and suggestions to him are desperately needed and he can look here for the basics. It is also useful for the experienced Pile Inspector as a reference guide. However, this manual is not a detailed check list of every possible scenario and detail which could ever be encountered. There are other sources available which give more detailed descriptions (and should be consulted by the Inspector when appropriate; a list of this additional reference material is provided and suggestions made in appropriate chapters of this text). The current manual is more a brief "textbook overview" with some of the more important aspects given at least some emphasis so that the Inspector has some direction and hopefully helps to produce a safe, yet economical, foundation.

Jan 1, 1997

By Donald A. Bruce

"The Deep Mixing Methods (DMM), in their current forms, have been employed in the United States since 1986, although an earlier version had seen service from 1954. The earlier developments were strongly influenced by practices in the Nordic countries and Japan, while by the late 1980’s several DMM systems had been developed in the U.S. itself. Since then, DMM has continued its evolution, principally via the challenges of a series of large, landmark projects, but also via distinct, significant technological advances. This paper highlights the key points in the history of DMM in the U.S., and provides an overview of the different methods currently in use.IN THE BEGINNINGIt is a common misconception that the history of applications of the Deep Mixing Methods (DMM) in the United States dates from 1986 when SMW Seiko Inc. — a subsidiary of Japan’s Seiko Kogyo Company — was established in the Bay Area. However, the author believes that Intrusion Prepakt Co.’s patented MIP (Mixed in Place) system had been used, albeit sporadically (about 30 projects are recorded), since 1954 (FHWA 2000, 2001). Ironically, by 1961 this single auger method had been extensively used under license in Japan for excavation support and groundwater control — by the Seiko Kogyo Company. By 1972, the original MIP technique had been succeeded by more advanced Japanese methods, involving multiple augers. Intrusion Prepakt have long since become defunct.The first systematic studies of contemporary Deep Mixing Methods in Japan began in 1967 when the Port and Harbor Research Institute of the Ministry of Transportation began laboratory testing using granular and powdered lime for treating soft marine soils. Fundamental studies continued through the early 1970’s, by which time the development of industrial scale equipment was well advanced, having its first application on a marine trial near Haneda Airport. Coincidentally, laboratory and field research also began in 1967 in Sweden (“Swedish Lime Column Method”) for treating soft clays using unslaked lime. Reportedly the progenitor was a Norwegian, Kjeld Paus, who had made observations on fluid lime columns in the U.S. It would seem that developments in Japan and the Nordic countries proceeded independently until 1975 when the technology leaders from each group (Broms and Boman; and Okumura and Terashi, respectively) presented their — very similar — findings at a conference in Bangalore, India. Limited technical exchanges ensued thereafter.Whereas the Nordic developments continued to focus on the use of dry reagents (cement and lime) and relatively light equipment compatible with operating on and in very soft clays and organics, the Japanese progressed into the use of fluid reagents (cement-based grouts) and heavier equipment for both marine and land-based projects. Thus, by 1986, there were a large number of proprietary (wet and dry) DMM systems in Japan, and a rapidly growing market already by then accounting for over 12,000,000 m3 of ground treatment."

Jan 1, 2015

By M. D. Riegel, Brian T. Felber

"Construction of foundation elements in an urban environment is often complicated by multiple constraints such as existing foundations, utility conflicts, maintenance and protection of traffic on high volume roadways, low overhead clearances, and vibration and displacement monitoring to reduce risks of impact to existing facilities. Micropiles are commonly a preferred foundation alternative in an urban setting to mitigate some of these risks. This paper presents examples in which micropiles helped reduce risk in an urban setting on the two subject infrastructure improvement projects. The case studies presented include the Verrazano Narrows Bridge HOV and Bus Ramp Improvements in Brooklyn, NY and the Kosciuszko Bridge Replacement in Queens and Brooklyn, NY. The paper details the micropile design, how risks were mitigated, and the complications to each of these projects associated with the urban setting.INTRODUCTIONThe paper begins with background information about the Verrazano Narrows Bridge HOV and Bus Ramp Improvements Project, followed by background information for the Kosciuszko Bridge Replacement Project. This introductory background information is followed by discussion of the urban site constraints, which controlled the foundation type selection for both projects. In closing, the paper discusses the micropile design process, load testing, and construction.VERRAZANO NARROWS BRIDGE HOV & BUS RAMP IMPROVEMENTS BACKGROUNDProject ScopeThe project consists of two new ramps; one designated for HOV / Bus traffic between Staten Island and the Gowanus Expressway, and one to be utilized for storing the barrier transfer vehicle. Also included is the complete reconstruction of Ramps B and F to accommodate horizontal and vertical alignment clearances from the new ramps, removal of the median of the upper level to add one lane, utilities improvements, stormwater improvements, and miscellaneous structural repairs. The new HOV / Bus Ramp was designed for reversible traffic flow to accommodate the demand of the peak traffic direction by movable barrier.Geotechnical / Foundation Engineering ScopeThe geotechnical work included a desk study review of existing plans, geotechnical reports, and geologic maps. This data was subsequently supplemented with a subsurface exploration program. Once completed, foundation design was performed for 25 proposed bridge substructures. Four existing battered pilesupported foundations and two shallow foundations were evaluated for increased loading. Upon completion of the foundation design, foundation plans, specifications, and an engineer’s estimate were prepared. Foundation installation was observed on a part-time as needed basis."

Jan 1, 2016

By Peter J. Nicholson

The methods of reinforcement to be discussed in this paper are all insitu methods, ones that can be used on the soil structure as it exists in the ground, and do not rely on excavation and replacement of the soil. Current practice in the United States, as well as new ideas and methods, will be discussed as they relate to slope stability, retaining walls, and to other uses such as control of mine or cavity related subsidence and to liquefaction control under existing structures. The method is based on the concept of "nailing" or reinforcing the soil in place, and thereby causing a mass of soil to act as a coherent unit. When performed properly, a true gravity structure can be constructed, one that will remain intact under both horizontal and vertical loadings and that will also resist vibrational and seismic loadings.

Jan 1, 1991

By Nils Schneider, Marc Peters, Stefan Frey, Andrea Fluck

Due to the worldwide population growth, the development of sustainable infrastructure and the exploration of renewable energies plays a key role to handle the rising megacity trends and to limit carbon footprint. Herrenknecht AG is a leading manufacturer of Tunnel Boring machines and has constantly endeavored through its extensive Research and Development programs to address limitations faced by the civil engineering industry as regards to construction equipment capabilities. New mechanized technologies, mainly coming from the tunnelling industry, have been developed by Herrenknecht AG as an efficient alternative to conventional civil engineering, where tailor-made concepts are required to comply with restricted conditions onsite. Very often this innovation led technology capability has meant making construction processes safer due to minimal human intervention and also far more productive due to higher performance as compared to other latest or conventional methods of construction. The rising need for even higher building structures and large-capacity bridges involve the development of innovative deep foundation technologies for on- and offshore operation. Conventional methods like bore piles reach their technical and economic limits under certain conditions. For building shafts and foundations, the mechanized Vertical Shaft Sinking Machine technology (VSM) from Herrenknecht AG is a proven innovation and has now been used in various onshore infrastructure projects worldwide to construct a total of 94 circular shafts in depths of up to 115 meters. It operates below the groundwater level, completely remote-controlled from the surface in a diameter range from 4.5 to 18 meters. Subsequently Herrenknecht noted that Offshore foundations, especially in non-drivable ground conditions such as soft and hard rock (e.g. limestone, sandstone, mudstone, granite etc. or soft soil with high density) and shallow continental shelf (water depth approx. 20-60m), presented construction challenges and equally an opportunity for building high performance equipment. The latter construction conditions usually requires drilled installation methods for applications such as harbor enlargements, bridge foundations and foundations for offshore wind turbines. The Offshore Foundation Drilling technology (OFD®) is Herrenknecht’s latest innovation, incorporating our learnings from the VSM and full-face Tunnel Boring machines, and the OFD® enables a rapid and economical offshore installation in such variable ground and rock conditions. This paper will discuss the technology behind the new mechanized technology of VSM and Herrenknecht’s latest innovation of the OFD® along with their respective application fields in foundations construction. The paper will further present in details, their range of benefits to the construction industry.

Nov 1, 2022

By Thomas L. Vande Voort

The strategic plan for bridge engineering issued by AASHTO in 2005 identified extending the service life and optimizing structural systems of bridges in the United States as two grand challenges in bridge engineering, with the objective of producing safer bridges that have a minimum service life of 75 years and reduced maintenance cost. Material deterioration was identified as one of the primary challenges to achieving the objective of extended life. In substructural applications (e.g., deep foundations), construction materials such as timber, steel, and concrete are subjected to deterioration due to environmental impacts. Using innovative and new materials for foundation applications makes the AASHTO objective of 75 years service life achievable. Ultra High Performance Concrete (UHPC) with compressive strength of 26,000 psi (180 MPa) and excellent durability has been used in superstructural applications but not in geotechnical and substructural applications. This paper explores the possibility of using precast, prestressed UHPC piles in future bridges. An H-shaped UHPC section, which is 10-in. (250-mm) deep with weight similar to that of an HP10×57 steel pile, was designed for constructability and economical reasons. Instrumented UHPC elements were cast to conduct large-scale field tests. In the field, two UHPC piles have been successfully driven in glacial till clay soil and load tested vertically. Test results, durability, drivability, and other material advantages over normal concrete and steel indicate that UHPC piles are a viable alternative to extend the life of bridge structures.

Jan 1, 2008

Jan 1, 1996

By Fabio Santillán, Mario Mauro, Raffaella Granata

"This paper presents the utilization of slurry walls methods for the recent remediation of three high hazard active dams in the United States. Tuttle Creek Dam, located in Manhattan, KS, required seismic retrofit. To this extent, transverse shear walls were installed on the downstream slope using self-hardening slurry (SHS) to reinforce the liquefiable foundation soils. Herbert Hoover Dike, located around Lake Okeechobee, FL, is subject to potential failure because of internal erosion, piping and slope instability at high water levels. The innovative use of the hydromill equipment with SHS allowed the successful construction of the cutoff wall through heterogeneous soils and rock. At Bolivar Dam, located in Bolivar, OH, under-seepage negatively affects the structural stability of the dam, and a partial seepage barrier wall is required through the upstream slope of the dam. In this case, the Contractor selected the plastic concrete seepage barrier, excavated by a combination of clamshell and hydromill equipment. The main features of the three projects are summarized in Table 1. IntroductionTuttle Creek Dam was constructed by the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers (USACE) on the Big Blue River in North-East Kansas in the 1950s for flood control. Tuttle Creek Dam is a zoned earthfill embankment, 7,500 ft long and about 137 ft high with a crest width of 50 ft (Fig. 1). It is located in an area of moderate seismicity associated with an old continental rift zone located just to the east of the dam. The USACE, under the Dam Safety and Assurance Program, determined the need for remediation. Site investigations and geotechnical analyses identified the upper alluvial foundation sands as being susceptible to liquefaction when subjected to the Maximum Credible Earthquake.In 2005, USACE awarded a construction-manager-at-risk/early Contractor involvement contract. The USACE and the Contractor closely cooperated to identify the most effective technologies, materials and configurations to be used in the remediation. The original remediation design required both the upstream and downstream slope stabilization of liquefiable foundation. Results of refined seismic deformation analyses revealed that the stabilization of the downstream slope and toe was needed to protect the downstream seepage control system and to provide assurance that a liquefaction-induced flow slide would not occur (Stark et al., 2012)."

Jan 1, 2016

By C. M. Haberfield

"1 INTRODUCTION Around the world, there is a demand for larger structures, tall buildings and large bridges. While good footing design is important for all structures, it is even more important in the case of large structures. Recent experience with footing design for tall buildings (e.g. Burj Al Alam development and Nakheel Tower in Dubai, the Gate of Kuwait in Kuwait, the City Centre Project in Bahrain and Eureka Tower and Freshwater Place in Melbourne) has shown the benefits of investing in footing planning, design and construction (Haberfield, 2011, Poulos and Bunce, 2007). The footing systems for most of these projects include the use of deep bored piles or barrettes (piles of rectangular cross-section). Many use piled rafts where the piles, while acting to support the load, are primarily used to reduce settlements. A clear understanding of the factors controlling the behaviour of the footing system is needed to enable a good engineering design to be achieved. This starts with a sound understanding of the ground characteristics and individual pile performance, including adequate collection of data and testing. The best footing solution can then be found using recent improvements in data collection and analytical techniques, complex and highly capable computer-based models and the availability of high speed computers. This paper focuses on the axial performance of deep bored piles socketed into rock – both their individual performance and their performance as part of a larger footing system. Recent research and construction practice is discussed. In practically all cases, serviceability conditions control the behaviour of the footings. Methods of establishing the parameters for input into sophisticated computer programs are described. Application of the methods to case studies is included and it is shown that the behaviour of individual piles can be closely predicted. These developments lead to lower construction costs, better constructability and shortened construction time because of the better understanding of footing behaviour. 2 FACTORS AFFECTING PERFORMANCE OF FOOTINGS ON ROCK For a typical pile-supported footing, it is necessary to consider both individual pile, pile group and raft performance. These require consideration of the behaviour of the ground immediately beneath the surface raft or footing, along the pile shaft, and at and beneath the pile toe (Figure 1). Immediately beneath the surface raft or footing, the important factors are strength for bearing capacity and stiffness for settlement and interaction effects. Along the pile shaft, of most interest are strength for bearing, excavatability and stability; stiffness for settlement and interaction effects; geology and permeability for pile stability and, most importantly, pile shaft resistance. At the pile toe all the above factors for the pile shaft are present and in addition the pile end bearing is of interest. Below the toe, stiffness for pile settlement is important to at least a depth of twice the building width."

Jan 1, 1900

By Packer M. L

Residual load development in driven precast piles has been widely researched in recent decades, however, cast-in-situ piles are often falsely assumed to be unaffected by this mechanism. In contrast to driven precast piles, driven cast-in-situ (DCIS) piles require adequate time prior to loading for the concrete hydration and curing processes to occur. The concrete-soil interaction is complex with several processes influencing the strains within the concrete pile after installation. DCIS piles are of particular interest given that residual loads can be developed during both the driving and casting phases. This paper present four instrumented end-bearing DCIS piles in which temperature and strains were monitored from installation, with the objective of identifying the processes contributing to the measured strains prior to testing. Strain gauges at all depths recorded a net compression and compressive strains continued to increase up to the commencement of load testing. Residual strains in the test piles were interpreted to be influenced by temperature (concrete and ambient soil and air temperature), consolidation of soils due to dissipation of excess pore water pressure, and swelling from absorption of groundwater. Several residual load interpretive methods are evaluated with the Siegel and McGillivray (2009) approach being consistent with the skin friction full mobilisation theory of the Unified Design method. The full-scale field tests presented herein provide a unique opportunity to examine DCIS pile behaviour, particularly given the lack of presently available published studies on these pile types.

May 1, 2022

By Larry Rayburn

Augercast piles evolved in the late forties from the process of pressure grouting open holes backfilled with stone. In 1956, a patent was issued for a cast in situ pile by pumping high pressure grout through hollow-stem, continuous flight auger as the auger is gradually withdrawn from the ground. The patent rights expired in 1973 and the use of auger-cast piles greatly expanded with most large deep foundation contractors now installing augercast piles. At one time augercast piles had a bad reputation, partly because of not having a blow count to give some engineers a confidence factor and there were some quality issues. Over the years the quality issues have been eliminated and I am sure the augercast is the most installed pile in private industry and is now being used by some State Agencies.

Jan 1, 2005

By Emad Farouz, Ehab S. Shatnawi

"The increasing demand for small deformations and high-capacity drilled shafts without enlarging drilledshaft diameters has motivated the development and increasing use of a base grouting (BG) technique. This technique has been demonstrated to improve drilled-shaft capacity, especially for shafts tipped into loose cohesionless soils. Nevertheless, there remains considerable uncertainty in predicting the performance of base-grouted shafts, particularly for shafts tipped into cohesive soils. To date, there are only two documented design methods for estimating the axial geotechnical resistance of base-grouted shafts: Tip Capacity Multiplier (TCM) and Axial Capacity Multiplier (ACM) methods. A comprehensive test program was carried out during the design phase of the Wisconsin Zoo Interchange project to help optimize the flyover ramp’s foundation design. The test program included installing and testing one base grouted shaft and one ungrouted shaft at two sites with different ground conditions. Based on test results, it was concluded that prediction of the TCM method is well correlated with the measured values for both cohesive and granular soils; however, both methods tend to underestimate the axial resistance. Results also highlighted the importance of the base-grouting criteria in taking full advantage of the base grouting.INTRODUCTIONBase-grouted drilled shafts (BGDS), also known as post-grouted drilled shafts, consist of conventionally installed drilled shafts that contain access grout tubes placed within the shaft during construction. After installing the drilled shaft and achieving the pre-established concrete strength, grout is injected at the shaft tip through the access grout tubes to improve soil behavior around the drilled-shaft base. The tip grout injection improves the overall shaft capacity and reduces settlement through Densifying the in situ soils, compressing any debris left by the drilling process, preloading the soil beneath the tip to mobilize the shaft base resistance within service limits, increasing the tip area, and increasing the side resistance in the lower portion of the shaft."

Jan 1, 2016

Jan 1, 1987

By Vijayakumar Viramuthu, Martin Heinrich

Tower of Lot L, L1 & M, Kuala Lumpur City Centre when completed would stand 700 m tall. This Mega tall Skyscraper would merely be less than 500 m away from the world tallest Twin Tower, the Petronas Twin Tower. From June 2018 to February 2020 BAUER (MALAYSIA) SDN. BHD. constructed 225 nos bored piles with diameters of 2.0 m and 2.5 m for this tower. To comply with the depth requirement of the initial design and the need to have the pile toe 2.0 m above competent bedrock, the drilling equipment was required to be able to achieve a maximum drilling depth of 150 m. Actual piles constructed on site were deeper than 120 m. These dimensions caused superlative challenges which included but were not limited to controlling the open borehole stability over time with polymer, installing 70 t heavy steel cages and pouring up to 550 m³ concrete continuously in conjunction with installation of 88 t heavy kingposts into workable fresh concrete. The piling works were executed with one BAUER BG 48 and one BG 72, the biggest drilling rig globally available.

May 1, 2022

By Ting Chinsu

Diaphragm wall with tie-back cable is widely used for deep excavation, especially in the area with high density of buildings. This paper presents the measured earth pressure distribution on diaphragm wall during excavation. The earth pressure cells used in field were successfully installed in deep slurry trench by a new type of simplified manipulator. The sizes of the deep excavation are 26m X 36m on plane and 9m in depth. The construction site is located between two multistorey buildings at the main business section of Beijing city. In this paper the field measurements of earth pressure distribution and the analyses based on the comparison between calculation and measurement are very valuable to improve the current calculation method for diaphragm wall design.

Jan 1, 1991

By Janaka J. Kumara, Takashi Kurashina, Yoshiaki Kikuchi, Takahiro Yajima

"The inner frictional resistance of open-ended piles depend heavily on the degree of soil plugging. Many factors including pile diameter, relative density and end conditions of the piles influence the degree of soil plugging. In this paper, the effects of inner sleeves attached at the pile base on the inner frictional resistance are discussed. The experiments were conducted on a medium-dense sandy ground using smallscale model piles. The results suggest that the inner frictional resistance is influenced by sleeve height for 50 mm diameter piles although it is independent for 30 mm diameter piles. The results also indicate that soil plug height is influenced by the sleeve height. The results of the incremental filling ratio (IFR) showed that penetration of non-sleeved piles is closer to unplugged state than the sleeved piles. The results of the IFR also reveal that the degree of soil plugging is affected by the sleeve height for 50 mm diameter piles although the variation is very limited in 30 mm diameter piles. The results on the coefficient of lateral earth pressure suggested that it increases from 1.08 – 1.75 when the sleeve height is increased from 10 – 100 mm for 50 mm diameter piles.INTRODUCTIONPrevious studies have shown that the behaviour of open-ended piles is different from closed-ended piles (Szechy, 1961; Randolph et al., 1979; Paikowsky and Whitman, 1990). Open-ended driven piles are widely used for deep foundations, in particular in offshore deep foundations. Generally, it is accepted that a short open-ended pile produces a smaller bearing capacity than a similar closed-ended pile (Nauroy and Tirant, 1983). However, a long open-ended pile can produce a similar bearing capacity as a closed-ended pile due to a large inner frictional resistance mobilised between the inner pile shaft and inner soil (Lehane and Randolph, 2002). The ultimate bearing capacity of an open-ended pile, Qu consists of three components as given in Eq. 1."

Jan 1, 2017

By Phil Wilkinson, Sam Whitaker

"The installation of large (XL) diameter monopiles offshore typically requires expensive and specialist plant, equipment and vessels. Due to the increasing size (weight, diameter and length) of the foundations, in order to mitigate installation risk, the use of large diameter drills is becoming an increasing requirement.Project developers often try to avoid drilling operations due to the time associated with the drilling process. This restricts projects in terms of location and it also overlooks the additional engineering benefits drilling can bring to monopile foundation design e.g. reduced foundation material and better fatigue design life.By comparing the lessons learned of three milestone overwater drilling projects; methods of maximising drill speed and decreasing drilling process time is established. Particular emphasis is put on pile internal relief drilling in a process known as Drive-Drill-Drive (DDD).The milestone overwater drilling projects are North Hoyle Offshore Wind Farm (OWF) (2003); Flamanville EPR cooling water outlet shaft (2008); and Gwynt-y-Mor OWF (2014).By evaluating the effect of foundation pile diameter on drilling process times, example foundation installation costs are derived and used to show that incorporating drilling as part of a process may not be cost prohibitive to projectsContinued advances in drill technology, and drilling rates of penetration, combined with an integrated approach to foundation design, challenge whether hammering only is always the optimal solution for XL monopile installation."

Jan 1, 2017