Search Documents

By R. Bruce Patterson

The New Tacoma Narrows Bridge is a classic suspension bridge founded on concrete caissons. Caisson construction was complicated by the proximity of the existing bridge piers, only sixty feet away. High capacity plate anchors were used successfully to moor the new caissons in currents as strong as seven knots during construction.

Jan 1, 2013

By Kirk Ellison, Sherif Elfass, Ramin Motamed, Kevin V. Stanton

"The determination of accurate load transfer curves are essential for estimating deep foundation loadsettlement response using t-z style analyses. While recently developed semi-empirical methods from Ashour et al. (2010) and Ashour & Helal (2012) have shown promise in preliminary studies, they have not yet been thoroughly benchmarked against a more widely accepted approach. To address this issue, these recent procedures are implemented in the computer program CGI-DFSAP to predict the results of four Osterberg-cell (O-Cell) load tests. These predictions are compared to outcomes obtained following the recommendations from Reese & O’Neill (1988) for t-z analyses of drilled shafts in sand and clay which are carried out with the program TZ-PILE. Overall, the results suggest that the new approach offers improved accuracy regarding predictions of drilled shaft response to axial loading.INTRODUCTIONThe behavior of axially loaded deep foundations is often analyzed using a technique known as the t-z method. In this method, deep foundation elements are broken into multiple segments which are supported by discrete nonlinear springs to capture the contribution of both side-friction (t-z springs) and end-bearing (Q-z springs). Hence, the t-z and Q-z relationships dictate the predicted load-settlement response. A number of different approaches have been developed to estimate load-transfer curves with some relying solely on empirical data from laboratory and field experiments (i.e. Coyle & Reese, 1966; Vijayvergiya, 1977) and others based mainly on analytical frameworks (i.e. Kraft et al., 1981; Randolph, 1994). Reese & O’Neill (1988) provide recommendations which are widely used for developing t-z and Q-z curves for analyzing drilled shafts. This method is hereafter referred to as Method 1 (M1). It should be noted that these empirically derived relationships are only applicable for problems associated with drilled shafts and are therefore not appropriate for developing load-transfer curves for other types of deep foundations (i.e. driven piles). This is because of the difference in the frictional resistance which can be developed between a circular concrete-soil interface as opposed to that of other materials (i.e. steel) and/or different cross sectional geometries.The M1 load-transfer curves form the basis for the t-z analysis of drilled shafts implemented in the computer program TZ-PILE (Ensoft, 2014). In light of this, TZ-PILE is employed herein as a reference to compare against the capabilities of another method of implementing t-z style analyses. This method is based on a semi-empirical framework for soil behavior developed by Norris (1986) and is implemented using the program CGI-DFSAP (Computers & GeoEngineering Inc., 2011). More information concerning this approach, hereafter referred to as Method 2 (M2), is given in subsequent sections."

Jan 1, 2017

By Fawad S. Niazi

Analysis of deep foundations in terms of axial capacity has been a topic of great interest in the soil-structure interaction problems. Soil behavior is governed by a series of complex stress-strain changes that occur during pile installation and subsequent loading. Owing to the difficulties and uncertainties on the basis of the soil strength-deformation characteristics, one of the most frequently followed design practice is to refer to the formulae correlating directly the pile axial capacity components of unit base resistance (qb) and unit shaft resistance (fp) to the data collected from cone penetration test (CPT), i.e. to the tip stress (qc or more proper qt), sleeve friction (fs), and shoulder pore water pressure (u2). The elementary basis for such formulations has been the idea of considering cone penetrometer as a mini-pile foundation. This has resulted in plethora of correlative relationships in the past over 60 years. Such correlations, although empirical, have been worked out on the basis of load test results from both instrumented and un-instrumented full scale piles and are able to accommodate many important variables. A quick review of the evolution process and development of such design formulations is presented with a view to propose recommendations for future research directions, where the latest version of CPT i.e. seismic piezocone test (SCPTu) can be used to advance from capacitysingularity to the complete axial pile load–displacement (Q–w) response.

Jan 1, 2013

By Dave P. DeClerck

Hardman Construction was faced with the challenge of completing a large earth retention project on a constricted downtown Detroit site, while maintaining a safe and productive worksite. To do so, new technologies using robotic equipment was instituted. HISTORY The historic J.L. Hudson Building (Hudson’s) in Detroit, Michigan was the premier retailer in the city’s downtown district from the 1890s through the 1960s. The massive flagship store sat at 1206 Woodward Avenue, one of the busiest streets in the Detroit area. Hudson’s broke ground in 1891 and would go through twelve renovations and expansions. The last renovations took place in 1946, which gave the building the title of being the largest department store in the world at the time. It spanned an entire city block and boasted 2.2 million square feet of retail space. By the 1970s, Detroit was in an economic downturn. The Hudson’s department store finally closed its doors in 1983. Besides a few working offices, the building sat vacant. The building was unique in that it had four levels underground, offices, mechanical areas, and equipment storage. Following years of neglect, the Hudson’s building was seized by the state and transferred into the hands of the city. The city had it demolished in 1998, (shown in Fig. 1) to construct a new, four- level underground parking garage as well as a potential future above-grade development (Sewlck, 2017). The building was imploded in one of the largest implosions of that time. The building rubble filled the underground rooms and helped to stabilize the exterior concrete walls and keep them from collapsing.

Jan 1, 2019

By Bernard B. Vannoy, Howard W. Gault, Ramesh Bobba

"Treviicos-Soletanche Joint Venture (JV) and the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) have installed a 3800-foot long, 275-foot deep and minimum 2-foot wide secant pile barrier wall at Wolf Creek Dam in Jamestown, KY. This paper describes the methodology employed by the JV and USACE to evaluate the overlap, thickness, and position of the barrier wall. It addresses the contractual requirements, positional uncertainty, and evaluation procedures.These procedures evolved over the course of the project as various issues were identified and procedures developed to evaluate these issues. During the project, it became clear that the JV and USACE could ascertain that the wall thickness and overlap requirements could be met if the overlap based upon Koden data was at least 0.7’ in the left-right direction. For a small number of piles with overlaps between 0.5’ and 0.7’, the piles are contractually compliant yet contain a minor degree of uncertainty in the overlap. Initially, the USACE assumption was that the amount of uncertainty of verticality measurements would require more than a 1-foot measured overlap in the left-right direction to confirm an actual, contractual 6-inch overlap. With time and experience, the limit of measured overlap was reduced in accordance with greater understanding of the equipment capabilities and tolerances. Other lessons learned include the need for Quality Control/Assurance personnel to collect data at the same starting point for every pile.For every pile the JV and USACE compared analog and digital data to provide confidence that the correct digital data was used for overlap calculations. Perhaps the most important lesson learned was the importance of the JV and USACE working together and sharing all data. Overlap analysis was performed by the JV’s Barrier Wall Specialist and a small number of USACE personnel. This resulted in a high level of experience and expertise within a small group.IntroductionThe Treviicos-Soletanche Joint Venture (JV) and the US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) have installed a 3800-foot long, 275-foot deep, and minimum 2-foot wide secant pile barrier wall at Wolf Creek Dam in Jamestown, KY. The wall was installed through a 6-foot wide Protective Concrete Embankment Wall (PCEW) which was installed two feet into rock. The PCEW protects the embankment from erosion of drilling fluids during subsequent operations. Below the PCEW the piles were installed to a specified elevation (staggered at 475’ and 473’ below the 748.2’ work platform). The Ordovician limestone and shale bedrock is flat lying with few vertical fractures. These conditions facilitate the advancement of pilot holes with very low deviations (with considerable credit to the JV’s drillers and steering engineers). The pilot holes were spaced on 31.5-inch and 35-inch spacing. Subsequent enlargement of the pilot holes to 50’ resulted in a continuous wall. This paper addresses the requirements and procedures to assure that the wall was as wide, deep and continuous as specified."

Jan 1, 2015

By Robert Bachus, Jamey Rosen, Fabio Santillan, Georgette Hlepas

"A seepage barrier of length 4,800 feet and maximum depth 144 feet is being installed at Bolivar Dam in Ohio. This project is owned by the United States Army Corps of Engineers and contracted to Treviicos South. Many data types are being collected, synthesized and analyzed on a nearly real-time basis to monitor and track dam construction using several technologies including an enterprise relational database and web-based Geographical Information Systems. These data are being collected by both the owner and contractor and managed by the data subcontractor, Geosyntec Consultants. Each of the owner and contractor brings their own list of goals and desires to the data management program, and the subcontractor’s duty is to address these goals with minimal compromise by either party. The owner requires comprehensive, transparent and timely access to data in both “executive summary” and detailed formats. The contractor requires immediate analysis of disparate data to determine (for example) if a given excavation meets the specified tolerance and continuity requirements. This paper will describe the tools and methods used to store, analyze and visualize these data and discuss how each party’s needs were met in a collaborative system.INTRODUCTIONThe 4,800 foot long seepage barrier under construction at Bolivar Dam requires the collection, organization, and sharing of several types of data. These data include drawings and borehole logs that existed prior to construction; data collected during construction (seepage barrier panel composition and verticality data, slurry quality control and quality assurance data, grouting records, etc.); and instrumentation data collected and reviewed throughout and beyond construction. Each of these data streams require input and review from the Owner (United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), responsible for quality assurance and the ultimate consumer of the data), the Contractor (Treviicos South, responsible for the construction of the seepage barrier, its quality control and analysis of the data per the Contract Specifications), and the Data Management Subcontractor (Geosyntec Consultants, responsible for organizing and presenting the data to meet the needs of the Owner and Contractor). While all parties work with the same common goal, i.e.: producing a high quality product in an efficient manner making dam safety paramount during construction, and require immediate and comprehensive access to these data, the needs and desires of the parties differ. The challenge presented to the Data Management Subcontractor is to synthesize these data into a series of tools and reports that meet each of these needs."

Jan 1, 2017

By Mohammad Ali Rowshanzamir, Mehdi Aghayarzadeh

"This article is an effort to improve our understanding of the performance of geogrid retaining structures (GRS) through numerical analyses. The numerical modeling utilized a commercially available finite difference program, FLAC3D. In this context an extensive parametric study has been carried out on two different GRS walls (vertical reinforced block and inclined reinforced block) to investigate the influence of internal design factors such as soil strength properties and reinforcement stiffness on the performance of these walls. The main purposes of the parametric study were to (1) investigate the sensitivity of the modeling results to the input material properties, (2) examine the influence of the internal design factors on the performance of GRS retaining structures, and (3) improve the internal design of GRS walls on the basis of the working stress information obtained from the parametric study. Based on the analyses results, it was revealed that GRS walls with oblique reinforcement and reinforced block (rotated against natural backfill) have much better performance in terms of reduction in the stresses and strains of reinforcing elements as well as decrease in the wall lateral and vertical displacements in comparison with vertical reinforced block (conventional wall). For example, with 12° inclination of the wall reinforced block there was 50% reduction in the backfill settlement. Also increasing the reinforcement stiffness amount from 10MPa to 50MPa decreases the wall face displacement more than 50% in both GRS walls.INTRODUCTIONOver the past few decades, Geosynthetic- Reinforced Soil (GRS), a soil mass reinforced by geosynthetic layers to restrain the soil lateral deformations, has been employed in the construction of many types of earth structures, including retaining walls, embankments, slopes and bridge abutments. In fact GRS structures are typically more flexible (hence more tolerant to differential settlement), more adaptable to low quality backfill, easier to construct, require less over-excavation, and more economical. Nevertheless, there is a need for an accurate design tool that can predict the performance of GRS structures under working stress conditions and can predict their failure loads as well.Many studies have been published on the performance of the soil reinforced walls such as Isabel et al., 1996; Bathurst et al., 2000; Kazimierowicz-Frankowska, 2005; Nernheim and Bathurst, 2008; Chen and Chiu, 2008 Correia et al., 2012; Erlich et al. 2012. Several numerical studies have also been made throgh finite elements and finite difference techniques on reinforced soil retaining walls to analyze the wall deformations (e.g. Hatami et al. 2001& 2006, Liu and Won 2009, and Abdelouhab et al. 2011). A limited laboratory research has been reported indicating of improving effect of tilting face on GRW performance (Chen and Chiu, 2008). However no major numerical study was found on the effects of face or reinforcement tilting."

Jan 1, 2017

By Ezra Ballinger, Matthew R. Glisson

Located in downtown Fargo, North Dakota, the Block 9 Redevelopment project site contains highly- compressible soils in the upper 100 feet with groundwater about 10 to 15 feet below the existing ground surface. The owner prohibited using driven piles to avoid disturbing neighbors of the project and historically, drilled shafts are used in Fargo as a reduced noise and vibration alternative to driven piles. However, developments over the last 20 to 30 years in drilling equipment, load testing and integrity testing resulted in the project team identifying augered cast-in-place piles as a suitable alternative for this project. To reduce the risks associated with using a relatively unproven foundation system in the area, the project team used the design-build delivery method for foundation design and construction. The team also specified compression load testing and higher-than-normal integrity testing. A successful bi-directional load test validated the design parameters for the augered cast-in-place pile while thermal integrity profiling gave the team confidence that these piles would perform similarly to the test pile. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Block 9 Redevelopment project goal was to turn an existing, at-grade parking lot in downtown Fargo, North Dakota into a public outdoor plaza, a mixed-use building and a parking ramp. The project provides new offices, retail spaces, a hotel, a restaurant and private apartments. Situated in the southeast quadrant at the intersection of Broadway and 3rd Avenue North, the project site wraps around a bank building that was to remain. According to aerial photographs, the eastern portion of the site contained a public parking ramp that was constructed between 1952 and 1976, and subsequently demolished between 2009 and 2010. The western portion of the site had some combination of buildings and surface parking visible in aerial photographs taken between 1952 and 1979. Since 1984, aerial photographs show the western portion of the site being entirely surface parking. The redevelopment included the construction of three structures: the Tower, the Podium and the Parking Ramp, as shown in Fig. 1. With plan dimensions of roughly 100 feet by 100 feet, the Tower has 1 level of below-grade parking and 19 above-grade levels rising to a height of about 230 feet above grade. The Tower contains eight levels of commercial office space, four levels of hotel, six levels of residences and a mechanical level. This configuration resulted in column service loads ranging between 435 and 2,685 kips. The Tower core area has a total service load of about 30,000 kips.

Jan 1, 2019

By Michael Kynett, Francke Walberg, Richard Millet, Khaled Chowdhury, Mary Perlea

"Cutoff walls are the most common seepage improvement measure for levee flood control projects throughout California’s Central Valley. Cutoff walls are widely used because they can be implemented within an existing right of way in either heavily urbanized areas with limited access, or in high-value crop agricultural areas. The most commonly used seepage cutoff wall types are soil-bentonite (SB), soilcement- bentonite (SCB), and cement-bentonite (CB). Contract values for cutoff wall rehabilitation projects in the Central Valley range from several millions of dollars to hundreds of millions of dollars, and play a significant role in the reduction of flood risk in urban and rural areas. However, recentlycompleted construction of several levee improvement projects has shown limitations and inconsistencies among the commonly used technical specifications for construction of seepage cutoff walls. These limitations were evaluated by practicing engineers involved in different stages of cutoff wall design and construction. This paper describes the specification areas that typically generate design and construction issues. Recommended improvements to specifications are suggested to address these issues. The paper’s topics include: the applicability of the different types of cutoff wall materials and construction methods, quality control testing requirements, backfill gradation requirements, mixing procedures, and settlement criteria for backfill.INTRODUCTIONFlood control projects on the Sacramento and San Joaquin rivers in the Central Valley region of Northern California consist of a large system of reservoirs, bypasses, and levees. The thousands of miles of levees within the system were largely constructed and raised by local entities as need arose; this construction occurred prior to the development of modern design and construction techniques. The majority of these levees were initially constructed to protect land for agricultural development; however, a significant portion of these areas have become or will soon be urbanized. This urbanization has historically occurred in locations right up to the levee footprint. This expedient form of historical levee construction, when combined with adverse riverine geomorphology, urban development, and productive agricultural regions, has led to a levee systems with severe seepage performance issues in a real-estate-constrained setting."

Jan 1, 2015

By Hugo Meggitt, Damian R. Siebert, Wystan Carswell

Excavation-induced ground movements are a critical component in the design and construction of deep excavations in urban settings due to the potential adverse effects on adjacent structures and infrastructure. Ground movements are influenced by soil stratigraphy, soil properties, adjacent structures, and construction means and methods. The use of empirical relationships, computer models, and reliance on experience with similar excavations in similar soil conditions often provides a basis for predicting excavation-induced ground movements. In this paper, data from 21 deep excavations approximately 20 ft to 75 ft deep supported by concrete diaphragm “slurry” walls in the Greater Boston area are compared to published literature, considering how different foundation systems (e.g. shallow foundations, caissons, and piles) of abutting structures have been affected by adjacent excavations. The influence of construction method (conventional vs. top-down) on adjacent foundation movements indicate that top-down construction typically results in smaller foundation movements. INTRODUCTION Estimation of ground movements due to excavation is a challenging endeavor, even with complex three- dimensional finite element modeling and high-order constitutive models that are increasingly available in modern engineering practice. Aside from the expense of the soil exploration and testing used to inform these higher-order models, the challenges of modeling past stress history, adjacent structures, and the groundwater conditions during excavation require not only large investments of time during design but also validation from past experience (to avoid a “garbage in, garbage out” paradigm). While site conditions such as soil stratigraphy, soil properties, groundwater conditions, and as-built conditions of adjacent structures can be obtained, measured, and estimated, the effects that means and methods of construction have on ground movements are difficult to quantify. During early phase design, assessments of predicted ground movement are unable to account for all aspects of project construction, nor is it cost-efficient to fully design an excavation while project parameters such as site size and excavation depth are under consideration by the design team. While construction is in progress, benchmarking support of excavation performance and associated ground movements in the context of successfully completed projects allows for a more nuanced view of system performance and provides the opportunity for more informed decision-making (if required) as construction proceeds. For these reasons, the use of empirical relationships and the collection of historical support of excavation performance holds high value for the practicing geotechnical engineer at all phases of the project.

Jan 1, 2019

By Seth Robertson, Daniel Belardo, Travis Coleman

Thermal Integrity Profiling (TIP) is a non-destructive method used to evaluate drilled deep foundation integrity. This integrity testing method is specified more frequently, and is becoming an industry standard in the transportation and private construction sectors. This testing method utilizes heat generated during the concrete/grout curing process to assess deep foundation integrity over the evaluated length. With compilation of the measured temperature versus time and installation records, a model of the Effective Average Radius versus measurement depth is generated. The generated effective shaft model is highly dependent on specific construction details, subjective modeling parameters, and proper interpretation of concrete/soil heat dissipation characteristics. Key components of the TIP analysis include both qualitative and quantitative assessments. Qualitatively, variations or sharp reductions in temperature profiles may indicate potential anomalous regions. Quantitatively, a correlation is established between measured temperatures and estimated Effective Radii for subsequent integrity evaluation. Best practices in processing the TIP measurements are presented, including selecting the optimal time for analysis, normalizing the thermal profile, and proper interpretation of potential anomalous regions. Recommendations for implementing mitigation efforts and interpretation of the TIP results are presented.

Sep 8, 2021

By Shyam Chengalath, Johan Jeansson, Magnus Hörman

Down-The-Hole (DTH) drilling usually uses compressed air to power the hammer. However, there are now DTH hammers on the market which instead of compressed air use high pressure water to power the hammer. There are several benefits with using water DTH compared to air DTH, which are discussed in more detail in this paper. From a physics point of view many of the benefits arise from the fact that water is an incompressible media and air is not. Energy consumption is roughly a quarter compared to air, resulting in lower carbon emission and a lower energy bill. In the case of water DTH the water leaving the drill bit in the hole is at a low velocity and ambient pressure. However, with air DTH the air leaving the drill bit in the hole is at a high velocity and high pressure. This means that the risk of damaging surrounding structures in sensitive areas such as urban environments and dams, is greatly reduced with water DTH. In this paper two cases where water DTH is used in jet-grouting applications are discussed in detail. As these cases show there is a clear improvement in productivity when using water DTH hammers.

Sep 1, 2022

By Silas C. Nichols, Jennifer E. Nicks

"Limit states design (LSD), or load and resistance factor design (LRFD), is a method to account for the uncertainty in loads and resistance through a reliability calibration that requires all applicable limit states (strength, service and extreme) to be checked during foundation design. LRFD has been in use internationally for several decades; however it wasn’t until recently that engineers working on highway projects were required to use the method for the design of highway bridges and other appurtenances. Although the bridge community has been using a form of limit states design for structural components since the early 1970s, the design of foundations for bridges, walls and other geotechnical features had long been performed using allowable stress design (ASD), whereby all uncertainty in loads and material resistance is combined in a single factor of safety. While the move to LRFD was viewed as a more rational approach for the design of bridges and structures, the transition to its use for geotechnical engineering has been met by many with confusion and difficulties in application. This article will revisit the history of transition from ASD to LRFD for geotechnical engineering, summarize the status of the transition and issues with its use, and briefly discuss some emerging research opportunities for improving and advancing the design platform.Background and HistoryUntil about a decade ago, foundations and substructures for bridges were traditionally designed using ASD, while the superstructure was designed using load factor design (LFD), a precursor to LRFD that incorporated factored design loads but no risk assessment. This combination led to uncertain and incompatible safety margins in design for the various bridge components. In 1986, the American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Subcommittee on Bridges and Structures (SCOBS) concluded that the standard bridge specifications in use at the time for U.S. transportation projects had significant inconsistencies and gaps, wasn’t up to date with emerging technology and that the development of new specifications was warranted. The proposed solution by the subcommittee was to transition to a more coherent method of design where applicable failure and serviceability conditions could be evaluated considering the uncertainties associated with loads and resistance."

Jan 1, 2015

By M. Hesham El Naggar, Tony Sangiuliano, Alper Turan

"Bridge abutments supported on pile foundations are often constructed over weak and compressible soils. The consolidation settlements induced by the embankment loads are known to result in downdrag and lateral forces on the piles supporting the bridge abutments. The performance of a pile group including inclined piles embedded in consolidating soils was investigated numerically considering surcharge loads from approach embankment construction. A two-dimensional numerical model was constructed using commercial finite element software PLAXIS and calibrated against field measurements of the abutment movements observed on Brookdale Avenue Underpass Structure located on the Macdonald-Cartier Freeway in Ontario between Cornwall and the Quebec border. The soft soil model (SSM) was used to simulate the constitutive behavior of the compressible soil deposit. The SSM model parameters were determined based on the laboratory tests. Subsequently, time dependant development of downdrag effects was comparatively evaluated for vertical and inclined single piles as well as a pile group that included both vertical and inclined piles.Results showed that drag loads increased with the consolidation time. However, majority of accumulation of drag loads took place within first 120 days after installation of piles. The results also indicated that the shear forces and bending moments are controlled by the lateral spreading of foundation soil and their accumulation is proportional to consolidation time. The large axial strains caused by large downdrag forces are considered to have yielded the piles and this is a possible reason for unusual abutment movements. The results presented in this study are considered to be of interest to researchers and practitioners.1. IntroductionDeep foundation units are widely used for supporting bridge piers and abutments, where weaker surficial soils preclude shallow foundations. Particularly in Ontario, semi-integral and integral abutment bridges are typically supported on end-bearing steel driven piles. The construction of approach embankments over weaker, compressible soils results in significant vertical and lateral soil movements, which induce additional loads on piles supporting the abutments. In order to minimize such effects, preloading and surcharging are commonly employed approaches to avoid unanticipated settlements prior to the installation of piles. Other alternatives such as aggregate pier supported approach embankment are also being studied as the schedule restrictions imposed by preloading and surcharging becomes cost prohibitive (Turan et al. 2012)."

Jan 1, 2015

By Howard A. Perko, Melinda J. Hummel

"Hydraulically jacked piles, herein referred to as jacked piles, are commonly used for underpinning existing structures to arrest settlement or augment an existing foundation for higher loads. They consist of steel pipe segments coupled together and jacked into the ground using a hydraulic ram. Pipe sections can vary in size from 3"" diameter to 18"" diameter or larger. Jacking resistance is typically provided by dead loads of existing structures. This type of piling system has been utilized for foundation underpinning, repair, and augmentation for more than 120 years, yet little has been published on the capacity, installation standards, and reliability of these systems. Pile load tests from a number of projects are presented and analysed. The data show that previous methods of jacked pile capacity and depth prediction are crude at best. Empirical relationships between capacity, depth, soil type, and standard penetration resistance blow count contain a high degree of scatter. Scatter in the data indicate capacity prediction for jacked piles needs further research and refinement.INTRODUCTIONPush pier, resistance pile, steel pier, and jacked pile are some of the names often applied to hydraulically jacked piles used for underpinning. The term ‘jacked pile’ is more common in building codes and will be used herein. Although jacked piles can be installed for new construction, this paper is focused on piles used for support of existing structures.Jacked piles consist of short segments of pipe or structural steel tube that are coupled together and forced into the ground using a hydraulic ram fastened to or beneath a footing, stem wall, or grade beam of an existing structure. In this way, the weight of the structure provides the resistance necessary to force the pile into the ground. A factor of safety can be achieved in design by redundancy, which is consecutively installing more than one jacked pile to support the same portion of foundation. Installing jacked piles consecutively using the same dead load and then releasing the load after each pile installation allows one to continue adding piles to the same general area until a total aggregate capacity is achieved to account for anticipated dead plus live loads and a desired factor of safety for that area.An engineering schematic of an example jacked pile connected to a footing foundation is shown in Figure 1. Modern jacked piles typically incorporate a steel bracket. There are many sizes and styles of brackets available. Some categories include plate brackets that bolt to the outside of an existing foundation wall, wide and narrow angle brackets that extend under existing footings, pin brackets for attachment to structural steel, and reverse angle brackets for attachment to footing and wall. Table 1 lists example brackets and their benefits."

Jan 1, 2017

By Bastian Hoffmann, Christian Moormann

The paper presents results of an experimental study on the axial load bearing behavior of vibratory driven full displacement piles in comparison with impact driven and cyclic quasi-static installed piles in dense sand. The test setup and the measurement devices used to this end are explained. Subsequently, the results of the axial loading like load settlement curves are shown and the impact of the installation method is interpreted. The results presented in this work are mainly based on three installation methods: test series one investigates axial behavior of vibratory driven piles, test series two describe the same cyclic pile installation process but without dynamic influence wherein a special test setup developed to install the piles cyclic quasi-static in the soil was used. A third test series carried out using the conventional impact pile driving method served the purpose of not only comparing the results against vibratory driving, but also aided in isolating the effects of dynamics inherent to the vibratory driving process.

May 1, 2022

By K. Madhusudan Reddy

"Pile response under combined uplift and lateral load is very important and it is imperative to evaluate the effect of combined loading and only few studies were reported on pile behavior under combined uplift and lateral loads. Model pile made-up of aluminum having an outer and inner diameter of 25.4 mm and 19.4 mm respectively is used. Dimensions of the model steel tank are fixed as 1.0 m x1.0 m x 1.2 m (depth) to avoid the boundary effects under combined lateral and uplift loads. Experiments were carried out on single piles at isolated uplift, isolated lateral loading and combined lateral and uplift loading, embedded in sandy soil. Results indicate that load–deflection behavior is nonlinear for isolated uplift and lateral load tests as well as in case of combined loadings. It is also observed that the behavior of piles under isolated loadings is substantially different when compared to combined loading.INTRODUCTIONPile foundations are generally used to support compressive loads from superstructures. Some structures, like transmission towers, mooring systems for ocean surface or submerged platforms, tall chimneys, jetty structures, etc. are constructed on pile foundations, which have to resist large lateral and uplift loads and moments. The various loads (compressive, lateral and uplift) and moments act on the piles simultaneously rather than isolated manner. There are well-established theoretical methods present to evaluate the pile behaviour under different isolated loadings namely, verticalcompressive, vertical-uplift and lateral (Poulos and Davis, 1980), but there are very limited studies focused on pile behaviour under combined loadings. Though there is good number of studies reported on pile behaviour under combined compressive-lateral and compressive-uplift loadings (Ramasamy, 1974; Jain et al. 1987; Zhang and Small, 1999; Dash and Pise, 2003; Karthigeyan et al. 2006 & 2007; , there are only very few studies reported on pile behaviour under combined uplift and lateral loads. Darr et al. (1990) described an approach to a rational solution of the interaction of pile to combined uplift and lateral loads based on analytical and experimental studies. Influence of cyclic loading was also considered. Narasimha Rao and Prasad (1993) investigated the uplift behaviour of pile anchors subjected to lateral cyclic loading. There were many onshore and offshore situations where lateral cyclic loading may affect both the pullout and lateral loading capacity of pile anchors. Jetty and wharf structures are usually subjected to lateral forces from wave and wind action. If these cyclic lateral loads are acting on the supporting piles, the resulting movement of the upper part of the embedded length of pile may reduce the skin friction. This progressive deterioration in pullout resistance may not be reflected by a pullout test made soon after the installation. Hence, Tomlinson and Woodward (2008) pointed out that a generous safety factor on the ultimate pullout load should be adopted for piles in such situations. Mroueh and Shahrour (2007, 2008) presented a threedimensional finite element analysis of the response of battered piles to the combined lateral and vertical pullout loads. Nevertheless, the model is not validated well due to lack of good experimental data based on rigorous experiments. Thus there is a scope for investigating the effect of lateral load on pile behaviour under uplift load and vice versa based on carefully designed experiments, which is main focus of the present investigation."

Jan 1, 2017

"The Metropolitan St. Louis Sewer District (MSD) in Missouri, the country’s fourth largest sewer system, is upgrading its storm and wastewater infrastructure in a 23-yearlong, $4.7 billion initiative called “Project Clear.” Historically, during times of intense precipitation, the current sewer system becomes overwhelmed. The primary goals of this project are to improve water quality and to alleviate many wastewater concerns in the St. Louis region by planning, designing and building community rainscaping, system improvements and an ambitious program of maintenance and repair.Part of the system renovation has focused on constructing underground tunnels for storm water storage, permitting controlled drainage of runoff, and preventing overflows into rivers and streams. Construction plans for these storage tunnels called for eight vertical intake and ventilation shafts to be bored from the ground surface. These shafts will then be intercepted in the bedrock at a depth of about 150 ft (45.7 m) during the excavation of the 3,000 ft (915 m) long underground tunnel that will be about 28 ft (8.5 m) in diameter. According to John Deeken , a geotechnical engineer with Black & Veatch Corp. and construction manager for the Maline Creek project, the drilling and blasting technique for creating the shafts was ruled out because the project was located in a residential neighborhood. “We could have used rock coring or a cutter head, but the drop shaft for this project is constructed within 10 ft (3.05 m) of an existing 108 in (274 cm) diameter sewer main,” Deeken said. “We had to take precautions to avoid damage to it.”A primary planning mandate of all MSD Project Clear phases requires minimized impact on traffic and residents. The canister drilling method enabled work to be confined to the median of a residential boulevard running perpendicular to the side street without detouring traffic. In addition, canister drilling offered a highly-precise means to create the shafts, leaving a smooth-sided borehole, right on target. Ground conditions in this 132 in (3.35 m) diameter intake shaft were wet due to the high groundwater levels and close proximity to the Mississippi River. “They’ve been finding shale in 2 to 6 ft (0.6 to 1.8 m) layers between weathered layers of Mississippian limestone,” said Dan Spiecher, technician at Center Rock (CRI). “The 2 ft (0.6 m) layers we can punch through. The 6 ft (1.8 m) layers slow us down.”"

Jan 1, 2017

By Kevin P. Gleckler, Steven C. Highfill

"Escalators to access platforms for the Second Avenue Subway Station at 72nd Street in Manhattan are to be installed in the basement of an existing 19-Story residential building. The escalators, which extend below the existing building foundations, require excavation of an inclined rock cavern up to 80-feet deep. Underpinning of columns within the 19-story building as well as a stone masonry party wall and columns for an adjacent 5-story building was completed prior to excavation of the rock cavern to ensure structural stability.This paper will discuss the analysis and design of the underpinning system, the installation and load transfer procedures and the cavern excavation immediately below. The underpinning system was subject to very strict deformation limits and to electronic monitoring prior to and throughout the load transfer and construction process. Key details such as the load transfer mechanism between the reinforced concrete column and the temporary structural steel underpinning frame will be discussed. The challenging rock excavation process will be described which utilized conventional equipment and pattern drilling with Damite rock splitting mortar.INTRODUCTIONPhase 1 of the Second Avenue Subway is being built by MTA Capital Construction (MTACC) to improve subway service on the east side of Manhattan. Entrance 1 for the 72nd Street Station of the Second Avenue Subway is located on the east side of 2nd Avenue at the corner of E 69th Street in New York City. Access to the station mezzanine, approximately 80-feet below grade, is designed to be routed through the basement of an existing 19-story residential building. From the sidewalk, stairs and escalators within the width of sidewalk connect the riding public to a basement level mezzanine, which turns into the building at roughly 16 feet below grade (Fig. 1). Riders then connect to three long escalators to arrive at the station mezzanine. The escalators are to be installed within an inclined and arched cast-in-place (CIP) concrete lined rock cavern (Fig. 2). Construction of both the entrance into the basement and the escalator cavern require the transfer of columns within the 19-story building. Excavation of the escalator cavern also impacts the foundation support for columns and a load bearing party wall for the 5-story residential building immediately to the north. Two stages of load transfer were used at each location. The Stage 1 transfer used a temporary underpinning system to unload the current structure which allowed for construction of the permanent transfer girders. Stage 2 transferred the load from the temporary system to the permanent transfer girders."

Jan 1, 2016

By Kevin Green, Iván Contreras, Aaron Grosser, Jon Ausdemore, Rachel Leier, Amr Ragy

"Construction of a new tailings dam was required to increase tailings storage capacity at a trona mine near Green River, Wyoming. The new dam was founded on overburden soils underlain by both fractured and competent bedrock. The stored tailings and water had high salt content, resulting in salty seepage water. To reduce the impact of the salty water on groundwater and the Green River, the design of the new tailings dam included a 257,260 SF (23,900 m2) seepage cutoff extending into competent rock.An extensive subsurface characterization was performed prior to completing the design and suitable seepage cutoff methods were evaluated. The approach selected was a full replacement panel using hydromill and clamshell for construction and self-hardening slurry (SHS) for the wall material. Laboratory testing was performed and ongoing monitoring has continued to evaluate the hydraulic conductivity and seepage cutoff performance in the briny environment.The paper includes project background, the collaborative approach and outcomes of the QA/QC program, and the monitoring results for the seepage cutoff wall.PROJECT BACKGROUNDCiner Wyoming, LLC (formerly OCI Wyoming, LLC) owns and operates the Big Island Mine facility near Green River, Wyoming. This underground trona mine has produced soda ash since 1962. The Greater Green River Basin covers much of southwestern Wyoming and extends into northeastern Utah and northwestern Colorado. The Ciner facility is located in the Green River Basin, which is part of the Wyoming Basin physiographic province. The Green River runs to the west and the south of the Ciner facility.Beginning in the early 1990s, Ciner primarily disposed tailings underground in mined-out panels. However, in recent years, underground storage has become limited and some disposal has transitioned to the ground surface. Long-term planning revealed a need to expand Ciner’s surface tailings disposal capabilities. Pond 2, a previously permitted disposal area, was identified as the most viable location for a storage facility. The Pond 2 site is directly north of the Ciner plant facilities, northwest of the active Upper Delta tailings storage facility, and northeast of the Green River (Fig 1)."

Jan 1, 2016