Search Documents

By Greg Canivan, Bernie Hertlein, Les Chernauskas, Joram Amir, Garland Likins, E. Anna Sellountou, Tim Kovacs, Peter Kandaris

Nondestructive testing of drilled shaft foundations via Crosshole Sonic Logging (CSL) is often performed as part of the quality assurance process to assess the soundness of concrete. The intent of CSL testing is to identify irregularities such as soil intrusion, necking, soft bottom, segregation, voids and other defects that could result in poor structural performance of the foundation. Over time, CSL rating criteria based on first arrival time and relative energy have incorrectly evolved to often be the sole means of determining the acceptability of a shaft. Some of these criteria have found their way into regulatory agency specifications, with acceptance values often differing from agency to agency.The purpose of this document is to review the state of the practice (including experience gained over the past 20 years), propose improved CSL rating criteria and make recommendations for additional assessment, as well as educate the industry on the proper interpretation of CSL test. CSL test results alone should not be the sole means of rejecting or accepting a shaft. A task force of industry exerts was formed to review the existing CSL rating criteria and propose improvements where appropriate. The recommendations presented herein are the consensus of the task force, which believes that they should be incorporated into future criteria, codes and specifications. This paper was produced as a joint effort between the Codes and Standards Committee, the Drilled Shafts Committee and Testing and Evaluation Committee. A task force was authorized under Testing and Evaluation Committee. The task force contributed their expertise in web-based discussions often every two weeks over a period of three years. Interested participants were invited to participate at any time. The document had two rounds of broad industry review, two rounds of DFI Technical Advisory Committee reviews, and a Public Comments process. All comments were considered in producing the final document.

Jan 1, 2019

By Md. Nafiul Haque, Murad Y. Abu-Farsakh, Chris Nickel

"This paper presents the results from a pile load testing program for a bridge construction project in Louisiana. The testing includes two 54-inch open-ended spun cast concrete cylinder piles (OECP), one 30-inch open-ended steel pile (OESP), and two (30-inch and 16-inch) square prestressed concrete (PSC) piles driven at two locations with very similar soil conditions. All the test piles were instrumented with vibrating wire strain gauges to measure the load distribution along the length of the test piles and the skin friction and the end bearing were derived from strain gauge measurements. High strain dynamic load tests (HSDLT) were performed on all test piles at different times after pile installations to quantify the amount of setup with time. Static load tests were also performed on the PSC and open-ended steel piles. Due to expected large pile capacities, the statnamic test method was used on the two open-ended cylinder piles. The pile capacities of these piles were evaluated using various CPT methods (such as Schmertmann, De Ruiter and Beringen, LCPC, COFS methods). The result showed that all the methods can estimate the skin friction with good accuracy; but not the end-bearing capacity. Setup was observed for all the piles, which was mainly attributed to increase in skin frictions. The setup rate parameters “A” [The “A” parameter is defined as the rate of increase of pile capacity ratio (Rt/Rto) per log cycle of elapsed time] were back-calculated for all the test piles and the values were between 0.31 and 0.41.INTRODUCTIONDue to greater efficiency (capacity to weight ratio) of the pipe piles, open-ended piles are a viable option to solid piles. However, the behavior of open-ended piles is more complicated compared to the close-ended piles owing to possible formation of “soil plug” inside the open-ended pile. Many researchers have analyzed the behavior of both types of piles for different purposes; however, very few studies in the literature offer the side-by-side comparison of the close-ended and open-ended piles."

Jan 1, 2017

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

By Bradley J. Fleming

Although soil improvement and its application to deep foundations is gaining popularity in the engineering community, this technique is not widely used in high seismic regions due to lack of fundamental understanding of both the behavior of improved soils under high-strain cyclic loading and the interactions between the pile, improved soil, and unimproved soil. This paper describes part of an ongoing Network for Earthquake Engineering Simulation (NEES) project, where two identical full-scale steel pipe piles were driven at a soft clay site in Oklahoma. The soil surrounding one of these piles was improved using the cement deep soil mixing technique in order to enhance its lateral load behavior. Both piles were tested for seismic resistance using dynamic and quasi-static loading. The pile in unimproved soil provided larger displacements with limited lateral force resistance. This pile was subjected to lateral displacements of up to 400 mm, but experienced minimum inelastic actions. On the other hand, the pile in improved soil reached its lateral capacity at a displacement of 100 mm, at which point the critical region at the base of the pile just above the improved ground experienced buckling and fractured due to low cycle fatigue. Compared to the pile in unimproved soil, the improved ground increased the system strength by 42%. Although the soil was improved over 2900 mm, the effective improvement depth was approximately 1300 mm below the ground surface. In this paper, it is demonstrated that the effects of block type soil improvement of limited horizontal and vertical dimensions can be described using a simplified theoretical approach involving a modification to the well-known p-y representation of soil response. An example using this method is presented and shown to give adequate support to a standard 12-inch diameter steel pipe pile embedded in soft soil.

"The development of non-destructive testing (NDT) methods for deep foundations occurred in several parts of the world, gradually coming together into the present state of the art. The compilation of this brief NDT history is the best effort of several knowledgeable members of the Deep Foundations Institute (DFI) Drilled Shaft Committee, coupled with the recollections of several historically important contributors to the science. It is not intended to be exhaustive, but rather concentrates on the origins of the methods in common use and on which this manual focuses.Modern NDT methods, and the spread of knowledge about them, have expanded through application to real foundations projects by the original researchers, sometimes inspired by their own curiosity, sometimes to respond to the cost and time limitations imposed by static testing, and sometimes to address the questions raised on research projects funded by large government agencies such as the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) in the USA, and various European transportation agencies. Initial attempts were primitive by today’s standards, and equipment limitations often restricted successful application to relatively simple cases. As electronics improved and confidence in them increased, the early researchers began commercial promotion of their methods, published their findings in professional journals, and shared experiences at conferences held by such groups as the DFI, the International Association of Foundation Drilling (ADSC), the International Conferences on the Application of Stress-Wave Theory to Piles and other venues such as ASCE and Transportation Research Board (TRB) conferences.NDT methods were developed to fill a need to assess the quality assurance of deep foundation elements. New pile types and higher design loads prompted engineers to verify the safety of their foundations via additional testing during construction. Static load testing was the traditional method to assess performance, and this method has been used for centuries and perhaps even millennia.Relatively recent alternatives to static load testing for determining the capacity of drilled shafts include the bottom load test method. This method uses a jack embedded in the lower portion of the pile (bottom load test) and was first reported to be used from Canada in the early 1970’s (Gibson& Devenny 1973). The concept immediately caught on in Israel, where it was used as a quality control measure for small-diameter piles drilled in rock (then a new technology). The method was later patented in the US by Jorj Osterberg, and offered as a commercially available service in thelate 1980s (Osterberg, 1989)"

Jan 1, 2004

By Nathan A. Ingraffea

The use of steel sheet pile walls and drilled shaft foundation elements to enable up-down construction methods has been used successfully on recent high-rise structures with multi-story below grade parking. The John Ross Tower and The 3720 Tower in Portland, Oregon each make use of this system and are discussed in-depth. Up-Down construction involves the simultaneous construction of the building levels above and below grade instead of the standard construction technique of excavating and shoring the below grade construction before being able to build upward from the base of the excavation. Advantages of the up-down system include a shortened overall construction schedule, permanent basement walls that double as the temporary shoring walls, elimination of the typical continuous wall footing or grade beam at the building perimeter, increased use of recycled material (steel) while maintaining an overall decrease in total materials, elimination of wall forming costs, decreases in forming costs for slabs, decreases in waterproofing costs for walls and elimination of pile caps and/or footings for the building columns. Lessons learned during the construction of both buildings include the need for more extensive geotechnical boring information, descriptive sheet pile and drilled shaft specifications, a clear understanding from the design team on finished appearance of sheet pile and shafts, and careful consideration of the connection between both slabs and the sheet pile wall and slabs and drilled shafts.

Jan 1, 2008

Jan 1, 1997

By Joint Micropiles Committee

"The three types of specifications which are used for micropile work are: • Performance Specifications: The contractor is permitted control over certain design and/or construction procedures but must demonstrate to the owner through testing and/or certification that the final product meets the specified performance criteria. This method allows and encourages the contractor to provide a competitive and/or innovative micropile design within the framework of the overall design requirements. The responsibilities for the work are shared between the owner and the contractor. • Open Specifications: These leave the scope and design of the installation up to the micropile contractor. This method is the most common for securing bids on temporary micropile work. The responsibility for design and performance is clearly placed on the contractor. Open specifications are not recommended for permanent applications. This method allows the contractor to select the most economical micropile system. • Prescriptive Specification: The Owner describes specific procedures that must be followed, but which may not necessarily describe the objective of the work. When prescriptive specifications are used, the owner is responsible for the proper performance of the system. The contractor is responsible for satisfying the details of the specifications.Performance specifications are the most common and best reflect the challenges and interests of micropile technology and applications.The owner, designer and contractor will together be responsible for the tasks associated with the design, installation, acceptance, and performance of the micropiles. The installation of micropiles requires specialized equipment, techniques, and appropriate workmanship. Not every detail of the work can be specified, and not every potential problem can be anticipated. Therefore, a contractor who has demonstrated experience in micropiles must be selected to execute the work required."

Jan 1, 2004

By Michael Moran

Typical ACIP Pile Rig [ ] Hollow Stem Auger ? Continuous flight auger ? 3 inch inside diameter pipe ? Auger diameters: 12, 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, 24, 30, and 36 inches ? Auger section lengths: 4, 5, 10, and 20 ft ? Weight ranges from about 70 lbs per ft for 12 inch to 120 lbs per ft for 24 inch and 200 lbs per ft for 36 inch

Jan 1, 2005

By Parameswaran V. S, Anshuman Singh

This is a case study on ground improvement using Stone columns at Kokrajhar in Assam which comes under seismic Zone V as per IS: 1893. The strata at site comprised of mostly fine sands with low SPTN values, fine content less than 10% and ground water table (GWT) at shallow depth. As ground water table subjected to seasonal variation, water table is considered at ground level for designing purpose. The geotechnical profile of the boreholes was analysed on the guidelines of IS 1893 (Part 1) -2016 and it was observed that the liquefaction potential of the soil layers is prominent and ground improvement is inevitable up to a depth of 9.5 m below existing ground level. In order to mitigate the liquefaction of soil layer, Stone columns were proposed. The in-situ soil is densified using wet top feed vibroreplacement method with an area replacement ratio of 16%, so that the relative density of the soil can be enhanced to prevent liquefaction risk. Correlation between relative density, fines content and increment of SPT N –value given by Tokimatsu and Yoshimi (1983) was used for designing purpose. Field tests such as SPTs were carried out at site to validate the extent of SPT (N) improvement. Detail comparison of pre and post density, SPT N values and CRR values were discussed in this paper.

Nov 1, 2022

By Donald Bruce

The three types of specifications which are used for micropile work are: ? Performance Specifications: The contractor is permitted control over certain design and/or construction procedures but must demonstrate to the owner through testing and/or certification that the final product meets the specified performance criteria. This method allows and encourages the contractor to provide a competitive and/or innovative micropile design within the framework of the overall design requirements. The responsibilities for the work are shared between the owner and the contractor. ? Open Specifications: These leave the scope and design of the installation up to the micropile contractor. This method is the most common for securing bids on temporary micropile work. The responsibility for design and performance is clearly placed on the contractor. Open specifications are not recommended for permanent applications. This method allows the contractor to select the most economical micropile system. ? Prescriptive Specification: The Owner describes specific procedures that must be followed, but which may not necessarily describe the objective of the work. When prescriptive specifications are used, the owner is responsible for the proper performance of the system. The contractor is responsible for satisfying the details of the specifications. Performance specifications are the most common and best reflect the challenges and interests of micropile technology and applications.

Jan 1, 2004

By Dr Karsten Galipp, Kai-Julian I. Hendler, Prof. Manuel G. Pinheiro, Dr Peter J. Bourne-Webb

With a share of approximately 11% of global greenhouse gas emissions, the construction industry contributes significantly towards climate change. This is why construction projects should not only be assessed on costs and technical solutions, but also on their carbon emissions. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) is a tool which can quantify the environmental impacts of a construction project over its entire lifetime. The objective of this study was to determine the carbon footprint of three types of quay wall structures, namely sheet pile combi-walls, open piled decks and caissons using an LCA approach. Each of these quay walls were studied under the same boundary conditions, such as design life, ground conditions, dimensions, location and so on. The analysis showed that the sheet pile wall has the lowest carbon footprint whereas the open piled structure has the highest. Furthermore, it could be shown that the largest share of greenhouse gases (approximately 80%) is emitted during the production of construction materials. The transportation of materials and construction activities each contributed under 12% to total emissions. The sensitivity analysis showed that with innovative approaches, such as adapting the concrete mix design, the carbon footprint could be reduced by 26% to 40%.

May 1, 2022

By Steven D. Scherer

The highest earthquake risk in the United States east of the Rockies is along the New Madrid Fault System, which extends for 193 km (120 miles) through the Central Mississippi Valley from northeastern Arkansas, through southwestern Missouri, western Tennessee and western Kentucky to southern Illinois. Historically, this fault has generated some of the most powerful earthquakes in U.S. history, notably three Magnitude 8 events in 1811. Apart from the West Coast, this region experiences more earthquakes than anywhere else in the United States, with more than 200 events recorded along the fault annually. These events are typically of much lower magnitude than those experienced in California. Most are too small to be felt. However, should a significant event occur, damage can be expected to be widespread because of the underlying geology. In recent years, earthquake preparedness and seismic upgrade of vulnerable structures has become a focus for a number of State Departments of Transportation, including those in Illinois and Missouri where there is a potential for future damage. This paper presents three case histories illustrating three different techniques used to retrofit interstate highway bridge foundations bearing on potentially liquefiable soils. Friction minipiles were installed at the approach span of the I-57 bridge crossing the Mississippi River near Cairo, Illinois to provide additional support to the pile caps in the event of liquefaction of the underlying sands during a seismic event. In St Louis, Missouri, rock-socketed minipiles were installed to increase the capacity of drilled shaft foundations supporting a section of Interstate 64. In Mounds, Illinois, compaction grouting was used to densify loose sand deposits beneath a pile-supported interstate bridge on I-57.

Jan 1, 2001

By Lawrence F. Johnsen

Six case histories are presented in which tall, slender high rises are supported on high capacity minicaissons. The recent development of a high strength rebar cage has resulted in compressive loads of up to 3400 kips on 24 inch diameter minicaissons. Provisions in the pending NYC building code will allow borehole video inspection in lieu of load testing. The ?new? technology results from the marriage of several well established methods: rotary duplex well drilling, high capacity micropiles and high capacity reinforced concrete building columns.

Jan 1, 2007

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 Venkatesh S. V J, Shubha M, Srilakshmi G

Choosing for the best option of pile foundations to overcome large lateral and uplift loads for the foundations in transmission line towers/offshore environment is still being a concern to achieve the required capacities but also by considering the suitability aspect in the environment. The objective of this paper is to review the methods that have been done for knowing the uplift resistance and lateral resistance of pedestal piles. Investigations by different methods such as experimental studies, numerical and analytical studies have been done by various researchers in order to evaluate the response of a belled pile. These methods are discussed in this paper and the comparison with straight shaft pile based upon the test and analysis. The results indicated that the uplift resistance and lateral resistance were significantly increased with the adoption of belled piles than straight shaft piles.

Sep 1, 2022

By Wu Jian-tao, LI Guo-wei

"The Cement Mixing Pile (CMP) quality assurance assessment is an important programme in evaluating the efficiency of foundation improvement. Coring is the current specified method of quality assessment in China which has the shortcomings of long cycle, high cost and low efficiency. The field and laboratory test show that the regular cone penetration test can only detect maximum of 4m of effective detection depth in CMP. In contrast, the method of cone penetration test in the reserved hole can detect the quality continuously along the pile at any depth. The tip resistance of reserved hole penetration in the 7th day has good linear relationship with unconfined compressive strength in the 28th day. The slope of linear relationship decreases with the increasing of clay particles content.INTRODUCTIONThe method of Cement Mixing Pile (CMP) is often used to improve soft soil foundation in highway construction, with the major purpose of reducing settlements under embankments (Bruce et al., 2000),which is a form of what is known as the Deep Mixing Method (Bruce et al., 2013). The CMP technology spread quickly in China in the 1980s. CMP quality assurance assessment is an important programme in evaluating the efficiency of foundation improvement. Coring is the current specified method of quality assessment in China (China Academy Of Building Research, 2002). The method of Coring is perceived in some quarters that samples will provide lower strengths given the distress caused to the core during drilling and extraction (Bruce et al., 2002).The cone penetration test CPT can provide continuous measurements of the penetration resistance, sleeve friction at the tip of the probe, which has advantages of simple operation, low cost and high efficiency compared with coring. However, CPT tests have not been established to assess CMP in Sweden because of difficulties in maintaining verticality (Larsson, 2005). In Finland and Norway, however, CPT tests are commonly used (Halkola, 1999). One of the disadvantages of CPT is the tendency of the cone to steer out of the column (Porbaha et al., 2003). Darya Mokrousova (2010) states this tendency to deviate can be overcome by pre-boring and starting the penetration test from the base of the pre-bored hole. Sheng Haiyang (1999) found that probes may be deflected out, sometimes even at small penetration depths, and may not give a complete inspection of the pile. Liu Songyu et al. (2003) suggested that the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) is an effective way to evaluate the strength and quality of stabilized soil-cement columns. In general, Regular CPT can’t test the full length of CMP, and SPT still needed drilling which causes discontinuous detection. From the existing standard of China, core sampling compressive strength test is the main method, evidently, coring displays a longer test cycle, high cost and low efficiency. Therefore, an improvement of CMP quality assessment, by conjuring a fast and reliable detection and evaluation method, is necessary. The aim of this paper is to research the feasibility of using CPT in assessing the quality of CMP and presents an improved CPT method."

Jan 1, 2015

By David M. Rempe

The purpose of this standard is to provide a method for testing of cushion materials that leads to uniform results when employed by various organizations and laboratories. The load-deflection characteristics measured using this method are intended to provide input data for analysis of pile driving, as in wave equation analysis of pile driving. It should be recognized, however, that there are several factors which may cause a difference in performance between the test samples under laboratory conditions and actual cushion materials under pile driving conditions. These factors include variations in material properties from sample to sample, compaction and/or deterioration of the materials with use, eccentric loading due to misalignment, confinement effects or the cushion container or inter layered materials, head buildup, rate of loading, etc. In order to obtain representative load-deflection characteristics, therefore, testing of cushion specimens which have been subjected to actual pile driving conditions is encouraged 1 such specimen should be tested at various stages of the useful life of the cushion. The users of the data are cautioned to determine if the particular wave equation program they are using requires either the secant or tangent definition of the stiffness and modulus of elasticity.

Dec 1, 1984

By M. Krzaninski, Y. Zou, A. Frost

The foundation solution for a data centre building in Sydney, Australia comprised two alternatives, the first of which incorporated the use of CFA piles founded in rock at approx. 27m depth to support column working loadings of approx. 7.5MN, and the second utilising rapid impact compaction with a raft foundation of 1.0m thick concrete slab. Soil conditions comprised 1m of fill over 3 to 4m of sands varying from loose to dense consistency, underlain by very stiff clays overlying the rock. A creative solution incorporating Rapid Impact Compaction to improve the loose soils in conjunction with a piled raft solution was proposed. Piles proposed under the raft were Atlas Drilled Displacement piles which offered advantages of displacement pile performance and savings in time and material costs. The piled raft solution was developed in consultation with the consulting structural engineer, combining the skills of the piling contractor and consulting engineer to the benefit of the project. This paper describes the development and design aspects of the piled raft solution adopted for the project.

Nov 1, 2022

By Douglas L. Scaggs

Over the past several years, pile foundations have grown to meet the demands of larger and heavier structures. As the foundations have grown, so has the need for larger and more robust piles to carry the increased loads. Seismic considerations have also required larger and tougher piles to withstand the added component of supporting structures during earthquakes. While H-piles, precast concrete piles, timber piles and small pipe piles have been the product of choice, many applications are now calling for much larger piling requiring larger equipment and presenting the contractor with new challenges. This paper is not intended to be a ?how to? guide as much as a discussion on the potential pitfalls a contractor should watch out for when considering a project where mega piles are required.

Jan 1, 2013