Search Documents

By Rick Ellman, Ian Chaney

"The Hampton Roads area encompassing the Norfolk, Virginia Beach and Newport News metropolitan region experiences some of the worst traffic congestion in Virginia. With continued growth of the ports and increasing demand, the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) initiated the Downtown Tunnel/Midtown Tunnel/MLK Expressway Project, a complex undertaking critical to addressing the Hampton Roads area’s transportation needs. The project is a $2.1 billion Design/Build/Finance/Operate (DBFO) endeavor most notably involving the construction of a new two-lane vehicular tunnel utilizing the Immersed Tube Tunnel (ITT) method. The tunnel will pass under the Elizabeth River parallel to the existing Midtown Tunnel between Norfolk and Portsmouth, Va. It will be the largest design-build project constructed in the history of the Hampton Roads District.The New Midtown Tunnel will extend approximately 6,450 ft (1,966 m) along the north side of the existing tunnel where it ties into the existing Midtown Tunnel approaches in Norfolk and Portsmouth. It is being installed in a pre-excavated trench of which approximately 2,250 ft (686 m) required bracing on the Portsmouth side and approximately 1,000 ft (305 m) required bracing on the Norfolk side. The remaining 3,200 ft (975 m) of trench excavation was open cut dredging with laid back side slopes, optimized to reduce dredging, disposal and backfill quantities while also reducing the risk to the existing tunnel. The braced excavation portions of the tunnel alignment were divided into distinct segments which include: Portsmouth Approach Boat Section, Portsmouth Approach Cut-and-Cover Section, Portsmouth Dredge Section, Norfolk Dredge Section, Norfolk Approach Cut-and- Cover Section and the Norfolk Approach Boat Section. All “approach” excavations were performed in the dry and all “dredge” excavations were performed in the wet. Eleven ITT segments are being fabricated in the Sparrows Point Dry Dock facility in Baltimore, Md., and each 14,000 ton (12,700 tonne) segment is being towed approximately 220 mi (354 km) to the site. The ITT segments will extend under the Elizabeth River, with the deepest crossing 90 ft (27 m) at the Federal Navigation Channel. Once beyond the channel limits the ITT rises at an approximate 4.5% slope. Controlled screeding and element lowering operations will be performed primarily from floating barges."

Jan 1, 2014

The intent of this manual is to provide guidelines for inspectors of drilled shaft construction otherwise referred to as drilled piers, caissons or bored piles. It should also be helpful to train beginning geotechnical engineers with limited first hand experience or for geotechnical engineers who are training inspectors. It is expected that the general guidelines and procedures described here will be supplemented by local geotechnical engineers working in a particular region based on local practice and experience. Since drilled shaft construction procedures vary widely based on local geology and size of project, an all-inclusive manual is not considered practical. This manual focuses on traditional topside inspection for routine drilled shaft construction. Other inspection and evaluation methods that rely on electronic equipment are available, but these methods require extensive training and experience in the interpretation of results. These more sophisticated methods of drilled shaft inspection and evaluation are common in construction, but they are usually provided by specialty subconsultants. The subconsultant will typically submit a report for each shaft, which will be reviewed by the geotechnical engineer. Other manuals are available to describe the electronic methods of drilled shaft inspection.

Jan 1, 2004

By Johannes Labenski, Christian Moormann, Johannes Aschrafi

"Open steel pipe piles are used for various applications in costal engineering, port structures and increasingly important for offshore structures. During the installation of open steel pipe piles the formation of a plug has an influence on the installation process of the pile and also on the final bearing capacity. The formation of the plug depends on different factors, e.g. the pile diameter and the installation method. This paper starts with a structured overview about analytical methods (API, EAP-EAU, UWA-05, HKU-12, Modified API) to calculate the axial bearing capacity of open steel pipe piles. The numerical simulation of the installation process of open steel pipe piles has to fulfill high demands, i.e. to accurately represent the penetration of the pile inside the soil, the formation of the plug and also the stresses and strains during the installation. A numerical back analysis of a comprehensive field test, using the Coupled Eulerian-Lagrangian (CEL) method and a hypoplastic constitutive model for sand, reveals the stresses and displacements of the soil and of the piles. The analysis provides a comprehensive understanding of soilpile interaction.INTRODRUCTIONThe particular difficulty in the numerical simulation of plug formation, is that the effect of plugging inside open ended steel pipe piles has not been fully investigated. In scientific papers different approaches are documented to explain this phenomenon. Some are based on in-situ tests and others are based on numerical simulations. One of the challenges is to determine the end bearing capacity and shaft friction of the steel pipe pile. Different approaches have been developed over the years to determine them e.g. from Randolph et. al. (1991, 1994) and Paik et. al. (2003). Recent approaches are the ICP-05 Method (Jardine 2005), the UWA-05 Method (Lehane 2005) and the HKU-12 Method (Yu & Yang 2012a). A comparison of some methods can be found in Schneider et al. (2010). A plug inside an open steel pipe pile can be visualized as a spatial bracing of soil between the inner surfaces of the pile, cf. Lüking (2010).. However according to Lüking & Kempfert (2012) this bracing only exists for the height in the end of the pile equal to twice its diameter.To identify a plug inside a pile, there are different measurable parameters. One parameter is the development of stresses around the pile during and after its installation. Henke (2013) measured the inand outside horizontal stresses at the pile tip during the installation. The results showed higher stresses on the inside compared to the outside. To validate his measurements he performed a numerical back-analysis of the measured installation process and got matching results."

Jan 1, 2017

Jan 1, 1996

Jan 1, 1986

Jan 1, 2004

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 Silas C. Nichols

"Abstract Piling and deep foundations are a staple for transportation projects in the United States (US). Driven or bored piles have been used for everything from support of bridge foundations and retaining structures to support of culverts and embankments on soft ground. Deep foundations have been popular in the US transportation market to better handle large axial and lateral loads, extreme event loading, and to better control structure movement. However, there are challenges in the maintenance of design and construction codes in transportation for consistent and reliable structure foundation elements. A significant amount of effort continues in the US to maintain national codes and specifications at a level consistent with the state of practice, and identify and conduct research for providing safe and cost effective highway structures.IntroductionThe transportation sector in the United States has a hierarchy of design and construction codes that are used for the specification of piling and deep foundations. Any highway or bridge project on the National Highway System (NHS) must be designed and constructed in accordance with a national set of standards approved by the State Highway Departments, and that are acceptable to the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). However, in any jurisdiction, exceptions are permitted with approval. Therefore, design may be governed by the national standard specification, a state standard specification and design manuals, special provisions, or guideline specifications. Any of these standards, or a combination, may be used depending on the needs of the owner agency.The FHWA and the American Association of Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) have worked together in the development and maintenance of geotechnical design and construction guidance and codes that support the surface transportation community. General geotechnical engineering practice in the United States lacks a singular, national design and construction code that addresses all aspects of geotechnical engineering. As a result, the AASHTO specifications provide the most complete geotechnical specifications focusing on structure foundations, retaining walls, and buried structures for surface transportation applications. This includes piling and deep foundation types commonly used for support of bridges and transportation structures.The FHWA National Geotechnical Team has published several technical guidance documents that include guideline specifications for the design and construction of driven and bored deep foundations. Reference documents published by FHWA summarize the state of practice and provide recommended design and construction guidance. These reference documents have long served as a basis for provisions included in the AASHTO specifications. Maintenance of the design code and specification, and related guidance documents for consistent use on US transportation projects requires a collaborative effort between industry, FHWA, and the member state highway departments that make up AASHTO."

Jan 1, 2014

Jan 1, 2002

By Randy R. Williams, Roberto R. Olivera, Brian W. Wilson, Marina S. W. Li

"An extensive, deep mixing (DM) ground improvement program using the Cutter Soil Mixing (CSM) technique was designed and constructed in 2013 to support up to 20 m (66 ft) high Mechanically Stabilized Earth (MSE) walls and bulk earthworks for the development of the Kitimat Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) facility at Bish Cove, British Columbia. The deep mixing program consisted of overlapping rectangular panels of in situ cement treated soils, constructed using the CSM technique, to form barrettes covering an area of approximately 12,900 m2 (15,428 yd2) and providing suitable static and seismic stability of foundation soils for support of the proposed MSE walls, which would in turn support LNG facilities. The deep mixing program comprised of 1645 CSM panels that were constructed through varying thicknesses and discontinuous layers of very soft fine-grained marine deposits and/or loose sandy silt to silty sand deposits, embedding typically 2 m ( 6.6 ft) into dense silty sand to sand and gravel. CSM panel depths ranged from 5 m (16 ft) to 30 m (98 ft) and were constructed by treating approximately 73,900 m3 (96,658 yd3) of soil yielding average unconfined compressive strengths exceeding 2.5MPa (363 psi).This paper outlines the approach adopted for the design of the CSM ground improvement program in the highly variable subsurface conditions present at the site. A phased sitespecific investigation consisting of boreholes, test pits, Cone Penetration Tests, piston tube sampling, advanced laboratory testing and groundwater monitoring was implemented. In addition, soil-cement bench scale testing was completed, followed by installation of 8 CSM panels for field trial purposes. Extensive geotechnical static and seismic analyses including Limit Equilibrium stability analyses, liquefaction assessments, and advanced numerical modeling were undertaken to optimize the design and meet the project-specific design performance criteria. The Design-Build team worked closely to develop and implement Quality Assurance and Quality Control plans and managed significant construction challenges while achieving suitable panel termination depths."

Jan 1, 2017

Jan 1, 2003

By Jean-Louis Briaud

The following is a summary of a very recent report prepared at Texas A&M University for the National Cooperative Highway Research Program and entitled "Downdrag on Bitumen Coated Piles". Anytime the soil settles more than the pile, downdrag or negative skin friction will develop. The load in the pile increases with depth up to a certain point and then decreases down to the pile point. This phenomenon has been quoted as being the number one culprit for deep foundation failures. In Chapter 1, an introduction to downdrag is given. The most common criterion for downdrag is to consider it in design as soon as the settlement of the soil surface after pile driving exceeds 0.5 in. Coating piles with bitumen is an effective way of reducing downdrag forces and therefore allows to use smaller piles for the same load. This results in cost savings. Coating piles with bitumen increase the cost of piles by about 33% and therefore the decision to use bitumen is generally based on economic considerations.

Jan 1, 1989

By Brandon Buschmeier, Frederic Masse

"Inclusions are a type of ground improvement that provide an improvement of a soil mass by insertion of a material with better characteristics than the surrounding soils. There are primarily two types of inclusions: “Soft” inclusions which are constructed of granular material (Stone Columns, Rammed Aggregate Piers, VibroPiers...), and “rigid” inclusions which are constructed of grout inserted with or without pressure (VibroConcrete Columns, Controlled Modulus Columns, Soil Mixing Columns).While the central principle of the inclusions is similar (i.e., overall improvement of characteristics of the soil mass below the structure), the load transfer mechanism is radically different for each technique. Therefore, the applicable design methodology is specific to the type of inclusions and there exists no universal method of design which spans across all inclusions.This paper will present an in-depth comparison between the standard design methods used for “soft” granular-type inclusions (Priebe modified, Balaam & Booker, Goughnour & Bayuk...) and the methods used for “rigid” inclusions which mainly rely on finite element analysis. The paper will explain why the design for soft inclusion methods cannot be applied to rigid inclusions and vice-versa. Each design method will be reviewed in detail to better emphasize its limitations and advantages.Two case histories will also be presented; one for each type of inclusions in order to illustrate the concepts developed in the first part of the paper.1 INTRODUCTION1.1 GENERAL OVERVIEW OF GROUND IMPROVEMENT WITH INCLUSIONSThe use of ground improvement methods to provide the appropriate amount of foundation support is a growing and constantly evolving industry. Traditional structural foundation methods including ‘shallow’ and ‘deep’ foundations do not adequately address the wide range of settlement tolerances, soil conditions, and loading considerations inherent to each unique potential project. In some instances, ‘shallow’ foundation solutions are simply not feasible due to soil and loading constraints. Furthermore, ‘deep’ foundation solutions are used to ‘bridge’ the soft compressible soils, ensuring that the entirety of the load in the structure is transmitted through individual elements into competent layers below the ground surface (bedrock, dense residual soils). Highly concentrated structural loads are transferred into the individual elements by means of direct contact requiring the use of structurally rigid surficial components (structural slabs, grade beams, and pile caps).Ground improvement bridges the gap between these two traditional methods, offering adequate foundation support while using more costeffective techniques and design methodologies. Inclusions are a type of ground improvement used to provide a reinforcement of the soil mass through the vertical insertion of a material with better characteristics than the surrounding soils. Much like deep foundations, inclusions are installed through soil layers with high compressibility and/or low bearing capacity and terminated in a suitable bearing stratum. However, unlike deep foundations, ground improvement inclusions rely on a distribution of load between the soil and the inclusions. By doing so, some of the structural load is applied directly to the soil in a proportion equal to its bearing capacity and compressibility limits, while the rest of the load is shed into the vertical inclusions down to the bearing stratum. Load sharing is a critical aspect in the performance and design of the various ground improvement methods."

Jan 1, 2015

By Patrick J. Hannigan, William H. Walton, Ryan C. Rusk, Van E. Komurka

"The project consists of a 33-story building with two levels of below-grade parking across the entire building footprint. Timely and cooperative teamwork among the owner/developer, geotechnical engineer, testing agency, structural engineer, construction manager, and pile-driving contractor resulted in an efficient, costeffective, high-capacity driven-pile foundation on a constrained urban site with significantly variable subsurface conditions. Design objectives included utilizing the highest allowable pile loads reasonably installed from a drivability perspective, using readily available equipment. A pre-production test program was performed on 16-inch-diameter (406-mm-diameter) steel pipe piles, driven closed-ended and subsequently filled with concrete. The test program included dynamic monitoring of 10 piles during installation, and of select piles during long-term restrike testing with a drop hammer, with one instrumented static load test. CAPWAP® analyses were performed on both end-of-initial-drive and beginning-of-restrike dynamic test records. The site exhibited significant soil set-up, even after relatively short wait times. Testprogram objectives included characterizing set-up profiles. A design set-up profile was used to develop depth-variable driving criteria for both 500- and 600-kip (2,224- and 2,669-kN) allowable load piles. Test program results permitted more-accurate reduced capacities to be assigned to damaged piles, and to piles which experienced practical refusal. These more-accurate assigned reduced capacities decreased the number of replacement piles required by 50 percent, saving both time and cost.PROJECT DESCRIPTIONThe project, located in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA consists of a 33-story mixed-use residential building with two levels of below-grade parking across the entire site footprint. Column service loads range from 1,400 to 4,200 kips (6,228 to 18,683 kN). The project is located immediately adjacent to an existing two-story masonry retail building with a partial basement, supported on shallow spread-footing foundations.Subsurface Conditions – The generalized soil conditions are presented in Fig. 1. Site grades were relatively level, with a ground-surface elevation of approximately +53 feet (16 m), Milwaukee City Datum (“MCD”). Fill material from previous construction was encountered to approximate Elev. +33 feet (10 m). Below the fill, medium dense silty sand, to silt with sand, was encountered to approximate Elev. +23 feet (7 m). Underlying deposits consisted of lean clay, with undrained shear strengths ranging from approximately 1,000 to 3,000 pounds per square foot (psf) (48 to 144 kPa). Silty sand, to silt with sand, exhibiting increasing relative density with depth, was found below the lean clay to approximate Elev. -92 feet (-28 m), where hard lean clay (glacial till) with undrained shear strengths in excess of 5,000 psf (239 kPa) was encountered. Borings did not extend below Elev. -103 feet (-31 m)."

Jan 1, 2017

Jan 1, 1993

By Dominik Gächter, Wojciech Szczepiñski

In early 2020, the construction phase began for the new complex of buildings for Radium Hospital in Oslo – the leading facility for cancer treatment in Norway. Settlements in the surrounding area, caused by pore pressure changes, allowed for the introduction of an alternative solution for the construction of the excavation pit. The presence of solid bedrock and sensitive clay – the same material that causes major landslides in the Scandinavia – in the excavation pit, lead to a combination of techniques, which were never applied in Norway before. For the stabilization of the clay Dry Deep Soil Mixing was applied to allow safe execution of the geotechnical works. Interlocking Bored Piles with footbolts and Jet Grouting columns, in combination with anchors, provided the retaining structure for the excavation pit. Rock injections were performed to avoid any ground water ingress into the pit. Underpinning of fully operational, adjacent buildings was carried out with jet grouting columns. These works were performed from the basement of the hospital and the ‘ACI – Acoustic Column Inspector’ was used to ensure proper installation of 2 m diameter columns to a maximum depth of 25 m. The buildings were later founded on Steel Core Piles, the most common pile type in Scandinavia.

Sep 8, 2021

By Wojciech Szczepiński, Dominik Gächter

In early 2020, the construction phase began for the new complex of buildings for Radium Hospital in Oslo – the leading facility for cancer treatment in Norway. Settlements in the surrounding area, caused by pore pressure changes, allowed for the introduction of an alternative solution for the construction of the excavation pit. The presence of solid bedrock and sensitive clay – the same material that causes major landslides in the Scandinavia – in the excavation pit, lead to a combination of techniques, which were never applied in Norway before. For the stabilization of the clay Dry Deep Soil Mixing was applied to allow safe execution of the geotechnical works. Interlocking Bored Piles with footbolts and Jet Grouting columns, in combination with anchors, provided the retaining structure for the excavation pit. Rock injections were performed to avoid any ground water ingress into the pit. Underpinning of fully operational, adjacent buildings was carried out with jet grouting columns. These works were performed from the basement of the hospital and the ‘ACI – Acoustic Column Inspector’ was used to ensure proper installation of 2 m diameter columns to a maximum depth of 25 m. The buildings were later founded on Steel Core Piles, the most common pile type in Scandinavia.

Oct 1, 2021

By Serhan Guner, Sundar Chiluwal

Although significant research has been conducted on helical piles, there is a lack of research and official design provisions on the helical pile-to-pile cap connections. These connections may govern the global response of pile cap systems—especially in tall and light structures where uplift forces dominate the response. To improve future industry practice, the objective of this study is to understand the influence of pile-to-pile cap connections on the global behavior of concrete pile caps and develop recommendations for their efficient design. For this purpose, 108 high- fidelity nonlinear finite element simulations are conducted to quantify the influences of bracket type, embedment depths, longitudinal reinforcement percentages, shear span-to-depth ratios, and loading conditions on the load, deformation, cracking, and failure behavior of concrete pile caps. The results indicate that the design configurations involving single bracket type may result in premature concrete cracking around the anchorage zones with a 25% reduction in the uplift load capacity. The investigations also confirm that high reinforcement percentages and low shear span-to-depth ratios result in higher load resistance in all bracket types, and that the load capacities of the double and studded bracket types are similar. For applications requiring the use of lower embedment depths, it is recommended that either double or studded bracket types be used. The research findings have applicability to both helical and micro piles given that both include similar connection types. INTRODUCTION Tall and light structures may experience significant uplift forces at their foundations due to large overturning moments from wind or other lateral loads. Helical piles (e.g., Fig. 1a) can provide a cost- effective, practical, and resilient solution for resisting significant uplift forces. In order to realize the full potential of helical piles, it is imperative that the helical pile-to-pile cap connections (see Figs. 1b, c and d for examples) are properly designed to resist the applied forces. However, there is a lack of research and associated knowledge on the influence of pile-to-pile cap connection detailing on the global response of pile caps.

Jan 1, 2019

By Thomas Domanski

Any type of deep excavation whether for Bored Piling, Diaphragm Walls or Contiguous Bored Piling Walls depends on forming a stable borehole with a defined cross-section to receive safely the permanent materials. In modern construction the excavation depth can reach well the range of 100 m and above. The diameters of the Piles reach often sizes of 2.5 m and bigger. Top casings in Bored Piles (Diaphragm Wall none) are rather short and stability below the casing, need to be secured by stabilization slurry. The boreholes need to be formed through a variety of different materials and stand open for an extended period. Without a safe stable borehole, it is impossible to produce quality products and work cost-efficient. The understanding and proper usage of a suitable slurry is a key element essential for the delivery of Foundation Elements with high quality and within a reasonable budget. The setting of mechanical and rheological parameters in specifications is necessary and helpful, but probably insufficient to embrace and control such a key element in the practical implementation of foundation construction. The proper selection, design, implementation and supervision of slurries on site requires both from Contractors and Engineers to understand how different slurries do function. Only with this knowledge the right decisions in slurry operations can be made. This talk is directed to give some help to both, Contractor’s and Engineer’s, in understanding how different type of slurries do work. (Which ones should be preferred in what kind of soils.) The better knowledge will help the Contractor to control cost and enhance production. The Engineer will be able to assist in arriving at the appropriate technical choices and include in the specifications.

Sep 1, 2022

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