Search Documents

By Masaaki Terashi

The machine for the hybrid method called JACSMAN is ordinarily a dual shaft machine. Each shaft has augers at three different levels and nozzles for jetting at two different levels. The distance between two shafts may be changed according to the particular requirements. Figure 4 shows single shaft and a treated soil column created by the method. The diameter of the auger is 1.0 m. As the jetting nozzles locate at the periphery of the auger, jetting can achieve the additional treated soil column beyond the diameter of the auger. The diameter of the jetting improvement is fixed at 2.3 m.

Feb 10, 2003

By Manfred Schoepf

"Construction projects using the most advanced technologies and organizational structures demand intelligent construction machinery. In this process, automation technology plays an increasingly important role. Many components used in the automatic control of machine components are being taken for granted to such an extent that operators are often even unaware of their existence. Innovations in micro-electronics, such as process computers, programmable logic controllers (PLC) or intelligent sensor systems, have by now found their way into construction machinery. Construction machines are indeed becoming ever more intelligent. Key electronic applications in foundation engineering machines can be summarized into the following main categories:- Data acquisition- Online monitoring of the equipment status- Remote data transfer- Satellite-based Navigation System for Positioning and Documentation- Process controlData acquisitionThis includes machine-specific operating data, such as engine speed or operating temperature, operating hours, display of fuel consumption, but also the acquisition of process-specific data, such as pile depth, pile inclination or slurry volume.Monitoring the equipment status onlineAn extremely important aspect is the acquisition of fault data. In conjunction with available remote data transfer systems, malfunctions can now be searched and diagnosed by specialists anywhere in the world to provide assistance to the site personnel.Remote data transfer - “Anywhere, from everywhere”All previously referred to parameters can be stored on appropriate storage media inside the machine. The customer also gets a worldwide, safe access via an internet browser to check the current status of the equipment, anytime, anywhere.All data can be saved on a secured web server for documentation and further analysis. The internet connection of the equipment through a special module (DTR Module) additionally allows the user to operate a local, password-saved WLAN hot spot at the construction site and exchange data between equipment, tablet and internet.The web based system, which is named “WEB-BGM Equipment Management” in the Bauer Group, can do much more than only communicating with one machine."

Jan 1, 2015

By Robert S. Thomas, Bernard M. Tarralle, Nasser Massoudi

"The Commonwealth of Virginia is restoring and expanding its Capitol of great historic significance. Designed by Thomas Jefferson in 1785, it is the second oldest Capitol building in the United States. The building expansion required excavations immediately adjacent to its South Portico. The building, which rests on shallow brick footings, is very sensitive to any disturbance caused by construction and excavation. A comprehensive and secure plan of operations was devised by the design team to ensure that this national monument remains unharmed by the new construction. Various construction techniques were implemented to satisfy the strict movement goal of 0.25 inch and distortion of U2000. They consisted of jet grout columns to stabilize the upper soils, compensation grouting for future foundation leveling, a tied-back reinforced concrete diaphragm wall for excavation retention and foundations, and realtime instrumentation for monitoring. This paper describes the design approach for the retention system, providing information on the various construction phases and techn iques, and reports on the movements recorded by the real-time monitoring system during the course of the project. At the time of this manuscript preparation, and the deep excavation complete to final grade, the results indicate that the extremely restrictive building movement criteria have been met. The success can be credited to detailed design, close cooperation among the project team, prudent construction methods, and real-time monitoring. INTRODUCTIONThe Commonwealth of Virginia is undertaking a comprehensive renovation and expansion of the Virginia Capitol building located in Richmond, Virginia. The Capitol building was designed by Thomas Jefferson in 1785, with construction of the original building starting the same year. The Capitol building was designated a National Historic Landmark in 1960 and was listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1966.A part of the comprehensive renovation and expansion of the Capitol is a 25,000-square foot, two-level subterranean extension on the south side of the Capitol building, which will serve as a new Visitor Center and public entrance for the Capitol. Deep excavations were required for the construction of the new Visitor Center. The excavation required a permanent retention system to accommodate an approximately 40- foot deep excavation."

Jan 1, 2005

By Jorj O. Osterberg

This paper is for presentation at the 14th Annual Members Conference of the Deep Foundations Institute held at the Hyatt Regency Hotel, Baltimore Maryland on October 10, 1989. This is an introductory presentation of a one hour symposium on the applications of a new testing device. This paper discusses how the device works and its uses. Papers following this describe: - How the cell is constructed and calibrated - Two projects on which the device was used on long driven piles to determine the frictional capacity - A bridge project on which the device was used on an instrumented test drilled shaft and a working drilled shaft

Jan 1, 1989

By Alireza Ayoubian, Douglas S. Roy, Gianni O. Chieruzzi

"A 400 MW, gas-fed power plant on floating piles and piled raft foundations was constructed in the Province of Moskovskaya, Russia in 2008. The subsurface is characterized by fill underlain by loose to medium dense alluvial deposits, with peat and clay interbeds, a stiff to hard, highly plastic, silty clay stratum of glacial origin, and a stratum of very dense, varved interbeds of sand and silt.More than 800, drilled concrete piles were constructed at the site. The pile length ranged from 15 to 23 meters below existing surface grade, and the pile diameter ranged from 0.9 to 1 meter.Initial analyses by others predicted total power plant settlements of 3 to 4 cm when subjected to the permanent loading conditions. Under a peer review process for the equipment supplier, subsurface investigation and testing were performed to verify the consolidation parameters used for foundation design of the power plant foundation. The parameters obtained in this investigation were used in the 3-D finite-element model ELPLA as inputs for the settlement analysis of the turbine building and power island. The ELPA analyses predicted settlements on the order of 7 cm over a period of 30 years. The actual settlements after two years of monitoring were compared against the model predictions. The rate of settlement and the recompression index were both underestimated in our model. The measured settlements have enabled us to calibrate both of these model parameters so that the model better matches the data.IntroductionA 400 MW, gas-fed power plant was constructed near Moscow in the Province of Moskovskaya in Russia.Figure 1 shows the general arrangement of the main structures, and the geometry of the piles supporting those structures."

Jan 1, 2017

By Satyajit A. Vaidya

This paper presents a case-study in the design and construction of deep foundation element supported mats for two residential towers on an18,000-square-foot site in Brooklyn, New York. Based on site sub-surface conditions, conventional mat foundations bearing on medium dense sand, having an allowable bearing capacity of 3 tsf, were originally anticipated for the 16 and 25-story towers. However, when the tower shear walls were relocated to the edges of the mat foundations due to architectural revisions, the significantly increased mat edge contact stresses applied to the soil subgrade resulted in calculated settlements of a magnitude that would adversely impact the proposed structures and the neighboring/bordering lot-line building and rail transit subway structures. To address this issue, deep foundation element supported mats were designed for the towers. The design was performed as an iterative process involving structural SAFE and geotechnical Plaxis finite element computer analysis to develop a coordinated geo-structural model of the foundation system. Initial presumptive design values of 45 pci and 445 kips/inch were used for the modulus of subgrade reaction and minimum deep foundation element stiffness, respectively. The designed foundation system consisted of 40 and 60-inch-thick mat foundations for the 16 and 25 story towers, respectively. Initially, the deep foundation elements were designed as 50-foot-long, 14-inch-diameter elements installed to sustain a maximum individual compressive load of 250 tons. The final deep foundation element design was subsequently refined to consist of a 48-foot-long, drilled and grouted IBO Titan 103/51 element designed to sustain a maximum load of 167 tons. Subsequent field load tests on the deep foundation elements confirmed element stiffness ranging from 1,040 to 1,530 kips/inch, with measured mobilized side shear of about 29 psi. The mat foundation reinforcement was adjusted for the pile stiffness values determined in the field load tests, and the deep foundation supported mats were constructed. The two towers were subsequently constructed, and have performed successfully.

Jan 1, 2010

By Beim Jorge, Piscsalko George

"Verifying the quality of cast-in-place foundation applications, particularly those cast under slurry, is of course important, due to its great dependency on the methodology employed and on the practices of the site personnel. Due to the techniques used to install these elements, it is usually not possible to inspect the hole prior to grout or concrete placement, but there are several Non Destructive Test (NDT) methods available to assess the integrity of the completed foundation elements. This paper will compare several NDT methods with the Thermal Integrity Profiling (TIP) method for verifying the integrity in Continuous Flight Auger (CFA) piles and Bored Piles. The Thermal Integrity Profiling method will be described and some examples will be presented where TIP testing was used to confirm the structural integrity of CFA piles and Bored Piles.IntroductionThere are several Non Destructive Test (NDT) methods available for integrity testing of foundation elements. Each of those methods has advantages and disadvantages (White et al, 2008). Some methods test the integrity based on the reflections of a stress-wave generated by low or high-strain impact, while others require tubes to be installed prior to concrete pouring, and test the integrity between those tubes, or within a small proximity of them. The former methods (especially the low-strain) are faster and more cost-effective, but are not able to detect the quadrant where the damage is located. The latter methods are able to determine the quadrant, but do not test the region outside of the reinforcing cage, that is, they are not able to determine the concrete cover. The Thermal Integrity Profiling (TIP) NDT method overcomes the limitations of these other NDT methods.Overview of Shaft Integrity MethodsUntil now, the most widely used methods to test the integrity of Bored and CFA piles were the low-strain pile integrity testing and the cross-hole ultra-sonic testing. The low-strain method for integrity testing (PIT) involves attaching an accelerometer usually to the pile top (using a putty or wax) and striking the pile surface with a handheld hammer, which causes a compressive wave to enter the pile. This wave is totally reflected when it reaches the end of the pile or a major defect, and is partially reflected when it encounters any change in crosssection, or a change in the resistance or density of the pile material. These reflections arrive at the top at a time determined by the distance and wave speed, and causes a noticeable change in the signal detected by the accelerometer. The acceleration signal is normally converted to velocity by simple integration, and sometimes the force applied by the hammer is also measured. The velocity (and force) signals can be processed by the pulse-echo method (in the time domain) or by the transient response method (in the frequency domain)."

Jan 1, 2015

By John P. Turner, Benjamin J. Turner

"Tieback anchors are now used routinely for landslide stabilization in the USA and abroad. It is generally understood by design engineers that friction loss over the unbonded length of a tieback anchor is inherent to the system, and such loss is permitted as long as it does not exceed a certain threshold, typically 20 percent of the post-tensioning load. However, recent experience from projects utilizing tieback anchors with unbonded lengths in excess of 150 feet has demonstrated that this criterion may be difficult to achieve, particularly in certain ground conditions. Furthermore, anchor friction loss, even if below the 20-percent threshold, has important implications for the stability of the slope that are often ignored in practice. This paper presents the results of a study in which friction loss is quantified from load test data for projects in a variety of ground conditions by means of a “wobble coefficient.” Factors that may influence the wobble coefficient are examined, and recommendations for addressing this issue in practice are presented. A recent instrumented load-test program for a landslide stabilization project in Southern California is examined, demonstrating that with appropriate monitoring controls, uncertainty with regard to friction loss can be minimized. IntroductionSteel-strand tieback anchors have been used by the geotechnical community to support shoring systems for many decades, and more recently as a means to stabilize landslides. For strand encased in grease-filled plastic sheathing, which is intended to allow the strand to elongate freely, some load can still be transferred by friction between the strand and the grease and between the grease and sheathing. The sheathing then transfers load to the surrounding grout and, in the case of ground anchors, to the surrounding soil or rock. The resulting decrease in load over the length of the unbonded zone is known as “friction loss.”A widely used criterion for ground anchor acceptance based on load testing is that the measured anchor elongation must achieve a minimum value of 80 percent of the theoretical elastic elongation, or in other words the actual elongation can be up to 20 percent less than the theoretical value. This ensures that the majority of the load applied at the anchor head is reaching the bond zone behind the assumed failure surface, since load shed within the failure mass does not contribute to stability. This criterion acknowledges that friction loss is an inherent feature of the anchor system which cannot be eliminated completely, only minimized."

Jan 1, 2017

By Shawn Downey

A helical pile with in-situ grouted shaft was used to underpin the existing slab of a large retail store in the Edmonton, Alberta Canada area. The existing structural slab did not have the capacity to support the increased load requirements. The design to upgrade the capacity specified a drilled shaft as the deep foundation to underpin a portion of the slab. A helical pile was quoted as an alternate and ultimately won the bid based on the advantages of the system. After an ASTM D1143 Quick Load Test confirmed the axial compression capacity, 723 helical piles with grouted shafts were installed in 3 weeks underpinning 40% of the 93,000 ft2 (8,660 m2) building.

Jan 1, 2003

By Timothy C. Siegel, Derrick Dasenbrock, Rich Lamb, Paul J. Axtell

"The axial resistance provided by deep foundations may be divided into two components: side resistance and tip resistance. The direction that the side resistance acts depends on the relative movement between the deep foundation and the adjacent soil. That is, when the foundation moves downward relative to the soil, then the side resistance is positive and acts upward. Conversely, when the soil moves downward relative to the foundation the side resistance is negative and acts downward. Research supports that both positive side resistance and negative skin friction develop in essentially all deep foundations. The side resistance distribution is a function of the soil strength and stiffness, the applied top loads, and whether the top load is sustained, transient, or a combination of sustained and transient loads. Consideration of drag load and downdrag has become more convoluted with implementation of geotechnical aspects into the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications and its use of load and resistance factors. This paper examines the current AASHTO Specifications and presents an alternative design approach for drag load and downdrag using the LRFD framework. The alternative design approach is illustrated by two examples involving drag load and downdrag.IntroductionThe axial resistance provided by deep foundations may be divided into two components: side resistance and tip resistance. The direction that the side resistance acts depends on the relative movement between the deep foundation and the adjacent soil. That is, when the foundation moves downward relative to the soil, then the side resistance is positive and acts upward. Conversely, when the soil moves downward relative to the foundation the side resistance is negative and acts downward. Research supports that both positive side resistance and negative skin friction develop in essentially all deep foundations. The side resistance distribution is a function of the soil strength and stiffness, the applied top load, and whether the top load is sustained, transient, or a combination of sustained and transient.Consideration of drag load and downdrag has become more convoluted with implementation of geotechnical aspects into the LRFD Bridge Design Specifications and its use of load and resistance factors. This paper examines current LRFD design specifications and presents an alternative design approach for drag load and alternative design approach is applied to several examples where drag load and/or downdrag may control design."

Jan 1, 2015

By Cornelis Van Der Veen

Foundation piles, partly passing through unconsolidated compressible layers, suffer a downward drag that is called negative skin friction. The negative skin friction depends on the movement of the surrounding unconsolidated soil relative to the pile and on the friction between pile and soil as a function of that movement. The negative skin friction adds to the load on the pile. However as it is a function of the pile movement relative to the soil, the amount of negative skin friction to be taken into account to determine the allowable bearing capacity depends on the allowable pile settlement. In this paper this property is indicated by the factor µ. As under the conditions of ultimate pile bearing capacity negative skin friction does not occur, a factor of safety is introduced, which is lower than normal. Eventually a formula for the bearing capacity is given in which µ and both figure. The exact values for given circumstances have to be determined empirically. A few examples are given.

Jan 1, 2010

By A. Paviani

The subject of this session is "Equipment Installa­tion, Recent Developments". This is a subject which is not usually addressed at conferences of Foundation Engineering. It is rare to find sessions dealing with the technological side of deep foundations, a subject which only recently seems to have aroused sufficient interest at national and international conferences. It is therefore natural for the subject of "Equipment", or the tools used to implement the various "technologies", to be over­looked or mentioned only occasionally during the discussion of other issues. At conferences, most of the attention is attached to research and to the theoretical interpretation of the performance and behaviour of deep foundations, as well as to establishing the most suitable calculation algorithms and approaches for the study, design and control of foundation structures. It is almost as if the subject of equipment is felt to be less important or, perhaps, that it is considered to belong more strictly to mechanical engineering than to civil engineering.

Jan 1, 1994

By Gerald Verbeek, David Tara

"When selecting an impact hammer to drive a particular pile, the decision is often based on local experience. In those cases, the contractor falls back on previous experience or draws on the experience of the hammer manufacturer to select the hammer that will be able to do the job. Obviously, a more scientific approach would be to perform a pile driving simulation using one of several commercially available software packages (e.g., GRLWEAP, AllWavePDP or PDPWave).However, this type of analysis requires quite a bit more effort. First, an accurate model of the pile driving process has to be developed, which includes a model of the soil profile at the job site and input into the analysis program. Then, the model must be analyzed to assess whether the combination of hammer, pile and soil model work.Over the years, numerous individuals and organizations have tried to develop something that would fit nicely in between these approaches: something more advanced than a gut feeling yet something that could be done on the back of an envelope; in other words, a “Goldilocks” approach — not too simple, not too complex, but just right.Screening Tool CriteriaThe goals of the approach are twofold: (1) select the appropriate impact hammer to drive an open toe steel pipe or H-pile, and (2) then use the model for the subsequent high strain dynamic testing (HSDT). The Goldilocks approach centers around five different criteria.1. Maximum Driving StressTo minimize the risk of damage, the maximum driving stresses are generally limited to 80 to 90% of the yield stress (fy) of the steel section. This approach does not consider issues such as hammer alignment, initial imperfections, denting and/or elastic buckling, and pile material fatigue history. However, even when these issues are not applicable, limiting average stresses to 0.9fy or even 0.8fy does not necessarily mitigate the risk of pile damage (Mostafa, 2011)."

Jan 1, 2017

By Gregory M. Landry

"There is an old joke at Moretrench that defines dewatering as “that element of an underground construction project, which, when disregarded, will generate the low bidder.” Sigmund Freud wrote that all jokes are true, and the kernel of truth behind this one is that dewatering is often misunderstood or neglected until the last possible moment in the life of a project. The purpose of this article is to describe commonly used dewatering methods and to clear up a pervasive but fundamental misunderstanding about how to determine the amount of dewatering effort required for a project. The Tools of DewateringDewatering may be divided into two broad categories: (1) methods that remove water from the excavation after it has already entered and (2) methods that seek to exclude or intercept the water before it reaches the excavation. The former is generally self-performed by general or earth moving contractors using sumps and ditches, while the latter is usually done by a specialty contractor. SumpsProperly installed sumps can be an effective and economical way to control water inflow into a site. In this technique, groundwater is allowed to enter the site before being pumped away. Advantages of this method include lost cost, easy availability of equipment and the fact that a general contractor can self-perform the dewatering. However, caution should be used when deciding whether to use this method, and consideration should be given to the following factors:1. How will the soil behave under seepage forces? Will it run, potentially causing ground loss?2. How much groundwater lowering is required? If the groundwater only needs to be lowered a few feet, using sumps will be much more practical than for a situation that requires significant drawdown.3. Will the excavation subgrade soften or otherwise be damaged by allowing water to run over it?4. Is my workforce skilled enough to implement and manage the sumping plan?In the photo, the sump is capturing groundwater that has already entered the excavation by traveling under the sheets. In this instance, the house in the background of the photo was eventually purchased by the project owner after sustaining damage due to ground loss."

Jan 1, 2017

By Farhad Elmi

In this paper, a new procedure is used to find the bearing capacity of single piles and cone penetration resistance in soils. Although the procedure is mainly applicable to clay and sand using any plasticity model, this paper deals only with steady penetration in Sand. Cylindrical cavity expansion around the probe in a calibration chamber is modeled by finite element method using the HUJEUX elasto-plastic multi-mechanism model. The penetration resistance (qc) is related to cylindrical cavity expansion pressure limit (pL) using the method of Salgado et al. (1997). This procedure is tested using the results found in 3S/IMG calibration chamber. In this article the word "penetrometer" refers to both pile and cone.

Jan 1, 2002

By Aly M. Mohammad

The Howland Hook Terminal Facility located in Staten Island, New York is one of the most active container terminals in the Northeast United States. Due to the high capacity of the facility, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (PANYNJ) recently acquired the adjacent 37-acre Port Ivory Facility. Expansion of this Site facilitates the additional transfer of goods for rail transport, where formerly the facility was solely highway transport. Upon completion, the facility will have the ability to transfer containers directly to a freight rail line onsite by crossing from Howland Hook Site to the Port Ivory Site via a proposed bridge over Bridge Creek. The geology of the Port Ivory Site consists of shallow glacial deposits left by the leading edge of the last advance of the Wisconsin Glacier. Glacial and marine action over the millennia and the modifications of past construction combined to form a challenging site geologically. Prior to the PANYNJ acquiring the site, the Port Ivory Facility was occupied by Proctor and Gamble for nearly 100 years. Over the course of time, the site has had a variety of structures constructed and demolished at the site. The earliest structures were often supported on shallow foundations and the foundation types used progressed over the years transitioning from low capacity timber piles to various new pile types as they became available; such as Raymond tapered piles, steel piles with concrete cores, precast piles and cast in place foundations. Currently, we are designing 4-foot diameter high capacity drilled shafts to support a new bridge over Bridge Creek to connect the two sites. Drilled shafts proved to be a very economical solution from both a design and construction point of view to carry the axial load of the bridge of approximately 400 tons per shaft. The paper will present a historical evolution of the progress of deep foundation types used at the Port Ivory Site; from low capacity timber piles to high capacity large diameter drilled shafts. The paper will also present changes and modifications of geotechnical design criteria over time that affects the type of deep foundations used. For instance, utilizing new seismic design criteria requires selecting a deep foundation system that withstands seismic loading conditions and overcomes the effects of liquefaction.

Jan 1, 2004

By Gordon King

This paper presents a case study of large diameter continuous flight auger (CFA) piles and drilled shafts utilized for foundation support of a series of heavily loaded cement plant structures at the Suwannee American Cement (SAC) Plant in Branford, Florida. The high loads and exacting total and differential settlement criteria when combined with a highly variable subsurface geology provided a challenging design scenario. Fully instrumented static pile load tests were performed to determine design parameters in the variable weathered limestone bedrock. Ultimate side friction values ranged from 2 to 8 tsf within the limestone, resulting in the requirement for CFA piles up to one meter (approximately 40 inches) in diameter and socket lengths of up to 40 feet. At several localized areas, the limestone bedrock was in excess of 60 feet below grade, requiring the use of cased drilled shafts to depths on the order of 80 to 90 feet. An integral part of the production pile installation was the use of instrumentation to monitor drilling and concreting parameters. Calibration of drill rates, torque and auger rotation with rock quality was performed to allow monitoring of the soil stratigraphy at each pile location. When combined with the results of the instrumented load testing, the monitoring of drilling parameters allowed confirmation that sufficient socket length was achieved within the quality of rock present at each and every pile location.

Jan 1, 2003

By Andrew Rietz, Yu Bao, Steven Halewski

"HP-Pile foundations are the most favorable type of foundations for bridges because of their constructability, versatility with regard to subsoil conditions, and settlement controllability. For many years, bridge engineers have puzzled over the most economical way to orient HP-Piles: Should the strong axis be oriented in the longitudinal direction or in the transverse direction? The accurate design of foundations may considerably reduce construction costs. In order to answer this question, 3-D finite element models will be set up to analyze the effects of pile orientation on bridge behavior. Because seismic loading usually controls the structural design in seismic zones, it is important to investigate the effects of pile orientation under such loading. HP-Piles are designed conservatively due to the uncertainty of the dynamic soil-structure interaction during earthquakes. For the bridge substructure, the soil’s stiffness plays an important role in load distribution as the soil and piles act as a combined system to resist the seismic loading. The dynamic soil-structure interaction mechanisms of bridges in both the longitudinal and the transverse directions will be investigated through the use of 3-D finite element models. The numerical models will realistically simulate the soil-pileabutment- wingwall-superstructure system subjected to seismic loads. Nonlinear soil springs will be employed to model the non-elastic soil behavior. The analysis will provide theoretical support to the design practice.IntroductionAs sustainability has asserted itself in the public’s eye, bridge professionals have rushed to develop criteria for sustainable bridges. The three main categories that define and distinguish sustainable bridges are: lower energy input, increased durability, and simplified deconstruction. By optimizing the structural members, the engineer is able to reduce the material quantities for the bridge, effectively reducing the energy input for the bridge (Hunt; Whittemore). A deeper understanding of soilfoundation- structure mechanism will facilitate sustainable bridge design by lowering energy input and increasing the service life of bridges (Rietz et al.)."

Jan 1, 2017

By Charles M. Wilk

"Mass stabilization (MS) is a ground improvement technique that can prepare areas of low bearing strength soil for subsequent infrastructure development. The technique involves mixing binding agents such as portland cement, fly ash, slag, or lime into the subject soil while the soil remains in-place (insitu). The binders “cement” the soil grains together to form a cement modified soil or a soil cement. The MS-treated area now has improved bearing capacity to support infrastructure or to prevent movement of the material such as landslides.The same insitu soil mixing technique can be used to address contaminated areas. Binders or reagents are mixed into soil. The treatment protects human health and the environment by immobilizing hazardous constituents within the treated material. When used for the purpose of environmental remediation the technology is called Insitu Solidification/Stabilization (ISS).Both Mass Stabilization and ISS treatments require laboratory studies to develop a mix design of soil and binder(s) that produce the desired physical and/or chemical properties. The mix design is then transferred into the field. Successful MS and ISS treatments rely on reproduction at full-scale of the mix design and the thorough mixing attained at laboratory scale. Fifty to 70% of the cost of a MS or ISS project is in the cost of the binding agent that is to be mixed into the subject soil. Under-dosing, overdosing, non-thorough mixing, and mixing in the wrong areas all create cost over-runs.This paper will discuss recent innovations in mass stabilization systems that improve the cost effectiveness of the treatment technology. Specialized equipment can impart greater mixing shear thus improving the thoroughness of mixing. Dry powder pressure feeders can conserve the “drying capacity” of binder resulting in higher strengths at lower binder dosages. Global Positioning System (GPS)-based systems can guide the mixing operator for complete mixing coverage. An integrated tracking and feeding system can record that proper dosing and mixing was accomplished and generate construction QA/QC reports for the client.INTRODUCTIONNew or expanding infrastructure projects may encounter areas of low bearing capacity soil or areas where marginal materials such as waste, dredged material, or sediment have been placed. Mass stabilization is a geotechnical method that can be used to improve the bearing capacity or stiffness of soil. Mass stabilization involves mixing binding agents into soil subject to treatment while the soil remains in-place or insitu.Mass stabilization technique can also address contaminated soil therefore, the same technique can be used to attain both civil and environmental engineering goals. In this environmental application the technology is known as insitu solidification/stabilization (ISS). ISS protects human health and the environment by immobilizing hazardous constituents within the treated material."

Jan 1, 2015

By Kamil Nuzha, Jianchao Li, Bashar S. Qubain

"The Philadelphia Water Department is rehabilitating Belmont Raw Water Basin. As part of this work, a 500-ft long, temporary cofferdam was designed to retain 35 ft of combined water and soil at the western half during the reconstruction of the eastern half. A cofferdam that comprises two integral rows of sheet piles was selected to take advantage of the soil’s weight between the sheet piles for increased stability. To fine tune the design, a geotechnical investigation was carried out to verify the subsurface conditions and, in particular, the top of rock variations along the centerline of the cofferdam. A detailed finite element analysis was performed based on the subsurface findings and incorporating the construction sequence to evaluate the behavior of the cofferdam at the following stages: installation of tie rods to connect to the two rows of sheet piles; partial excavation and installation of tiebacks; complete excavation of the east basin, and demolition of the cofferdam. Inclinometers and survey markers were installed every 100 ft along the cofferdam and were monitored throughout construction. The deformation measurements were in good agreement with the finite element results.INTRODUCTIONThe Philadelphia Water Department (PWD) Belmont Raw Water Basin is located at the intersection of City Line and Belmont Avenues in Philadelphia, PA. The facility actually contains two raw water basins, east and west, separated by an earthen dividing dike. Water leakage at the bottom of the basins and through the dividing dike together with increasing demand for a larger storage capacity dictated the replacement of the wide earthen dike with new narrower concrete structure. The temporary cofferdam was designed for a two-year period to facilitate excavation support, water cutoff, removal of the existing earthen dike and replacing it with a new concrete dike. During this construction sequence, the water level in the west basin had to be maintained at or near its full capacity.Various excavation support systems were considered for this project prior to the selection of a double wall sheet pile cofferdam. Fig. 1 shows a plan view of the cofferdam and the new dividing dike. A typical cross section of the two structures is shown in Fig. 2. Double row sheet pile walls are commonly used as both temporary and permanent retaining systems in open water applications such as construction works, quaywalls, breakwaters and revetments for storing industrial waste as indicated by Ohori, et al. (1984), Ohori et al. (1988), and Khan, et al. (2001). There are many advantages to double row sheet pile systems as recognized by Ohori, et al. (1984; 1988): (1) It can be installed and removed in the presence of water easily and quickly; (2) it provides stability with small width to height ratio, utilizing the existing soils between the installed sheet pile rows; and (3) it serves well as a means for water cutoff. These advantages meet the specific project requirements."

Jan 1, 2016