Search Documents

By David S. Yang

The Cement Deep Soil Mixing (CDSM) method introduces and mixes cementitious materials with in situ soils using hollow-stem rotating shafts equipped with a cutting tool at the tip and mixing paddles above the tip. CDSM generally produces a soil-cement panel consisting of three overlapping soil-cement columns. The soil-cement panel is then extended to form walls, which are effective for excavation support and groundwater control due to the continuity and low permeability of soil-cement walls. Two design approaches could be taken in the application of CDSM for excavation support: 1) single wall design and 2) gravity wall design. The former one is treated as a wall technology and the latter one is treated as a soil stabilization method. This paper will review the CDSM equipment and installation procedures for the construction of these two types of soil-cement walls. Four case examples are used to illustrate the design and application of these two types of soil-cement walls.

Jan 1, 2003

By E. Mongilardi

The construction of large underground openings through cohesionless or weak cohesive soils and under the water table in particular, often requires a ground improvement to be done from the surface or ahead of the excavation face in tunnelling problems. To this purpose various injection procedures have been used in the past and new outstanding techniques have been developed recently, such as "jet-grouting", extending the feasibility range. The paper presents a review of basic principles and practical design criteria with particular reference to the newest trends of development. Case histories have been selected within the experience of specialist contractor Rodio Co. showing the variety of problems solved by manifold grouting procedures and layouts, in widely different soils ranging from the sandy-gravelly alluvia of Milan to the soft marine clays of Singapore.

Jan 1, 2010

By Scott C. Vollmer

This paper seeks to examine some of the technical factors influencing the deflection of Mechanically Stabilized Earth (MSE) retaining walls based on the authors' field observation of numerous structures. Excessive deflections can be unsightly and can be perceived as wall failure. Deflections can cause cracking or gapping of the facing units and general misalignment. Deflection of the reinforced backfill zone behind the wall face can result in settlement of the backfill zone and adjacent pavement cracking. Deflections can be the result of excessive movement external or internal to the reinforced soil structure. This paper only examines internal factors affecting wall deflections. External factors such as foundation settlement are not discussed.

Jan 1, 2003

By Gyimah Kasali

Rapid Load Testing was performed as part of an extensive drilled pier testing program for the University of California Berkeley Capital Improvement Program. The purpose of the program was to: (1) Verify the axial compressive design capacity values for the planned 24" piers, and to estimate the capacity of the existing 30" CIDH piers, and (2) To evaluate the seismic performance of the proposed drilled shafts. The Fundex PLT was used since the loading period of the PLT is very similar to the period of a seismic event, making it an ideal tool to model the pier response to seismic events. "Performance-based design" of structures subject to seismic loads has been of particular interest to UC Berkeley Seismic Review Committee and the Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center. The comparison of static tests to Rapid Load testing also provided valuable correlations. The program represents one of the most comprehensive drilled pier test programs on the West Coast. The testing program consisted of Rapid Load Testing using the Fundex PLT on 6 drilled piers. Rapid Load Tests were followed by conventional static compression and tension tests on selected piers, followed by another cycle of rapid load tests on the statically tested piers. The piers featured extensive instrumentation to allow detailed interpretation of the test result. Correlations were drawn to compare static load test result to that of the PLT in the particular soil profile, and the PLT also provided the data to analyze the ultimate seismic capacity of the piers. The load test results indicate that the ratio of interpreted failure load from the PLT data to the corresponding load from the static load test data is about 1.2 to 1.3 for the clayey soils underlying the test site. The results also indicate that the PLT offers an economical approach to defining the stiffness of drilled pier foundations subjected to seismic loads for use in performance-based design.

Jan 1, 2002

By Walter Ensinger

Special foundation works is one of the most innovative sectors in civil engineering and construction. Both engineering techniques and construction machinery are undergoing continu­ous further development. These developments are providing ways to meeting the world-wide requirement for special geotechnical works even faster, even better and more efficiently. Unfortunately, accident prevention organisations have had to realise that the figures on in­dustrial accidents in special foundation works are still above average in number. The Safety & Environmental Working Group of the EFFC thereupon started to carry out a survey on acci­dents occurring in this sector and used this information as a basis for the preparation of acci­dent statistics and an accident analysis. The objective of this undertaking is to determine key accident occurrences and their causes and to consequently determine measures for improved health and industrial safety.

Jan 1, 2002

By Gao Dazhao

This paper presents some research results of pile foundation performance. Measurements on the bearing behaviour and driving effects of piles have been carried out during pile testing and pile driving. It has been found that the ratio of end resistance to the ultimate load depends on the pile length, and the ratio in general is less than 40% for single piles. However for pile group, the end resistance seems to be greater than skin friction. The characteristic curves of skin friction and end re­sistance appear as interaction between soils and pile. The contribution of skin friction to the pile bearing capacity not only depends on soil properties but also on the relative position of the soil layer. The pore pressure and the lateral pressure in ground have been observed during the stage of driving piles. Based on the available data, the radius of plastic region and the coefficient of pore pressure A can be found analytically. The pore pressure time process curves which may be used for practice have been predicted by means of numerical method.

Jan 1, 1991

By Dean E. Matthews

The concept of a pile for construction is credited to a Neolithic tribe called the "Swiss Lake Dwellers" who lived in what is now Switzerland about 6,000 years ago. They used piling, not for supporting heavy loads as we do today, but for elevation to protect themselves from wildlife. The Romans often used piles, and built many structures, including buildings, homes, bridges, roads and viaducts on piling. The Romans built the first bridge across the Tiber River in Rome on timber piles in B.C. 1620. Homes in the cities of Venice and Ravenna were built on piles from B.C. 100 to A.D. 400. The Romans also built the first bridge across the Thames River in London in A.D. 60 on timber piling.

Jan 1, 2003

By Peter White

A bridge reconstruction project involved driving pipe piles for the new foundations. Disturbances within soil layers at depth caused sinkholes to open up within the construction site. After a near fatal accident, the pile driving installations were suspended. The solution involved ground im­provement through cement grouting with sleeve pipes and special grout additives to minimize migration of cement grout.

Jan 1, 1997

By Robert A. Field

Static-Load Piledriving utilizes a hydraulic push to facilitate the installation of a pile. The pile is not rotated, impacted or vibrated. A smooth pushing force advances the pile incrementally into the ground. Static-Load devices must have a reaction mass to push against. The most simple form of a Static-Load device is a jack; more advanced equipment, such as the Still Worker, also utilizes this approach. This paper focuses on the use of the Still Worker on three challenging projects. In each case, the existing site conditions made it risky, or unattractive, to utilize conventional impact, vibratory, or drilled-shaft equipment.

Jan 1, 1997

By Philip Dubbeling

Conventional dynamic sheetpiling techniques are ill-suited to urban development because of the emission of excessive noise and ground vibrations. Drilled shafts and slurry walls alleviate some of these environmental concerns but add additional problems due to large bulky machines, reliance on dusty concrete plants and urban trucking grief. To solve these problems, pre-fabricated sheetpiles are hydraulically jacked-in by reaction principle using a compact and lightweight press-in machine, a so called the "Silent Piler". Through scientific analysis, definition and systemization of press-in machines and methods, new construction concepts such as the one-step approach, implant structures, functional design and life cycle design have been developed to comply with new basic construction principles.

Jan 1, 2006

By Allan Sylvester

This paper will discuss the design, construction, and performance of the support of excavation on the San Diego State University LRT Station. The vertical elements of the system include drilled secant piles and drilled soldier piles. We will discuss the geo-technical characteristics, design and construction considerations, loading criteria, construction techniques, schedule constraints, and performance of the pile and support of excavation systems. In consideration of the conference theme, there will be a discussion of the successful accomplishment of meeting the interim milestone dates of the Contract. The project team cooperatively worked to design and install approximately 1,100 drilled secant and soldier piles as well as excavate and install the balance of the support of excavation elements in such a manner as to minimize the disruption to campus students and operations.

Jan 1, 2002

By Mike Neill, O&apos

? Bypass soft soils near the surface ? Resist uplift loads ? Resist lateral loads ? Bypass scourable soils ? Bypass liquefyable soils ? Mitigate movement of expansive or frozen soils ? "Tune" foundations for vibrating machinery

Jan 1, 1998

By Marco D. Boscardin

Control and mitigation of building response to construction activities are assuming a greater role in design decisions for underground construction. Alternatives for controlling building response have multiplied with the continued development of ground modification methods, better control of construction activities that cause ground movements, and increased understanding of building behavior and response. This paper describes approaches to estimating building response to construction-related ground displacements caused by adjacent excavation and highlights the discussion with several case history examples. Examples discussed includes experiences with two, seven-story historic structures, supported by timber piles with granite block pile caps, which were underpinned in preparation for ground-freezing ground stabilization and tunnel construction beneath the buildings. The elevation of each building column was monitored and elevation adjustments were actively performed during construction. The second example examines the performance of a slurry wall braced cut, 45 to 50 feet deep penetrating through a stiff crust into a soft clay layer and associated building response. This cut was immediately adjacent to two, approximately 15-story office buildings, which were supported by deep foundations founded in the stiff crust.

Jan 1, 2003

By Reda M. Bakeer

"An approach slab is the roadway segment that immediately follows a bridge intended to provide a smooth transition between the two elements. Some approach slabs have developed rough rideability with time due to differential settlement between the roadway embankment and the bridge. Soils in south Louisiana are generally poor and highly compressible and, therefore, pile-supported approach slabs were occasionally used. Timber piles of variable lengths are driven into the soft soils where no appreciable toe support exists. This resulted in the soils both supporting loads through shaft resistance and yet experiencing long-term consolidation settlement. Field testing and review of the records of over 120 approach slabs constructed in south Louisiana yielded the conclusion that their performance is primarily governed by negative skin friction (downdrag) imposed on the relatively short timber piles. A software (TU-DRAG) was developed to evaluate the deflection profile of a pile-supported approach slab based on its geometry and conditions of the underlying soils. It evaluates the effect of dragload considering the number and spacing of the piles at each transverse row and their variable lengths along the approach slab. TU-DRAG was utilized in the design of two transportation related projects which have been in service for more than 10 years.INTRODUCTIONThe problem of differential settlement at bridge approaches or “the bump at the bridge” has been recognized for many years. Research studies (1986, 1989, 1997, 2009 and 2013) by the Transportation Research Board (TRB) and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) provided comprehensive evaluations of the performance of bridge approach slabs by assessing their field conditions and construction and maintenance records. Various states have also performed their own studies to investigate the performance of bridge approach slabs. The studies considered various types of structures including soil- and pile-supported approach slabs, integral bridge abutments and open-end abutments. Recommendations were provided for the design of new structures and for maintaining and repairing existing structures. Guidelines were offered regarding tolerable movements of bridges and their foundations based on measurements of vertical and horizontal movements of 580 bridges Moulton (1986). Vertical and horizontal movements greater than 102 mm (4 inches) and 51 mm (2 inches), respectively, were considered intolerable. Tolerable limits for angular distortion (differential settlement to span length) were suggested to be 1/250 and 1/200 for continuous and simple spans, respectively. It was reported that a differential settlement greater than 13 mm (0.5 inch) at the bridge interface would be sufficient to constitute a “bump” requiring mitigation."

Jan 1, 2017

By G. Tamaro

The World Financial Center is situated on a 60,000 square meter site at Battery Park City at the southern tip of Manhattan Island. The foundations for the buildings and the related infrastructure posed difficult design and construction problems since the site was filled land in the Hudson (North) River. Foundation construction was made difficult by both the geology and the existence of two railroad tunnels which passed under the site. The soils at the site were unsuitable to support construction of heavy structures, and as a result, all of the foundations had to be carried down to bedrock, or the glacial till over rock. Two buildings were supported on piling and special battered caissons which provided lateral support against wind loading. The other two buildings were supported directly on rock, requiring excavation to depths of 19 meters (63 feet) below grade.

Jan 1, 1989

By P. V. Chandramohan

"In ports, piled berths are designed and constructed for berthing of ships with a finite draught. Piles in a bridge foundation also have a large free stand above scoured level. The piles of these structures have to withstand large horizontal forces imparted by the impact of the approaching vessels or due to longitudinal and transverse action in a bridge. It is also imperative that these piles have to project out of the dredged / scoured bed. These piles are normally designed as slender compression members subjected to bending also. They are subjected to vertical load tests for assessing the soil resistance. Lateral load tests, as a rule, are also stipulated. IS and IRC codes stipulate a deflection criteria for lateral load test to arrive at the capacity. These tests are usually conducted on a working pile by jacking out two piles. At the time of the test, pile will be free headed. But in service, piles are fixed head. There is a large difference in deflections between a fixed head and a free headed pile. Besides, a free headed pile will be subjected to a much higher bending moment than the fixed head one. This will put the working test pile under risk of breaking during the test. The problem is analyzed with case studies. INTRODUCTION Vertical capacity of piles is assessed by static formulae. This formula is based on the soil properties obtained from random soil exploration and laboratory and in-situ testing. Since soil is not a homogeneous medium, properties can vary. The design parameters taken for computations may be different from the ones at the interface of the pile with the soil. The best way is to find out is by a load test. The code IRC:78-2014 has rightly stated that initial load test is part of the design process. This is true with the vertical load test. But there are certain problems with the purpose and inference of the lateral load test. In both the tests the criteria for acceptance is the quantum of movement of the point of application of the load. In the former, the movement is vertical and depends more on the compression of the soil than the compressive strain in concrete. But in the latter, this movement is partly on account of the flexural rigidity of the pile and partly due to the horizontal compressibility of the soil. The role of rigidity of the pile is more when compressibility of the soil is higher. Lateral load test is done by jacking one pile against another because it is difficult to get an independent horizontal reaction. Please see Fig.1 Photo."

Jan 1, 2015

By Donald A. Bruce

The paper reviews aspects of the construction and performance of prestressed ground anchors installed in soils and weak rocks. Attention is focused on good practice for drilling, tendon fabrication and handling, grouting, stressing and testing. Regional variations - not always logically justified - are described. The performance of anchors in a variety of geological conditions is illustrated with reference to recent full scale test programs. 1. Introduction In the United States there has been steady growth in the use of prestressed anchors in materials other than competent or hard rock, in the years since their introduction in the late 1960's. This expansion has to a large extent been driven by specialty geotechnical contractors who both imported foreign developments and conducted their own basic researches, in locally prevailing conditions. With such data and experience, these engineers have had the confidence to promote "alternative solutions" for difficult earth support problems to receptive designers and owners. In turn, being engaged in the details of design and performance monitoring has given these parties the close exposure necessary for the real transfer and understanding of the technological concepts, and this knowledge has generated positive feedback for the contractors.

Jan 1, 1991

By A. F. van Weele

In general cast-in place piles will have an irregular pile shape. However, it is possible that these irregularities are so large that they may lead to pile deficiencies. It is very rarely possible to examine the pile foundations visually. Also the performance of a static or dynamic load test on each individual pile is not practical and much too expensive. This is the reason why pile integrity tests have been developed: to reduce the risk of inadequate pile foundations by performing a simple test. Pile integrity tests are non destructive tests which are carried out after a pile has been installed. Over the years a number of techniques have been developed of which the most important techniques are briefly described in this paper. Of all pile integrity testing methods, Sonic Integrity Testing is the most widely used method in western Europe. This method has been developed by TNO some 15 years ago. Since then the method has been improved, largely due to advances in micro-processing. A major improvement was made by the introduction of digital signal processing techniques. This made the Sonic Integrity Testing method more accurate (smaller defects can be detected), faster (more than 200 piles can be tested on a single working-day) and more reliable (the results are easier to interprete). A few cases will be presented which will show the usefulness of the Sonic Integrity Testing method. In one of these cases, a helpful tool for interpretation of the results is explained: the Sonic Integrity Testing Simulation program TNOWAVE. Notwithstanding the fact that Sonic Integrity Testing is a powerful method, it has also some strict limitations. These will be discussed at the end of the paper.

Jan 1, 1987

By Tracy Brettmann

The use of rock-socketed Augered Cast-In-Place (ACIP) piles is new to the Austin and central Texas region. This case history describes the design methodology, load test results, quality control procedures and the rate of production pile installation for the first large commercial project where ACIP piles were used in Austin. The piles were 24 inches in diameter and extended through about 45 ft of alluvial materials to be socketed 6 ft into limestone. A full-scale instrumented load test was performed on a test pile that was loaded to 452 tons and held for 24 hours. Telltales were installed in the middle and the tip of the test pile. As part of the overall quality control procedures, singlehole sonic integrity logging was performed on the production piles to verify structural integrity during pile installation. During pile production, an average of 14 piles per day were installed, which is approximately seven times faster than the original design that consisted of drilled shaft foundations.

Jan 1, 1998

By Dennis J. Riley

A. This outline addresses what a sub-contractor, or a subsub-contractor should do to get paid in the event the general contractor or building owner files for bankruptcy. B. Negotiating payment terms. Progress payments vs. "pay when paid". How a sub or subsub can avoid financing the contract. C. Court interpretation of "pay when paid" clauses allow postponement not excusal of payment. See, e.g., Seal Tite Corporation v. Ehret. Inc., 589 F. Supp. 701 (D.N.J. 1984) (where the court held that the general contractor could not delay payment indefinitely to the subcontractor in the event of non-payment from the owner); United Plate Glass Co. v. Metal Industries. Inc., 525 A.2d 468 (Commw. Ct. Pa. 1987) (where the court held that payment from owner was not a condition precedent to paying subcontractor but instead a timing mechanism indicating when payment should be made); But see. Straham v. Landis Construction Co., 499 So. 2d 417 (La. App. 4 Cir. 1986) (where the court strictly interpreted the "pay when paid" clause).

Jan 1, 1991