Search Documents

By Jennifer L. Bell, PATRICK L. YORIO, Emily J. Haas, Susan M. Moore, Lee A. Greenawald

Although researchers have struggled to replicate Heinrich’s safety triangle findings (Heinrich 1931) for various reasons (e.g., no access to his original database and it is unclear if the database was of a single establishment/operation or for an entire industry), the occupational safety community has continued to adopt and expand the applications of this theory (e.g., McSween 2003). Within the mining industry, the potential exists for operations and companies to use concepts from the safety triangle as a way to inform or challenge the practices employed within their health and safety management systems (HSMS) to prevent incidents (Backlund 2016). This paper considers data obtained from the Mine Safety and Health Administration’s databases and demonstrates the validity of applying the safety triangle theory at the mine level. The results support the use of this theory and demonstrate that lower severity incidents can predict fatalities in a subsequent year where significant nuances and caveats to applying the theory are identified and discussed.

Jul 25, 2020

By AIME AIME

MONDAY, Feb. 21, evokes memories of the Silver Corridor at the Waldorf to be recalled and reflected upon for time to come when thoughts drift to the Annual Meeting of 1944. Crowded though it was, on occasion there lurked in the mind's eye a vision of what might have been had the 2886 persons who put in an appearance at one time or another milled around in the lobby of 29 West 39th Street. Some confusion resulted from difficulty in locating meeting rooms, but for the most part everyone found what he wanted. The usual bulletin board of members registered was missing this year and rumor has it that tile Waldorf didn't approve. Registration broke all previous records with many a busy engineer realizing that the program had something to offer that would be of use in his particular job. It might be noted here that "Arpad" co-operated nicely, previewing spring days on Monday, Wednesday, and Thursday; Tuesday was a bit damp.

Jan 1, 1944

By Matthew Janes

Advantages: Clean samples Low sample disturbance Very low spoil Versatile Fast Penetrates all formations Resonant Drill 100 or 150 kW Self tuning to resonance Rotation to 100 rpm Increased depth in dense soil Increased productivity Reduce water use Reduce casing plugging

May 1, 2013

By John S. Pack

The last 25 years have seen rapid expansion in the use of helical screw pile foundations and tiebacks for new and retrofit construction of buildings and earth retention structures. An estimated $100 million was spent in 2002 on helical foundations and tiebacks in the United States alone. While design information is available in the literature, information regarding quality control, inspection and performance monitoring is lacking. Recognition of at least one manufacturer's helical foundation material by the Uniform Building Code, Standard Building Code, and BOCA (all three codes now combined into the ICC International Building Code) has given added urgency to the dissemination of reliable and practical quality control, inspection and performance monitoring procedures. This paper describes a set of such procedures that have been followed for 17 years by engineers experienced in the industry who have directly installed or been involved in the installation of over 140,000 helical foundations and tiebacks in divers soil conditions for various types of structures, including earth retention structures. Topics covered include design responsibility, building code listings and requirements, manufacturer ISO certification, manufacturing process, material and installation specifications, installation contractor certification, field placement, installation procedures, field inspection, building code inspection and performance monitoring. The paper concludes with a step by step example of practical quality control, inspection and performance monitoring procedures on a typical helical foundation project.

Jan 1, 2003

By Gary L. Seider, Dana A. Wesolek, Fred C. Schmednecht

"A new condominium project, The Atelier, developed by Pickus Companies located at the corner of Bryn Mawr and Sheridan in Chicago, IL required an earth retention system to protect the surrounding roads, alley, and existing neighboring apartment bui lding during its construction. Slurry Systems, Inc. (SSI) and Ground Engineering Consultants, Inc. designed the earth retention system using cantilevered sheet piling for three of the four sides: two sides bordering major streets and one side bordering an alley. For the fourth side, which borders an existing occupied brick building, a combination of sheet pil ing and AB. CHANCE® helical screw piers were used. SSI was actively involved in the review process of its earth retention system with the City of Chicago and quickly learned that there was no specific code for hel ical piers/anchors. (It appears that this is the case with most metropolitan cities throughout the United States). Consequently, the approval of underpinning for this project became the critical path, as much testing, calculations, meetings, and other details were required prior to its approval.SSI and AB. CHANCE® recognized that this process for underpinning approval must be seen by other contractors/suppliers who wish to use helical piers/anchors in the City of Chicago. Consequently, this project served as an opportunity to work with the City of Chicago and the City's Building Code Committee in furthering the development of the Helical Piers/Anchors Code, Section 1814. INTRODUCTION - HELICAL PIERSDefinition. A helical pier or anchor consists of one or more helix-shaped steel bearing plate(s) attached to a central steel stem (solid bar or pipe), which is installed by rotating or ""torquing"" into the ground. Each helix is attached near the tip, is circular in plan , and is formed into a screw thread with a defined pitch. Helical piers/anchors are pre-fabricated and can derive their load-carrying capacity through both end bearing and skin friction. The helical piers/anchors can be augmented with grout."

Jan 1, 2005

By Dilip Khatri

Helical pile anchors have gained acceptance over the past sixty years. Most recently they have been commonplace in the 20th century for the power utility industry in anchoring transmission towers, equipment platforms, street lighting, telephone poles, and radio tower applications. They have a strong proven industrial track record in these industries. As the cost of conventional deep pile foundations rises, the practical benefits of helical pile anchors becomes evident as a practical alternative. Noted for their uplift capacity, helical piles demonstrate equally strong compressive capacity as a structural foundation element. This paper summarizes the history, practical benefits, and technical requirements for helical piles. Significant structural testing has been completed at various universities. The practical benefits of these tests are discussed. One case example of proven performance is presented to demonstrate the advantages and disadvantages of helical pile anchors as suitable foundation elements.

Jan 1, 2003

By Kevin Baumgartner, Steven Babcock

A landfill in Phoenix, AZ reached capacity and was graded over in the 1970s. The property was subdivided into lots in 2007 to create a business park. However, the challenging site conditions caused by the underlaying landfill put into question the feasibility of typical deep foundation systems. Several different foundation systems were evaluated to support the proposed development. The considered systems were: drilled concrete shaft, driven piles, drilled micropiles and helical piles. Soil stability, landfill decomposition, method of installation, flexibility of design, anticipated material, and equipment costs were considered. A system of helical piles with concrete pile caps and grade beams was selected. To mitigate unknown obstructions, holes were drilled through the landfill debris at pile locations and then backfilled with screened granular material. The helical piles were installed through these backfilled holes and advanced to bear in competent native material below the landfill. This method allowed for minimal disturbance of the landfill materials and provided a strong and adaptable foundation. Additional advantages of helical piles on this site include minimal installation vibration, no grout or concrete in the deep foundation, and capacity verification for each pile via torque correlation. Two load tests were performed to verify the design.

Sep 8, 2021

By Jeff Wilkinson, Brandon Walter

"A&N Electrical Cooperative provides electrical service to the counties of Accomack and Northampton along Virginia’s Eastern Shore and to Smith Island in Somerset County, Md.A&N recently worked to improve the efficiency of power distribution to a small island community and marina on Tangier Island in the Chesapeake Bay. This improvement consisted of upgrading the existing distribution substation with a new 25 kV 2-bay box distribution structure. Earth Contact Products (ECP) collaborated with PowerServices, Inc. (PSI) to design and install a helical foundation support system as part of the substation upgrade. Feasibility EvaluationThroughout the design process, A&Nworked with its partners PSI (design) andT&D Solutions (installation) to identifycost-effective alternatives. Foundationsystems considered included cast-in-placereinforced concrete caissons, precastconcrete foundations, driven steel piles and helical piles. In evaluating all of theoptions, the greatest concern was gettingthe material onto the island, followedclosely by the availability of the equipmentto install the foundations. Clearly, cost,more specifically the installed cost, was asignificant consideration and decisionfactor throughout the process.There were several limiting factors that had to be considered during the design process, the most significant of which was that all of the material had to be barged to the site. With traditional reinforced concrete deep foundations in mind, the cost for installing these piles was projected to be nearly $2,000/cu yd ($262/cu m) of installed concrete. Given that approximately 5 to 6 cu yd (3.8 to 4.6 cu m) of concrete would be required for this structure, the cost was significantly high for this project. What’s more, because the components of the concrete mix would have to be barged and then hand mixed on site, there was concern regarding both the time required to complete the piles and the quality of the installed concrete. For the driven pile alternative, the availability, or lack thereof, of equipment and material cost resulted in a total cost estimate that was more expensive than that of the concrete piling alternative. The high material cost for the piles, which was more than double than the cost of concrete, was due to the number and size of piles needed to resist the overturning moment. Ultimately, the team selected the helical pile alternative. The decision to a use helical pile foundation system was based on many factors, not the least of which was the remote location of the project site and the difficulties associated with getting material, equipment and construction personnel to the project site."

Jan 1, 2017

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 Gary L. Seider

Helical screw piles are used in various applications including the underpinning of distressed foundations and as deep foundations for new structures. At present, maximum design loads range between 12.5 and 50 tons. Helical piles installed with in-situ grouting of the central steel shaft are a relatively new type of deep foundation, which have extended the present maximum design loads to the 100-ton range. Vickars & Clemence discussed this new foundation system in a paper presented at GEO-Denver 2000 in Denver, CO. Over the past three years, grouted shaft helicals have been used successfully on remedial and new construction projects all across North America. The authors have studied several construction projects in a variety of soil conditions to compile a list of practical design guidelines. Those guidelines include installability of grouted shaft helicals based on soil type, equipment requirements, grout selection, and theoretical vs. actual load capacity. In a number of cases, full-scale, field load tests were conducted in both granular and cohesive soils and the results broken down between tip resistance on the helix bearing plates and friction resistance on the grouted shaft. Data is presented which will further efforts to develop a design model and method to accurately predict the axial and lateral capacity of grouted shaft helicals.

Jan 1, 2003

By Roy Jennings

The Discovery Expedition of St. Charles, MO chose to build its two-story museum in the flood plain of the Missouri River, near the starting point of the Lewis and Clark Expedition. Should the lower level be inundated at flood stage, plans call for the replica riverboats to be moved by trailer to higher ground. The museum's design required an open span structure with heavily loaded footing or piles. Spread footings could not be used due to the compressible soil profile. The location, in a historical district, precluded dynamically driven piles. Sixty-three uncased Helical Pulldown Micropiles were driven to the bearing stratum to support the museum with minimum disturbance. There were no spoils to dispose of during construction and the piles were completed in eight working days with minimum impact to the environment and neighborhood. The maximum working load required was 84,000 pounds (374kN). Test results are given in the form of installing torque.

Jan 1, 2003

By C E. Gordon Brown

Aircraft utilization, weather and cost data are given for three separate projects north of the sixtieth parallel in the Northwest Territories and the Yukon Territory. These operations, carried out by helicopter-equipped geological and prospecting parties, have cost $24 to $30 per square mile, depending principally on the distance from the base. They provide adequate surface exploration of areas with 40 to 50 per cent rock outcrop. A good one-inch-to-one-mile geological map can be made. T HE exploration of the Canadian northland has been given increasing attention by the mining industry during recent years. In many cases, the initial problem is to make an adequate reconnaissance of a large area where existing geological information is meagre. The Geological Survey of Canada pioneered the use of helicopter-equipped geological parties for mapping at a scale of eight miles to the inch.

Jan 1, 1964

By Arthur R. Rattew

In conjunction with the research study of the Coronation Mine recommended by the National Advisory Committee on Research in the Geo-logical Sciences and coordinated by the Geological Survey of Canada, Canadian Aero Service Limited per-formed a detailed, low-altitude air-borne survey over a block of ground encompassing the .Coronation Mine. The in-phase/out-of-phase air-borne electromagnetic data are com-pared with "horizontal-loop" ground data with reference to: size and nature of conductors detected; criteria in selection of targets for drilling. In-formation provided by Hudson Bay Mining and Smelting Company on their drilling of the numerous conductors in the area is employed in this comparison. The merits of combining a sensitive airborne magnetometer with an air-borne electromagnetic unit are discussed. The magnetic data are considered very important in assessing conductors as prospects for commercial sulphida deposits in this area of numerous electromagnetic anomalies. The "Coronation" survey illustrates

Jan 1, 1962

By Edwin M. Thomasson

HELIUM SHIPMENTS in 1964 exceeded the volume shipped during the previous year for the 15th successive time. Shipments from Bureau of Mines helium plants were 667.4 million cubic feet,2 about 6 percent more than in 1963. Production at Bureau of Mines plants totaled 784.5 million cubic feet. An additional 3,193.1 million cubic feet, which was produced by private companies participating in the helium conservation program, was purchased by the Bureau and stored underground for future use. The Bureau of Mines continued to sell helium at $35 a thousand cubic feet, the price established in 1961. Substantial railway freight rate reductions for tank car shipments of helium went into effect during the year, resulting in a lower delivered price for helium. As the Nation moved ahead in the space age, it became increasingly apparent that helium would continue to play an essential role in research, in technology, in defense, and in industry.

Jan 1, 1965

By Edwin M. Thomasson

Helium shipments for 1965 exceeded the volume shipped during the previous year for the 16th successive time. Shipments from Bureau of Mines helium plants were 698.6 million cubic feet, 2 about 4.7 percent more than in 1964. Production at Bureau of Mines plants totaled 757.4 million cubic feet, and an additional 3,549.6 million cubic feet was produced by private companies participating in the helium conservation program and purchased by the Bureau of Mines and stored underground for future use. The Bureau of Mines continued to sell helium at $35 per thousand cubic feet, the price established in 1961. Production and sales of helium increased from the one private plant operating entirely outside the Government's helium program. A second private plant was virtually complete at yearend, although actual production had not commenced.

Jan 1, 1967

By H. S. Kennedy

THE HELIUM ACT (50 Stat. 885; 50 U. S. C. 161,163-166), as amended, places the responsibility for conserving, producing, and selling helium upon the Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Bureau of Mines-the only producer of helium in quantity in the world. It operates 4 plants-I each at Amarillo and Exell, Tex.; Otis, Kans.; and Navajo (Shiprock), N. Mex. The demand for helium has increased steadily since the decline immediately after World War II and is expected to exceed the capacity of the present plants in the near future. The Congress has appropriated $6,000,000 far constructing a new plant. In addition to providing additional capacity to meet increased demands for helium, the new plant will enable the Bureau of Mines to better conserve the helium in, the Government-owned reserves at Amarillo and Navajo.

Jan 1, 1958

By Harold W. Lipper

BUREAU OF MINES helium plants produced a. record-breaking 477 million cubic feet of this essential element in 1959. The supply of helium was less than the demand before operations were resumed at the Navajo plant in July and begun Sit a. new plant at Keyes, Okla., in August. Helium was in abundant supply after August, and the informal allocation system which had been in use intermittently since 1955 was discontinued Delivery of 26 new tank cars in August and September increased the total in the tank-car pool to 163. Defense and space agencies and the Atomic Energy Commission continued to use more helium in their operations and research.

Jan 1, 1960

By AIME AIME

TRANSFER to the Bureau of Mines of the responsibility for conservation and production of helium, and announcement that a proposal has been made to the President for commercial operation of the Los Angeles has attracted new attention to the helium program of the Government. The matter is one in which mining engineers, and the mining industry in general, have a peculiar interest. Helium is a byproduct of the petroleum and natural gas industry. It is found in certain of the natural gases which have themselves been discovered, in the main, in the search for oil. If it is to be produced on a large scale, the conservation and development of the fields will necessarily be done by the men of the oil and gas industry. There is no known or expected source of supply of quantities of commercial importance save in the natural gas fields. Not all gas wells supply helium and none of them supply it in important percentages. If it were necessary to prospect a field, develop it, lay pipe lines and build production plants for the helium alone, the cost would be prohibitive. On that basis helium would necessarily be restricted to essential war uses, where cost is subordinate to need. As a byproduct of the natural gas in certain, at least, of the fields in the United States there is distinct reason for anticipating that it may be produced in amounts and at a cost that will permit its regular use in commercial airships.

Jan 1, 1925

By Henry P. Wheeler

H ELIUM (chemical symbol: He) is a member of a family of normally gaseous elements, which, because of their zero valence and corresponding lack of chemical activity, are called the "noble" or "inert" gases. It is a monatomic element with an atomic number of 2, and it exists naturally in two stable isotopic forms-He3, with an atomic mass of 3.0170, and He4, with an atomic mass of 4.0039. With the exception of a trace (10-6 percent) of He3, all of the naturally occurring helium is He4. Two unstable isotopes-He5, with atomic mass 5.0137, and He6, with atomic mass 6.0208-are listed by various scientists, but the existence of He5 is questioned by some of them. He6 is radioactive, with a half-life of 0.8 second. Helium was discovered in 1868 in the gaseous atmosphere surrounding the sun. Although several scientists studied the solar chromosphere that year, it is generally agreed that J. Norman Lockyer of England should be credited with the discovery of helium, which he named, deriving the word from "helios," the Greek name for the sun. It was not found on earth until March 1895, when William Ramsay of London produced a small amount from a sample of cleveite, a uranium-bearing mineral. In 1905, H. P. Cady and D. F. McFarland of Kansas found helium in natural gas produced from a well near Dexter, Kans., and for the first time a large source of helium became available.

Jan 1, 1952

By Adnan A. Malik, Tadashi Maejima, Jiro Kuwano

"Previous studies revealed that the helix deflection reduced the end bearing capacity of screw pile in dense ground even if the installation process is completed with minimal soil disturbance. The ultimate end bearing capacity in dense ground is difficult to achieve during the full-scale pile load test due to the limitation of the loading system. Therefore, in the present study, model scale of testing is selected to investigate the effect of helix deflection on load settlement behavior of single helix screw pile under increasing stress level. It is observed from the test results that the applied surcharge pressure, which is used to simulate the effect of stress level, is decreased with increase in model ground thickness. This decrease in the stress level is due to the frictional resistance between the container wall and sand. It is also observed that the end bearing capacity of screw pile increases with the increase in stress level but at gradually decreasing rate. The test results indicated that the helix deflection during the pile load test should not be more than critical deflection (0.72 mm average) of the helix to avoid any reduction in the end bearing capacity of screw pile. The helix deflection, which is measured after the pile load tests are also compared with the equations of flat circular plate having uniformly distributed load over the plate with simply supported and fixed inner edges.INTRODUCTIONThe screw pile consists of a central steel shaft with one or more helices attached at different location on the central shaft. The installation mechanism of screw pile consists of torque and pushing force. The screw pile installation mechanism can affect the unit weight of the ground during its installation. This effect is small in cohesive soils but it is quite noticeable in loose to medium dense sands (Adams 2011; Santos et al. 2013). The pushing force should be controlled in such a manner that pile penetration should be at least 80% of the pitch of the helix, during each revolution (Perko, 2009)."

Jan 1, 2017