Search Documents

By Steven M. Henderson, Zachary D. Jones

The risk of allocation in construction contracts is a primary concern for all parties. For contracts involving subsurface construction the allocation of site condition risk is critical. In the past one hundred years technological advances fundamentally changed how that risk is allocated; yet another shift in this risk allocation may lie just over the horizon due to advances in geotechnical data management. Around the world initiatives are underway to make geotechnical datasets more open and accessible. In the United States some states like Kentucky have already made geotechnical data readily accessible. This proliferation of geotechnical data in the U.S. may impact the allocation of subsurface risk in construction contracts. Many construction contracts contain a differing site condition clause. That clause allows for a modification of the contract price or schedule if the ground conditions encountered by the contractor differ materially from either what was indicated in the contract documents or would be reasonably expected. A contractor, however, is typically not entitled to that modification if the contractor knew or should have known of the adverse conditions encountered. Courts have interpreted the “should have known” language as requiring contractors to make a reasonable site investigation prior to bidding the project. If geotechnical data is available and accessible and reveals the adverse condition the contractor encounters, courts could find that the contractor should have known of the condition and thus will not be entitled to a modification based on the differing site condition clause. Accordingly, the U.S. could be on the threshold of significant shifts in how the risk of differing site conditions is allocated in construction contracts.

Jan 1, 2017

By Barritt Lovelace

Collins Engineers has been researching and implementing the use of drones on Civil Engineering Projects since 2015. Applications include bridge inspection, asset management, mapping, construction site management and emergency response. Recently this technology was used to map and model construction sites with deep foundations to verify and quantify designs. The ability to collect and use large amounts of data is transforming our world. Drone hardware and software is being used to capture and digitally replicate assets, giving owners unprecedented ability to visualize and manage their projects. Our teams help owners collect and process drone data into deliverables to be analyzed, annotated, stored, and shared. The use of drones can transform the way projects are managed and can improve project workflows. Data collected with drones can be processed into a digital twin of any project site or asset. This digital twin provides owners with a three-dimensional geometrically and geospatially accurate model. These models can be annotated and tagged with information that can be stored and shared locally or on cloud-based platforms. The data can be exported and used in a wide variety of CAD and GIS platforms. Goals When considering the use of UAS for several items need to be considered when establishing project goals. Safety Drones can be used to reduce job site safety risks in two ways. The first is that use of the drone can remove personnel from harm’s way. Surveyors and other project staff will traditionally walk the site to collect survey and other site information. These efforts can be replaced with the use of a drone eliminating much of the need for personnel to be on the job site itself which improves safety. The other way safety can be improved is that a digital model of a job site can be created on a daily or weekly basis that can be quickly analyzed for safety hazards. This analysis could be done remotely by safety officers to identify job site hazards which can then be corrected before injuries happen. Improved Deliverables Perhaps the most important reason to incorporate drones into project workflows it the ability to improve the project deliverables. Drones have the ability to quickly collect large amounts of high quality data which can be processed into orthomosaics, point clouds and 3D models that give engineers and project managers the information they need to make better decisions on design or project management.

Jan 1, 2019

By Patrick K. Wong, Richard Kelly

"The variability in strength and compressibility of in situ deep soil mixing products can be greater than the variability of the natural soil. However, satisfactory performance can be achieved by careful construction and an appropriate QA/QC program. This paper presents a case study on the use of deep dry soil mixing columns to support several embankments over soft clay along a highway project. Post-construction settlement monitoring indicated that good performance is achieved where the acceptance criteria are met, except in an area with high organic content. Embankments with contrasting performance are compared to the quality control test results which comprised laboratory testing of core samples as well as in situ test results such as pull-out and push-in vanes and conventional cone penetration tests. Drawing on the performance results and quality control testing, discussions and guidelines are given on quality assurance acceptance criteria and construction control testing regime for future projects.INTRODUCTIONBetween 2008 and 2012, the largest deep dry soil mixing (DSM) contract during that time in the southern hemisphere was carried out for the Ballina Bypass project. The project, comprising 12 km upgrade of the Pacific Highway located in northern New South Wales close to the border of Queensland, was commissioned by the Roads and Maritime Services (RMS) of NSW. The ground improvement contractor was Keller Ground Engineering (KGE) Australia. Seven different types of ground improvement techniques were employed for the project, ranging from low embankment strategy with nominal preloading, to surcharge with wick drains, light weight bottom ash fill, DSM, vibro-replacement stone columns, dynamic replacement, and vacuum consolidation (installed by Menard Bachy Pty Ltd). Different techniques were chosen depending on time program, cost, and performance requirements relative to proximity to piled structures (e.g. bridge abutments) and post-construction settlement and differential settlement for either rigid or flexible pavements at different locations.DSM was the most utilized ground improvement technique employed on the project, comprising a total of about 285 km of 0.8 m diameter columns to depths up to 18 m for the purpose of supporting bridge approach embankments and culverts with embankment heights up to 6 m. DSM was chosen due to the very soft nature of the clay soil with moisture content practically at liquid limit, and the relative speed and economy of the system. Dry cement powder at rates of 160 kg/m3 to 200 kg/m3 were pneumatically discharged via the hollow stem of the mixing tool, and mixed with the soil (using multiple horizontally mounted paddles on a single vertical stem) at high speed as the mixing tool is withdrawn."

Jan 1, 2015

By Stuart Coutts

"This paper presents an overview of the author’s experience related to the assessment of the base capacity of straight shafted and enlarged-base bored piles in sand. A design approach based on CPT qc is described which has been calibrated using a database of load tests. The importance of correct installation techniques with instrumentation are illustrated and a discussion is presented on the current use of high strain dynamic testing to validate compliance with design. An example of a recent project with high quality instrumented load test data illustrates the close match to the proposed best practice approach and also highlights the importance for consideration of the effects of stress relief for deep foundations installed in deep excavations.1 INTRODUCTIONContinuous Flight Auger (CFA) piles are the bored foundation pile of choice for sand deposits across Australia. The evolution of the determination of the base resistance of CFA piles has been shaped by available investigative techniques, calculation methods, and calibration of designs with laboratory and field testing. The Cone Penetration Test (CPT) has been widely used in Western Australia (WA) where the test has been commercially available via multiple contractors for more than 25 years. On the East coast, the adoption of CPT testing has been slower with a transition from traditional Standard Penetration Testing (SPT) still occurring. Dynamic pile load tests are often used to derive parameters. The influence of pile installation on performance is commonly misunderstood and is an important element on any discussion of pile capacity for CFA pile types. The interface between the base of the constructed pile and the in-situ soil has an influence on capacity such that a poorly constructed pile base will have limited (if any) contribution to pile performance within the normal working range, generally within a 10 mm movement. The research presented in this paper pertains to CFA piles (no drilling fluids) and enlarged base piles constructed using CFA techniques under drilling fluids such that clean pile/base interface is targeted. Developments in modern piling equipment and instrumentation allow the pressure and volume of delivered concrete/grout to piles to be accurately monitored at various stages of installation such that repeatable ‘best practice’ can be achieved. The changes in soil conditions that occur due to the disturbance of the install technique are also important.Although the results of this research are likely applicable to bored piles, the interface between the pile and in-situ soil (shaft and base) need to be considered for various installation techniques. The effects of stress relaxation (due to removal of soil above pile base and adjacent shaft), time to concreting, and the zone of disturbed soil around the pile shaft are paramount.2 INSTALLATION CONSIDERATIONS The pile mix (concrete/grout) and interface with the in-situ soil are also an important consideration. For example, coarse grained, poorly graded, dry, clean sand will be partially permeated by most pile mixes; such that the influenced soil will be enhanced and in instances the overall effective pile dimensions increased. Permeation of the disturbed zone of a pile or anchor shaft along with scale effects (Lehane 2009) can have significant effect on shaft capacity and shaft frictions significantly exceeding expected are not uncommon based on ‘theoretical’ dimensions. Advancements in mix technology and mix techniques also have a large influence on the pile/soil interface. The ability of the piling rig and augers to excavate a plumb and gauge hole can also have a large influence on the zone of soil disturbed adjacent the constructed pile with a resulting influence on capacity."

Jan 1, 1900

By C. Michael Morgano

Static tests are costly and time consuming, so they are not always the best answer [ ]

Jan 1, 2005

By Brian Wilson, Franz-Werner Gerressen

"Cutter Soil Mixing, also known as CSM, was developed in Europe as an alternate method of Deep Mixing to the more traditional single and multiple auger techniques, and brought to market by Bauer Maschinen GmbH (Bauer), towards the end of 2003. Initial development of the technique had been completed in a joint venture between Bauer and Bachy Soletanche. In 2004 the concept was introduced to the North American market. Continued development of the method and demonstration of its versatility, both in terms of applications and applicable soil types has seen a steady growth in the number of designs incorporating the approach, and contractors offering the technique. This paper provides a brief overview of the variety and size of projects and applications where the method has been adopted, discusses some lessons learned with respect to equipment operation as well as the improvements that have been introduced to the equipment, and briefly reviews the current state of practice, as well as some of the associated on-going research and development.BACKGROUNDCutter Soil Mixing (CSM) is a technique for deep soil mixing that was initially developed as a collaborative effort between Bauer Maschinen (Bauer) and Bachy Soletanche, but which ultimately resulted in the separate development of two somewhat different brands of CSM tool. The Bauer brand of CSM entered the European market in 2004, and was first promoted in the North American market in late 2004, with the first project starting in 2005. The Bachy Soletanche brand, sometimes referred to as “Geomix” was first marketed in Europe in 2005 and the first model introduced in North America in 2007.The development of the Cutter Soil Mixing technique utilized the experiences gained from Trench Cutter/Hydrofraise equipment, developing a technique that incorporates two cutting wheels rotating about a horizontal axis as opposed to the more conventional deep soil mixing approach which utilizes augers and mixing paddles rotating about vertical axes. Whereas the Trench Cutter/Hydrofraise technique excavates the soil from within a panel, and supports the open hole using a bentonite slurry, the CSM technique cuts and displaces the soil whilst pumping a slurry/grout directly into the soil through a port located between the wheels. The combination of cutting the soil while introducing an appropriate volume of slurry effectively fluidizes the column of soil around and above the cutter head. While this process achieves a high degree of mixing, even on the downward cutting stroke, thorough in-situ mixing typically occurs on the withdrawal stroke, when most of the slurry is added."

Jan 1, 2015

By Monique Nykamp

"INTRODUCTIONTerminal 46 is located just south of downtown Seattle, and is one of the Port of Seattle’s busiest container terminals. The Terminal 46 Redevelopment Project was undertaken to replace the existing 15-m-wide (50 ft) cranes along the apron with 30-m-wide (100 ft) cranes, which can unload larger, post- Panamax ships. The project included upgrading the existing waterside crane rail with new piles and constructing a new land-side rail behind the sheetpile bulkhead. The new piles had to be installed adjacent to the existing apron without causing damage, which was a signifi cant geotechnical challenge due to the soft soil conditions at the site. An instrumentation program performed during the test pile program evaluated this challenge and allowed for the development of specifi c production pile installation procedures that had the least possible effect on construction costs and schedule. SITE HISTORYThe site lies along the west side of Elliott Bay, north of the mouth of the Duwamish Waterway. Prior to development, this area was part of the tide fl ats where the Duwamish River drained into Elliott Bay. Prior to 1970, there were several existing timber piers and structures in the area. In the 1970s, the Port of Seattle constructed a 900-m-long (3,000 ft), 30- m-wide (100 ft) apron to support fi ve, 15-m-wide (50 ft) container cranes. The contained backland area was then fi lled with dredged spoils (sand and silt with organics) and the upper 5 to 20 m (16 to 65 ft) backfi lled with sand and gravel.The existing apron was constructed using 0.4 m (16 in) octagonal prestressed concrete piles to support the precast concrete deck and crane rails. The pile-supported bents were spaced at 6.1 m (20 ft), center-to-center, along the longitudinal direction. Pile lengths typically varied from about 20 to 40 m (65 to 130 ft) with 15 to 26 m penetration below mudline (50 to 85 ft penetration). The slope below the apron was constructed at about 1.75 horizontal to 1 vertical to allow for suffi cient water depth for cargo ships. In most areas, a riprap buttress was placed at the toe of the slope. A typical cross section of the apron is shown on Figure 2.Several stability, settlement and pile driving issues arose during the original construction of T-46 (Pita, 1983). Reportedly, movement of the submarine slope occurred during pile driving, resulting in settlement behind the bulkhead. Pile driving reportedly caused settlement of adjacent piles. In addition, some piles were “running” (dropping quickly under one hammer blow) during installation."

Jan 1, 2007

By Monique Nykamp

"INTRODUCTIONTerminal 46 is located just south of downtown Seattle, and is one of the Port of Seattle’s busiest container terminals. The Terminal 46 Redevelopment Project was undertaken to replace the existing 15-m-wide (50 ft) cranes along the apron with 30-m-wide (100 ft) cranes, which can unload larger, post- Panamax ships. The project included upgrading the existing waterside crane rail with new piles and constructing a new land-side rail behind the sheetpile bulkhead. The new piles had to be installed adjacent to the existing apron without causing damage, which was a signifi cant geotechnical challenge due to the soft soil conditions at the site. An instrumentation program performed during the test pile program evaluated this challenge and allowed for the development of specifi c production pile installation procedures that had the least possible effect on construction costs and schedule.SITE HISTORYThe site lies along the west side of Elliott Bay, north of the mouth of the Duwamish Waterway. Prior to development, this area was part of the tide fl ats where the Duwamish River drained into Elliott Bay. Prior to 1970, there were several existing timber piers and structures in the area. In the 1970s, the Port of Seattle constructed a 900-m-long (3,000 ft), 30- m-wide (100 ft) apron to support fi ve, 15-m-wide (50 ft) container cranes. The contained backland area was then fi lled with dredged spoils (sand and silt with organics) and the upper 5 to 20 m (16 to 65 ft) backfi lled with sand and gravel.The existing apron was constructed using 0.4 m (16 in) octagonal prestressed concrete piles to support the precast concrete deck and crane rails. The pile-supported bents were spaced at 6.1 m (20 ft), center-to-center, along the longitudinal direction. Pile lengths typically varied from about 20 to 40 m (65 to 130 ft) with 15 to 26 m penetration below mudline (50 to 85 ft penetration). The slope below the apron was constructed at about 1.75 horizontal to 1 vertical to allow for suffi cient water depth for cargo ships. In most areas, a riprap buttress was placed at the toe of the slope. A typical cross section of the apron is shown on Figure 2.Several stability, settlement and pile driving issues arose during the original construction of T-46 (Pita, 1983). Reportedly, movement of the submarine slope occurred during pile driving, resulting in settlement behind the bulkhead. Pile driving reportedly caused settlement of adjacent piles. In addition, some piles were “running” (dropping quickly under one hammer blow) during installation."

Jan 1, 2007

By Donald A. Bruce

"The Deep Mixing Methods (DMM), in their current forms, have been employed in the United States since 1986, although an earlier version had seen service from 1954. The earlier developments were strongly influenced by practices in the Nordic countries and Japan, while by the late 1980’s several DMM systems had been developed in the U.S. itself. Since then, DMM has continued its evolution, principally via the challenges of a series of large, landmark projects, but also via distinct, significant technological advances. This paper highlights the key points in the history of DMM in the U.S., and provides an overview of the different methods currently in use.IN THE BEGINNINGIt is a common misconception that the history of applications of the Deep Mixing Methods (DMM) in the United States dates from 1986 when SMW Seiko Inc. — a subsidiary of Japan’s Seiko Kogyo Company — was established in the Bay Area. However, the author believes that Intrusion Prepakt Co.’s patented MIP (Mixed in Place) system had been used, albeit sporadically (about 30 projects are recorded), since 1954 (FHWA 2000, 2001). Ironically, by 1961 this single auger method had been extensively used under license in Japan for excavation support and groundwater control — by the Seiko Kogyo Company. By 1972, the original MIP technique had been succeeded by more advanced Japanese methods, involving multiple augers. Intrusion Prepakt have long since become defunct.The first systematic studies of contemporary Deep Mixing Methods in Japan began in 1967 when the Port and Harbor Research Institute of the Ministry of Transportation began laboratory testing using granular and powdered lime for treating soft marine soils. Fundamental studies continued through the early 1970’s, by which time the development of industrial scale equipment was well advanced, having its first application on a marine trial near Haneda Airport. Coincidentally, laboratory and field research also began in 1967 in Sweden (“Swedish Lime Column Method”) for treating soft clays using unslaked lime. Reportedly the progenitor was a Norwegian, Kjeld Paus, who had made observations on fluid lime columns in the U.S. It would seem that developments in Japan and the Nordic countries proceeded independently until 1975 when the technology leaders from each group (Broms and Boman; and Okumura and Terashi, respectively) presented their — very similar — findings at a conference in Bangalore, India. Limited technical exchanges ensued thereafter.Whereas the Nordic developments continued to focus on the use of dry reagents (cement and lime) and relatively light equipment compatible with operating on and in very soft clays and organics, the Japanese progressed into the use of fluid reagents (cement-based grouts) and heavier equipment for both marine and land-based projects. Thus, by 1986, there were a large number of proprietary (wet and dry) DMM systems in Japan, and a rapidly growing market already by then accounting for over 12,000,000 m3 of ground treatment."

Jan 1, 2015

By W. G. K. Fleming

The general history of piling is traced up to the present time with regard to the evolution of methods and materials. The processes have been strongly influenced by developments in basic equipment and industrial change. It is noticeable that in the twentieth century more progress has taken place than in the many previous centuries. It has been strongly influenced by the general development of Soil Mechanics. Test loading is probably the most effective way to assess the success of designs and many empirical relationships have been challenged through it. As we approach a new century it appears that it will be an age of rapid equipment development, with much enhancement of understanding of what has been done. Processes of automatic construction and testing will becoming commonplace. These changes will narrow the limits of conventional scatter that have come to be accepted and to a large extent will be driven by political efforts to curtail energy consumption, to raise standards of quality and reliability, and to conserve the environment. 1. Ancient history. Piling is an ancient art. Its first mention in history is from Herodotus, the first person to commit an account of his times to the written word in the years 557 to 479 BC. He evidently had a strong interest in engineering matters because he wrote of building, brick making, reinforced brickwork, river training, canal building, bridge construction, tunnelling and its acoustic detection and piling. The piling reference comes from Book 5 at paragraph 16.

Jan 1, 1999

By Peter J. Nicholson

"IntroductionDuring my more than 40 years in the practice of underground construction and engineering, the industry has seen progress from the dig down to rock or hardpan or alternatively drive concrete or steel into the ground and count the blows; then you can be sure of you have a solid foundation; to the modern day, I’m willing to try anything to save money. Of course these are both exaggerations, but not gross ones. After getting bored being supervision on jobs counting blows, I struck out into the new field of “tie-backs” as they were called in the United States, or “ground anchors” as they were then termed in the United Kingdom. After installing some of the first permanent ground anchors for the Corps of Engineers on Lake Michigan as well as the highest loaded rock anchors of the time at two dams on the Ohio River, we were at the top of our game in the 1970’s. Subsequently in the 1980’s when my view of the future of ground anchors saw their installation becoming a commodity item, we branched out into “Pin Piles” now known as Micro Piles, high capacity, steel tube encased, small diameter (5-12” or so), high capacity (100-500 tons) piling. Next came soil nailing, both temporary and permanent retaining walls, as at Cumberland Gap Kentucky. My next morph was into “Cement Deep Soil Mixing” earlier on, known simply as “soil mixing”. For this education I traveled to Japan several times and established a long-term, Joint Venture, relationship with one of the better known Japanese specialty ground modification companies. In Boston at the “Big Dig” we established the then record size soil mixing project, 500,000 or so cubic meters of CDSM concluding in the year 2000. Since then I’ve been involved as a consultant mainly for dams and levees. Below is the story of how I came to be at this place in the road to innovation in Geotechnical processes."

Jan 1, 2017

By Peter J. Nicholson

During my more than 40 years in the practice of underground construction and engineering, the industry has seen progress from the dig down to rock or hardpan or alternatively drive concrete or steel into the ground and count the blows; then you can be sure of you have a solid foundation; to the modern day, I?m willing to try anything to save money. Of course these are both exaggerations, but not gross ones. After getting bored being supervision on jobs counting blows, I struck out into the new field of ?tie-backs? as they were called in the United States, or ?ground anchors? as they were then termed in the United Kingdom. After installing some of the first permanent ground anchors for the Corps of Engineers on Lake Michigan as well as the highest loaded rock anchors of the time at two dams on the Ohio River, we were at the top of our game in the 1970?s. Subsequently in the 1980?s when my view of the future of ground anchors saw their installation becoming a commodity item, we branched out into ?Pin Piles? now known as Micro Piles, high capacity, steel tube encased, small diameter (5-12? or so), high capacity (100-500 tons) piling. Next came soil nailing, both temporary and permanent retaining walls, as at Cumberland Gap Kentucky. My next morph was into ?Cement Deep Soil Mixing? earlier on, known simply as ?soil mixing?. For this education I traveled to Japan several times and established a long-term, Joint Venture, relationship with one of the better known Japanese specialty ground modification companies. In Boston at the ?Big Dig? we established the then record size soil mixing project, 500,000 or so cubic meters of CDSM concluding in the year 2000. Since then I?ve been involved as a consultant mainly for dams and levees. Below is the story of how I came to be at this place in the road to innovation in Geotechnical processes.

By Shawna Munn, Nadir Ansari, Allison Bennett

"This paper outlines how specification driven design has made Toronto Area transit infrastructure projects more expensive than similar private projects, and provides a case study of the results of an excavation at Launch Shaft 1 (LS1) for the Eglinton Crosstown Light Rail Transit project in Toronto, Ontario. The paper will describe the impact specification driven design parameters can have on design economy, constructability, and schedule and will suggest an alternative approach utilizing the Observational Method. As a result of the initial specification based design, Isherwood was retained by both the General Contractor and the Specialty Excavation Shoring Contractor to provide value engineering leveraging the Observational Method to improve constructability and construction schedule. By using well known, accepted design methods coupled with local experience in lieu of the specified design pressures and parameters, the redesigned bracing scheme reduced construction cost and schedule. This excavation case history can be a lesson learned for future transit projects.The City of Toronto has been developing its transportation network since the mid 1800’s. “Canada’s First Subway” along Yonge Street opened in March 1954 (TTC 1954), with a few additions to the subway network through to the 1980’s. The following two decades marked a long period of slow development due to recessions, budget cuts, and politics along with several cancelled projects. To fill the gap left by years of underfunding, several new transit projects are now under construction in the city as a part of Metrolinx’s $50B, 25 year, “The Big Move” initiative (Metrolinx 2013). The work on these types of infrastructure projects is highlighting a different and developing challenge within the tendering and design specification structure we will call Prescriptive Specification Design (PSD).PSD is a method used within contract specifications to control design risk on a project by applying conservative design methods, factors of safety, or other parameters to make a “fool proof” design. It is akin to requesting a colouring by numbers approach from a painter. There are inherent risks of using this method of tendering a project including increased project costs, longer construction schedules, and decrease of overall project economy. In PSD, the Owner “owns” all of the design risk on a project, including any additional costs due to changed site conditions. However, the Contractor commonly “owns” the risk of any deviations from the design specification they pursue, therefore making any improvements to the design, cost, or schedule less desirable from the Contractor’s point of view. The impact of this type of strict specified approach to design has been seen in transit infrastructure projects in the Toronto area. Figure 1 outlines the range of specified AEPD design pressures as a function of excavation height (H) specified for use in Toronto underground transit projects since the 1970’s to present day. A clear trend can be seen with respect to increased design pressures specified. The ranges shown for each project are intended to account for the potential differences in soil conditions for the highly overconsolidated glaciated soils in the Toronto area. The graph also highlights the typical range, in blue, for the industry practice in Toronto for comparison."

Jan 1, 2017

By Gerald Verbeek, Erick Baziw

"Downhole Seismic Testing (DST) is an important geotechnical testing technique for site characterization as it provides low strain (<10-5) in-situ interval compression (Vp) and shear (Vs) wave velocity estimates. These velocities are determined by obtaining relative arrival times of source waves as they travel through the stratigraphy and are recorded by one or more vertically offset seismic sensors. A challenging aspect of this process is to characterize the seismic data sets to determine the analysis method that will result in the most accurate interval velocity values. This paper introduces an assessment technique which utilizes linearity estimates (i.e., hodograms fitting straight lines) from the polarization analysis in conjunction with crosscorrelation coefficient calculations of the full waveforms as well as the deviation of the source wave frequency spectrum from a desirable bell-shaped curve. The paper will provide an overview of the technique and include some examples of actual data sets where the technique was applied to analyze those data sets.1. INTRODUCTIONIn general terms, Downhole Seismic Testing (DST) such as Seismic Cone Penetration Testing (SCPT) is a geotechnical technique for measuring in-situ shear and compression wave velocities (VS and VP respectively). The main goal in DST is to obtain arrival times as the source wave travels through the soil profile of interest, and from these arrival times the velocities are then calculated. Figure 1 shows a schematic of the typical DST configuration: a seismic source is used to generate a seismic wave train at the ground surface. One or more downhole seismic receivers are used to record the seismic wave train at predefined depth increments. The downhole receiver(s) may be positioned at selected test depths in a borehole or advanced as part of an instrumentation package as in the case of SCPT. When triggered by the seismic source a data recording system records the response of the downhole receiver(s)."

Jan 1, 2017

By Renato P. Cunha

The paper explores a parametric analysis of a four-pile group in contact (hence piled raft) and without contact (hence standard pile group) with the superficial soil layer, under a combined set of loadings (moment M, vertical V and horizontal H forces). The major design parameters of interest, as total and differential settlements, and raft bending moments and shear stresses are assessed under aforementioned distinct conditions. The slenderness ratio of the piles is also varied along the analyses, allowing the establishment of its influence on the derived parameters.

Jan 1, 2006

By Frederic A. Verheyde

The CPT pile design method of the ‘Laboratoire des Ponts et Chaussées’ (LPC) uses the cone resistance (qc) for the design of axially loaded piles. It was originally proposed in 1982 and was revised in 1993 and 2012. It has been widely used in France for several decades and is included in the current French pile design code. The objective of this paper is to summarise the two first versions (1982 and 1993) of the method and to detail the most recent one as described in the current French pile design code (AFNOR 2012).

Nov 1, 2022

By Parameswaran V. S, Anshuman Singh

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

Nov 1, 2022

By Stephan A. Jefferis, Adrian H. Bath

"This paper draws together some themes on the durability of barrier systems, and particularly cementitious systems. For contaminated land and water retaining structures, durability can be poorly addressed at all stages of a project, from specification, to barrier material selection, barrier design including toe-in and through to performance assessment in operation. Permeability (hydraulic conductivity) is a dynamic property which will vary over time as reaction processes propagate through a barrier. However, laboratory testing, when undertaken, tends to be focused on short term tests with aggressive chemicals so that the effects of longer-term processes such as carbonation and leaching by permeating water are missed. For water retaining structures, carbonation and leaching actually may be the most significant processes affecting barrier performance as the groundwater adjacent to many water bodies can be otherwise rather benign (as regards bentonite and cementitious systems). These and other reaction processes have been modelled in the arena of nuclear waste repositories and procedures are well recognised. However, such procedures have yet to be widely adopted for the assessment of other barrier systems.INTRODUCTIONOver the last few decades there has been an enormous amount of laboratory research on the durability of barrier materials or more specifically papers reporting the results of permeability tests. Unfortunately there is a much smaller literature on scaling test results to barrier dimensions in the field or to required design lives. Although in the geotechnical industry durability research has been largely laboratory based, in the nuclear industry where relevant timescales are multi-millennia rather than decades, research has been heavily underpinned by geochemical modelling. A significant purpose of this paper is to examine the tools that may be used to analyse the results of tests on barrier materials used in geotechnical engineering, for example, for water retaining structures and contaminated land and draw the attention of the construction industry to the potential of the modelling procedures developed for nuclear repository assessments. Modelling can help to identify underlying processes and so augment information from laboratory testing focused on changes of physical properties such as permeability and strength."

Jan 1, 2016

By Abid O. Adekunte, David Greentree, David Hilton

"The construction industry is witnessing an upsurge in demand by property developers to have basements incorporated into their residential and commercial development schemes. This is attributable to perceived improvement to aesthetic and commercial values of buildings by underground space, amongst property owners. This trend is compelling more owners of buildings with no basements to explore the possibility of creating underground additional space beneath their existing buildings. The creation of a basement beneath an existing building entails the installation of a reinforced concrete (RC) underpinning system, temporary works, bulk excavation to basement formation level and construction of the basement structure, with associated aesthetic finishes.The L-shaped segmental RC underpins are a common system of choice for such underpinning works. They are multi-functional; providing vertical support to the existing superstructure, providing lateral support to earth and groundwater, supporting temporary and permanent surcharge loads from adjacent structures and services, whilst also forming part of the basement slab. This paper focuses on the first function of the Lshaped RC underpins; capacity under vertical compressive loading from the superstructure. The most common industry approach for the prediction of vertical capacities of L-shaped underpins is the oldfashioned Meyerhof’s (1953, 1963) effective width method, which is based on the traditional bearing capacity theory, whilst accounting for correction factors for eccentricity and foundation depth.The traditional bearing capacity formula is surrounded by a significant degree of uncertainty; estimates are highly user-dependent, as capacity prediction is sensitive to the chosen angle of shearing resistance (?), while there are difficulties in accurately measuring the in-situ ??value of cohesionless soils. In addition, the effective width approach has been shown to be very conservative by many research workers. The segmental RC underpins presented in this paper have been designed with an alternative less conservative method, which involves the use of a recently proposed consistent work-hardening plasticity model calibrated with field-based tests on footings of various aspect ratios and relative embedment in sand. The paper highlights the principles behind underpinning works for urban basement construction, the design of L-shaped RC underpins with the recently proposed plasticity model and the advantages of the method over traditional bearing capacity solutions and pre-existing plasticity models."

Jan 1, 2016

By Mario Mauro

Tuttle Creek Dam was constructed by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in the 1950?s on the Big Blue River in north-east Kansas. Since the dam is located in a seismic area, the safety of the dam was re-evaluated under the national U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Dam Safety and Assurance Program. After a series of studies and analyses performed by the Kansas City District of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, in 2003 the Department of the Army authorized the implementation of the plan ?Stabilize Foundation Soil without Drawdown Alternative?, during a 7-10 year construction period. As part of this plan, in 2006 Treviicos South carried out a large scale jet grouting and deep mixing test program downstream the dam. The test program included the installation of twenty-seven double and triple-fluid jet grout columns and twenty-seven jet-assisted deep mix columns. The jet grout columns were constructed at different levels of specific energy and cement content. The deep mix columns ranged in diameter between 3 ft and 6 ft. During column placement, the drilling and grouting parameters, pore pressures, and soil movements were instrumented in real-time. The downstream test area was enclosed by a cement-bentonite wall extended to bedrock, which allowed a 35-ft deep open excavation around the 45-ft deep columns. The exposed jet grout columns measured up to 15 ft in diameter, exceeding the anticipated target diameter. In addition to coring, some of the jet grout and soil mix test columns were saw-cut along the group axis, providing useful information on the internal column structure.

Jan 1, 2008