Search Documents

By Dileej M. Dewaikar, Poonam A. Patil

"In this paper, the ultimate lateral resistance of a long, flexible, unrestrained vertical pile in a cohesive soil is computed under static loading condition using py curves. A simple and improved method for the construction of hyperbolic p-y curves for a cohesive soil is proposed for static loading conditions. An iterative analysis is employed with secant modulus approach, using a matrix method known as moment area method developed by Sawant and Dewaikar. The loadground line displacement relationship is obtained for different load eccentricities using p-y curves developed by Matlock, Georgiadis et al. and the proposed hyperbolic p-y curves for different eccentricity ratios. These values are compared with the values computed from model test performed by Rao et al. and with the limit equilibrium solution given by Broms. The comparison shows that, the results obtained using hyperbolic p-y curves shows a better agreement with the model test data with the maximum difference within 15% using other methods; whereas Broms' limit equilibrium solution shows some agreement with the results based on Matlock's p-y curves.INTRODUCTIONPile foundations are used for jacket type offshore structures, which are subjected to large magnitudes of lateral loads due to lake or ocean waves, winds and ice forces. The failure of a pile-soil system is catastrophic and excessive deflection of the pile creates operational difficulties. In the view of this, bending moment in the pile is required to be predicted in a rationar manner. The p-y concept developed by Reese and Matlock (1956) is popularly being used to estimate the pile top deflection and bending moments.The ultimate lateral load which causes collapse of a pile-soil system is generally estimated using Broms' (1964) method, which is based on limit equilibrium considerations. The p-y curves are basically nonlinear in nature and include ultimate pressure at the depth where they are generated. Therefore, if the lateral deflection of pile top against different magnitudes of lateral load is obtained, it should be possible to obtain the ultimate lateral load from this load-deflection relationship."

Jan 1, 2005

By Douglas G. Baker, Jason K. Braund-Read, Megan R. Sheffer

"Mica Dam, owned by British Columbia Hydro, is an 820 ft high earthfill embankment dam that was completed in 1973. The dam consists of a thin central impervious till core supported by upstream and downstream compacted sand, gravel and cobble shell zones, founded on bedrock and valley bottom alluvium deposits. In 2012, a project was started to install new piezometric instrumentation within the dam’s foundation and downstream shell zone.Deep drilling in large embankment dams is very difficult and requires careful planning to select a methodology capable of reaching the target locations, while ensuring that no damage is done to the surrounding dam fill zones. At Mica Dam, the drilling could only be carried out from the Dam Crest and drillholes had to be carefully oriented to avoid intersecting any existing dam instrumentation. The drilling work therefore required angled drillholes, at depths of up to 855 ft, through heavily compacted sands, gravels and cobbles, and to significant depths below the standing water table.During the planning stages for the Project, in early 2013, the preferred drilling method was selected and a drilling contractor was engaged for the drilling work. Critical dam safety concerns were identified and addressed during the design stage of the Project with the drilling contractor, so that risk mitigation measures and response plans could be effectively developed.This paper explains how background information and prior drilling experience influenced the final design and implementation of the drilling techniques used in 2013 to successfully drill the deep holes and carry out the piezometer installations in Mica Dam. Drilling procedures, instrumentation design and installation methods, as well as risk mitigation measures, are discussed."

Jan 1, 2017

By Silas C. Nichols

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

Jan 1, 2014

By Adriaan van Seters

"Abstract The content of Eurocode 7 – Part 1 and Part 2 – with respect to piled foundations is outlined. The important role of pile testing is presented and the derivation of the characteristic value of pile bearing resistance is explained. Recommendations for the use of correlation factors are given. The ongoing work of the Evolution Groups on piling is to prepare a revision of Eurocode 7 after 2019. Future topics and changes are highlighted.General outline of pile design by Eurocode 7In his paper for this conference Frank (2014) outlined the various aspects of standardisation for pile foundations, which involves Eurocode 7 as leading for pile construction in Europe. Standards for pile testing and execution of piling works were established in the last 15 years.This paper focuses on the design of piled foundations according to the design code Eurocode 7, which consists of 2 parts:EN 1997-1 Geotechnical design - Part 1: General Rules (CEN, 2004);EN 1997-2 Geotechnical design – Part 2: Ground investigation and testing (CEN, 2007) In Eurocode 7-1, Section 7 – Pile Foundations - deals with the design of piles. The safety concept for pile design is given in Section 2 – Basis of Geotechnical Design - for the three Design Approaches.In Section 7 presents the design of piles according to four methods:1. Results of static load tests2. Empirical or analytical calculation methods3. Results of dynamic load tests4. Observed performance of a comparable pile foundation.Guidelines for the ground investigation for piles is provided in Eurocode 7-2, Annex B.3. In the Annexes of Eurocode 7-2 examples of analytical methods to determine the bearing resistance of a single pile based on the results of various ground investigation techniques are given. Thus calculation models are presented based on design using the results of Cone Penetration Tests (D.6 and D.7) and Pressuremeter Tests (E.3). The Annexes of Eurocode 7-2 are informative.For the interpretation of Eurocode 7, reference is made to Frank et al (2004) and Bond and Harris(2008)."

Jan 1, 2014

By Clarissa Aguiar, Seok hyeon Chai, Thamer Yacoub, Sina Javankhoshdel

Sheet piles are used as an excavation support for soil retention. They are interlocked systems to form a wall for earth support along with anchors to provide an extra lateral support in excavations. The earth pressure against a sheet pile structure is not unique for each soil, but rather a function of soil-structure system. Movements of the structure with respect to the soil are primary factor in developing the pressure and thus the problem becomes indeterminate. In order to model a sheet pile wall for the analysis, structural element/interface can be used for the sheet pile. However, the use of the structural element with soil model alone is insufficient to simulate this soil-structure system as it fails to capture the slip condition between the sheet pile and the retained soil. In order to capture this slip condition, an interactive element can be used between sheet pile and soil to allow slip to occur. There have been many case studies where this method was used to analyze the response of the retained soil. Numerical studies have shown a good agreement with experimental results, but this stiffness is often not a well-known parameter, due to its complexity in nature of interactive behavior between soil and sheet pile walls. Also, many case studies are carried out with twodimensional analysis of the foundation, where three-dimensional analysis may be more suitable in some practical applications. In this paper, the interactive behavior of the element between sheet pile and soil is investigated with case studies for staged excavation using sheet piles and anchors. Then, investigation of a three-dimensional model is carried out by comparing with two-dimensional analysis.

By J. Matos e Silva

The paper refers five examples of executed diaphragm walls with one to five levels of anchorages. For each example a comparison is made between the results of the design using the traditional criteria and the Eurocode 7 recommendations. A comparison is also made with the behaviour of the diaphragm walls during the construction phase. From the referred examples the author presents his conclusions.

Jan 1, 2002

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 David S. Graham, Joseph D. Bailey, Paul J. Axtell, Michael K. Muchard

"Two instrumented test piles were simultaneously subjected to a static lateral load test by jacking the piles apart. One of the piles was loaded in axial compression via kentledge during the lateral load test. Both piles were constructed in an identical manner. These piles were constructed and tested as part of a construction-phase load test program for a floodwall improvement project along the Missouri River in Kansas City, Kansas. Details of the subsurface conditions, drilled pile construction, instrumentation, and load testing procedures are described. Data collected during testing of the piles are presented and compared. Potential effects of the axial compressive load related to observed differences in pile lateral response are discussed.INTRODUCTIONTwo instrumented test piles were simultaneously subjected to a static lateral load with one of the piles also subject to a combined axial load during testing. The load test program was part of a floodwall improvement project in Kansas City, Kansas. Known as the BPU floodwall, the floodwall runs along the south bank of the Missouri River at a Kansas City Board of Public Utilities power generation and water treatment facility. The project location is shown in Fig. 1.Drilled, 2-ft (610-mm) diameter piles were designated by the designer, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (COE), as the foundation type for supporting extended floodwall footings. The drilled piles are fully cased, cast-in-place concrete, reinforced with a steel 12x74 (310x110) H-pile. In order to test soil lateral response and pile structural response under combined loading, the COE required that both a lateral test and combined lateral and axial test pile be constructed and tested. In order to most efficiently test both piles and to allow for simpler comparison, the two piles were simultaneously laterally loaded by jacking the piles apart, applying a maximum lateral load of 195 kips (867 kN). A constant axial load was applied to the combined test pile by kentledge prior to lateral loading and was maintained for the duration of the lateral load test. The total weight of the kentledge was 61.5 kips (274 kN). Fig. 2 shows the test setup."

Jan 1, 2017

By Dan Brown

Improvements in construction equipment and techniques in recent years have made possible the use of drilled shaft foundations in diameters and lengths not previously considered practical or feasible. Many highway bridge and other structures are now routinely founded on drilled shafts which are 2.5 m to 3.0 m (8 to 12 feet) in diameter and extending over 60 m (200 feet) in depth below grade. There are unique challenges associated with constructing such large and deep cast-in-place foundations and engineers should be aware of the special needs associated with site investigation, construction specifications, material requirements, and quality assurance. This paper outlines a number of special considerations for these foundations, along with strategies that may be employed to improve the reliability and quality of large drilled shaft foundations.

Jan 1, 2008

By Kent C. Werle

This brief discusses the installation and application of sleeved piles of two different types for two different projects, the W, Seattle to Harbor Island Swing Bridge Project and the Seattle Access Project. A description of these relatively novel piling systems is given, as well as some notes on their installation and application. As implied by the term "sleeved" these are piles which consist of two piles, an inner pile combined with an outer concentric sleeve pile. Background, Swing Bridge The Swing Bridge project is virtually unique in the world in that it is a "lift and turn" swing bridge. It is also a concrete, cast -in-place segmental bridge which is designed to be moveable.

Jan 1, 1990

By Z. G. Lin

In Xian, China, compaction by means of soil (or lime-soil) piles is one of the effective methods widely used for densifying loess and eliminating its collapsibility. However, as a result of groundwater table rising, it is no longer applicable in many areas. This paper is the summary of the first-time use in Xian of sand-gravel compaction piles aimed at densifying the miscellaneous fill (already partially under water) and saturated loess at a certain project site. In-situ tests, conducted before and after the treatment and including several kinds of penetration tests backed up and confirmed by a set of plate loading tests, yielded very satisfactory results, strongly testifying to the viability of the method.

Jan 1, 2010

By Peter A. Thompson, Richard E. Prust

"The Bangkok Mass Rapid Transit (MRT} Chaleom Ratchamongkhon Line project is the first underground subway to be completed in Thailand. It consists of 22 km (14 miles) of twin-bored tunnels and 18 cut and cover stations constructed within the deltaic deposits that underlie the city. This paper describes the ground conditions, site investigation, including the use of the self-boring pressuremeter and the associated design issues for the construction of deep foundations. The paper also describes a selection of the various deep foundation solutions that were adopted to address particular constraints of the project and the ground conditions, including slurry walls for the cut and cover stations and foundations used for the underpinning of existing structures.INTRODUCTIONThe MRT Chaloem Ratchamongkhon Line Mass Transit Underground Railway comprises approximately 22 km (14 miles) of tunnels and 18 stations. The route is shown in Figure 1.The project was divided into two design and build contracts. The northern section was awarded to the ION joint venture, composed of Italian-Thai Development PLC, Obayashi Corporation and Nishimatsu Construction Co Ltd. Arup were contracted by ION for the design of the northern section. The section comprises 11 km (7 miles) of twin-bored tunnels, nine cut and cover station tunnels constructed within perimeter slurry walls using top down construction methods, and two cut and cover tunnel structures.The majority of the route of the northern contract follows existing highway Rights of Way. This results in the tunnel alignment passing through the foundations of existing highway bridge structures for which a variety of deep foundation solutions were adopted to underpin these structures.An 8-story park and ride building in the Lat Phrao area was also constructed using deep foundations."

Jan 1, 2005

By Anil Bhandari

Using subsurface data collected at each drilled shaft location is an ideal approach for conducting drilled shaft design. However, conducting subsurface tests at each drilled shaft location and subsequently performing the drilled shaft design can be a daunting task for a noise barrier wall that is divided into six (6) sections and stretches for approximately four (4) miles. In addition, having individual drilled shaft designs complicates the construction process. Grouping the subsurface conditions into broad categories and performing the design for each of those categories is an attractive alternative to the design per boring approach. Currently there are no existing guidelines to aid a designer on grouping the subsurface conditions for the drilled shaft design for the noise barrier walls. Therefore, a method was developed based on the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) N values of the near surface soils to categorize the soil profiles into distinct categories. Since the soil engineering properties of the near surface soils are known to be critical for drilled shaft lateral capacity, these soils were emphasized in the methodology. This method was successfully implemented for the design of drilled shafts supporting the noise barrier walls along the I-20 in Columbia, SC. For this project, two distinct soil profiles, labeled as ?strong? and ?weak?, were used. An overview of the soil profile grouping methodology is presented as well as the vertical and lateral drilled shaft capacity analyses for this project for the two general soil profiles. The analyses indicated that the axial capacity governed the design in the ?weak? soil profile and the lateral capacity controlled the design in the ?strong? soil profile. However, this is not a generalization and whether the axial or the lateral capacity governs the design of drilled shaft depends on the soil profile and design loads. Nonetheless, our findings emphasize that both lateral and axial capacity should be checked for drilled shaft design even when the vertical load are minor.

Jan 1, 2011

By Yan Lap J. Kan

"A waterfront stabilization system consisting of Deep Soil Mixing (DSM) columns, vinyl sheet pile fascia, and concrete flood walls supported on shallow footings was designed and constructed for a high-density waterfront development in Northern California. The project site is underlain by soft, compressible organic soil locally known as Bay Mud that has been capped with loose sand and imported fill. The waterfront stabilization system constructed at the site mitigates liquefaction, consolidation settlement and seismic potential slope deformation along the waterfront; the system was designed to reduce lateral displacements to tolerable amounts for the proposed structures. This paper presents the general design methodologies, construction challenges and quality control of this waterfront stabilization system.INTRODUCTIONUrban development in Northern California is fueling innovations in geotechnical engineering as more complex sites are developed. ENGEO Incorporated introduced a deep soil mixing technology from Japan to the US and designed a waterfront stabilization system for a high density waterfront development project in Redwood City, California. The approximately 12½-acre project site, as shown on Fig. 1, is surrounded by water on three sides, with an inner marina at the center of the site.The project site is located in the seismically active San Francisco Bay Area in California. The San Andreas Fault, the Monte Vista-Shannon Fault, the Hayward Fault and the San Gregorio Fault are major active faults located within 25 miles of the site. Once a former marshland with a major slough until the late 1950s, the site was reclaimed by placing imported fill over the native compressible clay deposits, locally known as Bay Mud."

Jan 1, 2016

By Lawrence F. Johnsen, Marc J. Gallagher

"Micropiles are small diameter, bored, grouted-in-place piles incorporating steel casing and/or reinforcements. The omission of micropiles from most United States building codes has resulted in the application of varying standards for design and installation. The ADSC/DFI Micropile Committee has developed a proposed section for the 2006 edition of the International Building Code (IBC 2006) covering micropiles. The proposed IBC 2006 micropile code section is presented, along with comparisons to existing micropile codes and guidelines. A discussion section is provided to clarify sections of the proposed code. IntroductionMicropiles, defined as small diameter (typically less than 12 inches outer diameter), bored, grouted-in-place piles incorporating steel casing and/or reinforcements, are becoming common foundation elements for new construction, retrofits, and emergency repairs. Developed in Europe in the 1950's and used in United States practice since the late 1970's, micropiles are typically not addressed in building codes, particularly in the United States. As a result, micropiles are often reviewed by building officials to a variety of standards, including drilled shafts, caissons, cast-in-place bored piles, and concrete filled pipe piles. None of these adequately address the unique design and construction aspects of micropiles. Therefore, it became apparent to the foundation design and construction community that a micropile-specific code section was required.To that end, the International Association of Foundation Drilling and the Deep Foundations Institute (ADSC/DFI) Micropile Committee appointed a subcommittee in October 2003 to develop and submit a proposed micropile code section for the 2006 IBC. The subcommittee members included the two co-authors, as well as Tom Richards (Nicholson Construction Company), Tom Armour (DBM Contractors, Inc.), John Wolosick (Hayward Baker, Inc.), Allen Cadden (Schnabel Engineering) and Matt Niermann (Schnabel Foundation Company). At the time of the writing of this paper, the proposed code section has been presented at the IBC public hearing during which it was modified slightly. Final adoption (or rejection) will be determined by the IBC at the final action hearing in September 2005. The attached code section is the revised version following the public review hearings."

Jan 1, 2005

By Yu Zhenquan

At the construction site of Bao Shan Iron &. Steel Mill in Shanghai, lots of RC driven piles with length of 50 to 60m were applied. The most unfavourable distribution of stress along the pile shaft was known by measuring the compressive and tensive stresses. With analysing the test results a phenomenon of impact fatigue of RC pile was discovered, the range of impact fatigue and its critical zone can be distinguished. Finally some countermeasures are presented to avoid the impact fatigue of RC long pile.

Jan 1, 1991

By Murray Gamble

A new type of groundwater cutoff wall has been developed at the University of Waterloo. The Waterloo Barrier? is a steel sheet piling system that incorporates a sealable cavity at each interlocking joint. In order to prevent leakage through the joints, the sealable cavity is flushed clean and injected with sealant after the installation of the piling. The installation and sealing procedures of the Waterloo Barrier? system allow for a high degree of quality control resulting in a very low permeability cutoff wall. Based upon field installations, the bulk wall hydraulic conductivity of the Waterloo Barrier? ranges from 10-8 to 10-10 cm/sec. Recent case histories are presented in which Waterloo Barrier? vertical cutoff walls have been used to prevent the off-site migration of contaminated groundwater or soil gases. In some instances, the Waterloo Barrier? system was used in combinations of applications such as preventing the migration of contaminants, redirecting the flow of groundwater, providing structural shoring for soil excavation and aiding in site de-watering processes.

Jan 1, 1997

By David Guy, John Stanbury, Gilbert Tallard

"In 2009, storm surge from Hurricane Sandy inundated the Bay Park Sewage Treatment Plant located at El. +4 to +12 (+1.2 to +3.6 m) in East Rockaway, Long Island, NY. With all systems down, raw sewage water mixed in the floodwaters. A recurrence of such an event being unacceptable, and in view of rising future sea levels, a flood protection project was developed by Nassau County with funding coming in large part from the federally funded Sandy Rescue Fund. Designed by Arcadis/Hazen & Sawyer Engineers J.V., the protection took the form of a perimeter barrier capable of withstanding future storm surge. Due to limitations imposed by property lines and existing facilities, a levee design with three different types of cross section was developed to adapt to each location, adding construction complexity. The Long Island subsurface is characterized by beach sand extending to great depth. The clay required for the core and levee cover therefore had to be brought in from out of state. A thin silty clay layer at El. -23 to -25 (-7.0 to -7.6 m) served as an aquitard. The under-seepage was reduced by a hanging cut-off wall designed as a vibrated beam thin wall and filled with a salt water resistant, low permeability, self-hardening slurry.INTRODUCTIONOn October 29, 2009, Hurricane Sandy hit New York City, with a devastating effect on the region. The low lying Bay Park Sewage Treatment Plant (STP) (Fig. 1) serving Nassau County on Long Island was submerged (Fig. 2). All basements and underground mechanical facilities were flooded (Fig. 3) and millions gallons of effluent were released into the waters of the nearby Hewlett Bay which connects via other small waterways to the Atlantic Ocean."

Jan 1, 2016

By Ilhan Chang, Ernest Nsabimana, Kiseok Kwak, Juhyung Lee, Young-Hoon Jung

"Numerical analyses were performed to analyze the behavior of two different type of suction piles (mono type and group type) under various soil layer conditions (uniform silty clay layer, uniform silty sand layer, and two-layer deposit consisting of clay and sand layers) and lateral loading locations (top, middle, and bottom of the suction pile). According to the results, mono suction pile shows maximum resistance when load is applied on its middle, regardless of the soil layer conditions, while group suction piles varies significantly according to the allowance on head rotation. When head rotation is allowed, the behavior of group type piles become similar to the behavior of mono suction pile. Whereas, when rotation is prevented, resistance is maximized when load is applied on the top head. Moreover, group suction piles show higher efficiency regardless of the ground condition and geological stratum. For further advances, concrete block on the top of group suction piles are suggested as an effective alternative method to prevent partial rotation and maximize ground resistance for group suction piles.IntroductionWith the development of offshore technology, applications and real site installations of suction piles are increasing significantly nowadays. They are generally used as mooring anchors in various floating structures, marine platforms, and offshore wind turbines. According to its convenience in installation and removal, suction type foundations are becoming good alternatives for deep ocean support systems. The bearing capacity is similar to the bearing behavior of ordinary offshore structures (piles or drilled shafts). The most common use of suction caissons is anchors for catenary mooring lines, where the chain angle at the mudline is close to zero (Randolph, 2002; Sharma, 2004).Recently, it is reported that a huge isolated single suction pile can be replaced by a group of moderatesized suction piles (Randolph et al. 2004). A single monopile is easy to be produced and installed in site. It is expected that monopile foundation is not applicable for deep depths because it has a limitation on penetration according to its huge side skin area (i.e. friction). Moreover, stiffness requirements sometimes render thicker pile wall conditions which are impractical to be produced."

Jan 1, 2017

By Chunli Wei, Mark Jen, Xiaojun Wang

"After more than 85 years of service, a critical link between New York and New Jersey, the Goethals Bridge over the Arthur Kill waterway, is being replaced with two new parallel bridges. Each bridge includes 1,650 feet long signature steel composite cable-stayed bridge, a 2,789 feet long New York approach and a 1,889 feet long New Jersey approach. The superstructure of each approach is supported on a series of two-column concrete piers and each column is supported on a single large diameter drilled shaft varying from 4.5 to 9 feet in diameter and anchored 45 feet below ground into the underlying rock.A performance-based methodology was followed for the strength and extreme event limit states design of the drilled shaft foundations. The design for seismic loads has been performed using the AASHTO Guide Specifications for LRFD Seismic Bridge Design. For all strength and service loads, the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications were used. Since the longitudinal and confinement requirements in the two specifications vary, the minimum longitudinal reinforcement was based on the more stringent requirements of the two codes. A design example is presented to illustrate the methodology in bridge deep foundation design using nonlinear time-history global analysis results with soil-pile interaction represented by sets of horizontal and vertical nonlinear soil springs along the drilled shaft, based on the soil and rock properties from the boreholes test results. In this paper the design methodology implements strain limits related to earthquake intensities and damage levels to calculate the capacity using XTRACT analysis, which aids designers to adopt applicable provisions that meet specific design requirements.INTRODUCTIONAfter more than 85 years of service, a critical link between New York and New Jersey, the Goethals Bridge over the Arthur Kill waterway, is being replaced with two new parallel bridges designed to carry vehicular traffic and a future mass transit corridor. They include two 1,650 feet long signature steel composite cablestayed bridges with 260 feet tall V-shaped concrete gateway towers (Figure 1). The approaches consist of continuous pre-stressed concrete girders. The New York approach is a single structure consisting of 18 continuous spans, sloping at 4% for a total length of 2,789 feet without expansion joints. Similarly, the longest continuous portion on the New Jersey approach, with a similar slope, consists of 11 spans for a total length of 1,889 feet without expansion joints. The superstructure of each approach is supported on a series of two-column concrete piers that vary in height from 121.3 feet near the cable-stayed bridges to 11.8 feet near the abutments. Each column is supported on a single large diameter drilled shaft varying from 4.5 to 9 feet in diameter and anchored 45 feet below ground into the underlying rock."

Jan 1, 2016