Search Documents

By Mario A. Terceros Herrera, Mario Terceros Arce, Antonio Marinucci

This paper describes the general principles of the expander body with post-grouting (EBI) system, and how it is similar in nature to a large-scale pressuremeter device. The results from the installation of an EBI can be used to provide information about the stress-strain characteristics of the soil adjacent to the device and to compute estimates of nominal axial resistance. As the EBI expands during grouting, pressure is applied to the in-situ soil surrounding the device thereby compacting/densifying the soil. The nominal axial resistance for small diameter piles/ground anchors can be increased due to the greater soil stiffness and shear strength around the device, larger surface and end area, and improved soil-to-EBI interaction in side resistance. The shape of the response curves depends on the geotechnical conditions of the soil (e.g., in-situ stress state, strength, and stiffness) and the installation method of the piling/ground anchor. This technique has been used successfully with different pile types and ground anchors in a wide range of conditions from very loose sands/silts to very dense sands and medium-dense gravels as well as in soft to stiff clays. This paper also describes a mini case history in which 80 piles were installed to support an office building, and the results of the static axial compression load tests performed on a production FDP+EBI pile is also included.

By Brandon Buschmeier, Frederic Masse

"Inclusions are a type of ground improvement that provide an improvement of a soil mass by insertion of a material with better characteristics than the surrounding soils. There are primarily two types of inclusions: “Soft” inclusions which are constructed of granular material (Stone Columns, Rammed Aggregate Piers, VibroPiers...), and “rigid” inclusions which are constructed of grout inserted with or without pressure (VibroConcrete Columns, Controlled Modulus Columns, Soil Mixing Columns).While the central principle of the inclusions is similar (i.e., overall improvement of characteristics of the soil mass below the structure), the load transfer mechanism is radically different for each technique. Therefore, the applicable design methodology is specific to the type of inclusions and there exists no universal method of design which spans across all inclusions.This paper will present an in-depth comparison between the standard design methods used for “soft” granular-type inclusions (Priebe modified, Balaam & Booker, Goughnour & Bayuk...) and the methods used for “rigid” inclusions which mainly rely on finite element analysis. The paper will explain why the design for soft inclusion methods cannot be applied to rigid inclusions and vice-versa. Each design method will be reviewed in detail to better emphasize its limitations and advantages.Two case histories will also be presented; one for each type of inclusions in order to illustrate the concepts developed in the first part of the paper.1 INTRODUCTION1.1 GENERAL OVERVIEW OF GROUND IMPROVEMENT WITH INCLUSIONSThe use of ground improvement methods to provide the appropriate amount of foundation support is a growing and constantly evolving industry. Traditional structural foundation methods including ‘shallow’ and ‘deep’ foundations do not adequately address the wide range of settlement tolerances, soil conditions, and loading considerations inherent to each unique potential project. In some instances, ‘shallow’ foundation solutions are simply not feasible due to soil and loading constraints. Furthermore, ‘deep’ foundation solutions are used to ‘bridge’ the soft compressible soils, ensuring that the entirety of the load in the structure is transmitted through individual elements into competent layers below the ground surface (bedrock, dense residual soils). Highly concentrated structural loads are transferred into the individual elements by means of direct contact requiring the use of structurally rigid surficial components (structural slabs, grade beams, and pile caps).Ground improvement bridges the gap between these two traditional methods, offering adequate foundation support while using more costeffective techniques and design methodologies. Inclusions are a type of ground improvement used to provide a reinforcement of the soil mass through the vertical insertion of a material with better characteristics than the surrounding soils. Much like deep foundations, inclusions are installed through soil layers with high compressibility and/or low bearing capacity and terminated in a suitable bearing stratum. However, unlike deep foundations, ground improvement inclusions rely on a distribution of load between the soil and the inclusions. By doing so, some of the structural load is applied directly to the soil in a proportion equal to its bearing capacity and compressibility limits, while the rest of the load is shed into the vertical inclusions down to the bearing stratum. Load sharing is a critical aspect in the performance and design of the various ground improvement methods."

Jan 1, 2015

By Alessandro Bertero, Dylan Pearson, Wesley Schmutzler, Matteo Bertoni

"The SR 83/US 331 highway is located in the Florida panhandle, where it connects the Walton County beaches to the I-10 corridor. The roadway is of vital importance to the economy of the area as well as its safety since it represents the primary hurricane evacuation route from southern Walton County. The Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) decided to increase the number of traffic lanes from two to four and improve the geotechnical properties of the moderately deep, very loose foundation soils, that had affected the highway rideability for years. The soil mixing was selected as the method to meet the unique deep ground improvement challenges of the project. The design required that Shallow Mixing Method (SMM) be used to build a 10-foot thick platform that transferred axial load to the bottom soil layers through a series of Deep Mixing Method (DMM) columns. Upon completion over 8,300 SMM columns and 1,500 DMM columns had been installed, with no remedial work required. Also, only 1% of the almost 1,500 specimens tested did not meet the specification requirements. This paper will describe the challenges encountered and provide valuable information that may be useful for other future projects, including details not previously published.INTRODUCTIONThe counties of Walton and Okaloosa have been a very popular vacation destination for many ears. The 50-mile long coastline boasts beautiful, sugar-white beaches and waters the color of emeralds. The popularity of the area has been growing even further, over the last few years. A consequence of this phenomenon is a fast-paced increase of the traffic flow on the SR83/US331 highway, especially at the bridge that connects the Walton County beaches across Choctawhatchee Bay (Fig. 1) to the heavily traveled I-10 corridor. The highway plays a very important role for the area also as a commercial link and as the primary hurricane evacuation route from southern Walton County. The increase in traffic has produced higher travel time, when not a complete traffic paralysis, and exacerbated the issue of ground settlement where accelerated wearing of road foundation occurred due to the presence of very loose, moderately deep, soils, that had afflicted the highway for several years. The Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) decided to put an end to these issues by increasing the number of traffic lanes from two to four and improving the geotechnical properties of the foundation soils. The Design-Build Maximum Price Request for Proposal (RFP) issued for the expansion of the Choctawhatchee Bay Bridge saw the participation of numerous D/B teams which produced various technical solutions. Among them, the FDOT selected the Skanska/Parsons Brinckerhoff (General Contractor) proposal which provided for the use of soil mixing as the ground improvement technology. The design/build team assigned Foundation & Geotechnical Engineering (Designer of Record) the ground improvement design which Treviicos South (Specialty Contractor) would execute."

Jan 1, 2017

By N. Charue

An international prediction event was carried out within the framework of a 30-pile testing program organized in a sandy soil in Belgium (Limelette). That program called upon sev­eral testing methods: static load tests, Statnamic testing, and dynamic testing. This paper provides a summary of received predictions and results obtained from the static pile load tests, which were carried up to failure of the instrumented piles. The comparison between predictions is made using load-settlement curves with reference to the results of the static load tests. The predictions are based on a geotechnical approach using an extensive soil investigation program and a dynamic approach using the dynamic load test data.

Jan 1, 2002

By A. B. Desai

The construction of 1144 nos. of piles, each 1.5 m diameter, bored-cast-in-situ type and varying in depths from 6.5 to 23m, has been completed as foundation for 26 piers of 548 m long aqueduct across Orsang river to carry 1128 m3 water of Narmada Main Canal of the Sardar Sarovar Project in Gujarat. These piles are socketed 1.5 m into foundation grade rockmass. The portal system of 44 nos. of piles and pile cap at the top for each pier is analyzed considering the portal fixed at bottom of piles. The borings for pile shaft were done deploying reverse mud circulation rigs and also by conventional chiseling and bailing operations. Besides vertical loading tests and lateral loading test on piles, dynamic tests such as low strain integrity testing on 290 piles and high strain pile testing on 17 piles were also conducted. The results indicated that (a) the settlement/ displacement are much less than the prescribed limits (b) good quality of concrete (c) piles are firmly socketed and (d) piles have adequate structural capacity to withstand the design load.

Jan 1, 1996

By Colin Curtis

In recent years, Manchester Airport has undergone expansion including the construction of a second runway, a new terminal building (Terminal 3) and extensions to the existing Terminal 1. Manchester is Britains third largest airport and ranked 20th in the world for international traffic. Arup (Manchester) was engaged as consulting engineer in a multi-disciplinary role for the terminal works. Part of this was a geotechnical commission including site investigation and pile design followed by supervision. This paper reviews the piling for the old, new and terminal extensions. In total, five pile types have been utilised over the years. The original 1950's Terminal 1 was founded on driven cast in situ piles, with a later 1970's extension utilising rotary augured piles. The recent piling comprised continuous flight auger piles (CFA), driven steel tube and tripod bored; the latter in areas of restricted access or low headroom. The ground conditions are Made Ground over thin Alluvial and Glacial drift, in turn, over a generally weak to moderately weak gypsiferous mudstone. All the piles were socketed into the mudstone. In terms of the new CFA piles, quality control using the instrumentation monitoring was problematical, but a substantial static load and integrity test programme resolved pile performance. Part of the work is matching new pile performance with previously installed piles and the continued use of older piles with new loads. Research provided some data on the older piles, including some static load test data, which enabled back analyses of their design and likely behaviour. Differences in design methods, installation techniques and pile behaviour based on load tests will be discussed.

Jan 1, 2001

By Jørn H. Thomsen

This paper presents the experience gained and the lessons learned over the last decade within the numerous offshore foundation projects undertaken in the offshore waters of Denmark and Belgium by COWI A/S of Denmark. This experience derives from the close collaboration with, and interaction between the owners, contractors, and engineers in the various stages of project development. In turn, the experience draws on COWI's experience within foundation of large bridges world wide over half a century. Focus is on two pioneering gravity base foundation projects: ? Nysted in Denmark, currently the largest offshore windfarm worldwide with 72 Nos Bonus 2.3 MW turbines in water depths up to 10 m in the relatively benign inner Danish waters ? Thornton Bank in Belgium, where the first phase - comprising 6 Nos REpower 5MW-turbines of a total of 60 - are planned to be built in the rough North Sea in water depths exceeding 25 m.

Jan 1, 2013

By Jakub Szary

Excavation and shoring adjacent to the above-grade Gilmore train station and elevated guideway was undertaken in 2019. A perimeter secant pile cut-off wall was constructed to a depth 37 m (121 ft) below ground surface consisting of 1.0 m (3.3 ft) diameter drilled piles spaced 750 mm (2.5 ft) on-center, tied back with soil anchors, and reinforced with W610 steel sections every 4th pile. A bracing/jacking system was also constructed to support 3 free-standing guideway caissons within the excavation. An automated instrumentation program was installed to monitor movements of shoring walls and train infrastructure in real time and consisted of a robotic total station, inclinometers, tiltmeters, strain gauges, extensometers, and anchor load cells. Baseline monitoring was able to establish diurnal and seasonal movements within the structure, strongly correlated with temperature. The system actively monitored various shoring elements and train infrastructure in real time and alerted the project team when values exceeded predetermined threshold values. Remote reconfiguration of the automated system allowed for more frequent monitoring during jacking of Pier 29 in March 2022. Monitoring data was in agreeance with on-site manual surveying results and jacking dial gauges, and proved to be a reliable monitoring system for construction applications.

Sep 1, 2022

By G. G. Goble

Significant progress has been made in the past decade in determining the load bearing capacity of pile foundations. Developments in the means of prediction of pile capacity as limited by soil strength have been substantial, particularly in the use of dynamic methods. The use of currently available equipment, analytical procedures, and practices in the field, will often produce material economies on a job by allowing increased loads with proven factors of safety. This approach justifies the minimum number of piles required for a safe foundation in a wide range of job sizes and soil conditions. To avoid exposing the reader to excessive detail in the body of this paper, technical topics have been covered more thoroughly in several appendices. I. Wave Equation Analysis of Piles Appendix A II. Dynamic Monitoring and the Pile Driving Analyzer Appendix B III. Case Method Capacity Calculation Appendix C IV. Case Pile Wave Analysis Program Appendix D 1 Preliminary Analysis In designing driven pile foundations, there must be a close relationship between design, construction control procedures, driving practices, and the size of the job. Small commercial buildings or residences involving loads that are only a fraction of the pile capacities do not justify the expense of detailed design processes or elaborate construction controls. Nevertheless, some preliminary analysis of the job requirements and a limited subsurface investigation must be made to understand existing conditions and the possible foundation solutions. In other words, it is necessary to determine that driven piling is the best overall choice of foundation.

Jan 1, 1988

By Marco D. Boscardin

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

Jan 1, 2003

By Gang Guo, Zhong Liu

"In response to an increasing demand of anchored structures for underground space and transportation infrastructure in China, an innovative underreamed ground anchorage system was created. The novel anchorage system has provided more efficient functions with higher capacity at lower cost, because of the enlarged cylindrical body (known as ECB) sealed in capsule at bottom of anchorage. This paper presents the detailed structure of innovative anchorage system and its special features. To investigate the bearing mechanism of new anchorage, we evaluate its performance and failure mode based on the experimental results, and also indicate its strain-hardening load-displacement relationship. Unlike the shaft anchorages, it is identified no overall failure to be found in soil surrounding the underreamed anchorage. More importantly, the anchorage capacity is governed by the base resistance, which takes more than 80% of total pullout capacity resulting from the contribution of ECB. Finally a case history of anti-floating project introduces the new combined construction approach and procedure, which has provided the contribution to the quality control and cost efficiency.INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUNDThe construction boom over two decades in China has resulted in an increasing demand for underground space and slope stability. The infrastructures market requires the more efficient anchorage systems for retaining structures, resisting uplift forces and slope protection. The major concern focuses on gaining higher capacity and lower cost resulted from perfecting anchorage systems. There are three main anchorage systems designed to achieve the above objectives: ? single bore multiple anchorage system (Barley 1997), ? regroutable anchorage system (Smoltczyk 1991), ? underreamed anchorage systems (Xanthakos 1991). Generally, the concept ? comparing with the other two, can be more competitive due to its distinct advantages. To improve the performance and durability of ground anchorages under the complex geological conditions and diversified engineering requirements, a number of different underreamed anchorage technologies had been used, which included cone - shape anchorage described by Liao, Wu and Shu (1997) in Taiwan, Soilex anchorage developed in Sweden (Massarsch et al. 1997), Soletanche anchorage proposed in France, blasting anchorage used in Czechoslovakia (Hobst and Zajic 1986), jet-grouting anchorage innovated in Europe (Anon 1988), as well as deep mixing anchorage created in Japan (Cheng et al. 2000).The underreamed anchorage systems have the remarkable advantages compared to the shaft anchorage system. However, there are also some weaknesses inherent in the underreamed systems. For instance, the mechanical underreamed anchorage is unsuitable in sand or waterbearing ground, because the enlarged hole is easy to collapse, and it is hard to ensure the quality of anchorages. On the other hand, relying on the blasting in deep hole, the geometrical space and dimension of enlarged hole is uncontrollable, meanwhile, the continuous blasting operations may easily cause the serious ground deformation and the negative effects to the completed anchorages."

Jan 1, 1900

By Howard A. Perko, M. Mae Benvenga, Heather H. Trantham

Displacement of soil and groundwater during helical pile installation can produce excess pore water pressures (PWP) in fine-grained soils. Pore water pressure reduces effective stress in the soil immediately adjacent to the helical pile shaft and near the helical piles. Previous studies have shown generation of PWP may affect the capacity to torque ratios of the helical bearing elements. Large diameter helical piles that generate much of their torque and capacity from shaft adhesion are affected by PWP and therefore exhibit significant pile "freeze" after installation. Computer modeling is used herein to evaluate PWP immediately adjacent to helical pile shafts during installation in various soil types. The models show the degree and distance from the shaft that is influenced by PWP during installation and the amount of time required for the PWP to dissipate. Pile freeze has been measured on several project sites by re‐torque measurements. These re-torque data are compared with computer modeling and correlations between saturated hydraulic conductivity and dissipation time are presented and discussed. INTRODUCTION Helical piles are full-displacement piles, meaning installation does not produce drill spoil. Soil is displaced laterally as the pile progresses into the ground. This displacement of soil causes an increase in PWP, which reduces adhesion between the pile and the soil. For helical piles with small-diameter shafts, adhesion contributes little to the overall capacity and torque of the pile, so PWP changes are not typically considered in determining pile capacity. In modern construction, the use of larger diameter helical piles has become very common. For large-diameter helical piles, changes in PWP immediately adjacent the shaft can be quite large during installation. Increased pore water pressure and reduced adhesion can have a temporary effect on pile capacity and installation torque.

Jan 1, 2018

By R. D. Short

Environmental regulations for noise and air pollution are directly affecting the type of equipment and construction techniques being utilized for pile driving construction using diesel hammers in California and elsewhere. Consequently, the cost of construction is increasing and in some cases, the use of diesel pile hammers has been prohibited. Based on the trend in California and elsewhere in the world, environmental constraints are spreading and becoming more restrictive. The City of Tokyo, Japan, for example has banned the use of diesel hammers. Environmental restrictions on diesel hammers can be satisfied by using modern hammers, clean burning fuels, synthetic lubricants and pre-excavation techniques.

Jan 1, 1989

Jan 1, 1994

By Walter Ensinger

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

Jan 1, 2002

By Ali Azizian, Brian Hall

"Driven piles were selected to support the Fraser Heights Bridge bents. Piles were a key component of the top-down construction approach, which was adopted for minimizing potential impacts on an environmentally sensitive wetland. Project requirements mandated verification of pile capacities using dynamic methods. More than 40 Pile Driving Analyzer (PDA) tests were performed. The subsurface conditions were highly variable. On the east side, piles extended through loose sands, soft silts/clays, and two peat layers and were founded in glacial till-like soils at about 45 m depth. However, on the west side, till-like materials were so shallow that it was difficult to drive the piles sufficiently deep to obtain the necessary lateral support. This paper provides an overview of the geotechnical considerations of the bridge design and top-down construction approach, and expands on the presentation of PDA results and how they compared to pile capacity estimation methods and parameters recommended in the applicable design codes.INTRODUCTIONThe Fraser Heights Bridge (FHB) was a component of the Fraser Heights Connector (FHC), a 2 km section of the South Fraser Perimeter Road (SFPR), constructed as part of the Port Mann/Highway 1 (PMH1) Improvement Project. The FHC is located in northeast Surrey BC (Fig. 1).Two major design and construction determinants were: 1) a mandated tight schedule to provide a non-tolled alternative to a new toll bridge; and, 2) an obligation that construction had to occur with minimal impact on the environmentally sensitive wetland the FHB crossed, including limiting the footprint of the permanent and temporary works to less than 45 m2, and prohibiting construction access onto the wetland. Construction equipment was only allowed on the wetland on temporary trestles or on the finished structure. This latter requirement resulted in the bridge being constructed span by span, using a top-down approach."

Jan 1, 2016

There are many ways to classify structural slurry wall elements, but the DFI committee chooses to limit these descriptions to three functional requirements, namely: design function, plan configuration and type of panel reinforcement. (See Figure 1 in Part IV for panel classification). Slurry walls can function as: 1. Curvilinear or linear elements for temporary and/or permanent structures to resist lateral forces transferred from the ground, water, earthquakes and various surcharge loads. 2. Load bearing elements in various plan shapes to resist vertical forces. 3. Combination Elements to resist combined forces under conditions 1 and/or 2. For example, elliptical shafts with various openings for tunnels and conduits have been commonly used for deep excavations.

Jan 1, 2005

By P. V. Chandramohan

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

Jan 1, 2015

By Bengt H. Fellenius

THIS PAPER deals with the analysis of results from axial testing of vertical single piles, i.e. the most common field test per-formed. Despite the numerous tests which have been carried out and the many Papers which have reported on such tests and the analysis thereof, the understanding of pile test loading in current engineering practice leaves much to be de-sired. The reason for this is that the engineers have concerned themselves with mainly only one question: "Does the pile have a certain least capacity?", finding little of practical value in analysing the actual capacity and the pile-soil interaction. This Paper aims to show that engineering value can be gained from elaborating on a pile test ? during the actual testing in the Held, as well as in the analysis of the results. The first portion of the notes make use of an earlier Paper by the author (Fellenius. 1975). However, additional views and recent literature have been incorporated.

Jan 1, 1988

By Jim Steding

L.G. Barcus and Sons, Inc. recently completed a three-phase project for the expansion of Presbyterian Hospital in Albuquerque, New Mexico for McCarthy Construction Co., the Construction Manager for the project. It was a challenge that allowed Barcus to demonstrate many of it's strengths. Safety of people and property, restricted access, low headroom conditions, extensive planning to maintain hospital operations and a tight schedule were all key elements affecting the successful installation of the Augered Cast-In-Place Piles. Phase I began with installing and performing a 450-ton pile load test on an 18-inch diameter Augerpile 65 ft long. The load test was installed and performed directly in front of the Emergency Room entrance. Space was limited and the E.R. had to remain open with uninterrupted ambulance access. The results of the load test were outstanding. In fact the test pile performed so well that some of the job piles were shortened from 75 ft long to 65 ft long. [ ]

Jan 1, 2003