Search Documents

By T. Wulleman, M. Ansriou

Integrity testing is a primary quality control check on a product that is for the most part not accessible to visual examination. Their cost can be expensive when using direct methods of inspection (like coring a pile) or more economical when using indirect methods (e.g. acoustic testing). All indirect methods operate by “inference” which means that they do not directly measure the defect of integrity. Indirect methods measure the variation of physical values (temperature, impedance, speed, ect.) correlated to the integrity of the pile allowing the detection of integrity defects, although these methods do not allow for the characterization of the defect. 1. INTRODUCTION Cast-in-place piles are particularly prone to integrity defects. The reasons for this are multiple, including lack of high quality of contractor workmanship, experience and supervision necessary in construction, variable soil and groundwater conditions on site, etc. Furthermore, visual inspection of the finalized pile is usually impossible. Therefore, special care has to be taken both during the execution process and during the subsequent quality control campaign to detect any defects of executed piles. Today, a lot of methods do exist to assess pile integrity. It is thus essential to understand the mechanism governing those devices to both make an engineering choice of the pile integrity testing method and to interpret correctly the provided results. 2. QUALITY IN PILE FOUNDATIONS 2.1 Pile anomalies A pile having an anomaly is a pile which has a different behavior from what is normally expected. The presence of a pile anomaly does not necessarily imply that a pile cannot be used for its intended purpose (Gordon & Chapman 2004). An anomaly can be considered as a defect, or a “performance” depending on the ability of the pile to fulfil the following three criteria (3C): C1 - Meet the Service Limit State (SLS) requirement and support the proposed working load without settling more than admissible by the superstructure ; C2 - Meet the Ultimate Limit State (ULS) requirement and carry a specified load with an adequate factor of safety against failure ; C3 - Remain durable throughout the design life of the structure such that the pile is not affected by time dependent activities (chemical attack, corrosion of steel reinforcement, ect.), which would jeopardize its ability to maintain its compliance with the first two criteria.

Jan 1, 2019

By David Wilshaw

Continuous Surface Wave (CSW) testing has been the “next big thing” in ground characterization for the last 25 years. The technique uses surface geophones to measure the speed at which Rayleigh waves (generated by a vibratory source) travel through the ground over a range of frequencies. The velocity at which surface waves travel through the ground is directly related to ground stiffness; the velocity of shorter wavelengths is influenced by the stiffness of shallower soil layers, while the velocity of longer wavelengths is influenced by the stiffness of deeper layers. Measuring the surface wave velocity over a range of frequencies, therefore, allows a stiffness / depth profile to be produced. Using the small-strain stiffness data measured by the CSW technique greatly improves the accuracy of simple limit state analyses; the data are also of sufficient quality for use in Finite Element modelling. Nonetheless, the technique has suffered from a perception of high cost, low productivity, and poor repeatability. An improved Advanced Continuous Surface Wave (ACSW) testing system has been developed by Ground Stiffness Surveys in the United Kingdom, has been deployed there commercially for several years, and is now available in the United States. ACSW uses an automated electronic control system that generates vibrations (from a purpose designed and manufactured portable seismic “shaker”) at different frequencies, measured across a 3m (10-foot) array of geophones, linked to a robust data acquisition and analysis software package. The range of applications in geologic and geotechnical site characterization includes rapid preliminary non-intrusive site assessments (utilizing published soil correlations); stiffness profiling to detect discrete layers (such as a variation in rockhead); average stiffness profiling for earthwork or ground improvement control testing, Working Platform stability assessments, foundation settlement analysis, rock quality and rippability assessments, and void detection.

Oct 1, 2022

By Matthew Runion, Christopher Lawler

The Aeolus – Jim Bridger Transmission Line Project is located in southern Wyoming, home to some of the largest coal seams in the world. Coal seams present unique challenges to underground construction, as they are at high risk of coal-seam fires and do not provide a reliable bearing stratum. Accurate identification of these hazards was essential for reliable design and successful construction of foundations on this project; however, environmental restrictions and other protections created short time frames to access several sites. Coupled with a firm construction deadline, this meant that a comprehensive geotechnical investigation prior to construction would not be possible. This paper presents the project as a case study, and details how an Engineer-Procure-Construct (EPC) contracting format supported by a comprehensive Quality Assurance (QA) program provided a solution to the defined challenges. It describes the initial design process using incomplete geotechnical data and explains how the developed QA program verified design assumptions and reduced geotechnical risk through early identification of geologic conditions during construction. Specific examples will be given, and industry implications will be discussed.

By Emre Biringen

Over the past decades, there has been an increasing recognition of the strategic use of pile-supported rafts in design of heavily-loaded structures to reduce total and differential settlements. However, such a hybrid foundation construction method has not been widely utilized in many countries, including the U.S., due to code limitations. In current practice, the foundation design is based on either (i) the bearing capacity of the raft supported by the subgrade soils, or (ii) solely the pile capacity. This paper addresses the potential use of such hybrid piled-raft systems, where the structural load is shared by both by the piles and the subgrade soils directly beneath the raft, in foundation design of power plant structures. The study assessed some of the characteristics of piled-raft behavior by undertaking three-dimensional finite element analyses of two raft sizes, and various pile layout patterns, including the rafts with piles distributed evenly and only in the central area of the raft. The computer software PLAXIS 3D with the Mohr-Coulomb constitutive soil model was used to facilitate the modeling of such cases. The results presented in this paper indicate how strategically locating the piles could reduce the differential and total settlements.

By Z. Q. Wang

The author is trying to clarify the existing problems in designing and laying out dynamic consolidation for soft ground improvement. Field testings and observations including vibrational parameters, pore pressures, stereoscopic photogrammetry etc. were run in order to trace the real behaviour of ground movement during tamping. It is believed that all the data got from the field work are rather informative and illustrative than that from theoretical modelling in the laboratory, thus some highlights relating effective thickness of compaction, maximum spacing between compaction points, number of blows for optimum tamping and seismic attenuation for environmental consideration are given.

Jan 1, 2010

By George Piscsalko

Quality control of drilled shafts and ACIP piles is greatly dependent upon the practices of the site personnel. In many applications it is difficult to properly inspect the shaft prior to concreting, such as when the shaft is drilled under slurry. In other cases, such as ACIP piles, it is impossible to inspect the shaft in any manner prior to concreting. There are numerous methods currently available to assess the integrity of drilled shafts and ACIP piles. Each method has its advantages and limitations. This paper will compare the various available methods as well as introduce a new method for assessing integrity in drilled shafts and ACIP piles. This new method, known as Thermal Integrity Profiling, determines the integrity over 100% of the shaft both inside and outside the reinforcing cage by measuring the hydration temperature of the concrete along the length of the shaft. These temperature measurements can be made by either passing a thermal probe through a standard Cross Hole access tube typically 12 to 48 hours after concrete placement, or from embedding thermal wires within the shaft prior to concrete placement and monitoring them with unattended data collectors for 12 to 48 hours after concrete placement. This Thermal Integrity Profile method will be described in detail and several case histories will be presented. Additional testing methods which will be compared include low strain Pile Integrity Testing, and Cross Hole Sonic Logging. Advantages and limitations for each method will be discussed.

By A. David Miller, Chika Oya

"Field sampling and testing are part of the Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) requirements for all Cement Deep Soil Mixing (CDSM) Projects. Field sampling and testing are also used for determining the performance and quality of soil mixing method(s) and are the primary basis for accepting or rejecting the soil mixing wall among all other QC testing. Two of the most commonly recognized and used sampling methods for CDSM walls are wet grab sampling and verification coring. Depending on the types of wall construction and project budget, one or both of these methods are normally used to help evaluate the in-situ matrix and quality of the mixed soils. Additional to ASTM strength and permeability testing from wet grab sampling and verification coring, more and more testing methods are being employed and accepted. However, these other testing methods tend to be unnecessary, lack consistency and repeatability, and are more subjective to manipulation and interpretation. In certain projects, there are also misconceptions involved with the results of wet grab sampling and verification coring, hence it is important to note how these wet grab sampling and verification coring work and represent the work in terms of quality of production.TYPES OF PROJECTSCDSM projects include (but not limited to) in-situ stabilization, liquefaction mitigation, excavation support, groundwater cutoff, and pollution containment. Although these projects use similar equipment on the jobsites, each project is treated differently in terms of catering to specification, uses of different mix designs, and emphasis on certain steps during production.Different types of projects with different specification changes the focus of quality, but soil types in jobsite also determine how to proceed with production. For example, a jobsite with predominate gravel layer must be treated differently as opposed to jobsite with clayey sand as the main soil type.WET GRAB SAMPLEWet grab sampling is one of the most used testing methods for QA/QC. The wet grab sample specimen is retrieved right after finishing the production of the desired element.Wet grab sampling equipment consist the use of 28 cubic inch (458.84 cubic cm) box attached directly to one of the auger stems. Hinges attached to the top and bottom of the box is fabricated to allow collection only during auger withdrawal. The collection box is strapped just above the mixing paddles on the auger stem and measured from the center auger head tip to confirm proper depth of collection. This box method has been used in Japan and U.S. for numerous projects."

Jan 1, 2017

By Dominic Parmantier, Jason Page

"In the past, the designers of DSM have analyzed various failure modes and then specified a minimum unconfined compressive strength (UCS) for the soil-cement. The specified minimum UCS reflected the compressive stress in the soil-cement under design loads and an appropriate factor of safety. With the increased use of finite element analysis for the design of DSM applications where allowable strain as well as stress are considered, there is a growing trend for designers to specify a modulus and occasionally a tensile strength for the soil-cement in addition to the UCS. This paper compares the relationship of modulus and tensile strength to UCS for soil-cement from a recent DSM project with unique testing requirements. These results are compared to published data. The case is made that designers should utilize published relationships to characterize the required strength and stiffness by a single acceptance criterion: UCS.INTRODUCTIONAs the use of DSM has increased in popularity so has the use of service state deformation analysis in lieu of more traditional failure mode analysis. Most DSM designers are interested in the appropriate modulus values and occasionally tensile strength values of soil-cement as well as simply the unconfined compressive strength (UCS) of soil-cement.Although there are numerous published correlations between the UCS, tensile strength and modulus of soil-cement, some DSM project specifications are produced which have acceptance values for tensile strength, modulus, and UCS. If this specification of multiple strength properties is consistent with the nature of soil-cement, then there is really no harm except for the expenditure of client money on unnecessary testing. If however the multiple strength properties specified are inconsistent with the material properties of soil-cement, then the specifications can create the expectation that the DSM contractor can somehow create a custom soil-cement with tensile strengths and modulus characteristics which are unachievable.This paper presents a brief summary of a project in Burnaby, B.C. which specified minimum values for the tensile strength, modulus, and UCS of the soil-cement. A comparison of those test results to published correlations between the UCS and the tensile strength is presented. Additionally, a comparison of modulus derived from two different methods of testing is presented along with a comparison to published correlations between UCS and modulus for soil-cement."

Jan 1, 2015

By David S. Graham, Paul J. Axtell

Crosshole Sonic Logging (CSL) non-destructive integrity testing identified anomalous readings near the base of a 6.5-foot diameter drilled shaft rock socket. The anomaly was confirmed to be a defect by subsequent coring and core hole camera inspection. A large void and exposed rebar were visually observed in one of the core hole camera inspections. The center of the shaft was then excavated initially with 3-foot diameter tooling and subsequently with 4-foot diameter tooling as part of the remedial actions to address the defect. While excavating with 3-foot diameter tooling, the shaft defect was not encountered. Excavation with 4-foot diameter tooling revealed the defect, a significant void around the majority of the shaft circumference. The void extended radially from the circumference of the 4-foot diameter excavation to beyond the reinforcement cage to the exposed wall of the rock socket around approximately 80 percent of the shaft circumference. CSL results and observations made during remedial shaft investigation and excavation are in good agreement. The shaft defect, located primarily outside of the reinforcement cage, was effectively identified by CSL testing. Although the defect was confirmed by investigative coring, the remedial excavation demonstrates how the investigative coring could have easily missed the defect. This paper shows how CSL results compare to physical observations made during a rare opportunity to characterize the full extent and nature of a drilled shaft defect originally identified as an anomaly by CSL testing. INTRODUCTION The case history presented here pertains to a drilled shaft for a multi-shaft bridge pier in the Midwestern United States. However, the observations presented in this paper are not a result of unique site conditions or the particulars of the project. The lessons learned from this case history are applicable to almost any drilled shaft constructed in the wet. The overall length of the subject shaft is 22 feet including approximately 12 feet of permanently cased, 7-foot diameter shaft extending to bedrock and approximately 10 feet of uncased, 6.5-foot diameter rock socket. The shaft is designed to resist axial and lateral loads and considers the contributions of side and base resistance in the axial design. Six, 2-inch diameter steel Crosshole Sonic Logging (CSL) tubes are include in the shaft. The bedrock at the shaft location includes beds of sandstone, shale, and limestone. The shaft was drilled using conventional drilling equipment and tooling, and water was used as the drilling fluid. Conventional drilled shaft concrete appropriate for underwater tremie-placement was placed via a 10-inch diameter open hopper tremie.

Jan 1, 2019

By Kiyotaka Ohno, Nobushige Yasuoka, Yosuke Hioki

"The diameter of improved columns adopted by the original DJM Method had been 1000 mm, however, in order to comply with the social need for construction cost reduction, the Expanded Dry Jet Mixing (EX-DJM) Method with maximum column diameter expanded to 1300 mm was developed between 1998 and 2001 and has been widely applied since then. From the first application of EX-DJM in January 2002 for a first construction project, the total volume of improved soil has reached 325,000 m3 in 17 projects up to September 2014. Because of the advantages of the EX-DJM such as reduction of construction costs and periods leading to reduction in the number of improved columns, adoption of this method is expected to increase in the future. This paper describes the advantages of the EX-DJM, its construction results and case examples including those applied to restoration projects after the Great East Japan Earthquake, 2011.1. BACKGROUND OF DEVELOPMENTThe Dry Jet Mixing (DJM) Method is a soil stabilization method in which a powdery or granular binder is pneumatically fed into and mixed with soft soil to induce chemical reactions that stabilize and strengthen the soil. It was developed by government - private collaboration in Japan between 1977 and 1979. Up to March 2014, the total volume of soil improved by DJM method reached 33,500,000 m3. The initial diameter of improved columns of the original DJM Method was 1000 mm. In order to comply with the social need for construction cost reduction, the Expanded Dry Jet Mixing (EX-DJM) Method with maximum column diameter 1300 mm was developed between 1998 and 2001.2. ADVANTAGES OF EX-DJMThe construction equipment for the EX-DJM consists of two major parts, which are DJM machine and binder plant are shown in Fig. 1.The construction machine is of double mixing-shaft type with its column diameter expanded to 1200mm or 1300mm. In association with the increase in the column diameter, the binder feeder has also increased its discharge rate by approximately 1.69 times. Same as the increase rate of the area of original diameter 1000mm to diameter 1300mm are shown in Fig. 4."

Jan 1, 2015

By Cen Guoji

The foundation of bored pouring concrete pile have been adopted in the bridge engineering of China since early in the sixties. They demonstrated tremendous technical advantage and achieved notable economic benefit. With improvement of bridge technique including construction technique work equipment, design theory, examination in quality and applicable range etc, the pile diameter became bigger and the foundation changed from shallow to deep-water. This paper examples Jiujiang Bridge of Guangdong in China, which is single-tower cable-staged bridge, total length of 1675m, and expouds adopted successfully the foundation of variable section large bored pile (upper part d=3m, central part d=2. 4m and lower part d=2m) on the conditions of complicated technique that the load is tremendous (it require specially to resist 12000 kN ship impact) and the piles have free length 30m. The paper will be to describle design project and construction practice of pile foundation with variable section, and to compare schemes of equal section pile and pile in sinking-well.

Jan 1, 1991

By John Davie

We used a Remtek survey in Glenrock and had very good luck with it when we first started the initial investigation. We would have loved to have used that more but my understanding is the equipment is hard to find. It also requires a flooded mine workings. If you're in a dry mine the communication between the two holes is not quite as successful.

Feb 10, 2003

By Matthew C. Janes, Mark C. Spence

"A former coal gasification site next to Rock Bay in Victoria, BC, Canada required a barrier to permit dewatering and excavation of the bay and surrounding property. The adjacent property owners had stringent requirements at the boundaries of their properties. Isherwood Geostructural Engineers designed a temporary steel sheet pile (SSP) water retention structure and excavation shoring system along the perimeter of the site. The project involved challenging geotechnical conditions in soft clay soils and a multi-faceted construction staging plan involving the diversion of two large storm water outfalls that drained into the bay. Despite a well-conceived design and construction plan, unexpected site conditions and delays led to significant changes in design and construction approach. Employment of the Observational Method and on-the-fly geotechnical investigation were instrumental in maintaining project momentum and schedule. The paper presents the geotechnical and geostructural design details and construction events as they transpired, highlighting the key issues, discussions and lessons learned.INTRODUCTIONFor over 100 years, the Rock Bay Site, in Victoria, British Columbia, Canada, had a legacy of contamination left behind from previous industrial activities. The site was the former location of a coal gasification plant that was in operation from 1862 to 1952. The site was also an infilling location for a nearby tannery and sawmill. The remediation of the Rock Bay Site involved the excavation and replacement of approximately 300,000 tonnes of contaminated soils on Transport Canada’s property. The project commenced in 2004 and has occurred over several phases on multiple properties. In the third and final phase of the project, a temporary steel sheet pile (SSP) excavation shoring system and ocean barrier wall – required to seal off the bay – was employed to enable disposal and replacement of approximately 90,000 tonnes of contaminated soils from the shoreline and base of the bay."

Jan 1, 2016

By R. Lee Wooten, David R. Shields, Darren D. Clark

"Borehole permeability tests that measure flow or head changes in boreholes located within seepage barrier walls are commonly used to estimate the in situ permeabilities of those walls for quality control and assurance. The current state of practice for estimating permeabilities from these barrier wall borehole tests is to use equations published by M. J. Hvorslev in 1951. Hvorslev’s borehole test equations model an infinite stratum of uniform permeability, which is not the actual condition for a test performed in a low permeability barrier wall located within a high permeability stratum. We examine and develop alternative equations based on line source analytical models, which more closely match barrier wall test conditions. We describe how these alternate equations can be used to estimate barrier wall permeabilities from borehole tests and compare the results to those obtained from the Hvorslev models. We also provide recommendations that consider differing upstream and downstream water levels.Barrier Wall Permeability Tests - State Of PracticeThe installation of seepage barrier walls has become more common in a variety of applications ranging from dams and levees to contaminated sites requiring retardation of groundwater flow. The types of seepage barrier walls and installation methods include soil-bentonite, soil-cement-bentonite, concrete, self-hardening slurry, geomembranes, and sheet piles, installed with various soil mixing, slurry-supported trench, and driving methods.Owners and contractors have used a variety of methods to evaluate the permeability of these seepage barriers. The following table lists commonly used quality control/assurance tests for evaluating the permeability of a seepage barrier."

Jan 1, 2016

By Dawn Shuttle

In trying to find a grout, or some kind of stabilizer that would work in this application, we established some performance criteria. Of those, what I controlled the most was viscosity, then I had a whole list of other criteria. I needed a long, controllable gel time, durability and the ability to set and stabilize the soil. So I looked through a lot of different stabilizers, some really crazy ones and also the typical chemical grouts that are used. The typical chemical grouts were eliminated because of long-term durability concerns, the need for having extended gel times, and several other concerns. I would be happy to discuss that with you further after the talk if you're interested. But, generally it was based on viscosity, gel time, and the need for extended gel time. In terms of the relative density of the sand many other grouts could have been used. But the main issue was trying to develop this way to do low pressure grouting that would not cause invasive disruption of the site. We couldn't go in and grout it, put centers, so most of the other grouts wouldn't work for various reasons. The forty percent relative density samples were prepared by plubiation. That was both during the cyclic testing stage of the research, which happened a few years back, and also during the box model and the laminar box models at RPI. In terms of what criteria were used to determine the success of the grouting, when I initially started this work what I did was take the grouted samples and I subjected them to cyclic triaxial testing. What I did was take a look at the cyclic deformation resistance of different concentrations of grouted colloidal silica treated sand. I looked first at 20% concentration because I wanted something that I knew worked and then I gradually decreased to 15%, 10%, and 5%. What I was most concerned with was that it did not liquefy and that it was able to hold together it and experience some deformation. But most importantly it needed to not liquefy. So, that was the biggest issue in determining the success of the grouting. In terms of the centrifuge modeling it was done by looking at several components: from looking at the pictures of the bending moments, looking at the acceleration records and how the acceleration records were transferred through the soil, looking at the reduction in the lateral displacement and those kinds of issues. So let me show you the difference.

Feb 10, 2003

By W. Morgan NeSmith

"The DFI ACIP Pile Committee, in conjunction with the Florida DOT, completed an ACIP Pile installation monitoring and performance test program in late 2016 to advance the inclusion of ACIP piles in future specifications for bridges by state agencies. Piles of different diameters were installed for compression, tension and lateral testing, and one pile was extracted for visual inspection. This paper presents the pile installation, non-destructive testing and load test results of the program.INTRODUCTION The Deep Foundations Institute (DFI) Augered Cast-In-Place (ACIP) Pile Committee performed a ACIP pile installation and test program in the fall of 2016 to demonstrate a fully monitored installation of 18-in and 24-in diameter ACIP piles. The program included automated and manual installation monitoring, Thermal Integrity Profiling, compression, tension and lateral load testing (including monitoring of strain gages embedded along the compression pile shaft), and post-testing extraction of an installed pile for visual inspection.PROJECT DETAILS AND FIELD EXPLORATION A general program location map along with an aerial view of the property in Okahumpka FL is shown in Figure 1. Two Cone Penetration Tests (CPT) were performed at initial reaction pile locations R-6 and R-8 (Figures 2 and 3) The results from CPT R-6 indicated very loose soil conditions at depths below 55-ft, indicating potential relic sinkhole conditions. The test layout was subsequently rotated and moved south of CPT R-8.TEST PILE INSTALLATION DETAILS Seven piles were installed to either 40-ft or 60-ft below grade. Thermal Integrity Profile (TIP) wires were installed in all piles but varied to include one wire each attached to a steel center bar or one wire attached to the steel center bar AND four additional wires (each) attached the steel reinforcing cage installed in these piles. Additionally, the 24-in lateral and compression piles had four steel or PVC casings installed next to the TIP wires for testing by thermal probe and/or wire inserted into the casing."

Jan 1, 2017

By Michael Cianchetti, Nadir Ansari, Matthew Janes

"PROJECT DESCRIPTIONThe R C Harris Filtration Plant underwent an expansion to install an underground sludge treatment capability consisting of a series of underground tanks within stepped excavations 12m (39 ft) and 10m (33 ft) deep into compact, wet sands over stiff clays and clayey silts.Concerns regarding the original structure influenced designers to set the lateral deflection limit for the proximal front footing at 4mm (1/6 in), (0.03% excavation depth). The design-build team indicated at the time of tender that the movement criteria was unattainable using the tender design. Through extensive Fast Lagrangian Analysis on Continua (FLAC) and a novel construction geometry the design-build team crafted an alternative that produced significant savings over the original concept and met deflection concerns.GEOTECHNIQUEThe hillside site drops 14.5m (47.6 ft) over a distance of 53m (174 ft) between the existing Filter Building on the north and the Services Building on the south. The soils adjacent to the Filter Building consist of 6m (20 ft) of sandy fills, to the footing elevation, over compact sands and layered dense sands and silts to a depth of 10m (33 ft) below existing footing. Beneath the silts lies a 10m (33 ft) thick stiff clayey silt, 2m (6.6 ft) of sandy silt till (containing cobbles and boulders) and an artesian gravelly sand at a total depth of 30m (98.5 ft).The tender information was deemed inadequate to accurately determine soil parameters for a finite element analysis. As a result, the design-build team performed pre-tender Cone Penetrometer Testing (CPT), including dynamic analysis. The CPT data indicated stratigraphy consistent with the conventional bore hole exploration (SPT results) however, the CPT data provided consistently superior soil strengths. The CPT data indicated the sands and silts were dense to very dense throughout their full thickness. The clayey silts below the sands were found to have shear strengths in the 100 to 200 kPa (14.5 to 29 psi) range with an Over-Consolidation Ratio (OCR) ratio of 1.5 to 2. The dynamic analysis, while low strain, indicated very competent behavior with Young’s Modulus values in the 200 to 350 MPa (29,000 psi to 51,000 psi) range. The CPT derived shear moduli and OCR values were vital in determining the soil engineering parameters used for the FLAC analyses."

Jan 1, 2007

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 Juhyung Lee

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.

By Terry Eldridge, Keith MacKay, David Siddle, Luke Moger

On August 4th, 2014, a breach occurred in the Perimeter Embankment of the Tailings Storage Facility (TSF) located at the Mount Polley Mine, releasing approximately 10.6 million m3 of supernatant water, 7.3 million m3 of tailings solids, 6.5 million m3 of tailings interstitial water and 0.6 million m3of construction materials. A Temporary Upstream Rockfill Berm was constructed between August 2014 and February 2015 within the area of the tailings dam failure in order to retain the remaining tailings solids during the low flows of the winter season. The Temporary Upstream Rockfill Berm was constructed as part of the initial response phase, with the primary objective to abate the flow of tailings into the receiving environment. A secondary objective of its construction was facilitating the required investigation works downstream of the tailings dam failure. The selection of the coarse grained material used in the construction of the Temporary Upstream Rockfill Berm was based on the availability of the material (timeliness of construction) and the non-water retaining design of this initial response phase. Consequently, an alternative method was required in order to prevent further loss of mine-affected water and tailings from the TSF, as well as to provide short-term contingency water storage, during high flow conditions expected in late spring. Golder Associates Ltd. designed the 2015 Freshet Management Embankment, a deep mixing cut-off wall, to meet these site requirements, which was constructed by Mount Polley Mining Corporation and Golder Construction Inc. between December 2015 and April 2015. The works included 132 soil cement panels constructed to depths of up to 27 meters. This aspect of the works was completed using an RG25S Bauer CSM rig on a 24 hour per day, 7 day per week schedule. The cut-off wall specifications included a target unconfined compressional strength (UCS) of between 1 and 2 MPa, a maximum hydraulic conductivity of 1x10-6 cm/s, and a ductility to enable the soil cement to undergo a minimum of 5% strain without a reduction in strength or increase in hydraulic conductivity. In order to control and assure the quality of the soil cement, 2553 wet grab specimens were retrieved from the fresh soil cement panels using a project-developed sampler. Four of the soil cement panels were cored with a mud-rotary drill rig and optical and acoustic televiewers were placed into the boreholes in order to log several relevant parameters, including image, texture, relative hardness, borehole-shape, and temperature.

Jan 1, 2016