Search Documents

By John P. Turner, Steven S. Dapp, Dan A. Brown

"The Goethals Bridge Replacement (GBR) spanning the Arthur Kill Waterway between Elizabeth, NJ and Staten Island, NY is supported on over 200 drilled shaft foundations ranging in diameter from 4.5 ft to 10 ft and socketed into Passaic Formation siltstone. Four drilled shafts, two on each side of the bridge (NJ and NY), were load tested using the bi-directional axial load method. Axial test results demonstrate that RQD, taken by itself, is not necessarily a reliable indicator of side or base resistance. High recovery with low RQD can be a function of horizontally bedded siltstone and shale where the individual pieces of core do not exceed four inches, but may still provide very high side and base resistance. Axial testing was followed by a lateral rapid-load test (Statnamic) on each of the same four shafts. In addition, one of the shafts was subjected to a static lateral load test to validate the rapid-load method as being representative of static loading conditions. Results of the axial load tests provide the basis of unit side and unit base resistances used in the LRFD design of the rock sockets for axial loading, while results of the static and Statnamic lateral load tests were used to calibrate p-y curve parameters used for design under lateral and moment loading. This paper describes implementation of the load testing program and its role in the design process.INTRODUCTIONDesign of drilled shaft foundations for the Goethals Bridge Replacement (GBR) required load testing in order to validate the parameters used for calculating geotechnical axial and lateral resistances. The bridge, including foundations, was designed in accordance with the AASHTO LRFD design specifications, 6th Edition (2012). The bridge owner is the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (PANYNJ). One of the PANYNJ project requirements was stated as follows:“Perform a minimum of two (2) separate axial compression load tests (one [1] in New York and one [1] in New Jersey) for each demonstration shaft of different size and construction methodology to verify the design assumptions and construction procedures. At a minimum, one (1) demonstration shaft is required to be representative of production shafts with a diameter within one (1) foot above or below the demonstration shaft diameter.Conduct a minimum of two (2) lateral load tests (one [1] in New York and one [1] in New Jersey) for each demonstration shaft of different size and construction methodology. At a minimum, one (1) demonstration shaft is required to be representative of production shafts with a diameter within one (1) foot above or below the demonstration shaft diameter.”"

Jan 1, 2016

By Les R. Chernauskas

? What is Integrity Testing? ? Cross-Hole Sonic Logging (CSL) ? Single-Hole Sonic Logging (SSL) ? Typical Specifications ? Case Histories ? Observations and Conclusions WHAT IS INTEGRITY TESTING? General Definition ? Process in which the condition or structural makeup of an object can be evaluated with respect to defects such as a reduction in cross section (void or crack) or reduction in material strength (water, slurry, soil mixed with concrete). ? If the defect is severe enough, it can reduce or alter the load carrying ability of the object.

Jan 1, 2001

By Paolo Cavalcoli, Federico Pagliacci

"As opposed to the static functional recovery of existing structures, the construction of infrastructures in an urban environment, when combined with complex geological situations, often involves building foundation structures, whether circular or rectangular in section, through rock formations or chaotic strata (sand and gravel with cobbles). Until a few years ago, these formations or strata were sometimes an insurmountable constraint on traditional foundation installation techniques. The difficulty in overcoming these geological situations is sometimes added to the increasingly frequent need to reach depths that were unimaginable just a decade ago. These are real challenges for those carrying out these works and for those manufacturing the necessary equipment. There are two main methodological approaches to these problems, that can be summed up in the rhetorical figure of ""David and Goliath"": cunning versus force. In reference to the case studies in this article: the permanent retaining walls for the Copenhagen Metro, and the structural repairs to the Arapuni Dam in New Zealand and the Wolf Creek Dam in the U.S., we will describe the foundations constructed in presence of rock using combined small-diameter direction drilling solutions, associated with their enlargement up to the project’s size, at depths exceeding 300 feet. Finally, a case study will be presented on the implementation of a large cross-section of an excavation in the rock, at depths greater than 800 feet.IntroductionAs opposed to the functional recovery of existing structures, the construction of infrastructures in an urban environment, when combined with complex geological situations, often involves building foundation structures, whether circular or rectangular in section, through rock formations or chaotic strata (sand and gravel with cobbles).Until a few years ago, these formations or strata were sometimes an insurmountable constraint on traditional foundation installation techniques. The difficulty in overcoming these geological situations is sometimes added to the increasingly frequent need to reach depths that were unimaginable just a decade ago.These are real challenges for those building these works and for those manufacturing the necessary equipment. There are two main methodological approaches to these problems, that can be summed up in the biblical figures of ""David and Goliath"": cunning versus force. In the engineering field, the force is summarized in the use of ever-larger drilling equipment in terms of installed power, weight in working conditions, winch and rotary capacity."

Jan 1, 2015

By Yu Chuang, Zai Jinmin, Liu Songyu

"The piled raft foundation is a geotechnical composite construction method, consisting of three elements, piles, raft and soils, which is applied for the foundation in an increasing number. Differential settlements have numerous negative effects on a superstructure in piled raft foundations. Through the analysis of the production mechanism of differential settlements and differential settlements control measures, a method of adjusting pile configurations is presented to control differential settlements. By comparing the measured data and finite element method analysis of one oil storage piled raft foundation, the new method is verified that the differential settlements can be reduced effectively and the inner forces of foundations are more reasonable with varying length pile configurations. The differential settlements can be minimized or even reduced to zero with right pile length.INTRODUCTIONPiled raft foundations are widely adopted for the prominent advantage of limited settlements and adequate bearing capacities. However, there always exits differential settlements in conventional piled raft foundations. The differential settlement is the main cause that produces additional stresses in the structure. Differential settlements have numerous negative effects on a superstructure as well as on a foundation, and should be restricted to allowable limits. How to control the differential settlement is the key interest.An increasing number of structures are founded on piled rafts. For this reason, design strategies that enable an optimized design have a major importance for safety and economy. An optimized design may be defined as a design achieving maximum economy of the solution, that is minimum cost for the installation of the foundation."

Jan 1, 2005

By Leena Korkiala-Tanttu, Ilkka Vähäaho, Juha Forsman, Paavo Lahdenperä, Kalle Rantala, Osmo Korhonen

"District of Arabianranta (Helsinki, Finland) has been founded on an old seabed, which was filled with miscellaneous soil materials. The subsoil consists of very low shear strength clays and organic clays (gyttjas). The soil was moving towards the sea at a rate of 1050 mm/year, because of filling on top of the soft subsoil. In the middle of 1990’s it was decided to build a residential area to Arabianranta, because it is located only 5 km away from the downtown. To inhibit the movement of soil, it was planned to build this 700 m long deep mixed column-wall barrier along the shore of Arabianranta in the years 1997–2005. A lot of instrumentation and inclinometers were analyzed and it was noticed that the column-wall remains at its place and the displacement rate inside the wall has been only 0.44.6 mm/year after construction works. Nevertheless, the displacement of soil at the landward side of the column-wall is still 1.25.1 mm/year. The soil at the seaside of the barrier is also moving towards the sea 12.922.2 mm/year. Another problem might be displacements of soil near the places where the column-wall ends (tails).1. INTRODUCTIONArabianranta district (Helsinki, Finland) has been an industrial, storage and wasteland area for a long time. Developing this area into a residential area was earlier considered too expensive, so it has been constructed during last decade. The organic clay layers (gyttjas), which have weak shear strength and high water content, were covered by various layers of fillings done in different phases. Because of the fillings, the area was not only consolidating, but also moving horizontally 1050 mm/year towards the sea due to the fact that the frictional soil under clay layers slopes towards the sea. A trial deep mixed structure was constructed in 1997 to inhibit the horizontal displacements of soil. The actual construction of the columnwall was completed in 2000-2005 with overlapping deep mixed cement columns on the seaward boundary. The barrier was built so that the horizontal movements would not risk the pile foundations at Arabianranta. The length of the barrier is about 680 m and width varies between 1220 m. There is a great amount of instrumentation near the barrier (inclinometer casings and other measuring devices). All this measuring information has been collected and analysed at 2014 to find out how this deep mixed column-wall has affected the horizontal displacements."

Jan 1, 2015

By Ke Yang

"Drilled shafts are typically used to support structures subjected to large moments at the shaft head. The large moment can produce push and pull forces on the two sides of a drilled shaft. Consequently, the applied moment is partially resisted by the push-pull moment resistance induced from the vertical side shears. This type of push-pull resistance has not been fully recognized in most design and analysis methods. In this paper, a 30 finite element model for a drilled shaft subjected to lateral load and moment is presented and is validated against two field lateral load tests. Based on the 30 finite element model, a parametric study is carried out. It shows that the push-pull moment can resist 18-35% of the applied moment. The parametric study also shows that the push-pull resistance varies linearly with loading eccentricity when the eccentricity is less than the shaft embedment length. A method to estimate the push-pull resistance is proposed based on the results of the parametric study. Then, a new method for lateral capacity prediction is proposed to account for the push-pull resistance. The base shear resistance is significant for short drilled shafts; therefore it is also included in the proposed method. A case study on four lateral load field tests illustrates that the new method could improve the accuracy of lateral capacity prediction when compared with the traditional Broms method.INTRODUCTIONDrilled shafts are typically used to support a variety of structures subjected to large moments. Sound walls, highway signs, traffic signals, high-rise buildings, electrical transmission towers, and bridge piers are examples of cases where lateral loads with large eccentricity would result in high overturning moments on foundations.Current analysis methods for capacity predictions (Broms, 1964a and 1964b; Brinch Hansen, 1961) or deflection predictions (Reese, et al. 197 4) of laterally loaded drilled shafts are based on the lateral resistance of soils and rocks. However, O'Neill pointed out that moments can be partially resisted through the push-pull resistance provided by the vertical side shears due to the rotation of the pile (Reese, 1997)."

Jan 1, 2005

"Full time inspection of drilled shafts by qualified personnel is a necessary part of construction. Detailed inspection procedures for routine inspection are provided in the Drilled Shaft Inspector’s Manual, published jointly by the DFI and ADSC: the International Association of Drilled Shaft Contractors.The use of NDT methods or other observation methods, such as probes, video camera inspection, remote shaft wall inspection devices or various calipers are not suitable substitutes for routine "topside" construction inspection as described in the Drilled Shaft Inspector’s Manual. However, these NDT and other "remote" or indirect observation methods are valuable alternatives to direct entry of personnel into drilled shaft excavations. They should be considered whenever appropriate to reduce the risks of direct entry of personnel into drilled shaft excavations.As described in the Drilled Shaft Inspector’s Manual, observations made during construction are essential for quality construction of drilled shafts. The shaft depth, diameter, plumbness, bottom conditions, reinforcement, concrete continuity, and bearing conditions are most easily checked during construction. Some of these observation methods include excavation around the shaft for relatively shallow inspection, down-hole inspection for end bearing conditions or rock sockets, and video camera devices for remote inspection. In rare circumstances, a drilled shaft can be extracted for inspection. Before concrete placement, the bottom of the shaft can also be probed by drilling or coring to determine if there are voids or soft zones in the material at the base of the shaft.The Drilled Shaft Inspector’s Manual focuses on traditional "topside" inspection for routine drilled shaft construction."

Jan 1, 2004

By David Pierce

The Port of Seattle, one of the largest on the west coast of North America, made a strong statement regarding their support for reusing existing structures when a decision was made to rehabilitate Pier 69, on Seattle's downtown waterfront, for their new headquarters. Because of its age and location, the pier provided an unusual challenge to the Port and its consultants. The Port hired Peratrovich, Nottingham, and Drage Inc. to design the seismic strengthening of the pier itself. To remedy the lack of seismic resistance in the 70-year-old pier, PN&D designed a new steel-pipe-pile supported concrete apron next to it. The structure relied on a development by PN&D, the "spin-fin pile", to achieve the tension capacities required of the batter piles. The construction of this apron was completed in October of 1991. Another team of consultants performed the superstructure renovation design, which is now under construction.

Jan 1, 1992

By Rick Deschamps

A reoccurring problem with support of excavations in urban areas involves the placement of external support components like anchors or nails in right-a-ways, subway and utility setbacks, in areas occupied by adjacent structures, and within the property of non cooperative neighbors. Such a situation occurred for a project in Arlington, Virginia, which ultimately resulted in the preliminary design of a large footing supported cantilever retaining wall that was extremely costly and impractical to build. An innovative design alternate consisting of a series of vertical concrete elements (VCEs) supported by post tensioned tiedowns was proposed to the General Contractor and accepted by the owner. The VCEs were designed to serve as the main structural elements for both the temporary support of excavation system and the permanent wall. The VCE?s were constructed using single bite diaphragm wall panels oriented perpendicular to the excavation face including a rebar cage and tremie concrete. Threaded inserts were placed within the rebar cage to attach the cast in place exterior wall. Overall stability and lateral movement of the VCEs were controlled by high capacity vertical anchors embedded within the VCE. A detailed instrumentation program was installed to monitor the movements of the VCEs with relation to the excavation depth. The paper present the project case history by discussing the design concepts of the VCE, the construction approaches used to install them, the construction challenges encountered, and the performance of the unique system.

Jan 1, 2008

By Brian Koch

Michels installed 242 drilled shafts to support the piers for a new basket-handle, true-arch twin bridge across the Mississippi River from Moline, IL to Bettendorf, IA. The installation of the drilled shafts was completed with the simultaneous use of two Liebherr LB36 and one IMT 300 drill rigs. Utilizing barges, 233 drilled shafts were installed in the river. Michels crews also installed 7-ft to 10-ft permanent steel casing into the bedrock, and drilled to depths of 60 feet for each shaft. Despite working in strong currents, freezing temperatures and on rocking barges, Michels crews placed the shafts within 3 inches of plan position. Since the drilled shafts are the key piece in supporting the bridge structure, Michels provided cross-hole sonic logging to verify the integrity and strength of the concrete within the shafts and to add another level of quality control for the owner/customer. Extensive planning took place each day to ensure that tugboats, the linchpin of the project, were being efficiently utilized to shift the barges and materials daily. On any given day, Michels transported five concrete trucks by barge from shore to shaft sites to pour between 40 and 240 cubic yards of concrete. The Michels environmental team was diligent with preparing, discussing and implementing a water treatment plan that was accepted by all state and federal agencies and adhered to strict environmental regulations. Grain hopper barges were rented to control and treat the water that was used in the drilling operations. Another challenge crews ran into was the discovery of caverns when drilling into some parts of the bedrock. Michels worked with the engineer to develop a plan to construct the drilled shafts that encountered the caverns.

Jan 1, 2019

By Joseph A. Sopko

There has been a trend in recent years in performing the initial formation freezing using liquid nitrogen (LIN) and then converting the system to circulating refrigerated brine. While proponents of this method state it decreases freezing time, it can also be considered an alternative to inadequate refrigeration capacity. This method was used on several small projects in the 1980s. Problems such as broken pipes, frozen brine, and unsafe work conditions caused contractors to re-think the method. This paper discusses these problems and also presents work schedules showing no schedule reduction. In fact, this method can lead to longer time as well as significantly higher costs. BACKGROUND Ground freezing as a method to provide groundwater control and temporary earth support for excavations is completed using a relatively simple process: drilling and installing refrigeration pipes around the perimeter of the excavation and introducing a coolant into these pipes. The coolant extracts heat from the ground, converting the pore water to ice and forming a strong, impermeable material. A typical ground freezing system is illustrated in Fig. 1. SYSTEMS There are two basic types of coolant systems: circulating and direct expansion. The circulating coolant system is made of two separate, closed systems. The medium circulating is the secondary coolant. It is cooled at a central refrigeration plant, circulated through the pipes, and warms as it extracts heat from the ground. It then circulates back to the plant where it is cooled. This coolant is chilled in a heat exchanger by the primary refrigeration system where a compressor system is charged with a refrigeration gas. The heat is ultimately extracted from the ground and expelled into the atmosphere by an evaporative condenser. Secondary coolants are usually a brine or glycol chemical while the primary refrigeration gas is anhydrous ammonia or another commercially available gas.

Jan 1, 2019

By Nicolas Moscoso, Gerald Verbeek, Marcel Bielefeld, Rob van Dorp

Upon recently, most offshore foundations were based on a number of driven piles that were installed with an impact hammer. With the increase in offshore windfarms two major developments have occurred: the shift from jackets to monopiles, leading to increase of the diameter of the foundation piles, and a shift from impact hammers to vibro hammers. As the use of vibratory hammers is becoming more and more common practice, the need for accurate vibro-driving simulation software has increased, which requires that the soil modelling is enhanced to address soil fatigue during pile driving and to predict reliably the soil behavior and resistance during pile driving. In addition pile driving monitoring, which is routine for piles driven with an impact hammer, needs to become common practice. This paper addresses advances in soil modelling that allows more accurate pile driving simulation as well as the application of Vibro Driving Analysis (VDA) or Monitoring (VDM) to validate the simulation results. This is illustrated by a case study of the test pile for the Delft Offshore Turbine project, a 28 m long monopile with a diameter of 4 m that was driven 15 m into dense sand layers using a vibro hammer. After some 6 months the pile was extracted, and pile driving simulations and VDA were done both for the installation and extraction phase. 1. INTRODUCTION At the end of 2017, the total worldwide offshore wind power capacity was 18.8 GW [1]. The vast majority of offshore wind farms are currently in Northern Europe, which together account for over two thirds of the total offshore wind power installed worldwide, followed by East Asia, while developments in North America are still in very early stages.

Jan 1, 2019

By Kozo Takeda, Arashi Shimano

"Dry Jet Mixing (DJM) method as the representative deep mixing technique has been demonstrating best practice on ground mitigation works coping with complicated soil condition and limited site space. This technique plays an important role in many projects to stabilize soft ground involving troubles like sliding failure, settlement, bearing capacity etc. Serious disasters caused larger earthquakes make great demand on the application of deep soil mixing these days. Special design and alignment of deep soil mixing has been established against to liquefaction and serious failure due to liquefaction. In this paper, representative example of liquefaction mitigation by DJM method is summarized. The paper also present result of surveillance of sites installed DJM col umns after attack by Tohoku Pacific Ocean Earthquake. Performance of DJM columns suffered the earthquake is demonstrated at several sites even with conventional column alignment.INTRODUCTIONThe DJM method is a representative deep soil mixing technique of dry mixing manner in Japan. DJM can successfully install soil mixing columns trough automatically controlled binder injection based on pneumatic feeding theory and cumulative experiences.This method was joint-developed in 1978 by private organization under initiative of the Public Works Research Institute of the Ministry of Construction as the optimum method for improving the Japanese soft ground. Figure 1 shows full view of the DJM construction system. Figure 2 illustrates DJM working system indicating Binder Feeding Plant side and Mixing Machine side respectively.As typical soil mitigation method, many projects related with rivers and roads and city development has required DJM technology. The total number of the projects applying DJM has exceeded 5,000 with the total treated soil volume more than 32,000,000 m3 by the end of fiscal year 2013."

Jan 1, 2015

"The Morris Island Lighthouse (MIL) is located between the jetties leading to the Charleston Harbor and Folly Beach, S.C. The present structure is the third lighthouse to occupy this location. The first navigational aid was erected in 1673, and consisted of a raised pan filled with pitch, which was set afire at night to guide early ships. The next structure was built in 1767, and constituted the first real lighthouse, standing 42 ft (12.8 m) in height. In 1838, a second lighthouse was built on the site, and it measured 102 ft (31 m) in height and featured a revolving light. This structure lasted until 1862 when Confederate troops, during the Civil War, destroyed it to deny its use to Union troops.Navigators steered these waters without a lighthouse for nearly a decade until 1876, when the current structure was built under the direction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). In 1886, the Charleston area suffered a M7.6 earthquake. Significant damage was caused throughout much of the area, including a slight “list” of the lighthouse to the northeast. As a result, the cast of the beacon was reduced from 18 mi (29 km) to about 6 mi (9.7 km), causing much distress to navigators until the beacon platform was releveled and remains at this list to the present day.Conditions for ConcernThe current lighthouse was originally constructed about 1,200 ft (366 m) from the shoreline. Over the years, USACE has undertaken several programs to meet the increased shipping and navigation demands in the Charleston Harbor. Around the turn of the last century, two jetties were constructed, which drastically changed the approach direction for ships entering the harbor. In subsequent years, the harbor began to experience accelerated siltation."

Jan 1, 2017

By H. Shiri

Iran's largest natural gas field is South Pars, geologically an extension of Qatar's 900-Tcf North Field. South Pars was first identified in 1988 and originally appraised at 128 Tcf in the early 1990s. This Field contains 38.6 % of the gas resources of Iran and is regarded as the largest offshore gas field in the world. Offshore geotechnical site investigations are one of the key activities of upstream fields operators to supply the EPC contractors with the required results for designing approaches of offshore complexes. In the mean time a lot of marine site investigations have been carried into execution within the phases of South Pars development. The authors are currently trying to create the fundamentals of investigating the small- and large-scale spatial variability of the South Pars Gas Field in Persian Gulf/ IRAN. Part of this investigation is the providing of an extensive data base of the offshore geotechnical properties of South Pars. Such a data base, will enable a model to be developed of the large-scale variability of these properties. In addition, this data set will provide a data whereby general trends to be established, as well as, providing relationships between geotechnical parameters and spatial parameters utilizing probabilistic and data mining methods like ANN (Artificial Neural Network) in Geotechnical Engineering.

Jan 1, 2006

By Kevin Kuhl

With the destruction of the US-90 Bridge spanning St. Louis Bay by Hurricane Katrina, the State of Mississippi awarded its first major design-build contract in order to have a completed four-lane bridge in a period of less than two years. The structure consists of 76 pre-cast concrete beam spans with a total bridge length from Bent 1 to Bent 77 of 11,124 ft (2.1 miles). All 77 bents are founded on pre-cast, pre-stressed concrete piles and consist of two foundation types: pile bents and water line footings. A total of 53 pile bents were utilized where the deck is less than 52 ft above the water. Further divided, 10 pile bents, supported by 24 in. square, solid piles, are located on land. The remainder of the pile bents are located within St. Louis Bay and supported by 36 in. square, voided piles. All the waterline footings are supported by 30 in. square, voided piles. In total, 138 -24 in., 437 -30 in., and 463 -36 in. piles support the structure. Production pile design was based upon information gathered from the subsurface investigation, design soil profile and 23 out-of-position test piles. Verification of the design was established by monitoring the first production pile driven at each bent using the Pile Driving Analyzer. Particular challenges included highly variable coastal deposits, loads in excess of 1600 kips per pile and a compressed construction schedule. Initial drive capacity of a portion of the production test piles was less than expected resulting in a minimum 14 day setup. Following the setup period, restrikes were necessary to verify capacity. Project production piles ranging from 50 ft in length to in excess of 160 ft in length were used to achieve the required resistance. This paper includes a brief overview of the foundation design and indicator test pile program. The main objective is to provide a summary of the quality control procedures including establishing the driving criteria for each bent and to present issues that arose during production pile driving and the solutions that followed.

May 11, 2007

By Steven D. Scherer

The highest earthquake risk in the United States east of the Rockies is along the New Madrid Fault System, which extends for 193 km (120 miles) through the Central Mississippi Valley from northeastern Arkansas, through southwestern Missouri, western Tennessee and western Kentucky to southern Illinois. Historically, this fault has generated some of the most powerful earthquakes in U.S. history, notably three Magnitude 8 events in 1811. Apart from the West Coast, this region experiences more earthquakes than anywhere else in the United States, with more than 200 events recorded along the fault annually. These events are typically of much lower magnitude than those experienced in California. Most are too small to be felt. However, should a significant event occur, damage can be expected to be widespread because of the underlying geology. In recent years, earthquake preparedness and seismic upgrade of vulnerable structures has become a focus for a number of State Departments of Transportation, including those in Illinois and Missouri where there is a potential for future damage. This paper presents three case histories illustrating three different techniques used to retrofit interstate highway bridge foundations bearing on potentially liquefiable soils. Friction minipiles were installed at the approach span of the I-57 bridge crossing the Mississippi River near Cairo, Illinois to provide additional support to the pile caps in the event of liquefaction of the underlying sands during a seismic event. In St Louis, Missouri, rock-socketed minipiles were installed to increase the capacity of drilled shaft foundations supporting a section of Interstate 64. In Mounds, Illinois, compaction grouting was used to densify loose sand deposits beneath a pile-supported interstate bridge on I-57.

Jan 1, 2001

By Ahmad Mahboubi

The damage caused by catastrophic earthquakes has always been an incentive towards more sophisticated building codes and requirements. In parallel to computer technology development, the engineers? attitude towards acquisition of more accurate results is increasing. This approach leads to designation of structural elements with more elaboration considering different aspects of their behavior. In addition, less simplified methods will be considered as satisfactory for analyzing such problems. The problem of soil-pile-structure interaction is one of the phenomena that can be included in this category. In general, there are two methods by which the study of soil-pile interaction phenomenon is studied. These include direct and sub-structuring methods. The sub-structuring approach relies on the linear or slightly non-linear behavior of soil since it employs the results of kinematic interaction analyses for inertial interaction studies. In the past, the kinematic interaction between pile-soil was considered as negligible. This was due to the softer nature of the surrounding soil that increased the time period of vibrations. However, more research revealed that although this approach was consistent in many cases, there were some sites where the time period decreased. This was due to the material properties of the foundation and the soil, in a way that caused the frequency of vibration meet natural frequency of the system. The second type of interaction is the inertial interaction which reflects the effect a structure on top exerts on the oscillation experienced by the foundation. This paper examines the impact of vertical load on the inertial interaction by virtue of impedance functions. Three different load cases for the structure at the top of a pile foundation were considered for the analyses conducted in this study. The changes in the stiffness and damping of the system by frequency are studied and finally, the results are presented.

Jan 1, 2010

By George Aristorenas, Carlos Englert, Jesús Gómez

"Laboratory test data of strain softening soils exhibit the development of a maximum (peak) shear strength followed by a decrease in the strength with continued straining. The rate of strength loss decreases such that an asymptotic minimum value, known as the residual strength, is approached. This paper presents an investigation of the evolution of strength degradation in excavation supported soils that exhibit strain softening behavior. The paper presents a numerical investigation of excavation support of slicken-sided clay, and results of shear testing on materials with similar strain softening behavior. A strain softening constitutive law is presented that can be used with the finite element computer software Plaxis for analysis of excavation support. A typical design section of a deep excavation support in stiff, fissured clay is presented that illustrates the limitations and conservatism of the residual strength approach for excavation support design. Finally, a discussion is presented on the impact of stiffer walls such as diaphragm walls, compared to less stiff systems such as sheet piles, on the design parameters.INTRODUCTIONIn the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area, the Potomac Formation is generally composed of stiff, fissured clays. Geotechnical engineers often associate the presence of slicken-sided planes within the formation as evidence that the soil cannot develop its peak strength. Although it is unclear how old and continuous these slicken-sided planes are, their occurrence, persistence and orientation appear to be somewhat random. Due to this uncertainty, the design of open cut slopes in these materials is often conservatively performed assuming residual shear strength values. This design approach may be justified for long-term open cuts when there is limited amount of geotechnical information and in view of back stability analyses of past slope failures. Furthermore, the lack of confinement in open cuts allows relatively high shear strains near the surface and toe throughout their existence, which promote mobilization of post-peak strength values and the ensuing progressive failure. Indeed, such behavior has been discussed in the past (Skempton, 1970; Schnabel et. al., 1982; Derrenbacher, 1998). A thorough study by Mesri et. al. (2003) of numerous slope failures concludes that the lower bound strength for stability analysis of non-failed slopes is the fully softened strength, which is intermediate between the peak and residual strengths, but that part of the slip surface may be in a residual condition prior to failure."

Jan 1, 2015

By Lance Helwirg

New high and low double outfall bridge structures for a juvenile fish bypass system have been constructed on the Washington Shore approximately two miles downstream from the Bonneville Dam on the Columbia River. The high and low outfalls each extend approximately 400 feet into the river from the Washington shore and are designed to release juvenile salmon into the river at above-water discharge elevations for improved survival rates. The two outfall structures include post-tensioned concrete double box flume girders approximately 7 feet high by 13 feet wide, which will be submerged in river flows as high as 15 feet per second. Each of the 6 offshore foundation piers is composed of a single 10-foot diameter reinforced concrete drilled shaft with a permanent steel casing embedded into the river bottom approximately 100 feet. Challenging outfall design conditions included designing the entire structures to be submerged for long periods of time in 15-feet-per-second river water flow with a 60-foot cantilever at the end of each outfall, and with the superstructure 70 to 80 feet above the river bottom. Figures 1-1,1-2, and 1-3 show the high and low outfall structure overhead photos and elevation view.

Jan 1, 2001