Search Documents

By Terence P. Holman

Micropiles are employed to retrofit existing foundations, including underpinning prior to future construction operations and resupport of existing structures that have experienced distortion and settlement. This paper presents analyses of the two case histories requiring the use of micropiles in these applications. The first case history involves micropiles used to resupport a settled pump station next to an excavation which had suffered basal failure and ground loss. A compression load test pile experienced plunging failure which, after analysis of the strain-gauge data acquired during the test, was attributable to a greater degree of disturbance to the subsoils beneath the site than anticipated. After construction of the micropiles around the pump chamber a synchronized jacking system was used to lift and right the 320 kip chamber structure, followed by resupporting it on the newly constructed piles. The second case history entails the use of micropiles for direct underpinning support of existing columns prior to a utility tunnel installation within an existing high-bay warehouse structure. The design constraint that most significantly affected the successful completion of this project was the desire to bond the new piles into the existing reinforced concrete foundations. As a result of the coring method through the footing, the ultimate bond stress measured during a pullout test was more than twice that assumed in the design. Monitoring of the underpinned columns during trench excavation indicated that the system performance was acceptable. These case histories reinforce the concept that lower capacity micropiles can provide a rapid means to underpin and retrofit existing structures.

Jan 1, 2007

By Goudschaal Mark R.

"The Museum of Science and Industry U-505 Submarine Relocation project in Chicago, IL consisted of building an underground reinforced concrete vault (37' deep) for the Museum's new U-505 exhibit. This WWII submarine was captured in 1944, had been located outdoors at the Museum since 1954 and was lowered into its new exhibit area in 2004. A unique combination of earth retention, water cut-off and underpinning systems allowed a forty-two foot (42') deep excavation underneath th is historic museum. The museum - originally built in 1893 for the Chicago World's Fair - was closely monitored for building movements throughout construction. The underpinning systems, construction activities and monitoring results are presented herein. IntroductionThe historic U-505 German submarine at the Museum of Science & Industry was restored, moved approximately 1,000' and then lowered into its new indoor home (Figures 1, 2 and 3). The new underground exhibit opened this year celebrating the 61st anniversary of the German submarine's capture on June 4, 1944. On this historic day, Captain Daniel V. Gallery, a Chicago native, led the Navy in the siege of this submarine near the coast of Africa. This U-boat was the only German sub captured by the United States Navy in WWII and the Enigma machines, codebooks and publications recovered from the sub helped the war effort."

Jan 1, 2005

By Lawrence F. Johnsen

Six case histories are presented in which tall, slender high rises are supported on high capacity minicaissons. The recent development of a high strength rebar cage has resulted in compressive loads of up to 3400 kips on 24 inch diameter minicaissons. Provisions in the pending NYC building code will allow borehole video inspection in lieu of load testing. The ?new? technology results from the marriage of several well established methods: rotary duplex well drilling, high capacity micropiles and high capacity reinforced concrete building columns.

Jan 1, 2007

By Frederic A. Verheyde

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

Nov 1, 2022

By Ingrid Engeset, Solve Hov, Arnfinn Endal, Per-Anders Mortensen, Priscilla Paniagua, Bjørn Kristian Fiskvik Bache

During the last decades, it has become common practice in the Nordic countries to use dry deep mixing in soft clays with lime and cement in for example deep excavation pits in soft clay, or as a reinforcement of the passive zone within sheet pile walls. The shear strength of stabilised soils is affected by the stress conditions during curing and shearing. However, this is normally not taken into consideration. As the strength of the stabilised clay is stress dependent, excavation of the overlying soil will lead to a reduction of the confining stresses in the underlying stabilised soils which means that the shear strength will also be reduced. Under embankments on the other hand, the effect is reversed as the shear strength will be increased. In this study, laboratory tests have been performed on stabilised soils cured and tested under different stress conditions to quantify the stress effects in a Norwegian sensitive clay. In addition, direct simple shear tests on samples from in situ columns have been made with varying normal stresses. Results are presented showing an increase of shear strength of the stabilised soil with increased curing stresses, and an even higher increase with increased confining stress during shearing. The results are compared to field measurements along with a discussion of practical application of the findings.

May 1, 2022

By Vivian M. Troughton, Clifford J. Wren, Tony P. Suckling

"Secant pile walls are used for the construction of deep basement walls and earth retaining structures. Risk associated with secant pile walls is commonly perceived as being the safety of site personnel and the public during piling operations, or safety used in design. It is recognized that both of these are of paramount importance, but additional risks associated with the construction methods must also be considered to complete the risk management profile for any project. For the particular case of secant pile walls, if Clients take a ""back seat"" they may be unaware of the total risk package they are procuring. The authors argue that the piling contractor should be involved at the earliest stage giving input into the overall risk management process. Such early involvement within the professional team will maximise cost benefits to the Client and minimise the delays and cost increases sometimes associated with these works. A consistent methodology for identifying and then managing all the risks associated with secant pile walls is proposed. An example is used to demonstrate how this methodology should be employed. INTRODUCTIONThis paper discusses the value of a complete and integrated risk management process for structures with basements formed using a secant pile wall.The risk associated with any secant pile wall can be consicfered as comprising four components;1. Safety of people on site2. Safety of design or design methodology3. Construction risks4. Commercial risksAny risk management system needs to fully consider and integrate each of these four components to maximise the likelihood of a successful outcome for the basement.This paper concentrates on the construction risks for secant pile walls, as these are not often understood by the Client (in this paper the term ""Client"" also includes the main contractor, principal contractor, Engineer, Planning Supervisor, quantity surveyor and cost consultant)."

Jan 1, 2005

By Gerald Verbeek, David Tara

"When selecting an impact hammer to drive a particular pile, the decision is often based on local experience. In those cases, the contractor falls back on previous experience or draws on the experience of the hammer manufacturer to select the hammer that will be able to do the job. Obviously, a more scientific approach would be to perform a pile driving simulation using one of several commercially available software packages (e.g., GRLWEAP, AllWavePDP or PDPWave).However, this type of analysis requires quite a bit more effort. First, an accurate model of the pile driving process has to be developed, which includes a model of the soil profile at the job site and input into the analysis program. Then, the model must be analyzed to assess whether the combination of hammer, pile and soil model work.Over the years, numerous individuals and organizations have tried to develop something that would fit nicely in between these approaches: something more advanced than a gut feeling yet something that could be done on the back of an envelope; in other words, a “Goldilocks” approach — not too simple, not too complex, but just right.Screening Tool CriteriaThe goals of the approach are twofold: (1) select the appropriate impact hammer to drive an open toe steel pipe or H-pile, and (2) then use the model for the subsequent high strain dynamic testing (HSDT). The Goldilocks approach centers around five different criteria.1. Maximum Driving StressTo minimize the risk of damage, the maximum driving stresses are generally limited to 80 to 90% of the yield stress (fy) of the steel section. This approach does not consider issues such as hammer alignment, initial imperfections, denting and/or elastic buckling, and pile material fatigue history. However, even when these issues are not applicable, limiting average stresses to 0.9fy or even 0.8fy does not necessarily mitigate the risk of pile damage (Mostafa, 2011)."

Jan 1, 2017

By Eleonora Di Mario, Colin B. Turnbull, Matthew G. Mills, Chengbin Miao, Wilhelm S. Degen

"In the past decade, the ‘zero-dredge’ philosophy has become the preferred option for the formation of marine seawalls and reclamations, compared to the partially or fully dredged options, as this solution presents several environmental advantages. Recent relevant project experience is presented herein in order to highlight key design principles and construction issues central to the successful construction and performance of a sloping rubble seawall founded on soft soil improved by stone columns. If designed and installed with proper quality control, correct treatment intensity and sensible construction staging, stone columns are a safe and cost effective method for seawall foundations. This paper provides guidelines with regards to the design, construction and quality control for the correct implementation of stone columns as a foundation element for sloping rubble marine seawalls.INTRODUCTIONBenefits of sloping marine seawalls founded on stone columnsTo suit the current environmental requirements in Hong Kong, recent projects are tending to favour zero-dredge solutions, such as the Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facility and the forthcoming Three-Runway System. The installation of stone columns allows the underlying deposits, generally consisting of very soft to soft clay and silt (soft soil), to improve in strength to the extent that the seawall can be directly placed on the seabed. This negates the need to dredge the soft soil and, therefore, this ground improvement technique represents an ideal solution for zero-dredge projects.Stone columns can also provide several other beneficial effects, including: accelerated drainage, reduced settlement, increased slope stability and soil reinforcement in the event of an earthquake. Stone columns, in contrast to competing cementitious methods, are a very ductile foundation method. This ductile behaviour is part of the design concept of stone columns in soft soil. Past projects located in Hong Kong and elsewhere, with an improved soft soil layer thickness of over 15m, have shown that stone columns can remain fully functional in terms of both drainage and horizontal reinforcement, even after settlements of over 3m and lateral displacements of up to 1m have occurred."

Jan 1, 2017

By Glen Mann, H. G. Vestberg, Robert D. Holtz

"Underpinning of residential and commercial structures is often accomplished using a number of driven-in-place small diameter steel pipe piles. These piles, at least in the Seattle area, are typically described as pin-piles and are driven with an air compressor operated jack hammer to a refusal criterion developed from an empirical basis. Over the past twenty years or so, the materials have improved in quality and strength, and the driving equipment has improved in efficiency and capability. These improvements have resulted in damage to the pin-piles during driving as well as to the driving equipment. The primary objectives of this load testing study were to develop a relationship between the driving penetration resistance of 2-inch diameter pin-piles and the ultimate bearing capacity when piles were driven at different penetration rates and, based on the load test results, to develop an opinion regarding an increase in the allowable axial load capacity [ultimate load capacity divided by a factor of safety] of a 2-inch diameter pin-pile over the currently used permissible load capacity of 4 kips in the Seattle area. Also, if feasible, a reduction in the present driving penetration rate was to be recommended to help reduce the rate and magnitude of pile and equipment damage whilst maintaining the allowable load capacity. The recorded ultimate bearing capacities were also compared with the Tagnent-line and the Davisson analytical methods in an effort to determine if either of these provided a reasonable determination of the pile load capacity.IntroductionThis paper describes the results of a series of load tests performed on small diameter, 2-inch, driven-in-place steel pin (pipe) piles and based on these results, provides the support for a modification to the presently used allowable axial pin-pile capacities.The intent of the load testing program was to determine how much influence the penetration resistance might have on the individual piles' ability to support the allowable axial load without undergoing any significant vertical deformation. For the purposes of this paper the ""allowable load capacity"" is considered to be the ultimate pile load capacity divided by a minimum factor of safety, typically considered to be 2.0 in this area. A pin (pipe) pile comprises an open or closed ended, schedule 80 steel tube which is driven-in-place, usually with an air compressor operated 90 pound pneumatic jack hammer. These jack hammers typically operate at a rate of about 1,200 blows per minute, (Haggard, Holtz and Mann, 2001 )."

Jan 1, 2005

By Joseph T. Coe, Siavash Mahvelati, Philip Asabere

Characterization of existing foundations remains an important issue as foundation reuse and rehabilitation continue to garner increased attention. In the case of unknown foundations, geophysical and nondestructive testing (NDT) methods have been utilized in the past to evaluate foundation geometry and could serve as useful tools in the case of foundation reuse. A comprehensive study was initiated in the late 1990’s and early 2000’s that evaluated the effectiveness of the available geophysical and NDT technologies to characterize unknown foundations for scour evaluation purposes. At the time of that study, the Multichannel Analysis of Surface Waves (MASW) geophysical method was in its infancy and not widely used. Since then, MASW has become increasingly prevalent in geotechnical applications as the method presents a number of potential advantages when characterizing the subsurface, including rapid testing, increased signal to noise ratio, and ability to resolve velocity inversions. This paper presents a case study that explores the abilities of MASW as an unknown foundation characterization tool. MASW was applied to determine subsurface stiffness at a bridge foundation site in the Philadelphia metropolitan area. One MASW survey line was performed immediately over the foundation of interest and another was performed over a control zone adjacent to the foundation to establish a baseline site profile. The purpose of this testing was to examine whether MASW could establish the geometry of the foundation at this site. This paper presents the site conditions and MASW testing procedures, followed by a discussion of data analysis and interpretation.

Jan 1, 2016

By Eric J. Pederson

The down hole hammer is widely used in specialty geotechnical construction. The common uses include tie-back anchor installation, micropile installation, and general soil/bedrock drilling operations. Veit used these techniques to develop a cost effective way of installing the foundation system for University of Minnesota Football Stadium. The soils present at the site of the stadium contained layers of concentrated cobbles and boulders. The geotechnical engineer recommended a driven pile system, and the base bid outlined in the project documents consisted of an H-Pile using a 14x73 pile section. Veit submitted an innovative alternate consisting of using a rotary percussion system to install a 12? O.D. pile. This paper will show that this pile type and installation method was the correct choice for the project. The design criteria for the compression, uplift, and lateral capacities and deflections were met, while eliminating pile damage. The method resulted in a significant cost savings to the University and maintained the project schedule.

Jan 1, 2008

By Gregory M. Landry

"There is an old joke at Moretrench that defines dewatering as “that element of an underground construction project, which, when disregarded, will generate the low bidder.” Sigmund Freud wrote that all jokes are true, and the kernel of truth behind this one is that dewatering is often misunderstood or neglected until the last possible moment in the life of a project. The purpose of this article is to describe commonly used dewatering methods and to clear up a pervasive but fundamental misunderstanding about how to determine the amount of dewatering effort required for a project. The Tools of DewateringDewatering may be divided into two broad categories: (1) methods that remove water from the excavation after it has already entered and (2) methods that seek to exclude or intercept the water before it reaches the excavation. The former is generally self-performed by general or earth moving contractors using sumps and ditches, while the latter is usually done by a specialty contractor. SumpsProperly installed sumps can be an effective and economical way to control water inflow into a site. In this technique, groundwater is allowed to enter the site before being pumped away. Advantages of this method include lost cost, easy availability of equipment and the fact that a general contractor can self-perform the dewatering. However, caution should be used when deciding whether to use this method, and consideration should be given to the following factors:1. How will the soil behave under seepage forces? Will it run, potentially causing ground loss?2. How much groundwater lowering is required? If the groundwater only needs to be lowered a few feet, using sumps will be much more practical than for a situation that requires significant drawdown.3. Will the excavation subgrade soften or otherwise be damaged by allowing water to run over it?4. Is my workforce skilled enough to implement and manage the sumping plan?In the photo, the sump is capturing groundwater that has already entered the excavation by traveling under the sheets. In this instance, the house in the background of the photo was eventually purchased by the project owner after sustaining damage due to ground loss."

Jan 1, 2017

By Hamed Ardalan, Mohamed Ashour

"CHAPTER 1INTRODUCTIONThe use of piles to stabilize active landslides or to prevent instability in currently stable slopes has become one of the most important innovative slope reinforcement techniques over the last few decades. Piles have been used successfully in many situations in order to stabilize slopes or to improve slope stability, and numerous methods have been developed for the analysis of piled slopes (Ito et al., 1981; Poulos, 1995; Chen and Poulos, 1997; Zeng and Liang, 2002; Won et al., 2005).The piles used in slope stabilization are usually subjected to lateral force through horizontal movements of the surrounding soil; hence they are considered to be passive piles. The interaction behavior between the piles and the soil is a complicated phenomenon due to its 3-dimensional nature and can be influenced by many factors, such as the characteristics of deformation and the strength parameters of both the pile and the soil. The interaction among piles installed in a slope is complex and depends on the pile and soil strength and stiffness properties, the length of the pile that is embedded in unstable (sliding) and stable soil layers, and the center-to-center pile spacing (S) in a row. Furthermore, the earth pressures applied to the piles are highly dependent upon the relative movement of the soil and the piles."

Jan 1, 2013

By Glenn J. Rix, Eduardo Tavera, Raphael Siebenmann, Zhongjie Zhang, Robert C. Bachus, Jongwon Jung

"The Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development (LADOTD) uses a variation of the FHWA-modified Gates equation to verify the nominal pile bearing resistance, typically on smaller projects where static load tests and dynamic monitoring are not practical. An inconsistency in the resistance factors for load and resistance factor design (LRFD) penalizes the target pile capacity needed during field observation if the LADOTD dynamic formula equation is used, which is unreasonable, and has created confusion among designers, consultants, district personnel, and inspectors in Louisiana. The objectives of this project are to recalibrate the FHWA-modified Gates equation and update the associated LRFD resistance factor for pile types and local soil conditions encountered in Louisiana. Improved consistency relative to the current design approaches will be achieved if the updated resistance factor matches or exceeds the worst-case resistance factor used by LADOTD, which will reduce confusion among users. Updating the resistance factor will also serve to increase confidence in the FHWA modified Gates equation, optimize the efficiency of the piles, and reduce project costs.IntroductionThe original 1957 Gates pile driving formula (Gates, 1957) is an empirically derived dynamic formula that is used to predict pile capacity in the field during pile installation. The original Gates formula tends to over-predict pile capacity for low driving resistances and under-predict pile capacity for high driving resistances (Hannigan et al., 1998). Thus, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) proposed a modified version of the Gates formula that addressed this limitation. The FHWA–modified Gates equation is:"

Jan 1, 2017

By Huw Williams

"Power companies are always looking to increase the carrying capacity of existing transmission lines, and the preferred method is to string heavier capacity conductor lines. However this results in higher wind loading and the potential for towers overturning, if the existing foundations do not have the tensile capacity. On older lines, there is often a lack of information on construction type and dimensions and in practice the as-built foundation can differ considerably from design drawings, due to unforeseen ground conditions along the line route, and no record of the resulting change in design being made.Following successful trials in New Zealand, integrity testing with Frequency Response and impedance profiling techniques is now being used in the region to check concrete foundation properties in-situ and are enabling power companies to get the most out of their assets. INTRODUCTIONIn most regions of the globe, the US included, there is generally a requirement to upgrade transmission line capacities, to cope with increasing power consumption. Problems with under capacity only come to light for the public when blackouts occur, even in developed countries.A large number of transmission line towers are designed with a certain capacity redundancy and will be able to carry greater loads than originally designed for. Power companies are therefore looking for ways to assess their assets and to minimize the costs of upgrade work.Re-assessment of tower foundation capacities using design drawings may not be valid , as constructed foundations may differ considerably from design drawings, to accommodate local difficulties and in some instanced, particularly with earlier lines, there is no information whatsoever. This complicates efforts to determine the capacity of foundations considerably."

Jan 1, 2005

By David Miller

"The biggest concern about using soil mixing is the inability to observe physically the final product, which has led to a lack of confidence about what is in the ground. After all, you can’t see it and you can’t taste it and you can’t smell it, so are you sure it’s soil mixing? In addition, there are variations in techniques, tools and monitoring that have led to additional skepticism and the desire to “elevate” the product. This skepticism is why the industry is so scrutinized even when there are other technologies being used that do not experience nearly the same level of scrutiny. With other techniques, even with a slurry wall, you can see the backfill before it goes into the ground, and drilled piers have careful evaluation of the concrete mix even before placement into and verification of the open hole. Essentially, you get control over the final material. There is less control in soil mixing, and it’s very dependent on in-situ conditions. These factors make it difficult to rely solely upon installation parameters, quality control (QC) and verification tests. At some point, you may need to apply some engineering judgment.Start at the BeginningThe availability of sufficient and accurate geotechnical data (soil type, heterogeneity, shear strength parameters, variability, etc.) is important in establishing the material that will be drilled. This data will also help in determining the proper mix design to achieve the desired soil cement properties. Many factors must be considered when designing the mix and the mixing program, including any debris in the ground, different soil properties and varying moisture contents.Each of the various factors affect the final properties of the soil cement, so it really takes careful planning and evaluation of the mix design through iterations by looking at the soil types and adjusting the mixes. Clay is going to behave very differently than sand in both mixing efficiency and final properties. That is, the presence of clays results in more difficulty in achieving higher strengths and to physically mix the soil and the binder, whereas the presence of sands results in more difficulty controlling the final permeability."

Jan 1, 2017

By John D. Nelson

Foundation underpinning is a common component of remediation schemes for distressed foundations on expansive soils. For many applications in expansive soil, micropiles have distinct advantages over other techniques. This paper will concentrate on the design and construction of micropiles in expansive soil. It discusses the nature of building distress and the relationship between foundation movement and soil heave. It presents methods for determining the factors that are required for the design of micropiles. Such factors include calculation of expected free-field heave, depth of soil wetting, and prediction of pier movement. A finite element program developed by the authors and others to determine pier heave and internal forces is presented. The input parameters that are required for pier analysis are discussed, and the nature of the output and the sensitivity of the results to the output are described. A case example illustrates the advantages of micropiles over other methods.

Aug 1, 2013

By Patrick J. Hannigan, Frank Rausche, Rozbeh B. Moghaddam

Large diameter open-end pipe piles are increasingly used as deep foundations to support heavy onshore and offshore structures. During the driving process, several factors such as subsurface conditions, hammer type, hammer efficiency, pile type, plug conditions, temporarily increased base resistance, and loss of shaft resistance have direct impact on the driveability of large diameter open-end pipe piles. In a uniform subsurface condition, the unit shaft resistance increases with depth. Consequently, more resistance is accumulated as piles penetrate to greater depths which results in higher driving resistance. However, according to the friction fatigue analysis, the greater the number of shearing cycles occurring on a soil segment along the pile shaft, the greater the reduction of its shear resistance. As a consequence, since upper soil layers are subjected to a greater number of blows than those at greater depths, they have a relatively lower resistance compared to what would be calculated with standard geotechnical analysis methods. As a result of this progressive and nonuniform loss of shaft resistance with driving, blowcounts tend to increase at a lower rate than expected from traditional analyses. This paper discusses one of the approaches to the driveability analysis with the geotechnical friction fatigue consideration. It also shows comparisons between predicted driveability obtained from wave equation analysis and field driving records. All analyses were performed for a 2.134 m (7.0 ft) diameter open-end pipe pile installed at a total depth of 192.90 m (554 ft). Two separate static resistance and wave equation analyses were completed for the case study presented in this paper: 1) Friction Fatigue analysis based on the recommendations of Alm and Hamre (2001), subsequently referred to as the FF model, and 2) Standard Driveability analysis based on soil set- up factors, hereafter referred to as the SD model in this paper. Results from analyses included the shaft resistance distributions compared to the result of the signal matching analyses determined from the pile dynamic measurement. Furthermore, predicted blowcounts were compared to observed blowcounts during the pile driving. The comparison analyses indicated a 54.4 percent resistance loss of the Static Resistance during Driving (SRD) due to the geotechnical friction fatigue corresponding to a 46 percent reduction in total resistance. The analyses also showed that average predicted blowcounts using the friction fatigue were 6.4 percent lower than measured blowcounts, whereas, the standard driveability approach showed 42.1 percent higher blowcounts compared to the blowcounts shown in the driving log values.

Jan 1, 2019

By Md. Nafiul Haque, Murad Y. Abu-Farsakh, Chris Nickel

"This paper presents the results from a pile load testing program for a bridge construction project in Louisiana. The testing includes two 54-inch open-ended spun cast concrete cylinder piles (OECP), one 30-inch open-ended steel pile (OESP), and two (30-inch and 16-inch) square prestressed concrete (PSC) piles driven at two locations with very similar soil conditions. All the test piles were instrumented with vibrating wire strain gauges to measure the load distribution along the length of the test piles and the skin friction and the end bearing were derived from strain gauge measurements. High strain dynamic load tests (HSDLT) were performed on all test piles at different times after pile installations to quantify the amount of setup with time. Static load tests were also performed on the PSC and open-ended steel piles. Due to expected large pile capacities, the statnamic test method was used on the two open-ended cylinder piles. The pile capacities of these piles were evaluated using various CPT methods (such as Schmertmann, De Ruiter and Beringen, LCPC, COFS methods). The result showed that all the methods can estimate the skin friction with good accuracy; but not the end-bearing capacity. Setup was observed for all the piles, which was mainly attributed to increase in skin frictions. The setup rate parameters “A” [The “A” parameter is defined as the rate of increase of pile capacity ratio (Rt/Rto) per log cycle of elapsed time] were back-calculated for all the test piles and the values were between 0.31 and 0.41.INTRODUCTIONDue to greater efficiency (capacity to weight ratio) of the pipe piles, open-ended piles are a viable option to solid piles. However, the behavior of open-ended piles is more complicated compared to the close-ended piles owing to possible formation of “soil plug” inside the open-ended pile. Many researchers have analyzed the behavior of both types of piles for different purposes; however, very few studies in the literature offer the side-by-side comparison of the close-ended and open-ended piles."

Jan 1, 2017

By Athul Prabhakaran, Ramin Motamed, Ahmed Elgamal, Milad Jahed Orang, Reza Boushehri

Documented case histories from past earthquakes have exhibited the devastating effects of the liquefaction phenomenon on the performance of buildings that are often presented in the form of excessive settlement of shallow foundations. Example earthquakes include the 1964 Niigata earthquake in Japan, and more recently the 2010-2011 Canterbury Earthquake Sequence in New Zealand, and the 2011 Tohoku earthquake in Japan. All of the listed events comprised several examples of severe liquefaction-related damage to the buildings founded on shallow foundations. Although the liquefaction-induced building settlements have been experimentally studied extensively since 1964 using shake table tests and dynamic centrifuge experiments, studies focusing on cost-effective mitigation strategies are still limited. In this study, the performance of helical piles as a cost-effective countermeasure to minimize the damaging effects of liquefaction-induced ground settlements on buildings founded on shallow foundations is studied. Two large-scale shake table experiments were conducted at the University of California, San Diego (UCSD) to investigate the effectiveness of helical piles in liquefiable grounds. Results from these two experiments highlight a highly improved performance of a shallow foundation supported on helical piles. These largescale shaking table experiments demonstrate the efficiency of using helical piles as a cost-effective countermeasure to reduce the liquefaction-induced building settlement.