Search Documents

By Kenneth M. Berrry

A unique situation has developed at an abandoned coal mine in St. Clair County, Illinois. Subsidence features have been observed at the ground surface over the mine including settlement of a pair of bridges for Illinois Route 158. The Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT) is currently replacing the two bridges. Foundation treatment for the two new bridges included backfilling the mine void. The light rail system for St Louis (MetroLink) is also constructing a bridge over the same abandoned coal mine less than 1000 ft from the Route 158 bridges. The new MetroLink bridge is being constructed using piles which extend through the coal mine and overlying bedrock in order to transfer the loads to below the mine floor. The differing foundation types for the IDOT and MetroLink bridges were due to geometry and economic factors involved with the individual structures.

Jan 1, 2001

By Daniel W. Mageau, Larry W. Applegate, Aaron K. McCain

"An innovative method of ground freezing was successfully tested to create a “dry” excavation condition for a new building foundation at a site in downtown, Miami, Florida. The subsurface conditions in Miami generally consist of very porous, weak limestone and sand with groundwater near the surface. Water flow through these materials can be very high. Dewatering is extremely restricted in Miami so deep below-grade structures are rare and expensive. A new, innovative method to allow deep excavations in dry conditions without dewatering involves the creation of a thick, temporary, frozen soil plug below the planned excavation depth across the entire site to cut off vertical groundwater flow during construction. Frozen soil is impermeable and very strong and has long been used for temporary structural and water-tight shored walls. Using the same proven principals, frozen soil plugs are very effective at cutting off water from the bottom of the excavation as well as resisting upward buoyant forces. This new freezing method can be used for fairly deep excavations in new building construction supported on deep foundations. The building piles act as temporary anchors for the frozen plug to resist very high upward buoyant pressures until the permanent structural slab is completed.IntroductionUnlike other Cities, below grade basements are rare in Miami. The few basement foundations constructed have utilized a cumbersome and expensive method of excavation and shoring involving underwater excavation, tremie slabs, and commercial divers. The key issue for underground construction in this area of the country is the vertical flow of groundwater through the base of the excavation. To deal with this issue in the past, the contractor first installed all of the building piles and the perimeter shoring walls. Then, interior sheet pile walls are installed to create small manageable excavation pits. Each pit is then excavated through standing water “in-the-blind” and around the buildings support piles. The final excavation, interior struts, and inspection is performed by commercial divers. Finally a thick foundation tremie slab is poured under water. This method could be successful but proved to be time consuming and expensive. In addition, some building piles were occasionally damaged during the under-water construction process."

Jan 1, 2015

By Tsunenobu Nozaki

"Basically, the “Press-in Piling Method” was invented to eliminate construction nuisances, such as noise and vibration which have been serious unsolved problems for advancing societies over a long time. In the construction industry, piling works have been a major cause of noise and vibration, because most piling methods utilize dynamic load to install piles into the ground. The secret of the Press-in Piling Method is to utilize static loading to install pre-formed piles rather than dynamic load. The piles are hydraulically gripped and jacked into the ground by the special piling rig known as the “Silent Piler”. Therefore, the piles can form a robust and firm foundation, which is another advantage of the Press-in Piling Method.The Press-in Piling Mechanism and Implant Foundations The basis of the Press-in Piling Method is simple. The Pres-in Piling Machine installs a preformed displacement pile into the ground by static jacking force. The reaction for the Press-in Force is generated by gripping previously installed piles, which are called “Reaction Piles”. Due to this, the Press-in Piling Machine can produce a powerful piling force whilst only requiring minimal machine size.With the Press-in Piling Method, as piles are pressed into the ground, they are incorporated with the surrounding soils, which provides a large bearing capacity and passive horizontal resistance. These embedded foundations which are firmly anchored into the ground are known as “Implant Foundations”. Being embedded into the ground, the foundations are resilient and maintain their serviceability even in the worst credible design conditions."

Jan 1, 2015

By Thai Nguyen Ph. D

Dynamic Load Test (DLT) on driven piles has been performed routinely all over the world. In several recent projects, even 100% testing has become a norm where every single pile is dynamically load tested. In these cases, most piles are of uniform sections, making the field analysis (CASE method) straight forward. The CASE method, which has been used for the last 50 years, however, is only applicable to uniform piles to monitor pile driving stresses as well as pile capacities. Signal matching analysis can handle different configurations. However, the analysis used to require user inputs (i.e., non-automatic). Manual signal matching analysis, which can solve non-uniform solutions, traditionally takes hour(s) to complete for one blow. As such, the real-time pile driving stresses and resistances had traditionally been relying upon the CASE method, using typical range of CASE damping (JC). Until 2021, due to the lack of a rigorous instant signal matching analysis for non-uniform piles, no tool was available to help engineers evaluate non-uniform piles in real-time. An inexperienced field engineer may overlook this shortcoming when evaluating peak driving stresses. Furthermore, ultimate bearing resistances for non-uniform piles may require further evaluation to account for the non-uniformity of piles if relying on the CASE method. This paper highlights recent advances in instant Signal Matching Analysis on non-uniform piles, allowing field engineers to monitor stresses and resistances of non-uniform piles during driving.

Oct 1, 2022

By Lance Rasband, Richard Hanke, John Starcevich

"The 17.4 meter (57 ft) diameter tunnel boring machine (TBM), the world’s largest at the time of her launch in 2012, locally referred to as “Bertha,” is stuck. Incapacitated due to mechanical failure approximately 36 meters (120 ft) beneath downtown Seattle, situated precariously between the deteriorating Alaskan Way Viaduct and the failing Seattle Seawall. Accessing Bertha with a vertical shaft provides the best approach to address all facets needed for repairs and will allow the full removal of Bertha’s cutter head and related inner workings. Limited area above the tunnel alignment and the physical restrictions of existing infrastructure, create significant challenges for the design of an otherwise symmetrical shaft, requiring special attention to design and layout. Consequently, the access/recovery shaft design required a combination of 3m, 2.5m, 2.2m, 1.5m and 1m diameter unreinforced drilled secant piles coupled with various ground improvement techniques and dewatering, to fully satisfy the shoring design requirements. This paper will describe the shaft installation procedures, equipment used and pitfalls encountered while undertaking access shaft construction of this magnitude.INTRODUCTIONTunneling on Seattle’s SR99 tunnel project began in July of 2013. After slowly mining through a 4.5 m (14.76 ft) thick fiber-reinforced concrete headwall and the first of three stabilized “safe havens,” Bertha would proceed along the proposed alignment through 122 meters (400 ft) of jet grout improved soil at a rate of slightly over 1.6 m (5.25 ft) per day. Once past the improved area, it was planned that “Bertha” – would be moving at a rate of about 11 m (36 ft) per day. By the end of October 2013, Bertha had mined roughly 131 m, (430 ft) averaging 1.4 m (4.6 ft) per day and had begun mining within native soils. By December 2013, tunneling had reached the 244 m mark and Bertha was averaging 3.6 m (11.8 ft) per day, achieving as much as 12.8 m (42 ft) of progress on given days. Unfortunately, on December 6th, 2013, Bertha began to stumble and all progress quickly came to a halt.It was initially reported that an obstruction had stopped Bertha in her tracks. The preliminary investigation involved installation of 10 deep dewatering wells to reduce the hydrostatic pressure around the TBM, and allow visual inspection of the cutter head from within the TBM, and also to investigate for the presence of obstructions at the face of the cutter head. During this inspection, fragments of steel pipe were discovered entangled in the cutter head. The fragments were apparently from an abandoned 254 mm (10 in.) diameter monitoring well casing, previously installed by WSDOT to monitor ground water conditions for the design and planning of this tunnel project. After the steel was removed from the cutter head and cleared from Bertha’s path, tunneling resumed. It was then discovered that Bertha was only able to generate a slow crawl."

Jan 1, 2016

By Thomas M. Caruso

Construction of a new ship dock at a major Philadelphia area refinery required geotechnical design and field consultation. The new dock, which consists of a system of mooring dolphins and platforms, will be capable of docking the Stena V-MAX Oil Tanker (V-MAX). The 1100 ft long V-MAX is currently the largest tanker to travel the Delaware River and will induce significant lateral loads on the new ship dock. Lateral loads induced on the dock will be resisted by over 200 pipe piles installed on a batter. The piles used for support of the dock included 20 and 30 in. diameter reinforced, concrete filled pipe piles. Complete construction of each pile included driving of the pile to the design ultimate capacity, flushing the pipe pile casing clean of overburden materials followed by drilling rock sockets into the underlying Wissahickon Formation. Variations in depth to bedrock, rock quality and degree of weathering and presence of very hard quartzite lenses created a complex geologic environment that presented challenges for the pile/rock socket design and installation. The design of the pile system, installation methods, QA/QC and testing (Pile Dynamic Analysis), as well as the challenges that were encountered through the duration of the project are presented and discussed.

Jan 1, 2008

By Chul Soo Park, Juhyung Lee, Duhyun Baek

"In this study the preliminary design of suction pile as the supporting system of the concrete floating structures was performed at the offshore pilot project area in Korea. The suction pile of the floating structures has to satisfy the lateral resistance against external force evaluated from the marine and structure conditions, as well as the penetration ability according to the soil and seepage conditions. In the design, the required penetration depths for lateral resistance were evaluated with different diameters of cylindrical steel suction pile, and the design suction pressures at each penetrating depths were assessed through the comparison of penetration forces and penetration-resistances. Finally, the optimal dimension of suction pile for the pilot project area was proposed.IntroductionInterests in sea spaces have rapidly increased around the world due to limitations in use of lands. Such increase has resulted in construction of numerous marine structures aimed at expanding the use of sea spaces and developing marine resources. South Korea also needs to secure construction technologies for floating infrastructures on its relatively deep seas. Foundations for floating structures consist of anchors and mooring systems rather than driven piles or cast-in-place piles, due to limitations in equipment operation or economic feasibility. Anchors and foundations used on the sea include drag anchors and suction piles, but the suction piles are more widely used for reasons regarding uncertainties of calculation of bearing capacity and construction. Large-diameter suction piles are generally used to utilize fully their penetration ability, which is proportionate to the square of the foundation diameter, and the length-diameter ratio (L/D) does not exceed 6 (Randolph et al., 2005; Andersen et al., 2005). Recently, a design and construction technology using group suction piles consisting of medium-diameter suction piles and concrete pile caps is being developed as an alternative to the conventional large-diameter mono suction piles. In addition, pilot projects involving the group suction piles of mediumdiameter are currently being reviewed for the southwest coast area in Korea. In this study, therefore, preliminary design for installation of medium-diameter mono suction piles as the supporting system of the concrete floating structures was performed, and suction pressures, penetration forces and resistances, and lateral loading capacity with diameters were reviewed."

Jan 1, 2017

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 Jim Cook

Arsenal Football Club required the development of a new home stadium in north London, subsequently named the Emirates Stadium. The proposed development comprised a 60,000 seat stadium, with associated facilities and a sports training centre. Described are the foundation solutions and piling construction techniques used, which take into consideration the potential impacts on existing above and below ground railway infrastructure and underground water structures. Methods used by the piling contractor to improve aspects associated with health, safety and quality are also described.

Jan 1, 2008

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 Dan A. Brown, Rich A. Lamb, Paul J. Axtell

"Over the last 10 years, the Minnesota Department of Transportation (Mn/DOT) has had a very active program of replacing many major bridges, large structures spanning the Mississippi River. The deep foundations for these new structures include both drilled shafts and large diameter open-ended driven steel pipe piles. Most of these projects included load tests, both axial and lateral.The geology of this area of Minnesota includes some interesting foundation challenges, including highly organic and compressible very soft silts and clays to very dense sand and gravel overlying sedimentary bedrock. In some cases scour requires embedment into rock, and the bedrock formations may range from very soft sandstone to very hard dolostone. Artesian groundwater conditions can sometimes complicate drilled shaft construction, but the rock is otherwise very favorable for drilled shafts. Experience with the open-ended driven steel pipe piles (typically 42 and 48 in, 1.07 and 1.2 m diameter) suggest that these piles most often penetrate even dense granular materials to achieve bearing on rock. Experiences with drilled shafts socketed into the soft sandstones demonstrate that these rocks provide very favorable conditions for drilled shafts, so long as suitable construction practices are followed. Here we present several recent case histories regarding the foundation design and construction of major bridge projects in the vicinity of Minneapolis, Minn., including the Wakota Bridge, the I-35W replacement, the Lafayette Bridge, the Hastings Bridge and the St. Croix Bridge. Some lessons learned from construction and load testing of both types of foundations are described along with implications for design in similar soil and rock conditions."

Jan 1, 2013

By Dave Paul

Dam rehabilitation involves a range of design, construction, and operation risks, some of which are not encountered in new dam construction. These risks can have significant impact on project schedule and project budget. Owners, engineers, and contractors need to understand these risks. Existing dams typically were designed in an era of design and construction standards that have been upgraded and changed. Modern standards will impact the construction approach taken and involve understanding the earlier standards. Knowledge of historical standards/practices as well as current design standards and construction methods is valuable for developing and designing rehabilitation components. Construction records and as-built drawings are valuable when they are available. Rehabilitation projects often consist of older projects where as-built documents or construction records are not available. Where these records exist, many (most) times, they do not fully reflect the current conditions within the dam and appurtenant works. leading experienced practitioners to “expect surprises” both during investigation of the existing facility, as well as during construction. “Surprises” should be expected even when historical records of investigations, design and construction are available. Unknowns, be they known unknowns or unknown unknowns, can be planned for by developing an approach for the design and construction process to identify potential issues/problems, or at least alert the designer and contractor of potential issues. A Risk-Based approach applied for the entire life of the rehabilitation project can be used to alert the parties of potential “surprises” and provide direction for mitigating issues as they arise. This type of approach is particularly effective when the process includes senior practitioners with decades of design and construction experience in all aspects of dams. Minimizing impacts created by “surprises”, particularly during construction, can result in an improved project meeting budget and schedule goals and design standards. This paper identifies and categorizes risk types salient to dam construction, reviews the process of risk identification and analysis, discusses guidelines for risk allocation, reviews strategies to mitigate risks, presents several case studies where risk mitigation strategies were employed successfully (or unsuccessfully), and presents lessons learned. The paper concludes with a summary and recommendations for best practices for Project Risk Management and mitigation that can be used by: Owners; Design Engineers; and Construction Managers, in planning, design, pre-construction and construction phases of dam related projects.

By George Filz, Peter R. Cali

"Unnecessarily restrictive specifications could be limiting the cost effectiveness of deep mixing (DM) applications and therefore limiting use of DM on projects where there are other options. Excessively restrictive standards demanded for strength and permeability certainly increase contractors’ bid prices, and costing the owners and, in the case of Government projects, the taxpayers more than necessary. Yet, lax or ineffective specifications often exist for some vital components of the quality assurance and quality control. In this paper, specifications for key elements of DM design and construction are examined. Recommendations are made to improve and streamline DM specifications to better serve the common objective of constructing a safe and cost effective ground improvement project.INTRODUCTIONSpecifications should, at their best, convey the project design requirements and provide clear direction to the contractor regarding requirements for submittals, materials, execution, measurement, schedule, and other aspects as necessary. The specifications should not be overly conservative, restrictive or ambiguous, and they absolutely should not be deficient in measurement of quality. Guide specifications or recycled sections from previous projects often form the template for new project specifications. But standards that appear in guide specifications or from former successful construction should be critically scrutinized by the designer for relevance before using the copy/paste functions of the specifications writer’s keyboard. Because work does not always go as smoothly as planned, specifications for remediation of non-compliant construction should be clearly stated and enforced. Often, non-compliancy is reviewed after-the-fact and deemed to have met the design intent, indicating that either the specifications were too restrictive or the enforcement too weak.The Federal Highway Administration Design Manual: Deep Mixing for Embankment and Foundation Support, October 2013, was written by a panel of DM expert design practitioners and contractors. Guide specifications are included as Appendix C of the FHWA manual. Those guide specifications have been updated in the deep mixing section of the www.GeoTechTools.org website, and the updated specifications represent the most complete and authoritative compilation published to date. Although the specifications for DM at www.GeoTechTools.org are current and complete, and they portray the state-ofthe- practice, they too must be modified to fit specific DM applications, project needs, and site conditions. The keys to a good set of specifications are to prescribe construction only to the level that is required to meet the design intent, to require appropriate quality control and quality assurance (QC/ QA) activities, and to clearly address remedial measures required for non-compliant work."

Jan 1, 2015

By Liiban A. Affi

The most difficult task of designing multilevel tieback walls for deep excavation support is the determination of lateral stresses. These lateral stresses act not only on the shored height, but also on the embedded portion of the soldier pile, all the way down to the pile tip. Examples of lateral stresses include uniform surcharge load (soil spoils or equipment), strip load surcharge from Cooper E80 (train loads), line load surcharge (exterior footing or retaining walls), and point loads (cell tower). In this paper we will discuss the various surcharges, do step by step example calculations and show how to take the total lateral stress output and present the design pressures for direct use by the substructural designer. Included is a case study from a project Anaheim Hills, California, USA.

Jan 1, 2010

By Emad Farouz

This paper presents a case history of a successful construction-phase pile load test program that optimized the pile design in challenging ground conditions at the Great Neck Wastewater Treatment Plant in the Town of North Hempstead in Nassau County, New York. The improvements and expansion of the wastewater treatment plant included the construction of several new structures to comply with new stringent nitrogen discharge requirements and new design flow. The challenging ground conditions included up to 20-ft thick organic deposits with weight of hammer blow counts and up to 14 percent organic content and tidal ground water that was near the ground surface. The foundation design evaluated various deep foundation alternatives and selected driven closed-ended pipe piles then filled with concrete as the most suitable foundation. The selection process included considerations of cost, risk, vibrations, noise, and schedule. The contract documents utilized an innovative approach of performing an optimization load test program that was implemented during construction to optimize pile lengths and reduce potential vibration and construction schedule. This paper discusses the details of the successful load test program including static testing, dynamic testing, and the innovative contracting approach utilized to implement the construction phase load test program. It also discusses the successful development and implementation of driving criteria for production piles and construction challenges. The successful load test program resulted in savings of several hundred thousand dollars, optimized schedule, and lower environmental impacts.

By Leonhard Weixler, Jean Wehbe, Gordian Ulrich, Franz-Werner Gerressen

"As alternative energy industries pick up speed internationally, and as government regulation and restriction limit the use of impact hammers due to environmental limitation from construction induced noise during pile driving operations, unconventional solutions for more complex offshore foundation installations have become a necessity. Manufacturers and equipment suppliers race to develop alternative techniques to accommodate for offshore foundation construction in various soil conditions and at greater water depth. The FLYDRILL, and the Seabed-Drill BSD are two innovative systems for the installation of offshore monopiles with reduced environmental impact.INTRODUCTIONThe FLYDRILL and the Seabed-Drill were born from techniques in the design and construction experiences gained from land based foundation drilling systems over the past 25 years. As the alternative energy industry ventures into uncharted territory of deeper water for offshore wind farms, fast current regions for tidal energy, and increasingly challenging soil conditions and project complexity, the advancement and development of new innovative equipment system and drilling techniques have become a necessity.The systems described herein show the development of the so called “FLY-Drill” system, and the all new “Seabed-Drilling” equipment applied at the first ever made job using a seabed drilling rig.FLY DRILLThe FLY DRILL method is a completely new concept for bored piling. The drilling unit with rotary head, Kelly bar, and drilling tool is suspended by the hoist rope of the base carrier crane. The hydraulic power for the drill unit is provided from the base crane.The drill head is fixed on the casing with a hydraulically operated clamping system during the drilling operation. When emptying the drilling tool, the clamp cylinders are opened and the complete unit is swung sideways."

Jan 1, 2017

By P. V. Chandramohan

"The paper deals with the arrangement of structural members for a retaining structure used as a berth in the port of Krishnapatnam. The height of retention is 24.3m. A T-shaped diaphragm wall acts as the retaining surface. A relieving platform has been provided at the top to ease lateral earth pressure on the wall. The diaphragm wall is tied back to a combination of vertical and raker pile. Later, this arrangement was altered to replace the relieving platform with just lowering of ground level below the berth. The tie back was changed to a classical A-frame anchorage. At certain reaches, installation of piles pointing towards the rear was obstructed by a conveyor structure. The anchorage was then changed to include a vertical pile and a pile that points towards the front of the berth. Change in position of inclined pile alters the force in the pile from compression to tension.GeneralPort is a major link in the multimodal transport chain. Berth is the heart of the Port infrastructure. It is here the ocean freight changes to land transport. The change-over, warrants special type of heavy duty handling equipment. The equipment and the process necessitate deep seated foundations. On one side of the berth, deep drafted ships would be berthed. But adjacent to this heavy duty cranes would be operating at the deck level. Berths are of various types. Some are founded on piles and may project into water. Some operators prefer a retaining structure. At the port of Krishnapatnam, a retaining structure was preferred. Dredged level at the berth was to be -20. Deck of the berth was at +4.3. This meant that the height of retention of soil was 24.3m. Ports are generally located near the coast. Subsoil in the port area generally consists of cohesive material of low shearing strength. The berth has to cater to imposed vertical and horizontal loads.Structural functionFor bulk cargo and containers, berth has to support the two crane tracks. These tracks will carry heavy wheel loads of the crane. Besides, the space between the tracks would be used for stacking of cargo or hatch covers. In short, the deck will be subjected to heavy surcharge. This vertical load will manifest as additional lateral force on the retaining wall. Since the height of soil to be retained is high, it is a practice to relieve the lateral earth pressure due to the heavy surcharge of the wall. This is done by providing a relieving platform. The surcharge of superimposed load on the deck and the self-weight of the soil up to a few metres below would be relieved by a suitable platform. This vertical load would be transferred directly to deeper levels through piles. Mooring pull is a horizontal force exerted by the vessel on the bollards towards water side. Berthing force is exerted by the vessel during berthing, through fenders and acts towards land side.Diaphragm walls are usually employed as the retaining face. If the height of retention is less, these walls can cantilever out but in the case of large retention, they have to be tied back. The ties are to be anchored on to suitable arrangements like a dead-man or an A-frame. Berthing structure in the early stages at Krishnapatnam port is shown in fig 1."

Jan 1, 2015

By Lynn Crayne

We used Glyoxal as the hardener, at a final concentration of 10% by volume and therefore 20% by volume in the A-Component. They worked pretty well what we did was we shaved the joints on each of the pipes when we assembled them so they wouldn't rip the packers and then we greased the packers very well going in. We had to replace some but we have any getting stuck or didn't lose any pipes.

Feb 10, 2003

By Dardis J. T. II, P. G. Reinhall

"Impact pile driving of steel piles in marine environments produces extremely high sound levels in the water. It has been shown that current pile driving noise attenuation techniques provide limited noise reduction because significant noise is transmitted through the sediment into the water. To solve this problem, we have developed a double walled pile to decrease the total noise transmitted into the water.The double walled pile consists of two concentric tubes connected by a special driving shoe, allowing for an air gap between the two tubes. The double walled pile is driven into the sediment using traditional equipment by striking the inner tube only. The air gap between the inner and outer tube prevents the radial deformation wave produced by the pile hammer from interacting with the water and the sediment. In one embodiment of the double pile design the inner tube can be removed and repeatedly reused.In this paper we report on the results from a recent full scale field test in Puget Sound, Washington. The use of these double walled piles reduces the peak sound pressure over 20 dB relative to single walled piles. We also show that only a 3 to 6 dB reduction is obtained when a bubble curtain is used on a single walled pile.INTRODUCTIONImpact pile driving of steel piles in marine environments produces extremely high sound levels in the water. It has been shown that current noise attenuation techniques provide limited noise reduction because the noise from pile driving is transmitted through the sediment into the water. In [1,2] we showed, using modeling and field data, that the primary source of underwater sound from an impact driven pile originates from radial expansion of the pile as the compression wave propagates down the pile after each strike. The radial expansion is coupled to the compression wave through the Poisson’s ratio of steel. As discussed in [1], the supersonic radial expansion wave (with respect to the water) produces an acoustic field in the shape of an axisymmetric cone, or Mach cone. We showed in [3] that the ability of any sound shield that surrounds the pile in the water only (such as a bubble curtain or a surrounding double wall engagement) to attenuate the sound in the water is limited by the fact that an upward moving sound Mach wave is produced in the sediment and is transmitted into the water. To improve the performance of bubble curtains and other noise shields in the water, it is necessary to attenuate the noise emanating from the sediment into the water. Figure 1 illustrates how sound from the seabed leaks out from the sediment, limiting the effect of the surrounding bubble curtain."

Jan 1, 2017

By Gene Bryant, Wesley Schmutzler, Matteo Bertoni

The levees where the Mississippi River and the Lower Wood River meet near East Alton Illinois have been a problem area for years due to underseepage. The first phase of the deep cutoff wall was a 2,000-linear foot section that was completed in 2016 for the Illinois Flood Prevention District Council. This section was installed along the Wood River and the Mississippi river to depths of over 135’, The United States Army Corps of Engineers was tasked with continuing the cutoff wall along the Mississippi river. The wall was a continuation of phase I with depths up to 140’. The 1,000’ long cutoff wall was installed through fill, loose sands, cobbles, and sandy clay. The cutoff wall was terminated in either Glacial Till or sound rock. In order to provide wall permeability equal to or less than 1.0 X 10-6 cm/sec a self-hardening slurry (SHS) composed of ordinary Portland cement, slag cement, and water was utilized. The depths reached on this project using SHS is the deepest done to date in the United States. Along with the permeability requirements, a very narrow range for the unconfined compressive strength was specified at 50 – 180 PSI. In order to monitor the ground movement and water level fluctuations during the excavation of the panels with the Hydromill or Clamshell, 6 automated inclinometers were installed and monitored continuously during panel excavation in phase 1. Seven automated piezometers were monitored in phase 2. This paper will give an overview of the project with emphasis on the effect of the excavation on the instrumentation, specifically the reaction of the piezometers as the last panels were installed. INTRODUCTION The project is in Illinois, about 1000 feet downstream from where the Wood River Creek enters the Mississippi River between East Alton, IL and Wood River, IL adjacent to State Highway 143 (Fig. 1). The Wood River Lower Cutoff Wall Phase 2 Project (WR2) was awarded to TREVIICOS SOUTH (TIS) in September 2017. The Main Project features are: Construction of work platform, inclinometers installation and removal, cutoff wall construction by the Self-Hardening Slurry method (approx. 135,000 sf) up to 140' depth, clay cap installation, and site restoration. The levee system along this stretch of the Mississippi River has been plagued by under-seepage for several years. The phenomenon has worsened to varying degrees, depending on location, to the point that remediation was needed to ensure that Levee failure would not be an issue in the future.

Jan 1, 2019