Search Documents

By Stuart Coutts

"This paper presents an overview of the author’s experience related to the assessment of the base capacity of straight shafted and enlarged-base bored piles in sand. A design approach based on CPT qc is described which has been calibrated using a database of load tests. The importance of correct installation techniques with instrumentation are illustrated and a discussion is presented on the current use of high strain dynamic testing to validate compliance with design. An example of a recent project with high quality instrumented load test data illustrates the close match to the proposed best practice approach and also highlights the importance for consideration of the effects of stress relief for deep foundations installed in deep excavations.1 INTRODUCTIONContinuous Flight Auger (CFA) piles are the bored foundation pile of choice for sand deposits across Australia. The evolution of the determination of the base resistance of CFA piles has been shaped by available investigative techniques, calculation methods, and calibration of designs with laboratory and field testing. The Cone Penetration Test (CPT) has been widely used in Western Australia (WA) where the test has been commercially available via multiple contractors for more than 25 years. On the East coast, the adoption of CPT testing has been slower with a transition from traditional Standard Penetration Testing (SPT) still occurring. Dynamic pile load tests are often used to derive parameters. The influence of pile installation on performance is commonly misunderstood and is an important element on any discussion of pile capacity for CFA pile types. The interface between the base of the constructed pile and the in-situ soil has an influence on capacity such that a poorly constructed pile base will have limited (if any) contribution to pile performance within the normal working range, generally within a 10 mm movement. The research presented in this paper pertains to CFA piles (no drilling fluids) and enlarged base piles constructed using CFA techniques under drilling fluids such that clean pile/base interface is targeted. Developments in modern piling equipment and instrumentation allow the pressure and volume of delivered concrete/grout to piles to be accurately monitored at various stages of installation such that repeatable ‘best practice’ can be achieved. The changes in soil conditions that occur due to the disturbance of the install technique are also important.Although the results of this research are likely applicable to bored piles, the interface between the pile and in-situ soil (shaft and base) need to be considered for various installation techniques. The effects of stress relaxation (due to removal of soil above pile base and adjacent shaft), time to concreting, and the zone of disturbed soil around the pile shaft are paramount.2 INSTALLATION CONSIDERATIONS The pile mix (concrete/grout) and interface with the in-situ soil are also an important consideration. For example, coarse grained, poorly graded, dry, clean sand will be partially permeated by most pile mixes; such that the influenced soil will be enhanced and in instances the overall effective pile dimensions increased. Permeation of the disturbed zone of a pile or anchor shaft along with scale effects (Lehane 2009) can have significant effect on shaft capacity and shaft frictions significantly exceeding expected are not uncommon based on ‘theoretical’ dimensions. Advancements in mix technology and mix techniques also have a large influence on the pile/soil interface. The ability of the piling rig and augers to excavate a plumb and gauge hole can also have a large influence on the zone of soil disturbed adjacent the constructed pile with a resulting influence on capacity."

Jan 1, 1900

By George J. Tamaro

The design and construction of foundations in the New York City area are usually dictated by the widely varying geologic conditions encountered in the five boroughs, particularly along the spine of Manhattan Island. Rock extends well above sea level at the northern reaches and falls to depths in excess of 250 m at the barrier islands at the southern extremities. These highly variable geologic conditions, significantly affected by glacial activity, dictate different design and construction approaches throughout the five boroughs of New York City. Extensive rock removal is required at the north while long piling is dictated in the south. Similar changes can occur within a project site on Manhattan Island. This paper will describe these conditions in general, will identify the various solutions used to solve these problems and will summarize various foundation types used in the New York City area.

Jan 1, 2000

By Joseph A. Mann

"Soil mixing is a proven solution for the construction of ground improvement adjacent to sensitive structures due to the use of computer controlled and monitored equipment. The precision to which geometry is controlled can often be the deciding factor for selection of soil mixing versus other means of ground improvement. Protection of existing structures and utilities requires careful planning, investigation, and may demand supplemental control measures. During planning, it is imperative that the process be fully developed by the project team to ensure proper control measures are budgeted; otherwise, the success and safety of a project can be jeopardized.This paper discusses case histories of soil mixing performed in close proximity to large, sensitive, and critical utilities, including foundation support for an existing earthen dam impounding a water reservoir in upstate NY, a buffer zone for a tunnel drop shaft at an operating wastewater treatment plant in Washington DC, and a containment system to protect a major water line along an interstate widening project in Baltimore, MD. The function of soil mixing as ground improvement varied; however, the selection and application of the technique versus other means of ground improvement was specific due to the controlled manner of construction with soil mixing. Through the three case studies, small diameter (3- ft [0.9 m]), large diameter (8-ft [2.4 m]), and mass mixing applications will be discussed. Furthermore, the case studies offer insight into how the geotechnical community in the Mid-Atlantic utilizes soil mixing technology for widely varying applications. Additional topics of discussion will be the design and construction of the ground improvement systems, procedures and execution of the work to protect existing structures, and the QA/QC methods, procedures, and results from the projects.INTRODUCTIONWet soil mixing, also known as the Deep Mixing Method, is a ground improvement technique that improves the characteristics of weak soils by mechanically mixing them with cementitious binder slurry. To construct columns, a powerful drill advances a mixing tool with radial mixing paddles located near the bottom of the drill string. The binder slurry is pumped through the drill string to the tool as it advances and additional soil mixing is achieved as the tool is withdrawn.Wet soil mixing is applicable in a wide range of soils. Soil mixing has been performed at depths more than 100 lf (30 m). Soils vary widely in their ability to be mixed, depending on the soil type, strength, water content, plasticity, stratigraphy, and texture. Almost any soil type, including organics, can be treated with certain soil mixing technologies, although they may require high binder contents and/or pretreatment to achieve the required results. In cases when the target soil is very soft, including some very weak clays and peats, 100% of the soil may require treatment. This complete coverage of soil mixing is referred to as mass mixing."

Jan 1, 2015

By Mary Ellen Bruce Large

"INTRODUCTIONIn partnership with California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), and with support from International Association of Foundation Drilling (ADSC), Deep Foundations Institute (DFI) organized a workshop on quality assurance (QA) practices for acceptance of post-grouted drilled shafts in conjunction with DFI’s 40th Annual Conference on Deep Foundations. The 1½-day workshop was held on October 15-16, 2015 at the Oakland Marriott City Center in Oakland, CA.Post-grouting, in the context of this workshop and report, refers to the alternative design and construction of base-grouted drilled shafts wherein a grout distribution system is installed during construction and used to grout the base under pressure after the drilled shaft concrete has gained adequate strength, resulting in a stiffer axial-compression load-displacement relationship and additional possible ground improvement effects. The primary goals of the workshop were to•?Identify and summarize the state of the practice for design, construction, inspection, verification, acceptance criteria, reliability and performance of post-grouting.•?Identify gaps and needs in quality assurance that should be addressed for successful use of post-grouting.This report is structured to follow the workshop program: workshop presentations outlined the state of practice and views from owners, engineers and contractors on acceptance of post grouting methods for drilled shafts; and subsequent workshop discussions attended by a small invited group of participants focused on identifying areas of agreement and disagreement on post-grouting best practices, acceptance criteria, design and verification procedures, and inspection requirements. A partial list of attendees of the open and closed sessions is provided as Appendix A, and copies of presentations are included as Appendix B.FHWA and Caltrans are the primary audiences for this report, and its content will be used to develop a roadmap for deploying the findings into policy and practice. The secondary audience is the broader industry group, and the report content will be disseminated in a variety of formats."

Jan 1, 2016

By Mary Ellen Bruce Large

"In partnership with California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), and with support from International Association of Foundation Drilling (ADSC), Deep Foundations Institute (DFI) organized a workshop on quality assurance (QA) practices for acceptance of post-grouted drilled shafts in conjunction with DFI’s 40th Annual Conference on Deep Foundations. The 1½-day workshop was held on October 15-16, 2015 at the Oakland Marriott City Center in Oakland, CA.Post-grouting, in the context of this workshop and report, refers to the alternative design and construction of base-grouted drilled shafts wherein a grout distribution system is installed during construction and used to grout the base under pressure after the drilled shaft concrete has gained adequate strength, resulting in a stiffer axial-compression load-displacement relationship and additional possible ground improvement effects.The primary goals of the workshop were to•?Identify and summarize the state of the practice for design, construction, inspection, verification, acceptance criteria, reliability and performance of post-grouting.•?Identify gaps and needs in quality assurance that should be addressed for successful use of post-grouting.This report is structured to follow the workshop program: workshop presentations outlined the state of practice and views from owners, engineers and contractors on acceptance of post grouting methods for drilled shafts; and subsequent workshop discussions attended by a small invited group of participants focused on identifying areas of agreement and disagreement on post-grouting best practices, acceptance criteria, design and verification procedures, and inspection requirements. A partial list of attendees of the open and closed sessions is provided as Appendix A, and copies of presentations are included as Appendix B.FHWA and Caltrans are the primary audiences for this report, and its content will be used to develop a roadmap for deploying the findings into policy and practice. The secondary audience is the broader industry group, and the report content will be disseminated in a variety of formats."

Jan 1, 2016

By Brian Wilson, Franz-Werner Gerressen

"Cutter Soil Mixing, also known as CSM, was developed in Europe as an alternate method of Deep Mixing to the more traditional single and multiple auger techniques, and brought to market by Bauer Maschinen GmbH (Bauer), towards the end of 2003. Initial development of the technique had been completed in a joint venture between Bauer and Bachy Soletanche. In 2004 the concept was introduced to the North American market. Continued development of the method and demonstration of its versatility, both in terms of applications and applicable soil types has seen a steady growth in the number of designs incorporating the approach, and contractors offering the technique. This paper provides a brief overview of the variety and size of projects and applications where the method has been adopted, discusses some lessons learned with respect to equipment operation as well as the improvements that have been introduced to the equipment, and briefly reviews the current state of practice, as well as some of the associated on-going research and development.BACKGROUNDCutter Soil Mixing (CSM) is a technique for deep soil mixing that was initially developed as a collaborative effort between Bauer Maschinen (Bauer) and Bachy Soletanche, but which ultimately resulted in the separate development of two somewhat different brands of CSM tool. The Bauer brand of CSM entered the European market in 2004, and was first promoted in the North American market in late 2004, with the first project starting in 2005. The Bachy Soletanche brand, sometimes referred to as “Geomix” was first marketed in Europe in 2005 and the first model introduced in North America in 2007.The development of the Cutter Soil Mixing technique utilized the experiences gained from Trench Cutter/Hydrofraise equipment, developing a technique that incorporates two cutting wheels rotating about a horizontal axis as opposed to the more conventional deep soil mixing approach which utilizes augers and mixing paddles rotating about vertical axes. Whereas the Trench Cutter/Hydrofraise technique excavates the soil from within a panel, and supports the open hole using a bentonite slurry, the CSM technique cuts and displaces the soil whilst pumping a slurry/grout directly into the soil through a port located between the wheels. The combination of cutting the soil while introducing an appropriate volume of slurry effectively fluidizes the column of soil around and above the cutter head. While this process achieves a high degree of mixing, even on the downward cutting stroke, thorough in-situ mixing typically occurs on the withdrawal stroke, when most of the slurry is added."

Jan 1, 2015

By Abhijit Saha

"The stone columns improve the performance of foundations on soft and loose soil due to the ability of composite ground to sustain increased structural loads under reduced settlements. The interaction between the two basic elements: the ambient subsoil and installed column, present a complexity of behaviour, both in terms of applied stresses and resulting strains. Moreover, as the same is provided in-group in a regular array beneath foundations, the performance of an individual column is likely to be influenced by the presence of neighbouring columns. The present paper addresses this very issue. Analysis of reported field hydro-test data of large diameter oil storage tanks in soft ground in reference to some existing theories led to the development of the stone-column ‘group efficiency factor’. In order that such factor is of general use, it was felt necessary to examine the applicability of the factor to different sizes of groups under varied subsoil conditions. With this in view, some model test results reported in literature of single and group of columns have been analysed and in the process an explicit relationship regarding the stone-column ‘groupeffect’ could be established.INTRODUCTIONThe field application of the stone column technology has gained momentum than the intricate design methodology due to its simplicity in installation and intuitive performance. The ground improvement is due to the complex interaction within the ‘unit-cell’ comprised of the installed column in ambient ground under sustained vertical stress; in association with the interdependence of problem geometry and material properties of the two different soils-one 'native' and the other 'back-filled'. The beneficial effects are increased load capacity, reduction in total and differential settlements, minimization of post construction settlements effected by accelerating consolidation, reduced risk of soil liquefaction, aiding in improvement of slope stability of embankments and natural slopes and effecting changes in the dynamic response. The ‘unit-cell’ concept of a tributary soil cylinder encapsulating an installed column with some reasonable assumptions and boundary conditions (Aboshi et al, 1979; Balaam & Booker, 1981; Van Impe & De Beer, 1983; Priebe, 1976; Saha & De, 1994; Saha; 2005, 2006, 2007, 2011, Saha & Das; 2007) deals with the load-settlement behaviour of the composite system. The present investigation is based on published field data from literature & validated with experimental study reported in literature. The study addresses the effect of group interaction of stone columns beneath a large area loading on ground settlement. The hydrotest load-settlement data of 12 large diameter oil storage tanks founded on stone column reinforced soil at Haldia1 and Kandla2 refinery sites in India; reported by Som (1997), has been analysed to quantify the group efficiency. The results as obtained are compared with experimental study on 2, 3 and 4 stone column groups at different spacing-diameter ratios in soft clay3 reported by Rao et al (1997) to validate the above analysis. A unique relationship between the column spacing and group efficiency has been obtained."

Jan 1, 2015

By Guo Qian, Du Guangyin, Deng Yongfeng, Liu Songyu, Wang Ningping

"Metakaolin (MK) can efficiently enhance the strength and the impermeability of concretes and mortars. However, it has rarely been attempted in admixtures of cement-stabilized soils until presently. As deep mixing method is wildly used in ground improvement, the strength of cemented soils (soilcrete) and the applicability of the MK should be considered. This paper focuses on the macro-strength development of cement-stabilised silty soil mixed with MK. The result shows that the addition of MK can enhance the unconfined compressive strength of the soilcrete, which attributes to a combination of the rates of OPC hydration and the MK-CH reaction. Note that the strength of soilcrete was influenced by the properties of soil, water-to-binder mass ratio (W/B) in admixtures, which needs to be reconsidered since the binder mass composes that of cement and MK totally.INTRODUCTIONCement was used in ground modification techniques, such as the jet grouting, deep mixing method (DMM) which was put into practices in Japan and Nordic countries in the middle of the 1970s, and then spread to China, South East Asia[1]. For last decades, fly ash, slag or silica fume was mixed with cement to form the new cement base stabilizing agent in the view of economy and performance improvement. The mechanical behavior of these soil-binder admixtures (nominated as “soilcrete”), was investigated. But the soilcrete modified with the metakaolin (MK) was still not investigated much and lots of further work needs to be conducted.Some laboratory experiments of the soilcretes modified with MK have been taken[2~4]. Kolovos et al. (2013) indicates that the unconfined compressive strength has a more significant improvement when W/B equals 0.4 than that when W/B equals 1.20 concerning the water-to-binder mass ratio (W/B). Sonebi et al. (2013) investigates the mechanical behaviors of cement grouting containing MK with W/B equals 0.4, and also found the effectiveness of the addition of MK. Zhang et al. (2014) performed the studies on Lianyungang marine clay improvement showed that MK obviously enhanced the quality of cemented soils.In this paper, the strength of soilcrete modified with MK is further investigated, where the unconfined compressive strength at different curing time, the content of MK and cement (w/w) in lab conditions was discussed."

Jan 1, 2015

By Jeffrey C. Evans, Daniel G. Ruffing, Hejintao Huang

Soil-bentonite slurry trench cutoff walls are the most common type of vertical cutoff wall used in the US for seepage control and for passive control of contaminant migration at environmental sites. Design considerations are often limited to constructability considerations and a target hydraulic conductivity. With design-build contracts common, the backfill design is often left to the contractor. As a barrier soil, the hydraulic conductivity of bentonite slurry wall backfill is typically required to be equal to or below 1x10-7cm/s. The importance of stress state upon the hydraulic conductivity as well as the expected stresses are both established in the literature. Grain size distribution of the base soil and bentonite content both affect compressibility and hydraulic conductivity. This paper describes the results of studies undertaken to evaluate the interrelationships between compressibility, hydraulic conductivity, grain size distribution, and bentonite content. Three base soils were used representing a range of soils found on typical construction projects. Using these base soils, mixtures containing a range of dry bentonite contents from 0% to 5% were prepared to a slump consistent with field practice. The compressibility and hydraulic conductivity were measured in consolidometers adapted for falling head permeability tests at the end of each load increment. These experiments yielded the relationship between effective stress and hydraulic conductivity as well as consolidation characteristics including time rate of consolidation and coefficients of compressibility. The experimental results are then used to indirectly evaluate stress development and to assess the time needed for consolidation. The findings show a substantial decrease in hydraulic conductivity as effective stress increases, regardless of base soil type and dry bentonite content, a relative insensitivity of stress development to backfill compressibility, and a wide range of values for coefficient of consolidation depending upon backfill mixture and stress level.

Jan 1, 2016

By Ramin Motamed, Fahim M. Bhuiyan, Raj V. Siddharthan, Joseph Toth

The difficulty in material characterization and the erratic response of cemented soil layers, such as caliche in the Las Vegas valley, creates challenges for practicing engineers to reliably predict the response of deep foundations. The focus of this paper is the numerical prediction of axial response in drilled shaft foundations, which are commonly used in infrastructure projects (i.e., bridges and tall buildings) in Las Vegas, NV. The prevalence of hard caliche layers with variation in the degree of cementation add to the complication in numerical modeling. In this study, the applicability of two existing t-z models, developed for Florida limestone and soft rock, was evaluated based on numerical simulations of three bi-directional load tests conducted at caliche-dominant sites. The corresponding top-down load tests were also simulated for further assessment. A MATLAB-based finite-difference program, NVShaft, has been used to implement the mentioned t-z models in axial load analysis. Complexity originating from drilled shaft construction and the interaction with caliche during one axial load test resulted in a stiffer predicted response compared to measure data. For the other two load tests, both t-z models produced comparable load-displacement responses. It was observed that the t-z model for Florida limestone predicted relatively stiffer responses and higher drilled shaft capacity.

Sep 8, 2021

By Anahita Modiriasari, Benjamin S. Rivers

Measurement while drilling (MWD) is a subsurface exploration technique associated with real-time and continuous monitoring and recording of drilling data during the drilling process. This technique can be used for underground investigations to differentiate ground strata, detect the presence of fractures and voids, and evaluate geological features and mechanical properties of geomaterial. When MWD is used for geotechnical investigations, it can improve site characterization, identify variable conditions, improve design and construction, lead to shorter project delivery times, reduce the cost and risks associated with limited subsurface data and geotechnical uncertainties, and maximum return-on-investment. Given these benefits, MWD is gaining attention among transportation agencies and the geotechnical industry. Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA’s) innovation deployment program “Every Day Counts (EDC-5)” includes the implementation of Advanced Geotechnical Methods in Exploration (A-GaME), which aims to implement effective, underutilized subsurface exploration methods, including MWD, in U.S. practice. This paper provides an overview of the MWD technology for geotechnical site investigations and presents a case history where MWD was employed to design deep foundation for the construction of a building in Massachusetts. The advantages of this technology for risk reduction and project cost and time saving are also discussed.

Oct 1, 2022

By Leena Korkiala-Tanttu, Noora Lindroos, Juha Forsman

"Construction works at the Helsinki city sea shoreline requires dredging and handling of contaminated sediments. Most of these soft dredged sediments are regarded as too poor quality material for earth construction purposes. Mass stabilization technology has been applied to improve the technical and environmental properties of the dredged sediment in order to utilize the material in construction. The treatment site presented in this article is placed in the West Harbor where the dredged sediments are disposed in basins, mixed with binders by mass stabilization and transported to utilization sites. The volume of these basins is about 90 000 m3. So far these basins have been used three times during the years 2011-2014. The most applied binder has been cement. Its high price and carbon footprint have encouraged use alternative binders. Other used binder materials include fly ash and end product of desulphurization from coal combustion, and fly ash from combustion of Estonian oil shale. The technical and environmental properties of stabilized sediments have been studies in the laboratory and in situ thoroughly. Some properties of the stabilized sediments which have been studied are: compression strength, modulus, hydraulic conductivity, leaching of contaminants, etc. The leaching test results show that heavy metal leaching is very low with all binder materials tested.1. INTRODUCTIONContaminated marine sedimentsMarine sediments in the coastal areas are often contaminated as a consequence of industrial and port activities, as well as the influence of cities located there. Construction activities and reclamation of shore line require dredging and handling of contaminated sediments since the level of contamination inhibit dumping of dredged sediments into the sea. Based on their technical properties, most of these dredged soft and watery sediments (clay, gyttja, etc.) are regarded as too poor quality material for earth construction purposes. Economic, sustainable and environmentally safe management of contaminated, dredged sediments is a key issue in many construction sites.In the City of Helsinki, mass stabilization technology has been applied to improve the technical properties of the dredged sediments in order to utilize the material in construction. Owing to stabilization / deep mixing / solidification, also the contamination is encapsulated in a monolithic solid of a high structural integrity. Thus, contaminants migration is restricted by the decreased surface area exposed to leaching.The treatment site presented in this article is placed in the West Harbor (a place of Helsinki called Jätkäsaari) where dredged sediments are disposed into stabilization basins, mixed with binders by mass stabilization and then transported to final utilization sites. The location and principle of these basins is presented in Figures 1-4. The overall volume of these four stabilization basins is about 90 000 m3."

Jan 1, 2015

By Ramin Motamed, Farshid Ghazavi, Joseph A. W. Toth

"Post-disaster reconnaissance of areas affected by earthquakes has documented extensive damage to buildings with shallow foundations located in liquefaction-prone areas. Currently, estimation of liquefaction settlement is based on empirical correlations that evaluate settlement in the free-field environment and are based on one-dimensional consolidation. However, observations have shown that liquefaction settlement under buildings can be considerably greater. This research is based on a series of 1- g shake table experiments using a transparent soil box to reproduce liquefaction-induced building settlement. Building settlements were evaluated using a scaled model of a building foundation representing a 1-2 story building. Comprehensive parametric study was carried out to establish the effects of several parameters on free-field and building settlements such as building width and thickness of liquefiable soil layer. The experiments utilized accelerometers and pore-water pressure sensors to monitor ground accelerations and buildup of pore-water pressures in both the free-field and model building footprint. Results of these experiments are compared to available centrifuge tests and field observations and conclusions are drawn with respect to the potential scaling effects. Lastly, this paper discusses the feasibility of installing helical piles as a mitigation strategy to reduce the building settlements by presenting some of the exploratory experimental data obtained from this series of 1-g shake table tests.INTRODUCTIONThe 2010-2011 Canterbury earthquake sequence and the 2011 Great Tohoku earthquake are some of the most recent examples where large numbers of low-story structures sustained damage resulting from liquefaction-induced settlements. This damage has commonly been observed in residential and commercial areas developed over loose, unconsolidated and saturated coarse grained soils resulting from both natural and man-made deposits. Damages incurred from the 2010-2011 Canterbury earthquake sequence occurred in the largely unconsolidated fluvial environment bordering the Avon River in Christchurch (Henderson 2013). Similar damage was also incurred during the 2011 Great Tohoku earthquake where liquefaction of soils occurred in both young alluvial deposits and fill materials (Ashford et al. 2011). Figure 1 presents typical modes of failure to structures resulting from the effects of liquefaction. Current practices in evaluation of liquefaction settlement rely on empirical correlations (Tokimatsu et al. 1987; Ishihara et al. 1992) developed for liquefiable soils in the freefield environment (Dashti et al. 2010a). However, recent observations of the performance of foundations suggest that settlement of rigid shallow foundations in liquefiable soils are commonly greater than those predicted in the free-field. Therefore, new correlations should be developed to better predict the degree of settlement of shallow foundations in liquefiable soils. Current research is beginning to focus on the mechanisms of settlement during liquefaction in regards to confining stress, pore-water pressure and shear stress induced from foundations (Dashti et al. 2010b)."

Jan 1, 2016

By Donald A. Bruce

"The Deep Mixing Methods (DMM), in their current forms, have been employed in the United States since 1986, although an earlier version had seen service from 1954. The earlier developments were strongly influenced by practices in the Nordic countries and Japan, while by the late 1980’s several DMM systems had been developed in the U.S. itself. Since then, DMM has continued its evolution, principally via the challenges of a series of large, landmark projects, but also via distinct, significant technological advances. This paper highlights the key points in the history of DMM in the U.S., and provides an overview of the different methods currently in use.IN THE BEGINNINGIt is a common misconception that the history of applications of the Deep Mixing Methods (DMM) in the United States dates from 1986 when SMW Seiko Inc. — a subsidiary of Japan’s Seiko Kogyo Company — was established in the Bay Area. However, the author believes that Intrusion Prepakt Co.’s patented MIP (Mixed in Place) system had been used, albeit sporadically (about 30 projects are recorded), since 1954 (FHWA 2000, 2001). Ironically, by 1961 this single auger method had been extensively used under license in Japan for excavation support and groundwater control — by the Seiko Kogyo Company. By 1972, the original MIP technique had been succeeded by more advanced Japanese methods, involving multiple augers. Intrusion Prepakt have long since become defunct.The first systematic studies of contemporary Deep Mixing Methods in Japan began in 1967 when the Port and Harbor Research Institute of the Ministry of Transportation began laboratory testing using granular and powdered lime for treating soft marine soils. Fundamental studies continued through the early 1970’s, by which time the development of industrial scale equipment was well advanced, having its first application on a marine trial near Haneda Airport. Coincidentally, laboratory and field research also began in 1967 in Sweden (“Swedish Lime Column Method”) for treating soft clays using unslaked lime. Reportedly the progenitor was a Norwegian, Kjeld Paus, who had made observations on fluid lime columns in the U.S. It would seem that developments in Japan and the Nordic countries proceeded independently until 1975 when the technology leaders from each group (Broms and Boman; and Okumura and Terashi, respectively) presented their — very similar — findings at a conference in Bangalore, India. Limited technical exchanges ensued thereafter.Whereas the Nordic developments continued to focus on the use of dry reagents (cement and lime) and relatively light equipment compatible with operating on and in very soft clays and organics, the Japanese progressed into the use of fluid reagents (cement-based grouts) and heavier equipment for both marine and land-based projects. Thus, by 1986, there were a large number of proprietary (wet and dry) DMM systems in Japan, and a rapidly growing market already by then accounting for over 12,000,000 m3 of ground treatment."

Jan 1, 2015

By Peter J. Nicholson

"IntroductionDuring my more than 40 years in the practice of underground construction and engineering, the industry has seen progress from the dig down to rock or hardpan or alternatively drive concrete or steel into the ground and count the blows; then you can be sure of you have a solid foundation; to the modern day, I’m willing to try anything to save money. Of course these are both exaggerations, but not gross ones. After getting bored being supervision on jobs counting blows, I struck out into the new field of “tie-backs” as they were called in the United States, or “ground anchors” as they were then termed in the United Kingdom. After installing some of the first permanent ground anchors for the Corps of Engineers on Lake Michigan as well as the highest loaded rock anchors of the time at two dams on the Ohio River, we were at the top of our game in the 1970’s. Subsequently in the 1980’s when my view of the future of ground anchors saw their installation becoming a commodity item, we branched out into “Pin Piles” now known as Micro Piles, high capacity, steel tube encased, small diameter (5-12” or so), high capacity (100-500 tons) piling. Next came soil nailing, both temporary and permanent retaining walls, as at Cumberland Gap Kentucky. My next morph was into “Cement Deep Soil Mixing” earlier on, known simply as “soil mixing”. For this education I traveled to Japan several times and established a long-term, Joint Venture, relationship with one of the better known Japanese specialty ground modification companies. In Boston at the “Big Dig” we established the then record size soil mixing project, 500,000 or so cubic meters of CDSM concluding in the year 2000. Since then I’ve been involved as a consultant mainly for dams and levees. Below is the story of how I came to be at this place in the road to innovation in Geotechnical processes."

Jan 1, 2017

By Peter J. Nicholson

During my more than 40 years in the practice of underground construction and engineering, the industry has seen progress from the dig down to rock or hardpan or alternatively drive concrete or steel into the ground and count the blows; then you can be sure of you have a solid foundation; to the modern day, I?m willing to try anything to save money. Of course these are both exaggerations, but not gross ones. After getting bored being supervision on jobs counting blows, I struck out into the new field of ?tie-backs? as they were called in the United States, or ?ground anchors? as they were then termed in the United Kingdom. After installing some of the first permanent ground anchors for the Corps of Engineers on Lake Michigan as well as the highest loaded rock anchors of the time at two dams on the Ohio River, we were at the top of our game in the 1970?s. Subsequently in the 1980?s when my view of the future of ground anchors saw their installation becoming a commodity item, we branched out into ?Pin Piles? now known as Micro Piles, high capacity, steel tube encased, small diameter (5-12? or so), high capacity (100-500 tons) piling. Next came soil nailing, both temporary and permanent retaining walls, as at Cumberland Gap Kentucky. My next morph was into ?Cement Deep Soil Mixing? earlier on, known simply as ?soil mixing?. For this education I traveled to Japan several times and established a long-term, Joint Venture, relationship with one of the better known Japanese specialty ground modification companies. In Boston at the ?Big Dig? we established the then record size soil mixing project, 500,000 or so cubic meters of CDSM concluding in the year 2000. Since then I?ve been involved as a consultant mainly for dams and levees. Below is the story of how I came to be at this place in the road to innovation in Geotechnical processes.

By Osama A. Safaqah

Driven plate anchors can be used to hold in place large bridge caissons during floating construction. Their small size and simple method of installation make them a very cost effective alternative to other direct-embedment, gravity, and drag anchors. The geotechnical design of plate anchors involves the anchor geometry, embedment, drivability, and proof testing. This paper describes the experience gained with plate anchors used during construction of the new Tacoma Narrows Bridge. For this project, the anchors had to be driven in dense to very dense sands, and had to resist large forces from 7-9 knot currents.

Jan 1, 2013

By Rick Piovesan, Pramod Rao, Nihal Bohra, Mark Wahler

"This paper discusses the approach followed for the geotechnical design of 355 mm and 457 mm diameter driven open-ended steel pipe piles used for a gas plant at a green field site in Pilbara region in Australia. The principal bearing layer at the site comprises of calcareous Red Bed soils and weak rock, which is the typical geology along a significant length of the northern Western Australian coastline with carbonate content up to 70%. The uncertainty associated with the mechanical behavior of the calcareous soils and cemented soils (weak rocks) presented design challenges in the selection of appropriate pile design method and design parameters for pile capacity estimation during Front End Engineering Design (FEED). The American Petroleum Institute (API)-based design methodology was adopted. The representative design parameters for the Red Bed weak rock were established by treating the weak rock as clay with undrained shear strength as one-half of the characteristic unconfined compressive strength (UCS) value. Both statically load tested and CAPWAP (Case Pile Analysis Wave Program) estimated ultimate axial pile capacities on 25 early pre-production indicator piles demonstrated that the API design methodology for siliceous soils provides reasonable prediction of axial pile capacity in the red bed soils/weak rock and no reduction to API computed axial capacity due to carbonate content is warranted. The results also demonstrated that penalizing axial pile capacity solely based on carbonate content is not appropriate.IntroductionA gas processing facility was proposed to commercialize the gas reserves located 130 km offshore from the north-west coast of Western Australia (WA). The project site is a green field site located in the Pilbara region along the northwest coast of WA. Specific information regarding the site has been withheld due to confidentiality reasons. The site layout is shown in Figure 1.The site comprises low-lying tidal flats, clay pans and sand dunes covered with low scrub. The onshore site levels vary from elevation 1 m to 10 m AHD (Australian Height Datum), with the largest proportion of the area (excluding sand dunes) between elevations of 1 m and 3 m.The onshore facilities are to comprise a liquefied natural gas (LNG) plant site, a construction camp, the land-based portion of the materials offloading facility (MOF), roadways, and borrow pit areas.The existing ground levels within the process train area, where pile load testing was performed, vary from over 7 m AHD where the summits and peaks of the central dune exist to typically 1 m to 2 m AHD towards the east and west edges of the dune. The proposed finished grade for the process train is set at 7 m AHD."

Jan 1, 2015

By Camilo A. Alvarez, Stephen K. Harris, Brian R. Zuckerman, Philip J. Meymand, Danielle M. Steinmetz

"The sleek new air traffic control tower at the San Francisco International Airport stands at 221 feet tall and is set to replace the existing air traffic control tower by 2016. This aluminum-clad, torch-like structure and three-story Integrated Facilities Building at the base are situated between Terminal 1 and Terminal 2 adjacent to the tarmac. Berkel & Company Contractors, Inc. and Simpson Gumpertz & Heger Inc. worked in conjunction with structural engineers from Walter P. Moore Engineers and Consultants, geotechnical engineers from URS Corporation, architects from Fentress Architects, and general contractors from Hensel Phelps Construction Company on the performance-based design of a foundation to support this critical facility, which is located in a high seismic zone and situated on the very soft soil of the San Francisco Bay margin. With the loading demands and performance criteria established and Young Bay Mud thicknesses ranging from 44 to 47 feet thick across the site, the design team employed a total of 214 24-inch diameter Auger Pressure Grouted piles, which were drilled into the underlying Franciscan Formation as deep as 148 feet below existing grade. Pile reinforcement included full-length confined cages.The piles were designed to resist Maximum Considered Earthquake axial demands as high as 1,400 kips in compression and 700 kips in tension. The performance-based pile design included verification of shear capacity under double-plastic-hinge flexural mechanisms, verification of pile ductility via non-linear moment-curvature analyses, and consideration of curvatures due to kinematic as well as inertial loading.The team implemented an extensive pile load test program including a full-scale static compressive load test on a sacrificial test pile and five non-destructive high-strain dynamic load tests, four of which were performed on indicator piles that were later used as part of the foundation system. These piles were monitored with extensive embedded instrumentation throughout their length, including strain gauges and accelerometers."

Jan 1, 2017

By Shawna Munn, Nadir Ansari, Allison Bennett

"This paper outlines how specification driven design has made Toronto Area transit infrastructure projects more expensive than similar private projects, and provides a case study of the results of an excavation at Launch Shaft 1 (LS1) for the Eglinton Crosstown Light Rail Transit project in Toronto, Ontario. The paper will describe the impact specification driven design parameters can have on design economy, constructability, and schedule and will suggest an alternative approach utilizing the Observational Method. As a result of the initial specification based design, Isherwood was retained by both the General Contractor and the Specialty Excavation Shoring Contractor to provide value engineering leveraging the Observational Method to improve constructability and construction schedule. By using well known, accepted design methods coupled with local experience in lieu of the specified design pressures and parameters, the redesigned bracing scheme reduced construction cost and schedule. This excavation case history can be a lesson learned for future transit projects.The City of Toronto has been developing its transportation network since the mid 1800’s. “Canada’s First Subway” along Yonge Street opened in March 1954 (TTC 1954), with a few additions to the subway network through to the 1980’s. The following two decades marked a long period of slow development due to recessions, budget cuts, and politics along with several cancelled projects. To fill the gap left by years of underfunding, several new transit projects are now under construction in the city as a part of Metrolinx’s $50B, 25 year, “The Big Move” initiative (Metrolinx 2013). The work on these types of infrastructure projects is highlighting a different and developing challenge within the tendering and design specification structure we will call Prescriptive Specification Design (PSD).PSD is a method used within contract specifications to control design risk on a project by applying conservative design methods, factors of safety, or other parameters to make a “fool proof” design. It is akin to requesting a colouring by numbers approach from a painter. There are inherent risks of using this method of tendering a project including increased project costs, longer construction schedules, and decrease of overall project economy. In PSD, the Owner “owns” all of the design risk on a project, including any additional costs due to changed site conditions. However, the Contractor commonly “owns” the risk of any deviations from the design specification they pursue, therefore making any improvements to the design, cost, or schedule less desirable from the Contractor’s point of view. The impact of this type of strict specified approach to design has been seen in transit infrastructure projects in the Toronto area. Figure 1 outlines the range of specified AEPD design pressures as a function of excavation height (H) specified for use in Toronto underground transit projects since the 1970’s to present day. A clear trend can be seen with respect to increased design pressures specified. The ranges shown for each project are intended to account for the potential differences in soil conditions for the highly overconsolidated glaciated soils in the Toronto area. The graph also highlights the typical range, in blue, for the industry practice in Toronto for comparison."

Jan 1, 2017