Search Documents

By Kirk Ellison, Eric S. Lindquist, Peter Faust, Stephen M. McLandrich

"The 181 Fremont Tower will be an 800-foot high-rise with a 60-foot deep basement located in a dense urban part of downtown San Francisco. The design and construction methods of the subsurface elements navigated a variety of site constraints such as loose fill and soft estuarine soils, shallow groundwater, contaminants, historic obstructions, small work area, proximity of adjacent buildings, and the on-going excavation and build-out of the adjacent Transbay Transit Center (TTC) train box. Design of the approximately 260-foot-deep drilled shafts (some of the deepest foundations ever constructed in San Francisco) was proven by a full-scale load test that provided unique data on the frictional capacity of the deep soil and Franciscan Complex bedrock in the region. Design and construction of the shoring system for the 5-story basement excavation was exceptionally challenging because of the on-going construction for the TTC. To allow for flexibility during construction, hydraulic rams were placed in a transfer waler along the shared TTC shoring wall that could adjust the forces transferred through to the TTC excavation if required. Open and steady communication between the shoring engineer, the geotechnical engineer, and the shoring/foundation contractor was crucial in order to satisfy the complex constraints of this site.INTRODUCTIONThe 181 Fremont Tower is a new build mixed-use tower, currently under construction in the dense urban core of the South of Market District of San Francisco, California. This high-rise will consist of 54 above ground floors with the roof level 700 feet high. Atop the roof will be some architectural features including a spire that will top out at just over 800 feet, which will make it the second tallest building in San Francisco upon completion.The tower is being developed by Jay Paul Company and the architectural design is by Heller Manus. The structural engineer and geotechnical engineer for the project is Arup North America Ltd (Arup). The shoring designer is Brierley Associates (Brierley). The general contractor is Level 10 Construction (Level 10) and the specialty foundation contractor and excavation contractor is Malcolm Drilling Co., Inc (Malcolm)."

Jan 1, 2017

By Eric P. Bregman, Justin Zarrella, Ryan M. Coulson, Connor Johnson

Within a prominent Boston, MA suburb are a pair of historic stone and mortar structures built in the late 1800’s. Both the Main House and Carriage House have been maintained and occupied throughout their rich history, but renovations were needed to address structural concerns and building code compliance issues. The focus of this paper is to detail an innovative underpinning design that addressed ongoing settlement issues at the Carriage House. GZA GeoEnvironmental, Inc. (GZA) partnered with Phoenix Foundation Company, Inc. (Phoenix) to design foundation wall support systems for Consigli Construction Company (Consigli) that would effectively underpin the historic field stone foundations. Originally, conventional concrete pit underpinning and jet grouting were contemplated as methods for support. However, due to the age and condition of the existing foundations, worker safety concerns, and the risk of additional structural damage, GZA/Phoenix elected to pursue a less traditional approach. The alternate design consisted of micropiles used for combined temporary and permanent foundation support. The load transfer system included steel headers with needle beams cored through the field stone foundation walls and reinforced concrete grade beams/pile caps. To validate design performance and ensure worker safety, GZA installed a fully automated survey monitoring system to record lateral and vertical building deformations. This included real-time email alert notifications to inform the Project Team of any threshold exceedances. From the start of micropile drilling through full load transfer to the temporary support and permanent foundation systems, the underpinning performed as designed resulting in less than 3/16-inch of vertical and horizontal deformations observed. This magnitude of movement is less than half of what is generally accepted deformation tolerances for masonry structures and considered exceptional performance. The focus of this paper is to provide additional details on the unique design, sequencing, installation, and performance of the underpinning systems.

Sep 8, 2021

By Harald Vogel, Johannes Lachenski, Friedemann Koetzel, Sebastian Schnell

In this paper, a digital subsoil approach, a work-in-progress, will be presented describing the transformation from a classical 2D to digital 3D thinking process in the design of geotechnical structures. Certain pitfalls as well as lessons learned are described, and the reader can understand that the digitalization process of the design of geotechnical structures is always a problem-focused approach by creating systems for certain processes rather than setting rules or regulations. Three project examples are presented. Two of the presented project examples feature a heterogeneous geology distribution and made it necessary for the design of the foundations to work with 3D subsoil and 3D calculation models. However, the digital 3D design process in the third project, an inner-city excavation pit, is driven by the complicated boundary conditions making it necessary to work in a parametric 3D design space. All projects have in common, that new processes had to be developed. The paper concludes with a flow chart describing the process of the elaborated digital subsoil approach.

May 1, 2022

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 Paul M. Schuman, Alessandro Bertero, Giuliana A. Zelada, Sharon G. Cranston

Many jet grouted columns were recently installed to create a jet grout-treated soil foundation for an earthen embankment used in a large shoreline stabilization project in the Mystic River in Charlestown, MA. A physical test program was used to determine whether the jet grouting parameters the Contractor selected would meet the design requirements given the local soil variability, including soft river sediments and organic soils. The presence of hydrocarbons encountered in the marine sediments during the test program caused concern that the design strength could not be achieved. The published literature discusses the environmental aspects of jet grouting with hydrocarbons. The literature did not include many studies of the effect on jet grout-treated soil strength for the types and concentration of hydrocarbons encountered on this project. The grout mix, air pressure, and number of passes of jet grouting were varied in a second field test program to determine jet grouting parameters needed to achieve the design strength of columns with hydrocarbons. A geo-probe study was performed to identify the type and concentration of hydrocarbons on the site. With few exceptions, the quality control core samples from the production columns met the design requirements with many strength values far exceeding the design strength. This paper presents the data, and reviews the lessons learned. PROJECT BACKGROUND The Charlestown Bus Garage, located in Cambridge, Massachusetts, is a Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) bus maintenance facility located on the Mystic River. The site was home to a coal gasification facility before it was developed by the MBTA as a bus garage in 1978. A deadman-anchored steel sheet pile bulkhead wall installed along the Mystic river on the east side of the site supports the site grade at about El. 11 ft (NAVD 1988) (Figure 1).

Jan 1, 2019

By Robert Bachus, Nikolaos Machairasm, Allen Cadden

Data Interchange for Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Specialists (DIGGS) is a data transfer standard that is gaining widespread acceptance in the geotechnical and geoenvironmental communities. Originally developed using funding from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) to efficiently capture data related to geotechnical boring logs, cone penetration test (CPT) soundings, and lab testing results, the data transfer protocol is rapidly gaining traction. It has been shown to have beneficial impacts in other allied areas where disparate parties (i.e., consultants, contractors, vendors, etc.) routinely publish/submit data as part of project deliverables. The historic problem is that many of these submissions use paper copies (i.e., .pdf images) to transmit valuable data for the project… data that may extend beyond the “technical” aspects of the project (e.g., equipment operating conditions, construction production rates, project costs, etc.). These data could be used by multiple parties to assess project performance and safety, as well as to track productivity, etc. Currently, in the limited situations when actual data are compiled and transmitted, the data often are submitted as an author-specific (and often proprietary) software application and must then be re-entered into other software applications (e.g., analysis software, database, etc.) for use beyond simple data collection. An initiative undertaken by the Geo-Institute (G-I) of the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) focuses on exploiting the full potential of DIGGS to geoprofessionals both within and outside of the transportation community. The deep foundations industry represents one community that could benefit significantly from using DIGGS. Data of interest to DFI members include production records, quality assurance information (e.g., verticality and alignment, concrete strength), and, importantly, load test results. When adopting DIGGS, users need not modify how they capture data, but rather will use DIGGS as a vehicle to transfer data to other applications in a standard format where it can be shared, used, stored, and retrieved. This paper and associated presentation will describe DIGGS and demonstrate how DIGGS can be used effectively within the deep foundations community.

Jan 1, 2019

By Jon Huff, Jeffrey Donville, Hannah Iezzoni, Dan Stevenson

Occasionally, in the design of deep foundations for a structure, a single deep foundation element may be used to support a building column. The most common type of element used in such cases is a drilled shaft (also referred to as a drilled pier, caisson, or bored pile). However, as installation capabilities have improved, large diameter augercast piles are increasingly more common. While drilled shafts and augercast piles differ significantly in construction methods, in the eyes of the International Building Code (IBC), both are treated as cast-in-place deep foundations and must comply with many of the same code provisions. Deep foundations are required to be braced such that lateral stability is provided in all directions, however isolated, cast-in-place elements that have a diameter (D) of at least 2-feet and a length (L) not more than 12 times the diameter can be an exception. In response to the concerns raised by some member professionals, the Deep Foundations Institute’s (DFI) Augered Cast-in-Place Pile and Drilled Displacement Pile Committee took a closer look at the code and its applications, the historical development of the code language through the years and performed analytical modeling to evaluate the impact of this ratio on a pile’s stability. The question is whether the limiting ratio included in the IBC 2018 code provisions is justified, or whether different criteria should be used to determine when isolated deep foundation members are allowed.

Sep 8, 2021

By Eric Lindquist, John Compagnone, Gabriel Carvajal

"Condon-Johnson & Associates, Inc. (CJA) with the assistance of design consultant, Brierley Associates, designed and installed a water tight shoring system utilizing several ground improvement techniques jointly. Prior to the installation of the shoring system, a test program consisting of the installation and testing of 7 jet grout columns; 1 soil mix panel; 7 soil anchors and 3 tie downs was performed to verify design assumptions. State-of-the-art quality control measures were employed throughout the project.The shoring system consisted of:•,Deep Soil Mixing (DSM) wall utilizing triple axis tooling to install overlapping columns along the perimeter of the proposed excavation to a treatment depth of 54 feet.•,Installation of steel piles in DSM to provide rigidity to the wall.•,Installation of a jet grout bottom seal, installed from surface to a depth of 58 feet below existing grade.•,Installation of 153 soil anchors, 1-1/4” diameter and 47’-6” length, to tie the jet grout bottom seal to the native soil below to resist hydrostatic uplift, installed from existing grade to a depth of 91 feet.•,Installation of walers and pipe struts for internal bracing•,Installation and stressing of 117 tie downs, 1” diameter and 16 ft length, to tie the pump station mat slab to the jet grout bottom seal, installed from inside the excavated pit.Subsurface conditions at the site consist of uncontrolled fill materials to a depth of 20 feet comprised of sandy silt and clayey sand. The native soils underlying the fill generally consist of soft and compressible lean clay and silt with varying amounts of sands to a depth ranging from approximately 44 to 54 feet below ground surface, which in turn are underlain by dense to very dense silty sand. The groundwater elevation at the site is approximately 8 feet below ground surface.This paper covers the design aspects, construction, and quality control measures undertaken by the geotechnical contractor, with supporting figures.INTRODUCTIONThe owner, County Sanitation District No. 2 of Los Angeles County, designed upgrades to their existing Long Beach Main Pumping Plant Facility. The upgrades consist of a new pump station that includes a reinforced concrete below-grade wet well and dry well, a two-story operations building, two 78-inch diameter pipe inlets, two 42-inch diameter discharge pipelines connecting the existing manifold, two pipe junction structures, two insert-type junction structures, and electrical transformers. This paper focuses on the excavation shoring for the new pump station. The original shoring design concept for the pump station excavation illustrated on the contract plans consisted of pressed in sheet piles, a jet grouted bottom seal with soil anchors, 2 levels of internal bracing, and tie-down anchors to resist hydraulic uplift forces on the buried pump station."

Jan 1, 2017

By Filippo Maria Leoni, George Filz, Wesley Schmutzler, Matteo Bertoni

"The US Army Corps of Engineers selected the Deep Mixing Method (DMM) for the required stabilization at the LPV 111 Project (New Orleans, USA). DMM was used for ground improvement/foundation strengthening and consequently to stabilize and support the burden of the new levee. Two different technologies were used: Trevi Turbo Mix (TTM) and Contrivance Innovation Cement Mixing Columns (CI-CMC). LPV 111 is the largest soil mixing project to date in the USA with its more than 18,000 elements installed to a depth of up to 67 feet for a total of 1.7 million cubic yards of treated soil. The preparation and execution of the project presented many challenges from various points of view. The little time available to complete the job led to the simultaneous utilization of eight deep mixing rigs and batch plants which worked 24 hours per day, 5.5 days per week on a stretch of land approximately 5.3 miles long. Given the imposing geographical extent of the project, a four phase laboratory programme and five field validation test programmes, conducted in as many different areas of the project, were completed to design and optimize the grout mixes and the installation parameters. The massive quality control/quality assurance testing programme produced over 500 drilled core holes and over 5,000 tested specimens in order to determine unconfined compressive strength (UCS) and uniformity of the DMM elements. This paper has the purposes of describing the tremendous challenges encountered and providing valuableinformation that may be useful for other future projects, including details not previously published.INTRODUCTIONReach LPV-111 is part of the Lake Pontchartrain and Vicinity Hurricane Protection System designed to protect the city of New Orleans and the surrounding areas from the surge that would accompany a 100 year hurricane event. LPV-111 measures approximately 8.5 km (5.3 miles) long, of which 7.2 (4.5 miles) extend along the north bank of the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway (GIWW) and the remaining 1.3 (0.8 miles) run north and terminates at the CSX Railroad Gate. The Bayou Sauvage National Wildlife Refuge borders the levee on both sides (Fig. 1)."

Jan 1, 2015

By David Guy, John Stanbury, Gilbert Tallard

"In 2009, storm surge from Hurricane Sandy inundated the Bay Park Sewage Treatment Plant located at El. +4 to +12 (+1.2 to +3.6 m) in East Rockaway, Long Island, NY. With all systems down, raw sewage water mixed in the floodwaters. A recurrence of such an event being unacceptable, and in view of rising future sea levels, a flood protection project was developed by Nassau County with funding coming in large part from the federally funded Sandy Rescue Fund. Designed by Arcadis/Hazen & Sawyer Engineers J.V., the protection took the form of a perimeter barrier capable of withstanding future storm surge. Due to limitations imposed by property lines and existing facilities, a levee design with three different types of cross section was developed to adapt to each location, adding construction complexity. The Long Island subsurface is characterized by beach sand extending to great depth. The clay required for the core and levee cover therefore had to be brought in from out of state. A thin silty clay layer at El. -23 to -25 (-7.0 to -7.6 m) served as an aquitard. The under-seepage was reduced by a hanging cut-off wall designed as a vibrated beam thin wall and filled with a salt water resistant, low permeability, self-hardening slurry.INTRODUCTIONOn October 29, 2009, Hurricane Sandy hit New York City, with a devastating effect on the region. The low lying Bay Park Sewage Treatment Plant (STP) (Fig. 1) serving Nassau County on Long Island was submerged (Fig. 2). All basements and underground mechanical facilities were flooded (Fig. 3) and millions gallons of effluent were released into the waters of the nearby Hewlett Bay which connects via other small waterways to the Atlantic Ocean."

Jan 1, 2016

By Brenton Cook, Daniel Mageau, Larry Applegate, Aaron McCain

"Ground freezing was successfully used to create an impermeable barrier wall along 3,000 feet of the downtown Seattle waterfront as part of the Seattle Seawall Replacement Project. This $360 million re-development involved removing the original 1930-era seawall and replacing it with a new, seismically resistant concrete wall supported on fill soil improved by jet-grout. The replacement wall was one of the largest construction projects in the state of Washington at the time. Ground freezing is typically used as both a structural shoring wall and groundwater cutoff. However, at this project it was used primarily as a cutoff wall to stop groundwater seepage into the 16-foot deep excavation from the landside areas.The project was divided into ten boxes (sections), each typically 200 to 600 feet in length. Only a few boxes were under construction at one time to reduce the impact on tourist-dependent local businesses. Soil conditions in the freeze zone consisted of sand, gravel and silt fill with abundant wood and debris. Tidally influenced groundwater, much of it contaminated, was difficult and expensive to control using wells during initial stages of construction. For all subsequent stages, a frozen soil wall extending to about 35 feet in depth was used to stop groundwater seepage into the excavation. An additional benefit of ground freezing included elimination of potential settlement beneath nearby buildings, utilities, and the Alaskan Way Viaduct that would likely have occurred with the use of conventional dewatering wells. The frozen soil wall crossed more than 130 buried utility locations (including water, sewer, storm, electrical, fiber optic, phone, gas, steam) with no damage. The frozen soil wall was very successful and limited groundwater influx from the landside to the seawall excavation to a negligible amount so that pumping, storage and treatment of contaminated groundwater was essentially eliminated."

Jan 1, 2016

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 Satyajit Vaidya, Rudolph Frizzi, Sandy Larimer

"This paper presents a case history in design and construction of a deep foundation system that included high-capacity open-ended driven piles constructed to support a high-rise building in Manhattan, New York. The project site is bordered by existing buildings, active streets, and critical public transportation infrastructure, which were considered in the new building’s deep foundation and seismic design. This paper focuses on driven pile foundation design and installation through relatively loose soil deposits. Unique design aspects included seismic design considerations, and pile splice design for open-ended steel pipe piles subject to significant uplift and lateral loading. Unique construction aspects included quality assurance of open-ended steel pipe pile splices, and uplift and lateral load testing of driven piles installed in close proximity to other foundation elements installed for the project.SITE CONDITIONS AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONSThe project site is located in Manhattan, New York, and is bordered by existing buildings, active streets, and critical public transportation infrastructure that is located about 60 feet from the site. The existing sidewalk grades around the site are between about el 4 and about el 13; elevations are referenced to the North American Vertical Datum 1988 (NAVD88).Subsurface conditions at the site generally consist of successive strata of historic fill, former river bottom deposits consisting of compressible clayey soils, and medium dense to dense sand, overlying mica schist bedrock. A generalized subsurface profile is shown in Fig. 1. The historic fill stratum is about 10 to 45 feet thick, and generally consists of loose to medium dense sandy soils with varying proportions of silt, gravel, and miscellaneous debris such as brick, concrete, and glass fragments. The underlying former river bottom deposit stratum is up to about 15 to 20 feet thick, and generally consists of very soft to very stiff clay and lenses of very loose to loose sand. Medium dense to dense sand was generally observed below the historic fill and former river bottom deposit strata and overlying bedrock. Top of bedrock was generally observed at about 80 to 105 feet (i.e. at about el -75 to el -100), except in the southeastern portion of the site where the top of rock was observed as deep as about 140 feet (i.e., at about el -135). Groundwater levels typically ranged between about el 1.5 and el -0.5."

Jan 1, 2016

By Maurizio Siepi, Bruno Vingiani, Claudio Asioli

"The article describes an emergency rehabilitation intervention executed at Buyo Dam, in Ivory Coast, to intercept a significant water seepage occurring through the foundation of this zoned earthfill retaining structure constructed in the late Seventies. To solve the problem, a 800 mm thick, 400 m long impervious cut-off wall (COW) was constructed on the right side of the embankment, operating from the dam crest and with the reservoir almost at its maximum level. The use of an innovative pre-mixed self-hardening grout, with a target hydraulic conductivity coefficient (k) lower than 10-9 m/s, was considered the only way to match the tight working schedule and the strict requirements for the filling material of the COW.Presentation of the Hydroelectric Scheme of BuyoThe hydroelectric scheme of Buyo, located at 6°14’28” N 7°20’45 W on the Sassandra River, in Ivory Coast (Figure 1), was built in the late Seventies for agriculture and power generation. With a reservoir of 8.3 billion m3 and an installed power capacity of 165 MW, enough to supply electricity to 111,000 homes, it represents an installation of great significance for this West African country."

Jan 1, 2016

By J. Racinais, P. Vincent

"In September 2011, Menard Oceania (MO) was engaged by Mac Mahon John Holland Joint Venture (MJHJV) to provide ground improvement solution for the $34bn Ichthys LNG development. With close to 400,000m2 of mangrove swampland set to be reclaimed and improved, this project was a great opportunity to showcase the technical, commercial and environmental benefits that Dynamic Replacement (DR) ground Improvement technique can provide. The ground improvement works involved complete design and construction for the Ichthys LNG site located at Blaydin Point on a low lying peninsula in Darwin Harbour. Dynamic replacement and stone columns technique were selected to treat intertidal mangrove mud to achieve required bearing strength, stability and limit settlement to an acceptable levels. The site is underlain by a 3m to 5m thick layer of highly organic mangrove muds with very soft shear strength ranging from 0kPa to 12kPa at depth. The site is exposed to daily sea water level tidal variations of up to 8m, which created significant constructability constraints and slope instability risks. This paper presents the design philosophy, the process involved in the selection of the construction methods, the site constraints encountered during the works and a review of the results achieved, quality control and post constructions performance.INTRODUCTIONInpex Browse, Ltd (Inpex) and its partner Total are developing the Ichthys gas field to pipe gas to onshore facilities at Blaydin Point on the south side of East Arm in Darwin Harbour. The proposed LNG plant consists of gas receiving facilities, 2 x 4.2Mtpa nominal capacity LNG trains, LPG and condensate production facilities, product storage and export facilities, a module offload facility (MOF), a flare pad (FP) and associated off plot facilities.The proposed on-shore facilities are located on extremely soft intertidal mangrove muds, therefore an appropriate ground improvement was required to achieve required strength and stability of site works and limit long term settlement to an acceptable level.Various ground improvement techniques were studied to select the most suitable for the ground conditions and site constraints encountered at the Blaydin point site. Dynamic replacement technique was selected for onshore section to improve soft mangrove mud to depths of 5.5m and Stone Columns (SC) technique was selected for MOF off-shore section to improve intertidal deposits to a depth of 2.5m.This paper presents DR design and construction works performed between December 2012 and August 2013 at Flare Pad Area."

Jan 1, 1900

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 Gisele R. Passalacqua, Taylor Malangone, Subhash Mahali

New York City is a busy metropolis with 8 million people. New York has the largest public transportation system with 6 million riders a day throughout the subway system. Keeping this infrastructure in service is vital to the overall economy of the region. Hurricane Sandy proved to have a devastating impact on infrastructure in Metropolitan New York. New York City Transit is on the forefront to provide resiliency and maintain its facilities with the use of flood protection systems. This paper presents flood protection structures utilized at Hammels Wye substation site in Far Rockaway, Queens, New York. The site is in close proximity and surrounded by water. The subsurface conditions consist of loose silts overlain by medium dense glacial sand. The high groundwater level combined with limited access to the site presented challenges. A flood protection system consisting of flood walls was recommended for this site. In certain areas the flood walls consisted of retaining walls supported on micropiles. For other areas, the flood walls consisted of steel sheet piles with jet grout columns to reduce seepage below the walls. The effect of driving sheet piles with vibratory hammers on nearby existing structures is always a concern. Recently, hydraulic hammers with variable moment/frequency are being considered as a mean to reduce vibration effects during driving. In this project, an instrumentation testing program was performed to measure peak particle velocity during sheet pile driving utilizing the variable moment vibratory hammer. Plots of peak particle velocity versus frequency were generated. This paper will present the design aspects of the flood walls and construction challenges during installation. This will prove beneficial to engineers in both design and construction fields.

Sep 8, 2021

By Ronaldo Luna, Donald Deardorff

"The use of load and resistance factor design (LRFD) is well documented since the 1960s for structural applications when it was first adopted into the American Concrete Institute Building Code in 1963 and was established for geotechnical applications by the Danish Geotechnical Institute about the same time under the name of Limit State Design (LSD).The Federal Highway Administration required all federally funded projects to use the LRFD method by 2007. Due to this funding requirement, recent LRFD research for geotechnical applications has focused on common bridge foundations (i.e., driven or drilled shafts), resulting in good documentation for design using these methods. Unfortunately, the practicing geotechnical engineer does not intuitively know how to create resistance factors for deep foundations systems that have design methodologies and installation techniques significantly different from driven or drilled shaft foundation systems.Helical anchors typically use semiempirical methods for preliminary capacity design and a torque correlation methodology during installation to verify required capacity. Here we provide basic information on the LRFD methodology for helical anchor design. Additionally, the First- Order Second Moment (FOSM) method is applied to a previous helical anchor study (Hoyt and Clemence 1989) to determine resistance factors for an ultimate tension capacity strength limit state.MethodologyThe concept of the LRFD method is to establish factors for both the load and resistance that account for uncertainties using probability theory. The factors increase the nominal load and/or decrease the nominal resistance such that the probability of failure is an acceptable value. LRFD also accounts for the effects of load combinations (dead, live, seismic, wind, etc.) by determining the probability of the combined occurrence. The general form of the LRFD equation used by American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) is:"

Jan 1, 2009

By Balasubramani M., Ramana P. V., Bairagi K.

This paper is a case study of an earthen Cofferdam, constructed for a deep excavation at Intake location in river Aaundha, Maharashtra, India. A 12 m (39 ft) deep excavation was made to construct the Intake well. The natural soil profile at this location is clay followed by rock. An earthen Cofferdam of maximum height 7 m (23 ft) was made around the periphery of the excavation. Cofferdam embankment and excavation slopes were analyzed using the finite element software PLAXIS-2D. Clayey sand was proposed as filling material during design, but clayey soil was used for the embankment formation during execution. The embankment was built up to 5m height in July 2017 and completely submerged due to monsoon. In February 2018 embankment height raised to 7m (23 ft) by filling the soil over the existing submerged embankment. After a few days of completion of the Cofferdam construction, the inside slope of the embankment had started sliding due to continuous dewatering. The design and execution of deep excavation with earthen Cofferdam for waterfront structures are challenging. The selection of filling material for embankment formation and dewatering techniques plays a vital role in the safety and stability of the embankments. Although all the safety measures were taken during the design, execution challenges are unpredictable.

Nov 1, 2022

By Hugo Meggitt, Damian R. Siebert, Wystan Carswell

Excavation-induced ground movements are a critical component in the design and construction of deep excavations in urban settings due to the potential adverse effects on adjacent structures and infrastructure. Ground movements are influenced by soil stratigraphy, soil properties, adjacent structures, and construction means and methods. The use of empirical relationships, computer models, and reliance on experience with similar excavations in similar soil conditions often provides a basis for predicting excavation-induced ground movements. In this paper, data from 21 deep excavations approximately 20 ft to 75 ft deep supported by concrete diaphragm “slurry” walls in the Greater Boston area are compared to published literature, considering how different foundation systems (e.g. shallow foundations, caissons, and piles) of abutting structures have been affected by adjacent excavations. The influence of construction method (conventional vs. top-down) on adjacent foundation movements indicate that top-down construction typically results in smaller foundation movements. INTRODUCTION Estimation of ground movements due to excavation is a challenging endeavor, even with complex three- dimensional finite element modeling and high-order constitutive models that are increasingly available in modern engineering practice. Aside from the expense of the soil exploration and testing used to inform these higher-order models, the challenges of modeling past stress history, adjacent structures, and the groundwater conditions during excavation require not only large investments of time during design but also validation from past experience (to avoid a “garbage in, garbage out” paradigm). While site conditions such as soil stratigraphy, soil properties, groundwater conditions, and as-built conditions of adjacent structures can be obtained, measured, and estimated, the effects that means and methods of construction have on ground movements are difficult to quantify. During early phase design, assessments of predicted ground movement are unable to account for all aspects of project construction, nor is it cost-efficient to fully design an excavation while project parameters such as site size and excavation depth are under consideration by the design team. While construction is in progress, benchmarking support of excavation performance and associated ground movements in the context of successfully completed projects allows for a more nuanced view of system performance and provides the opportunity for more informed decision-making (if required) as construction proceeds. For these reasons, the use of empirical relationships and the collection of historical support of excavation performance holds high value for the practicing geotechnical engineer at all phases of the project.

Jan 1, 2019