Search Documents

By Donald Deardorff

"Helical piles often rely on the final installation torque for ultimate capacity verification. When helical piles are designed using traditional bearing capacity equations for deep foundations and field monitored for a specified final installation torque, a factor of safety equal to 2 is often allowed for the design. One of the more common methods of determining torque during helical pile installation is by correlating the differential pressure across a hydraulic gear motor to a torque. Most drive head manufacturers provide multipliers to convert differential pressure to torque for different drive head models. These multipliers are based on theoretical torque equations and vary with the planetary gear ratio, hydraulic gear motor displacement and drive head efficiency. Drive head manufacturers show a linear fit between the differential pressure and output torque with no scaling effect. Previous drive head testing performed by the author has confirmed that the drive head differential pressure to torque relationship is generally linear however there is a scaling adjustment needed. This results in a variation of multipliers across the differential pressure range for a given drive head.Eight hydraulic drive heads from three manufacturers were field tested by Foundation Supportworks, Inc. to compare the torque versus differential pressure curves with varying installation equipment, hydraulic line sizes and hydraulic flow rates. Differential pressure was monitored using three methods including pressure gages, PT-Tracker and an Ashcroft AT-100. Flow and temperature was measured using a Webtech system analyzer. Torque was measured using a Pro-Dig in-line torque transducer, a TruTorque indicator and a Chance Mechanical Dial in-line torque indicator. The current testing indicates that a change in installation equipment and/or a change in hydraulic flow rate may affect the torque versus differential pressure curve of a given drive head. The results of this testing also show that some of the methods for determining torque during helical pile installations may be unconservative, thereby resulting in safety factors less than required."

Jan 1, 2017

By Donald Deardorff

Helical piles often rely on the final installation torque for ultimate capacity verification. When helical piles are designed using traditional bearing capacity equations for deep foundations and field monitored for a specified final installation torque, a factor of safety equal to 2 is often allowed for the design. One of the more common methods of determining torque during helical pile installation is by correlating the differential pressure across a hydraulic gear motor to a torque. Most drive head manufacturers provide multipliers to convert differential pressure to torque for different drive head models. These multipliers are based on theoretical torque equations and vary with the planetary gear ratio, hydraulic gear motor displacement and drive head efficiency. Drive head manufacturers show a linear fit between the differential pressure and output torque with no scaling effect. Previous drive head testing performed by the author has confirmed that the drive head differential pressure to torque relationship is generally linear however there is a scaling adjustment needed. This results in a variation of multipliers across the differential pressure range for a given drive head. Eight hydraulic drive heads from three manufacturers were field tested by Foundation Supportworks, Inc. to compare the torque versus differential pressure curves with varying installation equipment, hydraulic line sizes and hydraulic flow rates. Differential pressure was monitored using three methods including pressure gages, PT-Tracker and an Ashcroft AT-100. Flow and temperature was measured using a Webtech system analyzer. Torque was measured using a Pro-Dig in-line torque transducer, a TruTorque indicator and a Chance Mechanical Dial in-line torque indicator. The current testing indicates that a change in installation equipment and/or a change in hydraulic flow rate may affect the torque versus differential pressure curve of a given drive head. The results of this testing also show that some of the methods for determining torque during helical pile installations may be unconservative, thereby resulting in safety factors less than required.

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

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

Jan 1, 2017

By Mohamed A. Mansour, Ahmed M. Soliman, M. H. El-Naggar

"Grouted helical piles allow significant increase in pile capacity with low additional cost over that of conventional helical piles. They can be particularly advantageous in sites where installation disturbance can reduce or even eliminate the pile shaft resistance. For helical piles with slender shafts, a grout column offers increased buckling resistance under compression loading, and may reduce the potential settlement required to mobilize the bearing component of their plates. This paper investigates the performance of grouted helical piles installed in loose sand. Grouted helical piles were constructed and tested in a controlled laboratory environment. Helical piles with hollow pipe shaft and single helix were grouted during installation. The grout was injected into the soil under high pressure through two nozzles placed above the piles helices. The load test results showed significant improvement in the performance and load carrying capacity of the helical pile due to the formation of a cylindrical grout column along the entire shaft leading to a higher shaft resistance contribution to the total pile capacity. The results suggest that grouted helical piles with slender hollow shaft could be used to support large structural loads. INTRODUCTIONHelical piles are widely used as a deep foundation system for different engineering applications. They represent an attractive foundation option because of their cost effectiveness, ease of installation even in limited access areas, low levels of noise and vibrations, and their ability to be installed through ground water without casing. In addition, they allow immediate loading upon installation. Helical piles are installed into the ground by applying a mechanical torque to the pile head. The installation torque monitoring provides a kind of quality control during the construction of helical piles. It could be used in predicting the ultimate pile capacity using several capacity-torque correlations (Livneh and Elnaggar 2008; and Hoyt and Clemence 1989).However, helical piles installation can cause soil disturbance within the annular zone affected by the pile helices. This disturbance can introduce fissures within the pile cylindrical failure surface (Vesic 1971; Mooney el al. 1985; and Zhang 1999). Thus, the shear strength of the soil decreases along the affected zone. Bagheri and El Naggar (2013) evaluated the installation effects of helical piles in sand. They reported that as the helical blade proceeds into the ground, sand within the cylindrical path circumscribed by the helices experiences torsional and vertical shearing accompanied by sand displacement and stress changes. This process is more pronounced in the case of multi-helices and large diameter anchors. Bagheri and El Naggar (2016) evaluated the installation effects of helical piles in structured clay. They indicated that the behavior of the helical pile and its capacity are significantly affected by the degree of soil de-structuring induced by the penetration of the pile shaft and helices. In addition to the installation disturbance, helical piles have other drawbacks including; high potential settlement required to fully mobilize the bearing component of their plates, low buckling resistance of their slender shafts, and the incomplete rigidity of the coupling joints along the pile shaft that allow some lateral movement under compression loading (Vickars and Clemence 2000)."

Jan 1, 2016

By Gerald Verbeek, Erick Baziw

Stone columns are used in geotechnical site remediation to increase load-bearing capacity and reduce settlement of foundations. Stone columns also improve slope stability and increase the shear strength of a soil. A very challenging problem is to characterize the in-situ shear wave velocities from data acquired from Downhole Seismic Testing (DST) after the insertion of stone columns. DST is an important geotechnical testing tool for site characterization that provides low strain (<10-5) in-situ interval compression and shear wave velocity estimates, but the postanalysis of seismic data acquired from DST in the presence of stone columns is very challenging due to the resulting complicated in-situ soil conditions. To obtain the right results it is necessary to use an algorithm that incorporates source wave raypath refraction. Starting with the Normal Moveout Seismic Cone Tomographic Testing (NMO-SCTT) algorithm developed some years ago, this paper outlines the modifications and additions made to this NMO-SCTT algorithm to facilitate stone column site characterization. To dramatically reduce the optimal solution space for the estimated interval velocities the paper also described a priori conditions that are applied based on the unique nature of the stone column site conditions.

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

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

By Vijaya Bhushan Rao, Jason Redgers

A mixed-use development comprising of multistoried residential towers, retail and associated infrastructure covering an area of 500,000 m2 is under construction in Dubai. The subsoil conditions consist of calcareous sands with high carbonate and shell content with hard and competent strata encountered at varying depths. To achieve the design requirements of soil stiffness, friction angle, limit differential and total settlements and mitigate the liquefaction due to a seismic event then ground improvement were deemed necessary. In order to provide the most time and cost efficient solution numerous techniques were applied to meet the requirements for all depths such as Vibrocompaction, VC (depth >8m), Dynamic Compaction, DC (depth < 8m)] and Rapid Impact Compaction, RIC (depth <4m). The specified ground improvement requirements were translated into a target Cone Penetration Test, CPT line that served as the defacto performance requirements for the project. Suitable correction factors were applied to the CPT results to account for the high carbonate content following the works of Al-Homoud and Wehr 2006, Belotti and Jamiolkowski , 1991 and Vesic, 1965. Furthermore, the alpha factor, α, used to obtain stiffness from CPT results was applied following A.C. Meigh 1987 and Massarsch & Fellenius, 2005 where high over consolidation ratios (OCR) could be demonstrated.

Sep 8, 2021

By Vijaya Bhushan Rao, Jason Redgers

A mixed-use development comprising of multistoried residential towers, retail and associated infrastructure covering an area of 500,000 m2 is under construction in Dubai. The subsoil conditions consist of calcareous sands with high carbonate and shell content with hard and competent strata encountered at varying depths. To achieve the design requirements of soil stiffness, friction angle, limit differential and total settlements and mitigate the liquefaction due to a seismic event then ground improvement were deemed necessary. In order to provide the most time and cost efficient solution numerous techniques were applied to meet the requirements for all depths such as Vibrocompaction, VC (depth >8m), Dynamic Compaction, DC (depth < 8m)] and Rapid Impact Compaction, RIC (depth <4m). The specified ground improvement requirements were translated into a target Cone Penetration Test, CPT line that served as the defacto performance requirements for the project. Suitable correction factors were applied to the CPT results to account for the high carbonate content following the works of Al-Homoud and Wehr 2006, Belotti and Jamiolkowski , 1991 and Vesic, 1965. Furthermore, the alpha factor, α, used to obtain stiffness from CPT results was applied following A.C. Meigh 1987 and Massarsch & Fellenius, 2005 where high over consolidation ratios (OCR) could be demonstrated.

Sep 8, 2021

By Paul M. C. B. M. Cools, Martin Th. van Staveren

In 2010, the 5-years joint industry programme Geo-Impuls started in the Netherlands. The ambitious goal of this programme is to reduce geotechnical failures in our civil engineering projects by half in 2015. In the Geo-Impuls programme over 40 client organizations, engineering firms, contractors, research institutes, and universities are involved. In a risk-driven way, and based on top risks and dilemmas, the participants defined three central development themes. These themes are (1) contracts, for dealing with legal issues, (2) geo-engineering, for dealing with technical issues, and (3) communication, for paying attention to differences in risk perception by the human factor. In total 12 Working Groups contribute to these themes by producing one or more specific tools. These provide practical solutions for how to deal with contractual, geotechnical, and communication issues. The tools include working processes, guidelines, best practices, as well as some instruments. The development of these tools, as well as the available results, will be presented in this paper. From the start, Geo-Impuls embraced geotechnical risk management (GeoRM) as the risk-driven way of working for geotechnical engineering and construction. Over the past years, GeoRM and its supporting tools were already successfully applied in several projects. Therefore, the paper also describes also the GeoRM implementation process, including the quality assurance and control. Finally, the effectiveness of GeoRM will be discussed, by summarizing an analysis of all published geotechnical failures and accidents in construction projects in the Netherlands, which decreased substantially over the past 4 years.

Jan 1, 2017

By A. C. Galvis-Castro, R. Salgado, M. Prezzi, E. Ganju, R. D. Tovar-Valencia

It is generally accepted that the unit shaft resistance of piles in sands is lower for tensile loading than for compressive loading. So far, very little attention has been paid to the influence of the installation method on the tensile-to-compressive unit shaft resistance ratio. The objective of this paper is to analyze the effect of installation method on the ratio of unit shaft resistance in tension to that in compression for a model pile installed in a dense silica sand. To study installation effects, load tests on model piles were carried out in a half-cylindrical calibration chamber with digital image correlation (DIC) capability. The model piles were either jacked in one stroke using a constant rate of advance, or pre-installed into the dense sand samples. Digital images of the model pile and sand were taken during the load test and processed using DIC to obtain the displacement field in the sand. It was found that unit shaft resistance was essentially the same in tension and compression for the pre-installed pile, however for the jacked pile, the unit shaft resistance in tension was approximately half of that in compression. DIC analysis revealed that: (1) during the load test, more displacement occurs in the soil domain for the pre-installed pile compared to the jacked pile, (2) for the jacked pile, the magnitude of displacement in the soil domain is greater in tension than in compression and (3) for the pre-installed pile, the magnitudes of displacement in tension and compression are similar. INTRODUCTION Pile foundations can be categorized into two main types depending on the method of installation: displacement piles (e.g., jacked or driven piles) and non-displacement piles (e.g., bored piles or drilled shafts) (Basu et al. 2010; Salgado 2008). The response of these piles to loading can be studied in the laboratory by means of calibration chamber experiments on model piles that are either jacked into the samples, representing displacement piles (Jardine et al. 2005; Lee et al. 2011; Tovar-Valencia et al. 2018), or pre-installed in the sand sample, representing non-displacement piles(Galvis-Castro et al. 2019a; Le Kouby et al. 2013; Tehrani et al. 2016)

Jan 1, 2019

By James P. Hambleton, Anastasia Nally

This work focuses on the numerical simulation of multi-plate anchor systems (e.g., helical anchors) in sand subjected to vertical loading. In assessing the stiffness and capacity of these multi-plate anchor systems, full awareness of the abilities and limitations of the various analysis methods must be understood. This work first summarizes studies completed by others and then goes on to assess the failure mechanisms of multi-plate anchors in sand and the influence of (1) plate width-to-depth ratio, (2) number of plates, and (3) relative positioning of plates. The analysis makes use of (1) conventional limit analysis, (2) so-called modified limit analysis that employs reduced strength parameters to account for the influence of soil dilatancy, and (3) the displacement-based finite element method, which considers elastic as well as plastic deformation leading to failure. The work critically reflects on limitations in the current analysis methods for helical ground anchors. INTRODUCTION Helical anchors are a relatively low cost foundation type, typically consisting of a steel rod and single or multiple plate attachments. In recent decades, they have seen rapid growth, and as outlined by Merifield and Sloan (2006) and Hambleton et al. (2014). Design techniques for helical anchors have previously been predominately empirical, as much of the past research in this field is experimentally based. It is common practice for helical anchors to be modeled as horizontally oriented plate anchors in both numerical and experimental analysis. This work focuses on analysis based on the finite element method, including so-called finite element limit analysis and the conventional displacement-based finite element method, with some comparisons made to experimental studies. Numerical simulation of anchor pull-out capacity in cohesionless soils is stunted by the many difficulties faced when using numerical analysis with cohesionless soils. Additional variations can be seen when comparing the serviceability based load capacities to the ultimate load. In this work, both the force-displacement response (stiffness) and the ultimate anchor capacity are assessed, with more focus on the latter. This work focuses only on analysis techniques for multi-plate anchors with vertical loading in cohesionless soils. Many studies have been completed in this area, some of which assume a rectangular plate in a plain strain model (Rowe & Davis, 1982; Merifield & Sloan, 2006; Cerfontaine et al., 2019). Whereas others use axisymmetric conditions (Baker and Kondner, 1966; Saeedy, 1987; Murray & Geddes, 1987; Ghaly & Hanna, 1994; Sakai & Tanaka, 1998; Merifield et al., 2006;) and minimal studies considered both axisymmetric and plane strain in the one study (Vesic, 1971; Tagaya et al., 1988; Murray & Geddes, 1987; Sarac, 1989).

Jan 1, 2019

By Rouzbeh Vakili, Adel M. Hanna

"The application of piled raft foundations has significantly increased during the last few years. In this system, the raft and the pile group collectively transfer the applied building load to the underlying soil layers. Determination of load sharing between the raft and the piles derives the complexity of piled raft designs due to its multi-parameter nature. These parameters are but not limited to: soil density, pile length, pile spacing, raft geometry, and piles installation technique. This study is to examine experimentally the effect of sand density and pile installation techniques on the load sharing mechanism. Experimentally, tests were conducted on a square rigid raft with a single pile in sand under three different soil densities; 30%, 45%, and 60%. The experimental results are used to determine the pile and the raft shares in non-displacement and displacement piled raft systems. The results of this study reveal that soil density changes the load sharing of displacement piled raft; the pile share increases in higher soil density. However, this is not the case in non-displacement piled raft and load sharing is independent of soil density in working loads.IntroductionThe piled raft foundation is a combination of shallow and deep foundation which transfers the superstructure load to the soil by a complex soilstructure interaction. The interacting mechanism among foundation elements and their surrounding soil is illustrated schematically in Figure 1 and could be classified into two categories: (1) pile-soil-pile and (2) pile-soil-raft. The pile-soil-pile interaction is the same as the free standing pile group and is a function of pile spacing and pile installation method. Pile-soil-raft interaction, which only involves in piled raft foundation design, could be affected by: the length, spacing, and roughness of the pile, the rigidity and dimension of the cap, soil condition, and the pile installation method. Pile-soil-raft interaction could have favourable and unfavourable effects on bearing capacity and settlement, respectively. The pressure between the cap and the soil favourably increases the horizontal stress on the pile shaft and consequently increase the shaft resistance. Whereas, this pressure induces negative skin friction on the piles which increases the settlement. The pile-soil-raft interaction mainly controls the load sharing mechanism of piled raft foundation when pile spacing (S) is more than 3.5dp."

Jan 1, 2017

By Abdelmalek Bouazza, Aamir Mahawish, Will P. Gates

Bio-grouting by means of microbial induced calcite (calcium carbonate) precipitation (MICP) to improve mechanical properties of granular soils has gained much attention in recent years. The biogrouting process offers an alternative and environmentally friendly approach to conventional soil improvement techniques, such as cement. Bio-grouting by urea hydrolysis has been extensively applied to tackle various geotechnical problems. However, it has yet to be applied to improve engineering properties (compressive strength) of a coarse cohesionless material with the aim using it as sand/stone columns within soft and very soft soils. This paper investigates the effect of using light, moderate and heavy biochemical treatments on the unconfined compressive strength (UCS) of coarse sand columns. In addition, the microstructure of the bio-cemented coarse material has been analysed by X-ray computed tomography (XRCT). The experimental results revealed that the UCS could reach up to 200kPa, 1000kPa and 5500kPa for light, moderate and heavy bio-cemented coarse sand columns, respectively. The microstructure investigations showed that the deposited calcium carbonate can be identified using XRCT imaging and can be associated with the gain in UCS values. Various microstructure properties, such as void ratio, dry density and porosity were also identified and compared with the laboratory data.

Jan 1, 1900

By Richard E. Sylwester

Evaluating surface and subsurface conditions for marine foundations (bridges, causeways, terminals, etc.) is often done with a limited amount of data. Subsurface information for these projects is primarily acquired using traditional methods, such as boreholes, test pits or divers, which tend to be expensive and limited in the area of coverage. A number of geophysical methods, including precision bathymetry, sidescan sonar, and seismic reflection or subbottom profiling are extremely cost-effective and obtain significantly more data than can be acquired using traditional intrusive methods. These geophysical methods provide detailed surface images and continuous profiles of the subsurface stratigraphy. This information can be invaluable for selecting the best location for geotechnical boreholes and to map potential geohazards such as submarine slides and filled or open scour holes. Offshore investigations conducted for a proposed highway bridge (Knik Arm Bridge, Cook Inlet, AK), the retrofit of two existing bridge (Antioch and Dumbarton Bridges, CA) and a proposed cruise ship terminal (Ketchikan, AK) used a combination of geophysical methods to map water depth, detect and map debris on the seabed, map the thickness of unconsolidated sediment, determine the depth to bedrock and identify potential geohazards such as scour holes. The results of the geophysical investigations will be used to select locations for obtaining geotechnical borings, to extrapolate geologic information between existing or proposed boreholes, evaluate the potential depth of scour and design a pile support pier. Geotechnical engineers, offshore contractors and bridge designers are realizing the importance of the early use of offshore geophysics for (i) site characterization, (ii) to reduce the uncertainty of geotechnical conditions thus avoiding designs that may be overly conservative and thus more expensive and (iii) to assist in selecting locations for geotechnical borings.

May 11, 2007

By Joseph T. Coe, Siavash Mahvelati, Philip Asabere

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

Jan 1, 2016

By Toshio Yonezawa, Helmut Florian, Herbert Kuh, Masamichi Aoki, Takao Koono, Franz-Werner Gerressen

"To increase the bearing capacity of the ground, soil improvement technique is often adopted. One advantage of soil improvement techniques is the fact, that the impact to the environment is low, as the system utilizes the existing soil. Recently, compressive strength of soil improvement gets more into the focus for the use of building foundation. To prevent brittle fracture, which is a weak point of soil improvement, fiber reinforced soil improvement has been developed. Laboratory tests were conducted to examine the fibers suitable for reinforced soil improvement, and examine the optimum mix design for fiber cement slurry. Based on the laboratory tests, polypropylene fiber and cellulosic viscosity admixture was selected. For the laboratory tests a scaled model of CSM mixing head was used to examine the dispersion of the fibers in the ground. Using the CSM mixing head, the outer periphery fibers of soil improvement seemed to be arranged in the vertical direction, toughness performance of the soil improvement could be improved. Furthermore, full scale field test was performed using actual CSM unit, modified to enable the use of fiber mixed slurry. The validity of the material as well as the toughness performance of the soil improvement, determined from lab test results, was confirmed. In addition, it was confirmed that fiber reinforced soil improvement can be constructed appropriately by CSM method.2 INTRODUCTIONSoil improvement technique to improve the strength and deformation performance of ground has been used for a long time. Cement improved methods, with the increase of the deep Mixing Method, which has been disseminated since the 1970's, was often used since. Cement used soil improvement technology has been utilized to stabilize excavations, slopes in embankment and much more. Recently, it can be used for preventing liquefaction by building soil improvement in a grid (Suzuki et al. (1996)), and also as basis of the structure by increasing the compression strength of soil improvement (Yamashita et al. (2011)). Cement used soil improvement method, a technique for mixing the in-site soil and cement, can effectively utilize natural resources, and it can be expected that its use will increase further in the future. Therefore, soil improvement technique will be able to minimize the impact on the environment. Cement improved soil is a mixture of soil particles and cement with high compressive strength but low tensile strength. Since tensile strength of soil improvement is low, brittle destruction occurs. Therefore, it is not possible to use soil improvement in conditions acting with bending stress. If a horizontal impact force occurs in the improved soil, the width of the soil improvement needs to be increased to reduce the bending stress. If preventing the brittle fracture of soil improvement, the width of soil improvement could be reduced, then less resources would be needed. In order to increase the tensile strength of the soil improvement, several studies for the mix of fiber and soil were performed. Victor (1992) indicates cracking deterrent effect by fiber based on laboratory tests. Moreover, based on laboratory tests, Hayasaki (1982) illustrated the effect on the tensile strength of the fiber types, the type of fiber, the diameter of and the length of fiber."

Jan 1, 2015

With respect to liability damages, claims and costs thereof relating to or ansmg out of contamination, special or non-special wastes, hazardous wastes or pollution in connection with the performance of this subcontract: It is understood that the subcontractor&apos;s work and responsibility wholly exclude any requirement to handle such contaminants or to otherwise be responsible for such contaminants, and Subcontractor shall not be nor be considered to be a generator of such contaminants. Contractor shall indemnify, defend and save harmless Subcontractor and its sureties, from and against all liability, damages, claims and costs relating to or arising out of contamination, special or non-special wastes, hazardous wastes

By Gust Van Lysebetten, Monika de Vos

The objectives of monitoring geotechnical structures can be very diverse, including optimisation of the design, quality control, long term performance assessment, and approval of innovative execution techniques. In this context, new measurement techniques, based on optical fibres, offer the possibility of accurate strain and temperature monitoring with very small sensors and limited numbers of cables. This paper briefly presents optical fibre sensing techniques and illustrates their application to geotechnical structures by means of some projects, carried out by the Belgian Building Research Institute (BBRI).

May 1, 2022

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

"The Goethals Bridge Replacement (GBR) spanning the Arthur Kill Waterway between Elizabeth, NJ and Staten Island, NY consists of a dual-span 1,982.5-ft long cable-stayed bridge with approach spans of 2,545 ft on the NJ side and 2,788 ft on the NY side. The bridge is supported on over 200 drilled shaft foundations ranging in diameter from 4.5 ft to 10 ft and socketed into Passaic Formation siltstone. Drilled shaft resistances for design were based on load tests as described in a companion paper (Dapp et al. 2016). This paper presents the main foundation design considerations and challenges. The approach to construction of the rock sockets, with a focus on quality in order to support the use of high nominal values of side and base resistance, is described. Lessons learned from this project and their application to future similar projects are presented.INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUNDThe Goethals Bridge Replacement (GBR) project is a Public-Private Partnership (P3) that represents a major milestone for the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (PANYNJ) in its distinguished history of bridge building in the greater New York City metropolitan area. The new bridge will replace the existing Goethals Bridge, named after Major General George W. Goethals, Chief Engineer of the Panama Canal and the first consulting engineer for the Port Authority. The existing Goethals Bridge along with the Outerbridge Crossing and the Bayonne Bridge comprise the three Port Authority bridges connecting Staten Island with New Jersey. The existing Goethals Bridge and the Outerbridge Crossing are cantilever truss structures and both opened on the same day in 1928. They were designed by J.A.L. Waddell under the supervision of the eminent engineer Othmar H. Ammann (1879-1965), who was the designer of many other iconic bridges in the NY City area including the Bayonne Bridge (1931), the George Washington Bridge (1931), and the Verrazano Narrows Bridge (1964). The designer of record for the replacement Goethals Bridge is Parsons Corporation, which is the successor firm of Robinson & Steinman, whose principal David B. Steinman was also a notable NY area bridge designer and a contemporary and rival of O.H. Ammann.The replacement Goethals Bridge is supported on over 200 rock-socketed drilled shaft foundations. Each main pylon tower is supported on a group of six 9-ft diameter drilled shafts and each anchor pier is supported by two 10-ft diameter shafts. Each approach pier consists of a two-column bent with each column supported on a rock-socketed drilled shaft. A rendering of the Main Bridge crossing the Arthur Kill is shown in Fig. 1."

Jan 1, 2016

By W. G. K. Fleming

The codification of foundation design and construction is a subject of extensive discussion in Europe and all current code proposals are based on limit state partial factoring. For simplicity, it is claimed, simplified forms of Partial Factor use are presently being advocated but, if this is the direction which codes are to follow, then it is preferable in this age of computer technology that a true system should be adopted rather than a simplification. A philosophically satisfactory method can readily be found which can fulfilcurrent requirements and it is better that such a method should be adopted from the beginning rather than later to find it necessary to make important alterations and amendments.

Jan 1, 1996