Search Documents

By S. K. V. Avasarala

This paper presents a case history of design, prediction, probe and production pile driving monitoring, loading tests and installation of over 3,300 prestressed concrete piles for a building complex consisting of 12, 5- and 6-story over parking buildings. The project was recently completed in three-phases over a span of 4 years. The subsoil conditions were explored by performing 25, Standard Penetration Test (SPT) borings throughout the site. Various types of driven pile foundations were considered and following an evaluation of high structural loads and site-specific constraints such as variable depth of bearing layer of Florida limestone and quality of clay and limestone layers, a prestressed concrete pile support system was selected as the most economical and effective foundation approach. The building foundations were designed for a pile capacity of 353 kN (40 tons) in compression, 45 kN (5 tons) in lateral capacity for a deflection of 0.64 cm (0.25 in.), and 133 kN (15 tons) in uplift capacity. The axial and lateral allowable pile capacity and lengths were predicted using SPT91 and LPILE computer programs, which are generally used in Florida. The validation of these capacities was derived from 144 probe piles and performance of 12 pile loading tests on selected probe piles. Prior to installation of probe or production piles, a termination criterion was established using 1-dimensional wave equation analyses in addition to the design pile embedment requirement. The predicted pile capacities compared very well with the capacities from the loading tests on probe piles. This information was effectively utilized as part of the overall quality control program to install a total of 4,186 prestressed concrete piles (including 144 probe piles) in different building areas across the project site to depths ranging from 8 to 21 m (25 to 90 ft) below existing ground elevation as part of foundation support system. This engineered, monitored, and tested foundation solution provided an effective and satisfactory basis for completion and approval of the foundation work for this 12, 5- and 6-story over parking building complex. A recent reconnaissance has indicated that all the building foundations are performing satisfactorily.

Jan 1, 1995

By Roger A. Bullivant

As the UK's foremost domestic foundation underpinning contractor over the last 25 years it has become abundantly clear that the size of the repair market, some £500m per annum is a significant waste of resource and cost. To experience this scale of foundation failure in mainly new construction less than 20 years old is unacceptable. This is being further endorsed by our contracting experience in the USA over the last 10 years. Our foundation repair systems are mainly based upon the use of driven mini piles and it was considered appropriate that this type of pile should be upgraded and used on new build construction where the ground was marginal or bad.

Jan 1, 1995

By K. Rainer Massarsch

In some parts of the world, vibrators are used extensively for different types of foundation engineering projects. If used correctly and in suitable soils then vibratory pile driving for example is very efficient. However, soil conditions and the installation procedure have great significance for the driving resistance and affect the bearing capacity of vibrated piles. Also the intensity of ground vibrations which are transmitted to the surrounding soil is affected by the vibration process. In spite of the increasing use of vibrators and the rapid development of vibrator technology, many aspects of pile-soil interaction are not yet understood. In order to asses the importance of factors, which govern pile installation (and extraction), it is necessary to consider the entire chain of vibration energy transmission from the vibration source to the pile, the interaction between the vibrating pile and the soil and the wave propagation in the subsoil, Fig. 1. [ ] Fig. 1. Transfer of vibration energy from the vibrator through the pile into the ground In the present paper, some important aspects of vibratory driving and their significance for pile installation and soil compaction will be discussed.

Jan 1, 1995

By George G. Goble

In the middle of the nineteenth century, the dynamic formula appeared as a description of pile penetration during impact driving. The simplicity of use of the formula combined with the power of the energy concepts behind the formula caused it to be quickly accepted and integrated into practice. Dynamic formula had been in use for 100 years when the Wave Equation computer programs first appeared. With that long experience it is not surprising that the formula continued to be used and were only slowly abandoned. The Wave Equation offers many advantages over the various formula but it does not offer a clear sense of physical understanding of pile driving that is available with the formula. Large amounts of numbers are generated but often it is difficult or impossible to gain a physical understanding of the results or a feeling for the importance of the various parameters. The question that the Wave Equation user has is, "What will happen if I use a larger drive cap (or change any other item of equipment)?" In this paper, I will attempt to explain pile driving using elementary wave propagation theory. However, the presentation will not depend on any higher mathematics. With the use of wave mechanics, it is possible to explain driving characteristics that cannot be handled with the energy formula.

Jan 1, 1995

By Boleslaw A. Klosinski

Drilling of a pier hole is accompanied with stress releasing in the surrounding soil and often with loosening of soil at the pier base. In effect the drilled piers are more deformable than driven piles of comparable dimension. The bearing performance of a pier may be considerably improved by properly executed base grouting. Various techniques of base grouting are used; many of them were described by Bruce (1986). The grouting devices are often placed within the pier. Alternatively the soil at or under the base is treated by cement or chemical grout. Preloading of the base subsoil by use of a special grouting cell is considered as the most effective way. Treatment of the ground below pier base with cement or chemical grout may be also useful. It may be performed immediately after the pier construction or during service, as a measure for increasing the pier capacity.

Jan 1, 1995

By Darrell L. Beddard

The Loma Prieta earthquake occurred on October 17, 1989 at 5:04 PM, Pacific Daylight Time. It measured 7.1 in magnitude and was felt from Los Angeles north to the Oregon state line and east to western Nevada. The epicenter of the earthquake was located along the San Andreas Fault, in the Southern Santa Cruz Mountains just north of the City of Watsonville, California. It was the largest earthquake to occur in the San Francisco Bay area since the 1906 earthquake. A total of 87 aftershocks of Magnitude 3.0 or larger were recorded within 21 days after the seismic event. As a result of this earthquake thirteen State-owned and five locally-owned bridges were closed to traffic. Three of the most publicized State-owned structures closed to traffic were Struve Slough Bridge, San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge and Cypress Street Viaduct. Struve Slough Bridge was twin slab bridges that collapsed and were rebuilt and open to traffic three months after the earthquake. San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge experienced collapse of upper and lower spans at Pier 9 and was reopened to traffic one month after the earthquake. The Cypress Street Viaduct experienced collapse of 48 bents that resulted in the upper roadway falling onto the lower roadway.

Jan 1, 1995

By Juan M. Antorena

A pile driving and testing program was undertaken to evaluate installation procedures, assess capacity, particularly in uplift, of 360- and 460-mm (14- and 18-inch) square prestressed concrete piles and provide foundation design parameters for the New Mid-Point Bridge project in Fort Myers, Florida. Nine piles were dynamically monitored during installation, and six piles were monitored during restrike driving to evaluate pile drivability and uplift and bearing capacity including time related capacity increases due to soil "set-up". In addition, two static load tests (tension and compression) were performed to calibrated the results obtain during the dynamic testing. This paper presents descriptions of the pile driving testing program along with findings regarding pile uplift and compression capacities from the static load testing, pile capacities from dynamic testing (CAPWAP® analyses), soil-pile adhesion values, wave equation factors, soil strength vs. time dependency, foundation design (anticipated pile tip elevation) and pile driving recommendations.

Jan 1, 1995

By Roger A. Bullivant

The introduction of this size and type of piling rig is intended to address a multipurpose foundation activity. The 8000 denotes the size of equipment that is attached to the mast, namely 8000 Kg. Larger equipment can be carried subject to adjustment of rig geometry. The 8000 series rig will easily accept hydraulic piling hammers and CFA equipment, but for the purpose of this discussion it will be equipped with an auxiliary power pack that is matched to twin vibrators. The design of the siamesed vibrators allows long tube equipment or piles to be driven with a short mast configuration that provides a lower overturning risk. It is easily adapted within minutes to carry out other foundation requirements that are required on the same contract. The piling and ground consolidation activities that can be undertaken by the 800 series machine are:-

Jan 1, 1995

By Robert A. Field

Static-Load Piledriving systems utilize hydraulic push to advance piles into the ground. Dynamic systems (ie. hammers and vibratory equipment) utilize impact, or vibration, to advance the piles. Static-Load systems are most commonly utilized in situations where noise or vibration would adversely affect the people, structures or equipment located near the site. Static-Load technology is most advantageous in situations where vibration, noise or access constraints make it difficult, risky or disruptive to utilize conventional piledriving systems.

Jan 1, 1995

By Juan M. Antorena

A dynamic testing program was performed to evaluate installation procedures, assess capacity of 610-mm (24-inch) diameter open ended steel pipe to evaluate set-up and provide minimum pile tip elevation based on the dynamic testing results. The program was performed for a marine terminal project consisting of a 570-meter (1900-foot) long, overwater railroad trestle. The project location is Santa Marta, Colombia, South America. The subsurface profile generally consisted of 4m (12 ft.) of water and soft to hard silty clays. The piles were installed to an approximate tip elevation of -22 meters (MSL). Three piles were initially dynamically monitored during installation and then later monitored during restrike driving to evaluate pile drivability and bearing capacity including time related capacity increases due to soil "set-up". Knowledge of change in pile capacity with time after end of initial driving is important for design of pile foundations.

Jan 1, 1995

Jan 1, 1995

The pile inspector is a critical element in the quality control process necessary for a successful pile installation project. This guide is intended to provide the inspector with a basic understanding of only one of the many components of this process - the pile driving hammer. Pile driving hammers are used to install both bearing piles for structure foundations and sheet piles (and soldier piles) as used in retaining structures. In a single document, this guide offers a general presentation of the operation of the more common types of hammers the inspector is likely to encounter. It should make the information in the contractor's hammer submittal for the project more understandable. It should also provide an appreciation for the importance of a properly operating pile hammer. Prior to the start of most pile driving operations, the contractor will normally furnish a submittal to the engineer giving the specific pile driving equipment that he intends to use on the job. This submittal should include the make, model, and type of the intended pile driving hammer or hammers and their operating characteristics such as ram weight, rated energy, operating speed, external power requirements and, other pertinent information. Frequently, the operating characteristics are provided in the form of the manufacturer's specification sheet. The engineer will review this information and when he is satisfied, approve it and pass it on to the inspector. The driving criteria will have been determined by the engineer or others (the geotechnical engineer, consulting engineer, contractor, etc.) from the results of static analysis (for minimum penetration), driving during a test pile installation, Wave Equation analysis, dynamic formula, pile instrumentation during driving, static load test, or a combination of these or other appropriate analyses. The driving criteria can be a minimum penetration of driven pile length (embedded length), or a minimum (or maximum) blow count per unit of penetration. The pile inspector should become familiar with this information prior to the start of the job and should understand or seek help to comprehend the terminology and intent of each specification.

Jan 1, 1995

By the courtesy of Metropolitana Milanese (Milan Underground), roost of the delegates visited on April 12, 1991 the tunnel of "PORTA VENEZIA" STATION of MILANO RAILWAY LINK. The "PORTA VENEZIA" STATION will be the most important in the link and it will he also the largest underground project of the whole railway transport network in Lomhardy. The particular conditions of the soil and the collocation of site in the center of Milano have required new technologies and the technical solution applied to this job is called "Cellular Arch Method" by its designer Prof. P. Lunardi. Our sincere thanks go to Prof. P. Lunardi and Eng. E.M. Pizzarotti of Rocksoil, Milano who have kindly furnished us a technical description of this method. Eng. Pizzarotti was the guide during the visit and gave all the technical explanations to the delegates. THE "VENEZIA" STATION IN THE 2PB SECTION OF THE RAILWAY LINK The excavation of cavities in loose ground, exceeding a certain dimension and at shallow depth, is not feasible using traditional methods: in fact it is not possible to consolidate the ground around the cavity in such a way that homogeneity and resistance is sufficiently guaranteed.

Jan 1, 1994

By Edmund Cardoza

In the spring of 1993, construction began on an ambitious building project in Boston, Massachusetts. The Shriners organization committed to offer state-of-the-art adolescent burn treatment and rehabilitation in its Boston facility by expanding in a most unusual way. In short, the concept included installation of caisson foundations and perimeter slurry wall panels to enable construction of a completely independent structure around and above the existing, continually functioning, hospital. Two distinct phases of work were detailed in the Contract Documents. At the completion of the first phase, patients will be moved into the new building, above, and demolition of the old structure, beneath, will be performed. In Phase I, sections of the slurry wall and caissons, located outside the footprint of the existing building, were planned. The next phase of the work includes the installation of the remaining caissons and slurry wall. Once excavation is completed, the balance of the new hospital structure will be constructed from the bottom upward, connecting to the under side of the new structure.

Jan 1, 1994

[ ]

Jan 1, 1994

By Daniel L. Hanson

This paper presents a case history of the design, installation and performance of a tied-back tangent caisson retaining wall which was constructed as part of the Third Harbor Tunnel project currently underway in Boston, Massachusetts. The Third Harbor Tunnel project consists of a large multi-lane transportation tunnel which is being constructed by the sunken tube method. In this type of construction, the tunnel alignment, slopes and bedding are excavated and installed underwater and the tunnel sections floated over the proper alignment and sunk in place. The tangent caisson retaining wall discussed in this paper was constructed to provide support of the upper portions of the tunnel excavation at the East Boston Portal where the tunnel exited from below the harbor and continued underground on shore. A portion of the tangent caisson retaining wall was also utilized to provide earth support for the barge unloading facility where spoil from the tunnel excavation was transferred to surface vehicles for removal from the site. PROJECT BACKGROUND The tangent caisson retaining wall was constructed by The Millgard Corporation (TMC) as a subcontractor to the Boston Third Harbor Tunnel Contractors, a Joint Venture which consisted of the firms of Morrison-Knudsen Corporation, Interbeton Inc., and J.F. White Contracting Company. The entire project team is listed below on Table 1. The design of the tangent caisson wall system was performed by Hanson Engineering, P.C. (HE) acting as design consultant to TMC. The retaining wall system incorporated a single row of pressure injected earth anchors (tie-backs) as part of the design. The earth anchors were designed and installed by Drill Tech as a subcontractor to TMC.

Jan 1, 1994

By Jean J. Abiassi

The Boston Marine Industrial Park (BMIP) VENT 6 project is a cut and cover tunnel, part of the Central Artery / Tunnel (CA/T) in the city of Boston. The BMIP job will serve as the south approach to the Third Harbor Tunnel crossing. The alignment is approximately 2500 Ft long and is made up of four sections starting from west to east: 1. West Tunnel 2. Boat Section 3. East Tunnel 4. Tunnel inside Vent 6 Cofferdam and connection to the Third Harbor Tunnel. The support of excavation (SOE) system for the West Tunnel, Boat Section, and East Tunnel are all a part of this project whereas the SOE for Tunnel inside the Vent 6 Cofferdam was a part of the contract for the Third Harbor Tunnel.

Jan 1, 1994

By James V. Errico

On October 1, 1993 the regulations for assessing and cleaning up contaminated soil and groundwater in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts were revised. These new regulations, known as the Massachusetts Contingency Plan (MCP) 310 CMR 40.0000, were developed to keep routine releases out of the regulatory system and rely on private parties to handle most releases without Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) oversight. An integral part of the new MCP is the Licensed Site Professional (LSP). An LSP is required to handle activities and render opinions once a site enters the MCP. These regulations must be adhered to where ever a release has occurred, including construction sites. A brief overview of the new MCP is given below; see attached MCP Flowchart for graphical summary. Entering the MCP Process A release of oil or hazardous material (OHM) to the soil or groundwater above applicable reportable quantities (RQ's) or reportable concentrations (RC's) will require notification to the DEP and compliance with applicable provisions of the MCP. RQ's and RC's are listed in the MCP (310 CMR 40.1600) for most compounds that are typically encountered. For each compound there are two RC's for soil (S-1 and S-2) and two for groundwater (GW-1 and GW-2). The S-1 and GW-1 RC's apply to sites that are environmentally more sensitive, as a result they are lower than the S-2 and GW-2 RC's.

Jan 1, 1994

By Bengt H. Fellenius

Session 2, Deep Foundation without Soil Excavation, has attracted no fewer than 22 papers dealing with subjects from soil improvement by grouting, injection, and deep mixing techniques through vibroflotation and special piles, including aspects pertaining to conventional driven and bored piles. In the short time available, it is not possible to both do justice to the papers and provide a critical review of the state-of-the-art. Instead, to meet the objective of making the next half hour worthwhile to the audience, I have chosen to comment on a few special points brought forward in the papers and thereafter to discuss more in detail a couple of aspects I have deemed to be of general interest. Four papers deal with jet-grouting, injection, and deep mixing techniques: DOMSKI, J. J. Reinforcement of subsoil under the foundations of historical buildings in Cracow using deep injection technique. RESTELLI, A. B, BERTERO, M., and LODIGIANI, E. Deep mixing technology to improve the bearing capacity of a very soft clayey soil under an earth embankment.

Jan 1, 1994

Abouleid,A.F.327 Ajdic, I.451 Albert, L.F. 221,307 Alem, A. 525 Asama, T. 431 Avgherinos, P. J. 373 Baker Jr, C.N. 331 Balossi Restelli, A. 171 Beckwith,G.H.33 Bellini, A. 469 Bermingham, P. 481 Bertero,M. 171,535 Beyer, M. 503 Bottiau, M.41 Botto, G. 205 Bruskeland, O. 337 Budhu, M. 349 Bullivant, R.A. 181 Bustamante, M.G. 185, 475, 535

Jan 1, 1994