Search Documents

By Patrick E. Durnal, Henrik Dahl

"A joint venture of Ben C. Gerwick Inc., Sverdrup (now Jacobs) and DMJM (now DMJM + Harris) designed the $779 million seismic upgrade of the Richmond - San Rafael Bridge over the San Pablo Bay in the San Francisco Bay Area and provided construction support to Caltrans. Construction of the marine foundation retrofi t was completed by a joint venture of Tudor Saliba/Tidewater/Koch-Skanska and their subcontractors: Pomeroy Precast Construction, AGRA Foundations, Dutra Construction and Vortex Divers. Construction management and inspection was performed by Caltrans with the support of various consultants. MARINE FOUNDATION RETROFIT SCOPEThe retrofi t design of the submerged foundations included:??A total of 476 tension and compression micro piles (290- 1140 kips or 1290-5071 kN) installed through cored holes through the underwater bells at 31 pier locations??Fourteen 126/150/164 inch (3.20/3.81/4.17m) diameter CISS (Cast-in-steel shell) concrete shear piles (1160- 2660 kips or 5160-11832 kN) installed through new precast concrete pile cap extensions??Twelve CIDH (Cast-in-drilled-hole) shear piles (1060- 2130 kips or 4715-9475 kN) with 150 inch (3.91m) diameter steel shells to top of bedrock and 30 ft (9,14m) long and 11 ft (3.35m) diameter rock socket installed through new precast concrete pile cap extensions The specifi ed post bid test boring revealed deeper bedrock at one pier location allowing deletion of the rock socket. Thus 15 CISS and 11 CIDH shear piles were installed at 11 pier locations - 9 piers with 2 piles and 2 piers with 4 piles. Cut off elevations for the shear piles ranged from 46 ft to 60 ft (14.0m to 18.3m) below mean sea level and cut off for the micro piles was 8 ft to 46 ft (2.44m to 14.0m) below mean sea level. Almost all foundation retrofi ts required work under limited headroom conditions. Underwater construction connections required innovative design details and construction techniques for each pile type. The 11 piers had 22 precast concrete pile cap extensions installed in pairs and connected by either tremie concrete closure pours or by large pipe struts. The precast pile cap extensions were strapped underwater using large steel bands wrapping around the belled piers with grouted annulus. The precast pile caps were founded with 14 inch (355mm) diameter steel pipe piles, which were either support piles or seismic tension and compression piles. The seismic piles were connected in grouted corrugated steel pipe sleeves cast into the new concrete pile caps."

Jan 1, 2007

By Dan A. Brown

This paper describes a method of conducting rapid lateral loading tests of deep foundations in which the load is applied to the foundation with a time duration of less than one second. For purposes of this paper the loading is applied using a pyrotechnic loading system commonly referred to as Statnamic. However, the method should apply to any lateral loading system which produces a force time history with a loading duration of 20 msec to 1 second. The test provides a measure of the dynamic and static response of the soil/foundation system and must be evaluated as a dynamic loading. Interpretation of the test includes a simple single degree of freedom (SDOF) model which can account for the inertial effects of foundation mass, system damping, and static foundation stiffness. The results of the test measurements are compared with four case histories in which comparative static load test data are available, including pile group foundations and large diameter drilled shaft foundations.

Jan 1, 2007

By A. Ghorbani

The analysis of Combined Pile Raft Foundation (CPRF) is very complex due to involved interactions among components of CPRF system. Many researchers made efforts to develop sufficient methods including three dimensional finite element methods to compute these interactions. Since there are some restrictions and complexity in previous methods, in present study a new approach based on three dimensional finite difference methods is implemented to overcome some of these restrictions. The total and differential settlements of a centrifuge case study are computed using different numerical methods to show the performance of present numerical approach.

Jan 1, 2007

By Gary L. Seider

Chance, a Division of Hubbell Power Systems, Inc., in conjunction with Sailors Engineering, Inc. has updated its Helical Design Capacity Software. This latest version, ?HeliCAP® v2.0?, is a state-of-the-art helical anchor and pile capacity program designed to operate in the Microsoft® environment. The program calculates the tension and compression capacity along with the frictional capacity, if applicable, of CHANCE® Civil Construction helical anchors and piles using design theories and methods adopted by Chance. This paper details the current state of practice employed by the software in the design methods and installation methodologies of helical anchors and piles.

Jan 1, 2007

By Jerold Bishop

The application of the ?electro-hydrodynamic effect? (EHDE) to civil engineering has been made in the construction of drilled piles. Equipment for the commercial application of this process was developed in Russia in the late 1980's. The process is approved for general use by the Russian Federation building code and numerous projects have been successfully completed with this technique. EHDE is a process by which a moderately powerful shockwave is released in the bottom of a drill hole filled wet concrete slurry. The energy is carried outward through the fluid with minimal loss because it is an incompressible medium. Repetitive discharges provides a series of energy pulses which will compact the soil along the pile shaft and at base of the pile. The process is analogous to repeated applications of low energy blast densification or to dynamic compaction. In general, the process is not depth dependent. Repeated application of this treatment in a drilled pile hole can increase soil density at the base and along the shaft of the pile, as desired. The overall result is that the geotechnical capacity can be improved significantly. Test results documenting improvements are presented and other applications considered.

Jan 1, 2007

By Larry D. Olson

Research, hardware development, and field testing have been conducted on systems to allow easy and accurate determination of both foundation tip depth as well as the properties of the soils at and above the foundation tip. The nondestructive testing method used for tip depth determination is the Parallel Seismic (PS) method, while the soil properties are determined by a Cone Penetrometer Test (CPT). The research and development effort reported herein uses a novel combination of the two methods to allow a single piece of portable field equipment to perform both tests. A system has been developed and tested that includes a triaxial geophone and a hydrophone in the cone probe tip to allow collection of the PS data by a CPT rig without requiring a drill rig with hollow stem augers. Using the instrumented tip along with a standard instrumented CPT cone allows for the simultaneous determination of both the depth of unknown foundations and the measurement of soil properties along the length of the unknown foundation. The combined system allows for a more complete and accurate analysis of foundation capacity and scour susceptibility.

Jan 1, 2007

By John F. Spence

Ever since opening, the M25 motorway to the west of London has carried a rapidly increasing volume of traffic. The section of M25 between the junctions with the M3 and M4 motorways, which is in the near vicinity of Heathrow airport, is the most heavily trafficked section. Piling and ground treatment was required for motorway widening works over this route, which is 7 miles long. The foundation works were undertaken next to the live motorway and beneath the flightpath for aircraft landing and taking off at the airport. The paper describes the foundation construction techniques used, and the how the methods were affected by the live motorway and the height restrictions imposed by the airport. A unique method of piled retaining wall construction is also described.

Jan 1, 2007

By Y. Duraisamy

This paper presents the compressibility of tropical peat reinforced with cylindrical cement column. When a cement column installed vertically in peat, its compressibility was reduced because of the hardened skeleton matrix formed by cement particles bonding with adjacent soil particles in the presence of pore water. The effects of diameter, number of columns and cement proportions in cement columns on the compressibility have been investigated in this study. The results indicated that compressibility index Cc and Ca decreased with the increase in diameter of the cement column. Specimens with 45 mm and 60 mm diameter of cement column were cured for 28 days, after which they were subjected to Rowe Cell Consolidation test. Based on the results obtained, it shows that cement columns can successfully reduce the compressibility of tropical peat.

Jan 1, 2007

By Saieb Haddad, Henry Pate

"Building retaining walls in an urban area is becoming more difficult due to right-of-way restraints. Using standard concrete cantilever walls requires a construction easement behind the walls for installation, which for the most part is unavailable. To install these types of walls in a limited right-of-way requires extensive temporary walls to minimize the construction easement. Top-down construction walls utilizingtie-back anchors for support require either the purchase of the right-of-way or underground easements in the area of the anchors.These problems faced the Department on Interstate 75 widening in Knoxville, TN in an area of a large cut. A multi-story Insurance Building and a large commercial Retail Center were located at the top of the cut. To prevent any impact on the buildings, the walls had to be placed within a limited area. The option of buying the properties was prohibitively expensive. Due to the height of the two walls and the variability of the underling rock line, contiguous caisson pile cantilever walls were contemplated as the only wall type that would be appropriate. The cost of the two walls was estimated to be very close or even higher than the cost of purchasing the two buildings. The Department believed that there must be a better way to deal with the problem. A vertically tied-down pile frame wall constructed from the top-down with a concrete facing was developed. This allowed the construction of the walls to be restricted to the available limited area and provided substantial savings for the State.INTRODUCTIONThe widening of I-40/75 has been a major transportation project in the Knoxville area which is being constructed by the Tennessee Department of Transportation. The project includes 18 Retaining Walls and 13 Bridges.Two of the 18 Retaining Walls, refer to Figure 1, are to support two valuable properties, one being an insurance company housed in a multi-story office building and the other a suburban shopping center which were appraised at $13.0 million and $5.0 million respectively. Due to the 31 ft. (9.5m) maximum height of each of the two Retaining Walls and the limited Right-of- Way of 15.0 feet (4.6m), a contiguous caisson pile cantilever wall was proposed for each of the two retaining wall sites with an estimated cost of $12.0 million each. The contiguous pile cantilever Wall is comprised of a line of caisson piles socketed into underlying competent bedrock. The design required that 4 ft. (1219mm) dia. piles be installed at 6 ft. (1.83m) centers, socketed into rock in order to provide lateral stability and restrict lateral wall movement to acceptable limits. The line of caissons would be fronted with a cast-in-place concrete face wall"

Jan 1, 2007

By William Siegel

Kleinfelder provided foundation analysis and design for an expansion to a cement plant in Florence, Colorado. The expansion was a conversion from a horizontal wet process to a vertical dry process, and resulted in the construction of a number of structures with heavy foundation loads. [ ] The field investigation identified old fill and saturated sands and gravels above a shale/limestone bedrock environment. Based upon the anticipated loading, drilled piers socketed into bedrock were recommended. The structures were constructed in accordance with the design recommendations.

Jan 1, 2007

By John S. Pack

The application of square shaft helical piers in expansive soils is a standard of practice in many areas of the United States. Over 20 years of performance monitoring show exceptional performance and economy will result if proper design procedures, specification requirements and installation procedures are followed. This is true for new foundations and the repair of existing foundations, including lightly loaded wood-frame structures on expansive soils. Proper design includes: 1) site geotechnical characterization, 2) pier layout such that each pier is loaded to its maximum design capacity, 3) maximize spans between piers, 4) minimize the number of piers, 5) isolate the structure from the expansive soil with an appropriate void zone below all grade beams, slabs or other components that would otherwise be in soil contact and 6) utilize only single helix piers. Proper specification employs a performance specification that specifies: 1) the design load on each pier with a suitable safety factor, 2) the minimum installation torque, typically 4,000 ft-lbs (5.4 kN-m), or refusal, 3) a minimum pier shaft steel Fy = 70 to 90 ksi (483 to 621 Mpa) and pier helix steel Fy = 80 ksi (552 Mpa), 4) 1.5 to 1.75 inch (38.1 to 44.5 mm) square shafts, 5) smooth shaft surface, 6) the ICC Evaluation Report (ER) number of the manufacturer and 7) the manufacturer ISO 9001 certification for material quality control. Proper installation requires: 1) equipment with sufficient axial compression force (crowd) on the pier shaft so the helix engages the soil and advances to the specified minimum installation torque or refusal, 2) additional specialized techniques for expansive soils and 3) qualified specialty helical pier installation contractors experienced in expansive soils who submit and utilize pier configurations, techniques and equipment that will most effectively and economically meet the specified performance.

Jan 1, 2007

By Ryan P. Sullivan, G. Alan Klevens, Jian Huang

"BACKGROUNDLake Hamilton in Hot Springs, AR was created in 1932 when the Arkansas Power and Light Co. completed Carpenter Dam on the Ouachita River to generate electricity. Today, the 7,200-acre (2,914 hectares) impoundment is one of Arkansas’s most popular recreational and residential lakes.U.S. 70 crosses Lake Hamilton by means of a seven-span bridge featuring nine steel girders per span. Constructed between 1982 and 1984, the 1,410-foot long (430m) bridge carries four lanes of traffi c across the lake. The bridge is supported by six intermediate reinforced concrete piers composed of hammer heads, stems, footings and seals, which sit on the underlying rock. (See Figure 1). The bridge rises to a maximum of 33 feet (10m) above the surface of the lake and the footings and seals extend a maximum of 29.5 feet (9m) below the surface of the lake. The seals are situated on hard, fractured sandstone and shale.Routine underwater inspections in 1993 revealed large cracks in the lean seal concrete and refl ective cracks in the reinforced concrete footings. Infrastructure Engineers, Inc., The Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Department’s (AHTD) design consultant, then conducted an in-depth underwater inspection of the pier foundations. The investigation included cross-hole sonic logging, singlehole sonic logging, visual examination and strength testing of core samples, and petrographic analysis.The investigation revealed extensive cracking and low-strength concrete within the seals of all intermediate pier foundations. Many voids within the seal concrete had become fi lled with silt. There was evidence of continued seal deterioration between underwater inspections.AHTD and its engineers considered three rehabilitation solutions in the preliminary engineering stage: micropiles, a cofferdam supported concrete jacket, or a pile supported concrete jacket. The three alternatives were estimated to cost $1,250,000; $4,320,000; and $3,030,000 respectively. All three options would transfer the loads from the pier footing directly to the rock below, bypassing the seal concrete."

Jan 1, 2007

By Steven R. Musselman

The bending strength and flexural stiffness of a micropile at its threaded connection is less than its intact strength and may fail due to thread slippage or by fracture through the pin (reduced cross-sectional area of male threads in the threaded zone of the casing). The mode of failure depends on the reduction in cross-section necessary for machining the threads, and details of the threaded connection such as the length of threaded connection, size and shape of threads, and the thread density (threads per inch). Based on data from bending tests conducted on 9-5/8 inch diameter micropile casing, a method has been developed to predict the ultimate moment capacity and initial bending stiffness of round threaded micropile connections. Two modes of failure were observed from four-point bending tests conducted at the University of Illinois on 9-5/8 inch casing with round threads. Threaded micropile casing connections with an effective thread length of 1.35 inches typically failed by slippage at the threads (jump out), while connections using an effective thread length of 1.89 inches failed by fracture of the pin. These two failure modes were described by W.O. Clinedinst in his report to the American Petroleum Institute on tension tests of threaded pipe casing. Clinedinst developed an empirical formula to determine the tensile strength of threaded connections. A method to predict moment capacity for threaded micropile connections by modeling the micropile cross-section and applying Clinedinst?s equation to determine the max tensile stress along the threaded connection while satisfying force equilibrium is proposed. The predicted moment capacity for threaded connections using this approach is within ten percent of measured for both modes of failure observed from the bending tests.

Jan 1, 2007

By Andrew Budek

Reinforced concrete piles are used to carry foundation loads through considerable depths of soil to provide superstructure stability under gravity loads and lateral forces. The creation of cast-in-place (or cast-in-drilled-hole, i.e., CIDH) piles begins with the auger-drilling of a hole of the appropriate depth, into which a cage of reinforcing steel is placed (the cage length is generally equal to the depth of the hole, a construction joint being used to connect the in-ground pile with the superstructure). The pile is then finished by casting with concrete, and the superstructure then appended. The superstructure may either be a column (denoting the structure a pile-column), a column and cap beam, or a footing. Typical pile-column configurations are shown in Fig. 1 (a CIDH pile used in a footing would be similar in overall configuration to Fig. 1(b), with H=0). CIDH piles are well-suited for alluvial soil profiles with a deep water table; such conditions generally allow the auguring of a clean and regular hole.

Jan 1, 2007

By Jesús E. Gómez

A recent bridge underpinning project provided a unique opportunity to obtain information on the load-deflection response of 260 hollow-core bar micropiles. All production micropiles were proof-tested to a maximum load of 125 percent of the design load. In addition, four verification tests were performed on sacrificial micropiles to at least two and a half times the design loads. This paper presents the results of the verification and proof tests performed for this project, and provides recommended values for design of hollow core bar micropiles in soils similar to those encountered. This work shows that hollow core bar micropiles provide a significant unit bond capacity in both granular and fine soils, which may be greater than that typically expected in pressure-grouted (Type B) micropiles. The hollow core bar system allows faster installation rates in the soil types encountered than other traditional micropile techniques, and can be installed with relatively simple quality control procedures.

Jan 1, 2007

By Khamis Y. Haramy

Quality assurance and quality control of drilled shafts has become a concern due to difficulties in accurately locating construction anomalies and determining load bearing capacity of defected drilled shafts. Various non-destructive evaluation techniques have been developed to estimate the integrity of the concrete in drilled shafts. While these techniques have been widely accepted, variables and unknowns can affect the measurement results. Results are typically difficult to interpret, leading to unnecessary construction delays and possible litigation over shaft integrity. In addition, influences of surrounding ground materials, stress states under different load conditions, and crack and residual stress development during concrete curing further complicate determination of shaft performance. This paper focuses on the evaluation of load bearing capacity of defected drilled shafts under various conditions by numerical analysis and modeling.

Jan 1, 2007

By Monique Nykamp

"INTRODUCTIONTerminal 46 is located just south of downtown Seattle, and is one of the Port of Seattle’s busiest container terminals. The Terminal 46 Redevelopment Project was undertaken to replace the existing 15-m-wide (50 ft) cranes along the apron with 30-m-wide (100 ft) cranes, which can unload larger, post- Panamax ships. The project included upgrading the existing waterside crane rail with new piles and constructing a new land-side rail behind the sheetpile bulkhead. The new piles had to be installed adjacent to the existing apron without causing damage, which was a signifi cant geotechnical challenge due to the soft soil conditions at the site. An instrumentation program performed during the test pile program evaluated this challenge and allowed for the development of specifi c production pile installation procedures that had the least possible effect on construction costs and schedule. SITE HISTORYThe site lies along the west side of Elliott Bay, north of the mouth of the Duwamish Waterway. Prior to development, this area was part of the tide fl ats where the Duwamish River drained into Elliott Bay. Prior to 1970, there were several existing timber piers and structures in the area. In the 1970s, the Port of Seattle constructed a 900-m-long (3,000 ft), 30- m-wide (100 ft) apron to support fi ve, 15-m-wide (50 ft) container cranes. The contained backland area was then fi lled with dredged spoils (sand and silt with organics) and the upper 5 to 20 m (16 to 65 ft) backfi lled with sand and gravel.The existing apron was constructed using 0.4 m (16 in) octagonal prestressed concrete piles to support the precast concrete deck and crane rails. The pile-supported bents were spaced at 6.1 m (20 ft), center-to-center, along the longitudinal direction. Pile lengths typically varied from about 20 to 40 m (65 to 130 ft) with 15 to 26 m penetration below mudline (50 to 85 ft penetration). The slope below the apron was constructed at about 1.75 horizontal to 1 vertical to allow for suffi cient water depth for cargo ships. In most areas, a riprap buttress was placed at the toe of the slope. A typical cross section of the apron is shown on Figure 2.Several stability, settlement and pile driving issues arose during the original construction of T-46 (Pita, 1983). Reportedly, movement of the submarine slope occurred during pile driving, resulting in settlement behind the bulkhead. Pile driving reportedly caused settlement of adjacent piles. In addition, some piles were “running” (dropping quickly under one hammer blow) during installation."

Jan 1, 2007

By Emad Farouz, Roger Failmezger

"The proposed reconstruction of I-75 downtown consists of widening an approximately 2.46 Km section of IR-75 through the northern section of downtown Dayton, OH, USA. Bridge B-13 is a 9-span continuos prestressed concrete I-beam, 319.0-meter (1,048-foot) long bridge with a stub abutment on MSE walls for the rear abutment, and a stub abutment with spill-through slopes for the forward abutment. The piers in the river were located parallel to the Great Miami River, and are full-height reinforced concrete walls. PRESSUREMETER TEST PROCEDUREThe driller advanced either casing or augers approximately 1 meter above the pressuremeter test. Steel casing was used to advance borings performed in the river, and augers were used for borings on land. Mud rotary drilling with a large diameter roller bit was used to remove all of the gravel and cobble fragments inside the casing or augers.At the pressuremeter test elevation the driller used a 63.5-mm (2.5-inch) carbide button bi-cone bit, using a rotation rate of about 60 rpm, a mud fl ow rate of about 10 gallons per minute (40 liters per minute), and an advance rate of 6 to 10 minutes per meter (2 to 3 minutes per foot). To minimize vibrations, advance rates were slower where excessive cobbles were encountered. The 63.5-mm (2.5-inch) O.D. slotted casing pressuremeter was lowered to the test elevation, often requiring either pushing or hammering into the test zone. We believe that the test zone was not perfectly straight, or that gravel or cobble fragments jutted into the test zone and had to be displaced to advance the pressuremeter into the test zone. The slotted casing prevented membrane damage during insertion. A photograph of the slotted casing being lowered into the borehole is shown below.The pressuremeter was calibrated for system compressibility and membrane resistance. At full expansion of 800 cm3, the membrane resistance of the slotted casing was about 2.5 bars.Strain-controlled tests were performed using a Texam control unit with a monocell probe. Volume increments of 20 cm3 were injected into the probe and corresponding pressures were measured. Near the end of the elastic portion of the test, an unload-reload cycle was done. A creep test was performed for 10 minutes at the next volume increment. The test continued until either 800 cm3 were injected or the membrane burst."

Jan 1, 2007

By Artak D. Mirzoyan

Pile foundations near the edge of a slope are often required to resist lateral loads. This is particularly important for piles at abutments of bridges. However, very few full-scale tests are available that compare the effect on lateral resistance of piles installed in sloping ground to piles installed in horizontal ground. To investigate the effect of a slope on lateral pile resistance, three full-scale lateral load tests were performed on an instrumented steel pipe pile. For the first test, the pile was laterally loaded in horizontal ground; in the second test, the pile was at the crest of a 30º downward slope; and for the third test, the pile was located three pile diameters from the crest of a 30º slope. The soil around the pile consisted of well-graded clean sand (concrete sand) and was compacted to 95% of the modified Proctor maximum unit weight in all three tests. Lab and in-situ direct shear tests indicated that the friction angle of the sand was approximately 39 degrees. The pile was instrumented with strain gauges so that the bending moment versus depth profile could be determined. Pile head load, deflection and rotation were also measured. Based on the load versus deflection curves, the presence of the slope resulted in a decrease in lateral resistance of about 20% for the pile at the crest of the slope and 8% for the pile at 3D from the crest of the slope relative to the pile in horizontal ground. The presence of the slope also resulted in an increase in the maximum moment of 29% and 20% for the piles at the slope crest and at 3 pile diameters from slope crest, respectively. Analyses using LPILE with the measured friction angle significantly underestimated the lateral resistance for the horizontal soil profile. After calibrating the model with the response of the pile in horizontal sand, analyses including the slope still underestimated lateral resistance by about 20%.

Jan 1, 2007

By Monique Nykamp

"INTRODUCTIONTerminal 46 is located just south of downtown Seattle, and is one of the Port of Seattle’s busiest container terminals. The Terminal 46 Redevelopment Project was undertaken to replace the existing 15-m-wide (50 ft) cranes along the apron with 30-m-wide (100 ft) cranes, which can unload larger, post- Panamax ships. The project included upgrading the existing waterside crane rail with new piles and constructing a new land-side rail behind the sheetpile bulkhead. The new piles had to be installed adjacent to the existing apron without causing damage, which was a signifi cant geotechnical challenge due to the soft soil conditions at the site. An instrumentation program performed during the test pile program evaluated this challenge and allowed for the development of specifi c production pile installation procedures that had the least possible effect on construction costs and schedule.SITE HISTORYThe site lies along the west side of Elliott Bay, north of the mouth of the Duwamish Waterway. Prior to development, this area was part of the tide fl ats where the Duwamish River drained into Elliott Bay. Prior to 1970, there were several existing timber piers and structures in the area. In the 1970s, the Port of Seattle constructed a 900-m-long (3,000 ft), 30- m-wide (100 ft) apron to support fi ve, 15-m-wide (50 ft) container cranes. The contained backland area was then fi lled with dredged spoils (sand and silt with organics) and the upper 5 to 20 m (16 to 65 ft) backfi lled with sand and gravel.The existing apron was constructed using 0.4 m (16 in) octagonal prestressed concrete piles to support the precast concrete deck and crane rails. The pile-supported bents were spaced at 6.1 m (20 ft), center-to-center, along the longitudinal direction. Pile lengths typically varied from about 20 to 40 m (65 to 130 ft) with 15 to 26 m penetration below mudline (50 to 85 ft penetration). The slope below the apron was constructed at about 1.75 horizontal to 1 vertical to allow for suffi cient water depth for cargo ships. In most areas, a riprap buttress was placed at the toe of the slope. A typical cross section of the apron is shown on Figure 2.Several stability, settlement and pile driving issues arose during the original construction of T-46 (Pita, 1983). Reportedly, movement of the submarine slope occurred during pile driving, resulting in settlement behind the bulkhead. Pile driving reportedly caused settlement of adjacent piles. In addition, some piles were “running” (dropping quickly under one hammer blow) during installation."

Jan 1, 2007