Search Documents

By Tony Mazzo

It has often been said by consulting engineers that foundation contractors are in the business of taking risks. One would agree that the mere fact a foundation project can be budgeted, planned, engineered and executed solely on the reliability of eight test borings made at a proposed site having an area of approximately 19,000 square feet, is a risky proposition, in and of itself. Now imagine that this site is actually one half of a city block located in an urban setting in an old, congested, historical neighborhood, surrounded by narrow city streets and historic landmark buildings. And suppose that the required depth of excavation for the construction of the new building on this site is approximately 35 feet and the natural groundwater table is at a depth below existing grade of only 25 feet. Given the difficult site conditions outlined above, one could certainly add the words "challenging" and "complicated" to the inherent word "risky" when describing the construction techniques involved to undertake a foundation project of this magnitude. This case study will discuss in detail how the excavation, sheeting, dewatering and underpinning work was accomplished as well as the problems overcome along the way.

Jan 1, 2003

By T. J. Snell

Bolnore Village in Haywards Heath, Sussex, England, is a large development covering 8 to 10 hectares and expected to provide 1500 homes in five phases to assist in the continuing demand for new homes in the London area. Part of the development required housing on a relatively shallow slope found to have deep seated failure planes which are fairly prevalent in this part of Sussex. Locally the slope angle was around 20 degrees but more typically the gradient was 6 to 7 degrees. There were significant concerns about slope stability and bearing capacity due to pre-existing shear surfaces and the complex geotechnical profile. There was some evidence of instability in the form of residual shear surfaces and tension cracks. The development required terracing the site with retaining structures up to 5 meters in height, formation of access roads and foundations of new houses. The developer Crest Nicholson adopted a collaborative approach with consulting engineers Powell Tolner and specialist geotechnical contractor Keller Ground Engineering. The solution consisted of a novel combination of contiguous bored piling, ground anchors, and both block work and timbacrib retaining walls to ensure the geotechnical issues were adequately addressed within the time and cost constraints set by the team. The paper describes the geotechnics of the problem together with the design, practical implementation, and site progress achieved

Jan 1, 2006

By Michael D. Justason

...a global perspective... In March of 2000, the Japanese Geotechnical Society added "Rapid Load Testing" to their national standard for pile testing. In the year 2000. it is estimated that there will be more than 500 "Rapid Load Tests" on foundations around the world. ...so what is a "Rapid Load Test", and why is it gaining acceptance and popularity?

Jan 1, 2001

By Marius B. Wechsler

There are considered deep piles which are fixed in blocks of rotating machinery foundations. A mathematical background is developed for determining the behavior of this kind of piles for motions caused by horizontal and vertical oscillations, as well as by roc-king and twisting. It is assumed that the piles come across a top soil layer of depth c, not capable of lateral support, and penetrate over a length b, in a bottom firm soil layer, or in a bottom soft soil layer in which vibrations can produce voids around the piles. With respect to b and c, as well as to the elastic properties of piles and soils, the analysis leads to the maximum bending moments and shear forces subjecting the piles, to the maximum lateral bearing on the bottom soil layer, as well as to the deflection of the pile and the displacement of the foundation block. The results of the performed analysis can be applied to seismic loads too, and they are illustrated by a numerical example.

Jan 1, 1987

By James Su

The Green River Valley in Kent, Washington, is a fast growing area containing retail facilities, warehouse factories and industrial businesses, including the Boeing Space Center. Traffic from Interstate - 5 to the West Valley Highway is highly congested. Accordingly, a new corridor, including a bridge across the Green River, was designed and constructed between 1996 and 1997. This paper presents a case history of the design elements and issues associated with the construction of the pier foundations of the bridge. Subsurface conditions were evaluated using both deep test borings and CPT soundings to evaluate the strength and consolidation properties of the supporting soils. Subsurface conditions consisted of alternating layers of loose and medium dense silty sand and sandy silt. Engineering analysis included an assessment of liquefaction as well as pier supporting capacity and associated settlement. The constructed foundations included 6-foot-diameter piers cased to a depth of 120 feet below the ground surface. The pier casings were driven to the design tip elevation and the soil inside the casing was removed by drilling. Despite performing borings and CPT soundings at specific pier locations, occasional trees, buried thousands of years ago through geologic processes, were surprisingly encountered during pier construction. This presented unique and difficult driving and drilling conditions. During drilling, the water level inside the piers was maintained near the ground surface to create a balance of hydrostatic pressure and prevent boiling of soils the bottom of the casing. After the casings were installed, the soil inside the casing was excavated, the rebar cage was installed and the pier was filled with concrete using treme techniques. Construction of the piers is complete and the completed piers have experienced negligible settlement. Owner: City of Kent Engineering Department Timothy La Porte, Project Manager Kent, Washington General Contractor: Mowat Construction Company, Kirkland, Washington Foundation Contractor: Condon - Johnson & Associates, Inc., Tukwila, Washington

Jan 1, 1998

By Martin Walker, Joseph Ang, Jongwon Lee, Alvin Bayudanto, Lilian Lorincz, Morteza Khorshidi, Wenyong Rong

This paper presents a case history of liquefaction susceptibility evaluation study for a major infrastructure project in the San José area. The subsurface material of the study area consists of Holocene alluvial deposits composed of interbedded and crosscut clays and silts, sands and gravels. The simplified approach for liquefaction triggering evaluation was carried out using both CPT data and SPT data representing site’s seismic capacity and the peak ground acceleration associated with a return period of 975 years at ground surface representing seismic demands. Site-specific cyclic stress ratio (CSR) profiles as seismic demand are also estimated from one-dimensional site response analysis. The simplified approach uses empirical depth stress reduction factors (rd) based on generic shear wave velocity profiles to account for the non-rigid response of the soil profile in estimating CSR. The CSR profiles of the simplified procedure were examined by completing site response analyses using site-specific soil profiles to represent site-specific seismic demands in the liquefaction triggering evaluation. The paper concludes with a comparison and discussion of the liquefaction evaluation examining results from CPT versus SPT data, and the comparison of CSR profiles from the simplified procedure versus site-specific response analysis.

Sep 8, 2021

By X. L. Huang

This paper deals with the experimental and theoretic study of the contact pressure beneath the deep foundation of Beijing International Hotel, The experiments have been carried out in project and in model footing 6.6m2. The result of measurements shows the contact pressure at the edge is greater than that at the center. The theoretic analysis on the base of elastic theorey is in good agreement with the test if the proposed assumption used.

Jan 1, 2010

By Emad W. Shublaq

Contractual site plans are implemented for executing pile foundations (5 x 5) at segmental concrete bridge. Project schedule demands have forced the contractor to find out the most economical procedure in achieving the goal. This paper presents a site management technique which is applied by the Contractor. This was found to be fruitful and as much as 60% saving was gained.

Jan 1, 1992

By Douglas Brittsan

This paper presents pile tension and compression load test results for the Southern Freeway Viaduct (North) pile load test site. The testing program represents a collaboration between California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), Federal Highways Administration (FHWA), and a group of pile manufacturers and construction firms. The participating manufacturers included Fundex, Halliburton, Monotube, and Nicholson, with each firm supplying proprietary pile systems. The field test program measured and will allow the direct comparison of the tensile and compressive capacity of nine common and proprietary pile systems installed in nearly identical soil conditions. Data reported here-in details pile compression and tensile load-deformation measured at the pile head. Cursory data regarding pile installation details are included to aid in data interpretation.

Jan 1, 1993

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 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 Mark R. Svinkin

Construction-induced vibrations may be detrimental to adjacent structures and sensitive electronics operating nearby. Construction vibration sources have a wide range of energy and velocity, as a function of time, transmitted on the ground. Analysis of existing methods for predicting ground and structure vibrations shows that empirical equations provide calculations only of amplitudes of vertical soil vibrations with insufficient accuracy. This paper presents the application of the impulse response function concept to solve the geotechnical problem of predicting ground and structure vibrations before installation of vibration sources. Impulse response functions reflect real behavior of soil and structures without the investigation of soil and structure properties. A procedure is presented to compute predicted ground and structure vibrations. Good agreement is found between predicted and measured records.

Jan 1, 1999

By D. A. Bruce

The use of small diameter cast-in-place bored piles is becoming increasingly popular in the United States. Such inserts are used as conventional load bearing piles, and are generally referred to as pin piles. The other major application is for the in situ reinforcement of soil slopes or excavations. The paper reviews the applications, construction, design and performance of inserts of each type.

Jan 1, 1989

By Nicolas Moscoso, Gerald Verbeek, Marcel Bielefeld, Rob van Dorp

Upon recently, most offshore foundations were based on a number of driven piles that were installed with an impact hammer. With the increase in offshore windfarms two major developments have occurred: the shift from jackets to monopiles, leading to increase of the diameter of the foundation piles, and a shift from impact hammers to vibro hammers. As the use of vibratory hammers is becoming more and more common practice, the need for accurate vibro-driving simulation software has increased, which requires that the soil modelling is enhanced to address soil fatigue during pile driving and to predict reliably the soil behavior and resistance during pile driving. In addition pile driving monitoring, which is routine for piles driven with an impact hammer, needs to become common practice. This paper addresses advances in soil modelling that allows more accurate pile driving simulation as well as the application of Vibro Driving Analysis (VDA) or Monitoring (VDM) to validate the simulation results. This is illustrated by a case study of the test pile for the Delft Offshore Turbine project, a 28 m long monopile with a diameter of 4 m that was driven 15 m into dense sand layers using a vibro hammer. After some 6 months the pile was extracted, and pile driving simulations and VDA were done both for the installation and extraction phase. 1. INTRODUCTION At the end of 2017, the total worldwide offshore wind power capacity was 18.8 GW [1]. The vast majority of offshore wind farms are currently in Northern Europe, which together account for over two thirds of the total offshore wind power installed worldwide, followed by East Asia, while developments in North America are still in very early stages.

Jan 1, 2019

By J. Tanner Blackburn, James R. Gingery, Lisheng Shao

Rigid inclusions consist of grout columns installed using displacement auger or vibrated tooling. The columns are typically installed in an array to provide support for footings, mats, or embankments. Due to the relative small column diameter and low replacement ratio, the surrounding soils typically have minimal densification or improvement. A gravel load transfer platform is commonly used above the rigid inclusion head to distribute stresses more broadly to the supported structure. The axial stiffness and geotechnical engineering mechanics of rigid inclusion design are similar to those of deep foundation systems, but they are typically only lightly- or un-reinforced and are not structurally connected to the above-grade structure. The popularity of rigid inclusions is increasing in the Western U.S., where many urban areas are subject to moderate to high seismic hazard levels. However, the performance of rigid inclusions under seismic loading is poorly understood, and seldom addressed in current designs. The elements are brittle, with limited or no ductility and relatively low moment capacity, and therefore may be prone to damage under seismic loading. Three modes of seismic loading should be considered: inertial loading from the structure, kinematic loading from vertically propagating shear waves, and kinematic loading from ground failure- related permanent ground deformation. This paper focuses on the first two modes. A simplified procedure for evaluating kinematic and inertial loading of rigid inclusions is described, and its use is illustrated through application to a site in Southern California. The results show that moderate to severe kinematic loading can generate plastic hinges in the rigid inclusions. Engineering consequences of this hinging could include settlement or bearing failure. INTRODUCTION In this paper the term ‘rigid inclusion’ (RI) refers to grout or grouted aggregate columns that are installed using either drilled or vibration displacement techniques. They are commonly installed in arrays to support vertical loads from footings, mats, or embankments. RIs are not structurally connected to footings they support. Rather, it is typical for a dense gravel load transfer platform (LTP) to be installed as a cushion between the RI head and supported footing or new fill. In cases of RI support of fill embankments, the LTP may be reinforced with horizontal layers of geogrid.

Jan 1, 2018

By Satyajit Vaidya, Rudolph Frizzi, Quadri Owokoniran

"This paper presents a case history in the design and construction of high-capacity drilled shafts for the iconic New York Wheel presently being constructed along the St. George area waterfront in northern Staten Island, New York. Although the site is located in an area that offers views of the Statue of Liberty, the Manhattan skyline, and New York Harbor, the variable and challenging subsurface conditions at the site and the structural loading requirements for Wheel erection and service conditions presented geotechnical design and construction challenges. The paper focuses on site and subsurface conditions, drilled shaft design and construction details, results of Osterberg-cell and lateral load testing, and load test data analysis and evaluation.PROJECT DESCRIPTIONThe proposed 630-foot (190 m) -tall New York Wheel (the Wheel) is projected to be one of the tallest observation wheels in the world. Upon completion, the Wheel will be capable of carrying over 1,400 passengers in its 36 capsules. The Wheel site is located along New York Harbor offering views of the Statue of Liberty, the Manhattan skyline, and the New York Harbor; see Fig. 1. The Wheel structure is sited along the waterfront, and served by a 3-story terminal located south of the Wheel in the eastern portion of the site and having a footprint area of about 34,250 sq-ft (3,180 sq-m). A 4-story parking Garage, with a footprint of about 112,840 sq-ft (10,480 sqm), is to be constructed south of the Wheel in the central and western portions of the site.SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONSThe site’s close proximity to the New York Harbor presented geotechnical challenges because the site is located in an area that was once beyond the historic shoreline of Staten Island. The site is an about 350,000-sq-ft (32,500-sq-m) parcel generally bounded by the Richmond County Bank Ballpark to the southeast, the 9-11 Memorial to the east, Bank Street to the north and northeast, and Richmond Terrace and an associated retaining wall to the southwest and south. A 50-ft (15-m) -wide New York City Transit Easement, with an active on-grade service area and tracks, is located in the southern portion of the site. See Fig. 2 for site location and approximate location of the Wheel foundation footprint."

Jan 1, 2016

By William M. Camp

An extensive design phase testing program in which 10 piles and 2 drilled shafts were instrumented and statically load tested to failure, was undertaken to establish relevant foundation design parameters for two bridges in Charleston, South Carolina, USA. The bearing strata at both test sites was a calcareous, overconsolidated, firm to very stiff, slightly sandy, clayey silt (locally known as Cooper Marl). Confirmation dynamic and static loading tests on production piles indicated only 50 to 60% of anticipated pile capacities; including consideration of time effects. Supplemental subsurface explorations did not reveal any significant variations in marl properties. Ultimately, 22 static and 75 dynamic tests were performed on production piles for a 2 mile section of the project. Pore water pressures in the marl were also monitored during and after pile driving. A study of unit skin friction in the marl as a function of time revealed two distinct trends: piles driven in areas with a sand overlaying the marl gained more capacity significantly faster than those driven through a clay or silt. Although the insitu marl properties are apparently similar across the site, the material immediately above the marl evidently has a large effect on pile capacity. This effect of overburden on pile capacity was verified by testing piles over a period of two years.

Jan 1, 1993

By Michael Hughes, Selva Selvamohan, Ray Costa

"Cutoff walls are commonly used to mitigate underseepage problems for levee remediation projects. At abrupt changes in seepage cutoff wall depths there is a potential for water to flow around the back of the deeper cutoff wall leading to elevated seepage pressures on the landside that could result in exit gradients exceeding design criteria. This condition is referred to as end-around-effects and is a complex problem that requires detailed and time consuming 3-D numerical modeling to represent accurately. This paper presents a simple approach for assessing end-around-effects using the results of 2- D seepage analysis to determine if lateral extension of the deeper portion of the cutoff wall is required. This simplified approach provides a pragmatic solution to a complex 3-D problem. The presented procedure was used as part of the Feather River West Levee Project in Yuba City, California, to assess end-around-effects at 26 locations. The results showed that wall extensions of up to 100 feet were needed at only 2 locations.INTRODUCTIONAs the lead geotechnical consultant for the Feather River West Levee Project, AECOM were responsible for designing levee remediation works for approximately 35 miles of levee protecting the area around Yuba City, California, and communities to the north and south. Due to land use constraints, seepage cutoff walls were the main remediation alternative selected to address underseepage issues for the project.As part of the design review process, the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) requested AECOM to look at 26 locations along the levee alignment where the depth of cutoff wall changed abruptly from shallow to deep, or vice versa. At these locations there was the potential for seepage pressures to pass behind the deeper section of cutoff wall and stress the blanket layer landward of the cutoff wall. A condition referred to as end-around-effects.End-around-effects involve complex 3-D ground conditions that have traditionally been addressed by laterally extending the deeper section of cutoff wall an arbitrary distance based solely on engineering judgment. In discussions with DWR, AECOM developed a simple procedure to provide a more objective assessment of end-around-effects without the need for detailed and time consuming analysis. This procedure allows the engineer to make an informed decision of whether end-around-effects are a problem at the location of a cutoff wall transition rather than laterally extending the deeper section of cutoff wall an arbitrary distance based on engineering judgment alone."

Jan 1, 2015

By Robert F. Stevens, Robin Givet, Kenneth Viking

"Summary This paper describes a case of a directional pile installation conducted from an existing oil platform in the Caspian Sea, offshore Baku. Results are presented for 660 mm outer diameter (660 mm OD) conductor piles. Each conductor was equipped with a beveled aluminum toe for directional impact driving and was driven through a 710 mm casing using a Delmag 100–13 diesel hammer and a chaser pile. The 710 mm casings were preinstalled to a depth of 75 m below mud line (75 m BML). The longest impact driven conductor pile on the project was 456 m at end of drive, and reached the terminal depth of 295 m BML.Soil conditions consisted of soft to stiff silty clay to a depth of 30 m BML, underlain by stiff clay to 96 m BML, very stiff silty clay to 200 m BML, and very stiff to hard clay down to 300 m BML.In order to assess the maximum stresses in the conductors and check the performance of the hammer, the driving of each conductor was monitored using a Pile Driving Analyzer (PDA). The hammer fuel setting was adjusted based on the PDA outputs to ensure the conductors were not overstressed during installation. All driving and monitoring operations were carried out from the drill floor.The conductor piles drove easier than anticipated but in the direction predefined by the pre-cut angle of the beveled aluminum toe. The driving system performance was good. Post driving, the SRD were analyzed by either the global method analysis, using WEAP, or by the CAPWAP program.To detect any collision between the conductor being driven and the adjacent wells in production, the well heads were monitored in real time with high sensitivity accelerometers. These accelerometers were connected to an alarm system on the drill floor, triggering a siren and a strobe light should a collision be detected by an abnormal increase of the peak acceleration.IntroductionThe world longest directional impact driven pile was installed in year 2005. The operation was carried out from an offshore production, drilling, and quarters (PDQ) platform located about 120 km east of Baku, in the Caspian Sea.The platform foundation consists of driven piles and 24 slots were available for drilling the wells to the reservoir, located about 3800 m below sea floor. Each slot was fitted with a casing, 710 mm in diameter, running from the top of the jacket to a depth of about 75 m BML (Figure 1). Oil production started in 1997 and by the end of 2003, 14 wells were in operation; 10 slots were therefore still available, either for oil production or for water injection. However, due to larger than expected settlement of the platform, drilling of additional wells was put on hold. After further investigation, experts concluded the settlement was due to an alteration in the mechanical properties of the bearing strata supporting the foundation piles. This alteration was due to either excess soil material transportation, or soil fracture by the drilling fluids (mud), when drilling the first wells. With only 14 wells in production, out of 24 possible, the owner faced a new dilemma: to drill, or not to drill new wells?"

Jan 1, 2014

By Peter Middendorp

Pile foundations are widely applied in the Netherlands because of the soft soil conditions. One of the popular pile types are cast-in-situ piles, which have to be integrity tested to get accepted. Integrity testing has been applied for more than 30 years, with the number of integrity test performed nowadays exceeding 400,000 per year and subsequently there is a substantial amount of practical experience with this testing method. This paper will deal with some basics of integrity testing and describe some of the techniques that have been adopted in the Dutch pile testing practice, like detection of pile head defects with a spike type hammer pulse, and the site average or pile group average for the qualitative interpretation of measured signals.

Jan 1, 2006