Search Documents

By Alok Bhowmick

The most uncertain and challenging part of a bridge design and construction is the ‘Choice of foundation’. During the planning and conceptual design stage, it is extremely important to choose the right type of foundation. Wrong choice can lead to disaster for the project. This paper will present three interesting case studies of past bridge projects, to demonstrate how correct choice of foundation can help to meet the project commitments while the wrong choice of foundations can led to huge delay in project completion, leading to time and cost overrun.

Nov 1, 2022

By Guilherme L. M. G. Carvalho, Zachary T. Fleming

In a world of 2-dimensional design documents, envisioning and understanding 3-dimensional interferences for complex foundation construction scenarios can be challenging. Videos and computer models serve as 3-dimensional spatial aids but have drawbacks related to a fixed perspective. Augmented and virtual reality (AR/VR) provide new tools to communicate design challenges and improve construction planning. This paper provides a practical look at the basics of AR/VR systems and the tools available to the foundation design and construction industry by giving a high-level example of the technologies’ use in the design and delivery phases of a complex micropile installation project for the remediation of a dam foundation. Using these technologies, GEI was able to design and deliver a complex foundation remediation solution. AR/VR benefited regulators, and the client, to help understand the design concept, construction sequencing, and approach to overcoming installation challenges. Due to its user-friendly nature and less rigorous programming and hardware requirements, AR proved to be more useful than VR for this scenario. AR/VR will likely not replace videos and computer models; however, it can be a useful 3-dimensional visualization aid that complements the project delivery process and offers benefits that traditional methods cannot. INTRODUCTION Augmented and virtual reality is a promising and rapidly developing technology within the engineering and construction world. Like any rapidly developing new technology, the language describing it can be confusing and dynamic. To eliminate the confusion some definitions must be made. AR/ VR definitions The definitions of virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR) for the purposes of this paper are as follows: VR is a computer-generated immersive environment that the user experiences within a digital 3- dimensional space (Satava, 1993)AR is a composite view created by superimposing digital objects into the user’s real-world view (Azuma, 1997). Often, VR is used in an office environment and allows the user to “visit” the digital site to review site planning, construction sequences, and interference geometry. AR can be utilized in both the office and onsite environments. Like VR, the in-office application for AR is commonly site planning. AR also can be utilized in the field for applications such as seeing through the ground to locate known existing obstructions like utilities, gas tanks, etc.

Jan 1, 2019

By Evangelia Ieronymaki

Civil engineering education relies on traditional methods of teaching, comprising mostly of deductive instruction by presenting the theory, followed by applications. This paper presents an alternative way for teaching foundation design to senior students, introducing a more inductive approach. The students are presented with a project/game adapted to a real-world problem at the beginning of the course. They are asked to identify the correct steps and methods throughout the lectures, for reaching an appropriate solution that they document and present at the end of the course. To make the project more enjoyable, the project has the format of a game where the students compete with each other on completing the task faster and more efficiently. The goal of this teaching approach is to enhance the ability of the students for problem solving and the engineering way of thinking, while playing a game. In the end, the students were requested to respond to a survey regarding the efficiency of this project/game on their learning. The results showed that students prefer more inductive methods for a design course, feeling that this project made them think more like engineers, while the ‘game’ twist of it made the whole course more fun. INTRODUCTION Most civil engineering courses are taught in 2019 the same way they used to be taught 40 years ago in the 80s. Classic methods are mostly deductive, where the instructor presents the theory first and then applications of that theory follow. Little or no attention is given initially to why the theory was developed or what are the problems it solves. The applications of the theory, and thus the purpose it serves, come only in the end and after methodologies have been presented, leading the students to show low interest in the material. As Albanese and Mitchell (1993) have reported, people are mostly motivated to learn things when they clearly see the need to know them. This explains the students’ little motivation that, if any, comes mainly from the fact that the material may be useful either in other courses or in their future careers. On the other hand, there are alternative inductive methods of teaching, where the role of the students is more active. A lot of researchers have highlighted the benefits of inductive methods in teaching engineering courses. Based on Prince and Fedler (2006), inductive methods include; a) inquiry-learning, b) discovery learning, c) problem and project-based learning (PBL), d) case-based teaching, and e) just-in-time learning. Inquiry-learning is maybe the most traditional method of inductive teaching/learning methods, where the instructor asks questions or poses problems and the students need to apply the theory they have learnt in order to find the solution (Bateman 1990; Prince 2004; Lee 2012). Similar to inquire-learning is the discovery learning, where students have to find the solution to a problem or answer to a question, while the instructor simply provides feedback to the students without guiding their efforts (Leonard 1988; Westbrook and Rogers 1994).

Jan 1, 2019

By P. V. Chandramohan

"The paper deals with the arrangement of structural members for a retaining structure used as a berth in the port of Krishnapatnam. The height of retention is 24.3m. A T-shaped diaphragm wall acts as the retaining surface. A relieving platform has been provided at the top to ease lateral earth pressure on the wall. The diaphragm wall is tied back to a combination of vertical and raker pile. Later, this arrangement was altered to replace the relieving platform with just lowering of ground level below the berth. The tie back was changed to a classical A-frame anchorage. At certain reaches, installation of piles pointing towards the rear was obstructed by a conveyor structure. The anchorage was then changed to include a vertical pile and a pile that points towards the front of the berth. Change in position of inclined pile alters the force in the pile from compression to tension.GeneralPort is a major link in the multimodal transport chain. Berth is the heart of the Port infrastructure. It is here the ocean freight changes to land transport. The change-over, warrants special type of heavy duty handling equipment. The equipment and the process necessitate deep seated foundations. On one side of the berth, deep drafted ships would be berthed. But adjacent to this heavy duty cranes would be operating at the deck level. Berths are of various types. Some are founded on piles and may project into water. Some operators prefer a retaining structure. At the port of Krishnapatnam, a retaining structure was preferred. Dredged level at the berth was to be -20. Deck of the berth was at +4.3. This meant that the height of retention of soil was 24.3m. Ports are generally located near the coast. Subsoil in the port area generally consists of cohesive material of low shearing strength. The berth has to cater to imposed vertical and horizontal loads.Structural functionFor bulk cargo and containers, berth has to support the two crane tracks. These tracks will carry heavy wheel loads of the crane. Besides, the space between the tracks would be used for stacking of cargo or hatch covers. In short, the deck will be subjected to heavy surcharge. This vertical load will manifest as additional lateral force on the retaining wall. Since the height of soil to be retained is high, it is a practice to relieve the lateral earth pressure due to the heavy surcharge of the wall. This is done by providing a relieving platform. The surcharge of superimposed load on the deck and the self-weight of the soil up to a few metres below would be relieved by a suitable platform. This vertical load would be transferred directly to deeper levels through piles. Mooring pull is a horizontal force exerted by the vessel on the bollards towards water side. Berthing force is exerted by the vessel during berthing, through fenders and acts towards land side.Diaphragm walls are usually employed as the retaining face. If the height of retention is less, these walls can cantilever out but in the case of large retention, they have to be tied back. The ties are to be anchored on to suitable arrangements like a dead-man or an A-frame. Berthing structure in the early stages at Krishnapatnam port is shown in fig 1."

Jan 1, 2015

By John Kvinsland

"The Block 43 Project is the future home of the Paul Allen Institute for Brain Science located just off the southern shore of Lake Union in Seattle, Wash. The South Lake Union (SLU) district experienced considerable development over the last 10 years and Vulcan, Inc., which is headquartered in Seattle, is at the forefront of this transition. Once a light industrial/residential location, SLU has transformed into a hub of medical technology comprising new residential units and mixed-use buildings. Malcolm Drilling Company, Inc. constructed four shoring projects for Vulcan in this vicinity over the last year, beginning with Vulcan Block 44, which consisted of 42,000 sq ft (3,902 sq m) of soldier pile and tieback wall to support a below-grade parking facility. Block 44 construction began in February 2013 and ended in mid-April. The feature project, Vulcan Block 43, was in planning stages at the time and began construction in late fall 2013.Awarded by GLY Construction of Bellevue, Wash., in September 2013, Block 43 was the most complex of the block projects performed by Malcolm. Block 43 featured dewatering and ground improvement components along with a water-tight secant pile wall. Following the commencement of Block 43, Malcolm also began work on Vulcan Block 52 in December 2013. Block 52 consisted of 43,000 sq ft (3,995 sq m) of conventional shoring in conjunction with dewatering of 8 ft (2.4 m) of excavation located below the water table. The final Vulcan project was Block 45, which started in January 2014 for Turner Construction of Seattle and consisted of 41,000 sq ft (3,809 sq m) of conventional shoring and required dewatering to complete the final 15 ft (4.6 m) of excavation.Scope and Subsurface ConditionsBlock 43 involved a wide variety of drilling applications for the building to be constructed and properly founded. The primary scope of work involved shoring support for an underground parking structure requiring excavation of approximately 82,000 cu 3 yds (62,694 m ) of soil. The cuts for the excavation were up to 43 ft (13.1 m) in depth, and the excavation was bounded by city streets as well as the South Lake Union Light Rail on its perimeter. In order to excavate beneath the water table, an extensive, deep dewatering system was required to drain the upper fill and reduce the impact of the pressurized aquifer located beneath the excavation. In addition, drilled rigid inclusions, along with compaction grouting, were required for foundation support of the future structure."

Jan 1, 2014

By Dan A. Brown

The New Mississippi River Bridge (MRB) employed conventional design-bid-build procurement, but the bidding process included the opportunity for pre-qualified bidders to develop and propose confidential Alternative Technical Concepts (ATC?s) for evaluation and approval in advance of bidding. The ATC process provides a mechanism for value-engineering prior to bid, with incentives and opportunities for both the owner and the bidding contractor. The contract described in this paper is for the river bridge composed of a cable-stayed crossing with two pylons and the anchor piers on each side of the river. The Massman-Traylor-Alberici (MTA) team developed a re-designed foundation system for the main pylon and anchor foundations which utilizes their equipment and experience along with field load test measurements to optimize the foundations. The paper describes the experience with the use of the pre-bid ATC process on the project from the perspective of the bidder, and outlines some of the benefits and limitations of this concept with respect to foundation design and construction. Some keys for success are identified and impediments to the effective implementation of the process are described.

Jan 1, 2011

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 Saieb Haddad, Henry Pate

"Building retaining walls in an urban area is becoming more diffi cult 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 utilizing tie-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 offi ce 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 Vahid Tajdar

The behavior similarity between pile and cone penetration test, has guided the researchers to use the CPT results in prediction of piles bearing capacity. In this article, artificial neural networks have been used to study about relation between cone tip and sleeve friction strength obtained from cone penetration test and ultimate pile bearing capacity, obtained from static pile load test. Artificial neural networks "ANNS" is a form of artificial intelligence. ANN tries to dramatize the human nerves & brain system biology structure in self-structure. In this article, the results of relevant studies about the prediction of ultimate pile bearing capacity in especial area of soils are presented by use of back - propagation neural networks. The results of static pile load test up to failure on 63 piles with closed end and CPT test results in the place of construction these piles use in order to confirm and creation ANN model. Comparing predicted ultimate pile bearing capacity by utilizing ANN with the numbers which are predicted by 5 common traditional methods shows that using of artificial neural networks is a suitable method for predicted ultimate pile bearing capacity in identified area of texture of soil moreover it has a better operation in comparison with common traditional methods.

Jan 1, 2006

By Bas R. Hemmen

GeoBrain is a facility at GeoDelft with the purpose to provide society with all relevant geo-engineering knowledge and experience in a structured way. On the basis of the available knowledge and experience engineers, decision makers and construction supervisors can come to a fast, reproducible and objective choice, taking into account the consequences. The paper presents examples from the GeoBrain experience databases and forecasting models developed for foundation engineering and directional drilling, or: "GeoBrain Foundations" and "GeoBrain Drilling". GeoBrain is closing the gap between theory and practice. It is aimed directly at reducing uncertainty and the costs of failure, thereby increasing the quality of profession and minimising the risk in geo-engineering works.

Jan 1, 2006

By H. Boghosian

This paper presents the design and construction of a deep basement in a steeply sloping site in glacial till in Glasgow city centre. Existing foundations, adjacent structures and services, in tandem with asymmetric loading, presented particular challenges in the planning, execution and design of the project. The construction methods and temporary works, analysis by the Finite Element method and monitoring carried out are all described.

Jan 1, 2006

Jan 1, 2003

Jan 1, 1990

By Jerry A. Steding

How many times have you heard "You can't drive piles because of the vibration."? You hear these words come out of the mouths of owners, engineers, and contractors. When a piling contractor hears this, he can almost always do a psychological profile of the individual uttering these words of wisdom. If the owner makes the statement, we know the odds are about 95% that the owner owns the building next door or he wouldn't care what happens to it; or the guy next door has threatened to sue the owner if he even so much as walks across the site of the proposed new building. If the owner owns the building next door to the new construction you can also be just as certain the old structure has undergone settlement. If the statement comes from the mouth of the contractor, it is usually just a case of him being inexperienced.

Jan 1, 1988

Jan 1, 1988

By Brain E. Ladd

A load test program was performed on two auger cast piles constructed in the Inner Coastal Plain geology of North Carolina. Both test piles were installed through Coastal Plain deposits and into underlying Piedmont residual soils; one test pile was embedded into partially weathered rock (PWR). The recommended 100-ton design load was confirmed by a test program that included instrumenting the piles with strain gages. The two piles performed differently during the load tests due to the effect of embedment into PWR. Loading Test Pile No. 1, which was not embedded into PWR, to failure at about 230% of the design compressive load allowed for evaluation of the mobilization of the ultimate shaft and end bearing resistances. Mobilization pile resistance was evaluated by comparing shaft and end bearing resistances to top of pile deflection (?) normalized by the pile diameter (D). For Test Pile No. 1, the ultimate average shaft resistance was achieved at ?/D of about 7.5% and ultimate end bearing resistance at ?/D of about 9.5%. Test Pile No. 2, embedded into PWR, achieved a ?/D of only about 4% at 200% of the design load and was not loaded to failure. Shaft resistance was mobilized at a different rate within each individual geologic layer, i.e. ultimate shaft resistance did not occur simultaneously for all geologic layers. As the available total shaft resistance was exceeded and end bearing mobilized, the unit shaft resistances reduced from the peak values. A modified Davisson offset using ?/D of about 6.5% appears applicable for evaluating the ultimate capacity of auger cast piles in the Inner Coastal Plain.