By J. E. De Waele, J. J. Lee, M. J. Mulheron, Luke R. Deamer
There is increasing demand for geotechnical contractors to commit to carbon reduction, net zero or science
based targets. A lot of focus has therefore been placed on using low carbon materials and low emission rigs.
However, whilst these are ways to help reduce carbon, there is a need to look beyond just substituting
materials and fuels to meet net zero. Using the IEMA carbon hierarchy, there is a need to first look at
eliminating and reducing emissions, before considering substitute materials. For example, in geotechnical
designs, this may mean considering using ground improvement or reducing the number of piles, before
considering using low carbon cements. Equally, for remaining emissions, this hierarchy means considering
carbon negative products to offset emissions, such as ground source heat pumps. This hierarchy can also be
applied throughout geotechnical contractor organisations. For example, considering video conferencing for
meetings, before considering public transport or using an electric vehicle. This article explores the carbon
hierarchy and how it can be applied to all areas of a geotechnical contractor’s business. Only through
embedding this hierarchy across the business can geotechnical contractors achieve the step change required
to meet net zero.
This report presents the results of a synthesis on the design and analysis of ground improvement for liquefaction mitigation. The synthesis included an industry survey concerning the practice of ground improvement for liquefaction mitigation. Participation in the survey was solicited by advertisements in several trade magazines and by e-mail for the DFI membership. The survey participants numbered 150. Their professional roles include consulting engineers, specialty contractors, design engineers, government engineers, and academicians. They represent a variety of geographical areas including North/Central/South America, United Kingdom, Middle East, Caribbean, Hawaii, Japan, India, Egypt, France, Australia and New Zealand. Upon completion of the survey, several professionals in the field of liquefaction and ground improvement were interviewed for them to elaborate on the survey results. The interviews are included in the Appendix of this report. Financial support for the project was provided by DFI and Dan Brown and Associates PC. The concept of the liquefaction mitigation synthesis was developed by DFI?s Ground Improvement Committee in recognition that: (a) The results of recent research and post-earthquake reconnaissance have challenged previously longheld beliefs about liquefaction and associated mitigation techniques, and; (b) The DFI membership and the engineering/construction industry are interested to know if and how engineers and designers are subsequently adjusting their practice in consideration of recent research and post-earthquake reconnaissance. For more detailed information on recent research and post-earthquake reconnaissance, presentations are available from the State-of-the-Art Forum: Liquefaction Consequences and Mitigation that was held in St. Louis in 2012. A commentary of the state-of-practice in ground improvement for liquefaction mitigation (prepared by DFI?s Ground Improvement Committee) is included in this issue of the DFI Journal. The author would like to thank the participants of the survey and especially Mr. Mike Jeffries, Dr. Les Youd, and Dr. Ikuo Towhata for their willingness to share their expertise in interviews. The author also acknowledges Mary Ellen Bruce of DFI, Billy Camp of S&ME, Inc., and Marty Taube of DGI Menard (and Chair of DFI?s Ground Improvement Committee) for their signifi cant contributions.
By William M. Dalrymple, William P. Owen, Benjamin S. Rivers
For the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), geophysical applications have played an
important role as part of a successful multidisciplinary approach to subsurface characterization for the
design of high value structures. Since at least the 1950’s, geophysical methods have been deployed to guide
the exploration drilling program and to maximize the return on drilling investment by increasing the amount
of data obtained from test borings. Geophysical applications saw increased use beginning in the 1990’s,
during the seismic retrofit of the state’s toll bridges and the replacement of the west span of the San
Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge. Over the intervening years, increases in computing power and increasingly
sophisticated commercial off-the-shelf software applications have allowed Caltrans to leverage
advancements and perform geophysical investigations of increasing complexity and scale. Ultimately, the
goal of these efforts is to maximize return on investment, whereby increased investigation costs at the
design phase are offset by reduced uncertainty regarding subsurface conditions, leading to reduced cost
overruns related to change orders and unforeseen site conditions during construction. These objectives are
consistent with the recent Every Day Counts (EDC) initiative to incorporate Advanced Geotechnical
Methods in Exploration (A-GaME) into routine engineering practice. Caltrans is an implementation partner
of the A-GaME initiative, and Caltrans’ practices represent a model toward the institutionalized geophysical
site characterization practices for other transportation organizations. The authors provide a retrospective on
70 years of experience with geophysical applications for transportation infrastructure, with examples and
observations on potential future direction of the industry.