Search Documents

By Steve Davidow, Ashely E. Evans, Peter M. Kandaris

"Annually thousands of deep foundations are constructed across North America supporting high voltage transmission line structures. However, a recent state of the practice survey by the Deep Foundation Institutes’ Electric Power Systems Foundation Working Group discovered that the electric power utility industry lacks consistent foundation design guidelines. The survey identified a wide variability in design assumptions, a minimal understanding of risk based analysis, and a need to standardize design methodologies. This paper summarizes the state of practice in electric system foundation design and proposes a framework for risk-based foundation design by accounting for uncertainty from both loads and resistances. Loads derived from electric system codes do not necessarily provide a compatible level of reliability for the design of foundations, as they are a mixture of probabilistic and deterministic values. Load uncertainty is derived from variability in weather conditions, structural models and material properties, typically accounted for by code derived overload factors. Resistance uncertainty arises from variability in natural soil properties, resistance models, subsurface construction techniques, material sampling methods, and limited observations. A consistent methodology is offered relating nominal resistance capacity (strength) to structure loads and service state criteria. Discussion also includes the need for risk-based assessments to account for non-structure load influences (fluvial loads, scour ground loss, liquefaction, etc.).INTRODUCTIONNearly 40 years ago the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) embarked on a major research effort to optimize reliability and economics of transmission line foundation design. Strategies focused on improvements in design models, site characterization, exploration strategies and testing to reduce uncertainty and variance in analysis. Transmission line engineers realized that safety and reliability advancements in design based on probabilistic approaches, with a focus on the unique nature of transmission line, could better control risk and cost.Some transmission line professionals took full advantage of these advancements, particularly where research led to improved software and models. Yet, even after two decades of extensive research, by 1995 the industry still had made little progress in changing design habits. The majority of designers were still characterizing sites via deterministic methods, using loads that may or may not relate to a consistent probability of occurrence, and applying a traditional global factor of safety approach (Phoon, et al. 1995). The following two decades have seen even greater developments in software and reliability-based analysis methods, but old habits seem to die hard as recent surveys show less than half of design professional quantitatively assess risk in their design process."

Jan 1, 2017

By Frank Rausche, Scott D. Webster, Rozbeh B. Moghaddam

"Pile foundation driveability is a function of several variables such as subsurface characteristics, hammer type, hammer efficiency, pile type, and plugging conditions. One important phenomenon occurring during pile driving, and yet not well documented and published, is the friction fatigue, where a reduction of shaft resistance is observed as the pile is driven to greater embedment. This paper introduces current soil models developed for the assessment of friction fatigue, and further presents a comparison between predicted driveability obtained from Wave Equation Analysis Program (GRLWEAP) and field driving records. From a literature survey, and review of technical articles, a widely-used soil model known as AH-01 has been selected to analyze the friction fatigue concept. Using a WEAP software, two driveability analysis were completed using the standard approach with setup factors, and adapting the AH-01 model into the WEAP input file. Driveability predictions were compared to the driving records corresponding to a 1676-mm x 44- mm open-ended pipe pile with a total and embedment lengths of 180-m and 119-m, respectively. Results from analyses and the comparison presented in this paper provide further information regarding existing methods for the incorporation of the friction fatigue concept to the driveability analyses, and contributes to a better prediction of driveability of open-ended pipe piles. IntroductionDynamic measurements during pile installation provide more dependable information as compared to results obtained from predictive models used for design. Despite uncertainties associated with a specific project site and foundation type, measured data provides a reliable understanding of the soil resistance and its distribution throughout the length of the pile. Back-calculations or back-analyses based on a series of measured data from a pile driving process could help to obtain reliable models to better predict events related to pile installation process in spite of all variability related to fitted models. One of the widely-used analysis regarding pile driving during the design phase is the “driveability analysis” where capacity, blowcounts, maximum stresses in the pile element, and transferred energy from the hammer to the pile element are predicted using mathematical models along with a software. Such analysis requires relevant information regarding soil, pile, and hammer properties combined with a deep understanding of the level of impact each one of these properties could have on the analysis."

Jan 1, 2017

By William Billiet

"The Dulles Silver Line Phase II is an 11.4 mile extension of the Washington Area Metro Transit Authority’s Silver line in northern Virginia. There are three miles of elevated guideway, which are supported on 188 large diameter mono-shafts founded within the Triassic Geologic Aged Culpeper Fault Basin. Three lateral load tests were performed on fully instrumented test shafts. The challenge in developing the load testing program was how to reproduce the effects of the extremely high design loads along the test shafts, considering the limitations of the load test equipment. Development, execution, and analysis of the lateral load test program is discussed.INTRODUCTIONPlans for Dulles Silver Line Phase II include two Aerial Guideway sections on elevated track, the Main Line and Yard Leads. The Aerial Guideways are supported on mono-shafts (single, largediameter drilled shafts) socketed into rock. Lateral loads are resisted primarily through the stiffness of the shaft and the geotechnical resistance of the rock socket. The monoshafts were designed in accordance with AASHTO LRFD 2014. Based on our preliminary analyses, the production mono shafts were expected to consist of 6.5, 7.5, and 8.5 foot diameter drilled shafts with rock socket lengths varying between 8 and 34 feet (averaging 14 feet). Table 1 summarizes the maximum service load combinations for each size production shaft along the aerial guideway alignment.GEOLOGYThe project is located within the Piedmont Province, a major physiographic province on the east coast of the USA extending from Alabama to Pennsylvania. Within the Piedmont, a number of Mesozoic basins formed in rift valleys. Dulles Airport is located in the Culpeper Basin, characterized by a relatively shallow siltstone rock surface compared to the adjacent areas underlain by Piedmont crystalline rocks. The geologic stratigraphy at the load test sites generally consist of residual soils and intermediate geo-material (IGM) overlying siltstone rock. IGM is a term used by Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) to describe residual material as it transitions between soil and rock. For the purposes of the load test, the siltstone rock is classified as fractured rock (RQD<50), and competent rock (RQD=50). Table 2 summarizes the stratigraphy encountered at each test site."

Jan 1, 2017

By Lawrence F. Johnsen, Felix Ferrer, Dino Tomasetti, Cassandra A. Wetzel

"A 17 story building was constructed at the Brooklyn Navy Yard on a site with a long history of development. Most recently the site supported a dewatering well and craneway to service two adjacent drydocks. The subsurface conditions generally consist of the following strata and approximate depths: miscellaneous fill and debris to 20 ft., organic soils to 35 ft., liquefiable sand to 45 ft., varved clay to 65 ft., glacial till to 95 ft. and gneiss bedrock.Hollow core bar piles replaced 18 in. diameter caissons on a 1.67:1 basis. The resulting service loads on the hollow bar piles were 600 kips compression, 21 kips lateral, 180 kips tension and 450 inch-kips moment. The top 30 feet of the hollow bar was cased with a 16 in. x 0.375 in. Grade 50 steel pipe. The piles were socketed 6 feet into bedrock. An extensive load testing program confirmed the axial and lateral load capacities. The paper will also discuss some adjustments to the installation procedure based on the load test program.PROJECTThe hollow bar piles were installed to support a 95,000 sf footprint, 17-story office building at the Brooklyn Navy Yard. The Brooklyn Navy Yard was first developed in the late 1700’s to build merchant vessels. The federal government purchased the old docks and adjoining 40 acres in 1801. The site was an active U. S. Naval Shipyard from 1806 to its decommissioning in 1966. At its peak in World War II it employed 70,000 people, 24 hours a day. Since 1966 the property has been converted to private manufacturing and commercial activity.The site is located between Dry Docks 2 and 3. The adjacent drydocks extend 40 to 43 feet below grade. The drydock walls are restrained by tierods extending back to deadman anchors. The site is also underlain by piles that were installed to support rail lines and a craneway. The building footprint also covered an 85 ft. wide, 70 ft. deep dewatering well which had a thick slab. The structural engineer for the project, ARUP, designed the building to span over the dewatering well.SUBSURFACE CONDITIONSIn September 2014, Langan Engineering conducted a geotechnical engineering study for the project. Figure 1 provides a subsurface profile through the long axis of the site. The general soil profile was very erratic but generally consisted of miscellaneous fill and debris to 20 ft., organic soils to 35 ft., liquefiable sand to 45 ft., varved clay to 65 ft., glacial till to 95 ft. and gneiss bedrock. The fill contained numerous obstructions from the over 200 years of site development. The organic soils were mostly very weak and compressible organic silt. The depths and thicknesses of the varved clay, and sand varied"

Jan 1, 2017

By Eleonora Di Mario, Colin B. Turnbull, Matthew G. Mills, Chengbin Miao, Wilhelm S. Degen

"In the past decade, the ‘zero-dredge’ philosophy has become the preferred option for the formation of marine seawalls and reclamations, compared to the partially or fully dredged options, as this solution presents several environmental advantages. Recent relevant project experience is presented herein in order to highlight key design principles and construction issues central to the successful construction and performance of a sloping rubble seawall founded on soft soil improved by stone columns. If designed and installed with proper quality control, correct treatment intensity and sensible construction staging, stone columns are a safe and cost effective method for seawall foundations. This paper provides guidelines with regards to the design, construction and quality control for the correct implementation of stone columns as a foundation element for sloping rubble marine seawalls.INTRODUCTIONBenefits of sloping marine seawalls founded on stone columnsTo suit the current environmental requirements in Hong Kong, recent projects are tending to favour zero-dredge solutions, such as the Hong Kong Boundary Crossing Facility and the forthcoming Three-Runway System. The installation of stone columns allows the underlying deposits, generally consisting of very soft to soft clay and silt (soft soil), to improve in strength to the extent that the seawall can be directly placed on the seabed. This negates the need to dredge the soft soil and, therefore, this ground improvement technique represents an ideal solution for zero-dredge projects.Stone columns can also provide several other beneficial effects, including: accelerated drainage, reduced settlement, increased slope stability and soil reinforcement in the event of an earthquake. Stone columns, in contrast to competing cementitious methods, are a very ductile foundation method. This ductile behaviour is part of the design concept of stone columns in soft soil. Past projects located in Hong Kong and elsewhere, with an improved soft soil layer thickness of over 15m, have shown that stone columns can remain fully functional in terms of both drainage and horizontal reinforcement, even after settlements of over 3m and lateral displacements of up to 1m have occurred."

Jan 1, 2017

By Federico Pagliacci, Claudio Asioli, Marco Chiarabelli

"""Rigid inclusions"" are a consolidation method that provides improvement of soft soils thanks to the installation of cylindrical columns made up of a material with significant and permanent cohesive properties, whose stiffness is 500÷5000 times greater than the surrounding natural soil’s. ""Rigid inclusions"" find their application in marginal areas (reclamations, polluted sites) to ensure stability of adjacent structures during construction of new buildings and to reduce the impact of natural disasters (liquefaction in the event of earthquakes, embankment collapse in the event of floods). This paper analyses the “rigid inclusion” construction method, related materials and equipment. Moreover, two performed projects will be illustrated. The first is the restoration of Lungarno Torrigiani Embankment in Florence, Italy. In May 2016, the Torrigiani embankment underwent a structural collapse causing a 3 m. displacement of the riverbank towards the Arno River. “Rigid inclusions” (with 300 mm diameter) have been used to re-compact the loose soil and create a stable working platform for the equipment. The second project illustrates the use of “rigid inclusions” (800 mm diameter and maximum depth of 36.6 m) to control the settlement of a new automatic cold store (30 m high with a 65 x 120 m foot print) for fresh frozen vegetables.RIGID INCLUSIONSIn general, the word ""inclusions"" means a type of consolidation that improves the strength of a soil mass through the inclusion of elements constituted by a material having better characteristics than those of the surrounding natural ground, to improve the overall mechanical characteristics of the treated soil. Inclusions are ""rigid"" when the material introduced into the ground has significant and permanent cohesive properties (concrete or cement mortar) and a significantly higher stiffness (500 ÷ 5000 times) than that of the surrounding natural ground.Typically, medium-small diameters (from 300 to 800mm) with low percentages of treatment (from 2% to 10% of the volume of soil) are employed, ensuring a high quality and consistency of the obtained product, both in terms of diameters and elastic modulus.According to the scope of the project and in urban areas, ""rigid inclusion"" columns can also be performed by means of small diameter drilling rigs (micropiles), weighing less than 20-25 tonnes."

Jan 1, 2017

By Malek Smadi, Yazen A. Khasawneh

"New embankments were constructed mostly on soft clays as part of interstate I69 extension in southern Indiana. The embankments serve as bridge abutments and as part of the fill sections along the interstate extension alignment. The height of the embankments range from 50-ft to 125-ft with a maximum foundation thickness of about 75-ft. The foundation soils comprise relatively high compressible fine grained soils. A fully coupled Hydro-Mechanical numerical simulations were conducted for optimizing the construction stages of the embankments. The objective of the staged construction is to allow for sufficient effective stress and undrained shear strength gain to ensure foundation stability under the stage load. Wick drains were utilized to shorten the drainage path and thus accelerate achieving the required undrained shear strength. The extensive field investigation and laboratory testing programs provided a good understanding of the subsurface conditions and allowed the use of a relatively advanced soil constitutive model in the numerical simulations of the staged construction. The effectively designed instrumentation program allowed for monitoring the settlement and pore water dissipation during construction. The pore water pressure, and surface and subsurface settlements from the numerical model predictions reasonably agreed with the instrumentation data over the construction period.INTRODUCTIONThe stability of soft fine grained foundation soils due to embankment construction is dependent on the undrained shear strength of such soils. The permeability, compressibility, and drainage boundaries control the foundation soils response (settlement magnitude and rate) to loading. The settlement magnitude is a function of minerology and soil structure. The settlement rate which is equivalent to the rate of excess pore water pressure dissipation is a function of the soil permeability and drainage boundary. The dissipation rate control the evolution of effective stress and thus the gain of undrained shear strength. As such, if the increase in total applied load is controlled such that enough time is granted for the evolution of the total stresses into effective stresses, then the stability of the foundation soils is enhanced by the gain of the undrained shear strength. The controlled application of the total stress is the definition of the staged construction. From the definition of the staged construction, it is obvious that the process is a coupling of the hydraulic and mechanical responses of the foundation soils."

Jan 1, 2017

By Albert Neumann, Franz-Werner Gerressen, Giancarlo Santarelli

"Diaphragm walls are known as underground structural elements commonly used for retention systems and permanent foundation walls or elements. In addition they are also quite often used as deep groundwater barriers, named Cut-Off-Walls (COW). Due to the requirements of each particular job site, e.g. the need for carrying high loads or as seepage barriers, there is an increasing industry demand for efficiently cutting into rock. Besides the removal of boulders, cutting through rock, is always the most difficult part of the excavation process of a diaphragm wall or COW.There are a number of influencing factors which have an impact on the rock cutting performance. Besides the influence of the rock characteristics itself, which is not always the same, there are other factors related to equipment, tooling as well as the operating staff. In addition to RQD, the most commonly available rock property found in geotechnical reports is the Unconfined Compressive Strength (UCS) value. There are however some other related properties, such as weathering, bedding, inclination, abrasiveness, etc.,which can have a major impact on the achievable cutting performance. This paper will discuss the various parameters, and how they can be considered for performance estimation. Based on experiences gained on over 100 projects, a performance estimation chart was developed to allow for a better approach to these kinds of projects. This paper also explains the general installation process in as well as some specific features related to specific site conditions. In addition, some job site references will give more detailed information about such type of site conditions and how to deal with them.Keywords: Diaphragm wall, Cut-Off-Wall, Trench Cutter, RockINTRODUCTIONDiaphragm walls are known as underground structural elements commonly used as retention systems for excavation pits, shafts, permanent foundation walls and load bearing elements.It can be anticipated that, with the increasing trend of utilizing more and more underground space to accommodate environmental considerations and urban/suburban development, there will be an increasing requirement for diaphragm wall usage in even more difficult conditions.In addition diaphragm walls can also be used as deep groundwater barriers (Cut-Off-Walls). This market has demonstrated that the demand for these types of walls is reaching ever more difficult soil conditions and greater depths which are surpassing the current industry standards. The trench cutter is the most important tool for performing this type of work."

Jan 1, 2016

"1.0 INTRODUCTIONThese Guidelines reflect the state-of-the-practice of the Deep Mixing Method (DMM) in North America. DMM is an in situ mixing process that breaks down the soil structure; injects binders, fillers and reagents into the soil; and blends them with the soil. DMM is also commonly referred to as Soil Mixing. The final properties of the treated soil in situ are a function of the composition of the native soils and groundwater, the binders introduced, the mixing methods and energy, and the conditions and time of curing. Treated soils generally have increased strength and stiffness and/or reduced permeability relative to the native soils.This document addresses DMM performed by rotating single and multiple axis mixing tools, rotating cutter wheels at the end of a rigid kelly bar, or trench mixing using a rotating cutting/mixing chain around the perimeter of a rigid bar. Binder may be injected through low or high energy (velocity) jets.The treated soils created through wet DMM are heterogeneous mixtures of binder, water, soil, and groundwater. Treated soils produced by dry DMM techniques are a mixture of binder, soil, and the water already present in the native soil.DMM applications described in this document include•,Earth retention•,Liquefaction mitigation•,Groundwater seepage control and containment isolation•,Bearing capacity improvement•,Deep foundations•,Mass stabilization and contamination containment•,Embankment, levee and dam strengthening, and stabilization•,Casing replacementThis document was developed to address deep foundations applications. Use of deep mixing for seepage control is not specifically addressed. The reader is referred to documents prepared by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers for additional information. Shallow soil mixing and the use of DMM for stabilization/solidification of contaminated soils performed at depths less than 10 feet (3 m) are mentioned briefly. Jet grouting is not covered by these guidelines."

Jan 1, 2016

By Mary Ellen Bruce Large

"In partnership with California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), and with support from International Association of Foundation Drilling (ADSC), Deep Foundations Institute (DFI) organized a workshop on quality assurance (QA) practices for acceptance of post-grouted drilled shafts in conjunction with DFI’s 40th Annual Conference on Deep Foundations. The 1½-day workshop was held on October 15-16, 2015 at the Oakland Marriott City Center in Oakland, CA.Post-grouting, in the context of this workshop and report, refers to the alternative design and construction of base-grouted drilled shafts wherein a grout distribution system is installed during construction and used to grout the base under pressure after the drilled shaft concrete has gained adequate strength, resulting in a stiffer axial-compression load-displacement relationship and additional possible ground improvement effects.The primary goals of the workshop were to•?Identify and summarize the state of the practice for design, construction, inspection, verification, acceptance criteria, reliability and performance of post-grouting.•?Identify gaps and needs in quality assurance that should be addressed for successful use of post-grouting.This report is structured to follow the workshop program: workshop presentations outlined the state of practice and views from owners, engineers and contractors on acceptance of post grouting methods for drilled shafts; and subsequent workshop discussions attended by a small invited group of participants focused on identifying areas of agreement and disagreement on post-grouting best practices, acceptance criteria, design and verification procedures, and inspection requirements. A partial list of attendees of the open and closed sessions is provided as Appendix A, and copies of presentations are included as Appendix B.FHWA and Caltrans are the primary audiences for this report, and its content will be used to develop a roadmap for deploying the findings into policy and practice. The secondary audience is the broader industry group, and the report content will be disseminated in a variety of formats."

Jan 1, 2016

By Dharmil Patel, Michael J. Chow

"Construction progress is nearing completion at a Brownfield Site for a 100,000sf mixed-use 10 story building plus cellar for Silver Star Motors including a two-floor pre-owned Mercedes Benz showroom; high-end residential rental studios, 1, 2, and 3 bedroom apartments; and penthouses on the upper two floors. Excavation through impacted soil extended to 15ft depth. Project is approximately 7 ft north of a NYCT subway station, portions of the SOE are within inches of a 6ft diameter NYCDEP Sewer, and cellar extends below the depth of adjacent structures, requiring over 200 lf of underpinning.A complex series of earth retention systems was utilized consisting of underpinning, drilled-in soldier piles (micro-piles), timber/concrete lagging, soil anchors and inclined rakers supported by a partially constructed foundation mat. Foundation mat subgrade was approximately 4 ft below the groundwater level creating more challenges during underpinning and achieving suitable foundation subgrades. All construction was undertaken on a non-union basis.This paper describes the design, construction, and lessons learned for the multiple earth retention systems, Brownfield Remediation requirements, instrumentation, and monitoring used to manage complications of building adjacent to an active subway station, in close proximity to existing utilities, with underpinning and mat foundation installation below the water table.Results of the instrumentation program are summarized which utilized an AMTS, monitoring prisms on adjacent structures, automated seismographs, and manual NYCT surveys."

Jan 1, 2016

By Kevin Green, Iván Contreras, Aaron Grosser, Jon Ausdemore, Rachel Leier, Amr Ragy

"Construction of a new tailings dam was required to increase tailings storage capacity at a trona mine near Green River, Wyoming. The new dam was founded on overburden soils underlain by both fractured and competent bedrock. The stored tailings and water had high salt content, resulting in salty seepage water. To reduce the impact of the salty water on groundwater and the Green River, the design of the new tailings dam included a 257,260 SF (23,900 m2) seepage cutoff extending into competent rock.An extensive subsurface characterization was performed prior to completing the design and suitable seepage cutoff methods were evaluated. The approach selected was a full replacement panel using hydromill and clamshell for construction and self-hardening slurry (SHS) for the wall material. Laboratory testing was performed and ongoing monitoring has continued to evaluate the hydraulic conductivity and seepage cutoff performance in the briny environment.The paper includes project background, the collaborative approach and outcomes of the QA/QC program, and the monitoring results for the seepage cutoff wall.PROJECT BACKGROUNDCiner Wyoming, LLC (formerly OCI Wyoming, LLC) owns and operates the Big Island Mine facility near Green River, Wyoming. This underground trona mine has produced soda ash since 1962. The Greater Green River Basin covers much of southwestern Wyoming and extends into northeastern Utah and northwestern Colorado. The Ciner facility is located in the Green River Basin, which is part of the Wyoming Basin physiographic province. The Green River runs to the west and the south of the Ciner facility.Beginning in the early 1990s, Ciner primarily disposed tailings underground in mined-out panels. However, in recent years, underground storage has become limited and some disposal has transitioned to the ground surface. Long-term planning revealed a need to expand Ciner’s surface tailings disposal capabilities. Pond 2, a previously permitted disposal area, was identified as the most viable location for a storage facility. The Pond 2 site is directly north of the Ciner plant facilities, northwest of the active Upper Delta tailings storage facility, and northeast of the Green River (Fig 1)."

Jan 1, 2016

By Zia Zafir

"Levees in the central valley of California are primarily for flood control purposes and thus are subjected to infrequent hydraulic loading. The primary concern for these levees is their instability due to through and under seepage. Primary seepage control measures are seepage cutoff walls and/or seepage berms. The cutoff walls primarily consist of soil-bentonite (SB) slurry walls. The seepage berm could be a drainage blanket to allow the seepage with controlled exit gradient or an impervious layer to provide enough cover to protect any adverse effects of seepage in terms of sand boils. Although, Sacramento is an area of moderate seismic activity, levees protecting urban areas require assessment for the potential instability due to liquefaction and associated vertical and lateral deformations. In certain cases, the seismic deformations of the levee may not compromise the stability of the levees, but they may cause damage to the seepage control measures. Depending on the nature and extent of the damage, the mitigation measures may require limited or full replacement of the seepage control measures. This paper will provide a systematic assessment of these different types of seepage control measures under vertical and lateral deformations due to liquefaction and lateral spreading under seismic loadings.INTRODUCTIONThere are two broad categories of levees in Central California: levees that are subjected to continuous hydraulic loading such as delta levees and are called frequently loaded levees (FLL) and flood control levees that are subjected to seasonal or infrequent hydraulic loading, called infrequently loaded levees (ILL). This paper will focus on the seismic response of ILL. The probability of ILL experiencing an earthquake at the time of the design flood is very low. Therefore, consequences of seismic failure of flood control levees are only significant in terms of response time required to restore the level of flood protection provided by the levee before the next flood season. An example for this restoration is the restoration of the Pajaro River levees in Santa Cruz, California after the 1989 Loma Prieta Earthquake. Nevertheless, failure of flood control levees due to a seismic event could result in loss of the entire levee and/or loss of freeboard. In addition, some of the seismic failure of ILL levees may result in loss of seepage control measures such as the soil-bentonite wall.The State of California State approved Senate Bill (SB) 5 in 2007 that mandates for 200-year flood protection to be the minimum level of protection for urban and urbanizing areas in Central California (Sacramento-San Joaquin Valley) by the year 2025. This legislation also requires that urban and urbanizing areas protected by Federal project levees cannot use adequate progress as a condition to approve development after 2025. SB 5 requires that the urban level of flood protection be consistent with criteria used or developed by DWR (Government Code § 65007(k)). To avoid delaying urgently needed flood protection, Urban Levee Design Criteria (ULDC, 2012) was developed."

Jan 1, 2016

By M. Melih Demirkan, Jared Deible, Michael Rosenmeier, Mazen Elias Adib, Juan J. Gutierrez, Raghav Ramanathan

Dewatering and groundwater control is required frequently for construction projects and needs to be accounted for and dealt with care during design and construction to complete the project successfully. Dewatering can cause changes in porewater pressure, which changes the effective vertical stress in a soil mass. Dewatering can also cause changes in groundwater chemistry which in turn can cause changes in porewater pressure and also dissolution of soluble minerals in the soil and rock. The Guideline developed in this study addresses the engineering issues, approaches to lessen the potential risks associated with construction dewatering, and presents dewatering practices to support dewatering applications regulated by the Municipality of Abu Dhabi City (ADM) in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). The subsurface condition within the city presents significant geotechnical problems due to presence of shallow subsurface cavities and soluble minerals in the soil and rock. Therefore it is critical to develop standards for dewatering practices to provide information for local dewatering engineers and contractors with special emphasis to control and to eliminate the subsidence/collapse problems related to dewatering projects within the Abu Dhabi city. The ADM is also responsible for approval of permit applications for projects that involve dewatering. In order to minimize the risk related to subsidence/collapse problems due to dewatering, construction companies and dewatering contractors need to be informed about possible mitigative measures that can be employed to reduce risks. The guidelines were developed as part of this study based on detailed analysis of the local subsurface conditions. A set of rules and regulations are developed for geotechnical and hydrogeological investigations, dewatering design and monitoring criteria depending on the hazard zones, proximity of excavation to critical structures, excavation depth. The Guidelines include examples of permit application packages for three types of dewatering projects; one involving shallow dewatering, one involving intermediate depth dewatering, and one involving deep dewatering. These Guidelines are considered as living document and will be updated as required, as additional information is collected and additional local experience is gained.

Jan 1, 2016

By R. Lee Wooten, David R. Shields, Darren D. Clark

"Borehole permeability tests that measure flow or head changes in boreholes located within seepage barrier walls are commonly used to estimate the in situ permeabilities of those walls for quality control and assurance. The current state of practice for estimating permeabilities from these barrier wall borehole tests is to use equations published by M. J. Hvorslev in 1951. Hvorslev’s borehole test equations model an infinite stratum of uniform permeability, which is not the actual condition for a test performed in a low permeability barrier wall located within a high permeability stratum. We examine and develop alternative equations based on line source analytical models, which more closely match barrier wall test conditions. We describe how these alternate equations can be used to estimate barrier wall permeabilities from borehole tests and compare the results to those obtained from the Hvorslev models. We also provide recommendations that consider differing upstream and downstream water levels.Barrier Wall Permeability Tests - State Of PracticeThe installation of seepage barrier walls has become more common in a variety of applications ranging from dams and levees to contaminated sites requiring retardation of groundwater flow. The types of seepage barrier walls and installation methods include soil-bentonite, soil-cement-bentonite, concrete, self-hardening slurry, geomembranes, and sheet piles, installed with various soil mixing, slurry-supported trench, and driving methods.Owners and contractors have used a variety of methods to evaluate the permeability of these seepage barriers. The following table lists commonly used quality control/assurance tests for evaluating the permeability of a seepage barrier."

Jan 1, 2016

By Robert E. Schock, Eric J. Risberg

"Less than 20,000 years ago, the last of the glaciers retreated from the Chicago region. They left behind sheets of glacial clay till underlain by dense, over-consolidated till (“hardpan”) below which is the limestone bedrock, found about 100 ft (30.5 m) below street level. The most notable feature in this profile is the unusually soft clay till that has historically been called “Chicago Blue Clay.”But the founding fathers of Chicago really didn’t care about what was under the ground. They recognized the importance of the city’s location as a potential trade and transportation hub. With access to the East through the Great Lakes and access to the West through the Mississippi River system, the viability of the city was evident. Chicago’s population grew rapidly. The city continued to grow through the Civil War years, but was dealt a devastating blow in 1871 by the Great Chicago Fire, leaving the city in ruins. The Birth of the SkyscraperAfter the cleanup of the Great Fire came the first real building boom in Chicago’s history. During this era, buildings were generally founded on shallow footings bearing on sand or clay. Many multistory buildings were constructed between 1880 and 1890 on spread footings. The first tall buildings were constructed with load bearing masonry walls. These early tall buildings suffered significant settlement as the soft clay underwent consolidation.The Home Insurance Building, built in 1885, was 12-stories tall and is generally acknowledged to be the first “skyscraper” in the U.S. It was the first building constructed with an iron skeleton frame instead of load bearing masonry walls. Spread footings were used under the interior columns in an effort to better distribute the loads, but the building still experienced large settlements.Construction began for the Monadnock Building in 1891. The 17-story building was built using load bearing walls 7 ft (2.1 m) thick, supported on rail-grillage footing foundations. When completed in 1893, the Monadnock Building boasted the title “World’s Largest Office Building.” The total building settlement over the past 125 years has been measured at over 20 in (0.51 m). The engineering community in the late 19th century observed settlement, but did not yet understand the process of consolidation of the soft clay beneath the city. During this time, many of the new buildings required structural repairs during and after construction; the problem was especially acute in buildings where highrise towers joined lower podium structures."

Jan 1, 2016

By EFFC/DFI Concrete Task Group

Concrete technology continues to advance rapidly and modern mixes with five components – cement, additions, aggregates, (chemical) admixtures and water – often have characteristics which differ significantly from the older three component mixes – cement, aggregates and water. Recent trends have favoured higher strength classes and lower water/cement ratios, resulting in greater dependence on admixtures to compensate for reduced workability and to meet the (often competing) demands for workability in the fresh state and setting time. The application of testing methods which reflect the true rheological properties of the concrete has not developed at the same rate as the mixes themselves and it is still not uncommon for the slump or flow table test to be used as the only acceptance test for fresh concrete.A joint review of problems in bored piles (drilled shafts) and diaphragm walls cast using tremie methods by both the European Federation of Foundation Contractors (EFFC) and the Deep Foundations Institute in the United States (DFI) identified a common issue. The review determined that many of the problems were caused by (or in part due to) the use of inadequate concrete mixes with inadequate workability, or insufficient stability or robustness of the mixes. It further identified the primary causes as inadequate concrete specifications and inadequate testing procedures. The consequences of these problems are often significant and it has been recognised that spending more time and money on getting the concrete right is the most cost effective approach.A joint Concrete Task Group was set up by EFFC and DFI in 2014 to look at this issue and this guide is the output from that Task Group. A research and development project, funded by the Sponsors of this guide, is being carried out by the Technical University of Munich in conjunction with the Missouri University of Science and Technology. This project includes desk studies, laboratory testing, and onsite testing at worksites in Europe and the US. The research work will be completed during 2016.

Jan 1, 2016

By Mary Ellen Bruce Large

"INTRODUCTIONIn partnership with California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), and with support from International Association of Foundation Drilling (ADSC), Deep Foundations Institute (DFI) organized a workshop on quality assurance (QA) practices for acceptance of post-grouted drilled shafts in conjunction with DFI’s 40th Annual Conference on Deep Foundations. The 1½-day workshop was held on October 15-16, 2015 at the Oakland Marriott City Center in Oakland, CA.Post-grouting, in the context of this workshop and report, refers to the alternative design and construction of base-grouted drilled shafts wherein a grout distribution system is installed during construction and used to grout the base under pressure after the drilled shaft concrete has gained adequate strength, resulting in a stiffer axial-compression load-displacement relationship and additional possible ground improvement effects. The primary goals of the workshop were to•?Identify and summarize the state of the practice for design, construction, inspection, verification, acceptance criteria, reliability and performance of post-grouting.•?Identify gaps and needs in quality assurance that should be addressed for successful use of post-grouting.This report is structured to follow the workshop program: workshop presentations outlined the state of practice and views from owners, engineers and contractors on acceptance of post grouting methods for drilled shafts; and subsequent workshop discussions attended by a small invited group of participants focused on identifying areas of agreement and disagreement on post-grouting best practices, acceptance criteria, design and verification procedures, and inspection requirements. A partial list of attendees of the open and closed sessions is provided as Appendix A, and copies of presentations are included as Appendix B.FHWA and Caltrans are the primary audiences for this report, and its content will be used to develop a roadmap for deploying the findings into policy and practice. The secondary audience is the broader industry group, and the report content will be disseminated in a variety of formats."

Jan 1, 2016

By Jean Wehbe, Daniel C. Brahana

"The new Mercedes-Benz Stadium (MBS), home of the Atlanta Falcons, is part of a new era of stadium construction in the U.S. These new-age stadiums are larger and have more amenities than their predecessors. Many of the MBS’s features, including its innovative retractable roof, result in extraordinary structural loads. The roof structure is supported by a series of mega columns that bear on eight large caps, six of which are supported by drilled piers. Each of the pier caps contains between 8 and 16 drilled piers that bear in the underlying bedrock. The design pier diameters are 6 and 6.5 ft (1.8 m and 1.9 m). Augercast piles were used to support two of the mega column caps. Drilled piers, augercast piles, aggregate piers and spread footings were used to support the more lightly loaded portions of the structure.The focus of this article is the construction aspects of the drilled pier foundations. Initially, a fairly extensive drilled pier load test program was performed. Load testing included a Statnamic compression test, two Osterberg Cell tests and two lateral tests. Production pier installation included over 3,800 linear ft (1,158.2 m) of earth excavation and over 1,350 linear ft (411.4 m) of hard rock excavation. The piers contain more than 6,600 cu yd (4,587.3 cu m) of concrete and 1,100 tons (998 tonnes) of reinforcing steel. Drilled pier installation took about 4.5 months. ABE Enterprises was the specialty foundation subcontractor and Bauer-Pileco was the equipment provider.Site and Subsurface ConditionsThe project site is in downtown Atlanta and was originally occupied by residential buildings. A portion of the site was later developed as a rail yard, and other areas contained light manufacturing, warehouses and other relatively light structures. For the past 15 to 20 years the site had been used for surface parking.Beneath a surficial layer of manmade fill, soil test borings at the site generally encountered residual soil, partially weathered rock and the parent bedrock. The bedrock at the site is highly variable, both in elevation and in hardness/quality. The depth to rock is reasonably uniform within the western two-thirds of the site at about 20 to 50 ft (6 to 15.2 m), with a few exceptions. In the eastern third of the site, the rock drops off dramatically to the north and east. In one mega column cap, there was almost 80 ft (24.3 m) in elevation difference. In two borings in the cap that were 20 ft (6.1 m) apart, the top of rock varied in elevation by 34 ft (10.3 m)"

Jan 1, 2016

By Dale Berner, Michael O’Sullivan

"This article focuses on lessons learned from innovative designs including in-the-wet construction methodology and modified foundation conditions, for two United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) megaprojects. Olmsted Dam FoundationThe over $2 billion Olmsted Dam on the Ohio River is currently under construction 16 mi (29.6 km) upstream from the confluence with the Mississippi River. The project is under the jurisdiction of the Louisville District of the USACE. It will consist of an 800 ft (244 m) long tainter gate section, a 1,400 ft (427 m) navigable pass, two boat abutment sections, a fixed weir section, and upstream and downstream scour protection. The Olmsted Dam and its two 1,200 ft (366 m) locks, which were built in 2002, will eventually replace both Locks and Dam #52 and #53, both built in 1929, and thereby bring significant benefits to the Ohio River navigation system.In 2002, the Jacobs/COWI JV completed the design of the dam; which was an engineering challenge for several reasons. A significant consideration was its proximity to the New Madrid Fault, which could impose an 8.4 Richter scale seismic event on the structure, which is located in an area of potentially liquefiable alluvium. The extensive seismic analysis performed by the designer included a response spectra analyses, lateral pushover analyses of pile foundations, hydrodynamic added masses, pile group effects, and the development of kinematic motions as a result of the soil-pilestructure interaction."

Jan 1, 2016