Search Documents

By John R. Grillo, Gordian Ulrich, Franz-Werner Gerressen

Most geotechnical construction professionals are aware of piling using hydraulic drill rigs and the so-called Kelly drill mode. Kelly drilling has many advantages as it can work with a wide range of tools facing almost all types of soil and rock conditions. Kelly drilling can also deal with diameters up to 10 ft (3.00 m) and bigger or depths of more than 330 ft (100 m). Nonetheless, there is a concern about Kelly drilling as it is a relatively slow installation process. Therefore, an alternative piling method like Cased CFA (CCFA) Piles (Cased Auger Cast Piles) provides a significant advantage in terms of installation performance, schedule and cost saving potentials. Major application for the Cased CFA system is the secant pile wall construction. Against the traditional secant pile wall systems like fully cased bored piles or CFA secant piling the Cased CFA secant pile wall system has the advantage in cost and time against the fully cased system and in quality against the standard CFA system. This paper will describe the methodology and installation process in general as well as first reference projects carried out in the United States. This paper will present the results in cost and schedule saving using this method. In addition, we will also describe the limitations of this method. INTRODUCTION In the changing construction environment, companies are searching for new technologies or improvement of existing technologies to complete their projects in shorter time frames to provide a good economic solution. Especially with the focus of increasing urbanization, the aim of fast construction becomes more and more important. When thinking of piling, most people will have the same picture in mind: that of a hydraulic drill rig working in Kelly drilling mode; however, the perpetual drill rig development provides a number of options for the execution of specialist foundation projects, either for foundations or for pile walls when using single pass applications like CFA, Cased CFA and Full Displacement Piling (FDP). Single pass means, in general, that the tool is pushed and rotated into the ground to the final depth in one stroke. After reaching the final depth, concreting is started and concrete is pumped continuously while the tool is withdrawn.

Jan 1, 2019

By Dennis W. Boehm

The building boom of the late 1970's and early 1980's has all but used up most of the better sites across the more populated metropolitan areas of the United States. This means that current buildings and other types of structures are being founded on more marginal sites. The use of marginal sites has placed ever-increasing quality control on the installation of the deep foundation systems utilized for these sites. Several remedial techniques are available for the repair of the deep foundation systems. These include minipiles, compaction grouting and jet grouting. Eight case histories are cited where these methods have been utilized to repair deep foundations.

Jan 1, 1999

By John D. Nelson

Foundation underpinning is a common component of remediation schemes for distressed foundations on expansive soils. For many applications in expansive soil, micropiles have distinct advantages over other techniques. This paper will concentrate on the design and construction of micropiles in expansive soil. It discusses the nature of building distress and the relationship between foundation movement and soil heave. It presents methods for determining the factors that are required for the design of micropiles. Such factors include calculation of expected free-field heave, depth of soil wetting, and prediction of pier movement. A finite element program developed by the authors and others to determine pier heave and internal forces is presented. The input parameters that are required for pier analysis are discussed, and the nature of the output and the sensitivity of the results to the output are described. A case example illustrates the advantages of micropiles over other methods.

Aug 1, 2013

By Mark D. Fuhriman, Parham Khoshkbari, Robert Fosse

Drilled displacement piles are becoming an increasingly common deep foundation choice for their relatively simple installation methods, applicability to a wide range of subsurface conditions, and versatility. The installation method includes drilling and displacement of the soil followed by delivery of fluid cement grout under pressure, and placement of steel reinforcing to complete the pile. Because the installation method uses blind processes that do not permit direct observation of the pile, it is desirable to employ redundant testing tools to complement good construction techniques and inspection practices to ensure integrity of the piles. This paper examines the use of a range of integrity testing tools used for pile installations at a major office campus development. Because the integrity of a drilled displacement pile and its performance depend to a large extent on the skill and experience of the installation crew, the paper explores how use of multiple practical tools, including automated monitoring tools on the pile installation equipment, thermal integrity profiling, and high-strain dynamic testing, ensure structural integrity of the completed piles and how redundant integrity testing methods complement good construction and inspection practices add confidence in the quality of the foundation system.

Sep 8, 2021

By Alice Y. Tseng, Dan MacLean

"Corrosion protection of all deep foundation systems made of steel is THE issue when considering durability of the element in the long term. Protecting steel from corrosion and maintaining the steel tendon cross sectional area ensures a competent and durable system. The foundation of a building is usually difficult to repair and therefore high risk is taken when unknowingly choosing a non-adequate solution.Requirements according to EN 1990 (Eurocode 0 or EC 0) on construction durability requires a service life over 100 years. How can a service life over 100 years be achieved? How shall bare steel be protected in soil, which sometimes could be an aggressive environment to the steel? Which corrosion protection methods are commonly used in Europe and in North America?This paper will focus on hollow bars used as Micropiles, Anchor piles and Soil Nails. It gives an overview about the state of the practice in regards to corrosion protection (including head construction) and evaluates different options following the European Standards focusing on type of material and method of installation. Further the different corrosion protective methods such as thickness of grout body, coating types and sacrificial loss are listed with the pros and cons evaluated.Based not only on North American standards like FHWA “Micropile Design and Construction Guidelines”, FHWA Geotechnical Engineering Circular No. 7 for “Soil Nail Walls“ and Post-Tensioning Institute “Recommendations for Prestressed Rock and Soil Anchors”, but also European standards like EN 14199 “Execution of special geotechnical works – Micropiles”, EN 14490 “Execution of special geotechnical works - Soil nailing”, EN 1537 “Execution of special geotechnical work – Ground anchors“, and other relevant standards, all possibilities of protecting the hollow bars and the steel quality will be introduced, discussed and compared ."

Jan 1, 2017

By Silas C. Nichols, Jennifer E. Nicks

"Limit states design (LSD), or load and resistance factor design (LRFD), is a method to account for the uncertainty in loads and resistance through a reliability calibration that requires all applicable limit states (strength, service and extreme) to be checked during foundation design. LRFD has been in use internationally for several decades; however it wasn’t until recently that engineers working on highway projects were required to use the method for the design of highway bridges and other appurtenances. Although the bridge community has been using a form of limit states design for structural components since the early 1970s, the design of foundations for bridges, walls and other geotechnical features had long been performed using allowable stress design (ASD), whereby all uncertainty in loads and material resistance is combined in a single factor of safety. While the move to LRFD was viewed as a more rational approach for the design of bridges and structures, the transition to its use for geotechnical engineering has been met by many with confusion and difficulties in application. This article will revisit the history of transition from ASD to LRFD for geotechnical engineering, summarize the status of the transition and issues with its use, and briefly discuss some emerging research opportunities for improving and advancing the design platform.Background and HistoryUntil about a decade ago, foundations and substructures for bridges were traditionally designed using ASD, while the superstructure was designed using load factor design (LFD), a precursor to LRFD that incorporated factored design loads but no risk assessment. This combination led to uncertain and incompatible safety margins in design for the various bridge components. In 1986, the American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials (AASHTO) Subcommittee on Bridges and Structures (SCOBS) concluded that the standard bridge specifications in use at the time for U.S. transportation projects had significant inconsistencies and gaps, wasn’t up to date with emerging technology and that the development of new specifications was warranted. The proposed solution by the subcommittee was to transition to a more coherent method of design where applicable failure and serviceability conditions could be evaluated considering the uncertainties associated with loads and resistance."

Jan 1, 2015

By Arash Khosravifar

One of our research thrusts at Portland State University (PSU) centers on developing design guidelines for pile foundations in liquefiable, laterally spreading grounds. This research has been primarily sponsored by the DFI Committee Project Fund (CPF) program through four awards, totaling nearly $240,000 in financial support. DFI contributed half of this financial support, while the other half was contributed in-kind by PSU and DFI Project Advisory Board members. Leveraging the CPF funds, we secured an additional $550,000 in financial support from the National Science. Foundation (NSF), which has enabled our research group to continue exploring this topic and contributing to the broader engineering community's understanding of the behavior of pile foundations in liquefiable soils. The CPF funds have fostered collaborations with practitioners and researchers beyond PSU. Notable examples include collaborative research involving data from five large-scale centrifuge tests on pile-supported wharves by Steve Dickenson, Ph.D., New Albion Geotechnical; Nason McCullough, Ph.D., Jacobs Engineering and Scott Schlechter, Geotechnical Resources, as well as 1-g shake table tests of bridge pile shafts conducted by Professors Ahmed Elgamal, Ph.D., and Ahmed Ebeido, Ph.D., of the University of California, San Diego. In addition to these collaborations, our research has benefited from industry-university partnerships formed through the involvement of DFI Project Advisory Board members. Their support and feedback ensure that our research products are practical and imple- mentable in real-world projects. The impact of the CPF funds extends to supporting graduate students' theses, which were the basis for 17 technical publications. Some of these publications are expected to have a significant impact on the industry. For instance, our 2018 DFI Journal paper, co-authored by former master's student Jonathan Nasr, cur- rently with the Army Corps of Engineers, has been cited in the 2022 British Columbia Supplement to Canadian Highway Bridge Design Code S6:19. A noteworthy product of our study is a step-by-step design procedure for pile- supported wharf structures subjected to the combined effects of lateral spreading and inertial loads, outlined in a 2022 American Society of Civil Engineers' (ASCE) Journal of Geotechnical and Geo- environmental Engineering paper co- authored by former doctoral student Milad Souri, Ph.D., PE, Geotechnical Resources.

Nov 1, 2023

By Frank Haehnig, Kurt Kogler

"With a height of 200 m, a crown width of 626 m and a concrete volume of 1.6 million m³, the Kölnbrein Dam in the upper Malta valley in Carinthia / Austria is the largest concrete dam in Austria. Boasting a storage capacity of 200 million m³ with a received water load of 54 MN, this is one of the strongest arch dams in the world.During its construction from 1974 to 1977, the dam was equipped with a comprehensive monitoring system capable of comparing developing deformations and stresses with the design values.With a planned reservoir level of 1,900 m a.s.l. the dam saw the reservoir level of 1,860 m a.s.l. breached in the year 1978. This led to extremely high seepage losses of up to 200 ltr/sec and a rise in the foundation water pressure up to 100% of the dam’s height. These observations were caused by the development of horizontal cracks in the area of the middle dam blocks, between the lowest inspection walkway and the waterside.As a consequence, power plant operations had to significantly be reduced and a number of additional measures were carried out – though these did not lead to the desired sealings.The developer subsequently decided that the dam should undergo a general rehabilitation from 1998 to 1994 in accordance with a concept developed by Professor Lombardi. This concept involved erecting a 50 m high support structure with a concrete volume of 500,000 m³ on the airside of the dam, along with the addition of neoprene bearings to transfer 1.2 million tons of the horizontal load. These measures were able to reduce the deformations in the dam enough so that mostly load-bearing injections into the cracks in the dam’s concrete could successfully be carried out by way of targeted grouting measures using injection resin (RODUR) specifically developed for this purpose.In the years 1998 - 1994, a total of 130,000 m of grouting, monitoring and control drillings were executed, and around 200,000 kg of synthetic resin was injected into the cracks in the dam’s concrete.These measures have ensured the dam‘s uninterrupted operation since 1994. A number of small re- injections were again carried out on the contact surface in the years 2011 and 2012."

Jan 1, 2016

[ENGLISH active earth pressure adapter additive adhesion admixture, addition adsorbed water aggregate air air entrainment air hose allowable bearing value allowable pile bearing load]

Jan 1, 1994

By Trevor L. L. Orr

"AbstractThe background to the harmonization of geotechnical standards that has taken place in recent years in Europe has been the move to more economic and political integration following World War II that has led to the formation of the European Union. Prior to 2010 the standards used in the European countries for geotechnical design, investigation and testing and for the carrying out geotechnical work, such as the installation of piles, were the different national standards, which were not harmonized. The harmonization of geotechnical standards in Europe started in 1981 with work on a model Eurocode 7 for geotechnical design that led eventually to publication by CEN, the European Committee for Standardization, of the European Standard version of Eurocode 7 in 2004. In parallel with the work on Eurocode 7, a large number of associated harmonized standards have been, and are being, prepared by CEN and by the International Standards Organization (ISO) for geotechnical investigation and testing and for the execution of geotechnical works. Standards published by CEN must be adopted by the CEN member countries and all conflicting standards withdrawn. Hence all the CEN countries have adopted the same the harmonized text of Eurocode 7, but with National Annexes that allow national choice with regard to Design Approach and partial factor values. The adoption of Eurocode 7 and its associated geotechnical standards has removed the barriers to geotechnical activity in Europe due to the presence of different national standards. It has also enhanced the ability of EU firms to compete in the global market.Background to harmonization of geotechnical standards in EuropeThe initial moves towards the harmonization of geotechnical standards in Europe can be related to the economic and political developments that took place in the period immediately following World War II to revive the economies of Western Europe. Europe at that time was divided by a political and, in many places, a physical barrier, known as the Iron Curtain, into two very different and separate zones: communist in the east and non-communist in the west. In 1952 the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) was formed, linking 6 countries: Belgium, West Germany, France, Italy, Luxembourg and the Netherlands, and establishing a common market in coal and steel. The ECSC was the first international organization to be established on the basis of supranational principles whereby negotiated power is delegated to an authority by the governments of the member states. In 1957 the ECSC became the European Economic Community (EEC), also known as the Common Market in the English-speaking world, with the aim to bring about economic integration. With the addition of Denmark, Ireland and the UK in 1973 and Greece in 1981, followed by Portugal and Spain in 1986, this led to the formation of the European Union (EU) in 1993. East and West Germany were reunified in 1990, following the fall of the Iron Curtain in 1989. In 1995, Austria, Finland and Sweden joined the EU, and since then the numbers of countries in the EU has increased to 28, many of which are countries that were formerly behind the Iron Curtain."

Jan 1, 2014

By Shahid Islam, Lucian Bogdan

"The maintenance of infrastructures has been of particular concern to the engineering community. As the world’s infrastructure expands and existing infrastructure ages, monitoring and evaluation of the structures have become more critical than ever. A large number of retaining walls, tie backs, slope stabilizations and piles are designed using pre-stressing steel. Many piles and drilled shafts are designed using reinforcing steel. There are few testing methods available to assess these tension and compressive forces. High cost, complicated equipment and limitation of space often prevent these methods from being implemented. DYWIDAG-Systems International (DSI) has been involved in the development, testing and utilization of DYNA Force® sensors to measure the force in the anchors during construction and at any time during the lifetime of the structure. They can be used for bare, epoxy-coated, galvanized and greased-sheathed steel in the bonded, un-bonded, grouted or un-grouted length of the anchor. The sensor is robust and requires no maintenance. Sensors have received attention in terms of accuracy, performance, ease in installation, durability, and cost effectiveness. This paper describes its application in tie-back and anchor force monitoring of retaining walls and bridge abutment and compression forces in drilled shaft reinforcing steel where the data were collected manually, automated and remotely.INTRODUCTIONOur infrastructure is expanding and the existing infrastructure is aging. Some structures are expensive to maintain and some occasionally fail. There is a large demand for implementing health monitoring of structures. Many tie-backs, retaining walls, dams and other geotechnical structures are post-tensioned and many of them need repair using a post-tensioned system. On many occasions during construction and service life of the structure, it is useful to know the force in the post-tensioning and anchor system. Many piles and drilled shafts are designed using reinforcing steel and the compressive forces in reinforcement are unknown. Although there are many methods to measure the tendon force, most of them are cumbersome, expensive, and the accuracy varies depending on the method used.The elasto-magnetic (EM) technology is a novel approach to monitor forces in steel elements. The DYNA Force sensor is built based on EM technology (See Fig. 1). It is composed of a primary coil and a secondary coil (sensing coil). By passing current through the primary coil, ferromagnetic material is magnetized. The sensing coil picks up induced electromotive force that is proportional to change rate of applied magnetic flux (Faraday's law) and relative permeability. As permeability of core changes, output voltage changes. The output voltage is calibrated to measure the force. A readout unit is designed to magnetically energize the steel through the sensor and measure the response of the steel to the process. The readout unit then converts the response into a direct force reading. The sensor has an embedded thermistor which allows for temperature compensation. Due to the diversity of the magnetic property of steel, calibration is done for each type of steel allowing the sensors to perform at their highest accuracy."

Jan 1, 2017

By M. Hesham El Naggar, Yasser Abdelghany

"ABSTRACT: The axial and lateral monotonic and cyclic behavior of helical pile foundations was investigated and new innovative helical screw systems suitable for seismic loadings were developed and patented. More than one hundred full scale field load tests were conducted on instrumented helical screw piles installed in cohesive soil. The piles included: plain helical screw piles (P-HSP); grouted (G-HSPs); fiber reinforced polymer FRP-G-HSPs; and reinforced grouted RG-HSPs. The RG-HSP piles axial capacity was more than twice that for P-HSP, with minimal reduction after cyclic loading, and their lateral capacity was more than 3 times the P-HSPs capacity. A 3-D finite element model was established. The results of 3-D finite element modeling were used to establish the load transfer mechanism and a design methodology for the considered piles.INTRODUCTION AND LITERATURE REVIEWHelical (screw) anchors have been utilized in tension loading and have gained popularity for bearing load applications. Helical piles represent an overall cost effective alternative to conventional piles for new construction and repair applications. The helical piles speed and ease of installation, less noise during installation added advantage with regards to their efficiency and reliability for underpinning including re-support and reconstruction of distressed and damaged foundations for either stabilization or rehabilitation. The “square shaft” SS175 pile is a segmented deep foundation system with helical steel bearing plates (helices) welded to a central steel shaft. Load is transferred from the shaft to the surrounding soil through these bearing plates. Segments or sections are joined with bolted couplings. Practically installed depth is limited only by soil resistance and economics. A helical bearing plate or helix is one pitch of a screw thread. All helices regardless of their diameter have a standard 75 mm pitch (Figure.1). The performance of single helical anchors and group action were studied experimentally and theoretically by several researchers, the researches focuses on the installation torque and uplift resistance. Some researches focus on the load carrying capacity with little pile response to cyclic loading effects or to instrumented full scale field testing. Helical piles axial compressive or lateral loading still is not well characterized and needs more analyses and their seismic performance was not investigated. For such this research was initiated to investigate the helical piles monotonic and cyclic performances under axial and lateral loadings to consider their usage in different applications in seismic zones. Among the several researchers, Clemence (1983); Mooney et al. (1985) conducted field and laboratory testing; Hoyt (1989), Hoyt et al. (1995), and Ghaly and Clemence (1998) conducted theoretical and experimental testing, Puri and Vijay (1984), Huang et al. (1995), Perko (2000), and Pack (2000) conducted theoretical analyses. Rao and Prasad (1993), Prasad and Rao (1994), conducted experimental testing; Vickars and Clemence (2000) studied the performance of helical piles with grouted shafts."

Jan 1, 2014

By Bradley J. Fleming

Although soil improvement and its application to deep foundations is gaining popularity in the engineering community, this technique is not widely used in high seismic regions due to lack of fundamental understanding of both the behavior of improved soils under high-strain cyclic loading and the interactions between the pile, improved soil, and unimproved soil. This paper describes part of an ongoing Network for Earthquake Engineering Simulation (NEES) project, where two identical full-scale steel pipe piles were driven at a soft clay site in Oklahoma. The soil surrounding one of these piles was improved using the cement deep soil mixing technique in order to enhance its lateral load behavior. Both piles were tested for seismic resistance using dynamic and quasi-static loading. The pile in unimproved soil provided larger displacements with limited lateral force resistance. This pile was subjected to lateral displacements of up to 400 mm, but experienced minimum inelastic actions. On the other hand, the pile in improved soil reached its lateral capacity at a displacement of 100 mm, at which point the critical region at the base of the pile just above the improved ground experienced buckling and fractured due to low cycle fatigue. Compared to the pile in unimproved soil, the improved ground increased the system strength by 42%. Although the soil was improved over 2900 mm, the effective improvement depth was approximately 1300 mm below the ground surface. In this paper, it is demonstrated that the effects of block type soil improvement of limited horizontal and vertical dimensions can be described using a simplified theoretical approach involving a modification to the well-known p-y representation of soil response. An example using this method is presented and shown to give adequate support to a standard 12-inch diameter steel pipe pile embedded in soft soil.

By Jason Buenker, Molly Winston

Torque-installed piles are gaining popularity in Southern California as the go-to deep foundation element for small- to medium-capacity loads in urban environments. The torque-installed pile is a displacement- based screwed pipe pile with a closed-end conical tip welded to the bottom of the pipe. Torque-installed piles are most efficient in loose to medium dense soils with high liquefaction potential. Where used properly, torque-installed piles can be installed faster, require less clean-up, and create less onsite vibration/disturbance than other pile alternatives. However, torque-installed piles are not applicable in all soil conditions and care must be used to apply the pile effectively in the correct subsurface environment. This paper will review current Southern California state-of-the-practice for torque-installed pile design and construction, potential roadblocks to successful installation, and available capacities from load tests. INTRODUCTION Torque-installed piles are a type of full-displacement screwed pipe pile originally developed in Southern California circa 2001 by Substructure Support, Inc. The pile is unique for its proprietary closed-end conical tip shown in Fig. 1. The tip has a welded steel-helix plate and cutter teeth that allow the pile to be advanced efficiently under applied torque and down pressure (crowd). Since original development of the pile, several contractors or manufacturers have proposed similar proprietary screw-type piles with comparable conical tips. Pile installation is relatively quiet, vibration-free, does not generate spoils, and faster than comparable pile types. The pile was originally developed as an alternative to driven pile foundations and remains a critical substitute to driven foundations in urban environments. Torque-installed piles are conventionally specified as 12 ¾-inch outside diameter (OD) steel pipes with a ⅜-inch-thick wall, although larger sizes with alternative dimensions have been used outside Southern California. Pile installation lengths generally range from 30 to 50 feet but may reach 80 feet or greater where soil conditions permit. The pile is generally backfilled with concrete following installation to increase lateral pile stiffness and may incorporate rebar cages or other reinforcing steel to facilitate connections to structural elements. The pile is frequently specified using performance-based specifications that encourage contractor innovation and use of proprietary installation means and methods.

Jan 1, 2019

By Dave P. DeClerck

Hardman Construction was faced with the challenge of completing a large earth retention project on a constricted downtown Detroit site, while maintaining a safe and productive worksite. To do so, new technologies using robotic equipment was instituted. HISTORY The historic J.L. Hudson Building (Hudson’s) in Detroit, Michigan was the premier retailer in the city’s downtown district from the 1890s through the 1960s. The massive flagship store sat at 1206 Woodward Avenue, one of the busiest streets in the Detroit area. Hudson’s broke ground in 1891 and would go through twelve renovations and expansions. The last renovations took place in 1946, which gave the building the title of being the largest department store in the world at the time. It spanned an entire city block and boasted 2.2 million square feet of retail space. By the 1970s, Detroit was in an economic downturn. The Hudson’s department store finally closed its doors in 1983. Besides a few working offices, the building sat vacant. The building was unique in that it had four levels underground, offices, mechanical areas, and equipment storage. Following years of neglect, the Hudson’s building was seized by the state and transferred into the hands of the city. The city had it demolished in 1998, (shown in Fig. 1) to construct a new, four- level underground parking garage as well as a potential future above-grade development (Sewlck, 2017). The building was imploded in one of the largest implosions of that time. The building rubble filled the underground rooms and helped to stabilize the exterior concrete walls and keep them from collapsing.

Jan 1, 2019

By Joshua R. Omer

A numerical model is developed for predicting the load transfer and settlement behaviour of vertically loaded, bored cast in-situ piles. Based on analysis of full-scale pile tests, closed-form equations are formulated to uncouple the shaft and base transfer resistance components of the pile/soil system. Appropriate parameters are introduced to take into account: (i) the shaft resistance distribution in unlined and partially lined piles, (ii) the effects of ?soft toe? (voided toe pile) behaviour on base resistance development. For convenience, an interactive computer program has been developed in Matlab? with a user friendly interface system. The program can be applied to predict the complete load-settlement curve and axial force distribution in bored cast in-situ piles if reliable soil test data are available. To demonstrate its validity, the proposed method is applied to 4 test piles, which are also analysed using two previously published methods: (a) elastic solution method and (b) layer discretisation method. Methods (a) and (b) above are based on load transfer (t-z) and finite element models respectively. It is shown that the proposed method yields axial force distributions and load-settlement curves that are in good agreement with the observed pile test data.

Jan 1, 2010

By David Chadwick, Paul Marsden, Chris Hughes, Mathias Delapille

"Following damage caused by the 2011 Christchurch earthquakes, the NZ$127.5million Christchurch Town Hall Restoration project is due for completion in 2018. The building is undergoing extensive repairs and a strengthening regime to meet New Zealand’s New Building Standard. One major aspect of the project is the stabilisation of the soil directly beneath the building using interconnected jetgrouting columns installed a cellular configuration, the purpose of this being to decrease the likelihood and severity of foundation movements caused by earthquake-induced soil liquefaction and lateral spreading. The soils encountered on the site ranged from cobbles and gravels through to sandy silts with a significant quantity of timber and rootlets. This wide variation of soil types presented a number of challenges with regard to effective and consistent treatment by jet grouting. The paper presents an overview of the quality assurance practices and also the testing regime adopted on this project.INTRODUCTIONMost of the deformation experienced by the Christchurch Town Hall structure over the course of the Canterbury earthquakes was caused by movement of the underlying ground. Two primary mechanisms of ground deformation were observed:- Liquefaction of the soils underlying the building foundation- Lateral spread of surface soils towards the free face at the river edge which runs 20 metres from the building. This mechanism also resulted in additional vertical settlement of the building foundations.The overall foundation design philosophy adopted by the project team for the Christchurch Town Hall Conservation Project has been to improve the ground directly beneath the structure to mitigate against these two mechanisms of ground movement. Additionally, a robust raft slab is proposed to distribute the foundation loading more evenly and increase the ability of the structure to resist lateral stretch of the underlying ground.The ground improvement system proposed by the Client’s geotechnical consultants, Tonkin &Taylor, comprised a cellular arrangement of interlocking jet grout columns, this arrangement would effectively encapsulate the soil within the cells preventing lateral spread.In total 1,097 interlocking jet grout columns, extending over the entire floor plan of the structure, were required to satisfy the design requirements."

Jan 1, 1900

By Gerald E. H. Verbeek

As the number of driven concrete piles with Embedded Data Collectors increases, it has become possible to compare the widely used Beta Method to assess pile damage (using the change of pile impedance) with the so-called Measured Pile Integrity (MPI) method (a combination of two approaches using both the change of pile impedance and the change in pile pre-stress levels). After a brief introduction of both methods, this paper presents the outcome of that comparison based on data from more than 400 concrete piles driven in Florida, which brings into question the reliability of any damage assessment method based solely on the change of pile impedance (such as the Beta Method), especially to detect damage near the pile toe. Moreover the paper demonstrates the need to re-assess the damage classification used for the Beta Method as well as the use of Pile Driving Analysis (PDA) to detect pile toe damage.

Jan 1, 2011

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 Dan Brown

Renewal and revitalization of transportation presents a challenge in the need for replacement, repair, and improvements of existing bridges, as well as increased construction of transit systems within existing transportation rights of way. Difficulties with conventional deep foundation systems occur because of the limited site access, adjacent structures, the need to maintain traffic, and other constraints on construction activity. Major projects are often performed in a design-build contract environment in which the schedule is aggressive, and where speed and reliability represent major considerations. Foundation designers are confronted with a need to solve problems with a construction-oriented mindset, where typical experience with lowest cost solutions may not reflect the most effective approach. This presentation presents an overview of the challenges that may affect design and construction of deep foundations in this environment and the methods that have successfully been employed on several large transportation projects in the U.S.

Jan 1, 1900