Search Documents

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 Don Deardorff, Ke Yang, Yingcai Han, Ken Sorensen, Robert Kruger, Mark Petersen, Diane Fiorelli, Larry Goldfarb, Kathryn Petek, Kwabena Ofori-Awuah

Design of deep foundations for lateral loads requires an understanding of soil-foundation-structure response during loading. Lateral loads on a deep foundation (piles) could be due to earthquakes, winds, waves, and/or machine vibrations. Over the years, analysis of response of piles due to lateral loads evolved from closed-form solutions to p-y methods to strain wedge to finite element/finite difference modeling. Although analysis of lateral response of piles and shafts is routinely performed, there is no single guidance document and/or standard for design and testing. Several different analytical methods are available for the analysis, and the resulting design can result in significantly different responses which can create confusion. This is especially true for analyzing and designing piles in potentially liquefiable soils with lateral spread issues under seismic conditions.This guidance document is intended to assist geotechnical engineers, pile designers, and contractors in analysis, design, and testing of piles and drilled shafts for lateral loads. This document discusses the background of different analytical and testing procedures and presents the recommended methods for analysis, design and testing of piles for lateral loads.Chapter 1 defines the different kinds of lateral loads to which a single pile or pile group may be subjected. This first chapter also presents different types of piles used to resist lateral loads.Chapter 2 discusses geotechnical issues related to lateral pile design such as liquefaction and lateral spreading and other non-seismic issues. Also addressed in Chapter 2 is geotechnical site characterization (as related to lateral loads) in terms of site investigation, in-situ testing, geophysical testing, laboratory testing, and estimation of soil/rock properties.Chapter 3 discusses the background and available analytical methods and tools for the analysis and design of single piles and drilled shafts. Several methods of analyses from closed-form elastic solutions to the finite element/finite difference solutions and their applicability are discussed. Available commercial computer software packages for analyzing single piles and drilled shafts are also presented.Chapter 4 expands the discussion of single piles and drilled shafts into the analysis and design of pile groups. In addition, group effects, resistance of pile caps, results of previous experimental and analytical studies, and available analysis tools and software for pile groups are discussed.Chapter 5 presents the issue of lateral resistance of piles and drilled shafts as discussed in different national and international building and non-building codes. A summary of extensive research on several codes are presented to facilitate the compliance with different codes.Chapter 6 discusses structural design issues of individual piles and drilled shafts such as depth of fixity.Chapter 7 discusses soil structure interaction issues related to kinematic and inertial effects due to seismic loading and available methods of analyses.Chapter 8 discusses and presents the typical procedures for the lateral load testing of piles. This guideline was developed as an aid to the practicing engineer in providing information, direction and commentary on the lateral design of deep foundations. Although all reasonable effort has been made to accurately compile the material and information contained herein, no warranty is made with regard to any such material or information and the Deep Foundation Institute assumes no responsibility for any possible errors or any direct or indirect result of the use of any such material or information. It is not intended that this document address every factor affecting lateral design for every situation. Therefore it is the responsibility of the person utilizing information from this document to confirm that it is appropriate and correct for their situation as well as to understand and properly apply

Jan 1, 2012

By Emilie Lapointe, Fernando Famania

"A reliable determination of the in-placed cement factor, as defined by mass of cement over volume of final element of treated soil, allows the optimization of cement usage to achieve treated soil requirements. Cement determination tests were performed on soil-cement samples, both fresh (as per ASTM D5982) and hardened (as per ASTM C1084). This paper reviews the calibration work required for the D5982 determination of cement content by the heat of hydration method used on soil-cement samples obtained by wet-grabbing. Using the correlation curves in the field provides a rapid assessment of cement content hence optimizing the cement injection rate to match laboratory tests previously conducted. Cement determination tests on hardened soil-cement specimens from wet-grabs and cores were performed using the oxides method. Samples, both cored and wet-grabbed, were tested in a given cement-treated element, and in different soils to inform on the expected variation in cement content from field installation. Results indicate that both cement determination methods are valid for forensically determining cement contents and that they provide better assessment than the conventional field reporting methods. The methods can be used to optimise the cement usage as well as for Quality Assurance, especially when coring quality is poor.INTRODUCTIONThe degree of improvement, and inherent strength, which is attained in a deep-mixed soil is a function of many factors. The binder type, the existing soil, the mixing conditions and the curing conditions are the categories of factors influencing the strength of a given cement-treated soil as agreed by the deep mixing community and as summarized by the Coastal Development of Technology [CDIT] (2012). Given a site with existing soils and conditions requiring soil improvement using a given binder, the designer and/or contractor can control the mixing conditions. Mixing conditions are inclusive of the degree of mixing, mixing duration and the quantity of binder. Once a deep mixing method has been chosen to mix optimally the in-situ soil, the quantity of binder is the only remaining factor to be optimized. The quantity of binder, in the construction industry is commonly referred to as the field binder factor [ar] and defined by the mass of binder over the volume of soil treated with kg/m3 as unit. In research, the quantity of binder is referred to as the binder content [Cc] and expressed as a ratio of the mass of binder over the mass of dry soil mixed."

Jan 1, 2015

By Quanchen Sun, Mohammed Z. E. B. Elsahife, Anthony Fisher, Chris Barker, Jennifer Schooling

A review of the literature shows that pile integrity is a significant concern in pile construction. Recently, a new integrity test, thermal integrity profiling (TIP,) has been put into use in foundation construction. It measures temperature changes and thermal profiles of concrete during curing. Heat generation and dissipation of early-age concrete is determined by the concrete mix, the ground conditions and the shape of concrete structure. The current data interpretation practice is primary based on experience. Anomaly detection through direct analysis of temperature profiles is currently indicative or suggestive and temperature signatures are usually similar, and numerous causes are not easily isolated. The core of the TIP testing technique, i.e. collecting detailed temperature measurements along the pile during the hydration process, is promising but a new interpretation approach is required. In this paper, a new interpretation approach has been developed in which TIP constitutes the first step. An investigative staged process is then followed to establish and assess the anomalies in the problematic regions along the pile employing the combined use of detailed finite element (FE) simulations, the actual temperature data from TIP and genetic evolution algorithms. In each stage, more details could be revealed about the anomalies being investigated including, ultimately, location, size and shape; this staged process enables practitioners to follow a riskbased approach and decide whether or not to pursue subsequent stages depending on the results they get at the end of each stage. This new approach, depending on the stages required for the analysis, will potentially avail practicing engineers of crucial test results about the quality of the pile immediately following pile construction, hence enabling repair and remedial work straight away at a lower cost.

May 1, 2022

By Ryan P. Sullivan, G. Alan Klevens, Jian Huang

"BACKGROUNDLake Hamilton in Hot Springs, AR was created in 1932 when the Arkansas Power and Light Co. completed Carpenter Dam on the Ouachita River to generate electricity. Today, the 7,200-acre (2,914 hectares) impoundment is one of Arkansas’s most popular recreational and residential lakes.U.S. 70 crosses Lake Hamilton by means of a seven-span bridge featuring nine steel girders per span. Constructed between 1982 and 1984, the 1,410-foot long (430m) bridge carries four lanes of traffi c across the lake. The bridge is supported by six intermediate reinforced concrete piers composed of hammer heads, stems, footings and seals, which sit on the underlying rock. (See Figure 1). The bridge rises to a maximum of 33 feet (10m) above the surface of the lake and the footings and seals extend a maximum of 29.5 feet (9m) below the surface of the lake. The seals are situated on hard, fractured sandstone and shale.Routine underwater inspections in 1993 revealed large cracks in the lean seal concrete and refl ective cracks in the reinforced concrete footings. Infrastructure Engineers, Inc., The Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Department’s (AHTD) design consultant, then conducted an in-depth underwater inspection of the pier foundations. The investigation included cross-hole sonic logging, singlehole sonic logging, visual examination and strength testing of core samples, and petrographic analysis.The investigation revealed extensive cracking and low-strength concrete within the seals of all intermediate pier foundations. Many voids within the seal concrete had become fi lled with silt. There was evidence of continued seal deterioration between underwater inspections.AHTD and its engineers considered three rehabilitation solutions in the preliminary engineering stage: micropiles, a cofferdam supported concrete jacket, or a pile supported concrete jacket. The three alternatives were estimated to cost $1,250,000; $4,320,000; and $3,030,000 respectively. All three options would transfer the loads from the pier footing directly to the rock below, bypassing the seal concrete."

Jan 1, 2007

By Ryan P. Sullivan, G. Alan Klevens, Jian Huang

"BACKGROUNDLake Hamilton in Hot Springs, AR was created in 1932 when the Arkansas Power and Light Co. completed Carpenter Dam on the Ouachita River to generate electricity. Today, the 7,200-acre (2,914 hectares) impoundment is one of Arkansas’s most popular recreational and residential lakes.U.S. 70 crosses Lake Hamilton by means of a seven-span bridge featuring nine steel girders per span. Constructed between 1982 and 1984, the 1,410-foot long (430m) bridge carries four lanes of traffi c across the lake. The bridge is supported by six intermediate reinforced concrete piers composed of hammer heads, stems, footings and seals, which sit on the underlying rock. (See Figure 1). The bridge rises to a maximum of 33 feet (10m) above the surface of the lake and the footings and seals extend a maximum of 29.5 feet (9m) below the surface of the lake. The seals are situated on hard, fractured sandstone and shale. Routine underwater inspections in 1993 revealed large cracks in the lean seal concrete and reflective cracks in the reinforced concrete footings. Infrastructure Engineers, Inc., The Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Department’s (AHTD) design consultant, then conducted an in-depth underwater inspection of the pier foundations. The investigation included cross-hole sonic logging, singlehole sonic logging, visual examination and strength testing of core samples, and petrographic analysis.The investigation revealed extensive cracking and low-strength concrete within the seals of all intermediate pier foundations. Many voids within the seal concrete had become filled with silt. There was evidence of continued seal deterioration between underwater inspections.AHTD and its engineers considered three rehabilitation solutions in the preliminary engineering stage: micropiles, a cofferdam supported concrete jacket, or a pile supported concrete jacket. The three alternatives were estimated to cost $1,250,000; $4,320,000; and $3,030,000 respectively. All three options would transfer the loads from the pier footing directly to the rock below, bypassing the seal concrete."

Jan 1, 2007

By William H. Walton, Joel Dellaria, Jeffrey R. Hill

The City of Chicago has a world-renowned skyline and is known for its provocative architecture. The subsurface conditions in the city have allowed for construction of these significant structures. The skyline is supported on caissons as they are called in Chicago or drilled shafts in other locations. Despite the significant strides the industry has made in advancing the drilled shaft, the use of other specialty geotechnical construction techniques like micropiles has not been overlooked in Chicago and the surrounding areas. Micropiles have been utilized to underpin famous existing historic structures like Orchestra Hall any many others. Engineers have used 200 to 600 kip micropiles to underpin compromised, inadequate, or damaged caissons. The paper will discuss the use of drilled shafts, micropiles, and ground improvement over the last 30 years in Chicago using a curated collection of case histories. It will also examine advancing the industry beyond its current technical limitations using these techniques. INTRODUCTION 20,000 years ago, glaciers from the Chicago region left behind sheets of glacial clay till underlain by dense, over consolidated glacial till below: limestone bedrock, found about 100 ft below street level. An unusual feature in this profile is the soft Chicago Blue Clay. Chicago has been called the birthplace of the Skyscraper and drilled shaft foundation, both of which came about in the 19th century. After the Great Fire of 1871, tall new structures were built rapidly and designing a successful foundation was trial and error. The first deep driven wood pile and caisson foundations bypassed the problem layer and found solid support on hardpan till or bedrock below (Schock and Risberg 2013). Once the drilled shaft foundation became acceptable to the Chicago engineering and construction community, building heights and complexity grew dramatically. As the city grew, building foundations were being repurposed. There was also the need to underpin structures for additional loads and shallow foundations for adjacent construction. Hand-dug drilled shafts were an option for some of these restricted access and low headroom sites but a new technique, micropiles, would prove to be the future of retrofit and hard to construct foundations. Micropiles were introduced on a limited basis to the United States market in the 1970s and 80s. In the early 1990s, the Chicago market began to latch onto micropiles and their use has grown significantly as a solution to the most complex foundation problems a maturing skyline has to offer.

Jan 1, 2019

"Integrity tests refer to a variety of non-destructive tests (NDT) whose purpose is to measure or determine the quality and uniformity, and some- times dimensions, of cast-in-place concrete foundation elements. The tests are primarily aimed at detecting zones of poor quality concrete, voids, bulges, and/or necking.The non destructive integrity testing techniques in this section most generally used for drilled shaft testing are based on one of two physical principles - stress wave propagation or nuclear radiation. All of the stress wave methods involve monitoring a deliberately created vibration, usually of very low amplitude (strains on the order of ??). Some methods rely on direct transmission of the signal, while others rely on processing reflections of the imposed signal.The stress wave methods are inherently sensitive to vibrations from other sources, especially at frequencies that fall within the range of interest for the particular test being applied. Construction activity near the shaft being tested; such as: demolition jack-hammering, pile-driving, casing vibration, excavation and movement of track-vehicles are all known sources of interference that might render test data useless. The actual effect of such vibrations will vary with the type of activity, soil conditions and distance from the testing. The test operator must be able to recognize such interference, and the contractor should be prepared to cooperate with the testing personnel by stopping or moving the source of vibration. If this cannot be done immediately, testing should be postponed until the work in question is finished and the vibration source moved or shut down.NDT methods are not suitable substitutes for routine "topside" construction inspection as described in the Drilled Shaft Inspector’s Manual. However, these NDT methods do allow measurements of the quality of concrete placed in drilled shafts, which cannot be made from "topside" construction inspection. They should be considered supplemental to routine construction inspection as they do provide an additional level of quality control."

Jan 1, 2004

By Adrian Mercer, Ashkan Ameri

Due to general degradation, increased traffic levels, and historical ground movement, this road and rail bridge which provides an essential link between the interior of the country and the Port of Abidjan, required significant repair and reinforcement. This included strengthening the pre-stressed concrete box girders and replacement of the existing bored pile foundations. Replacement piles had to be adjacent to, and no longer than, the existing piles, in order to not compromise the stability of the operational bridge during the works. The underlying geology, however, meant that the pile loads had to be predominantly transferred into the ground through end bearing. Rather than installing a greater number of piles or larger diameter piles, innovative thinking changed the usual mind-set of designing the piles to the prevailing ground conditions, to designing the ground conditions to suit the piles. Jet grouted columns were installed beneath the toes of the new piles to increase the bearing capacity of the ground. This significantly contributed to the sustainability of the project and reduced carbon emissions through saving concrete, steel, plus transportation and disposal of spoil.

Sep 8, 2021

By Lawrence F. Johnsen, Marc J. Gallagher

"Micropiles are small diameter, bored, grouted-in-place piles incorporating steel casing and/or reinforcements. The omission of micropiles from most United States building codes has resulted in the application of varying standards for design and installation. The ADSC/DFI Micropile Committee has developed a proposed section for the 2006 edition of the International Building Code (IBC 2006) covering micropiles. The proposed IBC 2006 micropile code section is presented, along with comparisons to existing micropile codes and guidelines. A discussion section is provided to clarify sections of the proposed code. IntroductionMicropiles, defined as small diameter (typically less than 12 inches outer diameter), bored, grouted-in-place piles incorporating steel casing and/or reinforcements, are becoming common foundation elements for new construction, retrofits, and emergency repairs. Developed in Europe in the 1950's and used in United States practice since the late 1970's, micropiles are typically not addressed in building codes, particularly in the United States. As a result, micropiles are often reviewed by building officials to a variety of standards, including drilled shafts, caissons, cast-in-place bored piles, and concrete filled pipe piles. None of these adequately address the unique design and construction aspects of micropiles. Therefore, it became apparent to the foundation design and construction community that a micropile-specific code section was required.To that end, the International Association of Foundation Drilling and the Deep Foundations Institute (ADSC/DFI) Micropile Committee appointed a subcommittee in October 2003 to develop and submit a proposed micropile code section for the 2006 IBC. The subcommittee members included the two co-authors, as well as Tom Richards (Nicholson Construction Company), Tom Armour (DBM Contractors, Inc.), John Wolosick (Hayward Baker, Inc.), Allen Cadden (Schnabel Engineering) and Matt Niermann (Schnabel Foundation Company). At the time of the writing of this paper, the proposed code section has been presented at the IBC public hearing during which it was modified slightly. Final adoption (or rejection) will be determined by the IBC at the final action hearing in September 2005. The attached code section is the revised version following the public review hearings."

Jan 1, 2005

By Remco Offenberg, Marcel Bielefeld, Martijn van Delft

The question of the continued suitability of existing foundations arises when the function of the superstructure changes. This can occur when the superstructure is replaced or when the existing structure is expanded, leading to higher loads on the existing foundation. Quite often it is a challenge to define the suitability (with respect to integrity, bearing capacity or both). The lack of information on the existing foundation (such as pile dimensions, installation records, original soil investigation, design calculations, etc.) makes it frequently seemingly impossible to assess whether the foundation or foundation elements can be re-used. The paper outlines the tools available to an engineer to evaluate existing foundation piles for potential re-use. The paper illustrates the application of these tools through a few case studies from The Netherlands, including the evaluation of a 400 years old bridge foundation to address increasing traffic loads.

May 1, 2022

By Cory McElprang, Enamul Hoque, Aaron Thomas, Scott A. Jacobs

Crosshole Sonic Logging (CSL) only evaluates concrete on the inside of reinforcing cages leaving the outside unevaluated unless other types of testing are performed such as Perimeter Sonic Logging (PSL). While there have been some reports of PSL testing having accurately identified anomalies (e.g. Samtani et al 2005), experience by Case Foundation Company has indicated otherwise where false positives were determined with subsequent coring. Numerous cases of PSL false positives are presented as well as a study where a shaft was installed with both inside and outside tubes, and CSL and PSL data were compared. To date, there is very limited data published on perimeter sonic logging, or Gamma-Gamma Logging (GGL) with tubes on the exterior of drilled shafts. Several cases will be presented where false positives were experienced where PSL testing was performed. In addition, a direct comparison will also be presented where a shaft was installed with both tubes on the inside and outside where CSL and PSL data is compared. BRIEF HISTORY – CSL TESTING AND TUBES ON INSIDE The general procedure of Crosshole Sonic Logging (CSL) testing includes attaching tubes to the reinforcing cage to be able to send a transmitter in one tube and a receiver in another tube with which a sonic pulse is emitted from the transmitter and received in another tube. The time taken for the sonic pulse to travel between the tubes is measured and compared to expected values for the known distance between the tubes. Any increase in time from expected values indicates the sonic pulse traveled through a media other than homogeneous concrete such as objects in the path (spacer wheels, steel bracing, etc.), tube spacing, or soil inclusions. However, variations in arrival time can also result from differences in concrete density. The tubes have traditionally been placed on the interior of the reinforcing cage which protects them during hoisting and placement of the cage and reduces wave refraction caused by modulus of elasticity differences between steel and concrete. This allows the concrete within the interior of the reinforcing cage to be evaluated, but the concrete outside of the cage is excluded from traditional CSL testing. As a result, alternative integrity testing has been developed to not only provide different ways to evaluate the integrity of drilled shafts but to also address the issue of evaluating the concrete outside of the reinforcing cage. These alternative testing methods include Gamma-Gamma Logging (GGL), Thermal Integrity Profiling (TIP testing) and Perimeter Sonic Logging (PSL) which is similar to CSL testing but instead of the tubes placed inside the reinforcing cage, the tubes are placed on the outside of the reinforcing cage as shown in Fig. 1.

Jan 1, 2019

By Thang V. Nguyen, Lisheng Shao, Gary E. Taylor

"The Community Memorial Hospital of Ventura, California, proposed to build a new state-of-the-art Cancer Treatment Center with radiation shielding walls and roof. The loose silty soils at the site had the potential to liquefy during an earthquake, which would result in significant settlement under the heavy footing loads. Treatment options included various deep foundation alternatives, as well as several ground improvement methods. The choice of wet soil mixing minimized the disturbance to the adjacent hospital during construction and potential settlement. Wet soil mixing allowed the structure to be supported on a raft foundation, meeting the stringent building total and differential settlement criteria. The authors also performed unit cell 3-D finite element analyses to evaluate the behavior of the wet soil mixing system in seismic loading conditions. This paper highlights the ground improvement design, construction, QA/QC, and the research related to evaluating the effectiveness of soil mixing for liquefaction mitigation.INTRODUCTIONThe Ventura Community Memorial Hospital proposed the construction of a new Cancer Treatment Center to replace the existing structure, which was built in 1901. The hospital complex is located in a wellestablished residential neighborhood. The soil conditions at the site of the proposed structure required ground modification to support the very heavy radiation treatment section of the building and limit settlement. Originally, 90-foot-long precast piles were considered for foundation support. Based on supplemental Cone Penetration Tests (CPTs) performed, the deepest CPT did not encounter competent pile bearing strata at a depth exceeding 30.5 m (100 ft). This could result in failure of the piles under long-term conditions, especially if hydro-consolidation occurs. The more realistic pile penetration depth would have been 36.6 to 45.7 m (120 to 150 ft). In addition, the excessive noise in association with pile driving would have been unacceptable to the community, patients, and staff of the hospital, so an alternative ground improvement solution was required.The specialty geotechnical contractor recommended wet soil mixing, an economical solution of creating a soil-cement product known as soilcrete that would significantly reduce the construction related noise and provide a more complete deep foundation for the structure.SOIL CONDITIONS AND SETTLEMENT CONCERNSThe subsurface soils were interbedded (Fig. 1) consisting of loose to medium dense silty sands, and soft to medium stiff silty clays to a depth of 30.5 m (100 ft). Groundwater was encountered at depths of 9.1 m (30 ft) and historical high groundwater was at 8.5 m (28 ft) below the ground surface."

Jan 1, 2015

By A. B. Cerato, M. K. ElSawy, A. Elgamal

"Helical piles are gaining popularity as foundations for new construction as well as retrofitting option for deficient foundations. More recently, large diameter helical piles are used to support structures in regions characterized with high seismic hazard. Even though they have proven to be viable in seismic areas such as New Zealand, where they experienced little damage during the Christchurch earthquake, the knowledge about their seismic analysis and performance is largely lacking. Therefore, there is a need for comprehensive study to evaluate their performance under seismic loading. The current objective of this study is to investigate the performance of helical piles through a full-scale testing program that was performed at the NEES/UCSD Large High Performance Outdoor Shake Table (LLHPOST). The experimental setup involved ten steel piles of different configurations installed in dry sand. The piles were loaded with different masses and were subjected to different earthquake signals to simulate different dynamic behavior. This paper compares the performance of different moment curve fitting methods used to interpret the test data. Furthermore, the effects of different frequency content of loading on the pile response is illustrated in terms of deflection along the shafts of tested piles with different configurations.INTRODUCTIONEarthquakes are a major hazard for structures situated in seismic regions, and dynamic loading must be a design consideration. Successful design of a foundation system entails providing a safe and economic foundation solution to resist earthquake loading. Different foundation options have been used to support buildings in high seismic regions. Helical piles represent a viable foundation option that offers several advantages in terms of ease of installation, lower cost and environmental impact, ability to approximate the axial capacity directly from torque readings and more (Perko 2009). However, they are not typically considered as an option in many seismic regions. Meanwhile, several buildings supported on helical piles in New Zealand have survived the Christchurch earthquake with negligible damage, which encourages performing further research to understand the behaviour of these piles under seismic loading.A helical pile consists of a steel shaft fitted with a steel helix/helices. The helical pile is installed by applying torque to its head via mechanical torque. Nowadays, helical piles are used in a wide range of applications such as foundations for light posts and residential houses. The static behaviour of helical piles has been studied extensively and is relatively well understood (Tsuha and Aoki 2010; Mittal et al. 2010; Sakr 2011; Elsherbiny and El Naggar 2013; El Sharnouby and El Naggar 2012; Elkasabgy and El Naggar 2015; Weidong et al. 2015 and Bagheri and Naggar 2015) However, the dynamic and seismic behaviours of helical piles is seldom investigated (Elkasabgy and El Naggar 2013). This underscores the knowledge gap currently present regarding the seismic behaviour of helical piles."

Jan 1, 2017

By Mu Chen, Ye-Shuang Xu, Dong-Wei Hou, Shui-Long Shen, Huai-Na Wu

"This paper presents a laboratory investigation on the mechanical behaviors of the cement-clay admixture improved by polypropylene fiber. Cement can significantly improve the clay admixture. The fiber additive also improves the strength and ductility of the improved clay. The Unconfined Compression Strength (UCS) of the polypropylene fiber-reinforced cement-clay presents an overall trend to grow with the increase of fiber length. The improved clay reached its peak strength at the fiber content of 0.5%. Then the UCS of the improved clay will slowly reverse if the fiber content continues to rise. For study of curing time, improved clay behaves better in its early strength, but an inhibition will be brought about if fibers are excessive.INTRODUCTIONGround improvement technology is essential for construction of structures in soft ground. Some traditional techniques often cost much but result in little. For instance, along the coastal region of China, soft ground is often improved by backfill with high quality sandy soil transported far away, leading to high additional haulage costs and long construction period. Reutilizing the excavated soil as backfill or subgrade after treatment, by contrast, will be more economical and effective (Hufenus et al., 2006). Many researches have been conducted to improve the compression strength of soft soil, among which, the method of mixing the soft soil with cement and fly ash is one of the most common ways (Kolias et al., 2005; Horpibulsuk et al., 2009; Porcino et al., 2012). It is known that soil resists well against compression and shear force but behaves poorly in resistance to tension. Therefore, utilizing tensile elements such as fibers and strips to improve the tensile strength will be effective because of its strength isotropy, better durability and cost effective (Haeri et al., 2000; Kaniraj and Havanagi, 2001; Consoli et al., 2010)."

Jan 1, 2015

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 Timothy C. Siegel, Paul J. Axtell

The Missouri Department of Transportation (MoDOT) recently replaced the Hurricane Deck Bridge that carries Highway 5 traffic across the Osage Arm of the Lake of the Ozarks in Camden County, Missouri. The former bridge was constructed in the 1920's and was supported on pneumatic caissons bearing on dolostone bedrock. The replacement structure is founded on drilled shafts socketed into the bedrock. During the design phase of this bid-build project, a baseline design was developed and Alternative Technical Concepts (ATC's) were allowed from approved contractors. Those ATC's were confidential and not shared between teams. Either the baseline design or the approved ATC design could be bid by the respective contractors. The baseline design included re-use of the 90-year old caisson foundations. Accordingly, an extensive evaluation of the caissons and underlying bedrock were conducted by coring, laboratory testing, acoustic tele-viewer (ATV), and cross-hole sonic logging (CSL) methods. The results of the investigation indicated the caissons were in excellent condition and suitable for re-use. However, a more cost-effective ATC was submitted, awarded, and constructed that did not re-use the existing caisson foundations but rather reduced the span lengths, increased the number of piers in the water, and supported those piers on drilled shafts. Interestingly, the difference in low bid price between the awarded ATC and the baseline design was less than one percent of the construction cost. This paper describes the multiple foundation designs that were necessary for this interesting project. The various foundation evaluations include the existing pneumatic caissons, large-diameter open-ended pipe piles to support the baseline design, and the design of rock-socketed drilled shafts that were successfully constructed in 2012.

Jan 1, 2017

By Paolo Cavalcoli, Federico Pagliacci

"As opposed to the static functional recovery of existing structures, the construction of infrastructures in an urban environment, when combined with complex geological situations, often involves building foundation structures, whether circular or rectangular in section, through rock formations or chaotic strata (sand and gravel with cobbles). Until a few years ago, these formations or strata were sometimes an insurmountable constraint on traditional foundation installation techniques. The difficulty in overcoming these geological situations is sometimes added to the increasingly frequent need to reach depths that were unimaginable just a decade ago. These are real challenges for those carrying out these works and for those manufacturing the necessary equipment. There are two main methodological approaches to these problems, that can be summed up in the rhetorical figure of ""David and Goliath"": cunning versus force. In reference to the case studies in this article: the permanent retaining walls for the Copenhagen Metro, and the structural repairs to the Arapuni Dam in New Zealand and the Wolf Creek Dam in the U.S., we will describe the foundations constructed in presence of rock using combined small-diameter direction drilling solutions, associated with their enlargement up to the project’s size, at depths exceeding 300 feet. Finally, a case study will be presented on the implementation of a large cross-section of an excavation in the rock, at depths greater than 800 feet.IntroductionAs opposed to the functional recovery of existing structures, the construction of infrastructures in an urban environment, when combined with complex geological situations, often involves building foundation structures, whether circular or rectangular in section, through rock formations or chaotic strata (sand and gravel with cobbles).Until a few years ago, these formations or strata were sometimes an insurmountable constraint on traditional foundation installation techniques. The difficulty in overcoming these geological situations is sometimes added to the increasingly frequent need to reach depths that were unimaginable just a decade ago.These are real challenges for those building these works and for those manufacturing the necessary equipment. There are two main methodological approaches to these problems, that can be summed up in the biblical figures of ""David and Goliath"": cunning versus force. In the engineering field, the force is summarized in the use of ever-larger drilling equipment in terms of installed power, weight in working conditions, winch and rotary capacity."

Jan 1, 2015

By Garland Likins, Gray Mullins, George Piscsalko

"Quality control of drilled shafts is greatly dependent upon the practices of the site personnel. For drilled shafts cast under slurry, inspection of the hole prior to concreting is very difficult or impossible. There are numerous non-destructive test (NDT) methods currently available to assess the integrity of drilled shafts. This paper will discuss the theory and use of an emerging NDT technology known as Thermal Integrity Profiling (TIP). The Thermal Integrity Profiling method measures the elevated concrete temperatures that occur during the hydration process. These temperature measurements are made along the length of the pile and can determine the integrity over 100% of the pile cross section, both inside and outside the reinforcing cage. With the known shaft volume information, TIP can evaluate the effective shaft radius at each measurement location. With the increased use of TIP on highway projects, there is a need to have standard criteria for shaft acceptance. Shaft acceptance criteria can be based upon thermal measurements and subsequent analysis of the data to determine the average shaft radius, local concrete cover, and cage alignment. With this additional information obtained via the thermal testing method, acceptance methods based upon concrete cover can be developed. In this paper the Thermal Integrity Profiling method will be described, results from a case history will be discussed, and an acceptance criteria based upon concrete cover will be proposed.INTRODUCTIONDrilled shafts are an attractive foundation element in many applications due to their large axial and lateral capacities. When drilled shafts are cast in a dry hole, it is possible to inspect the hole prior to casting, allowing for very basic level of quality control, although the shape of the completed element is still unknown without some form of post construction testing. When drilled shafts are installed where soil conditions are unstable, the shafts will often be cast under slurry to support the surrounding soils during the construction process. When casting a drilled shaft under slurry, it is very difficult to impossible to accurately and efficiently inspect the hole prior to casting concrete and it is equally difficult or impossible to inspect the shaft during the casting process"

Jan 1, 2016

By Chunli Wei, Mark Jen, Xiaojun Wang

"After more than 85 years of service, a critical link between New York and New Jersey, the Goethals Bridge over the Arthur Kill waterway, is being replaced with two new parallel bridges. Each bridge includes 1,650 feet long signature steel composite cable-stayed bridge, a 2,789 feet long New York approach and a 1,889 feet long New Jersey approach. The superstructure of each approach is supported on a series of two-column concrete piers and each column is supported on a single large diameter drilled shaft varying from 4.5 to 9 feet in diameter and anchored 45 feet below ground into the underlying rock.A performance-based methodology was followed for the strength and extreme event limit states design of the drilled shaft foundations. The design for seismic loads has been performed using the AASHTO Guide Specifications for LRFD Seismic Bridge Design. For all strength and service loads, the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications were used. Since the longitudinal and confinement requirements in the two specifications vary, the minimum longitudinal reinforcement was based on the more stringent requirements of the two codes. A design example is presented to illustrate the methodology in bridge deep foundation design using nonlinear time-history global analysis results with soil-pile interaction represented by sets of horizontal and vertical nonlinear soil springs along the drilled shaft, based on the soil and rock properties from the boreholes test results. In this paper the design methodology implements strain limits related to earthquake intensities and damage levels to calculate the capacity using XTRACT analysis, which aids designers to adopt applicable provisions that meet specific design requirements.INTRODUCTIONAfter more than 85 years of service, a critical link between New York and New Jersey, the Goethals Bridge over the Arthur Kill waterway, is being replaced with two new parallel bridges designed to carry vehicular traffic and a future mass transit corridor. They include two 1,650 feet long signature steel composite cablestayed bridges with 260 feet tall V-shaped concrete gateway towers (Figure 1). The approaches consist of continuous pre-stressed concrete girders. The New York approach is a single structure consisting of 18 continuous spans, sloping at 4% for a total length of 2,789 feet without expansion joints. Similarly, the longest continuous portion on the New Jersey approach, with a similar slope, consists of 11 spans for a total length of 1,889 feet without expansion joints. The superstructure of each approach is supported on a series of two-column concrete piers that vary in height from 121.3 feet near the cable-stayed bridges to 11.8 feet near the abutments. Each column is supported on a single large diameter drilled shaft varying from 4.5 to 9 feet in diameter and anchored 45 feet below ground into the underlying rock."

Jan 1, 2016