Search Documents

By Jeffrey C. Schuh, Logan Bloemer, Daniel P. Dietzler

Over the past 30 years, the authors have encountered numerous projects where recognizing the geology, soil properties and groundwater conditions, and considering alternative construction techniques have promoted efficient and cost-saving construction. The construction documents for these projects, produced by various engineering firms, provided basic information on geotechnical conditions. The authors became involved in each project either because there was a problem during design or construction or, as a contractor, won the project because they saw a value engineering opportunity to take advantage of the geologic setting of the project to design and build alternatives to what the designer depicted. Understanding the geologic setting is critical before planning and designing begins. Being able to work with the geology and the materials on site is preferred before specifying more costly and complex solutions, which often require the importing of materials and adherence to unnecessary and/or inappropriate specifications. Failing to understand the geology or not knowing all the techniques available for construction can lead designers to develop solutions that could be inappropriate. This paper presents several examples of value engineering and project performance enhancements developed through knowledge of basic soil mechanics and implementing innovative solutions. History and Background Most people attend DFI meetings, present their experiences, listen to others, and read articles and papers with the hope they can learn from others. Geotechnical engineers and contractors often interface with others in the execution of projects who have, at best, a rudimentary knowledge of geology and soil mechanics. Of course, there is a need for architects, bankers, and regulators, etc., but they typically do not have much interest in the nuances of geotechnical engineering, which relies on both art and science. Thus, significant time is spent educating counterparts in the need for comprehensive subsurface investigation programs and the intricacies of construction in the “dirt,” as they typically refer to soil and rock.

Jan 1, 2019

By Rohrbach

Crosshole Sonic Logging (CSL) testing is commonly used to verify the integrity, quality and ultimately the acceptability of the concrete in structural elements such as drilled shaft foundations, secant pile cutoff walls, and secant/tangent pile earth retention structures. Besides concrete quality, many factors can impact CSL test results (e.g. laitance, air temperature, access tube spacing, access tube debonding, etc.). Effective use of CSL testing requires fully informed qualified practitioners capable of distinguishing between abnormal readings unrelated to deficiencies in the drilled shaft concrete and similar readings indicating the presence or possible presence of drilled shaft defects. Based on data and experience gathered from CSL testing of thousands of drilled shafts across North America, this paper discusses such factors and other information useful when evaluating CSL test results, and provides practical recommendations intended to reduce the potential for incorrect test data interpretation. The CSL testing industry is lacking in a clear, universally accepted guideline for the interpretation of CSL data and acceptance criteria of these concrete elements. This paper proposes terminology and a streamlined process for use when atypical results are obtained. The proposed terminology and method are intended to simplify and expedite the submittal review and approval process. Because construction activities for these elements are often on the project?s critical path, the benefits obtained in terms of project savings and reducing costly delays are undoubtedly valuable.

By Derrick Dasenbrock, Mary C. Nodine, Benjamin Rivers

Up to 50 percent of major infrastructure projects suffer impacts to schedule or cost due to geotechnical issues, many of which correspond to risks related directly or indirectly to the scope and quality of site characterization work. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) in coordination with industry organizations seeks to address this issue through Every Day Counts (EDC), a program that identifies and deploys proven, yet underutilized innovations at the project level to save time, money and resources. The A-GaME (Advanced Geotechnical Methods in Exploration) is one of the innovations supported under EDC.

By Danny Déry-Chamberland, Peter Bowman, Michael Byle

"The Barrage des Quinze dam is a concrete sluice dam consisting of 19 spillway sections, each of which is approximately 7.6 metres wide and 14.5 metres deep. Rehabilitation efforts being performed on the dam including demolition and improvement of the roadway and spillway sections and grouting to mitigate underseepage. Initially, conventional cement grouting was attempted and was successful in 14 of the spillway sections, but unsuccessful in 5 of the sections due to the high water flows which washed the grout away. The removal of the roadway and portions of the piers during construction temporarily reduced the stability of the structure limiting grouting pressures that could be applied. This and the substantial high water flows (leakage) beneath the dam between the concrete/rock contact and within fractures in the upper rock formation created a challenging situation to create a cutoff.A grouting solution was developed that involved implementing several different grouting methods and materials including balanced high mobility grouts (HMG); low mobility grouts (LMG); polyurethane grouts; and sodium silicates. Because of the critical scheduling for the work, multiple approaches were planned and made available on site so that the work could proceed with the best technology with little, if any, time loss. The end goal of the grouting program was to create a seepage cutoff beneath the 5 sections of the dam in a stepwise process. The initial step was to fill the large openings and create a grout barrier to reduce the high water flow. The second step was to seal the contact between the base of the dam and the bedrock; and the third step was to complete closure by grouting a deep grout curtain into the underlying rock. Other features of the work included an extensive grout mix testing program, water pressure testing, borehole camera survey, and monitoring of the grout injections."

Jan 1, 2016

By John P. Turner, Steven S. Dapp, Dan A. Brown

"The Goethals Bridge Replacement (GBR) spanning the Arthur Kill Waterway between Elizabeth, NJ and Staten Island, NY is supported on over 200 drilled shaft foundations ranging in diameter from 4.5 ft to 10 ft and socketed into Passaic Formation siltstone. Four drilled shafts, two on each side of the bridge (NJ and NY), were load tested using the bi-directional axial load method. Axial test results demonstrate that RQD, taken by itself, is not necessarily a reliable indicator of side or base resistance. High recovery with low RQD can be a function of horizontally bedded siltstone and shale where the individual pieces of core do not exceed four inches, but may still provide very high side and base resistance. Axial testing was followed by a lateral rapid-load test (Statnamic) on each of the same four shafts. In addition, one of the shafts was subjected to a static lateral load test to validate the rapid-load method as being representative of static loading conditions. Results of the axial load tests provide the basis of unit side and unit base resistances used in the LRFD design of the rock sockets for axial loading, while results of the static and Statnamic lateral load tests were used to calibrate p-y curve parameters used for design under lateral and moment loading. This paper describes implementation of the load testing program and its role in the design process.INTRODUCTIONDesign of drilled shaft foundations for the Goethals Bridge Replacement (GBR) required load testing in order to validate the parameters used for calculating geotechnical axial and lateral resistances. The bridge, including foundations, was designed in accordance with the AASHTO LRFD design specifications, 6th Edition (2012). The bridge owner is the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (PANYNJ). One of the PANYNJ project requirements was stated as follows:“Perform a minimum of two (2) separate axial compression load tests (one [1] in New York and one [1] in New Jersey) for each demonstration shaft of different size and construction methodology to verify the design assumptions and construction procedures. At a minimum, one (1) demonstration shaft is required to be representative of production shafts with a diameter within one (1) foot above or below the demonstration shaft diameter.Conduct a minimum of two (2) lateral load tests (one [1] in New York and one [1] in New Jersey) for each demonstration shaft of different size and construction methodology. At a minimum, one (1) demonstration shaft is required to be representative of production shafts with a diameter within one (1) foot above or below the demonstration shaft diameter.”"

Jan 1, 2016

By Juan M. Pestana-Nascimento, Robert G. Bea, Hamed Hamedifar, Emery M. Roe

The current State-of-the-Practice is grounded heavily on deterministic characterization and assessment of the performance of civil engineering infrastructure. In particular, flood defense systems, such as levees, have been evaluated within the context of the Factor-of-Safety where the computed capacity of the system is compared with the code specified demand forces. Uncertainties associated with the capacity and demand forces render deterministic modeling incomplete. In particular, two structures with the same Factor of Safety can have vastly different probabilities of failure. While efforts have been made to assess levee vulnerability, results from traditional engineering approaches omit important factors because they do not account for uncertainties included in analytical modeling, and natural variabilities, or human and organization factors. This paper utilizes risk assessment methods to advance methods for quantifying the contribution of uncertainties to engineering analyses, and thereby provide additional information to help assess sustainability of geotechnically engineered systems. The probability of failure of a geotechnically engineered system is directly impacted by how well the system is understood, and how uncertainties are incorporated in development of understanding of the system. This paper presents methods to evaluate two types of uncertainties for three potential failure modes of flood protection levees: underseepage, slope (or levee) instability, and overtopping/erosion. These analyses account for two types of uncertainty: 1) Type I – inherent uncertainty, 2) Type II – analytical modeling uncertainty. Human and organizational task performance and information development and utilization uncertainties are not included in these analyses. This paper focuses on the behavior of the flood protection levee system for Sherman Island, a western island in California’s Delta. Sherman Island is of critical importance to California because of the very important infrastructure systems that pass under, on, over, and adjacent to Sherman Island, including: natural gas pipelines, regional and interregional electricity transmission lines and telecommunication facilities, two deepwater shipping channels; and State Highway 160, a link between major transportation expressways. The work evaluates current (year 2010) and future conditions (year 2100) and incorporates variations in capacity and demand arising from projected human response activities and global climate change.

Jan 1, 2017

By Patrick J. Hannigan, William H. Walton, Ryan C. Rusk, Van E. Komurka

"The project consists of a 33-story building with two levels of below-grade parking across the entire building footprint. Timely and cooperative teamwork among the owner/developer, geotechnical engineer, testing agency, structural engineer, construction manager, and pile-driving contractor resulted in an efficient, costeffective, high-capacity driven-pile foundation on a constrained urban site with significantly variable subsurface conditions. Design objectives included utilizing the highest allowable pile loads reasonably installed from a drivability perspective, using readily available equipment. A pre-production test program was performed on 16-inch-diameter (406-mm-diameter) steel pipe piles, driven closed-ended and subsequently filled with concrete. The test program included dynamic monitoring of 10 piles during installation, and of select piles during long-term restrike testing with a drop hammer, with one instrumented static load test. CAPWAP® analyses were performed on both end-of-initial-drive and beginning-of-restrike dynamic test records. The site exhibited significant soil set-up, even after relatively short wait times. Testprogram objectives included characterizing set-up profiles. A design set-up profile was used to develop depth-variable driving criteria for both 500- and 600-kip (2,224- and 2,669-kN) allowable load piles. Test program results permitted more-accurate reduced capacities to be assigned to damaged piles, and to piles which experienced practical refusal. These more-accurate assigned reduced capacities decreased the number of replacement piles required by 50 percent, saving both time and cost.PROJECT DESCRIPTIONThe project, located in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA consists of a 33-story mixed-use residential building with two levels of below-grade parking across the entire site footprint. Column service loads range from 1,400 to 4,200 kips (6,228 to 18,683 kN). The project is located immediately adjacent to an existing two-story masonry retail building with a partial basement, supported on shallow spread-footing foundations.Subsurface Conditions – The generalized soil conditions are presented in Fig. 1. Site grades were relatively level, with a ground-surface elevation of approximately +53 feet (16 m), Milwaukee City Datum (“MCD”). Fill material from previous construction was encountered to approximate Elev. +33 feet (10 m). Below the fill, medium dense silty sand, to silt with sand, was encountered to approximate Elev. +23 feet (7 m). Underlying deposits consisted of lean clay, with undrained shear strengths ranging from approximately 1,000 to 3,000 pounds per square foot (psf) (48 to 144 kPa). Silty sand, to silt with sand, exhibiting increasing relative density with depth, was found below the lean clay to approximate Elev. -92 feet (-28 m), where hard lean clay (glacial till) with undrained shear strengths in excess of 5,000 psf (239 kPa) was encountered. Borings did not extend below Elev. -103 feet (-31 m)."

Jan 1, 2017

"Guideline Augered Cast-In-Place (ACIP) Pile Specification and Commentary11.0 GENERAL1.1 SCOPEThe Pile Contractor shall furnish all labor, materials, tools and equipment necessary for furnishing, installing and testing Augered Cast-in-Place (ACIP) piles as shown on the Contract Drawings and as specified herein.ACIP piles are commonly referred to by several other names. Some of them are trademarks or service marks owned by Foundation Contractors and some are names that try to describe the installation process. The term “cast-inplace” is sometimes replaced with “cast-in-situ,” especially in Europe. Some common names are Auger Cast Piles, Intruded Mortar Piles, Augerpress Piles, Augered Pressure Grouted Piles, AugerPile Foundations, Continuous Flight Auger (CFA) Piles, Grouted Bored Piles, Augered Grout-Injected Piles, Drilled or Augered Uncased Piles, and Uncased Cast-in-Place Concrete Piles. To avoid confusion, ACIP pile will be used exclusively herein.1.2 PILE CONTRACTOR QUALIFICATIONSThe ACIP piles shall be installed by an experienced Pile Contractor who upon request of the Engineer shall submit evidence of successful ACIP pile installation under similar job and subsurface conditions, including a job supervisor who shall have a minimum of five years of method specific experience.The proper installation of the ACIP piles is dependent upon the procedures used by the Pile Contractor’s field representatives and equipment provided. The Pile Contractor’s personnel responsible for the installation should have relevant experience with the auguring and pumping equipment, experience placing piles under similar site conditions (including restricted headroom if appropriate), in similar subsurface conditions, as well as experience handling the special grout mixes, admixtures, etc."

Jan 1, 2016

By Dave Paul

Dam rehabilitation involves a range of design, construction, and operation risks, some of which are not encountered in new dam construction. These risks can have significant impact on project schedule and project budget. Owners, engineers, and contractors need to understand these risks. Existing dams typically were designed in an era of design and construction standards that have been upgraded and changed. Modern standards will impact the construction approach taken and involve understanding the earlier standards. Knowledge of historical standards/practices as well as current design standards and construction methods is valuable for developing and designing rehabilitation components. Construction records and as-built drawings are valuable when they are available. Rehabilitation projects often consist of older projects where as-built documents or construction records are not available. Where these records exist, many (most) times, they do not fully reflect the current conditions within the dam and appurtenant works. leading experienced practitioners to “expect surprises” both during investigation of the existing facility, as well as during construction. “Surprises” should be expected even when historical records of investigations, design and construction are available. Unknowns, be they known unknowns or unknown unknowns, can be planned for by developing an approach for the design and construction process to identify potential issues/problems, or at least alert the designer and contractor of potential issues. A Risk-Based approach applied for the entire life of the rehabilitation project can be used to alert the parties of potential “surprises” and provide direction for mitigating issues as they arise. This type of approach is particularly effective when the process includes senior practitioners with decades of design and construction experience in all aspects of dams. Minimizing impacts created by “surprises”, particularly during construction, can result in an improved project meeting budget and schedule goals and design standards. This paper identifies and categorizes risk types salient to dam construction, reviews the process of risk identification and analysis, discusses guidelines for risk allocation, reviews strategies to mitigate risks, presents several case studies where risk mitigation strategies were employed successfully (or unsuccessfully), and presents lessons learned. The paper concludes with a summary and recommendations for best practices for Project Risk Management and mitigation that can be used by: Owners; Design Engineers; and Construction Managers, in planning, design, pre-construction and construction phases of dam related projects.

By Mary Ellen Large

This publication of Deep Foundations Institute (DFI) is intended to provide project owners, design engineers and construction professionals with guidelines for selecting cutoff wall and barrier systems and a general introduction to their methods of construction. Three categories of cutoff wall and barrier construction technology (excavated cutoff systems, in situ techniques, and driven cutoff systems) are presented and parameters for evaluating their design and construction are discussed. The information presented was compiled from the opinions of practicing engineers and construction specialists from the DFI Slurry Wall Committee.

Jan 1, 2021

By Patrick J. Hannigan, Frank Rausche, Rozbeh B. Moghaddam

The Top-Loaded Bi-Directional Test (“TLBT”) is a new method to apply bi-directional loads to a deep foundation element with the loading source located above the foundation head. In the TLBT reusable load assembly, loads are applied to the foundation using the R-System which consists of two stacked steel plates located at the geotechnical resistance balance point or at the foundation base connected to the load assembly via vertical elements. The top plate or the Shaft Bearing Plate (“SBP”) will transfer loads to the foundation upper portion, and the bottom plate or the Base Bearing Plate (“BBP”) will transfer loads to the foundation lower portion as well as the foundation base. At the surface, above the foundation head, a hydraulic jack is located between a Top Load Assembly (“TLA”), and the Bottom Load Assembly (“BLA”). The TLA and BLA are connected to vertical elements which are consequently connected to the R-system. As the jack is pressurized and expanded at the surface, the R-System plates are separated, and the foundation is bidirectionally loaded. This paper presents a brief description of the conventional Bi-Directional Load Test (“BDLT”) including benefits and limitations followed by the TLBT method introduction including its benefits and advantages over other testing methods.

Sep 8, 2021

By Juan M. Pestana, Jeremy M. Gasser, Cuneyt Gokmen, Paul J. Sabatini, William Tanner, Daniel J. Woeste

An access pathway and working platform were designed and constructed for equipment access for a Deep Soil Mixing (DSM) pilot study over a coal combustion residual (CCR) surface impoundment (SI). The DSM pilot study was conducted to evaluate slurry mix designs and construction techniques for installing DSM columns up to 95 feet deep. Two-dimensional (2-D) limit equilibrium and 2-D finite element analyses were used to evaluate multiple failure mechanisms including: (i) bearing capacity, (ii) punching shear of mixed ground and underlying CCR, (iii) effect of fluidized DSM columns on working platform stability, and (iv) liquefaction. The analysis results were used to design ground improvement required to increase bearing capacity and stability of the CCR under the proposed equipment access route. A long-reach excavator was used to perform shallow bucket mixing and walk onto the CCR SI atop previously mixed cells following a minimum cure time and acceptance of quality control test results. Prior to mobilizing the DSM rig, a static load test was conducted to evaluate performance of the working platform. Both the access pathway and working platform demonstrated acceptable performance under the design loads during the DSM pilot study. This case study emphasizes the economic and safety benefits that can be realized by appropriately designing critical temporary work items such as access pathways and working platforms in difficult ground conditions. INTRODUCTION A Deep Soil Mixing (DSM) pilot study was conducted at a coal combustion residual (CCR) surface impoundment (SI) to evaluate slurry mix designs and construction techniques for closure design of the SI (Site). Sluicing of CCR at the facility ceased and closure will be initiated based on requirements in the final United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Rule for Disposal of Coal Combustion Residuals from Electric Utilities, 40 CFR 257, effective October 19, 2015. The proposed closure approach involves constructing a DSM containment structure (DSM Wall) to separate the SI into two areas: (i) a closure by removal area; and (ii) a consolidate and cap-in-place area. The proposed DSM Wall would retain the CCR within the consolidated closure footprint and provide a barrier between the two areas of the SI. The predominant CCR in the SI where the pilot study was conducted were fly ash and bottom ash. CCR materials in surface impoundments are generally soft and saturated as a result of being sluiced into place and can present stability and safety challenges when performing earthwork activities.

Jan 1, 2019

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 Keith MacKay, John Carter, David Siddle, Fernando Faminia

"The River Green Residential development, is located in the municipality of Richmond, BC adjacent to the Fraser River. Ground conditions at the site consisted of medium to fine grained alluvial sands and a high groundwater elevation. A temporary low permeability retaining wall was required in order to facilitate the construction of an underground parking structure without inducing settlement of adjacent structures, which include the Richmond Olympic Oval; part of the legacy of the Vancouver 2010 Winter Olympics. Golder Associates Ltd. and GeoPacific Consultants Ltd. utilized Cutter Soil Mixing (CSM) technology to enable construction of a continuous combined low permeability cut-off and retaining wall around the perimeter of the property. The 350m long wall was keyed into marine clay at a depth of 28m below ground surface, and contained H-Pile reinforcement installed at regular intervals. The CSM technology provided many benefits for this project, allowing the combined cut-off and retaining wall to be constructed within a very narrow footprint (650mm width). The low noise impact and near vibration free construction of the CSM equipment provided minimal inconvenience to nearby stakeholders during construction. To reduce dewatering volumes during excavation and prevent significant water-table drawdown the Hydraulic Conductivity requirements for the wall were 1 x 10-7 cm/s or less. Project specifications called for a different strength requirement for upper and lower portions of the wall. The top 13 meters of the wall required an Unconfined Compressive Strength (UCS) of 4MPa to act as a retaining and cut-off wall, whereas the bottom 15 meters of the wall required a UCS of only 0.5 MPa to act only as a cut-off wall. Wet-grab and core samples were obtained from the panels to confirm the UCS and Hydraulic Conductivity specifications were met.INTRODUCTIONGolder Construction Inc. and GeoPacific Consultants Ltd. conducted the design and construction of a deep soil mixed cut-off and retaining wall system. The “dry-box” solution was used to surround the excavation of an underground parkade and prevent flows of groundwater into the excavation."

Jan 1, 2016

By Paul R. Lear

Sustainability continues to be an important aspect of remediation and infrastructure projects. Deep soil mixing (DSM), a common construction and remedial technology, can easily incorporate the following sustainability best management practices (BMPs), including Minimizing Total Energy Use and Maximizing Use of Renewable Energy; Minimizing Air Pollutants and Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions and Maximizing Use of Machinery Equipped with Advanced Emission; Minimizing Water Use and Impacts to Water Resources; Beneficial Reuse of Materials/Reduction of Materials and Waste Reduction; Use of Local Labor and Supplies. This paper focuses on the sustainability of DSM treatment and provide carbon footprint calculations at least one completed DSM project which used these sustainability BMPs to demonstrate the environmental impact of the sustainability.

Sep 8, 2021

By I. D. Dayal, Anil Kumar Jain

"Cutoff walls are frequently used to slow down or prevent seepage of water through and/or around dams. Cutoff wall is a type of seepage barrier structure designed to reduce the flow of water underneath temporary or main dam. There are number of techniques for the construction of cutoff walls including concrete, Jet grouting and permeation grouting. NHPC LTD, a premier Govt. of India undertaking has been instrumental in the hydropower development within the country & in nearby countries like Nepal & Bhutan since last four decades. NHPC LTD has completed more than 20 hydro-electric projects with total installed capacity of 6587MW (including capacity addition by JV- NHDC). In all these projects, different types of dams and spillways were constructed in not so benign to extreme challenging geological set up. There has always been challenge associated with the temporary diversion works. The project sites sometimes incur huge river bed excavations in case of concrete gravity dam founded on rock foundation at large depth. The challenges for minimizing the seepage have been well taken care by constructing the dedicated seepage barriers. The construction of cut-off walls have progressed from “conventional continuous trench backfilled with conventional concrete or plastic concrete” to “grout curtain”, to “jet grouting” to the “concrete cut-off wall” , the last being the most sophisticated & credible seepage barrier.The efficiency of the cut-off walls are monitored by the seepage quantity observed (reduction of the seepage flow), uplift pressures or exit gradients after construction of cut-off walls. For construction of the main concrete dam, required space is created by the river bed excavation for placing the dam foundation on sound rock. Sometimes there is deep river bed excavation from 30 to 40 m depth or even more as per the available rock profile. Temporary coffer dams are constructed for diverting the river flow through diversion tunnels / channels etc. In deep river bed excavation; there are high chances of the significant seepage through the coffer dam foundation / river bed material due to high hydraulic gradients. Seepage and piping are the main causes of the failure / damage of the temporary coffer dams. If the seepage quantity is too high, then it becomes difficult to handle it by dewatering in the dam pit. Dam concrete is required to be placed unhindered to have a monolithic construction of dam blocks & to have faster construction in the working season. Cut-off walls increase the seepage path considerably thus reducing the exit gradient and further reduction of the seepage thus helping in maintaining the seepage free area for working."

Jan 1, 2016

By P. Seethalakshmi, Yatakuri Yaswanth Naidu

The use of a single pile, group of piles with pile cap, piled raft foundation system, etc., are prevalent in transferring the superstructure load from the soft soil layers to the firm underground layers to reduce the settlement and improve the bearing capacity. The recent development of disconnected piled raft foundation has gained greater importance in improving the load transfer mechanism among the pile, raft, and subsoil by reducing the vulnerability of the greatest axial force on the pile head which leads to pile failure. The present study aims at analyzing the performance of unreinforced and Geogrid reinforced disconnected piled raft foundations under vertical loading using the commercially available finite element software PLAXIS-3D. A parametric study was conducted on unreinforced and reinforced disconnected piled raft foundations to explore the effect of varying pile stiffness as well as the inclusion of Geogrid layer on the load vs settlement, the load sharing ratio of piles and raft, and the distribution of axial load and bending moment along the length of the pile. The Mohr-Coulomb model was used for the granular cushion layer while the Modified Cam Clay model was used for soft clay underlain the sand layer. Raft and piles were assumed to be rigid and linear elastic. The results showed that axial force taken by piles with higher stiffness was maximum while settlement at the bottom tip of the pile with higher stiffness was maximum in both reinforced as well as unreinforced disconnected piled raft systems.

Sep 1, 2022

By Sarah Ramp, Daniel V. Cacciola, Justin Labrozzi, Shafiq I. Siddiqui, Faisal Ahmed

"Construction of embankments up to 34 ft in height for twelve ramps and roadways needed for the New Jersey Turnpike Interchange 14A project required ground improvement. The subsurface conditions, consisting of up to 30-ft thick layer of highly-compressible peat and organic soils, would induce up to 8 ft of primary and 4 in. of secondary consolidation settlements to the embankments over a long period of time. Innovative ground improvement solutions were needed to meet unique challenges posed by the poor subsurface conditions, space and existing utility constraints, aggressive construction schedule, and massive size of the project. A variety of ground improvement techniques were utilized in six different zones of the embankments to limit settlements and ensure stability of the embankments. These techniques included preloading with surcharge and prefabricated vertical drains (PVD), load balancing using light weight fill, and concrete column rigid inclusions (RI). Additionally, augercast piles with load transfer platform were used under an existing bridge with low vertical clearance. An innovative approach consisting of preloading with surcharge and PVDs followed by installation of RI was needed in one of the six embankment zones with the worst, i.e., very soft, soil conditions. The design of the RI was performed by a specialty ground improvement contractor (SGIC) using Plaxis 2D and 3D softwares. The performance of the ground improvement systems was verified and monitored by load tests and instrumentations. This paper presents details of the ground improvement design, construction, monitoring results, and lessons learned, with a focus on the RI.INTRODUCTIONNew Jersey Turnpike Interchange 14A is located within the cities of Bayonne and Jersey City, in Hudson County, New Jersey. The New Jersey Turnpike Authority (NJTA) identified Interchange 14A as an area of mass congestion in need of redevelopment to improve the increasing demand of traffic and roadway safety. The New Jersey Turnpike Interchange 14A project included the construction of twelve (12) new roadways, in addition to the construction of four new bridges. The limits of construction are shown in Fig. 1.The fill height required to construct the roadway embankments varied from 2 to 34 ft. The proposed embankment side slopes varied from 6H: 1V to 2H: 1V. Additionally, mechanically-stabilized-earth (MSE) walls were utilized to retain the embankment fill along some segments of the roadways. As shown in Table 1, the proposed roadways were divided into six zones, based on location, subsurface condition, and embankment height."

Jan 1, 2017

By James P. Chivilo, Gregory R. Meeder, Scott J. DiFiore, Matthew H. Johnson

New construction in metropolitan areas has direct impacts on immediate neighbors and abutters. While noise and dust are generally nuisance concerns, demolition, vibrations, excavation, and dewatering can cause structural damage to adjacent structures. Different cities, states, or jurisdictions have different regulations that dictate requirements, roles, or responsibilities for varying parties during construction. The authors will introduce and discuss risks of new construction adjacent to existing structures, and the legal framework in Illinois which requires the owner of the new construction project to provide adequate protections for adjacent existing structures. The authors, who are engineers and attorneys, will discuss technical and legal concerns, and will highlight the importance of early and frequent communication among project participants to manage risks, despite whether or not any local regulations exist to drive the process. RISKS IN ADJACENT CONSTRUCTION New construction in metropolitan areas inherently involves some combination of noise, dust, ground-borne vibrations, earth excavation, and subgrade dewatering. These issues have potential to directly and adversely affect abutters and their property. Noise and dust can be nuisance concerns, while vibrations, excavation, and dewatering can result in damage to abutters’ structures. Noise and dust are unlikely to lead to physical damage to abutters’ property, and can be controlled with limited work hours and good housekeeping practices. Vibrations and excavations, however, if not well understood, planned for, and mitigated, can result in serious damage to abutters’ structures. In turn, this damage introduces additional and often significant costs and schedule delays.

Jan 1, 2019

By Selvaganesh Selvaraju, Deepak Raj, Sandun N. Wimalasena

One of the world leading oil majors is carrying out a multi-billion-dollar expansion of its integrated manufacturing complex in Jurong Island, Singapore, the global oil trading and refining hub. Soil conditions at the site comprise 10-20m thick reclaimed sand, below which is 3-5m of soft marine clay underlain by stiff soils of the Jurong Formation. The conventional foundation solution would adopt driven precast concrete spun piles; however, precast spun piles have a high embodied carbon from the usage of steel and cement. In order to reduce the carbon footprint, an alternative solution comprising deep vibro techniques was developed. The EFFC-DFI carbon calculator was used to demonstrate the expected scope 1, 2 and 3 carbon emissions for both driven pile and vibro techniques. By using in-house, state-of-the-art fuel-efficient machines, alongside the innovative design concept and usage of natural materials such as sand and stones, actual CO2e emissions were reduced from a potential 21,000 tonnes, with the spun pile’s solution, to only 1,900 tonnes. The saved 20,100 tCO2e is equivalent to an average car driving 2,000x around the Earth’s equator. The paper discusses the application of soil improvement as a more sustainable, lower carbon alternative to conventional piled solutions.

May 1, 2022