Search Documents

By David A. Hart, Barry P. Osborn, Richard J. Totty, Ana T. Carvalho, Max B. Elliott

This paper addresses the experience designing and installing bored piles for the King’s Cross area. This includes continuous flight auger and rotary bored piles, with a range of diameters between 600 mm and 1200 mm, reaching a maximum depth of 56 m below ground level. Existing Network Rail Thameslink twin bored running tunnels are located directly beneath the subject plots. These tunnels have an external diameter of 6.6 m and the crowns of the tunnels are very shallow, in some cases just 10 m below the existing ground level. Some plots needed piles to be installed in close proximity to the tunnels, which required additional control measures and contingency plans. Pile verticality was monitored as the tip of each pile advanced and in-tunnel monitoring readings were verified and are presented. Lessons learned from designing, installing and testing the piles and monitoring the tunnels are addressed in this paper.

May 1, 2022

By Randy R. Williams, Brian W. Wilson, George M. Filz, Marina S. W. Li, Donald A. Bruce

"In-situ wet grab sampling and post-installation coring of soil-cement structures are typically carried out for Quality Control (QC) and Quality Assurance (QA) of deep mixing (DM) schemes. Wet grab sampling and testing is used to provide data to indicate that performance requirements are being met during production, in advance of coring, which typically occurs at 28 days or later, following installation. While unconfined compressive strength (UCS) tests from wet grab samples provide good production indicators, industry practice often requires that acceptance criteria of soil-cement structures be based on UCS results from representative core samples.This paper outlines the approach adopted for field sampling and QA/QC testing carried out in highly variable subsurface conditions at a site located in northern British Columbia (BC), focusing on postinstallation soil-cement coring and strength testing for an extensive deep mixing scheme. A discussion on suitable methods of coring soil-cement structures and appropriate selection of samples for testing that are representative of the in-situ soil-cement structures is provided. This paper also discusses the selection strategy adopted for verification of strength and modulus parameters used for design, providing spatial and time coverage, as well as the acceptance criteria implemented, and provides comparisons with published industry recommendations.BACKGROUNDAn extensive deep mixing ground improvement scheme was completed for the development of a Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) Facility to be located in Bish Cove, BC, Canada. The deep mixing scheme was implemented to treat very weak native deposits in-situ to support two mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) walls up to 20 m (66 ft) high, and their associated bulk earthworks. Within the DM area, the subsurface conditions were highly variable, ranging from deep (up to 21 m (69 ft) thick) deposits of very soft to soft clayey silt to silty clay, overlying layers of dense to very dense gravelly sand to sand and gravel, to compact deposits of silty sand (up to 15 m (49 ft) thick), overlying dense sand and gravel. Bedrock was encountered beneath the granular deposits and generally comprised granodiorite with occasional andesite dykes."

Jan 1, 2015

By Sara Moshfeghi, Seyyed Majdeddin Mir Mohammad Hosseini, Abolfazl Eslami

"Due to variety of current pile bearing capacity methods based on the cone penetration test (CPT), for optimum design, it is necessary to evaluate the performance of such methods in different geotechnical conditions. Geotechnical databases including piling and in-situ testing records have been recognized as useful tools for analysis, design and economical construction. In order to evaluate pile bearing capacity methods, AUT-CPT&Pile database has been compiled including 450 full scale pile load tests and CPT sounding records. This database consists of different pile types with a relatively wide range of geometries and various soil conditions. Forty three records of piles driven in sand deposits were then employed to evaluate effects of ultimate capacity interpretation criteria from load displacement diagrams. The Davisson offset limit criterion, the Brinch Hansen 80% criterion and the load at the displacement of 10% of the pile diameter were compared to estimated capacities from ten CPT based design methods currently used in practice. The Brinch Hansen 80% criterion and the load at the displacement of 10% of the pile diameter lead to reasonable results, the Brinch Hansen 80% criterion showed less scatter. For evaluating the accuracy and the precision of CPT-based methods, the results were compared to estimated capacities. Results of comparison indicate that the CPT-based methods mainly predict the pile capacity withreasonable accuracy.INTRODUCTIONAmong the different approaches of estimating the pile bearing capacity, in-situ tests, especially, the cone penetration test (CPT) are favored due to the cone similarities with piles in modes of installation as well as fast and continuous profiling. This trend is practically well established where deep foundations are to be constructed in soft to medium subsoil deposits (Eslami and Fellenius, 1997; Mayne and Niazi, 2009).Employing different design methods results in a wide range of values which complicates the selection of an appropriate one to determine the pile bearing capacity. Several studies by Briuad and Tucker (1988), Eslami and Fellenius (1997), Abu Farsakh and Titi (2004), Schneider et al. (2008) and Eslami et al. (2011) confirm disparity of different design methods predictions. Thus, for optimum design, it is necessary to evaluate and compare the performance of current methods.Geotechnical databases are known as helpful tools in research and practical applications for optimizing analysis and design and are mainly used for management and interpretation of data, evaluation of design methods, calibrating LRFD or ASD design factors, etc. Pile lateral and axial load tests are examples of databases in geotechnical engineering. A summary of several CPT and pile load test databases is presented in Table 1."

Jan 1, 2017

By Rahul Wankhade, Sunil S. Baswankar, Aditya S. Kharatkar

Despite advances in pile design methodologies and piling techniques at site, difficulties and uncertainties still exists for design of piles particularly in coralline deposits and weak carbonate rocks. Such deposits are known to be heterogenous in nature, and occupy major stretches of earth, where piling experiences are probably very scanty. Such deposits are associated with low unit weights and usually consist of weakly cemented calcareous and carbonate soils interbedded with coral rocks containing cavities, which are completely void or filled with coral debris. Many of the studies indicate that conventional parametric relationships are may not apply to such sediments and rock formations. This paper intends to provide an appraisal of the available information that cautions against risks involved in conventional design practice and also serve as a guideline for pile design in such formations despite being a grey area of research. Contents of the paper is expected to provide a basis for the pile design and likely to serve as an eye-opener for research into this important soil-pile structure interaction problem.

Sep 1, 2022

By Mario A. Terceros Herrera, Mario Terceros Arce, Antonio Marinucci

This paper describes the general principles of the expander body with post-grouting (EBI) system, and how it is similar in nature to a large-scale pressuremeter device. The results from the installation of an EBI can be used to provide information about the stress-strain characteristics of the soil adjacent to the device and to compute estimates of nominal axial resistance. As the EBI expands during grouting, pressure is applied to the in-situ soil surrounding the device thereby compacting/densifying the soil. The nominal axial resistance for small diameter piles/ground anchors can be increased due to the greater soil stiffness and shear strength around the device, larger surface and end area, and improved soil-to-EBI interaction in side resistance. The shape of the response curves depends on the geotechnical conditions of the soil (e.g., in-situ stress state, strength, and stiffness) and the installation method of the piling/ground anchor. This technique has been used successfully with different pile types and ground anchors in a wide range of conditions from very loose sands/silts to very dense sands and medium-dense gravels as well as in soft to stiff clays. This paper also describes a mini case history in which 80 piles were installed to support an office building, and the results of the static axial compression load tests performed on a production FDP+EBI pile is also included.

By Brian Wilson, Megan Atkinson, Richard Diggle, Nathan Sweeney

"Ruskin Dam, located near Mission, British Columbia, was constructed in 1929 and 1930 and comprises of a concrete gravity dam structure founded on bedrock. At the right abutment, which consists mostly of dense to very dense sands and silt, the dam abuts against overburden soils, and connects to a cutoff wall system consisting of sloping concrete slabs. Significant seepage and piping issues were encountered during first filling of the reservoir in 1930. In 2012, BC Hydro, the owner of the dam, awarded a contract for the construction of seepage control measures at the right abutment, including construction of a plastic concrete cut-off wall extending upstream of the dam, a plastic concrete seepage training wall extending downstream of the dam, tie-in of the new cutoff wall to the dam, consisting of jet grouting of the soils adjacent to the dam to allow for the construction of the special cutoff connecting the cutoff wall to the dam, and construction of additional jet-grouting ground improvement downstream of the dam.Integral to the upgrade was the requirement for the special tie-in cutoff wall, consisting of a highly flexible, impermeable membrane to connect the concrete dam to the new, 1 m thick plastic concrete cutoff wall. The tie-in extends vertically into bedrock through the dam and jet grout columns constructed adjacent and beneath the overhanging portion of the dam at the right abutment. The membrane is required to survive the anticipated earthquake induced deformation between the dam and the abutment soils.This paper describes the processes used to develop a material suitable to meet the specified flexibility and permeability criteria, as well as the innovative construction techniques utilized to construct the slot and place the bituminous material within it. The final dimensions of the slot were in the order of 7 m long by 25 m deep by 0.17 m wide. The bituminous material was placed under a head of water which was required to maintain stability of the slot, and was placed at temperatures in excess of 120 degrees Celsius."

Jan 1, 2017

Jan 1, 2002

By Timothy L. Roberts

For many years practicing geotechnical and structural engineers in Texas and Louisiana were reluctant to include augered cast-in-place (ACIP) piles as a viable deep foundation alternate. Three primary concerns were the lack of a final driving resistance to confirm adequate capacity, the inability to inspect ACIP piles prior to installation, and the fact that pile integrity is highly dependent on the skill of the ACIP pile contractor's field personnel. The Deep Foundations Institute (DFI) Committee on Augered Cast-In-Place Piles has responded to these quality control concerns by establishing standards of practice for ACIP pile installation and ACIP pile inspection. Regional areas of the country have different subsurface soil and rock conditions and many times this will influence local installation and inspection requirements. The best way structural and geotechnical engineers can address quality control concerns is to be familiar with the DFI standards of practice, to know the special requirements for a particular project site, and to incorporate them into a well-written ACIP pile specification. The purposes of this paper are to: 1) review the main fundamentals of a successful quality control program, 2) describe how these fundamentals can be applied to the installation of ACIP piles, and 3) add personal experiences from ACIP pile projects in Texas and Louisiana. Nondestructive test methods are frequently used as a quality control tool to evaluate questionable piles. An additional brief discussion of two nondestructive test methods is presented to complete the paper.

Jan 1, 1998

By Frank Rausche

Although Quality Control (QC) during construction is preferable for deep foundations, there are many instances when it is necessary to resort to Quality Assurance (QA) methods if, for various reasons, QC is not possible. Non Destructive Testing (NDT) methods for deep foundations are indirect approaches, i.e. in complex situations they do not provide complete information and need to be augmented by additional testing and/or analyses. While the challenges are varied for the different deep foundation types and the different test methods they are the same in many different countries. Experience of the tester is often mentioned as being most important for a successful quality assurance. In addition, reliable testing equipment for the best possible measurements and complete construction documentation for a meaningful data interpretation are minimum requirements for a successful test outcome. Another problem is the widely varying cost of the QA tests. For that reason the specifying engineer or authority has to be aware of what can reasonably be expected so that technically feasible specifications can be written for optimal cost and minimal construction delays. This paper discusses the most common NDT methods with a view on how these methods are applied world wide. It summarizes features of specifications, recommendations for test procedures and advanced analysis methods which can help to overcome uncertainty in the quality assessment of the foundation. Finally, the authors propose a decision tree for various QA methods, deep foundation types and soil properties.

Jan 1, 2008

GENERAL CONTRACTOR: ALEXANDER CONSTRUCTORS, INC. STRUCTURAL ENGINEER: CAGLEY & ASSOCIATES, INC. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER: F.T. KITLINSKI & ASSOCIATES, INC. PILE FOUNDATION CONTRACTOR: L.G. BARCUS AND SONS, INC. PROJECT PROFILE: 108-10 in. diameter AugerPiles installed to an approximate depth of 32 ft. Piles were installed through Stiff Clayey Fill and Medium-Dense Sands to Decomposed Shale. Piles were drilled to a refusal criteria of 1 ft. / 3 min. Piles were installed using a Barcus Mantis AugerPile rig which is large enough to install piles 25 to 50 ft. long outdoors. The Mantis is also ideal for indoor and low overhead installations. On top of being extremely versatile, the Mantis is also very economical to mobilize. The existing structure is supported on H-Piles. The AugerPiles were furnished and installed for less than the material price of the H-Piles. Design loads were under 40 tons which eliminated the need for a load test. AugerPiles were selected for minimal vibration, limited noise, and economy.

Jan 1, 2001

By Michael D. Justason

...a global perspective... In March of 2000, the Japanese Geotechnical Society added "Rapid Load Testing" to their national standard for pile testing. In the year 2000. it is estimated that there will be more than 500 "Rapid Load Tests" on foundations around the world. ...so what is a "Rapid Load Test", and why is it gaining acceptance and popularity?

Jan 1, 2001

By Peter Florian

At 5:50 am on October 1, 1992, the new $800 million Pittsburgh International Airport Midfield Terminal opened its gates to the world after five years of construction and more than 24 years of planning. Despite numerous design changes, this massive project was completed on time and substantially within budget. The importance of this airport to Allegheny County and the Pittsburgh region was recognized 24 years earlier by Allegheny County Commissioners Tom Foerster and the late Leonard Staisey. Staisey and Foerster established a program to acquire land for the "Airport of the Future".

Jan 1, 1993

This Section describes four alternative methods for load testing of drilled shafts: high strain dynamic test (HSDT), rapid load test, static load test, and bottom load test. Until recently, static load tests were the only method available for verifying the capacity of a drilled shaft. However, because many drilled shafts carry very high design loads, the static load test was prohibitively expensive. The alternative methods, HSDT, rapid load testing, and bottom load testing are gaining acceptance because of their lower cost and faster implementation. However, these different methods do not necessarily yield the same results. This section describes the load testing methods and the differences that may occur when interpreting the test results.

Jan 1, 2004

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 Stanley A. Schwartz

In the Piedmont, heavily loaded structures are generally supported by either drilled piers or one of several pile types. The choice of drilled piers or piles is typically one of comparative costs. The cost of a drilled pier foundation is usually the more difficult to predict because of the greater impact that variable conditions and construction monitoring have on cost. Poor specifications, related to the drilling equipment, procedures and bearing level, can also result in large cost extras. In the southern Piedmont, straight shafts are typically extended down to hard rock to achieve primary support in end-bearing: when bells are required, they are often constructed manually. In some eastern and northern Piedmont locations the thickness of the decompossed rock zone is significant and considerable skin friction can be mobilized. Typically piers are constructed in holes temporarily cased with steel liners. The bottom is cleaned of loose material and water, and then evaluated by a geotechnical engineer to confirm the design bearing pressure (and friction, where appropriate) or recommend alternative construction measures.

Jan 1, 1988

By Gregory J. Canivan

Three test pile programs were conducted in Charleston, South Carolina to evaluate differences in bearing resistance due to installation methods. The tested piles were installed with impact hammers and vibratory drivers through soft clays and/or loose sands into the Cooper Marl, a stiff calcareous marine clay or silt. Piles driven into the Cooper Marl experience significant capacity gain with time following initial installation due largely to pore pressure dissipation. Pile size and pile type were both known to affect pore pressure generation during installation and subsequently the capacity gain with time. The test programs were primarily conducted to optimize pile design values and construction methods with regard to trestle construction but the results also contribute to the understanding of driven pile behavior. High strain dynamic testing was performed on several open-end pipe and H-piles. The measured difference in long-term bearing capacity of the H-piles as a result of the two installation methods was negligible, while the short-term bearing capacity of the pipe pile was larger when the piles were installed using impact hammers. The lower short-term resistance in the vibratory driven piles is attributed to larger excess pore pressures generated during installation compared to those generated during impact driving.

Jan 1, 2002

This specification, along with the drawings, encompasses all designs, materials, products, accessories, tools, equipment, services, transportation, labor and supervision, installation techniques, and testing procedures required for the installation of soil nail excavation support or earth retention systems. This is a Guide Specification designed to assist in the development of project specifications for soil nail excavation support and earth retention systems. This Model Specification is based on generally accepted industry standards but may require modification by the specification writer to accommodate unusual and/or unforeseen site and subsurface conditions and the particular circumstances of the project. Care must be taken to avoid internal inconsistencies. It contains language allowing for a Contractor-Designed Soil Nail Wall, which would be removed if the design is provided by the Owner (e.g. See Sections 1.2 and 4.1).

Jan 1, 2010

By J. Tanner Blackburn, James R. Gingery, Lisheng Shao

Rigid inclusions consist of grout columns installed using displacement auger or vibrated tooling. The columns are typically installed in an array to provide support for footings, mats, or embankments. Due to the relative small column diameter and low replacement ratio, the surrounding soils typically have minimal densification or improvement. A gravel load transfer platform is commonly used above the rigid inclusion head to distribute stresses more broadly to the supported structure. The axial stiffness and geotechnical engineering mechanics of rigid inclusion design are similar to those of deep foundation systems, but they are typically only lightly- or un-reinforced and are not structurally connected to the above-grade structure. The popularity of rigid inclusions is increasing in the Western U.S., where many urban areas are subject to moderate to high seismic hazard levels. However, the performance of rigid inclusions under seismic loading is poorly understood, and seldom addressed in current designs. The elements are brittle, with limited or no ductility and relatively low moment capacity, and therefore may be prone to damage under seismic loading. Three modes of seismic loading should be considered: inertial loading from the structure, kinematic loading from vertically propagating shear waves, and kinematic loading from ground failure- related permanent ground deformation. This paper focuses on the first two modes. A simplified procedure for evaluating kinematic and inertial loading of rigid inclusions is described, and its use is illustrated through application to a site in Southern California. The results show that moderate to severe kinematic loading can generate plastic hinges in the rigid inclusions. Engineering consequences of this hinging could include settlement or bearing failure. INTRODUCTION In this paper the term ‘rigid inclusion’ (RI) refers to grout or grouted aggregate columns that are installed using either drilled or vibration displacement techniques. They are commonly installed in arrays to support vertical loads from footings, mats, or embankments. RIs are not structurally connected to footings they support. Rather, it is typical for a dense gravel load transfer platform (LTP) to be installed as a cushion between the RI head and supported footing or new fill. In cases of RI support of fill embankments, the LTP may be reinforced with horizontal layers of geogrid.

Jan 1, 2018

By Alain E. Holeyman

After scoping out the objectives of this general report, the report reviews the three assigned main themes addressed by the papers submitted to the session: pile monitoring, testing, and data processing. It focuses on later developments and on issues requiring clarification, thereby identifying topics for potential discussion. Pile Monitoring does not bring much novelty, except for the integration of IT on construction sites. As far as testing, new developments focus on internal pile loading procedures while more confidence is being gained with dynamic and kinematic load tests. Significant advances are noted in the interpretation of data, where variability of results are coped with, loading rate effects are being better addressed, and more routine use of Finite element analyses are observed. Several many older problems remain while new issues emerge from more recent technologies and approaches.

Jan 1, 2006

By Gyimah Kasali

Rapid Load Testing was performed as part of an extensive drilled pier testing program for the University of California Berkeley Capital Improvement Program. The purpose of the program was to: (1) Verify the axial compressive design capacity values for the planned 24" piers, and to estimate the capacity of the existing 30" CIDH piers, and (2) To evaluate the seismic performance of the proposed drilled shafts. The Fundex PLT was used since the loading period of the PLT is very similar to the period of a seismic event, making it an ideal tool to model the pier response to seismic events. "Performance-based design" of structures subject to seismic loads has been of particular interest to UC Berkeley Seismic Review Committee and the Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center. The comparison of static tests to Rapid Load testing also provided valuable correlations. The program represents one of the most comprehensive drilled pier test programs on the West Coast. The testing program consisted of Rapid Load Testing using the Fundex PLT on 6 drilled piers. Rapid Load Tests were followed by conventional static compression and tension tests on selected piers, followed by another cycle of rapid load tests on the statically tested piers. The piers featured extensive instrumentation to allow detailed interpretation of the test result. Correlations were drawn to compare static load test result to that of the PLT in the particular soil profile, and the PLT also provided the data to analyze the ultimate seismic capacity of the piers. The load test results indicate that the ratio of interpreted failure load from the PLT data to the corresponding load from the static load test data is about 1.2 to 1.3 for the clayey soils underlying the test site. The results also indicate that the PLT offers an economical approach to defining the stiffness of drilled pier foundations subjected to seismic loads for use in performance-based design.

Jan 1, 2002