Search Documents

By Kevin P. Gleckler, Steven C. Highfill

"Escalators to access platforms for the Second Avenue Subway Station at 72nd Street in Manhattan are to be installed in the basement of an existing 19-Story residential building. The escalators, which extend below the existing building foundations, require excavation of an inclined rock cavern up to 80-feet deep. Underpinning of columns within the 19-story building as well as a stone masonry party wall and columns for an adjacent 5-story building was completed prior to excavation of the rock cavern to ensure structural stability.This paper will discuss the analysis and design of the underpinning system, the installation and load transfer procedures and the cavern excavation immediately below. The underpinning system was subject to very strict deformation limits and to electronic monitoring prior to and throughout the load transfer and construction process. Key details such as the load transfer mechanism between the reinforced concrete column and the temporary structural steel underpinning frame will be discussed. The challenging rock excavation process will be described which utilized conventional equipment and pattern drilling with Damite rock splitting mortar.INTRODUCTIONPhase 1 of the Second Avenue Subway is being built by MTA Capital Construction (MTACC) to improve subway service on the east side of Manhattan. Entrance 1 for the 72nd Street Station of the Second Avenue Subway is located on the east side of 2nd Avenue at the corner of E 69th Street in New York City. Access to the station mezzanine, approximately 80-feet below grade, is designed to be routed through the basement of an existing 19-story residential building. From the sidewalk, stairs and escalators within the width of sidewalk connect the riding public to a basement level mezzanine, which turns into the building at roughly 16 feet below grade (Fig. 1). Riders then connect to three long escalators to arrive at the station mezzanine. The escalators are to be installed within an inclined and arched cast-in-place (CIP) concrete lined rock cavern (Fig. 2). Construction of both the entrance into the basement and the escalator cavern require the transfer of columns within the 19-story building. Excavation of the escalator cavern also impacts the foundation support for columns and a load bearing party wall for the 5-story residential building immediately to the north. Two stages of load transfer were used at each location. The Stage 1 transfer used a temporary underpinning system to unload the current structure which allowed for construction of the permanent transfer girders. Stage 2 transferred the load from the temporary system to the permanent transfer girders."

Jan 1, 2016

By William D. Oder, Seth H. Hamblin, Les R. Chernatskas, Jonathan L. Ernst

Large diameter drilled deep foundations are a widely utilized solution throughout North America and the world. Numerous design and construction techniques developed over the past 100 years have made this type of foundation a robust, reliable, and efficient foundation option to support a wide variety of structures. From bridges, to marine structures, to high-rise buildings, drilled shafts are a time-tested approach for all types of infrastructure projects. Yet, what remains ambiguous in the current state of engineering practice is how to respond when a shaft is constructed that, for potentially different reasons, may or may not meet the design requirements? In this case, what are the best practices for Contractors and Engineers when a structural, geotechnical, or material integrity issue arises during construction? In our experience the answers to these questions are not widely known, but are profoundly important so that engineers can have tools available to confidently and efficiently address concerns, and provide a path forward for the project. This paper seeks to answer the above questions by presenting details of different remediation approaches using the results of several case studies where structural and geotechnical engineering methods, combined with non-destructive integrity testing (NDT), were employed to evaluate the acceptance of “questionable” drilled shafts. Through multidisciplinary techniques like Cross-hole Sonic Logging and 3-D Tomography which enhance the resolution of anomalous zones and defects in concrete, the development of concrete strength estimates from non-destructive testing data, and executing innovative structural and geotechnical analyses to evaluate the as-built conditions, drilled shafts that might have historically been rejected were ultimately accepted by the project team. This paper presents a series of unique case studies that together depict a roadmap for a comprehensive approach to reliably evaluate and guide the industry to address these types of drilled shaft construction issues.

Oct 1, 2022

By Ezra Ballinger, Matthew R. Glisson

Located in downtown Fargo, North Dakota, the Block 9 Redevelopment project site contains highly- compressible soils in the upper 100 feet with groundwater about 10 to 15 feet below the existing ground surface. The owner prohibited using driven piles to avoid disturbing neighbors of the project and historically, drilled shafts are used in Fargo as a reduced noise and vibration alternative to driven piles. However, developments over the last 20 to 30 years in drilling equipment, load testing and integrity testing resulted in the project team identifying augered cast-in-place piles as a suitable alternative for this project. To reduce the risks associated with using a relatively unproven foundation system in the area, the project team used the design-build delivery method for foundation design and construction. The team also specified compression load testing and higher-than-normal integrity testing. A successful bi-directional load test validated the design parameters for the augered cast-in-place pile while thermal integrity profiling gave the team confidence that these piles would perform similarly to the test pile. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Block 9 Redevelopment project goal was to turn an existing, at-grade parking lot in downtown Fargo, North Dakota into a public outdoor plaza, a mixed-use building and a parking ramp. The project provides new offices, retail spaces, a hotel, a restaurant and private apartments. Situated in the southeast quadrant at the intersection of Broadway and 3rd Avenue North, the project site wraps around a bank building that was to remain. According to aerial photographs, the eastern portion of the site contained a public parking ramp that was constructed between 1952 and 1976, and subsequently demolished between 2009 and 2010. The western portion of the site had some combination of buildings and surface parking visible in aerial photographs taken between 1952 and 1979. Since 1984, aerial photographs show the western portion of the site being entirely surface parking. The redevelopment included the construction of three structures: the Tower, the Podium and the Parking Ramp, as shown in Fig. 1. With plan dimensions of roughly 100 feet by 100 feet, the Tower has 1 level of below-grade parking and 19 above-grade levels rising to a height of about 230 feet above grade. The Tower contains eight levels of commercial office space, four levels of hotel, six levels of residences and a mechanical level. This configuration resulted in column service loads ranging between 435 and 2,685 kips. The Tower core area has a total service load of about 30,000 kips.

Jan 1, 2019

By Suthan Pooranampillai

Verification of drilled shaft resistance is primarily obtained through the use of different load testing methods. Procedures utilized include conventional top down static loading, the Osterberg load cell (O-cell) test and dynamic tests such as the Statnamic method. The O-cell test provides a means of obtaining separately the base and side shear resistance behavior of drilled shafts (cast-in-drilled-hole). Alternatively, the Statnamic load test method enables the engineer to derive base and side shear behavior separately, based on measurements of load, accelerations and strains along the length of the shaft. However, due to time and cost constraints these tests can only be performed on selected shafts within a project. Post grouting of a drilled shaft base embedded within a cohesionless material, with a low mobility compaction grout, will essentially pre-load the shaft base soil against the side shear and self-weight in much the same manner as an O-cell load test (when the load cell is placed within the base vicinity). Therefore, successful post grouting of a drilled shaft would enable verification of both shaft side shear and base resistance simultaneously on each and every shaft it is carried out on. Additionally, such post grouted shafts display stiffer load-displacement response during subsequent downward, superstructure induced, loading compared to ungrouted shafts. Verification of resistance on each and every shaft through the use of post grouting will allow an increase in resistance factors (reduction in safety factor) used in the design. Two 6 ft. diameter drilled shafts were constructed in Fredonia, WA, for WSDOT, each with an approximate length of 52 ft. The shafts were terminated within medium dense poorly graded silty sand. Statnamic load testing of the shafts indicated maximum derived static side shear and base resistances of 2545 kips and 507 kips (1.6 in. displacement) for shaft One and 2466 kips and 212 kips (1.4 in. displacement) for shaft Two. Shaft Two was subsequently grouted, with a low mobility compaction grout. Shaft base mounted total earth pressure cells measured a maximum sustained pressure of 55.44 ksf during the compaction grouting operation. Shaft displacement reached 0.65 inches in the upward direction at termination of grouting. Comparison of grouting data with initial load test information indicates that properly instrumented post grouting verifies shaft base and side shear resistance. In addition, these grouting induced resistances were much higher than design values supplied by the engineer using conventional resistance factor design. Large scale laboratory testing also shows that base grouting verifies higher soil resistances than permissible in conventional design.

Jan 1, 2010

By Pete Howell, Patrick Granitzki, Alicia Plinio, Janitha Batagoda

The New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA) Red Hook Houses was subjected to damage during Superstorm Sandy. As a result, the NYCHA has an ongoing project known as Restoration Associated with Sandy Recovery Program to improve the resistance against future storms. The specific project included 28 residential buildings and several service buildings within the Red Hook Development. The subsurface conditions within the eastern portion of the site included existing fill material underlain by varying stratums of very loose, loose and medium dense silty sands followed by very soft to medium stiff clay or dense silty sands. The western portion of the site included existing fill material, very loose to medium dense silty sands and organic clayey silts underlain by very soft to medium stiff sandy silts. Based on the geotechnical report, a conventional driven steel pile system was specified containing two pile depths. As part of the project bidding, an alternative pile type was recommended and analyzed to provide quicker installation, reduce vibrations, reduce noise, and provide relatively large cost savings. Due to relatively high lateral loading, an innovative double steel casing drilled displacement piles was proposed as the alternative pile option. Field testing proved the piles capable of the required project capacities and the use of drilled displacement piles as the best alternative for the project and accepted by the NYCHA.

Oct 1, 2022

By Ben C. Gerwick

This publication is intended to document recent innovations and technologies that have the best potential for effectively improving the quality of marine foundations while reducing the cost, time and risk of construction. Marine foundations originated in Neolithic times with the Swiss Lake Dwellers who constructed pile-supported houses, safe from invading tribes. The Queen of Babylonia built the first recorded bridge in 1500 BC across the Tigris. The foundations were large flat stones laid on the river bottom. About the same time in India, builders extended their water well techniques to the construction of ?well? foundations in the beds of their rivers. These were really the first open caissons; brick walls were built up in a circular ring while divers excavated sand from the bottom, sometimes at a depth of 100 feet. The Romans extended the clay-filled cribs of the Middle East to shallow cofferdams, which they sealed by underwater concrete made with pozzolanic cement from Mt. Vesuvius.

Jan 1, 2013

By Hitendrabhai S. Dewangan, Dr. Aashish A. Mehta

Pile foundation is widely used in construction of marine structures. In offshore & marine piling work, drilling/boring supporting fluid is used to stabilize the borehole (excavation) prior to tremie concrete. The poly-fluid is a synthetic drilling granular polymer characterized by high molecular weight.it is mainly used for the preparation of stabilizing and lubrication mud in drilling of deep foundations. Disposal of polymers after using it into the sea, pollutant the sea environment, which may be harmful for living organisms inside sea. To reduce the pollution in offshore/Onshore, it is essential to take the precautions during flushing operation with proper recycled, reused & it’s Disposal. To provide economic and environmental solutions, used slurry was treated with addition dose of fresh material/polymers. The amount of fresh materials/ Polymer to be added can be decided based on (viscosity, density and pH value) test results. Finally, initiate water flow and air agitation as required. Run the tests on the re generated slurry before transferring to storage tank. Also, after storage, polymers will be reused for next operation. Moreover, mud wastage coming from borehole will also be disposed at suitable dumping places.

Sep 1, 2022

Jan 1, 1989

By G. Stuart Littlejohn

In spite of recent concerns in certain European countries, I believe that silicate-ester grouts will continue to be employed in practice, unless more cost-effective inorganic grouts are developed for the treatment of fine sands. It is also noteworthy that over the past 40 years, there has been a record of good experience where silicate-ester grouts have been used in ground improvement. Nevertheless, there is now a need via the European Standard EN 12715 (2000) "to assess the environmental impact, particularly the toxicity of the grout and grout components, and their effect on ground and drinking water should be considered before grouting." "When testing the grouting material for environmental impact, the following aspects should be considered: ? Whether during processing, transport or grouting, substance can be generated or released which could be hazardous to the environment or the grouting crew; ? Whether noxious substances can spread upon mixing with ground water; ? Whether reaction products can be produced or released which influence the water quality; ? The type of particles eroded from hardened grout; ? Chemical reactions between hardened grout and the ground water."

Feb 10, 2003

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

By Ehab S. Shatnawi

It is common in practice to design laterally loaded rock-socketed drilled shafts using the p-y curve methods. However, the existing p-y curve criteria for rock were derived either semi-empirically or based on the assumption that the rock is an elastic isotropic continuum. The assumption of isotropy may be invalid for rocks with intrinsic anisotropy or for rocks with joints and bedding planes. Therefore, there is a need to develop a new p-y curve criterion to take into account the effects of rock anisotropy on the response of laterally loaded shafts. This paper presents a method for estimating the initial tangent Ki to the p-y curve for rock that can be characterized as transversely isotropic elastic continuum. Examples of transversely isotropic rock formation can be seen in most sedimentary rock where dominant bedding planes exist. The knowledge of the initial tangent to p-y curve is important, because it controls to a large extent the predicted deflection of laterally loaded drilled shaft in rock. The 3-D finite element parametric study results of a laterally loaded drilled shafts socketed in transversely isotropic continuum are employed to develop a series of design charts for estimating Ki as a function of transversely isotropic elastic constants.

Jan 1, 2007

By Ross Cutts

As a public servant geotechnical engineer, I observed how costly and valuable geotechnical field explorations are to the success of every project. Often however, the field exploration is a long and complex process that is made less efficient by the difficulty of retrieving and utilizing nearby internal or external historic geotechnical datasets. As an employee of a public agency, we would often start our investigations for every project from scratch, given the difficulty of locating and utilizing historic geotechnical data. This is an ethical and technical failing of our profession. When we start subsurface explorations from scratch, not only do we often duplicate investigations, we are also likely defaulting to reapplying tradi- tional test methods that yield con- servative geotechnical parameters, resulting in overly conservative and potentially costly construction. To address this issue while working as a public servant, I started a research program with Yunfeng Zhang, Ph.D., of the University of Maryland, to build a tool that could compile internal historic geotechnical data and extract additional value from it, using machine learning. This tool was able to provide, upon request, nearby historic geotechnical data, estimated soil parameters and recommendations for geotechnical test methods best suited for a given project site. This prevented common field ex- ploration problems such as, requesting duplicate data, requesting test methods that were not applicable for the project geology, not realizing presence of karsts, missing permits for wetlands, private property and others. This tool allowed for more efficient field investigations with regards to time and money saved. There was one problem with this tool: it could only be used by internal employees of a single state's depart- ment of transportation (DOT) for which this data was compiled. I realized at that point that it would be of tremendous value to make this concept universally accessible to the geotechnical engi- neering profession. I left public service to devote time to building a platform that would host historic geotechnical data from publicly funded sources throughout the country. The tool I helped build as a public servant was the foundation of Geosetta, a nonprofit company dedicated to serving the geotechnical profession. The nonprofit structure was adopted to prevent acquisition by a for-profit company and to ensure that Geosetta remains an independent steward of our profession's valuable data. Geosetta provides a GIS (geographic information system) platform that enables users to view historic geo- technical data and extract value from it with machine learning-based predictions and visualization tools. This data is provided in an open and interchangeable format called DIGGS, which stands for Data Interchange for Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Specialists, making it easy for users to integrate it into their workflows. Geosetta is collaborating with the American Society of Civil Engineers' Geo-Institute and other sponsors to extract public data at no cost to the agency and provide the profession with free access to the existing data and access to advanced tools through a subscription to support the nonprofit mission.

Nov 1, 2023

By John P. Turner, Benjamin J. Turner

"Tieback anchors are now used routinely for landslide stabilization in the USA and abroad. It is generally understood by design engineers that friction loss over the unbonded length of a tieback anchor is inherent to the system, and such loss is permitted as long as it does not exceed a certain threshold, typically 20 percent of the post-tensioning load. However, recent experience from projects utilizing tieback anchors with unbonded lengths in excess of 150 feet has demonstrated that this criterion may be difficult to achieve, particularly in certain ground conditions. Furthermore, anchor friction loss, even if below the 20-percent threshold, has important implications for the stability of the slope that are often ignored in practice. This paper presents the results of a study in which friction loss is quantified from load test data for projects in a variety of ground conditions by means of a “wobble coefficient.” Factors that may influence the wobble coefficient are examined, and recommendations for addressing this issue in practice are presented. A recent instrumented load-test program for a landslide stabilization project in Southern California is examined, demonstrating that with appropriate monitoring controls, uncertainty with regard to friction loss can be minimized. IntroductionSteel-strand tieback anchors have been used by the geotechnical community to support shoring systems for many decades, and more recently as a means to stabilize landslides. For strand encased in grease-filled plastic sheathing, which is intended to allow the strand to elongate freely, some load can still be transferred by friction between the strand and the grease and between the grease and sheathing. The sheathing then transfers load to the surrounding grout and, in the case of ground anchors, to the surrounding soil or rock. The resulting decrease in load over the length of the unbonded zone is known as “friction loss.”A widely used criterion for ground anchor acceptance based on load testing is that the measured anchor elongation must achieve a minimum value of 80 percent of the theoretical elastic elongation, or in other words the actual elongation can be up to 20 percent less than the theoretical value. This ensures that the majority of the load applied at the anchor head is reaching the bond zone behind the assumed failure surface, since load shed within the failure mass does not contribute to stability. This criterion acknowledges that friction loss is an inherent feature of the anchor system which cannot be eliminated completely, only minimized."

Jan 1, 2017

By Karsten Beckhaus

"Abstract Tremie concrete for special geotechnical works needs special properties, especially during the casting process. Today’s execution standards for bored piles and diaphragm walls, EN 1536 and EN 1538, as well as the draft version of concrete standard EN 206, all comprise regulations for deep foundation concrete which have not been changed for decades. Considering the recent development in concrete technology at the same time and its actual state-of-the-art, it is essential to develop new normative specifications and specification requirements.GeneralTo allow the required integrity and quality after placing and hardening, concrete for structural elements like bored piles or diaphragm walls, used as foundations of high-rise buildings or as retaining structures for large and deep building pits, must have adequate workability and stability.In addition to requirements on mechanical properties and on durability, both of which have increased within the last decades, concrete must be suitable for being cast in deep or extremely deep excavations, see figure 1. Today’s specialist foundation engineering machinery makes it possible to drill or cut down to in excess of100 m depth. Concrete technology has developed and allows the use of high performance concrete for deep foundations. But is this capability represented by actual regulations?It has become very common for the industry to supply or use concrete with low water cement ratios, nevertheless highly flowable and set-retarded for several hours if needed. Very low water cement ratios allow design strength of 60 MPa or higher (Larisch, 2011), and a very low porosity which is required for a long service life in aggressive conditions, e.g. by chlorides.To achieve best performance, it is obvious that the concrete must completely fill the excavation and fully embed the reinforcement. As vibration of deep foundation concrete is (usually) not allowed and was anyway inefficient, deep foundation concrete must be designed to self-compact under hydrostatic pressure. Generally, it must be considered that after placement the concrete’s quality cannot be influenced anymore. Therefore, both the pouring procedure and the concrete quality must be adequate."

Jan 1, 2014

By Caciola Jr. Joseph J., Nidal M. AbiSaab

"Thanks in great part to the geology of the New York City Metropolitan area, mini-caissons are a popular choice for deep foundations. These drilled elements are readily available, easy to install with minimal impact on adjacent structures, and can be designed with large compressive and tensile capacities. Despite the frequency with which they are employed, the engineering design community is divided over several of the underlying principles governing the design of mini-caissons. This paper seeks to draw attention to several of these issues in an effort to encourage further research and discussion, namely: (1) how the allowable stresses have changed for the NYC Building Code over time, (2) the inconsistent load transfer mechanisms considered for geotechnical capacity, and (3) the role of the permanent steel casing towards structural capacities of mini-caissons.INTRODUCTIONIn the local construction nomenclature, mini-caissons are drilled deep foundation elements which derive their capacity from a socket in rock. A permanent steel casing (commonly between 7- and 24-inches in diameter) aides the drilling through overburden soils to the top of bedrock. Afterwards, an uncased rock socket is drilled into the bedrock and the inside of the casing and rock socket is inspected by means of portable video equipment. After inspection, the interior of the socket and casing is filled with steel reinforcement and concrete or grout. The casing-soil interface is generally ignored for axial design purposes and the full geotechnical compressive or tensile capacity is assumed to be generated in the rock socket. Figure 1 shows a typical mini-caisson cross section.Mini-caissons have been used for decades in the New York City area for a number of reasons. They have historically been proven to develop high axial capacities in the city’s metamorphic rock (Tamaro et. al. 2000), often exceeding 300- to 500-tons. Additionally, their method of installation (drilling) is generally able to bypass layers of dense Glacial Till, boulders, and manmade fill which would interfere with the installation of other pile types (e.g. driven piles, auger cast piles). Further they are able to extend to depths exceeding 50-ft to reach bedrock underlying a site, making them a useful tool in areas where rock is relatively deep or varied in elevation. Drilled casing installation also results in fewer vibrations and disturbances to adjacent structures and can occur in areas of restricted access (a constant concern for any project in a dense urban environment such as NYC)."

Jan 1, 2016

By T. G. Davies

The paper presents design equations for singly laterally loaded piles embedded in sand. These equations were obtained from a comprehensive nonlinear analysis of free and fixed head piles subjected to horizontal loads. The sand is modelled as an elastic-perfectly plastic material whose strength and stiffness are proportional to depth below ground level. The soil's response is described by means of a boundary element representation of the continuum while the pile itself is created as an elastic beam. Equations for the latter are derived directly from the Bernoulli-Euler theory and are coupled with those describing the non-linear soil response. The effects of bearing failure along the front, face of the pile, shear failure along its sides and tension failure at the back face are accounted for in the analysis. Simple equations are presented to describe both the elastic and inelastic responses. The only sol parameters required to use these equations are the angle of internal friction of the sand and a parameter characterizing the rate of increase of the sand's modulus with depth. The latter can be taken as equivalent to the modulus of subgrade reaction. The results of this analysis show that soil yielding is very significant at working load levels, resulting in substantial increase in bending moments and lateral deflection.

Jan 1, 2010

By Bryan Bet

Retaining wall systems of soldier pile ground anchors (SPGAs) have been used for many decades to stabilize landslide activity. Due to successful use of these walls to address slope instability on the California state highway system, their use has expanded to include larger, more complex landslide mitigations. The increase in size and scope of SPGA wall applications, combined with more stringent seismic design standards, have created new and unique challenges for design and construction. Constructability issues are revealing themselves in real time in Northern California, where the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) recently completed two large SPGA wall projects on state highways: the Peregrine Slide Project in inland Mendocino County, and the Westport Slide Complex located along coastal Highway 1. Each presented unique construction challenges that needed to be overcome quickly to make the projects successful. This article highlights some construction difficulties encountered on these projects, in greater depth, than what I covered last summer at DFI's S3: Slopes, Slides and Stabiliza- tion conference in San Francisco. Also covered are what steps were taken to overcome these difficulties, and mitigation advice for future wall designs. Specifically, ground anchor installation interference, ground anchor elongation variance, and difficulties with large diameter ground anchor drilled holes will be discussed.

Jul 1, 2022

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 consists of a dual-span 1,982.5-ft long cable-stayed bridge with approach spans of 2,545 ft on the NJ side and 2,788 ft on the NY side. The bridge is supported on over 200 drilled shaft foundations ranging in diameter from 4.5 ft to 10 ft and socketed into Passaic Formation siltstone. Drilled shaft resistances for design were based on load tests as described in a companion paper (Dapp et al. 2016). This paper presents the main foundation design considerations and challenges. The approach to construction of the rock sockets, with a focus on quality in order to support the use of high nominal values of side and base resistance, is described. Lessons learned from this project and their application to future similar projects are presented.INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUNDThe Goethals Bridge Replacement (GBR) project is a Public-Private Partnership (P3) that represents a major milestone for the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (PANYNJ) in its distinguished history of bridge building in the greater New York City metropolitan area. The new bridge will replace the existing Goethals Bridge, named after Major General George W. Goethals, Chief Engineer of the Panama Canal and the first consulting engineer for the Port Authority. The existing Goethals Bridge along with the Outerbridge Crossing and the Bayonne Bridge comprise the three Port Authority bridges connecting Staten Island with New Jersey. The existing Goethals Bridge and the Outerbridge Crossing are cantilever truss structures and both opened on the same day in 1928. They were designed by J.A.L. Waddell under the supervision of the eminent engineer Othmar H. Ammann (1879-1965), who was the designer of many other iconic bridges in the NY City area including the Bayonne Bridge (1931), the George Washington Bridge (1931), and the Verrazano Narrows Bridge (1964). The designer of record for the replacement Goethals Bridge is Parsons Corporation, which is the successor firm of Robinson & Steinman, whose principal David B. Steinman was also a notable NY area bridge designer and a contemporary and rival of O.H. Ammann.The replacement Goethals Bridge is supported on over 200 rock-socketed drilled shaft foundations. Each main pylon tower is supported on a group of six 9-ft diameter drilled shafts and each anchor pier is supported by two 10-ft diameter shafts. Each approach pier consists of a two-column bent with each column supported on a rock-socketed drilled shaft. A rendering of the Main Bridge crossing the Arthur Kill is shown in Fig. 1."

Jan 1, 2016

By G. W. Plant

This paper describes the design philosophy and construction details of piles between 25m and 32m deep to support 160m high and 110m base diameter cooling rowers for a major power station. It is sited on deep expansive soil where a vast plantation of Eucalypts had been felled. The depressed water table is expected to rise, leading to swell of the soil and uplift forces on the piles. These forces, combined with the complex loading from the cooling towers, led to design tensile loads up to 20MN (2 000 tons) per pile. When competent stable material was present hand excavated underreams 3m in diameter were constructed for the piles sup-porting the shells. However, in some areas it was not possible to form an effective underream and an innovative solution was sought. This comprised unstressed dowels in the underlying sandstone which were formed by percussion drilling through void formers cast into the piles.

Jan 1, 2010

By Mark R. Svinkin

"Construction equipment and operations usually produce soil and structural vibrations which may harmfully affect various structures and also the content of buildings and houses. The level of structural vibrations depends on a number of factors such as characterized sources of vibrations, soil conditions, and susceptibility of structures. There are certain knowledge and experience for managing the effects of construction vibrations which require implementation of condition survey of structures, information on construction dynamic sources and soil conditions at a site, evaluation of possible vibration effects on structure, calculation of ground vibrations before construction, use mitigation measures to decrease vibrations, and a choice of appropriate vibration limits. The paper presents the application of known concepts for assessment of vibration effects on structures from bridge constructions.INTRODUCTIONVibrations producing by construction activities such as pile driving, dynamic compaction of loose soils, demolition work, heavy construction equipment and trucks can affect adjacent and remote structures. Vibration effects on structures, sensitive devices and processes may create significant practical problems. Legal actions are often required for solutions of vibration consequences. The level of construction vibrations depends on dynamic sources, soil conditions at a site in particularly availability of soils with settlement potential, distances from the sources, parameters of waves propagating at a site and susceptibility rating of adjacent and remote structures. It is likely that intolerable structural vibrations from direct vibration effects of impact pile driving and resonant floor vibrations from vibratory pile driving may be induced in adjacent structures to construction sites.Foundation settlements resulting from soil vibrations in loose soils usually occur in the proximity of dynamic sources, but it is important that dynamic settlement may happen at various distances from the source. There are such examples. First, Kaminetzky (1991) mentioned a case history of building settlements developed at a distance of about 305 m (1000 ft) away from a pile driving site. Foundations of the buildings were underpinned on piles down to the tip elevation of the new driven piles to prevent building settlements. Second, Lacy and Gould (1985) shows that the peak particle velocity (PPV) of 2.5 mm/s (0.1 in/s) of ground vibrations could trigger dynamic settlements at distances up to 30.5 m (100 ft) from driven piles."

Jan 1, 2016