Search Documents

By Joshua C. Adams, Les Chernauskas, Edward L. Hajduk

"Drilled shafts are increasingly being used to support bridge and building foundations. Because these foundations usually carry very high design loads and often serve as non-redundant, single load carrying units, these foundation systems need a high level of quality control (QC) and quality assurance (QA) during construction. One such method for providing QC/QA is crosshole sonic logging (CSL) testing, in which ultrasonic signals sent across the drilled shaft concrete assess concrete quality.CSL testing is an effective tool to evaluate the integrity of the in-place drilled shaft concrete. While typically used to evaluate drilled shaft concrete after construction, CSL testing can also be used to evaluate drilled shaft repairs. This application can be difficult, given the variability of repair methods and material properties. CSL testing can also be adversely affected by the condition of the concrete/access tube bond, leading to false anomaly detection and/or inability to evaluate concrete integrity effectively. This phenomenon, called access tube debonding, is often located in upper portions of the drilled shafts where large changes in groundwater occur, such as within tidal zones.Two case histories showcase innovative uses of CSL testing to deal with consistent access tube debonding and to evaluate drilled shaft repairs.CSL OverviewCSL testing involves placing ultrasonic transmitters and receivers in access tubes installed in the drilled shafts prior to concrete placement. Concrete quality is assessed by examining the First Arrival Time (FAT) and relative energy of the signal sent between the transducers. If the distance between the access tubes is known, an apparent signal velocity (i.e., wave speed of the ultrasonic signal through the concrete) can also be determined and used to assess concrete quality.Common CSL testing practice consists of simultaneously raising the ultrasonic transmitter and receiver and recording the ultrasonic signals with respect to depth. This results in a 2D examination of the"

Jan 1, 2009

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 Martin D. Larisch, Ronald Damen

The design and construction of temporary working platforms for cranes and piling rigs is a high-risk activity. It requires the careful selection of the appropriate input parameters to obtain the correct load cases, as well as the application of robust and reliable design methods to assess the required thickness and stiffness of the working platform. The document introduces some of the most common and most relevant guidelines for working platform design which are currently used in Australia and New Zealand. The authors will also discuss the basic assumptions and considerations about load transfer from construction plant, debate ground risk, compare the applicability of different design methods for various ground conditions and suggest some common verification methods for working platform certification.

May 1, 2022

The intent of this manual is to provide guidelines for inspectors of drilled shaft construction otherwise referred to as drilled piers, caissons or bored piles. It should also be helpful to train beginning geotechnical engineers with limited first hand experience or for geotechnical engineers who are training inspectors. It is expected that the general guidelines and procedures described here will be supplemented by local geotechnical engineers working in a particular region based on local practice and experience. Since drilled shaft construction procedures vary widely based on local geology and size of project, an all-inclusive manual is not considered practical. This manual focuses on traditional topside inspection for routine drilled shaft construction. Other inspection and evaluation methods that rely on electronic equipment are available, but these methods require extensive training and experience in the interpretation of results. These more sophisticated methods of drilled shaft inspection and evaluation are common in construction, but they are usually provided by specialty subconsultants. The subconsultant will typically submit a report for each shaft, which will be reviewed by the geotechnical engineer. Other manuals are available to describe the electronic methods of drilled shaft inspection.

Jan 1, 2004

By Bengt H. Fellenius

The design of pile foundations is much more commonly verified by means of a full-scale test, than is the design of other foundation units. The reason is not that our knowledge of pile behavior is more uncertain than our knowledge of other foundation types making the verification necessary, but more that the loads in a structure are more concentrated to single foundations in a structure founded on piles as opposed to structures on footings or mats. Therefore, should a pile cap fail or move, the adverse consequence of this is often drastic, as the piled structure has little freedom to transfer its need for support to other foundation units. Consequently, it becomes important to assure the design of piled foundations. In many, maybe in most instances, the static pile loading test is routine and geared toward determining an at least capacity, only. However, in these times there is an ever increasing liability of the professional, demands for increased economy of the foundation, and frequent lack of the involvement in the test of the experienced old-timer exercising good judgment. Furthermore, modern pile design is leaving the single, simple concept of capacity and requires more information from the test to assist in determining aspects of long-term behavior and settlement. Therefore, even the straight forward, routine static loading test requires improved planning, execution, and analysis.

Jan 1, 1990

By Negin Khalili-Motlagh-Kasmaei, Paul O'Leary, Christopher J. Rothsiedl, Dimitar Ninesvski, Alexander Zöhrer, Vincent Winter

This paper presents the implementation of a digital twin for the vibro-replacement ground improvement process, as part of a digital construction site. The goal is to implement an evidence-based quality assurance for each produced element (column or point). The system uses a combination of planning data and real-time machine data collected automatically from construction equipment. In addition to the quality assurance, feedback is provided in a number of areas, e.g., condition monitoring of the equipment. The digital twin builds upon the real-time sensor and machine data, fused with metadata, to implement a digital model for the process. A hierarchical data evaluation, using rule-based Key Performance Indicators (KPIs), permits viewing of the spatial variation of data over the construction site. This permits the modelling of systematic variations in subsurface properties across the site, enabling the detection of anomalous individual elements, the diagnosis of their cause and the prediction of properties as construction proceeds over the site. All time-series data and KPIs are represented by standard classes of objects, leading to a generic coding of the data analysis; this minimizes the effort required to add additional sites and/or new KPIs. Examples are presented for a number of sites, where the system was used to identify anomalous columns.

May 1, 2022

By Ken MacLeod

A development at 83 Queens Road in Melbourne, Australia required construction of a three level basement. The normal geotechnical constraints of excavating adjacent to an existing relatively new building were challenging enough for the complicated soils profile occurring at the site. An additional significant challenge faced by the designers, was the requirement to excavate underneath the entire footprint of an existing heritage listed building, known locally as the Mansion, in the centre of the site. Maintaining the structural integrity of that building was afforded the highest priority during the 10m excavation. This paper describes geotechnical aspects of the analysis, design and construction of the secant retention system adjacent the new building and support of the Mansion enabling the 10m excavation to proceed without causing damage to the structure. The secant wall comprised hard-soft interlocking piles constructed using CFA methods. CFA piles along the length of the Mansion provided short term support, with the building load being transferred to the piles by large steel beams jacked under the building. Survey results confirmed that movements of the retaining wall and also the load bearing piles were minimal and well within design expectations.

Jan 1, 2006

By C. Guney Olgun, Charles Elks, Sherif L. Abdelaziz, James R. Martin, Christopher Fox, Pier Luigi Iovino, Fatih Catalbas, Pierre Gouvin

"Energy piles are a new innovative renewable energy technology to access and exploit the relative constant temperature of the ground for efficient heating and cooling of buildings. Examples of energy piles include drilled shafts, continuous flight auger (CFA) piles, driven piles, and micropiles. A field test setup was installed at the Virginia Tech Geotechnical Research Facility to study energy piles. The field test consists of a total of five micropiles 25 cm (10 inches) in diameter, four of which were equipped with circulation loops. The test piles extend to a depth of 30.5 meters (100 feet) and are heavily instrumented with strain gauges and temperature sensors. Several observation boreholes were formed around the test piles to monitor ground temperatures. Thermal conductivity tests and field load testing were performed to investigate the behavior of Energy Piles. This paper presents results of the thermal conductivity tests and thermo-mechanical field load test performed as part of this field investigation.IntroductionThere is a developing trend around the world to explore alternative energy sources. The main driving forces are growing global energy demand, depleting natural resources and the adverse effects of greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuel consumption. Geothermal energy is one of the promising renewable sources that can be utilized to offset such trends. However the use of geothermal energy has been limited mainly to certain hot spot areas where it is used either for district heating and/or electricity generation. Ground temperatures below a depth of about 6 meters (20 feet) remain stable compared to outside air temperatures, typically lying between 8-23°C (46-73°F) at most U.S. regions. The constant temperature and heat storage capacity of near surface soils in any region represent a tremendous potential of stored energy that can be used for heating and cooling of structures."

Jan 1, 2017

By Patrick E. Durnal

The Richmond-San Rafael Bridge was built in the early 50s' and was first opened to traffic on August 31, 1956. Among California's longest steel bridges, it spans more than 21,000 feet across the northern portion of San Francisco Bay. It is one of six toll bridges currently undergoing seismic retrofit in the Bay area. Current retrofit criteria require the structure not to collapse in a Magnitude 8.3 earthquake lasting 45 seconds on the San Andreas Fault. The earthquake epicenter is 10 miles to the west of the Bridge, near the mouth of San Francisco Bay. Another major fault is the Hayward Fault, with a potential of a 7.5 magnitude earthquake. It is only 4 miles east of the eastern end of the bridge. The retrofit criterion is that the structure survives these earthquakes without collapse or loss of life, and that they are capable of repair within a period of one year. Therefore an energy absorbing, ductility and nominal resistance based approach to the retrofit design have been adopted for the retrofit of this bridge. Foundation Retrofit The foundation retrofits were designed to satisfy of drift criteria of 6 inches at the base of the footings, and to keep the existing H-piles from experiencing unacceptable levels of permanent soil displacement and /or structural rupture. Full-scale structural lateral load testing of BP14x89 piling, to rupture, has helped to determine the drift criteria. However recent non-linear analytical results, have led to a redesign, which may allow for 12 inches of drift. The as-built analysis of the Micropile piers determined that those piers would not exceed the 6-inch drift criteria so lateral resisting shear piles were not needed at those piers.

Jan 1, 1998

By Michal Topolnicki

"Discussed is the use of wet Deep Soil Mixing, generally executed with single mixing tools 0.8 to 1.6m in diameter, employed in the foundation of viaduct supports. The applications involve economical patterns of ground improvement, covering in average about 40% of the foundation area or less, which contribute to the competitiveness of DSM solutions when compared to traditional piling. The focus is on selected aspects of the geotechnical design, applicable for geo-composite systems in which the interaction between the stabilised and the native soil should also be considered. Evaluation of settlement can be carried out with simplified methods, accounting for punching effects, or with more advanced FE models in case foundation tilt or differential settlements become important. Potential bending of DSM columns should be considered when evaluating column stresses, especially when dealing with deep deposits of soft soil and/or foundations loaded with overturning moments and/or high horizontal forces. Statistical evaluation of UCS data using lognormal distribution is recommended, and a new classification system for DSM application is proposed. Field investigations and monitoring data from completed projects are also presented.INTRODUCTIONThe first applications of wet Deep Soil Mixing in foundation of road viaducts constructed across and along the newly built A2-highway in Poland took place in 2002. Following detailed analyses, it was concluded that 39 viaducts, originally designed to rest upon large diameter piles in order to reduce excessive settlement of individual supports, could also be founded directly on the ground improved with DSM columns, fulfilling all relevant requirements of serviceability and ultimate limit states (SLS and ULS, respectively). It was also noticed that shorter construction times and lower costs of ground improvement with DSM contributed to substantial economical savings as compared to classical piling. Since then, more than 250 road and railway viaducts have been successfully founded on DSM treated ground in Poland, and wet soil mixing is now seen as a reliable and widely accepted technology for this purpose. These applications, together with a parallel use of wet DSM for foundation of buildings, industrial halls and wind turbines, have drawn international attention to the state of practice of wet DSM in Poland for foundation of engineering objects. What follows is an attempt to summarise experience gained during planning and execution of DSM works for foundation of the majority of road and railway viaducts constructed in the last 13 years, with emphasis on selected design aspects and evaluation of collected data and observed performance.The design process of DSM treatment is iterative, as described e.g. in Annex B of EN 14679, and typically involves two main steps, i.e., the selection of the design strength of cemented soil, called soil-mix design, and the adoption of suitable column pattern, referred to as geotechnical design. Soil-mix design was initially based on purposely arranged simple laboratory tests, involving mixing of soil specimen with different cement types and dosages and subsequent strength testing. However, with a growing number of completed projects the accumulated field strength data of different stabilised soils have been more and more frequently used, reducing the need for preceding laboratory testing of soil-mix to special projects only. Information on cement factors utilised in Poland and the range of recommended compressive strengths for different stabilised soils, as well as on mixing tools and characteristics of the wet method applied, can be found in Topolnicki (2008). Consequently, soil-mix design is not further discussed herein. Selected aspects of the geotechnical design are the main focus."

Jan 1, 2015

By Kirk Ellison, Eric S. Lindquist, Peter Faust, Stephen M. McLandrich

"The 181 Fremont Tower will be an 800-foot high-rise with a 60-foot deep basement located in a dense urban part of downtown San Francisco. The design and construction methods of the subsurface elements navigated a variety of site constraints such as loose fill and soft estuarine soils, shallow groundwater, contaminants, historic obstructions, small work area, proximity of adjacent buildings, and the on-going excavation and build-out of the adjacent Transbay Transit Center (TTC) train box. Design of the approximately 260-foot-deep drilled shafts (some of the deepest foundations ever constructed in San Francisco) was proven by a full-scale load test that provided unique data on the frictional capacity of the deep soil and Franciscan Complex bedrock in the region. Design and construction of the shoring system for the 5-story basement excavation was exceptionally challenging because of the on-going construction for the TTC. To allow for flexibility during construction, hydraulic rams were placed in a transfer waler along the shared TTC shoring wall that could adjust the forces transferred through to the TTC excavation if required. Open and steady communication between the shoring engineer, the geotechnical engineer, and the shoring/foundation contractor was crucial in order to satisfy the complex constraints of this site.INTRODUCTIONThe 181 Fremont Tower is a new build mixed-use tower, currently under construction in the dense urban core of the South of Market District of San Francisco, California. This high-rise will consist of 54 above ground floors with the roof level 700 feet high. Atop the roof will be some architectural features including a spire that will top out at just over 800 feet, which will make it the second tallest building in San Francisco upon completion.The tower is being developed by Jay Paul Company and the architectural design is by Heller Manus. The structural engineer and geotechnical engineer for the project is Arup North America Ltd (Arup). The shoring designer is Brierley Associates (Brierley). The general contractor is Level 10 Construction (Level 10) and the specialty foundation contractor and excavation contractor is Malcolm Drilling Co., Inc (Malcolm)."

Jan 1, 2017

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

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

Jan 1, 2007

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

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

Jan 1, 2007

By Dan Yang

Pile foundation designs are performed routinely based on geotechnical information available at the time of design, often with due consideration of large uncertainties inherent to soils and site conditions. These uncertainties frequently are the causes of piles being installed not the same as those designed, especially by factors beyond quality assurance and quality control. With a variety of both satisfactory and unsatisfactory pile test results from these nonconforming piles, the design engineers are required to examine the foundation performance as a whole against the project design requirements before signing off on them or calling for potentially costly remediation. Over the years, as-built analysis has been a consistent way of dealing with pile non-conformity and damage in our practice, avoiding many construction delays and it is an integral part of our pile foundation design. In this paper, the key elements of an as-built analysis along with several major bridge projects are presented.

Jan 1, 2010

By Scott D. Neely, Donald R. Clark

"An existing landslide located at the southeast corner of the Telluride Regional Airport has been in an active state of failure for several years. The presence of the landslide has represented an on-going liability for the Airport, the Federal Aviation Administration and the Colorado Department of Transportation. A catastrophic failure of this landslide occurring in a manner similar to that which occurred at the Airport in 1987 has posed an on-going threat to closing Colorado State Highway 145 south and below the slide area. The existing landslide has been characterized as a series of multiple failed block areas located downhill of the airport runway that have occurred in severely weathered Mancos Shale.A total of 12 alternatives were evaluated to mitigate the landslide, including the preferred alternatives of either partial or total landslide removal. However, prior development has left essentially no place on the airport property that would allow for the disposal of the landslide debris for either the total or partial removal alternatives, and the closest off-site disposal area was approximately 40 miles from the site. As a result, in-situ stabilization of the landslide, including a primary system of isolated tie-back anchor plates with strand anchors, and a secondary system of high strength steel mesh and intermediate anchors was selected for the ultimate design of the project to stabilize the landslide in place.For design purposes, geotechnical characterization of the slide area was accomplished through geological mapping, conventional borehole exploration and geophysics using multiple electrical resistivity. The paper discusses the design process utilized and the unique challenges faced one-third of the way through construction when discovery of a survey error required redesign of the entire landslide mass stabilization system using the prefabricated anchors that had already been delivered to the project.INTRODUCTIONTelluride Colorado is located at the toe of the Colorado Rocky Mountains on the western slope. The Telluride Regional Airport is located on Deep Creek Mesa about 5 miles west of the town of Telluride.The landslide is located at the southeast corner of the airport just below an abandoned portion of the quarry access road on a south facing slope. The quarry access road is located below the elevation of the runway and outside the elk fence that surrounds the air traffic area of the airport property. Since the reconstruction of the runway, the access road to the quarry and the construction access road for the reconstruction of the airport runway and safety area were rerouted to stable ground north of the previous access road location and off of the head scarp of the landslide."

Jan 1, 2015

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

Jan 1, 2004

By Brian Isherwood, Tara Brown, Paul Kreycir, Jenny Earle

"The Shangri-La hotel and luxury condominium tower, recently opened on University Avenue in downtown Toronto, required eight levels of underground structure, four extending into the shale bedrock.Isherwood Geostructural Engineers was retained in 2007 by Anchor Shoring Limited to provide an alternative design-build solution to better address serious foundation risks. The site, bounded on three sides by City streets, abuts an existing 1957 14-storey building with five underground levels to the north. Sitting on the rock surface along the east perimeter under University Avenue runs the existing Toronto Transit Commission’s University Subway Line built by cut-and-cover in the 1950’s and which was believed to lie very near the property boundary at the southeast corner of the site.The bedrock under Toronto is known to contain very high locked-in horizontal stresses, much higher than can be resisted by shoring techniques, which result in inevitable wall movement when excavating deep into the rock. The strategy adopted to control the risk to the Subway, adjacent building, and major utilities is described in the paper, along with the comprehensive monitoring of movements, and their comparison to predictions.The ProjectThe 66-storey Shangri-La hotel and luxury condominium tower, recently constructed on University Avenue in downtown Toronto, houses 222 hotel rooms in floors 1-17; 287 residences on floors 18-49; and private estates including two 2-storey penthouses on floors 50-66. These comprise 873,000 square feet of development. Eight levels of underground basement are required to provide parking and other amenities, the lower four extending into the shale bedrock."

Jan 1, 2015

By Ralphie Adams, Tiana Rasmussen, Ashley E. Shirer

Transmission line foundation designers must rely on limited subsurface information, from easily accessible locations, resulting in subsurface uncertainty, increased design risk and increased construction costs. This paper presents a different approach for foundation analysis conducted in mountainous and alluvial floodplains located northwest of Phoenix, AZ. The region is dominated by fault-bounded, northeast dipping mountain ranges, where rock types and drillability can vary from granite to intact basalt. The valleys between are comprised of “basin-fill” deposits ranging from conglomerates and cemented soils to lose alluvium. Recently deposited alluvial fills can vary in depth significantly from location to location due to erosion and deposition from active and historic hydraulic features. To limit the subsurface uncertainty for foundation design, a phased approach using geophysical surveys along with detailed geologic reconnaissance was employed. Both compression wave and shear wave velocities were measured in order to identify the depth and properties of loose erodible materials from more scourresistant cemented, conglomerate, and rock deposits. These analyses were used in combination with limited subsurface drilling and sampling to evaluate direct embedment steel pole foundations for over fifty structures. Post analysis results from limited construction drilling reports were used to assess this approach.

Sep 8, 2021

By Patrick J. Hannigan

The pile foundation designer typically performs a subsurface exploration program and static pile capacity calculations before selecting a pile foundation type, length, and capacity. During construction, a pile installation criterion must be established to meet these design requirements. This installation criterion usually consists of a minimum penetration resistance or blow count to confirm pile capacity and may also include a minimum embedment requirement. This text will focus on use of wave equation analysis and dynamic measurements to meet design requirements. BEFORE THE WAVE EQUATION Since the mid-1800s, over 450 dynamic formulas for pile driving control have proliferated. In their simplest form, these formulas relate hammer energy to the work of soil resistance, or simply: W ? h = R ? s (1) Where W = ram weight h = ram drop height or stroke R = pile capacity s = pile penetration per blow

Jan 1, 1990

By Jeff Starchuck, Harald Kullmann

"In 2005, an inspection showed that the Deception Bay Wharf in the Canadian Arctic was at the end of its service life. Although Deception Bay is closed with landfast ice up to 5 ft thick, shipping operations continue year-round, with additional voyages in the summer open-water season to supplement mine supplies. The rehabilitation scheme that allowed minimal interruptions to shipping involved concrete caissons cast on barges and an ingenious placing system.WorleyParsons Westmar of Vancouver, B.C., performed the inspection under contract to the owner, Xstrata Nickel, Montreal, Quebec. The wharf, on the coast of the Nunavik region of Quebec, was originally constructed in 1971 for an asbestos mine, and is now used to support Xstrata’s Raglan nickel mine, importing fuel for p o w e r g e n e r a t i o n a n d general mine supplies, and exporting nickel concentrate to smelters in the south. Emergency repairs were essential to allow operations to continue at the site, while the parties considered permanent rehabilitation options and secured funding. The repairs were done in the openwater seasons, and included reinforcing the failed interlocks above water level with steel patch plates and injection grouting of the cell fill below the port crane in 2005. In 2006, workers installed a circumferential belting system below water level.Westmar held critical planning sessions with the mine operation personnel to find ways to stretch the limits of the mine supplies and nickel storage facilities. In the end, the parties agreed to shut down construction activities four times during the ice-free season to allow access to the dock site.Westmar developed a plan that allowed mine operations to continue during construction, and Xstrata approved the plan and budget in September 2006, for execution in 2007. Rapid construction was essential. To accommodate the short construction season and maintain minimum levels of service for the mine, the work was radically different from conventional Arctic deep-sea port construction. Like the original Deception Bay Wharf, construction practice was to use steel sheet pile circular cells with the consequential heavy support services for the labour force. Construction duration was typically two seasons. The plan for Deception Bay was executable in one season based on a concrete caisson structure. Only a modest amount of schedule float was needed."

Jan 1, 2009