Search Documents

By Tim Chapman

This general report considers what promoters of deep basement projects want from their teams and whether they get it often enough. Most large projects are based on complex financial models where the funding is related to a future income stream. Project delays and cost over-runs can critically affect the financial model. Too often, delays and cost over-runs originate in the substructure and foundations. We must take positive steps to improve our industry's reputation for reliability.

Jan 1, 2006

Jan 1, 1987

By Gerry Houlahan

"The 2015 Outstanding Project Award (OPA), which recognizes the superior work of DFI members, was awarded for the San Francisco- Oakland Bay Bridge New East Span. The award was presented to representatives from Caltrans and the T.Y. Lin International/Moffatt & Nichol Joint Venture at the DFI 40th Annual Conference on Deep Foundations in Oakland, Calif. A committee selected this project based on size, scope and challenges of the project; degree of innovation and ingenuity exercised; and the uniqueness of the solution to the difficulties of the job. A bridge across the bay between San Francisco and Oakland was proposed as early as 1872, but it took until November 12, 1936, until it became a reality. The bridge spans to the west of Yerba Buena Island were conventional suspension spans, while the east spans used a steel cantilever truss design and simple steel truss spans. This double-deck bridge served the Bay Area well until 1989. In that year, the magnitude 7.1 Loma Prieta earthquake damaged the East Span of the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge. The resulting interruption to service across the bay demonstrated the vital role this bridge plays in the economic and life safety activities of the Bay Area. The project owner, California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), determined that the safest, most cost-effective solution was a total bridge replacement. The Engineer-of-Record, T.Y. Lin International/ Moffatt & Nichol Joint Venture, working closely with Caltrans, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) and the California Transportation Commission (CTC), was charged with developing a comprehensive design strategy that met the project’s stringent criteria for seismic safety. These criteria included the new bridge’s designation as a regional Lifeline Structure that must open to emergency traffic shortly after the occurrence of a 1,500-year return period earthquake"

Jan 1, 2015

By Harry Schnabel, Mitchell L. Fong, Douglas R. Jenevein, Thomas S. Lee

"The Warm Springs Extension (WSX) is one of a series of projects that will eventually extend the Bay Area Rapid Transit System (BART) from Fremont to San Jose, California. A cut and cover tunnel was used for a portion of the extension that runs through Fremont Central Park to minimize the impacts that an at-grade railway would have on the Park. A cement deep soil mix (CDSM) wall was selected by the engineer as the preferred method of providing structural support and groundwater cut-off for a portion of the tunnel where it passes through an important aquifer and near Lake Elizabeth. In addition to the CDSM wall, a jet grout plug was constructed at the base of the tunnel to provide a complete groundwater cut-off.This paper will discuss the unique quality assurance and quality control measures taken for the soil mix wall and jet grout plug as well as the methods used to repair leaks and mitigate water seepage through the exposed wall and grout plug.PROJECT DESCRIPTIONThe Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) Warm Springs Extension (WSX) project is located south of the existing Fremont BART station extending 8.9-km (5.4 miles) to Warm Springs District in Fremont, California. The WSX project has been divided into two contracts with different delivery methods. In order to minimize impacts to Fremont Central Park, a subway was selected at this portion of the alignment under a conventional design/bid/build contract.The Fremont Central Park Subway (FCPS) which begins on the south side of Walnut Ave and ends just north of Paseo Padre Parkway and is about 2.3-km (1.4 miles) long. Fig. 1 shows the entire WSX and the FCPS project. The FCPS contract consists of a cut-and-cover subway box, subway transition structures, ventilation structures and a section of which transverses Lake Elizabeth (a man-made lake). The geologic conditions consist of fill (sand, silt, clay and construction debris), Young Alluvium (clay and silt), Basin Deposits (clay, silt, and sand), and Older Alluvium (sand and gravel) as shown in Fig. 2.HYDROGEOLOGY OF THE PROJECT SITEThe FCPS is dominated by two geologic features - the Hayward Fault and the Above Hayward Fault (AHF) aquifer. The AHF aquifer provides a significant source and storage of water for the local water district. The underground subway will penetrate this aquifer and is up to 11m (36 ft) below the groundwater table. No groundwater was allowed to be pumped during construction of the subway box by Alameda County Water District (ACWD). To facilitate excavation for the subway box, temporary cut-off walls and a grout plug were designed to retain and resist high differential hydraulic pressure. The following section describes the selection of a deep soil mixing method for water cutoff. Design of the grout plug has been described in Lee, et al., 2011 and Fong and Lee, 2009, and is not the focus of this paper."

Jan 1, 2015

Jan 1, 1986

By Lawrence F. Johnsen, Marc J. Gallagher

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

Jan 1, 2005

By Howard A. Perko, Melinda J. Hummel

"Hydraulically jacked piles, herein referred to as jacked piles, are commonly used for underpinning existing structures to arrest settlement or augment an existing foundation for higher loads. They consist of steel pipe segments coupled together and jacked into the ground using a hydraulic ram. Pipe sections can vary in size from 3"" diameter to 18"" diameter or larger. Jacking resistance is typically provided by dead loads of existing structures. This type of piling system has been utilized for foundation underpinning, repair, and augmentation for more than 120 years, yet little has been published on the capacity, installation standards, and reliability of these systems. Pile load tests from a number of projects are presented and analysed. The data show that previous methods of jacked pile capacity and depth prediction are crude at best. Empirical relationships between capacity, depth, soil type, and standard penetration resistance blow count contain a high degree of scatter. Scatter in the data indicate capacity prediction for jacked piles needs further research and refinement.INTRODUCTIONPush pier, resistance pile, steel pier, and jacked pile are some of the names often applied to hydraulically jacked piles used for underpinning. The term ‘jacked pile’ is more common in building codes and will be used herein. Although jacked piles can be installed for new construction, this paper is focused on piles used for support of existing structures.Jacked piles consist of short segments of pipe or structural steel tube that are coupled together and forced into the ground using a hydraulic ram fastened to or beneath a footing, stem wall, or grade beam of an existing structure. In this way, the weight of the structure provides the resistance necessary to force the pile into the ground. A factor of safety can be achieved in design by redundancy, which is consecutively installing more than one jacked pile to support the same portion of foundation. Installing jacked piles consecutively using the same dead load and then releasing the load after each pile installation allows one to continue adding piles to the same general area until a total aggregate capacity is achieved to account for anticipated dead plus live loads and a desired factor of safety for that area.An engineering schematic of an example jacked pile connected to a footing foundation is shown in Figure 1. Modern jacked piles typically incorporate a steel bracket. There are many sizes and styles of brackets available. Some categories include plate brackets that bolt to the outside of an existing foundation wall, wide and narrow angle brackets that extend under existing footings, pin brackets for attachment to structural steel, and reverse angle brackets for attachment to footing and wall. Table 1 lists example brackets and their benefits."

Jan 1, 2017

By Christian Hoyme, Jochen Maurer

Most of the current foundation projects are suffering from disconnected information silos. In the first silo there is the planning of the project with corresponding data, presented by paper or digital drawings. Here will Building Information Modeling (BIM) be one of the trends for the future. We will see more and more projects leaving the “old way” of 2D drawings and moving into 3D planning including metadata of the foundations. But even with a perfect BIM model of a jobsite, we are not at final end of digitalization. While execution of the project at the jobsite, a second data silo is evolving. Data collected directly from construction equipment and manual measurements is currently undervalued in most projects. Paper is passed to the equipment operator and major data from measurements on site are noted on paper and digitized afterwards. Automatically collected data is not be used to create site progress reports or similar report. So, the real “data” just flows around without connection to any other data already existing in projects. And then the third silo arises: The documentation of the project. Data collected on paper es reentered to create some basic documentation of the work handed over to the client. Spreadsheet software is still the “tool-to-be-used” to create at least some documentation. Finally, the documentation is not connected to the data created while planning and not connected to the automatically collected data from the jobsite. A connected jobsite in the foundation industry must link these information silos and have to create a full data-workflow from the design through the execution to the as-built documentation. INTRODUCTION Building information modelling (BIM) is currently the most popular term of construction business in Germany and probably all over the world. But as often there are many different definitions out there and everyone has his own definition or at least understanding what BIM is about. But for sure it is the most relevant for the construction industry in the near future. Most popular is the digital twin for the upper structure of a building. In most cases the BIM models just shows the building itself, but there is more to be implemented. For example: projects where a special foundation is needed, BIM should include also the foundation elements with meta data. There are several advantages. Not only the clash detection of anchors, but also the possibilities to check the interaction with neighbor constructions, power lines and so on are a use case. For sure most of the special foundation elements are not relevant for the whole lifecycle of a building. But during construction and later the demolition the information about the hidden elements is important and gives a benefit to all stakeholders. In the future there will be not the question: “What is already in the ground?”. The risk for following construction projects on the same ground will be minimized.

Jan 1, 2019

Jan 1, 1988

By Osamu Taki

The innovative Soil-Cement Mixed Wall Technique emerged in Japan and obtained recognition in the engineering and construction communities in the 1980's. This technique was introduced to the United States in 1986. It was accepted as the most credible construction technique by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation for ground stabilization and cutoff wall work in the Jackson Lake Dam Project, Wyoming in 1987 and 1988. It was also accepted as a remediation technique by U.S. EPA for a Superfund Innovative Technology Evaluation (SITE) demonstration on in-situ solidification/ stabilization. The Soil-Cement Mixed Wall Technique consists of mixing in-place soils with cement grout or other reagent slurries using multiple axis augers and mixing paddles to construct overlapped soil-cement columns. The overlapped column panel is then extended to form an underground continuous soil-cement wall for use as a cutoff wall or a structural diaphragm wall for groundwater control and excavation support. By arranging the column panels in various configurations, the technique becomes a versatile tool for stabilization of soft or liquefiable soils.

Jan 1, 1990

By Greg Canivan, Bernie Hertlein, Les Chernauskas, Joram Amir, Garland Likins, E. Anna Sellountou, Tim Kovacs, Peter Kandaris

Nondestructive testing of drilled shaft foundations via Crosshole Sonic Logging (CSL) is often performed as part of the quality assurance process to assess the soundness of concrete. The intent of CSL testing is to identify irregularities such as soil intrusion, necking, soft bottom, segregation, voids and other defects that could result in poor structural performance of the foundation. Over time, CSL rating criteria based on first arrival time and relative energy have incorrectly evolved to often be the sole means of determining the acceptability of a shaft. Some of these criteria have found their way into regulatory agency specifications, with acceptance values often differing from agency to agency.The purpose of this document is to review the state of the practice (including experience gained over the past 20 years), propose improved CSL rating criteria and make recommendations for additional assessment, as well as educate the industry on the proper interpretation of CSL test. CSL test results alone should not be the sole means of rejecting or accepting a shaft. A task force of industry exerts was formed to review the existing CSL rating criteria and propose improvements where appropriate. The recommendations presented herein are the consensus of the task force, which believes that they should be incorporated into future criteria, codes and specifications. This paper was produced as a joint effort between the Codes and Standards Committee, the Drilled Shafts Committee and Testing and Evaluation Committee. A task force was authorized under Testing and Evaluation Committee. The task force contributed their expertise in web-based discussions often every two weeks over a period of three years. Interested participants were invited to participate at any time. The document had two rounds of broad industry review, two rounds of DFI Technical Advisory Committee reviews, and a Public Comments process. All comments were considered in producing the final document.

Jan 1, 2019

By Vivian M. Troughton, Clifford J. Wren, Tony P. Suckling

"Secant pile walls are used for the construction of deep basement walls and earth retaining structures. Risk associated with secant pile walls is commonly perceived as being the safety of site personnel and the public during piling operations, or safety used in design. It is recognized that both of these are of paramount importance, but additional risks associated with the construction methods must also be considered to complete the risk management profile for any project. For the particular case of secant pile walls, if Clients take a ""back seat"" they may be unaware of the total risk package they are procuring. The authors argue that the piling contractor should be involved at the earliest stage giving input into the overall risk management process. Such early involvement within the professional team will maximise cost benefits to the Client and minimise the delays and cost increases sometimes associated with these works. A consistent methodology for identifying and then managing all the risks associated with secant pile walls is proposed. An example is used to demonstrate how this methodology should be employed. INTRODUCTIONThis paper discusses the value of a complete and integrated risk management process for structures with basements formed using a secant pile wall.The risk associated with any secant pile wall can be consicfered as comprising four components;1. Safety of people on site2. Safety of design or design methodology3. Construction risks4. Commercial risksAny risk management system needs to fully consider and integrate each of these four components to maximise the likelihood of a successful outcome for the basement.This paper concentrates on the construction risks for secant pile walls, as these are not often understood by the Client (in this paper the term ""Client"" also includes the main contractor, principal contractor, Engineer, Planning Supervisor, quantity surveyor and cost consultant)."

Jan 1, 2005

By Willie M. NeSmith, W. Morgan NeSmith, Alan Roach

"In 2013, Augered Cast-in-Place (ACIP) piles are a mature foundation technology throughout the United States. General guidelines for the design and construction of ACIP piles are available along with numerous references for design in specific North American geologies. In fact, the current generation of contractors and geotechnical practitioners might view ACIP piles as just another deep foundation option to be considered, along with driven piles, drilled shafts and others. This acceptance has developed, however, over a 60-plus year period.The term, Augered Pressure-Grouted (APG) pile is often used when referring to ACIP piles because the piles emerged out of construction processes at the Intrusion-Prepakt firm in the late 1940s. The company’s specialty was pressure grouting and preplaced aggregate concrete. The grouting was typically accomplished by driving a pipe to a target level and then injecting grout under pressure. In some soil conditions, it was necessary to use an auger to reach the desired grouting depth. In these circumstances, the grout pipe was driven beside the auger and grout was pumped as the auger was withdrawn. The grout pipe was then withdrawn as well. This was the genesis of the APG, or ACIP pile, and many piles were installed using this technique. The patent application, “Method for Forming Piles” was filed by Raymond Patterson of Intrusion-Prepakt in 1951, and the patent was granted in 1956. The process was eventually modified when a suitable hollow-stem auger was developed. Licenses were granted to the Lee Turzillo Contracting Company and Berkel & Company Contractors, Inc. in the late 1950s. Each of the three companies Patent, LicensesThe patent application, “Method for Forming Piles” was filed by Raymond Patterson of Intrusion-Prepakt in 1951, and the patent was granted in 1956. The process was eventually modified when a suitable hollow-stem auger was developed. Licenses were granted to the Lee Turzillo Contracting Company and Berkel & Company Contractors, Inc. in the late 1950s. Each of the three companies coined their own terms for the piling process: “Pakt-In-Place” for Intrusion-Prepakt, “Auger Pressure-Grouted” for Berkel and “Augercast” for Turzillo. Over time, “Augercast” was frequently used as a generic term for the system. The installation of these piles was, and still is, a highly nuanced process; “contractor dependent” is a term often seen today. Intrusion-Prepakt, Berkel and Turzillo all had personnel who were part of the original group that developed the system and who appreciated the craftsmanship involved in forming sound piles."

Jan 1, 2013

By Fabio Santillán, Mario Mauro, Raffaella Granata

"This paper presents the utilization of slurry walls methods for the recent remediation of three high hazard active dams in the United States. Tuttle Creek Dam, located in Manhattan, KS, required seismic retrofit. To this extent, transverse shear walls were installed on the downstream slope using self-hardening slurry (SHS) to reinforce the liquefiable foundation soils. Herbert Hoover Dike, located around Lake Okeechobee, FL, is subject to potential failure because of internal erosion, piping and slope instability at high water levels. The innovative use of the hydromill equipment with SHS allowed the successful construction of the cutoff wall through heterogeneous soils and rock. At Bolivar Dam, located in Bolivar, OH, under-seepage negatively affects the structural stability of the dam, and a partial seepage barrier wall is required through the upstream slope of the dam. In this case, the Contractor selected the plastic concrete seepage barrier, excavated by a combination of clamshell and hydromill equipment. The main features of the three projects are summarized in Table 1. IntroductionTuttle Creek Dam was constructed by the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers (USACE) on the Big Blue River in North-East Kansas in the 1950s for flood control. Tuttle Creek Dam is a zoned earthfill embankment, 7,500 ft long and about 137 ft high with a crest width of 50 ft (Fig. 1). It is located in an area of moderate seismicity associated with an old continental rift zone located just to the east of the dam. The USACE, under the Dam Safety and Assurance Program, determined the need for remediation. Site investigations and geotechnical analyses identified the upper alluvial foundation sands as being susceptible to liquefaction when subjected to the Maximum Credible Earthquake.In 2005, USACE awarded a construction-manager-at-risk/early Contractor involvement contract. The USACE and the Contractor closely cooperated to identify the most effective technologies, materials and configurations to be used in the remediation. The original remediation design required both the upstream and downstream slope stabilization of liquefiable foundation. Results of refined seismic deformation analyses revealed that the stabilization of the downstream slope and toe was needed to protect the downstream seepage control system and to provide assurance that a liquefaction-induced flow slide would not occur (Stark et al., 2012)."

Jan 1, 2016

Jan 1, 2003

Jan 1, 1987

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 Mark A. Rohrbach, Timothy R. Kovacs, PhD Saidin

"Crosshole Sonic Logging (CSL) testing is commonly used to verify the integrity, quality and ultimately the acceptability of the concrete in structural elements such as drilled shaft foundations, secant pile cutoff walls, and secant/tangent pile earth retention structures. Besides concrete quality, many factors can impact CSL test results (e.g. laitance, air temperature, access tube spacing, access tube debonding, etc.). Effective use of CSL testing requires fully informed qualified practitioners capable of distinguishing between abnormal readings unrelated to deficiencies in the drilled shaft concrete and similar readings indicating the presence or possible presence of drilled shaft defects. Based on data and experience gathered from CSL testing of thousands of drilled shafts across North America, this paper discusses such factors and other information useful when evaluating CSL test results, and provides practical recommendations intended to reduce the potential for incorrect test data interpretation. The CSL testing industry is lacking in a clear, universally accepted guideline for the interpretation of CSL data and acceptance criteria of these concrete elements. This paper proposes terminology and a streamlined process for use when atypical results are obtained. The proposed terminology and method are intended to simplify and expedite the submittal review and approval process. Because construction activities for these elements are often on the project’s critical path, the benefits obtained in terms of project savings and reducing costly delays areundoubtedly valuable.1. INTRODUCTIONCSL testing is used extensively throughout the world on many projects to verify the quality of concrete used for drilled shaft foundations, secant pile walls, diaphragm walls, etc. In this paper, these structural elements will be referred to as “drilled shafts,” as they are the most common subject of this test method. In the United States, CSL testing is frequently specified by state and regional transportation agencies, ports, design builders, and others. Although other methods are currently available such as Gamma-Gamma Logging and low-strain Impulse-Echo or Sonic-Echo testing, and new methods are under development such as the Thermal Integrity testing, CSL testing is likely to remain one of the most useful tools for evaluating the acceptability of constructed drilled shafts for quite some time. The popularity of CSL as a testing method can be attributed to two main factors: 1) there is no depth limitation to the method and 2) the apparent ease of interpreting the results. A third advantage of CSL testing is that, when correctly interpreted and with adequate test coverage, it is unlikely to misrepresent a defective profile resulting in acceptance of a defective or inadequate drilled shaft. In other words, CSL testing is very likely to underestimate concrete quality/drilled shaft acceptability within its area of coverage."

Jan 1, 2017

By Douglas G. Baker, Jason K. Braund-Read, Megan R. Sheffer

"Mica Dam, owned by British Columbia Hydro, is an 820 ft high earthfill embankment dam that was completed in 1973. The dam consists of a thin central impervious till core supported by upstream and downstream compacted sand, gravel and cobble shell zones, founded on bedrock and valley bottom alluvium deposits. In 2012, a project was started to install new piezometric instrumentation within the dam’s foundation and downstream shell zone.Deep drilling in large embankment dams is very difficult and requires careful planning to select a methodology capable of reaching the target locations, while ensuring that no damage is done to the surrounding dam fill zones. At Mica Dam, the drilling could only be carried out from the Dam Crest and drillholes had to be carefully oriented to avoid intersecting any existing dam instrumentation. The drilling work therefore required angled drillholes, at depths of up to 855 ft, through heavily compacted sands, gravels and cobbles, and to significant depths below the standing water table.During the planning stages for the Project, in early 2013, the preferred drilling method was selected and a drilling contractor was engaged for the drilling work. Critical dam safety concerns were identified and addressed during the design stage of the Project with the drilling contractor, so that risk mitigation measures and response plans could be effectively developed.This paper explains how background information and prior drilling experience influenced the final design and implementation of the drilling techniques used in 2013 to successfully drill the deep holes and carry out the piezometer installations in Mica Dam. Drilling procedures, instrumentation design and installation methods, as well as risk mitigation measures, are discussed."

Jan 1, 2017

By Rohrbach

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