Search Documents

By Moritz Schleeh, Christian Moormann

Temporary working platforms are generally required in order to ensure that heavy construction machinery such as drilling and trench wall units, pile drivers, vehicle and crawler cranes can be set up safely at the site of operation. Considering all possible operating and loading conditions, especially on ground of low shear strength and stiffness, the design and construction of temporary mobile working platforms needs to be considered more as a serious engineering task than as a second order structure of minor relevance. Working platforms reinforced with one or several geosynthetic layers have proven to be especially effective with regard to stability, serviceability and durability but their design requests even more sophisticated approaches. Existing design models are often based on simplified assumptions and do not consider the complex interaction between construction machinery, working platform and subgrade. Non-monotonic loading as well as elastoplastic and time-variant deformation of cohesive subsoil can adversely affect the base layer system and the serviceability and stability of the construction machinery operating on it. In this context, there is a need for improvement of design approaches and their optimisation considering that there are no generally accepted design approaches or technical codes of practice available for the design of temporary working platforms. The present paper deals with the multifaceted and non-trivial interaction effects of working platforms investigated by model tests, field measurements and numerical simulations to develop a design approach that ensures a safe installation and operation of heavy plants on unstable ground.

May 1, 2022

By Leykam Chris J., Jacobs Scott. A.

"Construction of the New NY Bridge over the Hudson River 25 miles north of New York City is one of the largest civil infrastructure projects presently underway in the United States (formerly Tappan Zee Hudson River Crossing). The $3.14 billion Design-Build contract is also the largest ever awarded by the state of New York using an Alternative Project Delivery method, and the first major public project to use Design-Build. The new 3.1 mile long bridge will replace the existing Governor Malcolm Wilson Tappan Zee Bridge with a modern twin crossing featuring: Iconic side by side cable stay main spans; significant deck widths accommodating eight lanes of regular traffic, wide shoulders, and a shared use pedestrian and bike path; foundation with excess capacity to fully support a future rail bridge; more than 1,000 large diameter pipe piles driven in deep glacial deposits; drilled shafts installed through steep blast-rock slopes on the east shore landings. Geotechnical challenges included varied bedrock and glacial till surfaces with steep slopes and depths in excess of 750 ft.The purpose of this paper is to highlight major features of the New NY Bridge project with specific focus on the design and construction of the foundations supporting the approach and main span structures from abutment to abutment, provide background on alternative project delivery in NY, as well as provide an overview of the design-build process as it was applied to foundation delivery.The 3.1 mile Governor Malcolm Wilson Tappan Zee Bridge was constructed across the Hudson River connecting Nyack and Tarrytown (Rockland and Westchester Counties). Construction started in March 1952 and was completed in 1955 for a cost of $81 million. The seven lane crossing first opened to traffic on December 15, 1955 and coincided with the opening of a 28 mile segment of highway I-87 / I-287 between Suffern NY and Yonkers NY. The bridge is part of the extensive 574 mile New York State Thruway road system owned and operated by the New York State Thruway Authority (NYSTA)."

Jan 1, 2016

By Rick Piovesan, Pramod Rao, Nihal Bohra, Mark Wahler

"This paper discusses the approach followed for the geotechnical design of 355 mm and 457 mm diameter driven open-ended steel pipe piles used for a gas plant at a green field site in Pilbara region in Australia. The principal bearing layer at the site comprises of calcareous Red Bed soils and weak rock, which is the typical geology along a significant length of the northern Western Australian coastline with carbonate content up to 70%. The uncertainty associated with the mechanical behavior of the calcareous soils and cemented soils (weak rocks) presented design challenges in the selection of appropriate pile design method and design parameters for pile capacity estimation during Front End Engineering Design (FEED). The American Petroleum Institute (API)-based design methodology was adopted. The representative design parameters for the Red Bed weak rock were established by treating the weak rock as clay with undrained shear strength as one-half of the characteristic unconfined compressive strength (UCS) value. Both statically load tested and CAPWAP (Case Pile Analysis Wave Program) estimated ultimate axial pile capacities on 25 early pre-production indicator piles demonstrated that the API design methodology for siliceous soils provides reasonable prediction of axial pile capacity in the red bed soils/weak rock and no reduction to API computed axial capacity due to carbonate content is warranted. The results also demonstrated that penalizing axial pile capacity solely based on carbonate content is not appropriate.IntroductionA gas processing facility was proposed to commercialize the gas reserves located 130 km offshore from the north-west coast of Western Australia (WA). The project site is a green field site located in the Pilbara region along the northwest coast of WA. Specific information regarding the site has been withheld due to confidentiality reasons. The site layout is shown in Figure 1.The site comprises low-lying tidal flats, clay pans and sand dunes covered with low scrub. The onshore site levels vary from elevation 1 m to 10 m AHD (Australian Height Datum), with the largest proportion of the area (excluding sand dunes) between elevations of 1 m and 3 m.The onshore facilities are to comprise a liquefied natural gas (LNG) plant site, a construction camp, the land-based portion of the materials offloading facility (MOF), roadways, and borrow pit areas.The existing ground levels within the process train area, where pile load testing was performed, vary from over 7 m AHD where the summits and peaks of the central dune exist to typically 1 m to 2 m AHD towards the east and west edges of the dune. The proposed finished grade for the process train is set at 7 m AHD."

Jan 1, 2015

By Donald A. Bruce

"The Deep Mixing Methods (DMM), in their current forms, have been employed in the United States since 1986, although an earlier version had seen service from 1954. The earlier developments were strongly influenced by practices in the Nordic countries and Japan, while by the late 1980’s several DMM systems had been developed in the U.S. itself. Since then, DMM has continued its evolution, principally via the challenges of a series of large, landmark projects, but also via distinct, significant technological advances. This paper highlights the key points in the history of DMM in the U.S., and provides an overview of the different methods currently in use.IN THE BEGINNINGIt is a common misconception that the history of applications of the Deep Mixing Methods (DMM) in the United States dates from 1986 when SMW Seiko Inc. — a subsidiary of Japan’s Seiko Kogyo Company — was established in the Bay Area. However, the author believes that Intrusion Prepakt Co.’s patented MIP (Mixed in Place) system had been used, albeit sporadically (about 30 projects are recorded), since 1954 (FHWA 2000, 2001). Ironically, by 1961 this single auger method had been extensively used under license in Japan for excavation support and groundwater control — by the Seiko Kogyo Company. By 1972, the original MIP technique had been succeeded by more advanced Japanese methods, involving multiple augers. Intrusion Prepakt have long since become defunct.The first systematic studies of contemporary Deep Mixing Methods in Japan began in 1967 when the Port and Harbor Research Institute of the Ministry of Transportation began laboratory testing using granular and powdered lime for treating soft marine soils. Fundamental studies continued through the early 1970’s, by which time the development of industrial scale equipment was well advanced, having its first application on a marine trial near Haneda Airport. Coincidentally, laboratory and field research also began in 1967 in Sweden (“Swedish Lime Column Method”) for treating soft clays using unslaked lime. Reportedly the progenitor was a Norwegian, Kjeld Paus, who had made observations on fluid lime columns in the U.S. It would seem that developments in Japan and the Nordic countries proceeded independently until 1975 when the technology leaders from each group (Broms and Boman; and Okumura and Terashi, respectively) presented their — very similar — findings at a conference in Bangalore, India. Limited technical exchanges ensued thereafter.Whereas the Nordic developments continued to focus on the use of dry reagents (cement and lime) and relatively light equipment compatible with operating on and in very soft clays and organics, the Japanese progressed into the use of fluid reagents (cement-based grouts) and heavier equipment for both marine and land-based projects. Thus, by 1986, there were a large number of proprietary (wet and dry) DMM systems in Japan, and a rapidly growing market already by then accounting for over 12,000,000 m3 of ground treatment."

Jan 1, 2015

By Chunli Wei, Mark Jen, Xiaojun Wang

"After more than 85 years of service, a critical link between New York and New Jersey, the Goethals Bridge over the Arthur Kill waterway, is being replaced with two new parallel bridges. Each bridge includes 1,650 feet long signature steel composite cable-stayed bridge, a 2,789 feet long New York approach and a 1,889 feet long New Jersey approach. The superstructure of each approach is supported on a series of two-column concrete piers and each column is supported on a single large diameter drilled shaft varying from 4.5 to 9 feet in diameter and anchored 45 feet below ground into the underlying rock.A performance-based methodology was followed for the strength and extreme event limit states design of the drilled shaft foundations. The design for seismic loads has been performed using the AASHTO Guide Specifications for LRFD Seismic Bridge Design. For all strength and service loads, the AASHTO LRFD Bridge Design Specifications were used. Since the longitudinal and confinement requirements in the two specifications vary, the minimum longitudinal reinforcement was based on the more stringent requirements of the two codes. A design example is presented to illustrate the methodology in bridge deep foundation design using nonlinear time-history global analysis results with soil-pile interaction represented by sets of horizontal and vertical nonlinear soil springs along the drilled shaft, based on the soil and rock properties from the boreholes test results. In this paper the design methodology implements strain limits related to earthquake intensities and damage levels to calculate the capacity using XTRACT analysis, which aids designers to adopt applicable provisions that meet specific design requirements.INTRODUCTIONAfter more than 85 years of service, a critical link between New York and New Jersey, the Goethals Bridge over the Arthur Kill waterway, is being replaced with two new parallel bridges designed to carry vehicular traffic and a future mass transit corridor. They include two 1,650 feet long signature steel composite cablestayed bridges with 260 feet tall V-shaped concrete gateway towers (Figure 1). The approaches consist of continuous pre-stressed concrete girders. The New York approach is a single structure consisting of 18 continuous spans, sloping at 4% for a total length of 2,789 feet without expansion joints. Similarly, the longest continuous portion on the New Jersey approach, with a similar slope, consists of 11 spans for a total length of 1,889 feet without expansion joints. The superstructure of each approach is supported on a series of two-column concrete piers that vary in height from 121.3 feet near the cable-stayed bridges to 11.8 feet near the abutments. Each column is supported on a single large diameter drilled shaft varying from 4.5 to 9 feet in diameter and anchored 45 feet below ground into the underlying rock."

Jan 1, 2016

By Rick Deschamps

"Fountain Slide is located approximately 10 mi (16 km) northeast of Lillooet, British Columbia, Canada, within the Coastal Mountain Range, and has been locally active since the 1970s. The project site is located near the base of the relic Tunnel Mountain landslide. The progressive movements have posed a significant challenge to British Columbia (BC) 99, the main north-south highway in the region. The slide began affecting the British Columbia Railway Company (BCR) tracks in the 1990s. In 2004, the Canadian National Railway Company (CN) acquired BCR and, during the next 11 years, undertook measures to stabilize the rail bed. Some of the measures undertaken include numerous track realignments, a shotcrete and soil nail wall, an anchored soldier pile-and-lagging wall, and adding a row of anchors to the wall. For many years, the measures had proved successful until mid-2014 when it was observed that the slide retrogressed uphill of the tracks. Since that time, the slide movements typically ranged between 5/32 and 0.4 in (4 and 10 mm) per day, leading to extreme distortion of the earth retention system and the need for frequent track realignment.In the spring of 2016, CN issued a request for proposals (RFP) for a designbuild solution with the expectations of: (1) a safety factor greater than 1.2, (2) considering only the currently identified retrogressive blocks that extend to about 200 ft (61 m) above the track; and (3) minimizing activities outside the current easement. It was also communicated that there was a possibility that a portion of the line may have to be abandoned if the proposed remediation was cost prohibitive.The fact that the existing slide was a small fraction of the relic slide was intimidating. The relic slide extended for approximately 1.0 mi (1.6 km) above the uppermost retrogressive block that was now affecting the rail line. Other areas of concern included:"

Jan 1, 2017

By Brandon Buschmeier, Frederic Masse

"Inclusions are a type of ground improvement that provide an improvement of a soil mass by insertion of a material with better characteristics than the surrounding soils. There are primarily two types of inclusions: “Soft” inclusions which are constructed of granular material (Stone Columns, Rammed Aggregate Piers, VibroPiers...), and “rigid” inclusions which are constructed of grout inserted with or without pressure (VibroConcrete Columns, Controlled Modulus Columns, Soil Mixing Columns).While the central principle of the inclusions is similar (i.e., overall improvement of characteristics of the soil mass below the structure), the load transfer mechanism is radically different for each technique. Therefore, the applicable design methodology is specific to the type of inclusions and there exists no universal method of design which spans across all inclusions.This paper will present an in-depth comparison between the standard design methods used for “soft” granular-type inclusions (Priebe modified, Balaam & Booker, Goughnour & Bayuk...) and the methods used for “rigid” inclusions which mainly rely on finite element analysis. The paper will explain why the design for soft inclusion methods cannot be applied to rigid inclusions and vice-versa. Each design method will be reviewed in detail to better emphasize its limitations and advantages.Two case histories will also be presented; one for each type of inclusions in order to illustrate the concepts developed in the first part of the paper.1 INTRODUCTION1.1 GENERAL OVERVIEW OF GROUND IMPROVEMENT WITH INCLUSIONSThe use of ground improvement methods to provide the appropriate amount of foundation support is a growing and constantly evolving industry. Traditional structural foundation methods including ‘shallow’ and ‘deep’ foundations do not adequately address the wide range of settlement tolerances, soil conditions, and loading considerations inherent to each unique potential project. In some instances, ‘shallow’ foundation solutions are simply not feasible due to soil and loading constraints. Furthermore, ‘deep’ foundation solutions are used to ‘bridge’ the soft compressible soils, ensuring that the entirety of the load in the structure is transmitted through individual elements into competent layers below the ground surface (bedrock, dense residual soils). Highly concentrated structural loads are transferred into the individual elements by means of direct contact requiring the use of structurally rigid surficial components (structural slabs, grade beams, and pile caps).Ground improvement bridges the gap between these two traditional methods, offering adequate foundation support while using more costeffective techniques and design methodologies. Inclusions are a type of ground improvement used to provide a reinforcement of the soil mass through the vertical insertion of a material with better characteristics than the surrounding soils. Much like deep foundations, inclusions are installed through soil layers with high compressibility and/or low bearing capacity and terminated in a suitable bearing stratum. However, unlike deep foundations, ground improvement inclusions rely on a distribution of load between the soil and the inclusions. By doing so, some of the structural load is applied directly to the soil in a proportion equal to its bearing capacity and compressibility limits, while the rest of the load is shed into the vertical inclusions down to the bearing stratum. Load sharing is a critical aspect in the performance and design of the various ground improvement methods."

Jan 1, 2015

By Neil T. Russo, Peter M. Kandaris, Jogi S. Gadok

"Assessment of subsurface data for foundation design in support of long high voltage electric transmission lines is best accomplished using a probabilistic strategy since only a small portion of structure locations are typically sampled. Probabilistic approaches provide a tool to evaluate site uncertainty in a systematic and rational manner. This paper provides a case history of a risk-based design approach for a recently completed 191-mile long 69/161/345kV steel monopole transmission line traversing Central Iowa. The project owner made available limited subsurface information at project initiation, requiring the design team to obtain additional data within a constrained budget for 1067 large diameter, laterally-loaded deep drilled shaft reinforced concrete piers. The team commissioned a geologic desktop study to reduce uncertainty in subsurface evaluations and aid in selecting additional sample sites. In total, investigation programs tested approximately 15 percent of structure sites. The paper details the probabilistic approach used to estimate foundation geotechnical design parameters, with information from the various studies categorizing strata both laterally and with depth. Low-bound parameters were estimated via a statistical approach at a predetermined reliability level. Significant savings resulted from this approach when compared to conservative deterministic processes. Project QA/QC logged subsurface soil conditions during foundation excavation, then compared as-found conditions to the conditions assumed for design. The team redesigned foundations if either a non-conservative variance in soil conditions was observed or if bedrock elevation differed significantly from design assumptions. As a result, only 22 out of 1067 foundations required modification during construction (2% variance from initial design) with negligible impact on the construction budget and schedule.INTRODUCTIONFoundation design for long high voltage transmission lines presents a unique challenge in that the assessment of subsurface conditions typically requires substantial data that may or may not be obtainable. Investigations are usually performed well in advance of construction, often with limited access to structure sites and typically in remote areas. Probability and risk-based investigation and design strategies offer an opportunity to systematically estimate subsurface profiles and geotechnical design properties with limited data. Risk can be further reduced with dedicated field inspection of foundation construction along with good field and design team communication during construction. This paper presents a case history of probabilistic methods used for the investigation and design of electric transmission line foundations."

Jan 1, 2017

By Paikowsky, Samuel G.

"Due to the way drilled deep foundations are being constructed, their structural integrity and geotechnical capacity are highly variable. Drop weight systems are increasingly being used to dynamically test the capacity and integrity of drilled deep foundations. Conventional pile driving hammers are often either inadequate or not economical to test these foundations and drop weight systems have therefore been developed to allow for dynamic testing.The advantages of the tests include high mobility, short testing time, low cost relative to static load tests (allowing multiple tests at a single site), and integrity/construction quality evaluation concurrent with capacity determination. The dynamic testing method for drilled deep foundations encounter several difficulties including: the need for a pre-testing analysis for matching pile, soil and testing system, adequate mass and drop height to reflect the mobilized capacity without structural damage, test interpretations for irregularly shaped and/or non-uniform piles, need for reliable dynamic measurements depending on the impact and the distance between the impact and the measuring point, and limited knowledge about the accuracy of the predictions.The principles of the tests are presented using simplified models and demonstrated via a case history. Drop weight systems are reviewed. Dynamic measurement principles are explained and the construction and testing quality effects are outlined and demonstrated via numerical modeling and case histories. A comparison of dynamic and static tests is presented via a database, case histories and finally a short review of relevant codes is provided.1 IntroductionTraditional static axial load test is performed by a slow application of a force produced against independent reaction, imitating structural loading. It is the most reliable method to determine the pile’s performance as commonly required under typical service conditions. The major limitations of this testing are: (i) high cost associated with set-up, test duration, interpretation and construction delays, and (ii) inability to obtain information about the pile-soil interaction along the pile without additional testing means (e.g. tell tales, strain gauges, etc.). These limitations are acute when high capacity foundations are involved."

Jan 1, 2015

By Garland Likins, Gray Mullins, George Piscsalko

"Quality control of drilled shafts is greatly dependent upon the practices of the site personnel. For drilled shafts cast under slurry, inspection of the hole prior to concreting is very difficult or impossible. There are numerous non-destructive test (NDT) methods currently available to assess the integrity of drilled shafts. This paper will discuss the theory and use of an emerging NDT technology known as Thermal Integrity Profiling (TIP). The Thermal Integrity Profiling method measures the elevated concrete temperatures that occur during the hydration process. These temperature measurements are made along the length of the pile and can determine the integrity over 100% of the pile cross section, both inside and outside the reinforcing cage. With the known shaft volume information, TIP can evaluate the effective shaft radius at each measurement location. With the increased use of TIP on highway projects, there is a need to have standard criteria for shaft acceptance. Shaft acceptance criteria can be based upon thermal measurements and subsequent analysis of the data to determine the average shaft radius, local concrete cover, and cage alignment. With this additional information obtained via the thermal testing method, acceptance methods based upon concrete cover can be developed. In this paper the Thermal Integrity Profiling method will be described, results from a case history will be discussed, and an acceptance criteria based upon concrete cover will be proposed.INTRODUCTIONDrilled shafts are an attractive foundation element in many applications due to their large axial and lateral capacities. When drilled shafts are cast in a dry hole, it is possible to inspect the hole prior to casting, allowing for very basic level of quality control, although the shape of the completed element is still unknown without some form of post construction testing. When drilled shafts are installed where soil conditions are unstable, the shafts will often be cast under slurry to support the surrounding soils during the construction process. When casting a drilled shaft under slurry, it is very difficult to impossible to accurately and efficiently inspect the hole prior to casting concrete and it is equally difficult or impossible to inspect the shaft during the casting process"

Jan 1, 2016

By William H. Walton, Clyde N. Baker Jr., Darren S. Diehm

"A 51-story concrete core and steel frame commercial office tower was recently constructed on the site of the former US Gypsum building in downtown Chicago, Illinois, USA The structure foundation reused several caissons from the demolished US Gypsum building supplemented with new belled caissons bearing on silty clay hardpan. Extensive in-situ pressuremeter testing was performed during the geotechnical investigation to determine allowable bearing capacity and better estimate building settlements. Problems during foundation construction along the south side of the building frame required remediation of two caissons. One caisson was supplemented with micropiles, while the second caisson was abandoned and replaced with a straight-shaft rock socketed caisson. To determine the effectiveness of the repairs, the building foundation settlements were monitored during construction.IntroductionIn 2001, The John Buck Company began development of a new office tower at the southeast corner of West Monroe Street and South Wacker Drive in Chicago, Illinois. The site was formerly occupied by the 18-story US Gypsum (USG) building. Mr. Clyde N. Baker, Jr. (Senior Principal at STS Consultants, Ltd .) served as the foundation engineer for USG which was completed in 1962. The building was founded on a forest of belled caissons bearing at elevation -56 Chicago City Datum (CCD). For reference, the ground surface at Upper Wacker Drive is approximately elevation +20 CCD. The bearing material was a hard silty clay, locally described as Chicago Hardpan. The foundation caissons were designed using an allowable bearing pressure of 16 ksf (766 kPa). In 1996, the USG superstructure was razed, and the three-level basement was converted to an underground parking ramp.South Wacker DevelopmentThe 51-story high-rise building was completed in 2005 with a structural height of 681 feet (208 m), and an internal space of more than 1,000,000 square feet (93 ,000 square meter). The typical floor size is 27, 700 square feet (2, 570 square meter). Renderings of the building are provided in Figures 1 and 2. The largest single tenant is the accounting firm of Deloitte & Touche, which occupies roughly 45% of the building space with over 3,000 employees."

Jan 1, 2005

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 Dan Brown

Improvements in construction equipment and techniques in recent years have made possible the use of drilled shaft foundations in diameters and lengths not previously considered practical or feasible. Many highway bridge and other structures are now routinely founded on drilled shafts which -are 8 to 12 feet in diameter and extending over 200 feet in depth below grade. There are unique challenges associated with constructing such large and deep cast-In-place foundations and engineers should be aware of the special needs associated with site investigation, construction specifications, material requirements, and quality assurance. This paper outlines a number of special considerations for these foundations, along with strategies that may be employed to improve the reliability and quality of large drilled shaft foundations.

May 11, 2007

By Dan Brown

Improvements in construction equipment and techniques in recent years have made possible the use of drilled shaft foundations in diameters and lengths not previously considered practical or feasible. Many highway bridge and other structures are now routinely founded on drilled shafts which are 2.5 m to 3.0 m (8 to 12 feet) in diameter and extending over 60 m (200 feet) in depth below grade. There are unique challenges associated with constructing such large and deep cast-in-place foundations and engineers should be aware of the special needs associated with site investigation, construction specifications, material requirements, and quality assurance. This paper outlines a number of special considerations for these foundations, along with strategies that may be employed to improve the reliability and quality of large drilled shaft foundations.

Jan 1, 2008

By Brian T. Nereson, Michael C. Penney

"This technical paper was prepared to describe the general process by which the authors designed a column-supported load transfer platform (LTP) for support of asphalt-paved runway and taxiway embankment areas over soft organic soils, the major tasks and observations made during construction of the system, and the outcome of the system design and construction. The LTP system was designed using the method described in the BSI Standards Publication Code of Practice for Strengthened/Reinforced Soils and Other Fills, BS 8006-1:2010 (BS8006), to achieve performance objectives for the project. The design also used other criteria based upon the authors’ engineering experience and understanding of the expected interaction between soils, structures and geotextiles. The design and construction process described herein resulted in a successful project. The authors identified that full-time engineering oversight during construction was of high importance and provided a high degree of value to the project. The authors’ intimate knowledge of the potentially adverse effects of variations in construction practices promoted timely identification of construction deficiencies that could have affected the reliability of the system. This resulted in corrections and modifications being made, while materials were still accessible, to protect the intended performance of the finished system.INTRODUCTIONThe site is located in Marshfield, Massachusetts. The surrounding area is flat and contains significant wetlands with a water table at or near the ground surface. Prior to the improvements described herein, the site was already developed as an existing municipal airport with an approximately 3,000 linear-feet asphalt-paved runway oriented in a northeast/southwest direction (northeast end referred to as Runway 24 and southwest end referred to as Runway 6; Fig. 1). The site is located approximately 0.5 to 1 mile (Runway 24 and Runway 6, respectively) from the Atlantic Ocean.The improvement project included total extension of approximately 550 linear feet of asphalt-paved runways and taxiways over existing wetlands that consisted of soft, organic soils with varying but significant depths (Fig. 2). An initial geotechnical assessment performed for the project identified that the subsurface conditions were not suitable to support the proposed runways and taxiways in their existing state."

Jan 1, 2016

Jan 1, 1985

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 Bernard H. Hertlein

"When the Deep Foundations Institute (DFI) was founded, quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC) of foundation construction was rudimentary. Nondestructive testing (NDT) was a nascent technology, known to very few people, and very limited in its capabilities and applications. In the four decades since the DFI became a reality, NDT researchers and practitioners have taken advantage of technological advances to improve those existing testing and analysis techniques, and to create new ones that have all contributed to the engineering body of knowledge. This has enabled contractors to improve the quality and reliability of their products, and engineers to design more efficient foundations.Through its regular series of seminars, publications and annual meetings, the DFI has been vitally important in educating the deep foundations industry about the capabilities and benefits of NDT methods. In turn, NDT results have helped the industry identify problems in deep foundation construction, determine the causes of those problems, and improve design constructability and construction practices to increase the quality, reliability and efficiency of all types of deep foundations. This presentation reviews the evolution of several important NDT methods, and the contributions that they have made to foundation quality.THE BEGINNINGSThe Deep Foundations Institute (DFI) was incorporated in 1976 in the State of New Jersey as a 501(c)(6) non-profit association. The DFI is a consensus organization of Contractors, Engineers, Owners and Suppliers involved with the design and construction of all types of deep foundations. The purpose of the DFI was and still is to improve the planning, design and construction of deep foundations by educating all those involved, sharing best practices, and promoting the adoption of new technologies that improve quality, productivity or safety.This is well expressed in the current DFI Mission Statement: To bring together multi-disciplined individuals and organizations to find common ground and create a shared vision and a consensus voice for continual advancement in the deep foundations industry.At the time the DFI was born, nondestructive testing for verifying the quality and integrity of deep foundations was in its infancy, its growth constrained by the technology, or lack thereof. Some visionary engineers of the time understood the physics of the potential methods, and therefore the possible capabilities, but were frustrated by the lack of technology to work with. Electronic equipment was mostly analog, and the few digital data acquisition systems that were available had such slow sampling rates that they were incapable of recording rapid event sequences or short duration events such as those used in modern integrity tests. For example, Jean Paquet, a leading research engineer at the French National Construction Institute, (Centre Experimentale de Recherche et d’Etudes du Batiment et des Travaux Publics, or CEBTP) patented the frequency-based analysis procedure for the Transient Dynamic Response (TDR) method, aka Sonic Mobility or Impulse Response, in 1974, but it was not until 1977 that analog data acquisition systems became fast enough to turn his theory into a reality."

Jan 1, 2017

By Maurizio Siepi, Bruno Vingiani, Claudio Asioli

"The article describes an emergency rehabilitation intervention executed at Buyo Dam, in Ivory Coast, to intercept a significant water seepage occurring through the foundation of this zoned earthfill retaining structure constructed in the late Seventies. To solve the problem, a 800 mm thick, 400 m long impervious cut-off wall (COW) was constructed on the right side of the embankment, operating from the dam crest and with the reservoir almost at its maximum level. The use of an innovative pre-mixed self-hardening grout, with a target hydraulic conductivity coefficient (k) lower than 10-9 m/s, was considered the only way to match the tight working schedule and the strict requirements for the filling material of the COW.Presentation of the Hydroelectric Scheme of BuyoThe hydroelectric scheme of Buyo, located at 6°14’28” N 7°20’45 W on the Sassandra River, in Ivory Coast (Figure 1), was built in the late Seventies for agriculture and power generation. With a reservoir of 8.3 billion m3 and an installed power capacity of 165 MW, enough to supply electricity to 111,000 homes, it represents an installation of great significance for this West African country."

Jan 1, 2016

By Steve Davidow, Ashely E. Evans, Peter M. Kandaris

"Annually thousands of deep foundations are constructed across North America supporting high voltage transmission line structures. However, a recent state of the practice survey by the Deep Foundation Institutes’ Electric Power Systems Foundation Working Group discovered that the electric power utility industry lacks consistent foundation design guidelines. The survey identified a wide variability in design assumptions, a minimal understanding of risk based analysis, and a need to standardize design methodologies. This paper summarizes the state of practice in electric system foundation design and proposes a framework for risk-based foundation design by accounting for uncertainty from both loads and resistances. Loads derived from electric system codes do not necessarily provide a compatible level of reliability for the design of foundations, as they are a mixture of probabilistic and deterministic values. Load uncertainty is derived from variability in weather conditions, structural models and material properties, typically accounted for by code derived overload factors. Resistance uncertainty arises from variability in natural soil properties, resistance models, subsurface construction techniques, material sampling methods, and limited observations. A consistent methodology is offered relating nominal resistance capacity (strength) to structure loads and service state criteria. Discussion also includes the need for risk-based assessments to account for non-structure load influences (fluvial loads, scour ground loss, liquefaction, etc.).INTRODUCTIONNearly 40 years ago the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) embarked on a major research effort to optimize reliability and economics of transmission line foundation design. Strategies focused on improvements in design models, site characterization, exploration strategies and testing to reduce uncertainty and variance in analysis. Transmission line engineers realized that safety and reliability advancements in design based on probabilistic approaches, with a focus on the unique nature of transmission line, could better control risk and cost.Some transmission line professionals took full advantage of these advancements, particularly where research led to improved software and models. Yet, even after two decades of extensive research, by 1995 the industry still had made little progress in changing design habits. The majority of designers were still characterizing sites via deterministic methods, using loads that may or may not relate to a consistent probability of occurrence, and applying a traditional global factor of safety approach (Phoon, et al. 1995). The following two decades have seen even greater developments in software and reliability-based analysis methods, but old habits seem to die hard as recent surveys show less than half of design professional quantitatively assess risk in their design process."

Jan 1, 2017