Search Documents

By Gerald Verbeek, Erick Baziw

Cone penetration testing (CPT) is a popular and cost effective tool for geotechnical site characterization. CPT consists of pushing at a constant rate an electronic penetrometer into penetrable soils and recording cone bearing (qm), sleeve friction (fs) and dynamic pore pressure (u) with depth. The measured qm, fs and u values are utilized to estimate soil type and associated properties based predominantly on empirical correlations. The cone bearing measurements are highly susceptible to additive measurement noise for sandy, silty and gravelly soils. This measurement noise results in high peaks due to interbedded gravels and stones and low peaks due to softer materials or local pore pressure build-up. To date there has been little progress in filtering this additive noise aside from ad hoc techniques, which include discarding qm measurements and smoothing/averaging qm measurements. This paper outlines a qm filtering technique which attempts to put structure into the estimation problem. In this case, the dynamics of the cone bearing measurements are modelled within a state-space mathematical formulation and a Kalman filter (KF) is then utilized to obtain optimal estimates of qm. The mathematical details of the qm KF algorithm are outlined in this paper along with the results from a challenging test bed simulation.

Sep 8, 2021

By Gerald Verbeek, Erick Baziw

Cone penetration testing (CPT) is a popular and cost effective tool for geotechnical site characterization. CPT consists of pushing at a constant rate an electronic penetrometer into penetrable soils and recording cone bearing (qm), sleeve friction (fs) and dynamic pore pressure (u) with depth. The measured qm, fs and u values are utilized to estimate soil type and associated properties based predominantly on empirical correlations. The cone bearing measurements are highly susceptible to additive measurement noise for sandy, silty and gravelly soils. This measurement noise results in high peaks due to interbedded gravels and stones and low peaks due to softer materials or local pore pressure build-up. To date there has been little progress in filtering this additive noise aside from ad hoc techniques, which include discarding qm measurements and smoothing/averaging qm measurements. This paper outlines a qm filtering technique which attempts to put structure into the estimation problem. In this case, the dynamics of the cone bearing measurements are modelled within a state-space mathematical formulation and a Kalman filter (KF) is then utilized to obtain optimal estimates of qm. The mathematical details of the qm KF algorithm are outlined in this paper along with the results from a challenging test bed simulation.

Oct 1, 2021

By Sam Warren, Antonio Marinucci, Genesis Z. Figueroa, Anne Lemnitzer

Drilled Displacement Piles (DDP) provide an ideal deep foundation solution that combines the benefits of ground improvement with traditional advantages of piling systems. This paper consolidates data from 20 construction projects in which more than 30 DDPs were installed and tested axially. High quality site exploration data (e.g., Cone Penetration Test and Standard Penetration Test) were evaluated to derive geotechnical analysis parameters. The test sites consisted of mostly mixed soil types with strongly stratified layers of sand, silt, and clay. Pile diameters ranged between 40 cm and 61 cm. Test results were compared with predictive methods developed specifically for DDPs as well as methods used in general geotechnical practice. The accuracy of the empirical methods is presented in terms of total pile capacity, pile length/diameter, and soil type. The large majority of all examined methods underpredict the in-situ pile capacities. It was also found that the difference between the tested and predicted capacity is strongly related to the level of improvement in the surrounding soil due to the piles’ installation. A general comparison between predictive axial accuracy and the observed level of ground improvement upon installation is also discussed.

May 1, 2022

By Franz-Werner Gerressen

New developments are required each day as our industry becomes more competitive. To improve performance, continue and to ensure future demands can be met. This requires the development of technical support systems that enable a more constant delivery and quality of installation of pile foundations and other applications. For example: assistance systems capable of relieving the machine operator of automating monotonous or repetitive operations. Real time installation control of the production process to manage quality control, or data transfer and reporting systems capable of keeping pace with the digital future. This paper will describe these new approaches and considerations required for these new developments. The paper also describes the equipment which is needed to execute the work under the various conditions and provides references herein. INTRODUCTION The success of a construction site is influenced by a number of factors. Selecting the most efficient and economic methods during the planning phase to defining the right direction. This means having multifunctional equipment available. To ease the usage of this equipment by the operator, uniform operation and control systems are essential. Systems like this can provide uniform handling procedure for more than 20 different installation techniques. Experienced operators are not always available. Therefore, to ease the start for beginners and to support training, numerous assistance systems were developed. This ranges from simple information for controls shown on the monitor avoiding misuse to systems which can partly automate the construction process. Regardless, the best equipment is not enough when the construction is not running smooth. The control system not only helps to organize and coordinate service of the equipment; moreover, it allows the operator to control the quality during the installation process reacting if needed. It allows process optimization as well as documentation which might be required for later negotiations.

Jan 1, 2019

By Paul Suver

The closed loop standing column well (CLSCW) system uses a closed circuit of water to develop the same thermal heat exchange characteristics that are achieved from traditional open circuit standing column well that uses the ground water directly. Pipe pile and pipe anchor foundations can be used as CLSCW components for ground source heat exchange. New data gathering and analysis techniques and equipment installed in the heat pumps allow any mechanical engineer to design the system without specialty engineering equipment and certifications.

Jan 1, 2001

By Andrew Budek

"Analytical and experimental work has shown that achieving the full inelastic lateral capacity of a pile may require the formation of a plastic hinge below ground level, in the pile shaft. The confining action of soil about the pile shaft was further been shown to greatly enhance the ductility capacity of the pile. An experimental program was therefore undertaken to build in the effect of external confinement through the addition of a GFRP jacket to the subgrade plastic hinge region. Two piles were thus modified, and compared to an unjacketed pile in a test rig which simulated a subgrade moment pattern and soil confinement. The ductility achieved by the jacketed piles was found to be substantially lower than an unjacketed control specimen. Failure mode of the jacketed specimens was also undesirable, involving complete tendon rupture and sudden loss in capacity IntroductionSeismic loading of concrete pile shafts can result in a demand for inelastic response. In the case of a superstructure supported by a single pile (i.e., a pile-column forming a single-column bridge pier, in which there is no rotational restraint at the top of the pile}, a plastic hinge will form below grade, at a depth which varies with soil properties and above-grade height of the center of seismic mass.In the case of a superstructure supported by multiple piles, there is rotational restraint, and the connection will experience inelastic action first. However, development of the full lateral inelastic capacity of the pile may call for the formation of a second, subgrade plastic hinge (fig. 1 )."

Jan 1, 2005

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.

By J. E. De Waele, J. J. Lee, M. J. Mulheron, Luke R. Deamer

There is increasing demand for geotechnical contractors to commit to carbon reduction, net zero or science based targets. A lot of focus has therefore been placed on using low carbon materials and low emission rigs. However, whilst these are ways to help reduce carbon, there is a need to look beyond just substituting materials and fuels to meet net zero. Using the IEMA carbon hierarchy, there is a need to first look at eliminating and reducing emissions, before considering substitute materials. For example, in geotechnical designs, this may mean considering using ground improvement or reducing the number of piles, before considering using low carbon cements. Equally, for remaining emissions, this hierarchy means considering carbon negative products to offset emissions, such as ground source heat pumps. This hierarchy can also be applied throughout geotechnical contractor organisations. For example, considering video conferencing for meetings, before considering public transport or using an electric vehicle. This article explores the carbon hierarchy and how it can be applied to all areas of a geotechnical contractor’s business. Only through embedding this hierarchy across the business can geotechnical contractors achieve the step change required to meet net zero.

May 1, 2022

By Matthew E. Meyer

The intent of this manual is to provide guidelines for observing and documenting the installation of ACIP piles. The manual may also serve as a guide for the training of inspection personnel. It is expected that the general guidelines and procedures described in this manual for the inspection and installation of ACIP piles will be supplemented by engineering judgment, local practice, and experience. ACIP pile construction procedures will vary depending on soil, rock, and groundwater conditions. This manual represents a wide range of possible applications in a variety of projects. It is not intended to be applicable in all situations nor replace engineering judgment for any given project. Therefore, an all-inclusive inspection manual is not considered practical or desirable. This manual should not be used to interpret or replace project specifications. It has, however, been prepared to complement the Augered Castin- Place (ACIP) Piles Manual model specification (DFI, 2003).

Jan 1, 2010

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 Mikael Calando, Thomas Joussellin

"San Francisco's rapid growth has caused the city to plan for the Transbay Transit Center Project, a visionary transportation and housing project, that will transform downtown San Francisco and the San Francisco Bay Area’s regional transportation system by creating a “Grand Central Station of the West” in the heart of a new transit-friendly neighborhood that will be home to more than 20 new towers rising a high a 1,070 ft. This paper describes the specificities of using advanced diaphragm wall technology, tooling, equipment and installation practices for deep foundation and permanent underground structures. In particular, this paper will emphasize on the urban constraints, geotechnical conditions, and the novel approaches adopted for the construction challenges of the Transbay Transit Center’s Load Bearing Elements, or Barrette PilesPaperThe Transbay Transit Center Project consists of the construction of a new multimodal, five-story Transit Center located in the South of Market neighborhood near the Financial District in San Francisco. The future Transit Center will incorporate nearly 83,000 square feet of retail, a 5.4-acre rooftop park, an extensive public arts program and bus ramps that will connect the Transit Center to a new off-site bus storage facility and the San Francisco–Oakland Bay Bridge. The new facility will accommodate more than 100,000 passengers each weekday and up to 45 million per year. Additionally, the new Transbay Transit Center will replace the since-demolished San Francisco Transbay Terminal, and nearly 20 towers, such as Salesforce Tower, will take advantage of the height increases allowed through the Transit Center District Plan.The approximately $4.5 billion project features a new five-story structure (including two underground stories) and new bus ramps which include a cable-stay bridge. The deep foundations for the pylon of the bridge (Pylon 9) consist of two each 21 ft x 5 ft barrettes (also called Load Bearing Elements in the US) extending more than 180 feet below grade and 10 feet into the bedrock. The barrettes were chosen because of the combination of high loads, significant depth and small footprint. The barrettes are installed using the Diaphragm Wall technology. Nicholson Construction was contracted by Shimmick Construction to install the cable-stay bridge’s foundation elements."

Jan 1, 2016

By A. R. Dover

The Richmond San Rafael Bridge (Figure 1) is a 4.3 mile long major toll bridge span across northern San Francisco Bay. Tutor-Saliba/Koch/Tidewater (TSKT) conducted a comprehensive seismic retrofit, which was at the time Caltrans? largest-ever construction contract at $484 million. The robust foundation retrofit design of 11 bridge piers included the installation of 26 new, large diameter (126 to 162 inch OD, wall thickness 1.5 to 2.25 inches) CIDH and CISS piles, with steel pipe piles installed to tip elevations of Elev. ?140 to -220 ft, in water depths up to 70 feet. The open-ended steel pipe piles had initial sections ranging from 71 to 172 feet long, with full lengths that extended to the bay bottom and then through 100 to 130 feet of marine sediments to top of bedrock. The marine soils of most interest consisted mainly of soft to firm Young Bay Mud (YBM), a silty, moderately-sensitive clay common to SF Bay. A key constructability issue was the prediction of pipe piles ?running? under self weight (198 to 625 kips in air) and pile driving hammer weight (IHC S-500 with total assembly weight of 322 kips). The term "pile running" is used to describe the penetration of the pile into the soil due to the self-weight of the pile only. This issue was critical because 1) there was limited head room under the bridge deck, and 2) if piles run too deep, the pile splicing on several piles would be problematic (the lowest desirable pile top elevation after running was +10 ft). While running measurements are sometimes made during marine/nearshore construction, there is little published data on predicted vs. actual running. This paper discusses the running prediction under self weight for 26 piles, and the methodology used in developing the predictions, which ranged from 15 to 94 ft of penetration below mudline. Pile running was recorded and compared with predicted values. The prediction methodology was quite good, and no significant constructability problems were encountered. The authors ?tweaked? the model to provide a slightly improved prediction method. The paper presents the model, predictions, observations, and discusses important lessons learned.

Jan 1, 2006

This manual is limited to Augered Cast-in-Place (ACIP) piles constructed using a hollow stem continuous flight auger. 1.1SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS The intent of this manual is to provide guidelines for observing and documenting the installation of ACIP piles. The manual may also serve as a guide for the training of inspection personnel. It is expected that the general guidelines and procedures described in this manual for the inspection and installation of ACIP piles will be supplemented by engineering judgment, local practice, and experience. ACIP pile construction procedures will vary depending on soil, rock, and groundwater conditions. This manual represents a wide range of possible applications in a variety of projects. It is not intended to be applicable in all situations nor replace engineering judgment for any given project. Therefore, an all-inclusive inspection manual is not considered practical or desirable. This manual should not be used to interpret or replace project specifications. It has, however, been prepared to complement the Augered Cast-in-Place (ACIP) Piles Manual model specification (DFI, 2003).

Jan 1, 2010

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 C. M. Haberfield

"1 INTRODUCTION Around the world, there is a demand for larger structures, tall buildings and large bridges. While good footing design is important for all structures, it is even more important in the case of large structures. Recent experience with footing design for tall buildings (e.g. Burj Al Alam development and Nakheel Tower in Dubai, the Gate of Kuwait in Kuwait, the City Centre Project in Bahrain and Eureka Tower and Freshwater Place in Melbourne) has shown the benefits of investing in footing planning, design and construction (Haberfield, 2011, Poulos and Bunce, 2007). The footing systems for most of these projects include the use of deep bored piles or barrettes (piles of rectangular cross-section). Many use piled rafts where the piles, while acting to support the load, are primarily used to reduce settlements. A clear understanding of the factors controlling the behaviour of the footing system is needed to enable a good engineering design to be achieved. This starts with a sound understanding of the ground characteristics and individual pile performance, including adequate collection of data and testing. The best footing solution can then be found using recent improvements in data collection and analytical techniques, complex and highly capable computer-based models and the availability of high speed computers. This paper focuses on the axial performance of deep bored piles socketed into rock – both their individual performance and their performance as part of a larger footing system. Recent research and construction practice is discussed. In practically all cases, serviceability conditions control the behaviour of the footings. Methods of establishing the parameters for input into sophisticated computer programs are described. Application of the methods to case studies is included and it is shown that the behaviour of individual piles can be closely predicted. These developments lead to lower construction costs, better constructability and shortened construction time because of the better understanding of footing behaviour. 2 FACTORS AFFECTING PERFORMANCE OF FOOTINGS ON ROCK For a typical pile-supported footing, it is necessary to consider both individual pile, pile group and raft performance. These require consideration of the behaviour of the ground immediately beneath the surface raft or footing, along the pile shaft, and at and beneath the pile toe (Figure 1). Immediately beneath the surface raft or footing, the important factors are strength for bearing capacity and stiffness for settlement and interaction effects. Along the pile shaft, of most interest are strength for bearing, excavatability and stability; stiffness for settlement and interaction effects; geology and permeability for pile stability and, most importantly, pile shaft resistance. At the pile toe all the above factors for the pile shaft are present and in addition the pile end bearing is of interest. Below the toe, stiffness for pile settlement is important to at least a depth of twice the building width."

Jan 1, 1900

By Paul M. C. B. M. Cools, Martin Th. van Staveren

In 2010, the 5-years joint industry programme Geo-Impuls started in the Netherlands. The ambitious goal of this programme is to reduce geotechnical failures in our civil engineering projects by half in 2015. In the Geo-Impuls programme over 40 client organizations, engineering firms, contractors, research institutes, and universities are involved. In a risk-driven way, and based on top risks and dilemmas, the participants defined three central development themes. These themes are (1) contracts, for dealing with legal issues, (2) geo-engineering, for dealing with technical issues, and (3) communication, for paying attention to differences in risk perception by the human factor. In total 12 Working Groups contribute to these themes by producing one or more specific tools. These provide practical solutions for how to deal with contractual, geotechnical, and communication issues. The tools include working processes, guidelines, best practices, as well as some instruments. The development of these tools, as well as the available results, will be presented in this paper. From the start, Geo-Impuls embraced geotechnical risk management (GeoRM) as the risk-driven way of working for geotechnical engineering and construction. Over the past years, GeoRM and its supporting tools were already successfully applied in several projects. Therefore, the paper also describes also the GeoRM implementation process, including the quality assurance and control. Finally, the effectiveness of GeoRM will be discussed, by summarizing an analysis of all published geotechnical failures and accidents in construction projects in the Netherlands, which decreased substantially over the past 4 years.

Jan 1, 2017

By Paul Suver

"The closed loop standing column well (CLSCW) system uses a closed circuit of water to develop the same thermal heat exchange characteristics that are achieved from traditional open circuit standing column well that uses the ground water directly. Pipe pile and pipe anchor foundations can be used as CLSCW components for ground source heat exchange. New data gathering and analysis techniques and equipment installed in the heat pumps allow any mechanical engineer to design the system without specialty engineering equipment and certifications.CLSCW Description:Closed end steel pipe of varying outer diameter (O.D.) is installed by various technologies at varying depths depending on subsurface geology. The wells are arranged as stand alone wells or in groups joined in parallel or in series or in a combination of both. These pipes may also serve a dual function as foundation supports, deep foundation pile, anchors or earth retention components. These wells are then internally coated to minimize corrosion. The wells are then plumbed and capped to create a vessel equipped with a supply and return water line.The stand alone well or group of wells is then used as a ground heat exchanger for a ground source heat pumps located in or around the building.The ground source heat pumps provide heating and cooling to the building either with a traditional ducted distribution system or with radiant heating and cooling. These systems can reach efficiencies three times greater than traditional gas fired heat sources and five times greater than traditional air conditioning sources."

Jan 1, 2017

By Mark Zablocki, Dakarai McCoy

Ground vibrations are an unavoidable effect of driving piles and may pose a risk to nearby infrastructure and the comfort of adjacent occupants. Driven-pile-induced ground vibrations are known to vary widely based on ground conditions, pile material, and installation means and methods. A monitoring sensor to record ground vibrations during pile driving is necessary for understanding potential impacts to sensitive infrastructure and should be considered when implementing a monitoring program anticipating ground vibrations. The implementation of a vibration monitoring program historically relies on experiential-based decision-making, which may result in the costly vibration monitoring of low-risk infrastructure. Prior understanding of anticipated ground vibrations is necessary to create an appropriate monitoring program. A framework is proposed for organizing data from past monitoring programs and quantifying the anticipated risk of driven-pile-induced vibrations. An example of risk quantification from data imported to ]a cloud database is presented by comparing driven steel H-pile and prestressed precast concrete vibration monitoring measured and collected by Haley & Aldrich between 2010 and 2020. The methods presented within the example can be applied to quantify a first order approximation of risk for ground vibrations at proposed driven pile sites based on the measured performance of previous sites with similar ground characteristics and pile installation methods. The presented novel data managements tools allow for a quick aggregation of vibration data with similar site conditions.

Sep 8, 2021

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