Search Documents

By Mary Ellen Bruce

Let me first address the issue of the wet grab samples. The wet grab samples that were attempted to take on the Central Artery were hindered by the fact that the way the mixing was being done was only by injecting grout on the way out, during withdrawal of the mixing tools. They would auger down to the required depth (usually with some water being injected), which took anywhere from 45 minutes to an hour, and then when coming out, the grout would be injected with grout. That was leaving a column of grout in the center where the shaft had been (i.e. inside of the blades of the mixing tools), which would end up being something like a foot in diameter because the pipe that was used for the drill shaft was a foot in diameter. So we had 10 inches to a foot of almost pure grout in the middle of our column and then we had 2 feet on either side that was mixed soil cement. So when they went down with the wet grab sampler not knowing where that was in the column sometimes they/we were getting strengths of 1500 psi, and sometimes they/we were getting strength of 500 psi or 100 psi. So what was it that we were taking into the wet grab sampler? In those cases you don't really know, but it wasn't representative of the core samples we were taking. We were purposely not coring in the center because we knew that was going to be high cement content, almost pure grout. So the issue of wet grab sampling particularly on this project, the Central Artery Project, was that we didn't really know what we were sampling. What becomes an issue with wet grab sampling in other projects is that you have to have another device (machine) in most cases, a cherry picker crane or something similar that can raise and lower with a beam that is used to forces the sampler down into the freshly mixed soil-cement. And regarding economics, is it more economical to have that crane standing by with its operator or to have a drill rig to come along later and do the coring and take the material out that's fairly identical to what you're finding in situ? The complaint of micro-fracturing in the core samples as you're taking the cores was raised by Seiko as causing large strength reductions. But, if you're doing it carefully, then I don't think that's much of an issue anymore, on research basis perhaps but not on a practical level.

Feb 10, 2003

By Patrick E. Durnal

A joint venture of Ben C. Gerwick Inc., Sverdrup (now Jacobs) and DMJM (now DMJM Harris) designed the $779 mill seismic upgrade of the Richmond - San Rafael Bridge over the San Pablo Bay in the San Francisco Bay Area and provided construction support to Caltrans. Construction of the marine foundation retrofit was completed by a joint venture of Tudor Saliba/Tidewater/Koch-Skanska and their subcontractors: Pomeroy Precast Construction, AGRA Foundations, Dutra Construction and Vortex Divers. Construction management and inspection was performed by Caltrans with support of various consultants.

Jan 1, 2013

By Han Jie

The results of full scale plate load tests on stone columns on soft clay in coastal areas are presented in this paper. Four load tests were made, two of which were performed on the ground treated with stone columns, one on an isolated stone column and the last one on the untreated ground. For a given stress range, the settlement of the rigid plate, the stress concentration factor, and the excess pore water pressure were measured. It is found that the distribution of vertical stress beneath the rigid plate supported by the composite ground of stone columns is very different in shape from the one by the untreated ground, that the stress concentration factor has a relation with the stress level and time, that the stone columns increase the bearing capacity up to by 2 times, and that the ground stabilized by stone columns is of great advantage to keep the foundation stable.

Jan 1, 1991

By Scott A. Walker, Gabriel J. Alcantar, Brian Zuckerman, Ramin Golesorkhi

"The stadium development consists of construction of a 68,500-seat, open-air NFL football stadium for the San Francisco 49ers. The main structure will consist of a 7-story above grade steel structure supported by over 3,000 piles. Berkel and Company Contractors, Inc. (Berkel) was selected as the design-build pile contractor who used their auger pressure grouted displacement (APGD) piles for this project. During an indicator pile installation and pile load test program, fifteen piles were tested to develop installation criteria to support demands of 150kips tension and 180 kips compression. Following the indicator pile program Berkel installed 3088 piles in 30 working days. Throughout pile installation data were collected with an automated data acquisition system (DAS). During pile installation field engineers from Treadwell & Rollo observed the pile installation as well as the real-time data from the DAS. Strategic staging and pre-production planning by Berkel along with consistent collaboration with the design team created an atmosphere for a successful and on schedule project completion.IntroductionThe new San Francisco 49ers Stadium in Santa Clara, California will be a 68,500-seat facility, a rendering of which is shown in Figure 1. The main structure will consist of a 7-story above grade steel structure supported by more than 3,000 piles. The north, east and south portions of the stadium are designed as an open seating bowl, while the western portion includes open seating at the lower levels and seven-story tower which houses over 150 suites.The stadium project includes the stadium structure, as well as elevated open pedestrian walkways, commercial community space, and three new pedestrian bridges spanning a nearby by creek. Sustainable designs and innovations such as a green roof, photovoltaic panels, a ground source geothermal system, stadium-wide Wi-Fi capability, and access to public transit are provided throughout the project. The stadium is designed as an open, light, and airy structure and is surrounded by an existing amusement park, office buildings, the Santa Clara Convention Center, and the training facility of the 49ers."

Jan 1, 2015

By Michael Gebman, Jack Gerwick

"With the opening of the new San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge East Span, the former bridge and its caisson foundations are being demolished. Caisson foundations are in the path of a future shipping channel and therefore need removal down to the mudline 50 ft below water (MLLW). For the first caisson to be removed (E3) a mechanical demolition was performed above the waterline and an implosion was done for the remaining caisson down to mudline. Mechanical demolition consisted of excavators operating from either on top of the caisson, from work platforms or from barges. The demolition was implemented on a trial basis with a successful implosion on November 14, 2015. The work was conducted in an environmentally sensitive area, with measures taken to protect fish, marine mammals and birds. This demolition technique was cost effective, faster to execute, and had a better environmental impact then an alternative option. The demolition, measures implemented to protect the environment, outcome, and lessons learned are presented.INTRODUCTIONThe California Department of Transportation needed a cost effective and environmentally friendly solution for removal of the remaining San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge (former East Span) caisson foundations, starting with caisson E3. This was necessary to clear a future shipping channel. One option was to construct a steel cofferdam around the caisson to allow demolition in the dry down to the mudline. This option would take years to complete, be cost prohibitive, and its noise would disrupt aquatic life and birds throughout the cofferdam construction and demolition. An alternative option was implemented on a trial basis to conduct a mechanical demolition of the caisson above waterline along with an implosion of the remaining caisson down to mudline. This had the clear advantage as a cofferdam was not needed, and the demolition project duration would be approximately 6 months, instead of several years for the cofferdam option. The potential impact on aquatic life and birds from the implosion was a concern, as the location is environmentally sensitive; however, measures were implemented to minimize these impacts. As presented in this paper, this demolition option was implemented on a trial basis for Caisson E3. The technique succeeded and will now be used on the remaining caissons.BACKGROUND INFO ON CAISSON E3The reinforced concrete Caisson E3 is the largest caisson which supported the former East Span of the Bay Bridge. It was constructed in 1934, with the Bay Bridge opening in 1936. Figure 1 shows the project location. The caisson had a cell arrangement of 7 x 2 above the mudline. Below mudline, the caisson had a cell arrangement of 9 x 4. A structural transition was made between the 7 x 2 and 9 x 4 cell arrangements with buttress walls. All cells were flooded, as underwater openings were included in the original caisson walls to equalize the hydrostatic pressure. Figure 2 shows the caisson layout with limits for mechanical demolition and for the implosion."

Jan 1, 2016

By Atta B. Yiadom, A. David Miller, Robert C. Kirby, Sean M. Todaro

"San Pablo Dam is a 170-foot (52-meter)-high earthfill embankment, located approximately 10 miles (16 kilometers) north of downtown Oakland, California, that impounds a 38,600 acre-feet (47.6 million m3) reservoir for customers in the East Bay Municipal Utility District's (EBMUD's) service area. Seismic upgrades were designed and constructed in 2008 through 2010. Work included removal of an existing 140,000 cubic-yard (107,000 m3) downstream buttress, which was replaced with an enlarged 300,000 cubic-yard (230,000 m3) buttress founded on alluvium and colluvium that were improved in-place using Cement Deep Soil Mixing (CDSM) technology. The site characterization for the project, design of CDSM, reuse of CDSM spoils as construction materials, and environmental permitting have been described in five previously published professional papers.This paper provides a brief summary of the design of the seismic upgrades and presents the results of measurements made during and/or after construction including the variation of CDSM strengths with time, piezometric levels within the dam and foundation soils, and seepage flow rates. These measured values are compared to the values estimated during design of the seismic upgrades.INTRODUCTIONSan Pablo Reservoir is located approximately 10 miles (16 kilometers) north of downtown Oakland, California, as shown in Fig 1. As many as 50 million gallons (200,000 m3) per day pass through the reservoir for treatment and distribution to a portion of the 1.3 million customers served by EBMUD. The dam is founded mainly on alluvium and was originally built in 1920 using materials excavated from the left and right abutments consisting of siltstone, claystone, fine-grained sandstone, mudstone, and shale that were excavated and placed using hydraulic fill methods. The dam is located within two miles (three kilometers) of the Hayward Fault which is capable of a moment magnitude 7.25 earthquake.Because of the foundation materials, construction method, and proximity to the Hayward Fault, the dam has undergone a series of seismic improvements, including the placement of a downstream compacted earth buttress in 1967 and an upstream compacted earth buttress in 1979. In 2002, the State of California Division of Safety of Dams (DSOD) requested that EBMUD evaluate the seismic stability of San Pablo Dam, following the results of a study that same year that indicated a 62 percent chance of a greater than 6.7 magnitude earthquake striking the San Francisco Bay region between 2003 and 2032. The dam was evaluated and it was concluded that portions of the underlying foundation soils may liquefy during the maximum credible earthquake which could cause the dam to become unstable."

Jan 1, 2015

By Selvaganesh Selvaraju, Deepak Raj, Sandun N. Wimalasena

One of the world leading oil majors is carrying out a multi-billion-dollar expansion of its integrated manufacturing complex in Jurong Island, Singapore, the global oil trading and refining hub. Soil conditions at the site comprise 10-20m thick reclaimed sand, below which is 3-5m of soft marine clay underlain by stiff soils of the Jurong Formation. The conventional foundation solution would adopt driven precast concrete spun piles; however, precast spun piles have a high embodied carbon from the usage of steel and cement. In order to reduce the carbon footprint, an alternative solution comprising deep vibro techniques was developed. The EFFC-DFI carbon calculator was used to demonstrate the expected scope 1, 2 and 3 carbon emissions for both driven pile and vibro techniques. By using in-house, state-of-the-art fuel-efficient machines, alongside the innovative design concept and usage of natural materials such as sand and stones, actual CO2e emissions were reduced from a potential 21,000 tonnes, with the spun pile’s solution, to only 1,900 tonnes. The saved 20,100 tCO2e is equivalent to an average car driving 2,000x around the Earth’s equator. The paper discusses the application of soil improvement as a more sustainable, lower carbon alternative to conventional piled solutions.

May 1, 2022

By Sunil S. Basarkar, Vinothkumar S

Ground Improvement Techniques serves to improve various engineering properties for supporting various foundations. These may be undertaken either by conventional or advanced methods. The Controlled Modulus Column (CMC), also known as Rigid Inclusion is a soil improvement technique to reduce the total and differential settlement by using semi-rigid soil reinforcement columns. The CMC technique can be executed by displacement or non-displacement methods. It does not aim to bypass the compressive layer or to install a pile that will directly support the entire load from the structure. Principle of the technique is to introduce a load transfer platform between the head of the column and structure and transform a uniform load into soil. Initially, the structural load transmitted into the soil generate the settlement greater than CMC piles. When the settlement between the soil and column became equal at neutral point, maximum structural load shall be balanced by the positive friction and tip resistance to stabilize the foundation without exceeding the allowable settlement limit. This paper describes the behaviour of soil reinforcement with CMC column and their installation process with reference to a project at the Dry Bulk Terminal Port, San Pedro- Abidjan (Western Africa). Methodology of CMC, requirements of Ground Improvement, arrangements and outcome of this method are presented in this paper.

Sep 1, 2022

By Timothy Nelson, Simon Burnworth

"The University of California’s new Berkeley Art Museum and Pacific Film Archive will showcase a collection of art and film in a facility that pairs an existing 1930s-era printing press facility with a new, architecturally unique auditorium wing. The centerpiece of this adaptive-reuse project is the existing 3- story art-deco Administrative Building, which will be integrated into the new museum and provide approximately 18,000 square feet of usable space. Degenkolb Engineers, as the shoring engineer of record, along with Condon Johnson & Associates Inc., the shoring contractor, worked together with general contractor Plant Construction Company to design and build a temporary structure to facilitate the complex retrofit, renovation, and expansion of the Admin Building. This paper will discuss the challenges faced by the design and construction team, the sustainable solutions implemented on the project, and the collaboration between teams to meet the unique constraints of the project and the site.INTRODUCTION AND PROJECT BACKGROUNDThe Berkeley Art Museum and Pacific Film Archive (BAMPFA), which currently resides in a 1970s-era post-modern concrete structure just south of the University of California Berkeley (UCB) campus, was in need of a new home after an engineering evaluation revealed that the building possessed seismic deficiencies. Pressed for space, the University looked within its portfolio of properties and identified the site of the former University Printing Press facility as the place to build BAMPFA’s new home."

Jan 1, 2017

By Patrick O. Shires, Harry W. Schnabel

With stable building sites becoming scarce in the greater San Francisco Bay Area, the new Summit Senior Care Facility is being built into the side of an unstable hillside adjacent to the San Ramon Regional Medical Center in San Ramon, California. This hillside has had a long history of instability and the site of the new Senior Care Facility required excavation into both a historic old landslide and a more recent active landslide. After a thorough geotechnical study, it was concluded that the best way to build the new facility would be to construct a tied-back retaining wall in the area of the old landslide, since it extended off-site onto two adjacent properties, and remove the active landslide and replace it with compacted fill before cutting into its toe area with an additional tied-back retaining wall. The design was further complicated by the proximity of the site to several active faults. In the area of the old landslide, the combination of an ascending slope behind the wall, landslide forces and seismic forces resulted in total design pressures between 365 to 4,575 PSF for a wall with a maximum height of 30 feet. The wall for the old landslide was constructed by first drilling and placing steel soldier piles in concrete. The tip of the soldier piles extended a minimum of 12 feet below the landslide plane that was up to 36 feet below the bottom of the wall. Permanent double corrosion protected tiebacks were then installed through the soldier beams and anchored below the slide plane. A shotcrete facing was then installed on the face of the wall. BACKGROUND The site of the Summit Senior Care Facility is located on the southwest flank of Mount Diablo adjacent to San Ramon Valley which is characterized by gently rolling hills. The San Ramon Valley Regional Medical Center, which opened in 1990, is located to the north and an existing church is located to the southwest. There are also private residences located to the southeast. The site is shown in Figure 1. Numerous faults run close to the site, the most significant of which are the Calaveras and Pleasanton faults. The site has also had a long history of slope instability and has been the subject of numerous investigations. Studies conducted in 1979 and 1984 concluded that there was a landslide in the area and recommended that a buttress shear key be constructed between the subject site and the existing church for a sewer main as well as removal and replacement of the head area of the old landslide to stabilize the hospital site. While two previous geotechnical studies in 2008 and 2016 identified slope instability, they did not recognize the genesis and limits of the old landslide on the western portion of the site or the limits of the active landslide on the eastern portion of the site.

Jan 1, 2018

By James P. Chivilo, Gregory R. Meeder, Scott J. DiFiore, Matthew H. Johnson

New construction in metropolitan areas has direct impacts on immediate neighbors and abutters. While noise and dust are generally nuisance concerns, demolition, vibrations, excavation, and dewatering can cause structural damage to adjacent structures. Different cities, states, or jurisdictions have different regulations that dictate requirements, roles, or responsibilities for varying parties during construction. The authors will introduce and discuss risks of new construction adjacent to existing structures, and the legal framework in Illinois which requires the owner of the new construction project to provide adequate protections for adjacent existing structures. The authors, who are engineers and attorneys, will discuss technical and legal concerns, and will highlight the importance of early and frequent communication among project participants to manage risks, despite whether or not any local regulations exist to drive the process. RISKS IN ADJACENT CONSTRUCTION New construction in metropolitan areas inherently involves some combination of noise, dust, ground-borne vibrations, earth excavation, and subgrade dewatering. These issues have potential to directly and adversely affect abutters and their property. Noise and dust can be nuisance concerns, while vibrations, excavation, and dewatering can result in damage to abutters’ structures. Noise and dust are unlikely to lead to physical damage to abutters’ property, and can be controlled with limited work hours and good housekeeping practices. Vibrations and excavations, however, if not well understood, planned for, and mitigated, can result in serious damage to abutters’ structures. In turn, this damage introduces additional and often significant costs and schedule delays.

Jan 1, 2019

By Huw Williams

"Power companies are always looking to increase the carrying capacity of existing transmission lines, and the preferred method is to string heavier capacity conductor lines. However this results in higher wind loading and the potential for towers overturning, if the existing foundations do not have the tensile capacity. On older lines, there is often a lack of information on construction type and dimensions and in practice the as-built foundation can differ considerably from design drawings, due to unforeseen ground conditions along the line route, and no record of the resulting change in design being made.Following successful trials in New Zealand, integrity testing with Frequency Response and impedance profiling techniques is now being used in the region to check concrete foundation properties in-situ and are enabling power companies to get the most out of their assets. INTRODUCTIONIn most regions of the globe, the US included, there is generally a requirement to upgrade transmission line capacities, to cope with increasing power consumption. Problems with under capacity only come to light for the public when blackouts occur, even in developed countries.A large number of transmission line towers are designed with a certain capacity redundancy and will be able to carry greater loads than originally designed for. Power companies are therefore looking for ways to assess their assets and to minimize the costs of upgrade work.Re-assessment of tower foundation capacities using design drawings may not be valid , as constructed foundations may differ considerably from design drawings, to accommodate local difficulties and in some instanced, particularly with earlier lines, there is no information whatsoever. This complicates efforts to determine the capacity of foundations considerably."

Jan 1, 2005

"1 INTRODUCTIONThe use of nondestructive testing (NDT) methods to evaluate the integrity of Augered Cast-in-Place (ACIP) and Drilled Displacement (DD) piles has been a subject of significant debate among engineers, contractors and NDT practitioners. This guideline document will illustrate the importance of reviewing all available information in conjunction with the NDT records. ACIP and DD piles have unique properties that must be considered when using a specific NDT method. Any evaluation of the integrity of an ACIP or DD pile must also include a thorough review of the detailed pile installation records and the site specific soil conditions. Long or theoretical descriptions of the methods have not been included in this publication. More detailed information about these NDT methods including their theoretical and historical backgrounds can be found in DFI’s Manual for Non Destructive Testing and Evaluation of Drilled Shafts (2004). Additional information can also be found in the more comprehensive textbook Nondestructive Testing of Deep Foundations by Hertlein and Davis (2006).1.1 PurposeThe intent of this guideline is to provide practical guidance for the proper interpretation of NDT results on ACIP and DD piles. Short descriptions of the main integrity methods available are provided along with several examples of how to use all of the information available to make sound engineering judgments about the results. This publication is a state-of-the-practice guideline to promote accurate engineering evaluations.For engineers inexperienced with NDT, these guidelines provide sufficient background information on NDT methods to help understand the limitations of the testing, assess the results presented to them, and formulate appropriate questions. This is particularly important for engineers charged with the responsibility to determine from those results what, if any, consequences there may be on the performance of the structure under construction."

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

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 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 Adnan A. Malik, Tadashi Maejima, Jiro Kuwano

"ABSTRACTTheoretical approach to estimate the ultimate pile capacity gives a rough idea at the initial stage of design that later on strengthen by the execution of static pile load test at site. The static pile load test is the only best option for the estimation of ultimate capacity of various types of piles. There are various methods based on strength, serviceability, net deflection for end bearing, shaft adhesion, graphical and extrapolation approaches for the interpretation of pile load test data to calculate the ultimate capacity. In this paper an attempt is made to evaluate the best-fit method for the estimation of ultimate capacity of single helix screw pile. The pile load tests on model scale were performed on screw piles of different helix diameter. The purpose of adopting model scale of testing was to achieve a state at which settlement increases without further increase in vertical load. The ground was compacted with dry sand at denser state. It was observed from the test results that extrapolation methods such as Chin- Kondner and Decourt predict the load settlement curve of screw piles very well, however ultimate pile capacity was on higher side which may not be suitable for the strength of helix plate. Decourt approach to plot the pile load data showed clear indication of the deformation of helix due to strong subsurface condition. A modified approach in Decourt method is proposed for estimating the ultimate capacity of screw pile having deformed helix whereas reduction factor is suggested for Chin-Kondner method for the estimation of ultimate capacity of intact screw pile.INTRODUCTIONDeep foundations are used to avoid the soft ground at shallow depth that is not suitable for carrying the structural load. Different types of piles have been used to transfer the load to deeper stratum. The screw pile is one of the new piling method and its use is considerably increasing. It consists of a cylindrical steel shaft with one or more helices at various length of the shaft. The diameter of helices (Dw) is usually 2 – 2.5 times the shaft diameter (Ds). The pile is installed to the required depth through torque and pressure. The advantage of screw pile over other piling system is its quick installation mechanism, high end-bearing and uplift resistance, noise reduction and minimum use of man power."

Jan 1, 2014

By Gerald Verbeek

There are certain concepts that seem to invite responses from some, including some in the foundation industry and even some within DFI, that are at best surprising. Business owners and their employees share the desire that their company does well and continues to operate. Maybe company growth is not always realistic but maintaining the current level of activity is in the least what they hope for. In other words, they hope that their company is sustainable, and they are fully behind that notion. But when the concept of sustainability is raised, there is, at least with some, suddenly doubt that that is a good thing. And yet, that concept only aims to achieve at a grander scale what the owners and employees desire for their company. There are many definitions of the term sustainability, but probably the most commonly used description is that framed by the United Nations in 1987. It states that sustainability is the concept of meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. Arguably that definition is too abstract and does not provide the type of specific goals and targets we are used to. To help with that, to some extent, in 2015 the United Nations formulated 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), to provide "a shared blueprint for peace and prosperity for people and the planet, now and into the future." And undoubtedly those SDGs are fodder for those that question the concept of sustainability in the foundation industry. How can our industry, they wonder, ensure that there is no poverty or hunger (SDG 1 and 2), and the climate action goal (SDG 13) immediately leads to the hot button topic of global warming. And maybe this is where advocates lose (some of) the sceptics of the sustainability concept, but hopefully they will continue to read this article that lays out why sustainability simply makes sense, also for the foundation industry and especially for DFI.

Nov 1, 2022

By Peter Cali

There is one organization in Sweden, The Swedish Deep Stabilization Research Centre, which has been working with these questions and there is also a project, Eurosoilstab, within European Union to take a manual for deep stabilization.

Feb 10, 2003

By John P. Turner, Benjamin J. Turner

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

Jan 1, 2017