Search Documents

By Mustapha Zergoun

This paper presents the results of load tests to assess the vertical load carrying capacity of concrete expanded base piles, or pressure injected footings, for various projects located near Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. The site subsurface conditions and load test methods are described for the Vancouver International Airport site and the test results are reviewed under both compression and tension loading conditions. The pile load tests at Vancouver International Airport are compared to load tests at other sites near Vancouver. The pile load test results are reviewed with respect to available methods of estimating the vertical capacity of this type of piles. The effect of ground improvement by densification on the load test results is considered. The limitations of tension load tests on single piles with respect to uplift resistance of pile groups under seismic conditions are pointed out. Recommendations are proposed regarding pile load test methodology to estimate ultimate vertical load carrying capacity of plies for limit state design.

Jan 1, 2004

By K. Rainer Massarsch

"Part 1 of 2 By K. Rainer Massarsch, Geo Engineering AB, Stockholm, SwedenINTRODUCTIONConstruction activities, such as driving of piles and sheet piles, soil compaction or excavation generate noise and vibrations. In populated areas these can have a negative impact on the environment, disturb inhabitants and, under unfavorable conditions, cause damage to buildings and installations. This condition is aggravated by the growing public awareness of environmental issues and the increasing use of vibration-sensitive electronic equipment and machinery in industry. In many countries, environmental regulations are enforced more stringently and limit or even prohibit the use of impact or vibratory hammers. This development has restricted the use of cost-effective foundation methods, such as driven and vibrated piles and sheet piles.Vibration problems are gaining importance in many European countries and extensive research has been performed during the past decade, especially with respect to traffic vibrations (Massarsch, 2004). Significant progress has been made owing to the availability of high-quality field measurements and an improved theoretical understanding of how vibrations are generated and transmitted through soil layers. These findings can also be applied to vibration problems associated with construction activities. However, this information is not yet appreciated by the geotechnical profession and even less by the construction industry.This paper discusses the effects of ground vibrations on the surrounding soil and on buildings, with particular emphasis on the different mechanisms of damage that may occur. Guidance is given on the elements which should be taken into account in an assessment of risks associated with piling projects. A simplified method is proposed for assessing the risk of settlements or strength loss in soil deposits. Limiting vibration levels are presented, based on the Swedish standard, which can be used to assess the risk of damage to buildings. Aconcept to predict ground vibrations caused by pile driving and the mechanisms which control the propagation of ground vibrations, will be presented in the second part of this paper."

Jan 1, 2004

By William F. Starke

"The Ontario College of Art & Design (OCAD) located in Toronto, Ontario, found itself in dire need of space due to increased enrollment, leading them to embark on a major expansion and redevelopment on campus. The expansion entailed an additional 115,000 sq.ft. (10,700 m2) and a new major structure was required, as well as extensive redevelopment of existing buildings. The new Sharp Centre for Design was designed by acclaimed British Architect Will Alsop, of Alsop Architects, in a joint venture with Toronto-based Robbie/Young + Wright Architects. The OCAD campus is cramped for space and the design selected was a structure built over top of existing structures. The building has been described as resembling a “shoebox in the sky”, supported on raked columns transmitting high lateral forces as well as compression load to the foundations. There are 12 such supports, each supported by an individual caisson. In addition, the project entailed installation of other caissons in the courtyard area with the construction work accomplished under very confined conditions among the existing structures. The remarkable design for the new Ontario College of Arts will surely make it another of Toronto’s architectural landmarks. Several things make this project stand out as a unique deep foundations project.First is the architectural design. Words cannot do it justice: the picture is the only effective way to start to describe it. This is a big two-story box, built over the top of a fragile existing building. The underside of the box is 86 ft (26m) above street level. Students remained still inside the old building while construction was going on around and above them. There were serious concerns about vibration – not only its effects on the academic life; but more significantly, upon the stability and safety of the old building, which rests somewhat shakily on shallow spread footings.Steel stilts that look like toothpicks when scaled against the new and existing structures support the box. The stilts are much sturdier than they appear from the pictures, but it is easy to visualize the complexity of the loads they transfer to the foundations below."

Jan 1, 2004

By Joint Micropiles Committee

"The three types of specifications which are used for micropile work are: • Performance Specifications: The contractor is permitted control over certain design and/or construction procedures but must demonstrate to the owner through testing and/or certification that the final product meets the specified performance criteria. This method allows and encourages the contractor to provide a competitive and/or innovative micropile design within the framework of the overall design requirements. The responsibilities for the work are shared between the owner and the contractor. • Open Specifications: These leave the scope and design of the installation up to the micropile contractor. This method is the most common for securing bids on temporary micropile work. The responsibility for design and performance is clearly placed on the contractor. Open specifications are not recommended for permanent applications. This method allows the contractor to select the most economical micropile system. • Prescriptive Specification: The Owner describes specific procedures that must be followed, but which may not necessarily describe the objective of the work. When prescriptive specifications are used, the owner is responsible for the proper performance of the system. The contractor is responsible for satisfying the details of the specifications.Performance specifications are the most common and best reflect the challenges and interests of micropile technology and applications.The owner, designer and contractor will together be responsible for the tasks associated with the design, installation, acceptance, and performance of the micropiles. The installation of micropiles requires specialized equipment, techniques, and appropriate workmanship. Not every detail of the work can be specified, and not every potential problem can be anticipated. Therefore, a contractor who has demonstrated experience in micropiles must be selected to execute the work required."

Jan 1, 2004

By Joel Moskowitz, George J. Tamaro

"A new office complex is being constructed within 25m of the Hudson River in New Jersey. The project, about 140m by 100m, will include 4 basements under the entire footprint. The perimeter was to be secured by a 0.8m thick diaphragm wall, laterally supported by high capacity tieback anchors to rock. Columns were to be supported on footings or piers to rock at a nominal bearing pressure of 3.8MPa at depths up to 17m. Although some variation in rock quality was observed in borings, a substantial vertical seam of weathered and/or decomposed rock, 1 to 2 meters wide by as much as 8 meters deep, was encountered during construction necessitating field redesign. In some locations, the seam dipped below rock that is more competent. Footings were redesigned for support on drilled caissons, or soft rock was excavated and replaced with concrete necessitating a reduction in bearing pressure of the footings by one half. The tower covering the south half of the site was topped out in 2002 and the garage levels in the north half of the site were completed in 2003.PROJECT DESCRIPTIONIn September 1999, a major investment company began the due diligence process to evaluate a property on the shore of the Hudson River in Jersey City, New Jersey for a new multi-use complex. The site offers a spectacular view of lower Manhattan directly across the river from the site of the former World Trade Center. The site, covering two city blocks, was previously occupied by manufacturing and office facilities of Colgate-Palmolive.The building footprint is approximately 140m by 100m, the southern half of which is occupied by a 260m tall office tower, shown in Fig. 1. As of this writing, design of the structure for the northern half of the site has not been finalized, but it is expected to comprise an 11-story office building. A glass-covered atrium will occupy the street that formerly separated the two blocks. As part of the due diligence process and preliminary design evaluation, alternatives were considered to accommodate various numbers of parking places, both above and below existing grade. A major consideration for below grade parking is the proximity of the Hudson River some 25m east of the east building line."

Jan 1, 2004

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

Jan 1, 2004

By Bengt H. Fetlenius

The "Pile Prediction Event" at the ASCE GeoInstitute's Deep Foundation Conference in February 2002 involved prediction of drivability and capacity of three 14m long, 324mm diameter, closed-toe pipe piles driven into loose to compact fine sand to slightly silty sand. Predictors were provided the results of two soil borings and three cone penetrometer tests, as well as type and model of hammer to be used for the pile driving. A total of 33 persons submitted predictions. As to penetration resistance distribution, many predictions were far below actually observed values. As to capacity in compression, the predicted values ranged from 270KN through 2,340KN with a mean of 1,070KN. As to capacity in tension, the predicted values ranged from 100KN through 1,650KN. The maximum load applied to the compression pile in the static loading test was 1,25OKN, at which no more reaction load was available. The reaction system for the tension test failed early in the test. CAPWAP analysis on End-of-Driving blows showed capacities at the end of the driving for the push and pull piles of 670KN, and 710KN, respectively. No restrike tests were made. Additional CPT soundings indicate that the pile driving had densified the soil. Static analysis and calculations from the CPT indicated that capacities ranged from 1,000KN through 2,000KN. The paper presents the data and discusses the various methods of determining pile capacity and addresses influence of set-up Lessons useful for future similar events are indicated.

Jan 1, 2004

By Peter Yen

This session consists of five papers. Three involved research on the properties of grout materials, specifically ultrafine cements and polyurethane grouts. Two papers present the development of soil grouting technology and monitoring methods. Of great interest are the papers on ultrafine grout penetrability testing focusing on the pressure filtration effects encountered in permeation grouting applications (Ericksson, Stille and Mittag, Savidis). The comparison testing of hydrophilic and hydrophobic polyurethane grouts submitted by Vrignaud, Ballivy, Perret and Fernagu assessed the long-term performance of these materials for repairing saturated cracks in concrete, subject to thermal expansion and contraction. Two very practical papers present the development of soil grouting, where permeation, fracture, replacement, jetting and other grouting techniques are utilized. The papers by Lees with Chuaqui and Warner present experience with ultrafine and other commonly used grout materials. Methods to measure and monitor the injection process and verify production progress are discussed.

Feb 10, 2003

By John Davie

We used a Remtek survey in Glenrock and had very good luck with it when we first started the initial investigation. We would have loved to have used that more but my understanding is the equipment is hard to find. It also requires a flooded mine workings. If you're in a dry mine the communication between the two holes is not quite as successful.

Feb 10, 2003

By George Burke

Of the three projects, particularly the extensive Nimitz II (downtown) project, a single system, which was part of the operation, was used to control the spoil. Spoil control was continuous with the work since a vacuum truck and crew was used to suck up the spoils as they came out of the borehole. So, the whole job was kept clean both during operations and at the end of the shifts. On the Sand Island project, a double system was used. Larger spoil quantities were contained within the shaft limits during the work and the cleanup or disposal of the spoils was performed during excavation.

Feb 10, 2003

By Dawn Shuttle

In trying to find a grout, or some kind of stabilizer that would work in this application, we established some performance criteria. Of those, what I controlled the most was viscosity, then I had a whole list of other criteria. I needed a long, controllable gel time, durability and the ability to set and stabilize the soil. So I looked through a lot of different stabilizers, some really crazy ones and also the typical chemical grouts that are used. The typical chemical grouts were eliminated because of long-term durability concerns, the need for having extended gel times, and several other concerns. I would be happy to discuss that with you further after the talk if you're interested. But, generally it was based on viscosity, gel time, and the need for extended gel time. In terms of the relative density of the sand many other grouts could have been used. But the main issue was trying to develop this way to do low pressure grouting that would not cause invasive disruption of the site. We couldn't go in and grout it, put centers, so most of the other grouts wouldn't work for various reasons. The forty percent relative density samples were prepared by plubiation. That was both during the cyclic testing stage of the research, which happened a few years back, and also during the box model and the laminar box models at RPI. In terms of what criteria were used to determine the success of the grouting, when I initially started this work what I did was take the grouted samples and I subjected them to cyclic triaxial testing. What I did was take a look at the cyclic deformation resistance of different concentrations of grouted colloidal silica treated sand. I looked first at 20% concentration because I wanted something that I knew worked and then I gradually decreased to 15%, 10%, and 5%. What I was most concerned with was that it did not liquefy and that it was able to hold together it and experience some deformation. But most importantly it needed to not liquefy. So, that was the biggest issue in determining the success of the grouting. In terms of the centrifuge modeling it was done by looking at several components: from looking at the pictures of the bending moments, looking at the acceleration records and how the acceleration records were transferred through the soil, looking at the reduction in the lateral displacement and those kinds of issues. So let me show you the difference.

Feb 10, 2003

By G. Stuart Littlejohn

In spite of recent concerns in certain European countries, I believe that silicate-ester grouts will continue to be employed in practice, unless more cost-effective inorganic grouts are developed for the treatment of fine sands. It is also noteworthy that over the past 40 years, there has been a record of good experience where silicate-ester grouts have been used in ground improvement. Nevertheless, there is now a need via the European Standard EN 12715 (2000) "to assess the environmental impact, particularly the toxicity of the grout and grout components, and their effect on ground and drinking water should be considered before grouting." "When testing the grouting material for environmental impact, the following aspects should be considered: ? Whether during processing, transport or grouting, substance can be generated or released which could be hazardous to the environment or the grouting crew; ? Whether noxious substances can spread upon mixing with ground water; ? Whether reaction products can be produced or released which influence the water quality; ? The type of particles eroded from hardened grout; ? Chemical reactions between hardened grout and the ground water."

Feb 10, 2003

By James Warner

Although use of low mobility grout is just now beginning in some parts of the world, its advantage for many applications has been well established through more than 50 years of positive experience. The single largest area of application continues to be densification of soil by way of compaction grouting. Because it is often the safest and least costly method for soil improvement in general, and virtually always that in connection with soil improvement under, or adjacent to structures or in developed areas, use will undoubtedly increase both geographically and in diversity of application.

Feb 10, 2003

By Masaki Kitazume

Five papers were presented orally to the topics of Jet Grouting and Deep Mixing. The session was started with a brief introduction by the moderators. Following the oral presentation, floor discussions were directed by the moderators. A brief introduction of each of the oral presentations is provided before each discussion.

Feb 10, 2003

By Stephan A. Jefferis

I presume that the questioner is not asking about the reduction of sulfate in groundwater to hydrogen sulfide as a result of biological activity promoted by organics in the grout hardener and that the question relates to sulfate attack on cementitious grout systems. For the project in Spain presented in my paper, we used a very high pulverized fuel ash (PFA) content in the cementitious material. This gives good sulfate resistance and indeed the chemical interaction will actually cause the permeability to drop for about 50 years without any question of sulfate attack and damage to the whole thickness of the grout - of course there will be attack at the exposed face of the grout where it is in contact with the contaminated groundwater. The mix had over 75% PFA, and also a very high overall cementitious content. The mix was the contractor's design and showed excellent behavior in laboratory proving trials. In grouts as distinct from concrete, PFA gives significantly better sulfate resistance than ground granulated blast furnace slag which is often used in Europe as a component of bentonite-cement mixes for slurry trench cut-off walls.

Feb 10, 2003

By Raymond Henn

Yes we have also used some however, again because of the nature of the maintenance window where we have that two hour (at best) window every night and due to the numerous other crews that are wanting to get in to do the other types of maintenance activities, we don't know if we are going to be getting into that same area from one night to the next. So even with the dormancy additives that one can add to cementitious grouts (that are good up to 72 hours) we don't know if we are going to get back in to the same locations from one week to the next. That's why I use the term "the forgiving nature of the acrylamide". It allows us to ream out the hole allowing us to use the exact same hole without having to re-drill a new hole. The program started in 1997 and we have a budget between labor/materials and equipment of 4.5 million dollars on a year to year basis. For the next few years that is going to come down drastically because the program is going to be more of an ongoing maintenance program. The program started in 1997 and we have a budget between labor/materials and equipment of 4.5 million dollars on a year to year basis. For the next few years that is going to come down drastically because the program is going to be more of an ongoing maintenance program. Up to the end of 2001 we were just over 1.7 million liters of between AV100 and AV118 grout. Of that, approximately just under 200,000 was AV100 and the remaining balance was AV118.

Feb 10, 2003

By Douglas Heenan

The fracture orientations were inferred based on theory and previous experience. The fracture pattern was not monitored during the project. Grout volume was recorded at each sleeve port and real time movement monitoring of the building foundation was performed.

Feb 10, 2003

By Jim Henry

I would say mainly the cost. I showed only 3 cases. One of them was the one that Allen just described and there were two other cases. In those cases it was fairly easy to develop a solution using limited mobility grout to treat the soft soils suitable for the limited bearing pressures required by the structures. LMG readily provided a fairly reliable system for the foundation support at a reasonable cost.

Feb 10, 2003

By Richard Berry

The spacing of grout injections is typically about 2 to 2 V½ meters if the purpose of the grouting is densification of the in-situ soils. Hole spacing will vary with the in-situ soil properties and the grout injection rate; faster rates requiring closer hole spacing.

Feb 10, 2003

By Stephan Jefferis

It is my understanding that the Scandinavians have done some fundamental work on durability. I have seen a study published whereby the author, Helen Anderson, comments on the durability of polyurethane grouts and there was -if I am not mistaken- a reference made to another Scandinavian testing institute comparing durability of the polyurethane to cement grout under the same type of circumstances. Circumstances are important so we should actually ask the gentleman to shed some light on this particular method because apparently Scandinavia is the place where durability has been taken very seriously and has been well researched.

Feb 10, 2003