Spring - Deep Foundations Institute

Transcription

DFI DEEP FOUNDATIONS
ITUTE
ST
EP FO
U
DE
TIONS
DA
I
N
N
Spring 2010
Peribonka Dam
Cut-off Wall
Plunges 116 m Deep
at Canadian Site
The Magazine of the Deep Foundations Institute
N
TIONS
DA
I
COVER STORY: 8
N
DFI
Challenging Cut-off Wall at Canada Dam
ITUTE
ST
EP FO
U
DE
CONTENTS
DEEP FOUNDATIONS
The Magazine of the Deep
Foundations Institute (DFI) is
published four times a year: Winter,
Spring, Summer and Fall by DFI.
326 Lafayette Avenue,
Hawthorne, NJ, 07506, USA
T: 973.423.4030
F: 973.423.4031
Email: [email protected]
Bauer Foundations, Canada, faced many obstacles to
complete a 116-m-deep plastic cut-off to halt seepage
at the Peribonka Dam near Quebec.
TECHNICAL FEATURE: 47
Type 2 Micropiles in Las Vegas
In a rare U.S. application, Type 2 micropiles were
incorporated in the foundation of a Las Vegas
hotel and resort. DBM and Terracon worked on
the project.
DFI ACTIVITIES: 13
Executive Director
Theresa Rappaport
[email protected]
Winter Planning Meeting, Educational Trust update
on DFI Student Chapters, 11th DFI International
Conference in London, DFI Europe and more.
Executive Editor
Virginia Fairweather
[email protected]
Managing Editor Emeritus
Manuel A. Fine
[email protected]
DFI Executive Committee
President, Rudolph P. Frizzi
Vice President, James A. Morrison
Secretary, Robert B. Bittner
Treasurer, Patrick Bermingham
Past President, Seth L. Pearlman
PEOPLE, PROJECTS, EQUIPMENT: 31
Profile of George Filz, the Practical Professor
Company news and promotions, Schnabel Engineering
rehab at Thomas Jefferson Memorial, Spartan Specialties
soil nail solution, Manitowoc in China.
CONTINUED: 73
Challenges at the
kcICON Bridge in
Kansas City, McCook
Reservoir grouting
(Nicholson
Construction), more
product news.
Other Trustees
David Borger
Maurice Bottiau
Dan Brown
Bernard H. Hertlein
Matthew Janes
James Johnson
Douglas Keller
Samuel J. Kosa
Kirk A. McIntosh
Raymond J. Poletto
Arturo Ressi di Cervia
John R. Wolosick
Michael Wysockey
Regular Features:
President’s Message . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Executive Director Update . . . . . . . . . . 7
New Members. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
European News. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Technical Committee Reports . . . . . . . 55
FHWA Forum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
Q&A. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
Calendar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
Advertisers’ Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
PRESIDENT’S MESSAGE
Awareness of a “Bigger Picture”
ver the past months, I’ve been highly
aware of inter-generational interaction
and sustainability. It would seem obvious
that the two should go hand-in-hand —
the former being critical to realize the latter.
I’ve been looking for points of critical
awareness — the proverbial “ah-ha”
moments — in my day-to-day interaction
with my family, co-workers, clients and
DFI colleagues. My thoughts circle back to
building a sustainable structure/
organization, build on past experience to
improve on the future, and the importance
of mentoring in these processes. The recent
DFI Winter Planning Meeting, and a
subsequent trip to a National Historical
Park in the southwestern U.S., brought me
some insight that I’d like to share with you.
Our Winter Planning Meeting
consisted of three parts: our committee
reports and discussion, review and
discussion regarding the details of running
our organization, and a planning session
where new ideas regarding the future of the
DFI were presented and considered. It was
great to hear our committee chairs sharing
the latest trends and innovations in their
reports, and to take part in the vibrant
discussion among the trustees and
committee chairs. The committee
members collaborated, the trustee liaisons
mentored, and the committee chairs pulled
it all together. I’m truly humbled and
honored to have a front-row seat observing
the leaders (and our fellow DFI members)
shaping the positive evolution of our
organization and industry. Wise planning
and guidance by our preceding trustees
and headquarters staff built a strong
foundation for the DFI. My fellow trustees
and I say “thank-you” to them as our
current work in guiding the growth of our
organization could not be the success it is
without all their hard work. Last, the
planning portion of the meeting. Thanks to
my fellow trustees and the committee
chairs for their frank ideas, discussion and
comments, without the “idea skeet” that
O
can kill potential good thoughts
before they get very far. Look in
this and future issues of our
magazine and journal, at our
meetings and seminars, and other
media, as the DFI collaborates with new
organizations around the world and
increases visibility and return to our members. The meeting reinforced my belief that
ours is a collaborative organization, built
on a strong financial and administrative
base, with a willingness to openly discuss
and prepare for future events that will
impact our industry.
It’s a couple hours drive from the nearest
town, then another 20 miles of dirt road, to
reach the Chaco Culture National
Historical Park, a designated World
Heritage Site, in the remote northwestern
area of New Mexico. Quoting the National
Parks Service: “From AD 850 to 1250,
Chaco was a hub of ceremony, trade, and
administration for the prehistoric Four
Corners area — unlike anything before or
since. Chaco is remarkable for its multistoried public buildings, ceremonial buildings, and distinctive architecture. These
structures required considerable planning,
designing, organizing of labor, and engineering to construct. The Chacoan people
combined many elements: pre-planned architectural designs, astronomical alignments,
geometry, landscaping, and engineering to
create an ancient urban center of spectacular public architecture — one that still
awes and inspires us a thousand years later.”
The committee members
collaborated, the trustee
liaisons mentored, and the
committee chairs pulled it
all together.
Rudolph P. Frizzi, P.E., G.E.
President
[email protected]
I could only imagine the dedication and
effort of the Chacoan people to create such
a wonderful city in, what is still today, such
a remote area. The buildings of Pueblo
Bonito and other Chaco structures evolved
(and endured) over time, by families
building upon structures built by their
ancestors. There are different building
patterns, but each is an improvement on
the former. Mentoring, collaboration, a
model for a long-lasting, sustainable
construction? I think so. I was amused
when the Park Ranger told me that the
(only) decades-old Park visitor center was
about to be completely torn down and rebuilt because it was in such poor condition
(brought on by, get this, a poor
foundation!). I hope the new designers and
builders look to the spirit of the Park to
guide them in their work. My daughters
also experienced a part of a National Park
visit that I encourage you and your families
to enjoy. It’s called the “Junior Ranger”
program, where parents and kids can
explore, interact and learn about the Park
in a fun way. The Park Rangers were great,
taking time to share their knowledge of the
Park and its history with me and my family.
My DFI Winter Planning Meeting
experience and visit to Chaco reinforced
the value of spending time with others,
even if it means taking a long journey, and
taking the time to plan and discuss
collective thoughts and experiences.
Sometimes, we need to go out of our way,
but the reward can be new and exciting
discoveries, interaction, and learning. The
benefits are multiple generations
collaborating to openly share information
for the collective better good, and to create
a stronger institution, whether it be a
business, organization, city or family.
DEEP FOUNDATIONS • SPRING 2010 • 5
this is
GroundControl
Casagrande USA offers a modern, highly regarded line of large and small bore drilling
and piling rigs, hydromills and hydraulic clam shells, continuous flight augers, and related
equipment such as grout pumps, desanders, and more. Plus, they have a world class team
of mechanical, sales and support personnel, with immediate availability to make your
projects as productive as possible. Casagrande USA – The Tools and The Team You Need.
Large Bore Piling Rigs
From the B105 to the massive C850, Casagrande USA large
bore piling rigs drill shafts up to 285 feet deep and 118 inches
in diameter. This comprehensive line offers the driller equipment
for varying ground conditions and shaft requirements.
Applications include caissons, secant pile walls, augercast
piles, soil mixing and more.
Minipile and Anchor Rigs
Hydraulic crawler drills are offered in a wide range of
configurations for use in micropile and tieback installation,
soil nailing, geothermal well drilling, jet grouting, rotary
percussion drilling and additional applications. Individual
models offer select features such as dual rotary heads, an
advanced articulating mast for front-of-wall drilling, and digital
radio remote control.
Diaphragm Wall Equipment
Hydromills, cutter soil mixing technology (CSM), and guided
and rope-suspended hydraulic clamshells provide secure,
productive installation of slurry and diaphragm walls, barrettes
and deep cut-offs. These units can be mounted on Casagrande
base carriers and approved crawler cranes.
WhAtEvER thE gRounD conDitions
With cAsAgRAnDE usA you’RE in contRoL
Casagrande USA, Inc.
973-579-1906
1-866-939-CUSA
22 Van Sickle Rd.
Lafayette, NJ 07848
www.casagrandegroup.com
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR UPDATE
Strengthening DFI’s Infrastructure
The world recently witnessed two catastrophic earthquakes, both with devastating
effects on lives. Though the earthquake in
Chile was of a larger magnitude, the
earthquake that hit Haiti a month earlier
resulted in a much higher death toll and
greater damage to the city of Port-au-Prince.
Though there may be many reasons why a
lesser magnitude earthquake did more
damage, one of those identified is the
difference in the countries’ infrastructures
and building code requirements. After Chile’s
1960 earthquake, they developed seismic
design codes and building requirements,
later revised in 1993 based on technological
advances and research. This attention to
lessons learned and Chile’s preparedness for
future seismic events saved many lives this
year and emphasizes the importance of
creating a solid infrastructure and plan to
mitigate future disaster.
There is a analogy, on a different scale, to
DFI’s efforts to strengthen its own infrastructure. We are planning for the future
needs of members and the deep foundations community. Currently DFI is in the
throes of upgrading its IT system. The
purpose is to ensure that all the new
initiatives being explored and implemented
by its leadership will work effectively and
efficiently. The database, which will drive
the website and provide a mechanism for
tracking and recording important member
data, will be a more powerful tool. What will
be provided on the front end to members
and industry visitors is THE spot, dfi.org,
where they can conduct their membership
business and access a wealth of resources.
Social Media
DFI is also taking the leap into the use of
social media which will become an
extension of the new website. The buzz on
social media is that it’s powerful, it’s costeffective, and it provides another way of
communicating with everyone. DFI’s Task
Force on New Technologies formed at the
end of 2009, approached their assignment
with purpose and research. The first question they asked themselves was what DFI’s
goals are and how will getting involved in
social media/networking be a means to
achieving them. It was clear that
the primary goal is to provide
more value to the DFI member. To
that end, becoming more visible
and accessible globally would be
an asset; providing relevant information and resources is another;
and connecting industry members
and providing a forum for discussion, debate and collaboration in an affordable way was yet another. Their next step
was to explore how social media could
create these opportunities. They identified
several avenues that would allow members
to take an active role and get involved more
easily in DFI, not just by joining and paying
dues, but by fully participating and shaping
the future of DFI to work effectively for them.
The group also agreed that communicating to members and the industry at
large via this new media would not replace
the current methods, such as personal
verbal contact between staff and members,
face-to-face meeting opportunities via
For DFI this means a larger network of
people providing each other with more
options and opportunities. It also will
allow member feedback which will lead to
DFI the provision of better
member services. DFI LinkedIn
is a tool for fulfilling our mission
of affiliating everyone concerned
Theresa Rappaport
Executive Director
[email protected]
with the planning, design and construction
of deep foundations, improving and
extending knowledge of new ideas and
practices, encouraging participation in
deep foundation activities and disseminating information on support of structures
via deep foundation methods.
RSS Feeds, Twitter, You Tube
Future uses of social media for DFI that are
being explored include RSS news feeds for
one, to populate DFI’s website with relevant
deep foundations news articles so you don’t
need to search the worldwide web for this
information. Twitter is also being explored
Twitter is being explored for quick updates on committee and
Institute activities.
seminars and conferences, mailed and
emailed outreach. Rather it would be used
in addition. The Task Force decided that
the place to start is with a DFI LinkedIn
Group, which has been established with
sub-groups for its 15 technical committees.
The main group will allow members and
non-members to network with each other
and get involved in the various DFI
activities as they become available. The
sub-groups will provide a virtual meeting
place and collaborative forum for the
committee members to stay on task with
their projects on a more regular basis.
for quick updates on committee and
institute activities, and we are exploring
YouTube for educational videos and Wikis
for collaborative docu-ment creation. We
will listen to member needs and requests to
make sure we’re providing the value they
seek so I encourage you to give us your
feedback and make known to us what’s
working and what isn’t so we are prepared
for the future. Our goal is to create an
infrastructure that provides a way for you to
take advantage of all that DFI has to offer.
Peribonka Dam River
Challenging Cut-Off Wall at Peribonka Dam
Owner Hydro-Québec and designer SNC-Lavalin faced problems
with water seepage at the 80-m-high dam along the Peribonka
River in Québec, Canada. The solution was a plastic cut-off wall in
unusually complex ground conditions through deep alluvial
deposits that form the dam foundation. The wall, now successfully
completed, is exceptionally deep, about 116 m at one point. The
bedrock, where it was keyed, underlies coarse highly permeable
alluvial deposits, and formed a buried valley with steeply sloped
flanks, creating further difficulties.
Contractor Bauer Spezialtiefbau GmbH, based in Germany,
constructed the cut-off wall through its Canadian subsidiary,
Bauer Foundations, Canada, Inc. Bauer incorporated a variety of
geotechnical construction techniques and methods that were
stretched to new limits. Constructing the plastic concrete cut-off
wall with a trench cutter was a pioneering accomplishment in the
complex ground conditions.
Site Investigation
The soil investigation performed in 2003 showed an extremely
deep 60-m-wide valley in the bedrock underlying the riverbed
alluvium. The canyon-like fold, a glacial gully, was filled with
cobbles and boulders, with dimensions of up to 1 m within a sandy
matrix with zones of high permeability. There were further challenges, such as the almost vertical flanks and overhangs of the
bedrock, and concentrated boulder zones. In addition, the granite
and anorthosite at the site had
Sebouh Balian
measured strengths in the range
Regional Director
of 120 to 180 MPa, and occasionDr. Mazin Adnan
ally in excess of 200 MPa.
Peribonka Contract
The alluvial layers encounTechnical Director
tered and the open talus
BAUER Spezialtiefbau
structure further jeopardized
GmbH, International
AUTHORS:
Division, Schrobenhausen,
Germany
8 • DEEP FOUNDATIONS • SPRING 2010
the open cut-off trenches. The investigators expected sudden
losses of the supporting fluid that would destabilize the boulders
above the cutter frame. Furthermore, in-situ stability of boulders and
large cobbles had to be ensured.
To mitigate the risk of instability, Bauer Foundations, Canada,
grouted the alluvial zones in the gully section, creating a section
10 m wide with a depth of 120 m along the dam axis. The grouted
soil body had the advantage of preventing erosion. Besides the cutoff wall and the alluvium grouting, some other challenging
geotechnical measures were:
• Intensive drilling in the glacial gully section to identify the
contour of the bedrock, as well as the location of large boulders
in the dam axis
limited hydro-fracturing of the soil to open additional paths
towards the talus pockets.
Bauer performed limited gravity grouting, where the boreholes
were filled with stable but low viscosity mix to allow the grout
penetration through a wide front over the complete borehole. In
general, the classical grouting sequence with primary and
secondary tubes was applied.
The strict requirements for the quality of the work and the tight
work schedule necessitated the use of automatically controlled
grouting units. Three-dimensional plotting of the grout distribution,
based on inclinometric measurements and systematic recording of
all parameters, was an effective real-time support for the work.
Cut-off wall in progress
• Bedrock consolidation grouting
• Soil improvement by vibro compaction of the
alluvium layer and the dam base to mitigate the
extent of settlements and risks of liquefaction due
to seismic activity
• Installing a ground water lowering system during
construction to control potential rising river
water levels
Grouting Procedures
Bauer used “tubes à manchette” to grout the alluvia
within the glacial gully. The main concern here was
the risk of a limited penetration range of the grout
and the grout intake quantities.
Locally limited zones seemed to be suitable for
permeation grouting with conventional cements.
However, in some of the alluvia, the portion of the middle size sand
fraction (with D<1 mm) exceeded 15%. In these areas, the soil
could prove unsuitable for permeation grouting. The major risks
regarding the stability of open trenches, and hence the safety of the
cutter, were related to those zones. Because of these circumstances,
Bauer modified the refusal criteria for grouting works, allowing
General site view
Plastic Concrete Cut-off Wall
Cut-off walls were constructed in several areas of the dam. Here we
considered only the exceptionally deep wall in the glacial gully of the
main river valley. This wall’s width ranged from 1,500 mm to
1,200 mm, with 116 m maximum depth, with a total area 12,000 m2.
The trench excavation took place in zones previously treated by
cement grout. We took special measures to maintain the workability of the supporting fluid. This was due to several factors: the
relatively high water/cement ratios of the grout; the low
temperatures of the ground; the comparatively short time period
between the finishing of grouting works and the excavation of the
panels; and the large volumes of panel joint overcuts. The viscosity
rapidly increased to very high levels, due to the sensitivity of the
bentonite to cement contamination. This increase exacerbated the
need to control the rheological properties of the supporting fluid to
facilitate slurry circulation between the cutter pump at the bottom
of the deep trenches and the desanding unit.
Technical solutions such as the dosing mechanism integrated
into the cutter frame enabled Bauer to introduce the additives at the
right location in the vicinity of the cutter pump, i.e., at the deepest
level of the trench under the excavation. At the same time they
closely monitored the degree of slurry liquefaction to maintain
sufficient supporting effect.
Site plan view
Bauer had to maintain immense quantities of supporting fluid
reserves in this operation. The storage basins for the fresh excavation
and concreting slurry were covered for protection during the cold
months. The bentonite in basins was continuously agitated by pumps
and high-speed impellers. In addition, heating elements had to be
installed to prevent the slurry mixed into the plastic from freezing.
One of the most important mechanical properties of plastic
concrete is its ability to follow the deformations of the dam and the
soil layers underneath its base caused by the rising water head
when the reservoir is filled. The designer always wishes to have a
low modulus of elasticity in the plastic concrete. Usually the
required compressive strength of the hardened plastic concrete
does not exceed the few bars required for sufficient stability against
mechanical erosion.
Therefore, it is usually not very difficult to find a reasonable
compromise between both parameters (strength and E-modulus),
despite the comparatively narrow correlation between these two
parameters. However, due to the dimensions of the Peribonka Dam,
the cut-off wall underneath was exposed to considerable stresses.
These were due to the weight of the dam and the height of the acting
water head; both required higher compressive strengths. That is
why this project called for extreme fine tuning of the clayey
components, and the water/cement ratios of the mixes had to hit
the narrow envelope of the correlation range.
The required high plasticity restricted the aggregate portion in
the plastic concrete mix. The high fluid phase content of the mix, in
addition to the required flowability, resulted in adjustments to limit
the bleeding typical for such mixes placed under the considerable
hydrostatic pressures associated with deep panels.
Based on the originally assumed rock profile in the glacial gully,
we expected that the wall would reach a depth of more than 120 m
at its deepest point, and constructed a cutter prototype especially
for the project. Two more standard cutters were also mobilized.
The wall depth necessitated additional measures for the
verticality control to ascertain interlocking of the panels.
Considering the complicated soil conditions, Bauer adapted the
cutter direction control plates to allow longer stroke lengths, thus
increasing the correction efficiency.
Besides standard online monitoring and logging systems for
parameters such as the deviation in both axes, depth, penetration
progress, torque of each wheel and retention force acting at the
hook, the largest cutter was further equipped with a gyroscope that
monitored eventual rotations in the panel excavation.
Dam longitudinal section
Advanced Cutter Technology
As a technical solution, within easier reach of the currently
available technology, the cut-off wall was originally designed with a
limited rock keying of the individual panels, over less than a half of
their length, to facilitate its execution in the gully section against
very steep rock slopes. The resulting “windows” underneath the
non-embedded panel base were to be subsequently treated by
cement or chemical grouting, depending on the groutability of the
soils found.
Bauer proposed an alternative which, making use of advanced
cutter technology, allowed for a full embedment of the panels into
the rock to avoid the risks associated with such deep “windows,”
though this option would bring the project into pioneering territory.
To ascertain a better compliance with the requirements
regarding the overcut joints of the adjacent panels, Bauer developed a specific methodology. By starting panel construction at the
deepest point of the gully we could utilize the completed panels
successively as abutments for the following panels. This allowed
better control of the cutter frame verticality during cutting into the
Cut-off wall in progress
steep rock surface. Since the plastic concrete, with its specified
28 days compressive strength, could not serve as abutment with
sufficient strength to counteract the rock influence on the opposite
side of the cutter frame, it was replaced at greater depths by
structural concrete with strengths in the range of 30 MPa.
Such a sacrifice of the concrete plasticity could be afforded at
greater depths, since the cut-off wall there was not exposed
anymore to deformations. The methodology was verified on trial
trenches at a location outside the dam axis with similar rock surface
slopes before it was put into practice.
The wall paneling was designed with the overlap between the
panels increased to 60 cm in critical zones instead of 30 cm. Also, in
such complicated areas as zones with significant multi-axial slope
inclinations of the rock and sizable boulders, some of the panels
were rotated to a position perpendicular to the dam axis. This
rotation could accommodate larger deviations in the alignment
normal to the main wall direction.
Beside the preventive design and quality control measures
described here, real-time adjustment of the adjacent trenching was
systematically implemented, based on careful monitoring.
the specified criteria. To increase the safety of execution and to take
into account the accumulation of unfavorable conditions, the
nominal panel overlap in the most critical areas of the wall was
increased to 60 cm.
The deviation and torsion of the cutter frame were monitored
by real-time measurements conducted by the two inclinometers
and the gyroscope installed on the cutter frame, enabling the
cutter operator to correct any deviations during the excavation.
Finally, the alignment of the trench was controlled by ultrasonic
cross-hole measurements.
The overlap section of each panel was carefully analyzed based
on the comprehensive joint record to consider the necessary
measures needed before commencing with the excavation of the
adjacent panel.
Several control points were established to verify the specified
embedment of the panel base into the rock. We also used the results
of the rock surface detection obtained during the drilling for the
preliminary panels, and the additional interpolation between the
rock surfaces encountered in the primary panels to verify the rock
embedment of the secondary panels. The oil pressure of the gear
Alternative rock key solution
Panel Verticality
The special concerns of this project included the high risk of joint
defects between adjacent panels. This was due to the extreme
ground conditions and depth, and the quality of panel embedment in rock.
An absolute prerequisite for wall integrity was strict control of
panel verticality. This was especially important in the case of deep
cut-off panels, where the smallest deviations lead to reduced
overlap and in the worst case, to gaps between adjacent panels. The
variation of the wall thickness between 1.2 and 1.5 m was designed
on the basis of the depth of the relevant dam section. Specifications
called for a minimum overlap of 20 cm between adjacent panels
and a minimum wall thickness of 70 cm to achieve the required
integrity of the wall. Even such a marginal deviation from the
verticality as 0.5% would have exceeded the limits required to meet
box for both cutter wheels was also monitored. Finally, samples of
the excavated material separated at the coarse sieve of the
desanding unit were systematically inspected and sampled to
confirm the rock key quality.
Conclusion
Bauer completed the plastic concrete cut-off wall in October 2006.
The civil works were completed in October 2007 and the first
generator was put into service in December 2007, to the full
satisfaction of the owners. Piezometric monitoring continues to
ascertain the behavior of the cut-off wall.
The plastic cut-off wall at Peribonka demonstrates that it is now
possible to install highly reliable plastic concrete barriers against
water seepage in extremely challenging geotechnical conditions
well beyond the reach of other currently available techniques.
Ground engineering never got any easier.
Atlas Copco has put together a complete package that deals
with all things geotechnical.
When you have a foundation project – no
matter the application, location, or size
of the project – Atlas Copco offers the
equipment and technical expertise to help
develop and execute the plan.
Any way you need a hole drilled, be
it hammered, augured or driven, we
have the drill rig to power your job or
tooling to lead your drill string. The next
time you’re bidding a project that needs
soil stabilization, casing advancement
systems, or just a big or deep hole you can
be assured Atlas Copco is there with
the right equipment.
• MAI self-drilling anchor system
• Large or small down-the-hole
hammers
• Symmetrix overburden
drilling systems to 36”
• Cluster drills to 72”
• Auxiliary products like air
compressors, generators,
pneumatic and hydraulic
hammers
• Casing and tooling
• Core drilling supplies
• Or just the technical
advice to put the plan
together, we can make it work.
Some of the largest
(and smallest) contractors
in the country call on
Atlas Copco when
putting a project
together…you can too.
Committed to Your Superior Productivity
800-732-6762 Atlas Copco Construction Mining Technique USA LLC
800-760-4049 Atlas Copco Construction Equipment LLC
800-465-6719 Atlas Copco Construction and Mining Canada Inc.
www.atlascopco.us • www.atlascopco.ca
DFI ACTIVITIES
Winter Planning Meeting: Pondering the Future
The DFI Board of Trustees and chairs of the institute’s technical
committees explored possible long-range actions at the Winter
Planning Meeting in February in Tucson. On less theoretical matters,
they looked at budgets, membership, publishing and committee
progress. DFI’s budgets are in order, the membership continues to
grow, and seminars and short courses continue to flourish, in spite of
the continuing troubled economy. Notably, the Helical Foundations
and Tiebacks Committee began 2010 with a highly-successful
seminar, drawing 100 attendees to Las Vegas in February.
DFI now has 15 technical committees. At the WPM, the
Committee on Deep Foundations for Landslides/Slope
Stabilization was announced. The chair is J. Erik Loehr, of the
University of Missouri. The new group has 17 members, who
include 7 consultants, 5 contractors, 2 suppliers and 3 academics.
Before reaching official status, a request for participation in a task
force to decide if a committee should be formed was distributed to
DFI members. This request followed the show of interest in the
2009 Slope Stabilization Using Non-Earthworks Methods seminar
series. The first report by Chair Loehr will appear in the summer
issue of this magazine.
During 2009, DFI committees programmed 13 stand-alone
seminars, including Super Pile ’09, plus two short courses that
preceded the annual conference, and, of course, all held their
respective committee meetings at the conference as well. Looking
ahead, three committees are holding seminars just before the 35th
DFI Annual Meeting and Conference in Hollywood this October.
One is a seminar on Sustainability, the first effort by the committee,
which was created in 2008. The other two seminars will be
presented by the committees on Seismic and Lateral Loads and on
Ground Improvement. The chairman for the Hollywood meeting,
Francis Gularte, reported to the WPM attendees on papers and the
program so far for the event. In 2011,
the 36th Annual Meeting will be in
Boston, and the trustees selected
Houston as the venue for 2012.
Sikko Doornbos, president of DFI Europe reported on the
group’s progress, and Educational Trust Chair, Dick Short, also
recounted activities during 2009. Short announced that a meeting
with a professional fundraiser had been arranged for late March,
after this issue went to press.
Publications
On the publications front, the committee on Augered Cast-in-Place
Piles will publish its update to the Inspectors’ Guide to ACIP Piles, the
Tiebacks and Soil Nailing Committee will publish its guide
specification on soil nailing and the committee on Seismic and
Lateral Loads is sending its final draft of its Seismic and Lateral Load
design and testing guidelines to the DFI TAC (Technical Advisory
Committee). Other committees are making progress with specifications, manuals and webinars. An informal survey on the DFI
magazine was discussed and many suggestions were offered,
among them “lessons learned” case histories and historical articles.
The DFI Journal is gaining traction, and the number of papers in
the pipeline is increasing. It continues to be financially sound, according to Dan Brown, editor. Plans are moving forward to offer the
Journal electronically at no charge to members starting this year. For
2010, two issues will be published, one each in May and November.
Breakout Brainstorming
The attendees were divided into four groups, all of which
exchanged ideas and offered opinions on four main subjects. One
was how DFI can expand globally, and another was how DFI can
improve collaboration with other organizations. Enhancing the
member experience and evaluating the current structure of DFI
were the others. Within the last category was the prioritization of
tasks for DFI’s new Technical Activities Manager, Mary Ellen Bruce
(page 19 of the winter 2010 issue). She has a long list of potential
duties and areas of interests to address, the results of the attendees
will help clarify her role and the relative importance of various
areas. The final results of the breakout groups’ suggestions will be
ranked and actions will be discussed by the Board of Trustees.
2010 DFI Outstanding Project Award
If your company completed an Outstanding Deep Foundation Project, nominate it for the 2010 DFI Outstanding Project Award!
Eligibility:
Judgment Criteria:
Submission Requirements:
• Nominator must be a DFI member,
corporate or individual
• Size, scope and challenges of the project
• One page project summary
• Degree of innovation and ingenuity
exercised
• Up to 10 prints and electronic files of
project photos
• Uniqueness of the solution to the
difficulties of the job
• Completed application form
• Full project must have been
completed within the last 3 years
Nominations being accepted. Deadline: May 31, 2010
• $50 application fee
See www.dfi.org/opa.asp for further inforFOUNDATIONS
• SPRING 2010 • 13
mation andDEEP
nomination
form.
50 years of experience, an unmatched industry safety record and
peace of mind, it’s all yours by simply calling LG Barcus & Sons.
At L.G. Barcus and Sons we’re proud to be recognized as an industry leader in every
form of deep foundation construction. For over five decades–demanding engineers,
consultants, general contractors and owners have built their trust on BARCUS. When
you demand cost effective solutions, an unmatched safety record and unparalleled
service call L.G. Barcus and Sons. We’re the foundation of success.
BARCUS AugerPiles
TM
• Jobs from one pile to thousands
• Prebid analysis of foundation
alternatives
• Value Engineering Services
• Low Headroom Piles
• Omega Displacement Piles
• No Vibrations
• Pile Testing
CORPORATE OFFICE: 1430 State Ave., Kansas City, KS 66102 • 913-621-1100 • 1-800-255-0180 • FAX 913-621-3288
REGIONAL OFFICES: Albuquerque • Atlanta • Beaumont/Port Arthur • New Orleans • Philadelphia • www.barcus.com
Serving the Following States: AL, AZ, AR, CO, DE, DC, FL, GA, ID, IL, IN, IA, KS, KY, LA, MD, MI, MN, MS, MO, MT, NE, NJ, NM, NC,
ND, NY, OH, OK, PA, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, WV, WI, WY.
Compression Piles & Tension Piles • Earth Retention Systems • Design Build Services • Restricted Access/ Lowheadroom Installations
1
2
3
4
AUGER CAST COMPRESSION PILES
1. University of Louisville Parking Garage
Louisville, Kentucky
AUGER CAST PILE EARTH RETENTION SYSTEMS
2. Pedestrian bridge spread footing underpinning utilizing
augercast pile cutoff wall with tiebacks and concrete walers.
Aultman Hospital - Canton, Ohio
3. Pedestrian bridge and five story building footings underpinning
utilizing augercast pile cutoff wall with tiebacks and concrete walers.
Children's Hospital - Akron, Ohio
4. Internally braced augercast pile cutoff wall.
Federal Building Addition - Wheeling, West Virginia
For more information call toll free 800 272 4928
or go to www.augercastpiles.net
DFI Educational Trust Report
I am pleased to announce that DFI now has two active student
chapters. The first, as announced in Deep Foundations Fall 2009
issue, is the Chapter at U.C. Berkeley which has 21 members. The
second has just been established at the University of Illinois at
Urbana-Champaign.
The DFI at UIUC Chapter will be supported by faculty advisor
and long-time DFI member Dr. James Long, P.E., and led by Ph.D.
student Andrew C. Anderson. They will hold their first event on
April 9 with a lecture by DFI President Rudy Frizzi titled “NonDestructive and Full-Scale Testing, Evaluation, and Re-Use of Deep
Foundation Systems,” followed on April 10 with the University’s
Awards Convocation. Frizzi will attend the convocation to award
the Educational Trust’s Berkel and Company Contractor’s
Scholarship to students to be selected. The chapter plans to hold
monthly meetings and will pursue additional activities including
lectures and jobsite visits to fulfill their mission to promote the
study and practice of deep foundations.
The Student Chapter at U. C. Berkeley has an ambitious agenda
for the spring semester. The chapter sponsored a symposium titled
“Foundation Design and Construction in the 21st Century,” that
featured seven outstanding speakers from different sectors of the
industry. The symposium was presented to the engineering department students, DFI members and the at large community of
practicing engineers and contractors on March 12, 2010 in the
theater located in the new CITRIS building, and was videobroadcast for students at the University of Illinois. The theme of the
symposium encompassed foundation design and construction
with respect to the following:
• The evolution of more efficient methods of design and
construction in the first decade of the 21st century.
• Inventory of the current technologies and how they rate.
• Restraints against progress.
• The influence of the green technologies.
• Current technologies that are setting examples.
• Abundant and diminishing natural resources.
• How can innovation change our engineering and problem
solving approach to achieve the goals of the 21st century?
• Educating engineers to solve the challenges in the future.
The symposium began with an introduction by Student Chapter
President Cristina D’Costa Ferrer and a welcome from Dr. Juan
Pestana, Geotechnical Department chairman. Keynote Speaker,
David Sherwood, senior principal with Bachy-Soletanche in
London and Paris set the tone with his presentation “Recent
Advances and Current Trends in Foundation
Engineering.” Other presentations by prominent
engineers and contractors included:
AUTHOR:
Pont de Gard
• Bob Bittner: The Challenges of Marine Foundation Construction
• Dan Brown: Designing and Building Bridge Foundations for
our Infrastructure
• Patrick Bermingham: Meeting the Design and Construction
Challenge with Innovation
• David Coleman: Foundation Construction in the Urban
Environment
• Arturo Ressi di Cervia: Reflections on our industry
• John White: Manufacturing Diesel Pile Driving Equipment
in China
As the Berkeley Chapter Advisor, I will take 12 student members to
Europe on May 20 for a 10-day trip to attend the DFI-EFFC
International Conference in London. The conference includes site
visits to observe various projects under construction and
completed mega-projects such as the Thames River Flood Barrier
System. The tour begins before the International Conference in
Southern France at Avignon where the students will visit examples
of ancient Roman civil engineering construction. They will also
study the construction of the huge Cirque de Arles, a classic
example of a pile-supported structure built by the Romans and
nearby at Nimes, the famous Pont de Gard and viaduct.
Sponsors are being sought for the Student Chapter’s European
trip from the DFI membership. The students are each paying the
first $1,000 of the approximate $3,800 fare that includes travel and
lodging. This event has attracted a great amount of attention from
other engineering students on campus and will no doubt contribute greatly to future interest in the DFI Student Chapter and to the
deep foundation profession. Those interested in contributing
should contact [email protected].
Also anyone interested in supporting the DFI Chapter of UIUC
should contact DFI headquarters. Monetary support, as well as
volunteering to provide a lecture to the chapter students and other
civil engineering students, to make your jobsite available for a
student field trip or to sit on the DFI at UIUC Chapter
Advisory Board are all welcome and encouraged.
Richard D. Short
Chairman
[email protected]
DEEP FOUNDATIONS •SPRING 2010 • 15
Put infrastructure spending
on a solid foundation.
Monotube® Piles. Solid Economics
In the infrastructure space across America, it’s
estimated that more than 8,600 projects are shovelready and simply awaiting funding to get underway. Coincidentally, polls show we Americans are
strongly in favor of major investment in our aging
infrastructure. However, concurrent with this favorable opinion is a strong demand for accountability
and measurable efficiencies in how our tax dollars
are going to be spent. We as corporate citizens,
whether manufacturer, designer, engineer or
contractor, have a serious interest in this.
Monotube tapered steel foundation piles have
consistently delivered capital-saving measurability
for more than 80 years.
Using conventional equipment, a Monotube
requires a shorter driven length to achieve
design load capacity, fewer man-hours and less
energy to install than competing products. We
have numerable test site data proving
Monotube pile’s superior performance and it’s
yours free for the asking.
America is about to embark on a historic
expenditure of taxpayer dollars. We at
Monotube Pile Corporation know we can
help you keep costs in check. Give us a call
today because, as always, we’re ready to
deliver solid economics.
Request our
Free Catalog
P.O. Box 7339 • Canton, OH 44705-0339 / Ph. 330.454.6111 • Fax 330.454.1572
Executive Office: 5002 Second Avenue • Brooklyn, NY 11232
Email: [email protected] / www.monotube.com.
Conference Highlights
October 12th:
Pre-Conference Events
Sustainability: Save Money and Save the Planet
Ground Improvement Technology and Applications
Practical Deep Foundation Design and Construction
for Seismic and Lateral Loads
Exhibit Hall Preview Reception
DFI Technical Committee Meetings
October 13th:
DFI Technical Committee Meetings
Welcome Lunch
Keynote Lecture
Session I: Deep Foundations
Welcome Reception
October 14th:
Session II: Ground Improvement/Earth Retention
DFI Business Meeting Luncheon
Hal Hunt Lecture on Communications
Session III: Infrastructure/Local Projects
Award Banquet (separate ticket required)
All proceeds benefit the Educational Trust Scholarship
Programs and are 100% tax deductible
Distinguished Service Award presentation
Outstanding Project Award presentation
October 15th:
Session IV: Innovative Technologies/Sustainable
Design
Exhibition
Reach design and construction industry leaders
Be seen by 500+ expected deep foundation
professionals and decision makers
Over 80 booths in hall. Limited number still
available
Companions Program
Three day program including a full day tour on Oct 14th
of the sites and attractions in and around Hollywood,
Los Angeles and Santa Monica, a Welcome Tea, two
breakfasts and participation in the Welcome Reception.
Location
Renaissance Hollywood Hotel & Spa
1755 N. Highland Avenue Hollywood, CA 90028
www.renaissancehollywood.com
Direct: 323-856-1200 Toll Free: 866-835-7681
(Reservations)
DFI Special Hotel Rate $255.00
This discounted room rate is for DFI Attendees and is subject to a
cut-off date of Monday, September 20, 2010 and availability.
For more information or to register call 973-423-4030 or visit www.deepfoundations2010.org
Five Strategically
Located Facilities
SPIRAL WELD STEEL PIPE PILING
Northwest Pipe Co. manufactures
spiral weld steel pipe piling at five
ISO Certified production facilities
located nationwide to provide
prompt material delivery to the
most remote construction sites.
Three of the Northwest mills are
also API certified.
L.B. Foster Piling and Northwest Pipe Co. work together as
Northwest Pipe will soon open
two new steel pipe mills with
approximate yearly capacity of
150,000 tons each.
Pipe piling is readily available
from these strategically located
mills in sizes ranging from 18" to
156" OD and 0.188" to 1.00" wall
thicknesses. Shipping is available
by truck, rail and barge.
Quality piling from L.B. Foster and
Northwest Pipe is ideal for:
• Bridges
• Terminals
• Caissons
• Piers
• Marinas
• Offshore platforms
Manufactured by Northwest Pipe. Delivered by L.B. Foster.
strategic partners to provide quality spiral weld steel pipe
piling for the most demanding projects. This experienced
team can accommodate the widest variety of job
specifications and deliver from production facilities located
throughout the United States.
Since Winter 2010
NEW MEMBERS
CT = Contractor
ED = Educator
ME = Materials/Equpiment
S = Service
EA = Engineering
O = Owner
Joshua Adams
EA
[email protected]
Universal Engineering Sciences
Jacksonville FL USA
Andrew F. Brengola P.E.
CT
[email protected]
Nicholson Construction Company
Hudson MA USA
Jeff Glennon
[email protected]
Valsen Marine LLC
East Hills NY USA
CT
Aaron McConnell P.E.
[email protected]
Hayes Drilling Inc.
Olathe KS USA
CT
Jesus Alamo
[email protected]
Gruas Del Puerto
Manzanillo Colima MEXICO
ME
Jeff Bump
[email protected]
Viking Foundation Products
Minneapolis MN USA
ME
Ade Gumilar
[email protected]
GES
Bandung Jawa Barat INDONESIA
EA
Malcolm McPherson P.E.
[email protected]
Valsen Marine LLC
College Point NY USA
CT
Ken Andrews P.Eng.
[email protected]
Amcon Limited
Eastern Passage CANADA
EA
Michael Burmahl
[email protected]
Braun Intertec
Cedar Rapids IA USA
EA
Rick Hanke P.Eng.
[email protected]
Malcolm Drilling Co. Inc.
Kent WA USA
CT
Mark Mernik
[email protected]
Viking Foundation Products
Minneapolis MN USA
ME
OW
Henry Burton
[email protected]
Degenkolb Engineers
Oakland CA USA
EA
David Hill
[email protected]
J.F. White Contracting
Framingham MA USA
CT
Frederick Morell
[email protected]
Tutor-Saliba Corp
Burlingame CA USA
CT
Michael Atwood P.E.
[email protected]
Haley & Aldrich Inc.
Boston MA USA
EA
John Bush P.E.
[email protected]
Piletech
Auckland NEW ZEALAND
EA
Nabil Hourani P.E.
[email protected]
HNTB
Boston MA USA
OW
Matt Nagy
[email protected]
GRL Engineers Inc.
Cleveland OH USA
EA
Sam F. Baki P.E.
[email protected]
ZHI Inc.
San Antonio TX USA
CT
Daniel Connolly P.E.
[email protected]
Connolly Engineering Pllc
Pleasant Valley NY USA
EA
Selim Ikiz P.E.
[email protected]
Zetas Zemin Teknolojisi A.S.
Istanbul TURKEY
CT
Thomas W. Nolan P.E.
[email protected]
East Hartford CT USA
EA
Mark Balfe
[email protected]
Boston MA USA
EA
Jason Cumbers P.E.
[email protected]
Soil & Materials Engineers Inc.
Kalamazoo MI USA
EA
Turhan Karadayilar P.E.
[email protected]
Istanbul TURKEY
CT
Osciel Plaza
[email protected]
Moretrench
Windermere FL USA
CT
Michael J. Barbetta P.E.
[email protected]
S. T. Hudson Engineers Inc.
Camden NJ USA
EA
David J. Depaco P.E. M.S.
[email protected]
Irwindale CA USA
CT
Ozkan Kasimogullari P.E.
[email protected]
Istanbul TURKEY
CT
Erkki Poyhonen
[email protected]
Finnpiling Oy
70100 Kuopio FINLAND
CT
Luca Barison
CT
[email protected]
Nicholson Construction Company
Cuddy PA USA
Damon Desantis
[email protected]
Maclean-Dixie LLC
Franklin Park IL USA
ME
Fatih Kulac P.E.
[email protected]
Istanbul TURKEY
CT
Andrew Saint
[email protected]
American Deep Foundation &
Shoring West Inc.
Gladstone MO USA
CT
Debnath Bhattacharya P.E.
[email protected]
Desman Associates
New York NY USA
EA
John T. Difini P.E.
[email protected]
East Hartford CT USA
EA
Bruce Lane
[email protected]
Precision Measurements LLC
Rhododendron OR USA
EA
CT
Andrew Blaisdell P.E.
[email protected]
Portland ME USA
EA
John Digenova P.E.
[email protected]
Manchester NH USA
EA
Carrie Anne Layhee P.E.
[email protected]
Rochester NY USA
EA
Todd Saint
[email protected]
American Deep Foundation &
Shoring West Inc.
Gladstone MO USA
EA
Rudolph Bonaparte Ph.D. P.E.
[email protected]
Geosyntec Consultants
Atlanta GA USA
EA
James Dillon P.E.
[email protected]
Tioga Construction Co. Inc.
Herkimer NY USA
CT
Jean Louis Locsin
[email protected]
Boston MA USA
EA
Robert F. Scherzinger Jr.
[email protected]
Smith Monroe Gray Engineers
Beaverton OR USA
EA
Don Bortle Jr.
[email protected]
Buffalo Drilling Co. Inc.
Clarence NY USA
CT
Dylan Doss
[email protected]
Edminster Hinshaw Russ and
Associates Inc.
Houston TX USA
EA
Alan Lutenegger P.E. Ph.D.
[email protected]
University Of Massachusetts
Amherst MA USA
ED
Kevin Scott P.E.
[email protected]
Bhate Geosciences Corp.
Birmingham AL USA
CT
Ron Boyer
[email protected]
Langan Engineering and
Environmental Services
Elmwood Park NJ USA
EA
EA
Steven E. Gately P.E.
[email protected]
Boston MA USA
EA
Derek Martowska E.I.T.
[email protected]
Langan Engineering and
Environmental Services
Elmwood Park NJ USA
Richard Sedlacek
[email protected]
Topgeo Brno spol Ltd.
Brno CZECH REPUBLIC
Derrick Shelton P.E
[email protected]
McLean VA USA
EA
Brad Arcement P.E.
[email protected]
U.S. Army Corps Of Engineers
Vicksburg MS USA
DFI
ITUTE
ST
EP FO
U
DE
TIONS
DA
I
N
N
Super Pile 2010
June 10-11
Astor Crowne Plaza, New Orleans, LA, USA
Five DFI technical committees are hosting this super event to
present an overview of pile foundation construction.
• Augered Cast-in-Place Piles • Marine Foundations • Micropiles
• Testing & Evaluation • Drilled Displacement & Driven Piles
Visit dfi.org for concurrent sessions and exhibit opportunities
Shawn Sheridan
[email protected]
Sherco Services LLC
Glen Cove NY USA
CT
Alec D. Smith Ph.D. P.E.
[email protected]
Boston MA USA
EA
Damian Siebert P.E.
[email protected]
Boston MA USA
EA
Brian Keith Smith P.E.
[email protected]
Smith Engineering Co. Inc.
Bossier City LA USA
EA
Timothy C. Siegel P.E.
[email protected]
Berkel & Company Contractors Inc.
Knoxville TN USA
EA
Joseph Sopko Ph.D. P.E.
[email protected]
Layne Christensen Company
Port Washington WI USA
EA
Stacey Housley Simpson
[email protected]
TTL Inc.
Tuscaloosa AL USA
EA
Peter Speier P.E.
[email protected]
San Diego CA USA
CT
Bruce R. Spiro P.E.
[email protected]
CTI Consultants Inc.
Norfolk VA USA
EA
John Starcevich P.E.
[email protected]
Kent WA USA
CT
Scott Tebben
[email protected]
CDI Services
Grawn MI USA
CT
Shea Thorvaldsen
[email protected]
Valsen Marine LLC
College Point NY USA
CT
Mark Tigchelaar P.Eng.
[email protected]
Geosolv Design/Build Inc.
Gormley ON CANADA
CT
Alex Trahan
[email protected]
UC Berkeley
Berkeley CA USA
ED
Calvin Tsao
[email protected]
Ben C. Gerwick Inc.
San Francisco CA USA
EA
Aderson Vieira Ph.D.
[email protected]
Terracon Consultants Inc.
Tempe AZ USA
EA
Ted Walker
[email protected]
O.C.I. Division / Global Drilling
Suppliers Inc.
Cincinnati OH USA
ME
Mark Wathen
[email protected]
Maclean-Dixie LLC
Birmingham AL USA
ME
Erin Wood P.E.
[email protected]
Portland ME USA
EA
Betsy Woodruff
ME
[email protected]
AB Chance/Hubbell Power Systems
Centralia MO USA
Dan Yang P.Eng. P.E.
[email protected]
Buckland & Taylor Ltd.
North Vancouver BC CANADA
EA
Ed Zamiskie P.E.
[email protected]
Parsippany NJ USA
EA
Michael Zeman
[email protected]
D. J. Scheffler Inc.
Vancouver WA USA
CT
Alireza Ziaei
[email protected]
GRL Engineers Inc.
Cleveland OH USA
EA
Not all foundation construction
projects require a complex
solution. If you need ground
improvement or deep foundations,
let’s talk. Chances are that our
ground improvement services
can save you time, money and
complications.
Why Settle?
Call Us First: 800.326.6015
www.menardusa.com
Often the Best Solution
Is Simple and Affordable.
Ground Improvement Specialists
www.loadtest.com
SIDNEY LANIER BRIDGE
Brunswick, GA
NEW MILLENNIUM BRIDGE
Panama
ST. ANTHONY FALLS
BRIDGE (I-35)
Minneapolis, MN
GOLDEN EARS BRIDGE
British Columbia, Canada
ARTHUR RAVENEL BRIDGE
Charleston, SC
MY THUAN BRIDGE
Mekong River, Vietnam
Proud Recipient of the
2009
BEN C. GERWICK AWARD
“For Innovation in Design and Construction
of Marine Foundations”
Specializing in bi-directional load tests using the award winning
Osterberg Cell (O-Cell®)
World Leaders In Deep Foundation Load Testing
800-368-1138
Gainesville, FL • Baltimore, MD
London, UK • Dubai, UAE
Singapore • Seoul, Korea
Course:
State-of-the-art design of pile foundations
Course date: 21 - 23 June 2010
Worldwide buildings and many other constructions
are built on pile foundations. Recently, considerable
progress has been made in the field of understanding,
modelling and testing of pile foundations, leading to
the use of more advanced models in pile design.
Deltares, the Dutch Institute for water and subsurface
issues, organizes a three-day course presenting the
complete scope of pile design and pile behaviour
from the principles to state-of-the-art knowledge on
modeling and testing. The different aspects of pile
design and behaviour will be discussed by selected,
wellknown instructors from universities and industrial
companies all over the world.
Subjects:
• pile design according to Eurocode;
• axially loaded piles;
• pile load tests;
• laterally loaded piles;
• open-ended steel piles;
• piles under variable and cyclic loads;
• piled rafts;
• installation effects;
• pile design with Finite Element Models.
Course leaders
• Prof. Mark Randolph
• Prof. Frits van Tol
[email protected]
www.deltaresacademy.com (registration)
www.deltares.nl | [email protected] | +31 88 3357500
feb2010.indd
1 2010
22 Deltares
• DEEP Academy
FOUNDATIONS
• SPRING
9-2-2010 11:46:56
Safety
is our attitude
for life
Micropiles • Caissons • Driven/Drilled Piles • Augercast Piles
Ground Anchors / Tiebacks • Excavation and Drainage
Rock / Soil Nailing • Grouting • Sheet Piling
Bridges and Complex Structures • Concrete Foundations
Lock and Dam Construction • Steel Erection
Demolition/Brownfields Redevelopment
1000 John Roebling Way
Saxonburg, PA 16056
Office: 724-443-1533
Fax: 724-443-8733
www.braymanconstruction.com
LONDON
The DFI and EFFC 11th International Conference
in the DFI series:
r
% de
%
10 Rea 10 full te 4
D
VE DFI eive he uo J-A
SA ial Rec off t e. QDFI g
ec r! nt rat O- rin
Sp ffe ou te R iste
O c a e g
s
d
di leg co re
n
de rity he
io w
pr
DFI Readers save 10% off the full rate! Download your copy of the
conference brochure today at www.geotechnicalconference.com
GEOTECHNICAL
CHALLENGES IN 2010
URBAN REGENERATION
26th - 28th May 2010, ExCeL London
Featuring global
experts from the UK,
Europe, USA, Australia
and South East Asia:
5 reasons why you should attend:
Be inspired by expert presentations from Pan-European speakers on today's
hottest issues
Join an extensive exhibition showcasing the latest advances in
geotechnical engineering
Experience first hand examples of regeneration in practice with technical tours to
the Canary Wharf Crossrail Station, 2012 Games Construction Site, Battersea
Power Station and Thames Barrier
Optimise your learning by participating in interactive panel debates, poster
sessions and extensive presentations
Meet and network with hundreds of consultants, geotechnical engineers and
contractors to share best practice and explore new opportunities on an
international scale
Save up to 20%
on your flight
to the event
Join our network on
LinkedIn by searching for
Geotechnical Challenges
in Urban Regeneration
Special DFI Reader Offer! SAVE 10% off the full delegate rate!
Please quote priority code RO-DFIJ-AD4 when registering
[email protected]
+ 44 (0)20 7554 5816
Gala Dinner Sponsor:
Sponsor Partners:
Professor
Tom O'Rourke,
Cornell University
USA
Alan Powderham,
Mott MacDonald
UK
Professor Frits Van Tol,
Delft University of
Technology and Deltares
THE NETHERLANDS
Professor David White,
University of Western
Australia
AUSTRALIA
Professor
Malcolm Bolton,
University of
Cambridge
UK
Professor Colin
Leung Chun Fai,
National University
of Singapore
ASIA
Plus many more leading
industry experts! View the
full speaker line up at
www.geotechnicalconference.com
Event Partners:
Produced by:
EUROPEAN NEWS
DFI Europe Report
The DFI Europe Board held its 16th meeting
in December 2009 at the offices of Franki
Geotechnics NV/SA, in Saintes, Belgium. Sikko
Doornbos, president, thanked Maurice
Bottiau (board member and president of the
European Federation of Foundation
Contractors) for hosting the meeting.
Tony Butcher, corresponding board
member since his retirement from BRE,
editor of the European Section of Deep
Foundations and chairman of the Lexicon
Task Group, reported via email on the task
group’s progress. Work continues with a
new Portuguese column from José Matos e
Silva and a new Italian column from Marica
Romano. Matos e Silva has also looked at
the French translations. There are gaps in
the Spanish translations, and the Dutch
translations will be completed by board
members and Peter Middendorp, a task
group member. The draft will be circulated
to all board members for an assessment of
its acceptability as a DFI Europe Lexicon.
Online publication is scheduled for release
in April 2010. The Lexicon will be a user
driven document, continually being updated through the Lexicon Task Group.
The board will investigate creating a
new committee on monitoring that would
consider instrumentation and monitoring,
including vibrations, deformations, noise
and environmental aspects.
The next special course being organised
is “Special Course on Pile and Pile Group
Behaviour.” The Organising Committee
includes: Frank Haehnig, Adriaan van
Seters and Henk de Koning. This course
will be bilingual English/German, and the
content, venue and dates will be set by the
Organising Committee.
The board decided to look into linking
with the ECSMGE (European Conference
on Soil Mechanics and Geotechnical
Engineering), to be held in Athens on 13 - 19
September 2011, for a DFI Europe sponsored short course.
Bottiau and de Koning reported on
behalf of the Organising Committee for the
DFI-EFFC 11th International Conference:
Geotechnical Challenges in Urban Regeneration
(London 26-28 May 2010) that applications were well above those for the 2006
International Conference in Amsterdam at
the same stage. de Koning said “The Young
Engineers Programme, created to allow
engineering students, graduate engineers
and geotechnical specialists with not more
than 10 years post graduation experience
an opportunity to attend the conference at
a discounted rate as well as provide travel
assistance, gives a unique aspect to the
event.” Fifty-two young engineers out of
125 applicants were accepted for the
program, funded by 15 sponsoring
companies. Of the 85 papers that were
accepted for publication on a CD-ROM,
only a portion will be presented during the
conference. The published-only papers
could be the basis of other DFI Europe
events between conferences.
Doornbos outlined the student
exchange plan. The mutual benefits for
students and hosting companies would be:
exchanging knowledge, experience and
technology; improving languages and
insight regarding national cultural differences; networking; and exposure of DFI
in Europe.
The plan: DFI Europe members will be
contacted to offer apprenticeships for 3 to 6
months for a foreign student. Responses
would be managed in a DFI-controlled
database and the opportunity offered to a
number of selected technical universities.
DFI will bring the company and student
together; then the final contract will be
completed and agreed upon by the
company and student independently.
Participants will provide DFI with evaluations of their experience.
John Patch presented his view of the
role of DFI Europe compared to the
Institute as a whole. Some remarks were:
• There are great differences and backgrounds between the U.S. and Europe
• We are in favour of working with organisations like EFFC and ISSMGE
• There are not many consultants in our
group, though they are a strong part of
the industry
• It is not easy to attract or find the right
people to become involved as members
• DFI has a role to build a bridge between
academics and contractors
• In Europe, there is a different approach
for academics called to the courts as
experts
• In Europe, Codes of Practice and Standards are written by committees set up
by national bodies that have members
from all parts of the industry
Everybody shares Patch’s assessment in
general. The board therefore agreed to put
the review of DFI Europe’s Mission Statement on the Agenda for the next meeting.
William van Impe explained a new
federation FedIGS (Federation of the
International Geo-engineering Societies),
founded by the three learned societies
ISSMGE (International Society for Soil
Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering),
ISRM (International Society for Rock
Mechanics and IAEG (International
Association for Engineering Geology and
the Environment), on the principle that
each participating group, will retain its
identity and autonomy. After the 9/11
tragedy, ISSMGE offered help to the United
Nations, but they didn’t even know of its
existence. That prompted the idea of the
FedIGS to fulfill the role of a stronger
umbrella to communicate what geoengineering means. It covers nine sectors
and important world players with van Impe
as the first chairman. One goal will be to
improve the impact of Geotechnical
Engineering on the society. The first
International Congress of FedIGS will be
held in Hong Kong in October 2012.
Patrick Bermingham believes that DFI
should become a member, and Rudy Frizzi,
president of DFI and Theresa Rappaport,
executive director, will consider his request.
Pile Extraction and Sustainability
Piled foundations on land are almost
exclusively concrete. Marine piles, both
coastal and offshore, are very largely steel.
Such consistency across the construction
industry, by qualified engineers, suggests
that concrete piles are right for on-land
applications and steel piles are right for
marine applications. Why do we use
concrete piles almost exclusively on land
and steel at sea? Is corrosion of steel on land
a much bigger problem than it is at sea? Not
likely. Is the explanation based on science,
knowledge or logic, or is it just a “short
term, cheap today” decision?
Sustainability Criteria
Canary Wharf
AUTHOR:
Dave Brown, Managing Director
Dawson Construction Plant Ltd
Milton Keynes, U.K.
Sustainability may be defined as not
exhausting natural resources or causing
severe ecological damage. The ability to
recycle must be an important component
of such a definition. If everything we use
can be recycled, sustainability will be
achieved. Sustainability in piled foundations comes down to a choice between
steel or concrete. Timber, aluminum and
plastics are not significant alternatives at
this point in time.
So which is the more sustainable
product, steel or concrete? Both materials
perform their function as piles by taking on
a specific shape. That shape is achieved by
forming the material when in a fluid or
plastic state, when it has no structural
strength, and then allowing it to set, during
which it acquires its structural strength.
Concrete setting is a chemical reaction and
is therefore irreversible. Steel going hard is
a physical reaction, as in cooling, which is
not only entirely reversible, it can be
reversed an indefinite number of times.
Factors to consider when evaluating a pile
foundation’s sustainability are:
1. Extent of damage to site including
whether damage is reversible
2. Carbon footprint
3. Transport of muck away to landfill
4. Impact on surrounding community,
including noise and vibration
5. Re-usability of foundation
6. Cost of extraction/demolition
7. Value/liability of materials following
extraction/demolition
8. Cost of supply and installation
9. Speed of construction
Sustainable solutions can be less expensive
in the short term and offer big savings in the
long term.
Regarding sustainability and steel, one
must consider whether piles can be
extracted for further use or remanufacture.
Dawson Construction Plant has designed
and developed an innovative extracting
machine that is a stand-alone device with
an extracting force of 1,000 tonnes. It fits
directly over sheet piles, ‘H’ beams and
tubes, and by using the ground as a
reaction force, it can be used in any location
even when access is restricted; as a result it
has far greater capacity to remove piles than
many other techniques.
The following job sites show the
flexibility and versatility of the sort of work
that has been completed.
At Canary Wharf, London, Contractor
Dawson-WAM selected the X1000 Pile
Extractor to remove more than 1,500 sheet
piles at the Canary Wharf development in
London. The 22 m (72 ft) long Corus
LX25 piles had been driven as pairs to
refusal with a 7 t hydraulic drop hammer
some 6 years earlier. Extraction had to be
undertaken safely, without vibration and at
low noise levels. Production was impressive, with a pile being fully extracted in
30-35 minutes.
The project posed an additional
challenge because the piles sat in 10 m
(33 ft) of dock water. Dawson used a
pre-fabricated frame sitting on the dock
bed, to enable the X1000 to work above
water level, which resulted in offsafe and
silent extraction.
At Easington, England, the main contractor, Jan De Nul, carried out construction works for a gas pipeline landfall. The
offshore pipeline is the world’s longest, at
1,200 km. The steel piling included several
beach cofferdams and two parallel lines
running out to sea. All the piles required
extraction after the pipe was laid. The
longest were AZ36-630 crimped pairs at
24 m, driven to refusal with a Dawson HPH
6500 impact hammer. The X1000 operated
for several months, and its ability to apply
up to 1000 t of static pull force made it
possible to extract all the required piles.
Easington, U.K.
RELY ON DSI
®
HREADBAR
4 & #28 CR T
#2
!
now available
son for details
l DSI salesper
loca
Contact your
DYWIDAG THREADBAR®
Anchors
DYWIDAG Multistrand
Anchors
Investors attach great importance to the fastest possible completion of
ground engineering projects. DYWIDAG Geotechnical Systems match
these requirements perfectly.
Our innovative, high-quality DYWIDAG Systems are world-renowned for
their reliability and performance. DSI is the global market leader in the
development, production and supply of DYWIDAG Geotechnical Systems
to civil engineering companies. In line with our strong service approach,
we are always committed to satisfying our customers’ demands.
GEWI ® Piles (Micropiles)
DSI Hollow Bar Anchors
Ductile Iron Piles
DYWIDAG Rock Bolts
DYWIDAG Soil Nails
DYWIDAG Tierods
Headquarter Construction America
DYWIDAG-SYSTEMS
INTERNATIONAL USA INC.
w w w.dsiamerica.com
www. dsicanada .ca
DYWIDAG-SYSTEMS
INTERNATIONAL USA INC.
320 Marmon Drive
Bolingbrook, IL 60440, USA
Phone (630) 739-1100
[email protected]
DYWIDAG-SYSTEMS
INTERNATIONAL CANADA, LTD
NORTH CENTRAL
Bolingbrook, IL
Phone (630) 972-4036
NORTH WEST
Kent, WA
Phone (253) 859-9995
NORTH EAST
Long Valley, NJ
Phone (908) 850-3532
MID EAST
Toughkenamon, PA
Phone (610) 268-2221
SOUTH CENTRAL
Mansfield, TX
Phone (817) 473-6161
WEST
Long Beach, CA
Phone (562) 531-6161
SOUTH EAST
Tucker, GA
Phone (770) 491-3790
CENT.AM. Phone (973) 831-6560
ALASKA
Call North West
HAWAII
Call West
CANADA WEST
Surrey, BC
Phone (604) 888-8818
CANADA EAST
Gormley,
ON
DEEP
FOUNDATIONS
• SPRING 2010 • 29
Phone (905) 888-8988
Get Down to Business. Every Day. The 2500.
• Drill depths to 80’ (24.4m) with 2 kellys and up to 120’ (36.6m) with 3 kellys. • Single load transport. • Independent raising cylinders.
• Typical drill diameters range from 36” to 76” (90cm to 193cm). • Short mast available for low-headroom applications.
• Operator friendly hydraulic winches and joy stick controls. • Available mounted on a truck or crawler undercarriage.
Model 2500
2500CM
Auger Drilling, Inc.
2500TM Short Mast
Can Fer Construction Company
2500CM
Wylie Drilling &
Drainage, Inc.
Made in America...Best in the World.
watsonusa.com
PEOPLE, PROJECTS AND EQUIPMENT
George Filz: Professor of the Practical
George “doesn’t live in a bubble.” So says
Stefano Valagussa, referring to George Filz,
the Charles E. Via, Jr. professor of Civil &
Environmental Engineering at Virginia
Tech in Blacksburg. That colorful comment
sums up the thoughts of many practitioners
in the deep foundation industry. Filz, adds
Valagussa, is exceptional in that he is “one
of a few professors linking theory to actual
construction practice.” Both engineers are
among those working with the U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers (USACE) on levee
projects in New Orleans, Filz as a
consultant and Valagussa with the
contractor. According to Mike Duncan,
Emeritus professor, also in civil and
environmental engineering at Virginia
Tech, the levee project is one of “a handful
of projects in the country with unprecedented challenges.”
Filz’s academic admirers and roster of
awards (which include the J. James R. Croes
medal and the Thomas A. Middlebrooks
award from ASCE) attest to his intellectual
achievements. He has been at Virginia Tech
since he entered the Ph.D. program in
geotechnical engineering on the advice of
Professor Duncan, who became his
dissertation adviser. Another geotechnical
luminary, Wayne Clough, who was dean of
the College of Engineering at the time,
hired him as a professor after he received
his Ph.D. in 1992.
Filz’s much-appreciated practical
approach to engineering is due in part to
the eight years he spent in the private sector
before returning to academia for his Ph.D.
To begin his story at the beginning, he was a
math major at college when, one summer,
Filz and a buddy built a two-story storage
structure and loading dock for his father’s
business. That got him interested in engineering, and he graduated with degrees in
both math and in engineering.
Filz acquired some unusual practical
experience right after his undergraduate
studies. Chicago Bridge and Iron came to
his campus recruiting students to work on a
natural gas liquefaction and re-vaporization
plant near Jubail in Saudi Arabia. He spent
several months in that desert environment
“in the middle of nowhere.” He then
returned to Oregon for his master’s degree
in geotechnical engineering.
Next, Filz worked for about seven years
at two engineering firms in Oregon, first at a
small specialty geotechnical firm, Squier
Associates, and then at a large multidisciplinary firm, CH2M Hill. He considers
himself fortunate to have practical
experience in two very different kinds of
engineering firms. He says his professional
experience helps him in the classroom — he
doesn’t have to tell students about
something he read in a book; instead, he can
say “I did it.” Filz also believes his practical
experience helps him focus on research
topics “that will produce useful results.”
Filz says he has the “luxury” to contribute to private practice, where there are
people who don’t have time for research
because of other work demands. “I can
bring reflection to the challenges they face,
which gives me a unique opportunity to
contribute to private practice.”
New Orleans and Deep Soil Mixing
Filz takes pride in seeing his research used
in practice, as exemplified by his work in
New Orleans. Neil T. Schwanz, who is
regional geotechnical technical specialist
for the USACE, St. Paul District, of the
Corps of Engineers, worked with Filz to
develop design procedures for the Corps’
levee reconstruction program. He says Filz
has “a unique talent for describing complex
issues in easy to understand terms, and his
thorough knowledge of soil behavior and
deep foundations, coupled with his ability
to focus on critical issues, make him
extremely valuable.” Tom Cooling of URS,
who is the lead geotechnical designer for
the LPV 111 levee project in New Orleans,
says “George gave us alternative
approaches for deep mixing that made
design more efficient, and also offered great
insights to estimate settlement of the levee
spanning deep mixed elements.”
“Filz’s deep mixing work is the
benchmark for the technology,” says
Valagussa, whose firm, Treviicos, is a joint
venture partner for the project with FUDO
of Japan. Donald Bruce of Geosystems, the
joint venture’s consultant, says “Filz is
absolutely meticulous in his work.” Bruce
mentions another of Filz’s characteristics,
saying “he’s not self-aggrandizing in the least.”
Practitioner David Weatherby, of
Schnabel Foundations says Filz is the
“clearest-thinking researcher in the U.S. on
reliability of soil-cement as a composite
material.” Having watched him at meetings,
Weatherby says Filz is an excellent consensus builder, he understands what wastes
time, and what is needed.
Asked about the practical projects of
which he is especially proud, Filz mentions
two. One is the New Orleans work where
the results of his research integrating
reliability and numerical analyses for deepmixing-method support of embankments
and levees on soft ground are being
applied. The other was the challenge of
determining the cause of a one-meter
settlement of a high-pressure water main
that supplies 40 % of the fresh water supply
to Bogota, Columbia.
Wide Spectrum
Filz’s research covers a wide range of
geotechnical work. For example, he is
working with the Virginia DOT on integral
bridges, which experience less corrosion
and require less maintenance than bridges
with joints. When the abutment piles for
integral bridges extend through MSE wall
backfill, lateral pile displacements induced
by bridge expansion and contraction can
impose large stresses on the MSE wall
components. His research helps engineers
design to mitigate these stresses.
Another research challenge is posed by
crawler vehicles that transport extremely
heavy NASA rockets to the launch pads.
John Schmertmann (of Schmertmann and
Crapps) selected Filz for the difficult task of
evaluating the effects of these loads on the
“crawlerway” over which the rockets will
travel. Schmertmann says George Filz was
his first choice, he says, adding that Filz is
employing a “computer-assisted observational method,” based on the late Ralph
Peck’s assessment of the crawlway in 1969.
Academic Assessments
Mike Duncan says Filz always has his
students’ interests at heart. “He will spend
any amount of time to help students
understand,” he says, adding that Filz has
carved out a record of research that is “both
cutting edge and practical.” Colleague
James Mitchell, also at Virginia Tech, says
Filz is academically at the top, and he
“knows how to use what he knows.”
Filz counts Duncan and Mitchell as his
role models, along with William Knocke,
who was the Civil Engineering department
head at Virginia Tech from 1995-2009,
including the time in 2007 when 32 people
were killed in a shooting on campus. “Bill
Knocke led us through that,” says Filz.
Among other achievements, “when Knocke
started as department head, the Civil
Engineering Department at Virginia Tech
was ranked about 18th in the country.
When he completed his tenure, the
department was in the top ten.” That was a
“phenomenal achievement, considering
that every other CE department in the
country was trying to move up at the same
time,” says Filz. Geotechnical engineering is
becoming more popular at Virginia Tech,
says Filz. This academic year, the program
has over 50 geotechnical graduate students.
Filz also co-directs Virginia Tech’s
Center for Geotechnical Practice and
Research (CGPR) with Mike Duncan. The
Center exemplifies practical research. The
CGPR has over 20 members, which include
consulting firms, construction companies
and governmental agencies. At annual
meetings, the member organizations
discuss and prioritize their most important
engineering needs, which guide the
Center’s activities for the next year.
Members also present lectures on their
practice to the students. The CGPR
meetings provide numerous opportunities
for interaction between CGPR members
and Virginia Tech students, and these lead
to career-long connections that benefit all.
Future Foundations
Looking ahead, Filz says “there are huge
needs for deep foundation construction in
U.S. infrastructure, both for rehabilitation
and new construction, especially in coastal
areas. Deep foundations systems are becoming more complicated. We need to optimize
these systems to make them cost-efficient,
time-efficient and safe. There are great
opportunities for innovation to address the
infrastructure challenges we face.”
Virginia Fairweather
GEOSCIENCES TESTING
AND RESEARCH, INC.
•
Wave Equation Analysis (WEAP) and
Drivability Studies
•
Dynamic Pile Testing using PDA and
CAPWAP
•
Integrity Testing using PET and CSL Testing
using CHUM
•
3D Tomography Analyses of Shafts
•
Static Load Testing and Instrumentation
•
Earth Support System Design and Analysis
•
Construction Engineering Services
55 Middlesex Street, Suite 225, N. Chelmsford, MA 01863
Tel: (978) 251-9395 • Fax: (978) 251-9396
Web: www.gtrinc.net • E-Mail: [email protected]
1.800.331.0175 | shaftdrillers.com/dfi1
Monumental Repair Project
The Jefferson Memorial
Those strolling through Washington, D.C.
this spring admiring the cherry blossoms,
the memorials and the architectural
masterpieces, may be surprised to see large
cranes and construction equipment
reflecting off the Tidal Basin waters. Work is
underway on emergency repairs to the
Thomas Jefferson Memorial North Plaza
and Seawall. Recent settlement and lateral
movement of the seawall and plaza
prompted the National Park Service (NPS)
to close a portion of the Memorial to the
public due to safety concerns. The work at
the Memorial is one of the first large projects
undertaken in D.C. under the American
Recovery and Reinvestment Act 2009.
AUTHOR:
Darrell Wilder, P.E., Associate
Schnabel Engineering
West Chester, Pennsylvania
History
The site where the Jefferson Memorial
stands today was originally part of the tidal
flats of the Potomac River, and was filled
over the years to form the West Potomac
Park Historic District. Ever since the
Memorial’s construction from 1939-1943,
the North Plaza and adjacent seawall have
been subject to continued settlement. The
last wedge of fill was added to the southeast
shore of the Tidal Basin during
construction. This allowed the Memorial to
be placed at the southern terminus of the
cross-axis that links the U.S. Capitol
Building and the Lincoln Memorial in one
direction and the White House and the
Thomas Jefferson Memorial in the other.
The weight of this more recent fill caused
consolidation of the soft soil deposits
beneath it and significant differential
settlement with respect to the eastern half of
the Memorial site constructed on older fill.
The Memorial is founded on a network
of deep foundations and grade beams,
arranged radially. The main structure, and
surrounding stylobate and terrace walls,
are supported by 443 cast-in-place
Raymond piles, 88 24-in concrete caissons,
and 103 16-in concrete caissons. This
system of deep foundations protects the
Memorial structure from settlementinduced damage. The surrounding roads
and grass areas are on grade. By 1965,
settlement of the North Plaza had reached
about 3 ft, which prompted its reconstruction as a structural slab-on-grade
beams and piles in 1969-70.
The Ashlar seawall, which separates the
North Plaza from the Tidal Basin, to the
north of the Memorial is supported by
vertical and battered timber piles.
Investigators believe that the timber piles
did not reach rock and, consequently, the
wall was also susceptible to settlement.
Settlement of the surrounding on-grade
areas has continued. Since mid-2006, the
NPS detected significant settlement of areas
on grade and of the Ashlar seawall, particularly on its west side. Lateral movement
of the North Plaza has also taken place.
This movement is believed to be the
consequence of changes in the ground water
regime in the area and consequent
consolidation of the soils with depth.
Investigation
Schnabel Engineering, LLC, (Schnabel)
of West Chester, Pa., was contracted by the
NPS in September 2006 to investigate the
area surrounding the Memorial. The investigation included an extensive instrumentation program, consisting of piezometers, inclinometers, extensometers and
optical survey. Monitoring of these instruments is ongoing.
A report prepared by Schnabel for
HNTB Federal Services Corporation,
Washington, D.C., presented in January
Installation of timber piles to support the Ashlar seawall
2008, concluded that the settlements
observed are likely due mainly to a drop of
the piezometric head deep at the rock
interface. As the soft soils consolidate
under this drop in piezometric head, the
ground surface settles. Near the edge of the
North Plaza, there is also a horizontal
component to the movement due to
unbalanced loading conditions.
The instrumentation at the site has
revealed that lateral and horizontal
movements within the soil take place to a
depth of about 60 to 70 ft. Lateral
movement measured in the inclinometers
is taking place at a rate of approximately
1 in per year. Settlement at the seawall has
reached approximately 5 in, most of which
has likely occurred since late 2006.
Obstacles
A number of possible remediation options
were carefully considered. Based on alternatives and recommendations developed
by Schnabel, the NPS selected a movement
mitigation scheme that includes demolition and reconstruction of the seawall on
caissons and pipe piles. The scheme will
provide resistance to both future vertical
and lateral movement of the North Plaza
and new seawall.
Lateral movements of the subsurface
soils are likely to generate forces not only
on the new seawall foundation elements
but also the existing H-Piles that support
the North Plaza. The new seawall
Settlement of the Ashlar seawall with respect to the North Plaza
(photo courtesy of Schnabel)
foundation system will support the new
seawall and resist the anticipated lateral
forces by acting as an “A Wall” system. As
the soil tends to move laterally, lateral
forces develop against the caissons. The
battered piles restrain the lateral movement
as they go into compression. Eventually, as
the soil movements increase, the vertical
caissons will work in tension.
Additionally, the transition zones (from
pile-supported slab to slab-on-grade) to the
Historical Tidbits
• The Thomas Jefferson Memorial is
managed by the National Park
Service under its National Mall
and Memorial Parks unit.
• The Memorial ranked fourth on
the List of America’s Favorite
Architecture by the American
Institute of Architects in 2007.
• It was designed by John Russell Pope
in 1935. Pope was also the architect
of the National Archives Building
and original (west) building of the
National Gallery of Art.
• Prior to construction of the
Memorial, the site was a bathing
beach and swimming in the Tidal
Basin was permitted until 1925.
• It is the home of the National Cherry
Festival and Easter Sunrise Service.
east and west have been designed to accommodate future settlement of the surrounding Memorial grounds without exceeding
wheelchair accessibility standards.
Aside from technical difficulties with
installing caissons and pipe piles in a multitude of locations, splays and inclinations;
the greatest challenge of the project will
likely be the restoration of the North Plaza
and seawall to match the original construction. To this end, each facing and capping
Ashlar stone must be removed, catalogued,
carefully stored and then repositioned back
on the new seawall like a giant jigsaw
puzzle. Maintaining the “historical fabric” of
the Memorial is paramount to the NPS. The
extensive measures to document, protect
and reinstall the original Ashlar blocks will
ensure that the aesthetic character of the
Memorial is not impacted by this project.
Project Update
Clark Construction Group, LLC, of
Bethesda, Md., was selected by NPS to
perform the emergency repairs under a
competitive, negotiated acquisition. The
agency gave notice to proceed in December
2009 with the expectation that a majority of
the work would be completed by May 2011.
Since December 2009, Clark has begun
installation of the temporary work
platforms and cofferdams and has started
the process of removing the historical fascia
features. Caisson and pipe pile installation
are slated to begin in the summer of 2010.
14.1’ RCD bit for shaft drilling
The first step is the hardest.
Take it with confidence.
Take it with Aker Wirth.
Aker Wirth GmbH
Our representative in North America
Aker Wirth – the world market leader in RCD.
Innovative drilling solutions for on- and offshore
applications.
Since March 2009, Aker Wirth has been part of
Aker Solutions, the global provider of engineering
and construction services, technology products
and integrated solutions to the energy, process
and mining and metals sectors.
© Copyright 2009 Aker Solutions
DSI Underground Systems
American Commercial Division
www.akersolutions.com/akerwirth
Soil Nail Walls in Sands, Outdoors and In
The Battle Creek, Mich., Public School
District is building a multi-million dollar
addition to its senior high school. The
addition is designed to connect two
existing buildings, each close to 100 years
old. Well into foundation construction, the
owner had to select measures for protecting
the two buildings while excavating to
extend the basement of the older building.
The four-story brick buildings were
constructed in 1908 and 1923 on spread
foundations supported on sand soils.
Settlement due to undermining and
ground loss was the primary concern. Soil
nail walls and microfine cement
permeation grouting made this excavation
possible. Because this approach was so
successful, the owner decided to use it
inside the building to construct a new pool.
The 1908 building had been constructed with a full basement. The architect, TMP
Architecture, Inc., Portage, Mich., and the
structural engineer, JDH Engineering, Inc.,
Grand Rapids, Mich., designed a matching
basement in the new addition to allow
utilities to extend from the 1908 building,
through the basement addition, and up to
the existing utility corridor in the 1923
building. The owner needed a cost-effective
temporary earth retention solution to
protect the existing buildings while making
the excavation for the basement.
Challenges
The site geology consists of glacial outwash
deposits of sand and gravel and postglacial alluvium overlying weathered
sandstone of the sedimentary Marshall
formation at depths of about 40 ft. The soils
are generally clean, loose to medium dense
(N<20 blows per ft) sands with gravel,
occasional cobbles and boulders. The
backfill zone of the 1908 basement and
some other surficial areas consisted of
siltier urban fill material containing debris
and cinders.
The project team, including Soil and
Materials Engineers Inc., Kalamazoo,
Mich., (SME) faced several challenges in
designing the temporary earth retention for
the proposed construction. First, to reach
the basement of the 1908 building,
View of 1923 school building in Battle Creek with the new addition in the background
constructing the addition’s basement
required an excavation up to 14 ft below
the existing 1923 building foundations.
Second, an excavation extending 6 ft below
the floor level was required to extend the
utility corridor into the 1923 building.
Third, the bearing soils for the new
foundations required stabilization so the
new loads would not cause excessive
settlements of the existing footings.
Sheet piling would be a typical
alternative for earth retention. However, if
sheet piling were installed behind the
proposed basement wall, the sheets would
have extended from the face of the existing
basement wall to within a few feet of the
1923 building. SME considered sheet
piling a high-risk option particularly
because of the vibrations and the potential
effects on the loose granular soils and old,
brick facades. The firm initially suggested
two options for protecting the existing
buildings: one was a temporary tangential
AUTHOR:
Steve Maranowski, President
Spartan Specialties, Ltd
Sterling Heights, Mich.
augercast pile wall, the other was permeation grouting to stabilize the soils below
the existing foundations and behind the
location of the proposed basement wall.
The project team discussed the alternatives
with the owner’s representative (Skanska
Schweitzer, A Joint Venture) and selected
permeation grouting.
The owner solicited bids from specialty contractors. One of them, Spartan
Specialties, Ltd, Sterling Heights, Mich.,
included an unsolicited alternative with its
bid; using soil nail walls for the deep
excavation to reduce the amount of
permeation grout needed. The owner’s
representatives adopted this approach
because it provided the additional security
of structural inclusions (the soil nails) to
stabilize the excavation and lowered
construction cost. SME facilitated the new
approach by modifying the initial
basement-excavation design (including a
7-ft-wide grout zone) to be a soil nail wall
with a 3-ft-wide, permeation grout curtainwall. SME designed the grout curtain-wall
to limit sloughing of the granular soils
along the face between the time when the
excavation was made and the soil nails and
shotcrete face were installed.
holes with 4,000 psi grout, then applied
wire mesh and a 4-in-thick gunite facing in
three 5.5 ft vertical lifts. Spartan completed
the temporary soil nail wall in about four
weeks, permitting basement-wall excavation to proceed.
Spartan bid on the earth retention and
the permeation grouting for underpinning
under a performance specification that
phase of the project was even more
challenging, because it required Spartan to
Spartan Specialties began by grouting
build a second, similarly sized soil nail wall
inside the 1923 building and along the
inside the building in about half the time it
exterior foundations. Shortly after comtook them to complete the outdoor wall.
pleting the grouting, they installed a single
A 15-ft-deep excavation was required
row of grout tubes to a depth of 17 ft for the
adjacent to newly constructed, interior,
face of the soil nail wall at the basement
block walls. New floor slabs were in place
location. SME designed the soil nail wall to
behind the walls and three feet above
where the first row of soil
nails was placed. Spartan
Figure 1. Compressive strength of grouted sand samples versus time
installed a single row of
2,000
1,900
grout tubes along the wall
1,800
extending to depths of
1,700
about 15 ft over about 50 ft
1,600
in plan view to grout the
1,500
face
of the wall. This time
1,400
1,300
they used four rows of soil
1,200
nails, with the upper row
1,100
designed to prevent lateral
1,000
movement
of a new
900
foundation wall situated
800
700
near the top of the pro600
posed excavation. Spartan
500
installed the upper row
400
through the foundation
300
wall and angled the nails to
200
100
avoid damaging the new
0
utilities already in place
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
behind the wall. Spartan
Days Curing (since grouting)
added a shotcrete accelerant to the gunite mixture,
outlined areas on the plans where they were
which resulted in compressive strengths of
responsible for stabilization. As part of the
50% of the 28-day design values in about
specifications, the grouted soil zones were
48 hours. The rapid set-up allowed the
required to have an average minimum
excavators to continue without delay.
28-day compressive strength of 500 psi with
Conclusion
no samples less than 300 psi. SME made
several attempts to correlate the grout
Using the soil nail wall facilitated
strength to the in-situ grouted soil strength
construction of the new basement and
in the field, but eventually Spartan grouted
foundations without loss of ground or
a test area and excavated to obtain samples
damage to the existing buildings. Soil nail
for testing. Figure 1 indicates that the cominstallation, shotcreting, and excavation for
pressive strength of the grouted soil samples
the indoor pool area were completed
was around 600 psi at 28 days. The strength
successfully in February 2010. The design
The outdoor soil nail wall extending out
data for the grouted sand were valuable.
team addressed several issues during
from the 1908 building, with the partially
They
confirmed
the
material
properties
to
construction,
including access constraints,
constructed basement walls in-place
evaluate the performance of the grouting.
schedule challenges and the need to modify
The data also provided historical informaextend (in plan view) from the foundation
designs on the fly. During construction, the
tion for grouting and soil nail projects
of the 1908 building to the building line of
design team’s willingness to work with the
requiring excavations in this soil type.
the 1923 building. Spartan used 4 rows of
specialty contractor’s input helped the
Because of the success with the
18-foot-long, 1.25-in-diameter, Williams B7X
owner to reduce earth-retention costs by
basement excavation, Skanksa Schweitzer
Geo-Drill Bars at 5 ft on center. The
about 15%, and, even more important,
wanted to use a similar method for the pool
specialty contractor completed the face of
saved time, maintained the project schedule
excavation inside the new addition. That
the wall by grouting the 4-in-diameter drill
and protected the existing buildings.
Compressive Strength (psi)
Indoor/Outdoor Soil Nail Walls
We build the barriers that
keep clean water clean.
Grout Curtain, McCook Reservoir Stage I
Chicago, IL
The support you need to protect your vital resources.
The McCook Reservoir will store the wastewater overflow that would otherwise threaten
the City of Chicago’s drinking water. To create a seal in the fractured limestone around
the reservoir, Nicholson constructed a grout curtain using its computerized GROUT I.T.
system which measures, records and graphically displays grouting parameters in real time.
At Nicholson Construction Company, we specialize in deep foundations, earth retention,
ground treatment and ground improvement techniques that help you achieve your project
goals. Nicholson...the support you need.
1-800-388-2340
nicholsonconstruction.com
DEEP FOUNDATIONS

EARTH RETENTION

GROUND TREATMENT

GROUND IMPROVEMENT
An Award-Winning Geotechnical Division
Geotechnical Engineering
Subsurface Investigation
Soil and Rock Mechanics
Shoring and Underpinning Design
Pile Load Testing and Inspection
Vibration Monitoring
Construction Materials Testing
Third Party Inspections
Survey Layout
70 Pleasant Hill Road
Mountainville, NY 10953
Tel: (800)829-6531
Fax: (845)534-5999
www.tectonicengineering.com
DFI People and Companies
Dave Birkhauser retired
from Manitowoc Cranes
and Grove at the end of
2009, after a lifetime in
the lifting industry. As
senior vice president of
sales for the Americas region, he oversaw
all sales for Manitowoc’s four brands –
Manitowoc crawler cranes, Grove mobile
cranes, National Crane boom trucks and
Potain tower cranes, and was responsible
for sales in Latin America. He began his
career as a sales representative for America
State Equipment, a Manitowoc distributor.
In the mid 1980s Krupp asked him to
manage its North American organization.
Birkhauser was senior vice president of
sales and marketing, when it was
purchased by Grove Worldwide in 1995.
When Manitowoc bought Grove in 2002,
he became senior vice president of sales for
the Americas region.
David Maher Rempe, 72, of Champaign,
Ill. died Feb. 8, 2010, after a 15-year battle
with prostate cancer. He was born in 1937,
in Yonkers, N.Y., and graduated from
Cornell University in 1960 with a degree in
civil engineering. Rempe spent a number of
years working on overseas construction
projects, taking time out to travel around
the world. In 1968, he came to Champaign
to attend graduate school at the University
of Illinois. After completing his Ph.D. in civil
engineering in 1975, David developed a
business as an independent geotechnical
consultant. He contributed to construction
projects worldwide, including the Pentagon,
the NASA launch pad at Cape Canaveral,
and the Baltimore Ravens stadium. He was
active in DFI for many years, and was also
involved in many charitable and civic
causes, and was on the board of the local
Habitat for Humanity chapter.
Edward Dutton Graf, a pioneer in
grouting and foundation engineering,
passed away of lung disease on December
16, 2009 at Kaiser Hospital in Honolulu,
Hawaii, two weeks shy of his 85th birthday.
A native Californian, Ed Graf was a World
War II navy veteran, engineer, contractor,
inventor, consultant and pilot. He was
studying business and engineering at
UCLA when World War II began. His
NROTC training was accelerated, and he
was commissioned as an Ensign two years
later, and assigned as an officer of a wooden
hulled sub chaser. He served in New
Guinea, New Britain, the Philippines,
Admiralty Islands, Leyte Gulf and Borneo.
At age 20, he took over as skipper.
Following World War II, he completed his
engineering degree at UCLA in 1948. In
1957, he formed the Pressure Grout
Company. Over the next 31 years, as
owner, Graf was involved in soil
stabilization and underground water
shutoff projects for building and civil
projects all over the world. He was inventor
and co-inventor of six issued patents for
pressure grouting. Graf was an annual
Geotechnical Engineering lecturer at the
University of California at Berkeley and
Stanford University.
Ground Improvement Specialists
Menard, specialists in ground improvement, has a new corporate identity.
Following the merger of its parent
company, Freyssinet Group, with
Soletanche Bachy, the new identity is part
of consistent branding among all
companies in the Soletanche Freyssinet
Group, headquartered in France.
According to Seth Pearlman, president of
Menard and a former president of DFI, the
new logo reflects the firm’s position as the
U.S. branch of Menard, an international
specialty ground improvement contractor,
and as a part of a global network of
geotechnical resources. The Soletanche
Freyssinet Group includes Menard,
Reinforced Earth and Soletanche Bachy,
geotechnical and specialized civil
engineering companies; and Freyssinet,
specialists in prestressing, and cable-stayed
structures and structural repair.
Joseph M. McCann has
been appointed executive
vice president of Moretrench, Rockaway, N.J.
After graduating from
Villanova University in
1970, McCann joined Moretrench and was
appointed vice president in 1981. He has
been responsible for the design, cost
estimation, installation, operation and
maintenance of numerous large and
complex projects involving construction
dewatering and groundwater control,
groundwater remediation, and ground
freezing for new and remedial construction. Among notable projects on which he
worked are Lock and Dam 26; ground
freezing for Boston’s Big Dig; and most
recently, ground freezing under complex a
connector tunnel 140 ft below ground for
the East Side tunnel of the Willamette River
CSO project in Portland, Ore. In his new
role, McCann will become more involved
in Moretrench’s corporate operations,
particularly in the area of employee
ownership; Moretrench is a 100%
employee-owned company (ESOP).
Langan Engineering and Environmental
Services took part in a National Geographic television show that dealt with a
“haunted” penitentiary near Philadelphia.
The producers wanted an accurate 3dimensional model of the prison and
approached Langan, and four other firms,
to participate in the segment, which was
aired in February and March.
The show presented a scientific investigation of the former prison, now a museum,
for the presence of paranormal activity. Since
the closing of the prison in 1971, many
visitors and staff have reported hearing
voices, people crying and screams coming
from a number of cells. Some people have
even seen ghostly figures. Langan provided
3-Dimensional Laser Scanning services to
measure the dimensions of three cells in the
more “haunted” portions of the former
prison. The other investigative groups used
motion sensors, night-vision and infrared
cameras, and acoustic triangulation systems
to help solve the ghost mystery.
Joseph Romano, senior associate,
Survey and Mapping Services, at Langan
says that “laser scanning has revolutionized
the way we conduct surveys.” No ghosts
were found at the building.
Alice Arana, P.E., was promoted to senior associate
at Mueser Rutledge Consulting Engineers (MRCE).
She has B.S. and M.S. degrees
from Columbia University,
both in civil engineering. Arana joined the
firm in 1988 and her areas of expertise
include underpinning and excavation support systems, pile and caisson foundations,
secant piles and slurry walls. She was project
manager of the New South Ferry Terminal
in New York City, among other structures.
Two other MRCE engineers were promoted to the Associate level—Sitotaw Y.
Fantaye, who was a lead structural
engineer with the New York City Transit
Authority for eight years before joining
MRCE in 2005, and Ira A. Beer, P.E., who
joined MRCE in 1999 after working on the
Central Artery project in Boston.
Bruce Kabalen was promoted to manager, marketing communications for
Link-Belt, Lexington, Ky.
Kabalen spent 12 years in
the marketing communications department. He and his team created
Link-Belt Preferred, the crane industry’s
most comprehensive customer information
web portal. Kabalen has been a major contributor to Link-Belt’s promotional events
including multiple ConExpos and CraneFests, international events like Bauma, and
tradeshows in the U.K. and Russia. His new
responsibilities include oversight of advertising, publications, public relations and
training. Kabalen is a graduate of the
University of Kentucky.
Andy Brengola, P.E., the
new district manager of
Nicholson Construction
Company’s New England
district office in Hudson,
Mass., oversees Nicholson’s
New England construction operations and
business development efforts. He has a B.S.
in civil engineering from Syracuse University and a M.S. degree in geotechnical
engineering from Tufts University. Prior to
joining Nicholson, he was the New
England area manager for Hayward Baker
and worked for Haley and Aldrich in
Boston. He is a registered professional
engineer in Maryland and a member of DFI.
Stefano Valagussa has
been promoted to president and chief executive
officer of Boston based,
TREVIICOS. Valagussa
expects the firm to continue to expand both its traditional foundation work and its growing geotechnical
work on soil stabilization, barrier wall and
other complex type underground projects.
He assumes the role formerly held by
Ricardo Petrocelli, who has been named
chairman of the board of TREVIICOS.
SPECIALIZED DRILLING EQUIPMENT & TOOLING
HEAVY . CIVIL.
PHONE (972) 272
272-6461
272-9194
6461 / FAX (972) 272
9194
TOLL FREE (800) 527
527-1315
WWW.SMHAINCO.COM
Managing Uncertainty Underground
Geostructural Solutions Delivered Nationwide
City Creek Center
Salt Lake City, Utah
Mike Walker P.E.
781.721.4057
Giovanni Bonita, Ph.D., P.E.
202.828.9511
Grove GTK1100 at Wind Project in China
The first Grove GTK1100 in Asia, at work on a wind farm
installation in Inner Mongolia, China
The first Grove GTK1100 crane in Asia completed its first job, helping to build major wind farm installations in Inner Mongolia, China.
The high-telescoping crane was used to install 92 wind turbines
with tower heights of over 70 m and turbine sections of up to 75 t –
all in desert conditions. Zhu Jingcheng, chairman of China Power
Equipment Installation Engineering Co. Ltd., (CPIE), which owns
the crane, said the GTK1100 was the only choice for the project.
Manitowoc delivered the GTK to CPIE in June 2009, along with
two of the company’s most experienced service men. The crane’s first
job was to install two Shengguotongyuan 1.5 MW windmills with
77.5 m towers and turbines weighing 75 t in Ganqika, Inner Mongolia.
The men and equipment then traveled to the Zhurihe CHNG Wind
Farm in late October, 100 km from Tong Liao City where CPIE was
contracted to install 90 wind turbines in a three-phase program.
Phase I of the project involved the GTK1100 and several Grove
GMK7450 all-terrain cranes installing 33 wind turbines with
capacities of 1.5 MW. An additional 33 windmills of 1.5 MW
capacity were installed in Phase II. All these turbines weighed 60 t
and had tower heights of 70 m. In Phase III 24 windmills with a
2 MW capacity were installed.
CPIE is the first company to transport the GTK with its
superstructure attached, which reduced the number of trailers for
transporting it from six to four. Traveling in this configuration
meant that a smaller assist crane could be used as the maximum
load is 17.5 t for the GTK1100’s outriggers.
The Grove GTK1100 was designed with a focus on wind power
and other tall-height installations. Manitowoc’s engineers combined a superstructure from the 450 t capacity GMK7450 allterrain crane with an 80 m five-section telescoping tower and a
hydraulic chassis. The GTK1100 lifts loads of up to 95 t to heights
of up to 115 m at radii of up to of 11 m. In addition to the GTK,
CPIE owns several other Grove all-terrain cranes and has been
using them for a range of wind turbine installations.
TECHNICAL FEATURE
Type 2 Micropiles at Las Vegas Site
he Cosmopolitan Resort Hotel and
Casino project in Las Vegas incorporated
some unique and specialized design and
construction techniques below ground.
Although the building towers stretched
60 and 63 stories high, the project included
5 levels of below ground parking, requiring
a deep excavation extending up to almost
70 ft below Las Vegas Boulevard. In addition to the deep excavation support system,
the building design loads required more
foundation support than conventional
shallow foundations were predicted to
provide on the local site soils.
The site is in the central portion of the
Las Vegas Valley, a representative sedimentfilled basin within the Basin and Range
Geologic Province of the Southwestern
U.S. Historically, consolidation of the
sediments appears to have been limited to
the effects of desiccation and fluctuations
in the groundwater level. Fill ranging from
approximately 1 to 12 ft in thickness was
present across the site. The natural soils
beneath the site generally consisted of
clayey sand and sandy clay. There were also
thin layers of fine to coarse, non-cohesive
silty sand and silty gravel. The coarsegrained soils were encountered with
consistencies ranging from loose to very
dense. The consistency of fine-grained soils
ranged from soft or medium stiff to very
stiff or hard. Based on visual examination,
there was weak to moderate cementation in
most of the soil profile. Many thin to thick
layers of strong cemented soil and caliche
were encountered within the depths
explored (250 ft). Core samples of the
caliche and moderately cemented soil were
cut and tested for unconfined compressive
strength, with results ranging from 1,110
to 10,400 pounds per square inch (psi).
The natural moisture content and
Atterberg limits test results generally indicate a decreasing liquidity index with
increasing depth. However, the liquidity
index was relatively low throughout the soil
profile, indicating low historic past pressures
T
AUTHORS:
Walter E. Vanderpool, P.E.
Terracon Consulting Engineers
Robert A. Carnevale
DBM Contractors, Inc.
Ground Improvement Micropiles or
Drilled Shafts Options
Cosmopolitan tower erection
and compressible conditions in the noncemented strata. Fine-grained medium stiff
to stiff layers were moderately to highly
compressible and made up approximately
15 to 30% of the soil profile from approximately 30 to 250 feet below grade.
The design team used a large database of
soil index properties from the site in the
design of the ground improvement micropiles. The strength and compressibility
properties of the soil profile were estimated
from boring logs, SPT N values, laboratory
test data, and correlation with the CPT and
pressure meter database. The shear wave
velocity of the soil profile was measured
by down-the-hole techniques and by
background micro-tremor methods. The
geophysical test data, in addition to the
geotechnical exploration and laboratory
test data, were applied in the design of
ground improvements to characterize the
ground stiffness and estimate the additional
stiffening needed to transfer the structure
loads to deeper, broader based and stronger
materials, in order to reduce total settlement, and to limit excavation rebound and
differential settlements.
Drilled shafts and micropiles were
evaluated for the deep foundation support,
with the micropile option prevailing based
on performance, cost, installation schedule
and site logistics. The micropile option
presented a unique opportunity to save a
large amount of schedule time by
concurrently installing the small-diameter
elements from the existing grade while the
completion of the slurry wall panels for the
deep excavation support system was
ongoing, allowing immediate commencement of foundations once the deep
excavation subgrade was reached. On this
project, groundwater depths of 16 to 19 ft
below ground surface, column loads of up
to 15,000 kips/column, excavation and
spoils handling and disposal, site
congestion, and schedule constraints did
not permit construction by a standard
sequence. The design team considered and
rejected top-down construction with
drilled shafts, based on the very large
column loads. Initial predictions indicated
that drilled shafts of 8 to 10 ft diameter
drilled to depths greater than 160 ft below
existing grade would be required to
support the column loads. Risks associated
with constructability within the structural
design tolerances were also a concern.
Structural analysis for the mat foundations
indicated the contact bearing pressures
ranged from 4 to 23 ksf with an average
contact pressure of 12 to 13 ksf.
Ground model predictions for settlement under the indicated foundation loading resulted in up to 5 in of total static
settlement; tolerable differential settlement
below the mat, however, had to be less than
1.5 in and no more than 0.75 in between
adjacent columns. The premise for the
ground improvement micropiles was to
provide adequate soil strengthening to
make up the difference between the in-situ
stress (7 ksf at level of mat foundation from
soil overburden) and the design stresses of
the structure. This premise resulted in the
installation of small-diameter elements on
relatively close spacing to reinforce the
existing soil conditions beneath the mat
foundation. Because these micropiles were
intended to reinforce the soil block, they
did not require structural connection to the
foundation system, saving time in both
permitting stage and construction, and
costs of structural connections. The deep
excavation combined with ground
improvement micropiles installed prior to
mass excavation, controlled excavation
heave, and stiffened the founding soil profile and mat foundation in combination
with the compensation.
Type 2 Micropiles
Type 2 micropiles differ from Type 1
micropiles by their passive loading of the
soil. They are not structural elements of the
foundation system; the solution is a true
soil-structure interaction process. The Type
Instrumented site plan showing the micropile locations and types
bonded length for more accurate determination of unit bond strength. The deepest
test bond zone was between 160 and 180 ft
below original grade (90 to 110 ft below
bottom of foundations). The shallowest test
bond zone was between 120 and 140 ft
below original grade. Each test pile bond
zone was instrumented with 4 vibrating
wire embedded strain gauges grouted into
the hollow bar prior to installation. Four of
the test piles sustained a tensile test load
of 305 kips (90% of test bar G.U.T.S.).
Foundations must be designed for the localized concentration
load from the tops of Type 2 micropiles.
2 micropile design load is determined from
the total structure load, the contact
pressure, necessary settlement reduction,
micropile length and micropile grid
spacing. Site specific instrumented load
testing of the micropiled soil profile by
multiple, incremental test piles are required
to accurately evaluate bond strength and
bond shear. The design and construction
team performed five tension load tests for
the Cosmopolitan ground improvement
design. Each test pile was limited to a 20 ft
One test pile was extracted 8 in after a
sustained test interval of 182 kips. One test
pile pulled 3.5 in of residual displacement
at the 213 kip test load, but supported the
305 kip test load with a final residual
displacement of 6.2 in of displacement.
Three test piles sustained the maximum
test load (305 kips) at a residual displacement of 1.6 to 3.1 in. The average residual
displacements after the 182 kip and the
213 kip load increments were 0.5 in and
0.6 in, respectively.
The design team thoroughly reviewed
29 load tests by the Osterberg method on
drilled shafts 2 to 8 ft in diameter;
3 Osterberg load tests on barrette (LBE)
panels 2.5 ft by 10.3 ft in dimension;
10 years of unpublished daily observations
from over 100 embedded strain gauges; and
13 instrumented, incremental micropile
load tests in the Las Vegas Valley. The results
indicated that the incremental bond creep
limit (peak bond stress at the incipient
localized-yield bond shear strain) will occur
at a shear displacement in the immediate
vicinity of the grout-soil boundary, at a
relative displacement of 0.15 to 0.3 in for
strong to weak soils, respectively.
The Type 2 micropile is subject to three
modes of yielding or failure: (1) plunging,
(2) buckling and (3) punching. Soil
strength and compressibility throughout
the micropile length and in the tip region
govern plunging. Resistance is modeled in
the manner used for drilled shaft deep
foundation design. Buckling is governed by
the lateral restraint provided from the soil,
and this can be a governing condition
where a heavily loaded, slender, lightly
reinforced micropile penetrates a weak
strata sandwiched between two very strong
strata. The buckling limits of micropiles
can be reasonably estimated based on the
ADSC white paper “Buckling of Micropiles”
(see references). Punching is governed by
the “head space” and the soil properties
between the top of the micropile and the
bottom of the mat, footing or floor slab. The
foundations must be designed for the
localized concentrated load from the tops
of the Type 2 micropiles. A “head space” is
selected to develop a deformation
(settlement) of approximately 5% of the
gross micropile diameter. The head-space
deformation allows the micropile to
develop the maximum soil-related end
bearing capacity and develop the maximum
side-shear capacity near the top of the
micropile. A head space of approximately
one pile diameter has been used in several
successful published case histories with
stone columns and drilled shafts of up to
3 ft in diameter (see references).
With the exception of the design check
for consolidation settlement beneath the
micropiled region, the design is based on
elastic methods. Bond lengths are matched
Risk associated with constructability within the structural
design tolerances were a concern.
to boundary soil conditions, and bar yield
strength is selected to exceed the soil
ultimate bond strength while still allowing
elastic compression of the full bonded
zone. Settlement analysis for the reinforced
soil block is performed based on the soil
properties near the pile tip and below the
reinforced soil block. The Type 2 micropile
lengths are adjusted in design to limit the
combined headspace deformation, elastic
shortening of the micropiled soil block and
consolidation settlements below the reinforced soil block to less than the limiting
settlement criteria for the structure. The
micropile reinforcement and cross-section
are selected based on design loads,
buckling considerations and micropile
grid spacing.
Predicted total settlements (about
1.5 to 2.0 in) were greater than for largediameter shafts but fell within acceptable
differential settlement tolerances. Micropile construction started with the preproduction test program described earlier.
The test bars were cyclically tension loadtested to verify the ultimate grout-soil
adhesion. The results of these preproduction tests were a primary component of the final design of the ground
improvement micropile approach.
Typical design was based on 8-indiameter drill holes, filled with 4,000 psi
grout and the micropile tendon, generally
based on a steel cross sectional area of
7.2 sq in. Design specifications called for
precise pile lengths and minimum steel
400
Cosmopolitan
Final Ground Improvement Bar (GIB)
Installed 11/15/2006
300
Steel erection
start 7/2007
Micro-Strain
200
Level B5 Floor slab
poured 9/24/07
100
Level P5 - 7 foot thick Transfer plate
concrete placed 12/10/07
Last Foundation
Concrete 10/25/07
0
Mat Pour #1
12/2/06
-100
Steel framing complete to grade 6/28/08
Mat Pour #2
12/16/06
Structure top-out
1/23/2009
Mat Pour #3
1/6/07
GIB Z,21 @ 2040.1’ MSL zero reference12/16/06 2:28 AM (During mat
concrete placement over Z,21)
-200
9/2/06
12/23/06
4/14/07
8/4/07
11/24/07
3/15/08
7/5/08
10/25/08
2/14/09
6/6/09
Monitoring data
reinforcement area, based on plan location
and building load concentration. In general,
production micropiles consisted of 7-indiameter pipe coupled with oversize
coupling sleeves. The tops of the micropiles
were designed to terminate 6 to 12 in below
the bottom of mat foundation. This proved
to be one of the quality control challenges
since DBM completed drilling from the
existing site subgrade, about 70 ft above the
top of pile elevation. Excavation to subgrade
confirmed the micropile reinforcement was
fully encapsulated in grout.
Performance
Settlement performance was better than
predicted. When the excavation reached
subgrade, the design team located the tops
of the test pile bars. In each location the
vibrating wire strain gauge signal cables
were accessible and all of the 20 instruments were still responding in their normal
range of values. All of the instruments were
logged for a short period. However, four
were lost during mat foundation construction, and eight additional instruments
were lost during construction above the
mat. In addition, one instrument was
placed in the final micropile installed for
the mat foundations in November, 2006.
Nine instruments remained accessible and
were logged throughout construction of the
parking levels and tower construction to
approximately floor level 50. Logging
continued 12 times daily with results in a
range consistent with expectations. The
instruments were abandoned as the
parking levels were completed and placed
in service for employee parking. Settlement
monitoring through top-out of the towers
in January 2009 indicated West Tower
settlements of 0.84 in and 1.08 in at the
west and east ends, respectively. For the
East Tower, the settlements were 0.48 in
and 0.72 in at the northwest and southeast
corners, respectively.
GIP drilling
Super Pile 2009 Recap
This brief article presents some highlights of the discussion on use of Type 2 micropiles at a
high-rise project in Las Vegas. For more details, visit the DFI website for the full
presentation and conference handout. In addition, see the article in Foundation Drilling
Magazine (ADSC) May 2008 edition, for discussion on the design-build deep excavation
support system. Other references follow:
[1] Cadden, A.W., Gomez, J.E., “Buckling of Micropiles – A Review of Historic Research
and Recent Experiences.” ADSC-IAF Micropile Committee 2002
[2] D. Wilder, J. Mikitka, and J. Gomez, (2008), “Stone Columns at Trenton Water
Treatment Facility-Suitable Alternative to Remove and Replace for Mat Slab.”
[3] S. Lee, Y. Park, and J. Moon, (2008), “An Approximate Nonlinear Analysis of Vertically
Loaded Piled Rafts in Layered Soils.”
[4] W. Paniagua, E. Iberra, and J. A. Valle, (2008), “Rigid Inclusions for Soil Improvement in
a 76 Building Complex.”
[5] A. Eslami, M. V. Karami, and M. M. Eslami, “Piled-Raft Foundation (PRF) Optimization
and Design with Connected and Disconnected Piles.”
References 2 through 5 are in the proceedings of DFI’s 33rd Annual & 11th International
Conference on Deep Foundations.
When it’s a Question of Deep Foundations...
...Ask Fugro
Services: Geotechnical and Geological Engineering; Wave Equation Analysis (WEAP);
High Strain Testing (PDA); Low Strain Testing (PIT); Crosshole Sonic Logging (CHA);
Noise Monitoring; Vibration Monitoring; and Static Pile Load Tests.
Local Expertise. Worldwide Strength.
Fugro Consultants, Inc.
Tel: 888.241.6615
www.fugroconsultants.com
Austin TX Baton Rouge LA Beaumont TX Columbia MD Dallas TX Fort Worth TX Houston TX Lake Charles LA Los Angeles CA New Orleans LA Pasadena TX Phoenix AZ San Antonio TX Waco TX
ledcor foundations
The Ledcor Group of Companies
GeoConstruction
deep foundations: Drilled Shafts • Driven Piles
Continuous Flight Auger Piles • Auger Cast Piles
Concrete Foundations
specialty retention structures: Sheet Piles
Secant Walls • Earth Retention Systems
access shafts: Secant and Tangent Pile Walls
Sheet Pile Cells • Vertical Drilled Shafts
edmonton: (780)
vancouver: (604)
t h i n k
462-4211 • calgary: (403) 263-0592
681-7500 • [email protected]
s a f e t y
,
w o r k
www.ledcor.com
s a f e l y
!
DBM Contractors, Inc.
Donald B. Murphy Contractors, Inc.
Geotechnical Design & Construction
Design/Build
Earth Retention
Foundation Support
Slope Stabilization
Ground Improvement
Dewatering
Serving the
western U.S.A.
Headquarters
Federal Way, WA
800-562-8460
Regional Offices
Northern, CA
408-885-0620
Southern, CA
760-233-5888
1-800-562-8460 • www.dbmcontractors.com
COMMITTEE REPORTS
Codes and Standards Committee
The IBC code development cycle is transitioning to a three-year cycle with no interim
editions. The final action hearing for the
2012 Code will be held in Dallas, Texas,
May 14-23, 2010. The deadline for public
comment was February 8, and the final
action agenda was posted March 15, 2010.
This creates a two-year period of little
activity at the national level. The committee
believes that DFI members should use this
time to become active at the state level.
After all, the national code probably is not
used in an unabridged form anywhere. The
state, county or municipal version controls
your project. You should also consider the
long delay between the approval of a code
change at the national level and its
implementation at the local level. Some
state codes are still based on the 2003 IBC.
It can take eight years for an
approved code change to reach
your locale. By working at the
local level you can reduce that
time lag by several years.
In Connecticut, we are
working with the local structural
engineers’ coalition on the new
state building code, to be based
on IBC 2009. Indications are good that we
will be able to add a comment to the
Davisson Offset Limit criteria noting that it
was developed for driven piles.
Our committee is looking to recruit
members in states such as California,
which are very active in the code
development process. The intent is to work
with structural engineers at the grass roots
level, developing relationships and becoming more embedded in the process.
The International Code
Council planned to release the
International Green Construction Code (IGCC) in March. This
Larry Johnsen
Committee Chair
[email protected]
will be the first ever green code for traditional and high-performance buildings.
You can obtain more information on IGCC
activities at www.iccsafe.org/igcc.
The Codes and Standards Committee
began in January 2010 to hold four meetings per year, three of which will be teleconferences. So, no one will have an excuse
for missing one of our dynamic meetings.
Soil Mixing Committee
I was very pleased to see the turnout at the
Soil Mixing Committee meeting held in
conjunction with the DFI Conference in
Kansas City last October. More than 26
people attended, which is more than any
other meeting I have been to in the 7 years I
have been associated with the committee.
This is truly a sign of the interest level the
industry has in soil mixing.
During the meeting in Kansas City, the
committee put together a few tasks groups to:
1. Put the finishing touches on the
completion of incorporation of the
reviewing committee’s comments on
the DFI Guidelines document for
Soil Mixing
2. Start reviewing and researching the
quality control aspects of soil mixing to
parallel similar efforts made in Asia
The committee also discussed
forming a subcommittee or task
group to evaluate the size of the
soil mixing market. Again, this is
similar to what is done in Asian
markets. This exercise would
make it possible to truly understand the size of the market. This
bit of research could also spawn additional
interest among universities or other
interested groups, such as private industry
sectors or government bodies such as the
USACE or FHWA. This product data
exercise may be best done by an outside
consultant, since many contractors are
somewhat reluctant to be the first to dip
their toe into the water.
The committee is also developing a
one and a half day workshop. Day one
will appeal to a wide audience and include
an overview on soil mixing applications,
limitations, advantages, disadvantages,
equipment and techniques, case
histories, design and QC/QA.
Day two’s half day session will
delve further into the nuts and
bolts of design. It is tentatively
Dennis W. Boehm
Committee Chair
[email protected]
planned for New Orleans this September
with George Filz, Virginia Tech; Tom
Cooling, URS; Peter Cali, USACE and
Eddie Templeton, Burns Cooley Dennis
Inc. developing the program.
So, last, as always, I challenge our
committee members to become more
involved in the true aspects of our industry
and to foster a stronger relationship
between those who practice soil mixing
and those who design and specify it.
Testing and Evaluation Committee
As testing and evaluation is essential to the
completion of successful deep foundation
projects, the DFI Testing and Evaluation
(T&E) Committee strives to educate the
industry on the importance of proper testing
and evaluation techniques and technology.
At our last meeting held at the 34th Annual
Conference in October 2009, the T&E
Committee decided to refocus our efforts in
2010 to educate owners, contractors, engineers, and the public on the advantages of
proper testing and evaluation and potential
consequences of not performing these
tasks. To achieve this goal, the committee is
working on the following initiatives:
1. Continuing to have a significant presence in planning and attending the DFI
Super Pile seminars. The next seminar is
scheduled in New Orleans, June 10-11,
2010. Additional Super Pile 2010 details
can be found at dfi.org. The T&E Committee is also assisting in the planning of
Super Pile 2011 in Charleston, S.C.
2. Developing a draft guideline for
the selection of qualified testing
firms to aid owners, contractors
and engineers. The committee is
collecting information on
current testing and evaluationrelated specifications from state
DOTs, such as crosshole sonic
logging tomography (CSL) use. Undergraduate civil engineering students at The
Citadel are spearheading data collection.
3. Assisting state DOTs that do not have
specifications for deep foundation
testing and evaluation develop them.
4. Educating state DOTs with regards to
recent advances in techniques and
technology relating to deep foundation
testing, instrumentation and evaluation.
The Testing and Evaluation
Committee is comprised of 19
industry professionals with
extensive knowledge and experEdward Hajduk
Committee Chair
[email protected]
ience relating to testing, instrumentation,
evaluation and design of deep foundations
and their affects on adjacent structures. If
you have a question regarding deep foundation testing, instrumentation and evaluation, please submit it at our committee
website: http://www.dfi.org/commhome.
asp?commfield=TEST.
5. Exploring the use of internet technologies (e.g., wikis, social networking sites,
etc.) to assist the industry in finding
information relating to deep foundation
testing and evaluation.
ACIP Pile Committee
The ACIP Pile Committee’s last meeting
was held in conjunction with DFI’s Annual
Conference in Kansas City, in October. The
next meeting will be in New Orleans, La.,
on the evening preceding the Super Pile
conference (June 9). Response to the call
for abstracts has been good with many
focused on projects in the Gulf Coast region.
Super Pile 2010, chaired by Mike Moran of
Cajun Deep Foundation, is shaping up to
be an impressive event.
The committee has been working with
DFI’s Codes and Standards Committee to
address code modifications/amendments proposed at the International Code Council’s
(ICC) public hearings. In the fall of 2009, a
draft document was prepared, summarizing
the committee’s position relative to several
proposed amendments/modifications.
George Piscsalko of Pile Dynamics
subsequently presented the committee’s
position in Baltimore, Md. at the ICC public
hearings. The committee will continue to
follow the progress of the ICC’s
code development cycle and
provide input to the code
modification process.
The committee’s major initiatives for
2010 include developing an action plan to
facilitate obtaining AASHTO approval for
both ACIP piles and drilled displacement
piles. Several committee members have
already expressed interest in the first phase
of the process, which is envisioned to entail
Load Resistance Factor Design calibration of
ACIP and drilled displacement piles. The
AASHTO approval process is envisioned to
be a cooperative effort and the committee
welcomes any suggestions from industry
members, Departments of Transportation,
federal agencies and other city, county or
state agencies.
The committee continues its effort to
draft and eventually publish a drilled
displacement pile bulletin under the
direction of the drilled displacement pile
Matthew E. Meyer.
Committee Chair
[email protected]
subcommittee members. As a cooperative
effort with the Testing and Evaluation
Committee, the committee will further
investigate non-destructive testing of
ACIP piles to facilitate expansion of sections of subsequent versions of ACIP Pile
Committee publications.
An updated version of the AugeredCast-In-Place Inspector’s Manual has been
completed by Past Chairman Chris
Shewmaker. Order your copy of the second
edition at www.dfi.org.
I look forward to seeing many of you at
Super Pile 2010 and the next ACIP Pile
Committee meeting. And if anyone has an
interest in participating in the committee’s
activities, please send a letter of interest to
DFI headquarters.
p i l e
p r o t e c t i o n
t o p s
Underground Solutions
p i l e
p r o t e c t i o n
...for Buildings and Beyond
t o p s
It’s good to be on TOP
We have been providing superior “tops” for over a
decade to major drilling companies nationwide.
• Our galvanized tops can be shipped & stored with no
effect from moisture.
• The nesting of tops inside of one another will save
valuable storage space, plus shipping costs.
• Our snap lock seams take seconds to assemble.
• Pre-cut lengths save valuable labor time and waste.
Haley & Aldrich has a 50+ year tradition of
specialized capabilities in the geosciences,
including:
•
•
•
•
•
Geotechnical and environmental engineering
Site/Subsurface characterization
Environmental regulatory compliance
Geothermal energy
Construction monitoring
• Colored safety hem on the top also works as a stiffener.
20 + offices nationwide
617.886.7400 HaleyAldrich.com
Helical Foundations and Tiebacks Committee
The Helical Foundations and
Tiebacks (HFT) Committee is
comprised of helical foundation
Howard Perko
Committee Chair
[email protected]
manufacturing companies, installation
contractors and specialty foundation design
firms, as well as university faculty involved
in helical pile research. The goal of the
committee is to share knowledge and
collaborate on initiatives that serve the
helical foundations and tiebacks industry as
a whole by developing universal standards,
facilitating research, hosting educational
seminars and increasing public awareness.
The committee hosted a
successful seminar in Las Vegas in
February, chaired by Steve Petres
of McLean/Dixie. Over 90
registrants attended the seminar
and heard presentations on helical
piles in the building codes, load
tests, new design techniques, case
histories and lessons learned. The next HFT
seminar is being planned in Houston in
March 2011. The committee invites proposals for seminar presentations on any
topic regarding helical piles or helical
anchors. More information about the next
HFT seminar can be found on the
committee’s page of www.dfi.org.
The last committee meeting was held
February 1, immediately preceding the
seminar. The committee is busy planning
the 2011 annual seminar, completing a
series of standard specifications, finishing
a university slide presentation, proposing
a research investigation for the FHWA,
writing a state-of-practice paper for the
DFI Journal, and working on an industry
sponsored call for university helical pile
research. The standard specifications and
slide presentation are currently being
reviewed by the DFI Technical Advisory
Committee and should be ready for
publication in the coming year. The
committee is also involved in reviewing
and providing feedback to the New York
City Department of Buildings in writing
the helical pile building code memorandum. The committee’s next meeting will
be held at the DFI Annual Conference in
Hollywood, Calif.
We welcome participation. Anyone interested should write to DFI headquarters.
Drilled Shaft Committee
The committee held its annual meeting in
October 2009, during the DFI Annual
Conference in Kansas City. There
was a large turnout of 28 people
and lively discussion on several
interesting topics.
Frederick C. Rhyner, P.E.
Committee Chair
[email protected]
We plan to sponsor a one-day seminar
on drilled shafts on July 12, 2010 in
Minneapolis, Minn. Based on participant
surveys from the short course held last year,
we will focus on topics of current interest,
namely Design Using LRFD Codes, and
case histories of the drilled shafts on the
I-35W bridge project, among others.
Another area we are exploring is the
topic of proper use of slurries and bottom
cleanliness standards for inspection. We
are forming a joint subcommittee with
ADSC to investigate and propose a new
slurry specification to cover the range of
slurry products on the market
today, specifically for use in
drilled shafts. The members of
the joint subcommittee will
include representatives from
slurry manufacturers, contractors, design engineers and
researchers. We plan to have a
document ready by the end of 2010.
Alan MacNab reported via email that
the new Guide Specification for Drilled
Shaft Construction was voted on and
approved by AASHTO on July 1, 2009 in
New Orleans. Congratulations, Alan for
seeing this through to completion!
Dan Brown reported that the FHWA
drilled shaft manual is undergoing final
edits to address the last round of
comments, and he expected that the
manual would be published in the first
quarter of 2010.
The committee had a long, healthy
discussion about load test interpretation.
The IBC presently mentions three
acceptable methods for interpreting load
tests, one of which is the Davisson Offset
Limit method. Some committee members
believe the Davisson method is too
conservative for drilled shafts, while others
do not. DFI has established a special Task
Force, led by Willie NeSmith, to study the
Davisson criteria and get feedback from
the relevant committees, including ours.
Dan Brown suggested that the Task Force
might author a series of papers on load test
interpretation that could be published in
the DFI Journal. I suggested that the Task
Force could update the DFI publication,
Interpretation of Static Load Tests, written by
Bengt Fellenius in the early 1990s. All
agreed that static load tests on drilled
shafts are rare in the U.S., but some have
been done. The Osterberg load cell test is
more common for drilled shafts. Stay
tuned for more developments on this
controversial topic.
Iron Works, Inc.
Serving the Drilling Industry
MAILING ADDRESS: 257 Caroline Street, Punxsutawney, PA 15767
SHIPPING ADDRESS: Mitchell Avenue, Big Run, PA 15715
814-427-2555 • USA/Canada 800-927-0560 • FAX: 814-427-5164
www.starironworks.com • e-mail: [email protected]
WE MANUFACTURE ACCESSORIES FOR ALL DRILLING APPLICATIONS
• Mini-Micro Pile
Threaded Casing
• Metric Threaded
Casing
• Drill Rods
• Equalizer/Balance
Rods
• Grout Equipment
Tremie Pipe, Hoppers
Racks and Rods
• Rotary Stubs
• Fishing Tools
• Overburden Systems
• Percussion Hammers
and Bits
• Drop-Off Bits
• Drag Bits
• Swivels/Flushing Heads
PROVEN DEEP FOUNDATIONS EXPERTISE
Ben C. Gerwick, Inc. has extensive experience with marine foundation design and construction
for port and waterfront facilities. Our engineers work together to integrate soil-structureinteraction behavior, field testing, and monitoring into their investigation and design efforts.
The results of this collaboration help to: quantify geotechnical project risks, develop costeffective design and construction strategies, and troubleshoot problems during construction.
Learn more at www.gerwick.com
Contact: Michael Holloway, PhD, PE
Contact: Patrick Durnal, PE
Senior Foundation Engineer
Senior Foundation Engineer
[email protected]
[email protected]
(415) 288-2786
(415) 288-2736
Photo: Shaw E&I
Slurry Wall/Trench Committee
The committee met during the DFI Annual
Conference in Kansas City. The meeting was
very productive, and we see membership
growing with four new members in the last
few months and others asking to join. An
effort will be made through the company
websites of current members to promote
DFI and the Slurry Wall/Trench Committee.
Between April and May we will hold
several conference calls to follow-up on our
different projects, but will hold no formal
committee meeting before July to reduce
cost and save time.
Seminars
Cut-off Wall Seminar,
Sacramento, Calif.
• The committee is
planning a one-day
seminar on cut-off
walls/dam repair,
tentatively July 22, 2010; back up
date is June 24.
• Focus of the seminar will be information sharing and technology transfer
on specific regional projects, and plans
for levee rehabilitation (as opposed to a
teaching course on slurry wall practices
for cut-offs).
• Target attendance includes primarily
owners and their representatives.
• We will invite presentations and participants from USACE, Sacramento
Area Flood Control Authority (SAFCA)
state engineers and other local agencies
including FHWA, dams regulators
(local environmental protection agency),
ASDSO member organizations, etc.
Publications
Guide to Selection of Cut-off Methods
• This will be a new DFI document
• Deadline for committee comments on
draft is April 1, 2010
• Deadline for submittal to TAC is
April 30, 2010
Guidelines for Structural Slurry Walls
• This document will be an update
(photographs, references, etc.) to the
2005 DFI document.
• Goal is to begin working on revisions
to this document after Guide to
Selection of Cut-off Methods document is submitted to TAC at the end of
April 2010.
• A sustainability section is to be
developed for inclusion. Task force:
Jesús Goméz (Schnabel Engineering),
Ray Poletto (Mueser Rutledge) and
Giovanni Bonita (GEI Consultants).
Laurent LeFebvre
Committee Chair
[email protected]
DFI Presentation on Slurry Walls
• This presentation will be an overview of
slurry wall practices from design
through quality assurance. The target
audience is university geotechnical
engineering departments. Live presentations at universities will be made by
committee members (we estimate
seven or eight per year).
• Goal: Final document available for
use by June/July 2010 seminar in
Sacramento, Calif.
Editor’s Note
Committee Reports in this issue of
Deep Foundations are:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
ACIP Pile
Codes and Standards
Drilled Shaft
Helical Foundations and Tiebacks
Slurry Wall/Trench
Soil Mixing
Testing and Evaluation.
The other eight DFI Technical
Committee Reports will appear in the
summer issue of the magazine.
Virginia Fairweather, Executive Editor
TRU 12™ Pipe Piling:
Great Performance
for Less Cost.
L.B. Foster Piling provides the
cost savings of actual 12" pipe
piling to customers in North
America. Our new TRU 12™ piling
is manufactured to meet the
same performance requirements
as standard 12.75" pipe piling.
Domestically produced TRU 12™
ERW pipe piling has an actual 12"
OD diameter width with up to a
1/2" wall. New TRU 12™ is an
innovative piling solution that can
meet demanding project budgets
and requirements.
TM
TRUE 12” PIPE PILING
TRU 12™ is a trademark of L.B. Foster Company.
OUR SMALL 3/4" INNOVATION
PROVIDES BIG SAVINGS
New TRU 12™ Pipe Piling is More Cost Efficient than 12.75" Piling.
TRU 12” Piling vs. sTandaRd 12.75” Piling
steel weight per linear foot
6% less
construction fill per foot
12% less
pipe per truck
6% more
cetco.com
constructiondrilling.com
CETCO. Efficient, cost-effective solutions.
CETCO SERVICES PROVIDE A CUSTOM SOLUTION TAILORED SPECIFICALLY TO THE
REQUIREMENTS OF YOUR PROJECT.
SLURRY SCHOOLS & TRAINING
SLURRY COST ESTIMATIONS
SLURRY PROGRAMS
ON-SITE SLURRY ENGINEERING
CONTACT CETCO FOR INFORMATION ON
HOW WE MAY ASSIST YOU.
Right Photo by Tim Davis; Courtesy of Flatiron
800.527.9948
847.851.1800
Taking the Lead
in over 40 countries around theworld
“ Berminghammer supplied complex project specific pile tipping equipment outfitted
with B-6505HD hammers. Berminghammer's engineering and creative abilities are
really shining through on every pile that is tipped and driven on site today.”
– Mark Mallett, Project Manager, FLATIRON
LEADER SYSTEMS
IMPACT HAMMERS
STATNAMIC LOAD TESTING TECHNOLOGY
REVERSE CIRCULATION DRILLS
CUSTOM FOUNDATION EQUIPMENT
SITE SUPPORT
PROJECT PLANNING
Wellington Street Marine Terminal
Hamilton, Ontario, Canada L8L 4Z9
Tel: 1.905.528.7924 | Fax: 1.905.528.6187
Toll Free: 1.800.668.9432 (in Canada and USA)
www.berminghammer.com | www.berminghamfoundationsolutions.com
FHWA FORUM
DFI and FHWA Form a Training Partnership
To address the full life-cycle of the highway transportation
system, NHI offers hundreds of courses in a broad range of topics
including structures, pavements and materials, traffic operations,
(DFI) recently established a partnership to combine resources to
construction and maintenance, hydraulics, freight, real estate, envideliver geotechnical engineering training courses focused on
ronment, intelligent transportation systems (ITS), planning, civil
transportation facilities. NHI, the FHWA National Geotechnical
rights, highway safety, site and personal safety, communications, and
Team and the DFI will develop a training delivery and outreach
of course, geotechnical. Within geotechnical engineering, NHI curprogram specifically targeted at the DFI membership. The goals
rently offers twenty-four (24) courses on the design, construction
and objectives of the cooperative partnership are to:
and inspection of structural foundations and geotechnical features.
• Establish a framework for coordinated delivery of FHWA
In serving the transportation community, NHI has traditionally
National Highway Institute geotechnical engineering training on
partnered with other organizations to provide training resources to
multiple platforms through the DFI
customers, partners and learners. NHI has provided training to
• Promote the coordinated effort to build the professional
Federal and state agencies, local governments and private organcapacity of practitioners designing, constructing and inspecting
izations in every state, and to numerous international audiences.
deep foundations for roadways, bridges and other transNHI also works with groups such as the University and Grants
portation structures
Programs and Affiliate Programs to support the educational needs
of the transportation workforce.
• Advance the common mission of the FHWA and DFI of training
The newly created partnership between NHI and the DFI will
and education for practicing engineers; technicians; contractors;
offer selected courses from the NHI Geotechnical Curriculum. The
deep foundations material, equipment and service suppliers and
NHI/DFI course curriculum and cost structure were not finalized at
manufacturers; and other geo-professionals
the time this column was written, but we expect that the courses will
Many of you are familiar with NHI through one of the many
complement the current educational program and events developed
reference manuals developed and widely used for design and
and offered by the DFI. Periodically, we will evaluate the success of
construction of geotechnical features. Examples include
delivered courses and will solicit information from the DFI
FHWA-NHI-10-040, Drilled Shafts — Construction Procedures and
membership on training needs, potential course updates and
L R F D D e s i g n M e t h o d s ; F H WA - N H I - 0 5 - 0 4 2 / 0 4 3 ,
modifications, and opportunities for training on alternate platforms.
Design and Construction of Driven Pile Foundations;
We also anticipate that there will be opportunities to involve the DFI
FHWA-NHI-06-019/020, Ground Improvement Methods; and
membership in future development and delivery activities.
FHWA-NHI-07-071, Earth Retaining Structures. All of these
I expect this partnership to create new and exciting opporpublications were completed by NHI as part of geotechnical
tunities for the FHWA National Geotechnical Team. A major benefit
engineering training course development.
is that we will be better positioned to provide consultants and contracNHI was established by Congress in 1970 as the training and
tors with necessary technical guidance for design and construction
education arm of FHWA. Over its 40 years, NHI
of highway facilities. As state and local resources
has helped to improve the performance of the
and budgets continue to become smaller, outtransportation industry through instructor-led
sourcing and innovative contracting mechanisms
training, distance learning and blended education
will be more popular as means to do more with
platforms. To achieve its mission, NHI provides
less. Consultants and contractors will need to be
leadership and significant resources to guide the
better prepared to perform work for transportation
development and delivery of transportationowners, and partnerships like this will be essential.
related training. The goals of NHI are to train the
The FHWA National Geotechnical Team and
current and future transportation workforce;
NHI are very excited to be partnering with DFI in
transfer knowledge quickly and effectively to and
this capacity, and we hope that the membership
among transportation professionals; and provide
will take advantage of the fantastic training
training that addresses the full life-cycle of the
opportunities. If you have any questions about
highway transportation system.
NHI or any comments that you think would
improve our partnership, please contact me.
Silas C. Nichols, P.E.
he National Highway Institute (NHI) of the Federal Highway
TAdministration (FHWA) and the Deep Foundations Institute
AUTHOR:
Senior Geotechnical
Engineer
FHWA Office of Bridge
Technology
[email protected]
DEEP FOUNDATIONS • SPRING 2010 •69
R E N TA L
•
SALES
•
SERVICE
T R U S T , I N N O VA T I O N & E X P E R T I S E . . .
THE FOUNDATION OF SUCCESS.
For more than 90 years, Equipment Corporation of
America has been a premier distributor of Foundation
Construction Equipment. Our success and longevity is
a direct result of the relationships we’ve built by using
high quality equipment and best-in-class service.
Find out how we can build a foundation together.
1.800.PILE.USA -or- www.ecanet.com
EQUIPMENT CORPORATION OF AMERICA
B U I L D I N G F O U N DAT I O N S S I N C E 1 91 8
AUTHORIZED DEALER:
PITTSBURGH
PHIL ADELPHIA
WASHINGTON D.C.
TORONTO
Your True Project Partner
© 2010 Skyline Steel, LLC. Skyline Steel is a wholly owned subsidiary of ArcelorMittal, the largest and most globally integrated steel company.
A premier steel foundation supplier serving the US, Canada, Mexico, Caribbean and South American markets, Skyline Steel is a whollyowned subsidiary of ArcelorMittal, the world’s largest and most respected steel company. Skyline Steel has over twenty sales offices across
two continents and a robust infrastructure comprised of manufacturing, coating, and fabrication facilities; dozens of stocking locations; an
efficiently-coordinated supply chain; and exclusive engineering support. Collectively, these functions support a dynamic sales team that
supplies hundreds of thousands of tons of steel foundation products to the industry every year.
Pipe: Spiralweld and Rolled & Welded
Threaded Bar
Steel Sheet Pile
• Wide Range of Lengths, Diameters and
Thicknesses
• Grade 75 and Grade 150 Threaded Bars
ideal for: Tie Rods; Rock Bolts, Roof
Bolts, Anchor Bolts; Soil Nails; Micropile
Reinforcement; Threaded Bar Cages; Tie
Backs; Soil and Rock Anchors
• Widest Range of Hot Rolled and Cold
Formed Steel Sheet Pile Available in
the Industry
• Custom Lengths
• Accepted by DOTs in Seismically
Active Areas
• Spiralweld Pipe is Structurally
Equal to API Pipe*
• Threaded Bar Accessories
• Z-piles, Flat Sheets, Combination Walls
• Domestic & Foreign
• Multiple Corrosion Protection Options
*According to full-scale university study conducted in 2009
Skyline Steel’s flagship products include H-piles, pipe piles, hot rolled and cold formed steel sheet piles, threaded bar,
micropiles, accessories, structural shapes and connectors. Of the products we manufacture and supply, 80% are made
from recycled steel and are 100% recyclable.
www.skylinesteel.com/dfi | 973.428.6100 | technical hotline: 1.866.875.9546
Unmatched Product Range
Material Availability
Manufacturing Capabilities
Innovative Applications and Engineering Expertise
Y E S T E R D A Y ,
T O D A Y
A N D
T O M O R R O W
1959
2009
CELEBRATING
50 YEARS
OF SERVICE & COMMITMENT.
Auger Pressure Grouted
Piling Construction
Auger Pressure Grouted
Displacement
Piling Construction
Sheeting and Shoring
Earth Retention Systems
Ground Improvement
Berkel & Company Contractors, Inc. prides itself on being the industry leader for the construction of Auger Pressure Grouted (APG) Piling
and Auger Pressure Grouted Displacement (APGD) Piling, along with providing Sheeting, Shoring, Earth Retention Systems and
Ground Improvement Services. Visit our Web site at www.berkelandcompany.com
913.422.5125 KANSAS CITY • ATLANTA • BALTIMORE • ORLANDO • HOUSTON • LOUISVILLE • SAN FRANCISCO • WASHINGTON D.C.
(913) 422-3588 (770) 941-5100 (410) 439-9101 (352) 365-4308 (281) 344-1090 (502) 225-0053
(415) 495-3627
(301) 587-5111
PEOPLE, PROJECTS AND EQUIPMENT
Design and Construction Challenges at the kcICON Bridge
The Christopher Bond Bridge is a cablestayed structure that will span the Missouri
River and create a new gateway into Kansas
City, replacing the existing Paseo Bridge.
Also known as kcICON, the name of a
larger area project, the bridge will open in
2011. The bridge has 7 spans totaling
1,715 ft, with a 550 ft main span and a
452 ft back span. The main pylon foundation is in the river, near the navigation
channel, and subjected to significant vessel
impact forces. This layout was efficient
because the robust main pylon support
could be readily proportioned to resist
lateral forces from barge impact, and the
more lightly-loaded approach pier
foundations could be located away from
potential vessel collision. The trade-off was
the fact that marine construction was
required for the largest foundation unit.
The approach piers utilized individual
drilled shafts under each column.
Support for the main pylon of the
bridge consists of large-diameter, cast-inplace drilled shaft foundations embedded
into shale bedrock. The shafts beneath the
approach bents are embedded into bedrock
at Bents 1 through 4, and founded in
overburden soils above the deeper rock at
Bent 5. Base grouting was used on drilled
shafts at the approach piers.
The overburden soils are predominantly loose to medium-dense, poorly
graded, rounded sand with gravel. There
were also some thin, low-plasticity clay
layers at the site. Cobbles and boulders also
exist, particularly in the 15 to 20 ft above
the top of bedrock. The soil overburden is
approximately 55 ft thick.
The majority of the bedrock was shale
with lesser amounts of limestone at depth.
The bedrock is from the Pleasanton Group
of Pennsylvanian Age and weathered in the
upper 3 to 5 ft. The shale included some
limestone laminations and occasional 1 to
2 in coal seams. Most core runs had full
recovery and, excluding the weathered
portion near the surface of the bedrock, the
majority of the rock quality designations
(RQD) measured in the bearing stratum
exceeded 70%, with only two exceptions
that measured 60 and 65%. Unconfined
compression results in the bearing stratum
ranged from 800 to 3750 psi.
A highly-weathered, relatively soft
shale layer appeared in all 15 borings with
coring. The top of this 6-ft-thick soft shale
layer lies about 30 ft beneath the shaft.
While the recovery in this zone was high,
the RQDs were very low, as were the
unconfined compression strength test
results. Some layers within this zone
oozed hydrocarbons.
Conditions were similar for the
approach bents. However, the top of rock
elevation varied, declining towards the
north (Bents 2 through 5). Boulders were
present atop the rock and more prevalent at
locations where top-of-rock elevation was
lower. Some boulders were hard granitic
rock, likely as a result of glacial deposition.
All of the soil overburden was neglected
during design of the main pylon foundations because of scour. For the approach
structures, the scour generally extended to
the shale bedrock at Bents 1 and 2 in the
river, and shallower to the north at Bents 3
and 4. Bent 5 is on the opposite side of a
Federal flood control levee, so scour at that
location is not anticipated.
AUTHORS:
Dan Brown, Ph.D., Dan Brown and
Associates PLLC, Sequatchie, Tenn.
Paul J. Axtell, P.E., Dan Brown and
Associates PLLC, Overland Park, Kan.
Main Pylon Foundation
The main pylon foundation consists of a
single footing, approximately 116 ft by 48 ft
in plan, supported by a group of 8 drilled
shafts (Figure 1). The drilled shafts are
constructed with a permanent steel casing
extending into the top of the shale bedrock,
with a 10.5-ft-diameter socket extending
into the shale formation. Each shaft design
provides a required axial resistance of
approximately 10,000 kips.
This single, large pile cap with multiple
shafts provides a robust and reliable
foundation that is not sensitive to scour,
and constructed following the
and that has strength that
specific
plan details. The exposure
substantially exceeds potential
Test Shaft
time of the excavation was intenvessel impact or lateral load
tionally extended to four days to
demand. The permanent steel
simulate the worst possible concasings provide additional strength,
Cap
ditions for construction of a productility and confinement for the
Seal
duction shaft.
bending stresses in the drilled shafts
and facilitated construction by
Axial Performance
providing a stable environment in
The O-cell is the only practical
which to construct the rock socket.
Steel
method
for load testing drilled
Casing
The multiple shafts provide
alluvium
shafts with such large axial resisreliability as a redundant founDrilled
tance;
however, verifying axial
dation system.
Shale
Shafts
bedrock
resistance was complicated because
Although somewhat smallerthe engineers expected the base
diameter shafts could have satisfied
resistance of a production shaft to
the flexural strength demands,
Figure 1. Schematic diagram of main pylon foundation
exceed the side resistance available
designers selected the largeas a reaction. Therefore, they selected a
bearing formation were tested for slake
diameter shaft to the necessary axial
scaled
prototype test shaft 6 ft in diameter,
durability (ASTM D 4644). These tests provide
resistance within the rock of Stratum II and
so as to more closely balance the side and
a measure of the relative susceptibility of
thereby avoided the softer deeper strata.
base resistance at the target tip elevation.
the shale to deterioration under agitated
Using fewer larger shafts also provided a
The excavation tools used for the load
conditions similar to drilled shaft
minimum footprint dimension so the
test
shaft replicated the methods used for
construction in the presence of drilling
required navigation clearance could be
the production shafts. These tools included
fluids. The tests were performed on samples
maintained with the minimum span length.
digging buckets and augers to excavate the
rock socket, followed by the use of a “backscratcher”
to scarify the sidewall of the rock
Natural
Slake
Durability Rating
Sample
socket prior to final clean-out with a
Moisture
Durability
Based on Shear
Content
Index
Strength Loss
hydraulic pump. Video inspection of the
shaft base was conducted with a mini Shaft
(%)
Type
Id(2)
Type
DRs
Inspection Device (mini-SID) for the load
(%)
test shaft and the first two production
shafts
at the pylon. The contractor also
River Water
8.3
II
72.2
Intermediate
61.9
used the mini-SID on the first two shafts at
Polymer
8.3
II
98.2
Hard, more
78.6
the approach piers to verify that the
Slurry
durable
procedures achieved the desired level of
base cleaning.
Figure 2. Slake durability test result
The O-cell test was conducted on a
A 6-ft-diameter test shaft was tested in
30-ft-deep
rock socket, with sonic caliper
of shale exposed to both Missouri River
the center of the main pylon to evaluate the
testing to indicate the actual as-build
water and polymer drilling fluid. The
design values of side shear and end bearing
dimensions. Three 26-in-diameter O-cells
polymer was POLY-BORE™ Borehole
in the rock socket using the O-cell load test
(approximately 3,600 kip per O-cell) proStabilizing Agent mixed per the manumethod. Although 10.5-ft-diameter provided
the required bi-directional loading.
facturer’s instructions at the target density
duction shafts were planned, the somewhat
The O-cells were set 20 in above the tip, with
and viscosity. Soda ash was used to achieve
smaller-diameter test shaft provided a
4 levels of strain gages above to evaluate the
the proper pH in the mixing water.
balance between the anticipated base and
distribution of side shear along the shaft.
The test results suggest that the polymer
side resistance in an O-cell test with load
The O-cell test indicated that at the
slurry appears to preserve the integrity of
cells placed at the base of the shaft. The test
maximum upward displacement of 0.2 to
the shale better than river water alone. The
shaft rock socket was drilled using similar
0.3 in, the shaft mobilized a unit side
shale was not expected to experience
tools, installation and inspection techniques
resistance of 12 ksf in the 4 ft of the socket
significant decomposition if polymer slurry
as was used on the production shafts.
immediately
below the tip of the casing,
was used to drill the rock socket.
The design team was concerned about
and 16 ksf in the remainder of the socket. A
To demonstrate the installation plan
deterioration of the shale in the presence of
unit base resistance of 275 ksf was mobiland to provide site-specific measurement
various drilling fluids. To evaluate potential
ized at a downward displacement of 1.5 in.
of axial performance under the as-built
deterioration, core samples of rock from the
conditions, a load test shaft was designed
Figure 3. kcICON River Bridge profile
The test was successful in that the shaft was
installed in a manner similar to the method
planned for the production shafts without
any complications, the measured data
appeared to be reliable, and the test
mobilized values of side shear and end
bearing that approached the geotechnical
strength limit condition.
The displacement required to mobilize
the base resistance is typically proportional
to shaft diameter, and so the variation in
diameter between the test and production
shafts must be considered. The measured
unit base resistance was obtained at a
displacement of 1.5 in, or approximately
2% of the diameter of the test shaft. For a
10.5-ft-diameter shaft, similar values
would be anticipated at a displacement
approximately 2.5 in (2% of the 10.5 ft
diameter) in the production shaft.
Although typical design guidelines for
geotechnical strength are based on a larger
displacement value of 5% of diameter, the
measured unit base resistance was taken at
a more conservative displacement for
design purposes because of the creep
movements observed at this pressure and
because of the large-shaft diameter. The
shale bearing formation at the test location
had unconfined compressive strengths in
the rock near the base of the test shaft of
approximately 2,000 psi (288 ksf).
Therefore the nominal base resistance (at a
displacement of 2% of the shaft diameter)
was approximately equal to the unconfined
compressive strength. The shape of the load
versus displacement relationship suggests
that greater base resistance was likely
available at larger displacement.
To allow for the potential variation of
unconfined compressive strength across the
footprint of the main pylon foundation, a
lower value of 165 ksf (0.6 times the
maximum tested value) for base resistance
was used for design of the production
shafts. The values of maximum base
resistance at Bents 1 through 4 were
correlated with typical values of unconfined
compressive strength at those locations.
Although the maximum side resistance
occurred at a displacement smaller than the
displacement at which the maximum base
resistance was mobilized, the test data showed
no evidence of strain softening. Therefore
strain compatibility was not a factor in
combining side and base resistance. This
tendency is likely related to the dilation at
the shaft/rock interface because of the
rough interface surface. Load test measurements in similar (even softer) shale
materials from nearby projects referenced
by Miller (2003) showed ductile behavior
at significantly larger displacements. Thus,
the designers considered the maximum
unit side resistance mobilized in the load
test as the maximum available side
resistance for design in rock of similar
strength characteristics.
The load test results showed that a
maximum unit side resistance of 12 ksf was
appropriate for the upper 4 ft of shale
beneath the tip of the permanent casing,
and 16 ksf was appropriate for the
remainder of the Stratum II shale within 30
ft below the tip of the permanent casing.
This assessment is consistent with the
slightly lower rock core compressive
strengths recorded in the upper part of
Stratum II.
The average unconfined compressive
strength, q u, of the rock along the length of
the test shaft socket was around 1200 psi
(170 ksf), and thus the measured unit side
resistance, ƒs , of 16 ksf correlates to ƒs =
0.86√ q u, where ƒs and q u are in units of
atmospheres of pressure.
The service load capacity for the 8
drilled shafts supporting the pylon is
approximately 9,700 kips for corner shafts
and 9,500 kips for non-corner shafts. The
drilled shafts design is based on the use of a
socket into the shale of Stratum II, with a
factor of safety of 2.0 on side and 3.0 on
base resistance. The higher factor of safety
on base resistance is included because of
the greater influence of potential variability
in rock strength and the presence of softer
shale strata at greater depth.
Based on the design values outlined
above, a 20 ft rock-socket below the casing
provided the required resistance to support
the design loads with the target factors of
safety. The side resistance above the casing
tip was ignored due to possible scour,
weathering within the shallow zone and
the effect of casing installation.
Each of the five approach bents
includes five columns supported on
individual drilled shafts. The foundation
scheme at Bents 1 through 4 includes a
permanent casing at the surface (10 to 20 ft)
and uncased drilled shafts extending 4 ft
into shale bedrock (considered as a “seating
socket”). The foundations at Bent 5 are
similar to Bents 1 through 4, but the shafts
bear in sand above the shale bedrock.
During the subsurface exploration at
Bent 5 (after the contract award), the rock
was found to be deeper and overlain by a
large cobble and boulder field on the order
of 20 ft thick, directly above bedrock and
approximately 110 ft beneath the surface.
These conditions presented a significant
risk of difficulties during construction, and
so the plan to bear on rock was modified to
accommodate the conditions. To provide
the necessary axial resistance in the soils
above the bedrock, the design for the 5
shafts at Bent 5 utilized base-grouting to
Drill rig and “back-scratcher” tool
enhance the base resistance of the shafts
bearing in granular soils. Two of the five
base-grouted shafts were installed with
sister-bar strain gauges so that an indication
of axial side resistance could be observed
during the grouting operation as grout
pressure applied force to the base of the shaft.
The base grouting was accomplished
via the crosshole sonic logging tubes,
connected across the base of the shaft with
a sleeve-port tube to form three independent grouting circuits. Several of the
drilled shafts at Bent 5 encountered
boulders near the base of the excavation,
and two of the shafts constructed within
areas with boulders required significantly
more grout than the others.
In summary, the design-build system
worked well, encouraging collaboration
between construction and design resulting
in foundations for the kcICON bridge that
provided reliability and met the goals of
cost-effectiveness and scheduling. The
main pylon foundations incorporated a
reasonable exposure limitation on the shale
bedrock thanks to a load testing program,
which addressed construction and design
objectives. Using polymer slurry and the
“back-scratch” tool ensured an adequate
bond between the concrete and the rock
socket. The base cleaning methods were
developed using downhole inspection
tools and verified with the load tests. The
design of the drilled shafts for the approach
structure incorporated base grouting to
minimize the construction risks associated
with deep bedrock overlain by boulders at
some locations.
Acknowledgments
The authors thank the owner, Missouri
Department of Transportation, and the
joint-venture contractor, Paseo Corridor
Constructors, for their dedication to quality
with this project. Massman Construction
performed the load test and main pylon
shaft installation, Hayes Drilling constructed the drilled shafts for the approach
foundations, LoadTest performed the
O-cell test, Olson Engineering performed
the CSL tests, and Applied Foundation
Testing performed the base-grouting. In
addition to their work on the portions of the
project other than the river bridge, Terracon
provided independent review of the
geotechnical design.
ContraCtor:
“Do you have a rig that Can Drill a 20’ DiaMeter shaft?”
Bay shore:
“aBsolutely, our loDril Dh100.”
Model LōDril DH100-65
Recently a contractor needed to drill 20’ diameter shafts to 60’
in congested urban work sites. None of their operators had ever
drilled a shaft before, and they needed to start in 10 weeks. Bay
Shore Systems delivered a customized LōDril DH100 configured for
a quick and simple one piece move and a 65’ drilling depth. It was
delivered in just 8 weeks. See the video at bayshoresystems.com.
Break Ground
w w w. b a y s h o r e s y s t e m s . c o m
1-888-569-3745
Inlet for Flushing Air
Inlet for Hammering Air
Outlet for Water and Cuttings
Outlet for Exhaust Air
Casing, up to 54”
RC
Hammer
UnderReaming
Bit
Aerial view of McCook Reservoir
Computerized Grouting at McCook Reservoir
When the computerized cement grouting
project underway at the McCook Reservoir
near Chicago is completed in January
2012, the reservoir will have the longest
and deepest double-row grout curtain in
the country. Nicholson Construction,
Cuddy, Pa., completed Stage I of the grout
curtain work at McCook in 2008. That
contract was for $39 million, and the
contract for Stage II, awarded in late 2009,
is about the same price. Luca Barison,
project executive, offers a few numbers: the
contract includes 7,000 linear ft of doublerow grout curtain, 4,000 lf of which will be
installed next to the open face of the quarry.
There will also be 153,000 lf of overburden
casing, and the overburden ranges between
43 ft and 53 ft. Grout holes will go to 315 ft
in rock, and there are 419,000 lf of rock
drilling with water-activated hammers.
The McCook Reservoir is just part of the
much larger Chicagoland Underflow Plan
(CUP), which is part of TARP, the Tunnel
and Reservoir Project. TARP work began in
the 1970s and is scheduled to be complete
in 2019, at an estimated total cost of over
$5 billion. The USACE is overseeing
McCook and two other combined sewer
overflow reservoirs that are part of the CUP
work, McCook and two others, because
they have been designated as flood control
projects. In addition to the grout curtain
work around the reservoir perimeter, the
McCook Reservoir is expected to cost an
estimated $528 million including
excavation, tunneling, shafts gates and
other elements, plus a groundwater
pollution system that includes the
overburden cut-off wall.
Grouting Evolution
Nicholson used its proprietary SoletancheBachy Grout. I.T. computerized grouting
control and data collection system for Stage
I work at McCook, and will use it again for
Stage II. Tim Flaherty, engineering
geologist for the Corps, comments on the
growing use of computerized grouting
control systems in the U.S. He says there
are currently four such major proprietary
systems, including Nicholson’s. He notes
the advantages of such systems, while
making it clear that the Corps does not
officially endorse any product. One of the
first applications of computerized grouting
was Patoka Dam in Indiana, in 2000. It was
“revolutionary,” he says. “It was the first
real-time test with balance-stable grout.”
Formerly, grouting was costly in terms of
administration, time-consuming, says
Flaherty, adding that “you had to compile
the raw data manually, and figure out
where the next hole should be and how
deep.” Density of the grout was another
issue. With automated systems, he says,
“you get closure analysis, proper refusal,
residual permeability and it’s all figured out
for you.” With the computerized grouting
systems that are integrated with CAD, he
says, “you get defensible data and higherquality grouting.” Several systems include
integration with CAD, and Nicholson’s
Grout I.T., being used at McCook
Reservoir, is just one of them.
Flaherty also comments on the Corps’
“Best Value” bid evaluations. The Corps
uses boards for RFP selection that look at
the cost-benefit of the proposals.
may cause damage to the walls of the hole.
On smaller projects air-driven hammers are
still used, however, according to Barison,
the USACE has been using them less and
less on their large grouting projects.
The rock drills that Nicholson is using
at McCook are manufactured by Cubex
Ltd, based in Canada. Although these drills
are more expensive than typical rock drills,
says Barison, they include all the features
required for the proper functioning of the
water hammer technology, including a
filtration system to remove particles from
the water that could damage the hammer.
They are also automated and setup for
drilling grout holes in rock to depths of over
400 ft. When Nicholson reviewed different
drilling options and equipment for the
project, the Cubex drills with Wassara
water hammers were the best overall
solution, says Barison. Sonic drilling was
used on Stage I, but not for the Stage II
grouting project, for which top-drive rotary
percussion drills proved to be more
advantageous in the overburden material.
Installation of overburden casing for grout holes
Sometimes technical capability outweighs
cost, he says. Nicholson performed Stage I
of the McCook Dam grouting work, and
“sharpened their pencils” for the RFP. Price
was the dictator in the Stage II contract
award, and there was “strong competition,”
according to Nicholson’s Barison.
Barison notes other unusual aspects of
the McCook work, saying that use of water
hammers is a new technology for drilling
grout holes in fractured rock. The
traditional method has been to use an airdriven hammer or coring. The air has the
tendency to push the drill cuttings into the
rock fractures, creating more difficulties
during the grouting process, he says. The
water hammer satisfied the Corps’
preference for water flushing to remove
drill cuttings from the borehole coupled
with a higher penetration rate in rock.
Water hammers also produce lower uphole
velocity of return water, and instantaneous
production performance. These attributes
improve drilling and hole quality
compared with conventional down-thehole air hammers, he says, noting that high
pressure and high-volume compressed air
Engineering & Design
Deep Foundations
Over 50 Years Specializing in Design-Build.
GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING & CONSTRUCTION
Safe • On Time • Within Budget
www.goettle.com
(513) 825-8100
12071 Hamilton Ave., Cincinnati, Ohio 45231
Earth Retention
Marine Construction
Cincinna ti • For t Wor t h • New Or lean s • Pit t sbur gh
Illini Drilled Foundations, Inc.
Geotechnical / Structural
Instrumentation and Systems
In a world all too full
of uncertainties, you
can count on us for
the peace of mind
that comes from a
job well done.
Committed to safely
providing quality work
and dependable service
at competitive prices.
Pile testing systems
Testing and monitoring systems
for piles, shafts and deep foundations:
Pile Integrity (ASTM D5882)
Cross Hole Ultrasonic (ASTM D6760)
Geo Instruments, 24 Celestial Drive Suite B, Narragansett, RI 02882, USA
Tel: +1 800-477-2506, Fax: +1 401-633-6021
[email protected] | www.geo-instruments.com
www.illinidrilling.com
[email protected]
Whether your next project involves auger cast
piles or drilled shafts, limited access or low
headroom work, is out for bid or still in
design.... Give us a call at (217) 442-8765.
We’d be happy to serve you.
Wireless Pile Integrity Tester Unveiled
Pulse echo integrity testing has long been
used to quickly verify the integrity and
length of deep foundations. Pile Dynamics
first developed an instrument to perform
this test in 1991 — the Pile Integrity Tester
(PIT). In fact, the term “PIT test” is often
used in lieu of “pulse echo test.” The
method is also known as low strain
dynamic foundation testing, a term used in
the ASTM document that standardizes it
(ASTM D5882). The PIT test involves
placing an accelerometer on the foundation
and hitting it with a hand-held hammer.
The accelerometer sends data to the PIT;
records are visually evaluated immediately,
and later analyzed in further detail.
Pile Dynamics recently launched the
PIT-X, a palm-size Pile Integrity Tester, and
works with a wireless accelerometer. All
functions available on the latest edition of
the PIT-V model are the same, including a
built-in Fast Fourier Transform (FFT)
feature that is helpful to detect the length of
short foundation elements in the field.
PDI has also updated the PIT post
processing/data analysis software, PIT-W,
having recently launched PIT-W 2009 in
both standard and professional versions.
Dam Repair Contract to GZA
GZA GeoEnvironmental, Inc., was retained
by the Massachusetts Water Resources
Authority (MWRA) for work on six of the
Commonwealth’s dams.
GZA is the prime engineering firm for
the $1.5 million design contract to provide
engineering assessment, final design and
construction phase services for upgrades to
six of MWRA’s secondary water supply dams
located throughout the metro Boston region.
The most notable modification will occur at
Foss (No. 3) Reservoir Dam in Framingham,
Mass., where the100-year-old structure will
be retrofitted with a 7-foot-high, concretereinforced fuse gate required to safely pass
the spillway design flood. To protect against
overtopping under design flood conditions
at Foss Dam, as well as at Weston Reservoir
Dam, GZA plans to raise the dams through
a combination of earth fill and concrete par-
apet wall structures. Other design repairs
are for Sudbury Dam and Wachusett Open
Channel Dam, both in Southborough, as
well as Waban and Chestnut Hill Reservoir
Dams in Newton, all slated for 2011. The
Foss Reservoir Dam and the Weston
Reservoir Dam are scheduled for completion in 2013. Peter Baril, P.E., principal at
GZA, will serve as prime engineer and
Jonathan Andrews, P.E., as project manager.
Three Reasons to Specify the IBO*® Micro Pile
*Injection Bored
//FASTER
//STRONGER
//BETTER
IBO®/TITAN Micropiles
• One step fast installation
• Simultaneous drilling and grouting
• Smaller equipment at lower cost
• Low overhead and limited access installation
• Ground improvement (densification)
• Higher skin friction
• Total corrosion protection
Also available in Solid Bars.
www.micro-piles.com
Toll Free 1.888.818.4826
ADV.2009.02(7,5x10) 27-10-2009 8:44 Pagina 2
www.treviicos.com
C
M
Y
CM
MY
CY CMY
K
securing the past
maintaining the present
Diavik Diamond Mine., Canada
Tuttle Creek Dam, KS
WTC Transportation Hub
East Bathtub Slurry Wall, NY
building the future
dam rehabilitation • slurry walls • cutoff walls • secant piles • caissons • jet grouting
• soil mixing • soil improvement • auger cast piles
Headquarters:
38 Third Avenue • Charlestown, MA 02129 • Phone 617.241.4800
main brands:
Q&A COLUMN
Software for Soil Nail Wall Design
Q
To the Tiebacks & Soil Nailing Committee from Luis
Castillo of SOILTEC, S.A.
Hope this answers your questions. Also, please note that GEC #8 is
an FHWA document and available from their website.
Can you recommend good software for soil nail wall design?
A
Frederick Slack
Richard Goettle, Inc.
Three that come to mind are SNAILZ, GoldNail and UTEXAS. Each
has different features/characteristics that you may find useful. Be
sure you understand the design process behind any new computer
program you use. Understand the input data you use and the
results the program provides. Check a previously successful design
with the new program. Be sure you can fully understand and trust
your use of the new program.
A
Terence P. Holman
Moretrench
The previous reply is entirely correct. There are many programs out
there, but they ultimately do not have to arrive at the same solution
or margin of safety/stability. One important thing to recognize is
that the calculation model working in the background is what leads
to most of the differences between the software programs. Most of
the dedicated soil nailing design programs do not have the most
robust slope stability engines in the background. I will frequently
perform a design for both internal and global stability using SNAIL
or GoldNail and check it with a general slope stability program like
SLIDE5 or UTEXAS.
Editor’s Note: The excerpt from the document provided was 8 pages
in length and cannot be fully reproduced here, however, the section
dealing with the length of the rebar cage follows:
“Reinforcing steel for CFA piles typically consists of two different sections:
1) a top section that consists of a full cage configuration of multiple longitudinal bars and transverse spirals or ties; and
2) a bottom section that consists of a single longitudinal bar along
the centerline of the pile that extends the full length of the pile.
The top section of the reinforcement must extend to a depth that is
below the area where large bending moments take place. It is
recommended that the depth of full cage reinforcement be set to the
inflexion point in the displacement profile (i.e., second point of zero
displacement with depth) obtained from the lateral load analysis.”
Structural Design of ACIP Pile Shaft
Q
Jacobus Gertenbach, an attendee at a DFI Augered
Cast-in-Place Pile Short Course commented on the course
One thing I felt was missing from the course is the structural design
of the ACIP pile shaft, with particular reference to minimum cage
lengths. The GEC #8 is not very clear on the topic. Although I agree
with what is said in the document, it is difficult to explain that to a
structural engineer.
Can you point me in the right direction on this matter or refer me to
a publication that gives a rule of thumb?
A
Matthew Meyer
Langan Engineering & Environmental Services
Attached is an excerpt from GEC #8 regarding the structural design
of ACIP Piles. This can be used as an initial guide to the structural
design of ACIP Piles. The concept for design of the pile member
under combined loading as well as the suggested procedure for
determining the required length of the full section reinforcing cage
is included in the attached document.
• Diaphragm/Cut-Off Walls
• Micro Piles
• Soil Mixed Walls
• Drilled Shafts/Caissons
• CSV/Ground Improvement
• Secant Walls
• Flood Control Systems
• Driven Ductile Piles
• Earth Support Systems
• Drilled Displacement Piles
BAUER Foundation Corp.
1-800-270-0313
EMAIL: [email protected]
WEBSITE: www.bauerfoundations.com
LEADERS IN FOUNDATION SOLUTIONS
Soil Anchor Drilled Bulb Diameter
Q
Zenon Markewycz
Skyline Steel
I am in the process of designing soil anchors that will be pressure
grouted into medium sands. I would like to know if there is any
general practice or “rules of thumb” that can be used to determine
the diameter of the drilled bulb size in relation to the diameter of
the threaded bar that we are using? For example, say I have a 1-inOD threaded bar, what would be an approximate drilled hole
diameter for the pressure grouted bulb?
A
Frank Amend
Geobrugg North America
The post tensioning institute has a manual that we use to design the
diameter and length of the grout column. You need to know what
your pull-out resistance needs to be and then you can take the
friction of your grout/ground interaction layer to determine the
diameter and length required with a safety factor.
A
Terence P. Holman
Moretrench
The decision of what design diameter to assume for tieback anchors
is a function of a number of variables. The initial diameter, prior to
any pressure grouting, regrouting or post-grouting, is related to the
drilling technology and selected diameter of the drill casing and
inner drill bit. This, in turn, can be a decision based on the type and
size of the anchor tendon(s) to be inserted into the casing, among
other factors. Typical casing OD sizes used in practice are 114 mm,
133 mm and 152 mm for conventionally-sized bar and strand
tendon anchors. It is suggested that you contact a supplier and
fabricator of tieback anchors for specific details based on their
product line. Your stated 1 in threadbar would easily fit into a 114
mm casing if not a smaller casing, depending on whether a regrout
tube is needed. The various types of pressure grouting used in
tieback anchor construction are not typically used to increase an
assumed uniform bond zone diameter, but rather to increase lateral
stresses, grout penetration and create an irregular load transfer
surface. A practical design and specification would indicate the
service anchor load to be achieved, minimum free stressing and
bond length, a minimum diameter, the anchor tendon type and
required level of corrosion protection, and the test load and
acceptance criteria. The final determination of the anchor
configuration, design and grouting method should be left to a
specialty contractor as a decision based on drilling technique,
ground conditions, etc.
The Q&As are selected from the DFI Committee website
forum pages. The information and opinions are those of
the committee member respondents and do not
necessarily represent the position of the entire committee
or the DFI.
CONSOLIDATED
PIPE & SUPPLY CO., INC.
STRUCTURAL DIVISION
-Steel Pipe
-All Sizes and
Specifications
-Cut to Length
-Tested Material
-Mill Certification
-Coating and Lining
to all Specifications
-Applications for:
Piling, Foundation, Marine,
Bridge, Tunnel
Bore Casing, Micropile
-Sheet Piling
-Prompt Delivery
CONSOLIDATED PIPE & SUPPLY
1205 HILLTOP PARKWAY
BIRMINGHAM, AL 35204
WATS
BUS.
FAX
Cell
1-800-467-7261
(205) 323-7261
(205) 251-7838
(205) 739-1211
BRIAN ROGERS
[email protected]
CONSOLIDATED
PIPE & SUPPLY CO., INC.
“DEDICATED
TO
SERVICE”
GEO-INSTRUMENTS
PIEZOMETERS
WMPBX SYSTEM
GEOTECHNICAL INSTRUMENTATION AND
SYSTEMS FOR MONITORING MOVEMENT
WIRELESS TILTMETERS
OF STRUCTURES AND SOIL
AMTS SYSTEM INCLINOMETERS
STRAIN GAUGES
WISE NETWORKS
CRACKMETERS
LASER SCANNING
ARGUS WEB BASED MONITORING SOFTWARE
AGENTS FOR: PILETEST
SOIL INSTRUMENTS
JEAN LUTZ
WWW.GEO-INSTRUMENTS.COM
NARRAGANSETT RI
SEATTLE WA
T. 800.477.2506
F. 401.633.6021
CALENDAR
AD INDEX
American Commercial/DSI . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
American Piledriving Equipment . . . . . . . . 40
Anderson Drilling. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
Atlas Copco. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Atlas Tube. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
Bauer Foundation Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
Bay Shore Systems, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
Ben C. Gerwick, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
Berkel & Company Contractors, Inc . . . . . . 72
Bermingham Foundation Solutions . . . . . . 68
Brasfond Fundacoes Especials SA . . . . . . . . . 4
Brayman Construction Corporation . . . . . . 23
Casagrande USA. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Center Rock Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
CETCO Construction Drilling Products . . . . 67
Con-Tech Systems Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
Consolidated Pipe and Supply. . . . . . . . . . . 91
Dahil Corporation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
DBM Contactors Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
Deltares. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Dywidag Systems International USA, Inc.. . 29
EE Cruz & Company, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
Emeca/SPEusa, LLC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
Equipment Corporation of America . . . . . . 70
Foundation Technologies, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . 85
Foundation Testing and Consulting, LLC . . 44
Fugro Consultants, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
GEI Consultants, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
Geo-Instruments. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85, 93
Geokon, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
GeoSciences Testing and Research, Inc. . . . 33
Goettle, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
GRL Engineers, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
Grout Systems Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Haley & Aldrich Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
Hardman Construction, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Hayward Baker Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
Hennessy International, Inc. . . . . . . . . 21, 45
Illini Drilled Foundations, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . 85
ICE, International Construction Equipment . . 64
Kelly Tractor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
Langan Engineering &
Environmental Services. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
L.B. Foster Company . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18, 66
L.G. Barcus and Sons, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Ledcor Group of Companies . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
Loadtest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Maeda USA. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
Magnus Pacific Corporation . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Mait, SpA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
McKinney Drilling Company . . . . . . . . . . . 58
Menard (DGI-Menard) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Moffatt & Nichol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Monotube Pile Corporation . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Morris-Shea Bridge Company, Inc. . . . . . . . 95
Mueser Rutledge Consulting Engineers . . . 83
Municon Consultants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
Naylor Pipe Company . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
Nicholson Construction Company. . . . . . . . 39
PDSCo, Inc (Polymer Drilling Systems) . . . . 56
PennDrill Manufacturing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
Pile Dynamics, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
Pileco, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
Pile Protection Tops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
RST Instruments, Ltd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
Shaft Drillers International . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
Skyline Steel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
Star Iron Works, Inc.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
Steven M. Hain Co., Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
Subsurface Constructors, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . 61
Soilmec North America, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Tectonic Engineering &
Surveying Consultants, P.C.. . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Timber Piling Council . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
Treviicos Corporation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
Underpinning & Foundation Skanska. . . . . 65
Vibroflotation & Geotechnical Nigeria Ltd 84
Viking Helical Anchors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
VMS-Profound . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
Watson Drill Rigs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
Williams Form Engineering Corp. . . . . . . . 46
WIRTH/Aker Solutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
DFI Events
May 2010
6-7
Soil Nailing & Tieback Earth Retention Seminar
Pointe Hilton Tapatio Cliffs Resort, Phoenix, AZ
26-28
DFI-EFFC International Conference:
Geotechnical Challenges in Urban Regeneration
The ExCel Center, London, U.K.
June 2010
10-11
Super Pile 2010
Astor Crowne Plaza, New Orleans, LA
July 2010
12
Drilled Shafts Specialty Seminar
Embassy Suites Bloomington, Minneapolis, MN
12
DFI Educational Trust 5th Annual Golf Outing
Chartiers Country Club, Pittsburgh, PA
TBD
Slurry Walls for Cutoffs Seminar
Sacramento, CA
September 2010
17
CSCE/DFI 13th Annual Geotechnical Seminar
The Hawthorne Inn, Berlin, CT
TBD
Deep Mixing Short Course
New Orleans, LA
October 2010
12
Sustainability Seminar: Save Money and Save the Planet
Renaissance Hollywood Hotel & Spa, Hollywood, CA
12
Practical Deep Foundation Design and Construction for
Seismic and Lateral Loads Short Course
12
Ground Improvement Technology and Applications
12-15
35th Annual Conference on Deep Foundations
Go to www.dfi.org/conference.asp for up-to-date information on DFI Events.
Industry Events
A complete list of industry events can be found at www.dfi.org/events.asp
DFI
ITUTE
ST
EP FO
U
DE
TIONS
DA
I
N
N
Deep Foundations
Institute
326 Lafayette Avenue
Hawthorne, NJ
07506 USA
973-423-4030
Fax 973-423-4031
PRESORTED STANDARD
U.S. POSTAGE PAID
FOLCROFT, PA
PERMIT #100
Permeation Grouting Used in
Construction of Cut-off Wall
in Alluvial Soils

Spring - Deep Foundations Institute

Transcription

Similar documents

FOLLETO INT

Computer Information Systems

Technical Sheet - Microbes Biosciences

C ontracting C ompany GUIDE TO SERVICES

Spring - Deep Foundations Institute

David Wolfe wins the $20K SGMP Radial vs. World

NEW Load Test

Revel Casino News 2013

AZOMITE granular - Down To Earth Fertilizer

An option for adding value to solid waste from the tanning processes