Pub Date : 2016-11-04DOI: 10.1080/19375247.2017.1288855
J. Cleary, E. Steward
A project was conducted to collect ground vibration data while driving three piles, one square concrete pile and two steel H-piles, in Mobile, AL. The vibration data were analysed in several ways to quantify the vibration magnitudes including using the horizontal distance, the scaled-distance approach and the seismic distance (SD). For each analysis, two prediction equations were fit to the data, one for the concrete pile and one for the H-piles. In each case, the soil attenuation parameter was larger for the concrete pile (1.6 for horizontal and scaled-distance, and 2.11 for SD) than the H-piles (0.93 for horizontal and scaled-distance, and 1.01 for SD). An example design is presented to outline the use of each method and compare the results. The example provides practitioners with a guideline to follow when evaluating which analysis procedures to consider for a specific project.
{"title":"Analysis of ground vibrations induced by pile driving and a comparison of vibration prediction methods","authors":"J. Cleary, E. Steward","doi":"10.1080/19375247.2017.1288855","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19375247.2017.1288855","url":null,"abstract":"A project was conducted to collect ground vibration data while driving three piles, one square concrete pile and two steel H-piles, in Mobile, AL. The vibration data were analysed in several ways to quantify the vibration magnitudes including using the horizontal distance, the scaled-distance approach and the seismic distance (SD). For each analysis, two prediction equations were fit to the data, one for the concrete pile and one for the H-piles. In each case, the soil attenuation parameter was larger for the concrete pile (1.6 for horizontal and scaled-distance, and 2.11 for SD) than the H-piles (0.93 for horizontal and scaled-distance, and 1.01 for SD). An example design is presented to outline the use of each method and compare the results. The example provides practitioners with a guideline to follow when evaluating which analysis procedures to consider for a specific project.","PeriodicalId":272645,"journal":{"name":"DFI Journal - The Journal of the Deep Foundations Institute","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-11-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128503531","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2016-07-25DOI: 10.1080/19375247.2016.1211353
A. Fahmy, M. E. El Naggar
The cyclic performance of a novel piling system is presented in this article. It is composed of spun-cast ductile iron (SCDI) tapered pile fitted with a lower helix. The pile combines the durability of rough surface spun-cast ductile iron, the efficiency of tapered section and the construction advantages of helical piles. Five instrumented SCDI tapered helical piles and two straight helical piles were installed in sand and tested in cyclic compression and uplift. Effects of prior monotonic and cyclic tests on the piles’ cyclic performance were assessed. Finite element simulations of the tested piles were performed to evaluate the possible stiffness change during loading. The proposed pile exhibited enhanced cyclic compressive performance compared to straight shaft piles. Prior cyclic uplift loads had a negative effect on the proposed pile’s performance, whereas previous monotonic compression loading reduced its cyclic uplift displacement. Both tested configurations showed satisfactory cyclic uplift performance when tested following monotonic uplift.
{"title":"Cyclic axial performance of helical-tapered piles in sand","authors":"A. Fahmy, M. E. El Naggar","doi":"10.1080/19375247.2016.1211353","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19375247.2016.1211353","url":null,"abstract":"The cyclic performance of a novel piling system is presented in this article. It is composed of spun-cast ductile iron (SCDI) tapered pile fitted with a lower helix. The pile combines the durability of rough surface spun-cast ductile iron, the efficiency of tapered section and the construction advantages of helical piles. Five instrumented SCDI tapered helical piles and two straight helical piles were installed in sand and tested in cyclic compression and uplift. Effects of prior monotonic and cyclic tests on the piles’ cyclic performance were assessed. Finite element simulations of the tested piles were performed to evaluate the possible stiffness change during loading. The proposed pile exhibited enhanced cyclic compressive performance compared to straight shaft piles. Prior cyclic uplift loads had a negative effect on the proposed pile’s performance, whereas previous monotonic compression loading reduced its cyclic uplift displacement. Both tested configurations showed satisfactory cyclic uplift performance when tested following monotonic uplift.","PeriodicalId":272645,"journal":{"name":"DFI Journal - The Journal of the Deep Foundations Institute","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129700762","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2016-07-02DOI: 10.1080/19375247.2016.1247536
Anne Lemnitzer, Timothy C. Siegel
Issue 2 of 2016 presents our readers with an interesting committee project pioneered by James Johnson of Condon-Johnson and Associates along with selected team members and collaborators of the DFI Drilled Shaft Committee. Within four manuscripts the issue describes a comprehensive comparison study between drilled shaft/bored pile practice in Europe and North America (i.e., US and Canada) focusing on the design, construction, contracting, quality control and implementation of recent technologies into the deep foundation industry. The material was presented at conference sessions of the 2014 DFI Annual Conference on Deep Foundations in Atlanta, Georgia, and the 2015 International Foundations Congress and Equipment Expo (IFCEE) in San Antonio, Texas. These sessions were organized and moderated by Alan Macnab, P.Eng., D.GE, a practicing engineer with 40 plus years of experience in the drilled shaft/earth retention contracting industry. The presentations received enthusiastic audience feedback which stimulated further discussion on how the deep foundation practice between the two continents can be better aligned and knowledge be better exchanged. The presentations, lessons learned and discussions that followed are documented in this Issue and provide the reader with an interesting assessment study of our industry. For the purpose of this study the project team members (i.e. authors of the subsequent papers) were paired by geographic location, i.e., US team members collaborated with European team members to provide a detailed synopsis of the respective study topic. Conclusions drawn from the study were supported by data from a comprehensive project survey conducted on both continents. Brown, Wulleman and Bottiau present a comparison of design practice and recognize that while common trends in the design of deep foundations exist, local practice dictates much of the implementation. In addition thereto, differences in construction techniques (e. g., drilling fluids, reinforcement details, base cleaning) have an impact on the early design stages before construction starts. Marinucci and Jue follow up by investigating differences in construction methodology and note that in Europe, bored pile practice typically follows performance-based methodology and specifications, whereas, in North America, traditional prescriptive-based methodology and specifications are more widely used. In addition differences with respect to casing, usage of drilling fluid and safety requirements dictate the deep foundation construction. Coleman and Tipter explore the contracting methods, document forms, payment methods, contracting provisions, and regional influences in North America and Europe. Given the multitude of contract forms and the involvement of specialty contractors (and the legal responsibilities thereof) the concept of a “team approach” emerged among all comparisons, which would allow for more innovations, reduction of risk and a better methodology of risk sharing amo
{"title":"Editors’ Note","authors":"Anne Lemnitzer, Timothy C. Siegel","doi":"10.1080/19375247.2016.1247536","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19375247.2016.1247536","url":null,"abstract":"Issue 2 of 2016 presents our readers with an interesting committee project pioneered by James Johnson of Condon-Johnson and Associates along with selected team members and collaborators of the DFI Drilled Shaft Committee. Within four manuscripts the issue describes a comprehensive comparison study between drilled shaft/bored pile practice in Europe and North America (i.e., US and Canada) focusing on the design, construction, contracting, quality control and implementation of recent technologies into the deep foundation industry. The material was presented at conference sessions of the 2014 DFI Annual Conference on Deep Foundations in Atlanta, Georgia, and the 2015 International Foundations Congress and Equipment Expo (IFCEE) in San Antonio, Texas. These sessions were organized and moderated by Alan Macnab, P.Eng., D.GE, a practicing engineer with 40 plus years of experience in the drilled shaft/earth retention contracting industry. The presentations received enthusiastic audience feedback which stimulated further discussion on how the deep foundation practice between the two continents can be better aligned and knowledge be better exchanged. The presentations, lessons learned and discussions that followed are documented in this Issue and provide the reader with an interesting assessment study of our industry. For the purpose of this study the project team members (i.e. authors of the subsequent papers) were paired by geographic location, i.e., US team members collaborated with European team members to provide a detailed synopsis of the respective study topic. Conclusions drawn from the study were supported by data from a comprehensive project survey conducted on both continents. Brown, Wulleman and Bottiau present a comparison of design practice and recognize that while common trends in the design of deep foundations exist, local practice dictates much of the implementation. In addition thereto, differences in construction techniques (e. g., drilling fluids, reinforcement details, base cleaning) have an impact on the early design stages before construction starts. Marinucci and Jue follow up by investigating differences in construction methodology and note that in Europe, bored pile practice typically follows performance-based methodology and specifications, whereas, in North America, traditional prescriptive-based methodology and specifications are more widely used. In addition differences with respect to casing, usage of drilling fluid and safety requirements dictate the deep foundation construction. Coleman and Tipter explore the contracting methods, document forms, payment methods, contracting provisions, and regional influences in North America and Europe. Given the multitude of contract forms and the involvement of specialty contractors (and the legal responsibilities thereof) the concept of a “team approach” emerged among all comparisons, which would allow for more innovations, reduction of risk and a better methodology of risk sharing amo","PeriodicalId":272645,"journal":{"name":"DFI Journal - The Journal of the Deep Foundations Institute","volume":"4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115606324","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2016-07-02DOI: 10.1080/19375247.2016.1271529
{"title":"DFI Journal Underwriters","authors":"","doi":"10.1080/19375247.2016.1271529","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19375247.2016.1271529","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":272645,"journal":{"name":"DFI Journal - The Journal of the Deep Foundations Institute","volume":"14 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121286662","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2016-07-02DOI: 10.1080/19375247.2016.1254375
D. Brown, T. Wulleman, M. Bottiau
This paper assesses the comparative practices between Europe and North America with respect to the design of bored pile/drilled shaft foundations. Several major trends are identified that are common to both regions: (1) increasing complexity in the project demands and applications, and (2) more stringent testing and quality assurance requirements. The design codes differ in some respects but the most striking similarity between the European Union (EU) and the United States is the tendency for local (or national in the case of the EU) variations to persist in the implementation of design practices. Some of the variations reflect geologic differences, but much of the inconsistencies in design practice appear to be artefacts of the evolution of local practice that are not easily relinquished. Other common issues identified in the study include the wide local variations in constructability concerns with respect to concrete mix characteristics, reinforcement details and the influence of construction techniques on foundation performance.
{"title":"A comparison of design practice of bored piles/drilled shafts between Europe and North America","authors":"D. Brown, T. Wulleman, M. Bottiau","doi":"10.1080/19375247.2016.1254375","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19375247.2016.1254375","url":null,"abstract":"This paper assesses the comparative practices between Europe and North America with respect to the design of bored pile/drilled shaft foundations. Several major trends are identified that are common to both regions: (1) increasing complexity in the project demands and applications, and (2) more stringent testing and quality assurance requirements. The design codes differ in some respects but the most striking similarity between the European Union (EU) and the United States is the tendency for local (or national in the case of the EU) variations to persist in the implementation of design practices. Some of the variations reflect geologic differences, but much of the inconsistencies in design practice appear to be artefacts of the evolution of local practice that are not easily relinquished. Other common issues identified in the study include the wide local variations in constructability concerns with respect to concrete mix characteristics, reinforcement details and the influence of construction techniques on foundation performance.","PeriodicalId":272645,"journal":{"name":"DFI Journal - The Journal of the Deep Foundations Institute","volume":"30 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114747780","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2016-07-02DOI: 10.1080/19375247.2016.1253158
A. Marinucci, V. Jue
Supported by the Drilled Shaft Committee of Deep Foundations Institute (DFI), the similarities and differences in the bored pile foundations industry between Europe and North America were investigated, and the effort focused on five topic areas: (i) design, (ii) construction, (iii) contracting, (iv) innovations and (v) quality and testing. This paper compares and contrasts Kelly-drilled bored pile construction practices between Europe and North America, and presents the economic state of the marketplace in both Europe and North America at the time of the study. The results of the collaborative work among DFI, the European Federation of Foundation Contractors (EFFC) and numerous practitioners will be used to benchmark current industry practices, to recognise similarities and differences in practices between the two continents and markets, to disseminate solutions to similar or common problems, and to identify areas for potential improvement. By identifying and exploring national, regional and interregional differences on both continents, which made comparisons between North America and Europe more complicated, the basic assumptions and understanding of how best to design, construct, evaluate and contract work for bored piles were evaluated. A number of similarities in construction practice between Europe and North America were identified, which include: (i) the use of larger and deeper bored piles, (ii) greater focus on job site safety, (iii) increased demands imposed on the equipment including cleaner emissions and (iv) increasingly restrictive environmental regulations. Differences in practice exist throughout Europe and North America, which relate to (i) geology (spatial and composition), (ii) local vs. regional vs. national practices, (iii) concrete mix designs, (iv) performance-based vs. prescriptive-based methodology and specifications and (v) borehole stability methods (steel casing vs. bentonite or polymer slurry). The various components of the construction operation and practice contribute to the allowable or comfortable level of risk exposure of an owner, contractor and/or designer, which are typically manifested in the development and execution of the project delivery method, specifications, operating protocols and quality control and assurance programme.
{"title":"Kelly-drilled bored piles: a comparison of construction practices between Europe and North America","authors":"A. Marinucci, V. Jue","doi":"10.1080/19375247.2016.1253158","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19375247.2016.1253158","url":null,"abstract":"Supported by the Drilled Shaft Committee of Deep Foundations Institute (DFI), the similarities and differences in the bored pile foundations industry between Europe and North America were investigated, and the effort focused on five topic areas: (i) design, (ii) construction, (iii) contracting, (iv) innovations and (v) quality and testing. This paper compares and contrasts Kelly-drilled bored pile construction practices between Europe and North America, and presents the economic state of the marketplace in both Europe and North America at the time of the study. The results of the collaborative work among DFI, the European Federation of Foundation Contractors (EFFC) and numerous practitioners will be used to benchmark current industry practices, to recognise similarities and differences in practices between the two continents and markets, to disseminate solutions to similar or common problems, and to identify areas for potential improvement. By identifying and exploring national, regional and interregional differences on both continents, which made comparisons between North America and Europe more complicated, the basic assumptions and understanding of how best to design, construct, evaluate and contract work for bored piles were evaluated. A number of similarities in construction practice between Europe and North America were identified, which include: (i) the use of larger and deeper bored piles, (ii) greater focus on job site safety, (iii) increased demands imposed on the equipment including cleaner emissions and (iv) increasingly restrictive environmental regulations. Differences in practice exist throughout Europe and North America, which relate to (i) geology (spatial and composition), (ii) local vs. regional vs. national practices, (iii) concrete mix designs, (iv) performance-based vs. prescriptive-based methodology and specifications and (v) borehole stability methods (steel casing vs. bentonite or polymer slurry). The various components of the construction operation and practice contribute to the allowable or comfortable level of risk exposure of an owner, contractor and/or designer, which are typically manifested in the development and execution of the project delivery method, specifications, operating protocols and quality control and assurance programme.","PeriodicalId":272645,"journal":{"name":"DFI Journal - The Journal of the Deep Foundations Institute","volume":"7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131440839","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2016-07-02DOI: 10.1080/19375247.2016.1253164
D. Coleman, A. Tipter
Delivery techniques involving conventional and non-conventional contracting methods in North America (NA) and Europe are presented for the construction of bored pile (drilled shaft) foundations. For the purpose of this paper, NA and European Specialty Foundation Contractors (SFCs) were polled through the Deep Foundations Institute (DFI) to determine common practices, issues, views and experiences facing the SFC during the installation of deep foundations. Additional information was compiled from research on the subject matter. Comparisons are provided pertaining to: contracting methods, document forms, payment, contracting provisions, regional influences and cultural differences involving language barriers and currency. In addition, the authors have considered and summarised the common aspects, trends and how the evolution of these methods has impacted or altered the North American/European SFC's business model. It should be noted that the authors' reference to NA refers to the United States, while Europe refers to members of the European Union, with emphasis on the United Kingdom and Germany.
介绍了北美和欧洲钻孔灌注桩(钻孔竖井)基础施工的常规和非常规承包方式的交付技术。为了本文的目的，我们通过Deep Foundations Institute (DFI)对NA和欧洲的专业地基承包商(SFC)进行了调查，以确定SFC在安装深地基时面临的常见做法、问题、观点和经验。其他资料是从对该主题的研究中汇编而来的。比较内容包括:订约方法、文件形式、付款、订约条款、区域影响和涉及语言障碍和货币的文化差异。此外，作者还考虑并总结了这些方法的共同方面、趋势以及这些方法的演变如何影响或改变了北美/欧洲证监会的商业模式。应该指出的是，作者提到的NA指的是美国，而Europe指的是欧盟成员国，重点是英国和德国。
{"title":"A comparison of contracting methods for bored pile (drilled shaft) construction between Europe and North America","authors":"D. Coleman, A. Tipter","doi":"10.1080/19375247.2016.1253164","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19375247.2016.1253164","url":null,"abstract":"Delivery techniques involving conventional and non-conventional contracting methods in North America (NA) and Europe are presented for the construction of bored pile (drilled shaft) foundations. For the purpose of this paper, NA and European Specialty Foundation Contractors (SFCs) were polled through the Deep Foundations Institute (DFI) to determine common practices, issues, views and experiences facing the SFC during the installation of deep foundations. Additional information was compiled from research on the subject matter. Comparisons are provided pertaining to: contracting methods, document forms, payment, contracting provisions, regional influences and cultural differences involving language barriers and currency. In addition, the authors have considered and summarised the common aspects, trends and how the evolution of these methods has impacted or altered the North American/European SFC's business model. It should be noted that the authors' reference to NA refers to the United States, while Europe refers to members of the European Union, with emphasis on the United Kingdom and Germany.","PeriodicalId":272645,"journal":{"name":"DFI Journal - The Journal of the Deep Foundations Institute","volume":"25 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121206937","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2016-07-02DOI: 10.1080/19375247.2016.1255426
B. Hertlein, G. Verbeek, R. Fassett, M. Arnold
Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) requirements and the test results generated through the requirements have been the catalysts to the development of many innovations and improved practices used by contractors today to install bored piles/ drilled shafts (BP/DS). While the need for sophisticated QA/QC practice is acknowledged around the world, practices applied for these kinds of deep foundations differ significantly owing to local, state or federal requirements. This paper reviews QC code and standard guidelines frequently implemented in North America and Europe, along with technological developments over the past decade to assure the installation of a high-quality BP/DS. An overview of common non-destructive and destructive test methods is provided and the implementation in both continents evaluated through survey results.
{"title":"A comparison of quality management for bored pile/drilled shaft (BP/DS) foundation construction and the implementation of recent technologies","authors":"B. Hertlein, G. Verbeek, R. Fassett, M. Arnold","doi":"10.1080/19375247.2016.1255426","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19375247.2016.1255426","url":null,"abstract":"Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) requirements and the test results generated through the requirements have been the catalysts to the development of many innovations and improved practices used by contractors today to install bored piles/ drilled shafts (BP/DS). While the need for sophisticated QA/QC practice is acknowledged around the world, practices applied for these kinds of deep foundations differ significantly owing to local, state or federal requirements. This paper reviews QC code and standard guidelines frequently implemented in North America and Europe, along with technological developments over the past decade to assure the installation of a high-quality BP/DS. An overview of common non-destructive and destructive test methods is provided and the implementation in both continents evaluated through survey results.","PeriodicalId":272645,"journal":{"name":"DFI Journal - The Journal of the Deep Foundations Institute","volume":"189 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116455704","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2016-01-02DOI: 10.1080/19375247.2016.1184490
A. Lemnitzer, T. Siegel
This first issue of 2016 contains several papers that may be directly implemented into practice. Bradshaw et al. introduce a Borehole Plug Test that is verified in a test boring in very dense silty fine sand at a bridge site in Rhode Island. Test objectives include the derivation of engineering parameters to assess side shear and t-z behavior, and to provide a small scale simulation of the expected drilled shaft performance. With the intent to supplement static load test data, the results from a Borehole Plug Test can be directly applied to a number of early design stages when assessing concrete-to-soil or concrete-to-rock interface behavior. Coe and Kermani present the results on a study on methods to evaluate the length of in-place bridge foundations. The evaluation of existing foundations is important for two reasons. First, our profession is in need of practical methods to determine whether existing foundations can meet code requirements as they are updated. Second, the greater emphasis our society has placed on the re-use of foundations will only be realized if engineers and designers can reliably evaluate existing foundations. This paper won the 2014 DFI Young Professor paper award. The interpretation of the non-destructive test known as Thermal Integrity Profiling or TIP is the subject of a paper by Johnson. TIP is gaining wide acceptance for its credibility and simplicity, and the technical information presented by Johnson, who is part of the research team involved with its development, will help DFI members with real world projects. Johnson was recognized for this work as the student paper award winner of 2015. Another paper by Bradshaw describes a mathematical model for back-fitting the load-deflection data of a conventional top-down pile loading test to characterize the distribution of mobilized side and toe resistance. This model can be implemented where strain gages were not included in the test or where the strain gages were damaged. The proposed process uses nonlinear t-z modeling along with a genetic algorithm to perform the inversion. This procedure was verified with full scale pile load tests documented in literature and good agreement was found between the proposed methodology and measured test data. Bradshaw was recognized in October 2015 at the DFI annual conference in Oakland, CA, with the Young Professor Paper award for his contribution. Researchers from Virginia Tech present another pioneering paper on the application of energy piles. Olgun and Bowers investigate the use of energy piles for bridge deck de-icing without the aid of heat pumps. Field deicing and thermal recharge experiments are presented and a new parameter, called the thermal modulus was introduced. This modulus can be used to characterize the development of thermally induced axial stresses in energy piles. Olgun received the runnerup award for the Young Professor paper competition in 2015. We would like to thank the writers for their effort and willingness
{"title":"Editors' Note","authors":"A. Lemnitzer, T. Siegel","doi":"10.1080/19375247.2016.1184490","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19375247.2016.1184490","url":null,"abstract":"This first issue of 2016 contains several papers that may be directly implemented into practice. Bradshaw et al. introduce a Borehole Plug Test that is verified in a test boring in very dense silty fine sand at a bridge site in Rhode Island. Test objectives include the derivation of engineering parameters to assess side shear and t-z behavior, and to provide a small scale simulation of the expected drilled shaft performance. With the intent to supplement static load test data, the results from a Borehole Plug Test can be directly applied to a number of early design stages when assessing concrete-to-soil or concrete-to-rock interface behavior. Coe and Kermani present the results on a study on methods to evaluate the length of in-place bridge foundations. The evaluation of existing foundations is important for two reasons. First, our profession is in need of practical methods to determine whether existing foundations can meet code requirements as they are updated. Second, the greater emphasis our society has placed on the re-use of foundations will only be realized if engineers and designers can reliably evaluate existing foundations. This paper won the 2014 DFI Young Professor paper award. The interpretation of the non-destructive test known as Thermal Integrity Profiling or TIP is the subject of a paper by Johnson. TIP is gaining wide acceptance for its credibility and simplicity, and the technical information presented by Johnson, who is part of the research team involved with its development, will help DFI members with real world projects. Johnson was recognized for this work as the student paper award winner of 2015. Another paper by Bradshaw describes a mathematical model for back-fitting the load-deflection data of a conventional top-down pile loading test to characterize the distribution of mobilized side and toe resistance. This model can be implemented where strain gages were not included in the test or where the strain gages were damaged. The proposed process uses nonlinear t-z modeling along with a genetic algorithm to perform the inversion. This procedure was verified with full scale pile load tests documented in literature and good agreement was found between the proposed methodology and measured test data. Bradshaw was recognized in October 2015 at the DFI annual conference in Oakland, CA, with the Young Professor Paper award for his contribution. Researchers from Virginia Tech present another pioneering paper on the application of energy piles. Olgun and Bowers investigate the use of energy piles for bridge deck de-icing without the aid of heat pumps. Field deicing and thermal recharge experiments are presented and a new parameter, called the thermal modulus was introduced. This modulus can be used to characterize the development of thermally induced axial stresses in energy piles. Olgun received the runnerup award for the Young Professor paper competition in 2015. We would like to thank the writers for their effort and willingness ","PeriodicalId":272645,"journal":{"name":"DFI Journal - The Journal of the Deep Foundations Institute","volume":"48 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129276695","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2016-01-02DOI: 10.1080/19375247.2016.1158383
A. Bradshaw, B. Reyes, C. Devillers, P. Sauco
This paper describes a novel in situ test concept called the Borehole Plug Test that could improve the design of drilled foundations. The test method involves casting a small-scale grout plug at the bottom of a typical borehole for site investigations and load testing the plug to obtain the load transfer behaviour and the maximum unit side shear resistance (or bond strength). The plug test results can then be used to simulate full-scale load tests for design purposes. A field trial is presented that demonstrated its feasibility and potential benefits. Additional research is needed both to study fundamental behaviour and to collect more field data to compare with full-scale static load test data in a variety of soil and rock types.
{"title":"A novel in situ test for the design of drilled foundations","authors":"A. Bradshaw, B. Reyes, C. Devillers, P. Sauco","doi":"10.1080/19375247.2016.1158383","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/19375247.2016.1158383","url":null,"abstract":"This paper describes a novel in situ test concept called the Borehole Plug Test that could improve the design of drilled foundations. The test method involves casting a small-scale grout plug at the bottom of a typical borehole for site investigations and load testing the plug to obtain the load transfer behaviour and the maximum unit side shear resistance (or bond strength). The plug test results can then be used to simulate full-scale load tests for design purposes. A field trial is presented that demonstrated its feasibility and potential benefits. Additional research is needed both to study fundamental behaviour and to collect more field data to compare with full-scale static load test data in a variety of soil and rock types.","PeriodicalId":272645,"journal":{"name":"DFI Journal - The Journal of the Deep Foundations Institute","volume":"23 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2016-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125733622","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：