Recent evolutions in Deep Foundations Technologies

ir Maurice Bottiau
SEFE 7 - General Report Deep Foundations

Worldwide trends Deep Foundations Worldwide

50% 45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% Shallow foundations Deep found. w. Piles Ground improvement Piles f. reduc. settlement 10% 6% 36% 48%

Recent evolutions
Piling Ground improvement: probably more (marine works, reclaimed land...) Retaining walls
Evolution in the market Technological issues Recent research and practice
3

PILING

Piling: Most relevant evolution in design

Better understanding of pile behaviour Analysis of instrumented load tests : importance of the shaft resistance Deformation aspects of Deep Foundations Calculation methods Direct vs indirect methods Pile installation influence Eurocode 7 : statistical approach-safety factors Piled raft approach

Global evolution of piling market

External factors:
Design (see before) Environment Regulations and historical factors

Technological improvements :
Hydraulics and increase in installed power : longer, larger, bigger Electronics and monitoring Miniaturisation

Piling : worldwide trends

Driven piles: main issues

Driven and vibro-driven piles :
Energy transfer and driving analysis Environmental considerations Alternative systems : vibratory-driven piles Alternative systems : jacked or pressed piles
8

Driven piles
Type of hammer Diesel Hydraulic drop hammers Selfmonitored hydraulic Ram weight KN <200 <150 <1500 Rated energy KJ 0.4600 <200 <200 Efficiency transfer Ratio (ETR) 31 %(steel) 25%(concrete) 55-85 % 55-85 %

Hydraulic hammers:
Better energy transfer Reduced noise Driving sequence less soil-dependent

Diesel hammers:
Sturdy construction No external power unit Cheaper 9

After Rausche (2000)

Driven piles: driving analysis

Major issues (Rausche, 2000):
- The static resistance at the end-of-driving (EOD) is often lower than the total resistance (static and dynamic) at the EOD. - The long-term capacity after a set-up period is higher than the static resistance at the EOD.

Driving formulae:
Dutch, Engineering News formulae should be discarded Delmag, Danish, Gates formulae should be used with caution and never without calibration Pile Driving Analysis More attention should be given to set-up phenomenon

10

Vibratory driving
Key issues
Vibrodriveability Bearing capacity
After Holeyman (2002)
11

Vibratory driving
Vibro-driveability:
which vibro-hammer could drive the pile to the required depth? Premature refusal can often be encountered.

Bearing capacity:
Rausche(2002): usually still required to re-drive the pile with an impact hammer for acceptance. Viking (2002): too few case studies provide enough detailed information to increase the knowledge in this field. Borel & Guillaume (2002): no example could be found of accepted vibratory driven piles without field load tests.

12

Vibratory driving

After Borel et al (2002)

13

Resonant vibro-driving

Resonant vibro-driving
HP 360-36 m Tight 4 piles cluster First trial with impact drop hammer and diesel densification, settlements, EOD > 25 blows/300 mm Driving time > 60 minutes 140 kW resonant vibrohammer was used: 12 minutes driving time, no settlements, vibration monitoring showed velocities < 3 mm/sec. Impact re-tap and PDA showed comparable results with impactdriven

Jacked piles
Key issues
Vibration-free installation Equipment capacity Relaxation

16

Jacked piles
Filip (2006): 4 Hoesch Larssen 43 sheet piles, clutched to a 750 mm square box. Pressed-in in sequence 12 m depth for the abutments 16 m depth for the piers.

17

Jacked piles
Lehane (2005): Relaxation Ru,static < Rinstallation

18

Bored piles One name=different systems

Bored piles: main issues

Conventional bored piles:
Execution control/base cleaning Post-Grouting Bentonite vs Polymers

Augercast piles (CFA):

Soil loosening Proprietary systems

Cased Augercast piles (CAP)

20

Sandouville

Sandouville

Enlarged base

Bored Piles
Strain incompatibility between side shear development (required movement 0.5 to 1% of pile diameter) and base resistance mobilisation (10 to 15 % of pile diameter-sometimes even more). Soil stress relaxation due to the process, especially in cohesionless soils. Correct cleaning and curing of the pile base

Post-grouting
24

Bored Piles: sonic logging & coring

25

Bored piles: Polymers

Lot of recent papers published Recent experience with vinyl polymer (Lenon
2006) Improvement on PHPA polymers Tri-dimensional spider-structure No cake Any residual primary additive can cause segregation Not all projects are successful (Bustamante 2005)
26

CFA/ACIP piles: augering

process
Recent papers: Hannink and Van Tol (2005) Evers et al (2003) Lack of information about equipment

CFA: Improved systems

Increased penetration rate (due to increased installed power higher torques/pull down) Large diameters : up to 120 cm Long piles : more to 30 m Concreting under pressure (see DMT measurements Van Impe) resulting in enhanced shaft friction Full monitoring of pile installation

CFA/ACIP piles
PCS piles diam 900 en 1200 mm in sands

Piling rig :

torque > 22 Tm rpm > 8 Pull-down > 10 T

CFA piles
Monitoring is a relatively effective and reliable tool provided the presented records (e.g. Bustamante (2003): Come above all from rough data and give the adequate information (correct parameter) The sensor selected to measure each respective parameter has the capability to do it Is examined globally taking into account t he real soil conditions (and possible variations), the rig characteristics, the many possible incidents

30

Cased Augercast Piles : CAP/CSP

Cased CFA pile : CAP piles

Bustamante (2001) : This system promises L ess disturbance (loosening) of the surrounding soil, especially in sandy soils Limitation of the over-volume of concrete. But : Equipment influence: low installed power No beneficial influence of high penetration rate and concreting phase Full-scale load-tests (Theys, 2002): soil relaxation at pile basis.

Cased CFA pile

Soil loosening at the pile tip

After Theys (2002)

Recent evolution enables piles of 1000 mm with lengths to 20 m

Displacement auger piles (Screw piles)

Historical background Systems Fundamental issues Influence of the equipment

Fundamental issues of displacement auger piling

Augering with soil excavation

Augering with soil displacement

Displacement screw piles

First generation : high and quick displacement : Atlas, Fundex Second generation : some soil excavation at pile base and transport to full displacement body : Omega, De Waal,..

Fundamental issues of displacement auger piling

Displacement piling first generation : Atlas pile

Displacement piling first generation : Atlas pile

Displacement piling second generation Reverse

Fundamental issues of displacement auger piling

flighting

Soil transport

Omega pile

Berkel pile

Fundamental issues of displacement auger piling Each system is characterized by : Its drilling process :
full displacement, some soil transport shape of the pile

Its concreting/grouting procedure :

gravity, Pressure grouted

The reproductibility of its installation process and the control during execution.

Tests on Screw Piles

2001-2003 Belgium, St Katelijne Waver & Limelette (behaviour of different types of screw piles in clay and sand)

Reproductibility is a key issue Installation factor is globally 0.8, but differences exist between systems

Fundamental issues of displacement auger piling

The larger variation of depths should be accepted as an intrinsic component of the system.

A extensive and reliable soil investigation is much important The control during execution is therefore of major importance

Fundamental issues of displacement auger piling

torque
Penetration speed

CPT value

GROUTED SCREW PILES

Pre-grouted displacement piles

Help penetrate into dense sands and gravels Speed up the installation process Beneficial to final capacity

TOREN ERASMUSPAR K DEN HAAG september 2008 Omega piles founded in deep pleistocene sands 14 control CPT tests

Control CPT tests after execution

Sonderingen voor (DKM 200) en na (DKM 203)

Piling: what s more? Energy piles

Basics
Geothermal energy Energy exchange with the soil

50

PE-circuit BP

51

GROUND IMPROVEMENT

Trends in ground improvement

Soilmix Rigid inclusions Mega Jet Surface vibrocompaction Bio grout

Deep Mixing
Key issues Reproductability Homogeneity of the mixed soil/cement column Strength scatter

Deep Mixing
Factors affecting strength (after Terashi, 2000)
I. Characteristics of hardening agent 1. Type of hardening agent 2. Quality 3. Mixing water and additives

II. Characteristics and conditions 1. Physical chemical and mineralogical properties of of soil soil 2. Organic content 3. pH of pore water 4. Water content III. Mixing conditions 1. Degree of mixing (Mixing energy) 2. Timing of mixing/remixing 3. Quantity of hardening agent IV. Curing conditions 1. Temperature 2. Curing time 3. Humidity 4. Wetting and drying/freezing and thawing, etc.

Deep Mixing

Lime-cement (Limix)

MIP (Bauer)

Deep Mixing

CVR systems-single/multipleSmet system: cased TSM system

Deep Mixing

Keller Flapwing system

Soletanche Springsol system

Deep Mixing: Cutter Soil Mix

Deep Mixing: Cutter Soil Mix

UCS (MPa) 0 0 2 4 6 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18

Depth (m)

8 10 12 14 16 18 20

Matthieu et al (2006)

Soilmix: recent research

Denies et al (2012)

Soilmix: recent research (Denies 2012)

Even a small percentage of inclusions has a significant effect on the DSM strength. 1% of unmixed material can induce a reduction of the strength by 20%, 10% of unmixed material can half the strength

Rigid inclusions

Typical applications
Rail/road embankments Tanks

Typical applications
Large industrial halls Logistical platforms

Piled embankments / Rigid inclusions

Key issues Execution tips & risks Settlement free/Settlement reducing Transfer layer/geogrids Bending moments/deformation

Rigid inclusions
Inclusions: piles, Compaction Grouting Omega, Controled Modulus Columns, Jet Grouting, Importance of the transfer layer: material : , characteristics, cohesion layers with internal cohesion (cement, limecement) Geotextile, geogrids Deformation highly dependent of the ratio Height/type of TL/distance between columns

Rigid inclusions vs Stone columns

Settlement control: settlement limitation is better with RI Versatility :
Many systems Vibration-free Piles/RI

No drainage function

Phases of the design

Global dimensions Bearing capacity of piles Pile head Design of the transfer layer Settlement and stability control Plate bending moments

Compaction grouting Omega

Vibro-columns

Rigid inclusions: PCC pile

Liu et al (2006) and Zithao et al (2006)
B/2
1 1: .5
Cushion

B/2
Geotextile Embankment

1:

1.

PCC pile
Geotextile layer 25cm 25 cm thick gravel Geotextile layer 25cm 25 cm thick gravel

b/2 b/2

Ground surface

40 10

50 cm C15 plain 50cmC15 concrete C15 plain concrete C15

76 100

Pile Caps
Element which transfers the load from the transfer layer to the piles Increases the contact surface between the piles and the embankment Free, fixed to the pile, part of the pile itself

Horizontal loading

Transfer layer

Transfer layer
Specific points of attention:
Interaction between geogrid and fill material (granulometry) Limit of the treated area: return of grid on fill layer Placement and superposition of geogrids

RETAINING WALLS

Retaining walls (2006)

Retaining walls worldwide
60% 50% 48%

40%

30%

20%

19%

10%

10%

8% 1%

8%

5%

0%

Slurry walls Series1 19%

Pile walls 48%

Soil mixing Jet grouting 10% 8%

Soil nailed walls 1%

Soldier pile & lagging 8%

Sheet pile wall 5%

Retaining walls: secant piling

Secant piling: FOW system (CAP)

Main advantages of the system:
Tight tolerances on both position (<5 cm) and verticality (<1%), due to the rigidity of the combined tube/auger system, Execution possible even in man made obstructions, like old foundations or brick walls. Possibility of execution close (<20 cm) to an existing wall or faade

Main disadvantages of the system:

Installation of the reinforcement after pile concreting, which in some soil conditions can prove to be difficult. Limited length and diameter (but increasing today): heavy equipment

Retaining walls: SoilMix

Key issues Homogeneity, Strength scatter Arching effect Tolerances

Retaining walls: SoilMix

Arching effect: H or I profiles ensure the structural stability Mixed soil ensures the transfer of soil pressures to profiles

Soilmix

Retaining walls: Diaphragm (slurry) walls

Key developments Hydraulic Grabs Hydromills or cutters for excavating in difficult soil conditions, including limited headroom, or in tight working spaces. Monitoring of the execution, were key parameters are registered, as depth, inclination, deviation of the grab in the two directions. Improved systems for watertight joints New emphasis on execution control

Retaining walls: Diaphragm/ slurry walls

Confinement walls: slurry walls

Granata et al (2006): Confinement of a petrochemical site Pre-drilling or preexcavating Self-hardening slurry HDPE membrane
Self hardening mud HDPE Joint Double track welding HDPE Geomembrane

 CUR Handboek diepwanden T114/ C174 Follows a serie of major problems during large infrastructure jobs in Europe Focused on controls during execution and interaction between design and execution Based on risk categorization

Diaphragm walls Recent evolution in execution and control

Bentonite
Attention to reaction with surrounding soil/cement treatment Low sand content (1%) before concreting: substitution should be preferred to cleaning

Excavation
Downward speed should be limited (0,5 1,0 m/s) in order to avoid cake destruction Upwards speed is even more critical, because bentonite slurry can only move along the grab. Tolerances of 0.5% are possible depending on soil conditions

Joints
Frame should be as vertical and in good shape as possible Guidance systems on frame are preferable Horizontal removal of joints is largely preferable Joints should be cleaned before concreting

Reinforcement/concrete
Relation with design: attention to excessive reinforcement. Attention to concrete and bentonite workability Distance between cages and joints Transversal reinforcement

Distance between cage and joint

Upwards flow of concrete important at the joint, in order to avoid bentonite inclusions.

Transversal reinforcement

Concreting
After each concrete delivery the level of the concrete inside the trench is controlled

Concrete
Much important is the continuity of the concreting process Content of binding agent to respect EN 1538. Up to 400-500 kg/m.

Control of the quality of the joints

Development of different systems of control of the quality of the joints Seismic tomography (Sonic logging) between tubes through the joint Temperature measurements during concreting/hardening in the pannel and close to the joint

Control during the excavation phase

Excavation plan : Need for planification in order to anticipate and react timely Mitigation plan : list the potential risks and mitigation measures if a leakage is faced. Control plan : defines the type and the location of the controls

Conclusions
Technological advances have been enormous, in terms of systems or installed power, Need to improve the understanding of the installation effects of deep foundations techniques on the surrounding soil, and to convert them in installation factors. Need to anticipate and to use quality control systems properly: What do we do with the information? Do we reward the QA/QC? Know exactly what is behind safety factors