Hollow Bar Micropiles

H ll B Mi il for 
f
Settlement Control in Soft Soils
Jonathan Bennett, PE, D.GE – Chief Engineer
Earth Support Division
Saturday, September 25, 2010
PRESENTATION OVERVIEW
• Hollow bar micropiles exhibit outstanding bond transfer values and have the ability 
to stiffen soft soils thus improving the settlement behavior of foundations utilizing 
them.
• Over 1000 hollow bar micropiles were installed at the Spirit Aerospace facility in 
Kinston NC to reinforce soft coastal plain soils for settlement reduction at select
Kinston, NC to reinforce soft coastal plain soils for settlement reduction at select 
heavily loaded equipment pads.
• Due to the number of piles required for the job, an extensive load testing program 
p y p g
was employed to optimize the design and a mathematical model was developed to  p
describe the micropile behavior.
PRESENTATION OUTLINE
• Project Background
• Application
• Micropile Load Testing Program
• Descriptive Model
• Design Process
Design Process
• Production Micropile Installation
• Numerical Analysis
• Conclusions
 Project Location
Global Transpark
p – Lenoir Countyy
Kinston, NC

Erie

Pittsburg

Harrisburg
 Project Location
Global Transpark
p – Lenoir Countyy
Kinston, NC

Pittsburg
 Project Location
Global Transpark
p – Lenoir Countyy
Kinston, NC
 Project Background
Project Background
• Spirit
Spirit Aerospace chose the Global Transpark
Aerospace chose the Global Transpark in in
Kinston, NC as the site for a composites 
manufacturing center scheduled to begin
manufacturing center, scheduled to begin 
operations in 2010.
• Composites manufacturing for major 
Composites manufacturing for major
substructures for the Airbus A350 XWB will be 
produced at this 585 000 SF facility
produced at this 585,000 SF facility.
• Project was a fast track design‐build project.
 Application
• A
A number of heavily loaded equipment pads 
number of heavily loaded equipment pads
required foundation support that would result 
in very low differential movement across the
in very low differential movement across the 
foundation.
• For the purposes of this paper, we will focus 
For the purposes of this paper we will focus
on the trim and drill equipment pads.
• In total over 1000 hollow bar micropiles
I l 1000 h ll b i il were 
installed for pad support.
Application
Application
Application
Application
Application
Application
Hollow Bar Micropile Solution
Hollow Bar Micropile

Courtesy of Contech Systems

Courtesy of Contech
Hollow Bar Micropile Solution
Hollow Bar Micropile

Courtesy of Contech
Systems
Hollow Bar Micropile Solution
Hollow Bar Micropile

Courtesy of Contech
Courtesy of Contech
Systems
Hollow Bar Micropile Solution
Hollow Bar Micropile
Hollow Bar Micropile Solution
Hollow Bar Micropile
Hollow Bar Micropile Solution
Hollow Bar Micropile
 Hollow Bar Micropile Solution
Hollow Bar Micropile
Hollow bar micropiles
Hollow bar micropiles were recommended for 
were recommended for
ground reinforcement / stiffening below 
equipment mats:
equipment mats:
• Outstanding stiffness behavior exhibited in 
previous test programs
previous test programs
• Soil conditions were conducive to hollow bar 
i
installation and high expected production
ll i d hi h d d i
 Design Process
Design Process
• Modeling and design of the equipment pads was 
g g q p p
performed the Prime Contractor’s Structural 
Engineer based on equipment requirements and 
expected micropile performance.
expected micropile performance
• Performance / deflection requirements were 
provided by the equipment manufacturer.
• Pre‐Design Load Testing program was utilized to 
optimize the foundation support solution.
• The Structural Engineer was using spring supports 
Th S lE i i i
to simulate the behavior of the micropiles for 
pp
foundation support and model the mat.
 Load Testing Program
Load Testing Program
• Due to the anticipated size of the project, it made 
p p j ,
a lot of sense to perform and extensive pre‐
design load testing program so as to optimize the 
pile lengths for maximum economy
pile lengths for maximum economy.
• Four pairs of sacrificial hollow bar micropiles of 
four different lengths were installed for 
compression testing. Two piles of each length 
were installed (L=7m, 8.5m, 10m and 11.5m)
• Each test pile length had one pile with 150mm 
Each test pile length had one pile with 150mm
clay bit and one pile with 115mm cross bit to 
assess the difference due to bit size.
Load Testing Program
Load Testing Program
Load Testing Program
Load Testing Program
Load Testing Program
Load Testing Program
Load Testing Program
Load Testing Program
Load Testing Program
Load Testing Program
 Descriptive Model
Descriptive Model
• For conventional cased micropiles, the deflection of the cased length (free 
length) could be used as a starting point for estimating rough axial
length) could be used as a starting point for estimating rough axial 
deflection values at various magnitudes of load.
• With fully bonded micropiles or ground anchors, an assumed free length 
cannot be used to estimate rough deflection values because there is no 
f
free length.
l h
• Additionally, for fully bonded micropiles, the axial deflection is tied to the 
stiffness of the soil making estimating rough deformation difficult. The 
p
problem is essentially a soil‐structure interaction problem.
y p
• In this particular case, the deformation performance of the fully bonded 
micropiles was of more interest than the structural capacity alone making 
estimating deformation characteristics of utmost interest. 
• A mathematical model of a load test was developed in order to assist in
A mathematical model of a load test was developed in order to assist in 
estimating and communicating the deformation behavior of fully bonded 
micropiles and for assessing overall mat deflection performance.
 Descriptive Model
Descriptive Model

Rock Anchor

Δ
P

Soil Anchor

Δ
Descriptive Model
Descriptive Model
Descriptive Model
Descriptive Model
Descriptive Model
Descriptive Model
 Descriptive Model
Descriptive Model

Parabolic Model of Axial Deformation
Descriptive Model
Descriptive Model
Stiffness Function
Stiffness Function
 Descriptive Model
Descriptive Model
Fl ibilit F ti Pl t
Flexibility Function Plot
 Descriptive Model
Descriptive Model

Comparison of model with actual test results.
 Descriptive Model
Descriptive Model

Bracketed Estimated Deformation
Production Micropile Installation
Production Micropile
Production Micropile Installation
Production Micropile
Production Micropile Installation
Production Micropile
Production Micropile Installation
Production Micropile
Production Micropile Installation
Production Micropile
 Numerical Analysis
Numerical Analysis
• Some
Some simple geotechnical finite element 
simple geotechnical finite element
analysis was performed in order to estimate 
the amount of settlement improvement
the amount of settlement improvement 
achieved by using ground reinforcement.
• Two plane strain models were created in 
Two plane strain models were created in
SIGMA W. One with a single micropile and one 
with soil only Soil parameters were adjusted
with soil only. Soil parameters were adjusted 
such as to match load testing results.
 Numerical Analysis
Numerical Analysis
• The
The results of the two models were compared.
results of the two models were compared
• The vertical settlement values for the 
reinforced soil were about 38% of the values
reinforced soil were about 38% of the values 
for unreinfroced soil.
 Conclusions
• The axial stiffness properties of hollow bar micropiles can provide 
substantial reductions in surface settlement even in very soft soils.
b t ti l d ti i f ttl t i ft il
• High productivity rates and the ability to easily install hollow bar 
micropiles in low headroom or tight quarters applications results in 
a very economical approach to settlement reduction where access
a very economical approach to settlement reduction where access 
is restricted.
• The behavior of hollow bar micropiles can be modeled in a more 
precise manner than simply assuming rigid or spring supports. A 
model exists that can accurately describe their load‐deflection 
behavior and allow for direct calculation of various parameters.
• Geotechnical finite element analysis can be a useful tool to 
estimate the amount of settlement reduction that can be achieved
estimate the amount of settlement reduction that can be achieved 
using hollow bar micropiles for settlement control.
 THANK YOU!
for Your Time and Attention
You will be rewarded accordingly…

Sho ld o ha e f rther q estion onta t jbennett@ eostr t res om

Should you have further question, contact jbennett@geostructures.com.