1. Keynote Morrison

7/25/2019 1. Keynote Morrison

1/28

P R E S E N T I N G

James A. Morrison, P.E.

Past President, Deep Foundations InstituteEngineering Manager,Kiewit Infrastructure Group

Latest Trends in Design and Executionof Driven Pile Foundations


2/28

Foundation Trends in the world today

(From Bottiau 2012)

Worldwide Piling Trends

(From Bottiau 2012)


3/28

AGENDA

1. Design Methods

2. Equipment

3. Monitoring

4. Project Management

5. Summary

DESIGN Key Steps

1. Geotechnical input

2. Ultimate capacity

3. Installation resistance

4. Appropriate equipment

5. Prove capacity


4/28

Common Design References

North American Approach

FHWA (LS)

NCHRP(TRB) (LRFD)

Corps of Engineers (ASCE) (LS)

European Approach

Eurocode 7 (LRFD)

Design Methodology

Limit State or LRFD?


5/28

Resistance Factors for Design LRFD)

Lesson: Big Reward for good data andfield proof testing

Common Problems and Issues

Poor quality geotechnical input

Confused specifications ultimate vs.working load

Understanding set-up phenomenon

Scale factors with large diameter and deeppiles

Capacity loss with vibratory installation


6/28

Case Study - New Natomas Pump Station

Example SPT calibration


7/28

19x0.5 = 9

23x0.5 =12

37x0.5 =19

15

31x0.5 =16

41x0.5 =21

Blows/ft

2Standard

Penetration

Test

3 California

Sampler

3Californ ia

Sampler

Example Sampler Size Correction

SPT Hammer Energy Correction

N60 = C NAutohammer

The efficiency of a CME Autohammer is about 85 to 95%compared to the Rope-and-Cathead efficiency of 60%.

C = 0.85/0.6 to 0.95/0.6

C = 1.42 to 1.58

C ~ 1.5

C = Energy (Autohammer)/ Energy (SPT)


8/28

Lesson

SPT data needs to be calibrated toequivalent N60 in order to usestandard design formulas

Case Study - New Orleans 2005


9/28

Case Study New Orleans, LA

Gulf Intracoastal Waterway (GIWW)

West Closure Complex Pump Station

New Orleans, Louisiana


10/28

Case Study - Pitt River Bridge, Vancouver, BC

Vibratory hammer Installation through silty clay

deposits reduced the pile capacity at initial drive by a

factor of about 4, and the subsequent rate of set up

was only about half of that for piles driven with animpact hammer.

Driven Pile Design Summary

Design is not finished until piles are installedand proven

Design input parameters require experienceand judgment

Local calibration required


11/28

Current Developments in Equipment

Mobility

Hammer technology

Environmental improvements

Pile driving monitoring equipment

Mobility


12/28

Cranes

Crawler

Truck mounted

Barge mounted

All in one rigs

Cranes


13/28

Leads and Spotters

Fixed Box Leads

Traveling Leads

Swinging Leads

Off Shore Leads

Leads

Pile Line

Hammer

line (main)

Hammer

Boom head/

top sheaves

Boom tip

Pendants

Gantry

Back hitch

Counterweight

sCrawler

Kicker or

spotter

Boom

Boom insert

Butt Cab

Triple 9

Manitowoc 999 Crawler Crane with Ape Leads & D80

Hammer


14/28

Leads and Spotters

Forklifts


15/28

Areal work platforms

from Justason 2012)

New Developments in Hammer Technology

Diesel Hammers Hydraulic starting

Remote throttle (stroke)control

Free-standing operation

Direct-drive options

Near disappearance ofdouble-acting diesels

Air Hammers Small air hammer

Direct drive options

Less double-acting airhammers


Hydraulic Hammers Accelerated-ram hammers Direct drive options Free-standing options

General On-board performance monitoring Engine regulations meeting Tier II

and Tier III emissions standards


16/28

from Justason 2012)

Diesel Hammers Hydraulic starting

Remote throttle (stroke) control



Clean deisel


from Justason 2012)

Hydraulic Hammers Accelerated-ram hammers

Direct drive options

Free-standing options



17/28

from Justason 2012)


Air Hammers Small air hammer


Free standing operation

Resonance Hammer technology

High frequency vibration: 80-150 Hz

(4800 to 9000 VPM)

Conventional vibro 900-1200 VPM

Conventional Variable Moment high

frequency = 3000 VPM


18/28

Resonance

Resonance = high accelerations:(100 to 200 g) similar to impacts

Typical amplitude(3 to 6 mm) diameter dependent


19/28

Advances in QA/QC for Driven Piles

Automated data collection systems

Improved dynamic monitoring methods

Evaluation of hammer impact energy

Internet technology remote monitoring

from Justason 2012)

Installation QA/QC

SaximeterTM

Acoustic measurement

Automated blow-counts

blow-rate/energy

E-SaximeterTM

addition of impact(kinetic) energy

monitoring


20/28

from Justason 2012)

Pile Driving Monitor PDM)

from Justason 2012)

Pile Driving Monitor PDM)


21/28

from Justason 2012)

Max Potential Energy for diesel hammers)

ActualPotential

Energy

mgh Kinetic Energymv2

TransferredEnergy(PDA)

Need: a standard rating for hammer efficiency

Kinetic energy vs. transferred energy

Ambiguous or erroneous specifications leading toimproper hammer selection

Different energy transfer efficiency - hydraulic vsdiesel hammers


22/28

Recent advances in dynamic monitoring

Wireless PDA Testing

Remote PDA Testing

Smart transducers

Embedded transducers

from Justason 2012)

Wireless PDA testing

Eliminates cables

Improves safety.


23/28

Smart Structures SystemEmbeddedDataCollector

(wirelesssensor)

Internet

Wireless

InternetSmartPile PortalOnline

InformationSystem

SmartPile Gateway

(unmanneddatacollection)

SmartPile Workstation

(manneddatacollection)

SmartPile Review

(review&processsensordata)

Commercial

Users Other

Data storage & retrieval.

Post-processing &

reporting.

Condition-based

monitoring.

Alarms and alerting.

Asset management.

Governmental

Users

What could possibly go wrong?


24/28




25/28

Project Management - What could go wrong ?

1. Bad Data

2. Design error

3. Changed conditions

4. Build it wrong

5. Final cost exceeds budget

6. Product does not work

7. Third party damage

North American Common Law.

The party in the bestposition to manage the riskowns it.


26/28

Who can best manage the risk?

Designer Contractor Owner

Design error XChanged conditions XBuild it wrong XFinal cost exceeds

budgetX X

Product does not work X

Third party damage X X

Best vehicle for managing risk

Insurance Contract Quality

Control

Design error X XChanged conditions XBuild it wrong XFinal cost exceeds budget X XProduct does not work

X XThird party damage X


27/28

CONCLUSION - Putting the Pieces Together

1. Pile design requires calibration

2. Equipment improvements = reliability,efficiency, production

3. Monitoring = better quality

4. Sound risk management

General

DFI Purpose

Advancing the deep foundationsindustry through collaboration of

engineers, contractors, manufacturersand educators.


28/28

1. Keynote Morrison

Documents

Transcript of 1. Keynote Morrison