340 likes | 353 Views
This web-based class project from the University of Michigan explores Deep Soil Mixing (DSM) techniques for excavation retention. The report covers concepts, case studies, design considerations, construction methods, and quality control aspects of DSM. Four detailed case studies, including the Milwaukee Lake Parkway, PennDOT Excavation, Boston Central Artery Bird Island Flats, and Museum of Fine Arts Boston Addition, are analyzed with insights on structural support, performance demands, and stability. More information can be found at the provided link.
E N D
Deep Soil Mixing for Retention of Excavations Web-based Class Projecton Ground Improvement Prepared by: Report prepared as part of course CEE 542: Soil and Site Improvement Winter 2014 Semester Instructor: Professor Dimitrios Zekkos Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering University of Michigan Alex Willets Stefano Bruni With the Support of:
More Information More detailed technical information on this project can be found at: http://www.geoengineer.org/education/web-based-class-projects/select-topics-in-ground-improvement
Overview Concepts of DSM and SMW • Compile and analyze 4 case studies • Present findings • Analyze trends
Overview • DMM In situ improvement • Technique based on: • Geometry • Type and state of binder • Method of mixing
Overview • Synthesis • High performance demands • Equipment/Method of injection • Design concerns • Structural Support/Reinforcement • State and properties of stabilizers • Success and Quality Control
Background Info • Other wall types Slurry Wall Sheet Pile Wall Lagging Wall Secant Wall
Case Study #1: Lake Parkway Milwaukee
Project Overview • 1000 m long I-794 Extension • Minimize seepage/provide Retention • 75 year design life • Depths 12-18 m • Site conditions • Sand, silt, stiff clay • Water table depths 1m
Design and Construction • Staged Construction • Structural Support • Soldier beams • RC wall • Studs • Tiebacks/walers • High w/c slurry
Results and Quality Control • Cylinder UCS tests met design 0.50 Mpa • K as low as 10m/sec • 25 mm allowable displacement • Surficial crumbling
Case Study #2: PennDOT Excavation
Project Overview • State route 54 tunnel underpass • Historic Mansions 1m from wall • Limit Noise and Vibration • Depths 6.7- 9.4 m • Site Conditions • Dense sands, gravels, silts • Water table at depth
Design and Construction • Complicated design models • continuous wall, sheet pile wall, segmental wall • Structural Support • W18x40 Soldier beams • Pre-stressed horizontal braces • Soldier Pile anchorage
Results and Quality Control • Settlement was below 10 mm • 6 mm post-construction lateral movement • 3.8 MPa UCS from sampling
Case Study #3: Boston Central Artery Bird Island Flats (BIF) Google
Bird Island Flats (BIF) McGinn and O’Rourke, 2000
BIF Plan View O’Rourke and O’Donnell, 1997a
East Wall Soil Profile McGinn and O’Rourke, 2000
Ground Displacements McGinn and O’Rourke, 2000
East Wall Base Stabilization McGinn and O’Rourke, 2000
Reinforcing Buttress McGinn and O’Rourke, 2000
BIF West Wall O’Rourke and O’Donnell, 1997b
West Wall Soil Profile McGinn and O’Rourke, 2000
West Wall Base Stabilization McGinn and O’Rourke, 2000
West Wall Excavation Performance O’Rourke and O’Donnell, 1997b
West Wall Excavation Performance O’Rourke and O’Donnell, 1997b
Deep Rotational Stability O’Rourke and O’Donnell, 1997b
Case Study #4: Museum of Fine Arts (MFA) Boston Addition Foster and Partners
MFA Boston Addition Google
MFA Boston Addition Weatherby and Zywicki, 2012
MFA Soil Profile Weatherby and Zywicki, 2012
Structural SMW Weatherby and Zywicki, 2012
Conclusions • Performance demands • Design concerns • Lateral movement • Settlement • Rotational Instability • Structural support/reinforcement • Proper construction