1 / 16

Foundation Improvement Evaluation

Foundation Improvement Evaluation. A Major Qualifying Project for Stantec Consulting Services Inc . Michael Kendall Karyn Sutter. Kentucky River Lock and Dam No. 8. Worcester Polytechnic Institute Civil and Environmental Engineering. Major Qualifying Project Stantec Project Center

obelia
Download Presentation

Foundation Improvement Evaluation

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Foundation Improvement Evaluation A Major Qualifying Project for Stantec Consulting Services Inc. Michael Kendall Karyn Sutter Kentucky River Lock and Dam No. 8

  2. Worcester Polytechnic Institute Civil and Environmental Engineering • Major Qualifying Project • Stantec Project Center • Project Advisors • Professor Suzanne LePage • Professor Frederick Hart • Stantec Consulting Service Inc. Mentors • Daniel Gilbert • April Welshans • Adam Hacker

  3. Problem Statement • LD 8 Foundation Improvement • Karst Features • Water Quantity and Quality Concerns • Foundation Stability

  4. Project Scope • Evaluate Existing Dam Conditions • Develop Design Options • Apply Evaluation Criteria to Design Options • Create a Preliminary Design of Best Foundation Improvement Option

  5. Kentucky River Lock and Dam No. 8

  6. Site Geology • Boring Layout • Water Pressure Tests Exploratory Borings by Geological Region

  7. Background: Grouting • Materials • Portland Cement • Admixtures • Design Techniques • Grout Curtain • Grout Cap

  8. Background: Cut-off Walls Secant Walls Diaphragm Walls

  9. Methodology • Design Selection • Evaluated Existing Conditions • Developed Three Design Options Design Options

  10. Methodology • Application of Evaluation Criteria • Cost • Environmental • Permitting • Risks • Reduction in Seepage • Foundation Damage • Constructability • Dewatering • Site Access • Design Creation

  11. Results: Curtain and Cut-off Depth Each Secant Shaft Designed with a 4 Ft. Diameter with a 1 Ft. Overlap on Each Side Two Row Curtain with 16 Ft. Space Between Rows and Injection Holes every 6 Ft. Grouting Cut-off Walls

  12. Results: Evaluation Criteria • Cost Design Option Costs

  13. Results: Evaluation Criteria • Environmental • Identical Permitting Requirements • Risks • Mostly Dependant on Grouting • Seepage Reduction Crucial • Constructability • All Designs Practical • Verifiability of Technique

  14. Capstone Design Project • Selected Design 2: Grout Curtain Throughout with a Secant Wall in Region 2 Design of Proposed Foundation Improvement

  15. Conclusions • Highest Water Loss Observed through Region Two • Favorable Cost to Permeability Reduction Ratio • Practical Design

  16. Questions?

More Related