Correct understanding of passive force behavior is particularly key to lateral evaluations of bridges because plastic deformation of soil backfill is vital to dissipation of earthquake energy and thermally-induced stresses in abutments. Only recently have studies investigated the effects of skew on passive force. Numerical modeling and a handful of skewed abutment tests performed in sand backfill have found reduced passive force with increasing skew, but previous to this study no skewed tests had been performed in gravel or Geosynthetic Reinforced Soil (GRS) backfills. The goal of this study was to better understand passive force behavior in non-skewed and skewed abutments with gravel and GRS backfills. Prior to this study, passive pressures in a GRS integrated approach had not been investigated. Gravel backfills also lack extensive passive force tests.Large-scale testing was performed with non-skewed and 30° skewed abutment configurations. Two tests were performed at each skew angle, one with unconfined gravel backfill and one with GRS backfill, for a total of four tests. The test abutment backwall was 11 ft (3.35 m) wide, non-skewed, and 5.5 ft (1.68 m) high and loaded laterally into the backfill. However, due to actuator loading constraints, all tests except the non-skewed unconfined gravel test were performed to a backfill height of 3.5 ft (1.07 m). The passive force results for the unconfined gravel test was scaled to a 3.5 ft (1.07 m) height for comparison.Test results in both sets of backfills confirmed previous findings that there is significant reduction in passive force with skewed abutment configurations. The reduction factor was 0.58 for the gravel backfill and 0.63 for the GRS backfill, compared to the predicted reduction factor of 0.53 for a 30° skew. These results are within the scatter of previous skewed testing, but could indicate that slightly higher reduction factors may be applicable for gravel backfills. Both backfills exhibited greater passive strength than sand backfills due to increased internal friction angle and unit weight. The GRS backfill had reduced initial stiffness and only reached 79% to 87% of the passive force developed by the unreinforced gravel backfill. This reduction was considered to be a result of reduced interface friction due to the geotextile. Additionally, the GRS behaved more linearly than unreinforced soil. This backfill elasticity is favorable in the GRS-Integrated Bridge System (GRS-IBS) abutment configuration because it allows thermal movement without developing excessive induced stresses in the bridge superstructure.

Although it is well established that spacing of piles within a pile group influences the lateral load resistance of that group, additional research is needed to better understand trends for large pile groups (greater than three rows) and for groups in sand. A 15-pile group in a 3x5 configuration situated in sand was laterally loaded and data were collected to derive p-multipliers. A single pile separate from the 15-pile group was loaded for comparison. Results were compared to those of a similar test in clays. The load resisted by the single pile was greater than the average load resisted by each pile in the pile group. While the loads resisted by the first row of piles (i.e. the only row deflected away from all other rows of piles) were approximately equal to that resisted by the single pile, following rows resisted increasingly less load up through the fourth row. The fifth row consistently resisted more than the fourth row. The pile group in sand resisted much higher loads than did the pile group in clay. Maximum bending moments appeared largest in first row piles. For all deflection levels, first row moments seemed slightly smaller than those measured in the single pile. Maximum bending moments for the second through fifth rows appeared consistently lower than those of the first row at the same deflection. First row moments achieved in the group in sand appeared larger than those achieved in the group in clay at the same deflections, while bending moments normalized by associated loads appeared nearly equal regardless of soil type. Group effects became more influential at higher deflections, manifest by lower stiffness per pile. The single pile test was modeled using LPILE Plus, version 4.0. Soil parameters in LPILE were adjusted until a good match between measured and computed responses was obtained. This refined soil profile was then used to model the 15-pile group in GROUP, version 4.0. User-defined p-multipliers were selected to match GROUP calculated results with actual measured results. For the first loading cycle, p-multipliers were found to be 1.0, 0.5, 0.35, 0.3, and 0.4 for the first through fifth rows, respectively. For the tenth loading, p-multipliers were found to be 1.0, 0.6, 0.4, 0.37, and 0.4 for the first through fifth rows, respectively. Design curves suggested by Rollins et al. (2005) appear appropriate for Rows 1 and 2 while curves specified by AASHTO (2000) appear appropriate for subsequent rows.

Studies of seismic and impact loading on foundation piles is an important and a focused interest in the engineering world today. Because of seismic and other natural events are unpredictable, uncontrollable and potentially unsafe it is a vital study to understand the behavior and relationship structures in motion have on there foundation. Statnamic Loading has become a popular method of studying this relationship in a controlled environment. Two groups of 9 and 15 driven hollow pipe piles were tested in saturated clay at the Salt Lake City Airport in July of 2002. The 9-pile group (3x3 configuration) was separated at 5.65 pile diameters and the 15-pile group (3x5 configuration) was separated at 3.92 pile diameters. The testing consisted of five target deflections. Each target deflection consisted of 15 cyclic lateral static loadings and a 16th lateral statnamic load. This study focuses on the statnamic loading. Damping ratios ranged from 23 to 50 percent for the 15-pile group and 29 to 49 percent for the 9-pile group. Both pile groups increased in damping as the deflections increased. The optimized mass in motion for the entire system was found to be roughly 21,000kg for the 15-pile group and 14,000 kg for the 9-pile group. Stiffness for the 15-pile group started at 50kN/mm and ended at 21kN/mm. The 9-pile group ranged from 28kN/mm to 12kN/mm.

Compacted fill and rammed aggregate piers (RAPs) were separately installed adjacent to a 9-ft by 9-ft by 2.5-ft driven pile foundation founded in soft clay. The compacted fill used to laterally reinforce an area of 11 ft by 5 ft by 6 ft deep adjacent to the pile cap was clean concrete sand. The thirty-inch diameter RAPs were installed in three staggered rows to a depth of 12.5 ft below the ground surface adjacent to the pile cap to test the increase in lateral resistance afforded by their installation. The foundation was laterally loaded and load, displacement, and strain readings were recorded. The results of this testing were compared with similar tests performed with virgin soil conditions. The total lateral capacity of the pile foundation increased by 5 percent or14 kips due to compacted fill placement against the face of the pile cap. The passive force acting only on the pile cap decreased from 54 kips in the virgin case to 30 kips after installation of the compacted fill, a decrease of about 45 percent. The total lateral capacity of the pile foundation that was retrofit with RAPs was increased by 18 percent or 52 kips as compared to an identical pile cap in virgin clay. The passive force acting on the pile cap at 1.5 inches of pile cap displacement was determined to be approximately 50 kips, showing a slight decrease in passive resistance as compared to the tests performed on virgin soil. Both reinforcement techniques reduced pile head rotation and the bending moments in the shallow portions of the piles.

Lateral spread is a seismic hazard associated with soil liquefaction in which permanent deformations are developed within the soil profile due to cyclic mobility. Lateral spread has historically been one of the largest causes of earthquake-related damage to infrastructure. One of the infrastructure components most at risk from lateral spread is that of deep foundations. Because performance-based engineering is increasingly becoming adopted in earthquake engineering practice, it would be beneficial for engineers and researchers to have a performance-based methodology for computing pile performance during a lateral spread event. This study utilizes the probabilistic performance-based framework developed by the Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center to develop a methodology for computing probabilistic estimates of kinematic pile response. The methodology combines procedures familiar to most practicing engineers such as probabilistic seismic hazard analysis, empirical compution of lateral spread displacement, and kinematic pile response using p-y soil spring models (i.e. LPILE). The performance-based kinematic pile response model is applied to a series of lateral spread case histories from the earthquake that struck the Limon province of Costa Rica on April 22, 1991. The M7.6 earthquake killed 53 people, injured another 193 people, and disrupted an estimated 30-percent of the highway pavement and railways in the region due to fissures, scarps, and soil settlements resulting from liquefaction. Significant lateral spread was observed at bridge sites throughout the eastern part of Costa Rica near Limon, and the observed structural damage ranged from moderate to severe. This study identified five such bridges where damage due to lateral spread was observed following the earthquake. A geotechnical investigation is performed at each of these five bridges in an attempt to back-analyze the soil conditions leading to the liquefaction and lateral spread observed during the 1991 earthquake, and each of the five resulting case histories is developed and summarized. The results of this study should make a valuable contribution to the field of earthquake hazard reduction because they will introduce a procedure which will allow engineers and owners to objectively evaluate the performance of their deep foundation systems exposed to kinematic lateral spread loads corresponding to a given level of risk.

The effects of seismic forces and thermal expansion on bridge performance necessitate an accurate understanding of the relationship between passive force and backwall deflection. In past case studies, skewed bridges exhibited significantly more damage than non-skewed bridges. These findings prompted studies involving numerical modeling, lab-scale tests, and large-scale tests that each showed a dramatic reduction in passive force with increased skew. Using these results, a correlation was developed between peak passive force and backwall skew angle. The majority of these tests had length to height ratios of 2.0; however, for several abutments in the field, the length to height ratio might be considerably higher than 2.0. This change in geometry could potentially affect the validity of the previously found passive force reduction correlation. To explore this issue, laterally loaded, large-scale pile cap tests were performed with densely compacted sand at a length of 11 ft (3.35 m) and a height of 3 ft (0.91 m), resulting in a length to height ratio of 3.7. The backwall interface was adjusted to fit three various skew angles including: 0°, 15° and 30°. The behavior of both the pile cap and adjacent soil backfill were monitored under these conditions. The peak passive force for the 15° and 30° tests were found to be 71% and 45%, respectively, of the peak passive force for the 0° skew test. These findings are relatively consistent with previously performed tests. Passive forces peaked at deflections between 2% and 5% of the backwall height, decreasing with skew angle. All skews exhibited a log spiral failure plane that transitioned into a linear plane. These results also agreed with previously reported values for large-scale passive force-deflection tests. Rotation of the pile cap was detected in the direction opposite to the skew. Higher pressures were found to be on both corners of the pile cap than in the middle portion, as is suggested by the elastic theory.

In many construction works in urban areas vibratory driving is the most widely used technique toinstall sheet piles. But due to vibration-sensitive equipment and structures the amount of inducedground vibration need to be minimized. Hence, it is important to select appropriate vibratorparameters that will minimize the level of induced ground vibration.The main objective of this thesis is to study the effect of the vibratory parameter eccentricmoment (vibrator displacement amplitude) on the induced ground vibration during sheet piledriving. To achieve the objective, a literature review and a full-scale field test has beenconducted. The literature review was conducted to provide guidance for the evaluation of thefield test results.The field study was performed in Uppsala in June 2018, where a series of six sheet pile drivingtests were conducted, the first three sheet piles were driven with lower vibrator displacementamplitude and the next three with higher vibrator displacement amplitude, but the same drivingfrequency was used for all six sheet piles. Five tri-axial accelerometers were used to measure thevibration amplitude on vibrator, sheet pile and ground.Important findings of the field study confirmed that, driving sheet piles with higher eccentricmoment will induce lower ground vibration and higher sheet pile penetration speed incomparison to driving with lower eccentric moment. Limitations and possible future researchworks are pointed out. / I många byggnadsarbeten i tätorter är vibrerade drivning den mest använda tekniken för attinstallera sponter. Men på grund av vibrationskänslig utrustning och konstruktioner måstemängden inducerad markvibration minimeras. Därför är det viktigt att välja lämpligavibratorparametrar som minimerar graden av inducerad markvibration.Huvudsyftet med detta examensarbete är att studera effekten av vibrationsparameternsexcentriskamoment (vibratorförskjutningsamplituden) på den inducerade markvibrationen underspontdrivning. För att uppnå målet har en litteraturöversikt och en fullskalig fältundersökning utförts. Litteraturstudien genomfördes för att ge underlag för utvärderingen av fältundersökningenresultanten.Fältstudien utfördes i Uppsala i juni 2018, där en serie av sex spontdrivnings test utfördes, deförsta tre sponten kördes med lägre vibrator-förskjutningsamplitud och de närmaste tre medhögre vibrator-förskjutningsamplitud, men samma körfrekvens användes för alla sex sponter.Fem treaxiala accelerometrar användes för att mäta vibrationsamplituden på vibratorn, spontenoch jorden.Slutsatserna från fältstudien bekräftade att körsponter med högre excentriskt moment kommer attinducera lägre vibrationer och högre penetrationshastighet för sponten i jämförelse med körningmed lägre excentriskt moment. Begränsningar och möjliga framtida forskningsarbeten påpekas.

No description available.

Skewed bridges have exhibited poorer performance during lateral earthquake loading in comparison to non-skewed bridges (Apirakvorapinit et al. 2012; Elnashai et al. 2010). Results from numerical modeling by Shamsabadi et al. (2006), small-scale laboratory tests by Rollins and Jessee (2012), and several large-scale tests performed by Rollins et al. at Brigham Young University (Franke 2013; Marsh 2013; Palmer 2013; Smith 2014; Frederickson 2015) led to the proposal of a reduction curve used to determine a passive force skew reduction factor depending on abutment skew angle (Shamsabadi and Rollins 2014). In all previous tests, a uniform longitudinal load has been applied to the simulated bridge abutment. During seismic events, however, it is unlikely that bridge abutments would experience pure longitudinal loading. Rather, an inclined loading situation would be expected, causing rotation of the abutment backwall into the backfill. In this study, a large-scale test was performed where inclined loading was applied to a 30° skewed bridge abutment with sand backfill and compared to a baseline test with uniform loading and a non-skewed abutment. The impact of rotational force on the passive resistance of the backfill and the skew adjust factor was then evaluated. It was determined that inclined loading does not have a significant effect on the passive force skew reduction factor. However, the reduction factor was somewhat higher than predicted by the proposed reduction curve from Shamsabadi and Rollins 2014. This can be explained by a reduction in the effective skew angle caused by the friction between the side walls and the back wall. The inclined loading did not change the amount of movement required to mobilize passive resistance with ultimate passive force developing for displacements equal to 3 to 6% of the wall height. The rotation of the pile cap due to inclined loading produced higher earth pressure on the obtuse side of the skew wedge, as was expected.These findings largely resolve the concern that inclined loading situations during an earthquake may render the proposed passive force skew reduction curve invalid. We suggest that the proposed reduction curve remains accurate during inclined loading and should be implemented in current codes and practices to properly account for skew angle in bridge design.

Skewed bridges have exhibited poorer performance during lateral earthquake loading in comparison to non-skewed bridges (Apirakvorapinit et al. 2012; Elnashai et al. 2010). Results from numerical modeling by Shamsabadi et al. (2006), small-scale laboratory tests by Rollins and Jessee (2012), and several large-scale tests performed by Rollins et al. at Brigham Young University (Franke 2013; Marsh 2013; Palmer 2013; Smith 2014; Frederickson 2015) led to the proposal of a reduction curve used to determine a passive force skew reduction factor depending on abutment skew angle (Shamsabadi and Rollins 2014). In all previous tests, a uniform longitudinal load has been applied to the simulated bridge abutment. During seismic events, however, it is unlikely that bridge abutments would experience pure longitudinal loading. Rather, an inclined loading situation would be expected, causing rotation of the abutment backwall into the backfill. In this study, a large-scale test was performed where inclined loading was applied to a 30 skewed bridge abutment with sand backfill and compared to a baseline test with uniform loading and a non-skewed abutment. The impact of rotational force on the passive resistance of the backfill and the skew adjust factor was then evaluated. It was determined that inclined loading does not have a significant effect on the passive force skew reduction factor. However, the reduction factor was somewhat higher than predicted by the proposed reduction curve from Shamsabadi and Rollins 2014. This can be explained by a reduction in the effective skew angle caused by the friction between the side walls and the back wall. The inclined loading did not change the amount of movement required to mobilize passive resistance with ultimate passive force developing for displacements equal to 3 to 6% of the wall height. The rotation of the pile cap due to inclined loading produced higher earth pressure on the obtuse side of the skew wedge, as was expected.These findings largely resolve the concern that inclined loading situations during an earthquake may render the proposed passive force skew reduction curve invalid. We suggest that the proposed reduction curve remains accurate during inclined loading and should be implemented in current codes and practices to properly account for skew angle in bridge design.