jawdat siddiqi p.e. - ohio department of transportation · micropile design, field verification of...

GEOTECHNICAL CONSULTANT

WORKSHOP

JUNE 3, 2015

OHIO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

JAWDAT SIDDIQI P.E.

PROPOSED REVISIONS TO

FOUNDATIONS AND RETAINING

WALL DESIGN REQUIREMENTS

BRIDGE DESIGN MANUAL

2016 ?? BRIDGE DESIGN MANUAL

• TWO COLUMN FORMAT

• SPECIFICATION (LEFT COLUMN)

• COMMENTARY (RIGHT COLUMN)

• ALL GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING

(PRELIMINARY AND DETAIL) DESIGN

REQUIREMENTS WILL BE CONSOLIDATED

IN SECTION 300


PROPOSED TABLE OF CONTENTS30X FOUNDATION DESIGN

30X.1 GENERAL DISCUSSION

30X.2 SPREAD FOOTINGS

30X.3 DRIVEN PILES

30X.4 DRILLED SHAFTS

30X.5 MICROPILES

30X.6 CONTINUOUS FLIGHT AUGER

PILES

30X.7 FIELD VERIFICATION OF

NOMINAL RESISTANCE


30Y RETAINING STRUCTURES

30Y.1 GENERAL DISCUSSION

30Y.2 RIGID GRAVITY AND SEMIGRAVITY

WALLS

30Y.3 MSE WALLS

30Y.4 REINFORCED SOIL SLOPES

30Y.5 DRILLED SHAFT WALLS

30Y.6 STEEL SHEET PILE WALLS

30X.7 ANCHORED WALLS

30Y.8 SOIL NAIL WALLS

30Y.9 TEMPORARY WALLS

30X.3 DRIVEN PILES

DRIVEN PILE DESIGN, FIELD VERIFICATION OF

NOMINAL RESISTANCE

• MAX. PERMITTED UBV FOR ALL STEEL DRIVEN PILES

SHALL BE DETERMINED BASED UPON STRUCTURAL

RESISTANCE FACTOR FOR SEVERE DRIVING

CONDITIONS

• WAVE EQUATION ANALYSIS SHALL BE PERFORMED

TO DETERMINE MINIMUM WALL THICKNESS AND

MINIMUM RATED ENERGY REQUIREMENTS FOR PILE

DRIVING HAMMERS

• BDM SECTION 30X.7 STATIC LOAD TEST AND HIGH

STRAIN DYNAMIC LOAD TEST

30X.4 DRILLED SHAFTS

DRILLED SHAFT DESIGN, INTEGRITY TESTING,

FIELD VERIFICATION OF NOMINAL RESISTANCE• FRICTION DRILLED SHAFTS DESIGNED IN ACCORDANCE

WITH THE LRFD BRIDGE DESIGN SPECIFICATION WILL

NOW BE PERMITTED

• THERMAL INTEGRITY PROFILING (TIP) AS PER ASTM

D7949 WILL NOW BE PERMITTED. TIP TESTING USING

METHOD B WILL REQUIRE SENSOR STRING ARRAYS WITH

ONE FOOT SENSOR SPACING. THE NUMBER OF REQUIRED

STRING ARRAYS WILL BE SIMILAR TO THE CURRENT

ODOT SPECIFICATION FOR CSL TESTING REQUIREMENTS

• BDM SCTION 30X.7 STATIC LOAD TEST AND DROP WEIGHT

HIGH STRAIN DYNAMIC LOAD TEST

30X.5 MICROPILES

MICROPILE DESIGN, FIELD VERIFICATION OF

NOMINAL RESISTANCE• MICROPILES WILL NOW BE CONSIDERED AS A FEASIBLE

DEEP FOUNDATION ELEMENT BASED UPON ECONOMIC

ANALYSIS AND/OR DUE TO SITE CONSTRAINTS.

• DESIGN OF MICROPILES SHALL BE IN ACCORDNACE

WITH THE AASHTO LRFD BRIDGE DESIGN

SPECIFICATION SECTION 10.9. MICROPILES BEING

INSTALLED TO A TIP ELEVATION SHALL UTILIZE THE

STATIC RESISTANCE FACTORS SPECIFIED IN LRFD

TABLES 10.5.5.2.5-1 AND 10.5.5.2.5-2

• BDM SCTION 30X.7 STATIC LOAD TEST AND DROP

WEIGHT HIGH STRAIN DYNAMIC LOAD TEST

30X.6 CONTINUOUS FLIGHT

AUGER CAST (CFA) PILESCFA PILE DESIGN, FIELD VERIFICATION OF

NOMINAL RESISTANCE• CFA PILES WILL NOT BE PERMITTED AS A DEEP

FOUNDATION ELEMENT FOR BRIDGE STRUCTURES

• CFA PILES MAY BE CONSIDERED FOR:

• NOISE BARRIER WALLS

• TEMPORARY SUPPORT OF EXCAVATION

• SIGN POST FOUNDATIONS

• SOILDER PILE AND LAGGING WALLS

• CFA PILES SHALL BE DESIGNED IN ACCORDANCE WITH

THE ALLOWABLE STRESS DESIGN METHODOGY AS

AASHTO LRFD BRIDGE DESIGN SPECIFICATION DOES

NOT CURRENTLY ADDRESS THE DESIGN OF CFA PILES

30Y RETAINING STRUCTURES

• PREFABRICATED RETAINING WALL SYSTEM

ACCREDITATION PROTOCOL IS CURRENTLY IN

DEVELOPMENT AND WILL BE OFFICIALLY ENFORCED

SHORTLY

• PRECAST CONCRETE GRAVITY, SEMI-GRAVITY, BIN

AND CRIB RETAINING WALL SYSTEMS

• MODULAR BLOCK WALL AND BIG BLOCKS WALL

SYSTEMS

• MSE WALL SYSTEMS

PRECAST SEMI-GRAVITY

WALLS

MSE WALLS

Acute Corners Not Permitted

MSE WALLS

Erosion along MSE WallMSE WALLS

Void Beneath

Approach Slab

Joint

Separation

MSE WALLS

Final Resting Place of

MSE Wall Fill

MSE WALLS

EARTHQUAKE EFFECTS: EQ

SEISMIC HAZARD

• THE SITE IS WITHIN 6 MILES OF AN ACTIVE FAULT

• THE SITE IS CLASSIFIED AS SITE CLASS F

• LONG DURATION EARTHQUAKES ARE EXPECTED IN

THE REGION

• THE IMPORTANCE OF THE BRIDGE IS SUCH THAT A

LOWER PROBABILITY OF EXCEEDANCE SHOULD BE

CONSIDERED

SITE SPECIFIC PROCEDURE SHALL BE USED


SITE SPECIFIC PROCEDURE

SITE CLASS “A” THRU “F”

AASHTO LRFD

BRIDGE DESIGN

SPECIFICATION

FIGURE 3.10.2.1-1

HORIZONTAL PEAK

GROUND

ACCELERATION

COEFFICIENT “PGA”


AASHTO LRFD

BRIDGE DESIGN

SPECIFICATION

FIGURE 3.10.2.1-1

FOR OHIO

HORIZONTAL PEAK

GROUND

ACCELERATION

COEFFICIENT LIES

BETWEEN

0.03 < PGA < 0.06




SITE FACTOR

“Fpga”


AASHTO LRFD

BRIDGE DESIGN

SPECIFICATION

FIGURE 3.10.2.1-2

SHORT PERIOD

SPECTRAL

ACCELERATION

COEFFICIENT “SS”


AASHTO LRFD

BRIDGE DESIGN

SPECIFICATION

FIGURE 3.10.2.1-2

FOR OHIO SHORT

PERIOD SPECTRAL

ACCELERATION

COEFFICIENT LIES

BETWEEN

0.07 < SS < 0.14



SITE FACTOR

“Fa”


AASHTO LRFD

BRIDGE DESIGN

SPECIFICATION

FIGURE 3.10.2.1-3

LONG PERIOD

SPECTRAL

ACCELERATION

COEFFICIENT “S1”


AASHTO LRFD

BRIDGE DESIGN

SPECIFICATION

FIGURE 3.10.2.1-3

FOR OHIO LONG

PERIOD SPECTRAL

ACCELERATION

COEFFICIENT LIES

BETWEEN

0.03 < S1 < 0.05



SITE FACTOR

“Fv”



SEISMIC ZONES

SD1 = Fv * S1



SEISMIC ZONE 1

AS = Fpga * PGA

• IF AS < 0.05

• HORIZONTAL DESIGN CONNECTION FORCE SHALL BE

0.15 TIMES THE TRIBUTARY PERMANENT AND LIVE

LOADS EFFECTS

• IF AS > 0.05



LOADS EFFECTS



SEISMIC ZONE 2



LOADS DIVIDED BY “R/2” WHERE “R” SHALL NOT BE

TAKEN AS LESS THAN 1.0

CONSIDERATIONS FOR INCORPORATION OF

FOUNDATION DEFORMATIONS IN LRFD

SPECIFICATIONS

BRIDGES FOR SERVICE LIFE BEYOND 100

YEARS SERVICE LIMIT STATE DESIGN: SHRP 2 /

PROJECT R19B

NCHRP PROJECT 12-103: BRIDGE

SUPERSTRUCTURE TOLERANCE TO TOTAL

AND DIFFERENTIAL FOUNDATION

MOVEMENTS

SETTLEMENT “SE” LOAD FACTOR “SE”


CONSTRUCTION POINT CONCEPT

QUESTIONS

jawdat siddiqi p.e. - ohio department of transportation · micropile design, field verification of...

Documents