Axial load testing of helical pile groups in glaciolacustrine clay

Lanyi-Bennett, Stephen Alexej; Deng, Lijun

doi:10.1139/cgj-2017-0425

Cited by 40 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Elkasabgy and El Naggar ( 5 ) advised that the ultimate capacity ( Q u ) falls within the load–displacement curve’s nonlinear region, where creep displacement is low. From inspection of the load–displacement curves, Lanyi-Bennett and Deng ( 25 ) also recommended the same. Based on these recommendations, Q u adopted for this study was deﬁned as the load causing pile displacement of 5% of the helix diameter.…”

Section: Design Chart Validationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Performance-Based Design Method for Multiple Helices of Helical Pile in Cohesionless Soil

Shuman

Khan

Amini

2022

Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation R

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Multiple helices are being used frequently in helical pile applications nowadays. This paper presents multiple helices on simplified field design charts for small diameter helical piles that relate service compressive load and soil parameters as a group with the pile parameters. This study conducts an extensive three-dimensional nonlinear finite element analysis (FEA) study on multiple helices piles using the FEA program PLAXIS to evaluate helices’ performance subjected to axial compressive loads. A calibrated and verified numerical model uses full-scale load testing data of multiple helices from practical experience. This paper compiled numerical results from 495 models to propose an extension of the chart-based design. Here, the optimized combination of multiple helices will be the output of the design chart for soil type, service load, and allowable displacement as input. At the end of this paper, the design charts for double and triple helices are validated for cohesionless soil. The correlation square, R2, ranges from 0.69 to 0.86 for cohesionless soil. The mean Qc/ Qm is 0.90 for double helices and 1.04 for triple helices. Preliminary evaluation suggests that the method performs well. The authors believe that this study will permit engineers and state agencies to better understand the behavior of multiple helices, resulting in a more resilient approach in designing small diameter helical piles for a compressive load.

show abstract

Section: Design Chart Validationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Performance-Based Design Method for Multiple Helices of Helical Pile in Cohesionless Soil

Shuman

Khan

Amini

2022

Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation R

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Albusoda and Abbasi conducted a laboratory study and evaluated the performance of single and group helical piles in expansive soil [204]. Lanyi-Bennett and Deng performed a field study in Edmonton, Canada, by axial load testing of single and group helical piles in Glaciolacustrine clay [210]. In a field study, Lautenegger conducted an axial uplift test on the helical anchor group implemented in stiff and soft clay to understand the behavior of the anchor group [225].…”

Section: The Anchor and Pile Groupmentioning

confidence: 99%

A review of the advancement of helical foundations from 1990- 2020 and the barriers to their expansion in developing countries

Mahmoudi-Mehrizi¹,

Ghanbari²

2021

jeg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of piles, helical anchors, in general, helical foundations has considerably increased in the last 30 years. The adoption of this technology in the international and domestic codes of each country, as well as in research and studies, and, finally, the publication of numerous books and papers in this area, and the existence of manufacturers' products, committees, and contractors of this technology has contributed to its expansion and development. However, such methods have progressed at a very slow pace in many countries, especially in developing countries. This paper attempts to assess the global advancement of the helical foundations by reviewing 292 papers from 1990 to 2020 and comparing the related research findings. This will help clarify the issue and determine the scope of technological progress. On the other hand, collecting valuable papers in this area will make it easier for researchers to make further research.Subsequently, the characteristics of this technology are highlighted and the reasons for its lack of progress in developing countries are addressed. For this purpose, a questionnaire is sent to researchers, developers, designers, and contractors of the geotechnical projects. The purpose of this questionnaire is to specify the type of existing projects, the soil type of project site, the degree of familiarity with the helical foundation technology, the reasons for not using this method, and the solutions available to expand and develop this method. Finally, there are suggestions to develop this approach and the issues that need further research.

show abstract

“…A group of researchers has investigated the behavior of helical anchors in cohesionless soil [28][29][30][31][32][33][34] as well as in cohesive soil [35][36][37][38] using numerical, experimental, and field tests. Two failure mechanisms, the individual pile failure mechanism, and the block failure mechanism, which is dependent on the spacing between the anchors, are available when the grouped helical anchor is loaded vertically.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Field Experimental Study on the Uplift and Lateral Capacity of Deep Helical Anchors and Grouped Helical Anchors in Clays

Yuan,

Hao,

Ding

et al. 2024

Buildings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research aims to investigate the bearing capability of deep helical anchors and grouped helical anchors under uplift or lateral loads using field experiments. Grouped helical anchors may serve as a viable alternative to traditional deep foundations, offering increased resistance against uplift and lateral forces. The study of group effect primarily focuses on vertically installed helical anchors, with few data available on various configurations of grouped helical anchors. This research includes a total of 12 single-helix anchors, 4 double-helix anchors, and 4 grouped helical anchors, with anchor plate diameters of 400 mm and maximum embedment depths of 7.4 m. There are two configurations of grouped helical anchors, each with different platforms. This article studies the effect of some factors, including the embedment depth, the number of anchor plates, the spacing between anchor shafts, the selection of failure criteria, and the group effect. The primary findings indicate that adding the anchor plates to single-helix anchors without extending the shaft length does not increase uplift or lateral capacity. In this soil condition, the group efficiency of double-helix anchors is higher than 1. By comparing the group efficiency and economy of the G1 and G2 grouped helical anchors, it is highly recommended to use the G2 configuration. The data obtained from this work may also serve as a valuable tool for validating numerical models used to analyze interactions among grouped helical anchors.

show abstract

Axial load testing of helical pile groups in glaciolacustrine clay

Cited by 40 publications

References 17 publications

Performance-Based Design Method for Multiple Helices of Helical Pile in Cohesionless Soil

Performance-Based Design Method for Multiple Helices of Helical Pile in Cohesionless Soil

A review of the advancement of helical foundations from 1990- 2020 and the barriers to their expansion in developing countries

Field Experimental Study on the Uplift and Lateral Capacity of Deep Helical Anchors and Grouped Helical Anchors in Clays

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About