Thermal Integrity Testing of Drilled Shafts - Final Report
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
THERMAL INTEGRITY TESTING OF DRILLED SHAFTS - FINAL REPORT Principal Investigators: Gray Mullins, Ph.D., P.E. and Stan Kranc, Ph.D., P.E. Graduate Researchers: Kevin Johnson, Michael Stokes, and Danny Winters Prepared for: 2 C Cross-Section C-D D 4 75-80 6 70-75 65-70 60-65 A 55-60 50-55 45-50 40-45 B Temperature (deg C) Temperature 35-40 30-35 25-30 CSL Logging Tubes Thermal Logging Tubes 1 C 1 C Steel Logging Tubes Known Anomaly PVC Logging Tubes 5 3 5 3 Cross-Section A Cross-Section B Bottom Anomaly Top Anomaly D D MAY 2007 FDOT GRANT #BD544-20 DISCLAIMER The opinions, findings and conclusions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the State of Florida Department of Transportation. i CONVERSION FACTORS, US CUSTOMARY TO METRIC UNITS Multiply by to obtain inch 25.4 mm foot 0.3048 meter square inches 645 square mm cubic yard 0.765 cubic meter pound (lb) 4.448 Newtons kip (1000 lb) 4.448 kiloNewton (kN) Newton 0.2248 pound kip/ft 14.59 kN/meter pound/in2 0.0069 MPa kip/in2 6.895 MPa MPa 0.145 ksi kip-ft 1.356 kN-m kip-in 0.113 kN-m kN-m .7375 kip-ft ii Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipients Catalog No. 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Data Thermal Integrity Testing of Drilled Shafts May 2007 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Gray Mullins, Kevin Johnson, and Danny Winters 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) University of South Florida 4202 E. Fowler Ave., ENB 118 11. Contract or Grant No. Tampa, FL 33620 BD544-20 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered Final Report Florida Department of Transportation 10/31/2004 - 01/31/07 605 Suwannee Street 14. Sponsoring Agency Code Tallahassee, FL 32399 15. Supplementary Notes 16. Abstract 17. Key Word 18. Distribution Statement Non-destructive Integrity Testing, No Restrictions Thermal Integrity Testing, Drilled Shafts, Anomalies 19. Security Classif. (of this report) 20. Security Classif. (of this page) 21. No. of Pages 22. Price Unclassified. Unclassified. Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) Reproduction of complete page authorized iii THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY BLANK iv PREFACE This research project was awarded to the University of South Florida, Tampa by the Florida Department of Transportation. Mr. Michael Bergin was the Project Manager. It is a pleasure to acknowledge his contribution to this study. Likewise, the principal investigator is indebted to following companies and their associates for the interaction they afforded: R.W. Harris Engineering, Foundation & Geotechncial Engineering, LLC, and Rudy LTD. Therein, the opportunity to interact with prime contractors and provide access to sites was made possible by: Christopher Harris and Ron W. Harris; Christopher Lewis and Andrew Goulish; and Rudy, respectively. Special thanks are extended to the College of Engineering’s Machine Shop staff of Mr. Bob Smith, Mr. James Christopher, and Mr. Tom Gage for their unending support. The assistance of graduate researchers (not in any order) Mr. Byron Anderson, Mr. Greg Deese, Mr. Michael Stokes, and Mr. Julio Aguilar are duly recognized. v THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY BLANK vi EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Drilled shaft foundations have historically been plagued with construction related defects (i.e., soil inclusions or poor concrete cover) that most often go undetected due to the blind construction techniques necessary. These defects can affect the quality of the bond interface between the shaft concrete and the insitu geomaterial as well as the durability of the reinforcement. This project investigated the merits of a new easy-to-use method of assuring shaft integrity via infrared thermal detection methods that can assess the presence or absence of intact concrete both outside and inside the shaft reinforcement cage. The objectives included (1) field temperature measurements of mass concrete structures with specific interest in drilled shafts and (2) numerical modeling to verify the anticipated temperature response within a drilled shaft or mass concrete structure. Both small scale and full scale shafts were constructed and monitored during the curing/hydration phase. The temperature measurements obtained were used to verify the presence of anomalies while also obtaining temperature dissipation information to the surrounding materials. These case studies were used to calibrate a 3-D thermal modeling software developed expressly for mass concrete conditions with emphasis on drilled shaft integrity evaluation. Further evaluation of these sites along with case studies from larger diameter shafts showed that mass concrete conditions could be experienced by shafts even when small in diameter. Using the new thermal modeling software, the physical dimension of the test shafts as well as the location of known anomalies were inputted and signal matched against the measured temperature traces. The good correlation obtained showed that forward modeling shafts could be used to predict the size and location of anomalies. Inverse modeling algorithms were also developed with encouraging results. Finally, prospective construction techniques using voided shafts were conceived, modeled, and evaluated for feasibility. Initial results indicate that benefits could be derived from both mass concrete temperature control and reduction in concrete volume/usage. vii THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY BLANK viii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES..................................................... xii LIST OF FIGURES .................................................... xiii 1. INTRODUCTION ....................................................1 1.1 Background...................................................1 1.2 Report Organization ............................................3 2. NON-DESTRUCTIVE TESTING FOR DRILLED SHAFTS . 5 2.1 The Present State of Drilled Shaft Integrity Testing . 5 2.1.1 Cross Hole Sonic Logging................................5 2.1.2 Crosshole Tomography .................................10 2.1.3 Sonic Echo Test .......................................11 2.1.4 Impulse Response Test .................................16 2.1.5 Gamma-Gamma Testing ................................18 2.1.6 Concreteoscopy .......................................19 2.1.7 Parallel Seismic Integrity Testing . 20 2.1.8 Thermal Integrity Testing ...............................22 2.2 Development of the Thermal Integrity Testing Device . 23 3. THERMAL TESTING MODEL ........................................33 3.1 Algorithm Development .....................................33 3.1.1 Numerical Modeling ..................................33 3.1.2 Scheduled Residual Relaxation . 36 3.1.3 Model Testing .......................................37 3.2 User Guide ...................................................38 3.2.1 Editors...............................................39 3.3 Visual Post Processor...........................................42 4. FIELD TESTING AND MODELING RESULTS . 49 4.1 Site I: Ringling Causeway Bridge . 49 4.1.1 Instrumentation and Results . 49 4.1.2 Modeled Results .....................................49 4.2 Site II: USF Test Site........................................52 4.2.1 Construction & Instrumentation . 52 4.2.2 Thermal Testing and Results . 52 4.3 Site III: R.W. Harris Test Site .................................61 4.3.1 Construction & Instrumentation . 61 4.3.2 Quality Assurance Testing..............................61 4.3.3 Quality Assurance Testing Results . 62 4.3.5 Thermal Modeling ....................................62 4.4 Site IV: University of Florida Test Site . 81 4.4.1 Construction & Instrumentation . 81 4.4.2 Thermal Testing and Results . 81 ix 5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS . 87 5.1 General Conclusions ........................................87 5.1.1 Ringling Causeway Bridge Test Data . 87 5.1.2 University of South Florida Test Site . 87 5.1.3 R.W. Harris Test Site..................................88 5.1.4 University of Florida Test Site . 88 5.2 Recommendations ..........................................88 REFERENCES ........................................................91 APPENDICES .........................................................95 A.1 Visual Basic Code for Project Forms . 97 A.1.1 frmMain.frm.........................................97 A.1.2 frmTemp.frm .......................................103 A.1.3 frmSource.frm ......................................106 A.1.4 frmRun.frm ........................................108 A.1.5 frmRecs.frm ........................................113 A.1.6 frmConds.frm.......................................114 A.1.7 frmsectiongeom.frm..................................116 A.1.8 frmsubmodel.frm ....................................125 A.1.9 frmMaterials.frm ....................................134 A.1.10frmFillform.frm .....................................138 A.2 Visual Basic Code for Project Modules . 138 A.2.1 module1e.bas .......................................138 A.3 Visual Basic Code for Project Class Modules . 140 A.3.1 CBoundarytype.cls...................................140 A.3.2 CComposite.cls .....................................141 A.3.3 Cdataseries.cls ......................................142 A.3.4 Cexec.cls ..........................................142 A.3.5 Cgeom.cls..........................................148 A.3.6 Cmodel.cls .........................................151 A.3.7 CsdgDatum.cls......................................151 A.3.8 Csounding.cls.......................................153