Poster - Worcester Polytechnic Institute

Report
Foundation Improvement Evaluation
Kentucky River Lock and Dam No. 8
Michael Kendall and Karyn Sutter
Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering
Advised By: Suzanne LePage and Frederick Hart
Abstract
The goal of this project was to discuss and evaluate
different dam foundation improvement techniques
including two different positive cut-off walls, grouting,
and a combination of these. These techniques were
analyzed based on four different evaluation criteria: cost,
environmental impacts, risk and constructability. Finally
a schematic design was created based on the most
suitable foundation improvement.
Methods/Process
•
Capstone Design
Came up with three different design options
Design
Description
Design 1
Grouting in all regions
Design 2
Grouting in all regions,
secant wall in region 2
Design 3
Grouting in all regions,
Layout of Grout Holes and Secant Wall
secant wall in region 2, 3
and 4
Background
•
•
Applied four different evaluation criteria to design
options: cost, environmental impacts, risks and
constructability
Based on evaluation criteria, choose the best design
option and completed capstone design by making a
CAD drawing of the proposed foundation
improvement
Profile View of Grout Holes and Secant Pile Wall
Results
Conclusions
Cost
Grout Curtain
•
•
Materials including
portland cement
and admixtures
Increased pressure
with depth
Secant Wall
•
Overlapping
shafts
backfilled with
concrete
Design
Total Cost
Design 1
$2,506,804
Design 2
$2,948,554
Design 3
$5,024,554
Environmental Impacts
• US Army Corps of Engineers 404 Section 10 Permit
• Kentucky Division of Water 401 Permit
Risks
• Seepage reduction crucial
Constructability
• All designs practical
Cost was the most important of the evaluation criteria as
the other three had similar if not the same effects on each
design option. It was decided that Design Option 2 was
the best choice for Lock and Dam No. 8. Although it was
not the cheapest option for only a slightly higher cost it
provided a better chance at reducing seepage.
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank the following people for their help
and support during this project:
Professor Suzanne LePage, Professor Frederick Hart,
Daniel Gilbert, April Welshans, and Adam Hacker

similar documents