Geotechnical Engineering in the XXI Century: Lessons learned and future challenges 2231

N.P. López-Acosta et al. (Eds.)

© 2019 The authors and IOS Press.
This article is published online with Open Access by IOS Press and distributed under the terms
of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License 4.0 (CC BY-NC 4.0).
doi:10.3233/STAL190288

Jet Grouting for Mitigating Impact of

Secant Pile Wall Installation in Close
Proximity to Existing Building
Chu E. HOa,1 and Aaron EVANSb,2
a
Arup, USA
b
Nicholson Construction Company, USA

Abstract. Jet grouting was implemented to protect an existing building against the
impact of adjacent secant pile wall installation located 2ft from the building edge.
Sixteen vertical jet grout columns, 5ft in diameter and spaced at 47ins intervals, were
installed at 1.5ft offset from the external face of the building to form a continuous
grout wall to underpin the basement foundations. As the secant pile wall was located
in close proximity to the row of underpinning jet grout columns, subsequent casing
installation would be problematic having to drill through partially grouted and
partially ungrouted soils. The unbalanced drilling would lead to significant pile
deviation and cause damage to the completed underpinning jet grout columns. To
overcome this, an additional row of jet grout columns was introduced along the
secant pile wall line at the primary pile positions to provide full coverage of grouting
for the drilling platform. A range of column diameters from 5 to 6.5ft was formed
to ensure effective interlock between columns. This innovative scheme provided a
stable platform that allowed the secant piles to be installed through consistent
material and minimized disturbance to the adjacent building foundation. This paper
discusses the design considerations and practical issues associated with the
implementation of the jet grouting work.

Keywords. Secant pile walls, jet grouting, underpinning, casing installation.

1. Introduction

Construction of the 96th Street Station on the newly extended Q subway line in New York
City included two ancillary buildings located in close proximity to adjacent fragile
buildings. These fragile buildings were typically four to five stories high with a single
level rubble wall basement supported on timber piles or seated directly on the fill. The
buildings were more than 100 years old. Several of the buildings had to be strengthened
and underpinned to improve the stability of the structures prior to the new construction
[1].
Permanent secant pile walls were adopted as the earth support system for
construction of the ancillary buildings. The walls were internally braced by several levels
of preloaded steel struts to limit ground displacements caused by the excavation of the
basements which ranged from 60 to 70ft deep [2]. At one of the ancillary structures, a jet

1
77 Water Street, New York, NY10005, USA.
2
8725 West Higgins Road, Suite 820, Chicago, IL 60631, USA.
2232 C.E. Ho and A. Evans / Jet Grouting for Mitigating Impact of Secant Pile Wall Installation

grouted slab strut and grout wall scheme was implemented to control deep-seated inward
wall displacements due to the presence of thick soft soil deposits [3].
While mitigation of excavation-induced ground movements can be controlled by the
adoption of a stiff earth retention system, a more problematic issue was the impact of the
secant pile wall installation itself on the existing buildings. At Ancillary 1, where the
rock head was shallow and close to the excavation bottom, it was possible to protect the
building by underpinning with micropiles [4, 5]. The micropiles would also provide relief
of the building loads acting on the retained face of the secant pile wall. The situation at
Ancillary 2 was more challenging, as it was located in an area of deep rock and a thick
bed of soft soils, which would render micropiles ineffective. This paper presents alternate
mitigating measures implemented at Ancillary 2.

2. Construction of Ancillary 2 Substructure

Ancillary 2 was located adjacent to a 4-story building. The ground surface was generally
level at EL+111 to EL+112ft. The subsurface comprised fill, soft organics, loose to
medium dense silty sands and highly sensitive glacial deposits of varved silt and clay
that extended to depths greater than 120ft. Figure 1 shows typical soil conditions in the
vicinity of the site based on cone penetration test CPT 96-1. As can be seen, the cone tip
resistance (Qt) remained largely unchanged with depth, averaging about 80 to 100tsf
below 30ft depth within the silty sands and varved silts/clays. Water table was about 10ft
below ground.

Figure 1. Soil strength profile based on CPT 96-1.

 C.E. Ho and A. Evans / Jet Grouting for Mitigating Impact of Secant Pile Wall Installation 2233

Figure 2 shows the excavation support scheme at Ancillary 2. The secant pile wall
consisted of overlapping drilled shafts 34.5ins in diameter and spaced 23.5ft apart.
Primary piles were cast with 1000psi plain concrete, whereas secondary piles were cast
with 4000psi concrete with a W18x258 lbs/ft structural steel core beam installed at their
centers. All primary piles were constructed to EL+27ft (85ft depth). The secondary piles
were constructed to between EL-5ft to EL-10ft (117 to 122ft depth). The clear distance
between the secant pile wall and the adjacent 4-story building was only 2 feet.

Figure 2. Excavation support system for construction of Ancillary 2.

3. Underpinning Options

Initial test pit investigations along the adjacent 4-story building indicated the foundation
wall was made out of stones and typically 18ins thick, with continuous stone footings
extending 7 to 11.5ins beyond the external wall face. The footings were between 0.6 and
0.71ft thick with bottom elevations varying from +102.0 to +103.05ft. Groundwater table
was found at elevations ranging from +101.15 to +102.12ft within the test pits. The
investigations also uncovered 9 to 12ins diameter timber piles in an approximately
staggered layout beneath the foundation footings, but the termination depths were
unknown. Many piles were in poor condition and several were found disengaged from
the footings, suggesting the building loads were essentially carried directly on the
ground. Hence, any disturbance to the foundation soils would be potentially detrimental
to the stability of the building.
2234 C.E. Ho and A. Evans / Jet Grouting for Mitigating Impact of Secant Pile Wall Installation

The key purpose of the underpinning effort was to ensure that the building loads
were still supported in the event the foundation soils were disturbed during secant pile
installation, in particular within the potentially liquefiable glacial deposits. The rock at
this location was deep and there was no competent soil stratum in which to found
micropiles. Ground modification was considered a viable alternative. Several grouting
techniques were evaluated using field trials on the site. The trials simulated permeation
and compensation grouting through inclined injection pipes to be located beneath the
adjacent building, as well as vertical compaction grouting columns to be formed directly
under the stone footings along the building edge [6, 7]. Although the trials suggest these
techniques were potentially effective in controlling ground settlements, there were
concerns regarding the interference of existing timber piles with grout pipe installation,
as well as the pressurization of the organics which could result in significant
displacement of the timber piles due to bulk undrained shearing of the organics. In the
final analysis, jet grouting was considered most favorable as the soil surrounding the
timber piles would be disintegrated by the erosion process, resulting in the encapsulation
of the timber piles by the fluid soil-cement mixture. This could be achieved with minimal
disturbance by appropriate selection of jetting parameters.

4. Jet Grout Underpinning Scheme

Figure 3 shows the jet grouting scheme adopted for underpinning the adjacent 4-story
building.

Figure 3. Jet grout underpinning scheme (Row 1).

 C.E. Ho and A. Evans / Jet Grouting for Mitigating Impact of Secant Pile Wall Installation 2235

The proposed underpinning scheme involved installing sixteen vertical overlapping

jet grout columns to form a continuous grout wall below the building foundation up to
the toe elevation of the secant pile wall at EL-5ft. The jet grout columns were 5ft in
diameter and spaced 47ins apart, matching the spacing and position of the adjacent
secondary secant piles. In order for the jet grout columns to undergird the footings as
much as possible, the column centerlines were set at 18ins offset from the external face
of the building. This would result in a theoretical jetting reach of 12ins behind the
foundation wall for a 5ft diameter column. Due to uncertainty in the dimensions of the
footings, it was conservatively assumed that the footing extended 6ins beyond the outer
face of the foundation wall. For this arrangement, a net contact area of 685 square inches
between the footing base and jet grout column could be achieved. Based on the total dead
and live load of 14.1kips/ft acting at the foundation level, an average bearing stress of
81psi was obtained for the contact area. A 28-day jet grout strength of 400psi was
specified for design, giving an allowable bearing pressure of 100psi.

5. Additional Jet Grout Columns for Stabilizing Secant Pile Installation

In the course of developing the underpinning design, the Contractor highlighted possible
constructability issues relating to installation of the secant piles alongside the adjacent
building. Due to close proximity of the secant piles, the casing shoe would be cutting
partially into completed jet grout columns and partially into ungrouted soil. This would
cause potential deviation of the casing during installation of the secant piles and may
result in damage to pre-installed jet grout columns underpinning the footings. To
overcome this, an additional row of jet grout columns was introduced along the proposed
secant pile wall line to create a balanced platform (Figure 4).

Figure 4. Additional row of jet grout columns (Row 2) for stabilizing secant pile drilling.
2236 C.E. Ho and A. Evans / Jet Grouting for Mitigating Impact of Secant Pile Wall Installation

Seventeen additional jet grout columns were installed at the designated primary
secant pile positions located 47ins apart. Column diameters were nominally 5ft over the
upper 41ft, extending from the footing down to the Ancillary 2 excavation level at
EL+61ft. Below this level and up to the secant pile toes at EL-5ft, the column sizes
alternated between 5.5ft (for primary columns) and 6.5ft (for secondary columns).
Smaller grout columns were used in the upper sections to avoid excessive trimming of
hardened jet grout within the exposed face of the excavation. The enlarged column sizes
at the deeper elevations were necessary to ensure that overlap between jet grout columns
was still attainable for an anticipated column deviation of 1%. The respective secondary
jet grout columns would be formed after the two adjacent primary columns have been
completed. This innovative approach allowed the secant piles to be drilled from a firm
platform through consistent material for better verticality control during pile installation.

6. Jet Grout Installation

Jet grouting was performed using a Casagrande C-14 drill rig and Tecniwell TW400/S
high pressure triplex pump (Figure 5). An 89mm diameter Jet Plus monitor was used in
conjunction with a 114mm diameter drill rod. A 10ins diameter borehole was predrilled
and cased to the bottom elevation of the adjacent footing to maintain effective spoil
removal during jetting. The drill string was then lowered and progressed using a slightly
smaller bit size within the casing and then reamed out, using water as the flushing
medium. Jetting parameters were developed based on the results of initial jet grouting
field trials on site using CYLJET electric resistivity measurement methodology for
evaluation of in situ column dimensions in the various soil strata [8, 9]. Continuous
observation of jetting parameters was achieved using a Jean Lutz LT3 monitoring system.
Drilling rod inclination was measured using a ShapeAccelArray (SAA) tool.

Figure 5. Jet grouting adjacent to existing building.

For the basic underpinning jet grout columns (Row 1), grouting was executed in two
stages: Stage 1 from EL+95ft to +EL+102ft (bottom of footing) and Stage 2 from EL-5ft
to EL+96ft. The intention of Stage 1 grouting was to tighten up the soils near the ground
surface and immediately surrounding the footing in order to limit potential spoil entry
into the existing basement, as well as improving stability of the borehole for more
 C.E. Ho and A. Evans / Jet Grouting for Mitigating Impact of Secant Pile Wall Installation 2237

effective spoil return during the deeper grouting in Stage 2. A 10ins diameter cased hole
would be advanced through the completed Stage 1 grout for subsequent Stage 2 grouting.
The 1ft overlap between Stage 1 and Stage 2 was to ensure continuity of the completed
columns. Table 1 summarizes the jetting parameters adopted for Row 1. A single 5.5mm
diameter nozzle was adopted for grout injection. Compressed air was not used to avoid
potential instability of the surrounding soil supporting the footings, particularly when
jetting in the organics layer. A water-cement ratio of 1.20 by weight was adopted to
produce a grout mix with specific gravity of 1.45. The lift step adopted was 4 cm.

Table 1. Jetting parameters for grouting underneath existing footings (Row 1).
Grout Grout Rotational Lift
Diameter Elevation
Pressure Flowrate Speed Speed
Soil Stratum (D) (EL)
(Pg) (Qg) (Rs) (Ls)
ft ft bars liters/min rpm sec/step
Fill 5.0 +95 to +102 241 260 7.5 16
Organics 5.0 +86 to +96 157 210 4.4 41
Silty Sand 5.0 +52.5 to +86 300 290 8.0 15
Varved Silt/Clay 5.0 -5 to +52.5 365 320 5.3 23

In the case of the outer row of jet grout columns along the secant pile wall (Row 2),
a 10ins diameter hole was advanced directly to the toe elevation at EL-5ft and grouting
was executed in one continuous up-stage to the footing elevation. Tables 2 and 3
summarize the jetting parameters for the primary and secondary jet grout columns
respectively. Jetting was carried out using a single 6.5mm diameter nozzle. Compressed
air of 10 to 13 bars was utilized in this case to form the larger columns. A water-cement
ratio of 0.86 by weight was adopted to produce a grout mix with specific gravity of 1.58.

Table 2. Jetting parameters for grouting along secant pile wall line (Row 2 - primary columns).
Grout Grout Rotational Lift
Diameter Elevation
Pressure Flowrate Speed Speed
Soil Stratum (D) (EL)
(Pg) (Qg) (Rs) (Ls)
ft ft bars liters/min rpm sec/step
Fill/Organics 5.0 +86 to +102 125 250 18.8 16
Silty Sand 5.0 +61 to +86 179 300 20.0 6
Silty Sand 5.5 +52.5 to +61 179 300 15.0 8
Varved Silt/Clay 5.5 -5 to +52.5 266 365 12.0 10

Table 3. Jetting parameters for grouting along secant pile wall line (Row 2 - secondary columns).
Grout Grout Rotational Lift
Diameter Elevation
Pressure Flowrate Speed Speed
Soil Stratum (D) (EL)
(Pg) (Qg) (Rs) (Ls)
ft ft bars liters/min rpm sec/step
Fill/Organics 5.0 +86 to +102 125 250 18.8 16
Silty Sand 5.0 +61 to +86 179 300 20.0 6
Silty Sand 6.5 +52.5 to +61 179 300 10 12
Varved Silt/Clay 6.5 -5 to +52.5 266 365 7.5 16
2238 C.E. Ho and A. Evans / Jet Grouting for Mitigating Impact of Secant Pile Wall Installation

Due to the fragile state of the adjacent building, each installed jet grout column was
required to gain sufficient strength to achieve positive support for the building before
jetting is allowed to commence at an adjacent column. The design guideline specified
that no new columns were to be grouted within a clear distance of 15ft (three times the
diameter) from any previously installed columns with less than 100psi strength as
determined from grab samples. This criteria was considered to be conservative.
Discretion was required in the field to avoid jetting into hardened grout that was too
strong to cut. Upon completion of each column, grouting was continued above the design
top elevation to a sufficient level to ensure that the top of the column did not bleed out.
Due to the sensitivity of the existing building, verticality measurements were not
performed for Row 1 columns to avoid interruption to the drilling and jetting process.

7. Conclusions

Jet grouting was successfully implemented to provide underpinning support to an

adjacent 4-story fragile building for protection against ground displacements caused by
installation of a secant pile wall located 2ft away from the building. Vertical jet grout
columns were installed from the external face of the building to form a continuous grout
wall beneath the existing foundation footings for effective load transfer. Due to the close
proximity of the secant pile wall to the completed underpinning jet grout columns,
additional jet grouting was required along the centerline of the secant pile wall to ensure
subsequent installation of secant piles could be successfully carried out through fully
grouted soils. Jet grout column diameters were varied to ensure adequate overlap for
seepage control and to avoid excessive trimming of hardened grout during excavation.

References

[1] Trabold, M., Aksman, B. and Giffen, R. (2012). Second Avenue Subway Project, New York: Repair and
Refurbishment of Existing Structures Adjacent to Deep Excavations, Proc. Structures Congress, Chicago,
ASCE.
[2] Grigson, R., Ho, C. and Lemus, P. (2016). Second Avenue Subway Project: deep excavation support of a
cut-and-cover station. Proc. Geotechnical and Structural Engineering Congress 2016, Phoenix, AZ,
ASCE, Reston, VA: 402-415.
[3] Ho C. E. and Hu S. (2014). Jet Grouting for Mitigation of Excavation Wall Movements in Glacial Silts,
Geotechnical Special Publication No.238, ASCE, Reston, VA: 128-137.
[4] Ho C. E. and Pena-Iguaran A. (2013). “Underpinning Using Micropiles for Fragile Building Adjacent to
Deep Excavation in Manhattan, New York”, Proc. 7th International Conference on Case Histories in
Geotechnical Engineering, Wheeling, IL, Missouri University of Science and Technology, Paper No.
2.47.
[5] Ho C. E., Daugiala A. and Ebanks N. (2016). Installation of Secant Pile Wall in Rock Adjacent to Fragile
Building, Proc. International Conference on Deep Foundations, Seepage Control and Remediation, New
York, DFI: 271-280.
[6] Ho, C. E., Essler R. and Evans A. (2017). Ground Response to Permeation and Compensation Grouting in
Stratified Soil, Geotechnical Special Publication 287, Vol.2, ASCE, Reston, VA: 162-174.
[7] Ho, C. E. (2017). Compaction Grouting Verification Trial in Manhattan Soil Deposits, Geotechnical
Special Publication 287, Vol.2, ASCE, Reston, VA: 152-161.
[8] Frappin, P. and Morey, J. (2001). Jet Grouting Column Diameter Measurement Using the Electric Cylinder
Method, Travaux No.775, France.
[9] Ho, C. E. (2012). Jet grouting field trial in Manhattan soil deposits, New York, Geotechnical Special
Publication 228, Vol.2, ASCE, Reston, VA: 2122-2131.