IFCEE 2015 © ASCE 2015 2369

Ground Improvements for a Sloped Runway Expansion

Curtis R. Cook1, Mark E. Plaskett2, Ed J. Garbin, Ph.D., P.E., D.G.E.3

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by San Diego State University on 09/21/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

1
Vice President, Hayward Baker, 6850 Benjamin Road, Tampa, FL 33634-4416
2
Sr. Project Manager, Hayward Baker, 6850 Benjamin Road, Tampa, FL 33634-4416
3
Chief Engineer, Hayward Baker, 6850 Benjamin Road, Tampa, FL 33634-4416

ABSTRACT: This paper describes an extensive mass soil mixing and stone column
ground improvement program conducted for the expansion of a taxiway and runway
at Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport in Fort Lauderdale, Florida,
USA. The expansion, currently under construction, required a total elevation change
of up to 18.3 m (60 ft) over the 2,438.4 m (8,000 ft) long, 45.7 m (150 ft) wide ex-
pansion to allow planes to traverse over US 1 and the Florida East Coast railroad
tracks, and the airport’s perimeter and entrance roadways. The project includes a
complex system of mechanically stabilized earth (MSE) walls, cast-in-place walls,
and embankments to support the new taxiway and runway. A shallow organic layer
and deeper pockets of organic soils underlie the bridge abutments and MSE walls on
the project’s east side. Placement of embankment fill would produce excessive de-
formation and instability issues within the underlying organic and loose soils unless
these soils were treated prior to construction. The design-build solution included near-
ly 152,911.0 m3 (200,000 yd3) of mass soil mixing and over 3,000 vibro replacement
(VR) stone columns to depths up to 9.1 m (30 ft). The solution reduced settlement
and increased stability for all treatment areas. This paper presents project design, exe-
cution, verification testing, data acquisition, and post-improvement performance.

INTRODUCTION

The airport, built in 1929, is one of the busiest airports in Florida, servicing com-
mercial and intercontinental air travel. The $2 billion expansion focuses on accom-
modating large jets, modifying the runway and taxiway system to allow increased
speed and capacity, and upgrades to existing terminals. Upon completion, the airport
will feature 97 gates with the ability to handle 36 million passengers annually. Prior
to construction, the airport processed over 23 million passengers through 57 gates.
The project’s complex system includes 32,516.1 m2 (350,000 ft2) of mechanically
stabilized earth (MSE) walls, cast-in-place walls, and 5,351,884 m3 (7,000,000 yd3)
of embankment fill; however, in many areas, embankment and wall construction
would produce excessive settlement and stability issues due to the underlying organic

Page 1

IFCEE 2015
 IFCEE 2015 © ASCE 2015 2370

and loose soils unless these soils were treated prior to construction. Nearly 152,911
m3 (200,000 yd3) of wet mass soil mixing (WMSM) was constructed beneath the
planned runway MSE walls where deeper organic soils were encountered, and over
3,000 vibro replacement (VR) stone columns were constructed to depths up to 9.1 m
(30 ft) where shallower organic soils, loose upper sands, and weathered limestone
were encountered.
In addition to WMSM and VR, the initial specified ground improvement plan for
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by San Diego State University on 09/21/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

areas west of US 1 included Dynamic Compaction (DC) to support the new runway
and taxiway, MSE walls, cast-in-place walls, and embankments. However, during the
bid process, an alternate method of compaction was accepted due partly to the risks
DC posed to the adjacent structures. The alternate compaction technique including
pre-excavating to break up the surface limestone in area B, C, and D (Figure 1). Alt-
hough the surface compaction alternate worked in areas B and C, it had difficulties
achieving the project performance requirements in area D. Instead, a combination of
surface densification and vibro replacement was used to improve the soils within area
D.

SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

Subsurface exploration included multiple soil borings extending to depths of 38.1

m (125 ft), indicating loose sand and organic materials underlain by soft limestone,
loose sand, with medium dense sand and hard limestone below. Figure 1 provides an
overview of the treatment areas. In areas A and B, organic soils, loose sand and peat
was underlain by soft limestone, which was underlain by loose to dense sand with
hard limestone and very dense sand below. Subsurface conditions within area C and
D included mixed sand and limestone to EL. -7.6 m (-25 ft) with medium dense to
dense sand and limestone below. Figure 2 shows a typical boring for the different
treatment areas. All soil treatment scope was performed from EL. +1.2 to 2.1 m (+4
to +7 ft) NGVD.

FIG. 1. Sketch displaying treatment areas throughout the site.

Page 2

IFCEE 2015
 IFCEE 2015 © ASCE 2015 2371
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by San Diego State University on 09/21/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

FIG. 2. Soil borings of WMSM treatment areas.

The WMSM treatment footprint within area A included an embankment with

heights ranging from 12.2 and 18.0 m (40 and 59 ft). The geotechnical contractor
conducted finite element analyses of the embankment section to estimate the range of
construction related settlement for the varying heights of the embankment and to
evaluate global stability. The calculations indicated that an average soilcrete shear

Page 3

IFCEE 2015
 IFCEE 2015 © ASCE 2015 2372

strength of 25 and 50 psi would be required for the 12.2 and 18.0 m (40 and 59 ft)
heights, respectively. Based on achieving these target strength values, the calculations
indicated that the WMSM program would provide a mini-
mum global factor of safety of 1.5.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by San Diego State University on 09/21/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

FIG. 3. Finite Element Model for WMSM at MSE Walls within area A.

Table A shows the maximum calculated settlement within and beneath the WMSM
treatment zone as predicted in the WMSM finite element model (Figure 3). The ma-
jority of the anticipated settlement occurred within the natural soils beneath the
WMSM treatment zone. WMSM was performed along the edge of the embankment
while the inner part of the embankment soils were improved by pre-consolidation us-
ing fill surcharge, which experienced settlements up to 127 cm (50 in).

Table A. Estimate Settlement for WMSM.

WMSM CONSTRUCTION

WMSM construction utilized a conventional hydraulic excavator and special-

purpose mixing tool to introduce cement grout slurry to the soil mass (Figures 4 & 5).
The soil mixing extended up to 4.6 m (15 ft) deep to solidify the compressible, organ-

Page 4

IFCEE 2015
 IFCEE 2015 © ASCE 2015 2373

ic soils beneath the planned MSE walls that surrounded and re-
tained the fill for the site.
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by San Diego State University on 09/21/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

FIG. 4. Power Mixing Tool.

FIG. 5. Soil mixing near reclaimed wetlands for MSE walls.

Multiple soil samples were taken for pre-production laboratory testing to deter-
mine the mix methodology, mix energy, and binder type and content required to meet
the performance requirements.
All WMSM equipment included proprietary data acquisition (DAQ) to permit ac-
curate and continuous monitoring and recording of mixing tool depth, binder injection
rates, binder injection pressures, and other operations required to construct a soilcrete
mass. Frequent strength testing during production allowed the geotechnical contractor

Page 5

IFCEE 2015
 IFCEE 2015 © ASCE 2015 2374

to optimize the binder dosage and achieve the performance requirements while main-
taining high productivity.
Column penetration testing (KPS), a method developed to test larger cross sections
than cone penetrometer testing (CPT), provides a more accurate measurement of the
average shear strength (Garbin 2010). The geotechnical contractor utilized the KPS
test (Figure 6) to verify that design shear strength was met. In general, the test utilizes
a penetrating blade or cone to directly measure the in-situ shear strength of the soil
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by San Diego State University on 09/21/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

mix material. The KPS device was attached to a mast and hydraulically pushed into
the soil. An inline load cell measured the pushing force and a depth encoder tracked
tool position while an onboard computer and custom data acquisition (DAQ) system
recorded the data and converted the pushing force to shear strength by using calibra-
tion information collected before testing. The required design shear strength ranged
from 25 to 50 psi. Figure 7 shows a sample KPS test log.
During construction of the embankments and walls, most of the settlement oc-
curred rapidly in the granular material below the soilcrete mass. Long-term settlement
of the system will be negligible and meet or surpass the specified requirements of
15.2 cm (6 in) of long-term settlement after fill placement.

VR STONE COLUMN DESIGN

VR was proposed to improve the soils within the treatment zone through densifica-
tion of the clean granular soils and reinforcement of soils with higher fines content.
The VR stone columns were constructed beneath all bridge structure retaining walls,
the main body of each embankment, and the higher half of the embankment sloped
edges. The VR stone column spacing varied from as small as 2.4 m (8 ft) to as great
as 4.3 m (14 ft). All four VR grid patterns designed by the geotechnical contractor
achieved performance requirements.
The VR treatment extended to EL. -20 on the west side and EL. -25 on the east
side adjacent to US 1. The design of the stone columns included a maximum diameter
of 91.4 cm (36 in) utilizing # 57 stone backfill. All VR locations were predrilled to
ensure reaching the minimum tip elevation.
A two-dimensional finite element analyses (Figure 8) estimated settlement and
stability of the walls and embankments. The stiffer VR columns were modeled based
on strength parameters and area replacement. The 61.0 cm (24 in) square precast piles
shown in the model were used to support the abutment wall and were not designed or
analyzed by the geotechnical contractor.

Page 6

IFCEE 2015
 Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by San Diego State University on 09/21/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

IFCEE 2015 © ASCE 2015

IFCEE 2015
FIG. 6. KPS testing of mixed soil.

FIG. 7. KPS test graphically represented.

Page 7
2375
 IFCEE 2015 © ASCE 2015 2376
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by San Diego State University on 09/21/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

FIG. 8. Finite Element Model used for estimating settlements for VR treatment.

VR CONSTRUCTION

VR construction (Figure 9) required predrilling to penetrate the thin, shallow lime-

stone layers typical in the area. Two large down hole vibrators were used to construct
the stiff stone columns and densify the surrounding granular soils. The vibrators were
penetrated to design depth and stone was placed in the resulting cavities as the vibra-
tor was withdrawn. Raising and lowering the vibrator in 0.6 m (2 ft) intervals densi-
fied the stone fill and surrounding granular soils in lifts. The stone column and in-situ
soils formed an integrated system with a low compressibility and high shear strength.
A temporary surcharge of up to 1.5 m (5 ft) was placed on top of the completed
embankments and left in place until top-of-embankment settlement ceased. This en-
sured the post-construction settlement remained within allowable limits.

VR QUALITY CONTROL

The approximate stone column diameter was calculated based on approximate vol-
ume of stone added per column (number of stone skips). The volume calculation in-
cluded a correction for volume reduction during densification using the stones’ loose
and compacted unit weights. The volume of stone per skip was determined by direct
measurements of the skip buckets prior to construction. This method represents the
state of practice of the technology and produces a sufficiently accurate estimate of
column diameter.

Page 8

IFCEE 2015
 IFCEE 2015 © ASCE 2015 2377
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by San Diego State University on 09/21/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

FIG. 9. Aerial of predrilling and vibro replacement.

Amperage draw of the vibrator electric motor increases ass the surrounding stone
and soil densifies. Recording the amperage while the vibrator was hanging free from
the crane provided a baseline for the determination of the amount of densification
performed during VR construction. The maximum allowed increase from the free
hanging amperage was 50 amps.
Daily VR logs recorded all parameters, including volume of the stone backfill used
to assess diameters, amperage of the vibrator during column construction, probe
depth, diameter, and location. The geotechnical contractor evaluated the settlement
data collected from the settlement plates installed during the surcharge program to
determine when the surcharge could be removed and pavement placement com-
menced.

SURFACE DENSIFICATION AND VIBRO-REPLACEMENT COMBINA-

TION

Initially, ground improvement work for area D included DC to densify surface ma-
terial and collapse near surface cavities. However, vibrations caused by the DC sys-
tem and other technical concerns could potentially damage the adjacent active taxi-
ways, disturb sensitive equipment and disrupt local residences.

Page 9

IFCEE 2015
 IFCEE 2015 © ASCE 2015 2378

Up to 11.6 m (38 ft) of engineered fill was required to reach the design grade with-
in the area D footprint, but the new fill would induce settlement of the loose underly-
ing sands and possible collapse of voids in the limestone. Compatibility issues with
adjacent systems were also a concern if left untreated. Within this area, the geotech-
nical contractors proposed a surface densification and VR combined system (Figure
10) in lieu of DC to reduce potential damage from the vibrations and reinforce the
inadequate bearing soils. Both surface densification and VR individually performed
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by San Diego State University on 09/21/16. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

successfully on other portions of the project; combining the systems in area D provid-
ed a transition between the surface densification-only and VR-only areas. The surface
densification scope of work was completed concurrently with VR with the vibro work
being perform first.

FIG.10. Surface densification and VR alternate - column-supported embank-

ment.

CONCLUSION

The expansion of the Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport required

construction of runways and taxiways, MSE walls, and embankments with fill heights
up to 18.3 m (60 ft). The subsurface soil profile presented many challenges to the
proposed construction, such as global stability of the proposed walls and embank-
ments, and total and differential settlements of the runways and taxiways where the
embankment abutted the bridge structures. The design-build solution implemented
reduced settlement and increased stability of problem areas using a variety of soil im-
provement techniques, including wet mass soil mixing, vibro replacement stone col-
umns, and surface densification. Careful considerations made throughout planning,
design, construction, and quality control ensured specification requirements were met.

REFERENCES

Garbin, Ed, Mann, Joseph A., (2010), “Mass Stabilization for Environmentally Sensi-
tive Projects in Florida.” Proceedings, TRB 7th International Bridge Engineering Con-
ference, San Antonio, Texas.

Page 10

IFCEE 2015