GeoStrata Jul Aug2018 FINAL PDF

26 Lessons from GeoLegends: 34 Katrina Canal Breaches 42 56 T ales of Geofailure
Donald T. Goldberg Forensic Evaluation Standard of Care Compliance Investigations
JULY // AUGUST 2018
CASE
HISTORIES &
FORENSICS
Proudly published by the Geo-Institute of ASCE

GEOTECHNICAL AND STRUCTURAL
INSTRUMENTATION
PROVEN LONG-TERM RELIABILITY, PRECISION AND ACCURACY
■ Strain Gages ■ Piezometers ■ Load Cells ■ Readouts

■ Crackmeters ■ Pressure Transducers ■ Concrete Stress Cells ■ Terminal Boxes
■ Jointmeters ■ Weir Monitors ■ B/H Deformation Gages ■ Dataloggers
■ Strandmeters ■ Settlement Sensors ■ Stressmeters ■ Multiplexers
■ Convergence Meters ■ Pressure Cells ■ Inclinometers ■ Wireless Networks
■ Extensometers ■ DeAerators ■ Tiltmeters ■ Software
■ Temperature Gages ■ Pendulum Readouts ■ Custom Designs
■ Cables
to learn more, please visit: www.geokon.com⁄projects
INNOVATION AND QUALITY SINCE 1979

GEOKON, INCORPORATED | Lebanon, NH, USA | phone: +1.603.448.1562
July // August 2018
Features
34 ForensicInvestigations 62
Oroville Dam Spillway Incident
Get to the Facts Putting community safety first while investigating
East Side IHNC flood wall breaches during the cause.
Hurricane Katrina. By Craig Hall, Holly Nichols, and Les Harder
By W. Allen Marr
70
Avoid Negativity Bias
42
Compliance with the You may be unwittingly hampered by your brain!
By Stuart G. Walesh
Standard of Care
Hurricane Katrina canal breaches in New Orleans’
Lower 9th Ward.
By Patrick C. Lucia
50
The San Jacinto Monument j GEOSTRATA PRINT ARCHIVE Electronic copies
Over a foot of settlement, but level. of full issues of GEOSTRATA Magazine dating from
By Jean-Louis Briaud the current issue back to January/February 2010
are available in the GEOSTRATA Print Archive at
geoinstitute.org/publications/geostrata/print-archive.
56
Poison Oak, Mistakes, and Lessons The archive is only available to current members of
Tales of geofailure investigations.
ASCE and the Geo-Institute.
By Edmund Medley
CONNECT WITH US
www.asce.org/geo twitter.com/GeoInstitute facebook.com/GeoInstitute LinkedInGeo GeoInstituteASCE
2 GEOSTRATA JULY/AUGUST 2018

EDITORIAL BOARD
j J ames L. Withiam, PhD, PE, D.GE, M.ASCE, D’Appolonia
jlwithiam@dappolonia.com
j J . Tanner Blackburn, PhD, PE, M.ASCE, Hayward Baker
jtblackburn@haywardbaker.com
j J eff Dunn, PhD, PE, GE, D.GE, M.ASCE,
Geotechnical Consultant
rjeffdunn@gmail.com
July // August 2018
j K en Fishman, PhD, PE, M.ASCE, McMahon & Mann
Consulting Engineers
Departments
kfishman@mmce.net
jB
rian Hubel, PE, GE, M.ASCE, U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, San Francisco District
8
From the President brian.a.hubel@asace.army.mil
By Youssef M.A. Hashash jM
ichael P. McGuire, PhD, PE, M.ASCE, Lafayette College
mcguirem@lafayette.edu
10
From the Editorial Board j P eter G. Nicholson, PhD, PE, D.GE, F.ASCE,
By William K. Petersen Nicholson Geotechnical
peter.hawaii@gmail.com
10 Letter to the Editor jM
ary C. Nodine, PE, M.ASCE, GEI Consultants, Inc.
mnodine@geiconsultants.com
11 GeoCartoon jW
illiam K. Petersen, PE, M.ASCE,
Rimkus Consulting Group
12
Board of Governors Update bpetersen@rimkus.com
jM
ark Seel, PE, PG, M.ASCE, Langan
14 Technical Activities Update mseel@langan.com
18
As I See It: What Makes a Great jC
hris Woods, PE, D.GE, M.ASCE, Densification, Inc.
chris@densification.com
Geotechnical Expert?
By Ralph A. Finizio, Esq. 2 0 1 7 -1 8 G-I B O A R D O F
GOVERNORS
22
As I See It: Geotechnical Reporting – j Y oussef M. A. Hashash, PhD, PE, D.GE, F.ASCE –
President
A Source of Potential Liability?
jB
eth A. Gross, PhD, PE, D.GE, F.ASCE – Vice President
By Demetrious C. Koutsoftas
j P atrick J. Fox, PhD, PE, D.GE, F.ASCE – Treasurer
26 Lessons Learned from GeoLegends: jG
arry H. Gregory, PhD, PE, D.GE, M.ASCE –
Past President
Donald T. Goldberg
jC
harles W. Black, Jr., PE, M.ASCE
By Andrew Rohrman, Arash Pirouzi, and Shreeya Pandey
j J ames G. Collin, PhD, PE, D.GE, F.ASCE
72
Look Who’s a D.GE jR
obert B. Gilbert, PhD, PE, D.GE, M.ASCE
An interview with Edward J. Ulrich, Jr. j S issy Nikolaou, PhD, PE, D.GE, F.ASCE
jB
rad Keelor – Secretary (non-voting)
74
G-I ORGANIZATIONAL
G E O S T R ATA S TA F F
MEMBER NEWS
j S tefan Jaeger – Publisher
77
COREBITS NEWS jD
ianne Vance, CAE – Director of Advertising
dvance@asce.org
80
COREBITS CHAPTERS j K ristie C. Kehoe – Content Coordinator
j Helen Cook – Content Editor
82
ASCE EDUCATION and CAREERS j E lizabeth Cuscino – Content Editor
83
Coming in September/October j S ean Richardson – Production Manager
2018 GEOSTRATA ADVERTISING SALES MANAGERS

jH
allie Brown, Ben Harmon
83 INDUSTRY CALENDAR
G E O S T R ATA D E S I G N
84 GeoPoem: Urban Jungle j T HOR Design Studio, www.thor.design
By Mary C. Nodine
GEOSTRATA is a forum for the free expression and interchange
of ideas. The opinions and positions stated within are those of
the authors, and not necessarily those of GEOSTRATA, the
Geo-Institute, or the American Society of Civil Engineers
(ASCE). GEOSTRATA—ISSN 1529-2975—is published
bi-monthly by ASCE, 1801 Alexander Bell Drive, Reston, VA
20191-4400 and is a free ASCE/Geo-Institute membership
GEOSTRATA is published by the Geo-Institute benefit, not available by subscription. ADDRESS CHANGES:
and the American Society of Civil Engineers. ASCE/G-I members should e-mail memrec@asce.org, or click
on “My Profile” at asce.org. Copyright © 2018 by the American
Society of Civil Engineers. All rights reserved. Materials may
not be reproduced or translated without written permission
from ASCE. Periodicals postage paid at Herndon, VA, and at
additional mailing offices. POSTMASTER: Send address
changes to GEOSTRATA, 1801 Alexander Bell Drive, Reston, VA
20191-4400.

ISSUE NO. 4 • VOLUME 22
DUCTILE
IRON PILES
MODULAR, FAST AND LOW-
VIBRATION DRIVEN PILES
A proven, cost-effective pile solution to support

foundation loads in problematic soil conditions.
• Ideal for constrained, urban sites
• Rapid installations reduce project schedules
• Typical cost savings of 20-40%
• Alternative to traditional driven piles, drilled
micropiles, helical piles
• Plug & Drive connection easily adjusts to
variable depths and reduces waste
• 30+ years of experience
RECENT PROJECTS
The Adele Mystic Avenue HON Manufacturing Red Bank Marine Park
Washington, DC Medford, MA Muscatine, IA Red Bank, NJ
CONTACT US
FOR PROJECT FEASIBILITY OR MORE
INFORMATION ON OUR PARTNER NETWORK
781.817.6053 • info@duroterra.com
www.duroterra.com
The Evolution of
Geotechnical Data
Management
Stone Paper
Tablet Scroll gINT© pLog Tablet
HoleBASE SI & KeyLAB
• Tired of re-inputting the same data in the field, in gINT©, in the lab, in Excel®, in CAD?
• Interested in automatically mapping all borehole locations?
• Need to use borehole, lab testing and in-situ testing data together?
• Do you have many different ways of doing the same thing?
Discover Geotechnical Site Investigation Data Management. SIMPLIFIED.
Visit our website for more information:

www.dataforensics.net/geostrata
Boreholes • In-situ Testing • Laboratory Data
Call +1 844-666-5582
info@keynetix.com
Save Time and Money on

Geotechnical Projects
See how Keynetix software was used by
Deliver value for money TSP to realize a fully digitized workflow and
through focused site resilient data system for planning scheduling and
investigation
reporting of ground data to work more efficiently
React faster on site to and save time and money.
investigate potential
issues To date, about $1.5M has been spent
Communicate with the on this project on ground investigation,
wider team to improve compared with similar projects, where the
design and construction check is $2.1M. The added benefit is that the
level of detail in the data is also higher than
usual.
Callum Irving,TSP Projects
keynetix.com/stories
From the President
Pieces of the Puzzle
A
pproaching a civil engineering project often reminds me
of putting a puzzle together. There are many pieces to be
assembled to arrive at the complete solution. However,
unlike a puzzle, we do not necessarily know the full “picture,” nor
the shapes of the pieces that we are trying to put together. A civil
engineering project can be thought of as multiple puzzles within a
single puzzle: there is the geotechnical puzzle to assemble, there is
the structural puzzle, and there are other puzzles depending on the
project, such as hydraulics, transportation, and legal. Here, I will limit
my discussion primarily to the structural and geotechnical puzzles.
As geotechnical engineers, we are trained and highly experienced in putting together
the geotechnical puzzle, beginning with site characterization, field and laboratory testing,
YOUSSEF HASHASH design evaluation and development, analysis, and finally construction monitoring. Similarly,
our colleagues in other areas are highly trained in putting together their own puzzles.
Disciplinary training and focus is necessary. Engineers gain deeper understanding of how to
handle complex details and issues within their own specialty area. Given the increased spe-
cialization, master’s-level students in most academic programs have a plethora of courses to
take in their own specialty, but this often means that they don’t have time to take courses in
other complementary disciplines. Thus, they may not develop the necessary appreciation for
the nuances of other disciplines.
It’s insufficient to simply develop a geotechnical report for a project without further
engaging in design development to make sure that the geotechnical recommendations are
compatible with their intended use by other disciplines. As an example, with the new gener-
ation of easy-to-use analysis tools for soil-structure interaction, where the structure and the
soil are represented to a high degree of fidelity, both a geotechnical and a structural engineer
must work together. They need to collaborate to develop the input required for these analysis
tools, and more importantly they need to work together to interpret the output and possibly
re-evaluate the adequacy of the input. This can only be achieved if each engineer has a
better understanding of the other’s complementary field. Is our current disciplinary training
sufficient to equip engineers with the necessary skill sets to work together?

Over the years, we have seen significant efforts to pro- conflicting factors. Unlike a puzzle — where there is a
mote structural engineering licensure in many states for clear line or boundary that separates, yet also connects the
certain classes of structures. While the G-I supports this pieces — in most projects such clear boundaries do not exist.
effort, it also recognizes some unintended consequences, Recognizing the lack of clear boundaries is important for
i.e., structures traditionally designed by licensed civil many reasons, including project delivery, performance, and
engineers with geotechnical background could require SE legal responsibility.
licensure. Within the G-I, we’re learning to take better advan- Maybe no one engineer can be the lead, and true collabo-
tage of our umbrella organization, ASCE, to reach across the ration is needed. Regardless, we can all benefit from stronger
traditional disciplinary boundaries to the benefit of all our engagement with colleagues in other specialties. Maybe in
members. Jointly with SEI, we have reached what is known our conferences we can include more speakers from other
as the Oakbrook Accord, which excludes structures that are disciplines. Within the ASCE family we want to enhance our
in contact with soil from being designated structures for interactions with other institutes. In our practice, we want
SE licensing purposes. (For more on the Oakbrook Accord, to be better engaged with the overall project and go beyond
please see the G-I website.) The G-I is continuing this effort delivering the geotechnical recommendations to having a
in collaboration with SEI and ASCE as various states consider leadership role in project delivery.
adopting SE licensure. A parallel effort to promote geotech-
nical board certification (D.GE) is also underway to further
enhance geotechnical practice.
While these efforts to enhance disciplinary practice are
necessary, who is then responsible or most qualified to put
these puzzles together to deliver the project, whether it be Youssef Hashash, PhD, PE, F.ASCE
an underground structure, a high-rise building, a dam, or Geo-Institute President
a roadway? Who is responsible for making sure the pieces hashash@illinois.edu
fit together? Answering this question is not so simple, as linkedin.com/in/youssef-hashash-111a7115
it depends on numerous, often evolving, and sometimes https://twitter.com/YoussefHGeotech
www.geoinstitute.org 9
From the Editorial Board
Established in a forensic element to many civil-works Katrina. Two articles in this issue describe
1985, ASCE’s projects, where even site characterization common aspects of these matters:
Technical requires an in-depth investigation and assessing the probable causes of failure,
Council on possibly the evaluation of pre-existing and establishing the standard of care
Forensic failures of soil and rock. Further, this relative to the methods used for analysis
Engineering uncertainty often results in construction and design. “Forensic Investigations
(TCFE), and disputes directly involving the design Get to the Facts” by Allen Marr and
specifically team’s geotechnical consultant and/or “Compliance with the Standard of Care.”
its Forensic construction-monitoring forces. For all by Pat Lucia dissect the engineering
Practices of these reasons, there’s a natural overlap mechanics and legal activities associated
Committee between forensics and geotechnics, with two major floodwall breaches on the
(FPC), perhaps more so than exists with the east side of the Inner Harbor Navigation
undertook the other subdisciplines of civil engineering. Canal. Both articles, which should be
WILLIAM K. PETERSEN
development read consecutively, address allegations
of guidelines What’s Inside? of design liability against the U.S. Army
for forensic engineering practice in Whether specializing in the practice Corps of Engineers and the technical and
1994. Their work is presented in the of forensics or not, many geotechnical legal grounds forming the basis for the
first and second editions (2003 and engineers will be called upon to act as ensuing judicial rulings.
2012) of ASCE’s Guidelines for Forensic “experts” to help resolve negligence Jean-Louis Briaud’s “The San Jacinto
Engineering Practice. The preface to the of a claim at least once during their Monument, Over a Foot of Settlement
second edition defines forensic engineer- professional careers. Attorney Ralph but Level,” provides a brief history of
ing as the “engineering investigations of Finizio shares the lessons of his 25 years the Texas Revolution’s pivotal events
buildings, bridges, and other constructed with litigating construction disputes in along with an intriguing settlement case
facilities that fail or do not perform as his commentary, “What Makes a Great history involving the tallest free-standing
intended, rendering opinions as to the Geotechnical Expert?” Some of his column in the world. Built between 1936
causes of failure or underperformance, advice, including “a good expert is the and 1939, the 564-ft-high monument
and giving testimony in judicial harshest critic of his or her own opin- has settled a total of about 10 ft from the
proceedings.” Although the wider ions,” renders valuable insight to anyone combined effects of regional subsidence
field of professional practice includes new to the area of expert litigation and self-weight, despite a relatively low
the investigation of product defects, because it may seem counterintuitive at bearing pressure under its base. The
accidents, fires, machinery, and vehicles first glance. extensive settlement data, taken over the
(among other things), the FPC guidelines Our second commentary, last 80 years, has yielded an interesting
were developed specifically for forensic “Geotechnical Reporting – A Source list of lessons learned.
engineering as it relates to the civil-works of Potential Liability?” by Demetrious Ed Medley’s article, “Poison Oak,
built environment. Koutsoftas, explores the link between Mistakes, and Lessons: Tales of
While the term “forensic” implies poor writing skills and potential liability. Geofailure Investigations,” points out
that the problem under investigation This topic touches on issues with which some of the glaring differences between
may be decided in a legal forum with a we are all too frequently involved in investigating “geofailures” and working
component of blame allocation, more geotechnical consulting, and the conclu- on typical geotechnical projects from
loosely defined it can be viewed to sions he offers may surprise you. the design side, likening the former
include the analysis of failures that do The flooding of New Orleans to solving a jigsaw puzzle without the
not involve human activity. In geotechni- following Hurricane Katrina in August of benefit of the picture on the lid of the
cal engineering, where natural material 2005 represents one of the worst natural puzzle box. Through five tales connecting
properties are usually not well defined, disasters to ever strike the U.S. Disasters mistakes and lessons, this quick read
the back-calculation of engineering of this magnitude often lead to a period demonstrates the importance of diving
parameters following a failure is a of intensive forensic engineering and deep into these types of investigations.
standard practice, and it’s especially legal investigations to sort out the details In February 2017, following
common with earthen slopes. The level of countless individual failures, primarily record-breaking precipitation in the
of uncertainty in the subsurface lends levees and floodwalls in the case of Northern California Sierra Mountains,

Letter to the Editor rstar_Geostrata_MIG0
296L.pdf 1
4/2/2018 2:44:51
PM
RST Instrum
ents Ltd. offers
2 Wireless Data
Systems to
Collection
quickly get you
connected to
your data: WIRCOEL
DATA
LINK.
RSTAR and DT
um
s offer minim
Both system
cost, extra long
per channel
long distance ical Moni
batter y life and
ission. for Geotechn
GeoPoetry Always Gets Read First!

data transm
(REMOTELY)
GeoPoem
ATED COLLE CTION
FULLY AUTOM
The
Hub
left
j j Dear Mary Nodine, fellow geo-engineer,

uses
An RSTAR System the a fl
(nodes) at Da
data loggers
M.AS CE a Sy
deployed in
Nod ine, PE, sensor level, an
By Mary C. star topolog

y from an active an
containing an
C
Design-Build
RSTAR Hub
water had to be released via the flood

is
Logger.
You are so blessedly adept at scintillating

Data th
RST flexDAQ S
F E AT U R E m
‘D’ cell. w
from 1 lithium
of battery life
Up to 10 years country.
to Node in open
range from Hub antenna type)
style! Up to 14 km (depending on
to change their
control spillway chute at Oroville Dam

DB team wants
poetry that I kick myself for not having compli-

pile. per RSTAR Hub.
new kind of Up to 255 nodes
C
bridge to fix. With a brand-

Owner has a a trick. um on the way. M
2.4 GHz spread
spectrum band.
— he needs Design addend 868 MHz and (country dependen
t)
Deadline’s short appeal — ed without delay. Based on 900 MHz,
bid holds no Equipment swapp
Y
nstruments.com
Design-then- at: www.rsti
a package deal. CM
Watch the video

for both systems
He purchases is turning blue...
in order to control the reservoir level

Owner’s face
mented you on the always-first-read feature of

what to do!
TOLD them (ON-S ITE)
MY
from out of
town. We should have ATED COLLE
CTION
Contractor’s .
CY
SEMI- AUTOM
logies abound back on site.
New techno
le is the goal! Contractor is
CMY
g right.
Ahead of schedu holes. ue is workin DT LINK is an
on-site
to drill more New techniq , K
First: we need a bit behind tion to RST
and meet the dam’s operations plan. In

Schedule starts wireless connec
GEOSTRATA! Extra deep here,

Constitutes
than we though
Clay — it’s softer the rock.
to
a changed conditi
t.
on...
Catch up throug
Owner breathe
h the daily grind.
s a heavy sigh.
it through alive.
data loggers
access areas
for quick data
collection. Ideal
for hard to
where the data
line of sight.
, an addition. Project made
not to weep, logger is within S
To the budget F E AT U R E
doing so, however, the spillway suffered

He, in turn, tried
Don’t drop your pen!

sleep.
head, hair and losing that are in areas
a calm, cool While losing from data loggers s obstacles.
Owner keeps collect data and hazardou
Safely & easily
come out ahead. he grins. with poor access,
trespass issues
Sure he’ll still his new bridge, ‘D’ cell.
But crossing Years of battery
life from 1 lithium
seeps back in.
ction, no delays! Satisfaction MHz) and up
to 500 m (2.4
GHz). Pictu
Start constru acquiesce...
a catastrophic failure when about

800 m (900 wire
After all, he’ll
I cannot image that any other practitioner

t some stress! Range up to
g several days, world withou d to DT LINK
HUB.
coll
After workin a laptop connecte
ssing well. Can’t build this in seconds with
Drilling not progre meetings held. Collect data
d and
Work is stoppe
Da
RST’s “DT Series”
not to panic. Compatible
sensor
Owner’s trying .”
1,400 ft of the lower chute broke away,

ts from the “Titanic
(or any other of our orbiters) could even

Pote
Vibrating Wire,
Steers his though and a project Digitally Bussed
Se
Editorial Board,
GEOSTRATA’s
member of s.com.
nical poet, a e@geiconsultant
GERS
D ATA L O G
, PE, M.ASCE
, is a geotech reached at mnodin
She can be
MARY C. NODINE Woburn, MA. m
ants, Inc. in truments.co
manager with
GEI Consult info@rstins
and more than 1.6 million cy of soil and

ruments.com
enter your ring, just on the basis that your www.rstinst
www.youtube.com/
user/RSTgeotech
rock materials were scoured. In their understanding of our body of knowledge must
88 GEOST RATA
MAY/JU NE
2018
PM
4/25/18 5:46
article “Oroville Dam Spillway Incident,” be near encyclopedic in order to create feature 001022_GeoStrata_
May/June2018_FIN
AL.indd 88
Craig Hall, Holly Nichols, and Les Harder poems of such reader-magnetism — and due
describe the investigations and emer- on a regular-submission basis!
GeoPoem
gency actions taken to repair the spillway Nod ine, PE,
M.AS CE
By Mary C.
and protect the area’s nearly 200,000 Sincerely,

Our most po
residents downstream from the dam. Dr. Allen W. Hatheway, PhD, PE, F.ASCE limit equilib
If you need some motivation to fulfill Professor of Geological Engineering (Ret.) No
Creep
a long-term goal, be sure to read “Avoid Missouri University of Science & 2018
version
available!
Negativity Bias: You May Be Unwittingly Technology (UMR) — Soil collaps

e? Degradation?
What’s the cause and what’s the duration? Slide 2018 ity solution
it start, peat,
painstakingly When does landfills and
scene: You’ve who build upon slope stabil
comprehensive love, packed
Hampered by Your Brain!” by Stuart Rolla, Missouri

Imagine the You curse those in feet.
C, settlements
data for C r and c dream about The most the Slide you e
Analyzed all just right, And you fitfully better. It’s tics, surfac
to capture, – now even spatial statis and more.
Picked OCR
ic history of
your little site. specify hefty
preload. features like surfaces,
The geolog In the end, you .. with new n, anisotropic
into panic mode. optim izatio .
goes altering Slide 2018
analysis with
falls just within The owner schedule change
y settlement
Advance your
Walesh. Though not related to the theme

a win. This unanticipated to blame!
Your primar — sounds like and you are
requirements his profits —
The project figured out... Will eat into
you have it all doubt. same team.
Slide
But just when to fill you with
Creep sneaks
onto the scene
You calmly
explain that
ement’s an
you’re on the
option — togeth
er you schem
t be cheap....
e.
3 2017
that’s fixed... Ground improv , you canno
under a load creature lurking
of this issue, this article helps us to

Settlement exist? But with this Creep.
menon really you fear regret it if you ignore
analysis.
Does this pheno but deep down For you will equilibrium
to believe it, of your limit of the same
You want not of years.
Get more out s to dozens
ard over dozens 3 you have acces mers around
With Slide ,
pull downw
This steady of Slide custo
d by thousands
features truste available in full 3D.
recognize how and why our past failures

now
the world –
nical poet,
, is a geotech
, PE, M.ASCE
MARY C. NODINE and a project
Editorial Board,
GEOSTRATA’s She
a member of Woburn, MA.
ants, Inc. in
GEI Consult
manager with nsultants.com.
at mnodine@geico
can be reached
can hinder us later in our careers.

GeoCartoon
2018
MARCH /APRIL
GEOST RATA
80 2/20/18 12:01
PM
One-by-one, piles are driven to 000979_GeoStrata_

Mar/Apr2018_v4.ind
d 80
support structures that will bear on

them. But the path in advancing them is
not linear, as Mary Nodine recounts in
this issue’s poem, “Urban Jungle.”
Finally, Andrew Rohrman, Arash Editor's Note:
Pirouzi, and Shreeya Pandey offer For a short time many
an interview with GeoLegend Don years ago, a G-I member
Goldberg, a noted authority on stabi- volunteered to create
lizing deep “soft-ground” excavations geo-focused cartoons
and solving complex geotechnical for GEOSTRATA. Since
and foundation problems. Read about then we have reprinted
some of the things that have motivated just a few cartoons from
Goldberg in his career and his sugges- copyrighted sources.
tions for students entering consulting We'd love to restart
today. this fun feature with
We hope you enjoy this issue that cartoons like this one. If
delves into the investigative methods you see a cartoon with a
geotechnical engineers use to under- geotechnical focus — or
stand how and why problems happen, if you know a budding
and help support the methods we use for cartoonist who would
analysis and design. Read on! like to help us out —
please contact Jim
This message was prepared by WILLIAM Withiam at jlwithiam@
K. PETERSEN, PE, M.ASCE. He can be dappolonia.com.
reached at bpetersen@rimkus.com.
Board of Governors Update
Borderline Between Science and Art

Increasingly frequent, extreme multi-hazards such as due to recovery and restoration efforts, weather effects, or
earthquakes, tsunamis, hurricanes, landslides, floods, and subsequent failures.
wildfires have generated unfortunate, yet valuable lessons Our profession stands by its nature at the borderline
that reveal risks to our built environment and population between science and art, in the words of Karl Terzaghi, still
and offer significant case histories. The documentation of valid to date: “To acquire competence in the field of earth-
failures, but also successes, and long-term monitoring of the work engineering one must live with the soil. One must love
recovery and rebuild, are inherently necessary components it and observe its performance not only in the laboratory but
for geotechnical engineers to advance the research and state also in the field, to become familiar with those of its mani-
of practice that is mainly experience-driven from observed fold properties that are not disclosed by boring records.”
behavior of geo-structures. Rapid reconnaissance following The G-I Board of Governors supports the sharing of field
a major event is critical, as evidence can vanish quickly experience of the performance of geo-structures (dams,
G-I Board of Governors

Youssef M.A. Hashash, Beth A. Gross, Patrick J. Fox,
PhD, PE, F.ASCE PhD, PE, D.GE, F.ASCE PhD, PE, D.GE, F.ASCE
President Vice President Treasurer
hashash@illinois.edu bgross@geosyntec.com pjfox@engr.psu.edu
Committees: International Activities Committees: Awards, Nominations & Elections, Committees: Student Participation, Technical
Other Activities: ASCE Publication Access, Technical Coordination Publications
Digital G-I Other Activities: ASCE Grand Challenge, Other Activities: Finance, G-I Organization,
GEOSTRATA, Specialty Conferences Committee Summit Meeting
Garry H. Gregory, Charles W. Black, Jr., James G. Collin,

PhD, PE, D.GE, M.ASCE PE, M.ASCE PhD, PE, D.GE, F.ASCE
Past President cblack@smeinc.com jim@thecollingroup.com
ggregory@gregeo.com
Committees: Past Presidents Committees: Outreach & Engagement Committees: Local Involvement, Regional
Other Activities: Membership, Student Fund Other Activities: Membership Conferences
Other Activities: FHWA IDEA and DIGGS,
Collaboration with other organizations
Robert B. Gilbert, Sissy Nikolaou, Brad Keelor

PhD, PE, D.GE, M.ASCE PhD, PE, D.GE, F.ASCE Secretary and G-I Director
bob_gilbert@mail.utexas.edu sissy.nikolaou@wsp.com bkeelor@asce.org
Committees: Codes & Standards, GeoCongress Committees: Continuing Education, Manages the day-to-day activities of the G-I
Organizing Organizational Member
Other Activities: Re-imaging Conferences, Other Activities: Digital G-I
Risk-Based Design Code Task Force, Licensure
& Post-PE Credentialing, AGP Collaboration

GEOTECHNICS
Geological Engineers
Civil Engineers
Mining Engineers
Geologists Master of Engineering & Graduate Certificate
Earn your distance

graduate degree
in Geotechnics
while you work.
foundations, tunnels, landfills), in the

form of case histories that can advance
the geo-knowledge, as in the early days
of modern geotechnical engineering.
10 Classes for
Masters 4 Classes for
Graduate Certificate
The Geo-Congress 2019, scheduled for Courses in geological engineering,

March 24-27 in Philadelphia, PA, will geotechnics, soil mechanics, rock
showcase experiences and observations mechanics and subsurface hydrology
from hundreds of geo-engineering
projects with a wide range of knowl-
edge-enhancing technical and panel LEARN MORE
gtech.mst.edu
sessions, short courses, and workshops.
It will follow the long tradition started
more than 30 years ago by Professor
Shamsher Prakash and the series of
BOREHOLE SHEAR TEST

international conferences on case
histories in geotechnical engineering. Sometimes the
ONLY OPTION
Shared engineering judgment
toward advancing our profession is is not just an option; it is the
the essence of the Geo-Congress 2019.
As Ralph Peck said, the quality of our
when undisturbed core samples are not recoverable.
engineering judgment is the basis of
our ability as geotechnical engineers BST in weathered granite, total testing time less than one hour:
and enhances the safety of our designs. A test that can pay for itself the first time it is used.
He emphasized that this component
cannot be substituted by theory and
calculations, which form the basis
for sounder judgment. There is no
better way to advance engineering
judgment and to appreciate the close
connection of the geo-profession with
the industry, finance, risk, and human
relations, than to learn from case
histories. The G-I Board of Governors is
looking forward with excitement to the
exchange of ideas and information that
will take place next March in the 2019
Geo-Congress in Philadelphia! Watch for
more details at geocongress.org.
Data courtesy of
National Geotechnical Consultants, The Gap, Queensland, Australia
www.handygeotech.com
Handy Geotechnical Instruments, Inc., Madrid, Iowa, 50156 USA.
Technical Activities Update
The Risk Assessment and Management Technical

Committee, chaired by D. Vaughan Griffiths, PhD, PE,
D.GE, F.ASCE, continues to be a leader in the G-I Speakers
Program. Its lectures have been very popular and have
provided valuable technical content to several chapters,
GSOs, and G-I events nationally. In addition, the Geo-Risk
2017, Geotechnical Risk from Theory to Practice specialty
conference held in June 2017 was a successful and
well-attended event!
The Embankments, Dams, and Slopes (EDS) Technical

Committee, chaired by Timothy D. Stark, PhD, PE, D.GE,
Members of the Grouting Technical Committee and Conference F.ASCE, continues to revise its membership roster to increase
Organizing Committee, (l to r): Justice Maswoswe, Chadi El committee and member activity and include relevant stake-
Mohtar, Mike Byle, Donald Bruce, Jim Warner, Paolo Gazzarrini. holders in committee activities. Since October 2017, the EDS
Committee has added 12 new members from varying institu-
tions in academia, industry, regulatory agencies, and state and
federal public sectors. It’s anticipated that the new members
will become involved with new and ongoing EDS Committee
activities, including development of guidance documents to
address current topics requested by practitioners, participa-
tion in specially funded projects like assessing landslide risk
and EDS event reconnaissance teams, webinars, award nomi-
nations, and Geo-Institute conference development. Based on
its March 2018 meeting during the 2018 IFCEE conference, the
EDS Committee is moving forward on the following technical
Members of the Risk Assessment and Management Technical reports:
Committee, (l to r): Jinsong Huang, Jie Zhang, KK Phoon, Adrian oo Fully softened shear strength for slope stability analyses –
Rodriguez-Marek, Jianye Ching, BK Low, Hongwei Huang, Vern Schaefer (vern@iastate.edu)
Abdul-Hamid Soubra, DV Griffiths (Chair), Hsein Juang, oo Remote sensing for EDS applications – Ben Leshchinsky
Gordon Fenton, Limin Zhang (Vice-Chair), Michele Cavello. (ben.leshchinsky@oregonstate.edu)
oo Global and compound slope stability analyses – Garry
Please congratulate the Grouting and the Risk Assessment and Gregory (ggregory@gregeo.com)
Management technical committees, which have been selected as oo Seepage – 2D v. 3D, transient, steady state – Ming Xao
Geo-Institute co-committees of 2018. The Grouting Committee, (mxiao@engr.psu.edu)
chaired by Paolo Gazzarrini, P.Eng., M.ASCE, showed excellent oo Sustainable solutions for geotechnical application – Dan
work with the Grouting specialty conference held in July 2017. VandenBerge (dvandenberge@tntech.edu)
The event had 330 participants representing 24 countries,
five keynote lectures, five short courses, three concurrent The goal is to eventually have these published as a
sessions, and 130 papers. Excellent organization and efforts by Geotechnical Special Publication (GSP) by the ASCE/G-I, to
committee members helped turn this conference into a success! serve as a reference for the geotechnical profession. If you
Additionally, the Grouting Committee continued its outreach would like to participate in one the white papers listed above,
with its annual short course on “Grouting Fundamentals and please contact the chairperson identified using the email
Current Practice,” held at the University of Texas at Austin. address shown.

As part of the Grouting Technical
Committee’s outreach activities, mul-
tiple committee members participated
in the 39th Annual Short Course on
Grouting Fundamentals & Current
Practice. The event was hosted by The
University of Texas at Austin’s Cockrell
School of Engineering from February
12-16, 2018. The course was organized by
two committee members: Scott Kieffer,
PhD, PE, M.ASCE, and Chadi El Mohtar,
PE, A.M.ASCE, Grouting Committee
vice-chair and chair of the Grouting
Outreach subcommittee. Co-sponsored
by the ASCE Geo-Institute, the event was
attended by professionals worldwide to
learn the latest and best in the field of
geotechnical grouting.
39th Annual Short Course on Grouting Fundamentals & Current Practice
Technical Committees
COMMITTEE COMMITTEE CHAIR EMAIL ADDRESS
Computational Geotechnics José E. Andrade, PhD, M.ASCE jandrade@caltech.edu
Deep Foundations Muhannad Suleiman, PhD, A.MASCE mts210@lehigh.edu
Earth Retaining Structures Anne Lemnitzer, PE, M.ASCE alemnitz@uci.edu
Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics Adrian Rodriguez-Marek, PhD, M.ASCE adrianrm@vt.edu
Embankments, Dams, and Slopes Timothy Stark, PhD, PE, D.GE, F.ASCE tstark@illinois.edu
Engineering Geology and Site Characterization Xiong “Bill” Yu, PhD, PE, M.ASCE xxy21@case.edu
Geoenvironmental Engineering Dimitrios Zekkos, PhD, PE, M.ASCE zekkos@umich.edu
Geophysical Engineering Brent L. Rosenblad, A.M.ASCE rosenbladb@missouri.edu
Geosynthetics Jorge G. Zornberg, PhD, PE, M.ASCE zornberg@mail.utexas.edu
Geotechnics of Soil Erosion John D. Rice, PhD, A.M.ASCE john.rice@usu.edu
Grouting Paolo Gazzarrini, P.Eng, M.ASCE paolo@paologaz.com
Pavements Charles W. Schwartz, PhD, M.ASCE schwartz@umd.edu
Risk Assessment and Management D. Vaughan Griffiths, PhD, PE, D.GE, F.ASCE d.v.griffiths@mines.edu
Rock Mechanics M. Ronald Yeung, PhD, PE, M.ASCE mryeung@cpp.edu
Shallow Foundations Derrick D. Dasenbrock, PE, F.ASCE derrick.dasenbrock@state.mn.us
Soil Improvement Jie Han, PhD, PE, F.ASCE jiehan@ku.edu
Soil Properties and Modeling T. Matthew Evans, PhD, A.M.ASCE matt.evans@oregonstate.edu
Sustainability in Geotechnical Engineering Dipanjan Basu, Ph.D., C.Eng, M.ASCE dipanjan.basu@uwaterloo.ca
Underground Engineering and Construction Thomas W. Pennington, PE, M.ASCE pennington@mcmjac.com
Unsaturated Soils Laureano R. Hoyos, PhD, PE, M.ASCE hoyos@uta.edu
Technical Activities Update
Since 1979, this unique course

on grouting materials, methods, and
applications has educated over 2,000
professionals and has filled a wide gap
in traditional university education.
Although theory and calculations are
an integral part of competent grouting
work, practical field experience is essen-
tial for the success of any grouting job.
An incredible breadth and depth of sub-
ject matter was covered by a renowned
course faculty that included experts
from seven countries, many of whom
maintain active leadership and mem-
G-I GSO members tour the MD 355 Crossing (BRAC) project in Bethesda, MD, under bership roles on the ASCE G-I Grouting
the UEC Tunnel Tour Program. Committee. The 2018 course included
70 delegates representing engineering
design firms, specialty geotechnical
Photo from the bottom contractors, hydropower facility owners,
of the excavation. equipment manufacturers, and material
suppliers. As is common, the majority of
delegates were from throughout the U.S.
and Canada, with significant overseas
attendance based on major upcoming
geotechnical construction works. The
course included such delegates from
Australia, Albania, Bolivia, Uganda, and
throughout Europe.
The Underground Engineering

& Construction (UEC) Technical
Committee, chaired by Thomas
Pennington, PE, M.ASCE, in collabora-
tion with the Underground Construction
Association (UCA) of the Society for
Mining, Metallurgy & Exploration (SME),
has continued its popular student pro-
grams, offering student tunnel tours of
active underground construction proj-
ects. This spring, the UEC Committee
coordinated three tours, including visits
to the (BRAC) Project in Maryland and
the Randall’s Island Project in New York.
Additional tours are scheduled for later
this summer and fall for the Central
Subway Project in San Francisco and the
Fort Wayne Tunnel Project in Indiana.
For groups that are unavailable to attend
a tunnel tour, the UEC Committee also

Bi-Directional
www.GRLengineers.com Load Testing
GRL Engineers perform Bi-Directional Load Tests using the
GRL-Cell cast into a deep foundation.
• Test results allow optimization and
offers industry speakers available to corroboration of foundation design
address your ASCE/G-I Student Chapter
on several underground engineering • The pressurized cell loads the
foundation in two directions, against
topics, such as tunnel design and both the shaft resistance and toe
construction methods, groundwater resistance
and ground improvement methods for
• Foundation top load-movement
tunneling, tunnel case histories, and
curve can be estimated from
tunnel inspections and rehabilitation. measured
For additional information, contact load-movement responses
committee chairs Tom Pennington
• The GRL-Cell is manufactured and
(pennington@mcmjac.com) and Debra
calibrated in Cleveland, OH, USA
Laefer (debra.laefer@nyu.edu).
Under the Student Tunnel Tours Central Office: 216.831.6131
Program, six PhD student members www.GRLengineers.com
of the North Carolina State University
CA: 323.441.0965 NC: 704.593.0992
GSO visited the Maryland County CO: 303.666.6127 OH: 216.831.6131
Government/Base Realignment and FL: 407.826.9539 PA: 610.459.0278
Closure (BRAC) project, MD 355 IL: 847.221.2750 TX: 832.389.1156
LA: 985.640.7961 WA: 425.381.9690
Crossing in Bethesda, MD. Ashkan
Nafisi, Amin Rafiei, Qianwen Liu,
Rowshon Jadid, Zahra Faeli, and Pegah
Ghasemi, attended a tunnel tour
supported by ASCE's G-I and the UCA of
SME, and Atkinson Construction served
as field trip host. The site visit began
with safety training and an overview of
underground working hazards, such
as air quality concerns, air quality
monitoring, and evacuation procedures.
Then the students got to observe
explosive holes and drilling machines at
the tunnel, as well as view the shallow
underpass associated with the project.
The comprehensive tour was a great way
to check out the many aspects of the
project in detail as well as the challenges
that can be encountered in a project of
this scope. WE’RE THE MISSING PIECE…TO WITHSTAND THE UNEXPECTED
GROUP DISABILITY INCOME INSURANCE
LEARN MORE
800.650.2723 | ASCEplans.com/NowDI
Underwritten by New York Life Insurance Company, 51 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10010 on Policy Form GMR-G-12601/FACE. A complete description of coverage is
contained in the Certificate of Insurance, including features, costs, eligibility, renewability, limitations, and exclusions. Not intended for residents of New Mexico.
Plan Administrator’s
California Insurance License #0F76067; AR #1322 182023-ASCE-DI-MAG-PAD-5
As I See It
What Makes
a Great
Geotechnical
Expert?
How Conviction and Clear Communication

Set an Expert Apart from the Pack
By Ralph A. Finizio, Esq.
During more than 25 years of litigating construction disputes, I’ve handled

hundreds of cases of all shapes and sizes. What they all had in common was
the need for a qualified, effective expert, and sometimes several experts. You
simply cannot litigate a complex construction claim without an expert. In
many jurisdictions, if you’re making a claim of engineering negligence, you
can’t get into court without one. And because every project — commercial,
industrial, infrastructure, etc. — must be built on something, geotechnical
issues, and therefore geotechnical experts, are very often involved in con-
struction dispute cases.

The construction industry was
among the first to use contractual pro-
visions requiring the use of alternative
forms of dispute resolution (ADR);
“alternative,” that is, to the courts, where Do not overstate anything about your
disputes end up in the absence of an
agreement to resolve them elsewhere.
ADR can take several forms, but usually background or the facts that support
involves a mediation (essentially a
facilitated negotiation session), followed
by arbitration in one of several private
your opinion. The other side will find
forums. Nearly all of those forums have a
set of rules and a panel of available arbi- it. Effective cross-examination consists
trators specific to construction disputes.
ADR has resulted in fewer construction
disputes being resolved in court, but it
largely of sawing off limbs onto which
has not reduced the need for experts. An
effective expert is as important in every witnesses have climbed.
form of ADR as in court. Experts can
also be involved in the informal stages
of dispute resolution that precede any
formal proceeding. While somewhat
different skills are required to be an
effective expert in these various phases
and forums, there are some essential foundation design was appropriate And it applies equally to the meeting
characteristics. to withstand expected foundation room or the arbitration room. In several
So, what characteristics make a performance for the structure supported states, providing expert litigation support
great expert? Let’s take that in two parts. by it? Experience with local soils is also is considered the practice of engineering
First, what are the necessary baseline important. Experience with soils and (but no state requires a license in order to
requirements, those attributes that rocks in one region of the U.S., such as provide expert testimony). Good experts
are necessary but may not be entirely alluvial soils or sedimentary rocks in treat expert engagements with the same
sufficient? Then, we’ll move to the more western Pennsylvania, may not qualify level of diligence they apply to design
difficult, and entirely subjective, question you to opine on the behavior of soil and and investigative work that impacts the
suggested by the title of this commentary rocks elsewhere, such as swelling soils property and safety of their clients and
— what makes a great expert? in Texas. A license in the state where the public.
the project was built is also helpful for You do not need to have testified
What It Takes to Be Good, But credibility, especially with a lay audience before: Many well-qualified experts, and
Not Necessarily Great like a jury or judge, but it’s not essential. lawyers in search of them, are deterred
The right credentials: This seems A willingness to dig deep (pardon by lack of testifying experience. Don’t
obvious, but you’d be surprised. It goes the pun): Superficial opinions are be. While it’s helpful to demystify the
beyond the degree; the key consid- vulnerable opinions. A good expert is process and to minimize understandable
eration is experience with the issue the harshest critic of his or her own nervousness, it’s not necessary. A few
in dispute. That requires a threshold opinions, and considers every possible intense prep sessions can accomplish
determination of what the issue rebuttal before the other side raises it. the same thing. And too much testifying
actually is, which is sometimes less than The old lawyers’ axiom applies equally experience can be detrimental, as it may
obvious. For example, is the issue why to experts: “There are no geniuses in the allow opposing counsel to create the
the soil settled, or whether the chosen courtroom, just drudges in the office.” impression you’re a gun for hire.
As I See It
No skeletons in your closet or

conflicts of interest: Again this
seems obvious, but again you’d be
surprised. An engagement as an expert
should not be an opportunity to
I have been telling young lawyers for
settle a professional score or criticize
a competitor. Your motives must be years: “If you cannot explain to me in
pure, and your record unassailable. The
more technically sound your opinion 60 seconds why our side should win,
in the case, the harder opposing
counsel will look for nonsubstantive
issues that might discredit you, or at
you’re not ready to argue the case.”
least divert attention from your valid
opinion. If opposing counsel can spend
cross-examination time asking about
some overstatement or discrepancy
in your CV, or some failed project on
which you were a consultant, he or she
will. Before you accept an engagement
that is likely to lead to the submission validity of your opinion and of your and easily understood by a layperson —
of your CV and a report to the opposing client’s position. Your opinion will be is the home base to which you will
side, and ultimately to live testimony severely tested, and you will be able to likely have to return again and again
by deposition and/or appearance at a credibly defend it only if you genuinely as your opinion is challenged and, at
hearing, you must be brutally honest believe it. Even in the face of valid criti- times, distorted by the opposing side.
with yourself and the lawyer looking to cism by the opposing side — and there’s I have been telling young lawyers for
retain you. Do not overstate anything nearly always some valid criticism — you years: “If you cannot explain to me in
about your background or the facts that must be able to say, “I acknowledge your 60 seconds why our side should win,
support your opinion. The other side point, but let me explain to you why it you’re not ready to argue the case.” The
will find it. Effective cross-examination does not undermine my opinion…”. same goes for experts. That 60-second
consists largely of sawing off limbs onto The ability to communicate recitation cannot, of course, include all
which witnesses have climbed. complex ideas clearly: Remember that of the reasons your opinion is correct,
Don’t be an amateur lawyer: An there will always be someone, probably but it better include at least one
expert’s role is technical and factual, equally qualified, offering a contrary unassailable reason.
not legal. An expert who argues with the opinion and attempting to discredit In sum: Properly identify the issue,
opposing side over procedural or legal or mischaracterize yours. And if you investigate it thoroughly, distill your
issues loses his or her credibility. Leave are cross-examined, someone will be opinion to several basic points that you
the lawyering to the lawyers. actively attempting to muddle your can defend, and communicate those
opinion. You cannot persuade people points clearly.
But What Makes a Great Expert? who do not understand your point.
All of the things I’ve noted above are Many people think they are born with j RALPH A. FINIZIO, Esq., is the partner
necessary, but they won’t make you the ability to communicate clearly, and in charge of Pepper Hamilton’s Pittsburgh
great. Based on my experience, great certainly there are innate differences, office. He is highly rated in Chambers USA:
experts share two characteristics. but like nearly every other skill, you can America’s Best Lawyers for Business. He
Conviction: Litigation support is not improve. The key is to simplify. Distill is listed in Best Lawyers in America for
academia. It is an adversarial process, a your position to its essence, make sure construction and commercial litigation, and
sometimes sharp-elbowed competition you believe it (see “conviction,” above), in 2014 was named Pittsburgh Litigation —
of ideas. In that arena, there is no substi- and then organize the supporting data Construction Lawyer of the Year. He can be
tute for a firm belief in the fundamental around it. Your core opinion — clear reached at finizior@pepperlaw.com.

As I See It
Geotechnical Reporting –
A Source of Potential Liability?
By Demetrious C. Koutsoftas, PE, GE, NAE, M.ASCE
John Bachner’s GeoCurmudgeon column, “Ambiguity and the Humble

Hyphen,” which appeared on pp. 20-23 of the January/February 2018 issue
of GEOSTRATA, provides commentary and advice to geotechnical engineers
regarding the pitfalls that can arise from poor writing skills. While the
examples presented in the column are interesting, and the advice provided
is clearly well intended, I’m concerned that its intent could be misinterpreted
as suggesting that geotechnical engineers could avoid or limit responsibility
for their actions if only they could write better and more concise reports.
The purpose of this commentary is to provide a different and expanded
perspective regarding the issues of liability and poor writing skills.

crucial, differences between a new project and past
projects that the designer was relying on
3. Creation of unrealistic expectations by other project
participants regarding the engineer’s ability to forecast the
anticipated performance of the structure(s)
4. Ambiguity of unclear and sometimes conflicting specifica-
tion clauses regarding project requirements
5. Inadequate or, in some instances, no participation of the
geotechnical engineer during construction, which often
leads to missed opportunities to recognize unexpected
conditions in a timely manner, and would have allowed
implementation of corrective action at minimum cost
compared to remedial measures after construction
It’s been my experience that engineers sometimes fail to

appreciate and clearly articulate the extent of the inherent
uncertainty and risk involved with their recommendations
and designs, and therefore fall short in providing guidance
about how to reduce the uncertainty and risk. Without
detracting from the importance of well-written reports, the
difficulties that arise from these situations cannot be avoided
Construction of a prototype test fill to verify the design of by merely having a better command of the English language
unprecedented reclamation for a new airport at Chek Lap Kok, or by writing shorter reports.
Hong Kong, as part of the risk management program.
Some Lessons from the GeoCurmudgeon’s
Case History
The GeoCurmudgeon column offers a case history where
Common Sources of Professional Liability Claims the engineer’s field representative (FR) daily log-in question
I’ve had 45 years of professional practice, including stated, “I observed the excavation.” With no definition of what
numerous cases of providing support to geotechnical firms the observation or excavation entailed, this simple statement
for resolution of claims and disputes regarding professional cost the engineer big damages. Without making too much
liability, including litigation. I’ve learned that while the of the example, because it doesn’t include sufficient back-
language of geotechnical reports can be an important ground to analyze the case, I offer the following observations
issue, just once was it the primary factor impacting the that might have helped the engineer involved in the case and
outcome of litigation. In this case, the geotechnical engineer others facing similar circumstances.
had signed a one-page agreement, prepared by his client, 1. Field reports commonly include the time the engineer or
stating that the engineer had reviewed and approved the FR arrived at and departed the site. Had the field report
design. Unfortunately, he didn’t realize that the agreement included this information, the time period the FR was on
represented a much broader scope of services than he was site could have been compared with the contractor’s log to
contractually obligated to perform. Except for that one case, determine whether the FR had the opportunity to observe
the majority of the claims and disputes in which I’ve been the entire excavation process or not. Moreover, had the
involved have fallen into five broad categories: report included photographs (with time and date included
1. Inadequate exploration and testing that failed to capture in the images) of what had been observed, they would
the actual range of subsurface conditions and variations have been very helpful in answering what was observed
in soil properties and when.
2. Over-reliance on experience and judgment without 2. Construction contracts typically include a provision that
recognizing that there can be significant, and sometimes make the contractor responsible for the “means and
As I See It
methods” of construction. If such a provision had been presentation of their analysis of technical data, findings,
included in the contract, the engineer could not have and recommendations. This process, together with
been held liable for the construction method chosen by constructive criticism from reviewing supervisors, will
the contractor. improve employees’ writing skills over time, and prepare
3. Without supporting information, the statement “I them to take on the full task of preparing formal reports.
observed the excavation” is insufficient to establish the 3. Staff should be encouraged to take advantage of in-house
purpose and scope of the observation or the result of it. and external resources to help improve their skills and
The project owner does not pay an engineer or FR to visit capabilities, including technical writing. Training should
a site to observe something for the sake of observation. focus on teaching the staff what information must be
The engineer has a duty to tell the owner and his client included in a report to properly address the subject of the
whether the excavation met the specified design and report.
construction criteria, and to provide sufficient documen- 4. To aid report users, writers should learn to summarize
tation to justify his conclusions. available geotechnical data and other factual information
4. The supervising engineer responsible for reviewing and in user-friendly, clearly organized tables and figures, with
approving the field report should have recognized that a appropriate discussion of limitations of the data, potential
report that simply states “I observed the excavation” was uncertainties due to site variability, and the potential
insufficient to fulfill the engineer’s obligations under the impacts of site variability and uncertainty on design
contract, and was also too broad in terms of the implied decisions.
scope of the engineer’s responsibilities. If the supervising 5. Reports should clearly state all assumptions involved and
engineer failed to review the field report, or having any analytical model simplifications the engineer used
reviewed the report did not take corrective action, then it to represent site conditions in analyses and development
should be no surprise that the company was found liable. of design recommendations, and potential impacts of
these assumptions and simplifications on the forecasted
Suggestions for Improving Writing structure performance.
Skills and Report Quality 6. Report recommendations should include, as appropriate,
I cannot over-emphasize the value and importance of discussion of additional work that could be conducted to
well-written, concise, and user-friendly reports. They are reduce the uncertainty in the design and the potential risk
essential to effectively and clearly communicating critical that structure performance might be outside the range of
information about geotechnical site conditions and design expected performance.
recommendations, as well as important limitations that must 7. Report preparation and cycles of report review should be
be considered by the designer of record, the owner, and the scheduled to allow sufficient time for reviewers to perform
contractor. Therefore, geotechnical engineers stand to ben- an orderly and comprehensive review, and to implement
efit considerably by improving their writing skills. I offer the the necessary report revisions.
following suggestions that might help supervisors, managers,
and mentors guide young professionals toward improving Report preparation is a crucial component of geotech-
their skills, including preparing clearly written reports that nical engineering and deserves as much attention as the
minimize ambiguity and help reduce potential liability: technical components of the work. Well-written and user-
1. Young engineers can benefit from taking time to study friendly reports are essential in communicating geotechnical
and analyze the content of well-written reports prepared data and recommendations clearly and accurately to the
by more senior colleagues. These reports can serve as a project owner, the designer of record, and the contractor. A
guide when less experienced writers are called upon to discussion of limitations of the available data, uncertainties
prepare reports on their own. due to potential site variability, limitations of the engineer-
2. Staff supervisors and mentors can minimize potential ing analyses, and the potential risk that actual structure
liability by first recognizing the limitations of those performance might differ from what had been forecasted are
employees who are challenged by report writing. Report indispensable parts of any geotechnical report.
writing responsibilities should be assigned to match
each individual’s capabilities, while also offering advice, j DEMETRIOUS C. KOUTSOFTAS, PE, GE, NAE, M.ASCE, is a
guidance, and the opportunity to seek further training principal with DKGC, Inc., in San Francisco, CA. He provides expert
to improve technical writing skills consistent with staff advice and guidance on a wide range of projects for the solution
needs. Staff who are challenged by report writing will of technical issues arising from complex and difficult ground
benefit from in-house requirements to summarize their conditions. He can be reached at deme@dkgeotech.com.
technical work tasks in internal project memoranda
with a defined structure in order to gain experience with

WIRELESS
RST Instruments Ltd. offers
2 Wireless Data Collection
Systems to quickly get you
connected to your data:
RSTAR and DT LINK.
Both systems offer minimum
per channel cost, extra long
battery life and long distance
DATA COLLECTION
data transmission. for Geotechnical Monitoring Instrumentation
FULLY AUTOMATED COLLECTION (REMOTELY) NODE

(data logger and sensor)
The RSTAR
An RSTAR System uses Hub shown
data loggers (nodes) at the left contains
a flexDAQ
sensor level, deployed in a
Data Logger
star topology from an active System with
RSTAR Hub containing an an antenna
and battery.
RST flexDAQ Data Logger. Collected data
RSTAR
is saved to HUB
F E AT U R E S the flexDAQ NODE
Up to 10 years of battery life from 1 lithium ‘D’ cell. memory
where users
Up to 14 km range from Hub to Node in open country. can access
(depending on antenna type) it remotely,
either on-site
Up to 255 nodes per RSTAR Hub. or off-site.
Based on 900 MHz, 868 MHz and 2.4 GHz spread spectrum band. NODE
(country dependent) (data logger and sensor)
Watch the video for both systems at: www.rstinstruments.com/Wireless-Data-Collection.html
SEMI-AUTOMATED COLLECTION (ON-SITE)

C
DT LINK is an on-site
wireless connection to RST
data loggers for quick data
collection. Ideal for hard to A B
B
access areas where the data
logger is within line of sight.
F E AT U R E S
C
Safely & easily collect data from data loggers that are in areas
with poor access, trespass issues and hazardous obstacles.
Years of battery life from 1 lithium ‘D’ cell.
Range up to 800 m (900 MHz) and up to 500 m (2.4 GHz).

Pictured: (A) DT LINK WIRELESS data logger, connected to a vibrating
Collect data in seconds with a laptop connected to DT LINK HUB. wire piezometer and housed in a (B) protective enclosure, has its data
collected from a laptop connected to the (C) DT LINK HUB - all within
seconds from the convenience of your vehicle.
RST’s “DT Series” Data Loggers accommodate the RSTAR and DT LINK WIRELESS Systems.
Compatible sensor types include
Vibrating Wire, Potentiometers, MEMS Tilt Sensors, Strain Gauge (full bridge) Sensors,
D ATA L O G G E R S
Digitally Bussed Sensors, 4-20 mA Sensors, and Thermistors.
info@rstinstruments.com CANADA / USA - Sales, Service & Mfg.: 604 540 1100
Toll Free (Canada / USA only): 1 800 665 5599
www.rstinstruments.com EUROPE / MIDDLE EAST / AFRICA: +44 1449 613677
RST Instruments Ltd., 11545 Kingston St., Maple Ridge, BC Canada V2X 0Z5
www.youtube.com/user/RSTgeotechnical www.linkedin.com/company/rst-instruments-ltd-
RST Instruments Ltd. reserves the right to change specifications without notice. MIG0296L
Lessons Learned from GeoLegends
Donald T. Goldberg, PE
By Andrew Rohrman, EIT, S.M.ASCE, Arash Pirouzi, S.M.ASCE, and Shreeya
Pandey, S.M.ASCE
D
onald T. Goldberg is one of
the co-founders of Goldberg
Zoino and Associates (GZA),
now known as GZA GeoEnvironmental,
Inc. After getting his bachelor’s
degree in biology and chemistry
from Tufts University, he went to the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
(MIT) for another bachelor’s degree,
this time in civil engineering. He
worked briefly before returning to MIT
for his master’s in civil engineering as
part of the soil mechanics and founda-
tion engineering program.
Goldberg began his career as a
geotechnical engineer with Haley &
Aldrich before co-founding GZA with his
MIT classmate William S. Zoino in 1964.
Serving as the firm’s CEO until 1995, he
helped propel GZA’s early growth as a
geotechnical engineering consulting
firm, as well as its expansion into
environmental engineering services.
During his years in practice as a
principal-in-charge, Goldberg worked
on a wide variety of geotechnical
projects, including bridges, highways,
dams, and specialty structures. Over
his 40-year career, he took part in all
different aspects of these projects,
including site investigation, geotechnical
analysis, design, and forensic investi-
gations. Through his work, he became
a noted authority for the stabilization
(Photo courtesy of GZA.)
of deep “soft-ground” excavations and

developed an expertise in providing
solutions to complex geotechnical and
foundation problems. Goldberg remains
inquisitive about soils to this day, even
interrupting this interview to ask one of
the interviewers about the presence of
soft clays in her native country of Nepal!
Goldberg has always maintained
involvement with professional
organizations throughout his career. He
served as president of the Massachusetts
Division of ASCE and the American
Consulting Engineers Council (ACEC) of
New England. He was a member of the
board of directors of the Boston Society
of Civil Engineers and served as the chair
to both the geotechnical and structural
sections of the group. He also served
on the board of the Hazardous Waste
Action Coalition of the ACEC. Goldberg
continues to serve as chairman for GZA.
Q: You received undergraduate

degrees in biology and chemistry
before going back to school to study
civil engineering. What led to that
change and your interest in civil
engineering?
I graduated from Tufts when I was 20. I TOP: Goldberg and colleague Walter Jaworski received the ACEC Consulting Engi-
was very young and immature. I didn’t neers Prize of New England for their work on the Commonwealth Pier, now known
get into medical school, so I worked as Pier 5, in South Boston. LEFT: Goldberg circa 1972.RIGHT: A registered engineer in
at my father’s gas station for a couple many states, Goldberg is an expert in lateral earth support of excavations. (All pho-
of years. I had a conversation with my tos courtesy of GZA.)
father about what I was going to do
with the rest of my life. One thing led got into this field and met my future Q: What motivated you to start your
to another, and I applied to MIT and business partner. I attended classes own consulting firm?
somehow got in. I was in aeronautical during the summers and carried I was working for Jim Haley and Harl
engineering originally, but became five courses per semester instead of Aldrich in Boston at the time, a couple
disenchanted because it focused on the four, so I graduated in two years. of great guys. I recall one meeting in
military, and I didn’t really want to be particular that I had with Jim Haley
a part of that. I was commuting to MIT Q: Why did you go to graduate and a client. All of the discussion was
from Brockton, MA, and wanted some school to focus on soil mechanics between Haley and the client, not me.
fellow commuters to help cover the and foundation engineering? I felt like I was extra baggage, and I
cost. I placed an ad in the newspaper My job out of MIT was with the New wasn’t contributing very much to this
and found four people who wanted York consulting firm Mueser Rutledge meeting.
to share a ride. That’s how I met Bill Consulting Engineers. They’re very I wanted independence and
Zoino. Of the four people who traveled prominent in underground construction, recognition. I felt that I was pretty
with me every day, one was in electrical foundations, and other geotechnical work. good, and I wanted to express that.
engineering, and the others were in I went there, but it didn’t take me long to It wasn’t money. Actually, it was a
civil engineering. As I was looking for realize that I needed my union certificate, struggle financially; there was a risk I
another program, they convinced me which meant I needed a master’s degree. might not be successful. My first wife
I should follow civil. So that’s how I So, I returned to MIT for another two years. really encouraged me to do this. She
we had, and had the same ambitions.

They were looking for the same
things that we were looking for when
we went on our own. So, we tried to
provide that through the culture of the
company. We gave the senior people
the opportunity to participate in the
management of the company, allowing
them to make decisions about the
company’s direction. We wanted to
cultivate people who were professional
engineers just like we were and give
them the same opportunities that we
sought. And I believe to this day, peo-
ple who work there will say they love
working there, they love the culture
there, it’s a caring company, it devel-
ops people. It gives them opportunity
Goldberg instilled a very strong set of values in the company – values that exist in and independence.
GZA’s culture to this very day. (Photo courtesy of GZA.) Externally, we just put an emphasis
on quality. For example, we established
a principle of internal reviews. Every
project had to have an internal
reviewer. We were fair in terms of the
fees we charged. Well, we did very few,
if any, lump-sum projects. It was hourly
work, proposals with a reasonable
number of hours. We initially tried to
underprice the effort, maybe out of
a sense of insecurity. On projects, we
did what had to be done, and we went
the extra mile when it was necessary.
We also got a kick out of doing new
things that perhaps other people had
not done. For instance, we started
a soil and rock instrumentation
group, which is also how we got into
pile-driving analyzer services. I don’t
know too many other companies that
did that. We were forward-looking
in that respect. Additionally, when
Goldberg (second from left) celebrates the 50th anniversary of the company he I was the CEO, it became apparent
co-founded in 1964. (Photo courtesy of GZA.) that we couldn’t succeed solely as a
geotechnical engineering firm. We were
repeatedly said, “You can always get Q: What was the key to GZA’s success? getting competition, and some of the
another job.” I was 36, and I knew that Me! [laughter] Really, there are a cou- major design engineering firms that
if I didn’t do it then, I’d never do it. I ple of things. One of them is internal, were our clients had developed their
didn’t start my own firm because I had and the other is external. By internal, I own in-house geotechnical capability.
any problems with Haley or Aldrich, mean the culture of the company. Bill So, we launched what we originally
either. They were great guys who taught Zoino and I always recognized that our called “Investigation of Contaminated
me a lot, and I’m indebted to them. employees all had the same training Ground,” and we also started our own

environmental remediation company. Q: What kinds of projects did you gradual creep because of the shear
We later progressed beyond that into find the most interesting or the most stress applied compared to the ultimate
many facets of environmental issues. A fulfilling? shear strength of the soil. My colleague,
lot of the company’s success is due to Well, I’ll tell you about two jobs. One Walter Jaworski, helped me a lot with
these initiatives. is Commonwealth Pier, now Pier 5, in this. Our solution was to decrease
So, our success had to do with South Boston. Fidelity Investments the load on the pier by excavating
the internal culture and responding wanted to build an office on that everything above the water table and
externally to new opportunities property, but the pier had settled and replacing it with lightweight concrete
without being stuck in a rut. My phi- spread laterally. It was a classic pier weighing about 30 pcf. There was just
losophy is that the business world is constructed with a key wall supported one problem, though. During very high
ever-changing, and you have to be alert. on wood piles. To get a wall in place, tides, the lightweight concrete wants to
As Elio D’Appolonia, the founder of the contractor had to first dredge float! Fortunately, we had the foresight
D’Appolonia Consulting Engineers in out the slip. The problem was that to put in a drainage system that would
Pittsburgh, put it to me one day: “You the elevation of the pier was about kick in if the sea level got to a certain
have to look for the next wave on the +15 ft, and the dredged channel was elevation. In recognition of this work,
horizon.” You must also react ahead of located at elevation -30 or 35 ft. This we received the ACEC Consulting
others looking at the same opportuni- construction process meant there was Engineers Prize of New England.
ties. Bill and I wanted the freedom to a slope instability issue. The instability Another project was extending
react to what we saw as an opportunity. wasn’t a sudden failure, but rather a the MBTA (Massachusetts Bay
caused a lot of added pressure against

the slurry wall. We had put on three
levels of bracing. Someone called me
one day and said, “Don, there’s about
a 2-in. space between the wall and the
top brace.” The wall had tilted back,
and all of the load that was planned to
be shared by three struts was on one
strut instead. That was a scary moment!
The brace was overloaded by about
30 percent. That’s why you have safety
factors, I guess.
Q: What’s your greatest career

achievement?
Well, GZA is now upwards of 550 people,
and 30+ offices around the country. I like
to think I had something to do with that.
It was not my personal achievement, but
I like to think the culture we established,
both internally and externally, was
behind that.
Q: What lessons have you taken away

from your consulting career?
How you handle adversity is the true test
of leadership. You face adversity when
you must lay people off, close offices, or
can’t make payroll. Like many firms, we
went through those situations. How you
Goldberg (r) poses with company co-founder William Zoino. handle them are key. Personally, I think I
could have been a little more disciplined
Transportation Authority) Red Line it with embedment in the clay? We in my management style and my expec-
through Cambridge to its current constructed a 20-ft-long test wall that tations of what other people should be
terminus at the Alewife station. The soil terminated in the clay and conducted doing. Bill Zoino would probably say I
along the alignment was like nothing I a diaphragm wall load test by loading was naïve. Maybe I was, I don’t know.
had ever seen. It was in an environment it to failure. We determined the wall
where everything around it was Boston needed to go 10 ft below the bottom of Q: Who most influenced your career?
Blue Clay, but this soil was not. My the excavation, instead of 70 ft, which Any specific advice that somebody
hypothesis is that this was previously is a huge cost differential. We later gave you that was very helpful?
deposited Boston Blue Clay that was regretted the decision to terminate Jim Haley and Harl Aldrich were a huge
eroded by water during glacial outwash the wall at 10 ft below the excavation influence. Aldrich was a very disciplined
periods and then redeposited. This new because the Alewife garage was being kind of guy. He was incredible, all the
material was like miniature globules built simultaneously. It had a tunnel way down to his handwriting; it was just
of clay in a very soft matrix. It was very and piles that were being driven next beautiful. He was a tough taskmaster,
soft. There was a 50-ft-deep excavation to the excavation. We were concerned which helped me recognize that I had
to be supported by a diaphragm wall, about the pile driving, so we said in some growing up to do. He was very
so we needed to decide where to put the specs, “Thou shalt pre-auger the helpful in that regard. Haley was great,
the bottom of the excavation. Should pile holes,” so they wouldn’t displace too. Also, during my stint with Mueser
we extend the wall to 120 ft into the clay. Unfortunately, not all of the Rutledge, it was Jim Gould who told me
glacial till, or could the wall support clay was properly removed, and that to get my union card.

Q: What kept you excited and what they want to do. Choose a firm Q: What can universities do to better
engaged during your geotechnical that’s not hierarchal. You want a more prepare students?
career? congenial, collaborative kind of asso- I think bringing in outside speakers can
Bill Zoino and I both enjoyed meeting ciation, a firm that’s not exploitative, be useful. Particularly those who are in
and addressing new challenges. Take where there’s a broad sharing of eco- practice and can speak to the internal
the Commonwealth Pier project, for nomic opportunity. You can get a good machinations of how an engineering or
example. I mean, what do you do? How salary, but the owners of the company construction organization works and
do you stop this thing from moving? Just are way up, and there’s a significant how it is managed. This can address
melding the practical with the technical disparity between the people who are broader company development and
was exhilarating. doing the real engineering work and management from experience outside
those who are at the top of the heap. of academia.
Q: What advice do you have for You know, I look for the layers and
students entering consulting structure of the organization. The way Q: Do you have any final thoughts you
today? it’s managed, the way they deal with want to share?
If you have a dream, pursue it, people, and the benefits they provide, I just love what I did, and I love the
whatever that may be. And if it isn’t like opportunities for bonuses and challenges. I loved the ego trip that came
working, then find another path. advancement. That’s what I’d be look- along with success. Can I quote Theodore
But it’s very difficult for students to ing for. Within, of course, the technical Roosevelt? “Far better it is to dare mighty
really formulate clear thinking about area that you are most interested in. things, to win glorious triumphs, even
Cutoff Walls
Excavation Support
Jet Grouting
Landslide Control
Micropiles
Retaining Walls
Secant Piles
Shotcrete
Soil Mixing
Soil Nailing
Tiebacks
Tiedowns
Underpinning
www.schnabel.com
Corporate Office 703-742-0020 | Atlanta 770-971-6455 | Denver 303-696-7268
Houston 281-531-1103 | Orlando 407-566-0199 | Philadelphia 610-277-2950
San Francisco 925-947-1881 | Washington, D.C. 301-657-3060 | EOE - DFWP
2018-06-06 Geostrata July August.indd 1 6/6/18 1:34 PM
though checkered by failure, than to rank with those poor

spirits who neither enjoy nor suffer much, because they live
in the gray twilight that knows neither victory nor defeat.”
j ANDREW ROHRMAN, EIT, S.M.ASCE, is a graduate research

assistant at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, where he
researches strength and deformation properties of fouled railroad
ballast. He can be reached at arohrman@umass.edu.
j ARASH PIROUZI, S.M.ASCE, is a PhD candidate and graduate

research assistant at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst,
where he is involved with research on the compressibility and
shear behavior of fine-grained, organic and inorganic soils. He can
be reached at apirouzi@umass.edu.
j SHREEYA PANDEY, S.M.ASCE, is a graduate research assistant at

the University of Massachusetts, Amherst. Her research is based on
the influence of the reconsolidation procedure on the small-strain
The authors with Goldberg. From l to r: Andrew Rohrman, Shreeya shear modulus and undrained shear behavior of silts subjected to tube
Pandey, Don Goldberg, and Arash Pirouzi. sampling disturbance. She can be reached at spandey@umass.edu.
TUNNELING FUNDAMENTALS,
PRACTICE AND INNOVATIONS
October 15-18, 2018 : : Golden, Colorado
• This is the premier short course for tunneling profesisonals, held in world-
class tunnel research and education facilities at Colorado School of Mines.
• Topics and discussion will cover key principles of design and construction in
all ground types and across all excavation methods.
• Break-out lab and demo sessions round out each day of instruction,
providing attendees with hands-on experience.
Space is limited. Don’t miss this continuing ed opportunity to expand

your knowledge and your network. 2.3 CEUs offered. Register today!
Colorado School of Mines has a long-standing tradition of hosting world-class

short courses for industry professionals including owners, planners, designers and
contractors. Learn more and register online at underground.mines.edu.

STABILITY.
EXPERTISE.
PARTNERSHIP.
UNDER EVERY ROAD.
When the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE)
released its 2017 Infrastructure Report Card and America
received a D+ grade, Tensar International renewed our

TensarCorp.com | 800-TENSAR-1
commitment to help improve America’s roadways to
A+ infrastructure by supporting every road.
Visit InfrastructureReportCard.org to read the full report.

JULY/AUG CASE HISTORIES
2018 & FORENSICS
Forensic
Investigations
Get to the Facts
East Side IHNC Flood Wall Breaches
during Hurricane Katrina
By W. Allen Marr, PE, PhD, D.GE, NAE, F.ASCE

Photo courtesy of Peter G . Nicholson.
I served as a geotechnical expert for the U.S. case and its outcome, focusing on the dif-
Department of Justice (DOJ) supporting the ferent theories of failure for two flood wall
defense of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers breaches and presenting my assessment of
(USACE) against alleged professional the failures based on additional investiga-
negligence in its design of the flood walls for tions. (Editor’s note: The subsequent article
the Inner Harbor Navigation Canal (IHNC). A by Pat Lucia beginning on p. 42 provides
group of attorneys representing individuals additional background and perspective
affected by the levee failures launched a about the flood wall breaches. Also see
lawsuit, as Plaintiffs, seeking tens of billions “Levee Failure Mechanisms,” by Reed
of dollars of restitution from the U.S. gov- Mosher and Mike Duncan, in the January/
ernment. This article briefly describes the February 2007 issue of GEOSTRATA.)
flood walls loaded
with high water levels.
IPET concluded that
sliding through weak
foundation soils caused
the North Breach,
with stability further
reduced by relatively
low ground levels on the
land side of the levee.
IPET concluded the
South Breach resulted
from overtopping of the
I-wall that that led to an
overturning failure.
The American
Society of Civil
Engineers (ASCE), at the
Figure 1. Failed flood wall near the Florida Avenue Bridge. (Photo courtesy of U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.) request of the USACE,
assembled an External
Review Panel (ERP) of
The Event independent experts (ERP) to evaluate the principal failures.
In the early hours of August 29, 2005, Hurricane Katrina ASCE’s ERP reached conclusions similar to those of IPET for
slammed New Orleans and overwhelmed its flood protection the two IHNC breaches.
system. Levees and flood walls failed in many locations, The University of California at Berkeley assembled
resulting in massive flooding, and more than 1,800 deaths and another team with modest funding from the National Science
$150 billion in economic losses. The Lower 9th Ward was hit Foundation and the large effort of many volunteer profession-
particularly hard following two separate breaches on the east als to investigate the Katrina failures, including the breaches
side of the IHNC flood wall. discussed here. This team, referred to as the Independent
The two breaches, referred to herein as the North Breach Levee Investigation Team (ILIT), concluded that both breaches
and South Breach, occurred as the water level in the canal rose were likely caused by underseepage-induced instability of
to unprecedented levels. The North Breach, located about 150 ft the land-side levee toe owing to high horizontal permeability
south of Florida Avenue, occurred around 6 am and opened of soil beneath the sheet pile wall, and that overtopping and
to approximately 210 ft wide (Figure 1). The South Breach, land-side erosion may have contributed.
located 870 ft north of North Claiborne Avenue, started around The U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) commissioned an
7-8 am and opened to approximately 820 ft wide (Figure 2). independent study by the National Research Council (NRC)
Water flowed through these breaches at very high rates and was to consider the work of IPET. Although NRC found the failure
responsible for a major portion of the flooding of the Lower mechanisms proposed by IPET to be plausible, back-analyses
9th Ward. Once the floodwaters started to recede, water slowly only matched the observed surge elevation at failure by intro-
flowed out of the Lower 9th Ward through the breaches until the ducing a full-depth gap and assuming very low shear strength
pumping system drew the internal water level below ground. in the clay beyond the toe of the levee. The NRC thus found the
Subsequently, the USACE constructed rockfill dikes to provide documentation and analyses provided for the IHNC breaches
temporary closure of these and other breaches. to be insufficient for independent review and inadequate to
support definitive conclusions on cause of failure.
Prior Investigations There were other key questions left unanswered by these
While preparing for trial, the DOJ experts faced conflicting prior studies, including:
prior opinions regarding the causes of the flood wall failures. oo Why had the flood wall only failed at these two locations and
The USACE had assembled a team of internal and external not others along the east IHNC?
experts, referred to the Interagency Performance Evaluation oo What had the eyewitness — who claimed to hear a loud
Team (IPET), to characterize and evaluate the failures resulting explosion and see a hole in the wall — actually heard
from Hurricane Katrina. That team assembled information and seen?
on flood wall configuration, subsurface conditions, and oo Why was the concrete portion of the I-wall completely
storm water levels in order to assess the performance of the missing in many locations after the failures?

oo Why was there a long tear and a failed joint on adjacent sheet indicated that the sheet piles had been plastically deformed
pile sections recovered from the North Breach? along their horizontal axis.
The DOJ experts also investigated the condition of the
Work by DOJ Experts I-wall prior to the failures, particularly regarding the top of the
The DOJ expert team organized a field and laboratory investi- wall elevations. We expected the wall had settled differentially
gation program to further define the strength and permeability along its length; but all prior investigations assumed that the
characteristics of the foundation soils in the vicinity of the two top of the east IHNC wall was at El. +12.5 ft along its entire
failures, as well as at non-failed areas. This involved extensive 4,000-ft length. We found survey data taken by the local
field and laboratory tests to measure the stress history and Water and Sewer Board on several occasions prior to the
shear strength of the foundation soils below the levee for use in failures. These measurements showed that the top of the wall
global stability analyses and finite-element modeling of defor- likely varied from a low of El. +11.3 ft at the North Breach, to
mations versus flood level. This team was joined by experts another local low of El. +12.1 ft at the South Breach, to a high
from Washington Group International, which, as a contractor of El. +12.8 ft along the approximate 4,000-ft length between
already performing work on the IHNC, was a co-defendant the south and north corners. The North and South breaches
with the USACE. therefore occurred at local low spots along the top of the wall.
A key ILIT premise was that the levee foundation soils
contained a layer of high-horizontal-permeability soil that The North Breach
allowed water pressure to transmit to the protected side After studying the old and new data and the results of many
of the flood wall in a matter of minutes. This premise was analyses, I concluded that a structural failure in the I-wall con-
critical to the conclusion that the two IHNC breaches resulted crete and steel sheet piling at the transition between the wall’s
from instability of the land-side levee due to high pore construction in 1969 and 1980 initiated the North Breach.
pressure from the flood side of the wall. Because the Plaintiffs Several more inches of horizontal translation of the flood wall
in the case retained some of the authors of the ILIT report section to the south of this transition compared to the north
as experts, DOJ anticipated this failure mechanism would section caused the sheet pile to stretch along its horizontal
be one basis for its claim that the USACE was negligent in its axis. The section to the north had longer sheet piles and more
design of the flood wall. soil mass on the land side; thus, it was inherently stiffer than
Plaintiff and Defendant teams agreed to work together in the section to the south. The weak soils and relatively low
a joint program to measure the in-situ permeability of the ground level on the land side of the flood wall produced a
soft peat layers that ILIT had concluded had high-horizontal relatively low factor of safety (FOS) against global stability,
permeability. Field pump tests and laboratory tests demon- which resulted in greater relative lateral displacement.
strated that the peat layer was a compressible soil with low The differential horizontal movements of the two sections
permeability, on the order of 10-6 cm/sec; thus, it would not of flood wall caused tensile forces to build up in the I-wall
have been possible
to transmit water
pressure to the land
side of the flood wall
within minutes.
During the field
investigation, the
DOJ team located
two failed sheet pile
sections retrieved from
the North Breach and
observed a 12-ft tear at
the top of one section
and a torn connection
at the bottom of the
other. These sheets,
and others from both
breach locations,
had been stretched
horizontally. These
observations clearly Figure 2. Photo at South Breach of IHNC. (Photo courtesy of USACE.)
propagate southward
until the water levels
on each side of the
embankment equalized.
Stability analyses
showed that the flood
wall likely had a low FOS
against global instability,
which may have led to
lateral wall deforma-
tions, but apparently did
not result in the failure.
No team found any
evidence to indicate the
occurrence of a global
instability within the
foundation soils at the
North Breach.
The South Breach

I concluded that
overtopping of the
flood wall caused the
Figure 3. Rotated I-wall. (Photo courtesy of USACE.) South Breach. The
overflowing water
scoured away the soil
elements, to the point that the two sections of sheet piling just on the land side and removed the soil resistance that held the
south of the 1969-1980 intersection deformed plastically along I-wall in place against the pressure of the rising water in the
their horizontal axis by a substantial amount. These sections canal. My evaluation determined that the top of the wall was
were recovered and the plastic deformations measured. lower than previously thought (El. 12.1 ft versus El. 12.5 ft) at
As the sheet piles started to elongate along their horizontal this location. This meant that overtopping and scour started
axis, they stretched the concrete wall sitting atop the sheeting earlier than previously thought. It also explains why the South
laterally along the wall axis in ways it was not designed to Breach failure occurred where it did — at a low section at the
resist. Portions of the concrete wall then failed in tension and top of the wall. Photographs of unfailed sections of the I-wall
fell off the wall, creating a gap several feet wide in the wall show that significant scour occurred, and some sections of
through which water gushed. Simultaneously, excessive tensile the wall were rotated outward in the early phases of failure
forces caused one of the sheets to tear, starting at the location (Figure 3). Analyses show that sufficient scour depths could
where a previous tear had been poorly welded during prior occur to cause the wall to fail by the top rotating outward and
construction. When the tensile forces transferred to the bottom developing into an overturning failure. Aerial photographs
of the sheeting, a connection with a third sheet failed from show the progression of rotation from both ends of the South
bottom-up, completely separating the southern and northern Breach. Remarkably, the sheeting remained connected despite
wall sections. being rotated from vertical to horizontal and stretched to 944 ft
Failure of the concrete, tearing of the sheeting, and rupture over the 820-ft length of the failed zone. Most of the concrete
of the connection likely occurred very rapidly, possibly creating I-wall constructed on top of the sheeting had completely failed
the explosive sound heard by an eyewitness situated at a and fallen off. This was most likely the result of horizontal
nearby pump station. I concluded that water gushing through stretching of the sheeting as described for the North Breach.
the wall gaps rapidly eroded soil in front of the wall, allowing a Stability analyses showed that the flood wall at the South
segment to rotate outward and pull away from the transition. Breach could not have failed by global instability because the
The eyewitness observed these events as described in his FOS against global instability likely never fell below 1.3. In fact,
deposition. The steel object he described was likely the tops as the water level on the land side of the wall began to rise,
of three steel sheets he saw occasionally through the gushing the FOS against global instability increased. No team found
water. As the canal water level continued to rise, land-side any evidence to indicate the occurrence of a global instability
scour of the flood wall embankment caused the failure to within the foundation soils at the South Breach.

Develop G-I WEBINARS
HTTP://WWW.ASCE.ORG/BECOME_AN_INSTRUCTOR/
Webinars Provide You With a Means to:

Build Educate & Develop Give back
recognition, network a gateway to to the profession
prestige, with many short courses/
and clients geoprofessionals workshops,
conferences,
and articles
Attend G-I WEBINARS

HTTP://WWW.ASCE.ORG/CONTINUING-EDUCATION/LIVE-WEBINARS/
Webinars are convenient, low-cost,

and an efficient training option.
Login anywhere and interact with the instructor and other participants. Our
webinars cover practical, targeted topics taught by experts in their field. Gain
knowledge and earn PDHs.
Please direct questions regarding development of webinars to programproposals@asce.org.

For questions regarding attending webinars, please contact continuingeducation@asce.org.
that he had been persuaded by the testimony
of the Defendants’ experts on causation. He
also found the expert testimony of the Plaintiff’s
experts to have unscientific data, erroneous
During the field investigation, the DOJ analyses, and unconvincing arguments.
team located two failed sheet pile Some Observations

Failure investigations need to consider and incor-
sections retrieved from the North Breach porate all of the relevant facts and observations
about the failure. In this case, prior investigations
and observed a 12-ft tear at the top of did not explain the eyewitness observations of
an explosive sound and a gap in the I-wall, nor
one section and a torn connection at the did they give due weight to the many photos of
rotating segments of the I-wall, torn sheet piles,
bottom of the other. These sheets, and and cracked and missing concrete segments from
the top of the I-walls.
others from both breach locations, had Failure investigations need comprehensive
and reliable data on material properties. Much
been stretched horizontally. of the IPET and ILIT geotechnical investigations
and studies focused on the 17th Avenue and
London Avenue failures, with far less attention
given to the IHNC failures. The extent of their
investigations and analyses did not adequately
define the subsurface characteristics, resulting in
assumptions and speculations that didn’t hold up
to subsequent study.
Flow Analyses Comprehensive failure investigations take time and money.
Using updated permeability data from the additional field and Both ILIT and IPET were responding to pressures to get their
laboratory work, our flow analyses showed that the duration of reports completed and findings made public. NRC identified
high head differential was too short for water to flow through weaknesses in these reports, but there was no follow-up work
the foundation soil from the canal to the land side. As such, to address its findings. A huge opportunity was missed to
little change in pore water pressure could have occurred in the learn more from these failures and possibly improve geotech-
soils on the land side due to the rising water level in the canal. nical practice.
Therefore, ILIT’s conclusions and the Plaintiff Expert’s premise
that both breaches were likely caused by underseepage-induced Acknowledgements
instability of the land-side levee toe was not plausible given the My work on this case would not have been possible without my
new evidence and facts. Geocomp colleagues, who searched for missing information
and put puzzling pieces together. The input and opinions of
Failure Mechanisms other experts for DOJ were also invaluable. These included
Work by the DOJ Team revealed a failure mechanism for the Professor Tomas L. Brandon from Virginia Tech, Professor
North Breach that was fully consistent with witness observa- Timothy D. Stark from the University of Illinois, Dr. Patrick C.
tions, known facts, and measured data, e.g., a structural failure Lucia from Geosyntec Consultants, and Dr. Joseph Dunbar
of the flood wall. No prior investigation identified this failure of the USACE. We also collaborated with Dr. Francisco
mechanism. We concluded that the South Breach failed by Silva-Tulla, who served as an expert for Washington Group
overtopping, as determined by IPET and the ASCE ERP. The International, a co-defendant in the case. The opinions in this
additional tests, analyses, and studies showed that the ILIT and article are my own.
Plaintiff expert’s failure mechanism of rapidly increasing pore
pressures in the land-side earthen dike due to high permeabil- j W. ALLEN MARR, PhD, PE, D.GE, NAE, F.ASCE, is founder and
ity of the foundation soil was not plausible. CEO of Geocomp Corp in Acton, MA. He has practiced geotechnical
After many days of expert testimony, Judge Stanwood R. engineering for 50 years with a focus on complex projects and
Duval, Jr., U.S. District Court in New Orleans, ruled in favor failure investigations. He currently serves as president of the
of the United States and its co-defendant, Washington Group ASCE Academy of GeoProfessionals. He can be reached at wam@
International. In his written opinion, Judge Duval indicated geocomp.com.

RELIABLE INSTRUMENTATION AND DATA MONITORING SOLUTIONS
GEOTECHNICAL | GEODETIC | STRUCTURAL | ENVIRONMENTAL
SAFETY MONITORING
THROUGH 50 YEARS
OF GLOBAL EXPERIENCE!
Reliable Geotechnical and Structural
Instrumentation and Monitoring Solutions
PRODUCTS
PIEZOMETERS | INCLINOMETERS | STRAIN GAGES | TILTMETERS
EXTENSOMETERS | CRACK METERS | LOAD CELLS | DATA LOGGERS
AND MORE
FOR MARKETS
TUNNELS | DAMS | BRIDGES | DEEP EXCAVATIONS | LANDSLIDES
GROUNDWATER | BUILDINGS
1653 McFarland Rd. Pittsburgh PA 15216

+412 745 8300 | info.usa@ritegeosystems.com
www.ritegeosystems.com
2018 & FORENSICS
Compliance with
the Standard
of Care
Hurricane Katrina Canal Breaches in
New Orleans’ Lower 9th Ward
By Patrick C. Lucia, PhD, PE, GE, M.ASCE

Post-Katrina temporary earthen levee under construction where flood wall failed, with Florida Avenue Bridge in the distance.
On August 29, 2005, more than 50 levees become congested with traffic. The original
and flood walls failed to protect New locks were to be replaced with larger locks
Orleans, LA, during Hurricane Katrina, one in the area of the IHNC. The area, called the
of the most devastating storms to ever hit East Bank Industrial Area (EBIA), contained
the U.S. mainland. Among the failures, two numerous structures. The soils in the EBIA
major breaches of the flood wall occurred were known to be contaminated with
on the east side of the Inner Harbor hazardous materials that would need to be
Navigation Canal (IHNC), which protects remediated before dredging and widening
the Lower 9th Ward (Figure 1). The breaches the IHNC. The structures in the EBIA, includ-
were designated the “North Breach” at the ing their foundations, were removed with
site of the former Boland Marine area, and excavations as deep as 28 ft and backfilled.
the “South Breach” at the location of the When Katrina hit New Orleans, the only
former Saucer Marine area. major work completed on the lock recon-
The IHNC, which connects Lake struction was removal of the structures in
Pontchartrain to the Mississippi River, had the EBIA and backfilling of the excavations.
wall, was the cause of the failures and that the USACE and WGI
were negligent in their design of the removal of the structures
and the subsequent backfilling of the excavations.
The Plaintiffs alleged that the EBIA excavations were
backfilled with soils more permeable than the soils removed
during the environmental remediation. They further alleged
NORTH that horizontal layers of high-permeability soils existed
el
hann
BREACH between the excavations in the EBIA and the flood wall. They
claimed that these high-permeability soils acted as pathways
ion C
for seepage that decreased the stability of the flood wall,

igat
thus leading to the failures. The allegation that the USACE

Nav
failed to consider the Plaintiffs’ assumed mode of failure, if

EAST BANK
true, would constitute a negligent act that would breach the
rbor
INDUSTRIAL AREA
SOC. The geotechnical studies for the design of the flood wall
r Ha
for the initial construction of the levee and flood wall was
Inne
SOUTH incorporated in the 1966 Design Memorandum No. 3, and the

BREACH
planned reconstruction of the locks was incorporated in the
2002 USACE Design Document Reports (DDRs) No. 2 and 3.
9th Ward The Standard of Care

The criteria for presenting expert testimony in federal court
FLOOD WALL
relative to an allegation of negligence and failure to comply
with the SOC is based on a 1993 Supreme Court ruling that’s
referred to as the “Daubert Standard.” The rules of admissibil-
ity of expert testimony and the opinions expressed, according
to Daubert, are based on four criteria:
Figure 1. Location map. (Courtesy USACE.) oo When a scientific theory or technique is used to develop an
opinion, has the theory or technique been tested?
oo Has the scientific theory or technique been subjected to
The Parties publication and peer review?
The breach of the 9th Ward flood wall caused extensive oo Are there standards to control the application of the scien-
property damage and loss of life. Numerous individual tific theory or technique, and is there a known or potential
lawsuits were brought against the U.S. Army Corps of error rate?
Engineers (USACE) (the designer), and its subcontractor, oo Has the scientific theory or technique gained acceptance
the Washington Group International (WGI) (the contractor). within the relevant scientific community?
The lawsuits alleged negligence against the USACE and WGI
for their work in the EBIA. The court consolidated all the Daubert does not require expert testimony to be accurate
individual lawsuits (the Plaintiffs) for recovery of damages to 100 percent certainty, because it is recognized that uncer-
into one trial in federal court. tainties exist in science and engineering. In this litigation,
In the evaluation of negligence for the USACE and WGI, the the USACE, as Defendant, filed a Daubert challenge to the
issue is compliance with the Standard of Care (SOC). Federal Plaintiff’s allegation regarding the existence of horizontal
and state law generally define the SOC as that level of skill and permeable layers and the mode of failure, arguing that it failed
competence ordinarily and contemporaneously demonstrated to meet the Daubert Standard.
by professionals of the same discipline practicing in the same
locale and faced with the same or similar facts and circum- Evaluating Compliance with the SOC
stances. The qualitative nature of this statement leaves the The design of the flood wall protecting the 9th Ward for the
interpretation of the SOC subject to the opinions of experts. lock expansion project was based on 1966 evaluations of the
flood walls. The 1966 analyses for the stability of the flood wall
Allegation and seepage applied to the Boland and Saucer Marine sites
A unique aspect of the lawsuit was that the USACE has immu- and the entire EBIA. The geometry of the flood walls and levees
nity, granted by Congress, from litigation related to any flood evaluated in the 1966 global stability and seepage analyses had
wall or levee. By law, the plaintiffs could only argue that the remained essentially the same at the time of the failure of the
work done in the EBIA, outside the limits of the levee and flood flood walls.

FACTOR
FAILURE SURFACE DRIVING FORCES RESISTING FORCES
OF SAFETY
El.
No. No. +DA -DP SD +RA +RB +RP SR SR/SS
(ft)
1 6,422 25,565 7,176 10,950 35,526 1.39
-15 31,987 17,400
2 4,987 27,000 10,548 7,988 35,936 1.33
A 3 1,140 29,216 16,700 3,000 36,500 1.25
-14 30,056 16,800
4 121 30,235 19,900 1,100 37,800 1.25
4 -30 56,993 8,159 48,834 29,840 21,630 11,900 63,370 1.30
B 1 -44 93,470 22,145 71,325 45,050 28,230 24,000 97,280 1.36
Figure 2. Stability against inboard failure of existing levees (USACE 1966 Design Memorandum No.3). (Courtesy USACE.)
The critical loading condition for global stability and The MCL defines the limits within which no excavations
seepage is the storm condition when the design level flood is or backfilling can occur. The “A” surface daylights the slope
against the flood wall. This loading condition is short-term on the flood side at about 15 to 20 ft from the flood wall.
where the duration of loading is measured in hours. The This observation suggests that any excavation or backfill
water levels rise and then recede over a matter of hours. If the beyond this point on the EBIA (the point at which surface
excavations and backfilling for the EBIA remediation would “A” daylights the slope on the flood side) would generally
ultimately affect the performance of the flood walls and that have no effect on the stability of the flood wall under
effect was not evaluated, then that oversight would constitute the design-loading condition. This would apply to the
professional negligence. The guidance for engineering analy- excavations and backfilling conducted as part of the soil
ses for the new lock project and its components are detailed remediation in the EBIA.
in numerous USACE documents. Those documents, along The level of the flood water during the storm is assumed
with the local practices and widely accepted engineering to be 2 ft below the top of the flood wall, as shown on
standards, formed the basis for evaluating compliance of the Figure 2. Seepage was evaluated based on prior experience
design with the SOC. and the conclusion that the soil conditions and the short-
The analysis of the stability of the flood wall and levee term nature of hurricane floods would not result in seepage
system along the entire EBIA for the design condition of a or uplift hazards. This conclusion, in paragraph 31 of
flood, conducted in 1966, is shown in Figure 2. The surface USACE’s 1966 Design Memorandum No. 3, is as follows:
designated by “A” and shown in red in the figure has a factor
of safety against failure of 1.3, the minimum standard for the 31. Seepage and Uplift. Based on the soil conditions along
USACE for this failure mode. This surface corresponds to the this part of the project and the short duration of hurricane
minimum control line (MCL) for the flood walls along the floods, hazardous seepage or hydrostatic uplift on the
EBIA for the design storm loading condition. protected side is not anticipated.
SOUTH NORTH
BREACH BREACH
SHEET PILE TIP
20
10
LEVEE CREST
FILL
0 FILL
NATURAL LEVEE
-10 MARSH
MARSH
ELEVATION IN FEET - M.S.L
-20
CELLULAR COFFERDAM
-30
INTERDISTRIBUTARY
-40
-50
ESTUARINE
-60
-70
-80 PLEISTOCENE
Figure 3. Cross section of the flood wall between the EBIA and the 9th Ward (USACE 1966 Design Memorandum No.3).
(Courtesy USACE.)
The USACE’s approach to seepage analyses for the 9th Ward backfill material was found to be either borrow-pit material,
flood wall and levee is based on the duration of the storm load clean (non-contaminated) onsite soils, or not fully known.
and the presence of clayey soils that retard seepage. Where the The five areas with river sand fill are located at distances
seepage loading is of a short duration, as in the storm-loading of 120 to 560 ft from the breach in the flood wall. Here, the
events assumed for the flood walls, and the soils are known bottom of the excavations only penetrated to depths above the
to have high clay contents with low permeability, quantitative assumed bottom of the sheet-pile wall. At those depths, the
seepage analyses were not required. bottom of the excavations would be in what was considered
The knowledge of the soils underlying the EBIA flood wall “fat clay” based on the information in Figure 3; soil material of
is shown in Figure 3. Based on available data, the soils beneath that type would be consistent with the USACE’s procedure of
the base of the sheet-pile wall along the EBIA are classified not requiring quantitative seepage analyses.
as “fat clay” at the elevation of the base of the sheet-pile wall. The information available to the USACE at the time of
Marsh soils, classified as “very soft organic clays w/peat,” are construction indicates that the soils are soft to hard clays
shown below the elevation of the sheet-pile wall. No evidence at the flood wall location with no indication of permeable
of permeable pathways was observed. These soil classifications layers. There was no information available at that time or at
are consistent with the USACE’s criteria that analyses are not the present, to the best of my knowledge, that the soils are
required based on visual observation and applied judgment. significantly different than shown on Figure 3, which indicates
There had been speculation by the Plaintiff’s expert that that soft clays are present under the flood walls and levees, and
during the excavation and backfill placement in the EBIA, hard clays are present on the protected side of the levee.
the characteristics of the soil had been changed and that
the overlying soils had been replaced with more permeable Defendant’s Expert Opinions
sand. A review of all the available backfill data revealed that Based on reviewing the information described previously and
excavations in the Boland Marine area were backfilled with contained in the expert report, my opinions on compliance
river sand, or with mostly river sand. In the other cases, the with the SOC of the USACE are summarized below.

Threaded Bar Rock Anchors
Removable Strand Anchors with Smart Jack Hollow Bar Tiebacks
Your True Project Partner

In addition to providing the most comprehensive product offering from a single company in the
geotechnical industry, Skyline Steel offers:
Custom manufacturing of temporary and permanent Multi-strand and High-strength Bar Now (in Houston, TX
■■
),
Geotechnical Anchors. Now Available: Cutting Edge Extrusion Process Strand Sheathing! expanded micropile
■■ Anchor systems designed to satisfy the PTI Manual’s “Recommendations for Prestressed casing production
Rock and Soil Anchors” guidelines. capacity and size off
ering,
■■ “Buy America” compliant components which are all manufactured in the U.S.A. including the ability
to
■■ The most reliable manually removable strand anchor technology available worldwide. thread up to 20” diam
Skyline Steel is the exclusive distributor of Samwoo Geotech of Korea. eter
micropile casing.
■■ Proprietary stressing equipment and hardware including: Centerhole Rams, Smart Jacks
and Closed/Open Face Jack Chairs.
See how Skyline Steel can help with your next geostructural project.
Visit www.skylinesteel.com or call 888-450-4330.
Exclusive Distributors of Anker Schroeder

© 2018 Skyline Steel, LLC. Skyline Steel is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Nucor Corporation, the largest producer of steel in the United States. within NAFTA and Caribbean Countries
Skyline_Geo-Strata_Geo-Ad_0618_v1.indd 1 6/1/18 8:58 AM

was being placed in excavations classified as “fat
clays” located above soils classified as Marsh soils,
which are considered “very soft organic clays w/
The criteria for presenting expert peat.” These are soils with very low permeability that
are very unlikely to serve as a conduit for seepage.
testimony in federal court relative There is no information available in the documents
relative to this project that indicates that these soils
to an allegation of negligence and had permeable pathways under the levees and flood
walls.
failure to comply with the SOC is USACE Negligence for Seepage Assessment
No negligence was found on the part of the USACE
based on a 1993 Supreme Court in assessing the seepage conditions as part of
the studies of the EBIA. The 1966 USACE study
ruling that’s referred to as the considered seepage effects for the flood walls at the
EBIA. Consistent with their procedures, it was likely
“Daubert Standard.” that, due to the known nature of the soils under
the flood walls at the EBIA and the short duration
of storm loading, quantitative seepage analyses
were not required. The information available at the
time the flood walls were designed indicated that
they were underlain by clayey soils. The USACE’s
experience and assessment based on the knowledge
of the soil and loading conditions were sufficient
and appropriate to reach this conclusion.
Impacts of Excavation and Backfilling on Global Flood
Wall Stability The Court’s Decision
Regarding the evaluation of the impacts of the excavation and The case was tried in federal court in New Orleans in 2012.
backfill work on the global stability of the flood wall in the EBIA, The judge never ruled on the USACE Daubert challenge, per
no negligence on the part of the USACE was found. Sufficient the Plaintiff’s allegation, although his verdict was in support
analyses and engineering judgment were utilized by the USACE of the USACE. The Court’s evaluation was presented in a
in its evaluation of the impacts of the excavations and backfill lengthy opinion with the following conclusion: “…this Court
in the EBIA near the flood wall and levees. During implemen- has found the actions of the Corps [USACE] in supervising the
tation of the EBIA excavation and backfilling, a boundary of no remediation project executed by WGI along the EBIA did not
excavations within 15 ft of the flood wall on the flood side was substantially cause the North and South breaches.”
imposed. This decision was consistent with the results of the The Plaintiff appealed the case to the Supreme Court and
analyses that showed that excavation at this distance would the decision upheld. The fact that a failure occurred does not
have no impact on the stability of the flood wall. mean that the USACE was guilty of negligence. The impact of
The excavations and backfilling in the Boland and Saucer Katrina was far greater than could have been known at the time
Marine areas were generally conducted at distances of approx- of the design. The USACE met the standards for compliance
imately 100 to 560 ft from the eventual breaches in the flood with the SOC at the time the design was completed.
wall. Based on analyses conducted and presented in the 1966 These failures have led the USACE to scrutinize its design
USACE report, these excavations would have no effect on the procedures. However, those changes are more due to the
global stability of the wall. performance of the flood walls and levees rather than the
Court decision.
USACE Negligence for Excavation and Backfilling
No negligence on the part of the USACE was found in the j PATRICK C. LUCIA, PhD, PE, GE, M.ASCE, is an adjunct professor
excavation and placement of backfill in the EBIA. River sand in the Geotechnical Engineering Department at the University of
or mostly river sand backfill was placed in a limited number of California at Davis. Additionally, he serves as an outside director for
excavations at relatively shallow depths, or at substantial dis- Haley & Aldrich, Inc., Boston, MA, and for SAGE Engineers, Roseville,
tances from the flood wall. In the remainder of the excavations, CA. He served as the USACE’s testifying expert to assess the
borrow-pit soils or soil from the onsite excavations, considered compliance with the SOC for the levee and flood wall breaches. He
to have low permeability, were placed as backfill. The backfill can be reached at pat_lucia@comcast.net.

Mark Your Calendar!
GEO-CONGRESS 2019
8th International Conference on Case Histories in Geotechnical Engineering
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania | March 24-27
Case Histories – Capturing the Accomplishments of our Profession
Pennsylvania Convention Center/Loews Philadelphia Hotel

www.geocongress.org
One Site. Precise Data. Fast Results.

ASCE 7 Hazard Tool
ASCE 7 Hazard Tool is a quick reliable NEW!
way to look up key design parameters,
specified in ASCE 7-10 and 7-16.
Easy-to-use mapping features quickly
retrieve your choice of hazard data such
as wind, seismic, ice, rain, flood, snow,
and tsunami. Generate and download a
PDF report with your results to include in
your engineering proposals.
12-Month Subscription Information: Corporate Multi-site licensing is available
List Price: $60 ASCE Member: $45
Get started at asce7hazardtool.online

2018 & FORENSICS
THE SAN JACIN

MONUMENT

Over a Foot
of Settlement,
but Level
By Jean-Louis Briaud, PhD, PE, D.GE, Dist.M.ASCE
TO Remember the Alamo!

On March 6, 1836, General Santa Anna and his
Mexican troops killed all those defending the Alamo
Mission in San Antonio, TX. The Texans wished to be
independent from Mexico and regrouped after this
severe defeat under the leadership of Sam Houston.
Houston, a future U.S. senator and Texas governor,
retreated toward what is now the city of Houston while
assembling and readying volunteers to fight against the
advancing Mexican army.
By the time Houston reached the San Jacinto River,
he had an army of just 800 compared to Santa Anna’s
army of 1,800. Using the element of surprise on April
21, 1836, he managed to defeat Santa Anna in the
Battle of San Jacinto in present-day Harris County.
This victory is critically important in U.S. history, as it
freed many of the future southern states. To celebrate
this crucial accomplishment in freeing Texas, the Texas
legislature and U.S. Congress appropriated funds in
1936 to erect a monument (Figure 1) to commemorate
the 100-year anniversary of the victory. Construction
took place between 1936 and 1939.
Figure 1. The San Jacinto Monument.
Figure 2. Dimensions of the San Jacinto Monument.
Geometry, Weight, and Construction Soil Stratigraphy and Average Soil Properties
Standing tall at 171.9 m above the original ground surface The geology of the site is the result of a series of very slow
(Figure 2), the San Jacinto Monument is listed as the tallest transgressions and regressions of the Gulf of Mexico in
free-standing column in the world, and is taller than the and out of Texas. Because of the low-energy environment
Washington Monument by a few meters. Its foundation, in which the sediments were deposited, very fine particles
a 37.8-m-square, 4.6-m-thick, reinforced concrete mat had time to settle, resulting in high-plasticity clay deposits
that’s beveled at the corners, was designed by Raymond in many parts of the state. Figure 3 depicts the stratigraphy
Dawson, professor emeritus at the University of Texas. The at the site. The profile is dominated by layers of very stiff
Monument’s total weight is 312.7 MN. The area of the mat is clay with a 3-m-thick sand layer at a depth of 15 m. Over
1,397.3 m2, so the average contact pressure under the mat is the years, many borings have been advanced at the site to
223.8 kPa. The mat is founded at a depth of 4.6 m below the depths ranging from 3 m to 77 m, along with in-situ tests,
ground surface. Using a unit weight of 18 kN/m3, the weight including cone penetrometer tests (CPTs) and pressuremeter
of soil removed is 115.7 MN, leading to a net contact pressure tests (PMTs).
of 223.8 kPa - 82.8 kPa = 141 kPa. The calculated (estimated) The zone of influence of the Monument’s foundation,
weight of the mat foundation is 133 MN; therefore, at the end taken as two times the foundation width, is 75.6 m. Samples
of the mat construction, the net contact pressure on the soil were taken to that depth, and geotechnical consultant Fugro
is very small (12.4 kPa), or less than the pressure under your performed both index and consolidation tests on those sam-
feet. Benchmarks and settlement points were installed after ples. Fugro advanced two CPT soundings to refusal depths of
the mat was constructed, when settlement monitoring of the 15 m. Texas A&M, in concert with Fugro, obtained one PMT
structure began. profile to a depth of 37 m.

The average soil properties from these site investigations
are summarized in Table 1. The water table was likely quite
shallow (say 5 m) 100 years ago during construction because
the Houston ship channel is only a few meters from the
Monument. But water pumping starting in 1936 lowered
the water table to a depth of 90 m by 1972. More recently,
two piezocone soundings in 2007 indicated a water table at
depths of 8 and 12 m.
Settlement Calculations and Measurements

Fortunately, Professor Dawson had the foresight to install
several benchmarks at distances of 100 to 200 m away from
the Monument. He also placed targets on the top of the
mat foundation. Over the years, these targets have been
surveyed to obtain the settlement of the Monument since its
construction (Figure 4). The settlement can be calculated by
considering the known subsurface conditions.
But first, let’s talk about bearing capacity. The Skempton
method from 1951 gives an ultimate soil bearing pressure
of about six times the undrained shear strength, or 900 kPa.
The CPT method predicts about 0.4 times the CPT point
resistance, or 1,200 kPa, and the PMT method about 0.9
times the limit pressure, or 1,800 kPa. Because the total
bearing pressure under the foundation is 223.8 kPa, by all
estimates the San Jacinto Monument is safe against bearing
capacity failure.
Settlement prediction methods abound and include
Terzaghi’s one-dimensional theory of consolidation, the CPT
method, and the PMT method. These methods were used, in
conjunction with the subsurface information from the site,
to estimate the long-term settlement of the Monument. Two
components of Monument settlement need to be calculated:
subsidence due to lowering of the regional water table from Figure 3. Soil stratigraphy.
groundwater extraction that began before the foundation
was poured, and settlement due to the weight of the
Monument after the mat foundation was poured. Because
the settlement measurements began after the mat foun- PROPERTY VALUE
dation was constructed, only the calculated settlement for Total unit weight (kN/m3) 20
that case is presented. The long-term settlement estimates Water content (%) 25
based on the consolidation tests, the CPTs, and the PMTs are Plasticity Index (%) 40
0.353 m, 0.299 m, and 0.328 m, respectively. This outcome is CPT point resistance (kPa) 3,000
CPT friction (kPa) 150
surprisingly close to the long-term measured settlement of
Consolidation Compression Index (dim) 0.3
0.328 m.
Consolidation Recompression Index (dim) 0.1
Coefficient of consolidation (m2/s) 10-7
Does Subsidence Affect the Measured Preconsolidation pressure (kPa) 1,000
Settlement? PMT limit pressure (kPa) 2,000
From 1936 to 1973, Houston pumped water from aquifers PMT modulus (kPa) 40,000
below the City’s footprint as its primary source of water. PMT reload modulus (kPa) 90,000
The resulting increase in effective stress on the overburden PMT time exponent 0.04
Undrained shear strength estimate (kPa) 150
soils led to a subsidence settlement that affected an area of
about 6,000 km2 and reached 3 m in some locations. In 1973,
Houston decided to stop using the aquifers and switched Table 1. Average soil properties; for more detailed data, see
to using the surrounding lakes as the main source of water. Briaud et al., 2015.
Figure 4. Measured
settlement.
Since doing that, the groundwater level has been recovering. due to the higher strain leads to more settlement under the
At the Monument, there’s a monitoring well very close to the Monument than under the benchmark during subsidence.
foundation; the well record shows that the water level was The question is, then, which of these two conflicting influ-
90 m below the ground surface in 1973, compared to about ences dominates? Based on numerical modeling, it turns
10 m today. Topographic maps show a subsidence of 2.7 m out that subsidence induces about 33 mm more settlement
at the location of the Monument. Therefore, the Monument under the Monument than under the benchmark; therefore,
location has settled 2.7 m from subsidence. the influence of the higher strain dominates. The measured
Because the subsidence affected a very large area, a first settlement was 328 mm, which would be 295 mm after cor-
thought was, at that scale, the Monument and the reference rection for the influence of subsidence. So the answer is, yes.
benchmark some 100 m away settled the same amount. Subsidence has an effect, but not very much, so a 10 percent
By this reasoning, the subsidence has no effect on the correction is needed in this case.
settlement of the Monument with respect to the benchmark,
thus making the measured value of 0.328 m correct. A second A Chance to Share a Pet Peeve
thought recognizes that the mean normal stress and the The consolidation e versus log p' curve is a stress-strain
mean normal strain under the Monument are much higher curve. Typically, stress-strain curves are plotted as stress
than those same quantities under the benchmark. The on the vertical axis and strain on the horizontal axis. Both
higher normal stress and associated higher confinement axes are on normal scales, not log scales. It’s my view that
under the Monument should lead to a stiffer soil than under consolidation curves should be plotted in a similar fashion:
the benchmark. Conversely, the higher strain under the effective vertical stress on the vertical axis in arithmetic
Monument means that the soil under the Monument is scale, and normal strain on the horizontal axis also in
further along the stress-strain curve, and thus is associated arithmetic scale. When doing so, the steel ring confining the
with a softer tangent modulus. The water-pumping process test specimen influences the measurements and skews the
creates a very large increase in effective stress and leads to stiffness data. Indeed the stress-strain curve, which usually
a differential settlement between the Monument and the has a downward curvature, has an upward curvature in such
benchmark because of the difference in stiffness between the a plot. This important fact is not detected when plotting it on
two adjacent areas. the misleading classical e versus log p' curve (Figure 5).
The increased stiffness under the Monument due to
higher confinement leads to less settlement under the Lessons Learned 80 Years Later
Monument than under the benchmark during subsidence. The San Jacinto Monument settlement case history leads to
However, the decrease in stiffness under the Monument several lessons learned. They are:

1
0.7 7000
EFFECTIVE VERTICAL
1953 Consolidation Test,
0.65 6000 z=11-13m
2007 Consolidation Test,
STRESS (kPa)
0.6 5000 z=11-13m
VOID RATIO
0.55 4000
0.5 3000
0.45 1953 Consolidation Test, 2000
z=11-13m 1000
0.4 2007 Consolidation Test,
z=11-13m 0
0.35
1 10 100 1000 10000 0 0.05 0.1 0.15
EFFECTIVE VERTICAL STRESS (kPa) VERTICAL STRAIN
Figure 5. Consolidation curve in semi-log plot and natural scale plot (same data).
1. Settlement of the Monument is about 0.3 m. This would mat, and the monitoring of the settlement over a 70-year
not be acceptable by today’s standards, yet it led to no period created a remarkable case history for study. We
problems for the Monument. owe Professor Dawson a debt of gratitude for his vision.
2. For tall-building projects, there’s a need to analyze the We should strive to include instruments and encourage
structure and the soil in a single, finite-element simula- monitoring of the structures we design much more often.
tion so that the decision regarding tolerable movement It’s well worth the investment. We would learn so much
Jean-Louis Briaud – Texas A&M University
considers stresses induced by the soil-structure system. more and save money in the long run.
3. The concept of soil heterogeneity is linked to the scale
of the soil volume involved. At the scale of the borings Additional details on this case history can be found in
and the soundings for the Monument, the soil volume Briaud, et al., 2007, “San Jacinto Monument Case History,”
may seem very heterogeneous. However, at the scale of a Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering,
38 x 38 m mat foundation, the lack of tilt of the Monument 133(11), and in Briaud, et al., 2015, “San Jacinto Monument:
and uniform settlement indicate that the soil is less New Soil Data and Analysis Including Subsidence,” Journal of
1 heterogeneous than at the scale of the borings. Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, 141(6).
4. The soil modulus that gave the most correct long-term The author is indebted to Phil King, who gave him two large
settlement of the Monument was equal to 120 times boxes of archived materials in 2002, which inspired this whole
the undrained shear strength of the very stiff clay. This study; to Fugro, the geotechnical engineering firm that con-
is the typical magnitude of the pressuremeter first-load tributed many of the field and laboratory soil tests; to Professor
modulus. Raymond Dawson for his vision; and to all those who measured
5. The consolidation curve should always be plotted as the settlement and kept the data over many years.
stress on the vertical axis and strain on the horizontal axis,
with both axes on an arithmetic scale in addition to the j JEAN-LOUIS BRIAUD, PhD, PE, D.GE, Dist.M.ASCE, is a
classical semi-log plot. distinguished professor and the Spencer J. Buchanan Chair in the
6. The calculated settlement using the consolidation test, Zachry Department of Civil Engineering at Texas A&M University,
CPT, and PMT results were all very close to the measured and president of the Federation of International Geo-engineering
value. However, the long-term nature of the measured Societies. His research interests include soil mechanics, retaining
settlement (creep) had to be included in the CPT and walls, slope stability, field testing, scour around bridges, and shrink-
PMT calculations. swell soils. He can be reached at briaud@tamu.edu.
7. The inclusion of benchmarks beyond the zone of
influence of the Monument, settlement targets on the
2018 & FORENSICS
POISON OAK,
MISTAKES,
AND LESSONS

Tales of Geofailure Investigations
By Edmund Medley, PhD, PE, PG, CEG, D.GE, F.ASCE
When things go wrong in geotechnical

engineering — like ground movements and
earthwork construction delays — failure
investigations are often performed. In a
typical geotechnical project, the path is
relatively straightforward, and the final goal is
known: desk research-site investigation-
laboratory program-analysis-report-review
of/preparation of drawings and specifi-
cations. But, performing investigations
of geological/geotechnical failures
(geofailures) is not like working on typical
geotechnical projects.
advantage in geotechnical engineering —
is even more crucial for geofailure
investigators. Sometimes the evidence
for the causes of geofailures is masked
by uncomfortable field conditions, such
as at sites overgrown with poison oak.
Pacific poison oak (Toxicodendron
diversilobum) is a leafy shrub that grows
to about 6 ft tall. It has characteristic
three-part waxy green leaves that turn
red in the spring. Like poison ivy and
poison sumac, poison oak releases an
allergic oil (urushiol), which causes
humans to have painful itching and
blisters. Geopractitioners on the West
Coast had an understandable reluc-
tance to enter poison oak shrubbery, as
illustrated in the tale below.
Figure 1. A location sketch. Tale 1: During a couple of days of
intense rainfall, a low-lying neighbor-
hood was inundated by muddy waters
to several feet in depth. The source of
the water appeared to be an adjacent
hillside that had been developed as
Geofailure investigations can be random walks — often a golf course. However, the track of the flow was obscured
with dead ends and path reversals. The cause of the failure because dense vegetation and a major urban highway were
may be unclear until close to the end of the investigation. located between the hillside and the houses. There was no
The process is like solving a jigsaw puzzle without the clear evidence that the water had flowed across the highway
benefit of the picture on the puzzle box lid. This oft-quoted from the hillside into the housing area. Instead, allegations
analogy should be familiar to geopractitioners, because most were made that flooding was due to an overwhelmed drainage
geotechnical ground characterizations result from piecing system underlying the road.
together too few site and laboratory test observations to create The hillside was investigated long after the failure and site
a ground model “picture.” clean-up. One location showed subtle indications that run-off
In geofailure investigations, puzzle-piece facts must first from the hillside golf course had concentrated along a golf-cart
be discovered, and enough of them collected to discern the path, overflowed the curb, and flowed downslope into dense
causation. Some investigators form causation “pictures” early vegetation at the base of the slope. The underlying soil was an
in the process and then ignore new facts if they do not fit their erodible, fine sand. The vegetation included much poison oak
initial theory. Others try to jam extraneous puzzle pieces into shrubbery, which had apparently deterred other investigators.
the picture. And worst of all, some investigators toss away But, a curious investigator discovered that — completely
relevant pieces because they cannot fit them into the puzzle hidden by the poison oak — there was a freshly-eroded,
they envision. steep-sided, bowl-like depression about 8 ft deep and 20 ft
Lessons can be learned from the mistakes made in failure across at the base of the slope, directly below the apparent
investigations, and so a few tales are related here. flow point from the golf-cart path. The eroded bowl could not
be seen from the road because of the dense vegetation. The
Mistake: Avoiding Poison Oak erosion was evidence that run-off had flowed off the hillside
The effective investigator of geofailures has several personal in sufficient volumes to scour the bowl, flood across the road,
qualities, among which include humility, intuition, curiosity, and flow into the neighborhood. In other words, the source
honesty, dedication, and lucidity. I discuss each of these of the water was the golf course rather than the highway
qualities in my article, “So You Want to Be a Columbo? Some drainage system.
Necessary Qualities of the Effective Geo-Detective” in the Lesson: Effective investigators must be curious enough to
May/June 2005 issue of GEOSTRATA. Of these, curiosity — the find elusive puzzle pieces, even those that direct them into poi-
personal drive to get to the bottom of things — is vitally son oak or other uncomfortable site conditions — most of which
important. A tolerance for getting one’s hands dirty — an can be protected against with suitable clothing and equipment.

Mistake: Not Analyzing Air Photos Mistake: Jumping to Wrong Conclusions
Stereoscopically During an investigation, the cause of a geofailure may seem
The realistic representation of geomorphology afforded by clear. But, sometimes the early conclusion is wrong because
stereo photos is superior to monoscope aerial photos or even there are not enough puzzle pieces to define the correct
high-resolution satellite imagery (even in 3D mode). Faulty causation picture. The following tale is a sidebar to a much
analyses can result from not viewing air photos stereoscopically. longer story.
Tale 2: A rancher sued two oil companies for the damage Tale 3: In 1995, a 100-year-old brick gravity sewer failed at
allegedly caused to his property by claimed erosion due to night during a 2-year storm. Discharge from the sewer scoured
decades of construction and operation of oil-well pads, sumps, a pit 240 ft across and 40 ft deep, causing about $30 million in
pipelines, and access roads. To illustrate that the well-field damage. The causes of the failure were eventually identified
activities had “severely eroded, gullied, and degraded” the once as the combined influences of: 1) pressurization of the sewer
“pristine” land, his attorney commissioned a flight to secure during the storm due to a downstream blockage related to
one aerial photo of the plaintiff’s land and compared it to a ongoing sewer-improvement construction, and, 2) a sinkhole
vintage, pre-oilfield aerial photo. created under the sewer two years earlier that resulted from
The lawyer and his geopractitioner expert did not review construction of nearby tunneling works.
the aerial photos in stereo. In fact, the lawyer did not know that During the complex failure investigation, a sewage pump
he could have commissioned or purchased two overlapping station that had been part of the sewer improvements work
air photos for little more cost than for one image. Viewed became the focus of attention for investigators working for the
stereoscopically, the original “pristine” condition of the land contractors involved in the sewer and tunnel construction.
was seen to be topographically complex and severely eroded They claimed that before the failure, an operator for the
from the influence of livestock ranging. The oilfield activities — wastewater system had “done something” in the pumphouse
such as drill-pad grading and roads — had benefitted the land to cause the sewer pressurization. He had then tried to hide his
through better drainage practices, which in turn had reduced “error” by trying to erase his written entries in the pumphouse
erosion and promoted revegetation of the original severely logbook. Indeed, the operational records on the pages for that
gullied ranchland. night were indecipherable; the inked records had become
The stereo views were projected onto a screen to an arbitra- faded and smeared by water.
tion panel wearing stereo glasses. The claim of oilfield-related The log book was analyzed. Although the writing could not
erosion was dismissed because it was clear that the original be deciphered, faint imprints in the paper were discernable.
condition of the land was not at all “pristine,” and oilfield Micro-stereo photographs were taken, and much of the
activities had not damaged the land. original writing could then be read using a stereoscope. Later,
Lesson: It is best to view air photos stereoscopically, and the operator was shown the log book, and he was able to read
several options are available. Anaglyph (red/cyan) stereo back his own records from the writing imprints, which tallied
images can be created by stereovision software and analyzed with the analysis findings. The records were innocuous — the
on computer monitors using stereo glasses. The images can be operator had not tried to cover up an error. (Rather, the roof
displayed on projection screens and in reports. Also, terrestrial leaked during the storm from imperfectly sealed recent
stereo photos can be taken as shown at geoengineer.org/ openings in the pumphouse roof, and water had dripped onto
multimedia-virtual/item/238-3d_photos_in_geoengineering. the open log book.)
Figure 2. Cross-section through borrow pit.
and failure investigations. One claim involved
a house that appeared to have suffered little
damage: there were few cracks in its brittle wall
surfaces, the floors were generally level, and
the foundations showed only old and minor
cracks. But the Insured’s geotechnical engineer
identified what he considered to be the principal
indicator of earthquake damage to the structure:
an intensely sheared and cracked rock outcrop-
ping in the yard. His finding was that the house
had to be damaged because the earthquake had
“shattered” the rock on the property.
The rock turned out to be phyllite,
containing abundant parallel cleavages that
look like shears, but were “damaged” millions
of years ago by regional metamorphism. They
were not the result of a recent earthquake.
Lesson: In this case, the Insured’s investiga-
tor tried to cram the wrong-shaped piece into
his jigsaw puzzle picture. Learn some geology!
Or, team with a geological professional.
Mistake: Trusting Cross-Sections

Geotechnical engineers depend on cross-
sections to characterize subsurface
conditions. So, it may seem like heresy to
distrust them, even if report limitations state
that drilled borings only indicate ground
conditions at the locations of the borings.
Tale 5: Major site grading was performed
at a site underlain by basalt. A building pad
was thoroughly investigated by about a dozen
borings that intercepted variable and discon-
tinuous thicknesses of ash, massive basalt, and
Figure 3. A typical road-cut section through basalt. basalt clinker (Figure 1). Fill was required for
the building pad. The clinker was the preferred
material for the engineered fill, being generally
Lesson: Clearly this is not conventional geotechnical minus 12-in. size and easily fragmented under compactors.
engineering! Yet it is an example of the sort of detour that the A large borrow pit was designated elsewhere at the site, but
diligent investigator may have to take during the investigation the borrow pit was not explored by borings. The contractor
of a complex geofailure… a side puzzle that does not help to estimated that the borrow pit would produce sufficient
resolve the larger puzzle. In this case, the detour was the result clinker. But soon after excavation started, the earthwork
of other investigators jumping to the wrong conclusion. contractor encountered relatively little clinker; instead,
there was much massive basalt, which required blasting
Mistake: Misinterpreting Geology and jack-hammering to fragment into fill. A Differing Site
Many geotechnical engineers are confident that they “know Condition claim ensued from the earthwork contractor whose
enough geology to get by,” despite lacking a basic background investigating consultant claimed that the ground conditions
in geological principles and rock and mineral identification. encountered did not match those predicted.
Sometimes this ignorance leads to incorrect findings in Due to little workable fill being produced, the project
geofailure investigations. became seriously delayed, and the contractor was eventually
Tale 4: The 1994 Northridge earthquake (6.7 Mw) in the San dismissed. The project was completed by another contractor
Fernando Valley, northwest of Los Angeles, damaged many that crushed all the material excavated from the borrow pit
structures and facilities, and spawned myriad insurance claims into good-quality, 6-in. minus fill.

A geofailure investigation showed that the first contractor Takeaway
had estimated the volume of clinker available using a cross- Geofailure and geotechnical site investigations require
section through the borrow pit (Figure 2). The section was based investigators to collect sufficient data to develop realistic
on the log of Boring X, located some distance away from the pit. “pictures.” For geotechnical projects, once the ground
The log showed a sequence of ash, clinker, and basalt, which model has been visualized, the remainder of the project
were projected onto the section as layers with the same uniform is generally straightforward. But, as described in the tales
thickness as encountered in the remote Boring X. The volume of and lessons above, the solution of geofailure puzzles often
desirable clinker calculated from the section was estimated to be requires the geofailure investigator to work in zigzag fashion.
sufficient to construct the building-pad embankment. Furthermore, the investigator must avoid expedient short-
It was unfortunate that the contractor had assumed a cuts; seek hard-won clues in poison oak shrubbery or similar
homogeneous, stratiform geology, because the dozen borings uncomfortable site conditions; curb inclinations to jump
in the building area showed that there were likely no “layers” to conclusions; and, beware of the temptation to discard or
at the site, but instead a complex subsurface geology with no bend facts that do not fit!
uniform thickness of clinker. Furthermore, local road cuts
and excavations clearly revealed the typically heterogeneous j EDMUND MEDLEY, PhD, PE, PG, CEG, D.GE, F.ASCE, is a
geology that should have been expected at the site (Figure 3). geological engineer and principal consultant at Terraphase
Lesson: When drawing cross-sections, beware extrapolating Engineering Inc., in Oakland, CA. He specializes in investigating
from boring observations and check for contradicting data. geofailures and the geotechnical and geological characterization
Furthermore, base cross-sections on a reasoned interpretation of bimrocks (block-in-matrix rocks), such as melanges, fault rocks,
of geology. Not all subsurface conditions can be characterized and weathered rocks. He can be contacted at edmund.medley@
as well-behaved, uniform “strata.” terraphase.com.
2018 & FORENSICS
OROVILLE
DAM
SPILLWAY
INCIDENT
Overview of damaged spillway.
(Photo courtesy of the California
Department of Water Resources.)
Putting Community
Safety First While
Investigating the Cause
By Craig Hall, PE, GE, M.ASCE, Holly Nichols, PG, CEG,
and Les Harder, PhD, PE, GE, M.ASCE
The Oroville Dam, and its associated reservoir and

hydropower plant facility, is located on the Feather
River in Northern California and is owned and
operated by the State of California, Department of
Water Resources (DWR). At 770 ft high, this earth
embankment is the tallest dam in the United States.
With its 3.5 million acre-ft of storage, Lake Oroville is
the second largest reservoir in California, supplying
water as far south as Los Angeles.
The 2016-2017 winter storms brought record-breaking precipitation to
Northern California, including the Feather River watershed. On February 7,
2017, Oroville Dam’s 179-ft-wide Flood Control Outlet (FCO) spillway
(Figure 1) was releasing approximately 53,000 cubic feet per second (cfs) to
control the reservoir level in accordance with the prescribed flood-control
operations plan. During this operation, the FCO spillway suffered a major
failure of the chute at its approximate midway point. This initial damage was
approximately 200 ft in length and up to 45 ft in depth.
To safely pass storm inflows through the reservoir, the damaged FCO
spillway had to be used intermittently over the next three months to dis-
charge flows ranging up to 100,000 cfs. This resulted in further damage to the
FCO spillway, the general destruction of the lower 1,500 ft of the chute, and
the scour of over 1.6 million cubic yards (cy) of soil and rock materials into
the Feather River. During this time, the emergency spillway was used briefly
for limited flows of up to 12,600 cfs on February 11 and 12. This was the first
time that the emergency spillway had ever been used since its completion in
1968. However, these relatively small flows resulted in severe erosion of the
unlined slope below the emergency spillway crest monoliths/weirs, resulting
in head-cutting scour that threatened to undermine the weir crest monoliths.
The threat of the emergency spillway weir failure triggered an emergency
winter flood season of 2017-2018.
An extremely accelerated effort was
required from many people with a wide-
range of expertise, including more than
100 engineers, construction specialists,
geologists, scientists, policymakers,
contractors, and regulators. This team
was tasked with planning, designing,
and constructing the repairs within a
five-month period beginning May 1,
2017 (at the end of the 2016 -2017 flood
season) and finishing by November 1,
2017 (before the start of the 2017-2018
flood season).
The spillway restoration work
following the initial emergency response
was known as the Oroville Emergency
Recovery – Spillways (OER-S) Project.
The charge for the OER-S Project was
to restore adequate capacity of the
FCO spillway chute and the emergency
spillway to safely pass potential flood
events during the 2017-2018 winter flood
season, and thereafter.
The original 1960s design intent of
the FCO spillway chute was to pass flood
flows up to about 261,000 cfs without
using the emergency spillway. During
larger floods, the emergency spillway
would also be used to pass flood flows
for events up to the Probable Maximum
Flood (PMF), a very rare event that
has an average recurrence interval of
about 10,000 years. The peak design
outflow from the FCO spillway chute
and the emergency spillway during the
PMF event would be about 671,000 cfs,
split between the FCO spillway chute
(300,000 cfs) and the emergency spillway
Figure 1. Flood Control Outlet (FCO) structure and emergency spillway, March 2011. (371,000 cfs).
(Photo courtesy of the California Department of Water Resources.) The requirement for passing the
PMF is to prevent catastrophic failure
of the dam from this extreme design
evacuation of approximately 188,000 people from downstream event. Following the 2017 incident, the FCO spillway lower
communities and an increase in the discharge flows on the chute was left severely damaged and the emergency spillway
FCO spillway to stop releases over the emergency spillway. was judged to be incapable of safely passing even 12,000 cfs.
Early on, the OER-S Project Team recognized that full
Challenges for Spillway Recovery restoration or replacement of the damaged areas would
Shortly after the Oroville Dam spillway incident occurred in require multiple phases and years, in part because the first
February 2017, a multidisciplinary engineering design team design and construction season in 2017 was extremely short.
was assembled to quickly evaluate the causes of the failure and Accordingly, the first phase would include structural replace-
develop and implement spillway repairs required to provide ments, modifications, and other remedial measures to rebuild
safe passage of future spillway flows before the subsequent the existing spillway structures to safely pass water flows for

the upcoming flood season. Later phases of construction approximately 179 ft wide and 3,000 ft long. The 1,500-ft-long
will increase the level of protection until the original design FCO spillway lower chute was heavily damaged by the
capacities are restored. incident. The damage entailed two deep scour holes as much
As illustrated in Figure 2, the specific design objectives for as 100 ft in depth, including a large scoured erosion channel to
the May to November 2017 construction season were: the left (looking downstream) of the FCO spillway lower chute,
oo The relatively undamaged 1,500-ft-long upper chute on and severely distorted, broken concrete walls and invert slabs
the FCO spillway would be restored to safely pass a peak downstream of the scour holes (Figures 2 and 3). The eroded
discharge flow of 270,000 cfs. debris was discharged downstream into the Feather River.
oo The heavily damaged 1,500-ft-long lower chute on the FCO In the days following the incident, the OER-S Project Team
Spillway would be restored to safely pass a peak discharge developed, evaluated, and further refined several alternatives
flow of approximately 100,000 cfs without damage, and up to repair the FCO spillway. The OER-S Project team recom-
to 270,000 cfs with some potential for damage. mended the following measures be implemented for the FCO
oo The capacity of the emergency spillway would be restored spillway chute:
to safely pass a limited flow of up to 30,000 cfs without oo The entire FCO spillway chute, all 3,000 ft, should be
significant damage to the spillway monoliths/weirs, but completely removed and replaced to current spillway design
erosion further downslope would be expected. standards over a two-year construction schedule.
oo The removal and replacement of the upper chute should
FCO Spillway Chute - Conceptual Design proceed by completing as much as possible by November 1,
for Repairs 2017, in time for the 2017-2018 flood season, and finishing the
The FCO spillway chute is a reinforced-concrete spillway remaining portion the following 2018 construction season.
Figure 2. 2017 Oroville spillway recovery design objectives projected onto an aerial view of the damaged spillways at Oroville Dam.
(Photo courtesy of the California Department of Water Resources.)
oo The eroded scour holes in the
FCO spillway lower chute would
be filled with roller-compacted
concrete (RCC) to restore the
eroded spillway rock foundation.
In the following weeks, the

sequence of repairs for the FCO
spillway chute were further refined
and the types of repairs and spe-
cific limits for the 2017 and 2018
construction seasons established
(Figure 4).
Emergency Spillway Repair

The existing emergency spillway
is an ungated monolith/weir
structure with a crest length of
approximately 1,730 ft. The left
930 ft consists of 20 concrete-
gravity ogee monolith/weir sec-
tions that were keyed into slightly
weathered or better rock. The Figure 3. Aerial view of heavily damaged FCO spillway lower chute (March 2017). (Photo
structural heights of the monoliths courtesy of the California Department of Water Resources.)
range up to 90 ft. The right 800 ft
of the emergency spillway is cut
into rock with a small, 1-ft-high, stabilization, foundation objectives and treatments, excavation
concrete partial-ogee-shaped weir. depths, underdrain designs, RCC foundation replacement designs,
Numerous alternatives were considered for the emergency structural concrete, and secant pile wall designs.
spillway during the alternatives analysis phase for the OER-S
Project. Based on the evaluation and ranking of the alternatives, Geologic Background and Investigations
the selected measures for the emergency spillway included: The Oroville Dam site itself was well studied prior to dam
oo An RCC buttress to provide additional stability to the 20 construction in the 1960s. In addition to the dam foundation,
larger monoliths boreholes were advanced along the FCO spillway chute
oo Replacement of the small, 1-ft-high weir on the right side of alignment and along the monoliths/weir sections of the
the emergency spillway emergency spillway during original design. There was also
oo An RCC concrete apron for erosion protection over the rock very detailed geologic mapping of the FCO spillway chute
surface downstream of the monolith/weir sections and the emergency spillway monolith foundations completed
oo A secant pile wall located at the downstream edge of the RCC during original construction. However, relatively little detailed
concrete apron to protect the apron from undermining by geologic information was available on the emergency spillway
head-cutting erosion area downstream of the monoliths/weir sections.
The selected measures for the emergency spillway’s mono- At the onset of the OER-S Project design effort, many
liths/weir sections are illustrated in Figure 5. spillway repair concepts and alternatives were considered.
Not knowing which design alternative would be selected, the
General Design Approach geologic and geotechnical exploration plan accommodated
The OER-S Project Team was a multidisciplinary group each of the repair alternatives and the issues specific to each
including geology, geotechnical, hydrology and hydraulics, and alternative.
structural engineering professionals. Many of these individuals are Geologic explorations included the use of 10 drill rigs to
normally based far from either the dam or DWR’s main headquar- complete over 100 new borings, 26 piezometers, and 15 incli-
ters in Sacramento. To meet the very challenging schedule, team nometers, all within about a three-month time period. A total
members were brought to one location – initially in Sacramento of 22 seismic refraction lines were completed, and extensive
for the design phase (March to June 2017) and then in Oroville geologic mapping of exposed rock was carried out at both
(June to November 2017). Primary design tasks included slope spillways. In addition to explorations performed for the design

features, forensic investigations and
studies were performed at the request
of an independent forensic team to help
identify physical factors that contributed
to the spillway failure.
One of the major challenges for the
geologic and geotechnical design team
was the highly variable geology, which
changed significantly both laterally and
vertically within short distances. While
amphibolite was the only geologic rock
mass encountered onsite, the cross-
cutting shears in the rock mass created Figure 4. Plan view of 2017 and 2018 repair/replacement alternative
a patchwork of rock weathering and measures for the FCO spillway chute. (Courtesy of the California
fracturing conditions. The overall rock Department of Water Resources.)
mass strength of the amphibolite was
controlled by the degree of weathering
and the intensity and orientation of dis-
continuities (e.g., shears/joints) within
the rock. The integration of a detailed
surface and borehole geophysics pro-
gram, coupled with extensive rock-core
borings, proved invaluable in making
proper assessments of foundation rock
quality. The surface refraction methods
greatly assisted in developing interpre-
tations of rock uniformity (horizontal
and vertical) and estimates of rock-mass Figure 5. Repair/improvement monoliths/weir measures selected for emergency
strength with borehole correlations. spillway. (Courtesy of the California Department of Water Resources.)
In general, the 2017 geologic inves-
tigations confirmed the accuracy of the
original project geologic maps along the
FCO chute. Most of the FCO chute consisted of slightly weath- lead to the initial failure of the chute on February 7, 2017.
ered rock with moderately and intensely weathered rock along The structural designs for new chute walls and slabs called
shears. In addition, there were two large bands of intensely for substantially more robust reinforced-concrete sections
weathered to decomposed rock, the upper band coincident to meet modern spillway design standards and to address
with the location of the initial damage. Most of the intensely vulnerabilities in the original design. Table 1 presents a list of
weathered to decomposed rock originally mapped at these two physical factors and structural vulnerabilities that may have
locations, however, was eroded away during the 2017 incident. contributed to the initial slab failure and the design measures
developed by the OER-S design team to address those factors.
Structural Design of Spillway
The concrete chute slab thickness of the originally constructed Secant Pile Wall/RCC Apron/Buttress Designs for
FCO spillway chute was generally found to be in excess of the Emergency Spillway
nominal 15 in. required per the original 1960s design. One During the final design of the interim measures for the
of the principal physical factors believed to have led to the emergency spillway, designers provided improvements to
incident was the original design decision to embed the trans- meet a 30,000 cfs design objective for the upcoming 2017-2018
verse underdrains within the lower portion of the slab, rather flood season. It was recognized that major modifications
than completely beneath the slab. This resulted in a concrete would eventually be required for the emergency spillway to
thickness over the transverse drains of only about 7 in., and safely pass the PMF flood event. Further, it would likely require
sometimes as little as 4 in. at some locations. It is theorized that 5 to 10 years to design and construct these improvements.
this thin concrete cover was a major factor in initiating cracks Consequently, an improved right-side crest structure,
that permitted high hydraulic stagnation pressures to come buttressed monoliths, a robust RCC apron, and a deep, secant
in contact with the vulnerable foundation below, and that this pile wall anchored in slightly weathered or better rock were
Figure 6. Aerial views of construction on FCO spillway chute between May and November 2017. (Photo courtesy of the California
Department of Water Resources.)
designed to pass up to 100,000 cfs over

Areas for Improvement Identified Design Measures to Address Areas the interim period.
in Original Design/Construction for Improvement The RCC buttress, short-crest concrete
wall/weir, and minimum 10-ft-thick
Relatively thin design concrete slab thickness of 1.25 ft New structural concrete slab at 2.5 ft thick (minimum) RCC apron will be founded on rock,
requiring substantial removal of surface
Only one layer of relatively light steel reinforcement Two layers of robust steel reinforcement soils, fills, and temporary armoring. The
RCC buttress will be founded on slightly
No waterstops Waterstops added at each transverse joint
weathered rock or better.
Use of thick layers of leveling concrete beneath the
The purpose of the downstream
Variations in slab thickness
structural concrete secant pile wall is to support and protect
the RCC apron from head-cutting
Corrosion of reinforcing bars Upper layer of steel reinforcement epoxy coated
erosion. Using the results of the geologic
explorations, an alignment was chosen
Placement of underdrains within concrete slabs Underdrains placed beneath concrete slabs
for the secant pile wall approximately
Separate collector pipes for underdrain and wall 750 ft downstream of the existing mono-
Collector pipes drain both underdrain and wall backfill
backfill liths/weir sections. Along this alignment,
the depth to slightly weathered rock is
Brittle clay underdrain and collector drain pipes PVC underdrain and collector drain pipes
only about 20 ft or less. This allows for
the bottoms of the piles to be keyed into
No clean-outs for underdrain system Clean-outs added for each underdrain pipe
slightly weathered or fresh rock to depths
of at least 15 ft, with total pile depths
Presence of untreated erodible rock foundation Intensely weathered rock was over-excavated
ranging between 35 and 65 ft. The piles
Presence of untreated shears in rock foundation Shear zones over-excavated and treated
were designed to be a minimum 3 ft in
diameter with centers spaced at 2 ft,
Less rigorous foundation cleanup Extremely rigorous foundation cleanup
and to be constructed in 5-pile panels
with a 1-ft-gap between panels to allow
Insufficient rock anchorage (only 5 ft deep) Deeper rock anchors –15 to 25 ft deep
for drainage and to avoid the buildup of
groundwater pressure against the wall. A
Potential corrosion of rock anchors Rock anchors epoxy coated reinforced-concrete-grade beam will be
constructed across the tops of the piles
Table 1. Design measures included in the new FCO spillway chute. and anchored back into the RCC apron.

Making Communities Safe Understanding the various components that led to the spillway
The progress of the first phase of work on the FCO spillway incident will assist other spillway owners in taking a more
chute is illustrated in Figure 6. Final placement of concrete on detailed approach in evaluating their facilities to safeguard
the FCO spillway chute met the deadline of November 1, 2017. their communities.
The expedited design and construction processes used in
the urgent restoration of spillway capacity at Oroville Dam j CRAIG A. HALL, PE, GE, M.ASCE, is the lead geotechnical engineer for
were unprecedented, and were only successful because of the the Oroville Spillway Project and a principal geotechnical engineer with
commitment of the owner, consultants, contractors, and reg- GEI Consultants in Oakland, CA. He provides geotechnical and project
ulators to work in partnership to ensure that the public was management expertise on water resources projects, including dams and
protected. To meet the timeline, it was critical to work in tan- levees. He can be reached at chall@geiconsultants.com.
dem to understand the causes for the failure of the spillway
sections, collect valuable onsite geologic and geotechnical j HOLLY NICHOLS, PG, CEG, is the lead geologist for the Oroville
information, and design spillway repair alternatives. Spillway Recovery Project and a senior engineering geologist for the
Lessons learned during this project included integrating all California Department of Water Resources in Sacramento, CA. She
parties into one central location, first in Sacramento and then provides engineering geology expertise on water resources projects,
in Oroville. The dedication of regulatory staff fulltime to the including dams, pipelines, canals, and levees. She can be reached at holly.
project team and the timely comments and recommendations nichols@water.ca.gov.
from the Board of Consultants were critically important in
staying on schedule. Finally, recognizing early in the design j LES HARDER, PhD, PE, GE, M.ASCE, is a senior professional associate
process that the spillway incident was due to multiple factors with HDR in Folsom, CA. He provides geotechnical and project
allowed the engineers, geologists, and scientists to design management expertise on water resources projects, including dams and
the many safeguards necessary to keep the public protected. levees. He can be reached at les.harder@hdrinc.com.
Avoid Negativity Bias
2018 & FORENSICS
You May Be Unwittingly

Hampered by Your Brain!
By Stuart G. Walesh, PhD, PE, F.NSPE, Dist.M.ASCE
You are, or imagine you are, retired and always remain permanent fantasies.
reflecting. You recall unfulfilled personal How could an important desire that lived
and professional dreams, some held for vividly within in you for so long be put off,
decades. You might have wanted to walk and, in some cases, completely ignored?
the Appalachian Trail. Perhaps you longed The answer is likely your brain’s negativity
to move to the top of an organization, bias. You, and others, may not even know
live and travel on a boat, start a business, this force exists. But neuroscientists do, and
bike across England, or write a book. their knowledge can, in many cases, help us
Unfortunately, some of your dreams will achieve long-delayed dreams.

Our ancestors faced threats of predation and starvation, so they had to be
extremely cautious and defensive. When venturing out, their learned negativity
bias told them they could either be “eating lunch” or be “eaten as lunch.”
Negativity Bias: Our Unfortunate Inheritance to recall some negative event or circumstance that is counter to
Our ancestors lived in harsh environments like open savannas pursuing the opportunity. Better to recall positive experiences
or densely vegetated jungles. These hunter-gatherers faced the and think about how your dreams could be advanced by this
threats of predation and starvation. When venturing out on any opportunity. Then decide.
given day, they knew they could either be “eating lunch” or be This process requires a special effort. But the payoff will be an
“eaten as lunch.” So it was necessary to be extremely cautious increased likelihood that your heart-felt dreams will be realized.
and act defensively. When mistakes were made, survival As motivational speaker Jim Rohn says: “We must all suffer from
depended on remembering how they got out of the situation one of two pains: …the pain of discipline or the pain of regret. The
the last time. A noise in the tall grass might be danger rather difference is discipline weighs ounces, while regret weighs tons.”
than just the wind.
Negativity bias, although not needed today in the same way My Personal Story
that our ancestors needed it, is still with us. To some extent, In my mid-thirties, I was one of four scheduled speakers
our brains are still similar to those of our ancestors. While most sitting on a platform in a hotel conference room facing several
of us have had many more positive than negative experiences, hundred professionals. As the session chairperson welcomed
our brains tend to recall bad experiences more than good ones. the audience, something happened to my chair — to this day,
I’m not sure exactly what — and I fell, along with my chair, off
Negative Consequences of Negativity Bias the end of the platform and onto the floor. As I lay there on my
If we allow negativity bias to prevail, we will gradually miss back, completely mortified, I heard some audience members
many rewarding professional and personal experiences. We showing concern, but others were laughing. Determined to
might set ourselves up for major late-life regrets. Here are a few go on, I dutifully got up, returned my chair to the platform,
examples: climbed back up, and sat down with the others. Minutes later,
oo Your boss offers you an opportunity to speak about one of I self-consciously and nervously gave a mediocre presentation,
your firm’s projects at your professional society’s annual influenced no doubt by the event that had rattled me earlier.
national conference — but you recall your recent mediocre Fortunately in the years afterward, I’d be offered many
presentation at a local chapter meeting and decline because speaking opportunities. For quite a while, before accepting a
you’re anxious about speaking before a larger and more speaking engagement, I would recall the platform disaster and
imposing audience. be tempted to decline, thinking about the negativity that event
oo For almost two decades, you’ve wanted to play the guitar — would bring to mind. Fortunately, however, I overcame the
but repeatedly defer because of bad memories of forced embarrassment of falling off the stage that day and eventually
childhood piano lessons that you’ve just never let go. became an effective speaker. After a long series of positive
oo That book idea pops up every now and then, and you experiences, I drew on those successes to offset that fateful
certainly have the knowledge and experience to generate its event with new speaking opportunities and continued growth
needed content — but writing continues to be your weak to become the best speaker I could be.
suit. This reaction is evidenced by job performance reviews There are lessons here. Don’t let your brain’s negativity bias
where you are told you need to improve your writing skills, so frustrate your personal and professional growth, and lead you
you defer moving ahead with the book. to late-life regrets. Instead, recognize and overcome this force
to realize your dreams.
You may say these scenarios are extreme, because you don’t
recall having similar kinds of illogical thinking processes. But STUART G. WALESH, PhD, PE, F.NSPE, Dist.M.ASCE, is an
that’s the point: we can unwittingly and easily make regrettable independent consultant-teacher-author specializing in leadership,
decisions while under control of our subconscious mind and management, and education/training services. Previously, he worked
our no-longer-needed negativity bias. in the academic, government, and business sectors. Walesh has
authored six books and many engineering education and practice
Offsetting Negativity Bias publications and presentations. His most recent book, Introduction to
When presented with a unique opportunity, avoid a knee-jerk Creativity and Innovation for Engineers, provides the foundation for
reaction. Remember your brain could instinctively cause you this column. He can be contacted at stuwalesh@comcast.net.
Look Who’s a D.GE
Edward J. Ulrich, Jr., PE,

D.GE, M.ASCE
Ulrich’s career has taken him over while I was at Georgia Tech, and a
four continents, offshore and onshore. fellow Naval Academy student asked if I
He has directed the foundation wanted to inspect caissons. Thinking the
engineering of Houston’s modern, work had something to do with funerals,
tall buildings, helped contractors to I thought it would be interesting. I
succeed when the going got tough, and quickly learned he meant being lowered
developed foundation designs that to 100 ft below the ground surface on
have resulted in major cost savings. a Bosin’s chair to assess the bearing
He served as the committee chair for capacity of drilled piers! Yes, I was
ACI’s Foundation Committee for almost naïve… and so began my career in soil
15 years, leading industry experts in mechanics and foundation engineering.
modernizing foundation standards, and
he has made nearly 100 written and oral Did anyone influence you as you
presentations. ASCE has awarded Ulrich traveled down your career path?
with the Thomas A. Middlebrooks Award Eventually, I would study under Ralph
and the Harry S. Schnabel Award. ADSC Peck after a year of working in Atlanta.
EDWARD J. ULRICH, JR. gave Ulrich its President’s Award and The experience was more than a dream.
named his paper, “Drilled Piers Succeed He was such a humble man, but a man
Ed Ulrich’s career began in 1967, when with the Deepest Excavation in the Texas with such vision, just like Terzaghi. After
he worked as a part-time field engineer Medical Center,” as its feature article for a few design-build foundation projects,
in Atlanta, GA, helping with foundation May 2011. Ulrich also has given invita- you grew to “understand” the Terzaghi
projects to pay future wedding bills. In tional lectures to the state meetings of and Peck leadership in the practice of
1969, he graduated from Georgia Tech the Illinois and Louisiana ASCE Sections. foundation engineering.
with a bachelor’s degree in civil engi- Then I would find an understudy
neering and concentrations in George What class did you enjoy the most to Terzaghi as a mentor, but west of
Sowers Foundations, structures, and while in school? the Sabine River in Texas. His name
surveying. After one year as a construc- Mathematics, surveying, general civil was John Focht, a quiet, deliberate,
tion engineer, he entered the University engineering, hydraulics, and soil patient man and chief engineer at
of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign to mechanics. I only entered my first McClelland… clearly a disciple of the
study rock engineering, foundation course in soil mechanics because Terzaghi approach, having studied
engineering, engineering geology, and George Sowers, who at the time under Terzaghi at Harvard. Later I
tunneling. Upon graduating with a mas- was chairman of the Foundation would conclude John was the “father
ter’s degree, he returned to Atlanta for Engineering Dept. at Georgia Tech, of soil mechanics and foundation
another year, then crossed the Sabine in encouraged us to enroll because he was engineering in Texas” and also offshore
1972 to join McClelland Engineers. By teaching ”how to be successful with internationally. His leadership domi-
1980, he had become chief engineer for ladies.” As a young “Rambling Wreck,” I nates today.
tall buildings and braced excavations, was so naïve, but eager. To earn money At McClelland Engineers I had the
and he started Ulrich Engineers in 1984. to fund my marriage, I needed a job opportunity to be mentored by a team

of leaders and modern pioneers in foun- By the way, in Pennsylvania I was mankind that truly matters. Think for a
dation engineering. These men would one of the youngsters who walked moment about Maximus in Gladiator.
forever mold my professional character. down a winding dirt road for a mile to Yes, making a difference regardless of
Men like Bram McClelland, Carl Fenske, ride the bus to school… yes, in the rain, how big or small is the key. According to
Charles Mansur, John Johnston, John snow, sleet, and shine... Oh, and there Balian of Ibelin in Kingdom of Heaven:
Seknicka, and Peter Gemeinhardt. Many was no telephone! “What man is a man who does not make
are now memories, as I await my own the world better?”
turn to become a memory. When did you realize that you wanted
to study civil engineering? What were What are some of your personal
What was your favorite project? the key factors in your decision to hobbies and interests?
Arrest of a Texas landslide at the Cedar become a civil engineer? Enjoying my lovely wife, Patty Lou. She
Bayou Generating Station. The landslide I saw the construction of the tunnel for made me whole… without her, I would
was the largest ever in the Houston the Blue Ridge Turnpike through the be a “wanna-be man.” She gave my
Area, and, as the lead design builder, Blue Ridge Mountains alongside of the life, focus, and persistence to calm my
our client commissioned us to arrest the Lehigh River. We often hiked the Blue passion. Cave diving was an unexpected
slide. The project allowed for the initial Ridge in the summer; then one day, I sport to help me understand karstic
use of the ACI Drilled Pier Construction would feel the earth shake above the environments. Teaching scuba diving
Standard we had been revising and tunnel. It was not until I reached age was the excitement I needed to appre-
updating. It was exhilarating to execute 25 that I would design my own blast ciate the fundamentals of hydrostatics.
on the basis of project needs instead of rounds in a faraway desert highland of Oh, and then there is… Craps. For those
satisfying wannabes. Saudi Arabia. who think Craps is gambling... it is just a
study of applied Newtonian physics!
What is your favorite song and artist? How do you feel about the state of
Lady GaGa: “Paparazzi GaGa” is awe- civil engineering and the profession For the complete article, please visit:
some. A true modern artist who will step as it is today? geoprofessionals.org.
out to create. Sure there others, like Jan The profession is governed by loss
and Dean, the Beach Boys, Glen Fry, the prevention instead of innovative
Bee Gees… and yes, Neil Diamond. engineering. The loss prevention stifles
engineering. The principles of Terzaghi
What is your favorite movie or and Peck have been replaced by testing
television show? laboratory concepts governed by loss
Gladiator, of course. A working man’s prevention. The result… the owner buys It’s not the effort
leader who cared only about the a grossly contaminated product masked
success of the common good. And by icing. to obtain the D.GE
Kingdom of Heaven.
What do you feel are the biggest
Where did you spend most of your challenges on the horizon for the
that is important,
childhood, and what was it like for profession?
you to grow up there? The need to restore the art of engineer- but the effort to
Until ninth grade, I grew up in the ing with construction.
hills of Eastern Pennsylvania, just strive to be the best
north of the first line of the Blue Ridge Do you have a message about
Mountains outside of a town called specialty certification that you’d
Palmerton. Then from ninth through like to share with other professional
you can be and
twelfth grade, I lived in Miami, FL, engineers?
where I was totally committed to being We are civil engineers first, and we serve mankind that
the best I could be on the football field. should never forsake the requirements of
Transitioning from PA to Florida was CE to be a specialist. truly matters.
like going from Mayberry RFD to Disney
World. Yes, it was that different, but the Was the effort to get the D.GE worth it?
move to Florida would mold my life It’s not the effort to obtain the D.GE
forever, and it is where I met my bride of that is important, but the effort to strive
fifty years. to be the best you can be and serve
G-I ORGANIZATIONAL MEMBER NEWS
Backlund Joins Organizational Member Council Geopier Announces Promotions

The newest member of the G-I L to r: Miriam Smith; Juan
Organizational Member Council is Eric S. Pablo, director of engi-
Backlund, PE, M.ASCE. Backlund is a geo- neering for Latin Amer-
technical engineer at Kleinfelder in Exton, ica; Brian Metcalfe; Matt
PA. He has more than a decade of experience Caskey; and Kord Wiss-
providing geotechnical solutions for a variety mann, president and
Eric Backlund of projects, including electric power trans- chief engineer of
mission, oil and gas well pads, solar farms, Geopier Foundations.
mall expansions, water treatment plants, and
Geopier recently announced the promotion of three key leaders.
commercial buildings. Backlund serves on the board of the Geo-
Brian Metcalfe, PE, M.ASCE, was promoted to vice president of
Institute Delaware Valley Chapter. He organizes and is the head
engineering; in this position, he will lead and supervise Geopier’s
judge for ASCE’s Mid-Atlantic Regional Geo-Wall Competition, and
judges ASCE’s Mid-Atlantic Regional Steel Bridge Competition.international technical activities. James “Matthew” Caskey, PE,
M.ASCE, was promoted to director of sales, where he will be
Backlund received a bachelor’s degree in civil engineering from
responsible for sales strategies and further developing commercial
Lafayette College and a master’s degree in civil engineering from
Virginia Polytechnic and State Institute. markets. Caskey has been with Geopier for nearly 20 years, most
recently serving as director of business
development. Miriam Smith, PhD, PE,
M.ASCE, was promoted to director of
Online Course based on the book “Applied Soil Mechanics with Abaqus business development, where she will be
Applications”, John Wiley & Sons 2007. The purpose of this course is to identifying new business opportunities and
provide civil engineering graduate students and practitioners with simple developing new technologies.
basic knowledge on how to apply the finite element method to soil
mechanics problems. This course differs from traditional soil mechanics Hahn Joins Subsurface
courses in that it provides a simple and Constructors, Inc.
more flexible alternative using the finite Subsurface
element method to solve traditional soil Constructors has
mechanics problems that have closed- opened its third satel-
form solutions. The course also shows lite location with an
how to apply the finite element method office in Minneapolis,
to solve more complex geotechnical MN, and has hired
engineering problems of practical Gary Hahn Gary Hahn, PE, as the
nature that do not have closed-form business develop-
solutions. ment manager. Hahn’s professional

experience includes geotechnical con-
sulting, special inspections, construction
The course consists of several topics:
materials testing, structural design, and
stresses in semi-infinite soil mass, project management.
consolidation, shear strength, shallow Subsurface has served the con-
foundations, lateral earth pressure, deep foundations, and seepage. It also struction industry for over 100 years in
includes a section that describes several elastic and elastoplastic material Missouri and adjacent states, in the design
models to simulate soil behavior. The free PC Education Version of Abaqus and construction of deep foundations,
(or any other geotechnical software) can be used. The course is flexible in earth retention systems, and ground
terms of its duration and start/end dates. For more information please visit: improvement. Its ground improvement
https://www.geo-milwaukee.com/ systems include aggregate piers, vibro
concrete columns, vibrocompaction, and
wick drains.

Stan Boyle (Chair) Tim Abrams Curtis R. Basnett Ronald Boyer Donald E. Gerken Ara G. Mouradian Robert M. Saunders
“We’re Looking Out for You!”

The Geo-Institute Organizational Member Council (OMC) •O
pportunity to publish news about your company, including
invites your organization to join us. Enjoy the numerous awards, new staff and promotions, company projects, etc.
benefits that G-I organizational membership offers, including
•Y
our company logo posted on the G-I website at geoinstitute.
the following:
org/membership/organizational-membership.
• Up to a 50 percent discount on the G-I annual Geo-Congress
•Y
our company name listed in Organizational Member News in
for one person.
each issue of GEOSTRATA magazine.
• A 5 percent discount for advertising in GEOSTRATA magazine.
•O
pportunity to display the G-I logo on your website and on
• Forty percent ($400) of your annual G-I OM dues goes directly printed materials.
to fund G-I student activities. A portion of that money finances
•O
pportunity to display a G-I Organizational Member placard at
student travel to the annual Geo-Congress and the OM/Student
your exhibit booth.
Career Fair.
For more information, visit the G-I website at geoinstitute.
• Each year during the annual Geo-Congress, the OMC hosts
org/membership/organizational-membership, where you can
an OM Career Fair/Reception. Two OM members from each
download the Organizational Membership application.
OM firm are invited to participate, along with 45-50 students
carefully chosen by the OMC.
GEO-INSTITUTE ORGANIZATIONAL MEMBERS

Visit us at geoinstitute.org/membership/organizational-membership
jA
dvanced Construction j Fudo Construction, Inc j Hart Crowser Inc j Schnabel Engineering
Techniques, Inc
j Gannett Fleming, Inc. j Hayward Baker, Inc. j Schnabel Foundation Co
jA
merican Engineering
j Geocon Incorporated j HNTB Corporation j Sentez Insaat LTD, STI
Testing, Inc.
j Geo Engineers, Inc. j Huesker, Inc. j Shannon & Wilson Inc
j Ardaman & Associates, Inc.
j Geo-Instruments Inc j Kleinfelder j S&ME
j Bechtel Corporation
j Geokon Inc j Loadtest j SME
jB
erkel & Company
Contractors, Inc jG
eopier Foundation j Maccaferri, Inc j Specrete-IP Incorporated
Company
j Braun Intertec Corporation jM
oretrench American j Stantec
j Geo-Solutions Corporation
j CH2M HILL j Strata Systems, Inc.
jG
eoStabilization jN
icholson Construction
j ConeTec, Inc. j Subsurface Constructors, Inc
International Company
jD
an Brown and j TenCate Geosynthetics
j Geosyntec Consultants, Inc. j NTH Consutlants Ltd
Associates, PC
j Terracon
j Geotechnology, Inc jP
AGANI Geotechnical
jD
'Appolonia Engineering Div
Equipment j Terra Insurance Co
of Ground Technology, Inc. j Golder
jR
embco Geotechnical j WSP USA
j Densification, Inc. j GRL Engineers Inc
Contractors, Inc
jE
C S Corporate Services, LLC j Haley & Aldrich
j Rocscience Inc.
In Memoriam: Tien H. (T.H.) Wu, Wu taught courses in geotechnical mechanics and soil dynamics.
PhD, Hon.M.ASCE engineering on topics such as soil mechanics, Wu’s professional accomplishments
With sadness, The rock mechanics, soil properties, advanced soil were recognized by his peers. His awards
Ohio State University mechanics, seepage, soil dynamics, founda- include the U.S. Antarctica Service Medal
(OSU) civil tions and earthwork design, and probability (1967), the OSU College of Engineering
engineering and statistics. He remained an active professor Research Award (1988), the ASCE State-
community mourns emeritus, collaborating with other geotechni- of-the Art Award (1990), the Earnest
the passing of cal engineers on books and journals. Award from the ASCE Cleveland Section
Tien H. Wu professor emeritus During his long career, Wu researched (2000), and the Ralph B. Peck Award
Tien H. Wu on June 7, the strength properties of soil and from the Geo-Institute (2008). In 2006,
2018. For more than 50 years, he shared rock, stability of embankments and Wu was elected an Honorary Member of
his experience, knowledge, and wisdom natural slopes, soil reinforcement, and, ASCE. His professional service included
to generations of students. Wu received perhaps most notably, risk and reliability several committees in ASCE, TRB, and
his B.S. in civil engineering from St. assessments for foundations and slopes. ISSMFE. He also served on several review
John’s University in Shanghai, China, and A pioneer in the development and panels for NSF.
his M.S. and PhD degrees in civil application of probabilistic methods in The T.H. Wu Fund, endowed in 2011,
engineering from the University of Illinois, geotechnical engineering, he studied promotes excellence in civil engineering
where he was one of Ralph Peck’s first geotechnical reliability, providing by presenting lectures by eminent
PhD students. He served as a faculty leadership and insight into the probability practitioners and academics in the
member for 12 years at Michigan State of foundation safety, safety and hazard profession. The fund is made possible
University, and 29 years at OSU from analysis of slopes, and uncertainty through generous gifts, in Dr. Wu’s
1965 until his retirement in 1994. In and decision-making in geotechnical honor, from friends, family, colleagues,
addition to his exceptional teaching engineering. He had over 90 technical and students. To contribute or for more
career, he held positions as a visiting publications resulting from his research, information, go to: giveto.osu.edu/
professor at institutions worldwide. and he published books on soil makeagift/?fund=647747.
CALL FOR ABSTRACTS
KEY DATES
PIPELINES 2019 Call for Submissions Open: June 20, 2018
CONFERENCE
Abstracts Due: August 26, 2018
Draft Papers Due: December 1, 2018
Registration Opens: January 16, 2019
Nashville, TN July 21 – 24 Final Papers Due: February 21, 2019
Pipeline Engineering – Concepts in Harmony
For up-to-date information, visit

www.pipelinesconference.org

COREBITS NEWS
Kavazanjian Named Distinguished Member engineering and geological conditions.

ASCE has announced that Edward Kavazanjian, Jr., PhD, PE, The first part of the workshop was
D.GE, Dist.M.ASCE, has been named to the 2018 class of Distin- held at IFCEE 2018, in Orlando, FL,
guished Members for his leadership in the geotechnical field and and was opened with speeches by
contributions to the design of waste containment systems and Jean-Louis Briaud, PhD, PE, D.GE, Dist.
geotechnical earthquake engineering. Distinguished Membership is M.ASCE, president of the Federation
the highest honor ASCE can bestow. of International Geoengineering
Edward
Kavazanjian Kavazanjian earned his PhD at the University of California at Societies; Robert D. Holtz, PhD, PE,
Berkeley in 1978 and has spent his career in both academia and D.GE, Dist.M.ASCE, G-I international
the private sector. Currently, he is the Regents’ Professor and secretary; and Askar Zhussupbekov,
the Ira A. Fulton Professor of Geotechnical Engineering at Arizona State University PhD, A.M.ASCE, president of the KGS.
(ASU). He is the director of the Center for Bio-mediated and Bio-inspired Geotechnics Participants heard keynote speakers and
(CBBG), a National Science Foundation Gen-3 Engineering research center focusing special lecturers from Kazakhstan, the
on the emerging area of biogeotechnical soil improvement. His expertise also includes U.S., Japan, Turkey, and Russia, and partic-
geotechnical engineering for infrastructure development and design of waste contain- ipated in two working group sessions. The
ment systems, with a focus on their seismic design, and in 2014 he was elected to the day culminated with a Friendship Dinner,
National Academy of Engineering for his work in these areas. He is the lead author of when Professor Zhussupbekov presented
the FHWA guidance documents on LRFD seismic analysis and design of transportation Jim Hanson, PhD, PE, M.ASCE, chair of
geotechnical features and structural foundations and the U.S. EPA guidance document the G-I International Activities Council,
on RCRA Subtitle D (258), Seismic Design Guidance for Municipal Solid Waste Facilities. with a chapan, a long, loose robe that is a
He has delivered invited lectures on biogeotechnical engineering, earthquake-induced hallmark of the Kazakh national costume.
soil liquefaction, seismic design of landfills, the durability of engineered barriers for Workshop attendees also benefitted from
waste containment, and the mechanical properties of municipal solid waste. the other events of IFCEE 2018, including
Kavazanjian served on the G-I Board of Governors from 2005 to 2011, including the large technical exhibition.
a term as president in 2009-2010. He has served on the G-I Technical Coordination
Council, including a term as chair, and on the G-I Embankments, Dams, and Slopes
Technical Committee, including a term as chair. He has also served on technical com-
mittees and in leadership roles in ASCE and G-I national and local groups. At present, he
is the faculty advisor to the G-I Graduate Student Organization at ASU.
G-I — Kazakhstan
Geotechnical Society
Joint Workshop
In March, representatives of
the G-I and the Kazakhstan
Geotechnical Society (KGS) The workshop continued at Columbia
met for a joint workshop on University in New York City, with a
“Geotechnical Infrastructure seminar, a visit to the Donald M. Burmister
for Megacities and New and Robert A.W. Carleton laboratories, and
Capitals.” The goals of the a scenic dinner cruise. On March 11, work-
workshop were to exchange shop participants took a technical tour of
ideas and to study advanced the New York Metropolitan Transportation
technologies in the design, Authority (MTA)’s rehabilitation of the
Participants of the Second G-I — Kazakhstan installation, and testing of Canarsie Tunnel, which was damaged by
Geotechnical Society Joint Workshop in Orlando, FL. foundations in complex Hurricane Sandy.
ASCE members
receive
2 uses
FREE data
of the NEW
Salary Calculator
www.asce.org/salaries
DFI Announces Kulhawy University of California, Berkeley. His his 2007 DFI Hal Hunt lecture, Kulhawy
Memorial Scholarship Fund teaching and research focused on foun- presented “Communicating Technical
The Deep dations, soil-structure interaction, dams, Issues with Levity and Panache.” He
Foundations Institute soil and rock behavior, and geotechnical brought his lifelong interest in stamp
(DFI) Educational computer and reliability applications, and collecting to the DFI Educational Trust
Trust has established he authored over 365 published technical 2011 annual gala, where he presented “A
the Fred H. Kulhawy papers and reports. He gave more than View of Civil Engineering as Portrayed in
Memorial Scholarship 1,420 lectures around the world and Postage Stamps.”
Fred Kulhawy Fund. The fund, received numerous awards for his work,
which honors Dr. including ASCE’s Karl Terzaghi Award and
Kulhawy’s contribution to the deep Norman Medal. Kulhawy had extensive
j P
LEASE SUBMIT your
foundations industry, will provide at-large experience in geotechnical engineering
scholarships to students enrolled fulltime practice with several consulting firms news to GEOSTRATA via
in an undergraduate or graduate civil and was a private consultant for major geostrata@asce.org.
engineering program at any accredited projects on six continents. A Geotechnical
college or university in the U.S. Special Publication (GSP) 229, Foundation
Fred H. Kulhawy, PhD, PE, GE, Engineering in the Face of Uncertainty,
Dist.M.ASCE, was professor emeritus was published in his honor at Geo-
of civil and geotechnical engineering Congress 2013.
at Cornell University and a consulting A former student remembered
geotechnical engineer. He received his Kulhawy as a dedicated and rigorous
bachelor’s and master’s degrees in civil teacher who kept things in perspective
engineering from the New Jersey Institute with “his wry sense of humor and the
of Technology, and his PhD from the wildest wardrobe (especially his ties!).” For
Follow us on Social Media

Twitter: @GeoInstitute
YouTube: GeoInstituteASCE
LinkedIn: ASCE: Geotechnical Engineering
Facebook: facebook.com/GeoInstitute
www.geoinstitute.org
COREBITS CHAPTERS
Connecticut Chapter
On March 28, 2018, the St. Louis Chapter hosted the annual Case
Histories Seminar featuring the Cross-USA Lecture by Andrew J.
Whittle, M.ASCE, of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
The topic was “Prediction of Ground Movements Associated with
Tunneling.” Oral and poster presentations were made by students
from University of Missouri-Columbia, Missouri University of
Science and Technology (MS&T), and Southern Illinois University at
Edwardsville (SIUE). Approximately 50 people attended, including
about 20 students from three universities in this ASCE region.
San Diego Chapter
A group of geotechnical professionals engaged in a full-day

workshop focusing on helical piers, piles, and anchors.
On April 6, 2018, the Connecticut Valley Chapter hosted its 8th

Annual Spring Geotechnical Workshop at the University of New
Haven in West Haven, CT. Over 75 regional geotechnical engineers
attended. The topic of the workshop was Helical Piles, and was
led by Alan Lutenegger, PhD, PE, F.ASCE, of the University of
Massachusetts – Amherst. Other presenters included Gary Seider, Lecturer Professor Izzat M. Idriss presented at the Geotechnical
PE, M.ASCE, of Chancel Civil Construction, Derek Simpson, Forum held at UCSD.
A.M.ASCE, Michael Cronenberger, A.M.ASCE, Paul Yingling
A.M.ASCE, of Helical Drilling, and Matt Conte and Dan Armitage of
Conte Company LLC. The seminar provided historical, manufac-
turer, and contractor perspectives of the Helical Pile industry.
St. Louis Chapter
The UCSD G-I Student Chapter and San Diego Chapter.
The San Diego Chapter and the Geo-Institute Graduate Student

Organization at the University of California San Diego (UCSD)
L to r: Minh D. Uong (University of Missouri), Dr. Andrew Whit- hosted two events back-to-back on Wednesday, April 11, 2018.
tle (MIT), Junnan Cao (MS&T), Ruoyu Zhong (MS&T), Faiza The first was a forum discussion led by Izzat M. Idriss, PhD, PE,
Khan (SIUE), and Pradip Adhikari (SIUE). NAE, Dist.M.ASCE, Professor Emeritus at UC Davis. The forum

Engineering Ethics
Real World Case Studies
Steven K. Starrett, Ph.D., P.E., D.WRE;
Amy L. Lara, Ph.D.; and Carlos Bertha, Ph.D.
ASCE Press
Entrusted by the public to provide professional solutions to

complex situations, engineers can face ethical dilemmas in
included discussions of liquefaction all forms. In Engineering Ethics: Real World Case Studies,
assessment and mitigation techniques, Starrett, Lara, and Bertha provide in-depth analysis
with extended discussions and study questions of case
earthquake ground motions, seismic studies that are based on real work situations. Important
site response, and earth dams. Prior to concepts, such as rights and obligations; conflicts of
the forum, the attendees had submitted interest; professionalism and mentoring; confidentiality;
their questions to the forum’s moderator, whistleblowing; bribery, fraud, and corruption; and ethical
communication with the public in a social media world are
Professor Ahmed Elgamal, a professor at discussed in practical and approachable terms. Organized by the canons of the ASCE Code of
UC San Diego. Ethics, this book is intended for practitioners, consultants, government engineers, engineering
The second event was a graduate educators, and students in all engineering disciplines.
student technical presentation. The
2017 | 134 pp. | List $44 | ASCE Member $33
presenters included: Grace Parker, a PhD Soft Cover: ISBN 978-0-7844-1467-5
candidate from the University of California, E-book PDF: ISBN 978-0-7844-8035-9
Los Angeles, who discussed “Empirical
American Society of Civil Engineers
Linear Seismic Site Amplification in Central
1801 Alexander Bell Dr. Reston, Virginia 20191
and Eastern North America”; Ismaail
1-800-548-ASCE | 703-295-6300 (int’l)
Ghaaowd, C.Eng, S.M.ASCE, a PhD can-
www.asce.org/publications
didate from the University of California,
San Diego, who discussed “Behavior of
Energy Piles in Soft Clays”, and Ahmed
Ebeido, SE, S.M.ASCE, a PhD candidate
from the University of California, San
Diego, who discussed “Large-Scale Shake
Table Testing with Saturated Sands:
Experimental Observations.” Both events
were very successful and were attended
by faculty members, undergraduate and
graduate students, as well as practicing
professionals.
Join a Geo-Institute (G-I) Chapter/Technical Committee - Share

your expertise and learn from fellow Geoprofessionals locally
j PLEASE SUBMIT G-I and nationally. Join your local G-I Chapter and
chapter and company news
and career achievements Focus on local issues that impact your workplace
Benefit from onsite professional development programs
to GEOSTRATA via Build long-lasting friendships and strong business
geostrata@asce.org. partnerships with professional peers
Grow into a leadership role on chapter committees
chapters.geoinstitute.org
Share your expertise and join a G-I Technical Committee. The twenty technical
committees encompass all major technical disciplines within geotechnical engi-
neering and the geoprofession and focus on unique technical areas within the
geo-industry. Share your knowledge, grow your network and build your career.
committees.geoinstitute.org
ASCE EDUCATION and CAREERS
ASCE/G-I Co-sponsored Online j E

thics: The Road All Engineers Must Guided Online Courses
Live Webinars Follow (PDHs: 1.5) Guided Online Courses are asynchronous,
All posted webinars offer professional September 27, 2018 online, instructor-led programs in which
development hours (PDHs) as indicated. 11:30 a.m. - 1:00 p.m. (ET) you move through a 6- or 12-week
learning experience with your peers. The
j D
ynamically Loaded Machine and Guided Online Course content includes
Equipment Foundations: A Design
ASCE/G-I Seminars video lectures, interactive exercises,
Primer (PDHs: 1.5) case studies, live webinars, and weekly
All posted seminars offer continuing
July 9, 2018 discussion topics to help you master
education units (CEUs).
11:30 a.m. – 1:00 p.m. (ET) the course material. Unlimited, 24/7
j G
round Improvement Methods: accessibility to weekly modules. Complete
j I ntroduction to Geotechnical
Selection, Design, Construction, and coursework at the time and pace that
Grouting (PDHs: 1.5)
Monitoring/Inspection – NEW is most convenient for you, using your
July 12, 2018
(CEUs: 1.4) own devices. Courses offer continuing
11:30 a.m. – 1:00 p.m. (ET)
July 19-20, 2018 education units (CEUs).
j D
esign of Slab on Grade for Light Hyannis, MA
Buildings on Shrink Swell Soils
j P
ractical Aspects of Tunnel Design – j P
roject Planning and Control
(PDHs: 1.5)
NEW (CEUs: 1.4) (CEUs 1.0)
July 17, 2018
August 9-10, 2018 September 10 – October 19, 2018
11:30 a.m. – 1:00 p.m. (ET)
New York City Metro Area, NJ
j A
voiding Failures of Retaining Walls j Q
uality Management (CEUs:1.0)
September 20-21, 2018 September 10 – October 19, 2018
(PDHs: 1.5)
Sacramento Metro Area, CA
July 23, 2018
11:30 a.m. – 1:00 p.m. (ET) j S
oil and Rock Slope Stability
On-Demand Learning
On-demand learning opportunities
(CEUs: 1.4)
j U
nderpinning and Strengthening of offer continuing education units (CEUs).
September 13-14, 2018
Foundations (PDHs: 1.5) Recorded from ASCE’s most popular live
Atlanta Metro Area, GA
August 6, 2018 webinars or in-person seminars, these
11:30 a.m. – 1:00 p.m. (ET) j D
eep Foundations: Design, courses allow you to hear the instructor’s
Construction, and Quality Control lecture, see the presentation, and listen in
j G
eotechnical Applications of
(CEUs: 1.4) on questions from the audience.
Geophysics (PDHs: 1.5)
August 7, 2018 For more information about webinars,
Las Vegas, NV
11:30 a.m. – 1:00 p.m. (ET) seminars, guided online courses and
j A
pplication of Soil-Structure on-demand learning, visit the ASCE
j B
ridge Deep-Foundation Design for
Interaction to Buildings and Bridges Continuing Education website: asce.org/
Liquefaction and Lateral Spreading:
(CEUs: 1.4) continuing_education.
Lessons Learned (PDHs: 1.0)
August 14, 2018
Secaucus, NJ
12:00 p.m. – 1:00 p.m. (ET)
j E
arth-Retaining Structures: Selection,
j R
isk Management and Rehabilitation
Design, Construction, and Inspection
of Existing Structural Foundations for
(CEUs: 1.4)
New Infrastructure Facilities
(PDHs: 1.5)
Las Vegas, NV
September 21, 2018
11:30 a.m. - 1:00 p.m. (ET)
Internships Available
Are you looking for an internship? Explore the positions listed on the ASCE website to help you obtain the experience
you need to further your career path. New opportunities are added all the time, so start your search today:
careers.asce.org/jobs?keywords=internship.

CONNECT WITH US
www.asce.org/geo twitter.com/GeoInstitute facebook.com/GeoInstitute LinkedInGeo GeoInstituteASCE
INDUSTRY CALENDAR
COMING IN SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2018
Unconventional 2018 Rocky Mountain

Fill Materials Geotechnical Conference
Pipelines Conference 2018 November 2, 2018
July 14-18, 2018 Denver, CO
As I See It: Unconventional Toronto, ON
Fill Materials — A Little pipelinesconference.org GeoMEast International
Research Helps! Conference and Exhibition
By John Yzenas, Jr. 5th GeoChina International November 24-28, 2018
Conference: Civil Cairo, Egypt
Infrastructures Confronting issmge.org/events/
Lightweight Alternatives Severe Weathers and Climate geomeast-2018
Changes
for Embankments on
July 23-25, 2018
Soft Ground
HangZhou, China 2019
By Steven F. Bartlett
geochina2018.geoconf.org
2019 Geo-Congress
G-I Web Conferences March 24-27, 2019
Ultra-Lightweight Foamed August 20-24, 2018 Philadelphia, PA
Glass Aggregate Finds the geocongress.org
U.S. Market Connecticut Valley Chapter
By Theresa Andrejack Loux Annual Seminar Theory to Practice in
September 28, 2018 Numerical Modeling
Meriden, CT June 16-19, 2019
Properties of Biochar- sections.asce.org/ Pasadena, CA
Amended Highway Soils connecticut/21st-annual-
csce-fall-geotechnical-
By Kalehiwot Nega Manahiloh
and Paul Imhoff seminar-four-points- 2020
sheraton-meriden-ct
2020 Geo-Congress
The Awakening of an Central Pennsylvania February 25-28, 2020
Geotechnical Conference Minneapolis, MN
Ancient Landslide
October 31-Nov. 2, 2018
By Suresh Gutta
Hershey, PA
central-pa-asce-geotech.org
Lessons from GeoLegends:

Kord Wissmann
By Kaitlin Hall, Wenyong Rong,
For more seminar information:
Yewei Zheng, and Tugce Baser
asce.org/continuing-education/face-to-face-seminars
GeoPoem
By Mary C. Nodine, PE, M.ASCE
Urban Jungle
We won a fun new job, designing piles in a city! They’ve encountered an obstruction on Pile #2!
For a sleek and modern tower, very functional and pretty. An RFI: “Dear Engineer, whatever shall we do?
The site of a demolished 1920s factory, Move the pile north or south, two feet, three, or four?
Foundations left in place, ground surface level as can be. An answer please, ASAP! Please don’t delay us more!”
The column loads are heavy, and we lay out piles with care, The days and weeks that follow soon become a blur
Use the largest skin friction and bearing that we dare; Of checking eccentricities, finding the next cure
Cross fingers that the O-cell test will validate our guess, For foundations, once optimized and carefully aligned
For efficiency and value are our deep foundation quest! Now in need of having their locations reassigned.
We go into production, our design a hole-in-one, When it’s over, we draw as-built plans of all the piles that moved.
Feeling great relief now that our hardest work is done. Each group of them a masterpiece Picasso would approve.
Next, just make sure the contractors correctly build this thing! We sign and stamp them, proud that we could keep this job afloat.
But not a day into construction, our email inbox pings... But next time, we wouldn’t mind a site a little more remote.
MARY C. NODINE, PE, M.ASCE, is a geotechnical poet, a member of GEOSTRATA’s Editorial Board, and a project manager
with GEI Consultants, Inc. in Woburn, MA. She can be reached at mnodine@geiconsultants.com.
Photo courtesy of Atlas Tube, a division of Zekelman Industries. Special thanks to the
DFI Driven Pile Committee for its assistance in locating an appropriate photo.

DFP TAPERTUBE TM PILES...
THE BEST HIGH CAPACITY
FRICTION PILES
DFP Tapertube Piles...

A Foundation For Success
Project-proven Tapertubes are a dramatic leap forward in
on-the-job pile performance. Superior design and robust
construction means this remarkable product delivers big
advantages over conventional piles or other tapered piles.
Tapertube piles are the only tapered piles available with heavier
wall thicknesses ranging up to 0.500" produced from 50 ksi steel.
Directly driven, no mandrel or butt reinforcement required.
Cast steel conical driving points supplied.
Tapertube size and geometry can be configured to most
effectively meet capacity requirements and soil conditions.
PO Box 688 | Franklin Lakes, NJ 07417-0688

201-337-5748 | fax: 201-337-9022 | www.pileline.com

GeoStrata Jul Aug2018 FINAL PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

GeoStrata Jul Aug2018 FINAL PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

GeoStrata Jul Aug2018 FINAL PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

26 Lessons from GeoLegends: 34 Katrina Canal Breaches 42 56 T ales of Geofailure

Donald T. Goldberg Forensic Evaluation Standard of Care Compliance Investigations

JULY // AUGUST 2018

Proudly published by the Geo-Institute of ASCE

■ Strain Gages ■ Piezometers ■ Load Cells ■ Readouts

to learn more, please visit: www.geokon.com⁄projects

INNOVATION AND QUALITY SINCE 1979

www.asce.org/geo twitter.com/GeoInstitute facebook.com/GeoInstitute LinkedInGeo GeoInstituteASCE

2 GEOSTRATA JULY/AUGUST 2018

2018 GEOSTRATA ADVERTISING SALES MANAGERS

4 GEOSTRATA JULY/AUGUST 2018

A proven, cost-effective pile solution to support

Discover Geotechnical Site Investigation Data Management. SIMPLIFIED.

Visit our website for more information:

Save Time and Money on

Pieces of the Puzzle

8 GEOSTRATA JULY/AUGUST 2018

10 GEOSTRATA JULY/AUGUST 2018

GeoPoetry Always Gets Read First!

j j Dear Mary Nodine, fellow geo-engineer,

By Mary C. star topolog

water had to be released via the flood

You are so blessedly adept at scintillating

control spillway chute at Oroville Dam

poetry that I kick myself for not having compli-

bridge to fix. With a brand-

Watch the video

in order to control the reservoir level

mented you on the always-first-read feature of

First: we need a bit behind tion to RST

and meet the dam’s operations plan. In

GEOSTRATA! Extra deep here,

doing so, however, the spillway suffered

Don’t drop your pen!

a catastrophic failure when about

I cannot image that any other practitioner

1,400 ft of the lower chute broke away,

(or any other of our orbiters) could even

and more than 1.6 million cy of soil and

enter your ring, just on the basis that your www.rstinst

and protect the area’s nearly 200,000 Sincerely,

Negativity Bias: You May Be Unwittingly Technology (UMR) — Soil collaps

Hampered by Your Brain!” by Stuart Rolla, Missouri

Walesh. Though not related to the theme

of this issue, this article helps us to

recognize how and why our past failures

can hinder us later in our careers.

One-by-one, piles are driven to 000979_GeoStrata_

support structures that will bear on

Borderline Between Science and Art

G-I Board of Governors

Garry H. Gregory, Charles W. Black, Jr., James G. Collin,

Robert B. Gilbert, Sissy Nikolaou, Brad Keelor

12 GEOSTRATA JULY/AUGUST 2018

Earn your distance

foundations, tunnels, landfills), in the

The Geo-Congress 2019, scheduled for Courses in geological engineering,

BOREHOLE SHEAR TEST

26 Lessons from GeoLegends: 34 Katrina Canal Breaches 42 56 T ales of Geofailure

Donald T. Goldberg Forensic Evaluation Standard of Care Compliance Investigations