GROUND MODIFICATION, PROBLEM SOILS, AND GEO-SUPPORT 105

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of California, San Diego on 08/24/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

Secant Pile Wall Design and Construction in Manhattan, New York

Cem Altuntas1, M. ASCE, P.E., Deo Persaud2, A. M. ASCE, Alan R. Poeppel3, M.

ASCE, P.E.
1
Assistant Project Manager, Langan Engineering and Environmental Services, P.C., 360 West 31st
Street, 8th Floor, New York, NY 10001; caltuntas@langan.com
2
Senior Staff Engineer, Langan Engineering and Environmental Services, P.C., 360 West 31st Street,
8th Floor, New York, NY 10001; dpersaud@langan.com
3
Senior Associate, Langan Engineering and Environmental Services, P.C., 360 West 31st Street, 8th
Floor, New York, NY 10001; apoeppel@langan.com

ABSTRACT: Below-grade excavation for basement construction of real estate

developments is a risky and challenging undertaking in Manhattan. New
development sites are frequently adjacent to old buildings (with shallow foundations)
that require underpinning to the excavation levels. Presence of poor surficial soil
conditions and urban fill warrant the extension of underpinning to underlying deeper
satisfactory bearing materials or possibly bedrock. Furthermore, groundwater is
generally shallow, dictating excavations below the groundwater table. Secant pile
walls, a stiff excavation support system primarily consisting of overlapping drilled
concrete piles, are becoming more common in Manhattan because this support system
can eliminate the need for underpinning and dewatering.

This paper presents the state-of-the-practice design and construction of a secant pile
wall for a major real estate development in Lower Manhattan. At this site, the
presence of a 1.5-meter wide rear alley between the adjacent buildings and the
property line precluded the use of conventional underpinning. As an alternative, a
secant pile wall was constructed to provide an excavation support system for the
basement construction and to eliminate underpinning of adjacent buildings. The
secant pile wall inherently created a dry excavation that avoided costly dewatering
operations. The secant pile wall also served as the permanent foundation wall of the
new building. The 58-meter long wall was completed in less than five months.

INTRODUCTION

This paper presents the design and successful construction of a secant pile wall for a
real estate development located in the Greenwich Village section of Manhattan, New
York. The project site is located on the city block bordered by Spring Street on the
north, Canal Street on the south, Greenwich Street on the west and Hudson Street on
the east. The site area is about 836 square meters with a generally flat surface grade
at about Elevation 2.1 Manhattan Borough Datum (MBD), which is 0.84 meters

105
Copyright ASCE 2009 2009 International Foundation Congress and Equipment Expo
Contemporary Topics in Ground Modification, Problem Soils, and Geo-Support
 106 GROUND MODIFICATION, PROBLEM SOILS, AND GEO-SUPPORT

above the U.S. Coast and Geodetic Datum (Mean Sea Level at Sandy Hook, NJ
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of California, San Diego on 08/24/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

1929). The southern part of the sidewalk fronting the site is within the 100-year flood
level and the northern part of the sidewalk is within the 500-year flood level.

The project is an 11-story residential building with one cellar level. The cellar houses
mechanical and electrical rooms, a swimming pool and a parking garage. The
building is constructed of cast-in-place concrete slabs with reinforced concrete
columns and shear walls. Column loads (dead plus live service loads) ranged from
445 kilonewton (kN) to 3,100 kN.

The development site is adjacent to buildings on the north, south and west, and
Renwick Street to the east. A brick retaining wall and a rear alley of an adjacent
building abut the project site on the west. The adjacent residential buildings are
brick, 6- to 10-stories with single cellar levels.

Langan Engineering and Environmental Services, P.C. was the geotechnical design
engineer and Hayward Baker was the contractor for the secant pile wall construction.

GEOLOGY

The site is just inboard of the 17th century Manhattan shore line, according to the
Sanitary and Topographical Map (Viele 1865). The southern half of the site was
marsh and the northern half of the site was meadow. Marsh deposits in the vicinity of
the site generally consisted of dark brown peat and organic clayey silt with varying
amounts of sand.

The marsh deposits are underlain by glacial deposits. The New York metropolitan
area was covered by the great continental glaciers during the Pleistocene epoch.
During glaciations, ice transported and redeposited a layer of glacial till which
generally consisted of unsorted mixture of sand, gravel and clay with zones of cobble
and boulders. These materials vary widely in their texture, plasticity and engineering
properties.

The project site is underlain by the Manhattan Formation, which predominantly consists
of dark gray, medium to coarse-grained muscovite-biotite (mica) schist with localized
concentrations of garnet and intrusions of coarse-grained granitic pegmatite.

SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION

The subsurface investigation consisted of nine test borings that were advanced using
rotary drilling techniques with steel casing and drilling mud used for soil support.
Several of the borings extended into bedrock, which was cored with an NX-sized
double-tube core barrel with a diamond cutting bit. Several completed borings were
converted into observation wells to determine the groundwater levels. A boring and
site location plan is shown in Figure 1.

106
Copyright ASCE 2009 2009 International
2
Foundation Congress and Equipment Expo
Contemporary Topics in Ground Modification, Problem Soils, and Geo-Support
 GROUND MODIFICATION, PROBLEM SOILS, AND GEO-SUPPORT 107
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of California, San Diego on 08/24/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

FIG. 1. Boring and Site Location Plan

Subsurface soil units consisted of uncontrolled fill and organic materials extending 6
meters below the grade, 4.5 to 6 meters of soft to stiff, grey to brown silt with varying
amounts of sand and clay, followed by 12 to 18 meters of sand and gravel, and finally
bedrock. The bedrock was characterized as dark grey, slightly weathered mica schist.
Joints were fresh to slightly weathered. The depth to bedrock ranged from 25 to 37
meters below the grade. A representative subsurface profile is presented in Figure 2.
The depth to groundwater ranged from 2.3 to 2.6 meters below the existing grade.

FIG. 2. Representative Subsurface Profile

107
Copyright ASCE 2009 2009 International
3
Foundation Congress and Equipment Expo
Contemporary Topics in Ground Modification, Problem Soils, and Geo-Support
 108 GROUND MODIFICATION, PROBLEM SOILS, AND GEO-SUPPORT
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of California, San Diego on 08/24/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

SECANT PILE WALL ANALYSES AND DESIGN

Excavations extending seven meters below grade in some areas for the basement
construction required an excavation support system along Renwick Street and
potential underpinning of the adjacent buildings.

Test pits were completed to identify the foundation configuration of adjacent

buildings and to determine underpinning requirements for constructing the new
building’s basement.

• On the north, a four-story brick building was supported on a rubble-

foundation wall bearing on strip footing.

• On the northwest, a 10-story brick and steel renovated building supported

on drilled auger cast-in-place piles did not require underpinning.

• On the south, a six-story brick building’s foundation level extended to the

new building’s foundation level; therefore this building did not require
underpinning.

• On the west, foundation conditions for 6-story buildings could not be

determined because of a 1.5-meter wide rear alley. This alley precluded
the use of an underpinning system such as contiguous concrete piers or
bracket piles.

Since the 1.5-meter wide rear alley precluded an underpinning system such as
contiguous concrete piers or bracket piles for the western building, the project team
considered a secant pile wall. The secant pile wall, as a stiff and relatively
impervious support system, eliminated the need for underpinning and dewatering.
The secant pile wall was extended along the project site’s north boundary to eliminate
the need to underpin the adjacent northern building. The excavation support system
along Renwick Street consisted of soldier piles with steel sheeting to minimize water
inflow to the site and to minimize the dewatering effort during foundation excavation.

A secant pile wall is essentially a line of overlapping drilled concrete piles. Piles
that are drilled first and then filled with concrete are called primary piles. Piles that
are drilled in between the primary piles are called secondary piles and these are
generally filled with steel reinforcement. The overlapping of the piles creates a
continuous, stiff and water-tight wall.

Design Analyses

A commercially available finite-element software program, RISA-2D, was used for

the design analyses. The secant pile was modeled as a continuous beam with rigid
supports. Rankine active soil pressures, water pressure, surcharge from the adjacent
buildings and dynamic soil loadings (represented with an equivalent static loading)
were considered. A line load of 60 kN/meter/story (2/tons/foot/story) was assumed
108
Copyright ASCE 2009 2009 International
4
Foundation Congress and Equipment Expo
Contemporary Topics in Ground Modification, Problem Soils, and Geo-Support
 GROUND MODIFICATION, PROBLEM SOILS, AND GEO-SUPPORT 109

for adjacent buildings. Since the secant pile wall served as the permanent foundation
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of California, San Diego on 08/24/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

wall, the service column loads supported by the secant pile were also included in the
loading schedule. A portion of the secant pile wall along the northern boundary
supported the shear wall.

Two levels of lateral support were considered. The design analyses were performed
for each stage of excavation. The secant pile wall section consisted of 76.2-
centimeter (30 inches) diameter piles overlapping for 15.2 centimeters (6 inches) and
a W18x175 steel section at every secondary pile (Figure 3). The concrete for primary
and secondary piles was designed for a 28-day compressive strength of 41 MPa.
Shear studs were added at the top and bottom of the core beam to act against the
uplift loads.

FIG. 3. Plan View of Secant Pile Wall

The axial capacity design of the secant pile wall to support the column loads was
determined based on design methodologies recommended by FHWA (1999) and skin
resistances known from local experience. Pile lengths ranged from 13.7 to 21.3
meters with the longer piles located under the shear wall. Piles were required to
penetrate a minimum of 1.5 meters into the sand and gravel stratum.

Permanent Water Control

The cellar slab and below-grade walls were required to be fully waterproofed to 0.3
meters (1 foot) above the 100-year flood level. A membrane-type waterproofing,
which is the commonly used waterproofing method in the New York City area, was
recommended. Both bentonite waterproofing or negative side crystalline
waterproofing are not generally used in the city for basement waterproofing below
the water table.

Since the secant pile wall would be installed at the site boundary, installing the
membrane waterproofing to the outside face (positive side) of the secant pile wall
was not possible. Instead, a 20.3-centimeter (8-inch) thick interior foundation wall
was designed to confine the waterproofing membrane. This interior wall also created
a smooth finish for the basement.

109
Copyright ASCE 2009 2009 International
5
Foundation Congress and Equipment Expo
Contemporary Topics in Ground Modification, Problem Soils, and Geo-Support
 110 GROUND MODIFICATION, PROBLEM SOILS, AND GEO-SUPPORT

With the addition of a 20.3-centimeter (8-inch) thick interior wall, the basement
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of California, San Diego on 08/24/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

extended 1.27 meters within the property line which resulted in loss of space within
the basement. The loss of space was a concern to the owner as property values in
Manhattan are among the highest in the country.

SECANT PILE WALL CONSTRUCTION

Secant pile wall construction began with the construction of a cast-in-place reinforced
concrete guide wall. The purpose of the guide wall was to maintain horizontal and
vertical alignment of each pile. The guide wall, which was constructed
approximately 30.5 centimeters from the adjacent property line, had a plan width of
1.4 meters and a depth of 1.2 meters.

Sequence of Pile Installation

The secant pile wall was constructed by drilling primary and secondary piles in the
sequence shown in the Figure 4. Phase I primary piles (A1, A2 and A3) were first
drilled and concreted. After the concrete in Phase I piles had set, Phase II primary
piles (B1 and B2) were drilled and concreted. This was followed by drilling the
secondary piles (C1, C2, C3 and C4) before the concrete at primary piles achieved
full strength. The secondary piles cut into and overlapped the adjacent primary piles.
Steel core beams were installed in all secondary piles and secondary piles were filled
with concrete.

FIG. 4. Construction sequence of secant piles

Drilling of the Piles

Secant piles were drilled with a Bauer BG 24H double rotary drive drill rig with a
Kelly bar extension. The double rotary system consisted of two independent motor
drives, an upper rotary drive connected to an auger, and a lower rotary drive
connected to the casing. The two drives rotated opposite one another and permitted
removal of the auger and soil in a continuous pass while leaving a cased hole.

The 76.2-centimeter outside-diameter steel casing (with a wall thickness of 3.8

centimeters) was rotated and pushed into the ground while soil from within the casing
was simultaneously removed with a soil auger or a soil bucket. The casing provided
borehole stability. The borehole was advanced in one continuous process by adding
110
Copyright ASCE 2009 2009 International
6
Foundation Congress and Equipment Expo
Contemporary Topics in Ground Modification, Problem Soils, and Geo-Support
 GROUND MODIFICATION, PROBLEM SOILS, AND GEO-SUPPORT 111

3-meter or 4-meter sections to the required termination depths. Pile termination

Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of California, San Diego on 08/24/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

depths ranged from 10.7 to 19.8 meters below the groundwater table; therefore, the
casing was kept filled with water during drilling to maintain a positive head. The
casing was usually advanced about 0.6 meters beyond the termination depth of the
secant pile to form a plug at the bottom of the casing. This plug was formed to
maintain stability of the pile base. The bottom of the pile was cleaned with a soil
bucket before concreting.

Installation of the Core Beam

When a secondary secant pile was cased and drilled to the design pile-tip elevation,
the steel core-beam was installed into the casing using a heavy-duty crane. Steel rods
were welded to the core beam to serve as centralizers.

The contractor initially attempted to install the core beam after concreting the
borehole. However, several feet of the core beam did not sink in the concrete under
its own weight. Therefore, the contractor used a vibratory hammer to lower the core
beams in place. However, this practice was abandoned after completion of the first
three piles in order to prevent potential adverse effects of vibration to adjacent
buildings. The holes were concreted after the placement of the core beam.

Concreting of the Borehole

With the core beam installed to the design pile-tip elevation, a continuous water-tight
0.25 meter diameter tremie pipe formed by attaching 3-meter pipe sections and a top-
mounted hopper was inserted into the space between the steel core-beam and the
casing’s internal wall. The tremie pipe was suspended about 0.3 to 0.4 meters above
the pile-tip elevation and a plug was placed in the tremie pipe. The plug was used as
a stopper to prevent soil and water from getting into the tremie pipe during the
concrete pour. Concrete was then poured continuously into the hopper from a 1.5-
cubic-meter bucket. The discharge end of the tremie pipe was kept submerged in the
fresh concrete and a head of concrete was always maintained in the tremie pipe above
the groundwater level. The casing sections were withdrawn as the concrete pour
progressed.

Settlement and Vibration Monitoring Program

The adjacent buildings were monitored for vertical and horizontal movements
throughout the secant pile wall construction. The monitoring program consisted of
optical survey readings of monitoring points installed on the facades of the adjacent
buildings. In addition, crack gauges were installed on several cracks at the adjacent
buildings. Settlements up to 3.0 cm and horizontal movements up to 2.0 cm were
observed for the northern adjacent building. The movements at the western adjacent
buildings were smaller than 1.5 cm. The higher movements at the northern building
were attributed to the fact that this building was a more fragile building with rubble
wall foundation and was within 30 cm of the secant pile wall construction. The

111
Copyright ASCE 2009 2009 International
7
Foundation Congress and Equipment Expo
Contemporary Topics in Ground Modification, Problem Soils, and Geo-Support
 112 GROUND MODIFICATION, PROBLEM SOILS, AND GEO-SUPPORT

western buildings were more robust and were separated from the secant pile wall by
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by University of California, San Diego on 08/24/15. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.

the 1.5-meter wide rear alley.

Vibration monitoring was performed during the course of secant pile wall
construction. Multiseis type seismographs were placed in the basement of adjacent
buildings. The vibration levels were well below the city limit of peak particle
velocity of 1.3 centimeters per second (0.5 inches per second) for construction
activities adjacent to historic structures (Esrig and Ciancia, 1981).

CONCLUSIONS

1. The 58-meter long secant pile wall was completed in less than five months. A
total of 96 secant piles with a total length of 1,303 meters were drilled. The
secant pile served as a cutoff wall, a soil retention system, and the permanent
foundation wall, eliminating the need for continuous site dewatering and
underpinning of adjacent buildings.

2. The 76.2-centimeter diameter secant pile wall installed 30.5 centimeters away
from the property line and the 20.3-centimeter thick interior wall resulted in loss
of space within the basement. The loss of space was a concern to the owner as
property values in Manhattan are among the highest in the country.

3. Settlements up to 3.0 cm and horizontal movements up to 2.0 cm were observed

for the northern adjacent building. The movements at the western adjacent
buildings were smaller than 1.5 cm. The higher movements at the northern
building were attributed to the fact that this building was a more fragile building
with rubble wall foundation and was within 30 cm of the secant pile wall
construction. The western buildings were more robust and separated from the
secant pile wall by the 1.5-meter wide rear alley.

4. The design team concluded that the secant pile wall construction even drilled with
casings can significantly impact adjacent structures. The use of bentonite slurry
as a drilling agent to minimize base heave of the borehole will reduce impact to
adjacent structures. However, use of bentonite slurry will result in smaller skin
resistance warranting longer piles.

REFERENCES

Esrig, M. I. and Ciancia A. J. (1981). “The Avoidance of Damage to Historic

Structures Resulting from Adjacent Construction” ASCE Preprint 81-052, New York,
NY, May 11th-15th.

Federal Highway Administration (1999). “Drilled Shafts: Construction Procedures

and Design Methods.” Publication No. FHWA-IF-99-025

Viele, E. L. (1865). “Sanitary and topographical map of the city of New York.”

112
Copyright ASCE 2009 2009 International
8
Foundation Congress and Equipment Expo
Contemporary Topics in Ground Modification, Problem Soils, and Geo-Support