Mueser Rutledge

Consulting Engineers

14 Penn Plaza 225 West 34th Street New York, NY 10122

Tel: (917) 339-9300 Fax: (917) 339-9400
www.mrce.com
Alfred H. Brand
David M. Cacoilo
Peter W. Deming
Roderic A. Ellman, Jr.
Francis J. Arland

Partners

David R. Good
Walter E. Kaeck

Associate Partners
James L. Kaufman
Hugh S. Lacy
Joel Moskowitz
George J. Tamaro
Elmer A. Richards
John W. Fowler

Consultants

Thomas R. Wendel
Domenic DArgenzio
Robert K. Radske
Ketan H. Trivedi
Hiren J. Shah
Alice Arana
Joel L. Volterra
Tony D. Canale
Jan Cermak
Sissy Nikolaou
Anthony DeVito
Frederick C. Rhyner
Sitotaw Y. Fantaye

Senior Associates

Michael J. Chow
Douglas W. Christie
Gregg V. Piazza
Pablo V. Lopez
Steven R. Lowe
James M. Tantalla
Andrew R. Tognon
T. C. Michael Law
Andrew Pontecorvo
Renzo D. Verastegui

Associates

Joseph N. Courtade

Director of Finance
and Administration

April 17, 2014

Mr. Mark Terril
terril@ppg.com
PPG Industries Inc.
One PPG Place
Pittsburgh, PA 15272
Re:

Sheet Pile Vibratory Hammer Test Program Supplement

PPG Industries, Inc. Garfield Ave. Group Sites
Jersey City, NJ
MRCE File 11972

Gentlemen:
This letter includes supporting information and recommendations for use of the
ABI model MRZV 28VV hydraulic vibratory sheet pile hammer. It is to be
read as a supplement to and in conjunction with our April 9, 2014 letter,
attachments and references describing the vibration testing performed using the
RTG MR 150V-1 vibratory hammer. This letter summarizes data from an
additional six sheet pile pairs along 30-linear feet of AZ-14-770 sheet pile
installed on April 9, 2014. The sheet piles were driven north of those previously
driven, with the first two pairs driven on April 8 such that the manufacturers
technician could train the operator and familiarize him with the rig and its
operations without distraction or interference from monitoring activities.
The data from the ABI hammer and from the previous RTG hammer tested
further supports refinement of driving criteria from that provided on MRCE
design drawings for Phases 3A, 3B, 3C and 2B-3 and 2B-4. Either hammer is
suitable for installing steel sheet piles at closer distances than was conservatively
assumed in our design. This data collectively validates that a newer generation of
hydraulic vibratory hammers with variable moment and/or variable frequency
capabilities is available for use in marginal soft or hard driving conditions or
where settlement sensitive soils exist. The higher frequency capability of the
newer hammers and the variable force production allow a trained operator to
more readily adapt to changes in ground conditions and to be more in tune with
project needs given soil conditions and adjacent infrastructure.

Martha J. Huguet

Director of Marketing

The test data indicates the ABI model MRZV 28VV hammer produced lower
vibrations than the RTG MR150V-1 hammer, and so is equal or better. As
shown on an updated version of peak particle velocity versus distance
relationship attached, recorded data from the ABI MRZV 28VV hammer test
program suggests typical peak particle velocities emitted to the sewer pipe at 25ft clear distance will be 0.2 in/sec (50% probability line) with an upper bound of
Foundation Engineering Since 1910

PPG Industries Inc.

April 17, 2014
Page 2
0.3 in/sec. Similarly, the smallest clearance of 18-ft along the segment of sewer that is closest to
Phase 3A shoring yields an increase above typical vibrations to 0.3 in/sec with an upper bound
anticipated to remain below 0.5 in/sec. The ABI or RTG hammers are interchangeable from a
practical standpoint and either are suitable for use as close as 18-ft in plan distance from the 96
diameter sewer.
The ABI hammer includes the additional feature of allowing adjustment of the applied moment
or force at the higher frequency range of about 2,500 rpm whereas the RTG hammer did not. A
lower maximum moment (force or energy) results in lower vibration amplitudes and thus lower
vibrations at a constant frequency. The applied force can be initially set at 50% of maximum
while the frequency is set to 2,500 rpm (42 Hz). Where the sheet pile penetration is slowed or not
readily advancing, the operator would slowly raise the applied moment (as vibration amplitude
or imparted energy) to 60%, 70%, etc. arriving at towards 100% only as needed to resume
downward penetration through harder zones of driving if encountered. Once the hard zone is
cleared, the operator would ease off and resume driving at 50% applied moment, reducing the
energy imparted into the ground and absorbed by surrounding soils and infrastructure.
Vibrations resulting from historic truck traffic routed above the buried sewer regularly subject it
to vibrations of up to 0.5 in/sec, such that little to no increase in vibrations is anticipated to occur
from driving sheet piling 25-ft away using either hammer. Only a marginal increase of 0.25
in/sec above 0.5 in/sec to 0.75 in/sec is anticipated to occur from driving the sheet piling at 18-ft
clearance using the RTG hammer, whereas no increase is anticipated at this distance using the
ABI hammer. Thus from this test, the ABI hammer is preferred. Entact intends to continue sheet
pile installations using the ABI hammer. Note these values remain below those typically
associated with vibration limits for buried structures. High-definition laser scanning, video and
sonar surveys performed to date by RedZone in the area adjacent Phase 3A have not found the
pipe to be unsound or unsafe. Therefore, it can be reasonably assumed the pipe can withstand
peak particle velocities in excess of 0.75 in/sec.
The test data indicates and we recommend that the current no driving by vibratory means within
50-ft criteria can be revised to allow an 18-ft clear distance using the RTG MR150V-1 or the
ABI MRZV 28VV hammers.
Please do not hesitate to contact us should you have any questions.
Very truly yours,
MUESER RUTLEDGE CONSULTING ENGINEERS

By: ___________________________________________
Peter W. Deming, P.E.

Attachments
JLV:PWD:\\MRDATA\Files\119\11972\Memos and Letters\Garfield Hammer Test Letter Supplement 2014-04-11.docx

Garfield Ave Remediation Sheet Pile Vibratory Hammer Test Program, ABI MRZV VV28 Hammer
Source for background: Relative Intensities of Construction Vibration from Journal of Geotechnical Engineering Division,
February 1981, "Construction Vibrations: State of the Art", by John F. Wiss
10
Garfield - All Data from RTG 150V-I hammer

ABIMRZVVV28Hammer,alldata bestfit50%lineofvibrationdatafromApril9,2014driving of6sheetpiles

ABI MRZV VV28

"Settlement fromPileDrivinginSands"
Lacy &Gould

ABIMRZVVV28Hammer,alldata,UpperBoundofvibrationdatafromApril9,2014driving
Typical Vibration Threshold Value of6sheetpiles
=2 in/sec

RTG150VHammerUpperBound,98%confidence(2outlierpointsabovedata setof>100

1
0.48in/sec

Peak Particle Velocity (in/sec)

0.37in/sec
0.3in/sec
0.2in/sec

0.1
1 lb dynamite

diesel 36,000 ft-lb

0.01

vibratory pile hammer

pavement breaker, 6 ft
2 ton drop ball, 40 ft
jack hammers

small dozer

large dozers, trucks, caisson

0.001
1

10
Distance (ft)

Mueser Rutledge Consulting Engineers

18ft

100
25ft

1000

UsingtheABIhammerat25ftdistanceresultedintypicalvibrations(50%line)of0.2in/secwithanupperboundof0.3in/sec.
Attheveryclosestanticipatedcleardistanceof18ftbetweentheseweranddrivensheeting,typicalvibrationswouldbeonthe
orderof0.4in/sec(0.37fromplot)withanestimatedupperboundof0.5in/sec(0.48fromplot).

4/17/2014