Search Documents

By Seth Robertson, Daniel Belardo, Travis Coleman

Thermal Integrity Profiling (TIP) is a non-destructive method used to evaluate drilled deep foundation integrity. This integrity testing method is specified more frequently, and is becoming an industry standard in the transportation and private construction sectors. This testing method utilizes heat generated during the concrete/grout curing process to assess deep foundation integrity over the evaluated length. With compilation of the measured temperature versus time and installation records, a model of the Effective Average Radius versus measurement depth is generated. The generated effective shaft model is highly dependent on specific construction details, subjective modeling parameters, and proper interpretation of concrete/soil heat dissipation characteristics. Key components of the TIP analysis include both qualitative and quantitative assessments. Qualitatively, variations or sharp reductions in temperature profiles may indicate potential anomalous regions. Quantitatively, a correlation is established between measured temperatures and estimated Effective Radii for subsequent integrity evaluation. Best practices in processing the TIP measurements are presented, including selecting the optimal time for analysis, normalizing the thermal profile, and proper interpretation of potential anomalous regions. Recommendations for implementing mitigation efforts and interpretation of the TIP results are presented.

Sep 8, 2021

By Matthias Pulsfort, Jiarui Du, Torsten Wichtmann, Achim v. Blumenthal, Diethard König, Rowena Verst

The influence of the interaction between support fluid and soil, e.g., filter cake formation, on the shear stress transfer in the soil-concrete interface of diaphragm walls and bored piles is still controversially discussed. Actual research on the soil-concrete interface using bentonite suspensions indicates that shear stress transfer is underestimated by existing standards. Investigations on the soil-concrete interface using polymer solutions are rare. Therefore, complementary field investigations and systematic laboratory studies were conducted to analyse the soil-concrete interface using both bentonite suspensions and polymer solutions. Thickness and composition of real-scale filter cakes were investigated on several slurry wall construction sites, where bentonite suspensions were used. Direct shear tests (60 mm x 60 mm) were executed for soilbentonite mixtures with varying amounts of bentonite and different granular fines representing a realistic bandwidth of in-situ filter cake compositions. Larger direct shear tests (300 mm x 300 mm) with preceding horizontal penetration, subsequent vertical tremie concrete placement, and filter cake consolidation were performed using both bentonite suspensions and polymer solutions. The results support the view that shear stress transfer in the soil-concrete interface can be described by a wall friction angle in a range of 25° to 30° for bentonite suspensions and between 35° and 40° for polymer solutions in non-cohesive soils.

May 1, 2022

By Clayton A. Signor

Abstract: Expansive soils cause more damage to structures annually than a combination of other major natural disasters. Because of the cost to our society, all means and methods need to be fully explored to mitigate the problems associated with expansive soils. This study will present a foundation design approach that is underutilized in this application, driven piles. The main objective of the study is to present pile test results and analysis from four driven pile project sites in three types of expansive soils found in central Texas: Del Rio formation, Taylor/Navarro formation, and expansive alluvium. High strain dynamic pile tests were conducted on each of the four studies with rigorous signal matching analysis from the CAse Pile Wave Analysis Program (CAPWAP). Ultimate pile capacities ranged from 73 to 311 kips with an average of 61% of the total capacity coming from the pile shaft and were two to six times the structural capacity needed. Allowable loads calculated from Modified Gates dynamic formula best modeled allowable test results. Average unit skin frictions ranged from 0.50 to 4.71 ksf. Restrike pile tests of 1 to 17 days after initial driving reported 30 to 100% shaft capacity gain. All open-ended pipe piles driven produced soil plugs ranging from 4 to 14 feet thick. Small diameter, thick-walled, open-ended pipe piles reached penetration of twice the depth of designated zone of seasonal moisture change without problem. The observed production rate of the driven piles was on average 8 minutes, which implied daily production of 15 to 40 piles. Predrills or augered holes should be specified for underground obstructions found in soil investigation.

By Bengt H. Fetlenius

The "Pile Prediction Event" at the ASCE GeoInstitute's Deep Foundation Conference in February 2002 involved prediction of drivability and capacity of three 14m long, 324mm diameter, closed-toe pipe piles driven into loose to compact fine sand to slightly silty sand. Predictors were provided the results of two soil borings and three cone penetrometer tests, as well as type and model of hammer to be used for the pile driving. A total of 33 persons submitted predictions. As to penetration resistance distribution, many predictions were far below actually observed values. As to capacity in compression, the predicted values ranged from 270KN through 2,340KN with a mean of 1,070KN. As to capacity in tension, the predicted values ranged from 100KN through 1,650KN. The maximum load applied to the compression pile in the static loading test was 1,25OKN, at which no more reaction load was available. The reaction system for the tension test failed early in the test. CAPWAP analysis on End-of-Driving blows showed capacities at the end of the driving for the push and pull piles of 670KN, and 710KN, respectively. No restrike tests were made. Additional CPT soundings indicate that the pile driving had densified the soil. Static analysis and calculations from the CPT indicated that capacities ranged from 1,000KN through 2,000KN. The paper presents the data and discusses the various methods of determining pile capacity and addresses influence of set-up Lessons useful for future similar events are indicated.

Jan 1, 2004

By Brandon Buschmeier, Frederic Masse

"Inclusions are a type of ground improvement that provide an improvement of a soil mass by insertion of a material with better characteristics than the surrounding soils. There are primarily two types of inclusions: “Soft” inclusions which are constructed of granular material (Stone Columns, Rammed Aggregate Piers, VibroPiers...), and “rigid” inclusions which are constructed of grout inserted with or without pressure (VibroConcrete Columns, Controlled Modulus Columns, Soil Mixing Columns).While the central principle of the inclusions is similar (i.e., overall improvement of characteristics of the soil mass below the structure), the load transfer mechanism is radically different for each technique. Therefore, the applicable design methodology is specific to the type of inclusions and there exists no universal method of design which spans across all inclusions.This paper will present an in-depth comparison between the standard design methods used for “soft” granular-type inclusions (Priebe modified, Balaam & Booker, Goughnour & Bayuk...) and the methods used for “rigid” inclusions which mainly rely on finite element analysis. The paper will explain why the design for soft inclusion methods cannot be applied to rigid inclusions and vice-versa. Each design method will be reviewed in detail to better emphasize its limitations and advantages.Two case histories will also be presented; one for each type of inclusions in order to illustrate the concepts developed in the first part of the paper.1 INTRODUCTION1.1 GENERAL OVERVIEW OF GROUND IMPROVEMENT WITH INCLUSIONSThe use of ground improvement methods to provide the appropriate amount of foundation support is a growing and constantly evolving industry. Traditional structural foundation methods including ‘shallow’ and ‘deep’ foundations do not adequately address the wide range of settlement tolerances, soil conditions, and loading considerations inherent to each unique potential project. In some instances, ‘shallow’ foundation solutions are simply not feasible due to soil and loading constraints. Furthermore, ‘deep’ foundation solutions are used to ‘bridge’ the soft compressible soils, ensuring that the entirety of the load in the structure is transmitted through individual elements into competent layers below the ground surface (bedrock, dense residual soils). Highly concentrated structural loads are transferred into the individual elements by means of direct contact requiring the use of structurally rigid surficial components (structural slabs, grade beams, and pile caps).Ground improvement bridges the gap between these two traditional methods, offering adequate foundation support while using more costeffective techniques and design methodologies. Inclusions are a type of ground improvement used to provide a reinforcement of the soil mass through the vertical insertion of a material with better characteristics than the surrounding soils. Much like deep foundations, inclusions are installed through soil layers with high compressibility and/or low bearing capacity and terminated in a suitable bearing stratum. However, unlike deep foundations, ground improvement inclusions rely on a distribution of load between the soil and the inclusions. By doing so, some of the structural load is applied directly to the soil in a proportion equal to its bearing capacity and compressibility limits, while the rest of the load is shed into the vertical inclusions down to the bearing stratum. Load sharing is a critical aspect in the performance and design of the various ground improvement methods."

Jan 1, 2015

By Silas C. Nichols

"Abstract Piling and deep foundations are a staple for transportation projects in the United States (US). Driven or bored piles have been used for everything from support of bridge foundations and retaining structures to support of culverts and embankments on soft ground. Deep foundations have been popular in the US transportation market to better handle large axial and lateral loads, extreme event loading, and to better control structure movement. However, there are challenges in the maintenance of design and construction codes in transportation for consistent and reliable structure foundation elements. A significant amount of effort continues in the US to maintain national codes and specifications at a level consistent with the state of practice, and identify and conduct research for providing safe and cost effective highway structures.IntroductionThe transportation sector in the United States has a hierarchy of design and construction codes that are used for the specification of piling and deep foundations. Any highway or bridge project on the National Highway System (NHS) must be designed and constructed in accordance with a national set of standards approved by the State Highway Departments, and that are acceptable to the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). However, in any jurisdiction, exceptions are permitted with approval. Therefore, design may be governed by the national standard specification, a state standard specification and design manuals, special provisions, or guideline specifications. Any of these standards, or a combination, may be used depending on the needs of the owner agency.The FHWA and the American Association of Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) have worked together in the development and maintenance of geotechnical design and construction guidance and codes that support the surface transportation community. General geotechnical engineering practice in the United States lacks a singular, national design and construction code that addresses all aspects of geotechnical engineering. As a result, the AASHTO specifications provide the most complete geotechnical specifications focusing on structure foundations, retaining walls, and buried structures for surface transportation applications. This includes piling and deep foundation types commonly used for support of bridges and transportation structures.The FHWA National Geotechnical Team has published several technical guidance documents that include guideline specifications for the design and construction of driven and bored deep foundations. Reference documents published by FHWA summarize the state of practice and provide recommended design and construction guidance. These reference documents have long served as a basis for provisions included in the AASHTO specifications. Maintenance of the design code and specification, and related guidance documents for consistent use on US transportation projects requires a collaborative effort between industry, FHWA, and the member state highway departments that make up AASHTO."

Jan 1, 2014

By Antti J. Perala, Teemu J. Yli-Kovero

"Efficient use of land is constantly requiring more underground construction. Minimized execution time and disturbance to surroundings and nearby structures are essential benefits for all construction techniques. To meet the demands of a modern construction project, suppliers have to be able to provide high-quality and tailor-made products just on time. RD pile wall is a retaining wall based on drilled steel pipe piles which are connected to each other with special interlocking profiles. RD pile wall is a solution which enables penetration of overburden soil, dense fill layers including stones and boulders, and embedding into the bedrock in one single operation. Several test installations and laboratory tests have been made to develop the system and to test and improve the water tightness of the wall. Beside these tests, RD pile wall has also proven its reliability in almost 70 projects. Largest project so far has been Pasila Tripla project in Helsinki, Finland. A permanent retaining wall with surface area of 18,000 m2 (193,750 ft2), excavation depth of 21 m (68 ft) and over 17 m (56 ft) of water pressure was made with 711 mm (28”) and 406.4 mm (16”) pile sizes. Piles were delivered to site in one piece with lengths up to 33.5 m (110 ft).INTRODUCTIONExcavations in cramped city centers and in between of existing buildings and other structures are facing more and more challenges. Installation of sheet pile walls is often problematic or even impossible due to obstacles in ground from old structures and due to demand to extend the excavations to even deeper and harder soil layers. Also installations of secant pile walls are facing difficulties due to cramped construction sites and constantly tightening execution times.On the other hand, an efficient and reliable piling technique suitable for the demanding soil conditions described above, percussion drilling, has been developed since the 1960’s, and especially from the mid- 1990’s, when the concentric drilling method with the ring bit and pilot was introduced. A new retaining wall application, the RD pile wall, was developed by combining that drilling method with the widely used retaining wall solution based on steel pipe piles and welded interlocks (a pipe pile wall normally installed with vibratory or impact hammers).PRINCIPLE AND MAIN BENEFITS OF THE METHODRD pile walls can be used in all soil conditions. Most beneficial the system is in extremely demanding soil conditions where the installation of traditional retaining walls is challenging or even impossible. The RD pile wall is a combination of drilled steel pipe piles and interlocking sections as shown in Fig. 1.Individual RD piles are connected to each other with interlocks welded to the piles on the automated welding line at the workshop. The matching dimensions of the drilling system and interlocking sections allow the installation of RD piles through stones and boulders and even into the bedrock, if necessary, in a single operation. Installation is done by a down-the-hole (DTH) hammer using the centric drilling system and oversized ring bits or a drilling system consisting of a pilot bit and reamer wings shown in Fig. 2."

Jan 1, 2017

This manual is limited to Augered Cast-in-Place (ACIP) piles constructed using a hollow stem continuous flight auger. 1.1SCOPE AND LIMITATIONS The intent of this manual is to provide guidelines for observing and documenting the installation of ACIP piles. The manual may also serve as a guide for the training of inspection personnel. It is expected that the general guidelines and procedures described in this manual for the inspection and installation of ACIP piles will be supplemented by engineering judgment, local practice, and experience. ACIP pile construction procedures will vary depending on soil, rock, and groundwater conditions. This manual represents a wide range of possible applications in a variety of projects. It is not intended to be applicable in all situations nor replace engineering judgment for any given project. Therefore, an all-inclusive inspection manual is not considered practical or desirable. This manual should not be used to interpret or replace project specifications. It has, however, been prepared to complement the Augered Cast-in-Place (ACIP) Piles Manual model specification (DFI, 2003).

Jan 1, 2010

By Matthew E. Meyer

The intent of this manual is to provide guidelines for observing and documenting the installation of ACIP piles. The manual may also serve as a guide for the training of inspection personnel. It is expected that the general guidelines and procedures described in this manual for the inspection and installation of ACIP piles will be supplemented by engineering judgment, local practice, and experience. ACIP pile construction procedures will vary depending on soil, rock, and groundwater conditions. This manual represents a wide range of possible applications in a variety of projects. It is not intended to be applicable in all situations nor replace engineering judgment for any given project. Therefore, an all-inclusive inspection manual is not considered practical or desirable. This manual should not be used to interpret or replace project specifications. It has, however, been prepared to complement the Augered Castin- Place (ACIP) Piles Manual model specification (DFI, 2003).

Jan 1, 2010

By John S. Pack

The last 25 years have seen rapid expansion in the use of helical screw pile foundations and tiebacks for new and retrofit construction of buildings and earth retention structures. An estimated $100 million was spent in 2002 on helical foundations and tiebacks in the United States alone. While design information is available in the literature, information regarding quality control, inspection and performance monitoring is lacking. Recognition of at least one manufacturer's helical foundation material by the Uniform Building Code, Standard Building Code, and BOCA (all three codes now combined into the ICC International Building Code) has given added urgency to the dissemination of reliable and practical quality control, inspection and performance monitoring procedures. This paper describes a set of such procedures that have been followed for 17 years by engineers experienced in the industry who have directly installed or been involved in the installation of over 140,000 helical foundations and tiebacks in divers soil conditions for various types of structures, including earth retention structures. Topics covered include design responsibility, building code listings and requirements, manufacturer ISO certification, manufacturing process, material and installation specifications, installation contractor certification, field placement, installation procedures, field inspection, building code inspection and performance monitoring. The paper concludes with a step by step example of practical quality control, inspection and performance monitoring procedures on a typical helical foundation project.

Jan 1, 2003

By Jacob Chacko

The Izmit Bay bridge, a 3-km-long suspension bridge crossing of Izmit Bay, Turkey is planned to be constructed in one of the most seismically active places in the world. The site, which has the potential to experience significant earthquakes associated with the relative motion accommodated on the North Anatolian Fault, is underlain by deep deposits of soft soils, and areas of unstable and liquefiable soils. Characterizing the seismotectonic setting, foundation soil conditions, potential fault locations, as well as other geohazards was a critical component for the project concessionaire to finance the project and obtain meaningful bids for bridge design and construction. Given the Build Operate Transfer (BOT) funding mechanism, executing this work in the least possible time was critical to the concessionaire?s financing scheme. Fugro was retained to provide geotechnical, geological, and seismological evaluations for the project region, and to generate data for contractors to develop reliable designs and bids. The uncertainties in these data made it difficult for the BOT concessionaire to finance the project and tender Bridge design and construction. The investment in an early and comprehensive site characterization program to evaluate and quantify those uncertainties allowed the concessionaire to save schedule, provide a robust bid basis to bridge contractors, and persuade banks to finance what was perceived to be a relatively high risk project.

Jan 1, 2011

This specification, along with the drawings, encompasses all designs, materials, products, accessories, tools, equipment, services, transportation, labor and supervision, installation techniques, and testing procedures required for the installation of soil nail excavation support or earth retention systems. This is a Guide Specification designed to assist in the development of project specifications for soil nail excavation support and earth retention systems. This Model Specification is based on generally accepted industry standards but may require modification by the specification writer to accommodate unusual and/or unforeseen site and subsurface conditions and the particular circumstances of the project. Care must be taken to avoid internal inconsistencies. It contains language allowing for a Contractor-Designed Soil Nail Wall, which would be removed if the design is provided by the Owner (e.g. See Sections 1.2 and 4.1).

Jan 1, 2010

By Martin D. Larisch

The construction of diaphragm walls and most large-diameter bored piles (piers) is often carried out under drilling support fluids to temporarily stabilise the excavation prior to concrete placement. In most cases such fluids are either mineral-based slurries (bentonite) or polymer support fluids. The working mechanisms of these two fluid types are fundamentally different. Designers need to consider possible fluid-related impacts on the permanent design performance of the project-specific deep foundations as well as for the temporary excavation stage during construction. Robust design methods for bentonite slurry-supported excavations have been developed in the last few decades and the working principles and associated risks of such mineral-based slurries are understood reasonably well. However, such meth-ods have not been developed in detail for polymer-based drilling fluids. This document provides a brief overview of the main characteristics of bentonite- and polymer-based drilling fluids as a guide for construction practitioners and design engineers alike. The paper also high-lights some common construction risks related to casing installation and the selection of suitable fluid systems for different ground conditions. Typical defects caused by the incorrect application of drilling support fluids, and their pro-active mitigation, are discussed, too. In addition, the basic concepts of sta-bility calculations for bentonite fluid-supported deep excavations are briefly introduced and their ap-plicability for other fluid types such as polymer-based support fluids or water are reviewed.

Nov 1, 2022

Jan 1, 1993

By Elizabeth Varghese, Sanket Rawat, Prachuryya Kaushik, Ravi Kant Mittal

"Geo5 Software is gaining popularity worldwide due to its expediency in analysis and design of pile foundation. The analysis is based on various theoretical, empirical and semi-empirical methods available in existing literature and various country standards. Moreover, the ultimate resistance of pile in the software is based CSN 73 1002, Fellenius method, NAVFAC DM 7.2 and Tomlinson method. Due to the specificity in calculation of ultimate resistance, it becomes necessary to validate the results arrived using the software for better accuracy. Furthermore, the above-mentioned methods are not necessarily popular in every design offices. Therefore, an attempt has been made to predict the efficiency of Geo5-v15 software to analyze the pile foundation by comparing it with the results obtained using the analysis based on Indian Standard IS 2911:2010, performed with spreadsheet specifically designed for the same purpose. The accompanying outcome of the comparison and several shortcomings found in the design part associated with the software has been highlighted in the later part of the paper. Besides, the optimization tool present in the software is also described for the more efficient and economic design of pile foundation, hence contributing as practical aid to structural engineers.INTRODUCTIONThe analysis of individual pile foundation and pile in groups can be said to include the three main important parameters – Ultimate bearing capacity, Settlement and Structural Design. The first two parameters are to be evaluated to check the reliability of foundation against ultimate limit state and serviceability limit state. The third parameter includes the analysis of pile against both horizontal and vertical load. This parameter mainly intends to evaluate the size of foundation and the amount of reinforcement. Geo5 is a software which can expediently compute the above mentioned three parameters just by the mere input of the necessary factors. The ultimate bearing capacity analysis in Geo5 is based on various theoretical, empirical and semi-empirical methods available in existing literature and various country standards depending upon the drained and undrained condition of soil (Bowles, 1968; CSN 73 1002,1987; Felenius,1991; NAVFAC DM 7.2,1984; Tomlinson,1977). However, the method mentioned in IS 2911 (2010) is not the same and have slight variations in way of evaluating the parameters which affect ultimate bearing capacity. Therefore, it becomes necessary to evaluate the efficiency of Geo5 with respect to the value of ultimate bearing capacity and therefore, asserting the confidence in the software based method for the convenience of the designs in Indian Scenario. The present study aims to evaluate the efficiency of Geo5 v-15 software in predicting the ultimate bearing capacity of pile foundation. The results of the software are compared with the bearing capacity calculated using IS 2911 (2010) with the help of excel sheet. Moreover, as the software is frequently put under revision, therefore a comparison of this version has also been made with the latest version of Geo5 (2017) to check whether the latest revision has accounted for the discovered shortcomings. The design steps performed in the software is also shown. As Geo5 make use of IS 456 (2000) for the design purpose, hence it can be considered as reliable with respect to the estimate of the third parameter. Furthermore, the optimization process is also shown in the later part of the paper to emphasize the simplicity of the software in economizing the design cost."

Jan 1, 2017

"1 INTRODUCTIONThe use of nondestructive testing (NDT) methods to evaluate the integrity of Augered Cast-in-Place (ACIP) and Drilled Displacement (DD) piles has been a subject of significant debate among engineers, contractors and NDT practitioners. This guideline document will illustrate the importance of reviewing all available information in conjunction with the NDT records. ACIP and DD piles have unique properties that must be considered when using a specific NDT method. Any evaluation of the integrity of an ACIP or DD pile must also include a thorough review of the detailed pile installation records and the site specific soil conditions. Long or theoretical descriptions of the methods have not been included in this publication. More detailed information about these NDT methods including their theoretical and historical backgrounds can be found in DFI’s Manual for Non Destructive Testing and Evaluation of Drilled Shafts (2004). Additional information can also be found in the more comprehensive textbook Nondestructive Testing of Deep Foundations by Hertlein and Davis (2006).1.1 PurposeThe intent of this guideline is to provide practical guidance for the proper interpretation of NDT results on ACIP and DD piles. Short descriptions of the main integrity methods available are provided along with several examples of how to use all of the information available to make sound engineering judgments about the results. This publication is a state-of-the-practice guideline to promote accurate engineering evaluations.For engineers inexperienced with NDT, these guidelines provide sufficient background information on NDT methods to help understand the limitations of the testing, assess the results presented to them, and formulate appropriate questions. This is particularly important for engineers charged with the responsibility to determine from those results what, if any, consequences there may be on the performance of the structure under construction."

Jan 1, 2016

The intent of this manual is to provide guidelines for inspectors of drilled shaft construction otherwise referred to as drilled piers, caissons or bored piles. It should also be helpful to train beginning geotechnical engineers with limited first hand experience or for geotechnical engineers who are training inspectors. It is expected that the general guidelines and procedures described here will be supplemented by local geotechnical engineers working in a particular region based on local practice and experience. Since drilled shaft construction procedures vary widely based on local geology and size of project, an all-inclusive manual is not considered practical. This manual focuses on traditional topside inspection for routine drilled shaft construction. Other inspection and evaluation methods that rely on electronic equipment are available, but these methods require extensive training and experience in the interpretation of results. These more sophisticated methods of drilled shaft inspection and evaluation are common in construction, but they are usually provided by specialty subconsultants. The subconsultant will typically submit a report for each shaft, which will be reviewed by the geotechnical engineer. Other manuals are available to describe the electronic methods of drilled shaft inspection.

Jan 1, 2004

By George G. Goble

The use of augercast piles has been limited by the engineer's concern for the structural quality of the installed pile. The nature of the pile is such that its final structural continuity is very dependent on the skill of the personnel that do the installation. Thus, NDT methods have been used to verify integrity and when problems are indicated the available solutions are usually quite costly. If information were available during the pile installation so that immediate steps could be taken to correct perceived problems, the concerns of the engineer could be addressed and the system would gain increased reliability. Pile Dynamics, Inc. has developed a quality control system, the Pile Installation Recorder for Augered Cast-in-Place piles (PIR CFA). This system consists of the following devices as shown in Figure 1. 1) The Control Unit powers the sensors, conditions the signals from the sensors, records all measurements, takes input information from the operator, displays the results, and stores the recorded data on a flash card for later permanent storage and processing. During the use of the system all of the results obtained during a test are seen during recording and can be reviewed on the screen again after completion of the installation. The ability to review the measured information makes it unnecessary to print a copy in the field. Since printers often give difficulty in the construction site environment the ability to review the results quickly after completion of the installation is an important capability.

Jan 1, 1997

By W. G. K. Fleming

The general history of piling is traced up to the present time with regard to the evolution of methods and materials. The processes have been strongly influenced by developments in basic equipment and industrial change. It is noticeable that in the twentieth century more progress has taken place than in the many previous centuries. It has been strongly influenced by the general development of Soil Mechanics. Test loading is probably the most effective way to assess the success of designs and many empirical relationships have been challenged through it. As we approach a new century it appears that it will be an age of rapid equipment development, with much enhancement of understanding of what has been done. Processes of automatic construction and testing will becoming commonplace. These changes will narrow the limits of conventional scatter that have come to be accepted and to a large extent will be driven by political efforts to curtail energy consumption, to raise standards of quality and reliability, and to conserve the environment. 1. Ancient history. Piling is an ancient art. Its first mention in history is from Herodotus, the first person to commit an account of his times to the written word in the years 557 to 479 BC. He evidently had a strong interest in engineering matters because he wrote of building, brick making, reinforced brickwork, river training, canal building, bridge construction, tunnelling and its acoustic detection and piling. The piling reference comes from Book 5 at paragraph 16.

Jan 1, 1999

By Fabian Kirsch

Cyclic behaviour of axially loaded piles has been an issue since studies revealed that the capability to transfer skin friction into the ground is highly depending on the level and the number of load cycles the pile is subjected. It has been shown that degradation of skin friction due to axial cyclic loading leads to accumulating displacements and a severe reduction in pile capacity. In Germany the DIN 1054 as well as the Recommendations of the Working Group 2.1 ?Piles? of the German Geotechnical Society (EA-Pfähle) require the consideration of cyclic loading for the assessment of both the displacements and the capacity. Up to now no broadly accepted design method exists, which enables the engineer to give a reliable judgement on the pile capacity under axial cyclic loading and the displacements respectively. Instead numerous design charts make it possible to distinguish between stable and instable loading levels in order to ensure a design on the safe side. A newly developed design approach based on engineering models is presented which delivers a calculation algorithm for the remaining axial pile capacity after a defined number of load cycles to allow for the analysis of stability of the foundation. Furthermore the computation of accumulating displacements is made possible. The results are verified with pile load tests undertaken at Dunkirk, France and showed that the axial capacity after cyclic loading calculated with the newly developed design approach predicts actual capacity with an accuracy of ±20%.

Jan 1, 2011