Search Documents

By Bengt H. Fellenius

.1.1 Prior to commencement of pile installation operation, submit to [Engineer] for [approval] [review], details of equipment for installation of piles. SPEC NOTE: The information requested in 3.1 .1.2 is necessary as input to a detailed wave equation analysis of the pile driving. .1.2 For impact hammers, give manufacturer's name, type, maximum rated energy and rated energy per blow at normal working rate during easy and at termination driving, mass of striking parts of hammer, mass of driving cap, and type and elastic properties of hammer cushion. .1.3 For non-impact methods of installation, such as drilling, jacking, jetting, use of vibratory hammers, or other means, give full details of characteristics necessary to evaluate performance. .2 Impact Hammer SPEC NOTE: Do not exclude a hammer type unless for very specific reason. .2.1 [Drop hammers will not be permitted.] [Diesel hammers will not be permitted.] For final driving of [TYPE] piles, provide a hammer capable of delivering to the pile a non-erratic impact stress not smaller than [VALUE] Pascal and transferring a non-erratic energy not smaller than [VALUE] Joules per blow to the pile head at normal working rate.

Jan 1, 1991

The pile inspector is a critical element in the quality control process necessary for a successful pile installation project. This guide is intended to provide the inspector with a basic understanding of only one of the many components of this process - the pile driving hammer. Pile driving hammers are used to install both bearing piles for structure foundations and sheet piles (and soldier piles) as used in retaining structures. In a single document, this guide offers a general presentation of the operation of the more common types of hammers the inspector is likely to encounter. It should make the information in the contractor's hammer submittal for the project more understandable. It should also provide an appreciation for the importance of a properly operating pile hammer. Prior to the start of most pile driving operations, the contractor will normally furnish a submittal to the engineer giving the specific pile driving equipment that he intends to use on the job. This submittal should include the make, model, and type of the intended pile driving hammer or hammers and their operating characteristics such as ram weight, rated energy, operating speed, external power requirements and, other pertinent information. Frequently, the operating characteristics are provided in the form of the manufacturer's specification sheet. The engineer will review this information and when he is satisfied, approve it and pass it on to the inspector. The driving criteria will have been determined by the engineer or others (the geotechnical engineer, consulting engineer, contractor, etc.) from the results of static analysis (for minimum penetration), driving during a test pile installation, Wave Equation analysis, dynamic formula, pile instrumentation during driving, static load test, or a combination of these or other appropriate analyses. The driving criteria can be a minimum penetration of driven pile length (embedded length), or a minimum (or maximum) blow count per unit of penetration. The pile inspector should become familiar with this information prior to the start of the job and should understand or seek help to comprehend the terminology and intent of each specification.

Jan 1, 1995

By Peter Middendorp

Pile foundations are widely applied in the Netherlands because of the soft soil conditions. One of the popular pile types are cast-in-situ piles, which have to be integrity tested to get accepted. Integrity testing has been applied for more than 30 years, with the number of integrity test performed nowadays exceeding 400,000 per year and subsequently there is a substantial amount of practical experience with this testing method. This paper will deal with some basics of integrity testing and describe some of the techniques that have been adopted in the Dutch pile testing practice, like detection of pile head defects with a spike type hammer pulse, and the site average or pile group average for the qualitative interpretation of measured signals.

Jan 1, 2006

By Challa Venkata Rami Reddy, Anindya Roy, G. R. Konni

This paper presents the results of pile lateral capacities obtained from both conventional design and fullscale pile lateral load tests. Conventional design using P-Y curve analysis is very commonly being used by designers; designers use well accepted software programs like Lpile and Allpile for analysis. However, these programs do not cover the soil models to simulate engineering behavior of marine carbonate sands; which generally have different engineering behavior than silica/quarts sands. In this study, the existing soil models for common sands have been used to assess pile lateral capacities and these results are compared with the results from full-scale instrumented pile lateral load tests performed in compacted marine carbonate sand fills of artificial island constructed for oil and gas facilities in Abu Dhabi. The objective of this study was to verify the applicability of the existing sand soil models for carbonate sands and also to verify the associated conservatism in the pile lateral capacities. This study shows that the actual pile lateral response is much stiffer than what was anticipated through the LPile analysis. Therefore, further research focus may be required to capture the engineering behavior of the marine carbonate sands to develop specific P-Y curves.

Sep 8, 2021

By Joel Moskowitz, Jan Cermak

"New York City has unique geologic conditions which must be considered when designing pile foundations. Where shallow foundations are not feasible, the City's subsurface conditions require a variety of deep foundation systems, ranging from high capacity rock socketed piles, to piles end-bearing on bedrock, to friction piles bearing in alluvial or glacial deposits. Pile load testing is essential in confirming pile capacities as pile analyses include assumptions on soil and soil-pile response, and pile driving equipment. Load test results must be interpreted to estimate the long-term pile behavior. Except for lightly loaded driven piles, the New York City Building Code (the Code) requires that pile capacities be confirmed by static load testing. The Code provides the number of static load tests required, test procedures, and acceptance criteria. In the last few decades, methods other than static load testing have been developed including dynamic and rapid (pseudo-static) load tests. Recently, those methods have also been employed on several projects in New York City. The traditional approach to pile load testing in New York City is discussed herein including engineering involved in the analyses of test data with examples. In addition, several projects which included non-static load testing are discussed INTRODUCTIONPile load testing complements the subsurface information and pile design by providing further data on pile-soil interaction for the selected pile type and installation method. Traditional approaches to pile load testing in New York City involve static load tests to verify the design capacity of the piles for a given minimum factor of safety.In the late 1950's, Dr. Phillip C. Rutledge summarized his views on the philosophy of pile foundations in an unpublished, in-house document. He viewed pile foundations as good illustrations of pertinent and impertinent aspects of geotechnical engineering. In the analyses of piles he divided engineering into four general types:(a) Theoretical engineering in which decisions are made based on theoretical analyses. This represents ideal engineering, in which all factors affecting the pile design are well established or, at least, few simplifying assumptions with known effects on the analyses are made."

Jan 1, 2005

By Abolfazl Eslami, Sepide Lotfi, Mohammad M. Eslami

"Via direct CPT methods for pile capacity prediction, correlation coefficients smaller than unity are used to relate cone tip resistance (qc) and sleeve friction (fs) to pile toe capacity (rt) and shaft capacity (rs), respectively. For linking CPT data to pile capacity, factors such as diameter, penetration rate, partial embedment of pile toe into a hard layer, mechanism of plunging, failure zone, data processing, and stress-strain conditions must be considered. The aim of this paper is to investigate the role and significance of scale effects and establish direct relation between CPT data and pile shaft capacity. A database has been compiled including 40 full scale pile load tests and CPT sounding records for calibration and validation of the proposed approach. Analytical studies demonstrate that differences between pile and penetrometer penetration rate, geometry, and stress-strain conditions influence the relation between fs and rs. By considering the determinants, a procedure is proposed from which the pile shaft capacity can be predicted. This approach demonstrates better agreement with measured capacity by static loading test and less scatter than other current CPT methods.IntroductionAmong different approaches for pile capacity prediction, in-situ tests such as SPT and CPT have been used as supplementary of static analysis. Due to similarities between CPT and pile, the measured cone tip resistance and sleeve friction can be employed for prediction of unit toe and shaft capacities, respectively.Determination of pile capacity from CPT data includes two main approaches: direct and indirect methods. Direct CPT methods apply the measured values of cone tip resistance (qc) for pile toe capacity (rt), and sleeve friction (fs) for pile shaft capacity (rs) with some modifications regarding scale effects. Indirect CPT methods employ friction angle and undrained shear strength values that have been estimated from CPT data.When using direct CPT methods to relate qc and fs to rt and rs, correlation coefficients smaller than unity are used. Factors such as diameter, penetration rate, mechanism of plunging, failure zone, data processing, and stress-strain conditions must be considered for correlation between CPT and pile capacity. The work presented in this paper aims toward ameliorating the situation in the area of pile shaft capacity prediction, based on cone sleeve friction.Case histories from full-scale tests are compiled and analyzed by means of six methods including five direct CPT methods for shaft capacity prediction and the proposed method."

Jan 1, 2015

By W. G. K. Fleming

Mr P. Bermingham introduced paper 9.1, describing the development and trials of a new pile load-testing technique that the Authors had termed "Statnamic". The system involved launching a test weight mounted on the head of the pile by igniting chemical fuel in a pressure combustion chamber between the pile head and the test weight. The expansion products from the burning fuel generated large pressures which were used to launch the weight upwards at high velocity. The reaction from this force generates an equal and opposite force at the pile head. This force is typically of much longer duration compared with, for instance, dynamic load testing by drop hammer. In addition the pile experiences a much lower acceleration - typically of less than one g. Because of the long duration blow, the pile is loaded at below its natural frequency and is therefore under a uniform high stress over its full length throughout the duration of the test. The pile behaviour is not dominated by the complex action of an impulsive stress-wave as with standard dynamic testing. The test technique is thus essentially quasi-static. It was anticipated that a ram test weight of 16 tonne would be sufficient to provide the test reaction for a 600 tonne load test. It was pointed out that the device was still at the research stage, but had yielded encouraging results to date. Testing would proceed from model testing and computer simulation to full scale field testing.

Jan 1, 1991

By J. Nakayama

For installation of round steel piles or cast-in-place pile construction through boulder contained ground or rocky formation, usual system does not function properly or impossible to work. This paper introduces an installation system which combines unique mechanism where the drill is installed on the top of a driving round steel pile or a stand pipe which is initially driven into the overburden to the depth of self-standing. When the pile driving or bore hole drilling encounters hard strata or boulder contained ground, hard material shall be crushed by the down-the-hole chiselling operated in adjustable short stroke and high frequency of blows while cuttings are discharged in reverse circulation through central reverse pipe while round steel pile is simultaneously stroked by a hydraulic hammer. The paper shall explain the mechanism of the system and introduces construction examples for bridge foundation and piled jetty.

Jan 1, 1999

By Emre Biringen

Over the past decades, there has been an increasing recognition of the strategic use of pile-supported rafts in design of heavily-loaded structures to reduce total and differential settlements. However, such a hybrid foundation construction method has not been widely utilized in many countries, including the U.S., due to code limitations. In current practice, the foundation design is based on either (i) the bearing capacity of the raft supported by the subgrade soils, or (ii) solely the pile capacity. This paper addresses the potential use of such hybrid piled-raft systems, where the structural load is shared by both by the piles and the subgrade soils directly beneath the raft, in foundation design of power plant structures. The study assessed some of the characteristics of piled-raft behavior by undertaking three-dimensional finite element analyses of two raft sizes, and various pile layout patterns, including the rafts with piles distributed evenly and only in the central area of the raft. The computer software PLAXIS 3D with the Mohr-Coulomb constitutive soil model was used to facilitate the modeling of such cases. The results presented in this paper indicate how strategically locating the piles could reduce the differential and total settlements.

By Mohab Sabry, Emre Biringen

"Over the past decades, there has been an increasing recognition of the strategic use of pile-supported rafts in design of heavily-loaded structures to reduce total and differential settlements. However, such a hybrid foundation construction method has not been widely utilized in many countries, including the U.S., due to code limitations. In current practice, the foundation design is based on either (i) the bearing capacity of the raft supported by the subgrade soils, or (ii) solely the pile capacity. This paper addresses the potential use of such hybrid piled-raft systems, where the structural load is shared by both by the piles and the subgrade soils directly beneath the raft, in foundation design of power plant structures. The study assessed some of the characteristics of piled-raft behavior by undertaking three-dimensional finite element analyses of two raft sizes, and various pile layout patterns, including the rafts with piles distributed evenly and only in the central area of the raft. The computer software PLAXIS 3D with the Mohr-Coulomb constitutive soil model was used to facilitate the modeling of such cases. The results presented in this paper indicate how strategically locating the piles could reduce the differential and total settlements.INTRODUCTIONUnder the high applied loads coming from the superstructure, the addition of piles is primarily required to improve the factor of safety against failure when a raft does not provide adequate bearing capacity. If the bearing capacity of the raft is sufficient to carry the total load with a reasonable safety margin, then the addition of piles is usually intended to reduce the settlements to an acceptable amount. In current practice, the design process for pile-supported raft foundations conservatively concentrates on providing solely the pile capacity to carry the total structural load without taking the contribution of the raft into account. This paper addresses the potential use of hybrid piled-rafts in controlling foundation settlement of power plant structures by considering the support of both the piles and the subgrade soils beneath the raft to carry the load."

Jan 1, 2017

By Bengt H. Fellenius

"ABSTRACTAn example from a guidelines document for the Eurocode is discussed that addresses design for geotechnical strength of piled foundations in settling soil, generating drag force and downdrag. A modified example of geotechnical response is then analyzed in a failure mode, Ultimate Limit States (ULS), and stationary long-term state, Serviceable Limit States (SLS). It is shown that the Eurocode principles, when applied to correctly determined forces, results in an irrational and costly design. The results of the analysis of the modified example are applied to eight different codes pertaining to piled foundations from USA, Canada, Europe, and other countries. Several of the codes require that the drag force be included as a load in a ULS design, which an absurd and costly requirement, in some codes, in one case made even worse by combining drag force with live load. A major weakness of almost all codes is their minimal treatment and sometimes total absence of aspects of settlement of piled foundation. In contrast, my main argument is that design for capacity, whether in working stress approach, or by LFRD or ULS approaches, is not always safe unless a thorough settlement analysis shows that the design also meets the requirements of the SLS.1. INTRODUCTIONFirst, there were analysis, design, and construction establishing a State-of-Practice, SOP. Then, came codes and specifications summarizing the SOP, as interpreted by a committee. When the state-of-art, SOA, was not understood by that SOP-interpreting committee, the codes and specifications are uneconomical and, sometimes, also unsafe.The paper first presents an example quoted from two commentaries on the Eurocode 7 on design for geotechnical strength by the Eurocode (1997). The example is then modified to a more realistic case and analyzed in failure mode (ultimate limit states, ULS) and in the context of settlement (serviceability limit states, SLS). The analysis results are then applied to eight codes addressing piled foundation design and changes necessary for the referenced codes and specifications to be closer to the SOA are identified."

Jan 1, 2014

By Anthony L. Reynolds, Clifford J. Wren

"The adoption of a significant pile testing regime, the use of Eurocode 7 as the design standard, the development of lean construction techniques, and lateral thinking in overcoming some considerable construction challenges allowed Stent Foundations to construct the foundations for the new Wembley Stadium, London, on time and within budget. In addition to the piling works for the main stadium, and after significant design development, a large number of extra piles were required to raise the new iconic roof Arch to its final position some 133 metres above the ground. A 1,400m long contiguous bored pile wall was also constructed to allow for excavation and formation of the new pitch. INTRODUCTIONHjstorjcal lntrodyctionWembley Stadium is the 'home of English football'. As long ago as the 1880's, Wembley Park leisure grounds had football pitches and running tracks.In 1918 the British Government began planning a British Empire Exhibition with a stadium as its centrepiece. The Exhibition area covered 219 acres and the area on which a former abandoned tower called Watkins Folly had stood was chosen as the site for the new stadium (http://www.wembleystadium.com).The Empire Stadium, as it was originally known, was designed by architects Sir John Simpson and Maxwell Ayerton and the engineer Sir Owen Williams. It took just 300 days to complete at a cost of £750,000 ($1.4m), and was built using 25,000 tons of ferro concrete, 1,000 tons of steel, and over half a million rivets.The Empire Exhibition was a remarkable event, containing fountains, lakes, gardens, and many pavilions, each representing the architectural style of the countries exhibiting. It was opened on 23rd April 1924 and the final attendance was over 27 million, with 4.5 million admissions to the Empire Stadium alone."

Jan 1, 2005

By Jonathan J. Dewsbury

It is argued that approximate computer based methods are only suited to modelling conventional piled rafts, for pile enhanced rafts where the interactions will be non linear three dimensional finite element analysis is required. However current 3D finite element analysis often relies on symmetry to reduce computational cost and there are concerns over the dependency of the results on the user. Therefore a new strategy within the finite element framework has been proposed. The main advantage of this strategy is that each stage of the model can be checked for consistency. There is also the added benefit that non symmetrical models can easily be constructed by tying the validated components together without dramatic increases in computational time. The proposed strategy compared well to the published results of a hypothetical example of a piled raft previously analysed with numerous methods by Poulos et al. (1997).

Jan 1, 2010

By V. A. Sernov

"One of the ways to increase the bearing capacity of a piled foundation is to take into account soil resistance in the base of the raft. Piled raft is similar to shallow foundation and can transfer significant part of the load into the base. It allows reducing number of piles in the foundation or shortening their length. As a result building terms and foundation costs reduce considerably. However, nowadays in Belarus there is no reliable and suitable in design practice methods of calculation of piled-raft foundations. In order to devise such methods we have analyzed the results of piled foundation tests fulfilled by various authors up to date and have carried out series of field and laboratory investigations in Minsk. The most important results of the investigations are provided in the article. Methods of analysis of piled-raft foundations are described.INTRODUCTIONPile foundations of late years are used extensively in connection with the increased number of storeys and load increment on the soil. Often pile foundations are applied in comparative favorable ground conditions at the surface of the base. In such cases the increase of the bearing capacity of foundations and the reduction of construction cost are questions of primary importance for designers. One of the ways to increase the bearing capacity of a piled foundation is to take into account soil resistance in the base of the raft. Piled raft is similar to shallow foundation and can transfer significant part of the load into the base. It allows reducing number of piles in the foundation or shortening their length. As a result, building terms and foundation costs are reduced considerably. However, nowadays there is no reliable and suitable in design practice methods of calculation pile foundations with bearing rafts. In order to devise such methods we have analyzed the results of piled foundation tests fulfilled by various authors up to date and have carried out series of laboratory and field investigations.Long before the constitution of the first piled-raft foundations in the Soviet Union there were attempts to consider soil resistance in the basis of isolated and strip grillages. Such bases can be considered as separate fragments of the piled-raft foundation. Prof. A. A. Bartolomey had tested more than 70 pile foundations of natural size in different ground conditions. The length of piles was 3 12 m (?????????? 1995). The observed results show that the raft carries about 10 12% of the total load applied when length of piles is over 9 m and space between piles is a=3d. Bearing capacity of the raft is about 35 40% when the length of piles is 5 8 m and a=6d. Prof. Golubkov has tested 2 prismatic piles (cross section: 350x350 mm, L=3800 m) and 2 pyramidal piles (cross section: head - 600x600 mm, foot – 100x100 mm, L=3000 m). One of the piles was tested with a raft and the other one without a raft. Significant influence of the raft on total bearing capacity was determined, the more the settlement was the more it influenced on the raft. Bearing capacity of the raft was 27,5% in foundation with prismatic pile and 42% with pyramidal pile (???????? et al. 1971)."

Jan 1, 2016

By G. W. Plant

This paper describes the design philosophy and construction details of piles between 25m and 32m deep to support 160m high and 110m base diameter cooling rowers for a major power station. It is sited on deep expansive soil where a vast plantation of Eucalypts had been felled. The depressed water table is expected to rise, leading to swell of the soil and uplift forces on the piles. These forces, combined with the complex loading from the cooling towers, led to design tensile loads up to 20MN (2 000 tons) per pile. When competent stable material was present hand excavated underreams 3m in diameter were constructed for the piles sup-porting the shells. However, in some areas it was not possible to form an effective underream and an innovative solution was sought. This comprised unstressed dowels in the underlying sandstone which were formed by percussion drilling through void formers cast into the piles.

Jan 1, 2010

By David A. Hart, Barry P. Osborn, Richard J. Totty, Ana T. Carvalho, Max B. Elliott

This paper addresses the experience designing and installing bored piles for the King’s Cross area. This includes continuous flight auger and rotary bored piles, with a range of diameters between 600 mm and 1200 mm, reaching a maximum depth of 56 m below ground level. Existing Network Rail Thameslink twin bored running tunnels are located directly beneath the subject plots. These tunnels have an external diameter of 6.6 m and the crowns of the tunnels are very shallow, in some cases just 10 m below the existing ground level. Some plots needed piles to be installed in close proximity to the tunnels, which required additional control measures and contingency plans. Pile verticality was monitored as the tip of each pile advanced and in-tunnel monitoring readings were verified and are presented. Lessons learned from designing, installing and testing the piles and monitoring the tunnels are addressed in this paper.

May 1, 2022

Jan 1, 1991

Jan 1, 1994

Jan 1, 1989

By Saieb Haddad, Henry Pate

"Building retaining walls in an urban area is becoming more difficult due to right-of-way restraints. Using standard concrete cantilever walls requires a construction easement behind the walls for installation, which for the most part is unavailable. To install these types of walls in a limited right-of-way requires extensive temporary walls to minimize the construction easement. Top-down construction walls utilizingtie-back anchors for support require either the purchase of the right-of-way or underground easements in the area of the anchors.These problems faced the Department on Interstate 75 widening in Knoxville, TN in an area of a large cut. A multi-story Insurance Building and a large commercial Retail Center were located at the top of the cut. To prevent any impact on the buildings, the walls had to be placed within a limited area. The option of buying the properties was prohibitively expensive. Due to the height of the two walls and the variability of the underling rock line, contiguous caisson pile cantilever walls were contemplated as the only wall type that would be appropriate. The cost of the two walls was estimated to be very close or even higher than the cost of purchasing the two buildings. The Department believed that there must be a better way to deal with the problem. A vertically tied-down pile frame wall constructed from the top-down with a concrete facing was developed. This allowed the construction of the walls to be restricted to the available limited area and provided substantial savings for the State.INTRODUCTIONThe widening of I-40/75 has been a major transportation project in the Knoxville area which is being constructed by the Tennessee Department of Transportation. The project includes 18 Retaining Walls and 13 Bridges.Two of the 18 Retaining Walls, refer to Figure 1, are to support two valuable properties, one being an insurance company housed in a multi-story office building and the other a suburban shopping center which were appraised at $13.0 million and $5.0 million respectively. Due to the 31 ft. (9.5m) maximum height of each of the two Retaining Walls and the limited Right-of- Way of 15.0 feet (4.6m), a contiguous caisson pile cantilever wall was proposed for each of the two retaining wall sites with an estimated cost of $12.0 million each. The contiguous pile cantilever Wall is comprised of a line of caisson piles socketed into underlying competent bedrock. The design required that 4 ft. (1219mm) dia. piles be installed at 6 ft. (1.83m) centers, socketed into rock in order to provide lateral stability and restrict lateral wall movement to acceptable limits. The line of caissons would be fronted with a cast-in-place concrete face wall"

Jan 1, 2007