Analysis of piles in a residual soil—The ISC'2 prediction

2007 ◽  
Vol 44 (2) ◽  
pp. 201-220 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bengt H Fellenius ◽  
Jaime A Santos ◽  
António Viana da Fonseca

The 2nd International Conference on Site Characterization (ISC'2), held in 2004, included a seminar for prediction of pile capacity involving three 6 m embedment length test piles, one 350 mm square driven concrete pile, and two 600 mm diameter, strain-gage instrumented, bored piles. Invited predictors were provided with results of in situ, laboratory tests and dynamic tests. Test layout, soil information, and pile data are presented with calculations of pile capacity and load distribution, submitted predictions, and results of the static loading tests. The CPT-calculated capacities show considerable scatter—total values ranged from 500 to 1400 kN for the driven pile and from 1000 to 1900 kN for the bored piles. The static loading test on the driven pile showed an offset limit load of 1200 kN and a plunging capacity of 1500 kN. Despite pile movements of 100 mm for 1200 kN of applied load, neither of the bored piles showed signs of having reached an ultimate resistance value. Effective stress analysis of strain measurements for the bored piles showed the data to correlate to a β coefficient of 1.0 and a toe coefficient of 16. Most submitted predictions underestimated the capacity of the driven pile and overestimated the capacities of the bored piles.Key words: pile capacity, effective stress analysis, shaft and toe resistances, β coefficient, CPTU, dynamic testing.

Author(s):  
Askar Zh. Zhussupbekov ◽  
Yoshinori Iwasaki ◽  
Abdulla R. Omarov

At the present time, in Astana city is going on works by construction public transport system LRT (Light Railway Transport). LRT is an overhead road with two railway lines. The first stage of construction is including construction of overhead road (bridge) with 22,4 km length and 18 stations. The foundation of bridge is the bored piles with cross-section 1.0HL5 m and length 8-КЗ 5 m. In these conditions, very important to control integrity of concrete body of each bored piles. For checking integrity- applying two methods - Low Strain Method and Cross-Hole Sonic Logging. The aim of this paper is to discuss the advantages and disadvantages of each method using the examples of a real application. The article presents loading tests of large diameter and deep boring piles on the construction site in new capital city of the Republic of Kazakhstan. Finally, some recommendations for testmg methods suitable for problematical ground conditions of Kazakhstan are introduced. Traditionally, pile load tests in Kazakhstan are carried out using static loading test methods. Static pile loading test is the most reliable method to obtain the load-settlement relation of piles. Results of static pile tests using the static compression loading test (by ASTM). static loading test (by GOST) and bi-direction static loading test (by ASTM) methods are presented in this paper. Experienced bored piles with length of 31.5 m. diameter 1000 mm. Hereafter the results of underground testmg by the piles with the methods of vertical static tests of SLT. BDSLT and SCLT are presented, which had been made on Expo 2017 projects, buildings of Pavilion m Astana. Kazakhstan.


1965 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 274-286
Author(s):  
Alan E Insley

The paper describes the failure during construction of a proposed 70 ft. high railway embankment fill. The fill was built of a uniform clay of medium plasticity which was used at an average moisture content of 3 per cent greater than had been provided for in the design. The fill failed under its own weight when it reached a height of 55 feet.In order to assist in the design of stabilizing works three test holes were drilled in the fill and soil samples recovered. Properties of field compacted and laboratory compacted soil samples are compared. The age of both types of samples is shown to have a significant effect on the test results.Both total and effective stress analyses of the embankment at failure have been performed using the laboratory values of soil strength. The total stress analysis gives a safety factor of 1.0 at failure whereas the effective stress analysis gives a safety factor of 1.2. The hazards of choosing the correct value of laboratory shear strength for the total stress analysis are discussed.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document