INSTRUMENTED PILE LOAD TEST REPORT

Ji
.J
;
INSTRUMENTED PILE LOAD

TEST REPORT
PROPOSED ERECTION OF A BLOCK OF 25 STOREYS

CONDOMINIUM FLATS DEVELOPMENT (TOTAL 80 UNITS)
WITH 3 BASEMENT CARPARKS, SWIMMING POOL &
COMMUNAL FACILITES ON LOT 01070N TS 24
Pile Reference: PTP 1
Date: 13/10/2012
Rev.OD
RECEIVED
3 0 OCT 2012
RYOBI KISO (S) PTE LTD
58A, SUNGEI l<ADUT LOOP
SINGAPORE 729505
kklim & associates "' ,,,
RE~~EIVE~::D
1 '.l QC .f
?Dj
<.U .2
;s[RUCTION (S) PTE l.T"
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.
1.1
GENERAL
1.2
SOIL PROFILE AND PRELIMINARY DESIGN OF PILE
2.
1
1
INSTRUMENTATION AND TEST

2.1
VIBRATING WIRE STRAIN GAUGES (VWSG)
2.2
STATIC PILE LOAD TEST
3.
RESULTS
3.1
LOAD SETTLEMENT CURVE
3.2 LOAD DISTRIBUTION CURVE

3.2.1 Modulus of pile
3.2.2
3.3
4.
INTRODUCTION
VIBRATING WIRE STRAIN GAUGES
UNIT END BEARING RESISTANCE
CONCLUSIONS
3
3
4
5
5
.s .
lr
E
.
JJ ..
'
y---
1-2
I"
1"
.
l
.k~
-r; -
1r.:1y
.._
I
1.
I Ji,.
..
,,,_,
1'~
p --
:-j
I.
~I
LIST OF TABLES
~i
.,
~,
Table 1
Table 2
Table 3
Table 4
Table 5
Variation of skin friction with depth

Average Strain vs depth
Average Force vs depth
Skin Friction vs depth
Tell tale extensometers settlement
LIST OF FIGURES
I
,J,
Fig.1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
'
Instrumentation detail of bored pile.

Load & Average Settlement vs Time.
Load settlement curve from scale rule
Load settlement curve from dial gauge
Tangent modulus versus microstrain.
Unit Skin Friction vs Applied Load Plot - at 405% WL
Unit End Bearing vs Applied Load Plot - at 405%WL
Mobilised Unit Skin Friction - at 405% WL
Calculated Load vs Depth
APPENDIX
Appendix A:- Pile Head Settlement Readings (Dial Gauges and Scale Rule)
VWSG's and Extensometer Readings
Appendix B:-
-1
j
l
J
]
J
i
i
Bored Pile Record

Concrete Cube Test
Soil Investigation WW4
Design Calculation For Pile Length
Appendix C:- Calibration Certificates

Appendix D:
Design for Kentledge system
INSTRUMENTED PILE LOAD TEST REPORT
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 General
This report serves to transfer the data from instrumented static pile load test
conducted for PROPOSED ERECTION OF A BLOCK OF 25 STOREYS CONDOMINIUM
FLATS DEVELOPMENT (TOTAL 80 UNITS) WITH 3 BASEMENT CARPARKS, SWIMMING
POOL & COMMUNAL FACILITES ON LOT 01070N TS 24, which was started on 5
October 2012 and completed on 8 October 2012. The purpose of instrumentation
on pile load test is to ascertain the load distribution characteristics of soil
supporting the pile shaft and to establish the design of the pile.
1.2 Soil profile and preliminary design of pile

The Ultimate Test Pile (UTP) is a 1000mm diameter bored pile, with embedded pile
length 39.68m from RL115.09m (Ground Level). The working load for the test pile is
600.4Ton. The UTP is tested to 4.05 times of the working load, which is 2431.6Ton.
As seen from the piling records, the soil profile consists of a 3m upper layer of
brown mixed with dark brown gravelly Sandy SILT with concrete (Backfill) (0-3m),
followed by 17m of Firm to Stiff light brown and light brownish, yellow fine to
coarse Sandy SILT, (Bu kit Timah Granite-Residual Soil) GVI (3-20m). The successive
layers are Very stiff light brownish yellow Sandy SILT (Bukit Timah Granite-Residual
Soil) GVI (20-2sm) to 28m depth, Hard brownish yellow Sandy SILT (BukitTimah
Granite-Residual Soil) GVI (28-33m) to 33m depth, Hard light bluish grey slightly
gravelly fine to coarse Sandy CLAY very Sandy SILT (Bukit Timah Granite) GV
(33-38.48m) to 38.48m depth, Moderately strong medium grey spotted with white
Granite moderately weathered, medium spaced fractures (Bu kit Ti mah Granite) Giii
(38.48-39.48m) to 39.48m depth, Moderately strong to strong medium grey
Granite slightly weathered, medium spaced fractures (Bu kit Timah Granite) Gii
(39.48-39.68m) to 39.68m depth.
J
I
2.
INSTRUMENTATION AND TEST
The UTP consisted of 56nos of vibrating wire type strain gauges (VWSGs) at 14
different layers and three telltale extensometers as shown in Fig. 1.
J'
Three tell tale extensometers were installed at depth 39m, 33.3m and 14.89m
below the pile head level (RL115.3m). Load cell was equipped at pile top to monitor
the applied load on pile head at each increment, while dial gauges and dumpy level
were used to monitor the pile head settlements.
2.1 VIBRATING WIRE STRAIN GAUGES (VWSG)

Vibrating wire strain gauges (VWSG) consist of a calibrated wire tensioned to a
known distance between two end blocks. The VWSG's are connected with electrical
wires to a power source and digital readout box. At each applied load increments
during the pile load test, a signal is sent to a plucking coil which plucks the wire and
creates a vibration. The frequency of the vibration is recorded and referenced to a
change in length, or strain. The theory is, when pile is loaded; the VWSG experience
the same strain as pile. Knowing the strain at each load and elastic modulus allows a
calculation of load along the pile profile as explained in Section 2.2. Skin friction can
be calculated in the same way as explained in Section 2.2 using Eq. (3).
J
]
1
]
]
~i
I
2.2 Static pile load test

The pile was tested after 8 days of its installation. l<entledge method was used to
apply load on the pile head. The pile was tested according to the standard test
procedure. The working load for this test pile is 600.4Ton.
In this test, the pile was tested to 405%. 25% load increment (150.lTon) was
applied at each step before loaded to 200%, and 10% load increment (60Ton) was
applied at each step from 200% to 405%. The pile will be maintained for 1 hours
when it was loaded to 100%, 200%. The pile will be maintained for 18 hours when it
was loaded to 300%. The pile will be maintained for 1 hours when it was loaded to
405%.After that, it will be unloaded in steps of 50% (300Ton) to 0 Ton.
F.
3. RESULTS
3.1 Load settlement curve

The load & average settlement vs time is shown in Fig 2. The load settlement curve
as obtained is shown in Fig. 3 and Fig. 4. Elastic compression of a free standing pile
and Davisson's (1972) failure criteria has also been plotted.
During the test, as obtained from average readings, the pile head settled by
39.66mm and 47.345mm (Average reading of scale ruler and dial gauge) when
subjected to 2431Ton and 2461Ton (405% and 410% ofWL).
3.2 Load distribution curve

As described in Section 2.1, the load distribution curve can be evaluated from the
strain measurements along the length of pile.
[,
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
I
3.2.1 Modulus of pile

!
I
The concrete modulus is a function of stress on pile. Over the large stress range
imposed during a static loading test, the difference between the initial and final
tangent module for pile material may be substantial and the conclusion based
upon a constant modulus may lead to wrong interpretation of shaft and toe
bearings. Fellenius (2006) has suggested the conversion of every measured strain
value to stress via its corresponding strain-dependent secant modulus. The
equation for the tangent modulus line is:
rI
J,
M=(~;)=as+b
(4)
which can be integrated to:
er =(~}, 2 +bs
(5)
However,
J,
er= Ess
(6)
Therefore,
l
l
]
]
1
r
1
j
j
j
(7)
a = = 0.5ai!+b sand Es= 0.5 as +b
where M =tangent modulus of composite pile material
,=secant modulus of composite pile material
a= stress (load divided by cross section area)
da = (cr,.1- an)= change of stress from one load increment to the next
a= slope of the tangent modulus line
s =measured strain
ds = (s,,,- sn) =change of strain from one load increment to the next
b = y-intercept of the tangent modulus line (i.e., initial tangent modulus)
The plot of tangent modulus with microstrain is shown in Fig. 4. The equation of
stress dependent secant modulus is given by:
Es= 0.5 as +b
Where, a =-0.028 and b = 42
3.2.2 VIBRATING WIRE STRAIN GAUGES

The load distribution curves, using VWSG's data, have been plotted in Fig 9.
Whereas the mobilized unit skin friction for this pile are shown in Fig 8.
The Unit Skin Friction of Pile at maximum load of 405%WL is shown in Fig 6.
3.3 Unit end bearing resistance

The variation of unit end bearing with applied load at maximum load of 405%WL is
shown in Figure 7. It is obtained from VWSG's readings. The toe bearing increased
linearly with the additional load. The toe bearing mobilized at 2431Ton (4.05 X WL),
2
equals to 896.STon which is equivalent to 11414.6kN/m unit end bearing. Design
unit end bearing is 7500kN/m2.
4. Conclusions
The test pile was loaded to 2431Ton (4.05 X WL) during this load test. The estimated
shaft resistance and toe bearings obtained from VWSG's readings are 1534.5Ton
(63.12%) and 896.STon (36.88%) at 2431Ton (4.05 X WL).
The corresponding unit toe bearing is 11414.6kN/m2.
For the detail distribution of mobilized parameter refer to Table 1.
Load (Ton)
Pile Head Settlement at

max load (mm)
Settlement after release to

zero load (mm)
recovery
2431(405%)
38.2mm-39.66mm
N.A
N.A
2461(410%)
47.345mm
29.29mm
38.13%
From the settlement performance and the details analysis from the instrumentation,
we concluded that the geotechnical capacity of this PTP has not been fully mobilized
when loaded to 405% WL. The PTP pile encountered structural failure at 410%WL
(2461Ton).

.! !
J
]
LIST OF TABLES
'
J
J
J
j
]
J
j
Table 1
Table 2
Table 3
Table 4
Table 5
Variation of skin friction with depth

Average Strain vs depth
Average Force vs depth
Skin Friction vs depth
Tell tale extensometers settlement
l
Table 1 : Variation of skin friction with depth.
Unit skin friction as per VWSG levels at 405%WL.
S.No.
l
1
Soil profile from piling

records
Brown mixed with dark

brown gravelly Sandy
SILT with concrete
(Backfill)
Firm to Stiff light brown
and light brownish
yellow fine to coarse
Sandy SILT (Bukit Timah
Granite - Residual Soil)
GVI
Very stiff light brownish

yellow Sandy SILT (Bukit
Timah Granite Residual Soil) GVI
Hard brownish yellow
Granite - Residual Soil)
GVI
Hard light bluish grey
slightly gravelly fine to
coarse Sandy CLAY very
Granite) GV
Moderately strong
medium grey spotted
with white Granite
moderately weathered,
medium spaced
fractures (Bu kit Timah
Granite) Giii
Depth (m)
Thickness
of soil
layer
(m)
SPT (N)
value
Mobilized
average unit
skin friction
(Ton/m2)
Mobilised
Parameter
Design
Parameter for
PTPl
From
0
to
0.58
0.58
0.58
2.42
ON12
0.7
0.58N
7.38
4.38
12
0.7
0.58N
7.38
13.88
6.5
12
1.6
l.33N
13.88
14.98
1.1
12
6.67N
14.98
17.33
2.35
12
16.8
14N
17.33
19.93
2.6
12
8.4
7N
19.33
23.98
4.05
20
8.4
4.2N
2N
(MAX
150KN/m2)
2N
(MAX
150KN/m2)
{1
I
(~11
[~l
i.I
E
-
23.98
27.88
3.9
23
13.2
5.74N
27.88
30.48
2.6
59
15.8
2.68N
30.48
32.93
2.45
50
32.93
35.48
2.55
100
35.48
38.18
2.7
100
38.18
38.68
0.5
100
38.68
39.18
0.5
RQD=59
(\
/28.8 \
2.70N
2N
(MAX
150KN/m2)
2N
(MAX
150KN/m2)
2.88N
28.8 )
2.88N
~o.7j
.__,
3.07N
77.3
773kN/m2
2N
(MAX
150KN/m2)
39.68
0.5
RQD=59,
88
77.3
(estimate unit
skin friction)
773kN/m2
(estimate unit
skin friction)
Note:
Unit skin friction from 0 to 39.18m is from VWSG analysis. Refer to table 4.
Unit skin friction from 39.18 to 39.68m is estimated using the last layer unit skin
friction, 77.3Ton/m2.
Total skin friction is equal to 1534.STon at 405%WL, so end bearing 896.STon at
405%.
Unit end bearing 11414.6kN/m2, design unit end bearing 7500kN/m2.
~-
I ..
I
i'
.
I
600KN/m2
39.18
IJ'J
''"-
,__;;,___
"--1
......_,;,
>--....J
'....____J
l..----.J
<---1
.___;
<---1
....... -
-'
-'
~-'
-~
::_ - -.l!
':_
-~
_ft
WESTWOOD AT ORCHARD BOULEYARD

ULTIMATE LOAD TEST SUMMARY
Table 2: Average Strain (mirco strain) vs Depth of Gauges

39.18
Ap1>lit'(l load (tons)
38.68
38.18
35.48
32.93
30.48
27.88
23.98
19.93
17.33
14.98
13.88
7.38
0.58
.)
(~/
162
27%.
2.9
5.1
5.2
6.6
8.l
IO.I
12.l
16.0
27.4
27.0
24.7
23.7
26.8
38.9
313
52%.
!3.9
15.3
15.9
17.3
22.5
27.3
3 l.l
42.7
73.3
58.4
54.8
51.2
61.3
82.4
480
80%
34.9
36.5
45.2
52.7
62.4
80.8
138.9
91.6
48.0
53.5
56.1
66.5
76.l
89.9
113.5
195.7
!05.8
140.2
98.7
614
28.5
44.5
3 l.5
102'%
132.0
124.0
104.6
140.0
170.4
773
129%
57.7
62.l
69.6
79.2
89.l
106.5
I 17.5
150.3
260.5
187.l
171.0
158.8
916
153o/~
73.8
79.8
88.5
103.0
113.0
132.0
149.9
187.0
321.7
229.5
208.3
195.3
184.2
223.5
13 l.5
214.1
252.6
299.7
1093
182'l'o
94.9
103.3
112.0
132.2
143.3
163.3
187.0
231.7
395.2
280.9
258.l
239.9
272.3
1208
20t'Y~
116.6
125.9
134.9
160.6
174.3
196.6
225.5
274.9
461.6
322.7
30 l.2
278.5
312.4
336.3
1261
210%
124.4
133.8
146.8
169.9
186.7
242.3
289.8
484.I
292.3
329.2
349.4
221%
13 l.6
141.0
156.J
256.9
3!0.4
515.5
33 l.4
31 l.7
350.l
370.I
1'.180
230%
140.0
149.2
165.9
180.6
194.J
336.5
354.6
311.2
1324
221.4
278.0
332.0
549.8
370.8
348.9
329.0
369.9
385.3
1445
241%
144.8
156.9
174.J
204.6
222.5
241.2
264.2
299.8
355.5
591.6
409.0
369.5
347.4
390.l
401.4
202.2
1519
253'%
151.9
166.3
184.4
207.2
221.6
266.5
284.4
325.2
383.1
648.7
433.3
393.7
370.l
415.5
419.9
1557
259%
159.l
176.9
192.l
227.8
284.7
301.6
342.I
400.5
690.9
448.7
409.6
383.5
430.3
429.7
1621
270~~
171.0
189.2
205.4
235.9
307.J
324.l
364.7
425.3
753.8
471.7
429.9
402.4
452.3
440.7
1696
282"/o
181.5
199.9
278.9
342.l
353.8
399.0
461.3
842.l
504.0
459.6
429.2
479.4
459.3
1744
290'%
190.4
208.4
215.0
223.7
291.5
365.7
374.9
420.6
480.9
906.0
479.9
470.8
455.3
529.6
1086.9
502.9
524.8
497.2
406.0
407.5
422.0
445.l
471.9
497.0
392.7
525.0
543.6
464.5
544.2
1095.7
565.0
524.3
490.2
544.2
560.3
514.8
550.0
1819
303~/Q
264.5
Jl3'Y~
226.7
230.2
245.4
1878
257.2
273.5
336.2
343.6
242.0
1951
325o/o
241.5
274.l
294.0
369.4
441.5
456.0
506.9
584.l
1112.8
1988
331'!-'n
249.6
282.4
299.0
377.2
450.7
465.0
515.l
1124.7
597.5
604.0
568.3
519.9
527.0
578.2
565.0
2049
341%.
258.l
293.7
308.4
389.l
466.7
480.8
530.2
589.8
602.3
1141.5
614.61
585.7
541.5
597.5
581.4
2112
352'%
259.7
296.l
312.4
400.5
487.0
501.3
546.l
616.3
1157.8
633.2
603.5
560.0
628.2
597.0
2157
359o/..
260.J
297.l
316.3
404.6
495.8
506.9
549.3
622.5
ll63.4
640.I
609.3
565.4
638.9
615.7
2231
372/~
266.1
306.6
325.0
432.S
508.0
542.4
652.9
1217.3
691.4
664.6
615.3
673.2
2297
383Q/&
300.6
342.4
359.4
457.0
520.8
556.2
586.0
602.4
672.8
1236.0
688.8
639.2
699.8
634.2
655.7
2347
391"/fi
314.6
355.6
368.7
458.0
547.8
661.5
718.0
670.2
316.4
357.9
370.6
460.5
544.7
695.5
1250.4
1272.7
716.8
405"(,,
620.3
626.9
683.l
2431
577.3
578.4
717.7
741.6
758.7
722.7
669.7
733.I
685.0
571.2
RYOlll KlSO (S) PTE LTD
WESTWOOD AT ORCHARD BOULEVARD

Table 3 : Average Force (Ton) vs Depth of Gauges

39.18
38.68
Applied Lo:td (tons)
('%)
162
27%
9.7
16.7
313
52%
45.7
50.4
38.18
35.48
32.93
27.88
30.48
23.98
19.93
17.33
14.98
13.88
0.58
7.38
17.4
52.9
21.8
26.7
33.5
40.1
52.5
75.0
89.4
90.1
93.6
99.1
152.8
56.8
73.8
102.9
139.8
171.7
192.2
199.0
201.l
225.0
321.8
480
80%
93.7
103.3
115.5
119.7
147.9
90.4
173.6
205.4
262.8
313.3
345.6
355.5
357.0
381.3
509.3
614
102%
145.7
157.l
176.6
183.4
217.0
249.9
294.5
421.0
455.4
472.6
480.8
507.6
655.5
773
129'}'0
188.4
202.7
229.1
257.7
289.7
347.9
383.l
367.4
483.4
556.1
602.7
662.5
817.1
153'}'0
240.6
259.8
290.5
365.6
429.3
486.0
597.7
680.6
733.8
747.8
798.4
957.9
1093
182'%
308.0
334.9
366.3
334.1
426.4
608.3
736.1
612.0
916
461.3
528.2
602.3
734.9
829.5
890.3
904.4
911.5
964.5
1127.2
1208
201%
377.1
406.6
439.4
515.6
558.2
632.2
721.8
865.2
956.5
1015.2
1047.4
1051.4
1099.1
1256.7
1261
210%
401.9
431.6
477.2
544.5
596.6
657.2
773.2
909.8
998.8
1056.0
1080.3
1100.7
1154.5
1302.5
1324
221'%
424.6
454.1
506.6
577.7
644.5
712.5
817.7
970.9
1055.3
1109.5
1146.4
1169.7
1223.5
1374.5
1380
230%
479.9
504.0
537.5
619.6
703.2
769.9
1034.6
1203.I
1230.8
1288.l
1427.2
659.8
766.1
840.1
839.8
1103.1
1109.0
1203.1
1156.7
563.4
595.5
881.5
947.0
1267.3
1269.6
1295.4
1353.6
1276.5
1322.8
1336.6
1347.l
1374.5
1435.2
1482.5
1545.7
1380.5
1445.2
1397.4
1420.9
1482.2
1461.4
1486.0
1552.0
1579.0
1616.4
1553.8
1577.4
1637.0
1678.9
1616.6
1687.1
1631.3
1691.7
1717.3
1721.0
1777.2
1805.0
1836.4
1918.0
1863.0
1977.6
1445
241"/o
451.l
466.l
1519
253'%
488.3
533.4
1557
259o/e
5ll.I
1621
210/o
548.1
566.3
604.5
619.5
660.8
690.7
1696
282'Vi
580.6
637.5
1744
290%
663.6
1819
303~'..
608.1
719.5
776.3
717.4
842.4
1878
313'%
730.2
812.1
869.8
703.9
723.0
747.7
894.6
96l.I
1064.l
900.8
952.5
1022.7
1072.7
1183.0
1233.0
1019.6
1139.0
1238.6
1303.4
1404.8
1389.7
1484.2
1300.6
1459.1
1540.6
1535.1
1592.9
1132.7
1106.9
1168.8
1047.0
1210.5
1263.0
1398.9
1592.7
1623.8
1643.8
1248.6
1304.4
1425.1
1632.4
1674.7
1751.9
1781.7
877.4
914.8
1951
325"/o
764.4
862.7
931.5
1068.6
1143.6
1349.3
1401.0
1543.1
1739.3
1769.4
1701.8
1788.7
1860.I
1879.8
1988
331"/o
789.0
887.6
946.5
1166. l
1375.2
1426.2
1565.7
1754.2
1785.9
1806.2
1883.7
1902.8
1938.9
2025.9
2049
341"/a
814.6
921.5
974.7
1200.3
1419.6
1470.7
1607.1
1787.3
1815.9
1834.2
1950.0
1996.6
2112
352o/.
819.6
928.7
986.6
1232.9
1476.0
1527.5
1650.6
1824.2
1860.1
1883.2
1935.1
1987.6
2009.7
2087.2
2078.4
2128.I
2157
359%
820.8
931.6
998.4
1244.6
1500.2
1543.1
1659.3
1840.3
1877.5
1901.4
2004.4
2027.2
2118.6
2187.0
2231
312"1
838.9
959.7
1024.2
1324.8
1534.0
1640.4
1758.1
1919.4
1989.3
2034.1
2163.9
2185.7
2218.I
2244.9
2297
383"/o
942.0
1065.0
1125.7
1392.6
1568.9
1677.8
1801.8
1970.5
2050.0
2101.0
2232.5
2260.7
2294.1
2311.9
2347
391"/..
983.4
1103.4
1152.9
1395.4
1642.0
1734.8
1849.3
1996.8
2096.9
2161.2
2311.0
2329.9
2345.7
2356.6
2431
40So/o
988.8
1110.3
1158.5
1402.5
1633.6
1737.7
1866.7
2028.3
2135.1
2203.6
2327.5
2355.2
2388.0
2401.9
RYOBJ KISO (S) PTE LTD
.r'!"!'\
L-o~'""'"""'
rL
k.W>'.'oU"-'I
!"""\_J ..~
; ,!""'""'l~'"""'"""'1"'""'Ih.~"=ciJ......... ~w~\1
; J
'
-l"""""!
.,......,
~'""=
.,......,
10"''"''''''"4
-l""""'t
""'""'~ew>l
-l""""'t
i<tC ''''"'<l
!!"""'I
tu,\'"'"~
-""""'l
wxc-.~"'""~
~-'illll
;"!!"'"'II
tz.~
~-
,..
t\U&:\l)~
l,JMl
WESTWOOD AT ORCHARD BOULEVARD

Table 4 : Skin Friction (Ton!nh

Dcpth(m}
Appiled Load (tons)
(%)
162
27'YD
313
52%.
480
80%,
614
102"1~
773
129%.
916
I53'Vo
1093
182o/o
1203
20l'Yo
1261
210"/o
1324
22.lo/o
1380
230'}'(,
1445
241%
1519
253'1'
1557
259/o
1621
270"/o
1696
282"/o
1744
290'Vo
1819
303'Vo
187&
313"/,,
1951
325~;,,
1988
33lo/n
2049
3.JI'%
39.18
38.68
38.18
35.48
M-N
4.4
L-M
K-L
J-K
3.0
6.1
7.3
9.l
12.2
17.2
18.8
18.9
18.8
18.3
24.1
28.8
35.2
35.9
36.2
35.3
36.1
52.1
62.6
62.7
68.0
69.4
70.6
76.9
78.3
0.4
1.6
7.7
12.4
16.8
19.5
20.0
20.9
29.1
33.5
36.7
37.8
39.5
33.8
35.8
33.9
34.2
42.1
36.7
43.S
37.5
33.9
36.9
2112
352%.
2157
359%
:?.231
372'1-~
2297
383o/..
2347
391'1-'U
76.4
31.5
2431
4D5o/o
77.3
30.7
42.5
41.0
38.6
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.8
3.4
5.1
7.1
9.0
7.9
8.4
9.7
11.4
12.8
12.2
10.3
22.0
23.3
24.1
23.4
25.0
25.9
26.6
29.0
29.0
35.4
31.5
28.6
28.8
0.6
2.1
3.5
4.2
4.0
3.9
4.4
5.3
6.5
S.3
10.4
13.3
17.0
21.4
26.6
23.3
27.2
20.4
22.5
25.7
26.I
27.4
30.3
31.9
26.l
22.0
30.8
28.8
32.93
1-J
0.9
2.2
3.3
4.3
7.6
8.3
8.7
9.6
7.9
8.8
8.7
9.6
7.9
7.5
7.6
5.6
4.7
6.8
7.2
6.7
6.6
6.6
6.7
5.6
13.8
14.2
12.0
13.5
30.48
11-1
0.8
1.5
3.9
5.5
4.3
6.9
9.1
11.0
14.2
12.9
13.7
13.1
14.9
14.7
14.6
16.1
16.1
16.6
14.8
17.4
17.I
27.88
23.98
19.93
17.33
14.98
13.88
7.38
0.58
G-11
F-G
E-F
D-E
C-D
B-C
A-B
GL-A
1.0
3.0
4.7
6.0
8.2
9.1
10.8
I 1.7
I I.I
125
12.5
12.7
13.I
13.1
13.4
13.6
12.9
15.8
16.9
16.0
1.8
2.5
4.0
4.2
5.7
6.5
7.4
7.2
7.0
6.6
5.8
7.9
7.4
7.1
6.8
6.2
6.4
2.4
3.3
2.4
15.4
2.5
16.7
15.I
14.7
14.2
2.2
14.2
14.8
14.4
15.2
14.0
15.8
13.2
13.8
12.0
13.2
2.8
2.9
5.5
6.2
1.8
2.5
4.0
4.2
5.7
6.5
7.4
7.2
7.0
6.6
5.8
7.9
7.4
7.1
6.8
6.2
6.4
2.4
3.3
2.4
2.5
2.2
2.8
2.9
5.5
6.2
7.9
7.9
8.4
8.4
0.1
0.9
l.3
2.3
0.8
0.3
1.9
4.4
3.3
5.0
6.3
0.3
1.4
2.3
2.2
2.5
3.2
5.9
6.8
9.7
10.5
13.7
14.1
13.9
17.6
17.8
20.3
16.8
1.0
0.6
0.4
0.3
1.2
1.2
2.4
1.3
I. I
3.4
2.1
2.5
2.5
I.I
2.3
5.9
6.7
8.0
7.5
8.0
6.S
7.1
6.8
4.2
9.8
8.6
5.7
5.5
4.3
6.4
6.6
6.3
8.1
5.5
8.0
2.6
2.6
2.6
2.8
2.8
3.0
3.0
3.2
2.9
3.0
2.8
2.7
1.9
1.8
2.3
3.8
4.5
1.6
1.6
0.8
1.6
2.5
4.5
6.0
6.9
7.2
7.5
7.6
7.4
6.9
7.1
6.5
6.0
5.2
4.5
3.0
2.0
l.2
1.3
1.2
2.8
4.1
3.8
1.9
3.2
1.3
0.8
0.5
0.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
RYOBI KISO (S) PTE 1;ro
Table 5: Telltale extensometers settlement (mm)
Load (kN)
% increment
0
150
300
450
600
751
901
1051
1201
1261
1321
1381
1441
1501
1561
1621
1681
1741
1801
1861
1921
1981
2041
2101
2161
2221
2282
2342
2432
0
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
210
220
230
240
250
260
270
280
290
300
310
320
330
340
350
360
370
380
390
405
0
Tell Tale Extensometer

Settlement (mm)
39m
33.3m
14.89m
TT3
TTl
TT2
0.00
1.03
1.37
2.25
3.18
4.33
5.53
6.66
7.63
8.10
8.63
9.47
10.14
11.07
11.69
12.20
13.43
14.08
15.76
15.98
17.43
17.84
18.54
19.46
19.68
22.43
24.00
25.46
32.15
19.26
0.00
1.07
1.75
2.02
2.35
2.79
3.20
3.69
4.04
4.25
4.40
4.57
4.73
5.00
5.18
5.24
5.67
5.87
6.28
6.30
6.65
6.72
7.28
7.98
7.25
7.57
8.05
8.30
8.60
2.77
0.00
0.18
1.13
1.21
1.46
1.76
2.03
2.27
2.46
2.39
2.45
2.60
2.70
2.81
2.86
2.86
3.00
3.02
3.24
3.19
3.37
3.41
3.45
3.48
3.64
3.68
3.76
3.79
4.13
1.03
[.
-
-
'
-1
.
1
LIST OF FIGURES
Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
J
]
J
;J
Instrumentation detail of bored pile.

Load & Average Settlement vs Time.
Load settlement curve from scale rule
Load settlement curve from dial gauge
Tangent modulus versus microstrain.
Unit Skin Friction vs Applied Load Plot - at 405% WL
Unit End Bearing vs Applied Load Plot- at 405%WL
Mobilised Unit Skin Friction at 405% WL
Calculated Load vs Depth
r~
[~.
~,
Figure 1 Details of Test Pile Instrumentation

PTP1(BH-WW4)
Soil Description
NValue
Depth (m)
From Gl
T:f-:;:-fT~
PUe Top'"''
Brown mixed with dark brown gravelly Sandy
SilT with concrete (Sackfill)
Firm to Stiff light brown and light brownish
'nm r.I
RL115.3
Ground Level RUlS.09
~14.51
11
~1~01.11 r:
yellow flne to coarse Sandy SILT
0.58
7.38
20
I{
~01.21
,.
13.88
14.98
17.33
19.93
RL:lOO.S{FEL)
~00.11
~S.16
.J
L. .
[~r
~WSG
12
{Bukltlimah Granite - Residual Soil) GV!
r.
Depth (m) VWSG
Ground Level RUlS.09
r:'..
Rod Extensometers x
3nos
()
I
[l
[.;
['
(Bu kit Ti mah Granite Residual Soil) GVI
23.98
20
Very stiff light brownish yellow Sandy S!LT
22.5
28
~7.21
27.88
~l:=84.61
30.48
~2.16
32.93
~9.61
35.48
[~
~76.91
38.18
~6.41.
38.68
39.18
VWSGTotal
56
28
H;ird brownish yellow Sandy SILT

(Bukit Tim ah Granite - Residual Soll) GVI
54.5
33
33
Hard light bluish grey slightly gravelly fine to
coarse Sandy ClAY ve;y Sandy SILT
100
38.48
{Bukit Timah Granite) GV
Moderately strong medium grey spotted
medium spaced fractures
(Boldt Tim ah Granite) Giii

Moderately :Strong to strong
RQD=88
39.48
39.48
-39.68
'
RL:75.41 (
weathered, medium spaced fractures

(Bukit Tl mah Granite) GI!
[I
38.48
with white Granite moderately weathered,
medium grey Granite slightly
[,
[I
Layout of stain gauges

{Cross Section)
Note:
1. The estimated pile length in this proposal is based on Soil profile of Bore Hole WW4
2. Tl from RL115.3 to Rl76.3,length=39rn; T2 from RL115.3 to RL82.0,length=33.3rn;
l.~
f ..
Figure 2: PTP WESTEOOD

@ORCHARD BLVD
Load & Average Settlement vs Time
2500
2000
1500
"2
0
,,
1000
"'0
500
0
20
40
'fime (Hours)
-500
-1000
l
l
00
....
-1500
QJ
:>
""""'
QJ
-2000
c:
~
QJ
E -2500
.s
QJ
""::>
"'
-3000
.,~
--- .. ---- ..
~~-~-
C)
Iii
-i5
]
]
-3500
c:
QJ
E
QJ
-4000
E
QJ
Vl
-4500
-5000
----- .- ---.-- -----
---~-
--- --
60
BO
No increase in
settlement with
loads?
250% WL
50
r- -
<l--~-vr
45
J
I
......
....(I)
-0::
Cl
0
0
V')
IJ.I
s:
Cl
~
co
0..
!'f'I
....(IJ
l.J
II)
Cl .....
0:: !:
0.. <C
I-
ro
(IJ
E
:c (IJ
u ':p
0:: .....
(IJ
0 VI
<0ttlomeo>'ffim
405%WL(243~Ton)71
/
I
settlement 40.25mm
!.o/--
..
[
[
;omwc1m"~"'
I- ----
[.
!"
[~
(/)
::l
>
I.I..
"O
.~
~-I
::l
(IJ
.. -(,,.,",;,.,;;;,'- +
1
-i-I
ro
settlement 20mm
...I
15
[
10
Note:
1) GeotechnicalFailure at
settlement=lD,lOOmm.
2) Skin Friction and End
bearing fully mobilization at
settlement=O.SD, 50mm,
3) Pile structure failed at
410%, settlement=48.25mm.
no
'
o;nn
1nnn
?nnn
?c;nn
50 .
45
410%WL (2461 Ton)

settlement 46.44mm
40
35
QI
b.O
::I
I'll
(!1
0
0 0
.!!!
I- ~ 0
s:
w
s:
V'l CQ
Cl.
I-
..
-:!'
...Cl.I
Cl.
::I
tl.O
u::
0::
+-'
t:
QI
<C
::c (IJE
u
a::
0
@J
';:::
+-'
Q)
V'l
Vl
30
J/
'It
:;;
;::zw
:;; 25
w
....
I=
w
303%WL(1819Tonl_
settlement 21.29mm ~
"'
/t
fl?
>
"ti
ro
0
-I
"
15
'"wurnmoo)A
. ..
if!
_______
------1/JJ-
f
settlement.18.86mm
~~
io
--- _
---:;/L---------<P$J
.{
/>
5 , ____
--~~-
;;:'
"
'
l
;
. "'
.
/
___,___ --7<'!/-----~-""
//
/~
Note:
1) GeotechnicalFailure at
settlement=lD,lOOmm,
2) Skin Friction and End
bearing fully mobilization at
settlement=O.SD, SOmm.
3) Pile structure failed at
410%, settlement=46.44mm.
o L_-L..._._ - ---1-~-~---- -- ~---, -- ------------;-----~~----------

n
1nnn
c;.nn
J(l(l(l
?t;(l(l
[
[_
m
u o w
l
Ii
~
.q
~
-<I
~
'j
~
t1
"'
0
0
;?
[_
"'
0
0
E;J
4ll1
f;J
i! ~
0
&
~
.2
ci
"
"$1
"'""'
0
g__
r.
l,
;h
)<
0
ci
"'
ci
"'
"'
0
;':
"'
g
ci
ci
w
ci
~
"'
0
N
ci
[ ...
FIGURE 6: Unit Skin Friction VS Applied Load Plot - At 405% Working Load
90
80
70
N'
"'
"'0
0
60
;::.
"';:"
u..
:;;:
"'
50
U)
-.:
::::>
40
30
20
10
]
0
Applied Load(tons)
]
]
J
1
-.-AB
-G-H
-i--H-1
--1~
-.-C-0
-<>--D-E
JK
KL
-<>-FG
LM
MN
[ __
FIGURE 7: Unit End Bearing VS Applied
load Plot -At 405/o Working load
.. I
[l
[ __]
1400
End bearing increases with
increase in loadings
[ ....,
I
1200 ...............
'
[_I
I
I
I
I
1ooo ..._. . . . . . . . . ----+--.. . . . . . . . . . . . . .T ..................................-1I. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .i . . . . . . . . .--------1-----.
. --......................
N
800
c:
;Ct!: :
ifi
I
I
'
II
400
I
I
I
I
I
I
'
600
[_~
[
-------------+-----t---------+--- ------f----------.
.-----1----------I
(J)
"O
.1
Ill
I
!
'
'
I
I
....................--- ........+
. -----"-------~-. ---------- __________________, __,___, _______. . . . . . . !--..------"""""""
------------
--l------------1- ----------\-----------T--..--------J-----------1
["
["'
I
.
1500
2000
2500
I
"---------.+!----- ................--!--..------------ . . . .
200
+-.. . . . . . . .--+-----.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
I
J..................................
I
1
[~
500
1000
3000
[~
[""
[
r
J
]
J
J
J
l.J
0
0
-5
1,.
' 1,.
r-I
!,
f'lll-~'111
-15
1,--.L... + . :-. . l-1

I 1i
_t
I 1.
'
I1
I
i
'
!!
I
II
'
'
I
'
+- I
il
+- .
i .1..
............ 1
I L ,
'.
I!
...i.
'
'
----.--1-+~
i
ii
I,
1-I --I
I
'
'
'
I
I
J,,
,I
I
i!
!
'
-~-rrr1
. r---l-
i,
mobilised skin
I friction
is about 3N,
I
! II
,I
!
!i
, ,
I
'
'
to
Mobilised
--L-compared
.
. 2N in .:.----L---.L---t!
, _, .. . . .L. ____skin
. friction =
design
1 their
--:--
:
i
1 750kPa,
1
1 compared
I
to
(N=100)
600 kPa in their design
1
1
II II
'1' I I! ' ' ! I
l
c-i----,, --'----
I
I,!
---.-----~----,
rr r-r~-rrr~r--,
i
-25
'
,!
'
'
1'
ii
I\
'1
I '
I'
----1-- ---1--r----'"---~----"---1----t-l-i
T
I,
I I I
'
Ii J!
Ii
:
1'.:
1--1----1--t-i---t--1-t-1--t-i---- t t--1-i-r---'1
,I
-45
-40
,I
t tJ _ I JJ
-35
'
r-r
II
-30
I I
I
I I ,
I II !
+--+-+-1- . + ++ + + +--1 + -+ ...L.....-r---+-1
. I I '
i
I I I
l
-10
'I
I rI
iI tr
J
J
'!'
]
]
Averaged Unit Skin Friction(Tons/m2}

10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85
L.....
l
1
1
'
,'
1
I
I '1 I
L ... o ....
L. . . . . . . . L. . J. 1. . .
f
!I
.,1
I ! [
J.....L...L. . L. . .
!i
ii
'
l!
'
L. J. . . . . . .L...1..J
L ........
FIGURE 8: MOBILISED UNIT SKIN FRICTION

AT405%WL
[~
,-m,,,
Calcuh1tcd Load (tonnes)_
~~
'"'~
0.00
..,_'I;
\\
\
[~
,\\~
\
i\\
5.00
"~
,G
,' I!
I,
I
:' /
liff
II
[~
10.00
-> '
[,
15.00
'
I
y.
\,J
a_
""
~.[
"-~
~
--q~
..,_.
"'-
30.00
35.00
40.00
-+--162
--:-480
--*"'-614
-fll-1380
-Bl-313
-!c--1-145
->\-1519
~-1557
l988
'"''
2112
2157
45.00
Job No.
Dra\\'n by
Chkd. by
Rev.
TP
--773
-0-1093 -l-1208
1261
1621 - 1696 --1744
IS19
!878
2297
2431
2231
--916
2347
WESTWOOD AT ORCHARD BOULEY ARD

LOAD TRANSFER CURVE
JYY
0
FIGURE 9 : CALCULATED LOAD vs DEPTH
5f.,A
s\
Vi\
-?---
1324
PTPI
l-'
;;r:i

INSTRUMENTED PILE LOAD TEST REPORT

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

INSTRUMENTED PILE LOAD TEST REPORT

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Ji