Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
DOI 10.1007/s11440-015-0398-4
RESEARCH PAPER
1 Introduction
The cone penetration test (CPT) has been widely used to
characterize soils and has been directly applied in
geotechnical engineering, including the determination of
pile bearing capacity. Cones and piles possess a similar
working mechanism; thus, several CPT-based methods
related to unit shaft and toe resistances have been proposed
to evaluate pile bearing capacity using CPT data (e.g., qc
and fs). Most of the methods have been proposed to
determine the ultimate bearing capacity of driven piles
(e.g., [2, 15]), whereas some have been suggested for both
driven and cast in situ piles (e.g., [8, 26]) and base-grouted
cast in situ piles in sand (e.g., [31]).
Each CPT-based method has been developed based on
static load test (SLT) results obtained from specific regions
and geologies. In addition, the failure criteria used to define
the bearing capacity of a test pile (e.g., [11]) can differ
depending on author preference and the recommendation
for the region. Some methods exhibit large scatter of the
predicted bearing capacities of piles [23]. Thus, the applicability of CPT-based methods in new geological areas
(e.g., for Louisiana state area [1], Florida state area [6],
Jiangsu province of eastern China [9], or a combined
database from different countries [29]) must be evaluated.
Pretensioned spun high-strength concrete (PHC) piles
were developed in Japan in the early 1970s and introduced
to Korea in the early 1990s. The PHC pile has been used as
the foundation of a residential complex project only
recently in the Nakdong River delta west of Busan City in
South Korea. Several studies have been conducted on the
bearing capacities of the PHC piles used in the project;
these works include the determination of true resistance in
an instrumented PHC driven pile [16], a comparative study
among different design methods for the bearing capacity of
123
Acta Geotechnica
2 Field tests
2.1 Location of study site
The study site is the Myeongji residential complex situated
at the coastline of the Nakdong River deltaic area west of
Busan City in South Korea (Fig. 1). An approximately
5-m-thick landfill was constructed and finally completed in
the late 1990s. Tall apartment buildings were built at the
site only a few years ago. The total area of the study site
was approximately 1.0 km 9 1.4 km, and the site was
divided into four main blocks, namely MA (upper left),
MB (lower left), MC (lower right), and MD (upper right),
as shown in Fig. 2. Each main block was divided further
into sub-blocks (e.g., MA1MA4) to facilitate site investigation and construction management. The CPTus and
PDA test piles were conducted on blocks MA and MC, and
the results are used in the analysis.
2.2 Piezocone penetration test
The CPTus were conducted extensively at specific locations under the planned apartment buildings where driven
PHC piles were to be installed. The tests were conducted
using 15 cm2 Geomil cone (area ratio = 0.6) driven by a
track-mounted CPT machine with 20-t capacity. The
electrical-type cone had a 60 apex, and a porous element
Fig. 1 Location of the study site in the Nakdong River delta (Google maps)
123
Acta Geotechnica
Fig. 2 Schematic plan view of blocks with field tests at the study site
123
Acta Geotechnica
Fig. 3 Typical CPT profiles and soil properties at the study site. Notes on parameters: /0 = tan-1[0.1 ? 0.38log(qt/r0v0 )]; OCR =
0:580
G0.478
r0v0
0.101p0.102
a
0
0:27
; where G0 = q[277q0.13
rv0 ]2; Dr = 100 [0.268ln[(qt/pa)/(r0v0 =pa )0.5] - 0.675]. All equations are given by Mayne [22]
t
Penetration depth,
L (m)
500
35
600
Number of PDA
test
6
3235
63
3540
42
4054
37
3235
25
3554
17
123
Acta Geotechnica
(a)
(b)
MA1-101
0.0
MA3-203
Silty sand
10.0
14.0
Strain
gauges
20.0
Depth (m)
30.0
33.0
40.0
Silty clay
34.5
Silty sand &
sand
36.5
O-cells
Cement
Pre-tensed
steel bar
50.0
58.0
60.0
Fig. 4 Test piles with O-cells at the toes. a Soil profile and schematic configurations of two piles, b images illustrating the installation process
(a)
(b)
Fig. 5 Force and velocity records for CAPWAP analysis. a Pile MA1-101, b pile MA3-203
123
Acta Geotechnica
Fig. 6 Downward movement curves obtained from the O-cell tests. a Pile MA1-101, b pile MA3-203
Stage
Length (m)
Seta (mm/blow)
EMX (t 9 m)
MA1-101
EOID
32.0
9.0
10.41
28.40
2.80
2.48
0.91
MA3-203
EOID
34.0
3.0
9.46
28.70
6.10
3.54
0.35
CSX (MPa)
TSX (MPa)
Toe BC (MN)
Shaft BC (MN)
123
4 Applicability analysis
4.1 Data selection
A total of 82 CPTus and 190 PDA test piles were conducted for pile foundation design at the project. The PDA
test piles closest to each CPTu were used to evaluate the
applicability of the ten CPT-based methods in this study.
However, the soil profiles of the CPTu and PDA test pile
locations differed significantly as a result of the change in
ground surface level during construction and the variation
of the soil layers. To optimize the soil profiles of these
locations before analysis, three data selection steps were
performed as follows.
Acta Geotechnica
Table 3 Toe bearing capacity equations from ten CPT-based methods
Method
Note
qp = qca/Fb
(qp B 15 MPa)
qca = arithmetic mean of qc values in 8D above and 4D below the pile toe; Fb = correction
factor according to pile type, Fb = 1.75 for driven piles
Bustamante and
Gianeselli [8] (LCPC)
qp = kbqeq
qeq = equivalent mean of qc values in 1.5D above and 1.5D below the pile toe;
kb = 0.150.6 depending on soil type and pile installation method and kb = 0.4 for driven
pile in sandgravel
qp = [1 - 0.5log(D/
Dcpt)]qca
qca = qeq in LCPC method; qp = 0.3qc for D [ 0.90 m; D = pile diameter; Dcpt = cone
diameter
Meyerhof [24]
qp = C1C2qca
qca = arithmetic mean of qc values in 1D below and 4D above the pile toe; C1,
C2 = correction factors for scale effect and penetration into dense stratum, respectively
qp = 0.125qca
Philipponnat [25]
qp = kbqca
qca = arithmetic mean of qc values in 3D above and 3D below the pile toe; kb = bearing
factor depending on soil type, kb = 0.4 and 0.3 for sand and gravel, respectively
Schmertmann [28]
qp = (qc1 ? qc2)/2
(qp B 15 MPa)
qc1 = average qc by minimum path method in 0.74D below the pile toe; qc2 = mean qc by
minimum path method within 8D above the pile toe
qp = 0.6qca
qca = arithmetic mean of qc value 1.5D above and 1.5D below the pile toe
qp = aqca
qca = arithmetic mean of qc values 4D above and 4D below the pile toe; a = factor
according to soil type
qp = CtqEg
qEg = geometric mean qE (= qt - u2) values in 8D above and 4D below the pile toe;
Ct = toe adjustment factor, Ct = 1.0 for D B 0.4 m, Ct = 1/(3D) for D [ 0.4 m
The summary intentionally covers only for closed-end driven piles in sandy soils
n
X
cos ai Li
i1
123
Acta Geotechnica
123
i
n 1
Acta Geotechnica
123
Acta Geotechnica
Table 4 Rank index of CPT-based methods in predicting toe bearing capacities of the driven PHC piles
Method
Qfit/Qm
R1
R2
3.0
0.98
0.62
1.0
0.99
0.22
LCPC [8]
0.92
0.58
2.5
0.91
0.27
5.0
ICP-05 [15]
0.91
0.52
4.0
0.96
0.27
4.0
Philipponnat [25]
0.82
0.58
4.5
0.84
0.19
4.5
Schemrtmann [28]
0.90
0.37
5.5
0.94
0.30
5.5
0.66
0.62
4.0
0.69
0.13
4.5
0.84
0.27
7.0
0.88
0.36
7.0
UWA-05 [18]
0.56
0.31
8.0
0.57
0.20
6.5
Penpile [10]
0.31
0.52
10
7.5
0.31
0.10
10
5.5
Meyerhof [24]
1.65
0.21
10
9.5
1.40
0.72
10
9.0
Method
At P90
20 % accuracy of Qp/Qm
R3
Log-normal
Histogram
RI
G
Rank
R4
0.98
1.28
3.0
65.92
66.83
1.0
8.0
LCPC [8]
0.87
1.22
4.0
51.30
51.10
2.0
13.5
ICP-05 [15]
0.93
1.30
4.0
50.86
47.52
3.5
15.5
Philipponnat [25]
Schemrtmann [28]
0.82
0.90
1.12
1.40
6
3
1
7
3.5
5.0
48.75
44.28
54.21
44.30
4
5
3
5
3.5
5.0
16.0
21.0
4
5
0.68
0.86
4.5
18.98
17.50
8.0
21.0
0.85
1.40
6.0
33.22
35.00
6.0
26.0
7
8
UWA-05 [18]
0.55
0.83
6.0
12.40
12.50
9.0
29.5
Penpile [10]
0.30
0.45
10
9.5
0.16
0.00
10
10
10.0
32.5
Meyerhof [24]
1.43
2.41
10
9.5
29.92
18.80
7.0
35.0
10
lnxi lln 2
2r2ln
5 Analysis results
Figure 9 shows the Qp versus Qm plots and the regression
analysis results for the R1 criterion. The Aoki and De
Alencar [2] method is ranked first with a slope of Qfit/
Qm = 0.98 and r2 = 0.62. These values correspond to the
sub-ranks A = 1 and B = 1, respectively, and approach
R1 = 1. The LCPC [8] method has a slope of Qfit/
123
Acta Geotechnica
123
Acta Geotechnica
Fig. 11 Log-normal and histogram distributions of Qp/Qm for different CPT-based methods
123
Acta Geotechnica
6 Conclusions
Statistical analyses were conducted to investigate the
applicability of the ten CPT-based methods in calculating
the toe bearing capacities of the PHC piles driven into deep
sand in the Nakdong river deltaic area west of Busan City
in South Korea. A total of 82 CPTus and 190 PDA test
piles were used. The following conclusions were drawn.
The reliability of the PDA-based toe bearing capacity
was verified by comparing its toe bearing capacities with
those obtained from O-cell tests before the applicability of
the CPT-based methods was to be investigated. It was
found that the Qm,PDA values obtained from the PDA test at
EOID were slightly smaller than the Qm,O-cell values
determined from the O-cell tests, with the Qm,O-cell/Qm,PDA
ratios of 1.15. Thus, this finding indicated the reliability of
the PDA-based toe bearing capacity, and it could be used
as a reference value to evaluate the applicability of the
CPT-based methods.
To determine optimum toe bearing capacities and soil
profiles, three primary selection steps were performed: (1)
correction of CPTu penetration depth, (2) matching of soil
profiles of the CPTus and PDA test locations, and (3)
statistical screening to consider unknown factors, such as
the high variation in sandy soil layers that results in soft
soil portions between sandy soil layers, and the thickness
variation in soil layers within the influence zone. In all, 137
PDA test piles with 144154 toe bearing capacity data sets
were determined.
Acknowledgments The research presented in this paper was conducted with funding from the project entitled Development of
Control System for Disaster of Urban Underground Collapse at
Korea Institute of Civil Engineering and Building Technology. The
authors acknowledge the financial support from the institution.
References
1. Abu-Farsash MY, Titi HH (2004) Assessment of direct cone
penetration test methods for predicting the ultimate capacity of
friction driven piles. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng ASCE
130(GT9):935944
2. Aoki N, De Alencar D (1975) An approximate method to estimate the bearing capacity of piles. In: Proceedings of the 5th PanAmerican conference of soil mechanics and foundation engineering, vol 1, Buenos Aires, pp 367376
3. ASTM D4945-00 (2000) Standard test method for high-strain
dynamic testing of piles. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, USA
4. ASTM D3441-98 (1998) Standard test method mechanical cone
penetration tests of soil. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, USA
5. ASTM D1143M-07 (2007) Standard test methods for deep
foundations under static axial compressive load. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, USA
6. Bloomquist D, McVay M, Hu ZH (2007) Updating Florida of
transportations (FDOT) pile/shaft design procedures based on
CPT and DPT data, UF project 00005780
7. Bullock PJ (2013) O-Cell capacity determination for driven piles.
In: Proceedings of the 2013 Louisiana transportation conference,
February 1720, paper no. S-17
8. Bustamante M, Gianeselli L (1982) Pile bearing capacity prediction by means of static penetrometer CPT. In: Proceedings of
123
Acta Geotechnica
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
123
21. Long JH, Wysocker MH (1999) Accuracy of methods for predicting axial capacity of deep foundations. In: Proceedings of the
conference on analysis, design, construction, and testing of deep
foundation (OTRC 99), GSP no. 88, ASCE, Reston, VA,
pp 190195
22. Mayne PW (2007) Cone penetration testing. National Cooperative highway research program, NCHRP synthesis no. 386
23. Mascarucci Y, Miliziano S, Mandolini A (2014) A numerical
approach to estimate shaft friction of bored piles in sands. Acta
Geotech 9:547560
24. Meyerhof GG (1956) Penetration tests and bearing capacity of
cohesionless soils. J Soil Mech Found Eng Div ASCE
82(SM1):112
25. Philipponnat G (1980) Methode prtique de calcul dun pieuisole a
laide du penetrometre statique. Rev Fr Geotech 10:5564
26. Prince G, Wardle IF (1982) A comparison between cone penetration test results and the performance of small diameter
instrumented piles in stiff clay. In: Proceedings of the 2nd
European symposium on penetration testing, vol 2, Amsterdam,
pp 775780
27. Rausche F, Robinson B, Likins G (2004) On the prediction of
long term pile capacity from end-of-driving information.
Geotechnical special publication, no. 125. ASCE, pp 7795
28. Schmertmann JH (1978) Guidelines for cone penetration test,
performance and design. Report no. FHWA-TS-78-209, US
Department of Transportation, Washington, DC
29. Schneider JA, Xu X, Lehane MB (2008) Database Assessment of
CPT-based design methods for axial capacity of driven piles in
siliceous sands. J Geotech Eng ASCE 134(GT9):12271244
30. Singh VK, Chung SG (2013) Shear strength evaluation of lower
sand in Nakdong River delta. Mar Georesour Geotechnol
31(2):107124
31. Thiyyakkandi S, McVay M, Bloomquist D, Lai P (2014)
Experimental study, numerical modeling of and axial prediction
approach to base grouted drilled shafts in cohesionless soils. Acta
Geotech 9:439454
32. Zhou J, Xie Y, Zuo ZS, Luo MY, Tang XJ (1982) Prediction of
limit load of driven pile by CPT. In: Proceedings of the 2nd
European symposium on penetration testing, vol 2, Amsterdam,
pp 957961