Sie sind auf Seite 1von 71

GRLWEAP: Fundamentals, Models, Results

Frank Rausche, Ph.D., P.E., D.GE © 2014, Pile Dynamics, Inc.


1 © 2014 Pile Dynamics, Inc. GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015
Content
• Introduction, History, Objectives
• Static and Dynamic Formulas
• GRLWEAP Capabilities and Options
• Wave Equation Fundamentals
– Pile Model
– Hammer Models: Ext. Combustion, Diesel, Vibratory
– Driving System Model
– Soil: Static and Dynamic Resistance Models
– Numerical Treatment including Residual Stress Analysis
• Analysis Options and Bearing Graph Program Flow
• Summary
2 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015
History of Dynamic Pile Analysis
1800s Closed Form Solutions of the Wave Equation:
δ2u/δt2 = c2 (δ2u/δx2)
Wavespeed c=√E/ρ; Pile Impedance Z=EA/c
1850s: Dynamic Formula: R ≈ Energy/Set per Blow
1950s: Numerical Solutions - Smith’s Wave Equation
1960s Dynamic Testing, Case Method and CAPWAP
1976: WEAP, TTI
1980s: GRLWEAP
1986: Hammer Performance Study
1996, 2006: FHWA Driven Pile Manual updates

3 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


The Gates Formula
Ru = 7 (Wrh)½ log(10Blows/25 mm) - 550

Ru … Nominal Resistance (kN)


Wr … ram weight (kN)
h … actual stroke (m)
log … logarithm to base 10

4 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


The Hiley Formula
using Set-Rebound Measurements
Ru = ηWr h (Wr+ e2 WP)
(s + c/2) (Wr + WP)
Considers combined pile-soil elasticity effect
Usually with F.S. = 3; η = hammer efficiency.

Rebound: c
Set = s

5 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


Bearing Graphs from 2 Energy Formulas
Hammer D 19-42; Er = 59 kJ
4000
4000
[900]
3500 Ru = ηEr /(s + sl)
Ru -3000
kN η = 1/3; sl = 2.5mm
[kips]
Capacity in kN

2500

2000
2000
1500
[450]
Ru = 1.6 Ep ½ log(10Blows/25mm) – 120 kN
1000

0 500
0
0 0 25 505 75 10
100 125 15
150 175 20 200
Blows/25mm
Blows/0.25 m

Gates - w/ calculated Stroke ENR - Ru = Rd x 2

6 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


Wave Equation Objectives

Smith’s Basic Interest:

– Allow for realistic stress calculations


– Replace Unreliable Dynamic Formulas
– Use improved models
• elastic pile
• elasto-plastic static resistance
• viscous dynamic (damping) resistance
• detailed hammer, driving system representation

7 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


Wave Equation Models Fundamentals
• GRLWEAP uses a finite difference analysis
to solve the basic wave equation analysis to
calculate
– The displacement of any point along a slender, elastic
rod at any time during and after impact/dynamic
loading
– From the differences of displacements between
neighboring segments one obtains stresses and forces
– From the differences of displacements over time one
obtains velocities and accelerations

8 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


Hammer
GRLWEAP Fundamentals

• For a pile driving analysis, the “slender,


D.S.
elastic rod” consists of Hammer+Driving
System+Pile

• The soil is represented by resistance forces

Pile
acting on the pile and representing the
forces in the pile-soil interface

9 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


The Pile Model

• We divide the hammer-pile system into


segments
– of length ∆L ≤ 1 m (3.3 ft) ∆L
– with mass m = ρ A ∆L
– and stiffness k = E A / ∆L
• Where ρ, E and A are mass density, elastic
modulus and cross sectional area of the
segment.
• There are N = L / ∆L pile segments.

10 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


The Pile Model
Relationship between the uniform pile and the
lumped mass model properties:
m k = (ρ A ∆L)(EA/∆L) = A2Eρ = Z2 [kN s/m]2
2 = 2 2 ∆L
m/k = (ρ A ∆L)/(EA/∆L) = (ρ/E)∆L (∆L/c) [s]
Thus:
Z= (mk)1/2 (pile impedance) and
∆t = (m/k)1/2 (wave travel time) since
c= (E/ρ)1/2 (wave speed)
Note: the smaller ∆L, the higher the frequencies
that can be represented.
11 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015
We can model 3 hammer-pile systems

12 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


External Combustion Hammer Modeling
Cylinder and upper frame =
assembly top mass

Ram guides for assembly stiffness


Drop height

Ram: A, L for stiffness, mass

Hammer base =
assembly bottom mass

13 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


External Combustion Hammer Model
• Ram modeled like rod
• Stroke is an input (Energy/Ram Weight)
• Impact Velocity Calculated from Stroke with Hammer
Efficiency Reduction: vi = (2 g h η) ½
• Assembly also modeled because it may impact during
pile rebound
• Note approximation in data file:
Assembly mass = Total hammer mass – Ram mass

14 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


External Combustion Hammer Model

Ram segments

Assembly segments

Combined Ram-
Hammer Cushion
Helmet mass

15 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


External Combustion Hammer
Analysis Procedure
• Static equilibrium analysis
• Dynamic analysis starts when ram is within 1 ms of
impact.
• All ram segments then have velocity
VRAM = (2 g h η)1/2 – 0.001 g

g is the gravitational acceleration


h is the equivalent hammer stroke and η is the hammer efficiency
h = Hammer potential energy/ Ram weight

16 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


External Combustion Hammer
Analysis Procedure

• Dynamic analysis ends when


– Pile toe has rebounded to 80% of max dtoe
– Pile has penetrated more than 4 inches
– Pile toe has rebounded to 98% of max dtoe and energy
in pile is essentially dissipated

17 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


Diesel Hammers

Open Ended
Closed Ended

18 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


Diesel Hammer Components
Piston = Ram

Cylinder

Fuel Port (closed by piston)


Compressive stroke
pump
Combustion chamber

Impact block
Hammer Cushion; Helmet

19 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


Diesel Hammer Model
• Ram, Impact Block modeled like rods
• Compression, Expansion Pressures from Gas Law
• Combustion Pressure from rated energy –
measurements; different for Atomized and Liquid
Fuel injection
• Ram velocity reduced by efficiency just before
impact

20 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


Diesel Hammer Model

Ram segments ~1m long

Ram bottom/impact block


Impact Block mass
Hammer Cushion
Helmet mass

21 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


Diesel Hammer Combustion Pressure Model
• Compressive Stroke, hC
• Cylinder Area, ACH
• Final Chamber Volume, VCH
• Max. Pressure, pMAX

Ports
Precompression-
Combustion- hC
Expansion- Pressure

22 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


Liquid Injection Diesel Pressure model
Pressure Combustion Delay, ∆t

Combustion Duration, tD

Opens
Port
Expansion:
p=pMAX(VCH/V)1.25
∆t tD

Compression:
p=patm(Vin/V)1.35
pMAX

Time

23 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


Diesel Hammer Analysis Procedure
1 Assume stroke
2 Calculate static pile/soil displacements/forces
3 Calculate ram velocity at ports
4 Dynamic analysis begins
5 Two milliseconds before impact, efficiency reduction of ram velocity
6 Impact, combustion, expansion
7 Ram clears port; upstroke calculated
8 If stroke difference > stroke criterion go to 3

24 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


GRLWEAP hammer efficiencies
ηh = Ek/EP
•The hammer efficiency reduces the impact velocity of
the ram; it is based on experience
•Hammer efficiencies cover all losses which cannot be
calculated
•Diesel hammer energy loss due to pre-compression or
cushioning can be calculated and, therefore, is not
covered by hammer efficiency
•PDA Measurements provide indirect information about
energy transfer – to be discussed.

25 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


mR
For all impact hammers GRLWEAP
needs impact velocity
vi W h
Er = Wr he = mr g he R

he = Er / Wr he – equivalent stroke
he = h for single acting hammers
Epr = η Er Wr he (η = Hammer efficiency )

WP
Ek = Epr = ηh (½ mr vi2) (kinetic energy)

vi = 2g heηh
26 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015
Impact Hammer Efficiencies
ηh = Ek / Er
Hammers with internal energy monitor: 0.95
uncertainty of hammer alignment
All other hydraulic and diesel hammers: 0.80
uncertainty of fall height, alignment, friction
Traditional Single acting Air/Steam hammers: 0.67
fall height, preadmission, friction, alignment
Traditl. Double acting Air/Steam/Hydraulic: 0.50
preadmission, reduced pressure, friction, alignment

27 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


Vibratory
Hammers

28 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


Vibratory Hammer Model
• Line Force FL
• Bias Mass and m1
• Oscillator mass, m2
• Eccentric masses, me, m2 FV
radii, re
• Clamp
Vibratory Force:
FV = me [ω2resin ω t - a2(t)]

29 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


GRLWEAP Hammer data file

30 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


Driving System Models
The Driving Systems
Consists of
1. Helmet including inserts to
align hammer and pile
2. Optionally: Hammer Cushion
to protect hammer
3. For Concrete Piles: Softwood
Cushion

31 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


Driving System Model
Example of a diesel hammer
on a concrete piles

Hammer Cushion: Spring plus


Dashpot

Helmet + Inserts
Pile Cushion
Pile Top: Spring + Dashpot

32 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


Non-linear springs for cushions and splices
1. Stiffness, k = EA/t
2. Coefficient of Restitution, COR Compressive
3. Round-out deformation, δr , or Force
compressive slack
4. Tension slack, δs k k /COR2

δs δr Compressive
Deformation

33 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


The
After Smith
Soil Model

Soil outside of
Interface Soil: Elasto-
interface: Rigid
Plastic Springs and
Viscous Dashpots

34 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


Soil Resistance
• Soil resistance slows pile movement and causes pile
rebound
• A very slowly moving pile only encounters static
resistance
• A rapidly moving pile also encounters dynamic
resistance
• The static resistance to driving (SRD) differs from the
soil resistance under static loads

35 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


Soil Model Parameters
ki-1,Rui-1
Segment
Ji-1
i-1
RIGID SOIL
Pile-Soil Interface

ki,Rui
Segment Ji
i

Segment ki+1,Rui+1
i+1 Ji+1

36 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


Smith’s Soil Model
Total Soil Resistance
Rtotal = Rsi +Rdi

Fixed
Pile
Soil
Segment i

Displacement ui
Velocity vi
37 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015
The Static Soil Model
Static Resistance
Rui

Pile Displacement
ksi = Rui /qi
Pile
Segment i

Rui … ult. resistance


qi … quake
Displacement ui
Velocity vi
38 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015
Shaft Resistance and Quake
Static Resistance
-Rui Rui
qi

Recommended
qi Shaft Quakes:
2.5 mm or
0.1 inches
Pile Displacement
39 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015
The Static Toe Resistance and Quake
Static Toe Resistance
Rui
qi
For impact
hammers

For vibratory
hammers qi

Toe Displacement
40 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015
Recommended Toe Quakes, qtoe
Non-displacement piles Displacement piles
0.1” or 2.5 mm for D/120 for very dense or
all soil types hard soils
0.04” or 1 mm for D/60 for soils which are
Static Toe Res.
hard rock not very dense or v. hard
qtoe Ru,toe

D qtoe

Toe Displacement

41 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


Toe Quake Effect on Blow Count
Blow Count - Blows/m
S200 0 200 400 600 800
0

10

Depth of Pile Toe Penetration - m


20
qt = D/60
30
qt = D/120
40

50
610x12

100 m

95 m

60

70

80

90

100

Approximatelyy 50% Shaft Resistance


Total No. of Blows: ∞ (qt =D/60); 27,490 (qt=D/120)

42 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


The Dynamic Soil Model Standard

Rd = RsJs v
Smith damping
factor,
Js [s/m or s/ft]

Pile For RSA and


Segment i Vibratory Analysis
Rd = RuJsv v
Smith-viscous
Displacement ui damping factor,
Velocity vi Jsv [s/m or s/ft]

43 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


The effect of Loading Rate
1968 data from Coyle and Gibson

3.0

Clay
Relative Soil Resistance

2.5
Sand
2.0

1.5

1.0
0.00001 0.00100 0.10000 10.00000 1000.00000
Velocity of load application in ft/s

44 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


The effect of Loading Rate
1968 data from Coyle and Gibson and Case Institute of Technology Report

3.0

Clay
Relative Soil Resistance

2.5
Sand
2.0

1.5

1.0
0.00001 0.00100 0.10000 10.00000 1000.00000
Velocity of load application in ft/s

45 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


How fast do we load?
3.0
Relative Soil Resistance

Pile Driving
2.5 Rapid Load Test

CPT

CRP/Quick
2.0

1.5

1.0
0.00001 0.00100 0.10000 10.00000 1000.00000
Velocity of load application in ft/s

46 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


Recommended Smith damping factors
(Js or Jsv)
Shaft
Clay: 0.65 s/m or 0.20 s/ft
Sand: 0.16 s/m or 0.05 s/ft
Silts: use an intermediate value
Layered soils: use a weighted average
for bearing graph
Toe
All soils: 0.50 s/m or 0.15 s/ft

47 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


Shaft Damping on Blow Count
Blow Count - Blows/m
0 200 400 600 800
S200 0

10

Depth of Pile Toe Penetration - m


20
Js = 0.65 s/m
30
Js = 0.16 s/m
40

50
610x12

100 m

95 m

60

70

80

90

100

Approximatelyy 50% Shaft Resistance


Total No. of Blows: ∞ (Js=0.65 s/m); 27,490 (Js=0.16 s/m)

48 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


GRLWEAP’s Static Analysis Methods
Q
Icon Input Basic Analysis
ST Soil Type Effective Stress, Total Stress
SA SPT N-value Effective Stress
CPT R at cone tip and sleeve Schmertmann
API φ, Su Effective Stress, Total Stress

• GRLWEAP’s static analysis methods may be used


Rs for dynamic analysis preparation (resistance
distribution, estimate of capacity for driveability).
• For design, be sure to use a method based on
local experience.
Rt
49 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015
Use of Static Analysis Methods
• Should always be done for finding reasonable pile type
and length
• For driven piles static analysis is only a starting point,
since pile length is determined in the field (exceptions are
piles driven to depth, for example, because of high soil
setup)
• For LRFD when finding pile length by static analysis
method use resistance factor for selected capacity
verification method

50 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


Resistance Distribution
1. Simplest
I. Percentage Shaft Resistance

Penetration
(from static soil analysis)
II. Triangular or Rectangular or
Trapezoidal Distribution
Only reasonable for a simple Bearing
Graph where little is known about soil.

End Bearing = Total Capacity x


(100% - Percent Shaft Resistance)

51 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


Resistance Distribution
2. Still Simple:
ST Analysis based on some
knowledge of Soil Types

Penetration
Reasonable for a simple Bearing
Graph; for Driveability possible, but
more accurate analysis should be
done.

End Bearing = From Soil Type,


Pile Bottom Area
52 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015
Resistance Distribution
3. More Involved:
I. SA Input: SPT Blow Count, Friction
Angle or Unconfined Compressive
Strength

Penetration
II. API (offshore wave version)
Input: Friction Angle or Undrained
Shear Strength
III. CPT Input: Cone Record including Tip
Resistance and Sleeve Friction vs
Depth.

All are good for a Bearing Graph


May be OK for Driveability Analysis
Local experience may provide better values

53 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


Numerical Smith Soil Resistance - SI
Assume the following soil parameters for a segment:
Js = 0.65 s/m ; qS = 2.5 mm; Ru = 100 kN

Assume current displacement and velocity at one segment and one


time:
u = 1 mm; v = 3 m/s

then for Smith (Smith-viscous) Damping, at one segment and one


time:
Rs = 100(1.0/2.5) = 40 kN
Rt = 40 + 40(0.65)(3.0) = 40 + 78 kN
= 118 kN
Rt = 40+100(0.65)(3.0) = 40 + 195 kN
= 235 kN
54 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015
Numerical Treatment
• Predict displacements:
uni = uoi + voi ∆t
uni-1 Mass i-1 Ri-1
• Calculate spring compression:
ci = uni - uni-1 Fi, ci

• Calculate spring forces: uni Mass i Ri


Fi = ki ci

• Calculate resistance forces:


uni+1 Mass i+1 Ri+1
Ri = Rsi + Rdi

55 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


Force balance at a segment
Force from upper spring, Fi

Resistance force, Ri Weight, Wi


Mass i

Force from lower spring, Fi+1

Acceleration: ai = (Fi + Wi – Ri – Fi+1) / mi


Velocity, vi, and Displacement, ui, from Integration

56 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


TO REFINE CALCULATION:
• Smaller pile segments
• Smaller time increments
• Predictor-corrector numerics
(repeat calculation with new displacements for same
time step - “iterate” – not so effective)

57 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


Set or Blow Count Calculation
(a) Simplified: extrapolated toe displacement
Static soil Resistance

Max. Displacement

Calculated

Extrapolated
Ru

Pile
Displacement

Final Set Quake


58 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015
Blow Count Calculation
• Pile Set/Blow = umx,t – qavg
– qavg is a weighted average quake
– umx,t is the calculated maximum toe displacement

• Example: umx,t = 7.0 mm (0.27”)


qavg = 2.5 mm (0.10”)

Pile Set/Blow = 7.0 – 2.5


= 4.5 mm (0.17”)

Blow Count = 1000/4.5 = 222 Bl/m


= 12/.17 = 71 Bl/ft

59 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


(b) Blow Count Calculation by RSA
• Residual Stress Analysis is also called Multiple
Blow Analysis
• Analyzes several blows consecutively with initial
stresses, displacements from static state at end of
previous blow
• Yields residual stresses in pile at end of blow;
generally lower blow counts

60 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


Blow Count Calculation
(b) Residual Stress Analysis (RSA)

Set for 2 Blows

Convergence:
Consecutive Blows
have same
pile compression/sets

61 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


RSA Effect on Blow Count
Blow Count - Blows/m
S500 0 200 400 600 800
0

10

20

Depth of Pile Toe Penetration - m


Standard
30
RSA
40
1220x25

100 m

95 m

50

60

70

80

90

100
Total No. of Blows: 8907 (Standard); 6235 (RSA)

62 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


RSA: When and How
• RSA is the preferable method of analysis for long
slender piles (e.g., steel piles with Lp/D > 100 or
Monotube/Taper Tube piles)
• RSA calculates somewhat higher blow counts than
standard analysis (non-conservative)
• RSA calculates somewhat higher stresses than
standard analysis (conservative)

63 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


GRLWEAP Analysis Options
• Bearing Graph for capacity from observed blow count
– Hammer performance fixed
– One depth
– Assumed capacity values (10)
• Inspectors’ Chart for required blow count
– Hammer performance variable
– One depth
– One capacity
• Driveability Analysis for anticipated blow counts
– Hammer performance input for each depth analyzed
– Assumed depth values (up to 100)
– Several capacity values for each depth (up to 5)

64 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


Bearing Graph: Variable Capacity, One depth
SI-Units; Clay and Sand Example; D19-42; HP 12x53;

65 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


The Inspectors’ Chart:
GRL Engineers, Inc.
One Capacity and One Depth – Stroke Variable 21-Aug-2011
Demo 3-Inspector's Chart - D16-32 GRLWEAP Version 2010
250 250
DELMAG D 16-32
Capacity 1600.0 kN
Compressive Stress (MPa)

Ram Weight 15.66 kN


200 200

Tension Stress (MPa)


Efficiency 0.800
Pres s ure 9825 (99%) kPa
Helm et Weight 8.45 kN
150 150 Ham m er Cus hion 10535 kN/m m
COR of H.C. 0.800
Skin Quake 2.500 mm
Toe Quake 2.500 mm
100 100
Skin Dam ping 0.259 s ec/m
Toe Dam ping 0.500 s ec/m
Pile Length 18.28 m
50 50 Pile Penetration 16.76 m
Pile Top Area 140.64 cm 2

Skin Friction
0 0
Pile Model Dis tribution

3.50

3.10
Stroke (m)

2.70

2.30

1.90

1.50
40 80 120 160 200 240 280
Res . Shaft = 30 %
Blow Count (blows /.25m ) (Proportional)

66 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


Formulas and Wave Equation: D19-42; HP 12x53; Clay, Sand

4000

3500

3000
Capacity in kN

2500

2000

1500

1000

500

0
0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200
Blows/0.25 m

Gates ENR GRLWEAP-Clay GRLWEAP-Sand

The Wave Equation gives lower capacity results, because the


dynamic formulas include an estimate of soil setup (EOD based)
67 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015
Wave Equation:
Differences with dynamic formulas

• The wave equation models individual system


components and therefore requires more detailed input.
• The wave equation analysis works with ultimate
capacities. Factors of safety have to be applied.
• Capacities derived from blow count pertain to time of
testing. Setup/relaxation factors have to be considered.

68 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


When Should we do the Analysis?
• Before pile driving begins
– Equipment selection for safe and efficient installation
– Preliminary driving criterion
• After initial pile tests have been done
– Refined Wave Equation analysis for improved driving
criterion
– For different driving systems

69 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


Summary
• The wave equation analysis simulates what happens in
the pile when it is struck by a heavy hammer input.
• It calculates a relationship between capacity and blow
count, or blow count vs. depth.
• The analysis model represents hammer (3 types), driving
system (cushions, helmet), pile (concrete, steel, timber)
and soil (at the pile-soil interface)
• GRLWEAP provides a variety of input help features
(hammer and driving system data, static formulas among
others).

70 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015


Thank you for your
attention!

QUESTIONS?

71 GRLWEAP Webinar Fundamentals - 2015

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen