by
Lee Leon Lowery, Jr.
Associate Research Engineer
T. J. Hirsch
Research Engineer
Thomas C. Edwards
Assistant Research Engineer
Harry M. Coyle
Associate Research Engineer
Charles H. Samson, Jr.
Research Engineer
Sponsored by
The Texas Highway Department
January 1969
ii
Acknowledgments
Since this report is intended to summarize the research effort ~nee
gained by the authors over a sevenyear period, it is impossible to r the
persons, companies, and agencies without whose cooperation and support no ""state
of the art" in the analysis of piling by the wave equation would exist.
The greatest debt of gratitude is due Mr. E. A. L. Smith, Chief Mechanical Engi
neer of Raymond International (now retired), who not only first proposed the method
of analysis but also· maintained a continuing interest throughout the work and con
tributed significantly to the accomplishments of the research. His advice and guid
ance, based on his extensive field experience, and his intimate knowledge of the wave
equation have proven invaluable throughout all phases of the research.
The authors gratefully acknowledge the assistance and support of Farland C.
Bundy and Wayne Henneberger of the Bridge Division of the Texas Highway De
partment, who worked closely with the authors in accomplishing several of the proj ·
eels. A debt of gratitude is due the Bass Bros. Concrete Company of Victoria. Ross
Anglin and Son, General Contractors, and the California Company of New Orleans
for their unselfish cooperation with all phases of the field work. It was indeed
fortunate to have these foresighted and progressive businessmen as contractors on
the various jobs. They willingly invested considerable amounts of their own time
and effort to the accomplishment of the research projects.
Sincere thanks and our personal appreciation are extended to the Texas Highway
Department and the U. S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Adminis
tration, Bureau of Public Roads, whose sponsorship made all the research and studies
leading to this report a reality.
Several graduate students and research assistants contributed significantly to
the accomplishment of this work. They were Tom P. Airhart, Gary N. Reeves, Paul
C. Chan, Carl F. Raba, Gary Gibson, I. H. Sulaiman, James R. Finley, M. T. AlLayla,
and John Miller.
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF FIGURES _________________________________  _________ ,.
LIST OF FIGURES
n~re &~
2.I Method of Representing Pile for Purpose of Calculation (After Smith)_ _____________________________ 2
2.2 Load Deformation Relationships for Internal Springs ___________________________  _ __ __________ 3
2.3 L~ad Deformation Characteristics Assumed for Soil Spring M  _______________________ 3
3.I Typical Force vs Time Curve for a Diesel Hammer 6
3.2 Steam HaJnmer _______________________________ . ___  _______  _________ II
3.3 Diesel Hammer    _______________ ll
4.I Stress Strain Curve for a Cushion Block___________  ___________________ 13
4.2 Dynamic and Static Stress Strain Curves for a Fir Cushion ______________________ 13
4.3 Cushion Test Stand____________________________  _____________ 14
4.4 Dynamic Stress Strain Curve for an Oak Cushion __________________________________________________ I4
4.5 Dynamic Stress Strain Curve for a Micarta Cushion  ______  I5
4.6 Stress vs Strain for Garlock Asbestos Cushion ______ 15
5.1 Theoretical vs Experimental Solution: __________  16
5.2 Theoretical vs Experimental Solution  16
5.3 Theoretical vs Experimental Solution · I6
5.4 Theoretical vs Experimental Solution____________  _____________________________________________ I6
5.5 Comparison of Experimental and Theoretical Solutions for Stresses __________________________________ I7
6.1 Model Used by Smith to Describe Soil Resistance on Pile ________________________ I7
6.2 Load Deformation Characteristics of SoiL _______   I8
6.3 Load Deformation Properties of Ottawa Sand Determined by Triaxial Tests
(Specimens Nominally 3 in. in Diameter by 6.5 in. High) _____ . __ I8
6.4 Increase in Strength vs Rate of LoadingOttawa Sand__________________________________ _ __ __ ______ 1<)
6.5 "J" \'S "V" for Ottawa Sand ___________________ _ 19
6.6 "Set up" or Recovery of Strength After Driving in Cohesive Soil (After Reference 6. 7) ________________ 20
6.7 Pore Pressure Measurements in Clay Stratum50 ft Depth _______________________ _:_ ______  20
7.1 Ultimate Driving Resistance vs Blows per Inrh for an Exam1.J!e Problem~22
7.2 Comparison of WaYe Equation PmlirtPd Soil Hesi~tance to Soil Resistance Determined
by Load Test for Piles DriYen in Sands (Data from Table 7.1) 22
7.3 Comparison of Wave Equation Predicted Soil Resistance to Soil Resistance Determined
by Load Tests for Piles Driven in Clay (Data from Table 7.2 )_ _____________________________________ 23
7.4 Comparison of Wave Equation Predicted Soil nesistance to Soil Resistance Determined
by Load Tests for Piles Driven in Both Sand and Clay 24
v
.. ~ Summan <>f Pile;: Tt:>"tt•d 1\J Failure in Sands 1 Fn>m Heference 7.21 __________  2t
:.6 \Yaw Equation ntimate l~e,;i,;tance vs Te:!'t Load Failure tFrom Reference 7.2) ______________________ 25
8.1 Maximum Tt>nsile Strt>ss Alonp; a Pile ___________________________  25
8.2 Maximum Compressive Stress Along a Pile _____  26
8.3 Stress in Pile Heao YS Timt> for Test Pile ______  26
8.4 Stress at l\Iidleng:th of Pile vs Time for Test Pile 27
8.5 IdeJlized Stress \\'ave Produc2d Whe:1 Ram Strikes Cushion at Head of Concrete Pile. __________________ 29
8.6 Reflection of Stre;;s "\\"ave at Point of a Long Pile _____ :_ __________________________________________ 30
8. 7 Reflection of Stress Wave at Point of a Short Pile __________ ·30
8.8 Effect of Ratio of Stress Wave Length on Maximum Tensile Stress for Pile with Point free ____________ 31
9.1 Effect of Cushion Stiffness. Ram Weight, and Driving Energy on Stresses________________ __ _______ 33
9.2 Effect of Cushion Stiffness, Ram Weight, ano Driving Energy on Permanent Set_ _______________________ 34
9.3 Computer Analysis of Pile Hammer Effectiveness in Overcoming Soil Resistance,
Ru, When Driving a Pile llnder Varying Conditions 35
9.4 Evaluation of Vulcan 020 Hammer (60,000 ftlb) for Driving a Pile to Develop Ultimate
Capacity of 2000 Tons___________________________ _ 35
9.5 Blows/In. vs R U IT otall for Arkansas Load Test Pile _4. _ _______ _ __  ______________ 35
A.l Long Slender Elastic Pile _ _: ____________________ 38
A.2 Ram, Cushion, Pile ____________ 39
B.l Case I.Ram, Capblock. and Pile Cap  ________________ 43
B.2 Case II.Ram, Capblock, Pile Cap, and Cushion __  ________________________________________ _44
B.3 Case III.Ram, AmiL Capblock, and Pile Cap _____________ 44
B.4 Definition of Coefficient of Restitution ____________________ 46
B.S Pile Idealization   ____________________ 47
B.6 Example Problem _____________________________   ___ ___ __ _ _______ 51
B.7 Normal Output (Option 1.5=1"1 for Prob. I _____ 53
B.8 Effect of \' arying Cushion Stiffness ____________  __   ________________ 54
B.9 Summary Output for HU (Total) vs Blo1rs 'ln. (Option ll=li for Prob. land 2 ____________________ 54
B.lO Normal Output for Sin~le Hl' (Total I I Option ll =2) for Pro h. 3  ____ ______ _______ 55
B.ll Detailed Output for Single RU !Total) (Option 1.5=2) for Prob. 4 __________________________________ 55
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
3.1 Summary of Hammt>r Properties in Operating Characteristics 8
3.2 Effect of Cushion Stiffness on ENTIIRU _________  9
3.3 Effect of Cushion Stiffness on FMA X _________ 9
3.4 Effect of Cushion Stiffness on LIMSET    _  _____ 9
3.5 Effect of Removing Load Cell on ENTHHl'. Lii\'ISET, and Permanent Set of Pile ______________________ lO
3.6 Effect of Coefficient of Ht>stitution on ENTHHU (Maximum Point Displacement) ____________________ 10
3.7 Effect of Coefficient of Restitution on ENTHHU_  10
3.8 Effect of Breaking Ham Into Segments When Ham Strikes a Cushion or Capblock ____________________ ll
3.9 Effect of Breaking Ram Into Segments When Ram Strikes a Steel AnviL ___________________________ l2
4.1 Typical Se('ant Moduli of Elasticity (E) and Coefficients of Restitution (e)
of Various Pile Cushioning Materials 14 ·'·
7.1 _Errors Cause db y Assummg. J(. pomtj = 01 . amIJ'''d)
(si e = ·}(point)
  
3
for SandSupported Piles Only ___________________     22
7.2
~
Errors Ca use db y 1~ssunnng
. ]pomt
( . ,I = 03
. ant lJ'('l)
rH e
](point)
= 3·
for Clay (for ClaySupported Piles Only L           ___  '23
••":,_
7.3 Errors Caused by Assuming a Combined J (point l = 0.1 for Sand and J I point) = 0.3
for Clay Psing Equation 7.1 (for Piles SupportPrl IJy Roth Sand and Clay) ___________________________ 24
8.1 Variation of DriYing Stress With Ham Weight and Velocity_ 28
8.2 Variation of Dri1ing Stress With Ham \VPi~ht and Bam Enerp ____________________________________ 29 '.
B.l Drop Hammers and Stt'alll Hamniers _____   _________________________ 45
B.2 Diesel Hammers ____   · ____     46
yj
\ .,
,_
·!_ir
:; ':}
Pile Driving Analysis State of the Art
CHAPTER I
Introduction
The tremendous increase in the use of piles in both ~ation of the influence of various parameters on the
landbasecl and offshore foundation structures and the ap behavior of piles during driving and to present the re
pearance of new pile driving methods have created ~reat sults in the form of charts, diagrams or tables for direct
engineering interest in finding more reliable methods application by office design engineers.
for the analysis and design of pile3. Ever since
Isaac published his paper, "Reinforced Concrete Pile . _4. To p~esent r~commendations concerning good
Formula," in 1931.1. 1 * it has been recognized that the dnvmg practices whtch would prevent crackincr and
behavior of piling during driving does not follow the spalling of prestressed concrete piles during driving.
simple Newtonian impact as assumed by many simplified
5. To determine the dynamic loaddeformation
pile driving formulas, but rather is governed by the one
properties of various pile cushion materials which had
dimensional wave equation. Unfortunately, an exact tacitly been assumed linear.
mathematical solution to the wave equation was not
possible for most practical pile driving problems. 6. To determine tl.e dvnamic loaddt>formation
1 properties of soils required ' by the wave equation
In 1950, E. A. L. Smith ·~ developed a tractable analysis.
solution to the wave equation which could be used to
solve extremely complex pile drh·ing problems. The 7. To generalize Smith's original method of analy
solution was based on a discrete element idealization of sis and to develop the full potential of the solution by
the actual hammerpilesoil system coupled with the use using· the most recent and accurate parameter values
of a high speed digital computer. In a paper published determined experimentally.
in 1960, 1.a he dealt exclusi,·ely with the application of
wave theory to the investigation of the dynamic behavior 8. To illustrate the significance of the parameters
of piling durin~ dri,·in~. From that time to the present involved, such as the stiffness aml coeffieiPnt of restitu
the authors ha,·e en;ra~ed in research dealing with wave tion of the cushion, ram velocity, material damping in
Pquation analysis. The major objectives of these studies the pile, etc., and to detPrmine the quantitati,·e effect
were as follows: of these parameters where pos!'ible.
l. To develop a computer program ba~ed upon a 9. To study and if possible evaluate the actual
procedure developed by Smith to provide the engitwer energy output for various pile driving hammPrs, the
with a mathematical tool with which to imestigate the magnitudes of which \\'ere subject to much disagree
ment.
behavior of a pile during driving.
2. To conduct field tests to obtain experimental 10. To develop the computer solution for the wave
data with which to correlate the theoretical solution. equation so that it may be used to estimate the resistance
to penetration of piling at the time of driving from the
3. To make an orderly theoretical computer investi driving records.
*Numerical superscripts refer to corresponding items in 11. To develop a comprehensiYe users manual for
the References. the final computer program to enable its use by others.
CHAPTER II
PAGE ONE
!'trictly empirical. l\lany of the formulas proposed at
tempt to account for ,·arious impact losses through the
cushion, caphlock, pile, and soil.
When restricted to a particular soil. pile, and drh·
ino condition for "hich con·elation factors were derived,
d)~amic formulas are often able to predict ultimate
bearing capacities which a~ree with observed test loads.
However, since several hundred pile driving formulas
have· been proposed there is usually the problem of
choosing an appropriate or suitable one. 2 · 3 Als.o dis
tressing is the fact that in many cases no dynamic for
mula yields acceptable results; for exa~1ple, long heavy
piles generally show much greater ultimate loads than
predicted by pile driving equations. 2 ·;; This has beco.me
increasingly significant since prestressed concrete piles
172 ft lona and 54 in. in diameter have been successfully
driv~n, 2 ·G ~nd more and more larf!e diameter steel piles SIDE
several hundred feet "lonf! are being used in offshore FRICTIONAL
platforms. Numerous field tests have shown that the RESISTANCE
use of pile drivin~ formulas may well lead to a foun
dation design ranging from wasteful to dangerous. 2 ·~
Driving stresses are also of major importance in
the desian of piles, yet compressive stresses are com
monly d~termined simply by dividing the ultimate driv
in" resistance by the crosssectional area of the pile.~· 7 · 2 ·~
Ft.:"rthermore, conventional pile driYing analyses are un
able to calculate tensile stre!'ses. which are of. the utmost ACTUAL AS REPRESENTED
importance in the driving of precast or prestressed con (a) (b)
crete piles. This method of stress analysis completely
overlooks the true nature of the problem and computed
stresses almost never agree with experinie:Jtal val Figure 2.1. !If ethod of representing pile for purpose of
ues.~·•~.n Tensile failures of piles have been noted analysis (after Smith).
on numerous occasions~·•~· 1 " ~ 11 and the absence of a
reliable method of stress analysis has proven to be a
serious problem.
based on clividinrr the distributed mass of the pile into
Although most en~ineers today realize that pile a number of ~oneentrated weif!hts W ( 1) through
driYing formulas have serious limitations and cannot be W ( p), which are connected by weightless springs K ( 1)
depended upon to give accurate results, they are still throurrh K ( p] l, with the addition of soil resistance
used for lack of an adequate substitute. For further actin; on tl;e masses, as illustrated in Figure 2.1 (b).
discussion of pile formulas in f!eneral, the reader is Time is also divided into small increments.
referred to the work of Chellis. 2 "
Smith's proposed solution imolved the idealization
Isaacs 2 · 1 is thou~ht to ha,·e first pointed out the of the actual continuous pile shown in Figure 2.1 (a),
occurrence of wa\·e action in piling durin~ drivin~. He as a series of wei~hts and ~pring:s as shown in Figure
proposed a solution to the wa,·e equation assuming that 2.1 (b l. For the idealized system he set up a series of
the point of the pile was fixed and that side resistance equations of motion in the form of finite difference equa
was absent. Thest> assumptions \l"t>re so restrictive that tions which 11·ere easily solved using highspeed digital
the solution 11 as probably never used in practice. Cum
computers. Smith extended his original method of analy
mings~·1" in an earlier \\riling noted that although the
sis to include various nonlineal parameters such as elasto·
pile driving formulas were based on numerous erroneous
plastic soil resistance including velocity clamping and
assumptions and that only the 11·aye equation could be
others.
expected to yield accurate re>:ults for all clriYing con
ditions, he al><o pointt>d out that such >:olutions inYolved FiO"ure 2.1 illustrates the irlealization nf the pile
"long and compli('att>d matllf'mat i('al expn•,.;,.;ions so svstem "suggestt>d bv ~mi:h. In !lf'liNnl. the system is
that their u~e for practical problems wou'd ill\·olve considered· to be c;m1posecl of (s~e Figure 2.f(a)):
laborous, numerical calculations." In fact, with. the
adYent of a multitude of diffen·nt type drivin~J hammcn: 1. A ram. to \\hich an initial velo~ity is imparted
and driving conditions. an exact solution to the 11aYe hy the pilt• driver;
equation was not kno\m.
2. A cap block (cushioning material);
3. A pile cap;
2.2 Smith's Numerical Solution of the
lflat•e Equation 4. A cushion block (cushioning material) ;
5. A pile; and
In 1950, Smith~~ proposed a more realistic solution
to the problem of longitudinal impact. This solution is 6. The supporting medium, or soil.
PAGE TWO
~·~r:;:
> : : .'"' ~
In Figure 2.1 ( b ·1 are shtnm the idealizations for the
Yarious. romponent~ of the artual pilt>. The ram. rap· Rtm)
blork, pile cap, cushion block, and pile are pictured as LOAD
appropriate discrete weights and springs. The frictional .
soil resistance on the side of the pile is represented by
a series of side springs; the point resistance is accounted
for by a single spring at the point of the pile. The char.
acteristics of these various components will he discussed
1
in greater detail later in this report.
llm) DEFORMATION
Actual situations may deviate from that illustrated ~ D (m)
in Figure 2.1. For exan;ple, a cushion block may not
be used or an anvil may be placed between the ram and
caphlock. However, such cases are readily accommo
dated.
Tm)
Internal Springs. The ram. capblock. pile cap. and
cushion block rriaY in £eneral he considered to consist
of "internal" spri~gs, ;!though in the representation of
Figure 2.1 (b) the ram and the pile cap are assumed
rigid {a reasonable assumption for many practical
cases). Figure 2.3. Loaddeformation characteristics assumed
Figures 2.2{a) and 2.2(b) suggest different possi
for soil spring m.
bilities for representing the loaddeformation character
istics of the internal springs. In Figure 2.2 (a), the
·material is considered to experience no internal damping. tion characteristics assumed for the soil in Smith's pro
In Figure 2.2 !b) the material is assumed to have inter cedure, exclusive of damping effects. The path OABC
nal damping according to the linear relationship shown. DEFG represents loading and unloading in side friction.
For the point, only compressive loading maY take place
External Springs. The resistance to dynamic load and the loading and unloading path would be along
ing afforded by the soil in shear along the outer surface OABCF.
of the pile and in hearing at the point of the pile is
extremely complex. Figure 2.3 shows the loaddeforma It is seen that the characteristics of Figure 2.3 are
defined essentially by the quantities "Q''' and "Ru."
"Q" is termed the soil quake and represents the maxi
mum deformation which maY occur elastically. "Ru" is
the ultimate ground resistance, or the load at which the
soil spring behaves purely plastically.
LOAD
A loaddeformation diagram or the tYpe in Figure
2.3 may be established separately for each spring. Thus,
K'(m) equals Ru(m) divider! by Q(m), where K'!m)
is the spring constant (during elastic deformation) tor
external spring m.
I~
l (
. ] gilt
m,t 1 Tv(;;) (2.7)
functional clesignation;
(b) INTERNAL DAMPING PRESENT m eiPment number;
number of time interval:
ilt · size of time interval (sec);
Figure 2.2. Loaddeformation relationships for internal C(m,t) comprf'ssion of internal spring m m
springs. time interval t (in.);
PAGE THREE
di;;placement of element m in time The computations proceed as follows:
inteiTal t tin.);
I. The initial velocity of the ram is determined
J)' pn,ll plastic disp]acement of external soil spring from the properties of the pile driver. Other time
m in time inten·al t lin. I ; dependent quantities are initialized at zero or to satisfy
F(m,tJ static equilibrium conditions.
force in internal spring m in time
interval Lllb I ; 2. Displacements D ( m,I) are calculated by Equa
g acceleration due to graYity (ftlsec~); tion ( 2.3). It is to be noted that V (1,0) is the initial
velocity of the ram.
J(m) damping constant of soil at element m 3. Compressions C(m,1) are calculated by Equa
(sec/ft); tion (2.4).
K(m) spring constant associated with internal 4. Internal spring forces F(m,I) are calculated by
spring m (lb/in.) ; Equation (2.5) or Equation (2.8) as appropriate.
!Opring comtant as!'ociated \rith external 5. External spring forces R (m,1) are calculated
soil spring m I lb/in. I ; by Equation ( 2.6).
Rtm,t) force exerted by external spring m on 6. Velocities V (m,1) are calculated by Equation
element m in time interval t (lb) ; (2.7).
velocity of element m in time interval 7. The cycle is repeated for successive time inter
(ft I sec) ; and vals.
In Equation (2.6), the plastic deformation D' (m,t)
W ( m) = weight of element m (lb).
for a given external spring follows Figure (2.3) and
This notation differs sli;rhtly from that used by may be determined by special routines. For example,
Smith. Also, Smith restricts tl:e soil damping constant when D ( m,t) is less than Q ( m), D' (m,t) is zero; when
J to two values, one for the point of the pile in hearing Dtm,t) is greater than Q(m) along line AB (see Figure
and one for the side of the pile in friction. While the 2.3), D'(m,t) is equal to D(m,t)  Qfml.
present knowledge of damping behavior of soils perhaps
does not justify greater refinement, it is reasonable to Smith notes. that Equation ( 2.6) produces no damp
use this notation as a function of m for the sake of ing when D (m,t)  JJ' (m,t) becomes zero. He sug
generality. gests an alternate equation to be used after D(m,t) first
becomes equal to Qtm):
The use of a spring constant K l 111) implies a load.
deformation behavior of the sort shown in Figure 2.2 I a). R(m,t) = [D(m,t)  D'tm.t)] K'(m) +
For this situation, KIm) is the slope of the straight line. J fm) K' (m) Q(m) V tm,tll (2.9)
Smith de,·elops special n·latinnships to account for in·
ternal damping in the capblock and the cushion block. Care must be used to satisfy conditions at the head
He obtains instead of Equation 2.5 the following equa· and point of the pile. Consider Equation ( 2.5). When
tion: m = p, where p is number of the last element of the
pile, K (p) must be set equal to zero since there is no
~l:n) ]'
F ( p,t l force (see Figure l.Il. Beneath the point of the
Ktm) pile, the soil spring must be prevented from exerting
F(m,t)
[e(miF Ctm,lJ  tension on the pile point. In applying Equation (2.7)
J
to the ram (m =I), one should set F(O,t) equal to.zero.
For the idealization of Figure 2.1, it is apparent
l K(ml C(m,l)m,, (2.8) that the spring associated with K ( 2) represents both the
cushion block and the top element of the pile. Its spring
rate may be obtained by the following equation:
where
1 _ I + 1
e(m) coefficient of restitution of internal spring K ( 2)  ""K;(::2::)cnshion (2.10)
K(2) plle
m; and
A more complete discus!"ion of digital computer
Cim,t"lmnx = tempurar~· lllaXIIlllllll \·alue ofCtnl.!).
programming details and recommended ndue>< for vari
With reference to Figure 2.1. Equation t2.U) \rould lw ous physical quantities are given in the Appendices.
applicable in the calculation of the forces in intt·rnal From tlw point of Yie\1' of hasic mechanics. the wave
springs m = I and m = 2. The loaddefonnatimi t~quation solution is a method of analysis well founded
relationship characterized by Equation ( 2.1:, is illustrat('d physically and mathematically.
by the path OABCDEO in Figure 2.2 (b). For a pile
cap or a cushion block, no lensilt~ fon~t·s can exist: con·
sequently, only this part of the din;rram applies. lnt•·r·
2.3 Critical Time lntenJal
millen! unloadingloading i>< typified hy the path ABC. The accuracy of the discreteelement solution is also
established by control of the quantity Ctm,t), 11 , " in related to the size of the time increment ~t. Heising, 2 ·1 3
Equation f2.8l. The slopes of lines AB, BC. and J)E in his di!'cw•sion of thr> equation of motion for free
depend upon the coefficient of restitution e(m). longitudinal 'ihrations in a continuous elastic bar, points
PAGE FOUR
nut that the disnPteel!'nlt'nt snlut inn i~ an ex a!'! solution the system. Stricti~· speaking. these initial values should ~
of the partial dlffrrential equation '' hrn he tho~e in effect a~ a re~ult of the previous blow. How
.lL e\·er, not only would it be awkward to "keep books" on
~t = ===
\! E p
the pile throughout the driving so as to identify the
initial conditions for succe::sive blows. hut it is highly
questionable that this refinement is justified in light of
where ~L is the segment length. Smith ::.~ draws a simi other uncertainties which exist.
lar conclusion and has expressed the critical time inter
val as follows: A relatively simple scheme has been dewloped as
 a n1eans of getting the gravity effect into the compu
1
~t
19.648 v""·m+ll
1\:(m)
(2.lla)
tations.
v~
pressed may now he expressed
C(m,O) = F(m,O) /K(m) (2.16)
This means that if the pile is di,ided into only a few
segments, the accuracy of the solution will be more sensi By working upward from the point, one finds displace
tive to the choice of ~t than if it is divided into many ments from
segments. For practical problems, a choice of ~~ equ~l D(p,O) = R(p,O) !K' (p) (2.17)
to about onehalf the "critical" value appears suitable
since inelastic springs and materials of different densi D(m,O) = D(m + 1,0) + C(m,O) (m#p) (2.18)
ties and elastic moduli are usually imolved.
For the inclusion of gravity. Efpwtion !2.1) should be
modified as follows:
2.4 Effect of Gravity
\'!nul =\'(nUl) + [F(ml,t)  F(m,t)
The procedure as originall~· presenter! by Smith
gt.t
did not account for the static weight of the piiP. In  Rim,t) + W(m)] ~ (2.19).
other words. at t = 0 all springs. both intt>rnal and · W(mJ
external, exert zero force. Stated symbolically, In order that thP initial conditions of the external
F(m,O) = R tm,O) = 0 springs hP compatible with the assumed initial forces
R(m,O) aJl(l initial displacements D(m,Ol, plastic dis
If the effect of 1!ravity is to be included. these foreps placements D'(m,O) should be set equal to D(m,O) 
must be given initial values to produce equilibrium of l\(m,O) ;K' (m).
PAGE FIVE
CHAPTER III
While this explosive force works on the ram to Figure 3.1. Typical force vs time curve for a diesel
restore its potential energy Wn x h, the initially large hammer.
PAGE SIX
The total amount of explo,he eiWr;!y E,., 1.. 1nn is This can be reduced in terms of Equation ( :3.7) by
dependent upon the amount of diesel fuel injected, com using an equi,·alent stroke h,, which will give the same
pression pressure, and temperature: and therefore, ·may . energy output as Equation (3.10).
\·ary somewhat.
Thus:
rnfortunateJy. thE' Wa\"1' equation must be USE'd in
Pach case to dPtermine the exact magnitude of E, since (3.11)
it not only depends on the hammer characteristics, but Setting Equations (3.10) and (3.11) equal yields
also on the characteristics of the ami!. helmet. cushion,
pile. and soil resistnnn•. Howeyer. Yalut>s of E,. deter·
mined by the W<l\·e equation for sneral typical pile prob
lems indicates that it is usually small in proportion to the
Wn h + (
_P_ Wn
Prntrd ) h
w"]
Substituting Equations ( 3.3 J and f 3.+ J into Equation
(3.1) gives:
Etotal =E.
so that:
+ E,. = Wn 1h dJ + Wn d (3.5) he h [+p Prat .. <l
X
Wn
(3.12)
PAGE SEVEN
where \'\'n ram Wl'ight 3.3 Significance of Driving Accessories
h,. equh·alt'nt ram stroke
In 1965 the Michigan State II ighway Commission
completed an extensive research program designed to
h[1 + _P__ Prnt.<1
X obtain a better understanding of the complex problem
of pile driving. Though a number of specific objectives
were given, one was of primary importance. As noted
h actual or physical ram stroke by ijousel,u "Hammer energy actually delivered to the
pile, as compared with the manufacturer's rated energy,
p operatin~ steam pressure was the focal point of a major portion of this investi
Pratrcl maximum steam pressure recommended gation of piledriving hammers." In other words, they
by manufacturer. hoped to determine the energy delivered to the pile and
to compare these values with the manufacturer's ratings.
weight of hammer housing
e efficiency of doubleactin~ steam ham The energy transmitted to the pile was termed
mers, approximately 85 r;,;, by this "ENTIIRU" by the investigators and was determined
method. by the summation
E Wit h (e) Where F, the average force on the top of the pile during
a short interval of time, was measured hy a specially
Vn V 2g h (e) designed load cell, and ~S, the incremental movement
where Wn ram weight of the head of the pile during this time interval, was
found using displacement tran~dueers and ior reduced
h ram stroke
from accelerometer data. It should be pointed out that
e efficiency of singleacting steam ham· ENTHRU is not the total energy output of the hammer
mers, normally recommended around blow, but only a measure of that portion c>f the energy
75 'l to 85 ~', . In a study of the Michi delivered below the loadcell assembly.
gan data, a figure of 60 t,lr was found.
The writers feel the 60 j,;, figure is un· Many variables influence the value of ENTHRlT.
usually low and would not recommend As was noted in the Michigan report: "Hammer type and
it as a typical value. operating conditions; pile type, mass, rigidity, and
length; and the type and condition of rap blocks were
A summary of the properties and operating character· all factors that affect ENTHHli. but when. how. and
istics of various hammers is given in Table 3.1. how much could not be ascertained with any deg~ee of
Hammer Hammer Maximum Ram Hammer Anvil Maxi d Rated Maximum Cap
Manu Type Rated Weight Housing Weight mum or (ft) Steam Explosive Block
facturer Energy (!b) Weight (!b) Equiva Pres Pressure Normally
(ft !b) (!b) lent sure (!b) Specified
Stroke (psi)
(ft)
German .it··
_,..
Oak
 ~{
PAGE EIGHT ... ~~~;
.~\·
. .~J~~;~
!'ertainty." HoweYer. the wa,·e equation can account TABLE 3.3. EFFECT OF CUSHION STIFFNESS ON
for each of these factors so that their effects can be THE MAXIMUM FORCE MEASURED AT THE LOAD
determined. CELL (FMAX)
The maximum displacement of the head of the pile FMAX (kip)
was also reported and was designated LI:\ISET. Oscillo Ham Cushion Stiffness (kip/in.)
graphic records of force Ys time measured in the load Velocity RUT
(ft/sec) (kip) 540 1080 2700 27,000
cell were also reported. Since force was measured only
at the load cell, the single maximum observed values for 30 132 185 261 779
each case was called Fl\1AX. 8 90 137 185 261 779
150 148 186 261 779
The wave equation can be used to determine (amonl): 30 198 278 391 1,169
other quantities) the displacement D (m,t) of mass "m;' 12 90 205 278 391 1,169
at time "t", as well as the force F ( m,tl acting on any 150 215 279 391 1,169
mass "m" at time "t." Thus the equation for ENTHRU 30 264 371 522 1,558
at any point in the system can be determined by simply 16 90 275 371 522 1,558
150 288 371 522 1,558
letting the computer calculate the equation previously
mentioned:
ENTHRU = !F~S
From Table 3.2, it can be seen that ENTHRU does
or m terms of the wave equation: not always increase with increasing cushion stiffness,
and furthermore, the maximum increase in ENTHRU
ENTHRUim) = :l: r(m,t) ~.,:·rm,t1)= noted here is relatively smallonly about 10%.
When different cushions are used, the coefficient of
restitution will probably change. Since the coefficient
of restitution of the cushion may affect ENTHRU, a
X [0(m+1,tl 0(m+1,t11]
number of cases were solved with "e" ranl):inl): from
where ENTH R Ll (m I the 11·ork done on any mass 0.2 to 0.6. As shown in Tables 3.6 and :i.7, an increase
(m + 1), in "e" from 0.2 to 0.6 normally increases ENTHRU from
18 to 20',1,', while increasing the permanent sf'l from 6
m the mass llumber, and to 11 '/<'. Thus, for the case shown, the coefficient of
the time interval number. restitution of the cushion has a greater influence on rate
of penetration and ENTHRU than does it~ stiffness.
ENTHRll is greatly influenced by several parame This same effect was noted in the other solutions, and
ters, especially the type, condition, and coefficient of the cases shown in Tables 3.6 and 3.7 are tYpical of the
restitution of the cushion, and the weight of extra driv results found in other cases.
.
mg caps.
.
As can be seen from Table 3.:), anv increase in
It ha:; been shown,:u that the coefficient of restitu cushion stiff ness also increases thP driving' stress. Thus,
tion alone can change ENTH HU by 20/;, simply by according to the waye equation, increasing the cushion
changing e from 0.2 to 0.6. Nor is this variation in e stiffness to increase the rate of penetration (for example
unlikely since cushion condition varied from new to by not replacing the cushion until it has been beaten to
"badly burnt" and "chips added." a fraction of its original height or by omitting the cush
ion entirely) is both inefficient and poor practice be
The wave equation was therefore used to analyze causp of the high stresses imluced in the pile. It would
certain Michigan problems to determine the influence be better to use a cushion having a high coefficient of
of cushion stiffness, e, additional driving cap weights, restitution and a low cushion stiffness in order to in
driving resistance encountered, etc. crease ENTHRU and to limit the driving stress.
Table 3 ..'1 shows how ENTHHll and SET increases llnfortunately. the tremendous variety of driving
when the load cell assembly is removed from Michigan accessories precludes general conclusions to be drawn
piles.
PAGE NINE
TABLE :3.f> EFFECT OF HEl\10\'ING LOAD CELL ON ENTHHU, LIMSET, AND PERMANENT SET OF PILE
from wave equation analyses in all but tl:e most general which the force tapers to zero. As shown in Figure 3.1,
of terms. the force between the ram and anvil reaches some maxi
mum due to the steel on steel impact, afterwards the
Although the effect of driving accessories is quite
force decreases to the minimum diesel explosive force
variable, it was generally noted that the inclusion of
on the anvil. This force is maintained for 10 millisec
additional elements between the driving hammer and the
onds, thereafter decreasing to zero at 12.5 milliseconds.
pile and/ or the inclusion of heavier driving accessories·
The properties of this curve, including values of the
consistently decrea><ed both the e11ergy transmitted to the
minimum explosive force and time over which this force
head of the pile and the permanent set per blow of the
acts, were determined from the manufacturer',. published
hammer. Increasing cushion stiffness will increase com
literature for the diesel hammers.
pressive and tensil~ stresses induced in a pile during
driving. The effect of explosive pressure was found to be
extremely variable, possibly more so than the effect of
3.4 E:xplosive Pressure in Diesel Hammers the driving accessories, and few conclu,.ions could be
drawn. The only consistent effect that could be ob
In order to account for the effect of explosive force served was that if the maximum impact force induced
in diesel hammers. the force between the ram and the by tl;e falling ram was insufficient to produce perma
anvil is assumed to reach some maximum due to the nent set the addition of explosive force had little or no
impact between the ram and am·il, and then decrease. effcct on the solution. In other words, unless the par
However, should this impact force tend to decrease below ticular hammer, driving accessories, pile, and soil con
some specified minimum. it is assumed that the diesel ditions were such that it 11 as possible to get the pile
explosive pressure maintains this specified minimum moving. the explosive force, being so much smaller than
force between the ram and anvil for a given time, after the maximum impact force, had no effect.
I{am Maximum
Velocity ENTHHU (kip ft)
Change
(ftlsec) e = 0.2 e = 0.4 e = 0.6 (%)
PAGE TEN
However. the addition of explo~i,·e pressure in
creased the permanent set of the pile in somp cases
where the maximum impact force is sufficient to start
the pile moving; on the other hand, its addition was
found ineffective in an equal number of circumstances.
The explosivf~ forces assumerl to be acting within
various diesel hammers are listed in Table 3.1. These
forces were determined by experiment. personal corre ANVIL
spondence with the hammer manufacturers, and from
their published literature. ~~~~ CAPBLOCK
Maxi
mum Maxi Maxi
Com pres mum mum
Length sive Tensile Point
Number of Pile Force Force in Displace
SOIL of Ham Segments in Pile Pile ment
Divisions (ft) (kip) (kip) (in.)
1 10.0 305.4 273.9 3.019
PIPE PILE 1 5.0 273.8 245.9 3.042
1 2.5 265.6 224.8 3.053
PIPE PILE CLOSED AT TIP 1 1.25 26a.1 219.0 3.057
2 1.25 262.6 218.8 3.058
Figure 3.2. Stearn hammer. 10 1.25 262.9 218.5 3.059
PAGE ELEVEN
TARLE ;til. EFFECT OF Bl{EAKI:\G HAl\! !!\TO SEGl\IENTS WHEN RAl\I STHIKES A STEEL ANVIL
:'\o pile cap 11as included in the solution, the cushion held constant and the ram was divided equally into seg
being placed directh· bet\reen the hammer and the head ment lem!:ths as noted in Table 3.9. These variables were
of the pile. Since the ram ,,·as di,·ided into Yery short picked b~cause of their possible influence 011 thP solution.
lengths, the pile was also diYided into short segments.
The pile used was again a 12H5;) point bearing pile
As shown in Table 3.8, the solution is not chantred having a cushion of 2,000 kip per in. spring rate placed
to any significant extent \rhether the ram is divided into between the anvil and the hearl of the pile. The soil
1, 2, or 10 segments. The time interval was held con parameters used were RU = 500 kips, Q =0.1 in.,
stant in each case. and 1 = 0.15 sec. per ft. These factors were held con
stant for all problems listed in Tables 3.R and 3.9.
In the case of a diesel hammer. the ram strikes
directlY on a steel anvil rather than on a cushion. This The most obvious result shown in Table 3.9 is that
makes" the choice of a spring rate between the ram and when the steel ram impacts directly on a steel anvil,
am·il difficult because the impact occurs between two dividing the ram into se1:,'111ents has a marked effect on
steel elements. The most obvious solution is to place a the solution.
spring having a rate dictated by the elasticity of the
ram and/ or anvil. A second possible sol uti on is to break An unexpected result of the study was that even
when the ram was short, breaking it into segments still
the ram into a series of weights and springs as is the pile.
effected the solution. As seen in Table 3.9, the solutions
To determine when the ram should be divided, a for forces and displacements for both 6 thr~ugh 10 ft
parameter study was run in which the ram length varied ram lengths continue to change until a ram segment
between 6 and lO ft, and the anvil weight varied from, length of 2 ft was reached for the 2,000lb anvil and a
1,000 to 2,000 lb. In each case the ram parameter was segment length of 1 ft for the 1,000lb anvil was reached.
CHAPTER IV
Capblock and Cushions
4.1 JJiethods Used to Determine Capbluck and terial placed between the steel helmet and pile (usually
Cushion Properties used only when driving concrete pill'S).
As used here, the word "caphlock" refers to the Although a capblock and cushion serve several
material placed between the pile drivinp: hammer and purposes, their primary function is to limit impact
the steel helmet. The term "cushion" refers to the ma sl resses in both the pile and hammer. In general, it has
PAGE TWELVE
;·.i
:·
. ' "/
ht't'll fouud that a wood l'aphlol'k is quilt> t•ffel'lin• iu 5000,,
retlut'in!! tlrh in!! "lres:<t':<. mon• "o than a relatin·ly stiff
caphlock maleri,al such as Micarta. However, the stiffer
Micarta is usually more durable and transmits a greater
percentage of the hammer's energy to the pile because
of its higher coefficient of restitution.
,. DYNAMIC SS CURVE
For example, when fourteen different cases of the 4000 • STATIC S S CURVE
Michigan study were soh·ed hy the wa1·e equation, the
l\licarta assemblies a1·eraged 14'; more efficient than
capblock assemblies of wood. However, the increased
.. rushion stiffness in some of these cases inrreased the
impact stresses to a point 11 here damage to the pile or
hammer might result during driYing. The increase in
stre5s was particularly important when concrete or 3000
prestressed concrete piles were driwn. When driving
concrete piles, it is .also frequently necessary to include (J)
cushioning material between the helmet and the head of a.
the pile to distribute the impact load uniformly over the (J)
(J)
surface of the pile head and prevent spalling. w
a::
1
To apply the wave equation to pile driving, Smith (J)
2000
assumed that the cushion's stressstrain curve was a
series of straight lines as sho11·n in Figure 4.1. Although
this curve was found to be sufficiently accurate to pre
dict maximum compressiYe stresses in the pile, the shape
of the stress wave often disagreed with that of the actual
stress wave. To eliminate the effects of soil resistance
several test piles were suspended horizontally above the 1000
ground. These test piles were instrumented with strain
gages at several points along the length of the pile, and
especially at the head of the pile. A cushion was placed
at the head of the pile which was then hit by a hori
zontally swinging ram, and displacements, forces, and
accelerations of both the ram and head of the pile were
measured. Thus, by knowing the force at the head of
the pile and the relative displacement between the ram 0.08 0.12 0.16 0.20
and the head of the pile. the force exerted in the cushion STRAIN (lN./IN.)
PAGE THIRTEEN
TABLE 4.1. TYPICAL S.E<~CANT MODULI OF ELAS'
TICITY (E) AND COEFFICIENTS OF RESTITUTION
(e) OF VARIOUS PILE CUSHIONING MATERIAL
E e
psi
1000
600
4.2 Idealized LoadDeformation Properties
The major difficulty encountered in trying to use
the dynamic curves drtermined for the various cushion
en
a;
500
_.,,;.•,
,
3000
4000
2500
3500
3000 (/)
2000
a..
~ 2500
z
C/)
C/)
(/) 1500
w (/)
0: LLJ
Iii 2000 a::
1
(/)
1000
1500
1000
500
750
CHAPTER V
5.1 Comparison with Laboratory Experiments equation, the following information IS normally
required:
As noted in the precedinf!; section. several test piles
were instrumented and suspended horizontally above the l. The initial velocity and wri12:ht of the ram,
ground. This exainple pile was a steel pile, 85 ft in 2. The actual dynamic stressstrain curve for the
length with a crosssectional area of 21.46 sq. in. The cushion,
cushion was oak, 7 in. thick. The ram had a weight of
2128 lb and a velocity of 1.'3.93 fps. The cushion was 3. The area and length of the pile, and
clamped to the head of the pile and then struck hy a 4. The density and modulus of elasticity of the pile.
horizontally swinging ram. The pile was instrumentrrl
with strain gages at six points along the pile, and dis Since the stressstrain cun·e for the cushion was un
placements and accelerations of both the ram and hf'ad known, the numerical solution wa!" rewritten such that
of the pile were also measured. it was not nePded. This was possible since the pile was
instrumented with a strain gage approximately 1 ft from
In order to utilize Smith's solution to the wave the head of I he pile which recorded the actual stress
PAGE FIFTEEN
!lC'r
] "r~
~ :::r
·"r
I 00
i5
;:
o•o~ I
04
~ »q
"'
~ 020
2
o c•:>
~
..
> 060
~ ~::l ~
120
140
rI
_ _,: r
l ... ., ..
I
I
[
.,o•
,,::~(NTAL SOLUTOO;
THEORETICAL SOLUTION USING
KNOWN FORCES AT 11iE. PILE
HEAD TO ELIMINATE ERRORS
CAUSED BY THE RAM AND
CUSHION j
1I
i
I
I.Z   · ·  ·
[I
'lo
 · • ·   ~Q~
o•a
..
o:., .. •0 c

Figure 5.1. Theoretical vs experimental solution. Strain Figure 5.3. Theoretical vs experimental solution for.
25 ft from pile head. strains 25 ft from the pile head.
induced in pile by the ram and cushion. The force tensile and compressive stresses. Furthermore, it pre
measured at the head of the pile was then placed directly dicts the shape of the stress wm e reasonably well.
at the head of the pile and the \1aYe equation was used
to compute stres!"es and displacements at all of the gage 5.2 Significance of Jllaterial Daluping
points along the pile. Figures 5.1 and 5.2 present typi in the Pile
cal comparisons between the experimental results and
wave equation solutions at two points on the pile, and Other parameters were often Yaried in an attempt to
illustrate the degree of accuracy obtained by use of obtain more accurate results. one of which was the
the wave equation. material damping capacity o( the pile material. How
ever, most suspended pile cases studied strongly indicated
It must be emphasized that this excellent correlation that damping would be negligible because of the extreme
between experimental and theoretical results was in ef ly low rate of decay of the stress w aYe in the pile. The
fect obtained by using the actual dynamic loaddeforma only pile in which damping was thought to be signifi
tion curve for that particular case. However, as men cant was a lightweight concretE' pile with a static modulus
tioned earlier. the stressstrain curve for the cushion is of elasticity of 3.96 x 10n and a "sonic" modulus of
normally assumed to he linear as shown in Figure 4.1. elasticity of 4.63 x lQil psi. This problem was chosen
since E. was relatively larger than E. indicating the pos
To determine how much the use of the linear stress sibility of rather high damping. It can be seen in Figure
strain curve will affect the solution, the previous case 5.5 that the magnitude of the experimental results di
was rerun using the straight line stressstrain curves. As minishes slightly after four cycles. The magnitud~ of
noted in Figures .5.3 and 5.4, the solutions for the linear the theoretical solution with damping neglected would
and nonlinear cushion assumptions agreed fayorably. not. Figure 5.5 compares thP experimental and theo
The use of the straight line assumption is reasonable retical solutions for stresses when Smith's proposed
since it gives fairly accurate results for both maximum method of damping is included. In this case, the ex·
IZr,
•oc l
080 ~ 08
~
..··.
060
~ o•o
~ 04
r··
;:
z
0
5 0 ~=+
"'~ 020 ~
i'l
~ o•o
~ 04
0
~ 060
~
000 ... ~
z
3 oa
~
r   ··
I  SOLUTION WITH KNOWN FORCES PLACED ON 1'EAD OF PILE
n• SOLUTION USING A LINEAR CUSH10t<l SPRING RAT£
Figure 5.2. Theoretical vs experimental solution. Strain Fip:.ure .5.4. Theoreticaf t'S experimental solution for
52 ft from pile head. strains 52 /' from the pile head.
PAGE SIXTEEN
perimental and theoretical solutions are in excellent
agreement, both in wave shape and rate of decay.
1000 
Althou~h it is extremely interesting to be able to
predict the dynamic beha,·ior of piling with such accu
racy, most practically the primary interest is in the
maximum stresses induced in the pile which occur
durin? the firs~ or s~co~d pass of the stress wave along
the pile. Durmg this time, the effects of damping are
extremely small even for the lightweight aggregate pile,
and are apparently of no practical importance. Whether
this conclusion will be accurate for timber or other piles
having much higher damping capacities than either steel
or concrete piles is unknown. A higher damping ca
1000 / _ (XP[RIM£NTAL SOLUTION ~     ··Jo pacity could affect the results earlier in the solution and
:''''_l_Ji__l__l_c:~~:_~~~~~
0 I 2~ 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 IJ 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
thus be of significance.
TIME (SEC X 10· 3 1
It should be emphasized that the above conclusions
are valid only for normal pile driving conditions. If the
wave must be studied for an extended period of time,
Fi(!.ltre 5.5. Comparison of experimental and theoretical damping in the pile may be significant and should be
solutions for stresses 25 ft from the pile head. accounted for.
CHAPTER VI
Soil Properties
6.1 General 1t is also assumed to be constant for a ginn ~oil under
A limi It'd amount of work has het>n done on soil given conditions as is the static shear strength of the
properties and their effects on the wave equation solution soil from which Ru on a pile segment is determined.
of the piling behavior problem. A total of three re Hu is defined as the maximum soil resistance on a pile
segment.
search reports concernin~ soil properties hare been puh
lislwd by the Texas Transportation Institute durin!!; the Smith notes that Equation (6.1) producrs no damp
"Pilii1g Behavior" study. Research Heports it17 and in~ when Dtm,t)  D'(m.tl becomes zero. He sug
337 A'Ll. 6 ·~ ~ive the results of a series of laboratory {!:ests an alternate equation to be used after D (m,t) first
dynamic (impact) and static tests conducted on satu becomes equal to Q(m) :
rated sands. Research Report 338';.:1 gives the results
of a field test on a full scale instrumented pile in day. R(m,t) = [D(m.tl  D'(m,t)] K' (m)
A brief summary of the results of these tests are given + J (m) Hu(ml V(m,t1) (6.2)
in this chapter.
Care must be used to satisfy conditions at the point
of the pile. Consider Equation (6.1) when m = p,
6.2 Equations to Describe Soil Be/uwior where p is the number of the last element of the pile.
K ( p) is used as the point soil spring and J (p) as the
Examination of Equation ( 6.1 1 shows that Smith's
point soil damping constant. Also at the point of the
equation describes a type of Kelvin rheological model
as shown in Figure 6.1.
Rlm,t) = [Dim,t)  D'(m,t)]K'(m) SOIL RESISTANCE
R
[1 + J(mJ V(m,t 1'1] ( 6.1)
The soil spring behaves elastically until the deformation
Dlm,t) equals Q and then it yields plastically with a
loaddeformation property as shown in Fi~ure 6.2( a). FRICTION LINK
The dashpot J den·lops a resisting forcr proportional to LMITS LOIIO IN SPRIN
the velocity of loading V. Smith has modifird the tnw
K'
Kell'in model sli~htl~· as shown b~· Equation (6.2). This SPRING CONSTANT
J
CONSTANT
t·quation will produce a dnwmic loaddeformation he
ha,·\or shown by path OAUCDEF in Fi~ure 6.2tbL lf
terms in Equation ( 6.11 arP PXamined, it can be "een
that Smith's dashpot force is ~iven hy
lD(m,t)  D't m.t l] K'im J [J (m) Vt m,t  I l l
The dimensions of J are sec/ft and it is assumed to lw Fr:p;u rc 6. /_ :ll ode! u..sed hy Smith to describe soil re
independent of the total soil resistance or size of the pile. sistance on pile.
PAGE SEVENTEEN
pilt>, tht> soil spring must bt> pn•vt>ntt•d from exertin~
900
tPn"'ion on tl:e pile point. The point ~oil resistance will V=IOftpersac
follow the path OABCFG in Figure 6.2 ( bl. It should be
kept in mind that at the pile point the soil is loaded in
compression or bearing. The damping constant 1(p) coo
in bearing is b!"liewd to be larg!"r than the damping
constant 1 (m) in friction along the side of the pile.
700 V = 6.7 fl per sec
6.3 Soil Parameter.<: to Describe Dynamic
Soil Resistance During Pile Drh•ing
~GOO V = 3.3 fl per sec
The soil parameters used to describe the soil resist .1>
r8 ..:
T
..J
0
"'300
.I .2 ~ .4 .5 .6
DEFORMATION D (in.)
t Ru(m) fs
where
cr
lo
~L
perimeter of pile segment ( ft), and
length of pile segment (ft).
In cohesionless materials (sands and gravels)
0: tan c!J' (6.4)
...
0: such a manner th~t P<lnwuil•·• P•tntie• and V \H'H' meas
"'u ured, ami con~equentl~· .it was possible to evaluate J for
i
e • .60
a givt'n set of test conditions.
,.~1.2
0
0
The laboratory tests conducted on saturated sands
~ were conductt>cl with tl1e sand sample subjected to tl'iaxial
o: I.D OL..'2":0''4~0':6'0'8'0'',0'0'12.LO_..t.._JI40 confinement. Particular attention was given to the ef
RATE OF LOADING (IN /SEC) fects of variable loadin:r velocitit>s, initial sample densi
ties, and effPctive initial confining pressures. The
Figure 6.4. Increase in strenf!.lh vs rate of loa<lin[!, machine used for testing was developed for this particu
Ottawa sand. lar research and a complete description of the machine
PAGE NINETEEN
and thf' in!'trumentation used is l!iYen in Hesearch Report
:\:~7 :\. tl.~
PAGE TWENTY
made durin:r ~>tatic load tests at 13 daYs and 30 days where: r = radial distance from pile center; and
after drh·ing. Soil borings were made for the insitu.
remolded, a~1d reconsolidated conditions, and at specific
r1 = radius of pile.
radial distances from the pile. Conventional tests were Results of this study also suggest that the time after
conducted on the soil samples to measure the changes driving required for piles of different radii to attain
in engineering properties for the different conditions. comparable percentages of their ultimate bearing capaci
ty can be expressed as follows:
A mode of failure was established in this study for
. f
a cohesive soil involved in the load response of a pile T1
soil system. The behavior of the ~>oil in this study incli (6.9)
T2
cates that soil disturbances which imolve new soil parti
where: r1 radius of pile 1;
cle arrangement and altered engineering properties are
limited to a distance from the center of the pile of ap r~ radius of pile 2;
proximately 4.5 radii. 6 ·" This relationship can be ex
T1 time for pile 1 to attain a stated percent
pressed as follows:
age of ultimate bearing capacity; and
< 4.5 (6.8) T2 time for pile 2 to attain the same per
centage of ultimate bearing capacity.
CHAPTER VII
w ...J z
0
I ./
M9
•
u
z
0 .... I AI
/
•
..."" 400
(/)
I • /
/
(/) /
iii ;i 100 M2
"'
a: .... /
/AG
•
0
....
"~ 300
z
~
a: Q
0 ....
~
"'... 200
::J
0
2"" w
0 100 200 300
5:::> w TONS
>
:J 100 ~ SOIL RESISTANCE AT TIME OF DRIVING Rdr
...""
g Figure 7.2. Comparison of wave equation predicted soil
a:" resistance to soil resistance determined by lOad tests for
00 10 15 20 25
piles driven in sands. (Data from table 7.1.)
BLOWS PER IN
TABLE 7.1. ERRORS CAUSED BY ASSUMING J(point) = 0.1 AND J'(side) J (point)
3 FOR SAND (For Sand
Supported Piles Only)
Rttr* RwE
(Resistance (Indicated % Error
Load at Time of Soil in R.,
RwE ~' &, )
Test Driving) Resistance)
Loration Pile (kips) ( (100)
(kips)
Arkansas 1 280 255  9
2 380 495 +30
a 430 530 +23
4 340 370 + 9
5 500 380 24
6 280 170 a9
l(i
7 400 :no 2a
280 :380 +36
Copano Bay 10:{ 300 320 + 7
Muskegon 2 200 1P5  3
a 110 145 +32 .,
4
6
85
540
110 +29 ..
310 43
!) 470 270 43
Total 13501
Mean or Average '7o Error 13501
= 25%
14
*R., for piles driven in sands was assumed equal to the actual load test mensurements since no "setup" was considered.
PAGE TWENTYTWO
·.
250 250
t25%
w t 25%
\,) / /
z / /
ct
..... / w
0
/
!:!? 200 / z 200 V45/
l/)
w
a:
/ 25%
ct
.....
1/) /
• ;
;25%
•010 / /
/ iii / /
:::! / w /
a:
0 150 .J 150
l/) / 1/)
'(I) 08/ 0~ /
ctZ I/) I
..... o..... ./ / /
e 100
Bl
•
07
/ • /
/ .J'
:: ,..~100
..... __
Oa:
/
,V3
/
/
/
/
/ /
/ •o2
/ z / • Ch "'0
. / / 0 / V40
Dl / /
..... 50 / /
ct
/ / :::> / /
0 / /
;; / w
/ /. /
w w /
> >
ct
ct
3:: 0 50 100 150 200 250 ~
0 50 100 150 200 250
TONS
SOIL RESISTANCE AT TIME OF DRIVING (Rdr) SOIL RESISTANCE AT TIME OF DRIVING
CRdr> TONS
Figure 7.3. Comparison of wave equation predicted soil
resistance to soil resistance determined by load tests for Figure 7.4. Comparison of u·ave equation predicted soil
piles driven in clay. (Data from table 7.2.) resista.nce to soil resistance determined by lo@ tests for
piles driven in both sand and clay. (Data from table
7.3.)
R"
(Load R ,,, *** Rn·F:
Test (Resistance (Indicated
Load Resist at time of soil % Error in R.,
Test ance) driving) resistance) ( RwE  R.,) (100)
Location Pile (kips) (kips) (kips) R.,
PAGE TWENTYTHREE
DEPTH TYPICAL PILE PILE PILE PILE PILE PlLE PILE PILE PILE PILE PILE PILE
FT.
BORING B c E I R2 R4 R5 R6 R9 Rl2. R20 R23
0 _!2" _/5.3" _/6.3" _/5.3" _!5.3" _!5.3" _!6.3" 20.4" 21.2"
LOOSE SANDY
CLAYEY SILT
"'a:
Q.
"'a: ~
~
10
~·
Q.
Q,
MEDIUM ...J
.... ~ ~
..."'"' ., 0:: 0:: 0::
20 DENSE
FINE TO
a:"'
Q.
."'
Cl) ..."'"'
.
Cl)
,_~
0::
..."' .,
Q.
oq "'
Q.
~ .,... ~
~
;;; ~
~
.,
;,
..."' ;,.
Q.
..."' "'
MEDIUM ...J
"'0 "'"' 10 0
10 Co
Q.
oq Q. Q.
..."' ... oq
<o... a.. § ~
"' "' ..."'
"'..."'
0
~ "'
30 SAND Ill 0:: Q.
,><
Cl)
,><
., "' ..."' "'
Q. Cl) Cl)
..."' Cl) 8"
'10 "'....~ 10
.... 0 Q.
...
q
Cl)
Cl) 8"
40 0Ill ~
0
< ~ 1/_3"
"'0 Q.
M£DIUM )( ..."'
Cl) /0.3"
11.3"
50 TO DENSE '10
.... 10.3"
Fl N E !:,!
10.3"
60 TO 8.5"
COARSE
70 SAND
WITH 8.3"
80 TRACE
GRAVEL NOTE: ALL PILES OR!VEN WITH A 1S HAMMER,
90 6500 LB. RAM, 19,500FT.LBS.
100
FINAL DRIVING}
RESISTANCE 3 11/z 2 4
BLOWS PER INCH 3 6 3 4 1/z 4 5 5 1
WAVE EQUATION }
1
' LTIMATE RESISTANCE 100 70 86 95 140 190 105 150
(RU) TONS 135 164 152 200
Q = 0.1 in.and](point) = 0.15,](side) 0.0.5. Soil resistance was assumed to be 50'/r at the point and 50%
friction distributed uniformly over the embedded length below a depth of 10 ft. Hammer efficiency assumed to be
B07c.
Figure 7.5. Summary of piles tested to failure in sands.
TABLE 7.3. ERRORS CAUSED BY ASSUMING A COMBINED J(point) = 0.1 FOR SAND AND J(point) 0.3 FOR
CLAY USING EQ. 7.1 (For Piles Sul)ported by Both Sand and Clay)
Rw"
R" R.,,** (Indi
(Load (Resist cated
Test ance at Soil % Error
Load Resist Time of Resist in R.,
Test ilR,.,,,. ~R~:uul J (point) ance) Driving) a nee) ( Rwz  R.,)
Location Pile X 0.3 X 0.1 (sec/ft) (kips) (kips) (kips) R., (100)
131
Total rn
Average "lr Error = 9  14.5%
*Indicates piles which exceeded the testing equipment's capacity, and could not be loadt<'sted to failure.
**R.1, for these piles were actual load test measurements corrected to acC"ount for soil "setup."
PAGE TWENTYFOUR
1/)
z the dam pin~ constants J (point) 0.3 and J' (side)  =
0
t J (point) /3 gave the best correlation. The accuracy of
I the correlation is shown in Figure 7.3 to be approxi
5 NOTE: TEST FAILURE LOADS ARE mately +50/'o.
a:
LIJ THOSE EVALUATED BY If more than one soil was involved the damping
u constant used was a weighted average calculated from
z EBASCO Is. ENGINEERS
~
t
1/)
ii5 /
}O%R2e3 20%
}(point) = I [ R1 X J(point)t] (7.1)
LIJ /
a: /
/
where R 1 = the ratio of the amount of resistance of
LIJ each type of soil "i", to the total soil
t
~ resistance, both determined after setup
;;; has ceased, and
t
..J
:::> 100
z
J'(side) = J(pott)
0
i=
~ Table 7.3 shows the damping constant that was
:::> 50
0 calculated from Equation 7.1 using J (point) = 0.3 for
LIJ clay and J (point) = 0.1 for sand. The accuracy of the
LIJ ,;
correlation, as shown in Figure 7.4 was approximately
> +25%.
~
~ 0 60 120 180 240 Mosley 7 ·2 has found a similar correlation with 12
piles driven in sand. Figure 7.5 is a summary of the
TEST LOAD FAILURE  TONS
piles tested. Figure 7.6 shows that all resistances on
Figure 7.6. Wave equation ultimate resistance vs test these piles fall within +20% of that predicted by the
load failure (after Ref. 7.2, data from Fig. 7.5) (sands). wave equation.
CHAPTER VIII
Prediction of Driving Stresses
8.1 Introduction numerical solution by comparing its results with the
theoretical solution of Appendix A and with field data.
In Appendix A the exact solution for the stress
wave introduced into a long slender elastic pile is de
rived using the classical onedimensional wave equation. 8.2 Comparison of Smith's Numerical
The solution of this equation depends upon certain Solution with the Classical Solution
assumptions. It is assumed that the pile is prismatic For the purpose of correlation, consider a concrete
with lateral dimensions small in comparison to its length pile, square in crosssection, with an area of 489 in. 2
(Poisson's effects can be neglected I, that the pile and and 90 ft long. The modulus of elasticity of the pile
cushion material are linearly elastic, and the ram has material is assumed to be 5 X I 0° psi. The pile is COil•
infinite rigidity (assumed to be a rigid body). The sidered to be free at the top with the bottom end fixed
equation which governs the stress amplitude in most rigidly against movement. No side resistance is present.
practical cases, shows that the magnitude of the stress
induced at the head of the pile, by the falling ram, is
directly proportional to the velocity of the ram at im
pact. The equation further shows that the stiffnesses of
EXACT
the cushion and pile also have a significant effect on the iii 5000 0.tat : I /1410 SECOND : (O tk:r
Q.
magnitude of the stress generated. The soil resistance o···6t: 1/2~00 SECOND
~ 6QI: 1/!>000 SECOND
on the side and at the point of the pile will also affect 4000 IDENTICAL RESULTS WERE OOTAINEO
(/) fOR THE FOLLOWING VALUES 0~ t:. t
the magnitude of the stresses in the pile. (/)
w
tMOO, 1/10,000, AND 1/20,000
SECOND
a:: .6. L o PILE LfNGTH~
1
Chapter II discus~es Smith's numerical solution of
(/)
w
the onedimensional wave equation. This particular '
iii
technique for solving the wave equation is much simpler z
w
1
for application to problems which can have inelastic
::!i
cushions and material properties as well as soil on the ~
:::;;
side and point of the pile. Chapter V discusses the
generation of stress waves in piling, the sip:nificance of ~
:::;;
HEAD ~ PILE (FREEl POlNT OF PILE (FIXED)  . , ·
This chapter demonstrates the validity of Smith's Figure 8.1. Maximum tensile stress along the pile.
PAGE TWENTYFIVE
c;; 8.3 Correlations of Smith's Solution
0..
~
fX~CT
with Field Measurements
V>
V> 0 ·~t• I /1410 SECOND : lallcr
w
cr o· ·t..t ' l /2!100 SEC ON 0 In previous reportsH· 4 • t~.r. the writers have shown
Iii IDENTICAL RESULTS WERE OBTAINED
FOR THE FCX...Lo'WNG VALUES OF ,61 e several correlations of the wave equation with stresses
w V2:)()(), 1/~. 1/10,000, AND measured in piles during the time of driving in the field.
> 1/20,000 SECOND
u; A L : PILE LENGTH/10
8
Typical examples of the:>e correlations are shown in Fig.
133000
cr ures 8.3 and 8.4. The significant conclusions drawn
0..
:::E from these tests are as follows:
8 2000
:::E
l. The maximum compressive stresses occurred
::;)
::!! at the head of the pile.
)(1000 HEAD OF PILE (FREE 1 POINT OF PILE (FtXEDh=.
<(
:::E 2. Maximum tensile stresses were found to occur
near the midpoint of the piles.
OL~~~LL~~~~
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
DISTANCE FROM HEAD OF PILE IN FEET
3. The computed compressive stresses and dis
placements agree very well with the measured data.
Figure 8.2. ,1[ axim um compressive stress along the pile.
4. The computed tensile stresses appeared high
but in view of the unknown dynamic properties of the
soil, concrete, and cushioning materials involved in the
The following information 1s also applicable to the cor problem, the quantitative comparisons shown were con
relation: sidered good.
Weight of the ram 11,500 lb,
8.4 Effect of Hummer Type and
Velocity of the ram 14.45 fps
Simulation JJielhod
Cushion block stiffness 3,930,000 lb/in.,
It has been shownR.T (see Chapter Ill) that the ram
Coefficient of restitution of a pile hammer can be idealized as a rigid body pro
of the cushion block 1.00 vided it strikes on a capblock or cushion. If the ram
strikes directly on s:eeL as in the case of thE' dit'sel ham
Solutions have been obtained for the exact solution of mers, the accuracy of the ~olut inn for st rP~~es is im
the onedimensional wave equation and for Smith's proved by breaking the ram in~o segments.
numerical method using 10 segments. Previous studies~· 1
had shown that segment lengths of LllO would yield
accurate results. Figures 8.1 and 8.2 show comparisons
of the maximum tensile stress and maximum compres 2000,,
sive stress, respectively. versus position along the length
of the pile. Note the time interval used (time differenc
ing interval used in the numerical solution) for solutions
shown is varied from l/1410 seconds (this is the critical
time differencing interval) to l/20,000 seconds. No!e
1000
that when the differencing interval became very small,
i.e., 1/5000 seconds, the accuracy of the solution was
not improved. Note also that the numerical solution ..R
,,
is very close to the exact solution. Other comparisons· J~
have been made for the stresses at other points in the I
AL
At=
V E/p z
H
where,
At critical time differencing intervaL
AL segment length,
E modulus of elasticity, and LEGEtm
Comr'.lt<:ci Stress
Measured Stress
p mass density of the pile material.
This time interval is the "critical'' timP intenal. 3000L_____________________________________
=
~
For practical problems, a choice of At onehalf the 0 60 120 180 240 300 360
"critical value," appears suitahle since inelastic springs, TIMC IN 10 4 SECONDS
materials of different densities, and elastic moduli are
usually involved. Figure 8.3. Stress in pile head vs time for test pile.
PAGE TWENTYSIX
...
2000 ~·······
8.6 Effects of Cushion Stiffness, Coefficient
of Restitution, mul Pile JJlalerial Damping
It has been shownH.n (see Chapter IV) that the
actual load deformation curve for a cushion is not a
1000
straight line, but is parabolic. However, a straight line
which has a slope given by the secant modulus will give
reasonab:y accurate results. The cushion's dynamic
H
coefficient of restitution was found to agree with com
Ul
monly recommended values. It has also been shown
"'
,, that the effect of internal damping in the concrete and
::; steel piles will usually have a negligible effect on the
0
driving stresses.
"0
I
H
>:
2000
Compressive Stresses. High compressive stress at
the head of the pile can be caused by the following:
LEGEND l. Insufficient cushionin~ material bet\1·een the pile
 Computed Stress driving ram and the pile will result in a very high com
_ _ Measured Stress
pressive stress on impact.
3000 _.l_ ___L
';6c::O.L..._:1:::2:!071:::80! 240 300
3GO
2. When a pile is struck by a ram at a very high
TIME IN 10
4
SECONDS
velocity, or from a very high drop, a stress wave of high
magnitude is produced. This stress is directly propor
Figure 8.4. Stress a!, midlength of pile vs time for test tional to the ram velocity.
pile.
If the pile is idealized as a long elastic rod, with
an elastic cushion on top an equation for the compres
sive stress can be developed (see Appendix A). The
For diesel hammers, the explosi\·e force used to approximate equations for the maximum compresgive
raise the hammer for the next blow does work on the stress at the pile head are as follo\1·s:
pile and should be included. Notations used are:
In all hammer simulations. all parts which are in
the force transmission chain should be included. The
cr., max maximum compressive stress at pile
housing and other parts which do not serve to transmit l:ead (psi).
the driving energy may be neglected. w ram weight ( lb),
Refer to Appendix B, Tables B.l and B.2, for v ram impact velocity (in./sec),
recommended values for use in the simulation.
y2gh,
h ram free fall (in.),
8.5 Effect of Soil Resistance
g acceleration due to gravity,
If soil borings are available, the distribution of the 386 in./sec 2 ,
soil resistance on the pile should be estimated from soil
shear strength data. In general, piles in uniform co K cushion stiffness (lb/in.),
hesive soils will have the soil resistance distributed Ac Ec
uniformly in side friction with about 10 to 20 ';{ point
tc
resistance. Cohesionless soils can generally be simu
lated with a triangular friction distribution with about A,. crosssectional area of cu~hion (in. 2 ),
40'/t in srde friction and 60': of the total resistance
at the point. The al'lual distributions used will. of E,. modulus of elasticity of cushion (psi),
course, depend on the properties of the soils, pile length, initial uncompressecl thickness of
type, etc., and should he studied for each case. It is cushion tin.),
important to note. ho\l·ever, that the soil distribution
will affect the magnitude of the driving stre~ses. This t time (sec) ,
is particularly true for the reflected tensile stresses. In A crosssectional area of pile (in. 2 ),
most investi:.wtions for driving stresses, it i>< best to vary
the distribution over the expected range and choosf' the E modulus of elasti('ity of pile (psi),
most consPrvati\·e result. Hrflectecl tPnsile stresses are
highest when the soil resistance acting at the pile point length of pile (in.),
is small. unit weight of pile (lb/in.:1),
PAGE TWENTYSEVEN
Calculations:
n
K
2A VE~ 2~ y {y = 224 sec 1
v
n
K;;:
0
p
w ,/Kwg __
Case I.
p V 481 sec 1
n<p
KV ent Since n <p Equation 8.1 of Case I applies.
(]"0 n1aX =      = = Sill (t\/p~  n~)
A
(81)
where t is found from the expression
425
tan (t \/ p~ n~)
224 = 1.896
II
so t V p~  n 2
= 62.2 o or 1.085 radians
Case II. n p t = .00255 sec
~n'AV ·~
Using Equation 8.1
0" 0
max =  L.:: 
A . e 1 ( 8.2)
U"u max =
KV ent
A
Case Ill. n>p 3 X 10" X 167 e2H x .oo2;;r.
KV ent
20_0_X425 _____ (sin 62.2o)
0"0 max :A~oo======., sinh ( t Y n~  p~ )
\In p a., max = 2920 psi
(8.3)
where t is found from the expression Using these equations, Tables 8.1 anrl n.2 were
developed to illustrate the effect of ram weight and
Vn~p~ velocity on driving stresses. Table Kl shows the varia
n tion of the driving stress (compressive) with the ram
weight and ram velocity. It can be seen that the stress
Equations ( 8.1), ( 8.2 I, or ( 8.3) can be used to magnitude also increases with ram weight, however,
determine the maximum compressive stress at the pile this is usually not of serious consequence. Table 8.2
head. For most practical pile problems n will be less shows the variation of driving stress (compression)
than p and Equation (8.1) will be used. However, this with ram weight and ram driving energy. At a constant
is not always the case. For a given pile these equations driving energy the driving stress decrea!"es as the ram
can be used to determine a desirable combination of ram weight increases. Therefore, it is better to obtain driving
weight W, ram velocity V, and cushion stiffness K so energy with a heavy ram and short stroke than use a
as not to exceed a given allowable compressive stress light ram and large stroke.
at the pile head.
3. When the top of the pile is not perpendicular
To illustrate the use of the equations consider the to the longitudinal axis of the pile, the ram impacting
following situation. force will be eccentric and may cause very high stress
concentrations.
Given:
Concrete Pile 4. If the reinforcing steel in a concrete pile is not
cut flush with the end of the pile. high stress concen
~) 6.5 ft trations may result in the concrete adjacent to the rein
A 200 in.~ forcing. The ram impact force may be transmitted to
y 0.0868 lb/in.:1 (150 lb/ft:1 ) the concrete through the projecting reinforcing steel.
E 5.00 x 10n psi 5. Lack of adequate spiral reinforcing at the head
of a concrete pile and also at the pile point may lead
Green oak cushion, p:rain horizontal
200 in.~
4.'1,000 psi I for properties of wood see Chap TABLE 8.1. VARIATION OF DRIVING STRESS WITH
tt>r IV 1 RAM WEIGHT AND VELOCITY
Result from Equation 8.1 for 65 ft long concrete
3.0 in. pile, 200 in.' area, and !3 in. wood rushion. Stress
A,.Ec es shO\Yll are maximum compression at pile head.
K 3.0 x 10 11 lb/in. Eo = 45,00(1 psi.
tc
Ham Weight Ram Velocity, ft/secStroke, ft
Steel ram
w 5000 lb lb 11.42 l:l.93 16.14 18.05
h 36 in. 2,000 1,790 psi 2,200 n::i 2,540 psi 2,840 psi
5,000 2,380 psi 2,!l20 psi 3,380 psi 3,780 psi
v \,/2gh = 167 .
1n. 1
I
sec 10,000 2,8:10 psi 3 470 psi 4,000 psi 4,480 psi
386 in./ sec 2 20,000 3,250 psi :~:!HlO psi 4,600 psi 5,150 psi
g
PAGE TWENTYEIGHT
TABLE 8.2. VAHIATION OF DHI\ING STllESS WITH
RAJ\1 WEIGHT AND RAJ\1 ENERGY ion, it will also stay in contact for a longer period of
Results from Equation 8.1 for G5 ft long concrete time than when it strikes a thin hard cushion. For Case
pile, 200 in.' area, and 3 in. wood cushion. Stress I (when n <p which is typical for most practical con
es shown are maximum compression at pile head. crete pile conditions J the length of the stress wave can
E, = 45,000 psi.
be calculated by the equation which follows.
Ram Weight DriYing Energy L. =.ct.
lb ft lb or
20,000 40,000
(8.4)
2,000 4,010 psi 5,680 psi
5,000 3,380 psi 4,780 psi
10,000 2,8:30 psi 4,000 psi where L, length of stress wave (in.) and
20,000 2,290 psi 3,250 psi time of contact of ram (sec).
Figure 8.5 (b) shows the compressive stress wave
to spalling or splitting. In prestre:£ed concrete piles building up while the ram is in contact with the cushion.
anchorage of the strands is being developed in these After the ram rebounds clear of the cushion, the com
areas, and transverse tensile stresses are present. If no pressive stress wave is completely formed and travels
spiral reinforcing is used, the pile head may ~pall or down the length of the pile as shown by Figure 8.5 (c).
split on impact of the ram. When the compressive stress wave reaches the point of
the pile, it will be reflected back up the pile in some
6. Fatigue of the pile material can be caused by a manner depending on the soil resistance. If the point of
large number of blows at a very high stress level. the pile is experiencing little or no resistance from the
7. If the top edges and corners of a concrete pile soil, it will be reflected back up the pile as a tensile
are not chamfered the edges or corners are likely to spall stress wave as shown in Figure 8.6(a). If the point of
on impact of the ram. the pile is completely free, the reflected tensile wave will
Yielding of steel or spalling of concrete at the point be of tl:e same magnitude and length as the initial com
of the pile can be caused by extremely hard driving pressive wave. As shown in Figure 8.6(a) these two
resistance at the point. This type resistance may be waves may overlap each other. The net stress at a par
encountered when founding the pile point on bed rock. ticular point on the pile at a particular time \rill he the
Compressive stress under such driving conditions can algebraic sum of the initial compressiYe (  ) stress
be twice the magnitude of that produced at the head of wave and reflected tensile ( + ) stress wave. Whether
the pile by the hammer impact (see Figure 8.2).
Tension. Transverse cracking of a concrete pile
due to a reflected tensile stress wave is a complex phe
uomenon usually occurring in long piles (50 ft or over 1.
It may occur in the upper end, midlength, or lower end
of the pile. It can occur when driving in a very soft
JD
v
lGJ
soil or when the driving resistance is extremely hard or
rigid at the point such as in bearing on solid rock.
When a pile driver ram strikes the head of a pile
or the cushion on top, a compressive stress is produced
at the head of the pile. This compressive stress travels
down the pile at a velocity
c = y E/p
where
c velocity of the stress wave through the pile c Ll
materi~l in in./sec,
Lp
heavy ram will stay in eont<wt with the cushion or pile COMPRESSION COMPRESSION
head for a longer time than a light ram, thus producing figu.re B.S. Idealized stress wave produced when ram
a longer stress wave. If a ram strikes a thick soft cu~h strikes cushion at head of concrete pile.
PAGE TWENTYNINE
pendix A) and piles with a free point. These values are •
conservative since material damping of the pile and soil
resistance will lend to reduce them.
If the point soil resistance is hard or very firm, the
initial compressive stress wave traveling down the pile
will be reflected back up the pile also as a compressive
stress wave, as shown in Figure 8.6 (b). If the point of
the pile is fixed from movement, the reflected compres
sh·e stress wave will be on the same magnitude and
length as the initial compressive stress wave. As shown
in Figure 8.6 (b) these two stress waves may overlap
each other at certain points. The net compressive stress
at a particular point at a particular time will be the
algebraic sum of the initial compressive () stress wave
and the reflected compressive () stress wave. (Note
that under these conditions the maximum compressive
stress at the pile point can be twice that produced at
c c the pile head by ram impact.) Tensile stress will not
occur here until the compressive stress wave is reflected
from the free head of the pile back down the pile as a
tensile stress wave (similar to the reflection shown at ·
the free point in Figure 8.6 (a) L It is possible for
critical tensile stress to occur near the pile head in this
case; however, damping characteristics of the surround
ing soil may reduce the magnitude of this reflected
tensile stress wave by this time. Such failures have
occurred, however.
g fr 0 lllHX.
and CTt max. = (L,/Lp) 3 (8.6)
PAGE THIRTYTWO
111 rt! Hill Ill 1! Hltll
~rmmnnrrmt~~
,~~~ umvn 'F ljHf1lllH1jilljl1 umr ·
~lt ;;n tHnftrnt1lrn nmn mrm~tltflmmrm
tHtjf
··mtlmJifili·Ulml+r+m+UH+~t+Umm
lJ"' !I
~t!#i
:u
1
1
"11
0
c
;u
1
~[ IIr 1/liI, H.f l~!fff~l11<' 11!lt ~t I' 11 I l tt
·~
:;ft H1!i I' 1 I I :!+
I'l~fij 1~~~~
!! tdr llJllflt
1
!r ·lJ i rm
+ !I J;,l. , · H' II t
~m
r~i~ m! . IlL . 1 i IT 11 !IH
II ., I ffti
 i 't . 1 r
. itr~f 'J
. t
1:
.. .~ . I
• " 1 tt _;_
.f
t +
r~
f. i  r H'l+
...
q= rtm
• t r·
,lf
ll.,i.
I itt
t
1
i~
~
I
i  ~
4!.
mu
~:~ill
.... ,,r· me
•
,., ....
$t1J
fHjr
4t+HHHt..{ ~~.
' ~
"'Bll
Hi+
'
Figure IJ.2. Effect of cushion stiffness, ram weight and driving energy on permanent set. Square pile with uniform
ly distributed soil resistance of 107 tons.
\
IGOO
:~:~~:O E~~~~~T~:~~O%
0 ond R~,,. TON~
liY ~500
~
D .. D
~~=
AL\..IMINUM '\I CARTA CUSHION
j BLOCK, e : 0.60
1200
PILE WT I I
L VISCOUS DAMPING, uc/ft, (f)
z (l)i'Od BB"TONS ~IOOO /,... :.,.., 40 BLOWS/IN Ru (moll) I I :
1  SIOE,J'=005 ® "'r;;:: REQUIRED
"'0:_,
300"
~ 500 ~RANGE 0~ DRIVING
139TONS
+ ~ Q ;
0
END, J =0.15 BOO (j) 400" 1Ei4 TONS ~DESIGN •
L l>·· . ~f:KEI
~~MENT
cr"
400 PILE A
48" OIAM
020 HAMMER
L
2
;
Rp/Ru = 5%
zgo' rf'
RESPONSES FOR;
L '100 400'
L~: 100 290'
oL0~20~·~,;~·,~:~~~~Th~~~:~oe~o
REO'"REO
r·>·~ CAPACITY
"% '. . . . . "':
!E,!!ET~A.!!,O~:::._ _ ~
:
Figure 9.3. Computer analysis of pile hammer effective· problems can be solved in which the unknown parameter
ness in overcominr; soil resistance, R 11 , when drivinr; pile is varied between the upp~r and lower limits. These
under varying conditions: (A) computer input repre limits can usually be established with a reasonable
senting conditions of problem; (B) rariations in pile amount of engineering j udgeme:J.t. Parameter studies
length above ground; (C) variations in pile penetra of this typ~ were conducted by the authors"·" in studies
tion; (D) t•ariations in distribution of soil resistance, of the effect of ram elasticity all(] in the correlation and
R 11 (/rom Ref. 9.3). analysis of the Michigan pile data.
1000
800 )=0.0
(f)
c..
:.:::
J( )= 0.1
z
A ___  i r~J(~plc;:.=.0!.0.:.::2~ts
~8~
J( )=0.3
BLOWS /INCH
Figure 9 ..5. Blows/inch vs. Ru (total) for Arkansas load test pile 4.
PAGE THIRTYFIVE
CHAPTER X
PAGE THIRTYSEVEN
APPENDIX A
Developnlent of Equations for lnlpact Stresses
in a Long, Slender, Elastic Pile
A 1 Introduction u  the longitudinal disJ.Jlacement of a point on
the pile in the Xdirection, and
The study of the behavior of piling has received
considerable attention in the past, but only since 1960 t time.
when Smith J.:J adapted the general theory of stress wave Figure Al demonstrates the variables mentioned above.
propagation to pile driving problems, was it possible to
accurately determine the map:nitudes of stress induced It has been shown that any function f(x + ct),
in the pile durin~ drivinp:. Smith's method utilized a or f ( x  ct) is a solution to the above differential
highspeed eler'tronic digital computer to generate the equation. Further, the general solution is given by
solution, and while the calculations involved are sim
ple, it can often prove to be an expensive method of
u = f(x + ct) + £1 (x  ct)
solution. Therefore, it is the purpose of this Appendix From this solution, it can be shown that
to develop a series of equations from which a solution
to a limited number of piles can be obtained without
E du
(A.lb)
the use or expense of a computer. c dt
where
A2 One Dimensional Wave Equation
a = the stress in the pile.
Unlike a number of other approaches to the prob
lem, wave theory does not im·olve a formula in the The negative sign is used to denote compressive stress.
usual sense, but rather. is haEed on the classical, one Usually an elastic cushion is placed between the pile
dimensional wave equation. driving ram and the head of the pile in order to reduce
the impact stresses in the pile (Figure A2). The falling
iPu ram first strikes the cushion which in turn applies a
== c~ (A.la) force to the head of the pile. The sum of the forces on
the hammer are given by
where d2 z
c  the s!ress wave velocity \1 E/ p , F,. = W P = M
dt2
E the modulus of elasticity of the pile material, where
p the mass density of the pile. M the ram mass,
W the ram weight,
P force exerted between the head of the pile
and the cushion,
time, and
z displacement of the ram.
This equation can now be written in the form
p = M
( g 
d''z )
dt~ (A.2)
where
u ct
g acceleration due to gravity, and
W Mg
Considering the ram as being infinitely stiff, the
displacement of the ram, z, and the displacement of the
Long slender head of the pile u., defines tiH' total compression in the
elastic pile cushion at any time. Therefore,
Cushion cnmpn'ssion = z  U0
PAGE THIRTYEIGHT
of Rom at impact ' V0 is equa I to dt, . of ·
Since du., wI1ere
. V" IS
. t I~e ve Iocity
the head of the pile, it is found that
Rom (moss M, weight W)
= M l,. _ dVo _ AE
~:~l
c L' dt cK (A.9)
Cushion (stiffness K )
Equation A.9 may be rewritten in the following form:
Uo
l Pile (area A, elasticity E,
AE dt o
z=V
and
U0 = 0
Figure A.2.
where V is the initial ram velocity and the dotted quanti
ties denote differentiation with respect to time. From
Differentiating Equation A.3 with respect to time Equation A.3, we see that at t 0, =
we find P = K (z  u.. )
Differentiating. this equation with respect to time, we find
+ (A.4)
P K (z  u .. )
Combining Equation A.2 and A.4 gives and
=
~g d~>
P KV at t = 0
P = M (A.S) .
From EquatiOn A.7, we note that P
AE
=  V 0, so that
c
p AE
Noting Equation A.llb) it follows that
c
U'o (A.6) Therefore, at time t 0,
where V = KVc
o AE
the stress at the pile head, and
the displacement of the pile head.
In summary, the boundary conditions at timet =0
are given by Equations A.ll and A.l2.
p = AE (A.7)
c A4 Solving the Basic Differential Equation
D_ifferentiating Equation A.7 twice with respect to time The general solution of the differential Equation
gives A.l 0 is obtained by combining the homogt"ncous solution
V 1., and the particular solution Vp.
AE
(A.8) The particular !'olution to Equation A.lO is given by
c
r _ cMg
Substituting Equations A. 7 and A.8 into Equation \ P AI~ (A.l3)
A.S yields
The homogeneous solution to Equation A.lO is de
AE
c
du.,
dt
= M LO' _ d~uo
dt~
AE termined as fuilows:
1:> cK
0 (A.l4)
PAGE THIRTYNINE
Rewriting Equation A.l i using the values of Ah

II 
cK
2AE
K
2A y" [p
as noted above, yields
p
K K" !"'
AE Yp2 n2
M w
d2V .. cMg
v.. dt 2
+ AE
dV
v.. = d t
11
and therefore
m = n + Vn2 p2 (A.l6)
+
Three possible variations to this solution will now be
considered.
n
CASE I (n < p)
+ sm
(A.l9)
The first case is where n is less than p. When n is
less than p, the roots of Equation A.l7 are given by where
m = n + i Yp~ n 2
cK K ... fg
n=
The homogeneous solution to Equation A.ll then 2AE 2A V Ey
becomes
V 11 = ent (A 1 sin t Yp 2  n2 + Az cos t Yp 2  n 2 ) p
And the general solution is given by Equation A.1 9 gives the solution for the stress at
cM" the head of the pile at all times after impact.
Yo= Vh + AE (A.l7)
CASE II (n = p)
Applying the boundary conditions noted by Equations
A.l4 to A.l7 we find The second case is when n is equal to p in which
case the solution of the homogeneous differential equa
0 =A 2 + cMg tion (Equation A.l4) assumes the form
AE Vh = A1 ent + A2tent
_ cMg
A2 AE (A.20)
Applying the boundary conditions of Equation A.l2 to The complete solution for this case is given by
Equation A.l7 results in Vo v.. + Vp
V0 = ne" 1 (Al sin tYp 2 n 2 + A2 cos tYp 2 
 n 2) (A.21)
+ ent (AI Yp2 n2 cos tYp2 n2
Substituting the required boundary conditions given by
A2Yp 2  n 2 sin tYp 2  n2 )
Equation A.ll and A.l2, we find that
KVc
AE 0 =A + cMg
I AE
KVc Al = cMg
AE AE
PAGE FORTY
When t is equal to 0, we finJ that Substituting the requireJ boundary condition given by ,
+ ncMg + Az = KVc Equation A.l2 then gives
AE AE
KVc ncMg
Yo = nent (A1 sinh t \/n 2  p 2 + A2 cosh
t\1~ 2 ) + ent (A 1 \/n 2  p 2 cosh
AE A£
t Vn~ p 2 + A2 Vn 2  p 2 sinh t \/n 2  p2 )
_c_ 1 KV nl\1")
AE ' "'
Rewriting Equation A.21, using the values of A 1 and
A 2 , as given above, yields
ct
+ AE (KV nMg)J
j Krr
p
"t.
V W , and w
y = unit weight of pile material
x
Equation (A.23) gives the compressive stress at the
head of the pile, as a function of time for the case when + n sinh
n is equal to p.
CASE Ill (n > p)
The third and final case is where n is greater than
p. For this condition, the solution of the homogeneous
differential equation, given by Equation (A.14), assumes
the form
where
n Kvg
2A Ey'
and
Case3 (where n IS greater than p) Noting Equation A.l a, the stress wave velocity, c,
IS found to be
 KV e·nt sinh (t Vn 2 p~)
= v~

U 0 (max) = c
A Vn 2  p2 (A.29)
where t is found from the expression The length of the stress wave. L"' i~ then obtained from

. ., ., \/n2p2
= L. = ct . . IE
tanh t Vn p
n __ 7T v p
Equations A.21, A.28. and A.29 can be used to
determine the maximum compressive stress at the head
of the pile. In most practical pile problems, n will he L, = 7T"'
VI Eg
'Y (p2 n2)
for n < p (A.3l)
less than p, and Equation A.27 will most often he used,
although this is not always the case. Similarly use Equations A.2:~ and A.26 to establish that
For a given pile these equations can ht> used to when n = p and 11 > p the stress wave is infinitely long
determine the proper combination of ram weight, \C L, = :o
PAGE FORTYTWO
APPENDIX B
~
of capblocks,
      CAPBLOCK, K(l)
e) weight and dimensions of pile cap
helmet,
f) and dimensions and mechanical prop
erties of cushion. [j ~0_______ ::~: ::~N::2:(2)
2. Dimensions, weight, and mechanical prop
erties of the pile. Q       P I L E SEGMENT, W(J)
3. Soil medium.
a) embedment of pile,
h.l distribution of frictional soil resistance Calculations for idealization
over the embedded length of the pile
W(l) • weight of ram, (lb)
expresserl as a percentage of the total
static soil resistance, K(l) • A(l) E(l)
L(l)
, stiffness of the capblock, (lb/in)
T
~=
CUSHION, K(2)C
er
directly from the manufacturer's chart using
bounce chamber pressure)'
efficiency of diesel hammers is approximate
ly l007c
Calculations for idea11r.ation
~ A(l) E(l)
Kc •
K(l) , stiffness of the capblock,
vhere
L(l)
A • crosssection area of cushion, in. 2
(lb/in.)
Where
E • secant modulus of elasticity of cushion material, psi
A(l) cross sectional area of the capblock, (in 2 )
L • thickness of cushion, in.
E (l) modulus of elasticity of the capblock (psi)
Figu.re B.2. Case II ram, capblock, pile cap, and
cu.shion. L(l) thickness of the capblock, (in)
Note: See Table 4.1 for capblock properties.
Calculations for idealization
B3 Ram Kinetic Energies
The kinetic energy of the ram for specific hammer
W(l) = Weight of ram, lb)
types can be calculated as follows:
where
l. Drop hammers and single acting steam hammers:
EH = W{l) (h) (er)
T
hammer mechanical efficiency (usually
PILE CAP, W{3)
between 0.75 and 0.85 for most single
acting hammers) .
o
PILE SPRING, K(3)
Puctual W(h)
En W(l) er (13.2)
Prntod W(l) Calculations for idealization
efficiency is approximately 8.5 j';, for thesP Figu.re B.3. Case Illram, anvil, capblock, and pile
hammers. cap.
PAGE FORTYFOUR
K (1) = Stiffness of the Capblock, (lb/in.) E(l) = modulus of elasticity of ram material,
K(2)c = Stiffness of cushion, (lb/in.) (psi)
:,....:.;;:;;;;:; HOUSING Wh
W(l)~
RAM a: ~ ~t+:'I>+RAM W(l)
/~/
CAPBLOCK K(l)...........~
a:
w
::E ~ ;;~~·J.. CAPBLOCK K (I)
PILECAP~ ::E
W(2) ~ ~ PILE CAP W(2)
CUSHION
K(2lc
~
~ t ~ CJJSHION K(2)c
llf:
1.29
1.38 120 0.85
0 0
VULCAN 140C B 14000  13984 a:
0..
a:
a. 1.29 140 0.85
* REPRESENTATIVE VALUES FOR PILE NORMALLY USEO IN HIGHWAY CONSTRUCTION
PAGE FORTYFIVE
In Fip;ure IH the coefficient of re:<titution is defined
as
(B.6)
Since,
6.  DEFORMATION
Energy output = Area BCD = Fn (~r  ~n) /2
Energy input = Area ABC = Fn (~<') /2 Figure B.4. Definition of coefficient of restitution.
FB
Fn ( ~(·  ~]I) ~('
Fn (~c) Fn

(~c ~]I)
The combined restitution stiffness of K (2) c and
K(2) 1, can be determined from,
or
1 (for restitution
1 1
Knn
KAB
(B.7) +    phase DB in
e~ K(2) K(2)c K( 2 )p Figure B4)
~
RAM W (I) NOTES FOR TABLE B.2
~"' :?>~
S:: CAPBLOCK K (2) t average values
~ ~
w
..J
~
w ...>       PILE
PILE
K (3)p
W(4)
.::
• :::!'
C(
a:
93700
158700
1.00
1.00
OELMAG 0 44 9500 4081 0:
D 106.2 56.5 ~ 8.oo* 119 3: 200000 1.00
"
LINK BELT 180 1724 377
0
u
a.:. 44.5 15.5 !! 4.63** 0.64
II
z
0
81000 1.00
. g.x·~
~ 0. 142.5 18.6
:.:
3.87"* 0.50
!3 !/)
98000 1.00
LINK BELT 312 3857 1188 0
PAGE FORTYSIX
from Equation ! ,\./). where
e121~ ei2).,~ t•i2J 11 ~ K(m1) spring stiffness for sl'gment m,
Ki2) K(!iy"; + R(2)·1: ( Ib/in.)
A(m) cross sectional area of segment m,
e(2)~ = K(2)
~t..c:::2t.·;·2
[ e( 2·),... K(2) I' (in. 2)
~1 )c ~~ )"
E(m) modulus of elasticity of the material
+ e(2J/ K(2)c]
of segment m, (psi)
since K{ 2 ) = Ki2lc Ki2)p L(m) = length of segment m, (in.)
K(2Jc + K(2)p
The weight of each pile segment is calculated by
e(2J (B.8)
W(m) = A(m) L(m) a
. /
V K(2)c +
1
T
Ki2)p
. [e(2)c~ K(2)p + K(2)ce(2) 1 ~] where
a = unit weight of pile material, (lb/in.)
If the pile is tapered, the average value of A (m)
B5 /deali::alion of Piles should he used.
The idealization of the pile is handled by breaking
The program has provisions for handling cases
the continuous pile into discrete segments. Each seg
where the physical construction of the pile prohibits the
ment is repre3ented by its weight and spring repre
transmission of tensile stresses or is capable of trans
senting the total segment stiffness. In Figure B5, the
mitting tensile stresses only after a specified movement
weight representing the segment is assumed to he con
of a mechanical joint (joint slack or looseness!. These
centrated at the end of the segment away from the point
conditions occur with certain typPs of pile splices. The
of impact. This places the spring on top of the weight
program provides for this eventuality hy entering the
whose stiffness it represents, i.e., K (2) is associated following:
with '\\'(31.
1) If a joint (a joint is defined as tbe interface
Piles should he broken into segments not to exceed between hvo segments) can transmit tension,
approximately 10 feet in lengths, but into not less than the slack or looseness is entered as SLACK (m)
five sel,!ments. The stiffness of each pile segment spring
is calculated from
= 0. (Refer to Fi1!ure B5)
Atm) E(m) 2) lf a joint is completely loose, no tPncion can be
KlmlJ (B.CJ) transmitted and SLACK (m) !"hould he made
Lim)
a very large number, i.e., SLACK (m) 
1000.0.
lG)l 3) If a joint is capable of moving 1.25 in. before
·CAP BLOCK
""PILE Cf,p
~ CUSHIO~J
K(l 1
T,
ru SLACK {I)= 1000
transmitting tension, SLACK ( m l =
1.25, i.e.,
the physical value of the slack or looseness in
~SLACK (2)= 1000 a joint is entered in inches.
K(2)<~
The SLACK (m) values are always ass<•ciated with
spring K lm). In Figure 13.5, if tension ('an he trans
SLACK (3) =0 : :  ~
1® I mitted across the interface between segments .1 and 4,
the slack value would he associated with spring K ( 3),
i.e., SLACK (3) =
0.
I 25 LOOSEN:::CK ( )
4
=O ~ 1 the pile drh·er {ram, cap block, pile cap, its.) \vhich can
not transmit tension are also handled by setting the
:::::
Data for the Pile Driving Analysis program is en
tered on two sheets. Page 1 contains data pertaining
r~
to the physical parameters of a particular piiP. Page 2
"'" ,,,0 ',,,, is used to vary the soil, pile drin•r. or cushion charac
teristics for the pile described on page l. Examples of
SLACK (7) 0 ~ the rlata sheets follo11 the explanation.
Page 1
K (7)
Case No. A nv combination of up to six alpha
betic or numerical characters used for
SLACK (8)= 0'".;~..:r, identifying information. These char
K(8) acters will identify all problems as
sociated \Yith the pile data entered on
REAL IDEALIZED sheets 1 and 2.
No. of Probs.
Figure n.s. l'ile idealization. Total number of problems listed on
page 2.
PAGE FORTYSEVEN
1/DBLTA T This spnt"P 1nny lw IPI't blank in most Option 4 = 2. Option 4 may be left
cases as the program calculates the blank in which case it is automatic·ally
critical time intenal from the param set equal to 2.
eters of the system. The value cal !PRINT This is an option on the amount of
culated is data printed out when the long form
1/DELTA T = ~(19.698 \ 1l\:/W) output is used (Option 15 = 2). If
If. howeYer, one desires to use a spe Option 15 = 2, !PRINT is the print
cific 1/DELTA T, it mar be entered. interval expressed as the number of
The problem will then compare the time intervals. As an example, if a
entered value with the critical value print out is required every lOth time
calculated by the above formula and interval, 10 would be entered for
use the larger of the two. This is IPHINT. If Option 15 is "1" or "3",
done so that the user cannot inadver leave !PRINT blank.
tently enter a value too small and
hence introduce instability into the NSEG 1 NSEG 1 is the mass number of the
numerical process. first pile segment. If NSEG 1 is left
p Total number of weights including
blank, NSEG 1 = 2 will be used by
the program.
ram of hammer, follower, and helmet,
etc. The total weight of each segment, in pounds, is
SLACK (1) This indicates a specified looseness entered in the rows marked W(2), W(3), .... W(24).
between W(1) and W(2) in inches. The weights, W's, are entered for 2 to P inclusive. Note
This is the amount of moYement re
quired before K ( 1) will take tension. that W ( l) is not entered as it will he included on page 2.
If there is complete tensile freedom
of K(l), then enter SLACK (1) = The spring stiffness of each segment, in lb/in., is
entered in the rows marked K(l), K(2), . . . . Kf24).
1000. Leave blank if option 3 is "2".
SLACK (2), The stiffnesses, K's, are entered from l to P  l inclu
SLACK (3) see notes on Slack (1). sive. Spring K (P) is the soil sprin:.; at the pile tip and
Option 1 This is an option for the manual en is calculated by the program from the soil data entered
try of the cross sectional area of each on Page 2.
segment.
(a) Enter "1" and all AREAS will If Option 1 = 2, the avera~e area of each segment
automatically be set equal to 1.00. must be entered in the rows marked A (l). A I 2 l . . , . .
In this case, draw a horizontal line A (24). The units of A should he con~i~tent with the
through all AHEA rows on the mid stress units desired in the output. The basic force unit
dle portion of page 1. If "1" is used,
do not enter areas in AREA rows. of the output is the pound. The areas, A"s, are entered
(b) Enter "2" if the cross sectional from 1 to P inclusive. A ( P  l) and A ( P l in most
area of each segment is to be entered instances will he the same. ArPas of ~e!!ments of the
manually in the AREA rows. In this
case enter AHEAS (1) to (P) inclu
hammer are usually entered as A ( 1) =1:00. etc., since
sh·e.
stress values obtained for these ~eg:ments are not usuall\'
Option 2 This is an option for the manual
of concern. If Option 1 = l, tl;e area row should b~
entry of soil resistances.
marked through with a solid horizontal line indicating
(a) Enter "2" if the soil resistances no data cards are to he included.
(expressed as a percentage of the If Option 2 = 2, the side soil resistance on each
total soil resistance) are to be entered
manually in the HU rows. The RU segment, expressed as a percentage of the total soil resist
values are entered from (1) to (P + ance, is entered in the rows marked Rll( I L Rl. ( 2),
1) inclusiYe. Note that (P + 1) is . . . RU ( 24!. The soil resistances. RU's. are entered
the point resistance and all others are from I to P + 1 inclusive. The Yalue of l{ U ( P + 1)
side resistances. The total of all HU
percentages entered must total 100%. is the pile tip resistance. Mark out all rows when Option
(b) Enter "1" if the soil resistances
are not listed in the HU rows but are
2 = l.
indicated under Option 12 on page 2. If Option 3 = 2, the physical slack or looseness,
Option 3 This is an option for manual entry of expressed in inches. is entered in each row marked
the SLACK Yalues. SLACK (l 1, SLACK (2), . . . . SLACK (24).
(a) Enter "1" if SLACK values from SLACK's are entered from 1 to P  1 inclusive. If
SLACK (4) to SLACK (P  1) are there is no slack, enter 0.0; if there is complete loose
all 0.00 (indicating K(4) to K(P  1)
can take tension). In this case only ness. enter 1000.0. SLACK tP) is automatically set
SLACK (1) to SLACK (3) are en equal to 1000.0 since the point soil spring cannot take
tered in row 1. Draw a horizontal
line through all SLACK rows in the
tension. If Option 3 = 1, mark out all rows.
lower portion of pagp 1. I il this case Note that the forms havf' 2. ]. spa<'f'S for W's. K's,
do not t•nter any values in the Slack A·s, RU's, nml SLACI\. "s. The prof! ram is capable of
rows.
(b) Enter "2" if SLACK values nrc handling a pilt~ with a maximum of 140 segments. Ad
to be entered manuallv. In this cnsc, ditional ennis may lw addPd to pach parameter as TJPPded.
SLACK ( 1l to SLACK (3) in row 1
mar be left blank. Page 2
Option 4 This is an option on the ron tine USE'd W(l) The> weight of the pile driver's ram
to simulate the material behavior of in pounds.
springs K(l), K(2), and K(3). NC The number of the spring for which
(a) EntPr "1" fo1· use of Smith's K(NC) is being ,·aried.
routinE' 3 and 4. K(NC) The spring C'Onstant of the spring be
(b) Enter "2" for use of TPxas ing varied in lbs/in. Only one sprin.<:{
A&M's routine.4 It is suggested that can take on variable values per case.
PAGE FORTYEIGHT
The efficiency of the pile hammer. JSIDB = Damping constant for the soil on the
side of the pile.
ENERGY Kinetic energy of the falling ram
calculated by Equation B1, B2, or FEXP = The diesel explosive force (in pounds)
B3. which acts on the ram and anvil of
a diesel hammer. In the case where
ERES (1) The coefficient of restitution of no explosive force exists, as with drop
spring K(1) hammers or steam hammers, leave
ERES (2) The coefficient of restitution of FEXP blank.
spring K(2) Option 11 = This option provides for single or
ERES (3) = The coefficient
sprmg K(3)
of restitution of multiple calculations.
(a) Enter "1" if multiple calcula
tions for RU(TOTAL) VS BLOW/
RU (TOTAL) This space should be used only when IN., data are desired. The computer
Option 11 = 2. In this case RU will assign suitable Yalues of RU
(TOTAL) is the desired ultimate pile (TOTAL). Leave RU(TOTAL) space
resistance in pounds. When Option
11 = 1, leave this entry blank.
on page 2 blank.
(b) Enter "2" if single calculation is
'k RU (TOTAL to be made with RU(TOTAL) value
AT POINT The percentage of the total pile soil entered on page 2.
resistance, RU (TOTAL), under the
point of the pile. This value is en Option 12 = This option is used for designation
tered as a percentage. of the distribution of side friction on
MO If Option 12 is "1" or "2", enter the the pile.
number of the first pile segment act (a) Enter "1" for a uniform distri
ed upon by soil resistance. This space bution of side friction from segment
may be left blank if Option 12 3, = MO to P.
i.e., RU's are read in on page 1.
(b) Enter "2" for a triangular dis
Q POINT = Quake of the soil at the point. Nor tribution of side friction from seg
mally "0.10" is used. ment MO to P.
QSIDE Quake of the soil on the side of the (c) Enter "3" if Option 2 = 2, i.3.,
pile. Normally "0.10" is used. RU values are entered on page 1.
J POINT Damping constant for the soil at the Option 13 This option provides for computer
point. plotted curves using the data gen

PAGE ,.,
 ~ · ·
PILE DRIVING ANALYSIS OPTIONS
BY: .\DATE: OF 2
TEXAS AS. M UNIVERSITY "'~~v ~! ,_
z ;;;
I I I I I ~£ I I I I I I I I 12 I I I I I I I I I~ I I I I I I I I I~ I I ~I !0 z I I I I I lgl
.. 0:
ii: :::
I I I I I I I I lg I I I I I I I I I~
CASE NO.IPROBS.I !/DELTA T I p I SLACK (I) I SLACK (2) I SLACK(3) 12 314
Ill Ill I II I I I I J! Ill I I I I I l I I I 1111111 II I I I I I 111111 II IIIII II I II 111111
,., W(I) w (2) w (3) w (4) w (51 w (6) w (7) W(8)
II UJTIIT _IIIIJ]ill JlllJ1111 II I I I W(14)I I I 1I II I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I 1I I
W(9) W(ll) W(12l W(l3) W(l5) W(l6)
I I ! I II 11 I
W(l7)
rrrr\'Trrr
W(l8)
illilTIII
W(19l
u1lntll JJ
W(20)
I I I I I I I II 1 I I
W(21l W(22l
I I I I I i 1 I I i 1UJIW
W(23) W(24)
I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I 1 I I II I I IIlii I IIIII l II II I I I I I I 1I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I 1I I
LIS'IH. K(I) K(2) K(3) K(4) K(5) K(6) K(7) K(8)
111111 Ill JJiffiTI[ :ITTI]IIII 111111111 II I I I 111111 111111111 I! I 111111
K(9) K(10) K(ll) K(12) K(13) K(14) K(15) K(16)
I II I I I Lll u 1111111 II 1111111 Ill I ILl II J t l J L Jllll_L llLIJJJ ll l l l l l l Ul
K(17) K(18) K(19) K(201 K(21) K(22) K(23) K(24)
I!Lll!Ul ITIIlTJTTT: TflTITll1 "IDT!LLII Jl J l L Jl!lli llJJJJJ 11 11 UJJ.W
SQIIL AREA (I) AREA (2) AREA (3) AREA (4) AREA (5) AREA (6) AREA (7) AREA (B)
IIIIIIJJJ_ WllJJl(~f l Jj__lREA
AREA (9)
JJJT oil_ _UtRU 11~/1 JJ _]
AREA (13)
l L J IUJJ
AREA (14)
i l l IJJ 11 J I I I I I I l I I
AREA (15) AREA (16)
I I I I I I l I I l l l i l l l l l II I Ill l II I I I I I I 1 I I II I I I II Il II II II I Il I I I II I IIl I I
AREA (17) AREA (18) AREA (191 AREA (201 AREA (21) AREA (22) AREA (23) AREA (24)
IIUJ.I UJ UJTITJU JIUII LU llilL Ill I \I I Ill \ I I I I I 1 I I II 11111 \I I I I I I I l I I
... RU (I) T. RU (2) T. RU (3) T. RU (4) T. RU (51 T. RU (6) T. RU (7) T. RU (B) '4
TIJJIJTr[ liT!TlTil
RU (10) T.
lT1lTT1JI TI11TrTli JTlTITill. JJ
l1Jul_~~U RU (15) T.
r·,~llT
I ! I ._. lTlTUUJ
RU (9) '4 RU (II) T. RU (12) '4 RU OJl T. RU 061 '4
TIJIIUlT lJTlJiJll Jl11JillT JI~J ~JWJ_ RU (21) T.
l l I_~U URUI ~~JJ ~I I I i 1 I I I I I I I 11 IIIIII
RU (19) T. RU (23) '4 RU (24) l[,
INCH(S
lllul nTrr
SLACK (I)
1tt1 !'lrrrITrtrrnlT n'fr(nhr
SLACK (2) SLACK (3) SLACK (4)
]TfJ!l1·ll
SLACK (5l
·ru1rt1rr nrrlifJT
SLACK (61 SLACK (7)
I 11 I I I I I I
SLACK (8)
~~]1JT ffiTJUlT f±t;tJIIJII =HITJlLII 3ffl_illTI 33illillT ±[{_[[JJ I I +t1111111 SLACK (16)
SLACK (91 SLACK /10) SLACK (II) SLACK (12) SLACK (13) SLACK (14) SLACK (15)
B=trJillii
SLACK (17)
::EfiTIU.lT
SLACK (18) 8RILIJJI
J_ SLACK (19)
IB]lJJL[
SLACK (201
IEJJILIT
SLACK (21)
ffilll111 +H 111111 +HI IIlii
SLACK (22) SLACK (231 SLACK 1~41
r
Riiiiilll R=l~(r'JTJ 1 8+UJTlJT ~HTJJ!TlT +HI LTTI ~F8JJTlTr ~=FFlTT1T I I +HI IIlii
NOTES· ONE OR MORE PROBLEMS MUST BE LISTED ON PAGE 2
W's AND AREAS I TO P INCL.; K's AND SLACK's I TO P1 INCL 1 RU's I TO P+l INCL. (P+I IS '4 RU UNDER POINT OF PILE.)
PAGE FORTYNINE
erntt•tl for l{L!(TOT.\L) VS BLOW/ Bi Comments on Data Input
lN. (Option 11 1). =
(a) Enter "1" for computer plot of On page 2 of the input forms, provisions are made
data. If no plot is desired, leave for varyin~ the stiffness of any sprin~, K ( l) through
blank. K (P  1 I, in the hammer or pile idealization. This is
Option 14 This is used to include or exclude
gravity in the calculations. accomplished by entering the number of the spring to
(a) Enter "1" if the forces of gravity be changed in the NC column and then the stiffness of
are to be included in the calculations. spring K(NC1 in the K (NC) column. As soon as this
(b) Enter "2" if the forces of gravity problem is completed, the spring stiffnesses, K (NC) will
are to be excluded from the calcula
tion. This alternate in effect excludes be ·reset automatically to the value on page 1 of the
the weight of the pile from the calcu input forms.
lations. It is used when the pile driv
er is in a horizontal position or for The program is capable of handling pile idealiza
an extreme batter. tions with a maximum of 149 segments. There is no
Option 15 This option provides for versatility limit on the number of problems that can be run for
in the output format. each case.
(a) Enter "1" for a normal data
printout.
(b) Enter "2" for extra detail in Sample Problem
printout. This alternate gives perti Consider the pile shown in Figure B6.
nent stresses, deformations, velocities,
etc., at the print interval, specified Pile: 16 in. square prestres~ed concrete pile, 26 ft
as !PRINT on page 1. in length. The modulus of the concrete is 7.82 X 10 6
(c) Enter "3" for short output. This psi and its unit weight is 1.54 lbift:1• The pile is as
alternate gives only a tabular sum
mary of BLOW/IN. VS RU(TOTAL). sumed to be embedded for its full length.
Option J;j = :1 should he used only Pile hammer: Hypotheticill diesel hammer with
when Option 11 2. = 4850 lb ram with an input ram kinetic energv of 39,800
SPEC! A L fi:CJTE Where am thin!! lif'ted for Prob ft lb. The explosiYe force produced by the diesel fuel
lem 1 is to be repeated for Proliem 2', 3, etc .. draw an is 158.700 lb. The stiffness of the ram is given as 42.2.5
arrow down through the last problem to indicate repeti X lOll lb/in. The anvil is assumed rigid and weighs
tion. 1150 lb. The capblock stiffness is 24 ..5 X lOll lb/in.
H~ rr
0 EFF. ENERGY FEXP
c (I) (2) (3) POUNDS POINT f'OINT SIDE POINT SIDE
rr IT
B POUNDS POUNDS/INCH II 12131415
+·'++~
 ·
[_
·+
I
I
I !
JJ I ..  i
12 .1! i!
JH
I i I I I I l I
I I
l
tH~l
I
1
j
I
13 f.L
l· i 1 i _'JiI I

!
I
6
5 Ll U~ I~
I!, tll:i
i !
I
I
!
1
I
·~
I
ti I
i
I
 ..
t
B
7 
rq
i I i
! !
1tl:!
~ !I
I __..I
'
'
I±
I!
I
I
I
~t
I
'Jj_ 1
I !~ 'r iI _It I
1 ~
'I~~~
[ 1
H' ~~
J.
w !
tI Ii : 1 I II
'
i 11+l .  i _,__L
1I  
I
I
I
I 2
' ~) LLl I l .•
'I
I 3
I 4
I
I
_i
I
IJ
'tilL ,_:_. l !
I
J.
I
I
0~I
15
I
1JJ! i,.+1
.j.lL!. f+ 1
.,
I
!
.
I
·
I
wm
·  •.!  L .. I
·'+
I
 l
+
T
t _, ~
1
117
  1'
I+ ·J u
I I
I B . 
+ H .
l_j_
~.I
+1
+r .LJ
I 9
2 0
NOTE: IF OPTION
'I I II
" " . 1,
i
+
RU (TOTAL) . NOT
 ·
.l
REQUIRED
!
.
li It .j.ji I
1
T
_j
l 1i
PAGE FIFTY
FAL.L.ING 1 o ~AM 0•111•4000. 1
~k(I)I42.;1&1Q • •/I'N.
L_jwi21•1J!IO•
FAL.L.ING
where
At 3) ,E(3),
L(3J,
K( 3 )c = At3)r E(3)c
L(3)c
where
A(3)c 254 in. 2
E(3lc 1.00 X 106 psi
L(3)c 6.25 in.
then
(a) ACTUAL. PIL.E (b) IOEAL.IZEO PIL.E
K(3Jc (254) ~~5 X lOG I = 40.5 X lOs lb/in.
Fi[!,ure B.6. Sample problem.
The combined stiffness of K(3)c and Kt3J, is
In order to illustrate the utilization of the input K 3) = Kf3lr X K!3), (40.5) 151.0! (106)
data sheets and explain the output data sheets, four prob ( K(3J.
' ( + K13J p  icJ o.s + sT:u)(106)
lems are considered.
K(3l = 22.6 X lOG lb/in.
Problem l and Problem 2 are concernPd with the
driYing effects produced by two different cushions. The The coefficient of restitution for the combined
object of these two cases is to determine the drnamic springs is assumed to be 0 ..50.
.tatic resistance cun·es ( Rl' I TOTAL I VS BLOWS Ill\.)
For Problem 2 and 4 similar calculation yields
for one blow of the hammer. In Problem l, the cushion
is assumed to ha,·e a cross sectional area equal to that K(3) = 31.3 X 10 6 lb/in.
of the pile, is 6J4 in. thick and has a modulus of elas
The output data sheets are completed as follows:
ticity of 1.0 X lOr, psi. In ProblPm 2 the cushion area
and propertiPs are the samP as in Problem l, hut the Page 1 (Same for all 4 problems)
thickness is 3% in. In ProhlPm l and 2 the soil side No. of Problems = 4, there are 4 problems to be solved
friction is assumed to haYe a triangular distribution with on page 2.
lO'ic· point resistance. The soil constants are: 1/DELTA T 0.0, since the program will calculate the
(a) Q = Q' = 0.10 in. p
correct Yalue.
11, there are 11 weights (3 for the
(b) J = 0.15 sec./ft. hammer and 8 for the pile).
]' =
SLACK'S all set equal to 1000 since there is com
(c) 0.0.5 sec./ft. plete looseness between the ram, anvil,
Problems 3 and 4 illustrate the usP of program to capblock, pile cap, cushion, and pile
head.
imestigate the penetration of a pile to 200 tons of static OPTION 1 2, all areas are entered manually in
!'nil resistance produced hy one blow of the hammer. In AHEA rows.
Problem 3 the soil rPsistance is distributed uniformly OPTION 2 1, since OPTION' 12 is used to describe
along the side with lO ~;; at the point. The cushion is the soil distribution.
the same as in Case l. In Problem 4 the soil has a tri OPTION 3 1, all pile segments are connected,
angular distribution along the side with !Oj; soil resist hence SLACK (4) io SLACK (10) =
ance (same as Problem 21. The cushion is the same 0.0.
as in Problem 2. Problem 4. will also illustrate the use OPTION 4 left blank since it is desired to use the
A& l\i routine.
of the output option (OPTION lS). JPHJNT 10, in Problem 4, OPTION 15 =
2, it is
desired to print output eYery 10 itera
The following calculations illustrate tlw computa
tions.
tions for the hammer and pih~ idealization. NSEGl 4, thl.' first pile segment, see Figure
(a) Pile: The pile is broken into eight equal B6 (b).
length sf•gmPnt~ of ~<) in. The spring W'S enter thl.' weight of each element in lb.
Note that \V (1) is blank since it will
stiffness for each segment is, be entered on page 2.
PAGE FIFTYONE
K'S enter all spl'ing stiffnesses for the pile FEXP 158,700, lb. the diesel explosive force.
~n,tem con:;;idered to be basic, i.e., the
p'rogram \\'ill automatically reset the
OPTION 11 =
1, for program generated RU(TOTAL)
VS BLOWS/IN. curve.
~tiff1wsses to these Yalues after each
OPTION 12 2. for triangular side soil resistance
problem on page 2. distribution.
A'S enter all cross sectional areas of pile OPTION 13 leaYe blank since computer plotted
segments only. curve is not desired.
Page 2Problem 1 OPTION 14 1, to indicate gravity.
W(l) 4850 lb., the ram weight. OPTION 15 1, for normal data output.
NC :l, the cushion spring number, see Fig Page 2, Problem 2
ure B6 (b). Only the value of K(3), is changed.
K(NC)
K(3) 22,500,000, the stiffness of the com NC
K(NC) =
3
31,300,000.
=
bined springs.
EFF 1.00, diesel hammers are considered to
K(3) = 3.
be 1007c efficient. Page 2, Problem 3
Th~ value of K(3) and the OPTIONS are changed.
ENERGY 39,800, the input energy for this par
ticular hammer blow. NC 3.
ERES(l) O.GO, coefficient of restitution of steel K(NC) =
22,500,000.
on steel impact. K(3)
ERES(2) 0.80, coefficient of restitution of cap Rl!(TOTAL)
resistance.
=
400,000 lb for a 200 ton total static soil
block material.
ERES(3) 0.50, coefficient of restitution of com OPTION 11 2, for single calculation using RU
bined cushion and first pile spring. (TOTAL) 400,000. =
OPTION 12 1, for uniform side soil resistance dis
RU(TOTAL) =
leave blank, since OPTION 11 1, = tribution.
i.e .. the program will generate suitable
Yalut>s for t•urve generation. Page 2, Problem 4
c~ AT In this problem the cushion and the options are changed.
!>OINT lOS~. NC 3
MO 1, the first pile segment with side soil K(NC)
K(3)
=
31,300,000
resistance.
~POINT 0.10, Q. OPTION 12 2, for triangular side soil resistance
QSIDE 0.10, Q', distribution.
JPOINT 0.1f">, J. OPTION 15 2, for output at interval expressed by
JSIDE 0.05, J'. !PRINT on page 1.
   
ZN
PILE DRIVING ANALYSIS OPTIONS w. PAGE #I
TEXAS A B M UNIVERSITY "'~~~ "u ~~~
zoQ
 BY: A!t:tY~ SJi;Lt.7
loATE: OF 2
~
"
I i I I I ~2 I I I I !_I I i 12 I I LI I I I I 12 I I l_l_ I I \+1~ JJ ""'
rr~~
!!:::~o
~ I I I I I Jg i i I I I 1 I ! lg ' i_ I I ' I I I Jg
CASE NO IPRoss I II DELTA T I P I SLACK l 1J I SLACK l2J I SLACK(3J I 2 34
!1\PlSi It lo I I ifI I I I Jo o' I i I tltlt!oolo~ I lit ololol I I ltlojP]o I I ZI I It 0 ~ IIIIJI .J 11lJU iJ I II I I Ll
lBS W {I) w {2) w {3) w {4) w {5) w {6) w (7) W(8J
11116~
W(l7)
ITmTihr
glg ]JIIS"~W I I
W081
3
W(l91
I I ltfl1 I I II
W(201 W{21)
I I I i I 1I I I I I I I I 1I I
W{22) W(231
i I II 1111
W(24)
'
K {I) K (21 K {31 K (4) K (5) K (61 K (71 K (81
WLM~~~L mJJlllan::
 ~· J
AREA (101
Jllk!!1JtrTI
AREA (II)
;JITJ?ls~1 I I II lziH I
AREA (12) AREA (13)
I
AREA
l~lsl+l
(14)
I I II I ~isif· I I I I I lzls\41 I I
AREA (15) AREA (16)
PAGE FIFTYTWO
PILE . DRIVING ANALYSIS
I TEXAS ASM UNIVERSITY
BY :A. Ag:ji• DATE : li/31/D7 1 PAGE # 2
OF 2
z121s~o~oo~. I) 14ooooo 21 I
4 ~00000 II Z Z /~
1
9
I 0 :
I I
I
I 2
I ,3
I 4
I 7
I B
I 9
2 0
The output for the four sample problems are shown data. The Rl: (TOTAL) value of 1.010.962.1 is the
in Figures B7 through B11. Fi,zure B'i is the output total static soil resistance for which this .problem was
for one point on the Rl1 1TOTALI VS BLOWS/IN. run. This value was generated by the program and is
curve generated for Prohlem l. The block of data on only one point of 10 ust>d to develop the data for the
the upper part of the figure is a printout of the input total RU(TOTAL) VS BLOWS/INCH cun·e shown in
SEGMENT AREA TIM[ ~ MAX C STRESS TIME N MA< T STRESS D~AX(~) 01~) VIM I
I 1.000 4 2t\R36CJq. 0 0.0 0.4 1\7338 0.4P6170 0.50
2 1.000 7 22450'12. o o.o 0.430214 0.410214 4,07
3 254.000 II 7412. 42 0.0 0.359616 0.359616 I. )1
4 254.000 13 7324. 0 0 .o 0.239627 o. 223646 3.60
5 254.000 15 7107. o o. c 0.231331 0.211913 I. 14
6
7
000
254.000
2,..I7
19
6803.
6633.
0
34
0.0
1.
0.215890
0.203151
0.204061
0.198904
o. 57
2.68
254.000 21 6344. 34 1 7?. o. 1'101 95 0,JP8150 2.55
5R l4. 29 1973. 0.182027 0.174308 ~.39
'I 254.000 23
10 254.000 35 4195. 30 249 I. o.I72A78 0.168807 0.03
II 254.000 27 I 320. o o. o 0.167608 0.166761 I. 4 3
PERMANE'H SET OF PILE 0.06760A06 INCHES NUMBER OF ~L~WS P~R INCH = 14.79113579 TOTAL INTERVALS • 49
Figure n.9. Summary output for Rlf (total) vs blou•shn. (option 11=1) for Prob. 1 and 2.
PAGE FIFTYFOUR
TE<AS A ~ M UNIVERSITY PILE ORIVING ANAlYSIS CASE NO.HSP 10 PROBlEM NO. l OF ~
!/DELTA T p OPTIONS 1 2 3 4 11 12 13 H 15 EXP. FORC.E
9443.9 II 2 I 1 2 2 I 0 I I 158700.
ENERGY HAMMER EFF IENC¥ RUI TOTAL) PERCENT UNDER POINT HO Q{ PO INTI QISIOEI J!POINTI
39600.00 1.oo
JISIOEI NZ
400000.0 10.0 4 0.10 0.10 0.15 0.05 142
H WIMI KIM I AREA! HI RU!Ml SlACK!MI ERES!Ml VSTART! HI KPRIME!Hl
1 4850.000 0.4220000E 08 1.000 o.o 1000.000 0.60 22.99 o.o
2 ll50. 000 0.2450000E 08 1.000 o.o !000.000 0.80 o.o o.o
3 1200.000 0.2250000E 08 254.000 o.o 1000.000 0.50 o.o o.o
4 883.000 0.5!00000E 08 254.000 45000.000 o.o 1.00 o.o 0.4500001E 06
5 883.000 O. 5"!00000E 08 254.000 45000.000 o.o !.00 o.o 0.4500001E 06
6 883.000 0.5!00000E 08 254.000 45000.000 o.o 1.00 o.o 0.4500001E 06
7 883.000 0.5100000E OR 254.000 45000.000 o.o 1.00 o.o 0.450000!E 06
8 883.000 o.5toooooe 08 254.000 45000.000 o.o !.00 o.o 0.4500001E 06
9 883.000 0.5!00000E 08 254.000 45000.000 o.o 1.oo o.o 0.4500001E 06
10 883.000 0.5100000E OR 254.000 45000.000 o.o 1.00 o.o 0.4500001E 06
II 883.000 o.3999999E 06 254.000 45000.000 1000.000 1.00 o.o 0.4500001E 06
12 o.o o.o o.o 39999.984 o.o o.o ·0.0 o.o
SEGMENT AREA TIME N MAX C STRESS TIME N HAX T STRESS OMAX{Hl DIM) VI HI
I 1.000 4 2883701. 0 o.o 0.502888 o. 375493 4.67
2 1.000 7 2245095. 93 o.o 0.68R212 0.688212 !. 00
3 254.000 11 7445. 97 o.o 0.608394 0.606307 1.22
4 254.000 13 7258. 41 2537. 0.497042 0.495229 2:so
5 254.000 15 7017. 39 3001. 0.489747 0.489520 0.17
6 254.000 11 6826. 38 2655. 0.484540 0.484376 1.46
7 254.000 19 6656. 35 2477. 0.481653 0.481653 0.52
8 254.000 21 6493. 34 3081. 0.479475 0.479301 0.90
9 254.000 23 6133. 29 3078. 0.474198 0.473951 0.21
10 254.000 24 4278. 30 4194. 0.475263 0.470868 1.83
II 254.000 27 647. 0 o.o 0.473911 0.4730ll 1.43
PERMANENT SET OF PILE = o. 37391138 INCHES NUMBER OF BlOWS PER INCH = 2.67442989 TOTAl INTERVAlS • 9B
Figure B.JO. Normal output for single RU (total) (option 11 = 2) for Prob. a.
KPRIME(M)
FMAXC(M)
soil spring stiffness, (lb/in.),
maximum compressive force in seg
Time interval N =
0 is for the pile under the
ment, (lb), and influence of gravity alone. The particular oulput listed
FMAXT(M) maximum tensile force in segment, in Figure Bll shows that the point of the pile of Prob
(lb). lem 4 would penetrate 0.002353 in. under gravity alone.
J I He INTE~VAL N ~
SEGMENT M Ol><l Cl Ml
N(T PENET"ATION •
STRFSSIMI F I>< l
o.o
R:l"'l
Nl
W(M)
. 140
VI f.\)
N2 =
CPH 1 fiE I~ J KDRIMEIH) FMAXCIM1 FMAXTIMI
1 0.012!30 0.029211 1212h8?. 12326R~. o.o .t.P.SO.OC 22.!262~6 O.CC0~66 o.o 1232689. o.o
2 0.002919 o. 000041 1150. 11~0. o.o 1150.00 3.651348 o.oc0566 o.o 1150. o.o
3 0.002873 0.000075 9. 2350. D.o 1100.00 o.cooooo o.coo519 o.o 2350. o.o
0.002797 0,000061 12. 3101. 132. 981.00 o.oooooo O.CC0"4 56250. 3101. o.o
0.002737 0.000070 14. 35•6. 397. 883.00 o.cooooo C.OCC183 168750. 3586. o.o
6 0.002666 0.000075 15. 3808. 662. 883.00 D.cooooo O.CC0313 281250. 3808. o.o
7 0.002592 0.000074 15. 3764. 927. 883.00 o.oooooo 0.000238 393750. 3764. o.o
8 0.002518 0.00006~ 14. 3455. 11q1. 881.00 o.oooooo O.OC0164 506250. 3455. o.o
9 0.002450 O.D00057 11. 2682. 1456. BAl. 00 O.LOOOOO o.ococn 61R7SO. z~oz. o.o
10 O.OO?H4 O.OOOC4Q B. 2044, 1121. RB .1. 00 0.00)000 C.OC0040 731250. 2044. o.o
11 0,002353 o.o 4. 941. 1986. ~83.00 0.000000 o.o 843750. 941. o.o
Figure B.ll. Detailed output for single RU (total) ( uptinn 15 2) for Prub. 4.
PAGE FIFTYFIVE
APPENDIX C
OS360 Fortran IV Program Statements
The listing that follows is known as an XHEF list variable in the program and makes the logic much easier
in~. Each statement is numbered, for reference, consecu to follow.
ti\'ely from the first to the last statement. The variables
and program statement numbers are indexed by their A flow diagram of the program logic IS included
reference number. This listing facilitates finding each for reference.
C TEXA5 A • M UN! VERS ITY
C PILE DRIVING ANALYSIS BY THE WAVE EQUATION
C TEXAS A AND M PROGRA~ REVISED 12/l/65 BY EAS
C PE"MANENT SET,BLUWS PER INCH
C LCCSE,TIGHT,Uk LIMITEU MOTION AT JOINTS
C PAX!MUM STRESSES OR FORCES
C IUPT USCG FUR OPTION,
C l,JT,JTM,LAMP,LAY,LT,LACK, ARF U~[O fOR CONTROL
C X AT END OF NAME = LAST PRECEDING VALUE EXC~PT IN MAX MAXIMUM =
C N ALhAYS MEANS NUMBER OF TIME INTERVAL,
C NOTATION FOLLOWS SMITHS ASCE PAPER CLOSELY. TO UECOGE NOTE THAT
C NFMAXT = NO, OF TIME INTERVAL WHERE FORCE = MAXIMUM IN TENSION
I 5' 0002 5000 Hf6L JPOINT,JSIIl[,K,KPRtME,NPA~S.NPl,KHOLO,CASE*B
I~N 0003 5001 I~TEGER P,PPLUSl,PlESSl,PHUC,PROBS
I SN OOG4 5002 lll•CNSION AREA11501,CI1501,CXII501,CMAX(l501,DII501,DXII~OI
I ,CP.AXI I~.OI,DPRIMEI ISOI,ERESIISOI,F( 150I,FXI1501 ,FMAX[( 1~0),
') F,..AXTil':tOI,K..IlCiO),KPI{IMEili)Q),LAIIIl50l,NDMAXI1501 1
l MP.AXCII~QI,NFMAXTII50I,RIISOI,RUII~OI,SLA~KII501,
4 LDLUWSII501,UF•.AXC11501,URUTTLIISOI,VIISOI,
\1\ I 1 ':tO I , tiUl IS T I l SO I, RUH I l t '30 J, KWf f\IR I 30 I, KWM I CH ( 30 I,
6 XPLUT,I'>OI,YPLOTI501,STRt::S.51l50),KHf.ll01150),
7 FC~AXI~OI 1 ~CMAX150I,FTMAXt50I,NT~AXf501
?4 Cf EACH U A~tiVE SUFFICIENT fOR li!>UAL PROBLEMS
C INPUI  GENERAL
I>~ oou~ SOlO "fAUI5,Sllll CASE.P"OBS,TTOELT,P,SL•CKI ll,SLACKIZI,SLACKIJI,IUPTI,
I ICPT2,JIJPT3,1QPT4,lPRINT,NSEGl
l>N OOCb ~I{ If( (h,50031
I Sl>~ 0007 Sll01 fC~MATilHIJ
I SN OOUtl If ITTUELI.LE.O.I TTCELT=I.O
ISN 0010 IFI luPT4.Ll.OI !UPT4=2
l>N 0012 IFIIP•INT.LE.OI !PRINT•!
I~:'<~ 0014 lfi~>EG1.LE.OI ~>EGI=2
15N 0016 T~EL TA=TTDlLT
IS;., DOll ~~?0 IJ[LTAT ~1./TtJ(llA
I~N OOlii 'lU7l PPllJ)l = P+l
I SN 00 I 'I 50?2 PL[~>f • P1
1 s' 0020 'J(}lO HLAIJ f'.i,511411WI,..I,M=l 1 PI
I Sil 0011 S0\1 h!PillUS.ll = 0.0
C·CAL(ULAfL PILE W[!GHT
1 s~ 0012 iotPll(=O.
1 s;' 002' IJC (a JT=NSEGl,P
J ~~~ 00?4 6 ~PILL=wPJL[+wiJTI
I SN OQ;I_i 5040 Kft.il I'>,Sll'>IIKI"'·I ,M=l,Pl(S.~II
C K{Pl IS Ullli(Mif\1(() ,q 5184
I SN 0076 5041 KIPPLUS.Il: 0.0
I SN 0021 50Hl IJO ~U84 M=I 1 P
I SN 0028 KH(ltJ(lI)=KI,..I
I ~1l 00?9 5004 A~(l'd~l = 1.0
I SN OOI<J 50H6 AREAIPPLU>II • 0,0
ISN 0031 5087 IF110Plll150q0,508F! 1 ~0HB
I SN 0032 'lOHB f<EAO 1?,5ll4llfi.H.EAIMI 1 t.o:=l 1 PI
I SN OOB IFIAREAII I .L[,O.I A"tAI 1 1=1.0
I SN OOJS lfiA"EAIPI,LF,O,I ARtAIPI=l.O
ISN 0031 50QO IFI IUPT??15100,509?,5092
I SN 0038 'ioqz HEAD 15,~llbJIH.UliSTIMI,M=l 1 PPLU~ll
I SN 0039 5100 IFI IOPTJ215101,~104 1 5104
I SN 0040 SIOI UO 5102 ~=4,PLESS1
I SN 0041 5102 SLACKIMI • 0,0
ISN 0042 'JL03 GO TU 5105
!SN 0043 5104 «EAtJ l'>,~ll4I(SLAC.KIM) 1 f'=lrPLE~Sll
I SN 0044 5105 SLACKIPI = 1000,0
15N 004S ~106 ~lACKIPPLUSII 0.0
I SN 0046 'JollO IJC 5111 M=4 1 P
I SN 0047 Sill ERESIMl = 1.0
I SN 0048 5112 lRESIPPLUSII = 0,0
I SN 004CJ 5113 fQI{11AT(Ii.f. 1 IJ,fl0.4, I3 1 3F7.3 1 411 1 lXI3,121
I SN 00~0 5114 fCRMATIAF 10.11
ISN 00'1 5115 FCRMAT IUFIO.Ol
I SN OOS2 5116 Flm~<ATIHFI0,71
I SN 00~3 5117 FOitMII.T (12,F8.2,l1,F9.0,F3.7,F6.0,1F3.2,F9.I,F4.l,l3 1 4F3.2 1 fq.o
I, 511 I
ISN OOS4 'illtJ fLRMAllltiO,I)H CASErA7r4X,5H PROU,A6,74H Rll PlH.CfNTACES UN DATA ~H[
leT PAGE I SHOULO TOTAL 100.0 HUT ACTUALLY TUTAL,Fl5.7l
C UO 5570 SOLVE> PROBLEMS U~E AFTER A~OTHER
I SN DOSS NC"l
I SN 00,6 51?0 UC 5>70 !=I,PRIIHS
l>N 00~7 KINCI=KIHtLUINCI
I SN 00~8 'J121 H.(fi1JI5,'ill71 PH.£lii,Wil J,NC,KCNCI, HF,fNI H.f,Y,UU Sl ll ,(kl Sl?l 1 ur ~I 11
1
I 'H U~UH I PI HlNT I M()' Qfl(J 1 NT t QS I [)f 'J Pfll ~,y 'J ~I Of 'I { XP I I UP T I I '
2 ICPTtl.,lOPll ~ 1 IUPT14,1nPT15
I SN 0059 If I IOPfl?.ll.Ol 10Pfl2•3
ISN 0061 VST,k!= SORII64,4•EFF•I<NERGY/Wl II II
I SN 0062 lJO }QOq P'= l 1 'l0
15N OOu l fT.AX(MI•O.
I SN 00lJ4 qQQ4 fCPhX(~I=O.
I,,, 006~ NKCNT =0
I SN 0066 ~140 HUffLX • 0.0
ISN 0067 5141 ULCW>X = 0.0
I SN 0068 51 SO VII l = V>TAR!
I SN OOo9 SI52Lf=O
C FI"ST UFTERMI~E VALU[ OF RUIOTL
ISN 0070 5154 IFIIUPT1121~1Sl,5160,5151
PAGE FIFTYSIX
.
.
~
~ .
ir
.J
t F~~ CJKVl PLJTTI~G
~~~ 007l 5151 RvlUlL = kill* Vlll .. 2112.0
I SN 0077 5153 GC liJ 5170
c FOR SINGL[ PROALEH
1 s~ 0073 5160 RUTIJTL=~USUH
I~N 0014 GC TO 5170
c CC~PUTER
CYCLES FRO~ 707 NEAR END OF PROGRAM
I SN 001~ 701 SLCPE = IRUTOTLRUTTLXI/(HLOWSALOWSXI
I ~N 0016 SLCPE=AMAXIIIOOOO.,SLOPEJ
1 s~ 0077 IFI"LOw~7.015164,70?,707
ISN 007H 5164 IFIIOPT4?15165 0 703,703
I SN 0079 707 IFIALOWS?0.01704,704•705
I~N ooou 5165 ~B = 1.00
I SN 0081 GC TU 706
I ~N OOb? IOJ UH = 1.75
l ~N 00&3 hC TU 706
1 s~ 00H4 704 us = 7.5
I ~N 00H5 GC TO 706
I S'l OOBb 705 DB = 5.0
I SN 00tl7 GG TO 706
ISN 006H 706 RUT TLX = RUTOTL
I SN 00b9 RUTOTL ~ RUTTLX+IOB*SLOPEI
I ~N ooqo eLCWSX ~ BLOWS
c SECOND O[TERHINE ALL VALUES OF RUIHI
I ~N 0091 5170 DO l l H= 1 0 HO
ISN oon 1 3 RU(MJ s: 0.0
ISN 009J 51 7l RUPINT = IPlRCNT/IOO.OI*RUTOTL
I SN OOH 5172 IFIIOPTI?71143,146,5176
ISN 00Y5
I ~N 00Yh
lSN 0047
I SN OOYB
c
,.. FOR UNIFORM UISTRIAUTION
143 (JC 144 M=MO,P
RUI~l = IRUTUTLRUPINTI/FLOAT(PHCJ+Il
5173 RUIPPLUSll • RUPINT
GC TO 713
c FCR TRIANGULAR UISTRIBUTIUN
15di 0099 146 lJC 145 M=~O,P
ISN 01 •JO 145 RUI ><I = I?,O*IRUTOTLRUPINT l*IFLOATI MMOI+0.511/IFLOATIPMO+ 111 .. 7
I S'l 0101 5175 t{UIPPLUSll = H.UPINT
IS~ 01 Ol GC TU 71J
C ~CR LJISTRIHUTION P(R RU LIST liN CATh SIIEET
ISN 0101 ~176 TOTAL = 0.0
I SN 0104 IJC 5177 M=l,PPLU.Sl
I 511 010'> Sl77 JCTAL: TUTAL+RULISTIMI
ISN 0106 ~liB 1FI IABSIT11TAL100,01J2.0151UO,~I80,5179
I SN 01[;7 ')lJq ~RJTF (6,5liBICASF.,PROF\ 1 TOTAL
ISN OtuH l~O TO 5~ 70
I SN 01Qq 5100 lJC '>101 M=l ,PPLU~l
ISN 0110 51A1 RLI•J = IRULISTIHI/lOO,OI*RUTOTL
I 51< 0111 GO 10 713
C THIRU DETERMINE STARTING VALUES OF VIMI
I SN 0112 713 VIII=VSFART
I SN 0113 00 lHO M.=2,P
I SN 0114 180 v1•1 = o.o
I SN 0115 5183 V(PPLUSll ~ 0.0
c FOLRTH nETfRM!N( VALUE FOR KIPI
I SN 0116 ~184 KIPI = RUIPPLUS11/0POINT
c FIFTH CHANGE CYCLE COUNT
ISN 0117 ~IB6 LT ~ LT + 1
CCHEC< ON OFLTAT
I SN 0118 CALL OELTCKINPASS,TTDELT 0 P,o,K,TOfLTA,OELTAT,N21
CEND OELTAT CHECK
C ASSIGN OTH[R VALUES REQUIRED !TEXAS A ANO M REPII
I SN 0119 00 5718 M=1,P
I SN 0170 32 KPR!MEIMJ ~RUIHI/CSIDE
ISN 0121 Cl~l =_0,0
I SN 0122 Fl~l = 0.0
I SN 0123 C•AXIHJ = 0.0
I SN 0124 LA~IMI=I
ISN 0125 Dl~ I = 0.0
ISN 0126 NF•AXCIMI ~ 0
I SN 0177 NF~AXTIMI • 0
I SN 0178 u•AXIMI ~ 0.0
I SN 0129 NO~AX(MI ~ 0
I SN 01 JO FMAXCIMI = 0.0
I SN 0131 FfoiAXTIHI = 0.0
I SN 0132 Rl~l = 0,0
I SN 0133 5218 OPRIMEIMI = 0.0
I SN 0134 KPRIMEIPPLU~II=O.
I SN 0135 ()PRIMP = 0.0
ISN Oll6 • I
L A~P
C SIXFH PRINT INPUT FOR ONE PROBLEM
I SN 0137 5190 WRITE I6,5200JCASE,PROB,PROBS
I SN 0138 5191 wRITE 16,57011
ISN 0119 5192 •RITE16o57071 TDELTA,P,IUPTI,IOPT2,10PT3,10PT4, IOPT!I,
I IOPTl?olOPT13olUPTI4oiOPT15oFEKP
I SN 0140 5193 WRITE 16 0 57031
I SN 0141 5194 WRITEI6,52041 ENlRGY,EFF,RUlOTL 0 P[RCNT,MO,QPOINToO~IDF 0 JPOINT 0 JSI
lUE,Nl
ISN 0147 5195 kRITE 16,57051
I SN 0143 5lq6 WH.lTE {6 1 52061 (,..,wi,..I,KIMJ 1 AH.EAII•O,RUIM.I 1 SLA(.K(Ml EH.ESIMJ
1 1
1 VOO,KPRIMFIMI,M=l,PPLUS.tl
ISN 0144 5200 IORMATI///l7H T(XAS A • M UNIVERSITY ,,X,??~ PILF ORIVINL hNAIY
1SIS 1 4X,QH C.ASE NU .. ,A7,3Xd?P PRDI'LLM NO.tl4tlH Oftlitl
I SN 014'> 5201 FORMATI2XIOH 1/0ELTA l3K!HP4X67H11PTIONS I 2 3
I 11 12 13 14 15IOX10HEXP, FORCE I
I SN 0146 5202 FORMATIFII.I,I5 0 IIX415oi0X5l~,FIH.OI
ISN 0141 5703 fORMATill3H ENERGY HA•MfR EFFIENCY NUITOTALI PERCENT UN
PAGE FIFTY·SEVEN
lt>E• POINT MD CIPCINTI OISIDU JIPOI"'TI JlSIOEI N21
~~~ 014!:1 ')£1('4 FC~YA.TI2fl0.2, lOXFll.l,F 16.1,111 ,Ftn.z,lq.2,FlQ.2,fq.2,171
! S'4 fll4q SlrC> 1L•P"•\TI13t fl4.3,(liJ.7,Fl0.3,7Fl4.3,F9.2,Fll.2,ElS.1J
I~~ Ol'JU
520S tCM~ATilH~,7X,5H W(MJ,7X,5H K(MJ,7X,UH ARlAIMit6X 1 6H RU(H),7X 1 41
IH SLACK!MI E~ES!MI VSTART!MI KPRIMEIMI I
C [FFFCT OF G~AVITY BEFORE RAM STRIKESTEXAS A AND M SMITHS GRAVITY
I SN 01>1 5258 (FllUPT14215220,5221,5221
I ~N 01>2 ~l70 nTCTAL = 0.0
1 s"' 01>3 RICTAL = 0.0
I SN 01'4 UG 5 JT•Z,PPLUSI
I SN 01>5 hTCTAL = WTUTAL + WlJTI
IS"< 01'6 RICTAL • RTOTAL + RU!JTI
ISN 0157 UO R JT = Z,PLES~l
1 SN Ol>B R!JTI = IRUIJTI*WTOTALI/RTOTAL
I Sf< 01 c,q flJTI = f!JTli+WlJTIRIJTI
I ~N OlbG 1 F ( K (P) I 67,66,67
IS"' 0161 66 lFIKPRIME!PII67,63,67
I SN OH·2 67 !liP I = lf IPLESSII+W!PII/IKPRIMEIPI+KIPII
I SN 0163 lF10SlOEDIPII64,6S,65
I SN 0164 64 RlPI = RU!PI
I SN 011.> F !PI = F !PLESS! I + WI PI  RIP I
I SN 0166 UIPI = FIPI/KIPI
ISN 0167 GC TU 61
IS"' 0168 6> RIPI = U!PI*KPRIMEIPI
IS"' 0169 FIPI =
OIPI* KIPI
I SN 0170 63 CO~TINUE
I SN 0171 UC Ill JT = !,PLESS!
ISN 0172 JTtl = PJT
I SN OIB CIJTMI = FIJTMI/KIJTMI
IS"' 0174 O!JT"I = G!JTM+li+C!JTMI
I SN 01 7> DPRIME!JT"I = DIJTMIWTOTAL*OSIUE/RTOTAL
I~N 0176 Ill CC~THIUE
I SN 0117 oo eouo M=t,P
I SN 01 IB 8000 STRESS!MI•FIMI/A~EAIMI
I Srt 01/q 5271 N=O
IS"' OlbO LAY I =
I SN 01&1 5210 IF! 10PT15ZI>Z40,5ZJ1,5240
I SN 01U2 ~231 WH[1L(6,57341N,OPRJ~P,N2
IS"' Olo.l S2;Z WRIT[ l6,>73SI
I sr~ OIU4 5233 ~RllE16,52361 IM,DIMI,CIMI,STRESSIMI,F!MI,R!MI,WIMI,VIMI,OPRIME!MI,
l KPR I ME ( ..,, ,FMAXC (M), FHAXT tM I 1 M= 1, PI
ISN 01H5 fiiKC NT=O
I SN 01U6 S234 FCR~ATl/11811 TIME INTERVAL N =I6,7XIBHNET PENfTRATION = t\0,6,
L7xSti~l = r~.~x5HN2 = 151
I SN 0187 5235 FOR'<ATliZOH SEGMENT M D!MI .ClMI STRESSIMI F!MI
I R!MI Wl"l V!MI OPRIM[IMI KPRIME!MI FMAXCIMI FMAXTIMII
:Sf'\ 0108 S236 fCRMAT!IB,Fll.6,Fl0.6,Fl!.0,2FlO.O,Fl0.2,2FI0.6,3F!C.OI
C UYNAMIC LUMPUTATION BASFU ON SMITHS PAPER MODIFIED !TEXAS REPNI
I SN OloCJ 'J?40 lACK = 1
I SN 0190 5241 IJll bd M=ltP
C &8 1~ 1\rJ~[[N S41q A~D 5440
IS~ 01"1 Ul~l = Dl~l+V(MI*l2.0+0ELTAT
'sr.. 019? IFIUMAX("'.IU(MJ 120,21,21
1 ~~~ 01 ' l 70 UtiAX(M) = D(M)
I SN Ol·J4 NC,..J\XIMI = N + l
1 S'< Ol'l5 ?I (.XIMI = CIMI
ISN 01% IFI ''.P).\4,5400,34
IS~ Olq7 34 Cl"l = U1•1UIM+liV(",+II*l2.0*DELTAT
C STAI[Mf'T 34 MUST U5E A COMPUTED VALUE FOR THE ACTUAL O!M+ll
1 s~ otqo 5l4? IFIC(t'.)15743,30,30
1 sr~ 01·19 'J24l lrlh13SICIM)lSlALKI/JII5244,S244,52411
1 s~ 0200 '>744 ((to') = o.o
I>~ 02Jl S245 t,C Tu 111
1 SN 02C2 ~/46
Cl"l = C!ei+SLACKIMJ
(. r<Cil THAT U~LY A NEGATIVE VALUE GF C!MI RE~ULTS FKOe 5246
I ~N 02eJ 30 f X I ,o~.J = rIM I
c A TI_XAS R!IUTINF fOM RIMI IS OMITTED HEKE
1 " 02U4 52"1 Jf(I(JPT4li5300,J6r5300
c lb TL 1' IS A TEXAS ROUTI~E REPLACI~G SMITH ROUTINE 3 OR 4
J ~~~ 02<. '; 36 lFlAU~lEMESl~ll.OI.OOOOli3B,3A,l4
I SN OlfJO ld f PI) = CIM)*KIMl
IS~ 02C 1 Gr: TO 5400
1 SN ozog 14 IFICI~ICXIMIII2 1 35,15
15N 020" 15 F!"l • fX(MI+IIC!MICXIMli*KIMII
I Sl'ol 0210 <...0 TO 3'J
lSN 0211 IZ F tel = fXIMI+I !CI"iCX!MI I*KIMI/EKES!MI . . 21
1 SN 0212 35 f 1"1 • AMAXIID.O,F!nl
lSN 0213 t.U TO 'J400
C A T[XAS MO!ITINE fOR GAM"A IS OMITTED HEKE
C S"ITH NllUTl~[ 3 OR 4
IS~ 0214 •;oo lF1LM~SlMI1.001530?,5JD!,~JOl
I Si_, 0215 SJOI I 1"1 = C'"IHIMI
lSN 0216 <;O TO 5400
I SN 0217 .302 lfll!MII>I01,530J,5304
ISN 0218 5J03 Fl"l • o.o
ISN 0214 GO HJ 5400
I SN 02?0 5304 IFlC!MICMAXIMI1>3D6,5305,5305
I,,, 0221 5305 C~AX(H) = LIM)
I S:\1 0212 f tel = Cl"I•KIMI
1~"1 022J t..C TU l3 1t00
IS"< QU4 ; ·101> F 1 e I =I K I e Ill>< E S 1M I . . ? I*C 1M I I 1./ [~[ S 1M I•• 21. I•K 1M IOCMAX 1 ~I
I SN 0215 f If>~ I= h~.hXIIFif':) 1 0.01
I SN 021<. GC TO S4(J0
ISN 02?1 si.ov lrL,..r,T.II r.u rn 48
15N OU'I 1 f lfLXP.LF .0.1 (;II TO 4B
I SN 0251 NPt=r.,•1
PAGE FIFTYEIGHT
~~
IS~
. 0~
02.\4
.; 2 lfl',oi.C;T.t0.0!251PFL1Alll Gtl 10 46
IFt~PlO.Ol/DELThl}4b,46t90
I 5'< 02J~ 46 JfiFiliFXIlll47,48,48
IS'< 02J6 47 Flll=hMhXIIFI!I,F(XP,O.I
IS" 0237 GO 1U 48
IS" 0238 qo F II I= AMAX I I 0. 0, FE XP *II. 0 I 0 EL 1 AT *I '<P 10 ,Q 1/Ull 1 A1 I/O. 00251 II
Is" 023Q 48 IFIKPRJ~l(M)I5Q,~5t50
IS'< 0240 50 lfiUPRI"liMIUIMI+CSIDEI51,52,52
ISN 0241 51 UPRIMEIMI = OIMIOSIUE
IS·~ 0242 52 CCN IINUE
15" 0243 IFIUPNI"EINlUIMlQSIUEl53,53 1 54
I SN 0244 54 OPRIMUMl : UIMI+CSIDE .
ISN 024 s 5.3 CONIINUF
IS" 0246 5410 LAP LAM(Ml
I 5'1 024 7 GC TUI I0,57l,LAP
I SN 024 8 10 IFIUIMIOPNIMEIMIOSIUEI56,57,57
ISN 0249 56 Nl"l = IUIMIDPNI~EIMII*KPRIMEIMI*II.O+JSIOE*VIMII
ISN 0250 GC TO 55
ISN 0251 57 Hl"l = IUIMlOPRIMEIMl+JSID[*OSIDE*VIMII*KP~IMEIMl
I SN 0252 L'"l~l = 2
IS>l o2;3 55 CO~ I l~ll[
I 5'< 02':14 73 IFIMPJ7l,74,7l
I SN 0255 74 IFIUPRI~PU(PI+OPOI~1l75,16,76
I sr; 0256 75 UPR!MP = UIPlOPOIN1
ISN 02 0 7 76 CQ~lii<UE
IS~ 02>0 LA"P = LAMP
l SN o2sq GC TO 177,76l,LAMP
I SN 0260 77 IFIUIPIDPRIMPOPOI~1)1Q,78,78
ISN 0261 79 'IPI = IUIPIOPRIMPl*KIPl*II.O+JPOI~T*VIPII
I SN 0262 tJC TLl 171
IS" 0263 78 FIPI = IUIPIOPRIMP+JPOINT*CPUINT*VIPil*KIPl
I SN 0264 l A" P 7 =
ISN 0265 171 FIPI = AMAXliO.O,F(Pl)
IS'< 0266 7l CC~IINUt
c GRAVITY UPTIUN
IS'< 0267 5420 IFIIOPT14215421,54?3 1 5423
ISN on a 5421 IFILACK215Hr72,72
ISN 0269 58 VIII= VlllIFIII+~IIlWllll*i2.1HUELTA1/Wlll
l SN 0270 LACK = 7
ISN 0271 GO TO 542Q
ISN 0272 72 Vl•l = VIMI+IFIMliFIMlRIMl+WIMli*32.11*DlLTAT/W(Ml
ISN 0273 5422 GO TO 5424
I SN 0274 5423 IFILACK715424,5427,5427
I SN 0275 5424 VIII= VlliIFIII+RIIll*l2.1HDELTAT/Will
ISN 0276 5425 LACK = 2
ISN 0217 GO TO 542Q
I SN 0278 ~477 Vl"l = VIMI+IFIMIIFIMIRIMli*32.17*DELTAT/WIMl
I SN 027Q 54.?q CO'l I~UE
IS'< 02HO lfi~ •. ;T.ll GO Tn 5430
I Si>l ozez I f I f I l I • l F , 0 •• h NIJ. V II I • L [ •  0. l l VI I I = VS I AR I
I ~~l 02 H4 54 30 I ,..1\X(fKI .: AMI'tXllfMAX((Ml,F(M))
I~~ on' f"'f1Xl1'11 = AMI~IIFMliXTIMJ,FIMI)
l!lN ozeo "l4 3<.:J
IF!fMJ\XCU•tiFIMlll6htl67rl66
I~~ 021J7 In I 11. X(. I Jot I = "l+ 1
f~f ft
ISIJ OZtU 161l IF (I i'.AX.T (to! lF IMII68 1 69 1 68
I SN 02U'I 64 NF,..hXTI'11 = ~+l
ISN nzqu 08 ~TI{~ ~~fMI=f P"d/AKEAIMI
1 s:; 0201 ~·l = r.. + I
PAGE FIFTY·NINE
IS' O)lo S447 UG ~44q M=l 1 P
IS'<03Z7 5448 F•HCIMI : FMAXCI"I'/AREA!MI
I SN03lR r,449 I "AXI(MI=fMAXII"IIIA•EAIMII
ISN 03l9 GC TUI'i44J,5442,~553ltlOPTl5
IS~ 03j0 5442 hr.l:ll[ (6,21051
ISN 0,331 5550 kRill!0,21U61 IM,A.EAIMI,NFMAXCIMI,FMAXCIMioNFMAXTIMI,FMAXT(MioDMAX
1 f,.. I 'lJ I~ I I v f "') t M: 1 I p J
IS>< 0Jl2 OLCW!.=O.O
I SN 0333 5553 IFIOPRIMP.GT.O.OI BLOWS=1.0/0PRIMP
I SN 03J~ 5551 UOLUwSillf = BLOWS
ISN 033& u•LTTLILII • RUTOTL
I~~ 03 31 UF"AXCILII = FMAXCIPIOAREA!PI
C INITIAL U AO!IVF IOENTIFilS FIGURES USED IN WMMARY
ISN 0338 GO TUI5~~2.~~52, 1501,JOPT15
I SN 03H 5552 w•IIL 16o2107IOPRIMP,BLOWS,~
I St< 03~0 2105 FCR•ATI//l03H S[~"lhT AREA TIME N MAX C SIRES~ IIMl N
I "AX T SI•E>S CMAX!MI DIM I VIM I I
I~N 0341 2106 FCRMAT(I3,Fl~.3,(8,Fl2.0,ll4 1 Fl2.0,Fl&.6,Fl0.b,fl3.21
I SN 0342 ZI07 Fl•MATI24H PERMANENT SET UF PILE =FI5.8, 38H INCHES NUMBER OF R
ILCoS PER INCH= Fl6.B 0 27H TOTAL INTE•VALS = 181
ISN 0343 150 CL~TINU[
ISN 0344 5558 UO 5o63 M=NSEGI,P
I SN 0345 F T"AXIL T I= A•Ax I IF TMAX I l I I, F•AX I I M I I
I~N Oi46 F U OX I LT I= AeA X I IF CMAX I l T I , F" hXC I MI I
lSI< 0347 IF!~CMAXILIIFMAXCIMII5560 0 556l 0 5~60
ISN 0340 5561 NC.AX(LII=M
I SN 0349 5560 IFIFTMAXILTIFMAXTI"II5563 0 5562 0 5563
ISN 0350 5562 NI.AX(lii=M
I!>N 03~1 5061 CCNIINU[
I ~N Ol52 5'J:15 Jr( lOPTll215<)56,~570,5'>70
ISN 0353 5556 IF I!JPRIMPO.OOIJ~q,707,707
I ::,N 03'J4 107 IF IHllJWS60.01701,701,59
ISN 03?5 59 CONI INU~
I SN 0356 "'{If[ lh 1 H031 CASE 1 PK08
1 StJ 03j 7 r<HITF fh,/)04) QPGINT,JPOINT
I!>N 035tJ h'~ IT E I(,, A0':> I
1 Sl~ 03'>'1 00 HOI J=l,LT
ISN 0360 LI{L TtPi=UHUT T l I J 1/?0f'JO.
Is ..,. 03tJ 1 uOl WHIT(I6,HOZI UBLUW51JI,UkUTTLIJI,URIITO'\I,UFI"'A.XCIJI,FCpr.~Al(IJI,NCMAXIJ
71 IF T~A X { J I I:., TMAX f J I
ISN 0362 HC2 FOHI~ATI4XF7.4,FlO.OtlHF5.0 1 lHTF13.1l,F13.0,4XI2 1 Fl3.0,4XI21
ISN 0363 803 ~cq,v~T tl~OtlOX,22H PILE IJRIVJr.,r:, ANI\LYSJS,
1 lOX,lJH (.A~F \jUMHEK,lX,A6,)0X,l5ti PROBLEM f'.lUMOER 1 JX,I31
I SN 0364 U04 f.QI{J.1Alll4X 1 'JHC:POINT = FS.2,1JX,9HJP!lJNT = FS.ZI
J SN 0305 805 F0RMdi!?X11HULO•S P[R IN.2X7HRUTOTAL7XIIHPOJNI fORCE2X12HMAX C STR
llo52X3HSLG2XI2H•Ax I STRESS2X3HSEG//I
CPLCIIIN~ AGUTINF
I ~N 0366 IF!IllP11311>570,5514,5514
IS·~ 03&7 ')J74 C o\Ll L'IO.hiWTCTt.~'v"v• .... ,UOLGWStlT,C>\SE,PKUU}
C~\~ ~lOTTINl, KOUTI~E
I SN 03i.H 5'>7U lo.I{J lt {6,'>'>7?1
C UU •, llfl STAHl~ hT 5120
I S ~~ 0 3 u 'l ~'.177 fr<':!\T{lHI)
1 s" o 3 10 5571 •.,C TU S'JlO
I~'' ~311 lt.a;
c • e s s ll~lJ~G•••••
!)Y;>~BUL l~llK~Al ~TATL~[~T NlJ~I·I·R~
c OJ04 Ul?l fJl/3 tll.74 OlH4 0 I'll 0200 0202 0202 0206 020B 0209 0211 0215 02l7 0220
Ol?l C22l 0224 0190 0313
u Otln4 OI?S Olbl Olb3 016b 0168 0160 0174 0 174 0115 0184 01" 0191 0192 019) 0197 0197
0243 C244 0?4U 024'1 0251 0255 02~6 0260 0240 0241
0?61 0?63 02 98 0306 0313 0331
0~04 0122 0159 0151 O!h2 0165 0165 0166 0169 0113 01 78 0184 0203 0206 0209 02ll 0212
011• 0222 0214 0225 0Zl5 0235 0236 0236 0212 0215
on8 026 I 0263 0265 0265 0269 0272 Ol72 0275
O?o2 C284 0165 0286 07HH 0?9C 0298 0278 0278
Olll
Qu'jo
0J'l'1 036) o·H·l 036 I 0 361 0161 0361 0361 0161
K 01 tJ/ 0004 ()'i? ') ·>07h 0028 00'>7 0058 0116 0118 Ol4j 0160 016? 0166 0169
Olll C2?4 0J74 0161 0111 0206 0209 0 2ll 02l5
Olh1
M Oo.../IJ 002i: lh/0 007'> 00? '> 002 5 0017 002U 0028 0029 0"032 00 32 0032 0038 0038 0038
OL ..t 3 UG4 3 J()lt6 004/ 0062 0040 004l 0043
006 3 0064 ~091 0092 0095 0096 OQq9 0100 0100
"Olll Cll4 t)(l..; f11?1J
0104 0105 Ol09 OILO OliO
~1?0 0121 0122 0123 0124 012>
n L41 0126 0127 0L28 0129 0130 0131 0132 0133 01~3
J 14' Olld 014 3 014 J 014 ~ 014) 0141 0143 Ol43 0177 0178 0178 0178 OIB4 0184 Old4 0184 0184
Olu4 Gl~4 OIH4 u 184 Oltl4 0184 0184 0184 0104 0190 0191 0191 0191 0192 019?
O!•P1 Cl 01 q 1 01 n 0193 0193 0194 01'15
'.11., Ul9/ 0lQ7 01118 ot{n Q}q<.j 0100 0202 0202 0202 0203
0/Jf C;?QII IJ}I) lJ ;)20'1 0ZQ9 0203 0205 0206 0206 0206
0?09 0?09 0? II 02!1 0211 0211 0211 02!1 0212
0217 0212 0214 0215 07l5 0215
C21H 'l) 10 077fl 0121 0221 on2 0112 012? 0224 0224 0224 0224 0224 0224 0224 0225
0/1·/ Cl4r'l 0?4 c 0.?41 0/'41 0243 02"d 0244 0244 0?46 0248 024 B 0249
0225 0227
0/'ll C? ~I l 0249 0249 0249 0249 0251 0251
lll'j U?~J 01" 0?1? 0112 o2n 0772 0272 0272 0272 0278 0278 0278 0278 0278 0278
0/f\4 C21.i4 0}Hlt IJ?A'l 0211'> 0285 0106 0286 0280
O?RT 0288 0188 0289 0290 0290 0290 0298
0/·HI C?'"lll OJ'1H 1)2{)1~ OlOB 0108 0198 0298 0298 02'18
0208 0?98 029H 0311 0313 0313 0313 0313 0313
0 il" en\ ,) il j 0 lll 0 ll J 0326 0327 0327 0327 0328 0328 0328 0331
03!3 0313 0313
0 lll 03H IJJil r, ~ 31 0144
0331 on1 0331 0331 OHI 0331
Ol45 0346 0341 0148 0149 0350
N 0179 IJIR? :1 I 14 t)? 3t U)!J 7 02Hq 0291 Ol91 0293
p 0?96 0 311 01?5 OlH
(}1)1) J c;oo·J 0•'1 iJ •101 l OU/0 002 i 0077 003? 0() 1') 003'l 004it 0046 0095 0096 00'19
0114 0I l I n I C·C Ott. I 01 f•l 0(61 0100 0113 0116 0118
0162 0!'2 016} 0164 0164 0161) 0165 0165
OJt,fl ('I U'l t1l!•'l ul 0166 Ol6b 0166 016U 0168
f,·) u 112 0117 0184 OI'JO 0196 0254 0?5~ 0256 0260
O/o1 G2b i .)Jt,fj 0261 0261 0261 0261 0263 0263
•))h'> Ol'19 ,)30 l 0304 0106 0106 0 3l.l 0318 0326
oI 5 l 0331 0337 0337 0344
"v 0UIJ4
Oc04
Dill
CCl>ft
I)
Ot171
I'J H
01 J;
('I h4
( ll't
016'l
011 ~
0168
0143
0184
01 flit
0?4l
OI•JI
025l
0197
onq
0?44
0? 7?
0251
0275
02'1
0270
0263
0298
0269
0313
011'> 077 11 r17 111 0)[!(' 0}!1? 019R 0269 0277 0272 02 75
0101 030S 0106 0313 OH4 0318 03ll
O·,CJ4 007•1 Ol..l/ I l')f)?4 00'lll 1)061 0011 0 II H 0141 01,'> 0159
Ol 1S U4·l \.' "\'1') oq, 0162 0165 0184 0260 0272 oz 72 0275
Qt,l)4 01'l'l 02\JI! vlo·>
Ol.HO COO? 0 )U4 fl.Ji:H)
0·. :J4
0Ltl4 fl?G'1 >?II 073'>
0)04 (1\d''
0G2'1 Cl'..4 01~6 0 I'> 7 Olos 01':.4
Q(j()<}
01'>9 0159 015q Cl71 Oil?
0 II 1 0 i Jb U\37 "(J i4 '> 014h 0 34b 0 l47 014 8 0349 0350 0359 0367
OC)H 0·)·l') 00'liJ U\00 01\JO
UVI~I Ud'JT 00'18
0 II fl 01112 0 J II 0125
0U04 0046 0 1 1)0 0101 OliO 0116 Ol?O n 14 3 0156 0108 0164
PAGE SIXTY
•••••r !J H 1 ~ A ~ c " c ~
, • l r l K E N t ~ L I , 1 I N G•••••
>YMOOL INI(~~AL S!AHMHT NUMUFKS
wv 0303 0305 0305 0106
AOS 0106 Qlqo 070~
EFF Q(.;'J!:J C061 0141
J1M 0172 0173 0173 0171 01 74 0 I 74 0174 0175 0175
LAM 0004 0124 0746 0252
LAP 0246 0247
LAY 0180 0300 OJOO Ol?l
NPI 0002 Cl 31 0712 all4 0238
AltE A 0004 oozo 0030 0032 OOB GOB 0035 OJ35 014 3 017tj a2qo 03l7 0328 0 l3 I 0337
CASE 0002 000~ 0107 OlH 03'6 0367
(MAX Q(:[J4 Olll ono 0221 02?4
O,.AK 0,04 0128 Ol'll ~lq I 0306 OBI
ON:Ak 0367
EKES 0C04 0047 004 8 005H 005R 0058 014! 0205 0711 0214 0224 0724
f [ Xf' 00'8 0130 07?0 0236 0230
LALK 0109 C768 0270 0274 0276
lAJo{P Ul1b 0258 0258 0254 0264
PKUO 0·)01 0058 0107 3137 0356 0367
SCK 1 0061
AMAXl 0076 0212 0725 0236 02J8 0265 0284 034~J 0341.}
AMINI 0/85
BLO; 0075 007 I onq 0000 Ull? tJ311 0335 OJ Jo 03::.4
Ft•Ax 0004 0064 0)46 0346 0347 0361
Fl!JAT 00~6 ClOD 0100
FMA XC Oc04 0130 0164 0284 0?84 0286 o2q8 0113
FMA X T OG04
03?7 01ll 0331 0337 0346 Ol4 r
Gill o lo 4 0285 0785 02S8 0208 Olll Ol2R 032b OBI 0345 Qj4'/
F1.AX 0004 0061 0)4 5 OJ45 0)4q 0361
IUP 11 0005 0031 0130
IUP12 0005 0037 01Jq
IOPT3 0~05 QQ)q 01 )q
IOP14 O•l05 0010 01Jl 0 OQ7q 013q 0204
JSIUE 0002 0050 0141 0244 0251
KHULU 0002 0004 0028 0057
NCMAX OV04 0348 0161
NUMAX OG04 0124 0114
~KUNT 0J6S 0185 o2q4 ozq4 02Y5 ozqq
NPASS 0007 0118
N~EGI 0005 0014 0014 OO?l 0104 0344
~TMAX 0004 0350 Olb l
PKGBS 000'1 0005 0056 0117
CSIOE 0"58 0120 0141 0163 0175 0240 0741 0241 0?44 074U 0251
KUHIL 0004
KUSUM Otl~B 0073
H.WENI{ 0004
SLACK 0004 0005 0005 OJO"> 0041 004) 0044 0045 0143 Olq~ 0202
SLOPE 0075 OC76 0076 oosq
•••••F U R T R A N c
" L s s K l F E R E N C E l I , T I NG•••••
sv•uuL ll'.tTE~fi.AL >1Alfe"T NUM~(R~
TUThL 0103 0105 0105 Vl Oh 011!1
WPILE Oc.72 0024 0074
XPLOT Ou04
YPLU1 0004
HLOWSX 0JlJ7 0075 Qr)qQ
D[l1hf 0017 OliO ~I'll 0 Iq 7 onz 0234 02!8 0230 ozoq 071l 0?75 0278
UlLT(.K 0118
UPR l M( 0004 013'1 01 75 OlR4 0740 0241 0743 0244 024H 024Y 07 51 ozqa 0313
UPK\MP 01 jS 010? 02"> '; 02?& OlbO 0761 0263 02% 0111 OBJ 03ll OBO OJSJ
E:..L~<GY O·J'>S 0061 0141
ILI'lll Q(Jijij 007'1 0 I 1' 0357
IGP 112 Od•,s 0050 0050 0004 Ollo
IUP 1ll 0(..58 c 13'7 Olo6
I IJV t 14 0·)~8 0 lJq 0151 0201
lOP T 15 005tl 01 )q 0\Ul o2qz 0310 0'120 OH8
IPRI'IT O•lu"> 0017 0012 07q5
JPIJI rH 0002 0058 0141 0261 0263 0357
KPt{IMt. O·l02 0004 0110 0 I 34 0143 0161 0162 01(,~ 0!84 023Y 0240 0251 o2qs Oll3
Nr,..IIX(, 0004 0126 0287 0331
~f,..AICT Ou04 012 7 07~0 ant
PlK("' T Ot..'J8 co·•1 0141
Pl f ~~I . O':GJ COiq O'Jl 'i 004·1 OO't' ~)l '> 7 0162 Olb'l Jl 71
PPL~Sl \)',1\ r. ~"'I 9 ('r~~ l OGi' J 00}:1 ''rH~ 0045 00"1 0007 0\0l 0104 0100 0115 Ollb 0 l.l4 0141 015•
QP[JI 'IT OO'Jd cll b OJlol 075"> (ll5b 0260 0263 015 7
Nf(ITAL 01 , .• c 156 OJ 'Jb viSA 01 7'
Kllll S 1 OuU4 OOJA !llO'J 0110
ltUPI'4T Q()]1 coqo Q•Jl)7 01 no· 0 I ll
KUTIITL 0. 71 oon 0015 00hH uoc~q 0041 004b 0100 0110 0141 0136
H. \.IT l LX u,.,f. G0/5 oc·& a O'J8'l
w.. ~ I L.H 0.04
~ '"' t ~~ 0 Jtl4 Cl 7~ Jll'lt :·rn 0718 (J, 13
TIJl L r r. Ovlfl 0017 Ull H II) 3l
TlUELT O•,J' COOB O~·Ub "~OltJ Oil 8
UHlf) .... ~ OI,(Jl., 0 l )5 U16 1 11)(,7
lH "·~XL 0...!04 0331 03/.l
U~tl T0'1 0~60 Olbl
L..:L T ll 0\.04 0> ]I, J3f.O ()jf11 l•1h 7
V~ t A~ T 0'.f..l C06n 0111 1)2 fl) 0)14 QJig
hit. TAl Ol"J) 015~ 01 ">5 ') 15;! 017', 0367
PAGE SIXTYONE
•••••f ,, " r ~
h "
C K P ~ >
" E r £ ~ E " c E l l ~ r l •'4 G•••••
LA~El ~EF 1'[0 ~EFt~ENCES
5 0156 0154
6 00?4 00? l
0 0159 0157
10 U24B 0247
12 0211 020H
13 0092 0091
14 020B 02C5
15 0209 O?OB
20 tl193 0102
21 0195 0102 0142
JO 0203 0100 0198 G20l
32 OIZO
34 0197 Cl''b 0196
35 0212 0?08 0210
36 0?05 0?04
3B 0206 0205 U205
46 Oll5 0234 0?34
47 0236 023>
4B GlH D2ZI 0229 onz 0?35 023'> OZH
50 C240 0239 02!9
51 0?41 0?40
52 0?42 0240 0?40
53 OZ4 5 0243 0?43
'>4 0244 0243
5; 0253 OZJ9 0250
'>6 0?49 0?4U
57 0251 0?47 0246 0?48
'>8 G269 onu
54 0355 0153 l)3'l4
60 L) liS 0314 0314
61 GliB 0314
62 0319 0 ll u OliB
63 Ul70 Olol 0167
64 0164 0163
65 0168 0163 0163
66 0161 OlhO
67 0162 0160 0160 0161 0161
68 0/"0 (1(90 02UO 0788
69 0289 02HG
71 Ol66 02'>4 02'>4
72 0272 0?68 0?68
73 0254
74 Ul>S 0254
75 02'>6 025'>
76 (J2 57 025? 02'>5
77 0260 02'>~
C R 0 S ; q E F E K E N C E L l T I N G*****
LABEL OEFI,EO KEFF"ENCES
78 0263 02''" 0260 0260
19 0261 0260
90 02 38 023,
105 0316 0315
106 0321 03lq
Ill 0176 0171
143 0095 QQq4
144 00% 000'>
145 0100 00'Jl.J
146 0099 ooq4
ISO 0343 OB8
163 0322 0318
166 0288 0286 02B6
167 0287 0286
171 0265 0262
lBO 0114 0113
190 0309 0106
192 0314 0300 0301 0308 0310 0310
I 93 0305 0304
194 0311 0310
701 0075 0154 0354
702 0079 0077 0077
703 OOB2 0070 0078
704 0084 0079 001q
705 0086 0079
706 0088 OOUI 0083 0085 0087
707 0!54 03") ~ 0353
713 0112 OOC'JB 0101 0 Ill
·~·
001 0.\C..•J
tl\\! 0v '~·). ~' \~ l
0'.1'\ ,.'\,::.\ ._'\"'::
t~: ... ,· \:.• :'t ... •
f..:~) C3t~'1 ('q">~
PAGE SIXTYTWO
•••••F ) R T ~ l N c 1\ 0 s s 1\ E F E k E N C E L I S T IN G.....
lABEl OEFINEO REFERENCES
5084 0029 0027
5086 0030
5087 0031
5088 0032 0031 0031
5090 0037 0031
5092 0038 0037 0037
5100 00)9 0037
5101 0040 0039
5102 0041 0040
5103 0042
5104 0043 0039 0039
5105 0044 0042
5106 0045
5110 0046
5111 004 7 0046
5112 0048
5113 0049 0005
5114 coso 00?0 0032 0043
5115 0051 0025
5116 0052 00l8
5117 0053 0058
5118 0054 0107
5120 0056
5121 0058
5140 0066
5141 0067
5150 0068
5151 0071 0070 0070
5152 0069
5153 0072
5154 0070
5160 0073 0070
5164 0078 0077
5165 0080 0078
5170 0091 0012 0074
5171 0093
5172 0094
5173 0097
5175 0101
5176 0103 0094
5177 0105 0104
5178 0106
5179 CI07 0106
5180 0109 0106 0106
5181 0110 0109
5183 0115
PAGE SIXTYTHREE
•••••F (l ~ T ~ A ~ C K 0 5 $ R E F E R E N C E l I s T I N c•••••
l~l1El I tfiH[' RHEKE~~E5
~42l C273
5471 l'l74 0267 Olb1
SH4 0215 Ol74
5425 C276
5427 0278 0214 Ol74
542Q C27Q 0271 0273 0277
~430 Vl1:!4 0261)
543Q 0286
~440 02Q2
5441 o2q3 ozqz
5442 0130 03?4 O)?q
544 3 0301 0100
5444 liJOO 0?92 ol"2 0295 02Q5
032~ 0325
~··
rJ26 0323
51t4H7 UJ77
544Q ld?A 0326
SS5u v33l
5551 ens
5552 0339 0336 0338
5553 OJ33 0324
~555 0352
5556 0353 03~2
5556 Gi44
5560 C34Q 0347 0~47
5561 C 14 B 0347
5562 (,!50 034'1
5563 li351 0344 0349 034Q
5570 0168 00>6 0108 0317 0320 0352 0 352 0366
55 71 0;10
5'>72 0369 0368
5574 C367 0366 0366
7000 J294 0213 021.13
7001 0216 0203 Ul45
7003 ulQq
KOOO 0178 0177
4009 U0b4 0062
OS/360 F1~TtAN H
PAGE SIXTYFOUR
•••••( ,; H.
t " 4 N c ~ t: ~ ; ~ ~ I f: ~ t N C E L l $ T l ll
\~·····
LACEL 1.1 I l ~EO Hlfl ~[NCL5
3 0Ul0 001?
002? 0014
00i'4 OOih
6 00?6 OOie
10 0071 ann 00.?1 0075
~57\ 000q 0007
5~ 14 0004
OS/lbO Fn•TRAN H
CU~PILFR OPT I CNS  NAIl(= ,_,,,I I~ ,(JPT=OO, l I N(CI'fl =50, ~L;URC~, EHClJI C ,NOL 1ST ,1\lOOEC..K, LOAD, N0,..4P ,NOlO IT, IU, )(KEF
15N 0002 ~~e~OUTIN~ C[Ll(K(NPASS,TTOELT,P,W,K,TUlLTA 1 UfLTAT 1 Nll
l5N OOG1 ~El!.l K,~Pt.~~
1 sr. 00U4 i'T>GlR P,PLE5SI
l5N 0005 IJI,...[J~SHJIJ Wll'i01 1 K(lSC),I.JELT1(3001
ISN Q.J(,f) PLE5!>1 =Pl
I SN ')Q•j] N=2*Pl
l5N Qi)(,U SL~=J.
I Sf< OO:l'J T 1' I :o~= I.
(Jolt 0010 TLELT4=TTDlll
I ~N0011 DEl T/\l=l./TUELTh
I SN 0012 1~(1 1 f1= 1, Vl f ~S I
I Sl>~ 00 I l llFL 1 I If'. l = S~R TI o! ·~ + 1 I/ K! Mll/1 q. &4 H
I SN 0014 '·;N=Pll~Sl•M
IS~ 001') UELTI !N,l=SCRT!h!~l!K!Mll!lq.&4H
l SN 0016 I F I" I PI. t; T. 0. ) GO T 0 2
1 sr~ OOIU GEL li!Nl=l.O
I Srl 001'l (,[ T11 3
I JoN OJ/0 IJE L I I ! N l =S f:l< T! w! P l/ KIP l ll I q. M 8
I ::,.·~ 0021 Ul' it ,..=1 ,N
I Sli 00'/2 4 fp.'IN=ll.MINI IIMI~,UFllliM) I
15, 00/l IFIT~IN/~.UELTAT)S,6 1 6
C R 0 S S REFERENCE l I S T I N Gooooo
~y Mf!l)l I • t [I{" Al ~TAli n 1\ T f\l!~,. r H.~
•
M
\)!Ill CliO i "'J
0··17 r.r 1 1 0:'13 ')Jl'
11(' I ~
" 001 ')
UOl4
OOih
0015
00?0
0015 0021 0027 0026 0027
~ 0· •.17 CJ!'l ()~JC 00?1 002(,
p o_.. ,, (\(,:14 (J ~ I :) [I ~)00 7 00 I b 002\l 0020
O·• )? :")ofJ'J 0CJ13 :JOI> (JOID
"
~' 0\.14 OGI'l
~? OJUl ou z~.
C R 0 5 S R E F E R E N.C E l 1 S T ( N G*****
LABEL O~TI~lD REfLRE·KES
I 0015 0012
2 U020 0016
3 0021 001 q
4 con 00?1
5 0024 oou
6 0026 0073 0023
7 0027 OO?b
PAGE SIXTYFIVE
NO YES
NO Y£5
NO
NO
READ
WIM) ALL VAl.UES
M• I TOP
W(PPl.USI)• 0.0
WPILE • 0.0
PAGE SIXTYSIX
PAGE SIXTYSEVEN
L__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
PAGE SIXTYEIGHT
) ..
MAKE REAL
K 1 NPASS
MAKl lNTERGEA
P, Pl£UI
01MEN$10N
VARIABLES
IZ 14
PAGE SixTYNINE
IZ
J'TM• ~J'T
C(1 TM)• F(JTM)IK(HM)
!>(HMJ~ D(JTM•I)+C(J'TM)
Df'RIMJ: (l'TM)• D(ITM)WTOTAL
._Q$10E /R.TOTAL
l'
l\
jI
,.I
~
il
ji
:i
li
:i,,
.. '! WRITE M 1 O(M) 1 C(M),
STRESS(~, F(M) 1 R!M) 1W(M)1
VCM) 1 DPRIME{M),KPRIME(M) 1
FM,..'H.lM} 1 FMAXT(M).
FROM M•l iO P
.i
I!
''
;jlI
;1
i!
,.
I I
I'
!
i
i!
ll
l
~
PAGE SEVENTY
OMAX(M) • D(M)
NDMA'l{M) • N+l
18}~
19
PAGE SEVENTYONE
F(I)•AMAXI PICk A MA'II.
Po~ITIVE VALUE BETWf£N'
0 0 AND FE XP•(I 0{0ELTA
I"(NPr 0Sli/OELTAT}/OOZ5)})
PAGE SEVENTYTWO
i
i·
!>AGE SEVENTYTHREE
YES NO
NO
24 26
PAGE SEVENTYFOUR
15
PAGE SEVENTYFIVE
27
30
PAGE SEVENTYSIX
:>:<7
33
C.ALL
PLOT{O 0, 0.0, 3)
A X1$ I ( O.o, O.O,IOMaLOW,/INC H.101 •. 0,0.01
AXISI(0.0 1 0.0~i~~;.~~~~~T~i 1 1Z. 1 8.0 1 90.0,0.0,tT1 100.1}
';Y~eeoo~ h~;5~ eti.~! ~~ ~ ~~i~~~~g~d j)
SYM80L(o.J, 8.0,0.2., 4HPilOB,0.0,4)
NOMBE.R( L I&, 6.0, O. 1. 1 PPit08, O.Q,I.l
L~~t~ ~(~p~·~~\~yY~~~·,oL~', o;,•~~~)
L..INE3(1Z.O)
PLOT(O.O,O.O 99.)
PAGE SEVENTYSEVEN
REFERENCES
1.1 Isaacs, D. V., "Reinforced Concrete Pile Formula," 3.3 Lowery, L. L., Hirsch, T. ]. and Samson, C. H.,
lnst. Au.st. Eng. ]., Vol. 12, 1931. "Pile Driving AnalysisSimulation of Hammers,
Cushions, Piles and Soils," Research Report 339,
1.2 Smith, E. A. L., "Pile Driving Impact," Proceed
Texas Transportation Institute, August, 1967.
ings, Industrial Computation Seminar, September,
1950, International Business Machines Corp., New 6.1 Chan, P. C., Hirsch, T. J. and Coyle, H. M., "A
York, N.Y., 1951, p. 44. Laboratory Study of Dynamic LoadDeformation
1.3 Smith, E. A. L., "Pile Driving Analysis by the and Damping Properties of Sands Concerned with
Wave Equation," Proceedings, ASCE, August, a PileSoil System," Texas Transportation Institute,
1960. Research Report No. 337, June, 1967.
2.1 Isaacs, D. V., "Reinforced Concrete Pile Formula," 6.2 Reeves, G. N., Coyle, H. M., and Hirsch, T. ].,
lnst. Aust. Eng. !., Vol. 12, 1931. "Investigation of Sands Subjected to Dynamic
Loading." Texas Transportation Institute, Research
2.2 Smith, E. A. L., "Pile Driving Impact," Proceed Report No. 337 A, December, 1967.
ings, Industrial Computation Seminar, September,
1950, International Business Machines Corp., New 6.3 Airhart, T. P., Hirsch, T. ]. and Coyle, H. M.,
York, N. Y., 1951, p. 44. "PileSoil System Response in Clay as a Function
of Excess Pore Water Pressure and Other Soil
2.3 Smith, E. A. L., "Pile Driving Analysis by the
Properties," Texas Transportation Institute, Re
Wave Equation," Proceedings, ASCE, August,
search Report No. 338. September, 1967.
1960.
2.4 Dunham, C. W., Foundations of Structures, Mc 6.4. Chellis, R. D., "Pile Foundations," McGrawHill
GrawHill Book Company, New York, 1962. Book Co., New York, 1951.
2.5 Chellis, R. D., Pile Foundations, McGrawHill Book 6.5 Smith, E. A. L., "Pile Driving Analysis by the
Co., New York, 1951. Wave Equation," Transactions, ASCE, Paper No.
3306, Vol. 127, Part I, 1962.
2.6 Fowler, J. W., "Chesapeake Bay BridgeTunnel
Project," Civil Engineering, December, 1963. 6.6 Forehand, P. W. and Reese, J. L., "Pile Driving
Analysis Usinp; the Wan· Equation," l\·1aster of
2.7 Chellis, R. D., Pile Foundations, McGrawHill Science in Engineering Thesis, Princeton Univer
Book Co., New York, 1951. sity, 1963.
2.8 Leonards, G. A., Foundation Engineering, Mc 6.7 Mansur, C. I., "Pile Drivinf!,' and Loading Test,"
GrawHill Book Co., New York, 1962. Presented at ASCE Convention, New York, Octo
ber 22, 1964.
2.9 Janes, R. L .. "Driving Stresses in Steel Bearing
Piles," Dissertation at Illinois Institute of Tech 7.1 Lowery, L. L., Jr., Edwards, L. C., and Hir~ch,
nology, June, 1955. T. J ., "Use of the Wave Equation to Predict Soil
Resistance on a Pile During Driving," Texas
2.10 Cummings, A. E., "Dynamic Pile Driving For Transportation Institute, Research Report 3310,
mulas," Journal of the Boston Society of Civil August, 1968.
Engineers, January, 1940.
7.2 Moseley, E. T., "Test Piles in Sand at Helena,
2.11 Gardner, S. V. and Holt, D., "Some Experiences Arkansas. Wave Equation Analysis," Foundation
with Prestressed Concrete Piles." Proceedings of Facts, Vol. 3, No. 2, Raymond International, Con
the Institute of Civil Engineers, London, Vo,l. 18, crete Pile Division, New York, 1967.
January, 1961.
8.1 Samson, C. H., Hirsch, T. J. and Lowery, L. L.,
2.12 Glanville, W. H., Grime, G., Fox, E. N., and Davies, "Computer Study of The Dynamic Behavior of
W. W., "An Investigation of the S!resses in Rein Pilin~," .lournnl of the Structural Division, Pro
forced Concrete Piles During Driving," British ceedings, ASCE, Paper No. 2608, ST4, August,
Bldg. Research Board Technical Paper No. 20, 1963, p. 413.
D.S.I.R., 1938.
2.13 Reising, W. P., Discussion of "Impact and Lon~i 8.2 Reising, W. P., Discussion of "Impact and Lon~d
tudinal Wave Transmission" by E. A. L. Smith. tudinal Wave Transmission" hv E. A. L. Smith,
Tran.sactions, ASME. August, 195S, p. 963. Transactions, ASME, August, 19.5.5, p. 963.
~.1 Rand. Mog.en,;, ''Explo,;ion :\dds DriviP!! Fnrcp t•' B.3 Smith. E. A. L.. "Pile Drivin~ Analysis by the
11"\~Fl~.~ ,i~·.:.. ~~)~...: . . :·_·
r. :: f,;_, ···~ . '·>· ,r, ... i· ·;~' . ' ., _.,,. ·~·<11.1..'.1. ·.. · . r.~l·:..:w;1~ 1:.~. \'will. lZ'""~
3.2 Housel, W. S., "Pile Lnarl Capacity: Estimates and 8.4 Jlir~ch. T. ]., "A Report on Stresses in Long Pre·
Test Results," .lournal of the Soil Mechanics and stressed Concrete Piles During Driving," Research
Foundations Di,,ision, ASCE, Proc. Paper 4483, Ht•twrt No. 27, Texas Transportation Institute,
September, 1965. September, 1962.
?AGE SEVENTYEIGHT
8.5 Hirsch, T. J., "A Report on Field. Tests of Pre Cushions, Piles and Soils," Research Report No. ,
stressed Concrete Piles During DriYin~," Progress 339, Texas Transportation Institute, August, 1967.
Report, Project No. 256233, Texas Transporta
tion Institute, August, 1963. Bl. Smith, E. A. L., "Pile Driving Analysis by the
Wave Equation," Journal of the Soil Mechanics
8.6 Lowery, L. L., Hirsch, T. J. and Samson, C. H., and Foundations Division, Proceedings of the
"Pile Driving AnalysisSimulation of Hammers, American Society of Civil Engineers, Proc. Paper
Cushions, Piles and Soils," Research Report No. · 2574, SM4, August, 1960, pp. 3561.
339, Texas Transportation Institute, August, 1967.
9.1 Hirsch, T. J., "A Report on Computer Study of B2. · Hirsch, T. ]., and Edwards, T. C., "Impact Load
Variables which Affect the Behavior of Concrete Deformation Properties of Pile Cushioning Ma
Piles Durin~ Driving," Progress Report, Project terials," Research Report 334, Project 256233,
No. 256233, Texas Transportation Institute, Piling Behavior, Texas Transportation Institute,
Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas,
,_,
·~·
. 9.2
August, 1963.
Hirsch, T. J ., and Samson, C. H., "Driving Prac
May, 1966, p. 12.
tices for Prestressed Concrete Piles," Research Re B3. Smith, E. A. L., "Pile Driving Analysis by the
port 333, Texas Transportation Institute, April, Wave Equation," Journal of the Soil Mechanics
1965. and Foundations Division, Proceedings of the
~·· American Society of Civil Engineers, Proc. Paper
~: '. 9.3 McClelland, B., Focht, }., and Emrich, W., "Prob 2574, SM4, August, 1960, p. 47.
~
'
~i'
.. ~
~I
I ;~
I
I '·
.~
~·
....
'
\
i
~
PAGE SEVENTYNINE
Viel mehr als nur Dokumente.
Entdecken, was Scribd alles zu bieten hat, inklusive Bücher und Hörbücher von großen Verlagen.
Jederzeit kündbar.