Paper published in 10th International Conference on Piling and Deep Foundations, 31st May 2nd June 06, Amsterdam.

APPLICATION OF GLOBAL STRAIN EXTENSOMETER (GLOSTREXT) METHOD FOR INSTRUMENTED BORED PILES IN MALAYSIA
Abdul Aziz Hanifah, Senior Assistant Director, Public Works Department, Kuala Lumpur. Lee Sieng Kai, Managing Director, Glostrext Technology Sdn. Bhd., Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. A novel instrumentation and analysis technique, called GLOSTREXT method has recently been introduced for bored pile load tests in Malaysia. This technique provides an innovative and improved alternative for conventional bored pile instrumentation methods commonly practiced for the past few decades. Results for five case histories involving full scale static load tests for high capacity bored piles with both new and conventional instrumentation details placed in within the same instrumented piles are presented to demonstrate the advantages of this novel technique. Results show good agreement between the new and conventional instrumentation.

INTRODUCTION Over the past few decades, there is an obvious lack of innovation in the area of instrumentation and monitoring for the classical static load tests, while other indirect or alternative pile test methods such as Dynamic Load Tests, Statnamic Load Tests and Bi-Directional O-Cell Load Testing had undergone significant improvements in recent years. A conventional bored pile instrumentation method for static load testing is shown in Fig.1(a). In general, vibrating wire strain gauges and mechanical tell-tales are installed and cast within the pile to allow for monitoring of axial loads and movements at various levels down the pile shaft including the pile toe level. The constraints with this method includes long lead-time required for instrumentation, instruments have to be pre-assembled and installed onto the steel cage prior to concreting of the pile, information on pile length and instrument locations has to be planned and predetermined before the drilling and installation of the test pile. Strain gauges give localized strain measurements and are sensitive to variations in pile cross-section. Sleeved rod tell-tales often gives unsatisfactory results due to rod friction, bowing, eccentricity of loading and reference beam movement. The movement for lower portions of pile shaft is particularly difficult to be reliably measured most of the time. When instrumentation levels increases for a particular complex soil strata or geological structure, it is sometimes not practical to put tell-tales at every level due to congestion of the sleeved pipes in the piles, as well as difficulty in monitoring set-up at the pile head.
Instrumented Test Bored Pile Apllied load measured by vw load cells Pile head PTop Platform level Verify and backcalculate Ec Strain Gauges Lev. A

PB

Strain Gauges Lev. B

Tell-tale Extensometer 1 PC Strain Gauges Lev. C

PD

Strain Gauges Lev. D

PE

Strain Gauges Lev. E Tell-tale Extensometer 2 Strain Gauges Lev. F Pile toe

PF

Legend: denotes Vibrating Wire Strain Gauges denotes mechanical tell-tale extensometer

Fig.1(a) : Conventional pile instrumentation While development of removable extensometers in full scale static load tests (Bustamante et al 1991) had been very successful and unique in Europe for many years now, the advancement had not been

Paper published in 10th International Conference on Piling and Deep Foundations, 31st May 2nd June 06, Amsterdam.

materialized in this part of the world. Thanks to a new generation of pneumatic retrievable extensometer anchors coupled with highprecision spring-loaded vibrating-wire sensors (Geokon, 1995, 2003), highly accurate measurements of the relative deformations of anchored segments across entire pile lengths are now possible to be logged with relative ease during static load testing. The papers main focus is to highlight the several advantages of GLOSTREXT method and high correlation between GLOSTREXT method and conventional instrumentation from the results of five case histories involving both instrumentation details placed in within the same instrumented piles. DESCRIPTION OF GLOSTREXT METHOD The GLOSTREXT Method for static load testing on bored piles is a deformation monitoring system using advanced pneumatically anchored extensometers and a novel analytical technique for determining axial loads and movements at various levels down the pile shaft including the pile base level. This method is particularly useful for monitoring pile performance and optimizing pile foundation design. To appreciate the basic innovation contained in the GLOSTREXT Method, the deformation measurement in the pile by strain gauges and tell-tale extensometers are reviewed. Normally, strain gauges (typically short gauge length) are used for strain measurement at a particular level or spot, while tell-tale extensometers (typically long sleeved rod length) are used purely for shortening measurement over an interval (over a length between two levels). From a strain measurement point of view, the strain gauge gives strain measurement over a very short gauge length while the tell-tale extensometer gives strain measurement over a very long gauge length! Tell-tale extensometer that measure strain over a very long gauge length may be viewed as a very large strain gauge or simply called global strain extensometer. With recent advancement in the manufacturing of retrievable extensometers such as state-ofthe-art vibrating wire extensometers, it is now possible to measure strain deformation over the entire length of piles in segments with ease during static load testing.

Fig.1(b) illustrates typical arrangement of retrievable vibrating wire extensometers in test pile, permitting improved monitoring of axial loads and movements at various levels down the pile shaft including the pile base level using GLOSTREXT Method. Generally two strings of retrievable vibrating wire extensometers with 6 or 7 anchors are adequate to yield improved results for instrumented static load tests. This system is equivalent to the conventional method of using 24 no. VW Strain Gauges and 6 no. sleeved rod extensometers, which might not be possible to be installed satisfactorily due to congestion in small-sized piles.
Instrumented Test Bored Pile Apllied load measured by vw load cells Pile head PTop Anchored Lev. A GLOSTREXT Sensor 1 Anchored Lev. B GLOSTREXT Sensor 2 Verify and backcalculate Ec

PAve(BC)

Anchored Lev. C GLOSTREXT Sensor 3 PAve(CD) Anchored Lev. D GLOSTREXT Sensor 4 PAve(DE) Anchored Lev. E GLOSTREXT Sensor 5 Gauge Length

PAve(EF)

Anchored Lev F GLOSTREXT Sensor 6 Anchored Lev. G

PAve(FG)

Pile toe Legend: denotes GLOSTREXT anchored level denotes GLOSTREXT Vibrating Wire Sensor

Fig.1(b) : GLOSTREXT pile instrumentation CASE HISTORIES The results of five instrumented sacrificial bored test piles namely PTP1, PTP2, PTP3, PTP4 and PTP5, involving full scale static load tests with both new and conventional instrumentation details placed within the same piles are presented. The load tests were conducted with great care and control as described in following subsections. All the monitoring instruments were measured automatically during the loading and unloading cycles using a data-logger system. Fig.2 gives a typical illustration for instrumentation and monitoring set-up.

Paper published in 10th International Conference on Piling and Deep Foundations, 31st May 2nd June 06, Amsterdam.

ICW01 site
Johor Strait

Fig.3(a): Site location plan pile location and pile instrumentation details are graphically represented in Figure 3(b). For each of the sacrificial bored piles, two types of instruments, namely, the vibrating wire strain gauges and retrievable vibrating wire extensometers were installed internally in the pile. The strain gauges were installed at six levels with four strain gauges at each level. The Geokon A-9 retrievable vibrating wire extensometers sensors, housed in a 51mm internal diameter sonic logging pipe was installed at six levels at corresponding strain gauges levels, with 2 sets per level. Piles Structural Properties The instrumented test piles PTP1, PTP2, PTP3, PTP4 and PTP5 constructed were all bored cast-in-situ reinforced concrete piles having structural properties as listed in Table 1:
SPT value, N (blows/30cm)
150

Fig.2: Typical pile test instrumentation and monitoring set-up Subsurface Conditions Instrumentation Scheme and Piles

The location of the site [Figure 3(a)] is at Interchange No.1 (ICW01), part of Southern Integrated Gate Project located at Johor Bahru, Johor, Malaysia. The site is underlain predominantly by weathered residual soils, which consist mainly of silty sand. Standard penetration tests (SPT N values in blows/30cm) from borehole result at each test
Platform Level 0 5 10 15 20
xx x
SPT value, N (blows/30cm)
0 50 5 6 5 100 150

SPT value, N (blows/30cm)

0 5 7 8 50 100 150
0

SPT value, N (blows/30cm)

50 7 6 4 5 14 9 19 20 100

SPT value, N (blows/30cm)

50 5 9 7 0 6 0 9 7 8 9 11 3 4 11 10 12 14 25 29 16 22 28 24 17 19 22 21 19 21 32 33 37 37 26 32 45 50 27 40 45

100

150

50 8 8 14 4 6 11 8 3 4 9 9 10 10 12 11 30 18 22 17 18

100

150

Lev. A

Silty x x x SAND x x
x xx

6
9 7 17 18 12 13 16 18 42 39 18 21

7 18 22 19 27 20 50 19 39 32 37 45 37 35 39 25 27 27 28 40 43 36 50 50 34 42 50 75 67 79

23 25 15 41 68 42 49 64 18 40 30 33 51 73 103 143 143

Depth (m)

25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60

--x x x x x Clayey x x x x x - - SILT - x x x x x x x x x - - x x x x x

Lev. B

Clayey Silty SAND

xx x xx

Lev. C Lev. D Lev. E Lev. F

Silty x x SANDx
x xx x xx

PTP 1

43 45 12 14 28 26 45 50 23 8 9 21 43 36 100 67 33 38 36

64 83 33 47 57 55 79

PTP 3

PTP5

107 107

PTP 2

PTP 4
BH 4

DB 3
35

DB 5

DB 6

BH 2

Soil Profile

Legends: VW Strain Gauge (4 Nos/Level) GLOSTREXT Anchored Level GLOSTREXT VW Sensor

N.T.S

Fig.3(b) : SPT N values and pile instrumentation scheme for PTP1 to PTP5

Paper published in 10th International Conference on Piling and Deep Foundations, 31st May 2nd June 06, Amsterdam.

Table 1:Structural Properties of Piles Test Pile Pile Main Concrete Pile Diameter Length Reinfor- OverNo. (mm) (m) cement break PTP1 750 47.0 12T20 <9% PTP2 1000 50.5 40T20 <14% PTP3 1000 40.0 40T20 <9% PTP4 750 55.7 12T32 <8% PTP5 750 40.1 20T20 <15% Procedures for Installation of Test Piles The bored cast-in-place test piles were excavated with a Bauer BG22 heavy-duty rotary drilling rig using an 12m length temporary casing with bentonite slurry as a stabilizing fluid. Steel reinforcement cage was lowered after base cleaning using cleaning bucket and desanding of bentonite, followed by placing of Grade 40 concrete using tremie method. Loading Arrangement Programmes And Test

Pile Movement And Instruments Monitoring System The pile top settlement was monitored using the following instruments: (i) Four Linear Variation Displacement Transducers (LVDTs) mounted to the reference beams with its plungers placed vertically against glass plates fixed on the pile top. (ii) Vertical scale rules fixed to pile top sighted by a precise level instrument. Vertical scales were also provided on the reference beams to monitor any movement during load testing. The vibrating wire load cells, strain gauges, retrievable extensometers and LVDTs were logged automatically using a Micro-10x Datalogger and Multilogger software, at 3 minutes intervals for close monitoring during loading and unloading steps. Only precise level readings were taken manually. RESULTS AND ASSESSMENT OF PILES PERFORMANCE Load Movement Behaviour Of The Piles The measured pile head load-pile head settlement behaviours, pile head load versus pile toe settlement and the measured pile head load-total shortening behaviours are presented in Figure 4 for PTP1 to PTP5. Shortening readings acquired from measurements of the relative movement of anchored segments across entire pile lengths seemed highly consistent, giving highly reliable pile toe settlement behaviours (derived by subtracting the structural shortening from the pile head settlement ). Axial Load Distribution From VW Strain Gauges The load distribution curves indicating the load distribution along the shaft and at the base were derived from computations based on the measured changes in strain gauge readings and pile properties (steel content, crosssectional areas and concrete modulus) based on as-built details (including concreting record) known from the construction record.

The instrumented piles were tested by the Maintained Load Test (MLT) using a kentledge reaction system. In the set-up used, the test loads were applied using two 1,000 tonne capacity hydraulic jacks acting against the main reaction beam. The jacks were operated by an electric pump. The applied loads were measured by calibrated vibrating wire load cells. Static load tests commenced typically 3 weeks after pile installation, with cube strength exceeded specified concrete cube strength of 2 40 N/mm . To obtain good quality data, small load increments were chosen. Typically, increments of 10% of the working load were applied progressively in two loading cycles to a maximum test load of two and a half times the working load or failure, whichever occurs first. Table 2 : Test Programs Pile No. PTP1 PTP2 PTP3 PTP4 PTP5 Date Installed 15/09/03 22/09/03 25/09/03 27/09/03 09/10/03 Total Loading Period 102 hours 61 hours 83 hours 85 hours 85 hours Maximum Test Load 6,237 kN 11,056 kN 12,500 kN 8,125 kN 8,125 kN

Paper published in 10th International Conference on Piling and Deep Foundations, 31st May 2nd June 06, Amsterdam.

Load transferred (P) at each level is calculated as follows: P = (Ec*Ac + Es*As )

VW Strain Gauges test results for the test cycle for PTP1 to PTP5 are presented in Fig.5. Axial Load Distribution From Retrievable VW Extensometers In the GLOSTRET method, the modulus of by concrete, Ec was back-calculated measuring the strains in the top 2.0m of debonded length of the pile using the GLOSTREXT vw sensors and the pile top loads. For each stage of loading, Ec is backcalculated by assuming that the load at the mid-point of the 2.0m debonded length level was equal to the applied load at the pile top. Load distribution curves acquired from GLOSTREXT test results for the test cycle for PTP1 to PTP5 are plotted and presented in Fig.6. It is worthy to note that Fig.5 and Fig.6 show very similar characteristics.

where = average change in strain gauge readings Ac = cross-sectional area of concrete Ec = Concrete Modulus As = cross-sectional area of steel reinforcement Es = Young's Modulus of Elasticity in 2 steel ( = 200 kN/mm ) The modulus of concrete, Ec was backcalculated with the aid of the strain gauge results at level A and the pile top loads. For each stage of loading, Ec is back-calculated by assuming that the load at the strain gauge level A was equal to the applied load at the pile top. Load distribution curves acquired from

7000 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 0 20 40 60 80

12000

14000

PTP1
Pile Head Load (kN )
10000 8000 6000 4000 2000 0 0

PTP2
12000

PTP3

10000

10000

PTP4
Pile Head Load (kN )
8000

PTP5
Pile Head Load (kN )
8000

Pile Head Load (kN )

Pile Head Load (kN )

10000 8000 6000 4000 2000 0

6000

6000

4000

4000

2000

2000

0 0 5 10 15 20 25 0 5 10 15 20 25 30

0 0 5 10 15 20 25

20

40

60

80

100

120

Pile Head Settlement (mm)

7000

Pile Head Settlement (mm)

12000 14000

Pile Head Settlement (mm)

Pile Head Settlement (mm)

10000 10000

Pile Head Settlement (mm)

PTP1
Pile Head Load (kN )
6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 0 20 40 60 80

PTP2
Pile Head Load (kN )
8000 6000 4000 2000 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120

PTP3

PTP4
Pile Head Load (kN )
8000

PTP5
Pile Head Load (kN )
8000

Pile Head Load (kN )

10000

12000 10000 8000 6000 4000 2000 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0 0 5 10 15 20 25

6000

6000

4000

4000

2000

2000

Pile Toe Settlement (mm)

7000 6000

Pile Toe Settlement (mm)

12000 10000 8000 6000 4000 2000 0

Pile Toe Settlement (mm)

14000 12000 10000 8000 6000 4000 2000 0 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 0

Pile Toe Settlement (mm)

10000 10000

Pile Toe Settlement (mm)

PTP1

PTP2
Pile Head Load (kN )

PTP3

PTP4
Pile Head Load (kN )
8000

PTP5

Pile Head Load (kN )

Pile Head Load (kN )

Pile Head Load (kN )

5 10 15 20 25 30

5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 0 10 20 30 40

8000

6000

6000

4000

4000

2000

2000

0 0 5 10 15 20 25

10

20

30

40

Total Shortening (mm)

Total Shortening (mm)

Total Shortening (mm)

Total Shortening (mm)

Total Shortening (mm)

Fig.4: Pile Head Settlement, Pile Toe Settlement and Total Shortening behaviour, PTP1 to PTP5
Loads ( kN)
0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 0 0 2000

Loads ( kN)
4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 0 0 2000 4000

Loads ( kN)
6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 0 0 2000

Loads ( kN)
4000 6000 8000 10000 0 0 2000

Loads ( kN)
4000 6000 8000 10000

10 10 10 10 20 10

Depth (m)

Depth (m)

Depth (m)

20

30

Depth (m) PTP4

Depth (m)

20

20

20

30

30

40 30 40 40 50 30

PTP1
50 50

PTP2
40

PTP3
60

PTP5
40

Fig.5: Load Distribution Curves computed from vw strain gauges test results for PTP1 to PTP5

Paper published in 10th International Conference on Piling and Deep Foundations, 31st May 2nd June 06, Amsterdam.
Loads ( kN)
0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 0 0 2000

Loads ( kN)
4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 0 0 2000 4000

Loads ( kN)
6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 0 0 2000

Loads ( kN)
4000 6000 8000 10000 0 0 2000

Loads ( kN)
4000 6000 8000 10000

10 10 10 10 20 10

Depth (m)

Depth (m)

Depth (m)

20

Depth (m)

20

20

30

30

30

40 30 40 40 50 30

Depth (m)

20

PTP1
50 50

PTP2
40

PTP3
60

PTP4
40

PTP 5

Fig.6: Load Distribution Curves computed from GLOSTREXT test results for PTP1 to PTP5
40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750 800 850 900 -6

COMPARISON OF RESULTS FROM CONVENTIONAL AND GLOSTREXT METHOD Comparison Of Back Calculated Concrete Modulus Values The plots of back-calculated concrete modulus values, Ec, versus measured axial strain at level A from both conventional strain gauges (at 1.0m depth) and Global Strain Extensometers (from 0.0m to 2.0m depth) for the test cycles for 5 piles are plotted and presented in Fig.7 (a) to Fig.7 (e) respectively.
Concrete secant modulus, E c ( kN/mm )
40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750 800 850 900

Concrete secant modulus, E c ( kN/mm )

PTP3, VWSG PTP3, GloStrExt

Measured Axial Strain at Lev. A ( x 10 )

Fig. 7(c): Ec vs Measured Axial Strain for Test Pile PTP 3

Concrete secant modulus, E c ( kN/mm )
40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750 800 850 900 -6 2

PTP1, VWSG PTP1, GloStrExt

PTP4, VWSG PTP4, GloStrExt

Measured Axial Strain at Lev. A ( x 10 )

-6

Measured Axial Strain at Lev. A ( x 10 )

Fig. 7(a): Ec vs Measured Axial Strain for Test Pile PTP 1

Concrete secant modulus, E c ( kN/mm )
40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750 800 850 900 -6 2

Fig. 7(d): Ec vs Measured Axial Strain for Test Pile PTP 4

Concrete secant modulus, E c ( kN/mm )
40 38 36 34 32 30 28 26 24 22 20 18 16 14 12 10 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750 800 850 900 -6 2

PTP2, VWSG PTP2, GloStrExt

PTP5, VWSG PTP5, GloStrExt

Measured Axial Strain at Lev. A ( x 10 )

Measured Axial Strain at Lev. A ( x 10 )

Fig. 7(b): Ec vs Measured Axial Strain for Test Pile PTP 2

Fig. 7(e): Ec vs Measured Axial Strain for Test Pile PTP 5

Paper published in 10th International Conference on Piling and Deep Foundations, 31st May 2nd June 06, Amsterdam.

Axial Strain Fr VWSGs (x 10-6)

From the plots presented, it is clear that the back-calculated concrete modulus values measured by two independent systems (conventional Strain Gauges and Global Strain Extensometers) agree reasonably well. These plots are also extremely useful to study the correction of Ec according to variation of strain level with pile depth, which can further improve the accuracy of the axial load distribution computation using back-calculated Ec. Comparison Of Measured Along Pile Shaft Axial Strain

700 650 600 550 500 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 Lev A Lev A to Lev B Lev B to Lev C Lev C to Lev D Lev D to Lev E Lev E to Lev F Control Line "VWSG = GloStrEt"

Axial Strain Fr A9 ( x 10-6 )

Axial Strain from VWSGs (x 10-6)

The plots of measured axial strain at various levels along pile shaft from both conventional strain gauges and Global Strain Extensometers for 5 piles are presented in Fig.8(a) to Fig.8(e) respectively.
700

Fig. 8(c) : Measured Axial Strain from VWSG vs Axial Strain from GloStrExt for PTP 3

800 750 700 650 600 550 500 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750 800 Lev A Lev A to Lev B Lev B to Lev C Lev C to Lev D Lev D to Lev E Lev E to Lev F Control VWSGs=GloStrExt

Axial Strain from VWSGs (x 10 -6 )

650 600 550 500 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 0 50

Lev A Lev A to Lev B Lev B to Lev C Lev C to Lev E Lev E to Lev F Control Line for VWSG=GloStrExt

100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700

Axial Strain from GloStrExt ( x 10-6 )

Axial Strain from GloStrExt ( x 10-6 )

Fig. 8(a) : Measured Axial Strain from VWSG vs Axial Strain from GloStrExt for PTP 1
700

Fig. 8(d) : Measured Axial Strain from VWSG vs Axial Strain from GloStrExt for PTP 4
800

Axial Strain from VWSGs (x 10 -6)

650 600 550 500 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 0

Axial Strain from VWSGs (x 10-6)

Lev A Lev A to Lev B Lev B to Lev C Lev C to Lev D Lev D to Lev E Lev E to Lev F Control Line VWSG = GloStrExt

750 700 650 600 550 500 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 0 50

Lev A Lev A to Lev B Lev B to Lev C Lev C to Lev D Lev D to Lev E Lev E to Lev F Control Line VWSG=GloStrExt

100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750 800

50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700

Axial Strain from GloStrExt ( x 10-6 )

Axial Strain from GloStrExt ( x 10-6 )

Fig. 8(b) : Measured Axial Strain from VWSG vs Axial Strain from GloStrExt for PTP 2

Fig. 8(e) : Measured Axial Strain from VWSG vs Axial Strain from GloStrExt for PTP 5

Paper published in 10th International Conference on Piling and Deep Foundations, 31st May 2nd June 06, Amsterdam.

From the plots presented, it is shown that the axial strains measured by the two independent systems are in good agreement. Considering that the Global Strain Extensometers measure strains over an entire section of a pile, thus it integrates the strains over a larger and more representative sample than the conventional strain gauges. CONCLUSIONS The results of five instrumented bored test piles involving full-scale static load tests with both GLOSTREXT method and conventional instrumentation show the following behavior: i) The back-calculated concrete modulus values measured by two independent systems (conventional Strain Gauges and Global Strain Extensometers) agree reasonably well. The axial strains measured by the two independent systems are in good agreement. The Global Strain Extensometers measure strains over an entire section of a pile, thus it integrates the strains over a larger and more representative sample than the conventional strain gauges.

References: Bustamante M., Doix B (1991) A new model of th LPC removable extensometer, Proc. 4 International Deep Foundation Institute Conference, pp 475-480. Geokon Inc. 1995, revised 2003. Instruction Manual, Model A-9 Retrievable Extensometer.

ii)

iii) Using the global strain extensometers, measurement of the pile shortening over the whole pile length can now be reliably measured in segments. This enables the movement of the pile and strains at various levels down the pile shaft to be determined accurately, thus permitting an improved load transfer distribution of piles in static load tests. The GLOSTREXT method significantly simplifies the instrumentation effort by enabling the sensors to be post-installed after casting of pile. It also minimizes the risk of instruments being damaged during the concreting process. Acknowledgement The authors wish to thank the Public Works Department Malaysia for permission to publish this paper. The authors also wish to thank the Gerbang Selatan Bersepadu Public Works Project Team for their support.