Driven Pile Foundation Support-

Cost Components

2011 PDCA Professors’ Driven Pile Institute

June 20-24, 2011

Van E. Komurka, P.E.

Wagner Komurka Geotechnical Group, Inc.

1
• Glass is half empty.

• Glass is half full.

• Glass is twice
as big as it
needs to be!

2
 Talk Outline
• Define support cost.
• Discuss support-cost components:
– Pile
• Conventional
• Profile (as a function of depth)
– Cap
– Column (matching allowable pile loads to
structure column loads)
– System
• Present case histories (large and small)
illustrating load-matching approach.
3
Sup•port' Cost (Sŭ•pōrt' Kŏst)
The cost of an installed or constructed
foundation element or system divided by
its allowable load, usually expressed in
dollars per ton (i.e., how many dollars it
costs to support one ton of load).

4
Sup•port' Cost (Sŭ•pōrt' Kŏst)
• As a normalized parameter, allows direct
(apples-to-apples) economic comparison
of different foundation alternatives:
– Shallow vs. deep (e.g., spread footings vs. piles)
– Deep vs. deep (e.g., drilled piers vs. piles)
– Pile section vs. pile section (e.g., 10.75” vs. 12.75”)
– Pile capacity vs. pile capacity (e.g., 70T vs. 150T)

• Allows economic evaluation and

optimization of deep foundation system
cost components
5
Design Column Load
Deep Foundation
System Components

Column

Cap

Piles

6
 Pile Support Cost

Pile Cost
=
Allowable Pile Load
In general, higher allowable pile
loads result in lower pile support
costs:
• Spread pile length invested to
penetrate through poor soils over
more capacity
•In competent soils, capacity
generally increases faster with
depth than does cost
7
 Pile Support Cost
Pile Cost
Pile Support Cost = Allowable Pile Load

$1,500 per pile $3,000 per pile

= $30 / ton = $20 / ton
50-ton allow. load 150-ton allow. load

8
 WKG2 Pile Support Costs
Pile Support
Allowable Pile Cost, dollars per
Project Name Pile Type Load, tons allowable ton
Midwest Express (Wisconsin) Center, Phase 1 10.75 x 0.365 100 12.12
12.75 x 0.365 150 11.52

Miller Park 16-inch Monotube 200 12.20

Johnson Controls Brengel Technology Center 12.75 x 0.312 148 13.48

Potawatomi Casino Expansion 10.75 x 0.250 80

Potawatomi Casino Parking Structure 10.75 x 0.250 83

Overall Project Average 15.55

40 20.59
65 16.97
Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel Production Facility 10.75 x 0.307 75 15.12
80 15.34
85 14.81
Overall Project Average 15.64
10.75 x 0.250 65 20.47
Sixth Street Viaduct Replacement 12.75 x 0.375 154 10.50
12.75 x 0.375 182 8.62
12.75 x 0.375 190 13.92
Overall Project Average 15.28

State Fair Park Exposition Hall 9.625 x 0.545 200 9.40

Great Lakes Aquatarium/Discovery World Museum 10.75 x 0.365 91 14.73

(Pier Wisconsin) 13.375 x 0.480 180 13.36
13.375 x 0.480 251 9.91
9
 Pile Support Costs – WKG2 Projects
22
Pile Support Cost, dollars per allowable ton

20

18

y = 90.662x -0.402
16 R2 = 0.712

14

12

10

8
40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260
10
Allowable Pile Load, tons (factor of safety = 2.0)
 Pile Support Costs – Sixth Street Viaduct
Replacement
40
Pile Support Cost, dollars per allowable ton

Various:
 Pile Diameters (10.75- and 12.75-inch-
35 O.D.)
 Safety Factor (from 2.0 to 2.5)
30  Installation Criteria (WEAP, Modified EN)
 Subsurface Conditions (from till at 4 feet,
to 60 feet of organic silt)
25

20
y = 245.41x -0.5529
R2 = 0.4787

15

y = 35.326e-0.0058x
R2 = 0.5423
10

5
40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 170 180 190
Allowable Pile Load, tons 11
 Achieving Higher-Capacity Piles

 Use larger section, larger hammer, drive piles

“harder,” perhaps deeper.

 Incorporate soil/pile set-up:

 Use displacement pile.
 Adjust testing program (wait longer to test, restrike
testing, etc.).

 Increase design stresses (e.g., from 9-12 ksi to 16 ksi)

 Use higher-strength concrete (e.g., in concrete-filled

pipe piles from 3-4 ksi to 6 ksi)

12
 TIME
Capacity Initial Change Long-Term

Geotechnical Relatively Set-Up Relatively

Low High

Structural Relatively Concrete Relatively

Low (Steel Fill High (Steel
Shell Only) & Concrete
Composite
Section)

13
 Pile Type – Structural Capacity
Marquette South Leg Canal Street Viaduct
• Structural capacity • Structural capacity
derived from both steel derived only from
(expensive) and steel (expensive)
concrete (inexpensive)

16 x 0.500 16 x 1.350
As=24.35 in2 As=62.13 in2 14
 Cap Support Cost

Cap Cost
=
Design Column Load

Higher allowable pile loads

result in fewer piles, smaller
caps, and therefore lower cap
support costs.
Minimized cap support cost
results from using the minimum
required number of piles.
15
 Cap Support Costs
12
Cap Support Cost, dollars per allowable ton

11

10
3-Pile Minimum
9

7 50-Ton Piles

6 75-Ton Piles

5 100-Ton Piles 150-Ton Piles

200-Ton Piles
4
250-Ton Piles
3

2
0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 8,000 9,000 10,000

Design Column Load, kips

16
 Column Support Cost

Pile Cap Cost + Σ Pile Costs

=
Design Column Load

Measures how well the allowable

pile load, in conjunction with the
minimum required number of piles,
matches the design column load.
Minimum column support cost
results from using the optimum
allowable pile load.
17
900K
Optimum Allowable Pile Load
Design Column Load
=
Minimum Req’d No. of Piles

 Design Column Load = 900 kips

 Minimum Req’d No. of Piles = 3
 Optimum Allowable Pile Load =
900 kips
3 piles
= 300 kips/pile = 150 tons/pile

18
Lower-Than-Optimum Allowable Pile Loads

 Increased pile support costs – each ton of allowable

pile load costs more than it would have with higher-
capacity piles.
 Increased cap support costs – each cap is larger than
it would have been with higher-capacity piles.
 Increased column support costs – for a given column
load, pile and cap costs are higher than they would
have been with higher-capacity (closer to optimum
allowable load) piles.
 Increased number of pile installations – may increase
total project drive time.

19
 Higher-Than-Optimum Allowable Loads

 Increased column support costs – although pile

support costs are low, and cap costs are minimized,
unnecessary capacity is installed (unnecessary cost
is incurred).

Low unit cost. All you need.

20
Match Allowable Pile Loads to Column Loads!

 Piles are below-grade structural extensions of above-

grade structural elements; their design should be
integrated with the above-grade design.
 Using one allowable pile load for a project is
analogous to using one beam or column design
throughout a building.
 Two fixed design components:
 Structural loads to support (column load schedule).
 Soil/pile resistance behavior to support structural
loads (depth vs. capacity relationships).
 Deep foundation system design flexibility (choice of pile
type, section, allowable load, safety factor, etc.) allows
accommodating fixed design components. 21
 System Support Cost

Σ Deep Foundation System Costs

=
Σ Column Design Loads

Measures overall cost-

effectiveness of deep foundation
system. Provides basis for
comparison of viable design and
installation options.

22
 Load-Matching Design Approach

 Obtain foundation layout, column load schedule, and

the minimum required number of piles at each cap,
from structural engineer.
 Calculate optimum allowable pile load for each cap.

 If desired, calculate required “ultimate” pile capacity

for each cap. To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of
field testing, this can be done for a range of factors
of safety.

23
24
25
 F.S. = 2.00
Maximum
Optimum Required
Allowable "Ultimate"
Column Min. Column Pile Pile
Line
Designation
No.
of Piles
Load,
kips
Load,
tons
Capacity,
tons
Pier Wisconsin
0.A-8.5 1 158 79 158
0.A-0.5 1 180 90 180

P-3.3 1 181 91 181

P-3.7 1 181 91 181
P-4.5 1 181 91 181
P-5 1 181 91 181
P-5.5 1 181 91 181
P-6 1 181 91 181
0.A-8 1 203 102 203
M.5-8 1 228 114 228

N-8.5 1 360 180 360

P.7-8.5 1 360 180 360
P-0.5 1 360 180 360
P-8.5 1 360 180 360
Q.8-3 1 360 180 360
Q-0.5 1 360 180 360
M.5-4 1 368 184 368
J-5 2 748 187 374

G-7 3 1479 247 493

H-7 3 1479 247 493
K-6 3 1484 247 495
B-7 3 1487 248 496
B-6 3 1507 251 502
C-8 3 1508 251 503
R1-5.9 3 1510 252 503
K-7 3 1529 255 510

C-4 3 1874 312 625

F-6 3 1879 313 626
J-6 3 1942 324 647
J-4 3 1995 333 665
Q-9 3 2003 334 668
R-9 3 2003 334 668
448 26
 Load-Matching Design Approach

 Obtain foundation layout, column load schedule, and

an indication of the minimum required number of
piles at each cap, from structural engineer.
 Calculate optimum allowable pile load for each cap.

 Calculate required “ultimate” pile capacity for each

cap. To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of field
testing, this can be done for a range of factors of
safety.
 Generate histogram of optimized allowable pile loads
(or of “ultimate” pile capacities).

27
 Allowable Pile Load Histogram
Pier Wisconsin
Optimum (Minimum) Required Number of Piles

70
91 tons
60

50

227 tons
180 tons
40

194 tons
30

20

10

0
75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300 325 350 375
Allowable Pile Load, tons
28
 Load-Matching Design Approach
 Obtain foundation layout, column load schedule, and
an indication of the minimum required number of
piles at each cap, from structural engineer.
 Calculate optimum allowable pile load for each cap.

 Calculate required ultimate pile capacity for each

cap. To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of field
testing, this can be done for a range of factors of
safety.
 Generate histogram of optimized allowable, and/or
ultimate, pile capacities.

 Select appropriate allowable pile loads (or “ultimate”

pile capacities), with design-team input.
29
 Allowable Pile Load Histogram
Pier Wisconsin
Optimum (Minimum) Required Number of Piles

91 tons 180 tons 251 tons

70
91 tons
60

50

227 tons
40 180 tons

30 194 tons

20

10

0
75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300 325 350 375
Allowable Pile Load, tons
30
Load-Matching Design Approach (continued)
 Select viable pile type(s) and section(s) for selected
allowable loads/capacities (91T, 180T, and 251T) {borings}.

 Estimate individual pile lengths required for selected

pile capacities.

31
 Estimated Ultimate Pile Capacity - Borings
13.375-inch-diameter Pipe Piles
10

-10

-20
Pile Toe Elevation, feet

-30

-40

-50

-60

-70

-80

-90

-100

-110
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Estimated “Ultimate” Pile Capacity, tons 32
 10

-10

-20 EOID
-30 Capacity
-40 Pile Test
Pile Toe Elevation, feet

-50
Set-Up Program
-60

-70
Capacity
-80 Long-term Profile
-90 Capacity
-100

-110

-120

-130
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
Estimated “Ultimate” Capacity, tons 33
Load-Matching Design Approach (continued)
 Select viable pile type and section for selected pile
capacities.

 Estimate individual pile lengths required for selected

pile capacities.

 Estimate total pile lengths required for project.

 Using representative prices, estimate total pile cost

for project.

34
 Allowable Pile Load Histogram
Pier Wisconsin
Optimum (Minimum) Required Number of Piles

91 tons
70 91 tons 180 tons 251 tons

60

50

227 tons
40 180 tons

30 194 tons

20

10

0
75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300 325 350 375
Allowable Pile Load, tons
35
 F.S. = 2.00
Maximum
Optimum Required
Allowable "Ultimate" 3 Capacities (91, 180, and 251 tons)
Column Min. Column Pile Pile Est. Pile Est. Pile(s) Est. Pile(s)
Line No. Load, Load, Capacity, No. Length, Footage, Cost,
Designation of Piles kips tons tons of Piles feet feet dollars
0.A-8.5 1 158 79 158 1 62 62 1,340
0.A-0.5 1 180 90 180 1 62 62 1,340 $21.61 / ft
P-3.3 1 181 91 181 1 62 62 1,340 91-ton max.
P-3.7 1 181 91 181 1 62 62 1,340 allow. load:
P-4.5 1 181 91 181 1 62 62 1,340 71
P-5 1 181 91 181 1 62 62 1,340 10.75x0.365
P-5.5 1 181 91 181 1 62 62 1,340 feet:
P-6 1 181 91 181 1 62 62 1,340 4,402
0.A-8 1 203 102 203 1 86 86 2,405
M.5-8 1 228 114 228 1 86 86 2,405 $27.97 / ft
N-8.5 1 360 180 360 1 86 86 2,405 180-ton max.
P.7-8.5 1 360 180 360 1 86 86 2,405 allow. load:
P-0.5 1 360 180 360 1 86 86 2,405 108
P-8.5 1 360 180 360 1 86 86 2,405 13-3/8" 0.480
Q.8-3 1 360 180 360 1 86 86 2,405 feet:
Q-0.5 1 360 180 360 1 86 86 2,405 9,288
M.5-4 1 368 184 368 1 95 95 2,657
J-5 2 748 187 374 2 95 190 5,314

G-7 3 1479 247 493 3 95 285 7,971 251-ton max.

H-7 3 1479 247 493 3 95 285 7,971 allow. load:
K-6 3 1484 247 495 3 95 285 7,971 177
B-7 3 1487 248 496 3 95 285 7,971 13-3/8" 0.480
B-6 3 1507 251 502 3 95 285 7,971 feet:
C-8 3 1508 251 503 3 95 285 7,971 16,815
R1-5.9 3 1510 252 503 4 95 380 10,629
K-7 3 1529 255 510 4 95 380 10,629

C-4 3 1874 312 625 4 95 380 10,629 251-ton max.

F-6 3 1879 313 626 4 95 380 10,629 allow. load:
J-6 3 1942 324 647 4 95 380 10,629 125
J-4 3 1995 333 665 4 95 380 10,629 13-3/8" 0.480
Q-9 3 2003 334 668 4 95 380 10,629 feet:
R-9 3 2003 334 668 4 95 380 10,629 11,875
448 481 42,380 $1,157,416 36
Load-Matching Design Approach (continued)
 Select viable pile type and section for selected pile
capacities.

 Estimate individual pile lengths required for selected

pile capacities.

 Calculate total pile lengths required for project.

 Calculate total pile cost for project.

 Perform additional iterations as desired.

37
 $19.16 / ft
F.S. = 2.00
Maximum
Optimum Required
Allowable "Ultimate" 3 Capacities (91, 180, and 251 tons) 1 Capacity (10.75 x 0.188, 63 tons)
Column Min. Column Pile Pile Est. Pile Est. Pile(s) Est. Pile(s) Est. Pile Est. Pile(s) Est. Pile(s)
Line No. Load, Load, Capacity, No. Length, Footage, Cost, Number Length, Footage, Cost,
Designation of Piles kips tons tons of Piles feet feet dollars of Piles feet feet dollars
0.A-8.5 1 158 79 158 1 62 62 1,340 2 58 116 2,223
0.A-0.5 1 180 90 180 1 62 62 1,340 $21.61 / ft 2 58 116 2,223

P-3.3 1 181 91 181 1 62 62 1,340 91-ton max. 2 58 116 2,223

P-3.7 1 181 91 181 1 62 62 1,340 allow. load: 2 58 116 2,223
P-4.5 1 181 91 181 1 62 62 1,340 71 2 58 116 2,223
P-5 1 181 91 181 1 62 62 1,340 10.75x0.365 2 58 116 2,223
P-5.5 1 181 91 181 1 62 62 1,340 feet: 2 58 116 2,223
P-6 1 181 91 181 1 62 62 1,340 4,402 2 58 116 2,223
0.A-8 1 203 102 203 1 86 86 2,405 2 58 116 2,223
M.5-8 1 228 114 228 1 86 86 2,405 $27.97 / ft 2 58 116 2,223

N-8.5 1 360 180 360 1 86 86 2,405 180-ton max. 3 58 174 3,334

P.7-8.5 1 360 180 360 1 86 86 2,405 allow. load: 3 58 174 3,334
P-0.5 1 360 180 360 1 86 86 2,405 108 3 58 174 3,334
P-8.5 1 360 180 360 1 86 86 2,405 13-3/8" 0.480 3 58 174 3,334
Q.8-3 1 360 180 360 1 86 86 2,405 feet: 3 58 174 3,334
Q-0.5 1 360 180 360 1 86 86 2,405 9,288 3 58 174 3,334
M.5-4 1 368 184 368 1 95 95 2,657 3 58 174 3,334
J-5 2 748 187 374 2 95 190 5,314 6 58 348 6,668

G-7 3 1479 247 493 3 95 285 7,971 251-ton max. 12 58 696 13,335
H-7 3 1479 247 493 3 95 285 7,971 allow. load: 12 58 696 13,335
K-6 3 1484 247 495 3 95 285 7,971 177 12 58 696 13,335
B-7 3 1487 248 496 3 95 285 7,971 13-3/8" 0.480 12 58 696 13,335
B-6 3 1507 251 502 3 95 285 7,971 feet: 12 58 696 13,335
C-8 3 1508 251 503 3 95 285 7,971 16,815 12 58 696 13,335
R1-5.9 3 1510 252 503 4 95 380 10,629 12 58 696 13,335
K-7 3 1529 255 510 4 95 380 10,629 13 58 754 14,447

C-4 3 1874 312 625 4 95 380 10,629 251-ton max. 15 58 870 16,669
F-6 3 1879 313 626 4 95 380 10,629 allow. load: 15 58 870 16,669
J-6 3 1942 324 647 4 95 380 10,629 125 16 58 928 17,780
J-4 3 1995 333 665 4 95 380 10,629 13-3/8" 0.480 16 58 928 17,780
Q-9 3 2003 334 668 4 95 380 10,629 feet: 16 58 928 17,780
R-9 3 2003 334 668 4 95 380 10,629 11,875 16 58 928 17,780
448 481 42,380 $1,157,416 1,560 90,480 $1,733,597
$576,181 38
 $19.16 / ft
F.S. = 2.00
Maximum
Optimum Required
Allowable "Ultimate" 3 Capacities (91, 180, and 251 tons) 1 Capacity (10.75 x 0.188, 63 tons)
Column Min. Column Pile Pile Est. Pile Est. Pile(s) Est. Pile(s) Est. Pile Est. Pile(s) Est. Pile(s)
Line No. Load, Load, Capacity, No. Length, Footage, Cost, Number Length, Footage, Cost,
Designation of Piles kips tons tons of Piles feet feet dollars of Piles feet feet dollars
0.A-8.5 1 158 79 158 1 62 62 1,340 2 58 116 2,223
0.A-0.5 1 180 90 180 1 62 62 1,340 $21.61 / ft 2 58 116 2,223

P-3.3 1 181 91 181 1 62 62 1,340 91-ton max. 2 58 116 2,223

P-3.7 1 181 91 181 1 62 62 1,340 allow. load: 2 58 116 2,223
P-4.5 1 181 91 181 1 62 62 1,340 71 2 58 116 2,223
P-5 1 181 91 181 1 62 62 1,340 10.75x0.365 2 58 116 2,223
P-5.5 1 181 91 181 1 62 62 1,340 feet: 2 58 116 2,223
P-6 1 181 91 181 1 62 62 1,340 4,402 2 58 116 2,223
0.A-8 1 203 102 203 1 86 86 2,405 2 58 116 2,223
M.5-8 1 228 114 228 1 86 86 2,405 $27.97 / ft 2 58 116 2,223

N-8.5 1 360 180 360 1 86 86 2,405 180-ton max. 3 58 174 3,334

P.7-8.5 1 360 180 360 1 86 86 2,405 allow. load: 3 58 174 3,334
P-0.5 1 360 180 360 1 86 86 2,405 108 3 58 174 3,334
P-8.5 1 360 180 360 1 86 86 2,405 13-3/8" 0.480 3 58 174 3,334
Q.8-3 1 360 180 360 1 86 86 2,405 feet: 3 58 174 3,334
Q-0.5 1 360 180 360 1 86 86 2,405 9,288 3 58 174 3,334
M.5-4 1 368 184 368 1 95 95 2,657 3 58 174 3,334
J-5 2 748 187 374 2 95 190 5,314 6 58 348 6,668

G-7 3 1479 247 493 3 95 285 7,971 251-ton max. 12 58 696 13,335
H-7 3 1479 247 493 3 95 285 7,971 allow. load: 12 58 696 13,335
K-6 3 1484 247 495 3 95 285 7,971 177 12 58 696 13,335
B-7 3 1487 248 496 3 95 285 7,971 13-3/8" 0.480 12 58 696 13,335
B-6 3 1507 251 502 3 95 285 7,971 feet: 12 58 696 13,335
C-8 3 1508 251 503 3 95 285 7,971 16,815 12 58 696 13,335
R1-5.9 3 1510 252 503 4 95 380 10,629 12 58 696 13,335
K-7 3 1529 255 510 4 95 380 10,629 13 58 754 14,447

C-4 3 1874 312 625 4 95 380 10,629 251-ton max. 15 58 870 16,669
F-6 3 1879 313 626 4 95 380 10,629 allow. load: 15 58 870 16,669
J-6 3 1942 324 647 4 95 380 10,629 125 16 58 928 17,780
J-4 3 1995 333 665 4 95 380 10,629 13-3/8" 0.480 16 58 928 17,780
Q-9 3 2003 334 668 4 95 380 10,629 feet: 16 58 928 17,780
R-9 3 2003 334 668 4 95 380 10,629 11,875 16 58 928 17,780
448 481 42,380 $1,157,416 1,560 90,480 $1,733,597
$576,181 39
 Pile Support Costs – WKG2 Projects
22
Pile Support Cost, dollars per allowable ton

20

18

y = 90.662x -0.402
16 R2 = 0.712

14

12

10

8
40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260
Allowable Pile Load, tons (safety factor = 2.0) 40
 First Place Condominiums

 Relatively small project, approximately 200 piles

required.

 Renovation of a former storage warehouse into

condominiums.

 Piles required only beneath small building addition.

 Existing geotechnical engineering report prepared

for different site development plans.

 A review of existing recommendations relative to

currently proposed development was desired.

41
 Optimum Allowable Pile Load Histogram
First Place Condominiums
Optimum (Minimum) Required Number of Piles

30

129
72
25
54

20

108
15
42

50

10

125
36

215
5

0
30 50 70 90 110 130 150 170 190 210
Allowable Pile Load, tons 42
First Place Condominiums - Proposed
Designs
Allowable Number Estimated
Design Load, tons of Piles Footage

Original 70 205 15,580

43
 Optimum Allowable Pile Load Histogram
First Place Condominiums
Optimum (Minimum) Required Number of Piles

30

129
72
25
54

20

108
15
42

50

10

125
36

215
5

0
30 50 70 90 110 130 150 170 190 210
Allowable Pile Load, tons 44
First Place Condominiums - Proposed
Designs
Allowable Number Estimated
Design Load, tons of Piles Footage

Original 70 205 15,580

Revised 72 180 14,040

SAVE: 25 1,540
$34,250 + cap costs
on $346,500 worth of piles

45
First Place Condominiums - Proposed
Designs
Allowable Number Estimated
Design Load, tons of Piles Footage

Original 70 205 15,580

Revised 72 180 14,040

Alternate 100 130 $60,000 savings

72 tons per pile x 180 piles = 12,960 tons to support
12,960 tons / 100 tons per pile = 130 piles
Save 50 piles & $60,000 ?

46
 Optimum Allowable Pile Load Histogram
First Place Condominiums
Optimum (Minimum) Required Number of Piles

30

129
72
25
54

20

108
15
42

50

10

125
36

215
5

0
30 50 70 90 110 130 150 170 190 210
Allowable Pile Load, tons 47
 72-ton 100-ton
allowable allowable

72 tons 72 tons 72 tons

100 tons 100 tons 100 tons 48

First Place Condominiums - Proposed
Designs
Allowable Number Estimated
Design Load, tons of Piles Footage

Original 70 205 15,580

Revised 72 180 14,040

Alternate 100 164 15,744

SAVE: 16 (not 50) -1,704

($37,897) (if same pile section is used)

49
 Conclusions
• Consider using higher-capacity piles (when
building loads warrant)
- Lower pile support cost
- Lower cap support cost
• Consider matching (optimizing) allowable pile
loads to column loads
- Lower column support cost
• Evaluate design options/alternatives using
actual column loads and allowable pile load
histogram
• All should result in more-cost-effective
driven pile foundations
50
Questions / Comments?

51