03/06/2016

Right Way of PIT

PIT is frequently
specified to detect
defect on bored piles.

03/06/2016

Pile Integrity Testing looks for defects

Small hammer
impact device

Accelerometer
measures response

(defect)

PIT motivation and advantages

prime function is to locate major defects
(to evaluate questionable shafts)

inexpensive, can test many piles

(good for quality assurance)
no advance selection required
(good for forensic purposes)

03/06/2016

Concerns:
PIT is a useful tool when used properly
find major defects if they exist.

If PIT used improperly, it can either:

find defects that do not exist
not find defects that do exist

Bad diagnosis can lead to discredit of method

Goal is to use PIT properly
This presentation presents proper use
(and also examples of what not to do).

03/06/2016

Summary
Time Domain analysis
Locate major defects
Estimate profile
Frequency Domain analysis
Stiffness (must measure force)

Question:
How do we acquire data and process it so
that we can properly interpret it?

03/06/2016

Question:
How do we acquire data and process it so
that then we can properly interpret it to
obtain reliable conclusions?
conclusions?

Real data is not perfect

Imperfect piles
pile top contact surface not smooth
inhomogeneous material
(modulus versus length)
inhomogeneous material (particle sizes)
pile material damping
soil resistance

03/06/2016

Real data is not perfect

Imperfect impacts
spherical point contact versus plane wave
(pile not one dimensional)
protruding reinforcement rings
Rayleigh waves
long inputs versus short defects

Pile top clean and free of water

03/06/2016

Real data is not perfect

Imperfect piles
Imperfect impacts
Imperfect sensors
coupling to pile

Imperfect signal conditioning

external noise
internal noise

Imperfect processing
finite resolution in time and amplitude

03/06/2016

Collect Several Blows of Data

Pile
No clear toe signal, need more data processing

Real data is not perfect,

perfect so...
data enhancements play an
important part in evaluating low
strain integrity tests
Collect multiple blows:
averaging reduces random effects
Use best possible equipment
low noise, high resolution
best signal processing

03/06/2016

Velocity Records of a Sound Pile

Pile Te s t Cons ulta nts ( PV T) Ltd
DPJ TA TA 8 , 9
K:\ . . . \ DPJ - TA TA BULING\ DPJ TA TA 8 , 9 . PIT
0.16

cm /s

5/23/2016
PIT- W

Pile: P4 309

2009- 2

- 3: # 1
1200
9/24/2015 4:42:05 PM
2W
1.84 m
950.0 Hz

0.08
0.00

x 5.00 L/D=14 (D=120 cm)

-0.08

0.30

17.25 m (3500 m/s)

0

cm /s

12

Pile: P4 309

16

20

0.126 cm/s (0.138)

24 m

- 2: # 2
1200
9/24/2015 4:42:22 PM
2W
1.84 m
950.0 Hz

0.15
0.00

x 5.00 L/D=14 (D=120 cm)

-0.15

0.06

17.25 m (3500 m/s)

0

cm /s

12

Pile: P4 309

16

20

0.205 cm/s (0.229)

24 m

- 3: # 3
1200
9/24/2015 4:42:31 PM
2W
1.84 m
950.0 Hz

0.03
0.00

x 5.00 L/D=14 (D=120 cm)

-0.03

17.25 m (3500 m/s)

0

0.06

cm /s

12

Pile: P4 309

16

20

Clear Toe
reflection is
visible.

0.056 cm/s (0.059)

24 m

- 3: # 5
1200
9/24/2015 4:43:27 PM
2W
2.00 m
875.0 Hz

0.03
0.00

WS is with in
the range
Toe
Reflection is
compression

x 5.00 L/D=14 (D=120 cm)

Top

Bottom

-0.03

17.25 m (3500 m/s)

12

16

20

0.059 cm/s (0.068)

24 m

Velocity Records of a Pile Terminated on Soft Material

0.04

cm/s

Pile: P4 3 - 3: #

36
1000
10/11/2014 3:33:05 PM
2W
2.00 m
875.0 Hz

0.02
0.00

x 2.00 L/D=9.3 (D=100 cm)

-0.02

0.06

V 0.037 cm/s (0.039)

9.35 m (3500 m/s)

0

cm/s

Pile: P4 3 - 3: #

10

11

12

13 m

37
1000
10/11/2014 3:33:10 PM
2W
2.00 m
875.0 Hz

0.03
0.00

x 2.00 L/D=9.3 (D=100 cm)

-0.03

0.03

V 0.039 cm/s (0.040)

9.35 m (3500 m/s)

0

cm/s

Pile: P4 3 - 3: #

10

11

12

13 m

38
1000
10/11/2014 3:33:17 PM
2W
2.00 m
875.0 Hz

0.01

Clear Toe
reflection is
visible.
WS is with in
the range
Toe
Reflection is
tension

0.00
x 2.00 L/D=9.3 (D=100 cm)

-0.01

0.06

V 0.023 cm/s (0.024)

9.35 m (3500 m/s)

0

cm/s

Pile: P4 3 - 1: #

10

11

12

13 m

39
1000
10/11/2014 3:33:21 PM
2W
2.00 m
875.0 Hz

0.03

Accepted Or
Rejected ?

0.00
x 2.00 L/D=9.3 (D=100 cm)

-0.03

9.35 m (3500 m/s)

0

10

11

12

V 0.034 cm/s (0.036)

13 m

03/06/2016

Velocity Records of a Pile with a Bulging

0.10

cm/s

Pile: P-114 - 2: # 18
600
3/17/2016 4:04:14 PM
2W
2.00 m 950.0 Hz

0.05
0.00

V 0.087 cm/s (0.090)

21.93 m (3800 m/s)

0

10

cm/s

15

20

25

600
3/17/2016 3:53:28 PM
2W
1.00 m 1900.0 Hz

x 5.00 L/D=37 (D=60 cm)

-0.06

22.00 m (3800 m/s)

0

Pile: P-114 - 2: # 19
600
3/17/2016 4:04:28 PM
2W
2.00 m 950.0 Hz

0.00

0.08

10

cm/s

15

20

25

V 0.064 cm/s (0.066)

30 m

Pile: P-34 - 3: # 2
600
3/17/2016 3:53:47 PM
2W
1.00 m 1900.0 Hz

0.04
0.00

x 5.00 L/D=37 (D=60 cm)

-0.06

V 0.104 cm/s (0.107)

21.93 m (3800 m/s)

0

10

cm/s

15

20

25

x 5.00 L/D=37 (D=60 cm)

-0.04

30 m

22.00 m (3800 m/s)

0

Pile: P-114 - 2: # 20
600
3/17/2016 4:04:43 PM
2W
2.00 m 950.0 Hz

0.05
0.00

0.10

10

cm/s

15

20

25

V 0.053 cm/s (0.053)

30 m

Pile: P-34 - 3: # 3
600
3/17/2016 3:53:59 PM
2W
1.00 m 1900.0 Hz

0.05
0.00

x 5.00 L/D=37 (D=60 cm)

-0.05

V 0.095 cm/s (0.100)

21.93 m (3800 m/s)

0

0.16

Pile: P-34 - 3: # 1

0.06

30 m

0.06

0.10

cm/s

0.00
x 5.00 L/D=37 (D=60 cm)

-0.05

0.12

0.12

10

cm/s

15

20

25

30 m

22.00 m (3800 m/s)

0

Pile: P-114 - 1: # 21
600
3/17/2016 4:05:30 PM
2W
2.00 m 950.0 Hz

0.08

x 5.00 L/D=37 (D=60 cm)

-0.05

0.00

0.10

10

cm/s

15

20

25

V 0.063 cm/s (0.064)

30 m

Pile: P-34 - 3: # 4
600
3/17/2016 3:54:09 PM
2W
1.00 m 1900.0 Hz

0.05
0.00

x 5.00 L/D=37 (D=60 cm)

-0.08

V 0.139 cm/s (0.147)

21.93 m (3800 m/s)

0

10

15

20

25

x 5.00 L/D=37 (D=60 cm)

-0.05

30 m

22.00 m (3800 m/s)

0

10

15

20

25

V 0.068 cm/s (0.070)

30 m

Velocity Records of a Pile with a Necking

K:\...\Walkers A utomobles\Walkers Dematagoda 7.PIT
0.10
0.16

cm/s

0.08

cm/s

PIT- W 2009- 2

Pile: P-67 - 3: # 8

600
2/25/2016 2:05:21 PM

0.00

0.00

x 5.00 L/D=34 (D=60 cm)

-0.05
-0.08

cm/s

0.16

0.00

0.00

-0.06

-0.08

cm/s10

15

20

Pile: P-38 - 3: # 91

m
Pile:25P-67

- 2: # 10

cm/s
0.30

600
4/23/2016 1:55:23 PM
2W
2.00 m
950.0 Hz

600
2/25/2016 2:05:45 PM
2W
2.13 m 891.8 Hz

x 5.00 L/D=34 (D=60 cm)

V 0.086 cm/s (0.091)

20.24 m (3800 m/s)

10

cm/s

15

20

Pile: P-38 - 3: # 95

10

25 m

V 0.067 cm/s (0.073)

V 0.119
20 cm/s (0.119) 25 m

20.24
10 m (3800 m/s) 15

x 5.00 L/D=27 (D=75 cm)

0

0.10

0.08

0.06

20.21 m (3800 m/s)

x 5.00 L/D=27 (D=75 cm)

0
0

0.12

600
4/23/2016 1:54:05 PM
2W
2.00 m
950.0 Hz

Pile: P-38 - 3: # 90

0.05

20.21 m (3800 m/s)

15

20

V 0.088 cm/s (0.097)

25 m

Pile: P-67 - 2: #60011

2/25/2016 2:06:41 PM
2W
2.13 m 891.8 Hz

0.05

600
4/23/2016 1:55:39 PM
2W
2.00 m
950.0 Hz

0.15
0.00

0.00

-0.05

0.10

x 5.00 L/D=27 (D=75 cm)

V 0.071 cm/s (0.076)

20.24 m (3800 m/s)

0

cm/s

10

-0.15

15

0.12

0.00

x 5.00 L/D=34 (D=60 cm)

25 m

Pile: P-38 - 3: # 96
0

0.05

20

20.21 m (3800 m/s)

15 600

10

cm/s

Pile: P-67 - 3:

20

2/25/2016 2:06:49 PM
#2W
12
2.13 m 891.8 Hz

V 0.163 cm/s (0.179)

25 m
600
4/23/2016 1:56:09 PM
2W
2.00 m
950.0 Hz

0.06
x 5.00 L/D=27 (D=75 cm)

-0.05
0

0.00
5

-0.06

20.24 m (3800 m/s)

10

15

20

V 0.067 cm/s (0.071)

25 m

x 5.00 L/D=34 (D=60 cm)

V 0.092 cm/s (0.102)

10

03/06/2016

Velocity Records of a Pile having a Bulge

followed by a Necking
0.16

cm/s

Pile: P 158 (PDL) - 3: #

28
750
11/11/2014 5:53:11 PM
2W
2.00 m
875.0 Hz

0.08
0.00

x 5.00 L/D=15 (D=75 cm)

-0.08

0.16

V 0.052 cm/s (0.053)

11.42 m (3500 m/s)

0

cm/s

Pile: P 158 (PDL) - 3: #

10

12

14

16 m

27
750
11/11/2014 5:52:58 PM
2W
2.00 m
875.0 Hz

0.08
0.00

x 5.00 L/D=15 (D=75 cm)

-0.08

0.16

V 0.089 cm/s (0.098)

11.42 m (3500 m/s)

0

cm/s

Pile: P 158 (PDL) - 3: #

10

12

14

16 m

26
750
11/11/2014 5:52:53 PM
2W
2.00 m
875.0 Hz

0.08
0.00

x 5.00 L/D=15 (D=75 cm)

-0.08

11.42 m (3500 m/s)

0

10

12

14

V 0.103 cm/s (0.116)

16 m

Lets look at some more real data sets

11

03/06/2016

4x/c
Coring

Defect

Driven prestressed pile (600mm cylinder w/ center void)

Seafloor at approx. -10 m. Client asks interpretation.
T@ 4x/c
C@ 2x/c

T@ 8x/c
C@ 6x/c

MD
delay?
Fixed end (compression reflection):
massive concrete mat at seafloor,
or pile broken (top jammed into bottom)

12

03/06/2016

Conclusions
Use similar processing for similar piles in similar soils.
soils.
Compare results to spot unusual piles.
Data processing usually includes:

Important!

Averaging several blows (reduce random noise)

Magnification versus time (compensate for losses)
High pass filtering (or pivoting)
(eliminate low frequencies; keeps data near zero)
Wavelet filters (or low pass);
(eliminate high frequencies)
Rayleigh wave correction (experimental)

Conclusions
Interpretation looks for:

Good data (consistent & reasonable)

Similarity or differences for different piles
Rapidly changing features in data
Toe signal (tension or compression)
Shaft uniformity
Indications of major defects (+/
(+/-- cycle)
Comparison with soil profile, installation records

Integrity testing locates major defects.

defects. It is limited to
general interpretations rather than exact detail. Do not use
heroic effort to read more than data really tells.

13

03/06/2016

Classifications

(4 categories proposed by GRL)

A - Clear toe response, no obvious defect;
sound shaft (good pile)
B - Clear identification of serious defect;
toe not apparent (bad pile)
needs contingency tests or corrective measures

C - Possible shaft defect

re
re--test, other tests, reduce capacity or replace

D - Inconclusive data (poor pile top quality,

or no reflections due to strong soil)
fix pile top & rere-test; might give info for upper pile shaft
which is reason to accept pile.

What to do if find a problem ?

Compare with other observations

Re
Re--test with PIT (trim pile top to solid concrete)
Excavate if near top
Request pile core
Request a PDA test
Request a Static Test
Replace pile (or repair)
Accept pile (?) - is pile in group? Critical?
Other?
Each option has different associated costs

14

03/06/2016

Limitations:
full cracks or manufactured joints
L/D ratio (high soil resistance) ,
multiple defects or highly variable shafts
small defect size or short length
gradual changes hard to detect
wave speed (length) accuracy plus or minus
12.5%

Conclusions
Integrity testing equipment should be low noise and high
resolution to extract the most information.
Not all
equipment is sufficient for the task.
Studies suggested a 30 L/D limit based on old equipment.
Limit depends on soil strength, pile uniformity, pile
diameter, and equipment resolution.

15

03/06/2016

Conclusions
Integrity testing is not applicable to ALL situations.
situations. Do not
assure results and even try to discourage use in obviously
unusual conditions, or at least inform client of low
possibility of success.
Because integrity testing has several limitations, integrity
testing professionals will question test
if it seems
uncertain (inconclusive data).
Impossible to predict load capacity by low strain PIT. At
best, gives relative stiffness from mobility analysis.

16