Chapter 15

‫ﺑﺴﻢ اﷲ اﻟﺮﺣﻤﻦ اﻟﺮﺣﯿﻢ‬
Foundation Engineering
Chapter 5
by
Prof. Adel Ahmed Dif
Structural Eng. Dept.
Faculty of Engineering
El-Mansoura University
Chapter (5)
Geotechnical Design
Axial Pile Capacity
Geotechnical Capacity
PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

5.3 Pile Driving Formulae 5
Pile driving formulae are mainly used to estimate the

ultimate axial load of driven piles.
•These formulae depend

on correlations between
the weight of the used
hammer, the resulting
settlement and the height
of drop.

Engineering news formula:

η Wh
Pult =
s+c/2
Highly Formula (1925) :
kWh (W + e Wp )
2
Pult = *
( s + c / 2) (W + Wp )
C = C c + Cp + C g , C g = 0.50 % of the pile diameter
Pult L
Cc =
Pult t c Cp =
( AE ) c ( AE ) p

η Wh (W + e 2Wp )
Pult = P =
kWh
*
s + c / 2 or ult ( s + c / 2) (W + Wp )
Where:
Pult = pile resistance
S = pile set
c = temporary elastic compression
η = efficiency factor
W = hammer weight
Wp = pile weight
h = drop height
k = output efficiency of the hammer
e = coefficient of ‘restitution’
Type of hammer Power efficiency, k

Efficiency of different Drop hammer (triggered fall) 1.0
types of hammers
Steam or compressed air 0.9
hammer
Drop hammer( winch 0.8

operated)
Diesel hammer 0.5 –0.8
Cushion Coefficient of Young’ s modulus,

type Restitution, e Ec
(MN/m2)
Micarta 0.8 3x103
plastic
Greenheart 0.5 3x102

oak
Other 0.3 2x102

timber

‫ﻃﺒﻘﺎً ﻟﻠﻜﻮد اﻟﻤﺼﺮى ﻟﻸﺳﺎﺳﺎت‬
k = output efficiency
of the hammer
Cc Cg

Pult L
Cp =
( AE ) p
5.3 Pile Driving Formulae

Pile Parameters from Driving Analysis:
Hiley Formula
R(S+c/2) = ηWhh
R = pile resistance
S = pile set
c = temporary elastic compression
k (W h + e 2 W p )
Wh = hammer weight η=
Wh + Wp
Wp = pile weight
h = drop height
k = output efficiency of the hammer

Energy IN = Energy OUT
Pile head
displacement
S
Blow 1 Blow 3
The Hiley Formula

• Simple expression
• Requires driving efficiency of system
• Requires simple measurement of pile displacement
near design depth, for regulated driving energy
WARNING:
Good record in sands, not so good in clays
Dynamic Analysis “driving” data used (gives
capacity at the time of pile-driving)

5.4 Correlations with SPT and CPT tests 5
Variety of Field Testing Devices
5.4 Correlations with SPT and CPT tests 5
5.4.1- Correlations with SPT data

Standard penetration test (S.P.T)
‫ﺍﺨﺘﺒﺎﺭ ﺍﻻﺨﺘﺭﺍﻕ ﺍﻟﻘﻴﺎﺴﻰ‬

5.4.1 Correlations with SPT 5
Standard Penetration
Test (SPT)
SPT Hammer Types

SPT Hammer Types
١٠

Standard Penetration
Test (SPT)
Empirical correlations with the results of SPT data usually

take the following form:
fs = AN + BN N
where AN and BN are empirical numbers, and depend on
the units of fs, and N = SPT value at the point under
consideration.
(kN ‫ﻃﺒﻘﺎً ﻟﻠﻜﻮد اﻟﻤﺼﺮى ﻟﻸﺳﺎﺳﺎت ﻓﺈن ﻗﺪرة ﺗﺤﻤﻞ ﺧﺎزوق إزاﺣﺔ )ﺑﺎﻟﻜﯿﻠﻮ ﻧﯿﻮﺗﻦ‬
‫)ﺣﻤﻞ ﺗﺸﻐﯿﻞ اﻟﺨﺎزوق‬.‫)ﺣﻤﻞ اﻟﺘﺸﻐﯿﻞ( ﻣﺮﺗﻜﺰ ﻓﻰ ﺗﺮﺑﮫ ﻏﯿﺮ ﻣﺘﻤﺎﺳﻜﺔ اﻟﺤﺒﯿﺒﺎت‬
( .‫ ﻟﻤﻘﺎوﻣﺔ اﻻﺣﺘﻜﺎك‬٢ ،‫ ﻟﻤﻘﺎوﻣﺔ ارﺗﻜﺎز اﻟﺨﺎزوق‬٢.٥ ‫وﯾﺘﻀﻤﻦ ﻣﻌﺎﻣﻞ أﻣﺎن ﻗﺪرة‬
π d2
Q a ll ( d r iven)
= 90 N +N π dl
4
١١

‫‪5.4.1 Correlations with SPT‬‬ ‫‪5‬‬
‫ﺣﯿﺚ ‪:‬‬
‫‪ N‬اﻟﻘﯿﻤﺔ اﻟﻤﺘﻮﺳﻄﺔ ﻟﻌﺪد اﻟﺪﻗﺎت ﻓﻰ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﺔ اﻻﺧﺘﺮاق اﻟﻘﯿﺎﺳﻰ ﻓﻰ ﻃﺒﻘﺔ اﻟﺘﺮﺑﺔ‬
‫اﻟﻤﺆﺛﺮة ﻋﻠﻰ ﺣﻤﻞ اﻻرﺗﻜﺎز واﻟﻤﻤﺘﺪة ﻟﻤﺴﺎﻓﺔ ‪ d‬اﺳﻔﻞ ﻗﺎﻋﺪة اﻟﺨﺎزوق و ‪3d‬‬
‫أﻋﻠﻰ ﻧﻘﻄﺔ اﻻرﺗﻜﺎز – ﺑﺤﯿﺚ ﻻ ﺗﺰﯾﺪ ﻋﻦ ‪ ٥٠‬دﻗﺔ‪/‬ﻗﺪم‪.‬‬
‫¯‪ N‬اﻟﻘﯿﻤﺔ اﻟﻤﺘﻮﺳﻄﺔ ﻟﻌﺪد اﻟﺪﻗﺎت ﻓﻰ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﺔ اﻻﺧﺘﺮاق اﻟﻘﯿﺎﺳﻰ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻃﻮل‬
‫اﻟﺨﺎزوق داﺧﻞ اﻟﻄﺒﻘﺔ أو اﻟﻄﺒﻘﺎت ﻏﯿﺮ ﻣﺘﻤﺎﺳﻜﺔ اﻟﺤﺒﯿﺒﺎت‪.‬‬
‫‪ l‬ﻃﻮل اﺧﺘﺮاق اﻟﺨﺎزوق ﻟﻠﻄﺒﻘﺔ ﻏﯿﺮ ﻣﺘﻤﺎﺳﻜﺔ اﻟﺤﺒﯿﺒﺎت ﺑﺎﻟﻤﺘﺮ‪.‬‬
‫‪ d‬ﻗﻄﺮ اﻟﺨﺎزوق ﺑﺎﻟﻤﺘﺮ‪.‬‬
‫ﻓﻲ ﺣﺎﻟﺔ ﺧﻮازﯾﻖ اﻟﺘﺜﻘﯿﺐ اﻟﻤﻨﻔﺬة ﺑﻄﺮﯾﻘﺔ اﻟﺤﻔﺮ ﻓﺈن ﺣﻤﻞ ﺗﺸﻐﯿﻞ اﻟﺨﺎزوق ﯾﺘﺮاوح‬
‫ﺑﯿﻦ ‪ %٥٠‬و‪ %١٠٠‬ﻣﻦ اﻟﻘﯿﻤﺔ اﻟﻤﺤﺴﻮﺑﺔ ﺑﺎﻟﻤﻌﺎدﻟﺔ اﻟﻤﺬﻛﻮرة أﻋﻼه وذﻟﻚ ﻃﺒﻘ ًﺎ‬
‫ﻟﻨﻮﻋﯿﺔ ﺧﺎزوق اﻟﺘﺜﻘﯿﺐ اﻟﻤﺴﺘﺨﺪم وﻃﺮﯾﻘﺔ ﺗﻨﻔﯿﺬه‪.‬‬
‫‪5.4.1 Correlations with SPT‬‬ ‫‪5‬‬
‫‪١٢‬‬
‫‪PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com‬‬

Relationship between standard penetration test

and φ (friction angle)
١٣

Friction angle, SPT (N) values and relative density (Bowles 2004)
• A correction of field N values is also necessary to account

for the effects of overburden pressures when estimating
physical properties in cohesionless soils. The corrected N’
value is determined by multiplying the field N value by the
correction factor obtained from Figure 5-4-1.
• The corrected N` values and uncorrected N values (blows
/300 mm ) may be used to estimate the relative density of
cohesionless soils and consistency of cohesive soils,
respectively. Table (5-4-1-A) contains an empirical
relationship between N’ value, and the relative density, angle
of internal friction and weight of granular soils. It is
emphasized that for soils containing gravel sized particles,
this table may yield unreliable results. In those cases, the
correlations should be used for rough estimation purposes
only
١٤

• Table (5-4-1-B) contains an empirical relationship

between the uncorrected N value and the unconfined
compressive strength and saturated unit weight of
cohesive soils. Correlations of N values to undrained
shear strength of clays is crude and unreliable for design.
It should be used only for preliminary estimating
purposes. Undisturbed cohesive samples should be
obtained for laboratory determination of accurate shear
strength and unit weight.

Correction for overburden pressure:
Several investigators have found that the overburden pressure influences the
penetration resistance or the N value in a granular soil. If two granular soils
possessing the same relative density but having different confining pressures are
tested, the one with a higher confining pressure gives a higher N value. Since the
confining pressure (which is directly proportional to the overburden pressure)
increases with depth, the N values at shallow depths are underestimated and the
N values at larger depths are overestimated. Hence, if no correction is applied to
recorded N values, the relative densities at shallow depths will be underestimated
and at higher depths, they will be overestimated. To account for this, N values
recorded (NR) from field tests at different effective overburden pressures are
corrected to a standard effective overburden pressure .
The corrected N value is given by
N’ c = CN NR
Where,
N’c = corrected value of observed N value
CN = correction factor for overburden pressure
NR = Recorded or observed N value in the field
١٥

The correction proposed by Peck, Hanson and Thornburn (1974) is given

by the equation:
Where, σ’c = Effective overburden pressure at the depth at which N

value is recorded, in kPa
Correlation between N value and correlation between N value and

angle of shearing resistance UCC strength for cohesive soils
Figure 5-4-1 Chart for Correction of N-values in Sand for Influence

of Overburden Pressure (after Peck et al., 1974)
١٦

Table (5-4-1-A) EMPIRICAL VALUES FOR Ø, Dr , AND UNIT WEIGHT

OF GRANULAR SOILS BASED ON CORRECTED N’ (after Bowles, 1977)
Very Very
Description Loose Medium Dense
Loose Dense
Relative density Dr 0 - 0.15 0.15-0.35 0.35-0.65 0.65-0.85 0.85-1.00
Corrected standard
Penetration no. N’ 0 to 4 4 to 10 10 to 30 30 to 50 50 +
Approximate angle of
internal friction Ø * 25-30ْ 27-32ْ 30-35ْْ 35-40ْ 38-43ْ
Approximate range of
moist unit weight (γ)
kN/m3 11.0-15.7 14.1-18.1 17.3-20.4 17.3-22.0 20.4-23.6
Correlations may be unreliable in soils containing gravel.
* Use larger values for granular material with 5% or less fine sand and silt.
Table (5-4-1-B) EMPIRICAL VALUES FOR UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE

STRENGTH (qu ) AND CONSISTENCY OF COHESIVE SOILS BASED ON
UNCORRECTED N (after Bowles, 1977)
Very
Consistency Very soft Soft Medium Stiff Hard
Stiff
qu , kPa 0 - 24 24-48 48-96 96-192 192-384 348 +
N, Standard
Penetration
Resistance 0-2 2-4 4-8 8 -16 16 - 32 32 +
(γ) saturated,
kN/m3 15.8-18.8 15.8-18.8 17.3-20.4 18.8-22.0 18.8-22.0 18.8-22.0
The undrained shear strength is ½ of the unconfined compressive strength.
Correlations are unreliable. Use for preliminary estimates only.
١٧

5.4.2 Correlations with CPT tests 5
Static Cone penetrometer test (C.P.T)
CPT Truck
١٨

CPT Truck
١٩

n Measures:
n Cone Resistance, qc
n Sleeve Resistance, fsc
٢٠

CPT = Cone Penetration Test

designed specifically for interpreting pile parameters:
end resistance, qc and
shaft resistance, fs cone
36 mm diameter cone (60°)
pushed into the soil at 2 cm/sec 1.2 m in a minute
Cone Penetration Testing (CPT)
Real-Time readings in computer screen

Penetration at 2 cm/s
Sand
Clay
Buried Crust
Clay
٢١

qc (MPa)
loose sand
yc
dense sand
Depth (m)
n Typical CPT results
٢٢

•The cone penetration test is regarded as a better alternative

to the SPT because it reflects well the vertical pile loading
mechanism. The widely used CPT methods include the Dutch
method (DeRuiter and Beringen 1979), Schmertmann (1978),
Aoki-Velloso (1975), and the LCPC method (Bustamante and
Gianeselli 1982).
•Most CPT methods relate the base and shaft resistance to the
cone penetration resistance qc using empirical parameters.
The empirical parameters relating pile resistance to qc are
given as a function of soil and pile type.
•The LCPC method (Bustamante and Gianeselli 1982)
provides relatively detailed information regarding soil and
pile types. Some authors propose the use of cone sleeve
friction fs for the estimation of shaft resistance, while others
propose that it be done on the cone penetration resistance qc .
٢٣

٢٤

٢٥

W a te r c o n t e n t D e n s it y R e la ti v e w e i g h t o f g r a in s S t a ti c c o n e r e s i s t. S .P.T. D r i v i n g lo g
S o i l d e s c r ip ti o n % t /m 2 <d % q c - kg /cm N -v a lu e B lo w s / m
20 40 1. 50 1.75 2 .0 0 25 50 75 25 50 75 B lo w s /ft 1 0 0 300
0 FI L L
Figure 5.1. Soil data for driven piles G(Gregersen
.W . L . L a y e rs o fet al, 1973).
sa w d u s t Fine san d 6
FI N E SA N D
D ry d e n sit y
3
2
5 M e diu m C o a rs e 1
M E D IU M t o
san d san d
C OA R S E S A N D 1
1
10
D e p th - m
1
d = 0 .6 m m
15 2
B u lk d en s ity d= 0 .2 m m d = 2 .0 m m
5
20 11 0 →
10
15
S p l ic e o f p i l e
25
F i g . 5 . 1 S o il D a t a f o r D r i v e n P il e s
(G r e g e r s e n e t a l , 1 9 7 3 )
The Eslami-Fellenius profiling chart
٢٦

Use of CPT Data
٢٧

٢٨

•The friction ratio, Rf = (fs / qc).100 %, can be used to

identify the soil type. Charts have been prepared by several
researchers. One of these charts is shown as Figure 5.
٢٩


Empirical correlation with the results of CPT data often
take the following form:
fs = Aq qc
where Aq = empirical number, and qc = cone penetration
resistance at the point under consideration, and
fb = C q qcb
where Cq = empirical factor, and qcb = average cone resistance
around the pile tip.
In most practical methods of design, an upper limits are
placed on the values of fs (fsl) and fb (fbl), these being
dependent on the type of soil and the type of pile.
‫ﻃﺒﻘﺎً ﻟﻠﻜﻮد اﻟﻤﺼﺮى ﻟﻸﺳﺎﺳﺎت ﻓﺈن ﻗﺪرة ﺗﺤﻤﻞ ﺧﺎزوق إزاﺣﺔ )ﺑﺎﻟﻜﯿﻠﻮ ﻧﯿﻮﺗﻦ‬
‫ )ﺣﻤﻞ ﺗﺸﻐﯿﻞ‬.‫( )ﺣﻤﻞ اﻟﺘﺸﻐﯿﻞ( ﻣﺮﺗﻜﺰ ﻓﻰ ﺗﺮﺑﮫ ﻏﯿﺮ ﻣﺘﻤﺎﺳﻜﺔ اﻟﺤﺒﯿﺒﺎت‬kN
‫ ﻟﻤﻘﺎوﻣﺔ‬2 ،‫ ﻟﻤﻘﺎوﻣﺔ ارﺗﻜﺎز اﻟﺨﺎزوق‬3 ‫اﻟﺨﺎزوق وﯾﺘﻀﻤﻦ ﻣﻌﺎﻣﻞ أﻣﺎن ﻗﺪرة‬
: ( ‫اﻻﺣﺘﻜﺎك‬
0.7 π d2 1
Qall ( driven ) = qc ( )+ fc ( π dl)
3 4 2
: ‫ﺣﯿﺚ‬
‫ﻣﺮات ﻗﻄﺮ‬٦ ‫ اﻟﻤﻘﺎوﻣﺔ اﻟﻤﺘﻮﺳﻄﺔ ﻹﺧﺘﺮاق اﻟﻤﺨﺮوط اﻹﺳﺘﺎﺗﯿﻜﻲ ﻓﻲ ﻣﺴﺎﻓﺔ‬qc
‫ ﻣﺮات ھﺬا اﻟﻘﻄﺮ أﺳﻔﻞ ﻣﻨﺴﻮب اﻹرﺗﻜﺎز ﺣﯿﺚ‬٣ ‫اﻟﺨﺎزوق أﻋﻼ ﻣﻨﺴﻮب اﻹرﺗﻜﺎز و‬
.٢‫ﺳﻢ‬/‫ﻛﺠﻢ‬١٥٠ ‫ ﻋﻦ‬qc ‫ﻻ ﺗﺰﯾﺪ ﻗﯿﻤﺔ‬
‫ اﻟﻘﯿﻤﺔ اﻟﻤﺘﻮﺳﻄﺔ اﻟﻤﻘﺎﺳﺔ ﻟﻺﺣﺘﻜﺎك اﻟﺠﺎﻧﺒﻲ ﺑﻄﻮل اﻟﺨﺎزوق ﺑﺤﯿﺚ ﻻ ﺗﺰﯾﺪ ﻋﻦ‬fc
‫( وﯾﻤﻜﻦ ﻓﻲ ﺣﺎﻟﺔ ﻋﺪم ﻗﯿﺎﺳﮭﺎ ﺗﻘﺪﯾﺮھﺎ ﻛﻨﺴﺒﺔ‬٢‫ﺳﻢ‬/‫ ﻛﺠﻢ‬١.٠) ٢‫م‬/‫ﻛﯿﻠﻮ ﻧﯿﻮﺗﻦ‬١٠٠
.‫ اﻟﻤﻨﺎﻇﺮة‬qc ‫ ﻣﻦ ﻗﯿﻢ‬٠.٠٠٥ ‫ﺗﺒﻠﻎ‬
٣٠

‫ﯾﺘﻤﯿﺰ ھﺬا اﻹﺧﺘﺒﺎر ﺑﻌﺪم وﺟﻮد اﻟﻌﯿﻮب اﻟﻤﺼﺎﺣﺒﺔ ﻹﺧﺘﯿﺎر اﻹﺧﺘﺮاق اﻟﻘﯿﺎﺳﻲ إﻻ أﻧﮫ‬
‫ ﻻ ﺗﻌﺘﺒﺮ دﻗﯿﻘﺔ ﻓﻲ ﺣﺎﻟﺔ‬CPT ‫ﯾﺠﺐ ﻣﺮاﻋﺎة أن ﻧﺘﺎﺋﺞ إﺧﺘﺒﺎر اﻟﻤﺨﺮوط اﻹﺳﺘﺎﺗﯿﻜﻲ‬
‫اﻟﺘﺮﺑﺔ اﻟﺮﻣﻠﯿﺔ اﻟﻜﺜﯿﻔﺔ ﺟﺪاً أو ﻓﻲ اﻟﻄﺒﻘﺎت اﻟﺮﻣﻠﯿﺔ اﻟﻤﺤﺘﻮﯾﺔ ﻋﻠﻰ ﻧﺴﺒﺔ ﻣﻦ اﻟﺰﻟﻂ‬
‫وﯾﻤﻜﻦ ﺗﻘﺪﯾﺮ ﻗﺪرة ﺗﺤﻤﯿﻞ ﺧﺎزوق إزاﺣﺔ ﻣﺮﺗﻜﺰ ﻓﻲ رﻣﻞ ﺳﺎﺋﺐ إﻟﻰ ﻛﺜﯿﻒ أو ﻃﻤﻰ‬
.‫ﻏﯿﺮ ﻟﺪن ﺑﺎﺳﺘﺨﺪام ﻧﺘﺎﺋﺞ ﺗﺠﺮﺑﺔ اﻟﻤﺨﺮوط اﻹﺳﺘﺎﺗﯿﻜﻲ ﻃﺒﻘﺎً ﻟﻠﻌﻼﻗﺔ اﻟﺴﺎﺑﻘﺔ‬
‫ﻛﻤﺎ أﻧﮫ أﯾﻀﺎ ﻓﻲ ﺣﺎﻟﺔ ﺧﻮازﯾﻖ اﻟﺘﺜﻘﯿﺐ اﻟﻤﻨﻔﺬة ﺑﻄﺮﯾﻘﺔ اﻟﺤﻔﺮ ﻓﺈن ﺣﻤﻞ ﺗﺸﻐﯿﻞ‬
‫ ﻣﻦ اﻟﻘﯿﻤﺔ اﻟﻤﺤﺴﻮﺑﺔ ﺑﺎﻟﻤﻌﺎدﻟﺔ‬% ١٠٠ ‫ و‬% ٥٠ ‫اﻟﺨﺎزوق ﯾﺘﺮاوح ﺑﯿﻦ‬
.‫اﻟﻤﺬﻛﻮرة أﻋﻼه وذﻟﻚ ﻃﺒﻘﺎً ﻟﻨﻮﻋﯿﺔ ﺧﺎزوق اﻟﺘﺜﻘﯿﺐ اﻟﻤﺴﺘﺨﺪم وﻃﺮﯾﻘﺔ ﺗﻨﻔﯿﺬه‬
Schmertmann Method
Schmertmann proposed the following relationship to predict
the unit tip bearing capacity of the pile (qt) from the cone tip
resistance (qc):
where qc1 is the minimum of the average cone tip resistances of

zones ranging from 0.7D to 4D below the pile tip (where D is
the pile diameter) and qc2 is the average of minimum cone tip
resistances over a distance 8D above the pile tip. To determine
qc1, the minimum path rule is used as illustrated in figure 3.
The described zone (from 8D above to 0.7D-4D below the pile
tip) represents the failure surface, which is approximated by a
logarithmic spiral. Schmertmann suggested an upper limit of
150 TSF (15 MPa) for the unit tip bearing capacity (qt).
٣١

Calculation of the average cone tip resistance in Schmertmann

method
٣٢

5
5.5 Low Strain Integrity Methods 5
٣٣

5.5.1 Pile Integrity Testing (PIT) 5
٣٤

٣٥

٣٦

SONIC ECHO INTEGRITY TESTING

Low strain integrity tests
examine the response of a pile to
a small hammer blow at the pile
head. The induced stress wave
travels down the pile shaft and
reflected waves from significant
changes in pile shaft acoustic
impedance are registered by a
transducer held against the pile
head. The measured signals are
digitised by the test unit, stored
internally and downloaded onto
PC for hard copy reporting.
Ideal as quality control for pile integrity

All piles on site can be tested quickly and efficiently
Faults can be detected immediately on site
Pile lengths as well as necking & bulging can be detected.
Practical & inexpensive
Over 200 piles per day may be tested depending on access
and pile head condition
Modern, battery operated data acquisition systems
Data downloaded to PC for quick reporting
٣٧

٣٨

٣٩

٤٠

٤١

Sound pile
Major
defect at
5.5m
٤٢

٤٣

٤٤

THANK YOU 5
Pile Foundations
by
Prof. Adel Ahmed Dif
Structural Eng. Dept.
Faculty of Engineering, El-Mansoura University
٤٥

Chapter 15

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chapter 15

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

‫ﺑﺴﻢ اﷲ اﻟﺮﺣﻤﻦ اﻟﺮﺣﯿﻢ‬

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

Pile driving formulae are mainly used to estimate the

•These formulae depend

5.3 Pile Driving Formulae 5

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

5.3 Pile Driving Formulae 5

Engineering news formula:

C = C c + Cp + C g , C g = 0.50 % of the pile diameter

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

5.3 Pile Driving Formulae 5

Type of hammer Power efficiency, k

Drop hammer( winch 0.8

Cushion Coefficient of Young’ s modulus,

Greenheart 0.5 3x102

Other 0.3 2x102

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

‫ﻃﺒﻘﺎً ﻟﻠﻜﻮد اﻟﻤﺼﺮى ﻟﻸﺳﺎﺳﺎت‬

5.3 Pile Driving Formulae 5

‫ﻃﺒﻘﺎً ﻟﻠﻜﻮد اﻟﻤﺼﺮى ﻟﻸﺳﺎﺳﺎت‬

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

‫ﻃﺒﻘﺎً ﻟﻠﻜﻮد اﻟﻤﺼﺮى ﻟﻸﺳﺎﺳﺎت‬

5.3 Pile Driving Formulae

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

Energy IN = Energy OUT

5.3 Pile Driving Formulae

The Hiley Formula

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

Variety of Field Testing Devices

5.4 Correlations with SPT and CPT tests 5

5.4.1- Correlations with SPT data

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

5.4.1 Correlations with SPT 5

SPT Hammer Types

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

SPT Hammer Types

5.4.1 Correlations with SPT 5

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

5.4.1 Correlations with SPT 5

Empirical correlations with the results of SPT data usually

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

‫‪5.4.1 Correlations with SPT‬‬ ‫‪5‬‬

‫‪PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com‬‬

5.4.1 Correlations with SPT 5

Relationship between standard penetration test

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

5.4.1 Correlations with SPT 5

• A correction of field N values is also necessary to account

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

• Table (5-4-1-B) contains an empirical relationship

5.4.1 Correlations with SPT 5

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

The correction proposed by Peck, Hanson and Thornburn (1974) is given

Where, σ’c = Effective overburden pressure at the depth at which N

Correlation between N value and correlation between N value and

5.4.1 Correlations with SPT 5

Figure 5-4-1 Chart for Correction of N-values in Sand for Influence

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com

Table (5-4-1-A) EMPIRICAL VALUES FOR Ø, Dr , AND UNIT WEIGHT

5.4.1 Correlations with SPT 5

Table (5-4-1-B) EMPIRICAL VALUES FOR UNCONFINED COMPRESSIVE

The undrained shear strength is ½ of the unconfined compressive strength.

Correlations are unreliable. Use for preliminary estimates only.

PDF created with pdfFactory trial version www.pdffactory.com