Comparison of Five Different Methods for Determining Pile ...

1 Comparison of Five Different Methods for Determining pile Bearing Capacities Prepared for Wisconsin Highway Research Program Andrew Hanz WHRP Program Manager 3356 Engineering Hall 1415 Engineering Dr. Madison, WI 53706 by James H. Long, Associate Professor of Civil Engineering Josh Hendrix David Jaromin Department of Civil Engineering University of Illinois at Urbana/Champaign 205 North Mathews Urbana, Illinois 61801 Contact: Jim Long at (217) 333-2543 Wisconsin Highway Research Program #0092-07-04 Comparison of Five Different Methods for Determining pile Bearing Capacities Final Report by James H Long Joshua Hendrix David Jaromin of the University of Illinois at Urbana/Champaign SUBMITTED TO THE WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION February 2009 - i - ACKNOWLEDGMENTS.

2 Iv DISCLAIMER ..vi Technical Report Documentation Page ..vii Executive Summary ..ix Project Summary ..ix Process ..x Findings and Conclusions ..xii Chapter1 ..1 Chapter2 ..3 Methods FOR PREDICTING AXIAL pile INTRODUCTION ..3 ESTIMATES USING DYNAMIC FORMULAE ..3 The Engineering News (EN) Formula ..4 Original Gates Equation ..5 Modified Gates Equation (Olson and Flaate) ..5 FHWA-Modified Gates Equation (USDOT) ..6 Long (2001) Modification to Original Gates Method ..6 Washington Department of Transportation (WSDOT) ESTIMATES USING pile DRIVING ANALYZER (PDA).

3 7 EFFECT OF TIME ON pile CAPACITY ..9 CAPWAP (CASE pile Wave Analysis Program) ..10 SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION ..11 Chapter3 ..13 DATABASES, NATIONWIDE COLLECTION AND WISCONSIN DATA ..13 INTRODUCTION ..13 FLAATE, OLSON AND FLAATE, 1967 ..14 FRAGASZY et al. 1988, DATABASE FROM ALLEN (2005) and NCHRP 507 ..15 WISCONSIN DOT DATABASE ..15 SUMMARY ..16 Chapter4 ..30 PREDICTED VERSUS MEASURED CAPACITY USING THE NATIONWIDE DATABASE ..30 INTRODUCTION ..30 DESCRIPTION OF DATA ..30 COMPARISONS OF PREDICTED AND MEASURED CAPACITY.

4 31 WISC-EN Wisc-EN vs. SLT ..33 Wisc-EN vs. PDA (EOD) and CAPWAP (BOR) ..34 WASHINGTON STATE DOT METHOD (WSDOT)..34 - ii - WSDOT vs. SLT ..34 WSDOT vs. PDA and CAPWAP ..34 FHWA-GATES METHOD ..35 FHWA-Gates vs. FHWA-Gates vs. PDA(EOD) and CAPWAP(BOR)..35 PDA(EOD) AND CAPWAP(BOR) ..35 DEVELOPMENT OF THE CORRECTED FHWA-GATES SUMMARY AND Chapter 5 ..79 PREDICTED VERSUS MEASURED CAPACITY USING THE DATABASE COLLECTED FROM WISCONSIN INTRODUCTION ..79 DESCRIPTION OF DATA ..79 WISC-EN AND FHWA-GATES COMPARED WITH PDA-EOD.

5 81 WISC-EN AND FHWA-GATES COMPARED TO Wisc-EN ..84 STATIC LOAD TEST RESULTS ..85 FHWA-GATES COMPARED TO WISC-EN ..86 EFFECT OF HAMMER Wisc-EN ..87 PDA-EOD ..88 Wisc-EN, FHWA-Gates, PDA-EOD compared to CAPWAP-BOR ..88 Wisc-EN ..88 PDA-EOD ..89 WSDOT Formula ..90 PDA-EOD ..90 SLT ..90 CAPWAP-BOR ..91 CORRECTED FHWA-GATES FORMULA ..92 PDA-EOD ..92 SLT ..92 CAPWAP-BOR ..93 PDA-EOD ..93 Wisc-EN ..94 WSDOT Formula ..96 Corrected Chapter6 ..130 RESISTANCE FACTORS AND IMPACT OF USING A SPECIFIC PREDICTIVE INTRODUCTION.

6 130 SUMMARY OF PREDICTIVE Methods ..130 FACTORS OF SAFETY AND RELIABILITY ..131 RESISTANCE FACTORS AND First Order Second Moment (FOSM)..132 First Order Reliability Method (FORM) ..133 EFFICIENCY FOR THE Methods AND IMPACT OF MOVING FROM FS DESIGN TO - iii - Factor of Safety Approach ..135 Reliability Index for Factor of Safety Approach and Impact of Using a More Accurate Predictive Method ..137 CONSIDERATION OF THE DISTRIBUTION FOR Resistance Factors Based on Extremal Data.

7 138 Efficiency Factors Based on Extremal Impact on Capacity Demand using Efficiency Factors Based on Extremal Data ..140 SUMMARY AND Chapter7 ..153 SUMMARY AND Chapter 8 ..158 REFERENCES ..158 - iv - ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors acknowledge the contributions from the technical oversight committee: Mr. Jeffrey Horsfall, Wisconsin Department of Transportation, Mr. Robert Andorfer, WisDOT, Mr. Steven Maxwell, and Mr. Finn Hubbard. These members provided helpful guidance to ensure the project addressed issues relevant to WisDOT.

8 We also are grateful for the assistance provided by Mr. Andrew Hanz who ensured the administrative aspects ran smoothly. - v - - vi - DISCLAIMER This research was funded through the Wisconsin Highway Research Program by the Wisconsin Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration under Project # (0092-07-04). The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors who are responsible for the facts and the accuracy of the data presented herein.

9 The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views of the Wisconsin Department of Transportation or the Federal Highway Administration at the time of publication. This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The United States Government assumes no liability for its contents or use thereof. This report does not constitute a standard, specification or regulation. The United States Government does not endorse products or manufacturers.

10 Trade and manufacturers names appear in this report only because they are considered essential to the object of the document. - vii - Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. WisDOT 0092-07-04 2. Government Accession No 3. Recipient s Catalog No 4. Title and Subtitle Comparison of Five Different Methods for Determining pile Bearing Capacities 5. Report Date 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Authors James H. Long, Joshua Hendrix, David Jaromin 8. Performing Organization Report No.