Pile Driving Setup for Ohio Soils mer Bilgin, PhD, PE University of - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
pile driving setup for ohio soils
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Pile Driving Setup for Ohio Soils mer Bilgin, PhD, PE University of - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Jan 28, 2023 760 likes •1.12k views

Pile Driving Setup for Ohio Soils mer Bilgin, PhD, PE University of Dayton Dayton, Ohio 2019 MWGC September 17-19, 2019 Columbus, Ohio Motivation for the Pile Setup Research Pile driving setup is observed in ODOT projects Setup is

slide-1
SLIDE 1

Pile Driving Setup for Ohio Soils

Ömer Bilgin, PhD, PE

University of Dayton Dayton, Ohio

2019 MWGC September 17-19, 2019 Columbus, Ohio

slide-2
SLIDE 2

Motivation for the Pile Setup Research

  • Pile driving setup is observed in ODOT projects
  • Setup is rarely considered in ODOT’s current driven friction

pile design procedures, as it is not easily:

− Predicted, or − Quantified

  • Substantial driving losses encountered during construction
  • ften result in:

− Pile driving to halt for a while to determine if setup occurs, − Construction delays, and/or − Unforeseen costs if additional length of pile is driven.

2

slide-3
SLIDE 3

Goals and Objectives

  • Collect data from previous projects where pile setup was
  • bserved and restrike data available
  • Collect pile load test data on active projects in construction
  • Conduct analysis to investigate the pile setup mechanisms
  • Correlate pile setup behavior to the properties of soils in Ohio
  • Formulate pile setup predictions for different geologic

conditions and/or geographical locations across Ohio

3

slide-4
SLIDE 4

Collecting Data from Previous Projects

  • Data Sources: ODOT, GRL Engineers, CTL Engineering, and

G2 Consulting Group

  • At the end of data collection: 91 projects / 245 piles

4

Projects Piles

slide-5
SLIDE 5

Pile Setup Database

  • Data Sources: ODOT, GRL, and CTL
  • Number of Projects: 71 (all in Ohio)
  • Number of Piles: 245

Projects Piles

5

slide-6
SLIDE 6

Data Collected

  • Project Information

− County, district, coordinates, and project year

  • Pile Information

− Number, type, size, length, and elevations

  • Load Test Data

− EOID, restrike (total, shaft, and toe)

6

slide-7
SLIDE 7

Data Collected (cont’d)

  • Soil and Groundwater Information

− Pile and boring locations − Groundwater elevation − Overall and detailed soil type and layers along pile length − Properties collected

  • SPT-N
  • SPT-N60
  • w
  • LL, PL, and PI
  • Fine content (both silt and clay)

7

slide-8
SLIDE 8

Project Locations

8

slide-9
SLIDE 9

Projects & Piles per County

9

slide-10
SLIDE 10

Distribution of Projects & Piles per County

10

slide-11
SLIDE 11

Distribution of Dynamic Test Data per County

Note: CAPWAP analysis is the current standard of care (AASHTO LRFD)

11

(CASE: 245 / CAPWAP: 166)

slide-12
SLIDE 12

Maximum Setup Ratio (R = Q(t) / QEOID) per County

(CASE data)

12

slide-13
SLIDE 13

Maximum Setup Ratio (R = Q(t) / QEOID) per County

(CAPWAP data)

13

slide-14
SLIDE 14

Setup Ratio – CASE

14

slide-15
SLIDE 15

Setup Ratio – CASE

15

slide-16
SLIDE 16

Setup Ratio – CAPWAP

16

slide-17
SLIDE 17

Setup Components

  • Shaft setup
  • Toe setup/relaxation

17

slide-18
SLIDE 18

Pile Lengths

18

245 piles

slide-19
SLIDE 19

Pile Types

  • Pile types in the database:

− Cast-in-place pipe pile (CIPP) − Cast-in-place pipe open-ended pipe pile (CIPP-O) − H pile (H)

  • Other types in the literature:

− Concrete, timber, and composite

19

slide-20
SLIDE 20

Setup per Pile Types

  • CIPP, CIPP-O, and H piles

20

slide-21
SLIDE 21

Pile Sizes

21

174 piles

slide-22
SLIDE 22

Effect of Friction Component

22

slide-23
SLIDE 23

Effect of SPT-N value

23

slide-24
SLIDE 24

Existing Empirical Model (Skov & Denver, 1988)

  • Setup Ratio, R
  • Setup Factor, A

= 0.2 for sandy soils = 0.6 for clayey soils

  • Reference Time, t0

= 0.5 for sandy soils = 1.0 for clayey soils

( )

log 1

EOID

Q t t A Q t   = +    

24

slide-25
SLIDE 25

Next Phase: Field Tests and New Data Collection

  • Projects with static load test and multiple restrikes
  • Projects completed:

− CUY-21 − CUY-480

  • Ongoing projects as part of this research study:

− LUC-75 − HAM-75 − SUM-76

25

slide-26
SLIDE 26

New Projects: CPT Soundings

26

slide-27
SLIDE 27

New Projects – CPT Soundings

27

slide-28
SLIDE 28

New Projects – Piezometers

28

slide-29
SLIDE 29

New Projects – Piezometers

29

slide-30
SLIDE 30

What is Next?

  • Cluster analysis, based on:

− Pile properties − Soil properties − Geographic location

  • Field tests and new data collection
  • Combine the data from previous and new projects

30

slide-31
SLIDE 31

Example: Hamilton County

31

slide-32
SLIDE 32

Acknowledgments

  • ODOT:

− Chris Merklin − Alex Dettloff − Steve Taliaferro − Steve Slomski

  • Research Team:

− Saeed Alzahrani (UD PhD Student) − Matthew Heron (UD MS Student) − Jamal Nusairat (ELR Robinson) − Peter Narsavage (ELR Robinson) − Rick Engel (ELR Robinson) − Robert Liang (UD) − Jerry DiMaggio (ARA) − Jawdat Siddiqi (NEAS)

32

slide-33
SLIDE 33

Thank you…

Ömer Bilgin, PhD, PE (bilgin@udayton.edu)

33