Embedded data collector (EDC) evaluation, phase II - comparison with instrumented static load tests.

Details

• Creators:
  McVay, Michael C. ; Bloomquist, David ; Tran, Khiem T.
• Corporate Creators:
  University of Florida. Dept. of Civil and Coastal Engineering
• Corporate Contributors:
  United States. Dept. of Transportation
• Subject/TRT Terms:
  Data Collection Design Load Instruments For Measuring Loads Or Pressure Pile Driving Pile Foundations Piles (Supports) Resistance Tests Skin Friction Strain Gages
• Publication/ Report Number:
  BDK75 977-24
• Resource Type:
  Tech Report
• Geographical Coverage:
  Florida
• Corporate Publisher:
  Florida. Dept. of Transportation
• Abstract:
  A total of 139 piles and 213,000 hammer blows were compared between the Embedded Data Collector
  
  (EDC), the Pile Driving Analyzer (PDA), and the CAse Pile Wave Analysis Program (CAPWAP) along with
  
  SmartPile Review versions (3.6, 3.72, 3.73, 3.76 and 3.76.1):
  
   Fixed EDC/PDA ratio was consistent (0.89 to 0.97) for all version numbers, with little variability (max
  
  coefficient of variation (CV) = 0.17);
  
   UF EDC/PDA ratio was slightly unconservative (1.12) for earlier versions (3.6), but conservative (0.89 to
  
  0.93) for later releases, with little variability (max CV = 0.18);
  
   Top pile compressive stresses, CSX (EDC/PDA), were consistent (0.91 to 0.93) for all versions, with little
  
  variability (max CV = 0.09);
  
   Bottom pile compressive stresses, CSB (EDC/PDA), ranged from 0.77 for earlier version (3.6), but quickly
  
  stabilized at 0.74 for all subsequent versions (3.72-3.761), with maximum variability (CV = 0.25);
  
   Pile tension stress, TSX (EDC/PDA), was slightly unconservative (1.2) for earlier versions (3.6), but was
  
  conservative (0.87 to 0.90) for all later releases, with max variability (CV = 0.29);
  
   UF EDC/CAPWAP total capacity ratio varied from 1.0 (ver 3.6) to 0.89 (ver 3.761), with R2 = 0.89;
  
   UF EDC/CAPWAP skin friction ratio varied from 0.78 to 1.04, with R2
  
  = 0.57;
  
   UF EDC/CAPWAP tip resistance ratio varied from 0.85 to 0.93, with R2
  
  = 0.76.
  
  A total of 12 static pile test were collected in Florida and Louisiana. From the 12 piles, a total of 17 independent
  
  measurements (i.e., total, skin, and tip capacities) were recorded. EDC and SmartPile had a bias or  (ratio of
  
  measured/predicted) of 0.96, CVR, of 0.258 for combined (total, tip and skin) resistances. Using AASHTO,
  
  2012, the Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD)  was determined to be 0.65, for a reliability, , of 2.33.
  
  CAPWAP had a bias, , of 0.91, CVR = 0.311, and LRFD  = 0.54 for =2.33 with inclusion of side friction
  
  and tip resistance.
  
  
• Format:
  PDF
• Collection(s):
  US Transportation Collection
• Main Document Checksum:
  urn:sha256:93b26bd3eb474396ee312bce750e97564259ce21c75125c406d7ea13d4fca28b
• Download URL:
  https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/26849/dot_26849_DS1.pdf
• File Type:
  [PDF - 3.62 MB ]