STATIC LOAD TEST – A COMPARISON OF ULTIMATE LOAD BETWEEN STATNAMIC AND MAINTAINED LOAD TEST

MASTURA BINTI AZMI

A project report submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of degree of Master of Engineering (Civil-Geotechnic)

Faculty of Civil Engineering Universiti Teknologi Malaysia

MEI 2005

To everybody, thank you so much

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Through my preparation for this project, I have met several people that gave a lot of contribution towards this study. Many thanks to Dr. Khairul Anuar b Kassim who has been supervised me throughout this study and thank you for all the knowledge that you gave to me. I would also like to forward my thought to Mr. Tan Hui Hock of Geonamics Sdn. Bhd. who has been providing me with the necessary information for this study. I would also like to express my appreciation to Mr. Liu Chong Yew of SPYTL who has been a great mentor to me. Without the support from these people the thesis would not finish as this.

My sincere appreciation should also go to the people’s incharge of the projects that I went to get my data and information. All the information are valuable for this thesis and many thanks to you. I would also like to thank all the people involve directly or indirectly in this thesis. Not to forget my family and friends.

ABSTRACT

This study is conducted to give a good comparison of the ultimate load between the statnamic load test and the maintained load test. The study was done using three methods to predict the ultimate load of statnamic load test. The three methods are the Unloading Point Method, Matsumoto method and Simultaneous Equation method. The statnamic and maintained load test was done on two types of bored pile that are bored pile cast on limestone rock and bored pile cast on granite rock. The result shown in the study gave a different outcome. From the settlement-load curves derived, the result for the comparison of statnamic and maintained load test for bored pile cast on limestone gave an almost similar result. Thus, it can be said that the result for both statnamic and maintained load test can be used to determine the ultimate capacity of the pile. Where else, the result for bored pile cast on granite rock gave a very large difference due to large difference of length for the two bored pile. Therefore, it can be conclude that the result for this study on comparison of statnamic load test and maintained load test for bored pile cast on granite can not be used.

ABSTRAK

Projek ini dijalankan untuk memcari perbandingan kekuatan maksima di antara ujian beban statnamic dan ujian beban tertahan. Projek ini dijalankan menggunakan 3 kaedah berbeza bagi menentukan beban maksima dari ujian beban statnamic. 3 kaedah itu adalah kaedah pembebanan titik, kaedah Matsumoto dan kaedah penyelesaian persamaan serentak. Ujian statnamic dan beban tertahan telah dilakukan ke atas dua jenis bored pile iaitu cerucuk yang ditanam di atas batuan kapur dan di atas batuan granit. Ujian telah memberikan keputusan yang berbeza. Bagi keputusan ujian statnamic dan beban tertahan ke atas cerucuk di atas batuan kapur memberikan hasil yang lebih kurang sama tetapi bagi cerucuk yang terletak di atas batuan granit tidak. Ini berkemungkinan di sebabkan oleh perbezaan kedalaman yang sangat ketara. Oleh itu, bolehlah dikatakan bahawa perbandingan bagi ujian statnamic dan ujian beban tertahan bagi cerucuk yang dikorek di atas batuan granit bagi projek adalah gagal dan tidak boleh dibandingkan.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER TITLE PAGE

ORGANISATION OF THESIS Thesis Status Declaration Declaration Supervisor’s declaration Declaration of originality ii Dedication iii Acknowledgement iv Abstract v Abstrak vi Table of Content vii List of Tables xi List of Figures xii

1 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Objectives 2 1.2 Scopes 2 1.3 Problem Statement 3

2 LITERATURE REVIEW 5 2.1 Site Investigation 6 2.1.1 Planning 6 2.1.2 Depth of Exploration 7 2.1.3 Groundwater Condition 7 2.1.4 Sampling, in-situ testing and lab testing 8 2.2 Basic Piling Methods 10 2.2.1 Pile Types 10 2.2.1.1 Non-displacement piles 11 2.2.1.1.1 Bored cast-in-place 12 2.2.1.1.2 Small-diameter Percussion bored-cast- In-situ piles 13 2.2.1.1.3 Large-diameter Percussion bored pile 14 2.2.1.1.4 Rotary bored cast-in -place pile 15 2.2.1.2 Pile formation with rotary Boring equipment 17 2.2.1.3 Boring and Concreting 18 2.2.2 Concrete mixes for bored piles 19 2.2.3 Reinforcement for bored piles 21 2.2.4 Excavation using a bentonite suspension 21 2.3 Pile Testing 22 2.3.1 Introduction 22 2.4 of Piles 24 2.4.1 General 24 2.4.2 Test equipment 25 2.4.3 Load application and measurement 26 2.4.3.1 Measurement of settlement 27 2.5 Pile Load Test Procedure 27 2.5.1 Maintained load test 28 2.6 Interpretation of the results 29 2.6.1 Load-settlement curves 29 2.6.2 Estimation of ultimate load 30 2.6.3 Settlement criteria 30 2.7 Statnamic test 31 2.7.1 Introduction 31 2.7.2 Development of statnamic 33 2.7.3 Basic concept of statnamic 33 2.7.4 Application of statnamic test 35 2.7.5 Statnamic theory 36 2.7.5.1 Load duration 36 2.8 Stress Wave Analysis 37 2.9 Pyrotechnics 38 2.10 Data Acquisition 40 2.11 Statnamic Assembly 41 2.12 The Result 43 2.13 Statnamic compared to dynamic and static loading 43 2.13.1 Dynamic testing 43 2.13.2 Static Testing 44 2.14 Types 44 2.14.1 Elementary rock classification 44 3.14.2 Stratigraphy 48 3.14.2 Hardness 48 3.14.3 Defects in rock 49 2.14.4 Uniaxial compressive strength 50 2.14.5 Rock mass classification 51

3 METHODOLOGY 52 3.1 Statnamic test 52 3.2 Assembly of statnamic test equipment 53 3.3 Data Acquisition 63

4 DATA ANALYSIS 64 4.1 Interpretation of statnamic pile load test results 64 4.1.1 Unloading point method 67 4.1.2 Matsumoto method 68 4.1.3 Simultaneous equation method 69 4.2 Interpretation of maintained load test data 70

5 RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS 71 5.1 Results for bored pile on limestone rock 71 5.2 Results for bored pile on granite rock 78 5.3 Conclusions 85

REFERENCES 86 APPENDICES Appendix 1 89 Appendix 2 91 Appendix 3 93 Appendix 4 100 Appendix 5 114 Appendix 6 128 Appendix 7 135 Appendix 8 142 Appendix 9 157 Appendix 10 172

LIST OF TABLES

TABLES NO TITLE PAGE

2.1 Typical in-situ tests and their application to pile design 9 2.2 Recommended concrete slumps for cast- in- place pile 20 2.3 Schematic classification of igneous rock 45 2.4 Schematic classification of sedimentary rocks 47 2.5 Rock quality 51 5.1 Results for the statnamic test and maintained load test for bored pile cast on limestone rock 72 5.2 Results for the statnamic test and maintained load test for bored pile cast on granite rock 78

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURES TITLE PAGE NO

2.1 The unloading-point model 38 2.2 Statnamic devices assembly 42 3.1 Installation of piston and oil application 54 3.2 Piston and oil installation 54 3.3 Ignition system 55 3.4 Fuel cage 55 3.5 Loading of statnamic fuel 56 3.6 Closing of the piston 56 3.7 Installation of base plate 57 3.8 Installation of cylinder 57 3.9 Installation of cylinder 58 3.10 Installation of weight 58 3.11 Installation of weight 59 3.12 Installation of weight 59 3.13 After installation of weight mass 60 3.14 Placing the structure non-supporting panels 60 3.15 Closing of the structure panels and installation of gravel 61 3.16 Portable computer and data logging device 61 3.17 Cell laser source 62 3.18 After testing 62 4.1 Modelling of pie and soil during statnamic loading 5.1 Results for statnamic test using Unloading Point method for Limestone rock 73 5.2 Results for statnamic test using Matsumoto method for Limestone rock 74 5.3 Results for statnamic test using Simultaneous Equation method for Limestone rock 75 5.4 Results for maintained load test for Limestone rock 76 5.5 Results for statnamic test using 3 methods and maintained load test (3 rd cycle) for Limestone rock 77 5.6 Results for statnamic test using Unloading Point method for Granite rock 80 5.7 Results for statnamic test using Matsumoto method for Granite rock 81 5.8 Results for statnamic test using Simultaneous Equation method for Granite rock 82 5.9 Results for maintained load test for Granite rock 83 5.10 Results for statnamic test using 3 methods and maintained load test (2 nd cycle) for Granite rock 84

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURES TITLE PAGE NO

2.1 The unloading-point model 38 2.2 Statnamic devices assembly 42 3.1 Installation of piston and oil application 54 3.2 Piston and oil installation 54 3.3 Ignition system 55 3.4 Fuel cage 55 3.5 Loading of statnamic fuel 56 3.6 Closing of the piston 56 3.7 Installation of base plate 57 3.8 Installation of cylinder 57 3.9 Installation of cylinder 58 3.10 Installation of weight 58 3.11 Installation of weight 59 3.12 Installation of weight 59 3.13 After installation of weight mass 60 3.14 Placing the gravel structure non-supporting panels 60 3.15 Closing of the structure panels and installation of gravel 61 3.16 Portable computer and data logging device 61 3.17 Cell laser source 62 3.18 After testing 62 4.1 Modelling of pie and soil during statnamic loading 5.1 Results for statnamic test using Unloading Point method for Limestone rock 73 5.4 Results for statnamic test using Matsumoto method for Limestone rock 74 5.5 Results for statnamic test using Simultaneous Equation method for Limestone rock 75 5.4 Results for maintained load test for Limestone rock 76 5.5 Results for statnamic test using 3 methods and maintained load test (3 rd cycle) for Limestone rock 77 5.9 Results for statnamic test using Unloading Point method for Granite rock 80 5.10 Results for statnamic test using Matsumoto method for Granite rock 81 5.11 Results for statnamic test using Simultaneous Equation method for Granite rock 82 5.9 Results for maintained load test for Granite rock 83 5.10 Results for statnamic test using 3 methods and maintained load test (2 nd cycle) for Granite rock 84

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

In every construction, is one of the vital component that need a lot of attention whether in design or in construction. Choosing the correct foundation for a certain project is important to ensure a stable and longer life span of the structure. History shows that the usage of foundation in a structure is not new as it has been long use since man starts built a structure. Until now, there are a lot of efforts to increase the potency of foundation. This effort can also be seen with the introduction of variety of testing that would be suitable to see the effectiveness of foundation use. One of the study use in foundation especially pile foundation is static loading. There are several tests that can be used including statnamic load testing. This method is not new in construction engineering and been used in the west countries since 1988. The Statnamic test has now gained some attention in local construction since it has been used in 1994. Therefore, a study is needed in ensuring that this test can be used effectively in our construction industry

2

1.1 Objectives

The objectives that would be achieved in this study are:

i. The advantages and the disadvantages of the statnamic load test compared to the ordinary maintained load test.

ii. A comparison between the statnamic loading test and the typical maintained load test based on the settlement result and the ultimate of pile.

iii. A comparison between the statnamic load test and the maintained load test based on different types of .

1.2 Scopes

The scopes of this study are:

i. To compare statnamic test result on bored pile size 750mm diameter with maintained load test result on bored pile size 1050mm diameter cast on limestone rock.

ii. To compare the statnamic test result and maintained load test result on bored pile cast on limestone rock based on three methods of calculation (Unloading Point method, Matsumoto method and Simultaneous Equation method).

3

iii. To compare statnamic test result on bored pile size 1800mm diameter with maintained load test result on bored pile size 1200mm diameter cast on granite rock.

iv. To compare the statnamic test result and maintained load test result on bored pile cast on granite rock based on three methods of calculation (Unloading Point method, Matsumoto method and Simultaneous Equation method).

1.3 Problem statement

Although the usage of foundation especially the pile foundation is not new in the construction industry the people still not satisfy with the outcome of it. The introduction of latest testing devices shows that people still trying to find the most accurate way in predicting the pile behaviour. Typically several tests will be done for pile to show the integrity of the pile and its capacity. This prediction can ensure that the design of the pile meet the requirement needed for the use of the structure.

For capacity load testing of pile, several tests can be used in determining the pile capacity. The typical static load test that can show pile capacity and its settlement is the maintained load test or load test. This test gives an accurate result of the pile capacity and its settlement. Although this test gives a nearly perfect result of the pile behaviour but it does have several limitations such as long test time and it required a 24- hour close monitoring of the test.

In order to overcome this problem, several choices of tests that would give almost the same result as the ordinary maintained load test have been introduced

4 including the statnamic load test. This test has actually been used in the European countries since 1988 and has gained a lot of reputation on it. This statnamic load test already came to Malaysia in 1994 and has been used in a lot of projects in the country.

Although it has been almost 11 years since it been introduced here but there are least studies been carried out in comparing the statnamic load test to the ordinary maintained load test. Therefore, this study will be conducted to compare the statnamic load test to the ordinary maintained load test based on Malaysia condition.

REFERENCES

Amir, Joram M (1986) “Piling in Rock” A.A.Balkema

Chow, Y K and Chew, S H (1997) “Geotechnical Analysis of Statnamic Pile Load Test on Bored Pile No W47/5 For The Proposed Ampang Kuala Lumpur Elevated Highway”

Fleming et al (1992) “Piling Engineering” 2 nd Edition, Chapman & Hall

Geonamics (1998) “Statnamic – Load Testing Technology” Economy Express Printing

Goble G.G (1975) “Bearing Capacity of piles from dynamic measurements: Final report” Ohio Department of Transportation

Housel, William (1966) “Pile Load Capacity: Estimates and Test Results” Journal of The and Foundations Division

Kirkaldie, Louise (1988) “Rock Classification Systems for Engineering Purposes” Symposium on Rock Classification Systems for Engineering Purposes 1987, ASTM special technical publication

Peck et al (1974) “Foundation Engineering” 2 nd Edition, Wiley International

Smith, G.N and Smith, G.N (2000) “Elements of Soil Mechanics” 2 nd Edition, Blackwell Science