See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/290599539

Bearing capacity of driven piles in clay, the NGI approach

Article · August 2005

DOI: 10.1201/NOE0415390637.ch88

CITATIONS READS

42 1,577

3 authors, including:

Kjell Karlsrud
Norwegian Geotechnical Institute
31 PUBLICATIONS   437 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Kjell Karlsrud on 21 March 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Bearing Capacity of Driven Piles in Clay, the NGI Approach
K. Karlsrud
C.J.F. Clausen
P.M. Aas
Norwegian Geotechnical Institute, Oslo, Norway

ABSTRACT: A comparison between calculated and measured capacities of driven piles in clay shows that
the API RP2A calculation method from 1993 over-predicts the capacity of piles in normally consolidated clay
of low plasticity. The authors propose a revised calculation method called NGI-99. This method includes cor-
rections related to the undrained shear strength, time between pile driving and testing, and pile tip condition
during driving. Details of the method are presented together with comparisons between calculated and meas-
ured pile capacities. The proposed method gives a good agreement between measured and calculated capaci-
ties for most of the well-documented large scale pile tests included in the study.

1 INTRODUCTION local skin friction between two instrumented levels

Various semi-empirical methods have been proposed
over the last 30 years to calculate the axial capacity
of driven piles in clay. Fourteen such methods are
referred to in Clausen & Aas (2001). The design of
offshore piles has traditionally been carried out as
recommended by the American Petroleum Institute,
API RP2A, API (1993). The present API recom-
mendations are mainly based upon the results pre-
sented by Dennis & Olson (1983).
During the last 20 years, the Norwegian Geotech-
nical Institute (NGI) has carried out, or participated
in a number of field tests on driven piles in clays.
The results from these tests, together with results
published by others, have allowed a comparison be-
tween the pile capacities calculated by the API
(1993) method and those actually measured.
The authors present the results of such compari-
sons, and propose a new calculation method, called
NGI-99, that gives improved agreement between
predicted and observed capacities. An accompany-
ing paper by Clausen et al (2005) deals with the ca-
pacity of driven piles in sand.
2 DATABASE 1
Two different data bases with results from pile load
tests in clay were established by NGI. They are re-
ferred to as Database 1 and Database 2.
Database 1 (Table 1) includes results from a num-
ber of instrumented pile tests where the measured
axial forces in the piles at different depths allow the
to be back-figured. Other tests were carried out as
pile segment tests from the bottom of a drilled and
cased hole.
Key soil parameters for the interpretation are total
unit weight, porewater pressure, clay undrained
shear strength su and clay plasticity Ip. The reference
undrained shear strength used by NGI for Database
1 are from direct simple shear (DSS) tests consoli-
dated to the in situ vertical stress. This strength is
considered to represent the best estimate of the ac-
tual in situ strength on a vertical shear plane. For
many of the pile tests where NGI has been involved,
DSS testing had been carried out. For other sites, the
DSS strengths were estimated based upon other
available test results (see Section 4).
Another important matter is the length of time the
pile is allowed to rest between driving and test-
loading. The skin friction values quoted in Table 1
correspond to the estimated value after dissipation of
90 % of the excess porewater pressures due to pile
driving. Section 5 presents the time correction used
with the NGI-99 method for cases where a correc-
tion of the measured capacity was required.
The results in Table 1 may be used to calculate
α-, β- and ψ-values, defined by:
α = τ skin / suDSS (1)
β = τ skin / σ'vo (2)
ψ = suDSS / σ'vo (3)
where τ skin is the measured or calculated pile skin
friction, suDSS is the DSS undrained shear strength,
and σ'vo is the in situ vertical effective stress.
 The α-values back-figured from Database 1 are for NC clay deposits, and can for 10% < Ip < 55%
compared to the API recommendations on Figure 1. be expressed as:
The filled-in points on this plot represent values
from the large diameter pile tests (LDPT) at Pentre β NC = 0.08 · (Ip - 10%) 0.3 (4)
and Tilbrook, Clarke (1992).
The dotted β Min line on Figure 2 is taken to repre-
1.25
sent the lower bound value measured by all the pile
Database 1 tests studied by NGI. The lower bound skin friction
49 data points
only depends upon σ'vo and Ip, and not upon the
1
undrained shear strength. This minimum value is
given by :
α = τskin measured / suDSS

0.75 β Min = 0.06 · (Ip - 12%) 0.33 (5)

AP

0.05 < β Min < 0.20 (6)

I-9
3
,S
u-
DS

An inspection of the ψ = suDSS / σ'vo values in Ta-

S

0.5

ble 1 shows that ψ = 0.22 is a representative average

of the lowest values. It is also noted that the low β-
0.25 values back-calculated for the NC clays are not re-
flected in the nearly constant ψ-values for low plas-
Data points from LDPTs
at Pentre and Tilbrook
ticity clays.
0
0.1 1 10
Strength ratio ψ = suDSS/σ'vo (Log scale)
3 DATABASE 2
Figure 1. Measured pile skin friction in terms of α-values, Da-
tabase 1 This database contains results from 135 pile load
tests carried out at 52 different locations. The com-
For a strength ratio ψ of 0.2-0.3, most of the test plete data base is included in NGI (2000). All except
results fall well below the API line. This matter is four tests are in the public domain. Database 2 in-
further investigated on Figure 2 where the back- cludes the detailed soil layering and key soil pa-
calculated β-values are plotted against plasticity Ip. rameters at each of the pile test locations.
To calibrate the NGI-99 method, 36 of the best
0.4 documented and most relevant pile tests from Data-
base 2 were considered. All of these piles are tubular
Database 1
49 data points steel piles. The 36 tests were selected using the fol-
lowing criteria:
0.3 - The highest quality rating on soil and pile data.
β = τ skin measured / σ'vo

- A pile outer diameter of more than 0.2 m.

- A pile tip depth of more than 10 m.
- A time between driving and testing of more than
0.2 14 days.
The undrained shear strengths and pile capacities
β
NC
= 0.08⋅(Ip-10%)
0.3
reported in the source documents were modified by
βMin 0.05 ≤ βNC ≤ 0.25 the procedures described in Sections 4 and 5. To
0.1 calibrate the NGI-99 calculation method, the follow-
ing "anchor point" tests were selected, i.e. the model
Data points from parameters were adjusted in order to obtain a good
LDPT at Pentre
agreement with the measured results.
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Table 2. Database 2 "anchor points"
Clay plasticity, Ip (%)
Pile test location Reference
Figure 2. Measured pile skin friction in terms of β-values for Long Beach, USA Doyle & Pelletier (1985)
tests in soft clay, Database 1 Pentre LDPT, UK Clarke (1992)
Tilbrook LDPT,UK Clarke (1992)
All data points on this figure with β-values Onsøy, Norway Karlsrud et al (1992)
smaller than 0.3 are from clay deposits that are close West Delta, USA Chan & Birrell (1998)
Drammen E18, Norway Tvedt & Fredriksen (2003)
to normally consolidated (NC). The fully drawn β- Sandpoint, USA Fellenius et al (2004)
line shown on Figure 2, is taken to be representative

4 UNDRAINED SHEAR STRENGTH
CORRECTIONS
The undrained shear strength measured on a clay
sample in the laboratory depends upon a number of
factors, including :
- Sampling method - Type of test used
- Sample consolidation - Strain rate
- Direction of shear loading
As an example, unconsolidated undrained (UU)
triaxial tests are more influenced by sample distur-
bance than consolidated tests, but are often tested at
a higher strain rate. The API RP2A recommends that
the strengths to be used for pile design are obtained
from UU tests. The NGI-99 method uses the same
suUU reference strength. If other test types were used,
one needs to convert to suUU. In the NGI-99 method,
the different tests are assumed to give the following
NC strength ratios ψ.
Table 3. NC strength ratios for different test types.
Test type NC strength ratio = ψNC
Unconfined compression ψ UCT = 0.22
UU triaxial compression ψ UU = 0.25
CIU/CAU triaxial compression ψ CMP = 0.32
Direct simple shear ψ DSS = 0.22
ψ FVT = 0.18 + 0.24·Ip/100
Field vane
ψ FVT < 0.3
For each of these test types, it is assumed that the
strength of an overconsolidated sample (OC) can be
expressed as :
su = ψNC · σ'vo · OCR 0.85 (7)
where OCR is the overconsolidation ratio, σpc / σ'vo.
With known test type, su, σ'vo and Ip, the above can
be used to obtain suUU and OCR.
If equation (7) gives an OCR value that is smaller
than 1.0, this means that either the undrained shear
strength has been underestimated, or the in situ ver-
tical stress overestimated. For such cases the NGI-99
method assumes that the effective stress is correct,
and the undrained shear strength is calculated for
OCR = 1.0.
5 EFFECT OF TIME BETWEEN PILE DRIVING
AND TESTING
Practical experience shows that the time between
pile driving and pile testing has an important effect
upon the measured pile capacity. This is due to (1)
increased horizontal effective stresses between pile
and soil as the excess porewater pressure set up dur-
ing pile driving dissipates, and (2) an "ageing" con-
tinuing even after full dissipation of the excess water
pressures. In addition, the pile capacity may increase
as a result of previous test loading of the pile, see
Karlsrud & Haugen (1985) and Karlsrud et al
(1992).
The reference pile capacity used by the NGI-99
method is the capacity measured 100 days after pile
driving. Since none of the piles studied were tested
after exactly 100 days, a correction for the effects of
time is needed. NGI-99 assumes that the strength in-
crease after dissipation of the excess porewater pres-
sures can be expressed as:
Q(t) = Q(100) · [1 + ∆10 · log10 (t/100)] (8)
where t is the time between driving and test loading,
Q(t) is the capacity after t days and Q(100) the refer-
ence capacity after 100 days. This approach assumes
that at both time t and time 100 days, full dissipation
has taken place. The ∆10 value above is a dimen-
sionless capacity increase for a ten-fold time in-
crease.
The value of ∆10 could in theory be determined
from pile tests carried out on identical piles at differ-
ent times. In practice, the value of ∆10 needs to be
estimated from load tests carried out on the same
pile at different times after driving. Since the meas-
ured change in pile capacity is likely to be influ-
enced both by the time since driving, and by the pre-
vious test loading, it is not a straightforward matter
to isolate the time effect.
Based upon a few tests in Database 2, supple-
mented by the results given in Flaate (1968), the au-
thors decided to use the following ∆10 value for
time correction of the measured skin friction values:
∆10 = 0.1 + 0.4 · (1 - Ip / 50) · OCR -0.8 (9)
0.1 < ∆10 < 0.5 (10)
where Ip and OCR are average values along the pile
shaft.
6 THE NGI-99 CALCULATION METHOD
Section 2 showed that the API (1993) recommenda-
tions, referred to as API-93, do not predict the low
skin friction values measured in NC clays of low
plasticity. This effect was first documented by
Karlsrud et al (1992). The important effect of clay
plasticity upon pile capacity for piles in NC clays
has later been confirmed by full-scale pile tests in
Drammen, Norway, Tvedt & Fredriksen (2003), and
in Sandpoint, Idaho, Fellenius et al (2004). It is
therefore proposed to revise the API-93 α-values as
indicated on Figure 3.
ψ < 0.25 : For NC clays with ψ < 0.25, the skin
friction is given by:
τ skin = α NC · suRef = α NC · ψ NC · σ'vo (11)
τ skin = β NC · σ'vo (12)
 The authors recommend to check that the calcu-
where the reference strength suRef shall be taken as lated skin friction is not smaller than βMin · σ'vo,
suUU or 0.25/0.22 = 1.14 times suDSS. Dividing (11) where βMin is given by equations (5) and (6).
by (12) leads to : The tip resistance acting against a closed or
plugged pile is taken as 9 times the undrained refer-
α NC = β NC / ψ NC (13) ence shear strength. For piles subjected to long-term
tensile loads, a crack could form at the pile tip, be-
The value to be used for β NC, determined by cal- fore the clay strength is fully mobilised in reversed
culations with the two databases, is given by equa- end bearing.
tion (4). The ψ NC value for UU tests is 0.25 (Table
3), which leads to :
7 COMPARISON BETWEEN CALCULATED
NC 0.3
α = 0.32 · (Ip - 10) (14) AND MEASURED CAPACITY
0.20 < α NC < 1.00 (15)
Figure 4 compares calculated NGI-99 skin friction to
ψ > 1.0 : For the overconsolidated clays with ψ > the measured values from Database 1. For the major-
1.0, it is proposed to calculate the skin friction from: ity of the data points, NGI-99 gives a good predic-
tion. It should be noted that there is a fairly large in-
τ skin = α · suRef · F tip (16) herent scatter in the pile and/or soil test data.
α = 0.5 · ψ -0.3 (17)
2.5

The factor F tip is taken as 1.0 for a pile driven Calculated NGI-99 skin friction / Measured skin friction
Database 1
open-ended. Based upon results given by Clausen & 49 data points
Aas (2001), and the results in Table 4 below, the fol- 2 C/Mavr = 0.95
lowing F tip expression is proposed for a pile driven CoV = 0.29
closed-ended:
1.5
F tip closed = 0.8 + 0.2 · ψ 0.5 (18)
1.00 < F tip closed < 1.25 (19)
1
0.25 < ψ < 1.0 : For clays with 0.25 < ψ < 1.0,
the α-value is determined by a linear interpolation
between ψ = ψ NC and ψ = 1.0 as indicated on Figure
3, allowing for the log scale of this plot. 0.5

Data points from LDPTs

Ip > 55% at Pentre and Tilbrook
1
0
40% 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Clay plasticity, Ip (%)

0.8 30%

Figure 4. Comparison between calculated and measured

20% skin fiction, Data Base 1 and NGI-99 calculation method
α = τskin / SuRef

0.6
15% Ratios of calculated to measured pile capacities for
the 36 Database 2 tests are plotted on Figures 5 and
0.4
12% 6. Seven of the eight "anchor point" values fall
within +/- 20 %, which only reflects that these points
A C
B were used for the calibration of the NGI-99 method.
0.2
Ip< 10%
A : API-93
B : NGI-99, open-ended
C : NGI-99, close-ended
0
0.1 1 10

Strength ratio ψ = suRef / σ'vo (Log scale)

Figure 3. Comparison between NGI-99 and API-93 α-values

Calculated NGI-99 pile capacity / Measured capacity 2

Database 2
36 data points
Table 4. Effect of pile tip condition.
C/Mavr = 1.03
1.5 CoV = 0.26 Group Tests ψ Tip C/M avr.
1 26 0.25 - 1 Open 1.06
2 47 0.25 - 1 Closed 1.00
3 28 1 - 10 Open 0.78
4 27 1 - 10 Closed 0.65
1

For the "soft" clays with ψ = 0.25 to 1.0 the effect of

closing the pile tip is thus to increase the average
skin friction by 6 %. For the "stiff" clays with ψ = 1-
0.5 10 a 20 % increase is found.
Even if a calculation method gives the correct an-
"Anchor point" tests
swer for the total pile capacity, it may not give the
for NGI-99 calibration correct distribution of skin friction with depth. In
0 such case, the method could be non-conservative if
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
used for layered soil profiles. Figures 7 and 8 com-
Clay plasticity, Ip (%) pare the measured and the "predicted" local skin
friction values by the NGI-99 method for the LDPTs
Figure 5. Comparison between calculated and measured at Pentre and Tilbrook, Clarke (1992)
pile capacities, Data Base 2 and NGI-99 calculation method
Local skin friction & undrained shear strength (kPa)
Calculated NGI-99 pile capacity / Measured capacity
0 50 100 150
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 0
0
Pre-drilled Ip (%)
to 15 m
Database 2 10
36 data points 12
Depth below ground surface (m)
Tip depth below ground surface (m)

C/Mavr = 1.03
20 CoV = 0.26 14
20
Onsøy
Tilbrook Measured
18
30
Drammen NGI-99
40
Sandpoint
40
23
SuUU
Pentre
60
50
16
West Delta API-93
"Anchor point" tests
for NGI-99 calibration
60
Long Beach
80
Figure 7. Comparison between measured and calculated local
Figure 6. Comparison between calculated and measured skin friction, test pile Pentre
pile capacities, Data Base 2 and NGI-99 calculation method
For the nearly NC silty clay deposit at Pentre,
All of the 128 pile tests on steel piles in Database Figure 7, it is seen that NGI-99 captures the varia-
2 were analysed in order to see if an effect of tion of the measured skin friction with depth quite
open/closed pile tip during driving could be demon- well. For the overconsolidated clays at Tilbrook,
strated. The NGI-99 calculation method was used, Figure 8, there is only a small difference between
but with the F tip value in equation (16) taken as 1.0 the API-93 and the NGI-99 methods. Both methods
for all piles. Each pile test was placed into one of result in a good agreement with the measured values.
four groups (Table 4), and the average ratio between The low skin friction measured in the top 12 m of
the calculated and measured capacity (C/M) was the compression pile remains to be explained,
found for each group: Nowacki et al (1992).
 Local skin friction & undrained shear strength (kPa) (1996). If for a given case, these methods lead to
0 250 500 750
considerable differences in the calculated capacity,
0 the pile tests in the data base that have the closest
similarity to the case studied should be used for
SuUU
guidance.
5
Measured
Depth below ground surface (m)

tension pile 9 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

10
The work presented herein was supported by Norsk
Hydro, Statoil and NGI. The authors gratefully ac-
15 knowledge their generous support.

10 REFERENCES
20
Measured
compr. pile American Petroleum Institute 1993. "Recommended Practice
for Planning, Designing and Constructing Fixed Offshore
25 Platforms - Working Stress Design". API RP 2A-WSD,
NGI-99 open 20th Edition, Washington, 1 July 1993.
NGI-99 closed Chan J.H.C. & N.D. Birrell 1998. "Project Overview and Or-
API-93
30 ganization - Tension Pile Study." OTC Paper no. 8762,
Houston, May 1998.
Figure 8. Comparison between measured and calculated local Clarke J. 1992 (Editor) "Large-Scale Pile Tests in Clay". Proc.
skin friction, two test piles at Tilbrook Large-Scale Fully Instrumented Pile Tests in Clay, ICE,
London, June 1992, ISBN 0-7277-1917 1, T. Telford Ltd.
Clausen C.J.F. & P.M. Aas 2001."Capacity of Driven Piles in
8 CONCLUSIONS Clays and Sands on the Basis of Pile Load Tests." Pro-
ceedings of the 11th (2001) International Offshore and Po-
A comparison between pile axial capacities calcu- lar Engineering Conference, ISOPE, Volume II, Stavanger
lated by the API-93 method and the capacities actu- June 2001. p. 581-586.
Clausen C.J.F., P.M. Aas & K. Karlsrud 2005."Bearing Capac-
ally measured shows that the calculated values can ity of Driven Piles in Sand, the NGI Approach." Proc. of
be 3-4 times higher than the measured ones. This the ISFOG Conference, Perth, WA, September 2005.
large difference was only found for piles in normally Dennis N.D. & R.E. Olson 1983. "Axial Capacity of Steel Pipe
consolidated clays of low plasticity. The authors Piles in Clay." Proc., Geotechnical Practice in Offshore
therefore propose a modification of the α-factors, Engineering, Austin, Texas, April 1983.
used by the API-93 method, that leads to a better Doyle E.H. & J.H. Pelletier 1985. "Behaviour of a Large Scale
Pile in Silty Clay." Proc., 11th ICSMFE, San Francisco
agreement between calculated and measured capaci- 1985, Vol. 3, p.1595.
ties. Fellenius B.H., D.E. Harris & D.G. Anderson 2004. "Static
The proposed NGI-99 method uses the same ref- Loading Test on a 45 m Long Pipe Pile in Sandpoint,
erence undrained shear strength as API RP2A, i.e. Idaho". Canadian Geotechnical Journal, Vol. 41, No. 4,
UU triaxial values, and provides conversion factors August 2004, pp. 613-628.
Flaate K. 1968. "Bearing Capacity of Friction Piles in Clay".
in case other strength types are used. NGF Stipend 1967-1968, Veglaboratoriet, Oslo, 1968.
The calculated capacity corresponds to a time of Jardine R.J. & F.C. Chow 1996. "New Design Methods for
100 days after pile driving. The NGI-99 method in- Offshore Piles." Marine Technology Directorate Ltd., Pub-
cludes time corrections on the measured pile capac- lication MTD 96/103, London 1996.
ity. Karlsrud K. & T. Haugen 1985. "Axial Static Capacity of Steel
Results from pile load tests indicate that piles Model Piles in Over- Consolidated Clay." Proc. 11th
ICSMFE, San Francisco 1985.
driven closed-ended in stiff clays have higher skin Karlsrud K. & F. Nadim 1990. "Axial Capacity of Offshore
friction than open-ended piles. The NGI-99 method Piles in Clay". OTC paper 6245, Houston May 1990.
includes a factor that reflects this observation. Karlsrud K., B. Kalsnes & F. Nowacki 1992. "Response of
NGI-99 gives a good agreement between meas- Piles in Soft Clay and Silt Deposits to Static and Cyclic
ured and calculated capacities for most of the pub- Axial Loading Based on Recent Instrumented Pile Load
Tests". Society of Underwater Testing, London.
lished and well documented large scale pile tests. Norwegian Geotechnical Institute 2000. "Bearing Capacity of
However, there is considerable scatter and uncer- Driven Piles, Piles in Clay." Internal report no. 525211-1,
tainty when it comes to the precise effect of plastic- 23 March 2000.
ity upon the skin friction in soft clays. Further pile Nowacki F., K. Karlsrud & P. Sparrevik 1992. "Comparison of
load tests in soft clays of medium and low plasticity Recent Tests on OC Clay and Implications for Design".
are highly desirable. Proc. Large-Scale Pile Tests in Clay, ICE, London 1992,
edited by J. Clarke, Thomas Telford Ltd.
For design purposes the authors recommend to Tvedt G. & F. Fredriksen 2003. "E18 Ny motorvegbru i
use several calculation methods, including the NGI- Drammen. Prøvebelastning av peler." Proceedings from
99 and API-93 methods, complemented by e.g. the conference on Rock Blasting and Geotechnics, Oslo.
Karlsrud & Nadim (1990) and Jardine & Chow
 Table 1. Data Base no. 1, measured local pile skin friction.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Pile Pile Open 1) Depth Ip σ'vo suDSS τ s meas2)
Site ψ = 8/7 α = 9/8 β = 9/7
name no. Closed (m) (%) (kPa) (kPa) (kPa)
Haga B-piles 1 2 2.7 15 51 40 18 0.784 0.450 0.353
" 2 2 3.9 15 72 42 40 0.583 0.952 0.556
" 3 2 4.5 25 82 48 49 0.585 1.021 0.598
Onsøy A1 4 2 10 38 62 17 17.7 0.274 1.041 0.285
A2 5 2 17.5 47 100 24 21.8 0.240 0.908 0.218
A3 6 2 25 41 138 35 29.2 0.254 0.834 0.212
A4 7 2 32.5 35 176 45 34.8 0.256 0.773 0.198
CI 8 2 7.5 36 51 15 10.5 0.294 0.700 0.206
CI 9 2 12.5 43 75 19 13.8 0.253 0.726 0.184
CI 10 2 17.5 48 100 24 21.6 0.240 0.900 0.216
CI 11 2 22.5 43 125 31 22.7 0.248 0.732 0.182
CI 12 2 27.5 39 150 38 25.3 0.253 0.666 0.169
CI 13 2 32.5 35 176 45 36 0.256 0.800 0.205
B1 14 1 10 38 62 17 17.2 0.274 1.012 0.277
Lierstranda A7 15 2 10 24.5 78 23 11.4 0.295 0.496 0.146
A8 16 2 17.5 16 126 29 11.3 0.230 0.390 0.090
A9 17 2 25 12.5 181 38 12.9 0.210 0.339 0.071
A10 18 2 32.5 12 237 50 11 0.211 0.220 0.046
B2 19 1 10 23.5 78 23 13.5 0.295 0.587 0.173
Pentre NGI A5 20 2 20 13 174 50 22.3 0.287 0.446 0.128
A6 21 2 27.5 17 243 69 60.1 0.284 0.871 0.247
Pentre LDPT 22 1 20 13 179 50 17 0.279 0.340 0.095
23 1 30 13 263 75 51 0.285 0.680 0.194
24 1 40 18 350 100 79 0.286 0.790 0.226
25 1 50 18 445 125 78 0.281 0.624 0.175
Tilbrook NGI A 26 2 7.5 20 112 450 175 4.018 0.389 1.563
C 27 2 7.5 20 112 450 200 4.018 0.444 1.786
C 28 2 13.5 24 192 430 240 2.240 0.558 1.250
B 29 2 20 35 280 500 230 1.786 0.460 0.821
B 30 2 23.75 34 330 700 350 2.121 0.500 1.061
Tilbrook LDPT Compr. 31 1 7.5 20 112 450 100 4.018 0.222 0.893
Tension 32 1 12.5 25 172 425 200 2.471 0.471 1.163
-"- 33 1-2 17.5 33 240 460 210 1.917 0.457 0.875
-"- 34 1-2 22.5 35 308 670 300 2.175 0.448 0.974
West Delta 35 1 15 55 56 17 15.5 0.304 0.912 0.277
36 1 25 35 102 22 24 0.216 1.091 0.235
37 1 35 32 149 31 29 0.208 0.935 0.195
38 1 45 35 184 39 31.5 0.212 0.808 0.171
39 1 55 52 219 49 46.5 0.224 0.949 0.212
40 1 65 65 252 63 65 0.250 1.032 0.258
Bothkennar IC-pile 41 2 3.5 35 30 17 18 0.567 1.059 0.600
42 2 5 52 40.2 20 21 0.498 1.050 0.522
Cowden IC-pile 43 2 3.5 19 54 180 65 3.333 0.361 1.204
44 2 5 17 72.5 93 75 1.283 0.806 1.034
Canon's Park IC-pile 45 2 3.5 54 46 78 65 1.696 0.833 1.413
46 2 5 40 60 120 99 2.000 0.825 1.650
Houston Unv 47 2 6.1 42 85 86 60 1.012 0.698 0.706
Drammen Pier # 16 48 1 25 17 243 56 28 0.230 0.500 0.115
Lake Oromieh New pile 49 1 33 20 215 55.7 43 0.259 0.772 0.200

1) : Pile tip condition during driving : 1=Open 2=Closed 2) : Measured skin friction

View publication stats