AS2159-2009

Introduction to AS2159 – 2009

The major changes: what to expect & plan for

 AS2159 - 2009 : Major changes

• Method of assessing φg (to be calculated – no longer left to sole discretion

of designer)

• Slightly greater detail on downdrag

• Durability now addresses design life

• New pile types included (steel screws, jacked, cast insitu screw displacement)

• Some testing appendices now “normative” ie part of code; previously all

“informative” (for guidance only)

• Changes to Acceptance criteria

• Load testing WILL be done now on most jobs

• Recognition of “Rapid” & O-cell tests

AS2159 – 2009: Terminology

New terminology
(again!)
- Brings us into
line with ISO398
 AS2159 – 2009: Pile Classification

1995 2009
AS2159 – 2009: Information required – Cl. 2.2
AS2159 – 2009: Design geotech strength – Cl. 4.3.1

(R*g ≥ S*)

(R*g ≥ φg Rug)

NEW
 AS2159 – 2009: Assessing φg; Cl. 4.3.1 & 4.3.2
• Now based on weighted calculated risk factors

Steps involved:

• Determine Average Risk Rating (ARR) by calculation ex Table

4.3.2(A). Mathematically: ARR = (Σwi IRR)/ Σwi

• Look up value of Basic Geotech Reduction factor “φgb” (function of

ARR) from Table 4.3.2(C)

• Determine Geotech Reduction Factor “φg” pending level & type of

testing proposed ex Cl. 4.3.1

• Redundancy now included, penalising single piles

AS2159 – 2009: ARR assessment; Cl 4.3.2(B)

Assign Risk
AS2159 – 2009: ARR assessment; Cl 4.3.2(B)
Site investigation
AS2159 – 2009: ARR assessment; Cl 4.3.2(B)
Design
AS2159 – 2009: ARR assessment; Cl 4.3.2(B)
Installation
 AS2159 - 2009
Calculating φg

Table 4.3.2(A) AS2159-2009 (Cl. 4.3.2)

Weighting factors and Individual Risk ratings for Risk factors To calculate φgb enter individual risk rating (IRR) from Table 4.3.2(B) in yellow box in Column F
Risk Weighting Typical description of risk circumstances for individual risk rating Assigned
Factor factor (IRR) Risk
(w i ) 1 3 5 Factor
(Very low risk) (Moderate) (Very high risk) (1 to 5) w i IRRi
Site
Geological Horizontal strata, well-defined soil & rock Some variability over site, but without abrupt Highly variable profile or presence of karstic
complexity of 2 Characterstics changes in stratigraphy features or steeply dipping rock levels or 1 2
site faults present on site, or combinations of these
Extent of ground Extensive drilling investigation covering whole Some boreholes extending at least 5 pile Very limited investigation with few shallow
investigation 2 site to an adequate depth diameters below the base of the proposed boreholes 1 2
foundation level
Amount & quality Detailed information on strength & CPT probes over full depth of proposed piles or Limited amount of simple insitu testing
of geotechnical data 2 compressibility of the main strata boreholes confirming rock as proposed (eg SPT) or index tests only 1 2
founding level for piles
Design
Experience with similar Extensive Limited None
foundations in similar 1 1 1
geological conditions
Method of assessment Based on appropriate laboratory or insitu tests Based on site-specific correlations or on Based on non-site specific correlations with
of geotechnical 2 or relevant pile load test data conventional laboratory or insitu testing (for example) SPT data 1 2
parameters for design
Design method adopted Well-established and soundly based method Simplified methods with well-established Simple empirical methods or sophisticated
1 1 1
or methods basis methods that are not well established
Method of utilising Design values based on minimum measured Design methods based on average values Design values based on maximum measured
results of insitu test values on piles loaded to failure values on test piles loadde up to only working
data and installation 2 load, or indirect measurements used during 1 2
data installation, and not calibrated to static loading
tests
Installation

Level of construction Detailed with professional geotechnical Limited degree of professional geotechncial Very limited or no involvement by designer,
2 1 2
control supervision, construction processes that are well involvement in supervision, conventional construction processes that are not well
established and relatively straight forward construction procedures established or complex
Level of performance monitoring Detailed measurements of movements and pile Correlation of installed parameters with on-site No Monitoring
of the supported structure during 0.5 load static load tests carried out in accordance with 5 2.5
and after construction this Standard
NOTE: The pile design shall include the risk circumstances for each individual risk category and consideration of all of the relevant construction factors.
Σw i = 14.5 Σw i IRRi = 16.5

Table 4.3.2(B) ARR = Σw i IRRi /Σw i = 1.14

Risk Level Individual risk rating (IRR)
Very Low 1 φgb (ex Table 4.3.2C) - LOW REDUNDANCY = 0.67
Low 2
Moderate 3 φgb (ex Table 4.3.2C) - HIGH REDUNDANCY = 0.76
High 4
Very High 5 Overall Risk Rating (ex Table 4.3.2C) = Very low
 AS2159 – 2009 Geotechnical Reduction factor – influence of testing

φg = φgb + (φtf - φgb)K ≥ φgb

φgb = Basic geotechnical strength reduction factor

φtf = Intrinsic test factor = 0.9 for SLT;

= 0.75 for Rapid testing (ie Statnamic);
= 0.8 for DLT on preformed piles;
= 0.75 for other than preformed piles;
= 0.85 for Bi-directional (O-cell)

K = testing benefit factor

= 1.33p/(p+3.3) ≤ 1 for SLT & Rapid testing
= 1.13p/(p+3.3) ≤ 1 for DLT
(where p = % of piles tested)
 AS2159 – 2009
Geotechnical Reduction factor – influence of testing
Testing benefit factor “K”
ARR = 2.52 Cast Insitu

1.200

1.000

0.800

K (DLT)
K

0.600
K (SLT)

0.400

0.200

0.000
0 5 10 15 20 25

% of piles tested
 AS2159 – 2009
Geotechnical Reduction factor – influence of testing

ARR = 2.52 Cast Insitu

0.950

0.900

0.850

0.800

DLT (LO)
0.750
phig

DLT (HI)
SLT (LO)
0.700 SLT (HI)

0.650

0.600

0.550

0.500
0 5 10 15 20 25

% of piles tested
AS2159 – 2009: Downdrag
 AS2159 - 2009
Structural Design: CIS concrete placement factor Cl. 5.3
 AS2159 - 2009
Structural design Cl. 5.3.3

2009

1995
 AS2159 - 2009
Structural design: partial & no rebar
 AS2159 - 2009
Durability: cover requirements
 AS2159 - 2009
Section 7: Material & construction requirements

• No earth shattering changes here, but important

• Jacked pile installation now included

• Steel screw piles included

• Cast insitu screw displacement piles included

 AS2159 - 2009
Section 7: Material & construction requirements – jacked pile installation

• Now to follow Chinese (Inventors’) rules

• Jacking force Pmax = 0.74 γp Rug

where γp = coefficient of jacking pressure ex

SLT correlations ≥ 1.4
• If no SLT correlation:
γp = 1.5 for pile >15m
= 1.75 for piles between 8 & 15m
= 2.2 for piles less than 8m
 AS2159 - 2009
Section 8: TESTING – Significant changes here
 AS2159 - 2009
Integrity Test requirements
 AS2159 - 2009
Load testing – requirements from Table 8.2.4(A)
 AS2159 - 2009
Load testing – requirements from Table 8.2.4(A)
 AS2159 - 2009
Static testing – acceptance criteria
 AS2159 - 2009
DYNAMIC testing – acceptance criteria

I disagree with this

 AS2159 - 2009
DYNAMIC testing – acceptance criteria
For Static case:

F = k.u

where F = force on pile top

k = static spring stiffness of pile& soil
u = displacement Conclusion:
For Dynamic case: Displacement for
F = k.u + C.v +m.a static case ONLY
with C = damping
v = velocity
equivalent when
a = acceleration damping & inertia
C.v = damping force
m.a = inertia force
forces low
 AS2159 - 2009
AS2159 – 1995 loading sequence

Σ = 10hrs
 AS2159 - 2009
Static test loading sequence

Ps = Eds (service load) for nil Pn

= Eds + 2Fnf with Pn
(1995: Ps = 0.75S* (working load)
= no Pn advice)

Pg = Ed/φg for nil Pn

= Ed/φg + 2Fnf with Pn

(1995: Pg = 1.5S* (2 x working)

= no Pn advice)

Σ ≈ 10.5hrs
 AS2159 - 2009
Appendix A (normative): Lateral & tension test sequence (NEW)

Σ ≈ 5hrs
AS2159 - 2009
Terminology

“Common” definitions/terms
were felt as being desirable
in anticipation of confusion
arising from introduction of
new terms