GeoSS Event Seminar 7 Nov 2012 - Slides

Your Partner In Ground Engineering
Jack-in Piling
Environmental Friendly Piling System
Part 1 - Chris Loh 7 Nov 12 CSC HOLDINGS LIMITED
Gracious Piling
Environmental Friendly
Low Noise No Vibration
Jack-in Piling
How Many Decibels?

Permissible Leq 75dB (12 hours) within 150m
How Far Have We Gone Since 2004?

length of piles installed Singapore To Jakarta
Contents
Method of Jack-in Piling System Installation Process Machine Movement and Installation Process (Video) Advantages of Jack-in Piling Mitigating Measures Jack-in Piling Machines Completed High Rise Buildings Projects Some Valued Clients To Conclude
Method of Jack-in Piling System
CSC HOLDINGS LIMITED
Method of Jack-in Piling System

A modern technique by which pre-formed piles (e.g. Prestressed Spun Piles, Precast RC Piles, H-Piles, Steel Pipe Piles) are hydraulically jacked into the ground as displacement piles
Installation Process
Installation Process
Pile is jacked into the ground with a jack-in force adjusted in steps up to between 1.8 times - 2.5 times working load Jacking will continue until practical refusal where jack-in force is released and reapplied twice Downward movement of the pile between the two cycles is then measured and checked against the set criteria
Machine Movement and Installation Process (Video)
Machine Movement (Video)

Installation Process (Video)

Advantages of Jack-in Piling
Advantages of Jack-in Piling

Environmental Friendly Low Noise Vibration Free Minimal Spoils Disposal Able to achieve Good Verticality Lower Risk of machine toppling as compared with conventional leader type machines Every pile is jacked up to between 1.8 times - 2.5 times working load
Mitigating Measures
Mitigating Measures
Relief Boring
Pre-Boring at Piling Point
Jack-in Piling Machines

Low Capacity Machines - 100 to 130 tons

Medium Capacity Machines - 240 to 420 tons

High Capacity Machines - 600 to 800 tons
Completed High Rise Building Projects

Livia Condominium
17 Storey
1510 RC Piles & Spun Piles
RC Piles
250mm, 300mm, 350mm and 400mm

Spun Piles
500mm and 600mm

Piles Capacity
60tons, 85tons, 100tons, 160tons, 125tons and 170tons

Twin Waterfalls
17 Storey
1500 Spun Piles
Spun Piles
400mm, 500mm and 600mm

Piles Capacity
100tons, 150tons and 215tons

Austville Residences
18 Storey
1105 Spun Piles
RC Piles
250mm
Spun Piles
500mm and 600mm

Piles Capacity

DBSS @ AMK Street 52
30 Storey
1293 Spun Piles
Spun Piles
400mm, 500mm and 600mm

Piles Capacity
Some Valued Clients
Some Valued Clients

To Conclude
Environmental Friendly Suitable for all types of Pre-formed piles Proven to be viable foundation system for high rise buildings Piles are load tested during installation
Thank You
Jack-in Piling
Environmental Friendly Piling System
Part 2 Gwee Boon Hong 7 Nov 2012 CSC HOLDINGS LIMITED
Contents.
DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS DESIGN PARAMETERS EVALUATION BASED ON INSTRUMENTATION RESULTS (Case Study : Old Alluvium Formation) JACK-IN PILE PERFORMANCE USING DIFFERENT JACK-IN FORCE DURING INSTALLATION (Case Study : Tuas South Avenue - Jurong Formation)
JACK-IN PILING DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS
Jack-in Pile Design

Structural Considerations
Qa = 0.25 (fcu fpe) * Ac Qa : Allowable structural axial capacity fcu : Compressive strength of concrete at 28 days fpe : Effective prestress in concrete Ac : Cross-sectional area of concrete
Geotechnical Considerations
Ultimate geotechnical capacity is determined by : Static formula on the basis of soil test Termination criteria using resistance measured during pile installation Verify performance of piles designed by above methods using static load test For quality control purpose, PDA and PIT are also carried out
Design Parameters In Accordance with CP4:2003

Ultimate geotechnical axial capacity Qu = fs x As + qb x Ab
Shaft Resistance : fs = Ks.N; Ks = 2 to 5 ; (limiting to 200kPa) Base Resistance: qb= Kb.40.N; Kb = 6 to 9 ; (limiting to 18,000kPa for soil) For rock, qb = lesser of strength of pile material and unconfined compressive strength of rock
Factor of Safety : Shaft Resistance = 2.5 Base Resistance = 2.5 Ks and Kb are related to the characteristics of soil & method of installation Higher value of Ks and Kb may be adopted if substantiated by sufficient instrumented load test in similar soil condition
Set / Termination Criteria

Wide variations in termination (set) criteria for jacked piles Min jacked force = K x design working load (K varies between 1.8 to 2.5) Holding time = 30~60 seconds Max allowable settlement of 20mm for 2 or more consecutive cycles In Singapore context, termination criteria using min jacked force of 2 x WL and set criteria of 20mm between two jack cycles is commonly adopted Final acceptance criteria for the installed piles need to be verified by static pile load test
CASE STUDY 1 DESIGN PARAMETERS EVALUTION BASED ON INSTRUMENTATION RESULTS
Case Study 1 - Punggol View Pri Sch (Old Alluvium)

Design
0 0 20
SPT-N
40 60
Actual
80 100
Unit Shaft Resistance (kPa)

0 0 50 100 150 200 250
Unit End Bearing (kPa)

0 0 5000 10000 15000 0 0
Ultimate Pile Capacity (kN)

2000 4000 6000 8000
2
-5
CS 12 13 10 MS
-15 -5 -5 -5
JIF=2.1xWL
4430 (2.1xWL)
-10
-10
-15
12 17
Back Analysis
-10
-10
-15
-15
-20
35 SM 35 13 SM 23 15 CS
-20
-20
-20
Pile did not fail at 3xWL SF>2.5
Depth (m)
-25
-25
Design
-25
-25
-30
-30
-30
-30
-35
17 28 36 59 MS
-35
-35
-35
-40
-40
-40
-40
-45
100 68 SM 100 100 100
-45
-45
-45
10m difference in pile length = $$

Qs - Design Qb - Design Qult - Design
-50
-50
q
-50
-50
Structural Capacity = 2100 kN (Spun Pile diam. 600mm)

-55 -55
-55
-55
q
Geotechnical Capacity
q
fs qb F.O.S
-60
-60
q
-65
-65
q
= Ks.N , -60 Ks = 2.0 to 2.5 (limited to 120 kPa) = 40.N.Kb Kb = 5 (limited to 7500 kPa ) -65 = 2.5
-70
-60
JIF
-65
Qult - Back Analysis (Based on Ins Result)
-70
-70
-70
Load Distribution
Loads (kN)
0 0 2 5 12 13 10 15 12 17 20 35 MS CS 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 0 0 50
fs (kPa)
100 150 200 0 2 5 90 12 13 10 109 MS 81 15 CS 5 0
Ks (fs/Nav)
5 10
6304 5625
8.4 10
10
4385
15
10 12 17 20 35 35 25 13 30 23 15 35
Force Reading
5.4
3468
SM
121
20
D ep th (m )
25
35 13
2095
SM
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
SM 108 56 46 43 28 40 MS CS
4.7 25 4.5 30 2.4 3.1 35 2.5
SM
1177
30 23
858
15 35 CS
594 17430
28 36 59 MS
17
40
40 36 59 100 SM fs SPT
Soil Layer Layer
SPT
45 68 50
100
45 SM
Soil Layer Layer
45
50
50
Low unit end bearing (1520 kPa), Not fully mobilized
CP4 Ks = 2N
Average Ks = 4.4N
CP4 Ks = 5N
Load Settlement Curve

8000
Cycle-1 Cycle-2 Cycle-3
24.12; 6304
7000 6000
Load at Top (kN)
5000
13.54; 4326
4000 3000
6.35; 2090
2000 1000 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Settlement at Pile Head (mm)
Displacement Vs Mobilized Resistance

200
0-6m 6-12m 12-18m 18-24m 24-28.5m
End Bearing
2000
150
28.5-31.5m 34.5-36.5m
1500
100
Unit End Bearing (kPa)
31.5-34.5m
1000
50
500
0 0 5 10 15 20 25
0 0 5 10 15 20 25
Displacement (mm)
Displacement (mm)
Max unit shaft friction is mobilized at average pile displacement between soil stratum of 12mm or 2% of pile diameter. Mobilized unit end bearing was 1520 kPa at pile toe displacement of 5.89mm or 0.9% of pile diameter.
Design Parameters Evaluation, Ks & Kb

Assumed Ks Kb 2 to 2.5 5
Measured 4.4 120 kPa
CP-4 2 to 5 200 kPa
2.2 1520 kPa ** 6 to 9 18000 kPa

** Not fully mobilized
Mobilized Shaft Resistance

(Old Alluvium)
450
400
Non-displacement Pile (NDP) Displacement Pile (DP)
CP-4 Ks= 5N
350
300
CP-4 Ks=3N
250
200
CP-4
Ks=2N
150
100
CP-4 Ks=1.5N
50
0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90
N-SPT
Compilation of ULT (Instrumented) results from different piling systems within Punggol sites
CASE STUDY 2 EFFECT OF JACK-IN FORCE ON JACK-IN PILE PERFORMANCE AT TUAS SOUTH AVENUE - In collaboration with NUS (2009) -
Pile & Instrumentation Layout Plan

15m (25D)
30
CPT3a CPT2a CPT1a CPT3 CPT2 CPT1 CPT1b P1' CPT4a CPT3a
30
TP2
CPT1
CPT1b
CPT1a CPT2 CPT2a CPT3
TP3
30
30
30
CPT3a CPT4
8 .4
CPT2a CPT1a CPT1b
(14
CPT3 CPT2 CPT1
D)
TP1
8 .4
D 4 1 (
CPT1, CPT1a, CPT1b,
: 2r (0.6m) from center of spun pile
30
CPT2, CPT2a, : 3r (0.9m) from center of spun pile CPT3, CPT3a, : 5r (1.5m) from center of spun pile CPT4, CPT4a ; 10r (3.0m) from center of spun pile
Before pile installation After pile installation After load test
Soil Stratigraphy
TP2 (JIF = 2xWL=5860kN) TP1 (JIF=1.5xWL=4395kN) TP3 (JIF=2.25xWL=6592.5kN)
12m
SPT-N of 5 to 12
FILL
(Loose to Medium Dense SAND)
4m 4m
KALLANG FORMATION
SPT-N of 2 to 4
(Very Soft to Soft Marine CLAY) Residual Soil S VI (Stiff to Very Stiff Sandy CLAY) Completely Weathered Siltstone/Sandstone S V (Stiff to Very Stiff Sandy CLAY) 28.7m 31.7m
JURONG FORMATION
SPT-N of 10 to 20
10m
JURONG FORMATION
SPT-N of 20 to 40
29.9m
JURONG FORMATION, Completely Weathered Siltstone/Sandstone S V (Hard Sandy CLAY, N>60)
Installation Record
TP1 (1.5xWL=4395kN)
Jack-In Force (kN)
0 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000
TP2 (2xWL=5860kN)
0 0 20 40 60 80 100
TP3 (2.25xWL=6592.5kN)
0 0 20 40 60 80 100
0 0
20
40
60
80
100
10 13
5
4 11
SM (Fill)
9 13
SM (Fill)
-5 4
9 8
-5
11 11 8
-5 9 4 8 -10
14
SM (Fill)
9
10
8 -10 20 m arine CLAY
-10 4
9 m arine CLAY 10 MS (S-VI)
8 5 2 10 CS (S-VI) marine CLAY
4 -15 18 28
15
-15
-15
CS (S-VI)
Depth (m)
11 -20 20 34 15 25 MS (S-V)
10 -20 36 40 MS (S-V)
20
-20
27 38 21 27 MS (S-V)
14 16 -25 17 19 18 MS (S-V)
25
-25
23 35 62
-25
19 41 28
30
-30
MS (S-V) CS (S-V)
71 100
-30
CS (S-V)
100
-30
29 100 CS (S-V)
TP-1
35
TP-2
TP-3
-35
100
-35
-35
set at 28.7m
set at 29.9m
set at 31.7m
Test program and Test Arrangement

Kentledge reaction system (TP1 and TP3)
Jack-in rig counter-weight reaction system (TP2)
Load Test Results

Load LoadSettlement SettlementCurve Curve(Combine (CombinePlot) Plot) 2.5xWL (7325 kN) 10000 10000 9000 9000 8000 8000 7000 7000 Load at at Top Top (kN) (kN) Load 6000 6000 5000 5000 4000 4000 3000 3000 2000 2000 1000 1000 0 0 0 0 10 10 20 20 30 30 40 40 50 50 60 60 70 70 80 80 90 90 100 100 Settlement Settlementat atTop Top(mm) (mm)
2xWL (5860 kN)
TP1=18.8mm TP2=18.3mm TP3=18.0mm 85.09mm
85.09mm (at 2.62xWL (At 2.62xWL = 7690kN) = 7690kN)
TP1=29.9mm TP2=26.0mm TP3=26.5mm 98.24mm

98.24mm (at 2.99xWL (At 2.99xWL = 8762kN) = 8762kN)
TP1' TP1'
TP2 TP2
1xWL (2930 kN)

TP1=7.5mm TP2=6.2mm TP3=7.4mm
TP3 TP3
Allowable Allowable Settlement Settlement (CP4) (CP4)
JIF, Qtot, Qs, and Qb

10000 9000 8000 7000 6298 6000 7690 7332
(JIF) 5903 (JIF)
Qtot
Qtot Qtot*
8762
6353
6617 6025 Force
(kN)
(JIF)
5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0
Qtot Qs Qb 2737
4475
1392 979
TP1', L=28.7m
(Failure test)
TP2*, L=29.9m
(Non failure test)
TP3, L=31.7m
(Failure test)
Unit Shaft Resistance Vs Displacement

Lev A to Lev B
300
Lev B to Lev C
300 300
Le v B t o Le v C t o) (6 .4 5 Lev m t o 1B 4 .2m
Lev C to Lev D
Le v A t o Lev B ( 1.7Le m to .4 5 t m ) v 6A o
N - a ve = 10
TP2
Le v B t o Le v C ( 6 .4m t o 14 .9 m )
N - a v e = 10
Shaft Resistance (kPa) UnitUnit Shaft Resistance (kPa)
250
Le v A to Lev B ( 1.4 m t o 6 .4 m )
Le v B ( 1.7 m t o 6 .4 5 m )
N - av eTP1' = 10
TP1 TP1'
250 Unit Shaft Resistance (kPa)
Le v C ( 6 .45 m t o 1 4 .2 m)
N -a v e = 7
N - a veTP1' = 7
TP2
TP1'
N - a v e = 10
=5
TP1
250
Le v C t o Le v D N - av e = 11 to ( 14 Le .2 mv t oC 19 .7 m) Le v D
N -ave = 11 TP1'
TP2
TP1
TP1'
( 14 .2 m t o 19 .7 m )
Le v C t o Le v D ( 14 .9 m to 2 0.9 m ) N -a v e = 24
N - a ve = 9
200
Le v A t o Le v B ( 1.4 m Lev A t o Le v B N - av e = 11 ( 1.2m to t 8o . 45 m ) 6 .4m ) Le v A t o Le v B ( 1.2 m t o 8 . 4 5m )
N -ave = 9 TP3
TP2 TP2
200
( 8 .4 5m t o 15.9 5 m )
Le v B t o Lev C Le v B t o Le v C N -a v e ( 6 .4m t o 14.9 m)
TP3
TP2 TP2
TP3 TP3
200
Le v C t o Le v D ( 14 .9 m t o 2 0 .9 m) Le v C t o Le v D N -a v e
N -ave = 24
= 24
TP3
TP2 TP2 TP3
( 15.9 5 m to 22 .7 m )
150
N - a v e = 11
TP3 TP3
150
Le v B t o Lev C ( 8.4 5m t o 15.9 5m )
N - a ve = 5
150
Le v C t o Le v D ( 15 .9 5 m t o 2 2 .7 m )
N -ave = 24
TP3
100
100
100
50
50
50
0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 Displacement (mm) Displacement (mm)
Lev D to Lev E
300 300
Le v E to Le v F (2 3 .2 m to 2 6 .2m )
Lev E to Lev F
300
N -a v e = 2 4
Lev F to Lev G
TP1'
Unit Shaft Resistance (kPa) Unit Shaft Resistance (kPa)
250
250
Unit Shaft Resistance (kPa) (kPa) Unit Shaft Resistance
Le v E to Le v F (2 4 .4 m to 2 7 .4m ) Le v E to Le v F (2 8 .2 m to 2 9 .2m )
N -a v e = 3 0
250
TP2
N - a ve = 19
U nit Shaft R esistan ce (kPa)
200
200
TP3
200
150
Lev D to Lev E ( 19.7 m to 23 .2m ) N -a ve = 25
150
150
Lev F to Lev G (2 6 .2 m to 2 8.2 m ) N -a v e = 3 5
TP1'
100
Lev D to Lev E ( 20 .9m t o 24 .4 m) N -a ve = 29
TP1' TP2 TP3
100
100
Lev F to Lev G (2 7 .4 m to 2 9.4 m ) Lev F to Lev G ( 2 9 .2 m t o 3 1.2 m)
N -a v e = 3 5
TP2
N -a v e = 2 9
TP3
50
Lev D to Lev E ( 22 .7m t o 28 .2 m) N - av e = 16
50
50
Le v D t o Le v E ( 19 .7 m t o 2 3 .2 m ) Le v D t o Le v E ( 2 0 .9 m t o 2 4 .4 m ) Le v D t o Le v E ( 2 2 .7 m t o 2 8 .2 m )
N -ave = 25
TP1
TP1'
Le v E t o Le v F ( 2 3 .2 m t o 2 6 .2 m ) Le v E t o Le v F ( 2 4 .4 m t o 2 7 .4 m ) Le v E t o Le v F ( 2 8 .2 m t o 2 9 .2 m )
N -ave = 24
TP1
TP1'
Lev F t o Lev G ( 2 6.2 m t o 2 8.2 m ) Lev F t o Lev G ( 2 7.4 m t o 2 9.4 m ) Lev F t o Lev G ( 2 9.2 m t o 3 1.2 m )
N - a ve = 3 5
TP1'
N - a ve = 3 5
N -ave = 29
TP2
TP2
N -ave = 30
TP2
TP2
TP2
N - a v e = 16
TP3
TP3
N - a v e = 19
TP3
TP3
N - a ve = 2 9
TP3
Mobilized Shaft Resistance & End Bearing

(Jurong Formation)
250
10000
225
TP2
CP-4 Ks= 5N
TP1
Unit Un End it En dBearing B earin g (kPa) (kPa)
9000 8000 7000 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0

TP1' TP2 TP3
200
175
150
TP3
CP-4 Ks= 2N
125
100
75
50
25
0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
SPT-N SPT-N
N-SPT
Base Settlement (mm) (mm) PilePile Base Settlement
Combined Plot TP1, TP2 and TP3
Preload Effect
2003 Rankine Lecture (Prof M.F. Randolph)
Bored Pile
No residual pressure at pile base during installation End-bearing could only be mobilized at relatively large displacement Significant residual pressure at pile base during installation (higher than driven pile) Higher end bearing could be mobilized at small displacement
Jack-in pile
Jack-In Pile
Bored pile
Conclusions(1)
Instrumented load tests have verified that : Qu of pile > Calculated Qu adopted from driven pile Qu of pile > JIF Piles installed by JIF of 1.5~2.25 x WL have adequate Qu & settlement within allowable criteria. Qu of Jack-in pile is a function of JIF and increases as JIF increases. All 3 test piles showed similar load-settlement behaviour up to 2xWL. Higher JIF could result in higher Qu but the use of JIF 1.5xWL is enough to ensure satisfactory pile performance up to 2xWL.
Conclusions(2)
JIF > 2xWL could be better but may not be necessarily needed. An appropriate JIF shall be established with the use of static load test. Subsequently all piles could be installed using this termination criteria. Jack-in pile installation results in a preloaded pile toe condition, hence better displacement performance. More future research would help to provide accurate design in the use of jack-in pile.
THANK YOU !
Q & A

GeoSS Event Seminar 7 Nov 2012 - Slides

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Judul Asli

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

GeoSS Event Seminar 7 Nov 2012 - Slides

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Your Partner In Ground Engineering

Low Noise No Vibration

How Many Decibels?

Permissible Leq 75dB (12 hours) within 150m

How Far Have We Gone Since 2004?

length of piles installed Singapore To Jakarta

Your Partner In Ground Engineering

Method of Jack-in Piling System

CSC HOLDINGS LIMITED

Method of Jack-in Piling System

Your Partner In Ground Engineering

CSC HOLDINGS LIMITED

Your Partner In Ground Engineering

Machine Movement and Installation Process (Video)

CSC HOLDINGS LIMITED

Machine Movement (Video)

Installation Process (Video)

Your Partner In Ground Engineering

Advantages of Jack-in Piling

CSC HOLDINGS LIMITED

Advantages of Jack-in Piling

Your Partner In Ground Engineering

CSC HOLDINGS LIMITED

Pre-Boring at Piling Point

Your Partner In Ground Engineering

Jack-in Piling Machines

CSC HOLDINGS LIMITED

Jack-in Piling Machines

Low Capacity Machines - 100 to 130 tons

Jack-in Piling Machines

Medium Capacity Machines - 240 to 420 tons

Jack-in Piling Machines

High Capacity Machines - 600 to 800 tons

Your Partner In Ground Engineering

Completed High Rise Building Projects

CSC HOLDINGS LIMITED

Completed High Rise Building Projects

250mm, 300mm, 350mm and 400mm

500mm and 600mm

60tons, 85tons, 100tons, 160tons, 125tons and 170tons

Completed High Rise Building Projects

400mm, 500mm and 600mm

100tons, 150tons and 215tons

Completed High Rise Building Projects

500mm and 600mm

130tons, 187tons and 250tons

Completed High Rise Building Projects

DBSS @ AMK Street 52

400mm, 500mm and 600mm

118tons, 169tons and 231tons

Your Partner In Ground Engineering

Some Valued Clients

CSC HOLDINGS LIMITED

Some Valued Clients

Your Partner In Ground Engineering

Your Partner In Ground Engineering

Your Partner In Ground Engineering

JACK-IN PILING DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS

Jack-in Pile Design

Design Parameters In Accordance with CP4:2003

Ultimate geotechnical axial capacity Qu = fs x As + qb x Ab

Set / Termination Criteria

Your Partner In Ground Engineering