geoss event seminar 7 nov 2012_slides

8/13/2019 GeoSS Event Seminar 7 Nov 2012_slides

1/56

CSC HOLDINGS LIMITED

Jack-in PilingEnvironmental Friendly

Piling System

Part 1 - Chris Loh

7 Nov 12

Your Partner In Ground Engineering


2/56


Jack-in Piling

EnvironmentalFriendly

Low NoiseNo Vibration

Gracious Piling


3/56


Permissible

Leq 75dB (12 hours)within 150m

How Many Decibels?


4/56


5/56

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

Contents



6/56


7/56

Method of Jack-in Piling System


A modern technique by which pre-formed piles (e.g. Pre-

stressed Spun Piles, Precast RC Piles, H-Piles, Steel Pipe

Piles) are hydraulically jacked into the ground as

displacement piles


8/56


InstallationProcess



9/56



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-inforce is released and reapplied twice

Downward movement of the

pile between the two cycles is

then measured and checkedagainst the set criteria


10/56


Machine Movement and


(Video)



11/56

Machine Movement (Video)



12/56

Installation Process (Video)



13/56


Advantagesof Jack-in Piling



14/56

Environmental Friendly

- Low Noise

- Vibration Free

- Minimal Spoils Disposal

Able to achieveGood Verticality

Lower Riskof machine toppling as compared withconventional leader type machines

Every pile is jacked up to between 1.8 times - 2.5 timesworking load

Advantages of Jack-in Piling



15/56


Mitigating

Measures



16/56

Mitigating Measures


Relief Boring Pre-Boring at Piling Point


17/56





18/56



Low Capacity Machines - 100 to 130 tons


19/56


20/56



High Capacity Machines - 600 to 800 tons


21/56


Completed High RiseBuilding Projects



22/56

Completed High Rise Building Projects


Livia Condominium17 Storey1510RC Piles & Spun Piles

RC Piles

250mm, 300mm, 350mmand 400mm

Spun Piles

500mm and 600mm

Piles Capacity

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


23/56



Twin Waterfalls17 Storey1500Spun Piles

Spun Piles

400mm, 500mm and 600mm

Piles Capacity

100tons, 150tons

and 215tons


24/56



Austville Residences18 Storey1105Spun Piles

RC Piles

250mm

Spun Piles

500mm and 600mm

Piles Capacity

130tons, 187tonsand 250tons


25/56



DBSS @ AMK Street 5230 Storey1293Spun Piles

Spun Piles

400mm, 500mm and 600mm

Piles Capacity

118tons, 169tons

and 231tons


26/56


Some Valued Clients



27/56

Some Valued Clients



28/56

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


29/56


Thank You



30/56


Jack-in PilingEnvironmental Friendly

Piling System

Part 2 Gwee Boon Hong

7 Nov 2012

Y our P artner In Ground E ngineering


31/56

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)



32/56

JACK-IN PILING

DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS



33/56

Jack-in Pile Design

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

Structural 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

Geotechnical Considerations



34/56

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 unconfinedcompressive 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 H i g h er v a l u e o f K s a n d K b m a y b e a d o p t e d i f s u b s t a n t i at e d b y

s u f f i c i en t i n s t r u m e n t ed l o a d t e s t i n s i m i l ar s o i l c o n d i t io n



35/56

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 consecutivecycles

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

Fi n a l acce p t a n c e cri t e r i a f o r t h e i n st a l l ed p i l es n e ed t o b e ve ri f i ed b y st a t i c p i l e l o a d t e st

Set / Termination Criteria



36/56


37/56

Case Study 1 - Punggol View Pri Sch (OldAlluvium)

2

12

13

10

12

17

35

35

13

23

15

17

28

3659

100

68

100

100

100

-70

-65

-60

-55

-50

-45

-40

-35

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0 0 20 40 60 80 100

-SPT-N

CS

MS

SM

SM

CS

MS

SM

-70

-65

-60

-55

-50

-45

-40

-35

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0 0 50 100 150 200 250

Unit Shaft Resistance (kPa)

-70

-65

-60

-55

-50

-45

-40

-35

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0 0 5000 10000 15000

Unit End Bearing (kPa)

4430(2.1xWL)

-70

-65

-60

-55

-50

-45

-40

-35

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0 0 2000 4000 6000 8000

Ultimate Pile Capacity (kN)

Qs - Design

Qb - Design

Qult- Design

JIF

Qult- Back Analysis (Based on InsResult)

Design

JIF=2.1xWL

Design

q Structural Capacity = 2100 kN

(Spun Pile diam. 600mm)

q Geotechnical Capacity

q fs = Ks.N ,

Ks = 2.0 to 2.5 (limited to 120 kPa)

q qb = 40. N.Kb

Kb = 5 (limited to 7500 kPa)

q F. O. S = 2 .5

Depth(m

)


Actual

Piledid notfail at3xWL

SF>2.5

Back

Analysis

10mdifference inpile length= $$


38/56

Load Distribution

6304

5625

4385

3468

2095

1177

858

594

430

2

12

13

10

12

17

35

35

13

23

15

17

28

3659

100

68

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000

Depth(m

)

Loads(kN)

Reading

SPT

Layer

CS

MS

SM

SM

CS

MS

SM

90

109

81

121

108

56

46

43

2

12

13

10

12

17

35

35

13

23

15

17

28

3659

100

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

0 50 100 150 200

Depth(m)

fs (kPa)

fs

SPT

Layer

CS

MS

SM

SM

CS

MS

SM

8.4

5.4

4.7

4.5

2.4

3.1

2.5

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

0 5 10

Depth(m)

Ks (fs/Nav)

Low unit end bearing (1520 kPa), Not fully mobilized CP4Ks = 2N

CP4

Ks = 5NAverage

Ks = 4.4N

Force

SoilLayer

Soil Layer



39/56

Load Settlement Curve

6.35; 2090

13.54; 4326

24.12; 6304

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

LoadatTop(kN)

Settlement at Pile Head (mm)

Cycle-1 Cycle-2 Cycle-3



40/56

Displacement Vs Mobilized Resistance

0

50

100

150

200

0 5 10 15 20 25

UnitShaftResistance(kPa)

Displacement (mm)

0-6m

6-12m

12-18m

18-24m

24-28.5m

28.5-31.5m

31.5-34.5m

34.5-36.5m

0

500

1000

1500

2000

0 5 10 15 20 25

UnitEndBearing(kPa)

Displacement (mm)

End Bearing

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.



41/56

Design Parameters Evaluation, Ks & Kb

Assumed Measured CP-4

Ks 2 to 2.5 4.4 120 kPa 2 to 5 200 kPa

Kb 5 2.2 1520 kPa ** 6 to 9 18000 kPa

* * Not ful ly mobil ized



42/56

CP-4Ks=2N

CP-4

Ks=5N

CP-4Ks=1.5N

CP-4Ks=3N

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90

UnitShaftRe

sistance(kPa)

N-SPT

Mobilized Shaft Resistance(Old Alluvium)

Displacement Pile (DP)

Compilation of ULT (Instrumented) results from different piling

systems within Punggol sites

Non-displacement Pile (NDP)



43/56

CASE STUDY 2

EFFECT OF JACK-IN FORCE ON

JACK-IN PILE PERFORMANCEAT TUAS SOUTH AVENUE

- In collaboration with NUS (2009) -



44/56

15m (25D)

8.4m(14D) 8.4

m(14D

)

TP1

TP2 TP3CPT1CPT2

CPT3

CPT1CPT2

CPT3

CPT4

CPT3 CPT2 CPT1

CPT1a

CPT2a

CPT3a

CPT4a

CPT1a

CPT2a

CPT3a

P1'

30

30

30

30

30

CPT1aCPT2a

CPT3a

CPT1b CPT1b

CPT1b

30

Pile & Instrumentation Layout Plan

Before pile installation

After pile installation

After load test

CPT1, CPT1a, CPT1b, : 2r (0.6m) from center of spun pile

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



45/56

FILL (Loose to Medium Dense SAND)

KALLANG FORMATION (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)

JURONG FORMATION, Completely Weathered Siltstone/Sandstone S V (Hard

Sandy CLAY, N>60)

12m

4m

4m

10m

SPT-N of 5 to 12

SPT-N of 2 to 4

SPT-N of 10 to 20

SPT-N of 20 to 40

Soil Stratigraphy

28.7m

29.9m 31.7m

TP1

(JIF=1.5xWL=4395kN)

TP2

(JIF = 2xWL=5860kN)

TP3

(JIF=2.25xWL=6592.5kN)

JURONG FORMATION

JURONG FORMATION



46/56

Installation Record

13

9

4

8

8

5

2

10

10

36

40

14

16

17

19

18

29

100

14

9

-35

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

0 20 40 60 80 100

SM

(Fill)

marine

CLAY

CS

(S-VI)

MS

(S-V)

MS

(S-V)

CS

(S-V)

11

11

8

8

20

4

18

28

27

38

21

27

19

41

28

100

11

4

-35

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

0 20 40 60 80 1 00

SM

(Fill)

marine

CLAY

CS

(S-VI)

MS

(S-V)

CS

(S-V)

13

8

4

9

9

4

10

11

20

34

15

25

23

35

62

71

100

100

9

10

-35

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

00 20 40 60 80 1 00

SM

(Fill)

marine

CLAY

MS

(S-VI)

MS

(S-V)

MS

(S-V)

CS

(S-V)

TP1

(1.5xWL=4395kN)

TP2

(2xWL=5860kN)

TP3

(2.25xWL=6592.5kN)

set at 28.7m set at 29.9m set at 31.7m

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000

Depth(m)

Jack-In Force (kN)

TP-1 TP-2 TP-3



47/56

Kentledge reaction system

(TP1 and TP3)

Jack-in rig counter-weight reaction

system (TP2)

Test program and Test ArrangementYour Partner In Ground Engineering


48/56

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

10000

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

LoadatTop(kN

)

Settlement at Top (mm)

Load Settlement Curve (Combine Plot)

TP1'

TP2

TP3

AllowableSettlement

(CP4)0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

10000

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

LoadatTop(kN

)

Settlement at Top (mm)

Load Settlement Curve (Combine Plot)

TP1'

TP2

TP3

AllowableSettlement

(CP4)

TP1=7.5mm

TP2=6.2mm

TP3=7.4mm

1xWL (2930 kN)

2xWL (5860 kN)

2.5xWL (7325 kN)

TP1=18.8mm

TP2=18.3mm

TP3=18.0mm

TP1=29.9mm

TP2=26.0mm

TP3=26.5mm98.24mm(at2.99xWL

= 8762kN)

85.09mm(at2.62xWL

= 7690kN)

Load Test Results

98.24mm

(At 2.99xWL = 8762kN)

85.09mm

(At 2.62xWL = 7690kN)



49/56

4475

5903

6617

76907332

8762

6298 63536025

1392 979

2737

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

10000

TP1', L=28.7m TP2*, L=29.9m TP3, L=31.7m

(kN)

Force

Qtot

Qs

Qb

JIF, Qtot, Qs, and Qb

(Non failure test) (Failure test)(Failure test)

Qtot Qtot* Qtot

(JIF)

(JIF)

(JIF)



50/56

Unit Shaft Resistance Vs Displacement

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100


Displacement(mm)

LevA to Lev B

TP1'

TP2

TP3

Lev A t o Lev B

( 1.7m t o 6. 45m)

N-ave = 10

Lev A t o Lev B ( 1. 4m

t o 6. 4m)

N - ave = 9

Lev A t o Lev B

( 1.2m t o 8. 45 m)

N-ave = 11

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100


Displacement(mm)

LevB to Lev C

TP1'

TP2

TP3

Le v B to Le v C

(6 .4 5 m to 1 4 .2 m)

N-a v e = 7

Le v B to Le v C

(6 .4 m to 1 4 .9 m)

N-a v e = 1 0

Le v B to Le v C

(8 .4 5 m to 1 5 .9 5 m)

N-a v e = 5

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100


Displacement(mm)

LevC to Lev D

TP1'

TP2

TP3

Le v C to Le v D

(14.2m to 19.7m)

N-a v e = 1 1

Le v C to Le v D

(1 4 .9 m to 2 0 .9 m)

N-a v e = 2 4

Le v C to Le v D

(1 5 .9 5 m to 2 2 .7 m)

N-a v e = 2 4

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100


Displacement (mm)

LevD to Lev E

TP1'

TP2

TP3

L e v D t o L e v E

( 1 9 .7 m t o 2 3 .2 m)

N- a v e = 2 5

L e v D t o L e v E

( 2 0 .9 m t o 2 4 .4 m)

N- a v e = 2 9

L e v D t o L e v E

( 2 2 .7 m t o 2 8 .2 m)

N- a v e = 1 6

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100


Displacement(mm)

LevF toLev G

TP1'

TP2

TP3

Le v F to Le v G

(2 6 . 2 m to 2 8 . 2 m)

N -a v e = 3 5

Le v F to Le v G

(2 7 . 4 m to 2 9 . 4 m)

N -a v e = 3 5

Le v F to Le v G

(2 9 . 2 m to 3 1 . 2 m)

N -a v e = 2 9

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100


Displacement(mm)

LevE to Lev F

TP1'

TP2

TP3

Le v E to Le v F

(2 3 .2 m to 2 6 .2 m)

N-a v e = 2 4

Le v E to Le v F

(2 4 .4 m to 2 7 .4 m)

N-a v e = 3 0

Le v E to Le v F

(2 8 .2 m to 2 9 .2 m)

N-a v e = 1 9

TP1'

TP2

TP3

L e v A to L e v B

(1 .7 m to 6 .4 5 m)

N -a v e = 1 0

L e v A to L e v B (1 .4 m

to 6 .4 m)

N - a v e = 9

L e v A to L e v B

(1 .2 m to 8 . 4 5 m)

N -a v e = 1 1

TP1'

TP2

TP3

L e v B to L e v C

(6 .4 5 m to 1 4 .2 m)

N -a v e = 7

L e v B to L e v C

(6 .4 m to 14 .9 m)

N -a v e = 10

L e v B to L e v C

(8 .4 5 m to 15 .9 5 m)

N -a v e = 5

TP1'

TP2

TP3

Le v C t o Le v D

(14.2m to 19.7m)

N-ave = 11

Le v C t o Le v D

(14.9m to 20 .9m)

N - a v e = 2 4

Le v C t o Le v D

(15.95m to 2 2.7m)

N - a v e = 2 4

TP1'

TP2

TP3

L ev D to L ev E

(19.7m to 23.2m)

N - a v e = 2 5

L ev D to L ev E

(20.9m to 24.4m )

N - a v e = 2 9

L ev D to L ev E

(22.7m to 28.2m )

N-ave = 16

TP1'

TP2

TP3

Le v E to Le v F

(2 3 .2 m to 2 6 .2 m )

N - a v e = 2 4

Le v E to Le v F

(2 4 .4 m to 2 7 .4 m )

N - a v e = 3 0

Le v E to Le v F

(2 8 .2 m to 2 9 .2 m )

N-a v e = 19

TP1'

TP2

TP3

L e v F t o L e v G

( 2 6 . 2 m t o 2 8 . 2 m )

N - a v e = 3 5

L e v F t o L e v G

( 2 7 . 4 m t o 2 9 . 4 m )

N - a v e = 3 5

L e v F t o L e v G

29. 2m to 31. 2m

N - a v e = 2 9

TP1

TP2

TP3

TP1

TP2

TP3

TP1

TP2

TP3

TP1

TP2

TP3

TP1

TP2

TP3


Displacement (mm)Displacement (mm) Displacement (mm)

Displacement (mm)Displacement (mm) Displacement (mm)








51/56

CP-4Ks=2N

CP-4Ks=5N

0

25

50

75

100

125

150

175

200

225

250

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75


N-SPT

Mobilized Shaft Resistance & End Bearing(Jurong Formation)

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

10000

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

UnitEndBearing(kPa)

PileBaseSettlement (mm)

TP1'

TP2

TP3

TP1TP2

TP3

Combined Plot TP1, TP2 and TP3

SPT-N


UnitShaftResis

tance(kPa)

UnitEndBearing(kPa)

SPT-N Pile Base Settlement (mm)


52/56

Preload Effect

Bored pile

Jack-in pile

Bored Pile

No residual pressure at

pile base during

installation

End-bearing could only

be mobilized at relatively

large displacement

Jack-In Pile

Significant residual

pressure at pile base

during installation

(higher than driven pile)

Higher end bearingcould be mobilized at

small displacement

2003 Rankine Lecture (Prof M.F. Randolph)



53/56

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.



54/56

Conclusions(2)

JIF > 2xWL could be better but may not be necessarilyneeded.

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.



55/56

THANK YOU !Your Partner In Ground Engineering



56/56

Q & A



geoss event seminar 7 nov 2012_slides

Documents