Date
03 Jun 1988, 10:00 am - 5:30 pm
Abstract
Five case histories, where the ultimate bearing capacity of the piles was evaluated by both dynamic measurements and static load tests in Southern Ontario, Canada, are presented. The ultimate bearing capacity of the piles obtained by both methods are compared and found that the ultimate bearing capacities evaluated by dynamic measurements are within 1 to 15 percent of the static load test results analysed by the Offset Limit Load Criterion. In four of the six piles evaluated, the dynamic analysis results are within 10 percent of the static load test results. The correlations have shown that dynamic analysis of pile capacity by dynamic measurements is an excellent alternative to static load test.
Department(s)
Civil, Architectural and Environmental Engineering
Meeting Name
2nd Conference of the International Conference on Case Histories in Geotechnical Engineering
Publisher
University of Missouri--Rolla
Document Version
Final Version
Rights
© 1988 University of Missouri--Rolla, All rights reserved.
Creative Commons Licensing
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 License.
Document Type
Article - Conference proceedings
File Type
text
Language
English
Recommended Citation
Cheng, Stephen S. M. and Ahman, Shaheen A., "Dynamic Testing Versus Static Load Tests: Five Case Histories" (1988). International Conference on Case Histories in Geotechnical Engineering. 27.
https://scholarsmine.mst.edu/icchge/2icchge/2icchge-session6/27
Dynamic Testing Versus Static Load Tests: Five Case Histories
Five case histories, where the ultimate bearing capacity of the piles was evaluated by both dynamic measurements and static load tests in Southern Ontario, Canada, are presented. The ultimate bearing capacity of the piles obtained by both methods are compared and found that the ultimate bearing capacities evaluated by dynamic measurements are within 1 to 15 percent of the static load test results analysed by the Offset Limit Load Criterion. In four of the six piles evaluated, the dynamic analysis results are within 10 percent of the static load test results. The correlations have shown that dynamic analysis of pile capacity by dynamic measurements is an excellent alternative to static load test.
