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
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
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

(Video)
Machine Movement (Video)

Installation Process (Video)

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

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

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
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
130tons, 187tons
and 250tons

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

Piles Capacity
118tons, 169tons
and 231tons
Some Valued Clients
Some Valued Clients

To Conclude
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
Piling System
Part 2 Gwee Boon Hong
7 Nov 2012
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)

20
40
Unit Shaft Resistance (kPa)
Actual
60
80
100
-10
12
13
100
150
200
250
5000
10000
15000
-5
-5
-5
-10
-10
-15
-15
-20
-20
-20
-25
-25
-25
-30
-30
-30
-35
-35
-35
-40
-40
-40
-45
-45
-45
-50
-50
Back
Analysis
-10
10
-15
50
Ultimate Pile Capacity (kN)
CS
2
-5
Unit End Bearing (kPa)
MS
12
-15
2000
4000
6000
8000
JIF=2.1xWL
4430 (2.1xWL)
SPT-N
Design
Pile
did not
fail at
3xWL
17
-20
35
Depth (m)
SM
35
-25
13
-30
23
15
-35
-40
Design
SM
SF>2.5
CS
17
28
MS
10m
difference in
pile length
= $$
36
59
100
-45
68
-50
-55
SM
100
100
-50
q
(Spun Pile diam. 600mm)

-55
-55
q
100
-65
-70
fs
-60
q
qb
F.O.S
-65
-70
-55
Qb - Design
Geotechnical Capacity
q
-60
Qs - Design
Structural Capacity = 2100 kN
= Ks.N ,
Ks = 2.0 to-602.5 (limited to 120 kPa)
= 40.N.Kb
Kb = 5 (limited to 7500 kPa )
-65
= 2.5
-70
Qult - Design
-60
JIF
-65
-70
Qult - Back Analysis (Based on Ins

Result)
Load Distribution
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
6304
CS
5625
12
15
12
8.4
109
10
MS
12
15
81
SM
1177
SM
35
25
13
23
30
23
108
56
40
594
17430
35
36
59
50
36
45
SM
40
40
SPT
100
MS
28
MS
68
2.5
Force
Reading
28
45
2.4
3.1
35
43
17
4.5
CS
46
15
25
30
858
CS
SM
4.7
Depth (m)
Depth (m)
SM
2095
15
5.4
20
121
35
35
D ep th (m )
12
20
13
10
17
3468
35
CS
90
10
4385
MS
20
35
200
10
17
30
150
13
13
10
25
100
2
5
15
50
10
Ks (fs/Nav)
fs (kPa)
Loads (kN)
Soil
Layer
Layer
59
100
SM
50
Low unit end bearing (1520 kPa), Not fully mobilized
fs
45
SPT
Soil
Layer
Layer
50
CP4
Ks = 2N
Average
Ks = 4.4N
CP4
Ks = 5N
Load Settlement Curve

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

2000
200
0-6m
End Bearing
6-12m
12-18m
18-24m
1500
28.5-31.5m
31.5-34.5m
34.5-36.5m
100
50
Unit End Bearing (kPa)
24-28.5m
150
1000
500
0
0
10
15
Displacement (mm)
20
25
10
15
20
25
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
2 to 2.5
Kb
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
Non-displacement Pile (NDP)
400
Displacement Pile (DP)
350
CP-4
Ks= 5N
300
CP-4
Ks=3N
250
200
CP-4
Ks=2N
150
CP-4
Ks=1.5N
100
50
0
0
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

30
30
15m (25D)
TP2
CPT1
CPT1b
CPT3a
CPT2a
CPT1a
CPT3 CPT2
CPT1
CPT1b
CPT1a CPT2
CPT2a
CPT3
TP3
P1'
30
30
CPT3a
30
CPT4a
CPT3a
CPT4
CPT1, CPT1a, CPT1b,
30
8 .4
CPT2a
(14
D)
CPT1a
CPT1b
CPT3
CPT2
CPT1
TP1
8 .4
D
4
1
(
: 2r (0.6m) from center of spun pile
CPT2, CPT2a, : 3r (0.9m) from center of spun pile
Before pile installation
CPT3, CPT3a, : 5r (1.5m) from center of spun pile
After pile installation
CPT4, CPT4a
After load test
; 10r (3.0m) from center of spun pile
Soil Stratigraphy
TP2
(JIF = 2xWL=5860kN)
12m
4m
TP1
(JIF=1.5xWL=4395kN)
FILL
(Loose to Medium Dense SAND)
SPT-N of 5 to 12
KALLANG FORMATION
(Very Soft to Soft Marine CLAY)
SPT-N of 2 to 4
Residual Soil S VI
(Stiff to Very Stiff Sandy CLAY)
JURONG FORMATION
4m
SPT-N of 10 to 20
10m
Completely Weathered
Siltstone/Sandstone S V
(Stiff to Very Stiff Sandy CLAY)
JURONG FORMATION
SPT-N of 20 to 40
29.9m
TP3
(JIF=2.25xWL=6592.5kN)
28.7m
31.7m
JURONG FORMATION, Completely Weathered Siltstone/Sandstone S V (Hard
Sandy CLAY, N>60)
Installation Record
TP1
(1.5xWL=4395kN)
Jack-In Force (kN)
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
20
40
60
80
100
20
Depth (m)
-15
23
19
71
35
TP-2
CS
(S-V)
TP-3
CS
(S-V)
19
set at 28.7m
100
-30
29
100
CS
(S-V)
100
-35
-35
-35
MS
(S-V)
17
18
28
-30
100
TP-1
16
41
62
MS
(S-V)
14
-25
35
-30
40
MS
(S-V)
27
-25
MS
(S-V)
36
-20
21
MS
(S-V)
25
30
CS
(S-VI)
38
15
-25
10
27
34
25
CS
(S-VI)
28
-20
marine
CLAY
10
18
20
8
5
-15
11
-20
-10
m arine
CLAY
MS
(S-VI)
100
20
10
80
8
-10
m arine
CLAY
60
SM
(Fill)
14
-5
40
13
SM
(Fill)
11
20
20
11
-5
4
-10
100
11
SM
(Fill)
-15
80
-5
15
60
13
10
40
0
10
TP3
(2.25xWL=6592.5kN)
TP2
(2xWL=5860kN)
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
TP1=29.9mm
TP2=26.0mm
9000
9000
TP3=26.5mm
98.24mm
98.24mm
8000
8000
(at 2.99xWL
(At
2.99xWL = 8762kN)
= 8762kN)
85.09mm
Load at
at Top
Top (kN)
(kN)
Load
7000
7000
85.09mm
(at 2.62xWL
(At
2.62xWL = 7690kN)
= 7690kN)
6000
6000
2xWL (5860 kN)
5000
5000
TP1=18.8mm
TP1'
TP1'
TP2=18.3mm
4000
4000
TP2
TP2
TP3=18.0mm
3000
3000
1xWL (2930 kN)
TP3
TP3
TP1=7.5mm
2000
2000
TP2=6.2mm
1000
1000
Allowable
Allowable
Settlement
Settlement
(CP4)
(CP4)
TP3=7.4mm
00
00
10
10
20
20
30
30
40
40
50
50
60
60
Settlement
Settlementat
atTop
Top(mm)
(mm)
70
70
80
80
90
90
100
100
JIF, Qtot, Qs, and Qb

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

Lev A to Lev B
Lev B to Lev C
250
Le v A to Lev B ( 1.4 m
t o 6 .4 m )
N - a ve = 9
200
150
300
TP1
TP1'
N - av eTP1'
= 10
Le
v A t o Le v BN -(av1.4
m
Lev A t o Le v B
e = 11
( 1.2m to t8o
. 4 56m.4m
)
)
N - a v eTP3
= 9
Le v A t o Le v B
( 1.2 m t o 8 . 4 5m )
N - a v e = 11
TP2
TP2
TP3
TP3
100
N -a v e = 7
Le v B t o Le v C
( 6 .4m t o 14 .9 m )
N - a v e = 10
Le v C
( 6 .45 m t o 1 4 .2 m)
250
TP2
Le v B t o Le v C
t o)
(6 .4 5 Lev
m t o 1B
4 .2m
Le v B t o Lev C
Le v B t o Le v C
-a v e
( 6 .4m t o 14.9N m)
200
TP1'
TP2
N - a v e = 10
=5
TP2
TP2
TP3
( 8 .4 5m t o 15.9 5 m )
Le v B t o Lev C
( 8.4 5m t o 15.9 5m )
150
N - a ve = 5
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
TP3
TP3
100
50
100
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
150
N -a ve = 25
TP1'
100
N - av e = 16
TP2
50
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
N -ave = 25
Le v D t o Le v E
( 2 0 .9 m t o 2 4 .4 m )
N -ave = 29
Le v D t o Le v E
( 2 2 .7 m t o 2 8 .2 m )
N - a v e = 16
TP1
TP1'
TP2
TP2
TP3
TP3
TP3
TP3
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
70
80
90
100
Lev F to Lev G
250
200
Le v E to Le v F
(2 3 .2 m to 2 6 .2m )
N -a v e = 2 4
Le v E to Le v F
(2 4 .4 m to 2 7 .4m )
N -a v e = 3 0
Le v E to Le v F
(2 8 .2 m to 2 9 .2m )
N - a ve = 19
TP1'
TP2
TP3
150
100
250
200
150
100
50
Lev F to Lev G
(2 6 .2 m to 2 8.2 m )
N -a v e = 3 5
Lev F to Lev G
(2 7 .4 m to 2 9.4 m )
N -a v e = 3 5
TP2
Lev F to Lev G
( 2 9 .2 m t o 3 1.2 m)
N -a v e = 2 9
TP3
TP1'
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Displacement (mm)
Displacement
(mm)
Displacement
(mm)
Displacement
(mm)
Le v D t o Le v E
( 19 .7 m t o 2 3 .2 m )
100
N -ave = 24
300
0
0
TP2
TP2
TP3
Displacement (mm)
Displacement
(mm)
50
TP3
= 24
100
UnitShaft
Shaft Resistance
(kPa) (kPa)
Unit
Resistance

Unit
Shaft Resistance (kPa)
200
Lev D to Lev E
( 22 .7m t o 28 .2 m)
Le v C t o Le v D
( 15 .9 5 m t o 2 2 .7 m )
Lev E to Lev F
250
TP2
N -ave = 24
( 15.9 5 m to 22 .7 m )
150
100
300
N -a ve = 29
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
200
TP1'
N -a v e = 24
Displacement (mm)
Displacement
(mm)
Lev D to Lev E
Lev D to Lev E
( 20 .9m t o 24 .4 m)
Le v C t o Le v D
( 14 .9 m to 2 0.9 m )
0
10
Displacement(mm)
(mm)
Displacement
Lev D to Lev E
( 19.7 m to 23 .2m )
250
50
300
TP1
N - a v e =TP1'
11
( 14 .2 m t o 19 .7 m )
U nit Shaft R esistan ce (kPa)
Le v C t o Le v D
N - av e = 11
t om) Le v D
( 14 Le
.2 mvt oC19 .7
TP1
N - a veTP1'
= 7
ShaftResistance
Resistance (kPa)
UnitUnit
Shaft
(kPa)
N - a ve = 10
Le v B
( 1.7 m t o 6 .4 5 m )
Le v A t o Lev B
( 1.7Le
m to
.4 5 tmo
)
v 6A
50
Lev C to Lev D
300
300
Le v E t o Le v F
( 2 3 .2 m t o 2 6 .2 m )
N -ave = 24
Le v E t o Le v F
( 2 4 .4 m t o 2 7 .4 m )
N -ave = 30
Le v E t o Le v F
( 2 8 .2 m t o 2 9 .2 m )
N - a v e = 19
100
10
20
30
40
50
60
Displacement (mm)
Displacement
(mm)
TP1
TP1'
TP2
TP2
TP3
TP3
Lev F t o Lev G
( 2 6.2 m t o 2 8.2 m )
N - a ve = 3 5
Lev F t o Lev G
( 2 7.4 m t o 2 9.4 m )
N - a ve = 3 5
Lev F t o Lev G
( 2 9.2 m t o 3 1.2 m )
N - a ve = 2 9
TP1'
TP2
TP3
Mobilized Shaft Resistance & End Bearing

(Jurong Formation)
10000
250
CP-4
Ks= 5N
TP2
225
TP1
9000
8000
UnitU nEnd
it En dBearing
B earin g (kPa)
(kPa)
200
175
150
TP3
125
CP-4
Ks= 2N
100
75
7000
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
50
TP1'
TP2
1000
25
TP3
0
0
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
N-SPT
SPT-N
SPT-N
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Base Settlement
(mm) (mm)
PilePile
Base
Settlement
Combined Plot TP1, TP2 and TP3
80
90
100
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
Jack-In Pile
Significant residual
pressure at pile base
during installation
(higher than driven pile)
Higher end bearing

could be mobilized at
small displacement
Bored pile
Jack-in 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

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

GeoSS Event Seminar 7 Nov 2012 - Slides

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Your Partner In Ground Engineering

How Many Decibels?

How Far Have We Gone Since 2004?

length of piles installed

Method of Jack-in Piling System

Machine Movement and Installation Process (Video)

Advantages of Jack-in Piling

Jack-in Piling Machines

Completed High Rise Buildings Projects

Some Valued Clients

Your Partner In Ground Engineering

CSC HOLDINGS LIMITED

Method of Jack-in Piling System

Your Partner In Ground Engineering

CSC HOLDINGS LIMITED

Pile is jacked into the ground with a jack-in force

Your Partner In Ground Engineering

Machine Movement and

CSC HOLDINGS LIMITED

Machine Movement (Video)

Installation Process (Video)

Your Partner In Ground Engineering

CSC HOLDINGS LIMITED

Advantages of Jack-in Piling

Minimal Spoils Disposal

Able to achieve Good Verticality

Lower Risk of machine toppling as compared with

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

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

CSC HOLDINGS LIMITED

Completed High Rise Building Projects

250mm, 300mm, 350mm

500mm and 600mm

60tons, 85tons, 100tons,

Completed High Rise Building Projects

400mm, 500mm and 600mm

Completed High Rise Building Projects

500mm and 600mm

Completed High Rise Building Projects

DBSS @ AMK Street 52

400mm, 500mm and 600mm

Your Partner In Ground Engineering

Some Valued Clients

CSC HOLDINGS LIMITED

Some Valued Clients

Suitable for all types of Pre-formed piles

Proven to be viable foundation system for high rise

Piles are load tested during installation

Your Partner In Ground Engineering

Your Partner In Ground Engineering