Grond Vibrations Due To Pile and Sheet Pile Driving Ingluencing Factors, Predictions and Measurements

Groundvibrationsduetopileandsheetpile
drivinginfluencingfactors,predictionsand
measurements
FannyDeckner
Licentiatethesis
DivisionofSoilandRockMechanics
DepartmentofCivilandArchitecturalEngineering
SchoolofArchitectureandtheBuiltEnvironment
KTH,RoyalInstituteofTechnology
Stockholm2013
TRITAJOBLIC2019
ISSN1650951X
ISBN9789175016603
FannyDeckner
2013
PREFACE
TheworkpresentedinthisthesishasbeencarriedoutbetweenSeptember2009andMarch
2013atNCCEngineeringandtheDivisionofSoilandRockMechanics,DepartmentofCivil
andArchitecturalEngineeringattheRoyalInstituteofTechnology.Theworkwas
supervisedbyProfessorStaffanHintzewithassistancefromDrKennethViking.
IwouldliketoexpressmygratitudetotheDevelopmentFundoftheSwedishConstruction
Industry,NCCConstructionSwedenandtheRoyalInstituteofTechnologyforthefinancial
supportgiventothisresearchproject.
Iwouldliketogratefullyacknowledgetheparticipantsinmyreferencegroup(Johan
Blumfalk,Hercules;OlleBtelsson,Trafikverket;HkanEriksson,GeoMind;UlfHkansson,
Skanska/KTH,JrgenJohansson,NGIandNilsRydn,PEAB/LTH/KTH)forvaluable
commentsandreflectionsduringtheprocess.
ThewarmestofacknowledgementsIwouldliketodirecttomysupervisorsProfessorStaffan
HintzeandDrKennethViking.Withoutyoursupportandencouragementthisprojectwould
nothavebeenpossible.
Furthermore,IwouldliketothankmywonderfulcolleaguesatNCCEngineeringfor
makingeveryworkdayajoy.
Finally,IwouldliketothankmybelovedJoelforhisgreatsupportandunderstanding,my
wonderfulsonHenryforbeingsuchahappychild,theyetunbornchildforlettingmefinish
thisthesisbeforeenteringtheworld,andtherestofmyfamilyformakingthiswork
possible.
Stockholm,February2013
FannyDeckner
III
SUMMARY
Groundvibrationsduetopiledrivingarepartofacomplexprocess.Vibrationisgenerated
fromthepiledrivertothepile.Asthepileinteractswiththesurroundingsoil,vibrationsare
transferredatthepilesoilinterface.Thevibrationpropagatesthroughthegroundand
interactswithstructures,bothabovegroundandunderground.Thevibrationcontinuesinto
thestructurewhereitmaydisturboccupantsand/ordamagethestructure.
Inthisthesisthestudyofthevibrationtransferprocessduetopiledrivingislimitedtothe
vibrationsourceandthewavepropagationinthesoil.Vibrationtransmissiontoadjacent
buildingsandstructuresisnotstudied.However,impactofvibrationsonbuildingsisbriefly
discussedintheliteraturestudy.
Itisimportanttoaccuratelypredictthemagnitudeofgroundvibrationsthatresultfrompile
drivinginurbanareas,bothoverandunderestimatedvibrationlevelsleadtoincreased
costs.Alotofresearchhasbeenperformedwithinthisfieldofknowledge,butareliableand
acknowledgedpredictionmodelforvibrationsinducedbypileorsheetpiledrivingisstill
needed.
Theobjectiveoftheresearchprojectistoincreasetheknowledgeandunderstandinginthe
fieldofgroundvibrationsduetoimpactandvibratorydrivingofpilesandsheetpiles.This
researchprojectalsoaimstodevelopareliablepredictionmodelthatcanbeusedby
practisingengineerstoestimatevibrationduetopiledriving.Thislicentiatethesispresents
thefirstpartoftheresearchprojectandaimstoincreasetheknowledgeandunderstanding
ofthesubjectandtoformabasisforcontinuedresearchwork.
Themostimportantfindingsandconclusionsfromthisstudyare:
x Themainfactorsinfluencingvibrationsduetopileandsheetpiledrivingare;(1)the
vibrationstransferredfromthepiletothesoil,(2)thegeotechnicalconditionsatthe
siteand(3)thedistancefromthesource.
x Thevibrationstransmittedfromthepiletothesoildependonthevibrations
transferredtothepilefromthehammer,thepilesoilinteractionandthewave
propagationandattenuationintheplastic/elastoplasticzoneclosesttothepile.
x Thereistodaynopredictionmodelthatfulfilsthecriteriaoftheperfectprediction
model;reliablebutyeteasytoapply.
Futureresearchshouldstudythetransferofvibrationsatthepilesoilinterface,includingthe
generationofaplastic/elastoplasticzoneintheareaclosesttothepileandhowthataffects
thetransferofvibrationsfromthepiletothesoil.
Keywords:groundvibration,pile,sheetpile,prediction
SAMMANFATTNING
Markvibrationerpgrundavplningrdelavenkomplexprocess.Vibrationergenereras
frnplmaskinentillplen.Nrplenkommerikontaktmeddenomgivandejorden
verfrsvibrationermellanpleochjord.Vibrationernafortplantarsigsomvgorgenom
markenochtrffarbyggnaderochandrakonstruktioner,bdeovanochunderjord.
Vibrationernafortstterinibyggnadendrdekanorsakastrningarellerskador.
Idennaavhandlingbegrnsasstudienavvibrationsverfringsprocessentill
vibrationskllanochvgutbredningenijord.Vibrationsverfringentillintilliggande
byggnaderellerkonstruktionerharintestuderats.Pverkanavvibrationerpbyggnader
diskuterasdockkortilitteraturstudien.
Detrviktigtattpetttillfrlitligtsttkunnafrutsgamarkvibrationernapgrundav
plningistadsmilj,bdeverochunderskattadevibrationsniverledertillkade
kostnader.Forskninghartidigareutfrtsinomdettaomrde,menentillfrlitligochallmnt
accepteradprognosmodellfrvibrationerpgrundavplningellerspontningsaknas
fortfarande.
Syftetmedforskningsprojektetrattkakunskapenochfrstelsenfrmarkvibrationersom
uppkommervidinstallationgenomslagningellervibreringavplarochspont.
Forskningsprojektetsyftarockstillattutvecklaentillfrlitligprognosmodellsomkan
anvndasavyrkesverksammaingenjrerfrattuppskattavibrationsniverorsakadeav
plning.Dennalicentiatavhandlingpresenterardenfrstadelenavforskningsprojektetoch
syftartillattkakunskapenochfrstelseninommnesomrdetsamtattskapaenplattform
frdetfortsattaforskningsarbetet.
Deviktigasteresultatenochslutsatsernafrndennastudier:
x Dehuvudsakligafaktorersompverkarvibrationerorsakadeavplningr;(1)de
vibrationersomverfrsfrnkllantilljorden,(2)degeotekniskafrhllandenap
platsenoch(3)avstndetfrnvibrationskllan(plen).
x Vibrationernasomverfrsfrnplentilljordenberorpdevibrationersom
verfrsfrnplmaskinentillplen,plejordinteraktionensamtvgutbredningoch
dmpningidenplastiska/elastoplastiskazonensombildasnrmastplen.
x Detfinnsidagingenprognosmodellsomuppfyllerkriteriernafrdenperfekta
prognosmodellen;tillfrlitligmenndlttatttillmpa.
Framtidaforskningbrunderskaverfringenavvibrationermellanpleochjord,
innefattandeuppkomstenavenplastisk/elastoplastiskzonnrmastplenochhurdet
pverkarvibrationsverfringenfrnpletilljord.
Nyckelord:markvibrationer,ple,spont,prediktion
VII
LISTOFNOTATIONS
Keysymbolsusedinthetextarelistedbelow.
GreekSymbols
Symbol Represents
Absorptioncoefficient
Coefficientdependingonprobabilityofexceedance
Shearstrain
c
Cyclicshearstrain
Thresholdshearstrain
t
Criticalangle
crit
Wavelength
WavelengthofRwave
R
L
WavelengthofLovewave
Hystereticdamping
Pi
Materialdensity
Stress
Shearstress
Shearstressmobilisedatc
c
Poissonsratio
Diameter
Phaseangle
Angularfrequency
RomanSymbols
Symbol Represents
A
Amplitude
Amax
Maximumdisplacementamplitude
Ap
Crosssectionalareaofthepile
a
Acceleration
c
Wavepropagationvelocity
cB
Wavepropagationvelocityinthepile
Stresswavevelocityinhammer
cH
WavepropagationvelocityofPwave
cp
cR
WavepropagationvelocityofRwave
WavepropagationvelocityofSwave
cs
D
Materialdamping
d
Depth
E
Elasticitymodulus
e
Eccentricity
Unit
m1
rad
m
m
m
kg/m3
kPa
kPa
kPa
m
rad
rad/s
Unit
m
m
m 2
m/s2
m/s
m/s
m/s
m/s
m/s
m/s
(Hzs)1
m
MPa
m
IX
Groundvibrationsduetopileandsheetpiledriving
ev
F
F c
F d
Fi
F v
F 0
f
f d
fn
G
Gmax
Gs
g
g(t,r)
H
h
J c
k
LH
L p
L w
M
Me
MH
m
mdyn
N
n
P
PI
PPV
R
Rs
Rt
r
r0
rcrit
S
S p
s
s(t)
T
t
u
u 0
V0
X
Voidratio
Force
Centrifugalforce
Drivingforce
Impactforce
Dynamicdrivingforce
Staticoverload
Frequency
Drivingfrequency
Naturalfrequency
Shearmodulus
Initialshearmodulus
Secantshearmodulus
Accelerationofearthsgravity
PropagationfunctionorGreensfunction
Heightofsoillayer
Dropheight
Dampingfactor
Empiricallydeterminedconstant
Hammerlength
Pilelength
Stresswavelength
Deformationmodulus
Staticmoment
Hammermass
Mass
Totalvibratingmass
Numberofloops/stories
Valuedependingonwavetype
Dynamicforce
Plasticityindex
Peakparticlevelocity
Soilresistancetostaticprobing
Shaftresistance
Toeresistance
Distancefromsource
Referencedistance
Criticaldistance
Doubledisplacementamplitude
Contactareabetweenshaftandsoil
Slopedistance
Sourcefunction
Period
Time
Displacement
Initialvibrationvelocity
Coefficientofvariation
kN
kN
kN
kN
kN
kN
s1orHz
Hz
Hz
MPa
MPa
MPa
m/s2
m
m
m2/sJ
m
m
m
kPa
kgm
kg
kg
kg
kN
mm/s
kN/m2
kN
kN
m
m
m
m
m2
m
s
s
mm
mm/s
Listofnotations
v
vg
vH
vH0
vp
vres
vSRSS
vx
vy
v z
W
W0
Ws
w(t,r)
x
Z
ZH
Zp
Zs
Zsp
z
z
z
zs
zsp
zss
Particlevelocity
Groundvibrationvelocity
Particlevelocityofhammer
Velocityofhammeratimpact
Particlevelocityofpile
Resultantvelocity
Simulatedresultantparticlevelocity
Particlevelocityinxdirection
Particlevelocityinydirection
Particlevelocityinzdirection
Powersupply
Inputenergy
Dissipatedenergy
Groundvibrationfunction
Empiricallydeterminedconstant
Impedance
Hammerimpedance
Pileimpedance
Soilimpedance
SoilimpedanceforPwaves
Displacement
Velocity
Acceleration
Specificimpedance
SpecificimpedanceforPwaves
SpecificimpedanceforSwaves
mm/s
mm/s
m/s
m/s
m/s
mm/s
mm/s
mm/s
mm/s
mm/s
kW
J
J/m3
kNs/m
kNs/m
kNs/m
kNs/m
kNs/m
mm
mm/s
mm2/s
kNs/m3
kNs/m3
kNs/m3
XI
LISTOFPUBLICATIONS
Thislicentiatethesisisbasedontheworkpresentedinthefollowingpublications.
Appendedpapers:
PaperI
PaperII
PaperIII
Deckner,F.,Viking,K.andHintze,S.(2012).Groundvibrationsduetopileand
sheetpiledrivingpredictionmodelsoftoday.InProceedingsoftheEuropean
YoungGeotechnicalEngineersConference(Wood,T.andSwahn,V.(eds)).
SwedishGeotechnicalSociety,Gothenburg,Sweden,pp.107112.Peerreviewed
conferencepaper.
Deckner performed the analyses and wrote the paper. Viking and Hintze supervised the
work and contributed valuable comments.
Deckner,F.,Viking,K.andHintze,S.(2013).Factorsinfluencingvibrationsdue
topiledriving.SubmittedtoProceedingsoftheInstitutionofCivilEngineers
GeotechnicalEngineeringinDecember2012.Journalpaper.
Deckner performed the analyses and wrote the paper. Viking and Hintze supervised the
work and contributed valuable comments.
Deckner,F.,Lidn,M.,Viking,K.andHintze,S.(2013).Measuredground
vibrationsduringvibratorysheetpiledriving.TobesubmittedtoProceedingsof
theInstitutionofCivilEngineersGeotechnicalEngineeringinMarch2013.Journal
paper.
Deckner and Viking planned and took part in the field test measurements.Deckner and
Lidn performed the analyses. Deckner wrote the paper. Viking and Hintze supervised
the work and contributed valuable comments.
Relatedpublications:
Lidn,M.(2012).GroundVibrationsduetoVibratorySheetPileDriving.DivisionofSoiland
RockMechanics,RoyalInstituteofTechnology,Stockholm,Sweden,MasterofScienceThesis
12/06.
Deckner supervised the work.
Deckner,F.,Hintze,S.ochViking,K.(2010).Miljanpassadplochspontdrivningi
ttbebyggtomrdeetapp2.Bygg&teknik,Vol.102,Nr.1,pp.1220.
Deckner,F.,Lidn,M.,Hintze,S.ochViking,K.(2013).Markvibrationervidspontning
frKarlstadteater.Bygg&teknik,Vol.105,Nr.1,pp.2530.
XIII
TABLEOFCONTENTS
Preface..............................................................................................................................................III
Summary...........................................................................................................................................V
Sammanfattning............................................................................................................................VII
Listofnotations..............................................................................................................................IX
Listofpublications.......................................................................................................................XIII
Tableofcontents............................................................................................................................XV
1
2
3
4
5
Introduction..................................................................................................................................1
1.1
Background...........................................................................................................................1
1.2
Aimandobjective.................................................................................................................2
1.3
Extentandlimitations..........................................................................................................2
1.4
Methodandoutline..............................................................................................................3
LiteratureStudy............................................................................................................................5
2.1
Introduction..........................................................................................................................5
2.2
Basicdynamictheoryandgeodynamics...........................................................................5
2.3
Installationofpilesandsheetpiles...................................................................................24
2.4
Vibrationtransferprocess..................................................................................................28
2.5
Environmentalimpactduetovibrationsfrompiledriving..........................................51
2.6
Measurementofvibration..................................................................................................61
2.7
Predictionofvibrationsduetopiledriving....................................................................66
2.8
Previousfieldstudies..........................................................................................................81
FieldstudyKarlstadtheatre...................................................................................................95
Summaryofappendedpapers..................................................................................................97
4.1
PaperI...................................................................................................................................97
4.2
PaperII..................................................................................................................................97
4.3
PaperIII................................................................................................................................98
Conclusionsandfutureresearch...............................................................................................99
5.1
Conclusions..........................................................................................................................99
5.2
Futureresearch..................................................................................................................100
References...........................................................................................................................................101
PaperI.................................................................................................................................................111
PaperII................................................................................................................................................119
PaperIII..............................................................................................................................................137
XV

1.1 BACKGROUND
Environmentalimpactisdefinedasanychangetotheenvironment,whetheradverseor
beneficial.Thesurroundingsmayincludenearbybuildings,humansoranimalsinthe
neighbourhood,soilsinthevicinity,freshwaterandmore.Pileandsheetpiledrivingin
denselypopulatedareasmainlyimpactstheenvironmentthroughvibrations,settlements
and/ornoise.Thisresearchprojecthasbeenlimitedtothestudyofvibrations.Settlements
arebrieflytoucheduponasasideeffectofvibrations.
Vibrationscanarisefrommanydifferentsourcesinamodernsociety,forinstancetraffic,
machines,hammering,explosions,earthquakesandconstructionwork(IVA,1983)
(Holmberg,1984).Thisstudyfocusesonvibrationsfrompileandsheetpiledriving.
Vibrationduetopiledrivingisacomplexprocessthatinvolvesmanyparametersthatvary
duringtheprocess.Avibrationisgeneratedbythepiledriver.Afteraninteractionbetween
thepileandthesoil,thevibrationpropagatesthroughthegroundandinevitablyinteracts
withstructuresinurbanareas,bothabovegroundandunderground.Thevibrationthen
continuesintothestructurewhereitmaydisturboccupantsand/ordamagethestructure
(Hintze,1994).
Onetrendinconstructiontodayistoincreasedemandsonquality,whilereducing
constructiontimeandloweringenvironmentalimpact.Inaddition,constructionworktoday
isfrequentlylocatedinurbanareas,adjacenttoexistingstructuresandhumans.
Constructionworkinevitablyinfluencesitssurroundings.Itmayaffectnearbybuildings,
streets,ingroundpipesandmore,aswellasdisturbspecialequipmentandpeople.
Constructioninducedvibrationsincludevibrationsfromactivitiessuchasblasting,
excavation,demolition,compactionanddrivingofpilesandsheetpiles.Todayitisbelieved
thatvibrationsfrompiledrivingarethemostcommonsourcesofconstructionvibrations
(Athanasopoulos&Pelekis,2000).
Duetotheincreasedconcernofenvironmentalimpactandbecauseconstructionprojectsare
moreoftenlocatedinurbanareasclosetoexistingstructures,vibrationassessmentand
predictionhasbecomeofimmediateinterest.Itisimportanttoaccuratelypredictthe
magnitudeofgroundvibrationsthatresultfrompiledrivingatconstructionsites.Thishas
beendiscussedinAthanasopoulos&Pelekis(2000),Hope&Hiller(2000)andMassarsch&
Fellenius(2008)andothers.Themodelsandmethodsforpredictionofvibrationsduetopile
drivingareinadequatetoday.Asignificantamountofresearchhasbeenperformedinthis
fieldofknowledge,seechapterreferences,butareliableandacknowledgedprediction
modelforvibrationsinducedbypiledrivingisstillneeded.
Aninabilityofreliablypredictvibrationsduetopiledrivingleadstoincreasedcosts(Hintze,
1994).Ifvibrationlevelsareoverestimated,thisleadstoselectingmoreexpensiveandtime
consumingconstructionmethodsthannecessary.However,ifvibrationslevelsare
underestimatedtheyresultindamagedstructures,disturbedoccupantsandsuspensionsto
theconstructionwork.
Theactualcostofdamagescausedbyvibrationsduetopiledrivingisunknown.However,a
recentarticleintheSwedishpress(Karlsson,2013)estimatesthatdamagesanddelaysin
constructionprojectshasledtocostsofabout2.7billionEurosin2010inSwedenalone.Of
these,anestimated1/3or0.9billionEurosareduetogeotechnicalerrors.
1.2 AIMANDOBJECTIVE
Theobjectiveofthisresearchprojectistoincreasetheknowledgeandunderstandinginthe
fieldofvibrationsduetoimpactandvibratorydrivingofpilesandsheetpiles.Thisresearch
projectalsoaimstodevelopareliablepredictionmodelthatcanbeusedbypractising
engineerstoestimatevibrationduetopileandsheetpiledriving.Thepredictionmodel
shouldbereliableandadaptableforusebypractisinggeotechnicalengineers.Addressing
thisproblemwillhopefullyresultinlessenvironmentalimpactfrompileandsheetpile
drivinginthefuture,whichwillreducefoundationcostsandensurethecontinueduseof
pilesandsheetpilesinurbanareas.
Thislicentiatethesis,whichincludesaliteraturestudyandafieldstudy,isthefirstpartof
theresearchprojectandaimstoincreasetheknowledgeandunderstandingofthesubject
andtoformabasisforthecontinuedresearchwork.Itaimstoidentifyfactorsthatinfluence
vibrationlevelsandsurveytheexistingpredictionmodels,fromwhichareasthatneed
furtherresearchcanbeidentified.Theupcomingsecondpartoftheresearchprogramwill
focusonthedevelopmentofareliablepredictionmodelforvibrationsduetopileandsheet
piledriving.
1.3 EXTENTANDLIMITATIONS
Theresearchwillbefocusedontheenvironmentalimpactfrompileandsheetpiledrivingin
theformofvibrations.Theinstallationmethodsdiscussedarelimitedtoimpactand
vibratorypiledriving.Thethesisdiscussesvibrationsfrompileandsheetpiledriving,inthe
textthewordpilewillrefertobothpileandsheetpileunlessitisstatedtoapplytoonlyone
ortheother.
Thestudyofthevibrationtransferprocessduetopiledrivingislimitedtothevibration
sourceandthewavepropagationinthesoil.Vibrationtransmissiontoadjacentbuildings
andstructuresisnotstudied.However,impactofvibrationsonbuildingsisbrieflydiscussed
intheliteraturestudy.
1INTRODUCTION
1.4 METHODANDOUTLINE
Thisresearchprojectisfoundedonpriorresearchinthefieldofimpactandvibratorydriven
pilesandsheetpiles,withinwhichDrKennethVikingearlierpublishedadoctoralthesis
namedVibrodriveabilityafieldstudyofvibratorydrivensheetpilesinnoncohesivesoils(Viking,
2002a).
Toachievetheobjective,theresearchprojectisdividedintofourdifferentphases:
Phase1Literaturestudy
Anintroductiontothefieldofresearchandtheunderlyingtheories,whatis
knownandwhatfurtherresearchneedstobedone.
Phase2Fieldstudy/Casestudy
Initialtestsandmeasurementsareperformedeitherinarealprojectoratatest
site.Theresultsareevaluatedandanalysed,andpresentedinapaperaswellas
amastersthesis.
Phase3Theorydevelopmentandnumericalcalculations
Basedonprevioustheories,newtheorydevelopmentandnumerical
calculationsamodelisdevelopedforevaluationandpredictionofthe
vibrationsinducedinapiledrivingproject.
Phase4Verificationandimplementationofthemodelinsitu
Thedevelopedmodelistestedandrevisedifnecessaryusingcomparisons
betweenthemodelandmeasurementresults.
Thislicentiatethesisconcernstheworkdonewithinphase1and2asmentionedabove.
Thisthesisiswrittenasacompilationthesisandconsistsoffivechapters,whicharebriefly
describedbelow,andthreeappendedpeerreviewedpapers.
Chapter1isanintroductiondescribingthebackgroundandobjectivesofthisstudy.
Chapter2coversasummaryoftheliteraturestudyincludingmajorfindingsandconclusions
frompreviouswork.
Chapter3containsashortsummaryofthefieldtestperformedwithinthescopeofthis
licentiatethesis.
Chapter4comprisesashortsummaryofeachoftheappendedpapers.
Chapter5presentsthemajorconclusionsfromthisstudyalongwithsuggestionsforfuture
researchwithinthefieldofvibrationsduetopiledriving.

2.1 INTRODUCTION
Aliteraturestudybasedonavailableliteratureonenvironmentalimpactduetopiledriving
hasbeenconductedaspartofthislicentiatethesis.Limitationshavebeenmadetoliterature
availableinEnglishandSwedish.Alistofallreferencescanbefoundattheendofthethesis.
Asummaryoftheliteraturestudyispresentedhere.Thechapterbeginswithareviewofthe
basicsofdynamicsandgeodynamics.Anexplanationofthemechanismsandfunctionsof
pilesandsheetpilesandtheinstallationprocessesisnext,followedbyareviewofthe
vibrationtransferprocessforpiledriving.Theenvironmentalimpactofvibrationsdueto
piledrivingisstudiedmoreclosely,withafocusontheeffectonsoil,buildingsand
structures,andhumans.Inaddition,thecurrentlyusedmethodsforandpredicting
vibrationsfrompiledrivingarepresented.
2.2 BASICDYNAMICTHEORYANDGEODYNAMICS
Tofullyunderstandtheproblemcausedbyvibrationsduetopiledriving,itisnecessaryto
knowandrecognisetheunderlyingtheoriesregardingdynamicsandgeodynamics.Inthis
section,basicdynamictheoryaswellastheoriesandconceptsregardinggeodynamicsare
explained.
2.2.1 Basicsofdynamicsforvibratingsystems
Thissectionintroducesthemostcommondynamicsterminologyandafewbasicdefinitions
relatedtovibratorymotion.
2.2.1.1 Basicparameters
InTable2.1andFigure2.1someimportantparameterswhenitcomestovibratorymotion
arelistedandshown.
Table2.1Expression,definitionandunitforsomeimportantparametersindynamics(Richartetal.,
1970)(Bodare,1996)(Nordal,2009).
Parameter
A
T

f
c
v
Expression

T
T/2
f
fA
cf
Unit

Definition

Figure2.1Parameterscommonlyusedindynamics,modifiedafterMlleretal.(2000)andHolmberg
etal.(1984).
2.2.1.2 Vibratorymotion
Avibrationisanoscillatorymovementaroundastateofequilibrium,whereasablowisa
suddenchangeinthemotionofasystem.Anyvibratorymotioncanbedescribedusing
displacement,velocityoracceleration.Therearedifferenttypesofvibratorymotion;the
mostcommonaredescribedbelow.
2LITERATURESTUDY

Thesimplestformofvibratorymotionisrepresentedbysinusoidalorharmonicmotion
(Woods,1997).Harmonicmotionisamovementexpressedbyaharmonicfunction,see
Figure2.1,wherethedisplacement,z,isafunctionoftime,t.Bydifferentiatingthe
expressionforthedisplacement,thevelocityandaccelerationaregiven.Thevelocity, z ,is
thefirstderivativeofzwithrespecttotime,andtheacceleration, z ,isthesecondderivative.
Aharmonicmotioncanbeexpressedaccordingtothefollowingequationsforvertical
vibrations(Richartetal.,1970)(Kramer,1996):
z A sin(Zt M )
(m)
Eq.2.1
Eq.2.2
z
dz
dt
AZ cos(Zt M )
(m/s)
Eq.2.3
z
d 2z
dt 2
AZ 2 sin(Zt M )
Z 2 z
(m/s2)
Themostimportantfeaturesofharmonicmotionaredefinedbythreeparameters;
amplitude,angularfrequencyandphaseangle.Aisthesingleamplitude.Sometimesthe
doubleamplitude,alsocalledthepeaktopeakdisplacementamplitude,isused,whichis
equalto2A(Richartetal.,1970).Theangularfrequency,,describestherateofoscillationin
termsofradiansperunittime.Thephaseangle,,describestheamountoftimebywhich
thepeaksareshiftedfromthoseofapuresinusfunction,seeFigure2.1(Kramer,1996).From
thethreeequationsaboveandfromFigure2.1itcanbeseenthatthevelocityisphaseshifted
/2comparedtothedisplacement(sinecosine)andthattheaccelerationisphaseshifted
comparedtothedisplacement(sinerespectivelysine)(Thurner,1976).

PeriodicmotionisadisplacementtimepatternthatrepeatsitselfwithaperiodT,seeFigure
2.2a.Periodicvibrationsaregeneratedbymanytypesofmachineswithaperiodicworking
cycle,e.g.pumps,vibratoryrollers,compressorsandfans.Inthecaseofpiledriving,impact
drivinggeneratesperiodicvibrationsofatransienttype(Holmberget.al.,1984).

Randommotionisadisplacementtimerelationshipthatneverrepeatsitself,seeFigure2.2b.

Transientmotionisanirregular,shorttermmotionthatstartsoffatahighintensityand
graduallysubsidesoveraperiodoftime,seeFigure2.2.Anexampleofatransientvibration
couldbewhatabuildingexperienceswhenimpactpiledrivingisperformednearby
(Holmberget.al.,1984).
Figure2.2Examplesoftypesofvibratorymotiona)periodicmotion,b)randommotionandc)
transientmotion.
2.2.2 Generalwavepropagation
Individualparticlesareexcitedbyaforcethattransmitsthemotiontotheadjacentparticles.
Asthemotioncontinuesfromparticletoparticle,itresultsinwavestravellingthroughthe
material.Wavepropagationisthetransportationofenergythroughamediumwithoutthe
transportationofanymaterials.Asawavepassesthroughamedium,theparticlesinthe
materialareexcitedaroundanequilibriumstateandtheparticleisbothdeformedand
moved,aswellasreceivingstrainenergyandkineticenergy.Wavepropagationcanbe
consideredtohavetwoseparatemotions;awavetravelsthroughamediumwithawave
propagationvelocity,c,andtheparticlesmovewithaparticlevelocity,v(Bodare,1996).
Wavepropagationvelocity,c,referstothespeedatwhichaseismicwavetravelsthroughthe
groundwhiletheparticlevelocity,v,referstothespeedatwhichanindividualparticle
oscillatesaboutanatrestposition.Tocharacterisewavemotion,theparticlevelocityis
oftenused(Woods,1997).
2.2.2.1 Resonance
Duringresonancetheresponseofthesystemincreasessteadily,theoreticallytowards
infinity.Inpractice,withoutdampingsomethingwouldbreakandresultinfailure.Inreality,
somedampingalwayspreventstheresultfromgoingtoinfinity(Nordal,2009).
Forarodtherearetheoreticallyaninfinitenumberofnaturalfrequencies;however,formost
practicalproblemsthelowestfrequenciesarethemostimportant(Richartetal.,1970).
2.2.2.2 Wavetypes
Inanelastichalfspace,therearedifferenttypesofwaves,seeFigure2.3.Some
characteristicsofthevariouswavetypesaredescribedbelow.
2LITERATURESTUDY
Wavelength
Undisturbedmedium
a)
Wavelength
Undisturbedmedium
b)
Wavelength
Undisturbedmedium
c)
Wavelength
Undisturbedmedium
d)
Figure2.3Displacementcharacteristicsofdifferentwavetypes,a)Pwave,b)Swave,c)Rwaveand
d)Lovewave,modifiedafterWoods(1997)andKramer(1996).
a) Pwave
b) Swave
c) Rwave
d) Lwave
Apushpullmotioninthedirectionofthewave
Oscillationperpendiculartothepropagationdirection
AsortofcombinationofPandSwaveswithellipsoidalparticle
motion
Asnakelikemovement
Amorethoroughdescriptionofthewavetypesfollows.

Bodywavesarenamedforthefactthatthey,unlikesurfacewaves,travelinsideabodyor
medium(Nordal,2009).BodywavesaregenerallydividedintoPwavesandSwaves.Pand
Swavesexistonebyoneandareindependentofeachotherinafullspace.Davis(2010)
mentionedanothertypeofwavethatcanbepresentinsaturatedsoil,calledaBiotwave.
Thiswaveisacombinationbetweenacompressionwaveinafluidandacompressionwave
inasoil.
Pwaves
Pwavesarealsoknownasprimary,compressionalorlongitudinalwaves.Pwavesare
linkedtoavolumechangeinthemediumastheyinvolvesuccessivecompressionand
rarefaction(dilatationalwave).Particlemotionisparalleltothedirectionofwave
propagation.Pwavescantravelthroughbothsolidsandfluids(Richartetal.,1970)(Kramer,
1996).
ThePwave(orprimarywave)involvesnoshearingorrotationofthematerialasitpasses
through.Pwavesarethefastestwavepresentinasolidmaterial.Intermsoftheshear
modulusandPoissonsratio,thePwavevelocitycanbewrittenas(Kramer,1996)(Mlleret
al.,2000):
Eq.2.4
Where
cP
G ( 2 2X )
U (1 2X )
E (1 X )
U (1 2X )(1 X )
(m/s)
M=deformationmodulusoroedometermodulus(Pa)
G=shearmodulus(Pa)
E=elasticitymodulus(Pa)
=materialdensity(kg/m3)
=Poissonsratio()
Swaves
Swavesarealsoknownassecondary,shearortransversewaves.AnSwavecausesshearing
deformationsasitpropagatesthroughamedium.Swavescannottravelthroughfluidsdue
tothefactthatfluidshavenoshearingstiffness(Kramer,1996).
TheSwaveinvolvesnovolumechangeandisanequivoluminalordistortionalwave.The
velocityofashearwavecanbecalculatedfrom(Richartetal.,1970)(Kramer,1996)(Bodare,
1996)(Mlleretal.,2000)(Massarsch,2000a):
Eq.2.5
cS
2 U (1 X )
(m/s)
Where
G=shearmodulus(MPa)
=totaldensity(kg/m3)
E=elasticitymodulus(MPa)
=Poissonsratio()
Swavesareoftendividedintotwoperpendicularcomponents,SHwavesandSVwaves.
SHwavesareSwavesinwhichtheparticlesoscillateinahorizontalplane.SVwavesareS
wavesinwhichtheparticlesoscillateinaverticalplane.AnygivenSwavecanbeexpressed
asthevectorsumofitsSHandSVcomponents(Kramer,1996).
10
2LITERATURESTUDY
Figure2.4Wavetypesfordifferentboundaryconditionsinelasticmedia,modifiedafterNordal
(2009).

Thegroundisusuallyconceptualisedasasemiinfinitebodywithaplanarfreesurface(an
elastichalfspace).Thestressfreesurfaceofanelastichalfspaceimposesspecialboundary
conditionsthatresultinwavesotherthanbodywaves,namelysurfacewaves.Surfacewaves
aretheresultofinteractionbetweenbodywavesandthesurface,seeFigure2.4.Surface
wavestravelalongthesurfacewithamplitudesthatdecreaseroughlyexponentiallywith
depth(Kramer,1996).
Thereareanumberofdifferenttypesofsurfacewaves;thetwomostcommonarediscussed
below(RwavesandLovewaves).Bodare(1996)alsomentionedStonelywavesthatcanarise
intheinterfacebetweentwoelasticmaterials;however,thesewaveshavenotbeenshownto
beofimportanceingeodynamicsandarenottreatedanyfurtherinthisthesis.
Rwaves
ThemostcommontypeofsurfacewavesareRayleighwaves(Rwaves).Rwavesarea
productofinteractionofPandSVwaveswiththesurface(Kramer,1996).Rwavescanbe
seenascombinationsofPandSwaves.Theirmotionnearthesurfaceisintheformofa
retrogradeellipse,seeFigure2.3,whileatthesurfaceofwaterwaves,theparticlemotionis
insteadthatofaprogradeellipse.Rwavesinvolvebothverticalandhorizontalparticle
motion(Kramer,1996).Atadepthofaround0.2Rthemotionchangesdirectiontorotateina
progradedirection(Bodare,1996),seeFigure2.5.
ThedepthtowhichanRwavecausessignificantdisplacementincreaseswithwavelength.
Assuch,Rwaveswithlongwavelength(lowfrequency)canproduceparticlemotionat
greaterdepthsthanRwaveswithshortwavelengths(highfrequency)(Bodare,1996)
(Kramer,1996).
11
____Amplitudeatdepthd___
Horisontalsurfaceamplitude
0.5
0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
=0.5
=0.25
Horisontal
=0.5
=0.25
0.5
Vertical
d/
1.0
1.5
2.0
Figure2.5HorizontalandverticalvibrationamplitudeoftheRayleighwaveasafunctionofdepth,
PoissonsratioandwavelengthmodifiedafterRichartetal.(1970).
Figure2.5showstheRayleighwaveshorizontalandverticalamplitudeasafunctionof
depth,d,Poissonsratio,,andthewavelength,.FromFigure2.5itisnoticedthatthe
verticalamplitudeisgreaterthanthehorizontalamplitudeandalsothatthevertical
amplitudedecreasesrapidlywithdepth.
ThevelocityoftheRwavecanbeestimatedaccordingtothefollowingequation(Holmberg
etal.,1984)(Bodare,1996):
Eq.2.6
cR |
c s (0.87 1.12X )
1X
(m/s)
Where
cS=shearwavevelocity(m/s)
=Poissonsratio()
Byinserting=1/3inEq.2.6cR0.93cS,hence,theRwavevelocityisoftenapproximated
withtheSwavevelocity.
Rwavesarenondispersiveinahomogenoushalfspace,meaningthatthepropagating
velocityisindependentofvibrationfrequency(Richartetal.,1970).Inalayeredelastichalf
spacetheRwavesaredispersiveandthepropagationvelocitydependsonfrequency
(Jongmans&Demanet,1993)(Whenham,2011).
12
2LITERATURESTUDY
Lovewaves
AnothertypeofsurfacewaveistheLovewave,resultingfromtheinteractionofSHwaves
withasoftsurfacelayer.Lovewavesarehorizontallypolarisedshearwavesandhaveno
verticalcomponentofparticlemotion(Kramer,1996)(Athanasopoulosetal.,2000)
(Whenham,2011).Lovewavesonlyexistwhenthereisalayeroflowvelocityoverlayinga
layerofhighervelocity.InahomogenoushalfspacenoLovewavesareproduced(Auersch,
1995)(Athanasopoulosetal.,2000)(Whenham,2011).
Essentially,LovewavesconsistofSHwavesthatarereflectedwithinthesurfacelayer.The
displacementamplitudeoftheLovewavevariessinusoidallywithdepthanddecays
exponentiallywithdepth(Kramer,1996)(Niederwanger,1999).Lovewavestravelwitha
velocitythatisbetweentheshearwavevelocityofthesuperficiallayerandtheshearwave
velocityofthenextlowerlayer(Richartetal.,1970).
ThepropagationvelocityofLovewavesarebetweentheRwavevelocityandtheSwave
velocity.ThevelocityoftheLovewavevarieswithfrequencybetweenanupperandlower
limit,hencetheyaredispersive(Martin,1980)(Kramer,1996).Thewavepropagation
velocityforLovewavesisdependentuponthewavelength,L,andthefrequency.
2.2.2.3 Wavesinalayeredbody
AccordingtoKramer(1996)awavefrontisdefinedasasurfaceofequaltimetravel,see
Figure2.6.
Figure2.6Raypath,rayandwavefrontfora)planewaveandb)curvedwavefront,modifiedafter
Kramer(1996).
Abodywavetravellinginanelasticmediumthatencountersaboundarywithanother
elasticmediumwillpartlybereflectedbackintothefirstmediumandpartlybetransmitted
intothesecondmedium(Richartetal.,1970).InFigure2.7thedifferenttypesofwaves
producedbyincidentP,SVandSHwavesareillustrated.PandSVwavesapproachingan
interfaceinvolveparticlemotionperpendiculartotheinterfaceplane;hencetheyproduce
bothreflectedandrefractedPandSVwaves.ForanincidentSHwave,noparticlemotion
perpendiculartotheinterfaceoccurs.Asaresult,onlySHwavesarereflectedandrefracted
andnoPwavesorSVwavesareproduced.Boththedirectionandamplitudeoftheincident
waveaffectthedirectionsandrelativeamplitudesofthewavesproducedattheinterface
(Richartetal.,1970)(Kramer,1996)(Bodare,1996).
13
Figure2.7Reflectedandrefractedraysresultingfromanincidenta)Pwave,b)SVwaveandc)SH
wave,modifiedafterRichartetal.(1970)andKramer(1996).
ForbothPandSwavestheangleofincidenceisequaltotheangleofreflection,whilethe
angleofrefractionisdependentontheangleofincidenceandtheratioofthewavevelocities
ofthematerialsoneachsideoftheinterface(Kramer,1996).Snellslawcangiveexitangles
forallwaves(Richartetal.,1970):
Eq.2.7
sin a
c p1
sin b
c s1
sin e
c p2
sin f
cs2
Ahalfspaceofmultiplelayersresultsinacomplexarrayofwavesaswavesarereflected
andrefractedateachinterface(Richartetal.,1970).
Wavescannotcollide.Iftwoormorewavesexistwithinthesameareatheseareaddedto
eachother,aphenomenoncalledinterference.Ifthewaveshavethesamefrequencyand
reachesmaximumatthesametime(theyareinphase),interferenceresultsinamplification.
Iftheotherwaveinsteadisoutofphasebyhalfawavelength,theywillweakeneachother.
Thecombinationofrefraction,reflectionandinterferenceofwavesmeansthatinlayered
materials,amplificationandweakeningmayoccurthatisveryhardtotheoreticallyforesee
(Mlleretal.,2000).Theheterogeneitiesinthegroundandthecreationofnewwavesalong
withthereflectionandrefractionofraypathscausethegroundvibrationstoreacha
vulnerableobjectbymanydifferentpaths(Kramer,1996).
2.2.3 Vibrationattenuationanddamping
Inanideallinearelasticmaterial,stresswavestravelinfinitely,withoutamplitudechange.
However,inrealmaterialsthistypeofbehaviourisnotpossible;stresswavesattenuatewith
distance.Theattenuationiscausedbytwosources;thegeometryofthewavepropagation
(geometricdamping)andthematerialormaterialsthroughwhichthewavestravel(material
damping)(Kramer,1996)(Massarsch,2004).
2.2.3.1 Geometricdamping
Geometricdampingreducestheamplitudeofthevibrationsasdistancefromthesource
increases,duetothefactthatthesameenergyisspreadoveranincreasinglylargersurfaceor
volume.Fromthetheoryofenergyconservation,thewaveattenuationduetogeometric
dampingcanbedescribedwiththefollowingexpression(Woods,1997)(Nordal,2009):
14
2LITERATURESTUDY
Eq.2.8
Where
A2
r
A1 1
r2
(m)
A2=amplitudeofmotionatdistancer2fromthesource(m)
n=forRwaves()
1forbodywaves()
2forbodywavesatthesurface()
Thevalueofndependsonwavetype.Sincesurfacewavespropagateasexpandingrings,the
energyperunitareaofthewavedecaysinverselyproportionaltothedistancefromthe
sourceandsurfacewavesexperiencealowergeometricdampingthanbodywaves(Rockhill
etal.,2003)(Kramer,1996).
2.2.3.2 Materialdamping
Materialdampingisthelossofenergyduetointernalenergydissipationinthematerialas
thesoilparticlesaremovedbythepropagatingwave.Waveenergyistransformedtofriction
heat,andastheenergyisconvertedandlosttheamplitudeofthewavedecreases
(Attewell&Farmer,1973)(Heckman&Hagerty,1978)(Holmberget.al.,1984)(Kramer,
1996).Thebigdifferencebetweenmaterialdampingandgeometricdampingisthatin
materialdamping,elasticenergyisactuallydissipatedbyviscous,hysteretic,orother
mechanisms(Kramer,1996).
Materialdampingcanbedescribedbythefollowingexponentialfunction(Dowding,1996):
A2 A1e D ( r2 r1 )
Eq.2.9
Where
=absorptioncoefficient(m1)
Theabsorptioncoefficient,,canbeestimatedaccordingto(Athanasopoulosetal.,2000)
(Massarsch&Fellenius,2008):
Eq.2.10
2SDf
(m1)
Where
D=materialdamping(Hzs)1
f=vibrationfrequency(Hz)
c=wavepropagationvelocity(m/s)
Thewavepropagationvelocityisusuallyeitherexpressedbythesurfacewavevelocity,cR,or
theshearwavevelocity,cs.AccordingtoBodare(1996)Eq.2.10isvalidunderthecondition
thatD<<1applies.
15
FromequationEq.2.10itcanbeseenthattheabsorptioncoefficient,,decreasesby
decreasingvibrationfrequencyandincreasingwavepropagationvelocity.Hence,awave
withlowfrequencyisdampedlessthanawavewithhighfrequency(Martin,1980)
(Holmbergetal.,1984)(Athanasopoulos&Pelekis,2000)(Auersch&Said,2010).
Itisclearthattheabsorptioncoefficient,,varieswiththecharacteristicsofthematerial,the
wavetypeandthefrequency.Generally,softermaterialshavegreatervaluesofthan
hardermaterials;thusclaygenerallyexhibitsgreaterdampingthan,forexample,sand
(Holmbergetal.,1984)(Woods,1997)(Athanasopoulosetal.,2000)(Mlleretal.,2000).
Throughtheirmeasurements,Clough&Chameau(1980)showedthatsoftersoilsdamped
outvibrationsfasterthandensersoils.Auersch&Said(2010)reportstrongestdampingfora
peatysoil.
Table2.2showsdifferentvaluesoffordifferenttypesofmaterialsandfrequencies.The
coefficientisalsodependentonthematerialssettlementcharacteristics.Thevaluesofis
importantforcorrectestimationofthevibrationattenuation,thoughreachingasatisfying
valueofisdifficult;however,tablessuchasTable2.2canbeusedtogiveanapproximate
value(Whenham,2011).
Table2.2Attenuationcoefficientaccordingtoclassificationofrockandsoilmaterials(Dowding,
1996)(Woods,1997).
Class

Attenuationcoefficient, (m1)
5Hz
40Hz
50Hz

Descriptionofmaterial

Amick&Gendreau(2000)statedthatthemagnitudeofthematerialdampingdependson
vibrationamplitude,soiltype,moisturecontentandtemperature,forexample.Ithasbeen
seenthatwetsanddampsvibrationslessthandrysand,sincetheporewaterinthewetsand
helpstocarrycompressionwavesthatarethennotsubjectedtofrictiondamping.Amick&
Gendreau(2000)alsoclaimedthataccordingtoBarkan(1962),frozensoilattenuates
vibrationslessthanthawedsoil.
Thematerialdampingisalsodependentuponthedeformationsize,seeFigure2.8(IVA,1979
and1983).Asthestrainlevelincreasesandthesoilelementlosesstiffness,anincreasein
dampingisseen.Thedampingabilityisconnectedtotheenergydissipatedinthesoil(by
friction,heatorplasticyielding)(Bodare,1996)(Kim&Lee,2000)(Whenham,2011).Ithas
beenshowthattheplasticityindexofthesoilaffectsthedampingforsaturatedsoils,see
Figure2.8(Bodare,1996).Highlyplasticsoilshavelowerdampingratiosthanlowplasticity
soils(Whenham,2011).
16
2LITERATURESTUDY
Figure2.8Relationshipbetweenmaterialdamping,shearstrainandplasticityindex(PI),modified
afterIVA(1979)andWhenham(2011,afterVucetic&Dobry,1991).
2.2.3.3 Estimationoftotaldampingforapropagatingwave
Lamb(1904)presentedasimpletheoryfortheattenuationofgroundwavespropagating
alongthegroundsurface.TheattenuationofacylindricalRayleighwaveinahomogenous
elastichalfspaceispresentedas:
(m)
Eq.2.11
A | r 0.5
Where
A=waveamplitude(m)
r=distancefromthesource(m)
Fortheattenuationofsurfacewavesgeneratedbyearthquakes,Galitzin(1912)developeda
relationshipfortheattenuationbetweentwopointsatdistancesr1andr2fromthesource:
Eq.2.12
A2
A1
r1 D ( r2 r1 )
e
r2
(m)
Where
A1andA2=vibrationamplitudeatdistancer1respectivelyr2fromthesource
(m)
=attenuationcoefficient(m1)
AfterLambs(1904)andGalitzins(1912)fundamentalworktheattenuationmodelhasbeen
studiedfurtheranddevelopedovertheyears.However,thebaseforthegeometric
attenuationisstillthesamemorethan100yearslater,andthetotalattenuationofwaves
propagatinginsoilisapproximatedby:
17
Eq.2.13
A2
r
A1 1
r2
D ( r2 r1 )
e
(m)
Where
A1=vibrationamplitudeatdistancer1fromthesource(m)
A2=vibrationamplitudeatdistancer2fromthesource(m)
=absorptioncoefficient(m1)
n=forsurfacewaves()
1forbodywaves()
2forbodywavesalongthesurface()
Thisequationisonlyvalidunderhomogenousconditionsandwhenthedepthtotherock
surfaceisgreat(Mlleretal.,2000).Athanasopoulosetal.(2000)concludedthatEq.2.13is
satisfactoryfordescribingtheattenuationofRayleighwaveswithdistanceaslongascorrect
valuesforthecoefficientsareused.
2.2.4 Dynamicproperties
Thesoilsbehaviourwhensubjectedtodynamicloadingisgovernedbyitsdynamic
properties(Kramer,1996).Someofthemostimportantpropertiesaredescribedinthis
section(exceptformaterialdamping,whichisdescribedintheprevioussection).
2.2.4.1 ShearModulus
Theshearmodulus,G,isameasureofthestiffnessamaterialshowsatshearing.Theshear
modulusinsoilvarieswiththestrainandhasitslargestvalues,Gmax,atshearstrainssmaller
than105(0.001%),seeFigure2.9.Forlargerstrainsthesoilbehaviourbecomeselastoplastic
andtheshearmodulusdecreasesastheinnerdampingincreases.Atshearstrainsofabout
103andlarger,boththeshearmodulusandthedampingisaffectedbythenumberofcycles
andthefrequency(Erlingsson&Bodare(1992and1996)(Mlleretal.,2000)(Whenham,
2011).Justasformaterialdamping,ithasbeenshownthattheshearmodulusalsodepends
ontheplasticityindex,PI,ofthesoil,seeFigure2.9(Bodare,1996).
Figure2.9Relationshipbetweenshearmodulus,shearstrainandplasticityindex(PI),modifiedafter
IVA(1979)andWhenham(2011,originallyfromVucetic&Dobry,1991).
18
2LITERATURESTUDY
Theshearmodulus,G,isrelatedtotheelasticitymodulus,E,andthecompressionmodulus,
M,accordingly(Dowding,1996)(Nordal,2009):
G c s2 U
Eq.2.14
(MPa)
E 2G (1 X )
(MPa)
Eq.2.15
M c 2p U
Eq.2.16
(MPa)
Where
cs=shearwavevelocity
=density
=Poissonsratio
cp=compressionwavevelocity
Table2.3showstypicalvaluesoftheshearmodulus,G,fordifferentsoilandrockmaterials.
Table2.3Typicalvaluesofshearmodulus,G,forsomesoilandrockmaterials(Head&Jardine,1992).
Soil/Materialtype

Relativedensity

Shearmodulus,G(MN/m2)

2.2.4.2 Wavepropagationvelocity
Itisimportanttoemphasizethedifferencebetweentheparticlevelocity,v,andthe
propagationvelocityofthewavefront,c.Wavesmoveawayfromthesourceataconstant
velocity,thepropagationvelocity.Thepropagationvelocitydependsonthecharacteristicsof
thetransportingmediaandonthetypeofwave.Theparticlevelocityisthevelocityof
displacementofasingleindividualparticleasawavepasses(Heckman&Hagerty,1978).
Table2.4givestypicalvaluesofthePwavevelocity,cp,andtheSwavevelocity,cs,for
differentmaterials.Thesurfacewave(Rwave)velocity,cR,isonlyslightlylowerthanthe
shearwavevelocityandthedifferenceisusuallyconsiderednegligibleforpracticalpurposes
(Massarsch,2004)(Massarsch&Fellenius,2008).
19
Table2.4Typicalvaluesofwavevelocitiesindifferentsoilsandmaterials,afterHead&Jardine
(1992).
Soil/Materialtype

cp(m/s)

cs (m/s)

Thebodywavevelocitiesdependonthestiffnessanddensityofthematerialtheytravel
through.Sincegeologicmaterialsarestifferincompressionthaninshear,Pwavestravelata
highervelocitythanSwaves(Kramer,1996).
Thepropagationvelocityisdependentonmanyfactors,includingtemperature,effective
stress,stratificationvoidratioandmoisturecontent(Massarsch&Fellenius,2008).Holmberg
etal.(1984)andWoods(1997)statedthatthevelocityofstresswavesinsoilorrockdepends
ontheunitweightandthemoduli(Youngsmodulusandshearmodulus)ofthematerial.
ThePwavevelocitydependsonthedegreeofwatersaturation(groundwaterconditions)in
loosesoils.Belowthegroundwatertable,thePwavevelocitycorrespondstothatofwater
(~1450m/s)(Massarsch&Fellenius,2008).Sinceshearwavesareunabletopropagatein
fluidsandgases,theshearwavevelocitydoesnotchangebelowthegroundwatersurface
unlessthedensityofthesoilischanged(Massarsch&Fellenius,2008)(Mlleret.al.,2000).
AccordingtoRichartetal.(1970)thereseemstobenodifferenceinshearwavevelocity
betweendry,saturatedanddrainedconditions.However,Massarsch&Fellenius(2008)
statedthatduringpiledrivingtheshearwavevelocitycandecreaseduetoexcessporewater
pressureandsoildisturbance.TheRwavevelocityisnotaffectedbythegroundwaterlevel,
however,itisgenerallysaidtobelowerinmoistsoil(Head&Jardine,1992).
ThewavepropagationvelocityisalsodependentuponPoissonsratio,.Figure2.10shows
thecorrelationbetweenPoissonsratioandthewavepropagationvelocity,aswellasthe
relationshipbetweenthevelocitiesofthedifferentwavetypes.ThePwavevelocitycanbe
seentoincreaserapidlyasPoissonsratioincreases(Richartetal.,1970).
20
2LITERATURESTUDY
Figure2.10Relationshipbetweenthepropagationspeed,c,fordifferentwavetypes,Poissonsratio
andtheshearwavevelocity,cs,modifiedafterRichartetal.(1970).
Theshearwavevelocityisstronglydependentonthevoidnumberandgenerallyincreases
withdepth(confiningpressure),seeFigure2.11(Richartetal.,1970)(Massarsch&Fellenius,
2008).Incoarsegrainedsoils,thePwavevelocityislikelytoincreasebelowthepiletoedue
tocompaction,whileitmaybereducedinfinegrainedsoilsduetodisturbanceandpore
waterpressureincrease(Massarsch&Fellenius,2008).
Figure2.11Correlationbetweenshearwavevelocity,voidratio(e)anddepthfornormally
consolidated,saturatedsoil(Hintzeetal.,1997,originallyfromMassarsch,1984).
21
80
220
70
200
60
180
50
160
40
140
Shearmodulus
Shearwavevelocity
30
20
0.0001
Shearwavevelocity(m/s)
Shearmodulus(MPa)
120
100
0.001
0.01
0.1
Shearstrain(%)
Figure2.12Resultfromaresonantcolumntestonmediumdensesandshowingshearmodulusand
shearwavevelocitywithrespecttoshearstrain,modifiedafterMassarsch(2000a).
Sinceshearwavevelocityisafunctionoftheshearmodulus,theshearwavevelocity
dependsonthestrainlevel.Whentheshearstrainexceedsabout0.001%theshearwave
velocitydecreasesconsiderably,seeFigure2.12(Massarsch,2000a)(Athanasopoulosetal.,
2000)(Whenham,2011).Forshearstrainsoflessthan0.001%theshearwavevelocityis
relativelyconstantandsometimesdenoteslowamplitudeshearwavevelocity
(Athanasopoulosetal.,2000).
2.2.4.3 Impedance
Theratiobetweenforceandvelocityiscalledimpedance.AccordingtoMassarsch&
Fellenius(2008)impedancegovernsthetransferandpropagationofvibrationsinthepile,
alongthepilesoilinterfaceandinthesurroundingsoil.Richartetal.(1970)statedthat
impedanceisameasureoftheoppositionofasystemtoanappliedforce.

Thepileimpedance,Zp,dependsonthepiledensity,,wavepropagationspeedinthepile,
cB,andthecrosssectionalareaofthepile,Ap.Theimpedancecanalsobeexpressedasa
functionoftheelasticitymodulus,E(Bodare,1996)(Massarsch,2000b)(Massarsch&
Fellenius,2008):
Eq.2.17
Zp
Uc B A p
EA p
cB
A p EU
(kNs/m)
Whendrivingapile,theforceatthetopofthepilemustbegreaterthanthepenetration
resistanceofthepile.Impedancelimitstheamountofforcethatthepileisabletotransmit
fromthepileheadtothepiletoe(Heckman&Hagerty,1978),(Woods,1997).
22
2LITERATURESTUDY
Commonpilematerialsareconcrete,steelandwood.Theimpedanceofthepileswilldepend
onthecrosssectionconfigurationofthepiles.Generallytimberpileshavethelowest
impedanceduetotheelasticitymodulusofwoodbeinglowerthanthatofeitherconcreteor
steel,however,thecrosssectionalareaanditsshapeaffecttheimpedancegreatly(Woods,
1997).
InTable2.5typicalvaluesofacousticimpedancefordifferentpileandgroundmaterialsare
listed.
Table2.5Typicalvaluesofimpedanceandcorrespondingenergytransmissioncoefficients(Hope&
Hiller,2000).
Material

Massdensity,
(kg/m3)

Pwavespeed, cp
(m/s)
Acousticimpedance,Z
(MPasm1)

ThesoilimpedanceforPwaves,ZsP,dependsonthecrosssectionareaofthecontact
betweenthepiletoeandtheunderlyingsoil.Itshouldnotbemixedupwiththespecificsoil
impedance,zP,whichisamaterialpropertyofthesoilanddoesnotinvolvethepile
geometry.Thesoilimpedanceisstraindependentandneedstobeadjustedforstrainlevel
duringpiledriving(Massarsch&Fellenius,2008).
Thesoilimpedance,Zs,isgivenaccordingto(Massarsch&Fellenius,2008):
Z s A p c p U soil
Eq.2.18
(kNs/m)
Where
Ap=crosssectionareaofthepiletoe(m2)
cp=Pwavevelocityinthesoil(m/s)
soil=densityofthesoil(kg/m3)

Specificimpedancespecifiestherelationshipbetweenthecompressivestressandtheparticle
velocityofapropagatingwaveandisaproductofwavevelocityandmaterialdensity.
Specificimpedanceisdenotedbyz(lowercase)andisdefinedby(Bodare,1996)(Massarsch
&Fellenius,2008):
Eq.2.19
zs
E
c
Uc
EU
(kNs/m3)
23
ThespecificimpedancesforPwavesandSwaves,respectively,aregivenby:
cp
z sp
MU
cpU
Eq.2.21
z ss
GU
cs U
Where
M=deformationmodulusoroedometermodulus(MPa)
=materialdensity(kg/m3)
G=shearmodulus(MPa)
csandcp=SwaveandPwavevelocity,respectively(m/s)
Eq.2.20
(kNs/m3)
cp
(kNs/m3)
2.3 INSTALLATIONOFPILESANDSHEETPILES
Thereareanumberofdifferentinstallationmethodsforpilesandsheetpiles.Usuallypiles
aredrivenbyeitherimpactorvibratorydrivingoracombinationofboth.Installationby
drillingisalsobecomingmoreandmorecommon.Inthisliteraturestudyinstallationby
meansofimpactandvibratorydriversarestudiedfurtherandmechanismsandtheories
behindthemethodsaredescribedbelow.
2.3.1 Impactpiledriving
2.3.1.1 Machinesandcomponents
Amachineforimpactdrivingconsistsofabasemachineontowhichastabiliserisattached
toholdthesteeringforthehammer.Therearedifferenttypesofhammersincludingdrop
hammers,dieselhammers,hydraulichammersandpneumatichammers.
Drophammersconsistofaweightthatisliftedacertainheight(dropheight)andthen
released(dropped)ontothepile.Theweightmaybeenclosedinacylinder(Martin,1980)
(Hansbo,1994).Drophammerswithweightsof34tonnesarecommoninSweden;hammers
withweightsofupto8tonnesexist(Stille&Hall,1995).
Thedieselhammerconsistsofafreepistoninacylinder.Asmallexplosionisusedtoliftthe
piston.Thepistonisthenusuallyallowedtofallfreeundergravitybeforehittingthepilecap
(Martin,1980).
Pneumatichammersandhydraulichammersworkinprincipalthesameasdrophammers,
exceptthattheyhavecylinders/pistonsandhydraulicdevices,respectively,tohelpliftthe
weightandevenaccelerateitdownwardasapplicable(Martin,1980)(Hansbo,1994).
Impacthammerscanbedividedintolightandheavyhammers.Heavyiswhentheweightof
thedrophammerislargerthanthetotalweightofthepile/sheetpile.Usuallyheavy
hammersbeataround3060blowsperminutewhilelighthammersbeat3001000blowsper
minute(Holmbergetal.,1984).
24
2LITERATURESTUDY
2.3.1.2 Basictheory
Thedrivingenergyduringimpactpiledrivingcomesfromthehammerstrikingthepile
headwithdownwardimpactvelocity(Masoumietal.,2007).Thehammerenergyis
transferredbyblowimpulsesviathepilecaptothepilehead.Partoftheblowenergyis
dampedbythecapandsomeislostinthecontactareabetweenthecapandthepilehead.
Theratedenergyvariesbetween5upto300kJperblowforthemostcommonlyusedimpact
hammers(Svinkin,2005)(Svinkin,2008).Ofthisenergyitisestimatedthatonly3050%is
transferredintothepile(Svinkin,2008).
Impactdriverscandrivepilesintoanytypeofsoilandinorderforthepiletopenetratethe
soil,thestaticsoilresistancemustbeovercomebytheinducedforceinthehammerblow
(VanRompaeyetal.,1995)(ArcelorMittal,2008).Ineachblowthepileisacceleratedoutof
rest,whichmeansthattheinertiaandtheshaftandtoeresistancemustbeovercomewith
eachblow(Massarsch&Fellenius,2008).
2.3.2 Vibratorypiledriving
2.3.2.1 Machinesandcomponents
Vibratorydrivingisusedthroughouttheworldmainlyfordrivingandextractingsheetpiles.
Thereasonwhythetechniqueisnotcommonlyusedforpilesisbelievedtobebecausethere
isalackofguidelinesfordrivingtorefusalandbearingcapacityforpilesdrivenwith
vibratorydrivers(Viking,2002b).
Vibratorydriverscanbeclassifiedintothreebasiccategories(Warrington,1992):
1. LowfrequencymachinesVibratorfrequencybetween510Hz.Primarilyusedfor
piletypeswithahighmassandlargetoeresistance,e.g.concreteandlargesteel
pipes.
2. MediumfrequencymachinesVibratorfrequencybetween1030Hz.Themajority
ofallvibratorypiledriversusedtodayareofthistype.
3. HighfrequencymachinesVibratorfrequencygreaterthan30Hz.Thiscategoryis
usuallydividedintotwogroups.First,machinesinthe3040Hzrangethatare
designedtominimizevibrationofneighbouringstructures.Second,resonantpile
driversthatoperateatfrequenciesof90120Hz.Theresonantpiledriverinduces
resonantresponseinthepile,whichfacilitatesdriving.
Themostcommonvibratoryhammersconsistofpairsofeccentricallymountedmasses,see
Figure2.13.Themassesarecontainedinaframewhoseappreciablemassmaybecalledthe
oscillator(orexciterblock).Theoscillatorisisolatedfromthehammersupportbyastatic
mass(biasmassorsuppressorhousing).Betweentheoscillatorandthestaticmassthereisa
verysoftspring,generallyconsistingofelastomerpads.Thestaticmassaddsastaticforceto
oscillatorandpile.Thepileisattachedtotheoscillatorwithahydraulicclamp.Thehammer
isrunbyapowergeneratorandacontrolpanelisusuallymountedonthepowergenerator.
Thewholevibratorismountedonapilingframe(Holeyman,2002)(Rausche,2002)(Viking,
2006)(Whenham,2011)(Whenham&Holeyman,2012).Vibratorydrivingsystemscanbe
eitherfreehangingorleadermounted(Viking,2006).Afreehangingmodelisillustratedin
Figure2.13.
25
Figure2.13Equipmentforvibratorydrivingofpiles(freehangingmodel),modifiedafterMassarsch
(2000b)andHoleyman(2002).
Onthemarkettodaytherearetwotypesofvibrators;hydraulicandelectric.Thedifferenceis
thatthemotor,housedinthevibrator,ispoweredbyeitheracarriermounteddiesel
hydraulicordieselelectricpowerpack.Thehydraulicpowerpackisbasicallyadieselmotor
coupledtoahydraulicpump,whichinteractswiththevibratorviahydraulichoses.Today
hydraulicsystemsaremostcommon.Hydraulicmotorsaresmallerthanelectricmotorsand
thuslighter,whichisoneofthereasonswhyhydraulicvibratorsaremorecommonlyused
(Holeyman,2002)(Whenham,2011).
2.3.2.2 Basictheory
Theoscillationofthevibratoriscausedbytheeccentricmasses,whichrotatewiththesame
speedbutinoppositedirections,seeFigure2.14.Thevibratoristhenputinverticalvibration
sincethecentrifugalforceshorizontalcomponentsisdiminished(Woods,1997)(Massarsch,
2000)(Whenham,2011).
26
2LITERATURESTUDY
Figure2.14Counterrotatingmassesandtheproducedforces,modifiedafterRichartetal.(1970).
Variableamplitudevibratorsworkaccordingtotheprincipleoftwopairsofeccentricsthat
canmoverelativetooneanother.Inthiswaytheeccentricscanaddthemselvestotally,add
themselvespartiallyorcanceleachotherout(Houz,1994).Astherotatingeccentricsare
keptinoppositepositionstheresultingmomentiszerocausingnoamplitudeofvibration,
seeFigure2.15a.Iftheeccentricsareturned60,theresultingmomentandamplitudeof
vibrationreaches50%ofthemaximumvalues,seeFigure2.15b.Whenoneoftheeccentrics
ineachpairisturned180theyworkintimewiththeotherhalfcreatingmaximummoment
andamplitude,seeFigure2.15c(Houz,1994).
a)
b)
60
60
A=0
Fc/2
A/2
Fc =0
c)
Fc
Figure2.15Variationofrelativepositionofeccentricsinvariableamplitudevibrators;a)eccentricsin
oppositeposition,b)eccentricsturned60andc)eccentricsworkingintime,modifiedafterHouz
(1994).
Avibratorydriverdrivesthepileintothesoilwithtwomechanicalactions;avibratory
actionandastationaryaction.Thevibratoryactionisproducedbythecounterrotating
massesandthestationaryactionbytheweightofthepileandhammer(thestaticmass)
(Holeyman,2002).Thevibrationleadstoporepressurebuildupandeventuallyto
liquefactionandasignificantreductionofthestaticsoilresistance,enablingthepileto
penetratetheground.Ifthesoilconditionsaresuitablethepile/sheetpileisdrivenintothe
groundbyitsownweightandtheweightofthevibrator(Houz,1994)(VanRompaeyet.al.,
1995)(Niederwanger,1999).Viking(2006)discussedthatthelossinshearstrengthduring
vibratorydrivingisduetoadropinintergranularforcesbetweenthegrainsasthe
accelerationamplitudeexceedstheinitialoverburdenpressure.
27
Figure2.16Schematicdescriptionofa)thepenetrativemotion,b)theshaftresistanceandc)thetoe
resistance,modifiedafterViking(2000).
Thepenetrationofasheetpileduringvibratorydrivingdependsonthecharacteristicsofthe
mechanicalinteractionanddynamicnatureofthewholevibrator,sheetpileandsoilsystem
(Viking,2002b).Duringvibratorydrivingthefollowingforcesactonthepile(VandenBerghe
&Holeyman,2002)(Whenham,2011):
x Thevibratingforcefromthevibrator,Fv
x Thestaticweightontopofthevibrator,F0
x Thefrictionresistancealongtheshaft,Rs
x Thetoeresistance,Rt
x Theinertialforceinducedbythemovementofthemassofthepileandthevibrator.
Thedrivingforce,Fd,consistingofthestaticoverload,F0,anddynamicdrivingforce,Fv,
varieswithasinusshapeintimewiththedrivingfrequency.Thepenetrationmovementof
thesheetpile,u(t),isadownwardsinusshapeddisplacement,correlatedintimewiththe
drivingforce,seeFigure2.16a.Duringpenetrationthedynamicshaftresistance,Rs,varies
betweenpositiveandnegative,incorrelationwiththeupwardanddownwardpenetration
motion,seeFigure2.16b.Thedynamictoeresistance,Rt,ontheotherhand,variesbetween
zeroandmaximum,alsoincorrelationwiththepenetrativemotion,reachingmaximumat
thelowerendoftheupanddownwardmotion,seeFigure2.16c(Viking,2000)(Massarsch,
2000b)(Holeyman&Legrand,1997).
2.4 VIBRATIONTRANSFERPROCESS
Unlesstheentirechainofvibrationtransmissionisconsidered,itisnotpossibletofully
understandagroundvibrationproblem.Inthefollowingsectionsthemostimportant
aspectsgoverningthepropagationofdrivingenergyfromthepiledrivingequipment(the
source)tothesurroundingsoillayersandfurtherontoapotentialdamagedobjectwillbe
discussed.
28
2LITERATURESTUDY
Thevibrationtransferprocessisheredividedintothreeparts(samedivisionisseenine.g.
Stille&Hall(1995)andMassarsch(2000a)),inturndividedintosmallerparts,seeFigure
2.17:
1. Vibrationsource
a. Energytransferbetweenhammerandpile
b. Vibrationinpiles
c. Interactionbetweenpileandsoil
2. Wavepropagationinsoil
3. Damagedobject
a. Interactionbetweensoilandstructure
b. Vibrationtransmissioninstructures
Thedamagedobjectincludingtheimportantaspectsofsoilstructureinteractionand
vibrationstransmissioninstructuresisnotstudiedinthislicentiatethesis.
Figure2.17Schematicillustrationofthevibrationtransferduringpiledrivinginurbanareas,
modifiedafterHintzeetal.(1997).
2.4.1 Vibrationsource
2.4.1.1 DifferentVibrationSources
Vibrationsarisefromanumberofdifferentactivities.Whenitcomestomanmadevibrations
thereareusuallythreedifferentsourcesthatareidentified:operationofmachinery,roadand
railwaytraffic,andconstructionactivities(Athanasopoulos&Pelekis,2000).Another
importantvibrationsourceisnaturalvibrationssuchasearthquakes.Figure2.18show
typicaltimesequencesofvibrationscausedbya)impactpiledrivingb)vibratorydriving,c)
blastingandd)earthquake.
29
Figure2.18Typicalvibrationsequencefroma)impactpiledriving,b)vibratorypiledriving,c)
blastingandd)earthquake,modifiedafterMlleretal.(2000)andLidn(2012).Observethedifferent
timescalesonthexaxisandnotethatd)isforvibrationacceleration.
Thisthesisdealswithvibrationsduetopiledrivingbyimpactdriving,whichgenerates
transientvibrations,andvibratorydriving,whichgeneratescontinuousvibrations.
Oneofthedifferencesbetweenimpactdrivingandvibratorydrivingisthefrequencyof
excitation.Forvibratorypiledriving,thefrequencyisrelativelylowandrangefromabout10
to50Hz,whileforimpactdrivingfrequenciesarehigher,upto300Hz(Svinkin,2004)
(Thandavamoorthy,2004)(Masoumietal.,2007).
30
2LITERATURESTUDY
Thevibrationsgeneratedbyimpactpiledrivingdieoutbeforethenextblow,whilethe
vibrationscausedbyvibratorypiledrivingarecontinuousduringthetimeofdriving(Wiss,
1967).AccordingtoZiyazovetal.(1976)thedurationofvibrationsexcitedbyoneblowin
impactdrivingdoesnotexceed1.53periodsandisnotenoughtoinferresonanceof
buildingsandstructures.Also,theimpactcreatedbyimpactpiledrivingisnotasingle
frequency,andonlyafewcyclesofanygivenfrequencyoccur,soresonancedoesnot
developinthesamewayasforvibratorydrivingofpiles(Woods,1997).
Normallyimpactpiledrivingisconsideredtogeneratetransientvibrations.However,for
someimpactdrivers(e.g.doubleactingairordieselhammers)thestrokesaresorapidthat
thevibrationsdonotfullydieawaybetweentheblows.Thiscouldbeconsideredasaless
regularbutcontinuousformofvibrationandissometimescalledpseudosteadystate
vibration(Head&Jardine,1992)(Svinkin,2004).Sometimesimpactpiledrivingisclassified
asintermittentvibrationasitgivesrisetotransientvibrationswithsufficienttimebetween
eachblowfortheamplitudetodecaytoaninsignificantlevel.
2.4.1.2 Energytransferbetweenhammerandpile

Duringimpactpiledriving,ahammerhitsthepilehead.Energyistransferredintothepile
bytheimpulsecreatedwhenthehammerhitsthetopofthepile(Woods,1997)(Massarsch&
Fellenius,2008).Asthehammerhitthepileacompressionalbodywaveisgeneratedwithin
thepile.Thewavetravelsdownthepiletothetoe,wherepartofthewaveenergyisreflected
withinthepileandpartistransmittedtothesoil(Wiss,1967)(DAppolonia,1971)(Head&
Jardine,1992).
HerefollowsatheoreticalapproachpresentedinMassarsch&Fellenius(2008)(also
mentionedinNordal(2009))assumingnolossofenergy.Atimpacttheparticlevelocityof
thepileheadiszero,whilethevelocityofthehammercanbeestimatedfromthedropheight
accordingto:
vH 0
2 gh
(m/s)
Eq.2.22
Where
vH0=velocityofhammeratimpact(m/s)
g=accelerationofearthgravity(m/s2)
h=dropheight(m)
Asthehammerhitsthepileastresswaveiscreatedsimultaneouslyinthepileandinthe
hammer,seeFigure2.19.Thehammervelocityslowsdownasthepileheadaccelerates.Since
theforcesneedtobeequalthefollowingequationapplies:
Z H vH Z P vP
Eq.2.23
Where
ZH,P=impedanceofhammerandpilerespectively(kNs/m)
vH,P=particlevelocityofhammerandpilerespectively(m/s)
31
MH
vH0
LH
ZH
h
LH
vH
Fi
vP=vH0/2
Fi
vP
LW
Rs
ZP
RT
Figure2.19Stresswaveinpileduringimpactdriving,modifiedafterMassarsch&Fellenius(2008).
Atthecontactsurfacethehammervelocityisdecreasingwhilethepileheadvelocityis
increasing,whichgives:
vH 0 vH vP
Eq.2.24
(m/s)
CombiningEq.2.23andEq.2.24give:
Eq.2.25
vP
vH 0
Z
1 P
ZH
(m/s)
Ascanbeseen,theparticlevelocityinthepileisnotaffectedbythehammermass(mH),but
onlybythehammerdropheightandtheimpedanceratioofthehammerandthepile
(Massarsch&Fellenius,2008).
Thedurationoftheimpactofthehammerdeterminesthelengthofthepropagatingstress
wave.Thetime,t,duringwhichthehammerandthepileheadisincontactisthetimeit
takesforthestrainwavetotravelfromthetopofthehammertothebottomandbackupto
thetop,i.e.2LH,accordingto(Bodare,1996)(Massarsch&Fellenius,2008):
Eq.2.26
32
2 LH
cH
(s)
2LITERATURESTUDY
Where
LH=lengthofhammer(m)
cH=velocityofstresswaveinhammer(m/s)

Thestaticmoment(alsoknownastorque),Me,whichisofgreatimportanceforvibratory
driving,istheproductoftherotatingeccentricmasses,m,andthedistancetotherotational
axle,e,accordingto(Woods,1997)(Massarsch,2000b)(seealsoFigure2.14):
Eq.2.27
Me
me
(kgm)
Whentheeccentricallysupportedmassesrotateatanangularfrequencyitproducesa
centrifugalforce,Fv.accordingto(Woods,1997)(Massarsch,2000b)(Rausche,2002):
FV M e Z 2
Eq.2.28
(kN)
Where
Me=staticmoment
=angularfrequency
Onlyverticalcomponentsofthecentrifugalforcearetransmittedtothepilesincepairsof
eccentricmassesspininoppositedirections(Rausche,2002).AccordingtoRichartetal.
(1970),Whenham(2011)andWhenham&Holeyman(2012)theverticalcomponentofthe
centrifugalforce,Fv(t),isaharmonicfunctiondescribingasinusoidalpathintime:
Fv (t ) M e Z 2 sin(Zt )
Eq.2.29
(kN)
Anotherimportantfactorinvibratorypiledrivingisthedisplacementamplitude(double
amplitude)generatedbytherotatingmassvibrator(Woods,1997)(Massarsch,2000b).The
freehangingdoubledisplacementamplitudeisameasureofafreehangingvibratorandthe
upwardanddownwardoscillatingmotionofthepile.Thenominaldoubledisplacement
amplitudeforafreehangingdriverpilesystem,S,dependsonthestaticmoment,M,and
thetotalvibratingmass,mdyn,accordingto(Houz,1994)(Woods,1997)(Viking,2006)
(Whenham,2011):
Eq.2.30
2M e
m dyn
(m)
Where
mdyn=totalvibratingmass(vibrator+clamp+pile)
Therealamplitudeofthefreehangingpilewillalwaysbesmallerthanthespecifiednominal
amplitudesincethedynamicmassisincreasedbythatofthepileandtherearelossesdueto
soilresistance,forexample(Holeyman,2002)(Viking,2006).Whenham&Holeyman(2012)
actuallyshowthattheratiobetweenmeasuredforceinthepileandthenominalaxialforceis
around0.40.6.Theyobservedthattheforcetransferredtothepileisincreasedaspenetration
depth,i.e.soilresistance,increases.
33
2.4.1.3 Vibrationinpiles

Theimpulsegeneratedbydrivinggivesalongitudinalstresswaveinthepilethat
propagatesfromthepileheadtothepiletoe.Thepilebehavesasanelasticrodthrough
whichthelongitudinalstresswavepasses(Woods,1997).Thestresswavestravelsataspeed,
cB.Thewavesdependonthechangesofcrosssectionofthepileandontheinteractionofthe
pilewiththesurroundingmediumatthepileboundaries(thatisatthepilehead,alongthe
pileshaftandatthepiletoe).Whenthedownwardwavereachesthepiletoeitisreflected
upwardsandreversed(compressionwaveturnsintoatensionwave).Onitswaybackup
thepile,thewaveagaininteractswiththeshaftfrictionandreachesthepileheadaftertimet
whichcanbefoundaccordingto:
Eq.2.31
2Lp
cB
(s)
Where
Lp=pilelength(m)
cB=wavevelocityinthepile(m/s)
Theforce,P,createdbytheimpulsecanbeexpressedasstressmultipliedbyarea,according
to(Woods,1997)(Nordal,2009):
P VA P U c B v p A p Z p v p
Eq.2.32
(kN)
Where
vP=particlevelocityatthetopofthepile(m/s)
cB=wavevelocityinthepile(m/s)
AP=crosssectionalareaofthepile(m2)
=densityofthepilematerial(kg/m3)
ZP=pileimpedance(kNs/m)

Duringvibratorydriving,thewholesystemofvibratorandpilemovessimultaneouslyup
anddownwiththesamedisplacementamplitudeandacceleration(Viking,2002a).This
meansthatthevibratorpilesystemcanbeassumedtobearigidbodyandthatthewave
propagationinavibratorydrivenpile/sheetpilecanbeneglected(Viking,2002a).Massarsch
(2000b)statedthatasteelpileshorterthanabout10moscillatesasastiffbody.Viking(2006)
presentedaruleofthumbthatshouldbefulfilledinorderforthepiletobehaveasarigid
body.TheruleofthumbisthatonefourthofthetimeperiodTforthechosendriving
frequency,fd,shouldbeequaltoorgreaterthanthetime,t,ittakesforthestresswaveto
travel4Lpofthepile:
Eq.2.33
T
4
1
tt
4 fd
4L p
cB
Whenham(2011)presentedanotherruleofthumbfordeterminingwhenthepilewould
behaveasarigidbody:
34
2LITERATURESTUDY
Eq.2.34
f d d 0.1 f n
cB
20L p
Where
fd=drivingfrequency(Hz)
fn=longitudinalnaturalfrequencyofafreeslenderbar(Hz)
cp=longitudinalwavevelocityinthepile(m/s)
Lp=lengthofthepile(m)
Bycomparingtheaboveruleofthumbwithresultsfrommeasurements,Whenham(2011)
reportedthatonly8outof72piles/sheetpilesfulfiltherequirementofarigidbody.Viking
(2002a)statedthatresultsfromfieldmeasurementsshowthatthesheetpileheadandtoe
displaythesamedisplacementamplitudeandaccelerationthroughoutthedrivingphase.
Leeetal.(2012)concludedthatthetwosheetpilesintheirmeasurementsbehavedasrigid
bodiesduringdriving.
Thedynamicforce,P,thatistransferredtothepileheadandthenfurtherthroughthepileis
givenasaproductoftheimpedance,Zp,andthevibrationvelocityinthepile,vp,justasfor
impactdrivenpiles,seeEq.2.32(Massarsch,2000b).
2.4.1.4 Pilesoilinteraction

Theenergyinducedatthepileheadisprincipallydividedintoenergyusedforpenetration
ofthepile,energyreflectedbackupthepileandenergytransmittedintothesoil(Selby,
1991).
Whenthehammerhitsthepileabodywaveiscreatedthattravelsalongthepile.Whenthe
bodywavereachesthepile/soilinterface,partoftheenergytransmitstothesoilandpartof
theenergyisreflected(Attewell&Farmer,1973).AccordingtoAttewell&Farmer(1973)the
ratiobetweentheenergytransmittedtothesoilandtheenergyofthewavereflectedback
intothepileisapproximately2to1whenthebodywavepassesthroughasteelsoilinterface
thatisnormaltothewavedirection.Whenham(2011)reportedthatupto5060%ofthe
energytransferredtothepilefromthepowerpackisdissipatedatthepilesoilinterface.
Theenergytransmittedfromthepiletothesoilprincipallydependsonthehammerandpile
properties(Woods,1997).AccordingtoMassarsch&Fellenius(2008)thelengthofthestress
wavegovernsthetransmissionefficacyofvibrationsfromthepileshafttothesurrounding
soil.Theyalsoshowthatthevibrationtransmissionefficacyincreaseswithdecreasingpile
impedanceandincreaseswithincreasingsoildensity,hence,thepilematerialandpile
impedanceareimportantaspectsofthevibrationtransmission.AccordingtoWhenham
(2011),Westerbergetal.(1995)alsostressedtheimportanceofpileimpedancealongwiththe
behaviourofthesoilunderdynamicloadingwhenlookingatpilesoilinteraction.
Groundvibrationsfromimpactpiledrivinghaveoftenbeenreportedtobegreaterinstiff,
dense,soilsthaninloose,softsoils.DAppolonia(1971),Martin(1980)andalsoHead&
Jardine(1992)explainedthisfromthedifferenceinresistanceindifferentsoils.Hebelieved
thatthesoilresistanceruleshowmuchenergyisusedtodrivethepiledownandhowmuch
35
energyisavailabletobecomegroundvibrations.Inresistivesoilthesetperblowislowand
considerableenergyisavailableforgroundvibrations,whileinlowresistancesoilsthepile
penetratesquicklyandasmallamountofenergybecomesvibrations(Whyley&Sarsby,
1992)(Hiller&Hope,1998)(Hope&Hiller,2000).Attewell&Farmer(1973)andNilsson
(1989)ontheotherhand,explainedthisconsideringthepartitionofenergyatthepilesoil
interaction.Astiffgroundgenerallyhashighimpedance.Displacementpilesarestifferthan
theground,hence,theenergytransmissionratioatthepilesoilinterfaceincreasesasthe
groundstiffnessincreases.Hope&Hillers(2000)measurementscannotfullybeexplained
withacousticimpedanceeffects.Hence,theysuggestedthatperhapsbothmechanisms
occur;onepartofthehammerenergythatisgovernedbythetransmissionratiotransmits
directlyasgroundvibrationstothesoilfromthepiletoe.Theremainingenergyisavailable
todrivethepile;however,someofthisenergywillcauseelasticdeformationsintheground.
Thelargestpartoftheenergyistransmittedtothesoilatthepiletoeaslongasthepileisnot
predominantlyfrictional,taperedorstepped.Inthesecases,moreenergyistransmittedfrom
theshaft(Head&Jardine,1992).Duringdrivingtorefusal,alloftheenergyistransmittedto
vibrationsinthesoil(Head&Jardine,1992).Theamountofenergythatistransferredfrom
theshaftandthetoerespectivelymainlydependsonthesoillayersdynamicproperties
(Massarsch,2000b).

Attewell&Farmer(1973),Head&Jardine(1992),Athanasopoulos&Pelekis(2000),Kim&
Lee(2000)andThandavamoorthy(2004)proposedtheuseoftwosourcesofenergytransfer
fortransmissionofgroundvibrationfrompiledriving:thepiletoeandthepileshaft,see
Figure2.20.Atthepiletoe,thedisplacementofsoilgeneratesbothcompressionalPwaves
andshearSwavesthatpropagateoutwardfromthetipinasphericalwaveforminall
directions.Theskinresistanceofthepileleadstothegenerationofaconicalwavefrontof
verticallypolarizedbodyshearwavesexpandingfromtheshaft.Theangleoftheconeis
quiteshallowsincethevelocityofthedrivingimpulsetravellingdownthepileat
compressionwavevelocityisusually10timesorevengreaterthantheshearwavevelocity
inthesoil.Inpractice,thismeansthatthewavefrontemanatingfromthepileisassumedto
becylindrical,especiallyforvibratorydriving(Woods,1997).
AsthePandSwaveshitthegroundsurfacesomeenergyisconvertedintoRwaveswhile
someisreflectedbackintotheground.TheRwavespropagatealongthegroundsurface
havingbothverticalandhorizontalcomponentsofmotion(Head&Jardine,1992)
(Athanasopoulos&Pelekis,2000).Theshearwavesfromthepiletoereachtheground
surfaceatadistancethatisapproximatelyequaltothepiledepth(Head&Jardine,1992).
Athanasopoulos&Pelekis(2000)presentafigureshowingtheminimumdistancefromthe
sourcetowheresurfacewavesaredevelopedduetoreflectionofbodywaves,seeFigure
2.21.Amick&Gendreau(2000)statedthatduringpiledrivingwhenthesourceisbelowthe
groundsurface,Rayleighwavesareformedatahorizontaldistanceofaboutafewmeters
fromthepile.
36
2LITERATURESTUDY
Figure2.20Schematicrepresentationofdifferentwavetypesthatcanbegeneratedatpiledriving,
modifiedafterAttewelletal.(1973)andMartin(1980).
ThewavegenerationinFigure2.20isbasedontheassumptionthatonlytheelastic
deformationofthesoilisrelevanttothetransferofvibrations.Reflectionsandrefractions
fromunderlyingsoillayersandtheinteractionofwavesfromthetoeandtheshaftwill
generatecomplicatedarraysofparticlemotion(Head&Jardine,1992).
cRd
c P2 c R2
r
1
c R2
c P2 c R2
Figure2.21Determinationofminimumdistancefromthesourcetothepointonsurfacesinwhich
surfacewavesaregenerated,modifiedafterDowding(1996,originallyfromDaemonetal.,1983).
37
Figure2.22Criticaldistanceandcriticalangleforreflectionofsurfacewavesduringpiledriving,
modifiedafterMassarsch&Fellenius(2008).
Massarsch&Fellenius(2008)introducedadistancecalledcriticaldistance(seeFigure2.22),
whichisthedistancefromthepiletowhereasphericalwave(Pwave)emittedfromthepile
toerefractsasasurfacewavewhenreachingthegroundsurface.Thecriticalanglecanbe
determined:
Eq.2.35
T crit
c
arcsin S
cP
(rad)
Where
cS=Swavevelocity(m/s)
cP=Pwavevelocity(m/s)
Thecriticaldistance,rcrit,fromthepile,wherewaverefractionwilloccurattheground
surface,cannowbedeterminedfrom:
rcrit tan T crit d

(m)
Eq.2.36
Where
d=pilepenetrationdepth(m)
AtableinMassarschandFellenius(2008)suggestthatthecriticaldistancefromthepileis
locatedatadistanceapproximatelyhalftheembedmentdepthofthepileindrycoarse
grainedsoil,whilethecriticaldistanceinlooseorsoftsoilsbelowthegroundwaterlevel
becomesmuchshorterandisinthecaseofclayalmostzero.
Vibrationsinthesoilcanalsoariseiftheimpacthammerorvibratorcauseslateral
deformationsofthepile(Selby,1991).AccordingtoMassarsch&Fellenius(2008)friction
betweenpileshaftandgranularsoilcan,duringpiledriving,giverisetoahorizontal
vibrationcomponent.Thisisimportantinthecaseofvibratorydriving,whileitisusually
neglectedwhenitcomestoimpactdriving.
Fieldmeasurementsduringvibratorydrivingandsoilcompactionhaveshownthatthe
verticaloscillationofthepilegivesbothverticalandhorizontalvibrationsinthesurrounding
soil.Thehorizontalvibrationcomponentarisesfromthefrictionbetweenthepileshaftand
thesoilandcanbeintherangeof3050%oftheverticalvibration(Massarsch,2000b).
38
2LITERATURESTUDY
AccordingtoViking(2002b),lateralflexibilityinthesheetpilecancausethegenerationof
considerablyhighergroundvibrations.Laterallyinducedmovementinasheetpileis
claimedbyVikingtogenerallyoccurduetooneormoreofthefollowingreasons:
x Sheetpileprofilesaredrivenoneatatimewithvibratorsequippedwithasingle
clampingdeviceholdingthesheetpileintheweb.
x Verticalalignmentisneglectedwheninterlockinganewprofilewithanalready
installedprofile.
x Badchoiceofvibratorequipmentandbadequipmentoperation.
x Clutchesinbadcondition.

AccordingtoKim&Lee(2000)andMasoumietal.(2006and2008)theenergyfrompile
drivingishighandcausesplasticdeformationsinthenearfield.Furtherfromthepileithas
beenshownthatthevibrationscausesdeformationswithintheelasticrange.Thelargestrain
levelsinducedinthesoilimmediatelyadjacenttothedrivenpilecausethesoiltobehave
nonlinearlyanddegradeundercyclicloading(Denies&Holeyman,2008)(Whenham,2011).
Consequentlythesoilstiffness(andthuswavevelocity)decreases,and,especiallyalongthe
shaft,thesoilwillberemoulded(Massarsch&Fellenius,2008).
Asdiscussedinsection2.2.4.1,theshearmodulusdecreaseswhilematerialdamping
increaseswithcyclicstrain(seeFigure2.8andFigure2.10).Aboulella(1990)confirmedthis
bystatingthatthehighstrainscausedbypiledrivinginthesoiladjacenttothepilesreduce
thedynamicshearmodulusandincreasethedampinginthatregion.AndMasoumietal.
(2009)haveshownthatanonlinearbehaviourforthesoilnexttothepileleadstosmaller
levelsofvibration.
Theshearstraininducedbythevibrationcanbeestimatedfromthefollowingrelationship
(Massarsch,2000a):
Eq.2.37
cs
()
Where
v=particlevelocity(m/s)
cs=shearwavevelocity(m/s)
Svinkin(1996)referstoearlierstudies(Svinkin,1976)whereinsitumeasurementshavebeen
madebydroppingamassonthegroundrepetitiouslyinordertostudytheeffectsofthe
plasticdeformationsonthegroundvibrationsfurtherfromthevibrationsource.Theresults
showedthatdespitealargeplasticdeformationatthepointofimpact,thegroundsurface
vibrationsatadistanceof43and57mfromthesourcedidnotchangeconsiderablyasthe
plasticdeformationgrewlarger.
Duringdynamicproblemsthestrainlevelsvarywithinalargerange.Atsmallstrainlevels
(typically<105),rockandsoilbehaveaselasticmaterials.However,atmoderatestrain
levels(104102)mostmaterialsdisplayelasticaswellasplasticbehaviour(Bodare,1996).
Table2.6showssoilbehaviourfordifferentstrainlevels.
39
Table2.6Soilbehaviourfordifferentstrainlevels,afterWhenham(2011,afterIshihara,1996).
Shearstrain

106
105
104
103
102
101

Whenastresswavepropagatesdownthepileitencountersresistance.Theresistancecanbe
consideredeitherintermsofpenetration,viablowcount,ordrivingresistance,viaforce.Itis
onlythedynamicresistancethatgivesrisetovibrationsemittedfromthepileshaftorpile
toetosurroundingsoil(Massarsch&Fellenius,2008).AccordingtoWaarts&Bielefeld(1994)
thesoilresistanceisthereactionforceofthesoilonthepile.
Thedynamicresistancethatarisesalongtheshaftandatthetoeofthevibratingpileis
mainlyaffectedbyfourfactors(Massarsch,2000b):
x Vibrationfrequency(centrifugalforce)
x Vibrationvelocityofthepile
x Displacementamplitudebetweenpileandsoil
x Numberofvibrationcycles
Shaftresistance
Asthepilepenetratethesoiltheshaftresistanceincreaseduetotheincreasingshaftareain
contactwiththesoil(Whenham,2011).AccordingtoWhenham(2011)theinfluenceofthe
shaftresistanceincreaseswiththecontentoffinematerial(clay)inthesoil.Whendrivingin
clay,porewaterpressurebuildupandsoilremouldingreducestheshearresistancealong
thepileshaftconsiderably.Ontheotherhand,whendrivingingranularsoilthe
displacementofsoilaroundtheadvancingpilemightincreaseshaftfriction(Hope&Hiller,
2000).VanRompaeyetal.(1995)alsomentionedtheproblemofincreasingsoilresistance
duringvibratorydrivingduetocompactionofthesoil.Thisisaphenomenonthatcanbe
seeninmostnoncohesivesoils.
Theshaftresistanceactsintheoppositeofmotionregardlessofwhetherthepileismoving
upordown(Whenham,2011),seeFigure2.16b.
Thedynamicsoilresistanceatthepileshaft,Rs,canbegivenaccordingto:
Rs z s v p S p
Eq.2.38
(kN)
Where
zs=specificsoilimpedance(kNs/m3)
vp=particlevelocityinthepile(mm/s)
Sp=contactareabetweenshaftandsoil(m2)
40
2LITERATURESTUDY
Toeresistance
Thedynamicportionofthedrivingresistanceatthepiletoe,Rt,canbegivenfrom
(Massarsch&Fellenius,2008):
Rt J C Z P v P
(kN)
Eq.2.39
Where
JC=dampingfactor()
ZP=pileimpedance(kNs/m)
vP=particlevelocityinthepile(m/s)
Thetoeresistancevariesduringdrivingandiszeroattimeswhenthepileisnotmoving
downward(Whenham,2011),seeFigure2.16c.Ascanbeseenthecurvedoesnotdisplaya
linearrelationshipbutastrainhardeningloadingandunloadingcurve(Viking,2006).
Interlockresistance
Inordertocreatearetainingwall,sheetpilesaredriveninlock.Thefrictionbetweenthetwo
sheetsastheyaredriveninlockgivesrisetoaninterlockresistance.Theconditionofthe
locksandalsotheverticalityofthedrivenpilesaffectthesizeoftheinterlockresistance.The
magnitudeoftheinterlockresistanceaffectsthegroundvibrationsinducedduringdriving
(Whenham,2011).Theinterlockfrictionismainlyduetosoilparticlesinthelocks;however,
itisalsotosomeextentduetosteeltosteelfriction(Viking,2006).
Viking(2006)claimedthatresultshaveshownthatthegroundvibrationsgeneratedduring
vibratorydrivingincreasedby25timeswheninterlockfrictionwaspresent.Leeetal.(2012)
performedmeasurementsusingstraingaugesmountedontwosheetpiles(onewithout
interlockfrictionandonedriveninlock)duringvibratorydrivinginsand.Theresults
showedthatthepeaksectionforcesweregreaterforthepiledriveninlock.Theyalso
noticedthattheinterlockfrictionwasnotconstantwithpenetrationdepth.
Viking(2002b)presentedresults,frommeasurementofgroundvibrationrecordedduring
vibratorydrivingofsheetpiles,showingthatwhenconsideringtheinterlockingfriction
forcebetweentwosheetpilestheinducedgroundvibrationsareupto25timeshigherthan
whennofrictionforceisconsidered.

Itislikelytobelievethatastiffsurfacelayerontopofasofterlayerwouldindicatethat
vibrationsproblemsoccurduringthebeginningofdriving.Itisalsoexpectedtobelievethat
vibrationproblemscouldoccurduringseatingofthepilesintoastifferbearinglayeratthe
endofdriving(Hintzeetal,1997)(Woods,1997).
Massarsch&Fellenius(2008)showedthatduringdrivingthroughasurfacefilland
underlyingclaylayer,alargepartofthevibrationenergyistransmittedalongthepileshaft
and/orpropagatesassurfacewaves.However,whenthepilereachesthedenseglacialtillat
largerdepththevibrationsmeasuredagreebestwiththoseemittedassphericalwavesfrom
thepiletoe.
41
Figure2.23Experimentalresultsofdimensionlesspeakparticlevelocityplottedagainstdistancefrom
thepileduetovibratorypiledrivingatadrivingfrequencyof25Hz(Masoumietal.,2006).
Masoumietal.(2006)modelledthesoilbehaviourduringvibratorydrivinginorderto
investigatetheinfluencesofthesoilinhomogeneity.Theirexperimentalresultsshowthatin
inhomogeneoussoil,diffractedbodywavesarereflectedintothetoplayerandtheshear
wavefrontaroundtheshaftisaffectedbythereflectedandrefractedwaves.
Masoumietal.(2006)alsonoticedthatvibrationamplitudesattenuatemonotonicallyin
homogenoussoil.However,inalayeredsoilmodelorinamodelwithincreasingstiffness
withdepth,theattenuationisoscillatory,seeFigure2.23.Theoscillationisbelievedtobedue
totheinterferenceofthereflectedwavesonthegroundsurface.Theirresultsalsoshowed
thatvibrationsattenuatefasterinalayeredsoilthaninahomogeneoussoilprofileand
indicatedthatthehighertheoperatingfrequencyofthevibratorthemorethevibrationsare
attenuated.
Basedonexperimentalresults,Masoumietal.(2007)showedthatwhenthepenetration
depthissmallerthanthelayerthickness,thelayeringhasarelativelysmalleffectonthe
groundvibrationsgeneratedbyvibratorypiledriving.However,whenthepenetration
depthisgreaterthanthelayerthickness,theinfluenceofthelayeringislargeduetothe
reflectionandrefractionofwaves.
Thedistancefromthevibrationsourceconstantlychangesduringthedrivingofpilesor
sheetpiles.Duringpenetrationintotheground,severalvibrationsourcescanexistatthe
sametime,bothfromthepiletoeandalongtheshaft(Massarsch&Fellenius,2008).
DuringtheinstallationofpilesMassarsch(2004)identifiedthreecommonsituationsthatcan
causeexcessivegroundvibrations,seeFigure2.24:
a) Piledrivingintoastiffsurfacelayer.Theenergysourceissituatedattheground
surfaceandthevibrationswillmainlypropagateassurfacewaves.
b) Thepileisdrivenintoamediumdenseordensesanddeposit.Inthiscasethe
vibrationenergywillmainlybedissipatedalongtheshaftofthepile.Ifthesandis
verydenseorifthepilehitsanyobstruction,vibrationsmayalsobeemittedinthe
formofcompressionwavesfromthepilebase.
c) Forexamplewhendrivingtorefusalofendbearingpiles,thepileispressedhard
againstahardmaterial.Inthiscasevibrationswillpropagateasbodywaves,mainly
intheformofcompressionwaves,towardsthegroundsurfacewheretheyare
transformedtosurfacewaves.
42
2LITERATURESTUDY
Figure2.24Typicalsourcesofgroundvibrationsduringpiledriving,modifiedafterMassarsch
(2004).
Itisdifficulttoknowwhetherthepileshaftorthepiletoeisthesourceofvibrationor
whetheritisacombination.Hope&Hiller(2000)concludedthatvibrationsfromimpactpile
drivingdependsmoreonthesoilencounteredatthepiletoethanthesoilconditionsalong
theshaft.
Duringpenetrationthroughfirmlayersoratdrivingtorefusal,themainpartoftheenergyis
transmittedfromthetoeintheshapeofbodywaves(PandSwaves).Theinterchange
betweentheshaftfrictionandthetoeresistanceiscomplicatedandtheconditionschange
whenthepilepenetratesdifferentsoillayers.Atthesametime,vibrationscanbeproduced
alongtheshaftandfromthetoeandcancontainalargefrequencyspectrum(Massarsch,
2000b).
2.4.2 Wavepropagationinsoil
2.4.2.1 Wavetype
Miller&Pursey(1955),showedthatthedistributionoftotalinputenergyamongthethree
elasticwaveswas67%Rayleighwave,26%Swaveand7%Pwaveforasourcelocatedatthe
groundsurface.However,Wolf(1994)presentedevidencethatthepartitionofenergy
carriedbythedifferentwavetypesactuallyisdependentonthevibrationfrequency.The
earlierfindingsareapplicableforverylowfrequenciessoWolf(1994)statedthatforhigher
vibrationfrequenciesseeninengineeringpractice,thelargestpartoftheenergyisactually
carriedbyPwaves.
Acommondistinctionistodividegroundvibrationsduetoavibrationsourceintonearfield
conditionsandfarfieldconditions.Nearfieldconditionsareconsideredtobewhereboth
bodyandsurfacewavesarepresentandenergyisdissipatedduetoplasticdeformationsin
thesoil.Furtherawayfromthesource,inthefarfield,vibrationsmainlyconsistofsurface
wavesandthebehaviourofthesoiliselastic(Massarsch,2004)(Whenham,2011).Masoumi
&Degrande(2008)presentedresultsfromnumericalmodellingshowingthatinthenear
43
fieldverticallypolarizedshearwavesdominatewhileinthefarfieldthegroundvibrationis
dominatedbyRayleighwaves.
Thenearfieldzoneisnotverywellunderstood;neitheritsextentnorthewavepropagation
withinthezone.Generallythenearfieldzonewillbeoftheorderofmetersfromthedriven
pile(Head&Jardine,1992).
AccordingtoGutowski&Dym(1976)theverticalvibrationcomponentisinalmostallcases
muchlargerthanthehorizontalradialandtransversecomponentswhenthevibrationsource
ispiledriving.Head&Jardine(1992)andSvinkin(1996and2004)wrotethatnearasource
inducingverticalvibrations,thegroundvibrationsarehighlyvertical;however,asthe
distancefromthesourceincreases,ahorizontalcomponentisrapidlygenerated.
Athanasopoulos&Pelekis(2000)reportedtheoppositefromtheirfieldstudyasthe
distancefromthesourceincreasesthemotionbecomespredominantlyverticalasthe
horizontalcomponentisreduced.
Sincesurfacewavesattenuateslowerthanbodywavesthevibrationatlargedistancesfrom
thesourceislikelytobedominatedbyRandLwaves(Martin,1980).However,according
toHead&Jardine(1992),itisnotcleariftrueRayleighwavesactuallydevelopovertheshort
distancesthataregenerallydealtwithwhenconcerningproblemsofvibrationsduetopile
driving.Theysuspectthatpartlydevelopedwavesareinsteadgeneratedattheground
surface.Attewell&Farmer(1973)alsodiscussthattrueRayleighwavesareprobablynot
developeduntilatacertaindistancefromthepiledependingonsourcedepthand
wavelength.Wolf(1994)claimedthatRayleighwavesdonotfullydevelopuntiladistanceof
halftheRayleighwavelengthfromthesource.
Dongetal.(2000)showed,usingsnapshots,thatvibrationsresultinacomplicated
deformationpatternintheground,duetothereflectionandrefractionofPandSwavesas
wellasthesurfacewaves.Sometimesapeakofvibrationvelocityisseenatadistanceof
about10mfromthepile.Thisiscausedbytheoverlapofsurfacewavesfromthepile
movementatthesurfacewithwavescomingfromthepiletoe(Head&Jardine,1992).
Attewelletal.,(1991)alsoreportedthatasaresultofsuperpositionofsurfacewaves,caused
bylateralmovementsofthepile,aswellaswavesfromthepiletoe,amaximumvibration
levelcanbeobservedatadistanceofapproximately10mfromthesource.
2.4.2.2 Duration
DuetothedispersionofRayleighwavesinaninhomogeneoussoil,itisoftenobservedthat
thesoilresponseofthevibrationfromimpactdrivinggetsalongerdurationasthedistance
fromthesoilincreases(Svinkin,2008).Thedispersiongivesrisetocomponentsofdifferent
frequenciestravellingatdifferentdepthsandthuswithdifferentvelocities,resultinginthe
vibrationrecordsshowninFigure2.25(Auersch,2010a)(Auersch&Said,2010).According
toSvinkin(2008),thisisespeciallynoticeableinsaturatedsoilsandinareasinwhichthesoil
isunderlainbyrock.
44
2LITERATURESTUDY
Figure2.25Timerecordsoftheimpulseresponse,showingincreasingdurationbyincreasingdistance
fromthesource(Auersch&Said,2010).
2.4.2.3 Influenceofgroundconditions
Thegroundconditionsarehighlyimportantforthepropagationofvibrationsthroughthe
soil.Ashasbeenstatedbefore,stifferanddensersoilstransmitvibrationsmorereadilythan
morecompressiblematerials.Thereforethepresenceofanyharderlayersinthesoilprofile
enablesvibrationstotransmitmoreeasily,potentiallyresultinginhighervibrationlevels.It
couldalsobethatthepiledrivingitselfaltersthesoilstiffness(Head&Jardine,1992).
Heckman&Hagerty(1978)alsostatedthathardobjectsorstifflayersinthegroundmay
leadtothevibrationsbeingtransmittedovergreaterdistances.However,Auersch&Said
(2010)wrotethatgenerallysoftsoilsdisplaylargervibrationamplitudesinthenearfield
thanstiffersoils.
Asdiscussedinsection2.2.4.2thegroundwatertableaffectsthewavepropagationinsoil.
Wavepropagationinsoilpartlytakesplacethroughthesoilskeletonandpartlythroughthe
liquidinthepores.Pwavescanpropagatethroughtheliquidaswellasthroughthe
particles.Swavesontheotherhandcanonlypropagatethroughthesoilskeletonsince
watercannottransmitshearstress.Rwavespropagatebothinthesoilskeletonandinthe
poreliquid(Hintzeetal.,1997).
TheresultspresentedbyWiss(1967)showedadifferenceinvibrationtransmissionbetween
cohesiveandnoncohesivesoilsandbetweenwetanddrysands.Fortrainvibrationsithas
beenseenthatlowfrequencyoscillation(<10Hz)ischaracteristicforcohesivesoils,while
oscillationswithhigherfrequenciesarecharacteristicfornoncohesivesoils(Mlleretal.,
2000).
Ahighlyplasticsoilislinearlyelastictogreaterstrainsthanothertypesofsoils.Asaresult
thedampingfactorissmallerandtheproblemsofvibrationsincrease(forexamplethecase
45
ofvibrationsduetoarockconcertinGothenburg,Sweden)(Erlingsson&Bodare,1992and
1996)(Madheswaranetal.,2005).
2.4.2.4 Frequencycontent
Fromavibrationsource,wavestravelinalldirectionsasfairlyharmonicwaves.Ground
vibrationsfromvibratorypiledrivinggenerallycoincidewithorareclosetothefrequencyof
thevibrator.Vibratorydrivinggeneratessteadystatevibrations,whichforcethesoil
particlestovibratewiththefrequencyofthedriver,disregardingthenaturalfrequencyof
thesoil.Impactpiledrivingontheotherhandexcitesthepreferredfrequenciesofthe
groundandthevibrationfrequencyisgovernedbythegroundinsteadofthedriver(Wiss,
1967)(DAppolonia,1971)(Head&Jardine,1992)(Svinkin,1996).
Dampingpropertiesinthesoilnaturallyfilterouthighfrequenciesthatmightbeinducedby
thedrivingprocess(Whenham,2011).AccordingtoMartin(1980)soilscanactaslowpass
filtersduetothefrequencydependentinternaldamping.Forexample,peatyandsiltysoils
havepreferredfrequenciesintherangeof510Hz,whileclayshavepreferredfrequencies
between1525Hz.Thisisalsoprovedbymeasurementsperformedduringimpactdrivingof
sheetpiles.Masoumietal.(2007)observedthatasthedistancefromthepileincreases,the
varietyoffrequenciesinthegroundvibrationsdecrease.Thisphenomenonisduetomaterial
dampingreducingthevarietyoffrequenciesinthevibrationsinthefarfield.
Svinkin(1996)wrotethatdependingonthesoiltype,thefrequencyoftheverticalground
vibrationsmayeitherincreaseordecreasewiththedistancefromthevibrationsource.
AccordingtoZiyazovetal.(1976)thefrequencyofthegroundvibrationduetoimpactpile
drivingisindependentofthedistancetothesource;insteaditdependsonthesoilresistance
tostaticprobing,R.TheyproposedthefollowingrelationshipforcohesivesoilswithR=460
2400kN/m2:
f 0.00463R 8
Eq.2.40
(Hz)
TherelationshipisalsoillustratedinFigure2.26.
19
17
f(Hz)
15
13
11
9
400
800
1200
1600
R(kN/m2)
2000
2400
Figure2.26Variationoffrequencyofgroundvibrationsasafunctionofendresistanceofstatic
probing,R(Ziyazovetal.,1976).
46
2LITERATURESTUDY

Foraspecificfrequencyandwavespeed,thebodyheightbecomesthesameasthe
wavelength,andastandingwaveisproduced.Thishappensatthebodysnaturalfrequency,
hencewhenthevibrationfrequencyandthenaturalfrequencycoincideresonanceoccurs
(Mlleretal.,2000).Soilandrocksdonothaveanaturalfrequencyassuch;however
frequenciesatwhichtheytransmitvibrationsmorereadilycanbeobserved.InTable2.7
somegeneralcharacteristicnaturalfrequenciesaregivenfordifferentkindsofsoilsand
rocks.
Table2.7TypicalnaturalfrequenciesfordifferenttypesofsoilfromWiss(1967),Head&Jardine
(1992)andNiederwanger(1999).
Soiltype

Typicalnaturalfrequency(Hz)
3040
3080
>50
Therearemultiplenaturalfrequenciesforallsystems;however,usuallyonlythelowestof
theseareoftechnicalinterest.Thelowestnaturalfrequency,fn,can,forahomogenoussoil
layer,beestimatedas(Erlingsson,1999):
Eq.2.41
fn
cs
4H
(Hz)
Where
cs=shearwavevelocity(m/s)
H=heightofsoillayer(m)
AccordingtoBodare(1996)amaterialdoesnotinitselfhaveanaturalfrequency.Thenatural
frequencyoriginatesfrominteractionbetweenthematerialandacavity.Thenatural
frequencyisinverselyproportionaltothetimeittakesforanSwavetotravelacavity
radius.Thereforesmallcavitiesgivehighnaturalfrequenciesandlargecavitiesgivelow
naturalfrequencies.
2.4.2.5 Soilresponseduringvibration
InFigure2.27atypicalsoilresponsetouniformcyclicloadingispresented;ahysteresisloop
(Holeyman&Legrand,1994).Ahysteresisloopisadiagramshowingthecyclicshearstrain,
,andtheshearstress,,inaclosedcurve.Thesizeoftheareawithinthecurverepresents
theenergydensitylostineverycycle;thedimensionisenergypervolumeunit(energy
density)(Bodare,1996).
47
Figure2.27Soilbehaviourunderconstantcyclicshearstrainloading,modifiedafterHoleyman(2002)
(originallyfromVucetic(1993)).
ThehysteresisloopinFigure2.27representswhatatypicalsoilsubjectedtosymmetriccyclic
loadingwithamplitudecmightexhibit.Theinclinationoftheloopdependsonthestiffness
ofthesoil(Kramer,1996)(Whenham,2011).Fromtheresponsethefollowingfundamental
parameterscanbederived:
x Gmax=initial(ortangent)shearmodulus
x c=shearstressmobilizedatc
x Gs=secant(orequivalent)shearmodulus
Gsisstraindependentandneedstobedescribedbyspecificlawswithinagivencycle.maxis
theultimateshearstrengththatisrevealedatlargestrains.BothmaxandGmaxhavebeen
showntodecreasewiththenumberofcycles(calledcyclicdegradation)(Holeyman,2002).
Cyclicdegradationmayleadtothesoillosingitsshearresistancealmostcompletely,i.e.full
liquefaction(Whenham,2011).
Theenergydissipatedwithinaloopdependsontheamplitudeofthecyclicstrain
(Holeyman,2002).Fromtheenergylostduringagivencycle,Ws,theinternaldampingor
thehystereticdampingcanberepresentedby(Whenham,2011):
Eq.2.42
'W s
2SJ cW c
()
Thestressstrainrelationshipandthedegradationlawdependtoalargeextentonthesoil
type.Cohesivesoilsarelesssusceptibletocyclicdegradationthannoncohesivesoilasthe
particlesaremoretightlyconnectedtoeachother.Innoncohesivesoilstheparticlesareable
torearrangeandlosecontactduringvibrations(Whenham,2011).
48
2LITERATURESTUDY
2.4.2.6 Reflectionandrefraction
Inurbanenvironmentsthesoilandgroundconditionsareusuallyfarfromhomogenous.The
soilisoverlainbyhardlayers(asphalt,pavingstoneetc.)andthegroundisfilledwithpipes,
tunnelsandundergroundstructures.Thiscomplicatesthewavepropagationconsiderably,
resultinginmultiplereflectionsandwaveinterference(Head&Jardine,1992)(Whenham,
2011).
Therearenosimpletheoreticalsolutionsforwavepropagationinlayeredsoils(Waarts&
Bielefeld,1994).Reflectedandrefractedwavescanhavehighervelocitythantheincident
wave.Thedirectionandamplitudeofreflectedandrefractedwavesdependontheangleof
incidenceandtheratioofdensities(velocities)ofeachmaterial(Head&Jardine,1992)
(Massarsch&Fellenius,2008).Tworeflectedandtworefractedwaveswillbegeneratedfor
eachoftheoriginalwaveseverytimeaPorSwaveencountersaboundarybetweensoils
withdifferentproperties.FromFigure2.28thiscanbeseenwhentwoincidentwavesresult
in8newwaves(Woods,1997).Thishasearlierbeendescribedinsection2.2.2.3.Asdirect
andreflectedwaveswillhavedifferentpathlengthsaphasedifferencewillbenoticed
betweenthedirectandthereflectedwave(Auersch,2010c).
Figure2.28Partitionofwavesatsoillayerboundary,modifiedafterWoods(1997),
2.4.2.7 Vibrationattenuationanddamping
Generalvibrationattenuationhasearlierbeendescribedinsection2.2.3.Inthissectionfocus
liessolelyonattenuationofvibrationsduetopiledriving.
Attewell&Farmer(1973)statedthattheattenuationduetomaterialdampingissmall
comparedtothelossingeometricaldamping,andaccordingtoMlleretal.(2000)material
dampingcanbeneglectedwhenpredictingvibrationsfrompiling.Richartetal.(1970),on
theotherhand,statedthatmaterialdampingisimportantevenforsmallvaluesofthe
materialdampingcoefficient,.InFigure2.29theimportanceofmaterialdamping,
especiallyasthedistancefromthepileincrease,isillustrated.
49
Figure2.29Attenuationofsurfacewavewithdistancefromsourceofsteadystateexcitation(Richart
etal.,1970).
Auersch(2010a)showedthattheattenuationofgroundvibrationsdependsonthedamping
ofthesoils,thefrequencycontentofthesourceandgeometryofthesource(i.e.pointloador
lineload).However,Athanasopoulos&Pelekis(2000)showedthattheattenuationofground
vibrationsdidnotdifferconsiderablybetweenfivedifferentcaseswithdifferentsoil
conditions.
AccordingtoAuersch(2010b)ahighmaterialdampingcanbeseeninnearsurfacesoil
becauseofthelackofconfiningpressure.
Vibrationsfromimpactpiledrivingusuallyhaveahighfrequencyastheyentertheground
atthepilesoilinterface.Highfrequencyvibrationsareattenuatedfasterthanlowfrequency
vibrations.Thisimpliesthatgroundvibrationsfromimpactpiledrivingareattenuatedfaster
thangroundvibrationsfromvibratorypiledriving,whichinsteadtendtogiveastanding
waveandafairlyconstantfrequencyspectrumoverdistance(Attewelletal.,1992b).
Gutowski&Dym(1976)arguedthatitispossiblethatgrounddampingisnonlinearcloseto
thevibrationsourcewherelargevibrationamplitudesareexperienced.Theystatethatthere
ismoreattenuationperwavelengthinthenonlinearzone.However,theyalsoarguethatit
mightbesothatthedampingislinear,butatlargedistancessoilinhomogeneityresultsin
reflectionorscatteringofwavestothesurface.
Oneexceptiontothenormalattenuationofvibrationsinsoilsisbroughtupby
Athanasopoulos&Pelekis(2000).Theystatethatmeasurementsinurbanareassometimes
cangivehighervibrationlevelsforpointsslightlyfurtherfromthesourcethananotherpoint
50
2LITERATURESTUDY
closertothesource.Thisisduetothecomplexundergroundconditionsinurbanareasthat
oftenarefarfromhomogenousandcontainundergroundstructuresofvariouskinds,
leadingtocomplicatedreflectionpatternsandinterferenceofwaves.Selby(1991)also
presentedresultsshowingthattheattenuationwithdistancefromthepileisfarfrom
monotonic.Inseveralcases,peakvaluesareobservedatadistanceofabout10mfromthe
pile,aswasalsodiscussedinsection2.4.2.1.
ThedifficultyofusingthewaveattenuationrelationshipinEq.2.13inpracticehasbeento
decidewhatvaluetousefor.
2.5 ENVIRONMENTALIMPACTDUETOVIBRATIONSFROMPILEDRIVING
Unavoidably,vibrationshaveanimpactonthesurroundingenvironment.Thissection
presentstheimpactofvibrationsgeneratedbypileandsheetpilesdrivingonsoil,buildings
andstructures,andhumans.
AccordingtoWoods(1997)therearethreeelementsthatmustbepresentforpotential
developmentofproblemsduetopiledriving:
1) Sensitivetargetsorreceiversofvibrationcanbeanypersonorobjectthat
maybesensitivetovibrations.
2) Mediathroughwhichthevibrationsaretransmitted
3) Sourceofvibrations
2.5.1 Impactonsoil
Vibrationsproducedbypiledrivinghaveanimpactonthesoilthroughwhichtheyare
transmitted(Heckman&Hagerty,1978)(Madheswaranet.al.,2005).Theeffectofvibrations
onsoilandrockcanbesummarizedasfollows(Thurner,1976)(Holmbergetal.,1984)
(Hintzeetal.,1997):
x CohesivesoilVibrationscanreduceshearstrength
x NoncohesivesoilVibrationscangivesettlements,liquefactionorevenslides
Effectsofvibrationonnoncohesivesoilaregenerallymuchmoresignificantthantheeffects
ofthesamevibrationoncohesivesoils.
Asoilsubjectedtoacontinuousvibrationwillexperiencecyclicdegradationasthenumber
ofcyclesincrease.Forasoilsubjectedtotransientvibrations,theresponseismoreunknown.
Thereislittleinformationontheeffectsofrepeatedtransientvibrations,withapeakstress
occurringonlyonceortwiceforeachblowwiththeremainingcyclesbeingoflower
magnitude(Wiss,1981).
2.5.1.1 Settlementandheaveinnoncohesivesoil
Thesettlementsfromdensificationofthesoilduetopiledrivingmayinmanycaseshavea
muchmoredetrimentaleffectuponadjacentstructuresthanvibrationstransmitteddirectly
tothestructure(Heckman&Hagerty,1978).AccordingtoMassarsch(2000a)ahighshear
wavevelocityandplasticityindexdecreasetheriskforsettlementsandthesizeofthe
settlementisdependentuponthenumberofvibrationcycles.
51
Figure2.30Compactionofsoilconcerningrelativedensityandcriticalporepressure,modifiedafter
Viking(2002a).
Underthestrainofcyclicloading,loosesandstendtodensifywhiledensesandsdilate.
AccordingtoKramer(1996),Massarsch(2000a)andViking(2002a)thereexistsacritical
densityorcriticalvoidratiowhichthesandapproacheswhensubjectedtocyclicloading.
Disregardingthematerialsinitialrelativedensity,looseordense,therelativedensityclosest
tothepile/sheetpilewillalwayschangetowardsthecriticalrelativedensity,seeFigure2.30.
AccordingtoWoods(1997)itisbelievedthatvibrationsfrompiledrivingthatcause
settlementarelikelytocontainmanycyclesoflowamplitudeshearingstrains.Massarsch
(2000aand2004)agreed,statingthatfundamentalconceptsandearlierpublisheddatashow
thattheshearstrainistheprimaryfactorcausingcompactionofgranularmaterialandthat
compactionincreaseswithshearstrainamplitude.
Thethresholdstrain,t,isdefinedasthevalueofcyclicshearstrainsuchthatthecyclicshear
strainslessthantwillnotcauseanydensificationofdrygranularsoilsoranyporepressure
buildupinwatersaturatedsoil(Massarsch,2004).AccordingtoMassarsch(2000aand2004)
theriskforgroundsettlementorstrengthlossisverylowiftheshearstrainleveldoesnot
exceed0.001%.Shouldtheshearstrainlevelcausedbygroundvibrationexceed0.1%,the
riskforsettlementorlossofstrengthissignificantincohesivesoils.
Hintzeetal.(1997)statedinsteadthatcompactionduetovibrationdoesnothappenuntilthe
accelerationexceedsacertainthresholdvalue,oracriticalacceleration.Thisbasicallymeans
thatamaterialthathasbeencompactedbeforehandtoacertainvoidratio,ev,willnot
compactmoreuntilitexperiencesvibrationsinwhichtheaccelerationisgreaterthanwhatit
hasearlierexperienced.Bement&Selby(1997)showedthatloosegranularsaturatedsoils
maycompactduringprolongedvibrationiftheparticleaccelerationexceeds0.20.4g,butare
limitedtoadepthof10mbelowthegroundsurface.Theyalsoshowedthatcompactionis
unlikelytooccuratmorethan5mfromthepileunlesswidespreadliquefactionoccurs.
Clough&Chameau(1980)showedthatthereisacorrelationbetweenstrain(estimatedasthe
amountofsettlementatapointdividedbytheheightoffillmaterialbeneaththatpoint)and
acceleration,thefielddataalsoshowthataslongastheaccelerationsarelessthan0.1gthe
strainsdonotexceed0.3%.
52
2LITERATURESTUDY
Thesizeofthesettlementdependsonseveralfactors,includingsoiltypeandstratification,
groundwaterconditions(degreeofsaturation),piletypeanddrivingmethod(Massarsch,
2004).Hintzeetal.(1997)statedthatthesizeofsettlementsismostlydependentonthe
magnitudeofthevibrationamplitudeandthedensityofthesoil.Bement&Selby(1995)
showedfromlaboratoryteststhatawellgradedsoilwithahighcoefficientofuniformity
experienceslargersettlementsfromgroundvibrationsthanmoreuniformsoils.Theyalso
showthatdryandsaturatedsoilsexperiencelargersettlementsthanpartiallysaturatedsoils.
AccordingtoHeckman&Hagerty(1978),dry,loosetomediumdensesands,andsaturated,
loosetomediumdensesandsaremostsusceptibletodensification,whilepartiallysaturated
ormoistsandsarelesssusceptibletodensification.Thiscanalsobeseenindiscussions
regardingoptimalwatercontentinsoilsforcompaction.
Ithasbeenshownthatalreadyatavibrationmeasurementof2.55mm/s(ontheground
surface)thepiledrivinggivesacompactionofloosetomediumloosenoncohesivesoil
(Hintzeetal.,1997).Clough&Chameau(1980)measuredsettlementsduringvibratory
drivingofsheetpilesinmainlynoncohesivesoil.Veryclosetothepiles,themeasured
settlementswereashighas127mm.However,settlementdecreasedrapidlywithdistance
andwasbasicallyzeroat12mfromthepiles.Thedifferenceinsettlementsbetweendifferent
locationswasexplainedbythedifferencesinsoildensityinthefills;lowerdensities
coincidedwithlargersettlements.Heckman&Hagerty(1978)proposedtheuseofDutch
ConePenetrationTestsandStandardPenetrationTestsorequivalentforidentifyingzonesin
thegroundwithloosermaterialthatmaydensifyduringvibration.
2.5.1.2 Porewaterpressurebuildup
Piledrivingcancausegreatporewaterpressures(Hintzeetal.,1997).Theporewater
pressureinlesspermeablesoilsdoesnothavetimetodecreasebeforethenextvibration
givingagradualincreaseofthepressureresultinginadecreaseoftheeffectivestressinthe
soil.Thereducedeffectivestressinturnsleadstoreducedstrength(DAppolonia,1971)
(Nilsson,1989)(Hintzeetal.,1997)(Mlleretal.,2000).Whenpilesaredrivenintoclay
depositscontaininglayersofpermeablematerial(saturatedsandorsilt)thereisariskthat
theexcessporewaterpressurewillreducetheshearstrengthofthegranularlayers.This
phenomenonhasbeenobservedtocausestabilityproblemsandslopefailures(Massarsch,
2004).
ResearchdoneinBangkokcitybyMuktabhant&Sasisuwun(1975),citedbyBrenner&
Chittikuladilok(1975),statedthatexcessporepressureinducedbypiledrivingwasobserved
withinazoneofabouteightpilediameters.
Holeyman(2002)showedthattheexcessporepressurefromcyclicloadingincreaseswith
shearstrainandnumberofcycles.
Piledrivinginloose,saturatedsandsorsiltscangeneratehighporewaterpressures.The
highporewaterpressurecanreducethestabilityofslopesandexcavations.Liquefactionis
definedasa,oftendrastic,strengthreductionofthesoil,makingitunabletosupport
structuresorremainstable.Liquefactiononlyoccursinsaturatedsoils,andassuchismost
commonnearrivers,bays,andotherbodiesofwater(Kramer,1996).
53
2.5.2 Impactonbuildingsandstructures
Thecorrelationbetweenvibrationsandbuildingdamageiscomplicatedformanyreasons.
Onereasonisthatbuildingsareconstructedinsomanydifferentways,withdifferent
dimensions,buildingmaterials,constructionmethods,foundationtypesandexecutions
(IVA,1983).
Thandavamoorthy(2004)statedthataruleofthumbinpiledrivingpracticeisthatstructures
withinonepilelengthfromthedrivenpilecanbedamagedduetovibrations.
2.5.2.1 Damageonbuildingsandstructures
Buildingdamageduetovibrationcanrangefromstructuraldamage,suchasmajorfailures
inthebuildingstructure,toarchitecturaldamagesuchascrackingofplaster(Martin,1980).
Generallydamageonbuildingsandstructurescanbedividedinto(seee.g.Brenner&
Chittikuladilok(1975)andHead&Jardine(1992)):
x Architecturaldamagedamagetotheappearanceofsurfacefinishesandfittings
x Serviceabilitydamagedamagetothefunctionofthebuilding
x Structuraldamagedamagetostructuralpartsofthebuildingthatpotentiallyleads
tofailureorcollapse
x Damagetobuildingcontent
Structuraldamagetobuildingsoftenstartswiththedevelopmentofcracksinthestructure.
Otherevidenceofstructuraldamageduetovibrationscouldbebrokenorcrackedwindows,
buildingdistortionduetosettlement,orwaterleakingintoabasementoroutofaseweror
otherconduit(Woods,1997).
Bymanyinvestigators,apeakparticlevelocityof50mm/sisconsideredasafelimitwith
respecttostructures(Madheswaranet.al.,2005).Thesummaryofvibrationlevelsresulting
indamagecompiledbyHead&Jardine(1992)indicatedthatmostpublicationshaveplaced
thethresholdformajordamagebetween50and100mm/s.Itisextremelyunlikelythat
damagewouldoccuratpeakparticlevelocitiesmeasuredatthefoundationsmallerthan2
mm/s.Particularcareshouldbetakentooldandhistoricalbuildings,astheyareusually
moresensitivetovibrationsandalsomorecostlytorestoreifdamageweretooccur.
Buildingcontents,suchasblindsandpictures,wouldbegintovisiblymoveat0.5mm/s.
Rattlingofwindows,crockeryorlooseobjectswouldbeaudibleandannoyingat0.9mm/s
(SAGovernment,2007).
Manydifferenttypesofequipmentarehighlysensitivetovibrations.Forexamplecomputer
systemsandopticalequipment(electronmicroscopes)functionpoorlyandmightevenbe
damagedwhensubjectedtovibrations(Head&Jardine,1992).Whenassessingtheriskfor
damageonsensitiveequipment,Head&Jardine(1992)recommendedthatthemanufacturer
oroperatoriscontactedforacceptablevibrationlevels.Forverysensitiveequipment(for
exampleelectronmicroscopes),vibrationamplitudesassmallas24*106mmcanbe
damaging(Woods,1997).Asareferencetovibrationsgeneratedbyotheractivities,Table2.8
isincluded.
54
2LITERATURESTUDY
Table2.8Exampleofvibrationsinbuildingsundernormalconditions(Stille&Hall,1995fromNew,
1990).

Vibrationsource

Modernsteelframe
office
Resulting PPV (mm/s)

Modernmasonry
dwelling
Olddwelling(thick,
limemortarmasonry)
2.5.2.2 Damagemechanisms
Muchofthebuildingdamagesthatresultsfromconstructionworkissaidtobedueto
vibration.However,itisinfactcausedbyoneofthemechanismsdescribedbelow.

Anindirectcauseofbuildingdamageduetopiledrivingvibrationsissettlementinducedin
especiallynoncohesivesoils.Settlement,particularlyunevensettlementunderabuilding,
cancauseextensivedamage.Settlementissaidtobeseenatdistancesupto10pilediameters
orevenupto1015mfromthedrivenpile(Head&Jardine,1992)(Hintzeetal.,1997).
AccordingtoWoods(1997),settlementdamagetostructureshasbeenreportedtooccurup
to400mfromthepiledrivingsite.

Wavespropagatingalongthegroundsurfaceresultinanundulationofthegroundsurface
downtoadepthofapproximatelyonewavelength(Hintzeetal.,1997)(Massarsch,2004).
Thewavelength,,isofgreatimportancefortheinfluencethegrounddistortionhasona
building.Thewavelengthisinmanycasessomewherebetween1060m(Wiss,1967)
(Holmberget.al.,1984).Ifthewavelengthofthevibrationsisconsiderablylongerthanthe
buildinglength,thebuildingisliftedandsunkdown,seeFigure2.31a.Ifthebuildinglength
andwavelengthareapproximatelythesame,thewholebuildingcanexperienceflexural
(bending)stress,seeFigure2.31b.Shouldthebuildinglengthgreatlyexceedthewavelength,
thebuildingsabsolutelocationwillnotchange,butpartsofthebuildingmayexperience
flexuralstressorpartsmayexperiencehighaccelerationforces,seeFigure2.31c(Thurner,
1976).IfthefoundationofthestructureinFigure2.31cisrigid,thewaveinthegroundwill
causeareastoexperiencenegativereactionsfromtheelasticsoilbase,whichmightleadto
changesinthecontactconditionsbetweenthestructureandtheelasticsoilbase(Svinkin,
2008).
AccordingtoMassarsch(2000a)thereisariskforbuildingdamagewhenthewavelengthof
thepropagatingwaveisshorterthanthebuildinglength.Thiscouldbethecaseforsoftclays
orsiltsbelowgroundwaterlevel,inwhichwavepropagationvelocityislow.
55
Figure2.31Thewavelengthssignificanceontheimpact,modifiedafterThurner(1976).

Directvibrationiswhenthedamageisadirectresultofthevibrationvelocityorthe
accelerationandthevibrationfrequency,seeFigure2.32(Massarsch,2004).Forexample
dynamicamplificationfactorsintheframeorinbuildingpartscanleadtostructuralor
architecturaldamage(Hintzeet.al.,1997).
Figure2.32Directvibrations,modifiedafterMassarsch(2004).
AccordingtoAtlasCopcoABEM(1973),theBuildingResearchStationinEngland(1970)
showedfromnumerousinvestigationsofgroundandstructuralvibrationsthattherewere
nocasesinwhichobservedbuildingdamagewasproventobecausedbytheeffectsof
vibrationalone.Athanasopoulos&Pelekis(2000)andSvinkin(2005)saidthattheeffectof
directvibrationsonstructurescanbelimitedtoadistanceofonepilelengthfromthedriven
pile.However,forstructuressusceptibletovibrationsthisdistancecanbeconsiderably
larger.
2.5.2.3 Damagingfactors
Fromthefindingsinliterature(Heckman&Hagerty(1978),Martin(1980),IVA(1983),Head
&Jardine(1992),Stille&Hall(1995),Hintzeetal.(1997),Svinkin(2005)),itisconcludedthat
thefollowingfactorsaffectthevibrationimpactonabuilding:
x Frequencyofvibration
x Magnitudeofvibration
x Stiffnessofbuildingandbuildingelements
x Dampingcharacteristicsofthebuilding
x Typeofconstruction
x Typeoffoundation
x Durationofvibration
56
2LITERATURESTUDY
x
x
Waveform
Conditionofthebuilding,e.g.initialstaticstress
Ithasbeenshownthatdamagetobuildingscanbecorrelatedwiththepeakparticlevelocity
(Martin,1980).Itisnotthevibrationvelocitiesthemselvesthatcausestructuraldamageor
humandisturbance.Whenitcomestobuildingdamage,itistheresultingdynamicstrains
thatareofconcern(Rockhilletal.,2003).
Whentheeffectsofgroundvibrationsonbuildingsareconsidered,therangeoffrequencies
inthegroundvibrationisofgreatimportance.Iftheincomingvibrationhasafrequencyat
ornearthestructuresnaturalfrequency,resonanceoccursandthevibrationatgroundlevel
ismagnifiedinthestructure.Atresonance,thevibrationsareamplifiedanddamageisquite
likelytooccur(Wiss,1967)(Heckman&Hagerty,1978)(Stille&Hall,1995)
(Thandavamoorthy,2004).Svinkin(2005)statedthatresonantstructuralvibrationscanbe
triggeredatdistancesuptoafewhundredmetersfromthedrivenpile.Thenatural
frequencyofamultistoreybuildingisoftenapproximatedbyfn=10/N,whereNisthe
numberofstories(Head&Jardine,1992)(Stille&Hall,1995).Residentialstructuresusually
haveanaturalfrequencybetween410Hz.Asaresult,thecriteriaforlowfrequency
vibrationshavebeensetatalowerparticlevelocitythanforhighfrequencyvibrations(Wiss,
1981).
Alpan&Meidav(1963)statedthataccelerationaloneisnotasatisfactorycriterionfor
susceptibilitytodamage.Inearthquakeareasitwasobservedthataccelerationsof0.1g
causeddamageifassociatedwithlowfrequencies,whileaccelerationsof1gor2gweresafe
athighfrequencies.FromFigure2.33itcanbeseenthatlowfrequencyvibrationsrequire
lowertolerancesthanhighfrequencyvibrations(Woods,1997).
Figure2.33Relationshipbetweenpeakparticlevelocity,frequencyandpossibilityofdamageisshown,
modifiedafterMlleretal.(2000).
57
Table2.9Excitationfrequencyinrelationtonaturalfrequency,vibrationmode,dynamicstressand
physicalmeasure(Niederwanger,1999).
Frequencyofexcitation
(Hz)
Buildingexcitedby
05
510
1060
>60

Naturalfrequencyof
Modeofvibration
Dynamicstress
Significantphysical
measure
Niederwanger(1999)presentedaninterestingtableregardingexcitationfrequencyandits
relationtonaturalfrequencies,vibrationmode,dynamicstressandsignificantphysical
measure,seeTable2.9.
Kramer(1996)aswellasNiederwanger(1999)stressedthefactorofdurationasanimportant
parameterforbuildingdamage.Amotionwithshortdurationmightnotproduceenough
loadreversalsfordamagingresponsetobuildupinastructure,eveniftheamplitudewould
behigh.Itcouldalsobethatamotionwithmoderateamplitudebutlongdurationisableto
produceenoughloadreversalstocausedamage.
Theimportanceoffrequencyinregardtoresonanceismuchmoreaccentuatedwhendealing
withvibrationsfromvibratorydrivenpilesthanfromimpactdrivenpiles.Duringimpact
drivingthedurationofthevibrationisshort(0.20.3s)andresonancebuildupofstructural
componentsisunlikely(Wiss,1967)(Svinkin,2005).AccordingtoErlingsson&Bodare(1996)
ittakesabout1520loadcyclestobuildupasteadystateresponseoftheground.Wiss(1967)
statedthatthesafelevelofvibrationsduetotransientvibrationscouldbetwiceorevenupto
fivetimesthesafelevelforsteadystatevibrations.However,fromtheabovereasoningit
wouldmeanthatvibrationswithafrequencyoverabout50Hzduringaperiodof0.3s
wouldbeabletogiveresonance.
2.5.3 Impactonhumans
Humansensitivitytovibrationsisaheritagefromanerawhenpeopledevelopeda
perceptionsystemtowarnthemoflandslides,flocksofanimalsandthelike(Holmberget.
al.,1984).Hence,humansareverysensitivetogroundvibrations,andevenminorvibrations
mayattractcomplaintsfrompeoplelivingorworkinginthevicinityofconstructionwork
(Stille&Hall,1995)(Haegeman,2002)(ArcelorMittal,2008).Extremelylargevibrationscan
bedirectlyharmfultothehumanbody;however,inpracticesuchlevelsneveroccurduring
piledriving.Insteadtheproblemisthedisturbingeffectandtheexpectationeffect
(Holmberget.al.,1984).
58
2LITERATURESTUDY
2.5.3.1 Humanperceptionofvibrations
Humanperceptionissaidtobethemostdifficultcomponenttodealwith.Measuresof
humanperceptionandtolerancehavebeenmeasuredandresultsareapplicableforthe
averageindividual.However,inagroupofpeopleitistheleasttolerantindividualwho
maycontrolthesituation(Woods,1997).
Humansperceivevibrationsataverylowlevel(Head&Jardine,1992)(Hiller&Hope,1998).
AccordingtoBrenner&Chittikuladilok(1975)andMartin(1980)humanscanperceive
vibrationsthataremuchlower,actuallyuptoabout30timeslower,thanthelevelsthat
usuallycausearchitecturaldamagetobuildings.Asaresult,thetriggerforcomplaintsand
litigationismoreoftenhumanperceptionandtolerancethanactualphysicaldamageto
structures(Woods,1997).InTable2.10thehumanperceptionofdifferentvibrationlevelsare
shown.
Table2.10Approximatevibrationlevelwithcorrespondinghumanperception(Wiss,1981)(Selby,
1991)(SAGovernment,2007).
Approximatevibrationlevel(mm/s)
Degreeofhumanperception

2.5.3.2 Factorsaffectinghumanresponse
Fromliterature(Head&Jardine(1992),Hintzeetal.(1997),andStille&Hall(1995)alisthas
beencompiledofthefactorsthataffectthehumanresponseofvibrations:
x Durationofvibration
x Currentactivityofaperson(lyingorstanding,workingorrestingetc.)
x Accompanyingnoise
x Frequencyofvibration
x Characteristicsofvibration(transientorcontinuous)
x Vibrationmagnitude
x Physicalandmentalconditionaswellaspersonalattitude
x Timeofday
Anothercriticalfactorwhenitcomestoimpactonhumansisthatwhenpeoplefeel
vibrationstheybecomeconcernedaboutbuildingsafetyandbegintosearchforpossible
damage(Brenner&Chittikuladilok,1975)(SAGovernment,2007).Head&Jardine(1992)
claimedthatthereasonthatpeoplecomplainaboutpilingworksisinmanycasesthatthey
aretemporaryandintermittent,whilerepresentingachangetonormalconditionswith
intenseactivityandsuddennoise.Thefactorofpersonalattitudescanlargelybehelpedby
informingaffectedpeopleaboutthenatureandtimingofthevibrationsandassurancesthat
thevibrationsaremonitoredandundercontrol(Head&Jardine,1992).Ithasbeennoticed
thatthetoleratedvibrationlevelishigherifthecauseforthevibrationisknownandno
damageistobeexpected(Stille&Hall,1995).
59
Figure2.34Humanresponsetotransientpulsesofvaryingduration,modifiedafterWoods(1997).
Experiencehasshownthatforapersonstanding,verticalmovementsaremorenoticeable
thanhorizontalmovementsandviceversaforpeoplelyingdown.Thus,theconclusioncan
bedrawnthathumansaremoresensitivetovibrationsinthebodyslongitudinaldirection
(Richartetal.,1970)(Mlleretal,2000).
Inplacesnormallywithoutvibrations,peoplearemoredisturbedthaninurbanareaswitha
lotofbackgroundnoise(Stille&Hall,1995).
Thevibrationfrequencyaffectshowtheyareperceived;thehumanbodysownvibration
frequencycanamplifytheuneasinessofvibrations(Hintzeetal.,1997)(ArcelorMittal,2008).
Ithasbeenseenthatthehumanbodyismoresensitivetoaccelerationatlowfrequencies.
Thisisparticularlyobservablewhenfrequenciesarearound25Hz,whichistheresonance
frequencyofthehumanbody(Brenner&Chittikuladilok,1975).Thisisconfirmedbythe
SwedishEngineeringSociety(IVA,1983),whostatedthatvibrationswithinthefrequency
rangeof120Hzareusuallyespeciallydisturbingforhumans,whilevibrationswith
frequenciesgreaterthan20or30Hzarenormallyconsideredasmallerproblem.
Durationandtimeofexposureisanotherfactortoconsider,seeFigure2.34.Accordingtothe
figure,thelevelofbarelyperceptiblemotiondecreasesfromabout2.5mm/sfor1sof
exposuretoabout0.5mm/sat100sofexposure(Woods,1997).
Ithasbeenshownthatthethresholdofperceptionispracticallythesameforsteadystate
andtransientvibrations.However,whenitcomestocausingannoyanceforpeople,thelevel
isconsiderablylowerforsteadystatevibrationsthanfortransientvibrations(Brenner&
Chittikuladilok,1975).Thevibrationlevelshumansfinddisturbingfromtransientvibrations
are310timeshigherthanthedisturbingvibrationlevelfromacontinuousvibration,see
Figure2.35(Wiss,1967)(Stille&Hall,1995).
60
2LITERATURESTUDY
Figure2.35Comparisonofhumanreactionstosteadystateandtransientvibrations,modifiedafter
Stille&Hall(1995,originallyfromReiher&Meister(1931)andWiss&Parmlee(1974)).
2.6 MEASUREMENTOFVIBRATION
Acrucialkeyforunderstandingandanalysingtheproblemofvibrationsinducedbypile
drivingistoknowthevibrationlevelsactuallycausedbysuchactivities.Inthissection
vibrationmeasurementsandmonitoringarediscussedandmethodsarepresented.
2.6.1 Measurementequipment
Usuallyvibrationmeasurementsareperformedtodeterminemagnitudeoramplitudeof
motion(displacement,velocity,oracceleration)asafunctionoftime.Themeasuringdevice
selectedmustthereforebedesignedtomeasureoneofthesederivativesofmotion.Itis
alwayspreferabletomeasuretheparametertobecontrolledorevaluateddirectlyinorderto
avoiderrorsin,forexample,integration(Mlleretal.,2000).
Afewofthemostcommondevicesformeasuringvibrationsaredescribedbelow.
2.6.1.1 Velocitytransducers
Atransducerissaidtobeanydeviceorinstrumentthatconvertsaphysicalphenomenon
intoanelectricalsignal(Richartetal.,1970).Velocitytransducersusedasmeasurement
devicesincludegeophonesandseismographs.
61
Figure2.36Principalcomponentsofavelocitytransducer,modifiedafterRichartetal.(1970).

Theprincipalofoperationforvelocitytransducersisthatanelectriccoilmovesinamagnetic
field,seeFigure2.36.Whenthetransducerisshakenthecoilmovesthroughamagneticfield
producedbyapermanentmagnet.Thismechanismproducesavoltagethatisproportional
totherelativevelocitybetweenthecoilandthemagnet.Eitherthecoilorthemagnetmay
move.Velocitytransducerswithmovingcoilsareinsensitivetoexternalmagneticfields,
whilethoseinwhichthemagnetisthemovingcomponentaresensitivetoexternalmagnetic
fields(Woods,1997).
Sincevelocitytransducersproduceavoltagethatisproportionaltotheparticlevelocityof
thesurfaceonwhichtheyaremounted,itisimportantthatthemountingisdoneproperlyso
thatreliablerepresentationsofmotionaremade.Avelocitytransducercanbeplacedat
considerabledistancefromtherecordersincethevoltageisnotaffectedbycablelength
(Woods,1997).
Velocitytransducerscanonlymeasureinonedirection.Inordertomeasurebothvertical
andhorizontalvibrationsitisnecessarytohavedifferentvelocitytransducersbecauseofthe
internalmountingofamassonsprings(Mlleretal.,2000).Usuallythreetransducersare
connectedperpendiculartoeachothertoenablemeasurementsinthreecomponentsof
motion.Normallymeasurementsareperformedintheverticalandintwohorizontal
directions(longitudinaltothesourceandperpendiculartothesource)(Mlleretal.,2000).
AccordingtoKim&Lee(2000)theresponseofvelocitytransducersbecomesnonlinearat
lowfrequencies;theyalsohaveanaturalfrequencysinceitisasingledegreeoffreedom
system.Duetothisitisnecessarytocalibratetheexactvoltageoutputforthegeophonewith
frequency.
2.6.1.2 Accelerationtransducers
Accelerometersaresmallerthangeophones,buthavealargerfrequencyanddynamicrange
(Head&Jardine,1992).Itmaybeconvenientorevennecessarytouseaccelerometersfor
groundmotionsgreaterthan250mm/sandfrequencieshigherthanabout500Hz(Woods,
1997).
62
2LITERATURESTUDY
Themostcommontypeofaccelerationtransducersareaccelerometers.

Thereareseveraltransductionprinciplesforaccelerometers.Themostcommontypeusesthe
piezoelectricpropertiesofcertainnaturalandartificialcrystals.Itworksaccordingtothe
principlethatsqueezingorshearingofoneofthesepiezocrystalscausescurrenttoflowina
conductorattachedtooppositesidesofthecrystal.Theamountofgeneratedcurrentis
proportionaltothepressureorshearforce.Thefunctionoftheaccelerometeristhatthe
crystalissqueezedbyaseismicmass,producingaforceproportionaltoitsacceleration
(fromF=ma)(Woods,1997).
Accelerometersrequiresupplemental(signalconditioning)instrumentationinadditionto
recordinginstrumentation,whichisadisadvantage.Anotherdisadvantageisthe
vulnerabilityofthecablinginfieldapplicationsandthecalibrationofthetransducermay
alsobedependentoncablelength(Woods,1997).
Usuallyaccelerometersareconstructedtooperateineithershearorcompression(Head&
Jardine,1992).Oilexplorationgeophysicsledtothedevelopmentofrobustmovingcoil
accelerometersworkinginthefrequencyrangeof2200Hz(Head&Jardine,1992).
2.6.1.3 Displacementtransducers
Displacementtransducersarenotascommonasvelocityoraccelerationtransducersfor
measurementsofvibrationsduetopiledriving.Forliteraturedescribingdisplacement
transducersthereaderisreferredtoe.g.Richartetal.(1970).
2.6.1.4 Componentofmotiontomeasure
Therearethreedifferentquantitiesofvibrationthatcanbemeasured:amplitude,velocity
andacceleration.Thequantitytomeasureischosenaccordingtowhatthemeasurements
shouldshowandthequantitythatbestdescribestheimpactofthevibrationonnearby
objects.Themaximumparticlevelocityisoftenusedasameasureofvibration.Whyley&
Sarsby(1992)andAthanasopoulos&Pelekis(2000)confirmedthatinmoststudiesofground
vibrations,thevibrationintensityisdescribedbytheparticlevelocity.
Onereasonfortheuseofthevibrationvelocityisthatthekineticenergytransferredintothe
soilduringavibrationgeneratingactivityisproportionaltothesquareofthevelocity
(Niederwanger,1999).Anotherreasonisthatthevibrationvelocityisagoodindicatorofthe
potentialfordamagesincetheinduceddynamicstressinthebuildingisproportionaltothe
vibrationvelocity(Whyley&Sarsby,1992)(Hiller&Hope,1998).
Wavesproducedbyearthquakescontainlowfrequencies.Forthesewavesitismore
commonthataccelerationisusedasadamagemeasure.Thevibrationtolerancelevelin
vibrationsensitiveequipment,suchascomputersorsophisticatedlaboratoryequipment,is
oftenexpressedinacceleration(AtlasCopcoABEM,1973).
63
Figure2.37Examplesofoscillationmovementsshownasbothfunctionoftimeandfrequency.
2.6.2 Interpretationandpresentationofresults
Resultsfromvibrationmeasurementsneedtobeinterpretedandpresentedinordertobeof
anyvalue.
2.6.2.1 VibrationRecords
Vibrationrecordscanbeobtainedinmanydifferentways.Mostvibrationsarerecordedas
voltageversustime.Foreachtransducer,voltageisrelatedtomotionbytheuseofa
calibrationfactor.Today,mostrecordingisdoneindigitalformatinwhichtheanalogue
voltagesignalisconvertedtoadigitalformatandthenstoredonaharddisk(Woods,1997).
Avibratorymotionisusuallycharacterisedeitherasafunctionoftimeorasafunctionof
frequency,seeFigure2.37.Inthetimedomainthemaximumandminimumvaluecanbe
interpreted.Inthefrequencydomainthedominatingfrequencycanbeevaluated(Mlleret
al,2000).
Complicatedoscillationpatternsareoftenshownasafunctionoffrequency,afrequency
spectrum,inwhichtheincludingfrequenciesaredisplayed(IVA,1979).Different
oscillationmovementsareshowninFigure2.37,bothasfunctionoftimeandoffrequency.
ThefrequencyspectrumisusuallyobtainedbyperformingafastFouriertransform(FFT)
(Tamateetal.,1995).
2.6.2.2 Peakparticlevelocity(PPV)
Groundvibrationsare,forengineeringpurposes,usuallyquantifiedintermsofpeakparticle
velocity(PPV).PPVcanbedefinedinseveraldifferentways,someofwhicharelistedhere
(Head&Jardine,1992)(Hiller&Hope,1998)(Athansopoulos&Pelekis,2000):
64
2LITERATURESTUDY
SRSS(simulatedresultant)
Unidirectionalpeak
Verticalpeakvalue
Instantaneous(true)resultant

VibrationsfrompiledrivingcouldbecharacterisedbythesimulatedresultantPPV.The
simulatedresultantisalsoreferredtoastheSRSS(squarerootofsumofsquares)asitisthe
vectorsumofthepeakparticlevelocitiesinthreemutuallyperpendiculardirections,which
maynotoccursimultaneously(Head&Jardine,1992)(Rockhilletal.,2003).Sometimesthe
vibrationintensityisdescribedbythepeakcomponentofparticlevelocityorthepeakvalue
oftheverticalcomponent.Thetruevectorsumortheinstantaneousresultantisalsoused
(Hiller&Hope,1998)(Athansopoulos&Pelekis,2000).
ItisabsolutelynecessarytostatewhichdefinitionofthePPVisusedsincethenominalPPV
candifferlargelydependingonthedefinitionused.Head&Jardine(1992)andRockhilletal.
(2003)proposedtheuseofthesimulatedpeakresultant(SRSS).However,accordingto
Athanasopoulos&Pelekis(2000)SRSSisnolongerusedasoften,andisnowconsideredas
tooconservative.Theyclaimedthatfielddatahadindicatedthatcomparedtothetrue
resultant,orthetruevectorsumastheycallit,thepeakcomponentparticlevelocitywasup
to25%lowerwhilevSRSSwas50%higher.
2.6.2.3 Particledisplacementpaths
Vertical velocity [mm/s]
Vertical velocity [mm/s]
Particledisplacementpathscanbeplottedusinggroundvibrationdatainthreeorthogonal
directions,seeFigure2.38.Particledisplacementpathsareobtainedbycombiningthe
verticalandhorizontaltimehistoriesofcomponentsofmotionandcangiveinformation
regardingthetypesofwavepropagatingawayfromthevibrationsource(Athanasopoulos&
Pelekis,2000)(Whenham,2011).
-1
-2
-3
-3
-2
-1
Transversal velocity [mm/s]
-1
-2
-3
-3
-2
-1
Longitudinal velocity [mm/s]
Figure2.38Examplesofparticledisplacementpaths(Lidn,2012).
65
2.7 PREDICTIONOFVIBRATIONSDUETOPILEDRIVING
Head&Jardine(1992)statedthatthebestwaytoknowifapilingoperationwillresultin
acceptablevibrationlevelsistoperformtrialpilingatthesitebeforethestartofthereal
pilingworks.However,inmanycasestrialpilingisnotpossibleandareliableprediction
modelisneededinstead.
Predictionofthegeneratedvibrationsinaconstructionprojectcanhaveimportanteconomic
andtechnicalconsequences.Unnecessarilyconservativeassumptionsleadtoincreasingcosts
andmayalsolimitthechoiceofconstructionmethodsand/ordelaytheproject.However,
underestimatingtheenvironmentalimpactmayleadtodamagedstructures,disturbed
occupantsandauthoritiesmaystoptheconstructionwork.Despitethefactthatresearchon
thesubjecthasledtothedevelopmentofnew,mainlytheoretical,predictionmodelsthere
seemstobeageneralconsensusinliteraturethatasoftodayreliablemethodsforestimating
thevibrationsfrompiledrivingaremissing(seee.g.Hintzeetal.(1997),Whyley&Sarsby
(1992),Massarsch(2004),Jongmans(1996),Madheswaranetal.(2005),Waarts&Bielefeld
(1994)andDavis(2010)).
Thissectionpresentstheexistingpredictionmodelsandmethodsforestimatingvibrations
duetopiledriving.Furthermore,conceptsandtheoryaboutfactorsinfluencingthe
predictedvibrationsareincluded.
Theexistingpredictionmodelscanbedividedintodifferentcategoriesdependingontheir
approach.Inliteraturedifferentwaysofcategorisingpredictionmodelshavebeenseen.For
example,Whenham(2011)lookedatempiricalapproaches,analyticalapproachesand
numericalapproaches.Davis(2010)dividedpredictionmodelsintotheoretical/(semi)
analytical,insitutesting/fieldmeasurementsModularPredictionApproaches,empirical
prediction/DirectMeasurementPredictionModel(DMPM)andnumericalmodels.Inthis
studypredictionmodelsforpredictionofvibrationsfrompiledrivingaredividedintothe
followingthreecategories:
x Empiricalmodelsmodelsbasedonempiricalknowledgefromprevious
measurementsandexperience
x Theoreticalmodelssuchasfiniteelementmodelsoranalyticalmodels
x Engineeringmodelssometimesalsocalledmixedapproachmodels,theseareamix
ofempiricalmodels,theoreticalmodelsandengineeringknowledge
Thefirststepforpredictionbymeansofmeasurementinvolvesconductingvibration
measurementsatthesiteofinterestduringpiling/sheetpiling.Themeasurementsarethen
evaluatedandfitintoanattenuationrelationship.Thesetypesofpredictionmodelsareonly
applicableatthespecificsiteswheremeasurementhasbeenconducted.Predictionmodels
basedonmeasurementsarenotstudiedfurtherinthisliteraturestudy;onlymodelsthatcan
beusedwithoutpreviousvibrationmeasurementsarepresented.
2.7.1 Empiricalmodels
Eveniftherearenogenerallyacceptedmethodsforpredictingvibrationsduringpile
driving,alotofmeasurementsandempiricalknowledgeexists.Inmostcasesthecalculation
66
2LITERATURESTUDY
ofgroundvibrationsisstillbasedonroughempiricalrulesdevelopedalongtimeago
(Hintzeetal.,1997)(Massarsch&Fellenius,2008).
Head&Jardine(1992),Hiller&Hope(1998)andMassarsch(2004)pointedoutthatempirical
relationsshouldonlybeappliedinconditionssimilartothoseforwhichtheywere
developed.Inparticularempiricalmodelsmaybeunreliableclosetothepileorinlocations
withinterveningstructures.
2.7.1.1 Attewell&Farmermodel
Wiss(1967)discoveredthatthevibrationmagnitudeduetopiledrivingvariedbythe
amountofenergytransmittedtothesoil,thesoilpropertiesandthedistancefromthesource
andconcludedthattheparticlevelocityvariedwiththesquarerootoftheenergyofthe
hammer.Sincethenmanypredictionmodelshavetakentheformofapowerlaw(orenergy
basedpredictionmodel)inwhichthegroundvibrationmagnitudeisassumedtobe
dependentonthehammerenergy.
In1973Attewell&Farmerpresentedoneofthefirstempiricalpredictionmodels,wherethey
suggestthattheverticalpeakparticlevelocity,v,isgivenaccordingtothegeneralformula:
Eq.2.43
W0

k
r
(mm/s)
Where
k=empiricallydeterminedconstantofproportionality(m2/sJ)
W0=inputenergy(hammerenergy)(J)
r=radialdistancebetweenpileandmonitoringpoint(m)
x=empiricallydeterminedindex()
Attewell&Farmer(1973)concludedthatlossesduetomaterialdampingaresmallcompared
tolossesduetogeometricaldamping.Asaresult,theysuggestedthatmaterialdampingcan
beneglectedforpracticalestimatesofvibrationfrompiledriving.
Fromtheirfieldmeasurements,Attewell&Farmer(1973)claimedthattheresultscorrelate
quitewellwiththefollowingrelationship:
Eq.2.44
W0
r
(mm/s)
Whichgivesk=1andx=1.However,Attewell&Farmer(1973)suggestedthataconstantof
proportionality,k,of1.5shouldbeusedforpracticalconservativepredictionofground
vibrationsduetopiledriving.
67
Table2.11Summaryofvaluesofparametersusedindifferentpredictionmodels,modifiedafterHope
&Hiller(2000).
Literature

x

Parameters
k

r

Impactdriving

Vibratorydriving
Velocity
component
PPV

PPV

SRSS

ThegeneralforminEq.2.43hassincebeendevelopedbyvariousresearchers.In1981Wiss
proposedanequationequivalenttotheaboveequation(Eq.2.43)forthepeakparticle
velocity.Wiss(1981)statedthatxliesbetween1.0and2.0witharelativelycommonvalueof
1.5andthatthefactorkdependsongroundconditionsandsourcetype.Accordingto
Attewelletal.(1992a)abestfitlinefrommeasurementsofgroundvibrationsfromboth
impactandvibratorypiledrivinggivek=0.76andx=0.87.Wiss(1967),Whyley&Sarsby
(1992)andHiller&Crabb(1998)showedthatkvarieswithsoilconditions.Nilsson(1989)
statedthatseveralfieldstudieshaveshownthatkdoesnotexceed0.75fordrivingofpiles
and1.5fordrivingofsheetpiles.AccordingtoWhyley&Sarsby(1992),kvariedbetween
0.251.5dependingonsoiltypeandxrepresentsbothgeometricalandinternaldamping.
AccordingtoArcelorMittal(2008),kvariedbetween0.5and1.0dependingonsoiltypeand
drivingmethod.Heckman&Hagerty(1978)proposedthatkdependsonthesoilconditions
andtheimpedanceofthepileandvariesbetween0.2and1.5withincreasingkfordecreasing
impedance.
Table2.11givesasummaryofvaluessuggestedforkandxinequationEq.2.43foundin
literature.Thedatafittinginthetableareforallcasesupperbound.
Theactualsourceenergyisdifficulttoestimateduetolossesatthepilesoilinterface,
thereforeAttewelletal.(1992a)andWhenham(2011)suggestthatthenotionalenergy
quotedbythepiledrivermanufacturerisusedforsourceenergy,W0.W0isexpressedin
joules(Newtonmeters)forimpactpiledrivingandjoules/cycleforvibratorypiledriving.
Head&Jardine(1992)givethefollowingrulesofthumbsforcalculatingtheenergyvaluesin
Joulesfordifferentdrivingsystem:
68
2LITERATURESTUDY
Drophammers
Massofhammer
Dropheight
Energyperblow
Dieselhammers
Ratedenergyperblow
Energyperblow
Vibratorydrivers
Powersupply
Ratedfrequency
Energypercycle
=
=
=
mtonnes
hmeters
9807*m*hJoules
=
=
(R.E.)kgm
(R.E.)*9.807Joules
=
=
=
WkVA(=kilowatt=kiloJoules/s)
fHertz
1000*(W/f)Joules

Whyley&Sarsby(1992)presentedapredictiveplot,seeFigure2.39,basedonEq.2.43where
x=1andkis1.5forline1(stiffordensesoil),0.75forline2(firmtostifformediumdense
soil)and0.25forline3(softorloosesoil).Ifendingupinzone(a)thatmeansnoproblem,
zone(b)indicatesfurtherinvestigationisneededandzone(c)isequivalenttoredesignthe
work.Thefigureisapplicableforimpactdrivingandespeciallyforsheetpiles.
Figure2.39Whyley&Sarsbys(1992)predictiveplot.
69

Svinkin(2008)presentedadevelopmentoftheenergybasedrelationshipfortheprediction
ofgroundvibrationsduetopiledriving.Svinkinsmodelisbasedondeterminationofthe
vibrationvelocityonthepilehead,andfromthatcomputesthegroundvibrations.The
followingrelationshipisproposedforthegroundvibrationduetopiledriving:
W0
Eq.2.45
vg
Where
vg=groundvibration(mm/s)
vp=pilevibrationatthepilehead=
vp
(mm/s)
(mm/s)
c=wavepropagationvelocityinthepile(m/s)
Zp=pileimpedance(kNs/m)
Lp=pilelength(m)
W0=energytransferredtothepile(J)
r=distancefromthepiletothepointofinterest(m)
Svinkin(2008)suggestedthatW0isdeterminedastheratedenergytimestheefficiency.For
vibratorydrivingW0isthemaximumenergytransferredtoavibratorydrivenpilepercycle
ofdrivinganddeterminedfromthemaximumpowertimestheperiodtimestheefficiency.
2.7.1.2 HandboekDamwandenmodel
VanStaalduinenpresentedanempiricalpredictionmodelthatisbasedon250vibration
measurementsperformedduringthevibratoryinstallationofsheetpilesintheNetherlands.
ThemodelispresentedintheDutchSheetpileHandbook(HandboekDamwanden,CUR
publication166).Inthemodel,theNetherlandsisdividedintosevendifferentpartsthateach
representsacharacteristicsoilprofile.Fromtheresultsofthemeasurementsastatistical
analysishasbeenperformedfinallyresultinginTable2.12andTable2.13.Table2.12isvalid
forvibratoryhammerswithaneccentricforceofupto350kN.Forlargervibratorsthe
vibrationlevelshouldbeadjustedaccordingto:
u 0 u 0,350 0.002( F 350)

Eq.2.46
(mm/s)
Where
F=eccentricforceofthevibrator(kN)
Table2.12Dataforvibrationpredictionforvibratorydrivensheetpiles(hammersupto350kN)
(HandboekDamwanden).
Soilprofile

70
u0(mm/s)
Vert
Hor

(m)
Vert
Hor
V0
Vert
Hor
2LITERATURESTUDY
Table2.13Dataforvibrationpredictionforimpactdrivensheetpiles(HandboekDamwanden).
Soilprofile

u0(mm/s)
Vert
Hor
(m)
Vert
Hor
V0
Vert
Hor

ThevaluesfromTable2.12andTable2.13areusedinthefollowingsummarisedequationin
ordertoreceiveapredictedvibration,u(r):
r0 D ( r r0 ) 0.7 EV0

e
e
(mm/s)
Eq.2.47
u (r ) u 0
Where
=accordingtoTable2.14dependsontheprobabilityofexceedance
r0=referencedistancesetto5m
Table2.14Probabilityofexceedanceandvalues(HandboekDamwanden).
Probabilityofexceedance
value

2.7.1.3 Attewelletal.model
Attewelletal.(1992aand1992b)foundthataquadraticregressioncurvewasabetterfitto
fielddatafrommeasurementsofgroundvibrationsduetopiledrivingthanthepreviously
usedlinearregressioncurve(Attewell&Farmer,1973).Thedevelopedmodelproposedthe
followingequationforthepredictionofvibrationvelocityduetopiledriving:
Eq.2.48
Where
log v
W0
x log 2 W 0
x1 x 2 log
3
r
r
v=vibrationvelocity(mm/s)
x1,x2andx3=constantsofproportionality(),seeTable2.15andTable2.16
W0=inputenergy(J)
r=distancebetweensourceandpointofinterest(m)
Constantsx1,x2andx3arefunctionsofthesoilconditionsatthesiteofpiledriving(Attewell
etal.,1992b).ProposedvaluesoftheconstantsofproportionalityaregiveninTable2.15and
Table2.16forimpactrespectivelyvibratorypiledriving.InAttewelletal.(1992a)itis
71
recognisedthatvibratorydrivingisinmanywaysdifferentfromimpactdriving,andforthe
estimationofgroundvibrationsfrompiledrivingthetwoinstallationmethodsshouldbe
treatedseparately.Hence,thedevelopedmodelmakesadistinctionbetweenvibrationsfrom
impactdrivenandvibratorydrivenpiles.
Table2.15Valuesofx1,x2andx3forimpact pile driving,fromAttewelletal.(1992b).

Curvefit

x1
x2
x3

Table2.16Valuesofx1,x2andx3forvibratory pile driving,fromAttewelletal.(1992b).

Curvefit

x1
x2
x3

Attewelletal.(1992b)proposedthatthevaluesforhalfastandarddeviationshouldbeused
fornormalconstructionworkwhileonestandarddeviationshouldbeusedwherehigh
securityagainstvibrationisneeded.Forthebestfitlinethereisariskofexceedingthe
estimatedvaluesof50%,forhalfastandarddeviationtheriskis31%andforonestandard
deviationtheriskisreducedto16%(Attewelletal.,1992b).
InAttewelletal.(1992b)tablesforpredictionofvibrationsduetoimpactandvibratory
drivingarepresented.ThetablesarebasedonEq.2.48andvaluesfromTable2.15orTable
2.16andaimtowardshelpingpractitionersthatarenotusedtohandlingquadraticequations
tomakepredictionsontheconstructionsite.
Thehorizontaldistancealongthegroundbetweenthesourceandthepointofinterestis
usuallytakenasr.However,Attewelletal.(1992a)arewellawarethatthiscouldleadto
errorswhenalargeamountofthevibrationenergyistransferredatthepiletoe,especiallyat
closerange.Despitethistheyhavechosentoputrasthehorizontaldistancebetweensource
andpointofinterestmainlyforthesakeofsimplicity.
2.7.2 Theoreticalmodels
Theoreticalmodelsuseadifferentapproachforthepredictionofvibrationsduetopile
drivingthanempiricalmodels.Theoreticalmodelsareusuallybuiltupofnumericalor
analyticalmodellingindifferentcomputerprograms.Davis(2010)haslistedseveral
numericalmethodswhichcanbeusedforpredictionofgroundvibrations,themostcommon
thatarepresentinexistingpredictionmodelsare:
x FiniteDifferenceTimeDomainMethod(FDTDorFDM)
x FiniteElementMethod(FEM)
x BoundaryElementMethod(BEM)
72
2LITERATURESTUDY
FDMcantakeintoaccountlayeringandanisotropyofthesoil;however,thereisuncertainty
inthelossoftheenergyduetomaterialdamping.AnotherdrawbackofFDMisthatit
requiresahighlevelofmathematicalskillsfromtheuser(Davis,2010).
FEMispopularforthemodellingofproblemsinsoilandrockmaterials;thereareanumber
ofcommercialcomputerprogramsbasedonFEM(Plaxisbeingthemostcommonamong
geotechnicalengineers)withgraphicaluserinterfacesmakingitapopulartoolinmany
situations.2DFEMisnotidealformodellingpileorsheetpiledrivingasitgenerallyisa
pointsourceandthesoilconditionsareusuallycomplexgivingdivergingpropagationpaths
indifferentdirections(Davis,2010).
BEMissomewhatmorelimitedinitsusethanFEMandFDMduetoitsneedfor
reformulationofthepartialdifferentialequations.ToovercomethelimitationswithBEMthe
soilimmediatelynexttothesourcecanbemodelledwithFEMwhiletherestofthe
propagationpathcanbemodelledusingacoupledBEMmodel.Forthemodellingofground
vibrationproblemswithinfinitedomains,BEMisconsideredtobebetterthanFEMfor
efficiency,accuracyanduserfriendliness(Davis,2010).Severaloftheexistingprediction
modelsmixdifferentnumericalmethodsintheirpredictionmodels.
Theoreticalmodelsoftencontainsubmodelsforthepile,thesoilandsometimesalsofor
objectssusceptibletodamage.Thesubmodelsaremodelledseparatelyandthereafter
connectedtomaketheprediction.Connectionbetweenthesubmodelsisusuallybasedon
connectivityofvibrationorforceatnodes(Waarts&deWit,2004).
Inthissectionsomeoftheexistingtheoreticalmodelsaredescribedinbrief.
2.7.2.1 Waarts&Bielefeldmodel
Waarts&Bielefeld(1994)presentedamodeltopredictvibrationsfrompiledriving.Theonly
necessaryinputdataforthepredictionisthetypeofpileandhammerandtheresultsofa
CPTtest.
TheWaarts&Bielefeldmodelisactuallydividedintotwodifferentmodels.Themodelfor
thepiledriving,describedbythestresswavesimulationprogramTnowave,andthemodel
forthewavetransmissioninsoilsdescribedbythefiniteelementpackageDiana.The
Tnowaveprogramisbasedontheonedimensionalstresswavetheoryanditsimulatesthe
piledrivingprocessformanycombinationsofpiledrivinghammers(bothimpactand
vibratoryhammers),piletypesandsoilconditions.FromTnowavetheloadappliedtothe
soiliscomputed.Theload,consistingoftheforceatthepiletoeandtheoutsidefrictionon
thepile,isthereafterputintoDiana.WithDianadisplacements,velocitiesandaccelerations
canbecomputedasafunctionoftimeineverypointinthesoil.
Waarts&Bielefeld(1994)chosenottomodelthecompressionwaveintheFEMmodel.
However,whencomparingpredictedvalueswithmeasuredvalues,averyobvious
differencewasthelackofcompressionwavesinthepredictedsignals.Thepredictedpeak
accelerationswererelativelyclosetothemeasuredvalues.Thepredictedpeakvelocities,
however,showedadifferencecomparedtomeasuredvalues.Forpredicteddominant
frequenciesandshearwavevelocities,thecorrelationwiththemeasuredresultswasgood.
73
Waarts&Bielefeld(1994)proposesafewimprovementstotheirpredictionmodel.For
example,thepilesoilinteractioncanbeimprovedtakingdegradationeffectsonthesoilinto
account.Anotherimprovementistodevelopthedeterminationofsoilparametersfromsoil
investigationresults.
2.7.2.2 Holeymanmodel
TheHoleyman(1993)modelofcalculatingverticalshearwavespropagatingawayfromthe
pileisbasedonaradialdiscretemodel.ThecylindricalmodelisillustratedinFigure2.40
andconsistsofdisksorconcentricringswithincreasingdistancesthefurtherfromthepile
theyarelocated.Theringshavetheirown,individualmassesandtransmitforcestotheir
neighbouringrings.Thismethodofsoilmodellingismeanttosimulategeometricdamping.
Basedonthestressstrainrelationshiptheshearforcedisplacementrelationshipbetween
successiveringsisestablished(Holeyman&Legrand,1997)(Holeyman,2002)(Whenham,
2011).Themodelissaidtobeabletoprovideinsightintovibrationlevelsinthevicinityof
thepile(Holeyman,2002).
Figure2.40VibratorydrivingmodeldevelopedbyHoleyman(1993)(Whenham,2011from
Holeyman,1993b).
2.7.2.3 EDTToolbox(Directstiffnessmethod)
EDTToolboxispresentedbyWhenham(2011)andhasbeendevelopedatKULeuvenin
ordertocomputetheresponseofalayeredmediumduetoanexternalload.Ithasearlier
beenpresentedbySchevenelsetal.(2009).TheEDTToolboxcontainsaMatlabfunctionthat
calculatestheGreensfunctionsofthesoil,basedonthedirectstiffnessmethod.Themethod
modelsthesoilhavinglinearbehaviour.Theloadismodelledbyinsertingmultipleexternal
loadsuniformlydistributedbetween0and2.25mdepth.
74
2LITERATURESTUDY
2.7.2.4 FiniteElementMethod(Plaxis)
Whenham(2011)havemodelledvibratorypiledrivinginthecommercialFEMsoftware
Plaxis.Theproblemsetupisanaxisymmetricgeometryextending40mintheradial
directionand25mintheverticaldirection,seeFigure2.41.Theboundariesarechosenas
absorbentboundariesatthebottomandrighthandside,andhavethefunctionthat
compressionwavesthathittheboundaryperpendicularlywillbeabsorbedwhileshear
waveswillstillgiveasmallboundaryeffect.
Theloadisaddedaspointloadsdistributedbetween0and2.25matthecentreofsymmetry.
Thisloadmodelassumesthattheforceappliedtothesoilbythepileisequallydistributed
alongthepileshaft.
Thesoilisconsideredtobelinearelastic,andmaterialdampingisrepresentedbyadamping
parameterproportionaltothemassandstiffnessofthesystem.
Figure2.41SetupofPlaxismodel(Whenham,2011).
2.7.2.5 Masoumietal.model
Masoumietal.(2006,2007,and2008)presentedanumericalpredictionmodelmadeupofa
coupledfiniteelementboundaryelementmodelinordertopredictfreefieldvibrationsdue
toimpactandvibratorypiledriving.Thepileismodelledaslinearelasticmaterialusingthe
finiteelementtechniqueandthesoilismodelledasahorizontallylayeredelastichalfspace
usingtheboundaryelementtechnique.Thepilesoilinteractionismodelledusinga
subdomainformulation.Astheirfocusisonvibrationsinthefarfield,Masoumietal.(2006
and2007)assumedalinearelasticconstitutivebehaviourofthesoilasthedeformationsare
believedtoberelativelysmall.Thedampingisassumedtobeindependentoffrequencyand
noseparationisallowedbetweenpileandsoil.Thesoilisassumedtobehorizontally
layered.
Tosolvethesystem,theStructuralDynamicsToolboxinMatlabisfirstusedtomakethe
finiteelementmodelofthepile.Thenthesoilimpedanceandthemodalresponsesofthesoil
arecomputedusingtheprogramMISS6.3.Fromthereonthesoiltractionsontheinterface
andtheninthefreefieldarecomputed.
75
Figure2.42Geometryandoutlineoftheproblem(Masoumietal.,2009).
Masoumietal.(2008)noticedthattheirmodelseemedtooverestimategroundvibrationin
thefarfield.Theybelievedthistobeduetoplasticstrainsinducedinthesoilinthevicinity
ofthepileleadingtomorematerialdamping.Therefore,Masoumietal.(2009)proposedthe
useofamodelthatincludesaplasticzoneinthevicinityofthepile.AccordingtoMasoumi
etal.(2009)themodelincludesboththedynamicpilesoilinteractionandthenonlinear
behaviourofthesoilinthevicinityofthepile.Thesoilstructuresystemhasbeendivided
intotwosubstructures:aboundedstructureinvolvingthepileandthesectionofthesoil
aroundthepilethatmaynotbehavelinearly,andtheunboundedlinearelastichorizontally
layeredsoil,seeFigure2.42.Thepileandthesoilclosesttoitaremodelledusingatime
domainfiniteelementmethodandthesoilismodelledasahorizontallylayeredelastichalf
spaceusingtheboundaryelementtechniqueinthefrequencydomain.
Thesimulationclearlyshowedtheevolutionofaplasticzonearoundthepileandbelowthe
piletoeforbothimpactandvibratorydriving.Masoumietal.(2009)alsocomparedvibration
levelsreceivedfromtheirmodelwithfieldmeasurementspresentedbyWiss(1981)showing
goodagreementbetweenpredictionsandmeasurements.
2.7.2.6 Mahutka&Grabe(2006)
Mahutka&Grabe(2006)presentedamodelinwhichvibratorypiledrivingismodelledby
nonlineardynamicfiniteelementanalysiswithanexplicittimeintegrationscheme.The
installationprocessofthevibratorypiledrivingismodelledusingFEMandcomputations
aredoneinthecomputerprogramAbaqus.Thepileismodelledasalaterallysupported
rigidaxisymmetricsurfacewhilethesoilisdiscretisedwithaxisymmetriccontinuum
elements.
Mahutka&Grabe(2006)performedfieldteststovalidatetheirmodel.Theymeasuredthe
accelerationatthepileaswellastheverticalandhorizontalvelocitiesatfourpointslocated1
m,2m,4mand8mfromthevibratorydrivenpile.Themeasuredresultsshowagood
agreementwiththemodelledresults,seeFigure2.43.
76
2LITERATURESTUDY
Figure2.43Measuredandcalculatedvibrationvelocityatthegroundsurfaceandaccelerationatthe
pile(Mahutka&Grabe,2006).
2.7.2.7 Khoubani&Ahmadi(2012)
Khoubani&Ahmadi(2012)havecreatedanaxisymmetricfiniteelementmodelusing
AbaqustopredictvibrationsintheformofPPVfromimpactdrivenpilesinhomogenous
soil.Inthemodeltheentirepenetrationprocess,fromthegroundsurfacetothedesired
depth,isincluded.Plasticdeformationsinthesoilnexttothepileaswellasaslipfrictional
contactbetweenpileandsoilareaccountedforinthemodel.
Thepileisdrivendownbythemodellingofsuccessivehammerimpacts.Khoubani&
Ahmadi(2012)haveusedonesecondasthetimebetweeneachhammerblowintheirmodel.
ThePPViscomputedatdifferentdistancesfromthecentrelineofthepile.Themodelled
resultswerecomparedwiththeresultsmeasuredbyWiss(1981)andshowedgood
agreement.Theyalsocomparedtheirresultswiththenumericalresultspresentedby
Masoumietal.(2009).TheresultsdifferssomewhatKhoubani&Ahmadi(2012)reported
highervaluesthanMasoumietal.(2009)foradistanceof59mandviceversafordistances
of923m.
Khoubani&Ahmadi(2012)alsonoticedthatforallpointsmorethan5mfromthepilethe
maximumPPVoccurredatapenetrationdepthbetween4.55.5m.
FromtheirsensitivityanalysisKhoubani&Ahmadi(2012)concludedthatthelevelof
vibrationsdependedonthepropertiesofthepile,hammerandsoil.Anincreaseinthe
impactforce,thepilediameterorthesoilpilefrictionintheirmodelresultedinanincrease
inPPV.Iftheelasticitymodulusofthesoilwasincreased,PPVdecreased.
77
2.7.3 Engineeringmodels
2.7.3.1 Massarsch&Felleniusmodel
Massarsch&Fellenius(2008)introducedamodelforestimatingvibrationsfromimpactpile
driving.Themethodincludestheforceappliedtothepilehead,thedynamicstressesinthe
pileandthedynamicresistancealongthepiletoeandpileshaft.
Massarsch&Fellenius(2008)suggestedthatthecalculationofgroundvibrationsinducedby
piledrivingwithimpacthammersbebasedonthefollowingapproach:
x Determinethedynamicpilehammerproperties
x Determinethedynamicpileproperties
x Estimatethepeakparticlevelocityofthestresswave
x Assessthevibrationtransmissionefficacyalongthepileshaftandatthepiletoe
x Calculatethepropagationofsphericalwaveenergyfromthepiletoetotheground
surface,takingintoaccountwavereflection
x Atthecriticaldistancefromthepileonthegroundsurface,calculatethevibration
attenuationofsurfacewaves
x Calculatethecylindricalwavesfromthepileshaft
Predictedvaluesfromthemodelwerecomparedwithmeasurementresultsfromonedriven
pileinacasestudypresentedbyNilsson(1989).Massarsch&Fellenius(2008)claimedthat
therewasagoodcorrelationbetweenpredictedandmeasuredvalues.Massarsch&Fellenius
(2008)pointedoutthattheirpredictionmodeldoesnottakeintoaccountgroundvibration
amplificationduetowavesuperpositionwhenwavesinteract,suchasfromthepiletoeand
thepileshaft.
2.7.3.2 Jongmansmodel
Jongmans(1996)presentsamodelthataimstowardsreconstructingthewholevibration
signalgeneratedduringpiledriving.Themodelcontainstwoparts;thefirstpartisbasedin
theuseofgeophysicalprospectingtorepresenttheresponseofthesiteandtheotherpartis
anequivalentsourcefunctionidealisingenergytransmissionfrompiletoetosoil.
Jongmansmodelisbasedonthatthegroundvibrationatadistancerfromthesourcecanbe
givenaccordingtothefollowingfunction:
w(t , r ) s(t ) g (t , r )
Eq.2.49
Where
s(t)=sourcefunction
g(t,r)=propagationfunction,alsocalledGreensfunction
Thetwofunctionsaredeterminedseparately.Inordertodeterminethepointloadsolution,
Greensfunction(g(t,r)),itissuggestedthateachsiteisinvestigatedbyastandardseismic
prospectingtest.Fromtheseismogramsthesoilconditionswithdifferentlayersand
dynamicpropertiesaredecided.Theinterpretationisbasedontheassumptionthatthe
groundishorizontallylayered.Byusingadiscretewavenumbermethod,oncethegeometry
anddynamicpropertiesareknown,Greensfunctioniscomputed.
78
2LITERATURESTUDY
Thesourcefunctionsimulatestheinputwaveformandrepresentsanequivalentlinear
sourcefunction.Thefunctiondependsonpiletypeanddrivingmethodandvarieswithsoil
resistanceatthepiletoe.Jongmansmodelassumesthatvibrationsaregeneratedatthepile
toebyaverticalforce.Theequivalentlinearsourcefunctionisdeterminedfromavibration
recordclosetothepileandthesitesGreenfunction.Jongmanssuggeststhatadatabaseof
sourcefunctionsfordifferentdrivingmethodsandsoiltypescouldbesetup.
Jongmanscomparedhismodeltoresultsfromafieldtestshowingagoodcorrelation
regardingamplitudeandwaveformsofthevibrations.
2.7.3.3 Svinkinengineeringmodel
Svinkin(1996)presentedapredictionmodelbasedontheconceptoftheimpulseresponse
function.Theimpulseresponsefunctionmodelsbehaviourofthesoil.As,Svinkin(1996)
putsittheimpulseresponsefunctionisanoutputsignalofthesystembasedonasingle
instantaneousimpulseinput.Inthispredictionmodel,theoutputisalocationofinterest,
thedynamicsystemisthesoilandtheinputisthegroundattheplaceforpiledriving.
Bysettingupanexperimentofapplyingknownmagnitudesofimpactonthesiteofinterest,
forexamplebydroppingamassandrecordingtheoscillationatimpact,theimpulse
responsefunctionisdetermined.Oncetheimpulseresponsefunctionisknownthedynamic
loadsforpiledrivingarecomputedbywaveequationanalysis.FinallyDuhamelsintegral
(Smith&Downy,1968)isusedtofindthepredictedvibrations.
Thepredictionmodelisbasedontheassumptionthatthesoilbehavesasalinearmaterial.
2.7.4 Uncertaintiesinprediction
FromthestudyofWaarts&deWit(2004)onthereliabilityofpredictionmodelsof
vibrationsduetopiledrivingandthereportbyHintzeetal.(1997)thefollowingmain
sourcesofuncertaintyinvibrationpredictionsareidentified:
x Correctdeterminationorlackofinformationregardinginputdatasuchassoil
conditionsandhammercharacteristics
x Simplificationsandapproximationsinthemodelling
x Theeffectofotherfactorssuchastime,controlprogramsetc.
Intheirdiscussionaboutuncertaintiesinpredictionofvibrations,Waarts&deWit(2004)
cametotheconclusionthatvibrationsduetosheetpilevibratorydrivingaremoredifficult
topredictthanvibrationsfrompiledriving.However,theyconcludethatoverallthe
uncertaintyinvibrationpredictionoftodayisquitelarge,eventhoughthepredictionsare
somewhatmorereliablefortheoreticalmodels.
OneofthemainconclusionsinthestudyofWaarts&deWit(2004)arethattheuserofthe
predictionmodelhasamassiveinfluenceontheoutcomeoftheprediction.Another
conclusionwasthattheuncertaintyinvibrationpredictiongenerallyisquitelarge;however,
theuseofsophisticatedFEMmodelsreducedtheuncertaintycomparedtoexpert
judgement.
79
Hope&Hiller(2000)presentedareviewofthepredictionmodelsavailableatthattime.They
focusonvibrationsfromimpactpiledriving.Intheirreviewtheyfindthattheaccuracyof
theexistingpredictionmodelsislimited.Mostpredictionmodelsconsiderablyoverestimate
thevibrationmagnitudesatdistanceslessthan11mfromthepile.However,mostprediction
modelsareintentionallyconservative.
Davis(2010)discussedtheneedforrelativesimplicity,thespeedofcalculationandtheneed
foraccuracywhenitcomestopredictionmodels.Piledrivingprojectsareinalmostallcases
temporaryandofarelativelyshortduration,asopposedtopermanentvibrationsources,
suchase.g.railwaysortraffic.Thiscallsforadifferenceindemandsthatareputonthe
predictionmodels.Forpiledrivingthespeedofcalculationandrelativesimplicity(user
friendliness)areprobablyasimportantasaccuracy,whileforpermanentsourcesaccuracyis
probablymuchmoreimportantthanspeedofcalculationandasimplemodel.
AccordingtoAttewelletal.(1992a)itisquitereasonablethatgroundvibrationsduetopile
drivingcanbeestimatedbytheuseofempiricalmethods.Theystatethatempiricalmethods
arethemostsensibleandsuitableforuseonsite.Athanasopoulos&Pelekis(2000)agreed,
claimingthatempiricalmodelsdonottakestronglynonuniformsoilsnorthedynamicsoil
structureinteractionintoaccount.However,theyareeasytoapplyandthusvaluablefor
pilingpractitioners
However,Massarsch&Fellenius(2008)showedthattheenergybased,empiricalapproach
widelyusedbyengineersistoocrudeforreliableanalysisofgroundvibrationsandcaneven
bemisleading.AccordingtoMassarsch&Fellenius(2008)themainlimitationofempirical
energybasedpredictionmodelsarethenotionthatthedrivingenergygovernstheground
vibrations,theexclusionofgeotechnicalconditionsandtheuncertaintyintheinputvalues.
Svinkin(1996)andHope&Hiller(2000)alsodrawtheconclusionthatpredictionmodelsnot
takingsoilconditionsintoconsiderationarelessaccuratethanpredictionmodelstakingsoil
conditionsintoaccount.
AccordingtoSelby(1991)theproblemofgroundvibrationscausedbypiledrivingshould
notbeapproachedanalyticallyduetothecomplexityoftheproblem,resultingfromthe
imprecisionofthepiledrivingequipmentandtheinhomogeneityofthegroundconditions,
amongotherreasons.ThereforeSelby(1991)recommendsanempiricalapproach.
80
2LITERATURESTUDY
2.8 PREVIOUSFIELDSTUDIES
Thissectionpresentsmainresultsandconclusionsfromfieldstudiespreviouslypublished.
2.8.1 Vibratorydrivenpiles
2.8.1.1 Clough&Chameau(1980)
DuringmeasurementsbyClough&Chameau(1980)thetypicalaccelerationrecordfroma
vibratorydrivingshowedasteadystateresponsewithafrequencythatwaspracticallyequal
tothatofthevibrator.Measurementswereperformedatvariousdistancesfromthesheet
pileandadistributionofpeakaccelerationbydistancewasestablished.Within35mofthe
sheetpilesthemeasuredgroundaccelerationsareintherangeof0.15g0.30gforhard
drivingand0.10g0.15gfornormaldriving.Theaccelerationsareshowntodecreaserapidly
withdistancefromthepile.At12mfromthepilethegroundaccelerationsweremeasuredto
about0.08gandat30mtoabout0.02gorless.Atanothertestsite,boththehorizontaland
verticalaccelerationsnearthepilewereintherange0.4g0.5gforharddriving,andaround
0.2g0.3gfornormaldriving.Asattheotherlocation,theaccelerationmagnitudedecreased
rapidlywithdistance.
Bycomparingfielddatafromsheetpiledrivingwiththecommonattenuationrelationship
(Eq.2.13),Clough&Chameau(1980)showedagoodcorrelationusing=0.03/ft.Fromthe
comparisontheydrawthefollowingconclusionregardingtheabsorptioncoefficient,:
1.Softclayeysoilshavehighervaluesofthandenser,firmersoils,whichindicategreater
vibrationattenuationwithdistancefromthesource.
2.Higherabsorptioncoefficientisgivenforharddrivingthanfornormaldriving.This
believestobeduetothefactthatduringharddrivinghigherstrainlevelsareinduced
leadingtomorematerialdamping.
3.Thereisnotmuchdifferenceinvaluesforhorizontalandverticalvibrations.
2.8.1.2 Athanasopoulos&Pelekis(2000)
Athanasopoulos&Pelekis(2000)performedgroundvibrationmeasurementsduringthe
drivingofsheetpilesatninesitesinPatras,Greece.Thesheetpilesweredrivenwith
vibratoryhammersandmeasurements(geophonesinthreeorthogonaldirections)were
conductedonthesurfaceofpavementsatvaryingdistancesfromtheinstalledsheetpile.
Measurementswerealsodoneongroundfloorsinadjacentbuildings,andathigherfloorsin
mostofthebuildings.
Resultsfromthemeasurementsshowedthatinalmostallcasesthemaximumvalue
correspondedtotheverticalcomponentofvibration.Whencomparingthevibration
intensitiesmeasuredintheirstudytootherstudiesreportedinliterature,theymeasured
lowervalues,whichtheybelieveisduetofavourablesoilconditionsinPatras.
FromtheirmeasurementsAthanasopoulos&Pelekis(2000)reconstructedtheparticle
displacementpathsateachmeasurementpoint.Fromtheparticledisplacementpaths
Athanasopoulos&Pelekis(2000)observedthatverticalvibrationsoftheRayleightypewere
themostcommon.
81
Figure2.44Resultsfromgroundvibrationmeasurements(Athanasopoulos&Pelekis,2000).
TheresultsfromalltheirmeasurementsareplottedinFigure2.44,withpeakcomponent
velocityontheyaxisanddistanceonthexaxis.
Themeasurementsofvibrationlevelsinbuildingsshowedanamplificationofvibration
levelsatelevatedfloors,believedtobeduetoexcitationofthebuildingfloorsnatural
frequencies.Thevibrationwasamplifiedforeachfloor(upto7floors),however,therateof
increaseoftheamplificationratiodecreasedforeachfloorindicatingthattheremightbea
deamplificationathigherfloorsinhighrisebuildings.
2.8.1.3 Boreletal.(2002)
Boreletal.(2002)measuredvibrationsfromvibratorydrivenpilesinMontoirinFrance.The
datawereofacomplexnature.Transversevibrationsweremostimportantatadistanceof6
mfromthepile,wheretheyexceeded15mm/s,whiletheverticalvelocitiesdidnoteven
reach4mm/satthatdistance.However,at12and18mfromthepileverticalvelocitieswere
predominant.
Boreletal.(2002)investigatedresonancefrequenciesfortheslenderpile(339mm)usedin
theirfieldstudyandfoundthattheresonancefrequenciesforlateralmovementaremuch
lower(117Hz)thanforverticalmovement(50150Hz).Thisisbelievedtoexplainthehigh
horizontalvibrationsthatweremeasuredasitispossiblethatthedriversfrequency
82
2LITERATURESTUDY
repeatedlymatchedtheresonantlateralpilefrequency,andhencecausedhorizontal
vibrationstobetransmittedtothesoil.
FrommeasurementsBoreletal.(2002)noticedthatpeakvelocitieswerehigherduring
drivingthroughtheuppersandystrata.Whenthepilereachedtheunderlyingsandandclay
layers,thevibrationsdecreasedbyafactorof2.Attheendofdrivingvibrationlevelswere
seentoincreaseagainasthedrivingspeeddecreased.
2.8.1.4 Ahlqvist&Enggren(2006aand2006b)
Ahlqvist&Enggren(2006aand2006b)performedfieldmeasurementsattwodifferentsites
inSwedenduringtheinstallationofvibratorydrivensheetpiles.
TheresultsfromthemeasurementsattestsiteA(Norrkping)showedthatduringthe
installationofoneofthesheetpilesthemeasuredvibrationfrequencyshiftedbetween20
and40Hz,withafourfoldincreaseinmaximumparticlevelocitywhenthefrequency
shiftedfrom40to20Hz.Ahlqvist&Enggrencouldnotfindanyexplanationforthis
phenomenon;thedrivingfrequencyfromthevibratorwas40Hzduringtheentiredriving,
evenwhenthefrequencyofthesystemshiftedto20Hz.Thephenomenonwasonlyseen
duringthedrivingofoneoffoursheetpiles.
ThemeasurementsmadebyAhlqvist&Enggren(2006a)showedthatthevibrationsfromthe
sheetpileinstallationneverreachedthegeophonesandseismometersplacedmorethan40m
awayfromthesheetpile.
Ahlqvist&Enggren(2006aand2006b)concludedthatmaximumvibrationoccurswhenthe
penetrationspeedofthesheetpileislow.Theyalsoreceivehighvibrationswhenthedriving
frequencyislowduringthestartupandshutdownofthevibrator.Theystatethatthebest
solutiontoavoidhighvibrationsinthesurroundingenvironmentistogivethevibratory
driveroperatorrealtimeinformationaboutthevibrationsduringthesheetpileinstallation.
2.8.1.5 Whenhametal.(2009)andWhenham(2011)
OnatestsiteinLimeletteinBelgium,Whenham,alongwithotherresearchers,performed
measurementsonvibratorydrivenpilesin2007.Measurementsofvibrationsinthe
surroundingsoilconsistedofsoilparticlevelocityatthesurfaceandatdepthusingSCPT
equipment.
InFigure2.45theinfluenceofthedrivingpowerontheverticalparticlevelocityisshown.
FromFigure2.45itcanbeseenthatforpenetrationdepthslessthan6.1m,theparticle
velocityincreasedaspowerincreased,whileitremainedconstantorevendecreasedfor
penetrationdepthsgreaterthan6.1m.
Whenham(2011)reportedthatforalltheperformedteststheaccelerationanddisplacement
amplitudeswereloweratthepileheadthanatthepiletoe.
83
Figure2.45Verticalparticlevelocityasafunctionofpowerdevelopedbythepowerpack(Whenham,
2011).
Theresultsofthestudyindicatedhighhorizontalvibrations,inmostcaseshigherthanthe
verticalvibrations.Whenham(2011)alsoshowedresultsoftheinfluenceoftheclamping
deviceontheinducedhorizontalvibrations.Forcasesinwhichasingleclampwasused
(holdingthesheetpileeccentrically)vibrationlevelswerehigherthanforthecasesinwhich
thedoubleclampswereused(holdingthesheetpileintheneutralaxis).Thehighhorizontal
vibrationsobservedintheprojectoverallwerebelievedtobeexplainedbythedriving
frequencymatchingthenaturalfrequencyforlateralmovementofthepile.
Asthepilesreachedamoreresistantsoillayerat45mdepthasharpincreaseinthe
measuredgroundvibrationsatthesurface3mfromthepilewereseen.Attenuationcurves
withsoilparticlevelocityplottedagainstdistancetopileallshowedamonotonicdecrease
withdistanceforallpenetrationdepths.
FromparticlevelocitypathsWhenham(2011)concludedthatatashortdistancefromthepile
thevelocityhasanellipticalshapesimilartotheRwavemotion.Atagreaterdistancethe
velocitypathshowedapredominantlyradialmovement.Theresultsinthestudyalso
showedthatthelowerthedrivingfrequency,thehighertheverticalsoilvibrations.The
trendwaslessclearforthehorizontalvibrations.
Whenham(2011)presentedresultsfrommeasurementsoflateralvibrationperformedonthe
sheetpileduringdriving.Astheaccelerometeronthesheetpilereachedthesurfaceofthe
earthandstartedtopenetratethesoil,adropinthelateralaccelerationamplitudeswasseen.
Thisisbelievedtobeduetotheconfiningpressureholdingthesheetpileinplacewhen
penetratingintothesoil.
84
2LITERATURESTUDY
2.8.2 Impactdrivenpiles
2.8.2.1 Alpan&Meidav(1963)
Alpan&Meidav(1963)studiedthevibrationsoutsideandwithinbuildingscausedby
drivingpilesinthevicinity.Theresultsshowedthatthegreatestparticlevelocityoutsidethe
buildingwasattainedimmediatelyaftereachdrivingimpact,whilethegreatestparticle
velocityinsidethebuildingwasmeasured350400millisecondsafterthearrivalofthe
impactwaves.Theyalsosawthatthevibrationrecordwithinthebuildingcouldbe
separatedintotwodifferentphases.Thefirstphasestartedwhentheimpulsearrivedand
lastedforabout0.2s;theaccelerationandfrequencyinthefirstphasewerehighwitha
relativelylowkineticenergy.Thesecondphaseincludedlowerfrequencieswithhigh
particlevelocitiesandloweraccelerations.
2.8.2.2 Brenner&Chittikuladilok(1975)
InapaperbyBrenner&Chittikuladilok(1975)vibrationsfromimpactpiledrivingwere
evaluatedfortwositesintheBangkokarea.Measurementsofvibrationwereperformedon
thegroundsurface,atthreedifferentdepthsbelowthegroundsurfaceandonadjacent
buildings.
Someinterestingresultswerefoundfromthemeasurements;amongothersasudden
decreaseinvibrationwasseenwhenthepiletipmovedfromtheuppermostsandfilllayer
intothesoftclaybelow.Thenwhenthepiletipreachedafinesandlayerfurtherdowninthe
groundthevibrationincreasedandthemaximumpeakparticlevelocitywasreached.An
increaseinvibrationwasalsoseenasthepilepenetratedintoastifferclaylayerwithgreater
penetrationresistance.However,adistinctincreasewasonlyobservedatsurfacepoints
furtherawayfromthepile.BrennerandChittikuladilok(1975)believedthatareasonforthis
couldbethatatmeasurementpointsclosetothepile(r<6m)themaximumvibrationisnot
causedbywavesoriginatingfromthepiletipbutfromwaveshavingtheirsourcehigherup
alongthepileinthesoilprofile.Thenatgreaterdistances,wavesfromthepiletiphave
becomemoredominantandgivethelargestamplitudes.Itisalsobelievedthattheyare
probablycomposedofbodywavesradiatedfromthepiletip,andtosomeextent,bysurface
waves.
FromtheirmeasurementsBrenner&Chittikuladilok(1975)statedthattheradialand
tangentialvibrationcomponenthadvaluesbetween3080%oftheverticalcomponent.
Brenner&Chittikuladilok(1975)alsoperformedmeasurementsofvibrationlevelsatdepths
of1.75m,3.25mand4.75mbelowthesurface.Theresultsshowthatatadepthof1.75mthe
surfaceandsubsurfacevibrationswerealmostequal.Attheotherdepthsthesubsurface
vibrationwasalwayslessthanthesurfacevibrations.Theyexplainedthisbythefactthat
surfacewaveamplitudesdecreaserapidlywithdepth.
Theresultsshowedthatthegroundmotionfrequenciescausedbythepiledrivingranged
between1225Hzfortheverticalcomponentandbetween2833Hzfortheradialand
tangentialcomponent.Therewerenocorrelationsseenbetweenfrequencyrangeandtypeof
soillayerbeingpenetrated.
85
Measurementswithinbuildingsshowedthatonlyabout30%ofthegroundsurface
vibrationsweretransferredtothewallsofthebuilding.Formostmeasurementstheradial
andtangentialcomponentshowedvalueslessthan40%oftheverticalvibrations.However,
forastaircaseinonebuildingthetangential,butnottheradial,componenthadthesame
orderofmagnitudeastheverticalcomponent.Themeasurementsalsoshowedthatsome
vibrationamplificationwithrespecttothegroundslabtookplace,thoughmotionwasstill
lessthanforthegroundsurface.Theonlystructuralmemberofthebuildingswhichshowed
considerableamplificationwasthestaircase.Thisamplificationwasprobablydueto
resonanceeffects.
2.8.2.3 Brenner&Viranuvut(1977)
Brenner&Viranuvut(1977)performedvibrationsmeasurementsduringpiledrivingatasite
northofBangkok,Thailand.Vibrationmeasurementsintheverticaldirectionwere
performedonthegroundandonanadjacentbuilding.Brenner&Viranuvut(1977)also
performedDutchconesoundingswiththeaimoffindingacorrelationbetweensounding
resultsandrecordedvibrations.
Theirresultsshowedthatthevibrationvelocityappearstovaryaccordingtothecone
resistance;however,thecorrelationisfairlyweak.Brenner&Viranuvut(1977)pointedout
thatforlayersofequalconeresistancethedepthofthelayeralsoinfluencesthevibration
level.Nocorrelationwasfoundwiththeotherparametersstudied(localfriction,total
frictionandenergypermeterofpilepenetration).
2.8.2.4 Heckman&Hagerty(1978)
Heckman&Hagerty(1978)presentedresultsfromvibrationmeasurementsduringimpact
piledrivingofpipepiles.Theresultsindicatedthatthepeakparticlevelocitywasdirectly
relatedtoblowcount.Theyalsoshowedthatasthescaledenergydecreasedwithincreasing
distancetothepile,thePPVdecreased.However,asthepilesweredrivendeeperanincrease
inblowcountwasnotreadilyseeninmeasurementsatthegroundsurface.Thisisexplained
tobeduetothefactthatasandlayerwaspresent,dampingthevibrations.
Heckman&Hagerty(1978)alsostudiedresultsfromimpactdrivingofHpiles.Theresults
showedthathigherpeakparticlevelocitieswereobtainedfromthedrivingof305mmH
pilesthanfromthedrivingof350mmHpiles.
2.8.2.5 Ciesielskietal.(1980)
Ciesielskietal.(1980)presentedresultsfromgroundvibrationmeasurementsduringimpact
drivingofcasingtubesandvibratorydrivingofLpiles.Hereresultsandconclusionsfrom
theimpactdrivingarepresented.
Theresultsshowednocorrelationbetweenthedropheightofthehammerandthefrequency
ofthemeasuredvibrations.However,theresultsshowedthattherewasaconsiderable
changeinthedisplacementamplitude,Amax,withincreasinghammerdropheight.The
resultsshowedanincreaseinAmaxwithdecreasingpenetrationperblow.Thisissupported
bythetheorythatthesmallertheplasticpenetrationperblowofthehammer(withconstant
dropheight),thegreaterthequantityofenergytransferredintothesoilandinducingground
86
2LITERATURESTUDY
vibrations.Thepenetrationperblowinturndependsonthesoilresistance,whichgivesthe
conclusionthatthevibrationisdependentuponthesoilresistance(Ciesielskietal.,1980).
2.8.2.6 Martin(1980)
Martin(1980)usedpiezoelectricaccelerometersforthemeasurementofvibrationsinduced
byimpactdrivingofsheetpilesandsteelcasepiles.Thedatashowedthatthemainvibration
componentwassinusoidal.Theconclusionfromtheresultswasthatthemeasuredvibration
leveldependsonthepresenceofanysubsurfacelayersandonthetypeofpilebeingdriven.
Itcouldclearlybeseenthatwhenthepileenteredagravellayeratacasepilingsite,amuch
largertransversevibrationwasseen,whiletheverticalandlongitudinalcomponentswere
basicallyunaffectedbythechangeinsoiltype.Regardingthepiletype,theyconcludedthat
casepiles,withacircularcrosssection,generatedsignificanthorizontalvibrations,whereas
sheetpilesproducedpredominantlyverticalvibrations.
Martin(1980)alsodidmeasurementsinsidenearbybuildings.Theresultsshowedthatthe
ratiobetweentheinsideandoutsidevibrationlevelswasaround0.5inbuildingswith
concretefloors,andaround1.6inbuildingswithwoodenfloors.
2.8.2.7 Nilsson(1989)
Nilsson(1989)performedmeasurementsofvibrationinthegroundduetoimpactdrivingof
differentpiletypesinSkvdeinSweden.Bothconcretepilesandsteelpilesweredriven
througharelativelyhardupperlayer(compactedsand)followedby1015mofclay.The
resultsshowedthatmaximumvibrationlevelsweremeasuredwhenthepilespassed
throughthehardupperlayer.
Frequencyanalysisshowedthatthevibrationsignalshaveafrequencyrangeof060Hz.The
dominatingfrequencyfortheRayleighwavewasbetween815Hzandthedominating
frequencyfortheshearwavewasbetween3050Hz.
Thefieldstudyshowedthatimpactdrivingofconcretepilesgenerateshighervibration
valuesthanimpactdrivingofsteelpiles.Theresultsalsoshowedthatthesteelpiledriving
witha40kNhammercausedlessvibrationthanthepiledrivenwiththe15kNshammer.
AccordingtoNilsson(1989)thisisduetothefactthatthe40kNhammerwithlowdrop
heighttransferredlessenergyintothepile.
2.8.2.8 Whyley&Sarsby(1992)
Whyley&Sarsby(1992)presentedresultsfromvibrationmeasurementsduringimpact
drivingofsheetpilesandconcretepilesatthreedifferentsites.
AtsiteA,wheresheetpileswheredriven,resultsshowedgenerallylowervaluesforvertical
vibrationsthanforhorizontal(radialandtransversal).Bothairanddieselhammerswere
used.However,therewasnorecognisabledifferenceinthevibrationlevelbetweenthetwo
hammers.Thevibrationslevelsdidnotseemtodifferwithdepthnorbeanyhigherduring
finaldrivingtorefusal.ThiswasalsoobservedatsiteC,whereconcretepilesweredriven.
87
Figure2.46DatafordieselanddrophammersatsiteB(Whyley&Sarsby,1992).
AtsiteB,measurementswhereconductedonthegroundaswellasonandinsidestructures.
Resultsindicatedthatthevibrationlevelsonthestructuresweresimilartothevaluesoutside
ontheground.However,forsomecasesvaluesonfloorsandceilingswerehigher,probably
asaresultoflongfloorspans.Acomparisonwasmadebetweendieselanddrophammers,
(seeFigure2.46),showingnodifferencebetweenhammertypes.
AtsiteC,whereconcretepileswereimpactdriven,thehorizontalcomponentsintheradial
andtransversaldirectionwerehigherthantheverticalcomponent.
88
2LITERATURESTUDY
2.8.2.9 Jongmans(1996)
Jongmans(1996)presentedresultsfromafieldstudyinwhichgroundvibrationsfromfour
differentpiledrivingtechniquesweremeasured.Allpileswereimpactdrivenwithimpactat
eitherheadortoe.Measurementswereconductedusingbothverticalandtriaxial
geophonesatdifferentdistancesfromthepile.
Figure2.47showsresultsfromthemeasurementsbothintheverticalandintheradial
direction.Theattenuationfortheverticalcomponentwaslinear,whiletheradialcomponent
showedapeakatadistanceofabout10mfromthepile.
Figure2.47Measuredparticlevelocityattenuationwithdistanceforthreepiletoedepths.Left:
verticalcomponentandright:radialcomponent(Jongmans,1996).
2.8.2.10 Hope&Hiller(2000)
Hope&Hiller(2000)haveanalysedfieldmeasurementsofgroundvibrationsfromimpact
piledrivingatseveraldifferentsitesintheUnitedKingdom.Insomeoftheiranalysisthey
haveincludedresultspresentedbyUromeihy(1990).
Figure2.48andFigure2.49showthatpeakresultantvelocity,vres,wasnotlineartothe
horizontaldistance,r,nearthepile.Insteadvresshowedamorelinearbehaviourwhen
plottedagainstslopedistance,s,nearthepile.FromtheresultsinFigure2.49Hope&Hiller
(2000)proposedtheuseofsratherthanroverthewholerangeassgivesagoodlinearity
throughouttherange.
89
Figure2.48Groundvibrationsfromimpactpile
drivingaspeakresultantparticlevelocity
againsthorizontaldistance(Hope&Hiller,
2000).
Figure2.49Groundvibrationsfromimpactpile
drivingaspeakresultantparticlevelocityagainst
slopedistance(Hope&Hiller,2000).
Hope&Hiller(2000)alsoshowedthattherewasnolinearrelationshipbetweentheresultant
peakvelocityandthepotentialenergyofthehammermechanism.Thisstatementcontrasts
theassumptionsmadeinmostempiricalpredictionmodels.Fromtheirmanymeasurements,
Hope&Hiller(2000)concludedthatempiricalpredictionmodelsinvolvingonlydistance
andhammerenergyhaveverylittlechanceofreliablypredictinggroundvibrationsfrom
impactpiledriving.
Fromtheirmeasurements,Hope&Hiller(2000)sawthatPPVincreasedwiththeembedment
depthofthepile.Thiscouldbeduetonumerousfactors:thelengthofshaftincontactwith
soilincreaseswithincreasingembedment,thepropertiesofthesoilmayvaryalongtheshaft
andthepiletoemayhitsoilswithdifferentproperties.
2.8.2.11 Kim&Lee(2000)
Kim&Lee(2000)performedvibrationmeasurementsduringimpactpiledrivingofsteel
pipepilesinPusan,SouthKorea.Theymeasuredbothatthegroundsurfaceandatadepth
of15m.Theirresultsshowedthatthepeakparticlevelocityatthesurfacedecreasesasthe
piletippenetrateddownintheground.Atacertainhorizontaldistancefromthepilethe
magnitudesoftheverticalmotionmeasuredatthegroundsurfacewerealmostidenticalto
themeasuredvibrationat15mdepth.
Themeasurementsalsoshowedthatmostoftheenergywastransmittedbyverticalmotion
withfrequenciesbelow10Hz.
AccordingtoKim&Lee(2000)theparticlemotionsmeasuredweremostlyinthevertical
directionandfromthattheyconcludethatvibrationsduetoimpactpiledrivingcanbe
characterizedasverticalshearwaveswithconicalwavefronts.Becauseofthis,thevibration
sourcecanbeclassifiedasapointsourcegeneratingbodywavesandthetraveldistancecan
beestimatedasthehorizontaldistancefromthesource.
90
2LITERATURESTUDY
2.8.2.12 Hwangetal.(2001)
Hwangetal.(2001)studiedthegroundresponseduringimpactpiledrivingofconcretepiles
bymeasuringporewaterpressure,grounddeformationandvibrationsduringthedrivingof
threeconcretepilesatasiteinTaiwan.Thevibrationswererecordedduring10sateach
meterofpenetration.
Figure2.50AccelerationtimehistoriesduringdrivingofpileDP3atapilepenetrationdepthof15m
(Hwangetal.,2001).
Hwangetal.(2001)concludedthatthevibrationfromtheimpactpiledrivingwasofahigh
frequencyandhadaperiodoflessthan0.5s.However,itisnoticedthatthewavetracestarts
offatahighfrequency,seeFigure2.50,afterwhichthefrequencybecomeslower.Thisis
explainedasthehighfrequencybeingthebodywavesfollowedbythelowerfrequency
surfacewaves.Thepatternwasmorediscernibleatlargerdistancesfromthepile;at5mit
wasdifficulttomakeadistinction.
91
Theverticalvibrationswerehigherthanthevibrationsrecordedintheradialhorizontal
direction.Theresultsalsoindicatedthatthepeakgroundaccelerationforthesurfacewaves
waslargerthanthepeakgroundaccelerationforthebodywaves.
2.8.2.13 Thandavamoorthy(2004)
AtasiteinChennai,India,Thandavamoorthy(2004)executedvibrationmeasurements
duringimpactpiledrivingof600mmdiameterclosedendedsteelcasingsinsand.Vibration
measurementswereperformedonthegroundandonanadjacentpile(drivenearlier)using
piezoelectricaccelerometers.Measurementswereperformedatevery0.1mofpile
penetrationforadurationofabout2s.
Figure2.51Verticalgroundvibrationvelocityplottedagainstpenetrationdepth15mfromthedriven
pile(Thandavamoorthy,2004).
Resultsindicatedthatasthesoilgotharder,thedrivingresistanceincreasedandanincrease
ingroundvibrationwasobserved.Atadistanceof15mfromthepilethemaximumvelocity
wasrecordedas126.2mm/s,seeFigure2.51.
Measurementsofvibrationaccelerationatthealreadyinstalledpileatadistanceof6.25m
fromthedrivenpilegaveamaximumaccelerationof123.42m/s2,whichisavaluethatcould
potentiallyharmthepileandreduceitsbearingcapacity.Thefrequencyspectrumshoweda
frequencyrangeof0500Hzformeasurementsatthepile.
InFigure2.52verticalandhorizontalaccelerationsareplottedagainstpenetrationdepthata
distanceof3mfromthedrivenpile.Theresultsindicatedthattheverticalvibrationswere
largerthanhorizontalvibrations.Thefrequencyfortheverticalvibrationsintheground
rangedfrom0to200Hzandforthehorizontalvibrationstherangeis0to150Hz.
FromstudyingaccelerationrecordsatdifferentdepthsofimpactThandavamoorthy(2004)
concludedthatbodywaveswerepredominantintheverticalaccelerationwhilesurface
waveswerepredominantinthehorizontalacceleration.Timehistoriesforeachblowshowed
awavetraceofhighfrequencyinthebeginningandalowerfrequencyforthefollowing
time.AccordingtoThandavamoorthy(2004)thehighfrequencywasprimarilybodywaves
andthelowerfrequencywasthesurfacewaves.
92
2LITERATURESTUDY
Figure2.52Verticalandhorizontalvibrationaccelerationplottedagainstpenetrationdepth3mfrom
thedrivenpile(Thandavamoorthy,2004).
93

AretatiningstructurewasneededforaplannedextensionofKarlstadtheatre,inthecityof
KarlstadinthewesternregionofSweden.Thetheatrebuildingaswellasseveralother
buildingsinthevicinitywereconstructedaroundtheendofthe19thcenturyandfounded
shallowlyondryrubbleorraftfoundations.
ThetheatreislocatedalongtheKlarlvenriver,whichhighlyinfluencethegeotechnical
characteristicsofthesite.Theupperpartsofthesoilmainlyconsistofloose,finegrainriver
sediments,mostlysand.Belowaround8mfromthegroundsurface,thesandtransitionsinto
loosesiltfollowedbyastiffersandlayer.Belowthesand/silt,aclaylayercontinuestoa
depthofabout25m.Thegroundwaterlevelcorrespondstothewaterlevelintheriver,
approximately3mbelowthegroundsurface.
Toinvestigatethepossibilityofusingavibratorydrivensheetpilewall,atrialsheetpiling
wasundertaken.ThetrialsheetpilingwasexecutedonMay4,2010andincludedthedriving
offoursheetpiles.Measurementofgroundvibrationswereperformedduringthedrivingof
thelastthreesheetpiles.Thepilesweredriventoadepthofabout11m.
Thegroundvibrationsduringthesheetpiledrivingweremeasuredusingtwotriaxial
geophonesandoneuniaxialgeophone.Thetriaxialgeophoneswereconnectedtoa
recorder,whichwereabletorecordaneventatasamplingrateof750Hzduring70s.The
uniaxialgeophonewasconnectedtodataacquisitionequipmentrecordingonlymaximum
values.ThemeasurementandrecordingequipmentwassuppliedbyBergskerAB.
Thegeophoneswerepositioned3.4m,7.9mand15mrespectivelyfromthesheetpileline.
Inthetwoclosestmeasurementpoints,velocitywasmeasuredinthreedirections(vertical,
transversalandlongitudinal)whileonlytheverticaldirectionwasmeasuredinthethird
measurementpoint.
Forpresentation,analysisanddiscussionoftheresultsofthefieldmeasurementsthereader
isreferredtotheworkpresentedinLidn(2012)andthethirdappendedpaper(PaperIII).
95

4.1 PAPERI
Groundvibrationsduetopileandsheetpiledrivingpredictionmodelsof
today
Deckner,F.,Viking,K.andHintze,S.(2012).Groundvibrationsduetopileandsheetpile
drivingpredictionmodelsoftoday.InProceedingsoftheEuropeanYoungGeotechnical
EngineersConference(WoodTandSwahnV(eds)).SwedishGeotechnicalSociety,
Gothenburg,Sweden,pp.107112.Peerreviewedconferencepaper.
Aspartofconstructionwork,pileandsheetpiledrivingunavoidablygeneratesvibrations.
Constructionworkstodayareoftenlocatedinurbanareasandalongwithsocietys
increasingconcernforenvironmentalimpact,theneedforpredictingvibrationsbefore
constructionisofimmediateinterest.Thisstudypresentsareviewofthepredictionmodels
existingtoday.Forpredictionofgroundvibrationsfrompileandsheetpiledrivingthereare
roughlythreedifferenttypesofmodels:empiricalmodels,theoreticalmodelsand
engineeringmodels.Apredictionmodelshouldbereliableinallcasesinwhichitismeantto
beused.Itisalsoimportantthatitisrelativelyeasytouseandthattheinputdataiseasily
obtained.Thisstudyconcludesthat,asoftoday,suchamodelislacking.Todaysmodels
eitherlackinreliabilityorrequiregreatamountsofinputdata,knowledgeandskillsaswell
astimeandmoney.
4.2 PAPERII
Factorsinfluencingvibrationsduetopiledriving
Deckner,F.,Viking,K.andHintze,S.(2013).Factorsinfluencingvibrationsduetopile
driving.SubmittedtoProceedingsoftheInstitutionofCivilEngineersGeotechnicalEngineering
inDecember2012.Journalpaper.
Vibrationsduetopileandsheetpiledrivingarepartofacomplexprocessinvolvingmany
elementsandfactorsthatinfluencebothvibrationmagnitudeandfrequency.Better
understandingandpredictionofthevibrationsgeneratedwillgreatlybenefitthecivil
engineeringpracticeaswellastheconstructionindustry.Animportantcomponentin
understandingvibrationsduetopiledrivingistocomprehendandrecognisethefactorsthat
influencethesevibrations.Theobjectiveofthepresentstudyistoidentifyfactorsthat
97
influencevibrationscausedbypiledriving.Furthermore,currentmodelsforpredictionof
vibrationsarediscussedandevaluated.Basedontheliteraturestudyconducted,itis
concludedthatthemostimportantfactorsarethegeotechnicalconditions,theenergy
generatedatthesourceandthedistancefromthesource.Theidentifiedfactorsshouldbe
includedinordertocreateareliablepredictionmodelforvibrationscausedbypileandsheet
piledriving.
4.3 PAPERIII
Measuredgroundvibrationsduringvibratorysheetpiledriving
Deckner,F.,Lidn,M.,Viking,K.andHintze,S.(2013).Measuredgroundvibrationsduring
vibratorysheetpiledriving.TobesubmittedtoProceedingsoftheInstitutionofCivilEngineers
GeotechnicalEngineeringinMarch2013.Journalpaper.
AnextensionwasplannedfortheoldtheatrebuildinginthecityofKarlstadinSweden.The
theatrewasconstructedin1893andseveralofthesurroundingbuildingsareofthesame
age.ThetheatreislocatedalongtheriverbankofKlarlvenandthedryrubblefoundationis
placedontopofalayerofloosesand.Theoldbuildingsalongwiththecomplexsoil
conditionsmadeenvironmentalimpactacurrentissue.Theresearchdescribedinthispaper
wasundertakentoprovidedataforthedecisionwhethervibratorydrivensheetpilescould
beanoptionfortheretainingstructure.Groundvibrationsweremeasuredduringatrial
sheetpilingusinggeophones.Analysisoftheresultssuggeststhatvibratorydrivensheet
pileswouldcauselargesettlementsintheloosesandlayer.Itwasalsoconcludedthat
geotechnicalconditionsaswellasdistancefromthesourcehavelargeimpactonthe
generatedvibrations.Acomparisonbetweenmeasuredvibrationsandpredictedvibrations
usingempiricalrelationsgavevaluableinsightsforthedevelopmentoffutureprediction
models.
98

Thefollowingsectionisasummaryofthemajorfindingsandconclusionsofthisstudy.In
addition,proposalsforfutureresearchareincluded.
5.1 CONCLUSIONS
Animportantpartofunderstandingandpredictingvibrationsduetopiledrivingisbeing
awareofthefactorsthatinfluencethemagnitude,shapeandfrequencyofvibrations.From
theliteraturestudyandthefieldmeasurements,itisconcludedthatthemainfactors
influencingvibrationsduetopileandsheetpiledrivingarethevibrationstransferredfrom
thepiletothesoil,thegeotechnicalconditionsatthesiteandthedistancefromthesource.
Thevibrationstransmittedfromthepiletothesoilaredependentonthevibrations
transferredtothepilefromthehammer,thepilesoilinteractionandthewavepropagation
andattenuationintheplastic/elastoplasticzoneclosesttothepile.Thehammerpile
interactionandthevibrationtransmittedthereinisratherclearlyunderstoodanddescribed
inliterature.Thereforefurtherresearchneedstobefocusedonclarifyingtheactionsatthe
pilesoilinterface.Thesizeoftheplastic/elastoplasticzoneandthetransmissionof
vibrationsthereinandtotheelasticpartofthesoilwarrantfurtherresearch.
Itisclearthatthegeotechnicalconditionsaffectthevibrationmagnitude,shapeandthe
frequencycontentofthevibrationgeneratedbypiledriving.However,theliteraturestudy
hasshownthatitisstillunderdebateandunclearwhichfactorsinthesoilhavethelargest
influenceorifitisacombinationofseveralsoilparameters.Toreachthefinalaimofthe
researchprogramitisnecessarytoperformfuturestudiesshowingwhichsoilparameters
arenecessarytoincorporateinafuturepredictionmodelofvibrationsduetopileandsheet
piledriving.
Thedistancebetweenthesourceofvibrationandthepointofinterestlargelyaffectsthe
vibrationmagnitude.Thedifficultyhereliesindecidingthecorrectdistancetousein,for
example,apredictionmodel.Thehorizontaldistanceiseasytouse;howeveritmightbe
conservativeespeciallyincasesinwhichthedistancetothesourceisshortandthevibrations
aretransmittedatthepiletoe.Thatargumentvalidatestheuseoftheslopedistanceoverthe
horizontaldistance;however,sincethesourceatthepilecanbebothshaftandtoetheslope
distancecoulddifferconsiderablyduringthepenetrationofthepile.Therefore,inthe
processofdevelopingofanewpredictionmodelitmustbeclarifiedwhichdistancegivesthe
mostcorrectandreliablypredictedvibrations.
99
Thereareotherfactorsthathavebeenmentionedinliteraturetoaffectthevibrations,
foremostinthehorizontaldirection.Thatisforexamplethewaythepile/sheetpileisheld
(eccentricclampinggenerateseccentricvibrations)andinterlockfriction.Interlockfriction
andeccentricclampingwasalsoobservedinthefieldstudy.Theimportanceofsuchfactors
aredifficulttoquantify,however,theknowledgeoftheireffectishighlyimportantforfuture
designofpileandsheetpiledrivingworksanddrivingequipment.Therefore,further
researchontheeffectofthesefactorsiswarrantedinfuturefieldstudies.
Fromtheliteraturestudyitcanbeconcludedthatapredictionmodeltoalargeextent
dependsontheinputdata.Therefore,areliableandwellfunctioningpredictionmodelneeds
tobebasedondatathatisaccurateanddescriptivefortheproblem,forexampleregarding
drivingequipment,pile,andsoil.Itisalsonecessarythattheinputdataisrelativelyeasyto
obtainwithoutgreatcostsortimesincepredictionsshouldbeperformedatarelativelyearly
stageintheconstructionprocess.
Thereviewofthecurrentpredictionmodelsforvibrationsduetopileandsheetpiledriving
givereasontoconcludethatasoftodaythereisnopredictionmodelthatfulfilthecriteriaof
theperfectpredictionmodel;reliablebutyeteaystoapply.Thecurrentempiricalmodels
aretoounreliableandtendtohighlyoverestimatethevibrationlevels.Thecurrent
theoreticalmodelsrequiregreatamountsofinputdata,greatuserknowledgeandare
usuallyrelativelytimeconsuming.Thecurrentengineeringmodelsalllackvalidationto
measuredvibrationsinordertobeconsideredreliable.
5.2 FUTURERESEARCH
Thisstudyhashighlightedresearchareasthatwouldenhancetheunderstandingof
vibrationsduetopiledrivingaswellascreatingaplatformforanewmodelforpredictionof
thesevibrations.Areasthatneedtobestudiedfurtherare:
x Thetransferofvibrationsatthepilesoilinterface,includingthegenerationofa
plastic/elastoplasticzoneintheareaclosesttothepileandhowthataffectsthe
transferofvibrationsfromthepiletothesoil.
x Theinfluenceofdifferentfactorsandparametersofthegeotechnicalsiteconditions
onthevibrationsgeneratedbypiling.
x Theinfluenceofworkrelatedparametersonthegeneratedvibrations,suchas
holdingthesheetpileeccentricallyandinterlockfriction.
x Whichdistancetousebetweensourceandpointofinterest?
Withinthisresearchprogramthefocusoffutureresearchwilllieonthepilesoilinteraction
andthevibrationtransferbetweenpileandsoil.Attemptswillalsobemadetofurther
investigatewhichparametersofthegeotechnicalconditionsthatarethemostimportantfor
thegeneratedvibrationsandhowthesebestcanbeincorporatedintoapredictionmodel.
Thefuturestudieswithinthisresearchprojectwillmainlyconsistofnewfieldtestsandthe
analysisoftheirresults.
100

Aboulella,F.(1990).Verticalvibrationsofpilesinnonhomogeneoussoil.Geotechnical
Engineering,Vol.21,No.2,pp.109125.
Ahlqvist,A.&Enggren,E.(2006a).ImpactonSurroundingEnvironmentfromVibroDrivenSheet
Piles.MasterofSciencethesis06/01,DepartmentofCivilandArchitecturalEngineering,
RoyalInstituteofTechnology,Stockholm,Sweden.
Ahlqvist,A.&Enggren,E.(2006b).Impactonsurroundingenvironmentfromvibrodriven
sheetpiles.ProceedingsofTRANSVIB2006,Paris2122september,pp.317330.
Alpan,I.&Meidav,T.(1963).Theeffectofpiledrivingonadjacentbuildings.Acasehistory.
RilemSymposiumonMeasurementsandEvaluationsofDynamicEffectsandVibrationsin
Construction,Vol.2,pp.171181,Budapest.
Amick,H.&Gendreau,M.(2000).ConstructionVibrationsandTheirImpactonVibration
SensitiveFacilities.Proceedingsofthe6thASCEConstructionCongress,Orlando,Florida,
February22,2000.
ArcelorMittal(2008).PilingHandbook.8thedition(revised2008),ArcelorMittalCommercial
RPS2008.
Athanasopoulos,G.A.&Pelekis,P.C.(2000).Groundvibrationsfromsheetpiledrivingin
urbanenvironment:measurements,analysisandeffectsonbuildingsandoccupants.Soil
DynamicsandEarthquakeEngineering,Elsevier,Vol.19,No.5,pp.371387.
Athanasopoulos,G.A.,Pelekis,P.C.andAnagnostopoulos,G.A.(2000).Effectofsoilstiffness
intheattenuationofRayleighwavemotionsfromfieldmeasurements.SoilDynamicsand
EarthquakeEngineering,Vol.19,No.4,pp.277288.
AtlasCopcoABEM(1973).LetstalkaboutGroundVibrationsandtheirEffectonPeopleand
Buildings.ABEMPrintedMatterNo90073.Bromma,Sweden.
Attewell,P.B.&Farmer,I.W.(1973).Attenuationofgroundvibrationsfrompiledriving.
GroundEngineering,Vol.3,No.7,pp.2629.
101
Attewell,P.B.,Selby,A.R.&ODonnell,L.(1992a).Estimationofgroundvibrationfrom
drivenpilingbasedonstatisticalanalysesofrecordeddata.GeotechnicalandGeological
Engineering,Vol.10,pp.4159.
Attewell,P.B.,Selby,A.R.&ODonnell,L.(1992b).Tablesandgraphsfortheestimationof
groundvibrationfromdrivenpilingoperations.GeotechnicalandGeologicalEngineering,Vol.
10,pp.6187.
Auersch,L.(1995).Someeffectsofthelayeringofthesoilonwavepropagationand
foundationvibrations.TransactionsontheBuiltEnvironment,Vol.14WITPress,pp.283290.
Auersch,L.(2010a).TechnicallyInducedSurfaceWaveFields,PartI:MeasuredAttenuation
andTheoreticalAmplitudeDistanceLaws.BulletinoftheSeismologicalSocietyofAmerica,Vol.
100,No.4,pp.15281539.
Auersch,L.(2010b).TechnicallyInducedSurfaceWaveFields,PartII:Measuredand
CalculatedAdmittanceSpectra.BulletinoftheSeismologicalSocietyofAmerica,Vol.100,No.4,
pp.15401550.
Auersch,L.(2010c).Wavepropagationintheelastichalfspaceduetoaninteriorloadandits
applicationtogroundvibrationproblemsandbuildingsonpilefoundations.SoilDynamics
andEarthquakeEngineering,Vol.30,No.10,pp.925936.
Auersch,L.&Said,S.(2010).Attenuationofgroundvibrationsduetodifferenttechnical
sources.EarthquakeEngineeringandEngineeringVibration,Vol.9,No.3,pp.337344.
Bement,R.A.P.&SelbyA.R.(1995).Alaboratoryinvestigationofgroundcompaction
settlementinducedbyvibrodrivingofpiles.TransactionsontheBuiltEnvironment,Vol.14
WITPress,pp.8996.
Billet,P.&Sieffert,J.G.(1989).SoilSheetPileInteractioninVibroPiling.Journalof
GeotechnicalEngineering,Vol.115,No.8,pp.10851101.
Bodare,A.(1996).KompendiumJordochbergdynamik1B1435.DivisionforSoilandRock
Mechanics,RoyalInstituteofTechnology,Stockholm,Sweden.
Borel,S.,Gianeselli,L.,Durot,D.,Vaillant,P,Barbot,L.,Marsset,B.&LijourP.(2002).Full
scalebehaviourofvibratorydrivenpilesinMontoir.Proceedingsoftheinternationalconference
onvibratorypiledrivinganddeepsoilcompaction,LouvainLaNeuve,Belgium,910September
2002,pp.181192.
Brenner,R.P.&Chittikuladilok,B.(1975).VibrationsfrompiledrivingintheBangkokarea.
GeotechnicalEngineering,Vol.6,No.2,pp.167197.
Brenner,R.P.&Viranuvut,S.(1977).Measurementandpredictionofvibrationsgeneratedby
drophammerpilinginBangkoksubsoils.Proceedingsofthe5thSoutheastAsianConferenceon
SoilEngineering,Bangkok,Thailand,pp.105119.
102
REFERENCES
Ciesielski,R.,Maciag,E.&Stypula,K.(1980).Groundvibrationsinducedbypiledriving
Someresultsofexperimentalinvestigations.ProceedingsoftheInternationalSymposiumonSoils
underCyclicandTransientLoading,Swansea,UK,Vol.2,pp.757762.
Clough,G.W.&Chameau,JL.(1980).MeasuredEffectsofVibratorySheetpileDriving.
JournalofGeotechnicalEngineeringDivision,ASCE,Vol.106,No.GT10,pp.10811099.
DAppolonia,D.J.(1971).EffectsofFoundationConstructiononNearbyStructures.
ProceedingsoftheFourthPanamericanConferenceonSoilMechanicsandFoundationEngineering,
SanJuan,PuertoRico,Vol.1,pp.189236.
Davis,D.(2010).AReviewofPredictionMethodsforGroundBorneNoisedueto
ConstructionActivities.Proceedingsofthe20thInternationalCongressonAcoustics,2327August
2010,Sydney,Australia.
Denies,N.&Holeyman,A.(2008).Vibratorydrivingandsegregationingranularmatter.
Proceedingsofthe8thInternationalConferenceontheApplicationofStresswaveTheorytoPiles,
Lisbon,Portugal,September810,pp.549557.
DIN(DeutschesInstitutfurNormung)(2001).DIN41501StructuralvibrationPart1:
Predictingvibrationparameters.Berlin,Germany.
Dong,H.,KayniaM.K.,Madshus,C.&Hovern,J.M.(2000).Soundpropagationoverlayered
poroelasticgroundusingafinitedifferencemodel.JournaloftheAcousticalSocietyofAmerica,
Vol.108,No2,pp.494502.
Dowding,C.H.(1996).ConstructionVibrations.PrenticeHall,UpperSaddleRiver,USA.
Erlingsson,S.(1999).ThreedimensionaldynamicsoilanalysisofaliveloadinUllevi
Stadium.SoilDynamicsandEarthquakeEngineering,Vol.18,No.5,pp.373386.
Erlingsson,S.&Bodare,A.(1992).VerticalSwavesinsoilstratumoverhalfspace.Soil
DynamicsandEarthquakeEngineering.Vol.11,No.7,pp.427434.
Erlingsson,S.&Bodare,A.(1996).LiveloadinducedvibrationsinUlleviStadiumdynamic
soilanalysis.SoilDynamicsandEarthquakeEngineering,Vol.15,No.3,pp.171188.
Galitzin,B.(1912).UeberdieDispersionundDmpfungderseismischenOberflchenwellen.
BulletindelAcadmieImprialedesSciencesdeSt.Ptersbourg,pp.219236.
Gincharov,B.V.&Kovalev,V.F.(1995).Predictionofsoilvibrationsduringpiledrivingfrom
penetrationdata.SoilMechanicsandFoundationEngineering,Vol.32,No.1,pp.79.
Gutowski,T.G.&Dym,C.L.(1976).Propagationofgroundvibration:areview.Journalof
SoundandVibration,Vol.49,No.2,pp.179193.
103
Haegeman,W.(2002).Acasestudyonsafesheetpiledrivingwithvibrationmonitoring.
Proceedingsoftheinternationalconferenceonvibratorypiledrivinganddeepsoilcompaction,
LouvainLaNeuve,Belgium,910September2002,pp.135139.
HandboekDamwanden,CURpublication166.Extractpp.496507andpp.510513(In
Dutch).
Hansbo,S.(1994).FoundationEngineering.Elsevier,TheNetherlands.
Head,J.M.&Jardine,F.M.(1992).Groundbornevibrationsarisingfrompiling.CIRIATechnical
Note142,CIRIA,London,U.K.
Heckman,W.S.&Hagerty,D.J.(1978).VibrationsAssociatedwithPileDriving.Journalofthe
ConstructionDivision,Vol.104,No.CO4,December1978,pp.385394.
Hiller,D.M.&Hope,V.S.(1998).Groundbornevibrationgeneratedbymechanized
constructionactivities.ProceedingsoftheICEGeotechnicalEngineering,Vol.131,No.4,pp.
223232.
Hintze,S.(1994).RiskAnalysisinFoundationEngineeringwithApplicationtoPilinginLoose
FrictionSoilsinUrbanSituations.DoctoralThesis94/2,DivisionofSoilandRockMechanics,
RoyalInstituteofTechnology,NordstedtsTryckeriAB,Stockholm,Sweden.
Hintze,S.,Liedberg,S.,Massarsch,R.,Hanson,M.,Elvhammar,H.,Lundahl,B.&Rehnman,
SE.(1997).Omgivningspverkanvidplochspontslagning.Plkommissionenrapport95,
Linkping.
Holeyman,A.(2002).SoilBehaviorunderVibratoryDriving.Proceedingsoftheinternational
conferenceonvibratorypiledrivinganddeepsoilcompaction,LouvainLaNeuve,Belgium,910
September2002,pp.319.
Holeyman,A.E.&Legrand,C.(1994).SoilModelingforPileVibratoryDriving.Proceedingsof
theInternationalConferenceonDesignandConstructionofDeepFoundations,Orlando,1994,pp.
11651178.
Holeyman,A.E.&Legrand,C.(1997).Soilstructureinteractionduringpilevibratory
driving.Proceedingsofthe13thInternationalConferenceonSoilMechanicsandFoundation
Engineering,Hamburg,Germany,September1997,pp.817822.
Holmberg,R.,Arnberg,P.W.,Bennerhult,O.,Forssblad,L.,Gereben,L.,Hellman,L.,Olsson,
K.,Rundqvist,G.,Sjberg,C.,Sjkvist,K.&Wallmark,G.(1984).Vibrationsgeneratedbytraffic
andbuildingconstructionactivities.SwedishCouncilforBuildingResearch,Stockholm,
Sweden.
Hope,V.S.&Hiller,D.M.(2000).Thepredictionofgroundbornevibrationfrompercussive
piling.CanadianGeotechnicalJournal,Vol.37,No3,pp.700711.
104
REFERENCES
Houz,C.(1994).HFVAmplitudeControlVibratoryHammers:PilingEfficiencywithoutthe
Vibrationinconvenience.ProceedingsoftheFifthInternationalConferenceandExhibitionon
PilingandDeepFoundations,Bruges,Belgium,pp.2.4.12.4.10.
Hwang,JH.,Liang,N.&Chen,CH.(2001).GroundResponseduringPileDriving.Journalof
GeotechnicalandGeoenvironmentalEngineering,Vol.127,No.11,pp.939949.
IVA(1979).JordochBergdynamik.IVAskommittfrvibrationsfrgor,Arbetsgrupp4:Jord
ochbergdynamik,Volym225avIngenjrsvetenskapsakademien,IVA,Stockholm,Sweden.
IVA(1983).Vibrationer.Rapport256Ingenjrsvetenskapsakademien,SlutrapportfrnIVAs
kommittfrvibrationsfrgor,IVA,Stockholm,Sweden.
Jaksa,M.B.,Griffith,M.C.&Grounds,R.W.(2002).Groundvibrationsassociatedwith
installingenlargedbasedrivencastinsitupiles.AustralianGeomechanics,Vol.37,No.1,pp.
6773.
Jongmans,D.(1996).Predictionofgroundvibrationcausedbypiledriving:Anew
methodology.EngineeringGeology,Vol.42,No.1,pp.2536.
Jongmans,D.&Demanet,D.(1993).Theimportanceofsurfacewavesinvibrationstudyand
theuseofRayleighwavesforestimatingthedynamiccharacteristicsofsoils.Engineering
Geology,Vol.34,No.12,pp.105113.
Karlsson,B.(2013).Tillstthaverikommissionfrattutredabyggmisstag.Debatearticle
fromDagensNyheterswebpaperDN.se.Publishedonline20130111,
http://www.dn.se/debatt/tillsatthaverikommissionforattutredabyggmisstag.
Khoubani,A.&Ahmadi,M.M.(2012).Numericalstudyofgroundvibrationduetoimpact
piledriving.ProceedingsoftheICEGeotechnicalEngineering,publishedonline22August
2012,p.12.DOI:10.1680/geng.11.00094.
Kim,DS.&Lee,JS.(2000).Propagationandattenuationofcharacteristicsofvariousground
vibrations.SoilDynamicsandEarthquakeEngineering,Vol.19,No2,pp.115126.
Kramer,S.L.(1996).GeotechnicalEarthquakeEngineering.PrenticeHall,NewJersey,USA.
Lamb,H.(1904).OnthePropagationofTremorsovertheSurfaceofanElasticSolid.
PhilosophicalTransactionssoftheRoyalSocietyofLondon.SeriesA,ContainingPapersofa
MathematicalorPhysicalCharacter,Vol.203,pp.142.
Lee,SH.,Kim,BI.&Han,JT.(2012).PredictionofPenetrationRateofSheetPileInstalled
inSandbyVibratoryPileDriver.KSCEJournalofCivilEngineering,Vol.16,No.3,pp.316
324.
105
LegrandC,VanRompaeyDandMentenJ(1994)Acomparisonofdifferentsheetpile
installationmethods.InProceedingsoftheFifthInternationalConference&ExhibitiononPiling
andDeepFoundation.WestradeFairs,Bruges,Belgium.
Lidn,M.(2012).GroundVibrationsduetoVibratorySheetPileDriving.MasterofScienceThesis
12/06,DivisionofSoilandRockMechanics,RoyalInstituteofTechnology,Stockholm,
Sweden.
Madheswaran,C.K.,Natarajan,K.,Sundaravadivelu,R.&Boominathan,A.(2009).Effectof
openorconcreteinfilledtrenchesonscreeningofgroundvibrationduringpiledriving.
ExperimentalTechniques,Vol.33,No.2,pp.4351.
Madheswaran,C.K.,Sundaravadivelu,R.,Boominathan,A.&Natarajan,K.(2005).Response
ofGroundduringPileDriving.JournaloftheInstitutionofEngineers(India),CivilEngineering
Division,Vol.86,pp.2227.
Mahutka,KP.&Grabe,J.(2006).Numericalpredictionofsettlementsandvibrationsdueto
vibratorypiledrivingusingacontinuummodel.ProceedingsofTRANSVIB2006,Paris2122
September,pp.243252.
Martin,D.J.(1980).Groundvibrationsfromimpactpiledrivingduringroadconstruction.
TransportandRoadResearchLaboratorySupplementaryReport544,England.
Masoumi,H.R.,Degrande,G.&Lombaert,G.(2006).Freefieldvibrationsduetovibratory
piledrivinginalayeredsoilmedium.ProceedingsofTRANSVIB2006,Paris2122September.
Masoumi,H.R.,Degrande,G.&Lombaert,G.(2007).Predictionoffreefieldvibrationsdue
topiledrivingusingadynamicsoilstructureinteractionformulation.SoilDynamicsand
EarthquakeEngineering,Vol.27,No.2,pp.126143.
Masoumi,H.R.&Degrande,G.(2008).Numericalmodelingoffreefieldvibrationsdueto
piledrivingusingadynamicsoilstructureinteractionformulation.JournalofComputational
andAppliedMathematics,Vol.215,No.2,pp.503511.
Masoumi,H.R.,Francois,S.&Degrande,G.(2009).Anonlinearcoupledfiniteelement
boundaryelementmodelforthepredictionofvibrationsduetovibratoryandimpactpile
driving.InternationalJournalforNumericalandAnalyticalMethodsinGeomechanics,Vol.33,No.
2,pp.245274.
Massarsch,K.R.(2000a).Settlementsanddamagecausedbyconstructioninducedvibrations.
ProceedingsoftheInternationalWorkshopWave2000,Bochum,Germany,pp.299315.
Massarsch,K.R.(2000b).Vibratorersanvndningsmjligheterviddrivningavplarochspont.
Plkommissionenrapport99,Linkping,Sweden.
Massarsch,K.R.(2004).VibrationsCausedbyPileDriving.Deepfoundations,summer2004
andfall2004(twoparts).
106
REFERENCES
Massarsch,K.R.&Fellenius,B.H.(2008).GroundVibrationsInducedbyImpactPileDriving.
Proceedingsofthe6thInternationalConferenceonCaseHistoriesinGeotechnicalEngineering,
Arlington,August1116,2008.
Miller,G.F.&Pursey,H.(1955).OnthePartitionofEnergybetweenElasticWavesinaSemi
InfiniteSolid.ProceedingsoftheRoyalSocietyofLondon,Vol.233,pp.5569.
Mller,B.,Larsson,R.,Bengtsson,PE.&Moritz,L.(2000).Geodynamikipraktiken.Statens
geotekniskainstitut,Information17,Linkping,Sweden.
Niederwanger,G.(1999).Measurementandestimationofvibrationofoldbuildings.
TransactionsontheBuiltEnvironment,Vol.39,WITPress,pp.6776.
Nilsson,G.(1989).Markvibrationervidplslagning.MasterthesisNr3:89,DivisionforSoil
andRockMechanics,RoyalInstituteofTechnology,Stockholm,Sweden.
Nordal,S.(2009).Lecturenotes:PhDcourseBA8305Geodynamics.NorwegianUniversityof
ScienceandTechnology,Trondheim,Norway.
SA(SouthAustralia)Government(2007).NorthernExpresswayEnvironmentalReport,chapter
15Vibration.Adelaide,Australia.
Rausche,F.(2002).Modelingofvibratorypiledriving.Proceedingsoftheinternational
conferenceonvibratorypiledrivinganddeepsoilcompaction,LouvainLaNeuve,Belgium,910
September2002,pp.2132.
Richart,F.E.,Woods,R.D.&Hall,J.R.(1970).VibrationsofSoilsandFoundations.PrenticeHall,
EngelwoodCliffs,USA.
Rockhill,D.J.,Bolton,M.D.&White,D.J.(2003).Groundbornevibrationsduetopressinpiling
operations.CambridgeUniversityEngineeringDepartment.
Selby,A.R.(1991).Groundvibrationscausedbypileinstallation.Proceedingsofthe4th
InternationalConferenceonPilingandDeepFoundations,Stresa,Italy,712April,pp.497502.
Stille,H.&Hall,L.(1995).VibrationergenereradeavByggnadsverksamheternaturochkrav.
InstitutionenfrJordochBergmekanik,KungligaTekniskaHgskolan.
Svinkin,M.R.(1996).Overcomingsoiluncertaintyinpredictionofconstructionand
industrialvibrations.Uncertaintyinthegeologicenvironment:fromtheorytopractice,ASCE,
GeotechnicalSpecialEditionNo.58,pp.11781194.
Svinkin,M.R.(2004).MinimizingConstructionVibrationEffects.PracticePeriodicalon
StructuralDesignandConstruction,ASCE,Vol.9,No.2,pp.108115.
107
Svinkin,M.R.(2005).Environmentalvibrationproblemsduringconstruction.Proceedingsof
theInternationalConferenceonSoilMechanicsandGeotechnicalEngineering,Vol.4,pp.2453
2456.
Svinkin,M.R.(2008).Soilandstructurevibrationsfromconstructionandindustrialsources.
Proceedingsofthe6thInternationalConferenceonCaseHistoriesinGeotechnicalEngineering,
Arlington,August1116,2008.
Szchy,C.(1961).TheEffectsofVibrationandDrivingupontheVoidsinGranularSoil
SurroundingaPile.Proceedingsofthe5thInternationalConferenceSMFE,1961.
Tamate,S.,Horii,N.&Toyosawa,Y.(1995).FieldTesttoMeasuretheGroundVibrationand
EarthPressureInducedbyTrenchExcavationWork.SpecificResearchReportsoftheResearch
InstituteofIndustrialSafety,RIISSRRNO.14(1995).
Thurner,H(1976).SeismiskmtmetodikVibrationer.GeodynamikAB,SBEF,maj1976.
Thandavamoorthy,T.S.(2004).Pilinginfineandmediumsandacasestudyofgroundand
pilevibration.SoilDynamicsandEarthquakeEngineering,Vol.24,No.4,pp.295304.
Thusyanthan,I.&Madabhushi,S.P.G.(2002).Constructionprocessinducedvibrationson
undergroundstructures.Proceedingsoftheinternationalconferenceonvibratorypiledrivingand
deepsoilcompaction,LouvainLaNeuve,Belgium,910September2002,pp.147153.
Ulitsky,V.M.(2005).Soilstructureinteraction:Calculationmethodsandengineering
practice.Preface,ProceedingsoftheInternationalgeotechnicalconferencededicatedtothe
tercentenaryofSaintPetersburg,SaintPetersburg,2628May2005.
VandenBerghe,JF.(2002).Internationalpredictioneventofvibratorypiledriving.
Proceedingsoftheinternationalconferenceonvibratorypiledrivinganddeepsoilcompaction,
LouvainLaNeuve,Belgium,910September2002,pp.193209.
VandenBerghe,JF.&Holeyman,A.(2002).Applicationofahypoplasticconstitutivelaw
intoavibratorypiledrivingmodel.Proceedingsoftheinternationalconferenceonvibratorypile
drivinganddeepsoilcompaction,LouvainLaNeuve,Belgium,910September2002,pp.6168.
VanRompaey,D.,Legrand,C.&Holeyman,A.(1995).Apredictionmethodforthe
installationofvibratorydrivenpiles.TransactionsontheBuiltEnvironment,Vol.14,WITPress,
pp.533542.
Verstov,V.V.,Azbel,G.G.&Goldenshtein,I.V.(2002).Safevibropenetrationofsheetpiling
nearexistingbuildings.SoilMechanicsandFoundationEngineering,Vol.39,No.1.
Viking,K.(2000).Fullscalefieldteststudyofdynamicsoilresistanceofvibratorydriven
sheetpiles.Proceedingsofthesixthinternationalconferenceontheapplicationofstresswavetheory
topiles,SaoPaulo,Brazil,1113September2000.
108
REFERENCES
Viking,K.(2002a).Vibrodriveabilityafieldstudyofvibratorydrivensheetpilesinnoncohesive
soils.DoctoralThesis1002,DivisionofSoilandRockMechanics,RoyalInstituteof
Technology,Stockholm,Sweden.
Viking,K.(2002b).Vibrodrivabilityandinducedgroundvibrationsofvibratoryinstalled
sheetpiles.Proceedingsoftheinternationalconferenceonvibratorypiledrivinganddeepsoil
compaction,LouvainLaNeuve,Belgium,910September2002,pp.99112.
Viking,K.(2006).Thevibratorypileinstallationtechnique.ProceedingsofTRANSVIB2006,
Paris,France,pp.6582.
Waarts,P.H.&Bielefeld,M.W.(1994).PredictionandControlofVibrationsduetoPile
DrivingandSheetPileVibration.Proceedingsofthe5thInternationalConference&Exhibitionon
PilingandDeepFoundations,Bruges,Belgium,pp.2.11.12.11.6.
Waarts,P.H.&deWit,M.S.(2004).Doesmoresophisticatedmodellingreducemodel
uncertainty?Acasestudyonvibrationpredictions.HERON,Vol.49,No.2,pp.119137.
Warrington,D.C.(1992).VibratoryandImpactvibrationPileDrivingEquipment.Publishedon
www.vulcanhammer.info/vibro/Vibrator,downloaded20091010.
Whenham,V.(2011).PowerTransferandVibratorPileSoilInteractionswithintheframeworkof
vibratorypiledriving.DoctoralThesis,UniversityofLouvain,Belgium.
Whenham,V.,Areias,L.,RocherLacoste,F.,Vi,D.,Bourdouxhe,MP.&Holeyman,A.
(2009).Fullscalesheetpilevibrodrivingtests.Proceedingsofthe17thInternationalConference
onSoilMechanicsandGeotechnicalEngineering,pp.13541357.
Whenham,V.&Holeyman,A.(2012).LoadTransferDuringVibratoryDriving.Geotechnical
andGeologicalEngineering,Vol.30,No.5,pp.11191135.
Whenham,V.,Huybrechts,N.,Legrand,C.,Bourdouxhe,MP.&Schmitt,A.(2006).Energy
consumptionduringsheetpilesvibrodriving:Experimentalresults.Proceedingsof
TRANSVIB2006,Paris,France,pp.209218.
Whyley,P.J.&Sarsby,R.W.(1992).Groundbornevibrationfrompiling.GroundEngineering,
Vol.May1992,pp.3237.
Wiss,J.F.(1967).DamageEffectsofPileDrivingVibration.HighwayResearchBoardRecord
155,pp.1420.
Wiss,J.F.(1981).ConstructionVibrations:StateoftheArt.JournalofGeotechnicalEngineering
Division,Vol.107,No.GT2,pp.167181.
Wolf,J.P.(1994).FoundationVibrationAnalysisUsingSimplePhysicalModels.PrenticeHall,
UpperSaddleRiver,USA.
109
Woods,R.D.(1997).DynamicEffectsofPileInstallationsonAdjacentStructures.NCHRP
Synthesis253,NationalCooperativeHighwayResearchProgram,TransportationResearch
Board,NationalAcademyPress,WashingtonD.C.,USA.
Ziyazov,Y.S.,Kovalev,V.F.,Yanyshev,G.S.&Gotman,A.L.(1976).Studyofground
vibrationsexcitedduringpiledriving.SoilMechanicsandFoundationEngineering,Vol.13,No.
1,pp.2023.
110

Grond Vibrations Due To Pile and Sheet Pile Driving Ingluencing Factors, Predictions and Measurements

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

Grond Vibrations Due To Pile and Sheet Pile Driving Ingluencing Factors, Predictions and Measurements

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Groundvibrationsduetopileandsheetpile

rcrit tan T crit d

Resulting PPV (mm/s)

Vertical velocity [mm/s]

Vertical velocity [mm/s]

Transversal velocity [mm/s]

Longitudinal velocity [mm/s]

u 0 u 0,350 0.002( F 350)

r0 D ( r r0 ) 0.7 EV0

Table2.15Valuesofx1,x2andx3forimpact pile driving,fromAttewelletal.(1992b).

Table2.16Valuesofx1,x2andx3forvibratory pile driving,fromAttewelletal.(1992b).

You might also like

Grond Vibrations Due To Pile and Sheet Pile Driving Ingluencing Factors, Predictions and Measurements

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

Grond Vibrations Due To Pile and Sheet Pile Driving Ingluencing Factors, Predictions and Measurements

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Groundvibrationsduetopileandsheetpile

rcrit tan T crit d

Resulting PPV (mm/s)

Vertical velocity [mm/s]

Vertical velocity [mm/s]

Transversal velocity [mm/s]

Longitudinal velocity [mm/s]

u 0 u 0,350  0.002( F  350)

r0 D ( r r0 ) 0.7 EV0

Table2.15Valuesofx1,x2andx3forimpact pile driving,fromAttewelletal.(1992b).

Table2.16Valuesofx1,x2andx3forvibratory pile driving,fromAttewelletal.(1992b).

  

You might also like

u 0 u 0,350 0.002( F 350)

r0 D ( r r0 ) 0.7 EV0