RK171619 (JTC Gul Circle, I - ULT-6) - Correlation Report

i
GEONAMICS
STATNAMIC Load Test Report
SUMMARY
This report gives the correlation test results of one (1) no of Statnamic Load Test
conducted by Geonamics (S) Pte Ltd to static load test by Kentledge method conducted
by Geomonitor (S) Pte Ltd. The Statnamic Load test was performed on Pile No. ST-2
(i_ULT-6) on 05 January 2017 for Proposed 9-Storey Warehouse Development Involving
3-Storey Container Depot on Lot 00301L, 00302C, & 00303M MK 07 at Gul Circle,
Singapore. The Kentledge load test setup was subsequently deployed on the same pile on
04 April 2017 to 11 April 2017.
The aforesaid Bored pile is of 1200 mm diameter and length 35.05 m from ground level.
A maximum Statnamic load of 35,950 kN was applied to Pile No. ST-2 (i_ULT-6) on 05
January 2017 during the load test. The derived static resistance from the Unloading Point
Method was 35,340 kN. The gross displacement of the pile head during the test was
20.48 mm and the recovery from this displacement was 16.37 mm leaving behind 4.11
mm of permanent settlement. Based on the test results, we can conclude that the Pile No.
ST-2 (i_ULT-6) using UPM has a capacity of 35,340 kN.
The comparison of load-displacement results by Statnamic load test and Kentledge load
test are shown below:
Settlement from Static test using Kentledge

Test Date: 04-11 April 2017
Load Times of Settlement from
Statnamic Method Scale Ruler Dial Gauge Average
Cycle working load Settlement Settlement Settlement
[A] [B] [C]
Test Date: 05 Jan 2017 [D] [E] [F]
(mm) (mm) (mm)
1 1.00xWL (11,500kN) 5.63 4.50 4.50 4.50
2 1.50xWL (17,250kN) 8.66 7.50 7.99 7.75
3 2.00xWL (23,000kN) 11.54 10.50 10.08 10.29
4 3.00xWL (34,500kN) 18.58 18.75 18.49 18.62
From the above table, the settlement at 1.0xWL, 1.5xWL, 2.0xWL, and 3.0xWL by
Statnamic test is 5.63 mm, 8.66 mm, 11.54 mm, and 18.58 mm respectively, compares
well with 4.50 mm, 7.75 mm, 10.29 mm and 18.62 mm obtained from Static test. Please
refer to Figure 6.1 for more details of correlation.
The load-settlement results from Statnamic were within expectation and showed a very
good correlation to the Static test results hence no additional correlation factor is required
for the Statnamic test results on subsequent piles.
Soil, Foundation & Concrete Specialists

ii
GEONAMICS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SUMMARY........................................................................................................................i
TABLE OF CONTENTS...................................................................................................ii
1.0 INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................1
2.0 THE STATNAMIC APPARATUS........................................................................2
2.1 Background and Theory..............................................................................2

2.2 The STATNAMIC Device..........................................................................3
2.3 Supporting Equipment.................................................................................3
3.0 TEST PROCEDURE...............................................................................................5
3.1 Foundation Element Tested.........................................................................5

3.2 Test Setup Procedure...................................................................................5
3.3 Target Load..................................................................................................5
3
4.0 STATNAMIC TEST RESULTS.............................................................................6
4.1 Load-Displacement Results.........................................................................6

4.2 Test Observations........................................................................................6
5.0 ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION...........................................................................7
5.1 Interpretation Method…………………………..........................................7

5.2 Unloading Point Method…………….….....................................................8
5.3 Load Displacement and Pile Capacity….....................................................9

iii
GEONAMICS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
6.0 COMPARISON OF KENTLEDGE LOAD TEST AND RAPID LOAD TEST...10
7.0 CONCLUSION......................................................................................................11
APPENDIX A Statnamic Test Setup Procedure
APPENDIX B Statnamic Load Test Data Tabulations
APPENDIX C Statnamic Load Test Graphs
APPENDIX D Calibration Records
APPENDIX E Soil Logging Information
APPENDIX F Kentledge Load Test Results

1
GEONAMICS
1.0 INTRODUCTION
On 05 January 2017, Geonamics (S) Pte Ltd performed Statnamic Load Test on the
Bored pile, Pile No. ST-2 (i_ULT-6) for Proposed 9-Storey Warehouse Development
Involving 3-Storey Container Depot on Lot 00301L, 00302C, & 00303M MK 07 at
Gul Circle, Singapore. The test was performed at the request of Messrs Ryobi Kiso (S)
Pte Ltd as a correlation test to static load test by Kentledge method on the same pile.

2
GEONAMICS
2.0 THE STATNAMIC APPARATUS
2.1 Background and Theory
The Statnamic load testing method was developed in 1988 to meet the construction
industry's need for an accurate and cost-effective method of determining the load bearing
capacity of deep foundation elements. The technology was developed jointly by
Berminghammer Corporation of Canada (now Berminghammer Foundation Equipment)
and TNO Building and Construction Research of the Netherlands.
A Statnamic load testing device is similar in concept to a compressed-air jack. High-

pressure gas forces apart the Statnamic piston and cylinder, with the piston acting
downward on the foundation element and the cylinder acting upward against a reaction
mass. The gas that powers the load test is produced by the burning of a solid fuel
propellant. The load duration of a Statnamic test is usually about 120 milliseconds. This
duration is fast enough to take advantage of the reaction mass inertia, requiring only 5%
of the mass of an equivalent static load, yet the load duration is long enough to eliminate
a travelling compression wave in the foundation element. Even for very long, flexible,
foundations, the load duration of a Statnamic test is approximately 10 times longer than
the natural frequency of the foundation, thus mobilising the entire foundation element.
The rate of loading of a Statnamic test may introduce damping and inertial effects.
Through experience and through numerical calculations, these rate effects can be
quantified and the static load bearing capacity of the foundation can be determined. These
rate effects are generally more significant in soft soils. In very dense, end bearing
conditions, the Statnamic load-displacement behaviour is virtually identical to that of a
static load test. For tests with a small displacement , the accelerations and velocities
experienced by the foundation element are usually very low (maximum acceleration less
than 1 g and maximum velocity less than 1 m/s).

3
GEONAMICS
2.2 The STATNAMIC Device
For the load test conducted on 05 January 2017, a Statnamic device was used to apply a
compressive load. A diagram of the device is shown in Figure 2.1. This device was
manufactured in 1995, and is the property of Geonamics (S) Pte Ltd.
Figure 2.1 - STATNAMIC Device

2.3 Supporting Equipment
The applied compressive load was measured using a Kelk load cell (serial ST95-C4027-
1-13). The load cell calibration factor that was used was 0.00004865 mV/V/kN. To
measure displacement, a portable laser source and a centrally mounted laser sensor (serial
#ST95-SL76-014) were used calibration factor 8.253 mm/V. Acceleration was monitored
using a solenoid low g accelerometer (serial # 071900) with calibration factor of 0.7410

4
GEONAMICS
mV/g. The data from these two components was collected in real-time using a TNO
FPDS-4® System (Foundation Pile Diagnostic System), consisting of a 486 processor
and a Statnamic signal conditioning unit. Digitization was performed at 5000 hertz per
channel. For these tests the computer was powered by a 12 V battery and the laser was
powered by a portable generator. An equipment schematic is shown in Figure 2.2.
Silencer
Cylinder
Load Cell & Laser Sensor Housing Piston (inside)
Figure 2.2 - Equipment Schematic

5
GEONAMICS
3.0 TEST PROCEDURE
3.1 Foundation Elements Tested
The Statnamic load test was performed on Pile No. ST-2 (i_ULT-6), a 1200 mm and
35.05 m long bored pile from ground level. The original 8 metres by 8 metres formation
surrounding the pile was back filled to the level of the pile top level. The pile top was
levelled using a high strength epoxy grout product and prepared for the load test.
3.2 Test Setup Procedure
The setup procedure that was followed for the Statnamic device is shown in Appendix A.
The steel platform was constructed to support the device during the test.
3.3 Target Load
Geonamics (S) Pte Ltd was informed by Ryobi Kiso (S) Pte Ltd that the test load would
be 34,500 kN. In anticipation of soil rate effects, a target Statnamic peak load of 35,000
kN was selected for this test. This load was to be attained by using 27.60 kg of
Statnamic fuel (approximately 6900 grain), with a reaction mass of 177,700 kg of
Statnamic weights.

6
GEONAMICS
4.0 STATNAMIC TEST RESULTS
4.1 Load-Displacement Results
The peak Statnamic load achieved was 35,950 kN and the static resistance by Unloading
Point Method was 35,340 kN. The maximum pile head displacement was 20.48 mm and
the recorded permanent settlement was 4.11 mm after a recovery of 16.37 mm from the
maximum displacement recorded. The maximum compression on the pile head was
31,783.10 kPa.
Load Settlement (mm)

1.00 times working load – 11,500 kN 5.63
4.2 Test Observations
This pile moved at a maximum velocity of 0.52 m/s and recovered with a comparable
upward velocity. The maximum acceleration recorded was 19.81 m/s2 while the
maximum deceleration recorded was 31.70 m/s2.

7
GEONAMICS
5.0 ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION
5.1 Statnamic Calculation of Pile Response
The established procedure for the evaluation of Statnamic pile load-deflection response is
based on a simplified pile and soil model that is subjected to a rigid body translation
during the loading and unloading stages. Stress wave propagation within the pile is
minimised. The pile is treated as a rigid mass with elastic properties. The soil is
modelled as a spring and dashpot system in parallel as shown in Fig.2. The spring
represents the static soil resistance, while the dashpot represents the damping of the soil.
Physical Model
F
In a STATNAMIC LOAD TEST:
F = Applied force from the Statnamic device
(measured by a load cell)
m = Pile mass (easy to calculate)
u c = pile/soil damping (UNKNOWN)
m k = pile and soil stiffness (the term we need to find)
u, v, a = measured by an optical sensor and/or
accelerometer
k c
Figure 2
The response of a pile to a Statnamic loading can be mathematically described by the

following equation:
Fstn(t) = Fu(t) + Fv(t) + Fa(t) (1)
where Fstn(t) is the Statnamic applied load, Fu(t) is the term accounting for the static soil
resistance, Fv(t) is the term accounting for the effect of damping, and Fa(t) accounting for
the effect of inertia during the loading/unloading stage.
The three components can be represented by
Fu(t) = K u(t)
Fv(t) = C v(t) (2)
Fa(t) = M a(t)

8
GEONAMICS
where u(t) is the pile top displacement and v(t) is the velocity at the pile top, a(t) is the
acceleration at the pile top, M is the mass of pile, K is the total spring stiffness, and C is
the damping component of the pile-soil system.
Substituting Eq.(2) into Eq.(1) yields
Fstn(t) = K u(t) + C v(t) + M a(t) (3)
Alternatively, Eq.(3) can be written as
Fstn(t) = Fsoil(t) + M a(t) (4)
where Fsoil(t) = K u(t) + C v(t) (5)
In a pile load test, u(t), v(t) and a(t) are measured together with Fstn(t) at any time t. The
mass M of the pile can easily be calculated. The value of K and C are to be determined,
and thus the components of Fu(t) and Fv(t) can then be obtained.
5.2 Unloading Point Method
This is a modification of the Equilibrium Point method. This method assumes that
damping is linear, i.e. the damping coefficient C is constant through out the test.
In the Unloading Point method, Fsoil is calculated from
Fsoil(t) = Fstn(t) - M a(t) (6)
The point of maximum displacement on the Fsoil versus u curve is called the ‘‘Unloading
Point’’, which corresponds to the point when the velocity is zero (v = 0). Since this zero
velocity point is unique, it also corresponds to the point of maximum displacement on the
Fstn versus u curve.
At this unloading point, the damping force Fv (tu) is equal to zero as the velocity is zero,
where tu is the time at the Unloading point. Thus, at the Unloading Point
Fsoil(tu) = Fu(tu) = Fstn(tu) - M a(tu) (7)
This value of Fu(tu) corresponding to the Unloading Point is taken to the maximum static
soil resistance, Fu(up) obtained in the Statnamic test

9
GEONAMICS
The damping factor C is estimated from
C = [Fsoil(max) - Fu(up)] / v (8)
where Fsoil(max) is the maximum value of Fsoil determined from the Fsoil versus u curve, and
v is the pile velocity at Fsoil(max).
The complete static load-deflection curve can then be obtained by using this value of C
and calculating the static load Fu(t) as follows:
Fu(t) = Fstn - Cv(t) - Ma(t) (9)
5.3 Load Displacement and Pile Capacity
Base on the results of the test, we can deduce that the Pile No. ST-2 (i_ULT-6) at least
has a capacity of 35,340 kN and the corresponding settlement is 20.48 mm where the
permanent settlement recorded was 4.11 mm.

10
GEONAMICS
6.0 COMPARISON OF KENTLEDGE LOAD TEST AND STATNAMIC LOAD

TEST
Pile No. ST-2 (i_ULT-6) has been previously tested with the Statnamic Load Test system
on 05 January 2017. Subsequently, the Kentledge load test (Appendix F) was deployed
on 04 to 11 April 2017 to test the same pile after the completion of Statnamic Load Test.
The comparison results are summarized below:
Settlement from Static test using Kentledge

Test Date: 04-11 Apr 2017
Load Times of Settlement from
Statnamic Method Scale Ruler Dial Gauge Average
Cycle working load Settlement Settlement Settlement
[A] [B] [C]
Test Date: 05 Jan 2017 [D] [E] [F]
(mm) (mm) (mm)
1 1.00xWL (11,500kN) 5.63 4.50 4.50 4.50
2 1.50xWL (17,250kN) 8.66 7.50 7.99 7.75
3 2.00xWL (23,000kN) 11.54 10.50 10.08 10.29
4 3.00xWL (34,500kN) 18.58 18.75 18.49 18.62
*Please refer to Figure 6.1 for more details of correlation.
From the above table, the settlement from Statnamic test in Column C compares well
with the settlements obtained from Static test in Column F.
The load displacements from the Statnamic load test (UPM) were plotted together with
the cycles from Kentledge load test as shown in Figure 6.1.
The load-settlement results from Statnamic were within expectation and showed a very
good correlation to the Static test results hence no additional correlation factor is required
for the Statnamic test results on subsequent piles.

11
GEONAMICS
Gul Circle Benoi Road, Pile No. i_ST-2

Static Load-Settlement Graph VS Statnamic Load-Displacement Plot (UPM) Graph
*Static Test settlements are averaged Scale ruler and Dial Gauge settlement readings
0
5
Displacement(mm)
10
15
20
25
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000 40000
Load (kN)
Statnamic Test (Cycle 1) Static Test (Cycle 1-3)
*Statnamic load test was conducted three months prior to the Static load test; it appeared that the pile was still
behaving elastically under the load applied during the Statnamic and Static load tests and the effects from pre-loading
is likely to be insignificant hence we ignored the residual settlement after the Statnamic test in the comparison. The
load-settlement results from Statnamic and Static load test also compares well.
Figure 6.1 – Static Load-Settlement Graph VS Statnamic Load-

Displacement (UPM) Graph

GEONAMICS
APPENDIX A
STATNAMIC TEST SETUP PROCEDURE

GEONAMICS
APPENDIX B
STATNAMIC LOAD TEST DATA TABULATION

GEONAMICS
APPENDIX C
STATNAMIC LOAD TEST GRAPHS

Load vs Time Plot
40.00
Pile No. = ST-2 (ULT-6)
Max. Load = 35.95 MN
35.00 Max. Displacement = 20.48 mm
Max. Static Resistance = 35.34 MN
30.00
25.00
20.00
Load (MN)
15.00
10.00
5.00
0.00
0.00 50.00 100.00 150.00 200.00 250.00
Time (ms)
Displacement vs Time Plot
Time (ms)
0.00 50.00 100.00 150.00 200.00 250.00
0
Max. Displacement = 20.48 mm
-5
-10
-15
DIsplacement (mm)
-20
-25
Load Displacement Plot (Statnamic Load)
Load (MN)
0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00 35.00 40.00

0
-5
-10
Displacement (mm)
-15
-20
-25
Load Displacement Plot (Unloading Point Method)
Load (MN)
0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00 35.00 40.00
0
-5
-10
-15
Displacement (mm)
-20
-25
Load Displacement Plot
Load (MN)
0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00 35.00 40.00
0
-5
-10
-15
Displacement (mm)
-20
-25
Statnamic Load Unloading Point Method

Velocity vs Time Plot
0.60
0.40
0.20
0.00
Velocity (m/s)
-0.20
-0.40
-0.60
0.00 50.00 100.00 150.00 200.00 250.00
Time (ms)
Acceleration vs Time Plot
30.00
20.00 Max. Static Resistance = 35.34 MN
10.00
0.00
-10.00
Acceleration m2/s
-20.00
-30.00
-40.00
0.00 50.00 100.00 150.00 200.00 250.00
Time (ms)
Load & Displacement vs Time Plot
40.00
30.00 Max. Static Resistance = 35.34 MN
20.00
10.00
Load
Load (MN)
0.00
0.00 50.00 100.00 150.00 200.00 250.00
Displacement
-10.00
-20.00
-30.00
Time (ms)
GEONAMICS
APPENDIX D
CALIBRATION RECORDS

2/16/2016 Collaboration / International Recognition
Collaboration / International Recognition
Accredited Once, Accepted Everywhere.
The SAC works closely with other accreditation bodies to establish and maintain the Mutual Recognition Arrangements (MRAs), which help
to facilitate regional and international trade for Singapore. Based on the results of intensive multinational peer evaluation of its signatories,
MRAs are important in building confidence for the competence and capabilities of an international network of accredited conformity
assessment bodies. This is why the SAC’s signatory status in the MRAs is a global passport for enterprises in Singapore, without any need
for retesting, reinspection and recertification.
Countries that are signatories of the MRAs recognise that the conformity assessment bodies accredited by their partners operate in an
equivalent way, and that they deliver equivalent accreditations, providing the same level of competence and confidence. Therefore, test or
inspection reports or certificates issued by the SACaccredited body are recognised by the MRA partners as equivalent to those issued by
their own accredited bodies.
SAC’s MRA partners include various international organisations, such as ILAC (http://www.ilac.org/) (International Laboratory Accreditation
Cooperation), IAF (http://www.iaf.nu/) (International Accreditation Forum), APLAC (http://www.aplac.org/) (Asia Pacific Laboratory
Accreditation Cooperation) and PAC (http://www.apecpac.org/) (Pacific Accreditation Cooperation).
http://www.sacaccreditation.gov.sg/about/CollaborationInternationalRecognition/Pages/CollaborationInternationalRecognition.aspx 1/1
Gilbert
From: Gilbert <gilbertcfs@gmail.com>

Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2016 5:05 PM
To: 'Kaandeepan Vinayagamoorthy'
Subject: FW: Clarification request for MRA and SAC Singlas Equivalent Accreditation
Hi Kaandee,
Please see some clarification from SAC Singlas regarding ILAC MRA signatories and in particular Standards Malaysia &
ANAB.
Thanks.
Regards,
Gilbert
9771 3635
From: Ham Eng LEE (SPRING) [mailto:LEE_Ham_Eng@spring.gov.sg]
Sent: Thursday, January 07, 2016 4:43 PM
To: Gilbert <gilbert@geonamics.com.sg>
Subject: RE: Clarification request for MRA and SAC Singlas Equivalent Accreditation
Dear Mr Gilbert
SAC, Standards Malaysia and ANAB are ILAC MRA signatories. As MRA signatories, reports issued by accredited
organisations accredited by ILAC MRA signatories are deemed as equivalent to us.
Regards
LEE Ham Eng (Ms) | Head (System & Measurement) | SAC Secretariat | SPRING Singapore
D: +65 6279 1860 | F: +65 6659 0640 | www.sac-accreditation.gov.sg | www.spring.gov.sg
2 Fusionopolis Way, #15-01, Innovis, Singapore 138634
Our Mission: To help Singapore enterprises grow & to build trust in Singapore products and services
Privileged/Confidential information may be contained in this message. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately.
From: Gilbert [mailto:gilbert@geonamics.com.sg]

Sent: Tuesday, 5 January, 2016 5:04 PM
To: Ham Eng LEE (SPRING)
Subject: Clarification request for MRA and SAC Singlas Equivalent Accreditation
Dear Ms Lee,
We were referred to you from the SAC hotline regarding a clarification request on the Mutual Recognition
Arrangements (MRA) from the below website address:
http://www.sac‐accreditation.gov.sg/about/Collaboration‐International‐Recognition/Pages/Collaboration‐
International‐Recognition.aspx
1
Select Language Search
Powered by Translate (https://translate.google.com)
Contact Us View
Email Enquiry
(/international/contact/bask
(mailto:sales@sherbornesensors.com)
(/) or Call +44 (0)1256 630 300
Home (/international/) About us (/about) Accreditations
Accreditations
Custom Products
(/international/products/customproducts)
More about custom products
(/international/products/customproducts)
Standard Product Finder
Accelerometers
Any
Any
Any
Search
International Representation
Sherborne Sensors Quality Assurance system is certified to AS9100C for the design,
development, manufacture, repair and recalibration of transducers. Quality and reliability are
(/distribution)
critical values for the aerospace industry. In an environment where failure of products or services
Industry Leading 2Year Warranty
can be fatal, the effective operation of a quality management system plays an essential role in
(/termsandconditions#warranty)
helping to reduce risks and provides a reliable framework for organizations to supply the highest
quality products and services. AS9100B is the ISO9001 derivative for suppliers to the aerospace Visit Our Online Shop
industry and provides added customer assurance that Sherborne Sensors products and business (http://www.theloadcellsuperstore.com)
processes meet or exceed the aerospace industry's highest standards of quality, reliability and
performance.
The addition of AS9100C to our ISO9001 quality certification reaffirm our unwavering
commitment to our customers, and to manufacturing some of the industry's highest performance
transducers, a philosophy that carries over into all facets of our daily business operations.
Quality Assurance
We design and manufacture Our Force Transducers and Load Cells offer
superior precision unequalled performance and reliability for all
inclinometers, accelerometers load measurement requirements. Our
Inclinometers provide angular and tilt
and load cells that are in use
measurements to the highest levels of accuracy
throughout the world.
and reliability and our Accelerometers measure
linear acceleration, deceleration and vibration to
extreme levels of precision.
Follow us Share us We accept

(http://www.linkedin.com/company/696371) Share (http://www.addthis.com/bookmark.php?
v=250&username=xa4d55437778126bad)
(http://twitter.com/sherbornesensor)
| (#) (#) (#) (#)
(http://plus.google.com/u/0/103919543910242836884)
(/international/terms
Site Map (/sitemap) | Terms and Conditions (/termsandconditions) | Accessibility Statement (/accessibilitydisclaimer) | Contact Us
and
(/contact) conditions#warranty)
© 2016 Sherborne Sensors. All rights reserved.
USA & Canada Rest of the World
PO Box 115, Wyckoff, NJ 074810115 1 Ringway Centre, Edison Road, Basingstoke,
USA Hampshire, RG21 6YH, United Kingdom.
Telephone: (201)2584647, Telephone: +44 (0)1256 630 300,
Fax: (201) 8471394 Fax: +44 (0)870 444 0729
Email: info@sherbornesensors.com Email: sales@sherbornesensors.com (http://www.novametrix.com/)
(mailto:info@sherbornesensors.com) (mailto:sales@sherbornesensors.com)
and applications@sherbornesensors.com and applications@sherbornesensors.com
(mailto:applications@sherbornesensors.com) (mailto:applications@sherbornesensors.com)
(/international/accreditations)
4/18/2016 SAI Global Certification Register Licence Details
SAI Global Home Search Advanced Search Client Zone Help
Licence Holder : Sherborne Sensors Limited
Licence No : ASP20171
Certificate not yet available.
Standard Number : SAE AS 9100 Standard Title : Quality Management Systems Aerospace Requirements
Originally Certified : 14 Apr 2010 Issued Date : 13 Apr 2016

Currently Certified : 13 Apr 2016 Expires : 14 Sep 2018
Scope : Sale, Design, Manufacture and Repair of Transducers
Site Details :
State Country
HANTS United Kingdom
www.saiglobal.com | copyright
http://register.saiglobal.com/client/schedule.aspx?setID=SF01&custID=AS280884&appCertNo=ASP20171 1/1
Fuel Chart
60
50
Expected Force (MN)
40
Target Test Load = 35.00 MN
30
20
10
Required Amount of Fuel = 27.60 kg
0
0 10 20 30 40 50
Propellant Charge Size (kg)

GEONAMICS
APPENDIX E
SOIL LOGGING INFORMATION

22H40
TENDER CORRIGENDUM NO. 1 APPVIII /52
GEONAMICS
APPENDIX F
KENTLEDGE LOAD TEST RESULTS

GEOMONITOR (S) PTE LTD
Geotechnical , Environmental & Other Monitoring Systems – Instrumentation, Field Service, Data Acquisition, Real-Time Monitoring & Consulting
Our Ref: GM-140GC-C17015-02 Date: 18 April 2017
INSTRUMENTED ULTIMATE STATIC LOAD TEST

PILE i_ULT-6 (ST-2) - 1200 mm Dia. Bored Pile
PROJECT:
Proposed 9-Storey Warehouse Development Involving 3-

Storey Container Depot on Lot 00301L, 00302C, & 00303M
MK 07 at Gul Circle, Singapore
TEST DATE:
04th April 2017 to 11th April 2017
PREPARED FOR:
RYOBI KISO (S) PTE. LTD.
CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................. 4
II. SOIL PROFILE AND GROUND CONDITIONS ............................................... 4
III. INSTRUMENTED TEST PILE ......................................................................... 5
IV. INSTRUMENTATION ...................................................................................... 5
A. RESISTANCE WIRE STRAIN GAUGES ...................................................... 5
B. SCALE RULER (SETTLEMENT READINGS) .............................................. 6
C. DIAL GAUGES (SETTLEMENT READINGS) ............................................... 6
V. LOADING SYSTEM, TEST PROGRAM .......................................................... 6
VI. LOAD SETTLEMENT BEHAVIOR................................................................... 7
VI. LOAD DISTRIBUTION AND TRANSFER CHARACTERISTICS ..................... 8
A. LOAD TRANSFER DISTRIBUTION ............................................................. 8
B. MOBILISED UNIT SKIN FRICTION .............................................................. 8
C. MOBILISED END BEARING & UNIT END BEARING .................................. 9
VII. CONCLUSION............................................................................................... 10
TABLES
TABLE 1 AVERAGE STRAIN CHANGE AT VARIOUS LEVELS
TABLE 2 LOAD-TRANSFERRED AT VARIOUS LEVELS
TABLE 3 AVERAGED UNIT SKIN FRICTIONS AT VARIOUS LEVELS
TABLE 4 TOTAL SHAFT FRICTION AND END BEARING
TABLE 5 LOAD-SETTLEMENT DATA
Page 2
FIGURES
FIGURE 1 PILE INSTRUMENTATION LAYOUT
FIGURE 2 LOAD SETTLEMENT CURVE VS TIME ELAPSED
FIGURE 3 LOAD SETTLEMENT CURVE (SCALE RULER READING)
FIGURE 4 LOAD SETTLEMENT CURVE (DIAL GAUGE READING)
FIGURE 5 LOAD TRANSFER CURVES BASED ON STRAIN GAUGE ELEVATION
FIGURE 6 APPLIED LOAD VS MOBILISED UNIT SKIN FRICTION
FIGURE 7 DISTRIBUTION OF MOBILISED UNIT SKIN FRICITON AGAINST DEPTH

AT 300%WL
FIGURE 8 TOTAL SHAFT FRICTION, END BEARING & TOTAL LOAD
FIGURE 9 APPLIED LOAD VS MOBILISED END BEARING
FIGURE 10 APPLIED LOAD VS MOBILISED UNIT END BEARING
APPPENDICES
APPENDIX A PILE LOAD TEST RECORDS
APPENDIX B CALIBRATION CERTIFICATES
APPENDIX C BORED PILE RECORD & SI BORELOG
Page 3
I. INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of one (1) no. of instrumented pile load test
conducted by Geomonitor (S) Pte Ltd on 04th to 11th April 2017. The load test was
performed on Pile No. i_ULT-6 (ST-2) at JTC Gul Circle, Benoi Road site. Three
loading cycles were applied for the testing of the pile up to 300% Working Load.
II. SOIL PROFILE AND GROUND CONDITIONS
A summary of Soil profile based on the soil investigation (BH-10) and Bored Pile
Record is shown below:
Depth from Ground

Soil Description
Level (m)
0.00m to 1.05m Loose silty sand
1.05m to 6.05m Loose silty sand and soft silt to firm peat
6.05m to 11.05m Firm peat to very stiff silt
11.05m to 15.05m Very stiff to hard silt
15.05m to 18.05m Hard silt
24.05m to 27.05m Hard silt to moderately strong mudstone (SIII)
27.05m to 29.05m Weak to moderately strong mudstone (SIII)
29.05m to 31.05m Moderately strong mudstone (SIII)
31.05m to 34.05m Moderately strong to weak mudstone (SIII)

The pile installation record and soil investigation borehole log BH-10 are presented in the
Appendices.
Page 4
III. INSTRUMENTED TEST PILE
One pile have been tested, the specifications of which are presented in the table
below.
Pile Reference : i_ULT-6 (ST-2)

Location : Benoi Road, Gul Circle, Singapore
Type of Pile : Bored Pile
Pile Diameter : 1200 mm Dia.
Ground Level : 106.160 mRL
Penetration : 35.05 m from Ground Level
Final Toe Level : 71.112 mRL
Date Installed : 22 December 2016
Duration of Test : 04 to 11 April 2017
Working Load : 11500 kN
Testing Load : 34500 kN (3.0xWL)
IV. INSTRUMENTATION
Instrumented test piles are used to measure the transfer of load along the length of
the pile. The strain gauge sensors work on the principle that a tensioned wire
housed within the sensor when electronically plucked will change the frequency of its
response with a change in length. The output frequencies were monitored using
independent data loggers which automatically measure and record the required
data. In this method, load transfer characteristics may be established, and from
these load transfer curves, the unit skin friction and unit end bearing may be
calculated.
A. Resistance Wire Strain Gauges (RSWG)
The test pile was instrumented with 44 numbers sister bar strain gauges located at
11 different levels. The locations of gauges were presented in Figure 1. The strain
gauges are pre-installed onto reinforcement steel cage prior the pile being casted.
Page 5
Forces or load applied to the re-bar during testing give an electrical output that is
directly proportional to the micro strain of the bored pile.
B. Scale Ruler (Settlement Readings)
The settlement of the pile was measured by a levelling instrument reading two scale
rulers installed onto the pile head. Another two scale rulers were installed outside
the Kentledge influence zone to be used as datum. As the pile settles with increased
load, the scale readings were taken from the survey instrument, since the line of
collimation remains unchanged, pile settlement is calculated by change in the
reading
C. Dial Gauge (Settlement Readings)
Dial gauges were installed to measure the total settlement at the top of the pile
under load. The accuracy of the dial gauges is +/-0.01mm.
V. LOADING SYSTEM AND TEST PROGRAM
The loading test schedule was carried between 04 April 2017 and 11 April 2017.
Three loading cycles were applied for the testing of the pile. The pile was loaded in
increments of 25% and 50% of the working load up to 100%, 200% and 300%WL
and held for a specific time, in three loading cycles. The pile was then fully unloaded
upon the completion of the test. The applied load against time was plotted as shown
in Figure 2.
Page 6
VI. LOAD SETTLEMENT BEHAVIOR
The maximum and residual settlement measured at pile head are summarized in the
table below.
Scale Ruler
Pile Head Residual Percentage

Load
Applied Load (tons) Settlement Settlement Recovery
Cycle
(mm) (mm) (%)
1 1.50 x WL (1725 tons) 7.50 - -
2 2.00 x WL (2300 tons) 10.50 - -
3 3.00 x WL (3450 tons) 18.75 1.00 94.67
Dial Gauge

Load
Cycle
(mm) (mm) (%)
1 1.50 x WL (1725 tons) 7.99 - -
2 2.00 x WL (2300 tons) 10.08 - -
3 3.00 x WL (3450 tons) 18.49 0.95 94.86
Average Scale Ruler and Dial Gauge Settlement

Load
Cycle
(mm) (mm) (%)
1 1.50 x WL (1725 tons) 7.75 - -
2 2.00 x WL (2300 tons) 10.29 - -
3 3.00 x WL (3450 tons) 18.62 0.98 94.74
Load-Settlement curves on monitored scale ruler and dial gauges are shown in
Figure 3 and Figure 4 respectively.
Page 7
VII. LOAD DISTRIBUTION AND TRANSFER CHARACTERISTICS
A. Load Transfer Distribution
The load transfer curves were computed based on the measured changes in strain
gauge readings and estimated pile properties (cross-sectional areas, concrete
density and modulus of elasticity). Computation made is based on the as-built details
known during the strain gauges installation and construction record. Load
transferred (P) at each level is calculated as follows:
P = Δ(RWSG) * Ec * Ac
Where:
Δ(RWSG) = Change in strain gauge readings
Ec = Young’s modulus of elasticity of pile
Ac = Pile cross-sectional area
The difference between the loads at any two levels represents the shaft load carried
by the portion of pile between the two levels. The load transfer curves obtained are
presented in Figure 5.
B. Unit Skin Friciton
Average unit skin friction between any two sections of the pile is calculated by the
change in loads divided by the perimeter area between the two sections. The
mobilised unit skin friction at different soil levels are shown in Figure 6.
The estimated mobilised average unit skin friction results are tabulated as below:
Mobilised
Estimated Average Unit
Depth from
SPT N Soil Description Skin Friction at
Ground Level (m)
Values 34500 kN
(kN/m2)
0.00m to 1.05m - Loose silty sand -
Loose silty sand and soft silt to firm

1.05m to 6.05m 4-6 29
peat
6.05m to 11.05m 8-30 Firm peat to very stiff silt 64
Page 8
11.05m to 15.05m 30-39 Very stiff to hard silt 216
15.05m to 18.05m 39-100 Hard silt 319
18.05m to 21.05m 100 Hard silt 303
21.05m to 24.05m 100 Hard silt 346
Hard silt to moderately strong

24.05m to 27.05m >100 451
mudstone (SIII)
Weak to moderately strong
27.05m to 29.05m >100 538
mudstone (SIII)
29.05m to 31.05m >100 Moderately strong mudstone (SIII) 341
Moderately strong to weak mudstone

31.05m to 34.05m >100 277
(SIII)
C. Mobilised End Bearing & Unit End Bearing
From the load transfer curve, at the maximum applied load of 34,500 kN, the
mobilised end bearing is 3,683 kN and the mobilised unit end bearing is 3,257
kN/m2. Total shaft friction, end bearing and total applied load for three cycles were
plotted in Figure 8.
Page 9
VIII. CONCLUSION
1. Pile Load Test was conducted on one (1) no. of 1200 mm dia. Bored Pile,
i_ULT-6 (ST-2) between 04th April 2017 and 11th April 2017.
2. It shows settlement of 7.50 mm, 10.50 mm, and 18.75 mm (scale ruler) at 1.5
times working load, 2.0 times working load, and 3.0 times working load
respectively. Upon unloading to zero, the pile shows residual settlement of
1.00 mm, which represents 94.7% recovery.
3. It shows settlement of 7.99 mm, 10.08 mm, and 18.49 mm (dial gauge) at 1.5
times working load, 2.0 times working load, and 3.0 times working load
respectively. Upon unloading to zero, the pile shows residual settlement of
0.95 mm, which represents 94.9% recovery.
4. From the instrumented pile load test results, the mobilised averaged unit skin
friction ranged from 29 kN/m2 to 538 kN/m2.
Mobilised
Estimated
Depth from Soil Description from Bored Pile Average Unit Estimated
SPT N
Ground Level (m) Record Skin Friction at Ks
Values
34500 kN (kN/m2)
0.00m to 1.05m Loose silty sand - - -
Loose silty sand and soft silt to

1.05m to 6.05m 29 4-6 >5.0
firm peat
6.05m to 11.05m Firm peat to very stiff silt 64 8-30 ~3.4
11.05m to 15.05m Very stiff to hard silt 216 30-39 >5.0
15.05m to 18.05m Hard silt 319 39-100 ~4.6
18.05m to 21.05m Hard silt 303 100 ~3.0
21.05m to 24.05m Hard silt 346 100 ~3.5
Hard silt to moderately strong

24.05m to 27.05m 451 >100 ~4.5
mudstone (SIII)
Weak to moderately strong
27.05m to 29.05m 538 >100 ~5.4
mudstone (SIII)
Moderately strong mudstone
29.05m to 31.05m 341 >100 ~3.4
(SIII)
Page 10
Moderately strong to weak

31.05m to 34.05m 277 >100 ~2.8
mudstone (SIII)
5. Pile i_ULT-6 (ST-2) has an ultimate capacity of more than 3450 tonnes.
6. Based on the ultimate load test results above, it concludes that pile i_ULT-6
(ST-2) is satisfactory both in terms of settlement as well as its capability to
resist the working load.
Page 11
TABLES
Page 12
FIGURES
Page 13
FIGURE 1: Pile Instrumentation Layout
Project Title : JTC Gul Circle

Pile Reference : i_ST-2 (1200 mm Dia)
Working Load : 11,500 kN
Test Load : 34,500 kN (3.0xWL)
FIGURE 2: Load-Settlement Curve VS Time Elapsed

Load - Settlement vs Time (JTC Gul Circle, ST-2)

3500 35
3000 30
Load (Tons)
2500 25
2000 20
1500 15
1000 10
500 5
Time (Hrs)
Average Settlement (mm)

0 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
-500 -5
-1000 -10
-1500 -15
-2000 -20
Load (Tons) Ave. Settlement (mm)
FIGURE 3: Load-Settlement Curve (Scale Ruler readings)
Load vs Settlement Curve (Scale Ruler)

Applied Load (Tons)
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500
0
6
Settlement (mm)
10
12
14
16
18
20
Settlement (mm) -Scale Ruler
FIGURE 4: Load-Settlement Curve (Dial Gauge readings)

Load vs Settlement Curve (Dial Gauge)

Applied Load (Tons)
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500
0
8
Settlement (mm)
10
12
14
16
18
20
Settlement (mm) - Dial Gauge
FIGURE 5: Load Transfer Curves Based on Strain Gauge Elevation

Load Transferred from Strain Gauge (kN)

Applied Load (kN)
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000 40000
0 34500
34500
5
33947
10
32732
15 29481
Depth (m)
25878
20
22454
18544
25
13445
9387
30
6814
3683
35
25% 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200%
213% 225% 238% 250% 263% 275% 288% 300%

FIGURE 6: Applied Load VS Mobilised Unit Skin Friction
Mobilised Unit Skin Friction (i_ST-2)

Applied Load (kN)
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000 40000
600
500
400
Unit Skin Friction (kN/m2 )
300
200
100
0
1.05 to 6.05m 6.05 to 11.05m 11.05 to 15.05m 15.05 to 18.05m 18.05 to 21.05m
21.05 to 24.05m 24.05 to 27.05m 27.05 to 29.05m 29.05 to 31.05m 31.05 to 34.05m
FIGURE 7: Distribution of Mobilised Skin Friction against Depth at 300%WL
Distribution of Mobilised Unit Skin Friction Vs Depth at 300%WL

Mobilised Unit Skin Friction (kN/m2)
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
0.00
1.05
6.05
11.05
Depth (m)
15.05
18.05
21.05
24.05
27.05
29.05
31.05
FIGURE 8: Total Shaft Friction, End Bearing, & Total Loads
Total Shaft Friction, End Bearing & Total Static Resistance (i_ST-2)
40000
Shaft (kN)
35000 Base (kN)
Total (kN)
30000
25000
Load (kN)
20000
15000
10000
5000
0
25% 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 213% 225% 238% 250% 263% 275% 288% 300%
Shaft (kN) 2869 5728 8600 11393 14052 16808 19511 21997 23152 24440 25566 26792 27976 28860 30059 30817
Base (kN) 11 22 30 107 328 442 619 1003 1288 1440 1754 1958 2214 2770 3011 3683
Total (kN) 2880 5750 8630 11500 14380 17250 20130 23000 24440 25880 27320 28750 30190 31630 33070 34500
FIGURE 9: Applied Load VS Mobilised End Bearing
Mobilised End Bearing (i_ST-2)

Applied Load (kN)
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000 40000
4000
3683
3500
3011
3000 2770
End Bearing (kN)
2500
2214
1958
2000
1754
1440
1500 1288
1003
1000
619
442
500 328
107
11 22 30
0
End Bearing (kN)
FIGURE 10: Applied Load VS Mobilised Unit End Bearing
Mobilised Unit End Bearing (i_ST-2)

Applied Load (kN)
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000 40000
3500
3257
3000
2663
2449
2500
Unit End Bearing (kN/m2)
1957
2000
1731
1551
1500
1273
1139
1000 887
548
500 391
290
95
10 20 27
0
Unit End Bearing (kN/m2)

APPENDICES
APPENDIX A – PILE LOAD TEST RECORDS
APPENDIX B - BORED PILE RECORD
APPENDIX C – SI BORELOG
Page 14
APPENDIX A
PILE LOAD TEST RECORDS
Page 15
APPENDIX B
CALIBRATION CERTIFICATES
Page 16
SAC SINGLAS INTERNATIONAL COLLABORATION SCHEME
The SAC works closely with other accreditation bodies to establish and maintain the Mutual
Recognition Arrangements (MRAs), which help to facilitate regional and international trade for
Singapore. Based on the results of intensive multi-national peer evaluation of its signatories,
MRAs are important in building confidence for the competence and capabilities of an
international network of accredited conformity assessment bodies. This is why the SAC’s
signatory status in the MRAs is a global passport for enterprises in Singapore, without any need
for re-testing, re-inspection and re-certification.
Countries that are signatories of the MRAs recognise that the conformity assessment bodies
accredited by their partners operate in an equivalent way, and that they deliver equivalent
accreditations, providing the same level of competence and confidence. Therefore, test or
inspection reports or certificates issued by the SAC-accredited body are recognised by the MRA
partners as equivalent to those issued by their own accredited bodies.
SAC’s MRA partners include various international organisations, such as ILAC (International
Laboratory Accreditation Co-operation), IAF (International Accreditation Forum), APLAC (Asia
Pacific Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation) and PAC (Pacific Accreditation Cooperation).
-extracted from SAC SINGLAS website
BATCH RWSG CALIBRATION:

EQUIPMENT CALIBRATED BY
RWSG Geolab
(Accredited under SAAM, member of ILAC)
23 Disember 2015 | 11 Rabi'ul Awwal 1437 H | 6:35:19 PM | Standard Malaysia Time English (?
(http://time.sirim.my/) p_p_id=82&p_p_lifecycle=1&p_p_state=normal&p_p_mode=view&p_p_col_id=column
1&p_p_col_count=2&_82_struts_action=%2Flanguage%2Fview&_82_redirect=%2Fweb%2Fguest%2Fhome&languageId=en_US)
| Bahasa Malaysia (?
p_p_id=82&p_p_lifecycle=1&p_p_state=normal&p_p_mode=view&p_p_col_id=column
1&p_p_col_count=2&_82_struts_action=%2Flanguage%2Fview&_82_redirect=%2Fweb%2Fguest%2Fhome&languageId=ms_MY)
Login (/c/portal/login?p_l_id=87094) Search...

The Official Website of
Department of Standards Malaysia

Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation (MOSTI)
Accreditation Overview (http://www.jsm.gov.my/accreditationoverview)
Schemes & Programmes (http://www.jsm.gov.my/schemesprogrammes)
Skim Akreditasi Makmal Malaysia
(SAMM) (http://www.jsm.gov.my/skim
akreditasimakmalmalaysiasamm)
Fields
(http://www.jsm.gov.my/fields)
Fees
(http://www.jsm.gov.my/fees)
Statistics
(http://www.jsm.gov.my/statistics2)
Application Kits
(http://www.jsm.gov.my/application
kit17025)
SAMM Lead Assessor Area
(http://www.jsm.gov.my/samm
leadassessorarea)
SAMM Assessor Area
assessorarea)
Evaluators Only Area
(http://www.jsm.gov.my/evaluators
onlyarea)
Proficiency Testing
(http://www.jsm.gov.my/proficiency
testing)
Application for Combined ILAC
MRA
(http://www.jsm.gov.my/application
forcombinedilacmra)
Lab Area
(http://www.jsm.gov.my/labarea)
SAMM Publication
publication)
Accreditation of Certification Bodies
(ACB)
(http://www.jsm.gov.my/accreditation
ofcertificationbodiesacb)
Malaysia Inspection Bodies
Accreditation Scheme (MIBAS)
(http://www.jsm.gov.my/malaysia
inspectionbodiesaccreditation
schememibas)
Good Laboratory Practice Compliance
Program (GLP CP)
(http://www.jsm.gov.my/good
laboratorypracticecompliance
programglpcp)
Malaysia Proficiency Testing Provider
Accreditation Scheme (MyPTP)
(http://www.jsm.gov.my/malaysia
proficiencytestingprovider
accreditationschememyptp)
Find Accredited CABs (http://www.jsm.gov.my/findcabdirectories)
Tax Benefits (http://www.jsm.gov.my/taxbenefits)
Benefits & Advantages (http://www.jsm.gov.my/benefitsadvantages)
Benefits & Advantages (http://www.jsm.gov.my/benefitsadvantages)
EAccreditation (http://www.jsm.gov.my/eaccreditation)
APEC Workshop (http://www.jsm.gov.my/apecworkshop1)
JSM Portal (http://www.jsm.gov.my/;jsessionid=WrjvdkSFICQBNMNUqON+Ek8.AS1INSTANCE01)
Accreditation (http://www.jsm.gov.my/accreditation;jsessionid=WrjvdkSFICQBNMNUqON+Ek8.AS1INSTANCE01)
Schemes & Programmes (http://www.jsm.gov.my/schemesprogrammes;jsessionid=WrjvdkSFICQBNMNUqON+Ek8.AS1INSTANCE01)
Skim Akreditasi Makmal Malaysia (SAMM) (http://www.jsm.gov.my/skimakreditasimakmalmalaysiasamm;jsessionid=WrjvdkSFICQBNMNUqON+Ek8.AS1INSTANCE01)
Skim Akreditasi Makmal Malaysia (SAMM)
Laboratory accreditation based on ISO/IEC 17025 (formerly ISO/IEC Guide 25) was first introduced in Malaysia on 1 July 1987. This was followed by the introduction
in 15 August 1990 of a national unified laboratory accreditation scheme, known as Skim Akreditasi Makmal Malaysia (SAMM). The SAMM scheme was initially
administered by SAMM National Council that directly come under the authority of the Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation.
Following the establishment of the Department of Standards Malaysia (Standards Malaysia) on 28 August 1996 under the Standards of Malaysia Act, 1996, all
accreditation activities of the former Malaysia Accreditation Council were transferred to and come directly under the responsibility of Standards Malaysia. The
laboratory accreditation scheme, however, retains its original name "Skim Akreditasi Makmal Malaysia (SAMM).
The primary objective of SAMM is to provide a credible accreditation service to testing and calibration laboratories including medical testing laboratories such that
ultimately SAMM endorsed test reports and calibration certificates are accepted internationally. The accepted mechanism for recognition is by means of the Mutual
Recognition Arrangements framework of the International Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation (ILAC) and Asia Pacific Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation
(APLAC).

Scope of Activities
SAMM is unified national laboratory accreditation scheme and is multidisciplinary in its scope of accreditation activities. It covers both calibration and testing
including medical testing.
Reference to SAMM Accreditation
Accredited laboratories may use Accreditation Symbol and combined ILAC MRA Mark or make reference to SAMM accreditation.

Operations
Standards Malaysia is staffed by full time technical officers and supporting staff to carry out daily operations. It is operated in accordance with MS ISO/IEC 17011.

Accreditation Criteria
General criteria as published in MS ISO/IEC 17025 / MS ISO 15189, SAMM Policies (SP), Specific Criteria (SC) and Specific Technical Requirements (STR) are used
in assessments and accreditation process.

Policy on Cross Frontier Accreditation
It is the policy of Standards Malaysia not to accept any CAB application from abroad. This policy is consistent with the Act 549, Standards of Malaysia Act 1996,
clause 10 (2)(h).
Test/Calibration Methods
All existing standard methods from both national and international standard bodies as well as reputable technical organisation are acceptable. For nonstandard/in
house method are also acceptable provide that they are validated and documented.

Accreditation Process
Figure 1 : Accreditation Processes

Accreditation Certificate
Valid for three (3) years and renewable subject to terms and conditions of the SAMM scheme.
Surveillance and Reassessment
The first surveillance is scheduled nine (9) months from the date of award/renewal of accreditation and 2nd surveillance is scheduled twelth (12) months from the
date of 1st surveillance. Reassessment is scheduled three (3) months before the expiry date of accreditation.
Laboratory Assessors
Assessors are drawn from technical agencies, such as MRB, MPOB, Chemistry Department, Ministry of Health, universities and government laboratories. Other
competent individuals are also employed as parttime assessors. Assessors are trained by competent training organizations. The criteria for the acceptability of
laboratory assessors, are prescribed in SAMM documentations.
Proficiency Testing
Accredited laboratories are required to participate in available interlaboratory comparison programmes or other forms of comparison testing such as the proficiency
testing programmes by APLAC (Asia Pacific Laboratory Accreditation Cooperation).
Appeals Procedure
Appeals procedure which maintained the independence, impartiality in the process of appeal, has been established for the handling and resolution of any appeal that
may arise from the accreditation process.
Address Contact
Century Square, Level 1 & 2, Tel : +6038318 0002
Block 2300, Jalan Usahawan, Fax : +6038319 3131
63000 Cyberjaya, Email : central@jsm.gov.my (mailto:central@jsm.gov.my)
Selangor Darul Ehsan, Follow Us
MALAYSIA
(https://www.facebook.com/standardsmalaysia)
(http://twitter.com/STANDARDS_MY)
(http://instagram.com/standards_my)
(http://www.youtube.com/StandardsMalaysiaMY)
(https://plus.google.com/111354575806769232612/about)
(/rss//journal/rss/122678?
doAsGroupId=10180&refererPlid=11149&_15_groupId=10180)
This website has been visited
(http://www.hitwebcounter.com/)
times and was last updated on
22 December 2015 02:36 AM
FAQ (/faq) | SITEMAP (/sitemap) | CONTACT US (/contact‐us1) | COPYRIGHT AND DISCLAIMER (/copyright‐and‐disclaimer) | SECURITY POLICY (/security‐policy) | PRIVACY POLICY (/privacy‐policy)
Copyright 2014 @ Department of Standards Malaysia (Standards Malaysia). Best viewed on latest browser.
This is Responsive Website.
APPENDIX C
BORED PILE RECORD & SI BORELOG
Page 17
22H40

RK171619 (JTC Gul Circle, I - ULT-6) - Correlation Report

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

RK171619 (JTC Gul Circle, I - ULT-6) - Correlation Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

i

Settlement from Static test using Kentledge

Soil, Foundation & Concrete Specialists

2.0 THE STATNAMIC APPARATUS........................................................................2

2.1 Background and Theory..............................................................................2

3.0 TEST PROCEDURE...............................................................................................5

3.1 Foundation Element Tested.........................................................................5

4.1 Load-Displacement Results.........................................................................6

5.0 ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION...........................................................................7

5.1 Interpretation Method…………………………..........................................7

Soil, Foundation & Concrete Specialists

6.0 COMPARISON OF KENTLEDGE LOAD TEST AND RAPID LOAD TEST...10

APPENDIX A Statnamic Test Setup Procedure

APPENDIX B Statnamic Load Test Data Tabulations

APPENDIX C Statnamic Load Test Graphs

APPENDIX D Calibration Records

APPENDIX E Soil Logging Information

APPENDIX F Kentledge Load Test Results

Soil, Foundation & Concrete Specialists

Soil, Foundation & Concrete Specialists

2.0 THE STATNAMIC APPARATUS

2.1 Background and Theory

A Statnamic load testing device is similar in concept to a compressed-air jack. High-

Soil, Foundation & Concrete Specialists

2.2 The STATNAMIC Device

Figure 2.1 - STATNAMIC Device

Soil, Foundation & Concrete Specialists

Load Cell & Laser Sensor Housing Piston (inside)

Figure 2.2 - Equipment Schematic

Soil, Foundation & Concrete Specialists

3.0 TEST PROCEDURE

3.1 Foundation Elements Tested

3.2 Test Setup Procedure

3.3 Target Load

Soil, Foundation & Concrete Specialists

4.0 STATNAMIC TEST RESULTS

4.1 Load-Displacement Results

Load Settlement (mm)

4.2 Test Observations

Soil, Foundation & Concrete Specialists

5.0 ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION

5.1 Statnamic Calculation of Pile Response

The response of a pile to a Statnamic loading can be mathematically described by the

Fstn(t) = Fu(t) + Fv(t) + Fa(t) (1)

The three components can be represented by

Soil, Foundation & Concrete Specialists

Substituting Eq.(2) into Eq.(1) yields

Fstn(t) = K u(t) + C v(t) + M a(t) (3)

Alternatively, Eq.(3) can be written as

Fstn(t) = Fsoil(t) + M a(t) (4)

where Fsoil(t) = K u(t) + C v(t) (5)

5.2 Unloading Point Method

In the Unloading Point method, Fsoil is calculated from

Fsoil(t) = Fstn(t) - M a(t) (6)

Fsoil(tu) = Fu(tu) = Fstn(tu) - M a(tu) (7)

Soil, Foundation & Concrete Specialists

The damping factor C is estimated from

C = [Fsoil(max) - Fu(up)] / v (8)

Fu(t) = Fstn - Cv(t) - Ma(t) (9)

5.3 Load Displacement and Pile Capacity

Soil, Foundation & Concrete Specialists

6.0 COMPARISON OF KENTLEDGE LOAD TEST AND STATNAMIC LOAD

The comparison results are summarized below:

Standard Number : SAE AS 9100 Standard Title : Quality Management Systems Aerospace Requirements