You are on page 1of 87

this document downloaded from

vulcanhammer.info
the website about
Vulcan Iron Works
Inc. and the pile
driving equipment it
manufactured

Visit our companion site
http://www.vulcanhammer.org
Terms and Conditions of Use:
All of the information, data and computer software (“information”)
presented on this web site is for general information only. While every
effort will be made to insure its accuracy, this information should not
be used or relied on for any specific application without independent,
competent professional examination and verification of its accuracy, suit-
ability and applicability by a licensed professional. Anyone making use
of this information does so at his or her own risk and assumes any and all
liability resulting from such use. The entire risk as to quality or usability of
the information contained within is with the reader. In no event will this web
page or webmaster be held liable, nor does this web page or its webmaster
provide insurance against liability, for any damages including lost profits, lost
savings or any other incidental or consequential damages arising from the use
or inability to use the information contained within.

This site is not an official site of Prentice-Hall, Pile Buck, or Vulcan Foundation
Equipment. All references to sources of software, equipment, parts, service or
repairs do not constitute an endorsement.

TEXAS
TRANSPORTATION
INSTITUTE

TEXAS
HIGHWAY
DEPARTMENT

- COOPERATIVE
RESEARCH

PILE DRIVING ANALYSIS-.
_ j. 1 C . . C 7~ = - - . -, , . ,
I I

-. -
STATE OF THE ART
L

k t

in cooperation with the
Department of Transportation .
Federal Highway Administration
Bureau of Public Roads

RESEARCH REPORT 33-13 (FINAL)
STUDY 2-5-62-33
PILING BEHAVIOR

PILE DRIVING ANALYSIS
STATE OF THE ART

Lee Leon Lowery, Jr.
Associate Research ~ n g i n e e r
T. J. Hirsch
Research Engineer
Thomas C. Edwards
Assistant Research Engineer
Harry M. Coyle
Associate Research Engineer
Charles H. Samson, Jr.
Research Engineer

Research Report 33-I3 (Final)

Research Study No. 2-5-62-33
Piling Behavior

Sponsored by
The Texas Highway Department
in cooperation with the
U. S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration
Bureau of Public Roads

January 1969

TEXAS TRANSPORTATION INSTITUTE
Texas A&M University
College Station, Texas

Foreword
The information contained herein was developed on the Research Study 2-5-62-33
entitled "Piling Behavior" which is a cooperative research endeavor sponsored jointly
by the Texas Highway Department and the U. S. Department of Transportation,
Federal Highway Administration, Bureau of Public Roads, and also by the authors
as evidenced by the number of publications during the past seven years of intense
study and research. The broad objective of the project was to fully develop the
computer solution of the wave equation and its use for pile driving analysis, to
determine values for the significant parameters involved to enable engineers to
predict driving stresses in piling during driving, and to estimate the static soil resist-
ance to penetration on piling at the time of driving from driving resistance records.
The opinions, findings, and conclusions expressed in this report are those of the
authors and not necessarily those of the Bureau of Public Roads.

Carl F. and agencies without whose cooperation and support no "state of the art" in the analysis of piling by the wave equation would exist. Ross Anglin and Son. They willingly invested considerable amounts of their own time and effort to the accomplishment of the research projects. whose sponsorship made all the research and studies leading to this report a reality. Chief Mechmical Engi- neer of Raymond International (now retired). T. Raba. Gary Gibson. Concrete Company of Victoria. Airhart. Department of Transportation. A. who worked closely with the authors in accomplishing several of the proj- ects. Gary N. M. The greatest debt of gratitude is due Mr. Paul C. Al-Layla. based on his extensive field experience. His advice and guid- ance. who not only first proposed the method of analysis but also maintained a continuing interest throughout the work and con- tributed significantly to the accomplishments of the research. companies. Acknowledgments Since this report is intended to summarize the research efforts and experience gained by the authors over a seven-year period. E. Federal Highway Adminis- tration. Bundy and Wayne Henneberger of the Bridge Division of the Texas Highway De- partment. and John Miller. General Contractors. Reeves. James R. Bureau of Public Roads. Chan. iii . Finley. It was indeed fortunate to have these foresighted and progressive businessmen as contractors on the various jobs. Sincere thanks and our personal appreciation are extended to the Texas Highway Department and the U. S. Several graduate students and research assistants contributed significantly to the accomplishment of this work. They were Tom P. L. Sulaiman. H. The authors gratefully acknowledge the assistance and support of Farland C. and the California Company of New Orleans for their unselfish cooperation with all phases of the field work. and his intimate knowledge of the wave equation have proven invaluable throughout all phases of the research. I. A debt of gratitude is due the Bass Bros. it is impossible to mention all of the persons. Smith.

3.. . . .1 Energy Output of Impact Hammers 6 . .1 Introduction -------------------------. .. .. . . ... .8 Summary of Fundamental Driving Stress Considerations 31 USE OF THE WAVE EQUATION FOR PARAMETER STUDIES 32 9...16 VI SOIL PROPERTIES -----------------------------------------------------------------------... .. .. . . .. 20 6.. . .1 General 17 6.SSES-----------------------------------------------------.2 Significant Parameters -----------------.. ...... ..4 Laboratory Tests on Sands . . .3 Examples of Parameter Studies--------------------. . ... .. . .7 Fundamental Driving Stress Considerations -----------------------.. . 1 I1 PILE DRIVING ANALYSIS 1 2... TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF FIGURES --------------------------------.... . ... 24 VIII PREDICTION OF DRIVING STRE.5 Static Soil Resistance After Pile Driving (Time Effect) --------.. 18 6. .. .. . . ...... .. .. . ..... . . .. . .1 Comparison with Laboratory Experiments 15 . 41... .. ..2 Significance of Material Damping in the Pile -. . . ... .. ........ . .ri CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION -----. . . . . . ... . 7..2 Dekermination of Hammer Energy Output. . .2 Smiths Numerical Solution of the Wave Equation 9 2 .. . . . . . .. . .. . ..-----------------------------------. .. . . . .. . .. . ... 9.. . . .--. .. . .. .. 8.. . .. .. . . 6 ... ... . . . .... . . ... . .. . .3 Coefficient of Rest1:ution. . ... . .. . ... ... . . .6 Effects of Cushion Stiffness.. ..... . .. . 5. . . . .. ... ... .. . ... . ... . ----------------... . . . 14 V STRESS WAVES IN PILING 15 5.. .. . . .. . 6 3... . ...2 -----------------------------------. . . . 20 VI I USE OF THE WAVE EQUATION TO PREDICT PILE LOAD BEARING CAPACITY AT TIME OF DRIVING ----------------------------------------------. . . 12 4. .2 Equations to Describe Soil Behavior 17 6. .. ..... ... . .21 .. .25 .. .4 Effect of Gravity . .5 Effect of Ram Elasticity -----------------------------------..6 Field Test in Clay. . .. 21 7...... .. . .26 8......---------------------. . .27 ..1 Method Used to Determine Capblock and Cushion Properties ----------------------------..5 I11 PILE DRIVING HAMMERS . 14 . 6. ... 8.. 2. . v LIST OF TABLES _----..32 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS. . .. . ..3 Critical Time Interval 4 2. .. ..2 Idealized Load-Deformation Properties . ... . .3 Soil Parameters to Describe Dynamic Soil Resistance During Pile Driving .. . . 3. . . ...... . .2 Comparison of Smith's Numerical Solution with the Classical Solution -. 32 .17 6. . . . ..1 Introduction .. ..... . ... . 3..... .. . .---------------------------------.4 Effect of Hammer Type and Simulation Method -----------------------------------------. . . . . . . . 11 IV CAPBLOCKS AND CUSHION BLOCKS 12 4. .... . . ... . ..25 8. 3 Sdution with Field Measurements 8. ..3 Comparison of Prehctions with Field Tests ---------------------.. 19 . . .. . 36 ..4 Explosive Pressure in Diesel Hammers 10 . . . ... .3 Significance of Driving Accessories . .. . .. . . .2 Wave Equation Method ----------------------------------------------------------------... . . . .1 Introduction .... 25 8. . .. . .. ... .. . . 27 8. . 32 9... .. . . .. .. ..... . .. 8 . and Pile Material Damping-------------27 . . . . Coefficient of Restitution. .. .21 7.. .. .. . . . . . . . .1 General 1 2.5 Effect of Soil Resistance ----------------------.1. 3. . ..T----------------------. . . .. . .. . . . . . . .3 Correlation of Smiths 26 8... . . . . . .

. .. ......... ............ ...6 LIST OF REFERENCES ------.... 78 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 2... .... 18 Load Deformation Properties . B3 Ram Kinetic Energies 44 B4 Method of Including Coefficient of Restitution in Capblock and Cushion Springs . . B2 Idealization of Hammers ...42 I I APPENDIX B-------------------------------------. . ........ .. . --------------.. ......... -----------------------...----------.. .. 13 1 . ........ .EQUATIONS FOR IMPACT STRESSES ' IN A LO..... . ELASTIC PILE 38 A1 Introduction .. . .... . . Sand Determined by Triaxial Tests (Specimens Nominally 3 in..... ..50 APPENDIX C _------------------------------------... ... .......... in Diameter by 6.. 45 .. ... .. .. ...... ..... ....... 41 ---....-----------.......1 Typical . Dynamic and Static Stress Strain Curves for a Fir Cushion _ ... .. ..... .......... . .-1 3 Cushion Test Stand ------------------------. ---.. ... ...... ... 22 Comparison of Wave Equation Predicted Soil Resistance to Soil Resistance Determined by Load Test for Piles Driven in Sands (Data from Table 7........---------------------............ 56 OS/360 FORTRAN IV PROGRAM STATEMENTS 5. . .. ... . . .20 Ultimate Driving Resistance vs Blows per Inch for a n Example Problem ... ..... .......3 .. 16 Theoretical vs Experimental Solution 16 Theoretical vs Experimental Solution -----------......... .. ...... .. .. ... . ...Wave Equation 38 A3 Boundary Conditions 39 ......... 3 2... 38 DEVELOPMENT OF ... ................... .. .. 43 . ..... High) 18 Increase in Strength vs Rate of Loading-Ottawa Sand . .. 16 Comparison of Experimental and Theoretical Solutions for Stresses --------.... ..... SLENDER..... . .3 3. 11 Stress Strain Curve for a Cushion Block . ........ .... . ... 43 WAVE EQUATION COMPUTER PROGRAM UTILIZATION MANUAL 43 B1 Introduction 43 ....20 Pore Pressure Measurements in Clay Stratum-50 ft Depth --------------------------....... .. . .......2 Load Deformation Relationships for Internal Springs-----------------------...2) ----------------7-------------------...5 in. .... Idealization of Piles 47 B6 Explanation of Data Input Sheets 47 B7 Comments on Data Input ..17 Model Used by Smith to Describe Soil Resistance on Pile ----------------. .7) ---.........................1 Method of Representing Pile for Purpose of Calculation (After Smith) ---------------------------..... .. ...... ..... 38 I A2 One Dimensional. ..... .......... B5 ..2 2.. . ..1) ..... .. .- Force vs Time Curve for a Diesel Hammer 6 Steam Hammer------------------------------- Diesel Hammer------------------------------.. . 17 ....19 c'Jyyvs "V" for Ottawa cc Set up" or Recovery of Strength After Driving in Cohesive Soil (After Reference 6. ........ by Load Tests for Piles Driven in Both Sand and Clay 24 . ... -----------. . ........ ... . .... of Ottawa . 22 Comparison of Wave Equation Predicted Soil Resistance to Soil Resistance Determined by Load Tests for Piles Driven in Clay (Data from Table 7........... . ......... 23 Comparison of Wave Equation Predicted Soil Resistance to Soil Resistance Determined . . .....-------.16 Theoretical vs Experimental Solution . .... . ... . ....... .. .. .. I A4 Solving the Basic Differential Equation 39 I A5 Maximum Compressive Stress at the Head of the Pile A6 Length of the Stress Wave ... . .... . 14 Dynamic Stress Strain Curve for an Oak Cushion 14 Dynamic Stress Strain Curve for a Micarta Cushion 15 Stress vs Strain for Garlock Asbestos Cushion .... .. Load Deformation Charactenstics of Soil-------..NG........ ........ .... . ....... ... ...... APPENDIX A ...... ..... ... Load Deformation Charactenstics Assumed for Soil Spring M ---------------.. . ..-----------.. .. . .. . .. ..... . ..15 Theoretical vs Experimental Solution _----------------------------------------------------------........... .. ..

...000 ft-lb) for Driving a Pile to Develop Ultimate Capacity of 2000 Tons ---....3 for Clay Using Equation 7.. Pile Cap..-Ram.... . .......2) 24 Wave Equation Ultimate Resistance vs Test Load Failure (From Reference 7..4_------------_-----------------. Stress in Pile Head vs Time for Test Pile 26 Stress at Mid-length of Pile vs Time for Test Pile ...3 Effect of Cushion Stiffness on FMAX 9 3..... .. . ..3 Errors Caused by Assuming a Combined J(point) = 0.. When Driving a Pile Under Varying Conditions 35 Evaluation of Vulcan 020 Hammer (60....1 ..------------------. Elasticity ( E ) and Coefficients of Restitution (e) of Various Pile Cushioning Materials ---.............2 Variation of Driving Stress With Ram Weight and Ram Energy 29 B. Variation of Driving Stress With Ram Weight and Velocity 28 8. 1 and 2 54 Normal Output for Single RU (Total) (Option 11=2) for Prob..... Pile --... . .......2 Effect of Cushion Stiffness on ENTHRU 9 3.. .... and Cushion 44 Case 111. 3 _---------------------------------55 Detailed Output for Single RU (Total) (Option 15=2) for Prob. ..........3 and J1(side) = - J (point) 7...7 3.. Capblock... .. .. Definition of Coefficient of Restitution 46 ... 10 3.......... and Driving Energy on Sti-esses---------------.. 45 B... ..-27 ------- Idealized Stress Wave Produced When Ram Strikes Cushion at Head of Concrete Pile. .... 5 5 LIST OF TABLES Table Page 3...... ..... 47 Example Problem_---------------------------. Capblock....... and Pile Cap 43 . . . 25 Maximum Tensile Stress Along a Pile 25 Maximum Compressive Stress Along a Pile 26 . 39 Case I... and Pile Cap 44 ...... 14 J (point) Errors Caused by Assuming J(point) = 0.. and Driving Energy on Permanent Set 34 Computer Analysis .. 30 Effect of Ratio of Stress Wave Length on Maximum Tensile Stress for Pile with Point Free Effect of Cushion Stiffness. in Overcoming Soil Resistance....8 3....10 3....8 Effect of Breaking Ram Into Segments When Ram Strikes a Cushion or Capblock .....-Ram.. of.-. 46 ...... 35 Blows/In....9 Effect of Breaking Ram Into Segments When Ram Strikes a Steel Anvil .1 . . ... (Option 11=1) for Prob.. Capblock... .. ------------------------------------------------5l Normal Output (Option 15=1) for Prob. .... . 12 4.. ... .. . ..... LIMSET..1 Drop Hammers and Steam Hammers -----------. ... Case 11..... . . l---.... and Permanent Set of Pile ---------------------...... 11 3.... ..2 3 for Clay (for Clay-Supported Piles Only) 23 7. of Pile Hammer Effectiveness.1 Typical Secant Moduli . ...2) .4 Effect of Cushion Stiffness on LIMSET 9 3....1 (for Piles Supported by Both Sand and Clay) 24 8.. Cushion.. 22 Errors Caused by Assuming J(point) = 0.. Summary of Piles Tested to Failure in Sands (From Reference 7.1 for Sand and J(point) = 0..... . Ram Weight..6 Effect of Coefficient of Restitution on ENTHRU (Maximum Point Displacement) ----_--------------. Anvil. Effect of Coefficient of Restitution on ENTHRU . .. Pile Idealization .. .. . .. 38 Ram..30 Reflection of Stress Wave at Point of a Short Pile -----------------------2.-Ram. vs RU (Total) for Arkansas Load Test Pile 4 35 .... 33 Effect of Cushion Stiffness. Summary of Hammer Properties in Operating Characteristics _--------------------------------------. Long Slender Elastic Pile ---------------------------7-----------------------------------------....... Ram Weight.... Ru...... .5 Effect of Removing Load Cell on ENTHRU...... . ..1 and J1(side) = 3 for Sand-Supported Piles Only-----------------...10 . .. . . .....2 Diesel Hammers-------------------------------------------------------------------------...... . 29 Reflection of Stress Wave at Point of a Long Pile 1-1-------------. 1 53 Effect of Varying Cushion Stiffness 54 Summary Output for RU (Total) vs Blows/In........ ........ . .. ..

1 General In 1851. Sanders evaluate the resistance of a pile to the dynamic forces applied a safety factor of 8 to this ultimate soil resist- applied upon it during the driving and to estimate from ance to determine an assumed safe load capacity for the this the statical longitudinal load that the pile can sup. behavior of piles during driving and to present the re- pearance of new pile driving methods have created great sults in the form of charts. the product caused great interest among engineers in finding more of the weight of the ram and the stroke was assumed reliable methods of pile analysis and design. an exact tacitly been assumed linear. To develop a comprehensive users manual for the References. To determine the dynamic load-deformation pile driving formulas. To generalize Smith's original method of analy- solution was based on a discrete element idealization of sis and to develop the full potential of the solution by the actual hammer-pile-soil system coupled with the use using the most recent and accurate parameter values of a high speed digital computer. but rather is governed by the one properties of various pile cushion materials which had dimensional wave equation. in 1960. The 7.. The major objectives of these studies of these parameters where possible." proposed. to penetration of piling at the time of driving from the 3. 6. etc.l. ""A ~ pile driving formula is an attempt to the distance through which the pile moved. for the analysis and design of piles. were as follows: 9. Ever since Isaac published his paper. simple Newtonian impact as assumed by many simplified 5. E. mathematical solution to the wave equation was not possible for most practical pile driving problems. To determine the dynamic load-deformation properties of soils required by the wave equation In 1950. and to determine the quantitative effect equation analysis. To conduct field tests to obtain experimental equation so that it may be used to estimate the resistance data with which to correlate the theoretical solution. pile.l):' it has been recognized that the driving practices which would prevent cracking and behavior of piling during driving does not follow the spalling of prestressed concrete piles during driving. In a paper published determined experimentally. To study and if possible evaluate the actual 1. L. Sanders (Army Corps of Engineers) pro- posed the first dynamic pile driving formula by equating The rapidly increasing use of pile foundations and the total energy of the ram at the instant of impact to the the appearance of new pile driving techniques have work done in forcing down the pile. that is. 10. Smith12 developed a tractable analysis. driving records. a multitude of formulas have been port safely as a part of the permanent substructure. T o make an orderly theoretical computer investi. solution to the wave equation which could be used to solve extremely complex pile driving problems. Pile Driving Analysis -State of the Art CHAPTER I Introduction The tremendous increase in the use of piles in both gation of the influence of various parameters on the landbased and offshore foundation structures and the ap. ram velocity. others being PAGE ONE . T o present recommendations concerning good Formula. Unfortunately. such as the stiffness and coefficient of retitu- of Piling during driving. To illustrate the significance of the parameters wave theory to the investigation of the dynamic behavior involved. the procedure developed by Smith to provide the en. To develop the computer solution for the wave 2. diagrams or tables for direct engineering interest in finding more reliable methods application by office design engineers. *Numerical superscripts refer t o corresponding items in 11. material damping in the authors have engaged in research dealing with wave the pile.'Wineer magnitudes of which were subject to much 'disagree- with a mathematical tool with which to investigate the ment. behavior of a pile during driving. To develop a computer program based upon a energy output for various pile driving hammers. As noted equal to the product of the ultimate soil resistance by by D ~ n h a m . Since that time. A. the final computer program to enable its use by others. CHAPTER I1 Pile Driving Analysis 2. "Reinforced Concrete Pile 4. some of which are semirational. he dealt exclusively with the application of 8." in 1931. From that time to the present tion of the cushion.

on numerous '. discussion of pile formulas in general. A capblock (cushioning material) . and driv- ing condition for which correlation factors were derived. ~ Driving stresses are also of major importance in the design of piles. Method of represenring pile for purpose o f u e ~ . the reader is Time is also divided into small increments. Many of the formulas proposed at- tempt to account for various impact losses through the cushion. conventional pile driving analyses are un- able to calculate tensile stresses. with the advent of a multitude of different type driving hammers 1. occurrence of wave action in piling during driving. He as a zeries of weights and springs as shown in Figure proposed a solution to the wave equation assuming that 2 . ~ Smith's proposed solution involved the idealization Isaacs2. since several hundred pile driving formulas have been proposed there is usually the problem of choosing an appropriate or suitable ~ n e .l is thonght to have first pointed out the of the actual continuous pile shown in Figure 2 . l ( b ) . and soil. equation was not known. based on dividing the distributed mass of the pile into Although most engineers today realize that pile a number of concentrated weights W ( l ) through driving formulas have serious limitations and cannot be W ( p ) . Smith2. as illustrated in Figure 2 .1 illustrates the idealization of the pile (6 long and complicated mathematical expressions so system suggested by Smith. numerical calculations. computers. pile.1. However. For further acting on the masses. A cushion block (cushioning material) . ~Also . ~ . which are connected by weightless springs K ( 1 ) depended upon to give accurate results. ~ . referred to the work of C h e l l i ~ . These assumptions were so restrictive that tions which were easily solved using high-speed digital the solution was probably never used in practice. and In 1950. Figure 2. A ram. pile.2 Smith's Numerical Solution of the 4. 3.^. with the addition of soil resistance used for lack of an adequate substitute. A pile. The supporting medium. This solution is 6.2proposed a more realistic solution to the problem of longitudinal impact. yet compressive stresses are com- monly determined simply by dividing the ultimate driv.2. When restricted to a particular soil. the system is that their use for practical probjems would involve considered to be composed of (see Figure 2. an exact solution to the wave by the pile driver.^ This has become increasingly significant since prestressed concrete piles 172 ft long and 54 in. dynamic formulas are often able to predict ultimate bearing capacities which agree with observed test loads. This method of stress analysis complete'y overlooks the true nature of the problem and computed stresses almost never agree with experimeltal val. 2. (a 1 (b 1 crete piles. ~ dis- - tressing is the fact that in manv cases no dvnamic for- mula yields acceptable results. Numerous field tests have shown that the I~ ~ - RESISTANCE use of pile driving formulas may well lead to a foun- dation design ranging from wasteful to d a n g e r ~ u s . expected to yield accurate results for all driving con- ditions. ~ ~ ~ . in diameter have been successfully and more and more large diameter steel piles SIDE several hundred feet long are being used in offshore FRICTIONAL datforms.1 ( a ) ) : laborous. Cum.l ) . he also pointed out that such solutions involved Figure 2. PAGE TWO . In general. capblock.7v2. or soil. A pile cap .8 Furthermore. to which an initial velocity is imparted and driving conditions. ~ . 2. Smith extended his original method of analy- mings"1° in an earlier writing noted that although the sis to include various nonlineal parameters such as elasto- pile driving formulas were based on numerous erroneous plastic soil resistance including velocity damping and assumptions and that only the wave equation could be others.ll and the absence of a reliable method of stress analysis has proven to be a serious problem." In fact. For the idealized system he set up a series of the point of the pile was fixed and that side resistance equations of motion in the form of finite difference equa- was absent. l ( b ) . they are still through K ( p .stricdy empirical. POINT RESISTANCE ing resistance by the cross-sectional area of the pile. V efailures n s i l e of piles have becn noted analysis (after Smith). Wave Equation 5. for example. which are of the utmost ACTUAL AS REPRESENTED importance in the driving of precast or prestressed con. long heavy piles generally show much greater ultimate loads than predicted by pile driving equation^. l ( a ) .

although in the representation of Figure 2.7) were developed by Smith.2. .the material is considered to experience no internal damping. Internal Springs.3 shows the load-deforma. acteristics of these various components will be discussed in greater detail later in this report. ( b ) INTERNAL DAMPING PRESENT m = element number. "Ru" is the ultimate ground resisiance. In Figure 2.2(a) and 2.) . exclusive of damping effecis. The ram.3 may be established separately for each spring. capblock. cushion block. such cases are readily accommo- dated. Load-deformation characterisrics assumed for soil spring m. For the point.2 ( a ) . t = number of time interval. pile cap. The char. For example. Bmic Equations. tion characteristics assumed for the soil in Smith's pro- cedure. and pile are pictured as LOAD 1 appropriate discrete weights and springs. Load-deformation relationships for internal C(m. where K'(m) is the spring constant (during elastic deformation) for external spring m. K'(m) equals Ru(m) divided by Q ( m ) . a cushion block may not be used or an anvil may be placed be~weenthe ram and capblock. cap. or the load at which the soil spring behave. In Figure 2. The ram. A load-deformation diagram of the type in Figure 2.1. and the lozding and unloading path would be along ing afforded by the soil in shear along the outer surface OABCF. Equations (2.2 ( b ) suggest different possi- bilities for representing the load-deformation character- istics of the internal springs. PAGE T H R E E .1 (b) are shown the idealizations for the various components of the actual pile. the point resistance is accounted l for by a single spring at the point of the pile. Figure 2. The path OABC- In Figure 2. The frictional ! I soil resistance on the side of the pile is represented by a series of side springs.l(b) the ram and the pile cap are assumed rigid ( a reasonable assumption for many practical cases). It is seen that the characteristics of Figure 2. time interval t (in. At = size of time interval (sec) .2. 0 Actual situations may deviate from that illustrated in Figure 2. RCm3 block.2(b) the material is assumed to have inter- nal damping according to tlie linear relationship shown.2 (0) NO INTERNAL DAMPING qk yoRMATloN where ( ) = functional designation. only compressive loading may take place E x t e r d Springs. Figure 2.3) through (2. The resistance to dynamic load. of the pile and in bearing at the point of the pile is extremely complex. However. Figure 2.t) = compression of internal spring m in springs.3 are defined essentially by the quantities "Q" and "Ru. DEFG represents loading and unloading in side friction. 0 cushion block may in general be considered to consist of "internal" springs. purely plastically. ~ i l ecap. Figures 2. Thus.3." "Q" is termed the soil quake and represents the maxi- mum deformation which may occur elastically. and E .

It is to be noted that V(1.3) and This notation differs slightly from that used by may be determined by special routines. C (m. for a given external spring follows Figure (2. longitudinal vibrations in a continuous elastic bar. (2. Consider Equation (2.t) = velocity of element m in time -interval t vals.6).3).. When m = p. The load-deformation equation solution is a method of analysis well founded relationship characterized by Equation (2.5 the following equa. tion (2. and DE in his discussion of the equation of motion for free depend upon the coefficient of restitution e(m). 2.t) . by the path OABCDEO in Figure 2. For example. only this part of the diagram applies. the plastic deformation Dr(m. 1. The cycle is repeated for successive time inter- V(m. While the 2. in related to the size of the time increment At. Smith.t) is less than Q(m) .2 ( a ) . con. it is apparent that the spring associated with K ( 2 ) represents both the cushion block and the top element of the pile.) .t) is equal to D (m. l ) are calculated soil spring m (lb/in. dependent quantities are initialized at zero or to satisfy static equilibrium conditions.t) equal to zero.O) is the initial g = acceleration due to gravity (ft/sec2) . no tensile forces can exist.8). Equation (2. Velocities V(m.D1(m.7) to the ram (m = l ) . F(p.1).6) produces no damp- use this notation as a function of m for the sake of ing when D(m. For the idealization of Figure 2.t) is zero. R(m.t) = plastic displacement of external soil spring from the properties of the pile driver.8) as appropriate.) . and point of the pile. the soil spring must be prevented from exerting tension on the pile point. applicable in the calculation of the forces in internal From the point of view of basic mechanics. Also..4).) . For this situation.: Other time- m in time interval t (in.t) force (see Figure 1. present knowledge of damping behavior of soils perhaps does not justify greater refinement.6). D' (m.t) is greater than Q(m) along line AB (see Figure and one for the side of the pile in friction. Internal spring forces F ( m . l ) are calculated by spring m (lb/in. In applying Equation (2. = temporary maximum value of C (m. when J to two values. K'(m) = spring constant associated with external 5.8) would be ous physical quantities are given. F(m. ~ . and In Equation (2.t) .1. (ft/sec) . 7.3).8) is illustrated physically and mathematically. K ( m ) = spring constant associated with internal 4. the wave springs m = 1 and m = 2. Displacements D ( m .l) are calculated by Equation element m in time interval t (lb) . Equation (2. He sug- generality. BC. one for the point of the pile in bearing D (m..t) = displacement of element m in time The computations proceed as foliows: interval t (in. The slopes of lines AB.t). The initial velocity of the ram is determined D1(m. 2. Beneath the point of the pile. External spring forces R ( m . gests an alternate equation to be used after D(m. programming details and recommended values for vari- With reference to Figure 2. where p is number of the last element of the tion : pile. points PAGE FOUR . Care must be used to satisfy conditions at the head He obtains instead of Equation 2.l) are calculated by Equa- (sec/ft) . D' (m.t) first becomes equal to Q(m) : The use of a spring constant K ( m ) implies a load- deformation behavior of the sort shown in Figure 2.7). J ( m ) = damping constant of soil at element m 3.) . Inter- mittent unloading-loading is typified by the path ABC.Q (m) . H e i ~ i n g .5). velocity of the ram. one should set F(0. and A more complete discussion of digital computer .t): W ( m ) = weight of element m (lb).2(b). Its spring 2 rate may be obtained by the following equation: where e ( m ) = coefficient of restitution of internal spring m.1.3 Critical Time Interval sequently. The accuracy of the discrete-element solution is also established by control of the quantity C(m. Compressions C(m. l ) are calculated by Equa- tion (2. by Equation (2.t) . K ( p ) must be set equal to zero since there is no E.t) = force exerted by external spring m on 6. D(m. For a pile cap or a cushion block. it is reasonable to Smith notes that Equation (2.t) .t) becomes zero.5) or Equation (2. ~ ~ Equation (2. Smith develops special relationships to account for in- ternal damping in the capblock and the cushion block.t) = force in internal spring m in time interval t(1b) . in the Appendices. K ( m ) is the slope of the straight line. Smith restricts the soil damping constant when D(m.

but it is highly questionable that this refinement is justified in light of where AL is the se..4 Effect of Gravity The procedure as originally presented by Smith did not account for the static weight of the pile.14) is zero. these forces placements D1(m.11 is used. tlie 'discrete-element system were divided and in general..O) /K'(m). one finds displace- segments. excluding ram (Ib) . For practical problems.O) and initial displacements D(m.11) is called the "criti. and is used in a discrete-element solution. ments from . ' . where tion 2.gment length. If. As pointed (lb) . the value of At given by Equation (2. the behavior of this simulated pile would be essentially the same as that of * . As At be. both internal and external. rapidly as the actual stress -wave.out that the discrete-element solution is an exact solution thehsystem. the solution approaches the actual behavior of the discrete-element system (se. as F(c) solution is obtained for the continuous bar. the accuracy of the solution will be more sensi.> the slender continuous bar irrespective of how small At In the absence of compressed gases and hammer weight becomes. Smith suggests that the external (soil) springs be assumed to resist the static weight of the system accord- ing to the relationship If a time increment larger than that given by Equa.13) m=2 where W(b) = weight of body of hammer. provided resting on the pile system. does not progress as Ru(tota1) = total ultimate ground resistance (lb) . Stated symbolically. in this case the numerical calculation of the discrete-element stress wave. under the ram of a diesel hammer (lb). however. . Heising2. The amount that each internal spring m is com- ELAt > O This means that if the pile is divided into only a few pressed may now be expressed By working upward from the point. not only would it be awkward to "keep books" on the pile throughout the driving so as to identify the initial conditions for successive blows. comes progressively smaller.O) - must be given initial values to produce equilibrium of R(m. into a large number of segments.O). may now be obtained: This in general leads to a less accurate solution for the longitudinal vibrations of a slender continuous bar. For the inclusion of gravity. exert zero force.O) should be set equal to D (m. other uncertainties which exist. plastic dis- If the Gffect of gravity is to be included. In order that the initial conditions of the external springs be compatible with the assumed initial forces R(m. Smith 3. these initial values should of the partial differential equation when be those in effect as a result of the previous blow.7) should be modified as follows: 2. In other words. the discrete-element solution will di. at t = 0 all springs.gnent The internal forces which initially exist in the pile lengths equal to AL) used to simulate the pile. Strictly speaking. Consequently. AL . Equation (2.- tive to the choice of At than if it is divided into many segments. and - out by Smith. W(tota1) = total.13 has also pointed out that when W(tota1) = W ( b ) + F(c) + I: W(m) (2. lar conclusion and has expressed the critical time inter- val as follows: A relatively simple scheme has been developed as a means of getting the gravity effect into the compu- tations. a choice of At equal to about one-half the "critical" value appears suitable since inelastic springs and materials of different densi- ties and elastic moduli are usually involved. a less accurate = force exerted by compressed gases. How- ever. the right-hand side of Equa- tion (2."raws a simi. static weight resisted by soil verge and no valid results can be obtained. The quantity W(tota1) is found by cal" value.

The energy ratings given by these two methods differ considerably since the ram stroke h varies greatly thereby causing much controversy as to which. force acts. the energy required to compress the air- ing and Research. WE x h. the energy delivered to the piling anvil. of a variety of hammers in general use. = 1F ds (3. a method was needed to determine a simple and uniform El. Towards this purpose. exhaust ports. The magnitude of the steam force is too small to force the pile downward and consequently it works only on the ram to restore its potential energy. In conventional single acting steam hammers the steam pressure or energy is used to raise the ram for W each blow.2'~eterminationof Hammer Energy Output Diesel Hammers. method is correct and what energy output should be used in dynamic pile analysis.1) energy output must be known or assumed before the where F = the explosive force. PAGE SIX . the initially large hummer. Al- though most manufacturers of pile driving equipment ds = the infinitesimal distance through which the furnish maximum energy ratings for their hammers. known to seriously reduce ehergy output of a hammer. and wear are explosive force. This E.~ as at impact. While this explosive force works on the ram to Figure 3.1.WR x h. if either.the other hand. These data were analyzed fuel mixture is nearly identical to that gained by the by the wave equation to determine the pile driver energy remaining fall (d) of the Therefore. In addition. and wave equation or dynamic formula can be applied. and the the exhaust ports and impacts with the temperature constant. Typical jorce us time curve for a diesel restore its potential energy. is also ~ o n s t a n t . and by two different methods. " ~ . = the kinetic energy of the ram at the method which would accurately predict the energy output instant of impact. the diesel explosive pressure used to raise "I) LL jf IDEALIZED DIESEL EXPLOSIVE FORCE ON THE ANVIL AND RAM the ram is. At present the manufacturers of where WR = the ram weight.~.l = the total energy output per blow. lack of lubrication. their paper entitled "A Performance Investigation of It has been noted that after the ram passes the Pile Driving Hammers and Piles" by the Office of Test. the compression pressure is constant. or the equivalent stroke in the case of closed-end diesel hammers. the velocity which would have been required to produce the reported of the ram at the exhaust ports is essentially the same beha~ior. where Et.The ~ energy output per blow is thus computed as the kinetic energy of the falling ram plus the explosive energy found by thermodynamics.1). on. and the length of the stroke h. Therefore. the energy output of many hammers can be controlled by regulating the steam pressure or quan- tity of diesel fuel supplied to the hammer. One manufacturer feels that "Since the amount of (diesel) fuel injected per blow is d = the distance the ram moves after closing constant. A number of conditions such as Door kinetic energy at impact plus the work done by the hammer condition. CHAPTER 111 Pile Driving Hammers 3. In a diesel hammer. Other manufacturers simply give the energy output per blow as the product of the weight of the ram-piston W. these are usually downgraded by foundation experts for Since the total energy output is the sum of the various reasons. relatively large (see Figure 3.1 Energy Output of Impact Hammer explosive pressure also does some useful work on the pile given by: One of the most significant parameters involved in pile driving is the energy output of the hammer. the information generated by the Michigan and E. was used. and the kinetic energy at impact can be clogely approximated by: 3. a short time at least. diesel hammers arrive at the energy delivered per blow h = the total observed stroke of the ram. = the diesel explosive energy which does State Highway Commission in 1965 and presented in usejd work on the pile. for the next blow. for.t.

d ) + WR d (3. This method of energy S t e m Hammers. and where WR = ram weight h = the observed or actual ram stroke. E = WR he (e) I The total energy output is then given by v = V 2g he (el *Note: For the Link Belt Hammers.1) gives: Etotal = E. rating of 60% for the single-acting steam hammers..4) into Equation (3.7) Open End Diesel Hammers In order to determine an equivalent ram stroke for the double-acting hammers. this energy can be read directly from the manufacturer's chart using bounce chamber pressure gage. the actual steam force can be chamber pressure gage expressed as : d = distance from anvil to exhaust ports e = efficiency of closed end diesel hammers.3) and (3.12) so that : Etob1 = WR h (3.6) Conclusions. deter- mined by the wave equation for several typical pile prob- lems indicates that it is usually small in proportion to the total explosive energy output per blow. com. he which will give the same pression pressure.. they add kinetic energy computed by this method. = WR he (3. and t o be 100%. PAGE SEVEN . The preceding discussion has shown that it is possible to determine reasonable values of ham- The results given by this equation were compared with mer energy output simply by taking the product of the experimental values and the average efficiency was found ram weight and its observed or equivalent stroke. and 87% for the double-acting hammer. VR = V 2g (he-d) (el FR a steam force not exceeding the weight of the hammer housing. or the VR = initial ram velocity housing may be lifted off the pile.10). +Ee = WR ( h . Thus. Since these forces both act on the ram as it falls approximately 100% when energy is through the actual ram stroke h. may energy output as Equation (3. to the ram.7) by dependent upon the amount of diesel fuel injected. cushion. Equation (3. where WE = the hammer housing weight. p = the operating pressure. which is given by: Closed End Diesel Ha.11) equal yields also on the characteristics of the anvil.11) each case to determine the exact magnitude of Ee since i t not only depends on the hammer characteristics. Using the same equation for com. values of E.1) can be simplified by assuming: or solving for the equivalent stroke: Substituting Equations (3. and furthermore.5) he=h l + -P Prated X WR ( (3. rating can be applied to all types of impact pile drivers parison with experimental values indicated an efficiency with reasonable accuracy. Thus : Unfortunately. using an equivalent stroke. the internal steam pressure E WR h (e) above the ram which is forcing it down must be taken VR = V 2g (h-d) (e) into consideration. Thus the maximum h = observed total stroke of ram downward force on the ram is limited to the total weight = Distance from anvil to exhaust ports d of the ram and housing. VR = initial ram velocity Since the actual steam pressure is not always applied at he = equivalent stroke derived from bounce the rated maximum. and therefore. based on an energy A brief summary of this simple procedure for ar- output given by: riving at hammer energies and initial ram velocities is as follows: Eta.mmers E" = WR he (e) where WR = the ram weight. and soil resistance. but Setting Equations (3. e = efficiency of open end diesel hammers. However. applying an efficiency factor. vary somewhat. approximately 100% when energy is computed by this method.10) and (3. the wave equation must be used in Eta. pile. that it is on the same order of magnitude as WR X d. The total amount of explosive energy Eectotnl)is This can be reduced in terms of Equation (3. and Double-Acting Steam Hammers Prated= the maximum rated steam pressure. and temperature. helmet. = WR h (3. The manufacturers of such hammers where WR = ram weight state that'the maximum steam pressure or force should not exceed the weight of the housing or casing.

00 1. and length: and the t v ~ eand condit~onof cav blocks were A summary of the properties and operating character. and AS. a figure of 60% was found. rigidity. approximately 85 % by this "ENTHRU" by the investigators and was determined _ method." In other words. p . mass. 2" x 24" dia. As noted h = actual or physical ram stroke by H o u ~ e l .influence the value of ENTHRU.17 138. hoped to determine the energy delivered to the pile and to compare these values with the manufacturer's ratings.000 nylon disk -.000 4. delivered below the load-cell assemblv. was found using displacement transducers and/or reduced h = ram stroke from accelerometer data. one was of primary importance.92 46. d Rated Maximum Cap Manu.where WR = ram weight 3.000 4.000 9.1.750 754 8.400 2.93 0.1. the incremental movement where WR = ram weight of the head of the pile during this time interval.500 2.04 98. normally recommended around blow.operating steam pressure was the focal point of a major portion of this investi- Prated = maximum steam pressure recommended gation of pile-driving hammers. DE30 22.50 98.000 13. The writers feel the 60% figure is un.800 775 8. allvfa&ors that &ect ENTHRU. ENTHRU is not the total energy output of the hammer mers. SUMMARY OF HAMMER PROPERTIES AND OPERATING CHARACTERISTICS Hammer Hammer Maximum Ram Hammer Anvil Maxi. The energy transmitted to the pile was termed mers.000 ' 1350 8.00 0. Delmag D-12 22. Though a number of specific objectives were given.000 MKT Corp DE20 16. It should be pointed out that e = efficiencv of single-acting u u steam ham. Type Rated Weight Housing Weight mum or (ft) Steam Explosive Block facturer Energy (lb) Weight (lb) Equiva.000 5 Micarta disks 1" x 10%" dia.885 Link Belt 312 18.700 15" x 15" X 5" German Oak 158.857 1188 4. was measured by a specially VR = d 2g h (e) designed load cell. as compared with the manufacturer's rated energy.25 93. but only a measure of that portion of the energy 75 % to 85 %. Pres. ~ "Hammer . and istics of various hammers is given in Table 3. pile typf.~ energy actually delivered to the . how.450 8.000 5.070 1179 5.3 Significance of Driving Accessories he = equivalent ram stroke In 1965 the Michigan State Highway Commission completed an extensive research program designed to obtain a better understanding of the complex problem of pile driving. Pressure Normally (ft lb) (lb) lent sure (lb) Specified Stroke (psi) (ft) Vulcan #1 15. gan data. DE40 32.800 80C 24. operating conditions.700 014 42.000 3.000 14. In a study of the Michi. but w&n.000 2. WH = weight of hammer housing e = efficiency of double-acting steam ham.700 15" x 15" x 5" German Oak PAGE EIGHT h .66 0.000 6.000 640 8. 520 30. usually low and would not recommend As was noted in the Michigan report: "Hammer type and it as a typical value.19 1.500 50C 15.300 nylon disk 2" x 9" dia. the average force on the top of the pile during a short interval of time.000 5. pile.000 nylon disk 2" x 19" dia. how much could not be ascertained with any degree of TABLE 3.83 98.00 1.100 5. by the summation ENTHRU = XFAS Single-Achg Steam Hammers E = WR h (e) Where F. they by manufacturer. Many variables .

" a fraction of its original height or by omitting the cush- ion entirely) is both inefficient and poor practice be- The wave equation was therefore used to analyze cause of the high stresses induced in the pile.3. additional driving cap weights.6 and 3. it can be seen that ENTHRU does or in terms of the wave equation: not always increase with increasing cushion stiffness.2 to 0.t) of mass "m" at time "t".45 PAGE N I N E . simply by according to the wave equation. EFFECT OF CUSHION STIFFNESS ON for each of these factors so that their effects can be THE FORCE MEASURED AT THE LOAD determined. tion alone can change ENTHRU by 20%. increasing the cushion changing e from 0. the tremendous variety of driving when the load cell assembly is removed from Michigan accessories precludes general conclusions to be drawn piles.08 1. the maximum increase in ENTHRU noted h e r e is relatively small-only about 10%.2. condition." Thus the equation for ENTHRU at any point in the system can be determined by simply letting the computer calculate the equation previously mentioned : ENTHRU = ZFAS From Table 3. restitution and a low cushion stiffness in order to in- driving resistance encountered. and ters.6 normally increases ENTHRU from 18 to 20%. The maximum displacement of the head of the pile FMAX (kip) was also reported and was designated LIMSET.6.5 shows how ENTHRU and SET increases Unfortunately. and furthermore.6 and 3. especially the type. .2 to 0.08 1. CELL (FMAX) .) Ram Cushion Stiffness (kip/in. cushion stiffness also increases the driving stress. Thus. a number of cases were solved with "e" ranging from where ENTHRU (m) = the work done on any mass 0. Since force was measured only at the load cell. in "e" from 0. the coefficient of restitution will probably change. It would certain Michigan problems to determine the influence be better to use a cushion having a high coefficient of of cushion stiffness. restitution of the cushion has a greater influence on rate of penetration and ENTHRU than does its stiffness. Oscillo.2. and the weight of extra driv.t) acting on any mass "m" at time "t.6.3. Nor is this variation in e stiffness to increase the rate of penetration (for example unlikely since cushion condition varied from new to by not replacing the cushion until it has been beaten to "badly burnt" and "chips added. Ram Cushion Stiffness (kip/in. as well as the force F(m. As shown in Tables 3.) Ram Cushion Stiffness (kip/in. ing caps. The wave equation can be used to determine (among other quantities) the displacement D(m. an increase (m + 11.". the single maximum observed values for each case was called FMAX.2 to 0. TABLE 3. Table 3. This same effect was noted in the other solutions.44 0. the coefficient of t = the time interval number. ENTHRU is greatly influenced by several parame.44 0.4.000 cell were also reported. for the case shown. As can be seen from Table 3. e. etc.7. EFFECT OF CUSHION STIFFNESS ON TABLE 3. Since the coefficient of restitution of the cushion may affect ENTHRU. Thus.7 are typical of the restitution of the cushion. while increasing the permanent set from 6 m = the mass number. results found in other cases." that the coefficient of restitu. When different cushions are used.13 8 90 0.certainty.09 1. crease ENTHRU and to limit the driving stress.) Velocity Velocity RUT (ft/sec) $?: 540 1080 2700 27. any increase in It has been shown. EFFECT OF CUSHION STIFFNESS ON THE MAXIMUM DISPLACEMENT OF THE HEAD OF ENERGY TRANSMITTED TO THE PILE (ENTHRU) THE PILE (LIMSET) ENTHRU ( k i ~ft) LIMSET (in.45 0.) graphic records of force vs time measured in the load Velocity RUT (ft/sec) (kip) 540 1080 2700 27. the wave equation' can account TABLE 3. and coefficient of the cases shown in Tables 3.000 (ft/sec) (kip) 540 1080 2700 27." However.000 30 1. and to 11%.

were determined from the manufacturer's published hammer. the explosive force. and few conclusions could be drawn. pile.D. driving accessories. pressive and tensile stresses induced in a pile during driving.D. ~ (ft/sec) Cell Cell Cell Cell Cell Cell from wave equation analyses in all but the most general which the force tapers to zero. (kip) (ft/sec) e = 0. EFFECT OF COEFFICIENT OF RESTITUTION ON MAXIMUM POINT DISPLACEMENT Ram Maximum Point Displacement (in. possibly more so than the effect of 3. Increasing cushion stiffness will increase com- literature for the diesel hammers. thereafter decreasing to zero at 12.) (in. pile and/or the inclusion of heavier driving accessories' The properties of this curve.4 Explosive Pressure in Diesel Hammers the driving accessories. (kip) (ft/sec) e = 0. of terms.2 e = 0. afterwards the Although the effect of driving accessories is quite force decreases to the minimum diesel explosive force variable.5 EFFECT OF REMOVING LOAD CELL ON ENTHRU.6 (%) TABLE 3. after the maximum impact force.5 milliseconds. it is assumed that the diesel ditions were such that it was possible to get the pile explosive pressure maintains this specified minimum moving. EFFECT OF COEFFICIENT OF RESTITUTION ON ENTHRU Ram ENTHRU (kip f t ) Maximum Pile RUT Velocity Change I. and soil con- some specified minimum. and then decrease. unless the par- However.6 (% PAGE TEN . the force between the ram and anvil reaches some maxi- mum due to the steel on steel impact. including values of the consistently decreased both the energy transmitted to the minimum explosive force and time over which this force head of the pile and the permanent set per blow of the acts. This force is maintained for 10 rnillisec- additional elements between the driving hammer and the onds.) Ram With Without With Without With Without Velocity Load Load Load Load Load Load C a ~ e ~ .6.1.4 e = 0. effect on the solution. being so much smaller than force between the ram and anvil for a given time. TABLE 3.7. The effect of explosive pressure was found to be extremely variable. In other words. The only consistent effect that could be ob- In order to account for the effect of explosive force served was that if the maximum impact force induced in diesel hammers. the force between the ram and the by the falling ram was insufficient to produce perma- anvil is assumed to reach some maximum due to the nent set.) Maximum Pile RUT Velocity Change I. As shown in Figure 3. TABLE 3. AND PERMANENT SET OF PILE ENTHRU LIMSET PERMANENT SET (kip f t ) (in. it was generally noted that the inclusion of on the anvil. the addition of explosive force had little or no impact between the ram and anvil. had no effect.2 e = 0.4 e = 0. should this impact force tend t o decrease below ticular hammer. LIMSET.

driven by a 5.8 lists the results found for a typical prob- CUSHION lem solved in this study.1.3.. PlPE PlLE CLOSED AT TIP Figure 3. the steam hammer normally strikes a relatively soft capblock. CAPBLOCK PlLE CAP CUSHION 3.2 and 3. The pile used was a 100-ft 12H53 steel pile.000 Ib.000 kips per in. the addition of explosive pressure in- creased the permanent set of the pile in some cases where the maximum impact force is sufficient to start the pile moving. ANVIL spondence with the hammer manufacturers.) PlPE PlLE PlPE PlLE CLOSED AT TIP Figure 3. . Maxi- Compres. while the ultimate CAPBLOCK soil resistance ranged from 0 to 10. The cushion was assumed to have a stiffness of 2.000-lb ram. and from their published literature. These 1 forces were determined by experiment. he suggested that since the ram is usually short in length. there is a signifi- cant difference between the steam or drop hammers and diesel hammers. Steam hammer. mum mum Length sive Tensile Point Number of Pile Force Force in Displace. since K ( l ) represents the spring constant of only the capblock. The example illustrated in Figure 2.5 Effect of Ram Elasticity ADAPTER In 1960.3. the ram could also be divided into a series of weights and springs. GUIDES To determine the influence of dividing the ram into RAM a number of segments. on the other hand. Sol L of Ram Segments in Pile. Diesel hammer. its addition was found ineffective in an equal number of circumstances.000 lb.2. several ram lengths ranging from 2 to 10 ft were assumed. whereas the diesel hammer in- volves steel on steel impact between the ram and anvil. The explosive forces assumed to be acting within I various diesel hammers are listed in Table 3. As noted in Figures 3. EFFECT OF BREAKING THE RAM INTO SEGMENTS WHEN RAM STRIKES A CUSHION OR CAPBLOCK Maxi- mum Maxi. the problem consisting of a ADAPTER 10-ft long ram traveling at 20 fps striking a cushion with a stiffness of 2000 kips per in. TABLE 3.8. as is the pile. Smith also noted that if greater accuracy was desired.e. However. PlLE CAP Table 3. Pile ment Divisions (ft) (kip) (kip) (in. The total weight of the pile being HAMMERBASE driven varied from 1500 to 10. driving a 100-ft pile having point resistance only. i. when Smith first proposed his numerical solution to the wave equation for application to pile driving problems. PAGE ELEVEN . it can in many cases'be repre- sented by a single weight having infinite stiffness. the elasticity of the ram having been neglected.1 makes this assumption. personal corre.

These variables were of the pile.' This The most obvious result shown in Table 3. it has P A G E TWELVE .. stant in each case. parameters used were RU = 500 kips. The term "cushion" refers to the ma. In each case the ram parameter was seapent length of 1 ft for the 1. The soil 1. spring having a rate dictated by the elasticity of the ram and/or anvil. when the ram was short. The most obvious solution is to place a the solution. lengths. a for forces and displacements for both 6 through 1 0 ft parameter study was run in which the ram length varied ram lengths continue to change until a ram segment between 6 and 10 ft. In general.short picked because of their possible influence on the solution. and J = 0.9.1 Methods Used to Determine Capblock and terial placed between the steel helmet and ~ i l e(usually Cushion Properties used only when driving concrete piles). the pile was also divided into short segments. The pile used was again a 12H53 point bearing pile As shown in Table 3.000 to 2. In the case of a diesel hammer. or 10 segments. the solution is not changed having a cushion of 2. The time interval was held con. EFFECT O F BREAKING RAM INTO SEGMENTS WHEN RAM STRIKES A STEEL ANVIL Length Maximum Com~ressive Maximum Number of Each Force on PiIe Point Anvil Ram of Ram Ram At At At Displace- Weight Length Divisions Segment Head Center Tip ment Ib ft fb kip kip kip in. the word "capblock" refers to the Although a capblock and cushion serve several material placed between the pile driving hammer and purposes. As seen in Table 3. A second possible solution is to break An unexpected result of the study was that even the ram into a series of weights and springs as is the pile. Q = 0. Since the ram was divided into very . siresses in both the pile and hammer.ments has a marked effect on steel elements.15 sec. No pile cap was included in the soluiion. breaking it into segments still effected the solution.000-lb anvil and a 1. As used here. These factors were held con- stact for all problems listed in Tables 3. the solutions T o determine when the ram should be divided. the cushion held constant and the ram was divided equally into seg- being placed directly between the hammer and the head ment lengths as noted in Table 3.000-lb anvil was reached. the ram strikes directly on a steel anvil rather than on a cushion.1 in. spring rate placed to any significant extent whether the ram is divided into between the anvil and the head of the pile. per ft. TABLE 3.8 and 3. their primary function is to limit impact the steel helmet. CHAPTER IV Capblock and Cushions 4.8.9.9 is that makes the choice of a spring rate between the ram and when the steel ram impacts directly on a steel anvil. and the anvil weight varied from.9.000 lb.9.000 kip per in. 2. anvil difficult because the impact occurs between two dividing the ram into se. length of 2 ft was reached for the 2.

when fourteen different cases of the A STATIC S . but rather appeared as shown in Figure 4.20 and the head of the pile. and the compression in the cushion at all times could be calculated. However. . the increased cushion stiffness in some of these cases increased the impact stresses to a point where damage to the pile or hammer might result during driving.3 in an attempt to simplify the procedure. forces.2. DYNAMIC S-S CURVE For example. T o eliminate the effects of soil resistance several test piles were suspended horizontally above the ground. deformation properties of cushioning material. the stiffer Micarta is usually more durable and transmits a greater percentage of the hammer's energy to the pile because of its higher coefficient of restitution. Since it was not known how much the rigidity of the pedestal affected the cushion's behavior. Thus the cushion's stress-strain diagram could be plotted to determine whether or not it was actually a straight line. the dynamic stress-strain prop- erties were measured for several types 04 cushions.ion block. These A D studies indicated that the curves determined by either STRAIN method were similar and that the cushion test stand could be used to accurately study the dynamic load- Figure 4.btxn found that a wood capblock is quite effective in reducing driving stresses. The increase in stress was particularly important when concrete or prestressed concrete piles were driven. Smith assumed that the cushion's stress-strain curve was a series of straight lines as shown in Figure 4. Using this method. more so than a relatively stiff capblock material such as Micarta. the Micarta assemblies averaged 14% more efficient than capblock assemblies of wood. Stress-strain curve for a cush. However. PAGE THIRTEEN . a cushion test stand was con- structed as shown in Figure 4. several cushions whose stress-strain curve had been previously determined by the first method were checked. and accelerations of both the ram and head of the pile were measured. the force exerted in the cushion STRAIN (IN. and especially at the head of the pile. It was further determined that the stress-strain curves were not linear as was assumed by Smith.s CURVE Michigan study were solved by the wave equation. and displacements. Dynamic and static stress-s~ra'incurves for a fir cushfo~. Although this curve was found to be sufficiently accurate to pre- dict maximum compressive stresses in the pile.1. Because it was extremely difficult to determine the dynamic stress-strain curve by this method.1. it is also frequently necessary to include cushioning material between the helmet and the head of P the pile to distribute the impact load uniformly over the surface of the pile head and prevent spalling. These test piles were instrumented with strain gages at several points along the length of the pile.2. w n I- To apply the wave equation to pile driving.) Figure 4. the shape of the stress wave often disagreed with that of the actual stress wave. When driving concrete piles. Thus./IN. A cushion was placed at the head of the pile which was then hit by a hori- zontally swinging ram. by knowing the force at the head of the pile and the relative displacement between the ram o 002 004 008 012 o 16 0.

its internal damping CUSHION BLOCK reduces the available driving energy transmitted to the head of the pile.6. This energy FLOOR SLAB loss is commonly termed coefficient of restitution of the I L cushion "e".2 Idealized Load-Deformation Properties The major difficulty encountered in trying to use the dynamic curves determined for the various cushion materials was that it was extremely difficult to input the information required by the wave equation. 4. or average modulus of elasticity). and asbestos are shown by Figures 4.3.2. Micarta. so long as the loading portion was based on the secant modulus of elasticity for the material (as opposed to the initial. 1 PAGE FOURTEEN . the top segment and unloading portion were extremely com- plex. Surprisingly. This prevented the curve from being input in equation form. and the unload- ing portion of the curve was based on the actual dynamic STRAIN (IN. Throughout this investigation. TABLE 4. in which / FIXED BASE CONCRETE PILE e = d Area Area ABD BCD / Figure 4.1 illustrates4this energy loss. Fortunately. a static stress-strain curve was also determined for each of the cushions. Dynamic stress-strain curve for an oak I materials are presented in Table 4. the static and dynamic stress-strain curves for wood cushions agreed remarkably well.) ! coefficient of restitution. cushion. final.1. it was found that the wave equation accurately predicted both the shape and magnitude of the stress wave induced in the pile even if a linear force- deformation curve was assumed for the cushion. A typical example of this agreement is shown in Figure 4. The stress-strain curves for a number of other materials commonly used as pile cushions and capblocks. with the input energy being given by the area ABC while the energy output is given by area BCD. TYPICAL SECANT MODULI OF ELAS- . namely oak./lN.4-4.-""LLLI TICITY (E) AND COEFFICIENTS OF RESTITUTION (e) OF VARIOUS PILE CUSHIONING MATERIAL E e psi GUIDES Micarta Plastic Oak (Green) Asbestos Discs Fir Plywood Pine Plywood Gum GUIDE RAIL *Properties of wood with load applied perpendicular to wood grain.1. Cushion test stand. Figure 4. Although the initial portion of the curve was nearly parabolic.4. and required numerous points on the curve to be specified. 4.3 Coefficient of Restitution Although the cushion is needed to limit the driving stresses in both hammer and pile. Typical secant moduli of elasticity and coefficient of restitution values for various Figure 4.

Dynamic stress-strain curve for a micarta cushion. The area and length of the pile. and dis./IN. 85 ft in 2. ' Figure 4. known. secant moduli tion. were instrumented and suspended horizontally above the ground. and 2128 lb and a velocity of 13. Table 4. the numerical solution was rewritten such that placements and accelerations of both the ram and head it was not needed.5. coefficient of restitution for the materials which should mined as noted in Figure 4. cushion was oak. 7 in. the slope of the unloading curve can be deter. STRAIN (IN.1 Comparison with Laboratory Experiments As noted in the preceding section. several test piles equation. PER IN. The density and modulus of elasticity of the pile. This was possible since the pile was of the pile were also measured. The ram had a weight of 3. The pile was instrumented Since the stress-strain curve for the cushion was un- with strain gages at six points along the pile. thick. The cushion. horizontally swinging ram. STRAIN IN IN. Table 4. of elasticity values for well consolidated cushions should be used.6.) Figure 4. The initial velocity and weight of the ram.1 also lists the is known.98 fps. in. The cushion was clamped to the head of the pile and then struck by a 4.1 shows typical secant moduli of well Once the coefficient of restitution for the material consolidated wood cushions. the following information is normally required : 1. I CHAPTER V I 1 Stress Waves in Piling i 5.1. Stress us strain for garlock asbestos cushion. instrumented with a strain gage approximately 1 ft from I In order to utilize Smith's solution to the wave the head of the pile which recorded the actual stress I P A G E FIFTEEN . This example pile was a steel pile.46 sq. The actual dynamic stress-strain curve for the length with a cross-sectional area of 21. be used when analyzing the problem by the wave equa- For practical pile driving problems.

in the Pile cal comparisons between the experimental results and Other parameters were often varied in an attempt to wave equation solutions at two points on the pile. the previous case 5. SOLUTION WrrH KNOWN FORCES PLACED ON HEAD OF PlLE *DsD SOLUTION USING A LlNEaR CUSHION SPRING RATE CUSHION SOLUTION USING A PARABOLIC WSHION SPRING RATE I1 . Theoretical us experimental solution for 25 ft from pile head. The force tensile and compressive stresses. SOLUTION USING A LINEAR CUSHION SPRING R A T E CUSHION "00 SOLUTION USING A PARABOLIC CUSHION SPRING RATE I I I60 0 " I " 2 ' 3 " 4 ' 5 ' 6 ' 7 ' 6 " 9 ' 10 ' 11 ~ 12 ~ 13 I 14 ' 15 16 17 16 19 20 1 6 1 " " " " ' " " " " " I 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 B 9 10 11 I2 13 14 15 16 17 I8 19 20 T l M E (SEC X lo1) T I M E (SECXIO-~I Figure 5. Figures 5. PAGE SIXTEEN .4. at the head of the pile and the wave equation was used to compute stresses and displacements at all of the gage 5.1 and 5. As minishes slightly after four cycles. This problem was chosen since E.3 and 5. I-ExPERIMEmAL SOLUTION? O n O D THEORETICAL SOLUTION USING I KNOWN FORCES AT THE PlLE HEAD TO ELIMINATE ERRORS CAUSED B Y T H E R I M AND . Furthermore. How- the wave equation. Strain Figure 5. points along the pile. induced in pile by the ram and cushion. the solutions for the linear the theoretical solution with damping neglected would and nonlinear cushion assumptions agreed favorably. The magnitud-: of noted in Figures 5.SOLUTION WITH KNOWN FORCES PLACE0 ON HEAD OF PlLE CAUSED BY THE RAM 1 N D 00. strains 25 ft from the pile head. one of which was the illustrate the degree of accuracy obtained by use of material damping capacity of the pile material. strains 52 ft from the pile head. the stress-strain curve for the cushion is of elasticity of 3.5 compares the experimental and theo- The use of the straight line assumption is reasonable retical solutions for stresses when Smith's proposed since it gives fairly accurate results for both maximum method of damping is included. S ~ r a i n Figure 5. was relatively larger than E. elasticity of $.3. In this case. Theoretical vs experimental solution for 52 ft from pile head.3) T l M E I S E C X 10-31 Figure 5.2 Significance of Material Damping .1. DODO 160 I I 8 J ' I l I I I I I I I I I I I I l ' l l l f I ~ ' m ~ I I I I J I I I 0 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ID 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 16 19 20 T l M E ( S E C X 10.1..the actual dynamic load-deforma. Theoretical vs experimental solution.96 x 10"nd a "sonic" modulus of normally assumed to be linear as shown in Figure 4. It can be seen in Figure strain curve will affect the solution.2. EXPERIMENTAL SOLUTION I I II OmsD THEORETICAL SOLUTION USING KNOWN FORCES AT THE PILE HEAD TO ELIMINATE ERRORS . the ex- I . as men. only pile in which damping was thought to be sipnili- tion curve for that particular case. most suspended pile cases studied strongly indicated I t must be emphasized that this excellent correlation that damping would be negligible because of the extreme- between experimental and theoretical results was in ef. Theoretical vs experimental solution.2 present typi. and obtain more accurate results. ever. not. sibility of rather high damping. ft pre- measured at the held of the pile was then placed directly dicts the shape of the stress wave reasonably well. However. ly low rate of decay of the stress wave in the pile. cant was a lightweight concrete pile with a static modulus tioned earlier.4.5 that the magnitude of the experimental results di- was rerun using the straight line stress-strain curves. indicating the pos- To determine how much the use of the linear stress.63 x lo6 psi. Figure 5. The fect obtained by using .

2(a).5. W U) Zoo and are apparently of no practical importance.t) = [D(m. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 P 13 14 I5 16 17 18 I9 20 TIME (SEC x 10 31 It should be emphasized that the above conclusions are valid only for normal pile driving conditions.Qives the results R(m.t) first dynamic (impact) and static tests conducted on satu. K ( p ) is used as the point soil spring and J ( p ) as the Examination of Equation (6.I. Smith has modified the true Kelvin model slightly as shown by Equation (6. segment.1) are examined. 6.1) produces no damp- "Piling Behavior" study. Model used by Smith to describe soil re- independent of the total soil resistance or size of the pile.t)] K1(m) of a field test on a full scale instrumented pile in clay. properties and their effects on the wave equation solution Ru is defined as the maximum soil resistance on a pile of the piling behavior problem. zoo the pile. If the wave must be studied for an extended period of time. search reports concerning soil properties have been pub- lished by the Texas Transportation Institute during the Smith notes that Equation (6.1) shows that Smith's point soil damping constant. If terms in Equation (6.t-1) (6. Research Report 33-@.D1(m. Consider Equation (6. accounted for. the effects of damping are o extremely small even for the lightweight aggregate pile. both in wave shape and rate of decay. perimental and theoretical solutions are in excellent agreement. Care must be used to satisfy conditions at the point of the pile. Figure 5.D1(m. Research Reports 33-7 and ing when D(m. This equation will produce a dynamic load-deformation be- ~ I havior shown by path OABCDEF in Figure 6.t) .1. A total of three re. Comparison of experimentaJ and theoreticd damping in the ~ i l emay be significant and should be solutions for stresses 25 ft from the ~ i l ehead.2(b). During this time. = u. He sug- 33-7A6. A higher damping ca- 1oC l. PAGE SEVENTEEN . A brief summary of the results of these tests are given + J ( m ) Ru(m) V(m.1 General It is also assumed to be constant for a given soil under given conditions as is the static shear strength of the A limited amount of work has been done on soil soil from which Ru on a pile segment is determined.6 2 give the results of a series of laboratory gests an alternate equation to be used after D(m. it can be seen that Smith's dashpot force is given by The dimensions of J are sec/ft and it is assumed to be Figure 6.2 Equations to Describe Soil Behavior where p is the number of the last element of the pile.1.2) in this chapter. becomes equal to Q (m) : rated sands. Also at the point of the equation describes a type of Kelvin rheological model as shown in Figure 6. SOIL RESISTANCE R The soil spring behaves elastically until the deformation D(m. FRICTION LINK The dashpot J develops a resisting force proportional to the velocity of loading V. Whether 400 this conclusion will be accurate for timber or other piles 600 having much higher damping capccities than either steel 800 or concrete piles is unknown. CHAPTER VI Soil Properties 6.t) -. lorn Although it is extremely interesting to be able to predict the dynamic behavior of piling with such accu- 800 racy.t) becomes zero.1) when m p. sistance on pile. most practically the primary interest is in the 600 maximum stresses induced in the pile which occur - 400 during the first or second pass of the stress wave along .2). pacity could affect the results earlier in the solution and thus be of significance.t) equals Q and then it yields plastically with a 1 DISPLACEMENT load-deformation property as shown in Figure 6.

The damping constant J ( p ) in bearing is believed to be larger than the damping constant J ( m ) in friction along the side of the pile.pile.5 in.) Figure 6. the soil spring must be prevented from exerting tension on the pile point. AL (6. high). / V = 6.I .3. I D i n diam. b y 6. It should be kept in mind that at the pile point the soil is loaded in compression or bearing.2 .3) where fs = maximum soil adhesion or friction (lb/ft2). ( a ) STATIC Soil Resistance "Ru.6 DEFORMATION 0 (in. In cohesive soils (clays) fs during driving is the re- molded adhesion strength between the soil and pile.3 ft p e r sec The soil parameters used to describe the soil resist- ance in the wave equation are Ru. 5 0 CONFINING PRESSURE u3 = 4 5 Ib per in 'ION .5) where Qu = ultimate bearing strength of soil (lb/ft". Load-deformaion properties of Ottawa sand determined b y triaxial tests (specimens n o m i d l y 3 in. = perimeter of ~ i l esegment (ft). Z. and 4' = angle of friction between soil and pile (de- grees). P A G E EIGHTEEN .3 . Ru is determined by the maximum static soil adhesion or friction against the side of a given pile segment by: LOAD Ru(m) = fs 2.2.2(b).7 f t per sec 6. The point soil resistance will V = 10 f t per sec follow the path OABCFG in Figure 6. and J. Q.5 . Ap = area of pile point (ft".3 Soil Parameters to Describe Dynamic Soil Resistance During Pile Driving V: 3. V = 0 (static test) LOAD VELOCITY O F LOADING DATA FOR SATURATED OTTAWA SAND VOID RATIO e = 0 . Load-deformation characteristics of soil. (b) DYNAMIC and Figure 6. At the point of the pile Ru is determined by the maximum static bearing strength of the soil and is found by Ru = (Qu) (AP) (6.4 . In cohesionless materials (sands and gravels) fs = a tan 4' (6." For the side or friction soil resistance.4) where - cr = effective normal stress against the side of the pile (lb per ft2). and AL = length of pile segment (ft).

J(P). These values of J ( p ) for where: = peak load developed in dynamically Pdynnmic loaded sample at a constant veloci- ty. J ( m ) values in friction of about 1/3 those at the point. since the material at the pile point is 5=EFFECTIVE CONFINING PRESSURE in the process of being compacted and may even have a higher bearing value. Various sources of data indicate that values of Q in both friction and point bearing probably range from 0. Forehand and conducted on Ottawa sand at different loading velocities. in particular situations where more precise values of Q are known.4. ~ to Institute has conducted static and dynamic tests 0. and effective initial confining pressures. Figure 6.5 to 1.15 in. J ( p ) varied at the pile point can be represented in equation form from about 0. sand are in reasonable agreement with those recom- Dampimg Constant "J".In cohesive soils (clays) it is believed that the undis- turbed strength of the soil may be used conservatively e = VOID RATIO to determine Qu. There are no data now available to indicate the value of J ( m ) in friction along the side of the pile. it is possible for Q to go as high as 0. or more. Triaxial soil tests were cate it is at least equal to that for sand. At the present state of the art of pile driving technology it is recommended that a value of Q = 0.10 in. ChellisG. The laboratory tests conducted on saturated sands were conducted with the sand sample subjected to triaxial ' " " ' ' ' ' ~ ' 'I 2 0 ' ~ confinement.and V were meas- ured. 6. and consequently it was possible to evaluate J for a given set of test conditions. confining stress(T3 increases.j and Forehand and R e e ~ e ~ (0. Pstntic = peak load developed in statically loaded sample. the elastic deformation of the soil is difficult to determine for various types of soils conditions.1 . J = a damping constant.2 in. they should be used. and During the laboratory tests in saturated sands. 80% of the confining pressure q The laboratory tests on sands were conducted in such a manner that PdyunIllio Pstatic. When the sand was dry J ( p ) for Smith's mathematical model as follows: was nominally equal to zero. At beginning of tests .12.4 shows additional data concerning the Smith believes it is smaller than J (p) and recommends increase in soil strength as the rate of loading is in. and AII specimens w e r e s a t u r a t e d .3 shows typical results from a series of such tests. creased. on cohesionless soil samples to determine if Smith's The value of J ( p ) for cohesive soils (clays) is not rheological model adequately describes the load-defor.05 in. at- given to the determination of the soil darn^- tention was " u = pore water pressure. The value of Q. The J value increases as time J (m) in friction or adhesion is assumed to be 1/3 of the sand density increases (void ratio e decreases) and it increases as the effective . for computer simulation of friction and point soil re- sistance.0.01 to 0. "J" versus "V" for Ottawa sand.l indicates that the most typical value for average pile driving conditions is Q = 0. machine used for testing was developed for this particu- Ottawa sand. Figure 6. Reese believe it ranges from 0. Increase in strength vs rate of loading. Since these tests were confined compression Research is under way at Texas A&M University which tests it is believed that they simulate to some extent the should indicate the value of J in friction. ing constant. The peak dynamic resistance of the soil For saturated Ottawa sand specimens. be used Figure 6. The very limited data available indi- mation properties of these soils. presently known.4 Laboratory Tests on Sands where cr3 = total confining pressure. v .10 in.me pore V = impact velocity of the dynamic w ~ t e rpressure u was nominally load.5. The Texas Transportation mended by Smithe. However. to 0. lar research and a complete description of the machine PAGE NINETEEN .4). Particular attention was given to the ef- 20 40 60 80 RATE OF LOADING (IN/SEC) 100 140 fects of variable loading velocities. Quake "Q". If the soil strata immediately underlying the pile tip is very soft. initial sample densi- ties. The Figure 6. At the present soil behavior at the pile point.

How- ever.04 to 0. since the adhesion or m = l friction strength of clay is generally restored with the where passage of time. if Smith's equation is modified by raising the ve- locity. J. Note this is taken as the strength of modified equation is as follows: the soil in an undisturbed condition which should be conservative. In cohesive soils (clays) the increase in sistance or bearing capacity of the pile equals the sum strength upon reconsolidation (sometimes referred to as of the Ru values discussed previously. For two other sands tested.2 The results of the study of Ottawa sand are sum- marized in Figure 6. of time show that ultimate adhesion is approximately ments m = 1 to m = p . of loading velocities of from 0 to 12 fps. strain gages. Pore pressure measurements in clay stratum that the use of Smith's original equation (Equation 6.0. TexasG. less than 1. The proposed . "Setup" or recovery of strength after driv.6 illustrates the time effect or "setup" of a pile driven in a cohesive soil. A test pile instrumented with pressure transducers. Application of Smith's mathe- matical model with the experimental data yields a damp- ing factor.07. Ru(m) for m 1 to p 6. Strain measurements were Figure 6. to some power. Loading tests at increasing intervals Ru(m) = soil adhesion or friction on seg. the value of J varied from 0.6. condition. is the bearing capacity immediately after driving.6. to ~ investi- gate the failure mechanisms of clay soils subjected to dynamic and static loading.01 to 0. Normally.7 shows a typical plot of pore pressure versus elapsed time in the T l M E AFTER DRIVING (HOURS) clay stratum at a 50 ft depth. and therefore Smith's equation did not accurately predict peak dynamic loads for the ranges of loading velocities ( 3 to 12 fps) used in these tests. the value of Ru(p) at the pile point changes very little. a reasonably Ru(p) = bearing or compressive strength of constant value of J can be obtained for the full range soil at the pile point m = p (lb).1 may increase as the disturbed or remolded soil Pile Driving (Time Effect) along the side of the pile reconsolidates and the excess pore water pressure dissipates back to an equilibrium Immediately after driving. n. and accelerome- ters was driven into a saturated clay at a site in Beau- mont. the total static soil re.7." The tests on clays have shown Figure 6. *Sensitivity of clay = remolded strengith PAGE TWENTY .and the instrumentation used is given in Research Report 33-7A.7).1 (lb). m=p The bearing capacity of the pile will increase as Ru(tota1) = 2 Ru (m) the remolded or disturbed clay along the side of the pile reconsolidates and gains strength. Pore pressure measure- ments were made at the pile-soil interface for a continu- ous period of 30 days after driving. Figure 6. the (note that this is the strength of the amount of increase in bearing capacity with time is disturbed or remolded soil along related to the sensitivity and reconsolidation of the clay". Ru(tota1) "setup") is often considerable. a series of tests have been conducted on clays at loading velocities of from 0 to 12 fps. Arkansas sand and Victoria sand. yields a variable J value as was the case in sands. Additional tests have been conducted on these sands at loading velocities from 0 to 3 fps. Also. As time elapses after driving.2) -50' depth.j Measurements of strains and accelerations of the pile were taken during driving. In cohesionless soils (sands and gravels) the friction strength of the soil will usually change very little. the side of the pile). undisturbed strength ing in cohesive soil (after reference 6.5 Static Soil Resistance After . These values of J are not constant.6 Field Test in Clay The purpose of the field test s t ~ d ywas ~ .5. and Figure 6. which varies from 0. V. equal to the undisturbed cohesion. This work has been accomplished ELAPSED TIME (HRS) under a new research study entitled "Bearing Capacity of Axially Loaded Piles. Therefore.15. 6. Thus.

000 lb/in. the time effect or soil "setup" which J ( p ) point = 0. r2 = radius of pile 2. Soil borings were made for the in-situ.1. A total soil resist- piling during driving.5 radii. It then computes the pile penetration or "permanent set" when driven against this Ru (total).8 ered in the analysis by use of J. per blow). and Tz = time for pile 2 to attain the same per- centage of ultimate bearing capacity. W i t h this simulation the driving ance Ru(tota1) is assumed by the computer for analysis stresses and penetration of the pile can be computed. per blow) is observed and this can be The computer program then selects a larger translated -into the static soil resistance through the use Ru(tota1) and computes the corresponding blows per of the wave equation.1 in. The behavior of the soil in this study indi- cates that soil disturbances which involve new soil parti. HAMMER: No."j This relationship can be ex.000 lb set equal to 0. It is again emphasized that this Ru(tota1) is the total static soil resistance encountered during driv- K = 6. where: rl = radius of pile 1 . By the wave equation method of analysis a much more realistic engineering Curve I : 25% side friction (triangular distri- estimate can be made using information generated by bution) 75% point bearing. In general. in the work. T1 = time for pile 1 to attain a stated percent- pressed as follows: age of ultimate bearing capacity. In the field the pile penetration or permanent set per blow (in. simplified dynamic pile equations such as the Hiley or ASSUMED SOIL DISTRIBUTION: Engineering News formulas. then the ultimate pile load bearing capacity immediately after driving should Energy = 32.600. cle arrangement and altered engineering properties are limited to a distance from the center of the pile of ap. 00 Raymond In the field if driving had ceased when the resist- Efficiency = 80% ance to penetration was 1 0 blows per in. ing. in. 7. remolded. carrying capacity of the driven pile. since the increased dynamic resistance was consid- e = 0. In the past the with the pile point founded on a dense layer of sand and engineer has often had to rely on judgement based on gravel. to Consider the following example: Ru(tota1) as shown in Figure 7. and reconsolidated conditions. and at specific radial distances from the pile.made during static load tests at 13 days and 30 days where: r = radial distance from pile center. CHAPTER VII Use of the Wave Equation to Predict Pile Load Bearing Capacity At Time of Driving 7.10 in. rl = radius of pile. the program. tends to increase the pile bearing capacity will be small PAGE TWENTY-ONE . This is done several times until enough points are generated to develop a curve relating blows per in. and after driving. Conventional tests were Results of this study also suggest that the time after conducted on the soil samples to measure the changes driving required for piles of different radii to attain in engineering properties for the different conditions. ( a permanent Ram Weight = 10. pile-soil system can be simulated and analyzed by the This information is used to simulate the system to wave equation to determine the dynamic behavior of be analyzed by the wave equation.1 (two curves for the two different assumed distributions of soil resistance PILE: 72 ft steel step taper pile are shown).2 Waue Equation Method The reciprocal of "permanent set" is usually computed to convert this to blows per in. and muck.05 sec/ft Q(m) side = 0. proximately 4. silt.500 ft lb have been approximately 370 to 380 tons as shown on CAPBLOCK: Micarta Figure 7.1 Introduction J ( m ) side = 0. If the soil resistance is predominantly due to cohesionless materials such as ASSUMED SOIL PARAMETERS: sands and gravels.10 is.15 sec/ft Q ( p ) point = 0. Curve 11: 10% side friction (triangular distri- The previous chapters have shown how the hammer bution) 90% point bearing. engineers are interested in the static load Soil is a soft marine deposit of fine sand. comparable percentages of their ultimate bearing capaci- ty can be expressed as follows: A mode of failure was established in this study for a cohesive soil involved in the load response of a pile- soil system.

= ..BO. Figure 7. the time effect o r soil "setup" might increase the bearing capacity 2.1.1. All that is re- TABLE 7.1.1.1 AND & . Cwnparison of m e equcntioln predicted sod resistance to soil resistawe d & r m i d by bod tests for 5 10 15 20 piles driven in sands. PILE: 72 ft. (Data from table 7.) 25 BLOWS PER IN. (kips) (R m ~ Rdr ) (100) Arkansas Copano Bay Muskegon Mean or Average % Error *Rd.: J (Point) = 0. 90% Point CONSTANTS . Step Taper. Test Driving) Resistance) Location Pile (kips) .ERRORS CAUSED BY ASSUMING J(point) = 0. - W TONS > a 3 SOIL RESISTANCE A T TIME OF DRIVING . Figure 7. If the soil is a cohesive clay. Coeff. necessary to assume the following soil parameters: 1. I t can also be con. small variations in the distribution of soil resistance pacity is usually greater than that predicted by a curve between side friction and point bearing will not affect similar to Figure 7. for piles driven in sands was assumed equal to the actual load test measurements since no "setup" was considered.1.1. As illustrated by Curves I and I1 on Figure 7. the wave equation results. Soil damping constant "J" "setup7' can be estimated if the "sensitivity" and recon- solidation of the clay is known.10 . 1 to No. of Rest.-.000 ? ~ i DISTRIBUTION OF RESISTANCE: Curve 1: 25% Side (Triangular Distribution).(e)j'J = J(point) FOR SAND (For Sand- Supported Piles Only) Rar* RWE (Resistance (Indicated % Error Load a t Time of Soil in Ra. Distribution of soil resistance or negligible. The magnitude of this 3. it was inch for cn example problem. servatively disregarded since the "setup" bearing ca.05 Q (Point) = 0. 6 HAHHER: No. P A G E TWENTY-TWO . 75% Point Curve 11: 10% Side (Triangular Distribution). Q (Side) = 0. steps. 00 Ramond SHELL: Step Taper Corrugated CAPBLOCK: Hicarta.-.2.Rd.10.600. K = 6. No. Ultimate driving resistance us blows per In developing the curves of Figure 7..significantly. 12 ft.15: J (Side) = 0. Soil Quake "Q" as discussed in Chapter VI.

a t time of soil % Error in Kr ( R"Ecr Test ance) driving) resistance) Location Pile (kips) (kips) (kips) ) (100) Rdr Belleville I** 4* 5* Detroit 70 +156 155 6 205 240 ++. shows the accuracy of the correlation to be approxi- scale load tests to failure have provided a degree of mately +250/0..3. Comparison of wave eqllation predicted soil piles driven in clay. Comparison of wave equation predicted soil resistance to soil resistance determined by load tests for Figure 7.3 Comparison of Predictions with Field Tests constants of J (point) = 0. for clay-supported piles TABLE 7. = 54. dicting static bearing capacity.1 and J' (side) = J (point) /3 were found to give the best correlation. The value of J ( m ) is confidence in the previously described method of pre- assumed to be 1/3 of J ( p ) .3. W 250 - 0 Z a I- ?? V) 200 - W (r -1 0 V) 150 - 50 100 150 200 250 TONS SOlL RESISTANCE AT TlME OF DRIVING (Rd.5% *90% clay-supported piles. **The test values for these piles were questionable. for piles driven in clay were actual load test measurements corrected to account for soil "set-up. (Data from table 7. (Data from table 7.) SOlL RESISTANCE AT TlME OF DRIVING ' CRdrI.) quired is a reasonable estimate of the situation.*** R. ERROR CAUSED BY ASSUMING J(point) = 0. is satisfactory (see Chapter VI).1) damping 7.) resistance t o soil resistance determined b y lo& tests for piles driven i n both sand and clay. In Table 7.2." PAGE TWENTY-THREE . TONS Figure 7. Figure 7.2. For most conditions an assumption of soil quake Q = 0.4.2 Correlations of wave equation solutions with full.2. Test (~es-istance (~ndicited Load Resist. For the sand-supported piles (Table 7. ***Rd..1 in.3 AND Jf(dde) = 7 J(point) FOR CLAY (For Clay- Supported Piles Only) (Load R.33 29 250 + L Total = 436 436 Average % Error = .

- I00 - F I N A L DRIVING 2 3 4 6 3 4 '12 4 5 5 7 TEST LOAD 60 104 80 170 185 125 140 140 140 140 240 WAVE EQUATION 70 86 95 140 190 105 150 135 164 152 200 ( R U -TONS Q = 0.DEPTH TYPICAL PILE PILE PILE PILE PILE PILE PILE PILE PILE PILE PILE PILE I FT.071 0.087 0.1 FOR SAND AND J(point) = 0. and J(point) = 0. 6 5 0 0 LB.069 0.090 0.1 J(point) (sec/ft) ance) (kips) Driving) (kips) ance) (kips) ( Rwn Victoria 35 0. Summary of piles tested to failure in sands. Figare 7.058 0.'.18 210 166 150 -10% Bayou 60 0.070 0.1 (For Piles Supported by Both Sand and Clay) RJTD RIr Rdr** (Indi- (Load (Resist.18 * * 740 b - Copano Bay 58 0.5. Time of Resist- Location Test Pile A R ~ I ~ x 0.3 F O E CLAY USING EQ. and could not be load-tested to failure. 19.060 0. 7.05.102 Muskegon 7 * 320 8 * 295 Total = 131' Average % Error = = 14. for these piles were actual load test measurements corrected to account for soil "setup. RAM.16 160 352 136 300 148 380 +$2776 - 9% Chocolate 40 0. **Rd. ERRORS CAUSED BY ASSUMING A COMBINED J(point) = 0. Hammer efficiency assumed to be 80%.1 in. TABLE 7.16 208 176 170 3% 40 45 0.3 ARsana x 0.5% *Indicates piles which exceeded the testing equipment's capacity.ALL P/LESDR/VEN WITH A I .126 0.S HAfdMER. Soil resistance was assumed to be 59% at the point and 50% friction distributed uniformly over the embedded length below a depth of 10 ft.15.120 0." PAGE TWENTY-FOUR .500 F % LBS.093 0.252 Belleville 3 0. J(side) = 0. BORING B C E I R2 R4 R5 R6 R9 R 12 R20 R23 8 LOOSE SANDY CLAYEY SILT MEDIUM DENSE F I N E TO MEDIUM SAND 10 MEDIUM 2 TO DENSE I: FINE Rt TO COARSE SAND WITH TRACE GRAVEL NOTE.16 0.3. cated Test ance a t Soil % Error Load Resist.

both determined after setup has ceased.A t : 1 / 5 W SECDND on the side and at the point of the pile will also affect IOENTICL RESULTS WERE LEAtNED FOR THE FOLLOWING VALUES OF A I the magnitude of the stresses in the pile. ~ a similar co..1 for sand. [ Ri X J (point) i 1 (7.3 to be approxi- mately -+SO %. AND 1/20. It is assumed that the pile is prismatic For the purpose of correlation.6. The accuracy of the correlation. as shown in Figure 7. shows that the magnitude of the stress induced at the head of the pile.1) where Ri = the ratio of the amount of resistance of each type of soil "i".1 Introduction numerical solution by comparing its results with the theoretical solution of Appendix A and with field data. data from Fig. Chapter V discusses the generation of stress waves in piling. Wave equation ultimate r e s i s t a m us test these piles fall within -t20% of that predicted by the load failure (after Ref. square in cross-section.3 shows the damping constant that was calculated from Equation 7. The accuracy of -a I the correlation is shown in Figure 7. In Appendix A the exact solution for the stress wave introduced into a long slender elastic pile is de- rived using the classical one-dimensional wave equation. the damping constants J(point) = 0. CHAPTER VIII Prediction of Driving Stresses 8. and the ram has material is assumed to be 5 x lo6 psi. with an area of 489 in.5) (sands). 1/1QD00. Maximum tensile stress along the pile.TONS piles tested.1 using J ( ~ o i n t 1= 0.2 Comparison of Smith's Numerical The solution of this equation depends upon certain Solution with the Classical Solution assumptions. by the falling ram. No side resistance is present.2. DISTANCE FROM HEAD OF PlLE IN FEET This chapter demonstrates the validity of Smith's Figure 8. M o ~ l e has ~ ~ found . is directly proportional to the velocity of the ram at im- pact. The equation further shows that the stiffnesses of the cushion and pile also have a significant effect on the 0---A1 :1 1 1 4 0 SECOND : ( ~ l l c r magnitude of the stress generated.rrelation with 12 piles driven in sand. I/Y)OO.. that the' pile and and 90 ft long.6 shows that all resistances on Figure 7. Figure 7.5 is a summary of the TEST LOAD FAILURE .4 was approximately k25%. to the-total soil resistance. The pile is con- infinite rigidity (assumed to be a rigid body). PAGE TWENTY-FIVE . 7. The soil resistance 0---A1 :I / W 0 0 SECOND A . practical cases. The modulus of elasticity of the pile cushion material are linearly elastic.2 (Poisson's effects can be neglected).1.000 SECOND A L :PILE LENGTHAO Chapter I1 discusses Smith's numerical solution of the one-dimensional wave equation. the significance of material damping in the pile and the effects of pile 3 X 9 1000 0 HEAD ff PILE [FREE) 10 20 30 40 50 POINT OF PlLE (FIXED) 60 70 80 -90 dimensions on driveability. 8. wave equation. This particular technique for solving the wave equation is much simpler for application to problems which can have inelastic cushions and material properties as well as soil on the side and point of the pile. Figure 7. 7.3 for clay and J (point) = 0. and J' (si-de) = J (point) 3 Table 7. - 3 W NOTE: TEST THOSE FAILURE EVALUATED LOADS ARE BY If more than one soil was involved the damping 0 z EBASCO ' S ENGINEERS constant used was a weighted average calculated from ~ ( ~ o i i= t) C.3 and J' (side) = J ( ~ o i n t/3) gave the best correlation. consider a concrete with lateral dimensions small in comparison to its length pile. The sidered to be free at the top with the bottom end fixed equation which governs the stress amplitude in most rigidly against movement.

000 lb/in. and cushioning materials involved in the The f ~ l l o w i ninformation '~ is also applicable to the cor.930..2. The maximum compressive stresses occurred at the head of the pile. The significant conclusions drawn a from these tests are as follows: 1. and p = mass density of the pile material.' H e i ~ i n and ~~. Other comparisons have been made for the stresses at other points in the pile and for other combinations of the end boundary conditi~ns.e. numerical method using 10 segments. AL = segment length. AND measured in piles during the time of driving in the field. the accuracy of the solution for stresses is im- the one-dimensional wave equation and for Smith's proved by breaking the ram into segments. and elastic moduli are usually involved.^. Maximum tensile stresses were found to occur near the midpoint of the piles. 1/10.3. ~Chapter 111) that the ram Coefficient of restitution of a pile hammer can be idealized as a rigid body pro- of the cushion block = 1. E .000 seconds. - Figure 8." appears suitable since inelastic springs. Figures 8.00 vided it strikes on a capblock or cushion.1 and 8. respectively. At = critical. It has been s h o ~ n (see ~ . 8 3000 ures 8.At' 1 1 2 5 0 0 SECOND :l A l l c r In previous report^^.= modulus of elasticity. POINT OF PlLE (FIXED) \ 2.~.000 SECOND a A L : PILE Lm(iTH/Io Typical examples of these correlations are shown in Fig.. Maximum compressive stress along the pile.3 and 8.45 fps Simulation Method Cushion block stiffness = 3. problem.2 show comparisons of the maximum tensile stress and maximum compres- sive stress.. Note the time interval used (time differenc- ing interval used in the numerical solution) for solutions shown is varied from 1/1410 seconds (this is the critical time differencing interval) to 1/20.l had shown that segment lengths of L/10 would yield accurate results. If the ram strikes directly on steel.3 Correlations of Smith's Solution Z with Field Measurements 500f --EXACT W LT O-'AI: 1/1410 SECOND =. 1/5000 seconds.000.4. The computed compressive stresses and dis- placements agree very well with the measured data. PAGE TWENTY-SIX . I M e a s u r e d Stress I This time interval is the "critical" time interval. 4. i. a choice of At = one-half the "critical value. For practical problems. versus position along the length of the pile.4 Effect of Hammer Type and Velocity of the ram = 14. Note also that the numerical solution is very close to the exact solution. the writers have shown IDENTICAL RESULTS WERE OBTAINED several correlations of the wave equation with stresses FOR THE FOLLOWWG VALUES OF A1 VZ500. 1/20. as in the case of the diesel ham- Solutions have been obtained for the exact solution of mers. 0 0 I 10 I 20 I 30 DISTANCE FROM HEAD OF I 40 I 50 I 60 I 70 PlLE IN FEET I 80 1 90 3. time differencing interval.500 lb. Stress i n pile head us time for test pile. The computed tensile stresses appeared high but in view of the unknown dynamic properties of the soil. Note that when the differencing interval became very small.. concrete. Previous studies8.~ have shown that the discrete-element numerical solution is an exact solu- tion of the one-dimensional wave equation when where. TIME IN SECONDS ! materials of different densities. the accuracy of the solution was not improved. 1/5000. Figure 8. 8. 8. Weight of the ram = 11. the quantitative comparisons shown were con- relation : sidered good.

to the ram velocity. cross-sectional area of cushion (in. Stress a.2). but is parabolic. it is best to vary the distribution over the expected range and choose the E = modulus of elasticity of pile (psi).). If soil borings are available. 8. K = cushion stiffness (Ib/in. t. The head (psi). 8. Insufficient cushioning material between the pile ---. and Pile Material Damping It has been s h o ~ n (see ~ . the distribution of the 386 in. is particularly true for the reflected tensile stresses. soil resistance on the pile should be estimated from soil shear strength data. If the pile is idealized as a long elastic rod. hesive soils will have the soil resistance distributed . However.Computed Stress driving ram and the pile will result in a very high com- . the explosive force used to approximate equations for the maximum compressive raise the hammer for the next blow does work on the stress at the pile head are as follows: pile and should be included. 2. 40% in side friction and 60% of the total resistance at the point..Ac Ec uniformly in side friction with about 10 to 20% point -- tc resistance. Compressive Stresses. Tables B./sec) . The For diesel hammers. piles in uniform co.7 Fundamental Driving Stress Considerations The purpose of this discussion is to briefly describe and discuss the phenomena of impact stresses during driving.t mid-length of pile vs time for test tional. High compressive stress at the head of the pile can be caused by the following: LEGEND 1. Notations used are: I n all hammer simulations. ~ Chapter IV) that the actual load deformation curve for a cushion is not a straight line. In - A .cross-sectional area of pile (in. - recommended values for use in the simulation.5 Effect of Soil Resistance g = acceleration due to gavity.)./sec2. = V2gh. that the soil distribution will affect the magnitude of the driving stresses. most conservative result. depend on the properties of the soils. highest when the soil resistance acting at the pile point L. The cushion's dynamic coefficient of restitution was found to agree with com- monly recommended values.4. is small. pile length.Measured Stress pressive stress on impact. however. all parts which are in c0max = maximum compressive stress at pile the force transmission chain should be included. course. or from a very high drop. W = ram weight (lb). of EC = modulus of elasticity of cushion (psi). pile. It is cushion (in.3). The actual dis:ributions used will. Refer to Appendix B. h = ram free fall (in. = initial uncompressed thickness of type. for V = ram irnpact velocity (in. Reflected tensile stresses are = length of pile (in. etc.). PAGE TWENTY-SEVEN . and should be studied for each case. Y = unit weight of pile (lb/in. When a pile is struck 'by a ram at a very high velocity.6 Effects of Cushion Stiffness. 8. This t = time (sec). In general. with an elastic cushion on top an equation for the compres- sive stress can be developed (see Appendix A).) . important to note. a stress wave of high magnitude is produced.2). most investigations for driving stresses. Coefficient of Restitution. This stress is directly propor- Figure 8. housing and other parts which do not serve to transmit the driving energy may be neglected. It has also been shown that the effect of internal damping in the concrete and steel piles will usually have a negligible effect on the driving stresses.l and B. Cohesionless soils can generally be simu- lated with a triangular friction distribution with about A.2. a straight line which has a slope given by the secant modulus will give reasonably accurate results.

Tables 8. Lack of adequate spiral reinforcing at the head of a concrete pile and also at the pile point may lead Green oak cushion. Result from Equation 8. grain horizontal A. ram velocity V. Table 8. = VP" n2 L (8-1) tan (t Vp" n2) where t is found from the expression tan (t d p" nn") = V p2 . a. n>p 3 X 106 X 167 e-244 x .p2) = n tion of the driving stress (compressive) with the ram weight and ram velocity. and 3 in.600 psi 5.2" or 1.000 3. The ram impact force may be transmitted to y = 0.1 shows the varia- tanh ( t V n 2 . n<p -KV e-nt Since n < p Equation 8.00255 .830 psi 3. = 45. ft W = 5000 lb h = 3 6 in.540 psi 2.00255 sec Using Equation 8.3) where t is found from the expression Using these equations. at the pile head. max = sin ( t V p 2 .790 psi 2. (8. or (8.085 radians t = . 200 in. When the top of the pile is not perpendicular T o illustrate the use of the equations consider the to the longitudinal axis of the pile. TABLE 8.000 psi. determine the maximum compressive stress at the pile this is usually not of serious consequence. It can be seen that the stress Equations (8. For most practical pile problems n will be less shows the variation of driving stress (compression) than p and Equation (8. .1) will be used.000 1.p2 velocity on driving stresses.380 psi 3.200 ~ s i2.00 x lo6 psi 5.840 psi 5.n2 = 62.2 E.480 psi g = 386 in.0868 lb/in.000 2. (sin 62. and cushion stiffness K so energy with a heavy ram and short stroke than use a as not to exceed a given allowable compressive stress light ram and large stroke. E. Calculations : Case I.2 head. = 45. .000 2.1 of Case I applies. . For a given pile these equations driving energy the driving stress decreases as the ram can be used twdetermine a desirable combination of ram weight increases.0 in.000 psi (for properties of wood see Chap. At a constant is not always the case./sec 10. Therefore. however. = 200 in. a. Given : Concrete Pile 4. the ram impacting following situation.920 psi 3. 3. However. - Steel ram Ram Weight Ram Velocitv. it is better to obtain driving weight W.000 psi 4. VARIATION OF DRIVING STRESS WITH ter IV) RAM WEIGHT AND VELOCITY t. max = 2920 psi (8.2") KV e-nt 200 X 425 uomax = . wood cushion.2 were developed to illustrate the effect of ram weight and V n 2 .1 and 8.1. force will be eccentric and may cause very high stress concentrations. Stress- es shown are maximum compression a t pile head. high stress concen- I&.1 -KV e-llt a. 2. = 65 ft trations may result in the concrete adjacent to the rein- A = 200 in.3 (150 lb/ft3) the concrete through the projecting reinforcing steel.' area.470 psi 4.2).1 for 65 f t long concrete pile. = 3. this with ram weight and ram driving energy. max = sin ( t Vp' .2 forcing.780 psi V = ~ 2 g h= 167 in.n2) A . Table 8.150 psi PAGE TWENTY-EIGHT .3) can be used to magnitude also increases with ram weight.n2) L 2 A VpLn2 Case III.380 psi 2./sec2 20. E = 5. .980 psi 4. If the reinforcing steel in a concrete pile is not cut flush with the end of the pile. ft/sec-Stroke. y s i n h (t V n" p2 ) A Vn2 -p.250 psi 3.1).n2 n so t dp2.

290 psi 3.6(a).) can be deter- mined by Equations 8.2. For Case Results from Equation 8. I t may occur in the upper end. When a pile driver ram strikes the head of a pile or the cushion on top. the com- areas. E = modulus of elasticity of the pile material in psi. TABLE 8. If the point of on impact of the ram. I (when n < p which is typical for most practical con- es shown are maximum compression a t pile head. This compressive stress travels down the pile at a velocity where c = velocity of the stress wave through the pile material in in.000 psi.) will depend on the length of time (t.1. = length of stress wave (in. Stress.) the ram is in contact with the cushion or pile head.380 psi 4. = 45. If the top edges and corners of a concrete pile soil. and 3 in. = ct. the pile is completely free. In prestressed concrete piles building up while the ram is in contact with the cushion.6(a) these two of the pile can be caused by extremely hard driving waves may overlap each other.000 3. and transverse tensile stresses are present.000 ft/sec) the length of the stress wave (L. and stiffness of the pile. When the compressive stress wave reaches the point of the pile.2. It can occur when driving in a very soft soil or when the driving resistance is extremely hard or rigid at the point such as in bearing on solid rock.5. split on impact of the ram./sec.2). midlength. a compressive stress is produced at the head of the pile.780 psi where L.' area. If a ram strikes a thick soft cush.~ The intensity of the stress wave (a. and p = mass density of the pile material in lb- se~~/in. be calculated by the equation which follows. the pile is experiencing 1it:le or no resistance from the 7. anchorage of the strands is being developed in these After the ram rebounds clear of the cushion. If no pressive stress wave is completely formed and travels spiral reinforcing is used. or 8.3 and depends on the weight of the ram. the pile head may zpall or down the length of the pile as shown by Figure 8. PAGE T W E N N .) and 10. Figure 8. 8.) stress Compressive stress under such driving conditions can be twice the magnitude of that produced at the head of + wave and reflected tensile ( ) stress wave.680' psi 5. stiffness of the cushion. As shown in Figure 8.000 4. 200 in. it will also stay in contact for a longer period of RAM WEIGHT AND RAM ENERGY time than when it strikes a thin hard cushion. strikes cushion at head of concrete pile.830 psi 4. Whether the pile by the hammer impact (see Figure 8. Idealized stress wave produced when r a n a longer stress wave. velocity of the ram.ws at a very high stress level. Transverse cracking of a concrete pile due to a reflected tensile stress wave is a complex phe- nomenon usually occurring in long piles (50 ft or over). wood cushion. max. This type resistance may be ticular point on the pile at a par:icular time will be the encountered when founding the pile point on bed rock. If the point of large number of blo. Tension. A COMPRESSION COMPRESSIW heavy ram will stay in contact with the cushion or pile head for a longer time than a light ram.5(b) shows the compressive stress wave to spalling or splitting.lb or 20.250 psi t.5 (c) .000 2.000 to 15.000 2. Since in a given concrete pile the stress wave tradels at a constant veiocity (about 13. lb f t .N I N E . it will be reflected back up the pile in some 6. VARIATION OF DRIVING STRESS WITH ion. or lower end of the pile.000 40. the reflected tensile wave will be of the same magnitude and length as the initial com- Yielding of steel or spalling of concrete at the poin.1 for 65 f t long concrete pile. pressive wave.000 psi 20.000 2. crete pile conditions) the length of the stress wave can E. = time of contact of ram (sec). it will be reflected back up the pile as a tensile are not chamfered the edges or corners are likely to spa11 stress wave as shown in Figure 8.010 psi 5. Fatigue of the pile material can be caused by a manner depending on the soil resistance. The net stress at a par- resistance at the point. thus producing figure 8.. algebraic sum of the initial compressive ( . Ram Weight Driving Energy L.

) stress wave from the point of a relatively tu -u -0 . they tend to cancel each other and critical tension is not likely to occur. It is possible for critical tensile stress to occur near the pile head in this case.) stress wave and the reflected compressive (.puted approximately by Equations 8.) stress wave.) stress wave is being reflected critical tensile stresses may occur at certain points. and crt max./L. the reflected compres- sive stress wave will be on the same magnitude and length as the initial compressive stress wave. = (I-rg/LD) when L. the stress wave may be around 150 ft in length.) can be com- . A similar phenomenon will occur when the reflected compressive ( -) stress wave from the point or not the pile will ever experience critical tensile stresses is likely to find the ram still in contact with the pile head will depend on the pile length ( L ) relative to the length when it arrives there. Such failures have occurred. Figure 8. If the point of the pile is fixed from movement. Reflection of stress wave on a long pile.7. If flected tensile stress wave will occur.7(a) the reflected tensile (A) (B) + ( ) stress wave overlaps the initial compressive (. max. as shown in Figure 8. the initial compressive stress wave traveling down the pile will be reflected back up the pile also as a compressive stress wave. is affected by cr.5 and 8. If the pile is short compared to the length TENSION COMPRESSION COMPRESSION of the stress wave (L.) and on material damping. In Figure 8. The data points shown were computed using stress wave theory (Ap.) Tensile stress will not occur here until the compressive stress wave is reflected from the free head of the pile back down the pile as a tensile stress wave (similar to the reflection shown at the free point in Figure 8. crt max.7(b) t h e pile is long compared to the length of the stress wave. the length of the stress (A (B wave L. P A G E THIRTY . and the length of the pile b. rnax. the initial compressive ( . Figure 8. = a.. The net compressive stress at a particular point at a particular time will be the algebraic sum of the initial compressive ( . When a heavy ram strikes a thick soft cushion.7 shows the reflection of the initial com- pressive ( .6(a) ). Since the net stress Figure 8. (8. In Figure 8. at any point is the algebraic sum of the two. In such a case. The results of a theoretical study on ideal piles with the point free of soil resistance has shown that the maximum reflected tensile stress ( a t rnax. As shown in Figure 8.6 given below. little or no re- of the stress wave (L. If the point soil resistance is hard or very firm. max.) stress wave coming down the pile. pendix A ) and piles with a free point. Reflection of stress wave along a short pile. u short pile. (Note that under these conditions the maximum compressive stress at the pile point can be twice that at the pile head by ram impact.6(b) these two stress waves may overlap each other at certain points. These values are conservative since material damping of the pile and soil resistance will tend to reduce them.) critical tensile stresses are not POINT FREE POINT FIXED likely to occur. When a light ram strikes a thin hard cushion it may be only 50 or 60 ft in length. however.6(b).8 shows in dimensionless parameters how POINT FREE POINT FIXED at max.. damping characteristics of the surround- ing soil may reduce the magnitude of this reflected tensile stress wave by this time.5) when L/& 5 2 8 a. 12 to -u -u -u TENSION COMPRESSION COMPRESSION Figure 8. however.6.

In this case also. A. When it begins to become crete piles to resist reflected tensile stresses. severe crack. 3. ensure that the pile point is well seated tion on the embedded portion of the pile. the point of long piles. Ensure that the pile driving helmet or cap fits 8.6). If pre-drilling or jetting is permitted in placing pile. . driving longer concrete piles in very soft soil. 5 '. ' 0 40'PILE P: The cases illustrated by Figures 8. when the point occur during driving and they combine with diagonal of the pile is free of resistance. For concrete piles 8. critical tensile stress.7 are high._ concrete pile.. from the fixed point also as a compressive (-) stress wave. or from a very high drop. practices for piles and particularly for concrete piles can be summarized as follows: 7. concrete piles. tensile cracking of con. However. Driving stresses can be reduced by using a es may occur in the lower half or near rnid-length of heavy ram with a low impact velocity (short stroke) to the pile. This is very effective when driving long con- cause pile failure. the maximum tensile tensile stress due to torsion the situation can become stress can be determined approximately by using E ~ ~ ~ - even more critical.8 Summary of Fundamental Driving loosely around ~ i l top e so that the pile may rotate slightly Stress Considerations without binding within the driving head to prevent torsional stress. Ensure that the pile is straight and not cambered. pine or fir plywood. Driving and jetting of concrete 2.D I L ~ I L ~ ) ~ in concrete piles. When insufficient cushioning material is used * a ' . When a pile is struck by a ram at a very high Figure 8. Excessive restraint of the pile in the leads and piles should not be done simultaneously. or (8. Use adequate cushioning material between the pile driver's ram and the pile head. 2. the cushion is too low to resist a reflected tensile stress. may have to be replaced several times during driving of ing can occur. by the following: 1. When the tensile sbren@h of the concrete pile every pile. but they skould indicate some fl 90mPILE (TT MAX of the basic factors which can cause tensile stress failures b" A. adequate for short (50 ft or less) piles with reasonably 9. Chamfer top and bottom edges and comers of placed. (8. A ' A 0 0 1.) may be prevent their direct loading by the ram sthke. Antici- piles can be caused by a combination of torsion and pate soft driving or at the first sign of easy driving reflected tensile stress. 1. a single pile. high magnitude is produced. The 10. tions (8. it should be re. a stress wave of tensile stress for Pile with point free. Torsion on the pile may be caused. with reasonable soil resistance at the point before full driving energy is used. Some specifications require a new cushion on concrete ~ i l e sto reduce tendency of concrete to spaU. Driving 5. rotation of the leads. --- between the pile driver's steel helmet or cap and the . Reduce the ram velocity or stroke during early Torsion. When little or no soil resistance at the point of long piles is present during driving. reflected from the pile head. X A 65'PILE \a ly idealized and simplified. Ensure that the top of the pile is square or perpendicular to the longitudinal axis of the pile.r O5 A\\ o Crete piles can be caused by the following: b+ I A\ .2).1). The stress is proportional to the ram velocity. In summary.5) or (8. 3. Use adequate amount of prestress in re stressed wood cushioning material should be placed on top of the pile with the grain horizontal and inspected to see concrete piles or reinforcement in ordinary precast con- +hat it is in good condition. little or no reflected tensile 10 ---------->-- stress will occur. 2. preventing it from rotating slightly due to soil ac. critical tensile stresses may occur maximum compressive stress can be determined in the 'PPer -of 'he pile when the tensile stress is approximately by Equations (8. High flexural stresses may result during driving of a These fundamentals for good design and driving crooked pile. highly compressed. From the preceding discussion some very basic and fundamental considerations have been revealed. The helmet or pile cap fitting too tightly on the 4. etc.6 and 8. Cut ends of prestressing or reinforcing steel in three or four inches of wood cushioning material concrete piles flush with the end of the pile head to (qreen oak. Use adequate spiral reinforcing at the head and good point soil resistances.3). obtain the desired driving energy rather than a light ram with a high impact velocity (large stroke). gum. Six to eight inches or more tip concrete piles to reduce tendency of pile to split of wood cushioning material may be required when or spall. if reflected tensile stresses crete piles through very soft soil layers. charred or burned. Diagonal tensile stress resulting reduce the ram velocity or stroke to avoid critical tensile from a twisting moment applied to the pile can by itself stresses. 6. 4. Or transverse cracking of concrete driving when light soil resistance is encountered. P A G E THIRTY-ONE . If driving is extremely hard. both characteristics being L s / L ~ undesirable. 5. When hard driving resistance is encountered at stresses are proportional to he ram impact velocity. E f f e c t o f ratio o f stress wame length o n velocity. Use of an adequate cushion is usually a very economical means of controlling driving stresses. 11.8. a stress wave of high magnitude and of o 0 2 3 4 short length is produced.

~ used tive drop and the mechanical efficiency of the wave equation to investigate the characteristics of the hammer. specifically the dis. drive a given pile to a specified soil resistance. driving limit versus the design load capacity as shown in chanical conditioning effects caused by Figure 9. By generating an ultimate soil resistance. damping constant of the soil at the point. distribution of point and side frictional assembly. hammer-soil system was (2) The pile held constant and the soil damping values were varied.1 Introduction (3) The soil The wave equation can be used effectively to evalu. lIn that report. This study yielded representative values of the soil damping c. Figures (1) The pile driving hammer 9. McClelland. Focht. For exam- ple: the determination of the optimum pile driver to c.3 ( a ) ) . This study was oriented toward provid- ing information on the effects of ram weight and energy. the length of the pile. soil in side friction. the behavior of a pile during driving. For example.2 Significant Parameters graphically.2 show representative curves from this study. the stiffness of the capblock. were the pile length above the mud line. CHAPTER IX Use of the Wave Equation for Parameter Studies 9. a. soil quake in side friction. when the ratio of point soil resistance to total resistance f. shore construction. affect the behavior of a pile during driving are as and distribution of soil resistance on the driving be- follows : havior of representative square concrete piles. and the ratio of the soil resistance at the pile point to the d. stiffness to make the most efficient utilization of a speci- fied pile hammer and driving assembly to drive a spe- cific pile. lar pile installation be known. Figure 9. stiffness and weight of the pile driver's part in formulating recommended driving practices for ram. prestressed concrete b. cross sectional area. d. (see Figure 9.3 (b) shows the re- repeated blows of the hammer. the determination of the pile stiffness which will yield the d. pile penetration.106 problems are presented 9. The parameters varied in this study sive force. The parameters which are known to significantly stiffness of cushion blocks. from a full-scale field test pile (see Figure 9.3 (c) is for the same pile. length of pile. and me. soil resistance. curve the appropriate soil damping b. The results of pendent upon its mechanical properties.4 the writers used the affects the magnitude of the stresses which wave equation to determine the soil damping values for are generated. soil quake at the point. The results of this study have played a very significant a. the results of 2.3 (d) gives the results cushion is usually omitted. the weight of the pile.5). In the case of steel piles the bedded length varied. most efficient use of a specified pile hammer and cushion e. several PAGE THIRTY-TWO . available pile hammers for obtaining pile penetrations c.4 ( a ) and ( b ) . and penetration per blow. others. total soil resistance. block and cushion influence the shape of the wave induced in the pile and hence In Research Report 33-109. In this particu- lar parameter study the pile.3 Examples of Parameter Studies butions of soil side and point resistance on the pile bear- ing capacity. various soils encountered in field tests. Fisure 9. the energy of the falling ram which is Parameter studies of this type have been used by dependent upon the ram weight. constants for the soil at the point of the pile and the tribution of the weight. but ness of the cushion between the helmet and with the unembedded length held constant and the em- the pile. and E m r i ~ h ~have . the determination of the optimum cushion resistance. versus blows/in. driving stresses. The most notable parameter study which has been reported to date is that presented by H i r ~ c h . the effec. the weight of the pile helmet and the stiff- held constant. 9. which is de. the stiffness of the pile which is a function properties could be determined by comparing the com- of its cross sectional area and the modulus puter generated solution with the measured data taken of elasticity of the pile material. ~ . in the case of a diesel hammer. Figure 9. this study enabled the authors to determine the pile thickness. and to determine the effects of various distri. the existence of physical joints in the pile It is not necessary that all parameters for a particu- which cannot transmit tension. the weight sufficient to support the heavy loads required in off- of the anvil and the impulse of the explo. the coefficient of restitution of the cap. sults of one study to determine the effects of varying the unembedded portion of a pile whose total length was e. damping constant of the soil in friction.1 and 9. is varied. Ru (total) a. ate the effects of the numerous parameters which affect b.

'PAGE THIRTY-THREE .

P A G E THIRTY-FOUR .

( m a x ) . V) Z 9.15 DESIGN CAPACITY ' L2 = 290' W 0 I" (QUAKE) REQUIRED 4 8 " DIAM.4. 9.tions i n pile penetra. These under varying conditions : ( A ) computer inpa? repre.1 z J(p)=0.2 0 HAMMER 20 40 60 1 80 0 0 .. 48"DIAM 4 8 " DIAM 0 0 0 .3). Ll = 320' LI :3 2 0 .te capacity of 2000 tons: ( A ) summary of wave equation analysis (Fig.3. R. 6 0 VISCOUS DAMPING s a c / f t : SIDE. of the effect of ram elasticity and in the correlation and R.. of this type were conducted by the in studies tion.. Blom/inch us..3 - 0 I- LOAD TEST 340 KIPS I I I I 0 I A 1~2 1'6 d0 4 2's 3!2 J6 BLOWS / I N C H Figure 9. Evaluation of 0-20 hcmmer (60. PAGE THIRTY-FIVE . R.3) estcllblishing approximate p& driving limit. Parameter studies length above ground. 9. i o M 5 HAMMER EFFICIENCY :8 0 % ALUMINUM -MICARTA CUSHION BLOCK.000 ft-16) Rp /R" = 5% 20% 75% for driving to develop uLtima. 1000 - " cn 800 . ( C ) vcriu.d k. (to&) fo~r Arkansas load test pile 4. problems can be solved in which the unknown parameter ness i n overcoming soil resistance. (max) with required Rp /R" = 5% L2 :z oo design capacity (from Ref. 0 20 40 60 80 R p = END RESISTANCE BLOWS PER INCH IRu = TOTAL RESISTANCE) '0 20 40 60 BO BLWS PER INCH (A (6) (A) (8) Figure 9.. J' = o .3). analysis of the Michigan pile data. J =0. when driving pile is varied between the upper and lower limits.2 & A J(P)= 0. ( B ) variations i n pile amount of engineering judgement. ( D ) variations in distribution of soil resistance. ASSUMED CON~I~IONS 6 0. o ~ REQUIRED : END..2 0 HAMMER 0 20 40 €0 80 BLOWS PER INCH BLOWS PER INCH (C (D) Figure 9.5. e :0 . (from Ref. Computer analysis of pik hammer effective. J(p)=o d 0 P a Y m- n J ( ~ ) =0. ( B ) comparison of R. R. limits can usually be established with a reasonable senting conditions of problem.

Instead. helmet. anvil. A thorough discussion of the significant parameters pile. cushion block. and 60% for single acting 9. The writers feel that 60% was un. a simple equation relating energy output for determine cushion stiffness. An efficiency of 80% is believed to be more typical for the single acting 10. hammer. However. steel on steel impact does properties in this report. numerical solution of the wave equation proposed by Smith were indeed encouraging. It was found that the two dynamic testing methods 2. From piling behavior. cushion. and finally static tests. of the cushion could be idealized by a straight line hav- The efficiencies determined during the course of this ing a slope based on the secant modulus of elasticity of investigation were 100% for diesel hammers. and 8. It was determined that for the cases in. slender steel piles. dence for the analysis of pile driving problems. Extensive correlation and research has and is being conducted by By using this method of analysis. and in this case. is relatively impractical. The effect of internal damping in concrete and P A G E THIRTY-SIX . especially regarding the in- creased permanent set per blow claimed by the manu- involved in pile driving has been presented in this report. and soil resistance. Comparisons between field test results and the to be extremely accurate. driving assemblies (capblock. helmet. Typical properties are presented in This equation is Chapter IV. linearly related to compression. a conservative solution for driving stresses and pile. facturer. characteristics of the hammer. petroleum companies. and its use hammers and closed end diesel hammers). the wave 11. The Among the more significant were the comparisons with wave equation can be used to predict impact stresses in the Michigan pile study which dealt almost exclusively a pile during driving and can also be used to estimate with extremely long. the dynamic curves during the determining the energy output for pile driving hammers loading of the specimens were almost identical to the can be used. many contractors. To date. These included actual full- occur. etc. Three methods were used to determine cushion the case of diesel hammers. E = (WR) ( h ) (e) 7. The dynamic coefficient of restitution for the steam hammers. the effects of sig. area for the Texas Highway Depar~ment. Static tests can be used to vestigated. For this reason. Comparisons with the Michigan pile study indi. but not for the coefficient both diesel and steam hammers gave accurate results. the results of laboratory experiments. maximum driving stresses and had been placed on a concrete pedestal atop a large point displacements may be reduced as much as 20%. the numerical solu- tion to the wave equation proposed by Smith was found 3. equation has been compared with the results of thousands sional wave equation can be used with reasonable confi. and other hammers in which steel on steel impact between the ram and anvil is not present. 87% for the material. can be selected to correct or avoid expensive and time consuming construction problems such as excessive driv. When the elasticity of the which a ram was dropped on the cushion specimen which ram is accounted for. type and size of pile. in 6. In general. tests performed using a cushion test stand in and permanent set results. if the elasticity of the ram is scale cushion tests dynamically loaded between a ram disregarded. However. corresponding static curves. It was also found cated that a relatively simple yet accurate method of that for a given material. their selection should such an analysis appropriate piles and driving equipment be carefully considered and analyzed whenever possible. When the wave equation was compared with steam hammer. The elasticity of the ram was found to have a explosive pressure does not have a large effect on the negligible effect on the solution in the case of steam. The driving accessories significantly affect the be evaluated during the foundation design stage. pile penetration per blow. h = actual observed total ram stroke (or the use of the exact load-deformation curve for the cushion equivalent stroke for double acting steam is both time consuming and cumbersome. concrete base embedded in the floor. when the driving resistance is large Some of the significant conclusions are as follows: (which is usually the case near the end of driving) the 1. and others in- nificant parameters such as type and size of pile driving terested in the economical design of pile foundations. The effect of explosive pressure in diesel ham- ing stresses or pile breakage and inadequate equipment mers varies greatly depending on the condition and to achieve desired penetration or bearing capacity. of actual field tests performed throughout the country. of restitution. 5. not recommend it as a typical value. the curve is closely parabolic during the loading phase. drop. cushion materials studied herein were found to agree usually low for the single acting hammer and would generally with commonly recommended values. used yielded almost identical results. and soil condition can 4. It was shown in Chapter IV that the stress-strain where diagrams for the material used as cushions are not WR = ram weight. a wide variety the static soil resistance on a pile at the time of driving of prestressed concrete piles driven in the Gulf Coast from driving records. It was found that the load-deformation diagram e = efficiency of the hammer in question. double acting steam hammers.). CHAPTER X Summary and Conclusions The numerical computer solution of the one dimen.

fects which might be of importance. engineers 12. it was found "relaxation" which is a function of time. if necessary. and size or type of pile. Before long- counted for by the wave equation. The effect of pile dimensions on ability to must consider the effect of soil "setup" or possible soil drive the pile varied greatly. although. the greater soil resistance to condition. and other time ef- penetration it can overcome. term bearing capacity can be extrapolated from this soil resistance at the time of driving. it can be accurately ac. 13. resistance on a pile at the time of driving. In general. soil type and that the stiffer the pile. The wave equation can be used to estimate soil ied. PAGE THIRTY-SEVEN . however.steel piles was found to be negligible for the cases stud.

W the ram weight.. but only since 1960 t = time. P = force exerted between the head of the pile and the cushion. in the pile during driving. .u. when Smith1 h d a p t e d the general theory of stress wave Figure A1 demonstrates the variables mentioned above. The sum of the forces on the hammer are given by where - c = the stress wave velocity = E/p . The falling ram first strikes the cushion which in turn applies a force to the head of the pile. and W = Mg Considering the ram as being infinitely stiff. Unlike a number of other approaches to the prob- lem. Assuming the cushion to be linearly elastic. Therefore. it can often prove to be an expensive method of u = f(x + ct) + f1(x . z. it is the purpose of this Appendix From this solution. then the cushion compression is given by: Cushion compression = P/K. T- This equation can now be written in the form where U - g . M = the ram mass. where p = the mass density of the pile. and The study of the behavior of piling has received considerable attention in the past. propagation to pile driving problems. Further. wave theory does not involve a formula in the The negative sign is used to denote compressive stress. Cushion compression = z . driving ram and the head of the pile in order to reduce the impact stresses in the pile (Figure A2). X Figure A.ct) sdution. Smith's method utilized a or f ( x . Usually an elastic cushion is placed between the pile dimensional wave equation. Elastic Pile A1 Introduction u = the longitudinal displacement of a point on the pile in the X-direction. with a spring constant of K lb per in. usual sense.ct) is a solution to the above differential high-speed electronic digital computer to generate the equation. and the displacement of the Long slender head of the pile u. APPENDIX A Development of Equations for Impact Stresses in a Long. and z = displacement of the ram. was it possible to accurately determine the magnitudes of stress induced It has been shown that any function f ( x +ct). one.I. the displacement of the ram. it can be shown that to develop a series of equations from which a solution to a limited number of piles can be obtained without the use or expense of a computer.acceleration due to gravity. P A G E THIRTY-EIGHT . the general solution is given by solution. where A2 One Dimensional Wave Equation u = the stress in the pile. defines the total compression in the elastic pile cushion at any time. and while the calculations involved are sim- ple. but rather is based on the classical. i t = time. E = the modulus of elasticity of the pile material. Therefore. Slender. Therefore.

-- AE -duo AE d3u0 termined as follows: c dt . at t = 0 we find that z = v and U. KVc where v. = - AE uo = the stress at the pile head. A3 Boundary Conditions In order to satisfy the boundary conditions. 13) A. where A is the cross-sectional A KVc area of the pile. it is seen that v. From Differentiating Equation A. V = velocity of Ram at impact du Since V. Vh -t 2nVh + p2V1.u. we find Differentiating this equation with respect to time. = cKMg - AE (A. = the displacement of the pile head. and In summary. dt + KV.V.lO) which is the basic differential equation to be solved.2. l l and A.) Combining Equation A. are given by Equations A . we note that P = -.8 into Equation Vp . = - AE A4 Solving the Basic Differential Equation Differentiating Equation A.. we see that at t = 0. is the velocity of I dt the head of the pile.10 is obtained by combining the homogeneous solution Vh.4 gives and P = K V a t t = O AE From Equation A.1 ( b ) it follows that Therefore. at time t = 0.-AE (A. it is found that R a m (mass M. the boundary conditions at time t = 0 u.5 yields The homogeneous solution to Equation A. = O at time t = 0.9 may be rewritten in the following form: Md2Vo dt2 + -McK - AE dV.. is equal to -2. we find P =K (z .14) PAGE THIRTY-NINE . = 0 (A.2 and A. and the articular solution Vp.7.. where V is the initial ram velocity and the dotted quanti- ties denote differentiation with respect to time. where V. =0 Figure A.cMg Substituting Equations A.7 and A. it is necessary to set V. P Since uoequals ..12.3.7 twice with respect to time The general solution of the differential Equation gives A.10 is de- . weight W ) 7 z Cushion (stiffness K ) Equation A.3 with respect to time Equation A. Further. so that C L Noting Equation A.10 is given by . The particd~arsolution to Equation A.

that Using the boundary condition given by Equation A.14) assumes the form The complete solution for this case is given by Applying the boundary conditions of Equation A.12 to Equation A. we determine C A1 = [KV .n2 A v p 2 .n2 Substituting the required boundary conditions given by . Vo = -ne-nt(Al sin t v p 2 .n2 Three possible variations to this solution will now be considered.n2 PAGE F O R N . we the value of n is less than p.6 gives the final solution for the stress at the head of the pile when By substituting Equation A. l l and A.17 using the values of Al. CASE I ( n < p) The first case is where n is less than p.14 to A.17 results in vo = v.n2 sin t v p 2 .n2 vo = AE v p 2 . yields cKV e-nt sin t v p 2 .19) less than p.ll then becomes Vh = e-nt (A1 sin t v p 2 .n2 + A2 cos t v p 2 .sin t v p- V p 2 .18 into Equation A.12.A 2 v p 2 . When n is + n .n2) Vo = e-nt (A1 + A2 t ) + cMa - AE (A.17 we find case the solution of the homogeneous differential equa- tion (Equation A.lO. obtain m2 + 2 n m + p 2 = 0 q = -KVe-nt sin t v p2 .n2) Equation A .n2 1 and therefore m = -n +_ vn2-p2 (A.n2 +A2 cos t v p 2 .n2 cos t v p 2 .15 into Equation A.19 gives the solution for the stress at the head of the pile at all times after impact. the roots of Equation A.17 are given by where The homogeneous solution to Equation A. as noted above. CASE II ( n = p) Applying the boundary conditions noted by Equations The second case is when n is equal to p in which A. Rewriting Equation A.21) + e-nt (A1 v p 2 .16) + 1. + v. we find .n2) 1 (1.12.n2) And the general solution is given by Equation A.n2 2 .n2 We shall now investigate solutions for this case having the form Substituting Equation A.nMg] AE v p 2 . e-nt (COSt v p 2 .

26) A \/n2 . yields + ct .23. and A.p2) +eWnt(Al v n L p2 cosh t v n 2 .14).nMg) AE Rewriting Equation A. " d&. l l yields that if the last term in each equation is omitted.p2 Equation A.19. p2 vo = e-bt LI A2. the solution of the homogeneous differential equation.p2 + e t V n 2 . (KV . A. assumes the form n = . = .. as given above. we find that Substituting the required boundary conclition given by Equation A.23. as a function of time for the case when n is equal to p. This in turn will allow the maximum PAGE FORTY-ONE . t.p2 (A. Since it is necessary to know the time.12 then gives + -ncMg AE A2=-+ KVc AE V. For this condition.p2 -t uo = .- Mg ( 1 - A A u.p2 + A2 cosh A .26 gives the stress at the head of the + A2 cosh t v n 2 . = v..21. A5 Maximum Compressive Stress at the V.p21 or Vh = e-nt [A1 sinh t \/n2 .nW) e-nt f n sinh t VnLI p2) 2 where Substituting Equation A. Equations A. = e-nt sinh t v n 2 . The general solution then becomes v. = -ne-nt (A1 sinh t v n 2 .nMg) AE J and : 7 Rewriting Equation A. Applying the boundary conditions required by Equation Numerical studies of these equations have shown A .p2) +.6 gives v.26 are required.. little accuracy is lost. at which the maximum stress occurs.(KV . and the expression becomes relatively simple..- AE t V n 2 . When t is equal to 0.p2 + A2 V n 2 . using the values of A1 and KVc .= -t - A (KV .24 gives KVc e-nt Substituting Equation A.p2 sinh t V n 2 .23) gives the compressive stress at the head of the pile. 2A - and v.6 gives -KV U. cMa AE To compute the maximum compressive stress at the pile head.25 into Equation A. CASE III (n > p) 'where The third and final case is where n is greater than p. = e-nt (A1 sinh t V n 2 .19. = AE V=2 sinh t \/n2 . A.p2) C then : A2 = .p2 Head of the Pile + A2 cosh t V n 2 .KVc AE ncMg . given by Equation (A. + v.p2 y = unit weight of pile material Equation (A. and A. = e-nt t V n 2 .22 into Equation A.-nA2 AE + Al v n 2 .p 2 ) ] pile as a function of time in the case where n is greater than p.26 will be differentiated with respect to time and set equal to 0.nMg) e-nt .(KV . Equations A.

l a.E. c. and A.23 and A.19 yields tan ( t v p 2 .29 can be used to determine the maximum compressive stress at the head of the pile. A. is then obtained from - .) V.29 show that the maximum compressive stress at the head of the pile A.26 to establish that For a given pile these equations can be used to when n = p and n > p the stress wave is infinitely long determine the proper combination of ram weight.27) If the last term is again omitted in each of these where t is given by the equation equations. per It would appear that the most efficient way to increase sec2) hammer energy would be by increasing the ram velocity h = the free fall of the ram (in. W. (max) = .29) vP where t is found from the expression The length of the stress wave. A6 Length of the Stress Waue pressive stress are presented: It is known that the magnitude of the reflected stresses in a pile will be a function of the length of the Case I (where n is less than p ) stress wave and the length of the pile.a y = unit weight of the pile (lb per in. - v n 2 . = the modulus of elasticity of the cushion hand. little accuracy is lost and relatively simple expressions are obtained for the stress at the head of the v p 2 . The following notations are again ram velocity. In most practical pile problems. the maximum energy output avail- K = cushion stiffness (lb per in.n2 Case 2 (where n is equal to p ) uo = A vp" n2 (A.p2 (A./sec) = v 2 g h . = the cross-sectional area of the cushion (in.28.) as W increases. to increase driving energy the maximum compres- (psi) sive stress at the head of the pile increases slightly t. V. there is some minimum amount of - V = the ram impact velocity (in. n will be for n < p (A. the stress wave velocity. again at where the value of t was given by Thus.26. driving energy which must be available to drive the A E pile.p2) c = 11- E A v n 2 . However.n2 pile. if the pile driving situation requires that the driving energy be increased. W.n2) although this is not always the case. and A. Equations A. g = acceleration due to gravity (386 in. In order to further simplify the solutions.. The length of -KV this stress wave is easily found from Equations A. = W - V" E = modulus of elasticity of the pile (psi) 2. K. Noting Equation A.27 will most often be used.') will increase ~ r o ~ o r t i o n a l with l v velocitv. Therefore. = cushion thickness (in. used : in order to prevent excessive stresses at the head of the W = the ram weight (lb) pile. and the required cushion stiffness. the fol- lowing approximate equations for the maximum com. In most cases.n2 = n -KV e-nt sin t v p 2 .19. For example. A. t = time (seconds) A = the cross-sectional area of the pile (inO2) K. Similarly use Equations A. y (p2 . L.n2) uo (max) = -.30) Equation A. A.) = able to a drop hammer is given by its kinetic energy t" at the instant of impact.stress to be found. and A. L. A vp2-n (A.27.30 is seen to equal 0 at time t equals 0 and u.p2 tanh t v n L p2 = n Equations A.27.31) less than p. e-nt sin ( t q p2 . On the other I I E. = co PAGE FORTY-TWO . Case 3 (where n is greater than p ) is found to be - uo (max) = -KV e-nt sinh ( t v n 2 . Once the ram weight and its velocity at im- pact have been selected. the spring rate of the cushion ( K ) can be varied to hold tke maximum compressive stress within allowable limits.3) should be equal to or greater than the energy required. and Equation A. It is therefore desirable (considering driving stresses) to increase the ram weight. Omitting the last term in Equation A. the second of these equations gives the duration of the impulse stress.28.23.

Dimensions. cushion. Case I1 -Ram. (in2 E(1) = modulus of elasticity of the capblock. The techniques presented in this section are pacity is the static resistance at the time of general in scope and are presented for illustration. and mechanical prop- erties of the pile.1 for capblock properties. weight. K(2) 2. b ) weight and dimensions of ram. 3. and pile rather than relying only upon experience and judgement. ~(1) . APPENDIX B Wave Equation Computer Program Utilization Manual Bl Introduction the hammer at the specified soil embedment arid soil resistance. Note: See Table 4. PILE SEGMENT. anvil. (lb) expressed as a percentage of the total static soil resistance. W(3) b) distribution of frictional soil resistance Calculations for idealization over the embedded length of the pile W(1) = weight of ram. Case III-Ram. K(1) helmet. 9. The program is valuable in that system parameters ig. The program is formulated to handle drop ham- mers. PILE CAP. pile cap. Where d ) ultimate elastic displacement for the soil on the side and point of pile. cross sectional area of the capblock. a ) embedment of pile. and information is essential: pile (Figure B2). and information for one blow of the pile driver's ram for any specified soil resistance: 3. pile cap. Displacement of the pile (penetration per blow). .(in) on the side and point of the pile. 1. a ) energy and efficiency of hammer. Static load capacity of the pile for specified mers and diesel hammers that operate on the head of soil resistance and distribution. Soil medium. Case I -Ram. the pile. f ) and dimensions and mechanical prop- erties of cushion. capblock. stiffness of the capblock. the following 2. 1. It should be recognized that the solution obtained with the program represents the results for one blow of Figure B. (psi) e) and the damping constant for the soil L(1) = thickness of the capblock. the following cases: and their effects investigated. capblock. c ) weight and dimensions of anvil (if included). 1. and differential acting steam ham- 3. . e ) weight and dimensions of pile cap 5. Case I-ram.This appendix describes the utilization of the com- puter program for the application of the one-dimensional The techniques for idealization can be categorized wave equation to the investigation of a pile during in three groups: driving. 3. It makes possible an engi- neering evaluation of driving equipment and pile type.1. and pile (Figure B3). This ca. pile cap. PAGE FORTY-THREE . the soil. CAPBLOCK. driving and does not reflect soil set-up due Appendix B gives the idealizations and pertinent infor- to consolidation. In order t o simulate a given system. 1. BZ Idealization of Hammers 2. capblock. the pile. and pile cap. Figures B1 through B3 describe the idealization for nored before (in pile driving formulas) can be included. (lblin) c) Point soil resistance expressed as a per- centage of the total static soil resistance. mation for the most common hammers. K(1) = . double. Pile driver. the hammer and driving accessories. 9. single. The program can be used to obtain the following 2. Stresses in the pile. W(2) PILE SPRING. capblock. d ) dimensions and mechanical properties of capblocks. (Figure B1) .

in. 3.2. ) W ( h ) = hammer housing weight. (lblin.75 and 0. = CAPBLOCK. ANVIL.ram. Weight of cam.) Where E . (lb) This c a l c u l a t i o n assumes t h a t t h e p i l e cap and a n v i l a r e r i g i d . capblock. W ( l ) = ram weight. E ( l ) = modulus of elasticity of the capblock (psi) Figure B. K(2) . ) h = actual ram stroke. in. (psi) L(1) = l e n g t h of ram. (lblin. (lb) I. P A G E FORTY-FOUR . K(2) ef = hammer mechanical efficiency (usually between 0. Diesel hammers: EH = W ( 1 ) (he -C) (Q) (B. psi A ( l ) = cross sectional area of the capblock. ( l b . (ft) 2 . W(2) and the effective stroke (includes effect of e- >. (psi) E(1) = modulus of e l a s t i c i t y o f ram material. PILE CAP. W(4) E H = h where I l+&e!!L Prated . and pile hammers.3.) K(2)C . K(2IC K(2) bounce chamber pressure) for closed-end hammers. where L(1) A = cross-section area of cushion. cap. W(1) = weight of ram. (in2) L = thichess of cushion.1) n= u RAM. (ft) . stiffness of the capblock. ef = efficiency of diesel hammers is approximate- ly 100% Calculations for idealization W(1) . (lblin. AE Kc = . lb) The kinetic energy of the ram for specific hammer types can be calculated as follows: where 1. ) A(i)(ly(l) . The energy EH for the PILE SPRING. secant modulus of elasticity of cushion material. Calculations for idealization B3 Ram Kinetic Energies W ( l ) = Weight of ram.3) where CAPBLOCK. W(2) h = ram stroke.85 for most single &a4 PILE CAP. (lb) 9 = efficiency is approximately 85% for these Figure B. ( i n . n 5 - PILE SPRING. K ( l ) = A(1) E ( l ) . CUSHION. - W(h) W(1) W ( 1 ) ef (B. K(2)C K(2)C K(2) + K(2j)p . pile cap. Drop hammers and single acting steam hammers: EH EH = W ( 1 ) (h) ( 4 = ram kinetic energy.2) Calculations f o r i d e a l i z a t i o n W(1) K(1) = = Weight of ram.W(3) acting hammers). K(2) closed-end Link Belt hammers can be read directly from the manufacturer's chart using 1ST PILE SEGMENT. (ft) . anvil. (Ib) C = distance from bottom-dead-center ef anvil to exhaust ports. (ft). the s t i f f n e s s of t h e ram. (psi) prated = manufacturers rated steam pressure. W(3) bounce chamber pressure).1 for eapblock and cushion properties. (ft-lb) (B. K(1) = Stiffness of the Capblock..1 for capblock properties. Stiffness of cushion. ) Pactual = actual steam pressure. ond cushion. where A(1) = ram c r o s s s e c t i o n a l area. FIRST PILE SEGMENT. Case II . ( i n . Differential and double-acting steam hammers: I v-. K ( 1 ) he = actual ram stroke for open-end hammers.) Work done on the pile by the diesel explosive force is K(2)p = Stiffness of pile spring. ( 1 h . combined stiffness of K(2)C Calculations for idealization and K(2) in series. K(1) W(l) = ram weight.) automatically accounted for by using an-explosive pres- sure (see Sample Problem and Table 2 ) . .' @/in. Case Ill-ram. capblock. (lb) Note: See Table 4. W(1) RAM STIFFNESS. l i n . L(l) = thickness of the capblock. (in) Note: See Table 4. K(3) 2.

2 chanics of this provision are more fully explained in E = secant modulus of elasticity of cushion ma.) (psi) K ( 2 ) . (in. (lb/in.1 for capblock and cushion properties. in. terial. psi Tables B1 and B2 list the information needed for L = thickness of cushion. K(2) = K ( 2 ) c K ( 2 ) p .) This calculation assumes that the pile cap is rigid. in series. the simulation of the most common types of pile driving hammers. the stiffness of the ram.. The program contains where provisions for eliminating the capability of transmitting tensile forces between adjacent segments. posing the pile driver are physically separated. (lb/in. K ( 2 ) c = Stiffness of cushion. The same is true of the interface between the anvil and pile cap. in. Calculations for idealization W ( l ) = Weight of ram. the following section. and the pile cap and the head of the pile. (lb/in.) L ( 1 ) = length of ram. = Stiffness of pile spring. (in. (lb) B4 Methods of Including Coefficient of Restitution in Capblock and Cushion Springs K ( l ) = A(1) E(l) . i. and K ( 2 ) is a cushion (Case 11). (lb/in.e. to the anvil but not tension.) E ( l ) = modulus of elasticity of ram material. K ( l ) = Stiffness of the Capblock. note that the parts com- K ( 2 ) c and K ( 2 ) . RAM W ( I ) RAM W ( I ) CAPBLOCK K ( I CAPBLOCK K ( I ) w (2) u P l L E CAP W ( 2 ) I -CUSHION K(2)- w DROP HAMMERS DOUBLE AND DIFFERENTIAL ACTING SINGLE ACTING STEAM HAMMERS STEAM HAMMERS (A) (0) TABLE 81 DROP HAMMERS AND STEAM HAMMERS TYPE 8z ! !m! W W a & W 0 a 0 a a + REPRESENTATIVE VALUES FOR PlLE NORMALLY USED IN . The me- A = cross-sectional area of cushion. combined stiffness of K ( 2 ) c + K(21. L(1) In the case where K ( l ) is a capblock (Cases I. 11.) and 111).) tion of the particular material. the ram is capable of transmitting compressive force Note: See Table 4. HOUSING W. it is desirable where to include the energy loss due the coefficient of restitu- A(1) = ram cross sectional area..HIGt YAY CONS PAGE FORTY-FIVE . In the hammer idealization.

- FB (Ac) FB KDB The combined restitution stiffness of K ( 2 ) c and (Ac . Energy output = Area BCD = FB (AC . FB ez = Fn (Ac . 0 to 8 . In w this instance it is also necessary to determine the coeffi. 1 K(2)c + -phase DB in K ( 2 ) p Figure B4) RAM W ( I ) NOTES FOR TABLE B.AD (B.4.2 + for actual stroke use f i e l d observotions A(l) E l l ) (may vary from 4 . to determine the equivalent spring K (2). DEFORMATION Energy input = Area ABC = FB (AC)/2 Figure B.6) Since. 2 DIESEL HAMMERS PAGE FORTY-SIX . PlLE W (4) - TABLE 8 . I n Figure B4 the coefficient of restitution is defined as e = q Area BCD - Area ABC . FB KDB = Ac . can be determined from. The stiff. or (for restitution 1 K(2) . 0 f t . 0 ness of the spring in the restitution phase is the slope of I the line DB in Figure B4.AD) K ( 2 ) . o K I cient of restitution of the combined springs. ) r + determine f r o m bounce chamber ANVIL W (2) pressure ( h e = E / W ( I ) where E = Indicated Energy CAPBLOCK K (2) t overage values PlLE CAP W (3) CUSHION K ( 3)c PlLE K( 3 ) ~ W 2 0 .KAB .5) I n Case I1 it is necessary to combine springs K ( 2 ) c and K (2).AD) /2 A . Definition of coefficient of restitution.An) - - Ac . d Energy output Energy input (B.

In Figure B5. CAP BLOCK PILE CAP the physical value of the slack or looseness in CUSHION a joint is entered in inches.) since The weight of each pile segment is calculated by W(m) = A(m) L(m) a where a = unit weight of pile material.25. (lb/in. In Figure B5. The SLACK (m) values are always associated with spring K ( m ) ..grnents. of Probs. i. Pile idealization. where K(m-1) = spring stiffness for segment m..from Equation (A-7). if tension can be trans- SLACK ( 3 ) = 0 . Page 1 contains data pertaining SLACK to the physical parameters of a particular pile. (psi) L ( m ) = length of segment m.e.) If the pile is tapered. Each seg. PAGE FORTY-SEVEN . = Any combination of up to six alpha- betic or numerical characters used for identifying information. the average value of A(m) 235 Idealization of Piles should be used. or cushion charac- teristics for the pile described on page 1. ) A(m) = cross sectional area of segment m. 1 ) If a joint ( a joint is defined as the interface Piles should be broken into segments not to exceed between two segments) can transmit tension. pile driver. The interfaces between the various parts composing the pile driver (ram.e. approximately 10 feet in lengths. 3) If a joint is capable of moving 1. i.25 in. i. the mitting tensile stresses only after a specified movement weight representing the segment is assumed to be con. its. (lb/in. The stiffness of each pile segment spring = 0. page 2.0.5... pile cap. (in. Page 2 is used to vary the soil. no tension can be transmitted and SLACK (m) should be made a very large number. The of impact. These centrated at the end of the seapent away from the point conditions occur with certain types of pile splices. of a mechanical joint (joint slack or looseness) . (Refer to Figure B5) is calculated from 2 ) If a joint is completely loose. before RAM transmitting tension. IC(2) is associated following : with W ( 3 ) . SLACK Page 1 Case No. mitted across the interface between segments 3 and 4. i.) which can- not transmit tension are also handled by setting the SLACK values equal to 1000. SLACK (m) = 1000. (in. These char- SLACK acters will identify all problems as- REAL * IDEALIZED sociated with the pile data entered on sheets 1 and 2.2) E ( m ) = modulus of elasticity of the material of segment m. No. the slack value would be associated with spring K ( 3 ) . but into not less than the slack or looseness is entered as SLACK (m) five se. capblock. Examples of the data sheets follow the explanation. The idealization of the pile is handled by breaking The program has provisions for handling cases the continuous pile into discrete segments.e. B6 Explanation of Data Input Sheets Data for the Pile Driving Analysis program is en- tered on two sheets. where the physical construction of the pile prohibits the ment is represented by its weight and spring repre. = Total number of problems listed on Figure B. transmission of tensile stresses or is capable of trans- senting the total segment stiffness. SLACK (m) = 1. This places the spring on top of the weight program provides for this eventuality by entering the whose stiffnejs it represents. SLACK (3) = 0.e.

( a ) Enter "1" and all AREAS will If Option 1 = 2. SLACK (1) to SLACK (3) in row 1 may be left blank. The value cal. are entered from 1 to P .0. since case enter AREAS (1) to ( P ) inclu. K's. . Draw a horizontal tension. is SLACK (1) = This indicates a specified looseness between W ( l ) and W(2) in inches. handling a pile with a maximum of 149 segments. RU's. Option 3 = This i s a n option for manual entry of expressed in inches. . The areas. A ( 2 ) . Ad- (b) Enter "2" if SLACK values are to be entered manually. are entered the point resistance and all others are side resistances. . W's. segment. enter 1000. Option 4 may be left cases as the program calculates the blank in which case i t is automatically critical time interval from the param. Areas of segments of the manually in the AREA rows. is 1000.4 I t is suggested that can take on variable values per case. that W ( 1 ) is not entered as it will be included on page 2. must be entered in the rows marked A ( 1 ) . This is IPRINT. Mark out all rows when Option (b) Enter "1" if the soil resistances 2 = 1. K's. . in pounds. K(2). the average area of each segment automatically be set equal to 1. (a) Enter "2" if the soil resistances (expressed as a percentage of the If Option 2 = 2. The basic force unit dle portion of page 1. RU's. is the pile tip resistance. . = This space may be left blank in most Option 4 = 2.00.1 ) ness.. If NSEG 1 is left P = Total number of weights including blank. The total weight of each segment. NC = The number of the spring for which (a) Enter "1" for use of Smith's K(NC) is being varied. 10 would be entered for use the larger of the two. do not enter areas in AREA rows. A's.1 inclusive. n o data cards are to be included. The weights. done so that the user cannot inadver.1 ) and A ( P ) in most area of each segment is to be entered instances will be the same. In this case Note that the forms have 24 spaces for W's. . ram of hammer. If "1" is used. R U ( 2 4 ) . the area row should be Option 2 = This is an option for the manual marked through with a solid horizontal line indicating entry of soil resistances. expressed as a percentage of the total soil resist- 1) inclusive. of the output is the pound. entered in the rows marked K ( l ) . and K(3). If there is complete tensile freedom of K ( l ) . Page 2 Option 4 = This is an option on the routine used w(l) = The weight of the pile driver's ram to simulate the material behavior of in pounds. The soil resistances. routine 3 and 4. the side soil resistance on each total soil resistance) are to be entered manually in the RU rows. IPRINT is the print cific l/DELTA T. mark out all rows. . NSEG 1 = 2 will be used by the program. Only one spriny A&M's routine. SLACK (2). one desires to use a spe. first pile segment. and SLACK'S. are entered for 2 to P inclusive.00.0 since the point soil spring cannot take tered in row 1. in lb/in. ditional cards may be added to each parameter as needed. R U ( 2 ) . draw a horizontal line A ( 2 4 ) . leave IPRINT blank. entered in the rows marked W ( 2 ) . (a) Enter "1" if SLACK values from SLACK'S are entered from 1 to P . if a entered value with the critical value print out is required every 10th time calculated by the above formula and interval. In this hammer are usually entered as A ( l ) = 1.1) are there is n o slack. If SLACK (4) to SLACK (P . do not enter any values in the Slack A's. As an example. If Option 3 = 2. SLACK ( 2 ) . stress values obtained for these segments are not usually sive. it may be entered. The stiffnesses. stress units desired in the output. is entered in the rows marked R U ( 1 ) . W (24). SLACK (24).. The units of A should be consistent with the through all AREA rows on the mid. Leave blank if option 3 is "2". etc. In this case only SLACK (1) to SLACK (3) are en. The total of all RU from 1 to P + 1 inclusive. In this case.00 (indicating K(4) to K ( P . interval expressed as the number of The problem will then compare the time intervals. SLACK ( P ) is automatically set can take tension). . If Option 1 = 1. A ( P . K ( 2 4 ) . tently enter a value too small and hence introduce instability into the NSEG 1 = NSEG 1 is the mass number of the numerical process. equal to 1000.. are not listed in the RU rows but are indicated under Option 12 on page 2. The RU seapent. . springs K(1). eters of the system. however. enter 0. In this case.698 d m ) output is used (Option 15 = 2). K ( 2 ) . then enter SLACK (1) = The spring stiffness of each seapent. follower. Note that (P + + values are entered from (1) to ( P 1) is ance. and helmet. if ihere is complete loose- all 0. Option 15 = 2. K(NC) = The spring constant of the spring be- (b) Enter "2" for use of Texas ing varied in lbs/in. The value of RU ( P 1)+ percentages entered must total 1 0 0 ~ o . Spring K ( P ) is the soil spring at the pile tip and Option 1 = This is an option for the manual en. . of concern. W ( 3 ) .. If Option 15 is "1" or "3". is calculated by the program from the soil data entered try of the cross sectional area of each on Page 2. If Option 3 = 1. . . The program is capable of rows. are entered (b) Enter "2" if the cross sectional from 1 to P inclusive.1 inclu- SLACK (3) = see notes on Slack (1). IPRINT = This is an option on the amount of culated is data printed out when the long form l/DELTA T = 2(19. the physical slack or looseness. . Note This is the amount of movement re- quired before K ( l ) will take tension. set equal to 2. If If. is _entered in each row marked the SLACK values. . line through all SLACK rows in the lower portion of page 1.0. etc. . A G E FORTY-EIGHT . SLACK ( l ) . sive. . .

.. i. . number of the first pile segment act. . B-2. NOTES : ONE OR MORE PROBLEMS MUST BE LISTED ON PAGE 2 K's A N D SLACK'S I TO P-l INCL. J SIDE = Damping constant for the soii on the side of the pile. (P+I IS % RU UNDER POINT OF PILE. a s with drpp hammers or steam hammers. ENERGY = Kinetic energy of the falling ram calculated by Equation B-1. Normally "0. Nor. of the distribution of side friction on MO = If Option 12 is "1" or "2".e. MO to P. This space bution of side friction from segment may be left blank if Option 12 = 3. which acts on the ram and anvil of ERES (1) = The coefficient of restitution of a diesel hammer. leave ERES (2) = The coefficient of restitution of FEXP blank. RU(T0TAL) . ( a ) Enter "1" for a uniform distri- ed upon by soil resistance. .10" i s used. . This value is en. % RU (TOTAL (b) Enter "2" if single calculation is AT POINT = The percentage of the total pile soil to be made with RU(T0TAL) value resistance. point of the pile. Leave RU(T0TAL) space 11 = 1. ... .. When Option (TOTAL). J POINT = Damping constant for the soil a t the Option 13 = This option provides for computer point.. spring K(2) Option 11 = This option provides for single or ERES ( 3 ) = The coefficient of restitution of multiple calculations. data are desired. ment MO to P. plotted curves using the data gen- . on page 2 blank. tribution of side friction from seg- mally "0. leave this entry blank. . RU's are read in on page 1. In this case RU IN. .) PAGE FORTY-N IN E . spring K(3) (a) Enter "I" if multiple calcula- RU (TOTAL) = This space should be used only when tions for RU(T0TAL) VS BLOW/ Option 11 = 2.10" is used..3. i. (b) Enter "2" for a triangular dis- Q POINT = Quake of the soil a t the point. .. pile. RU'S I TO P+I INCL. under the entered on page 2.EFF = The efficiency of the pile hammer. enter the the pile. Option 12 = This option is used for designation tered a s a percentage. Q SIDE = Quake of the soil on the side of the (c) Enter "3" if Option 2 = 2. W'S AND A R E A S I TO P INCL. The computer (TOTAL) is the desired ultimate pile will assign suitable values of RU resistance in pounds. RU values are entered on page 1. In the case where spring K ( l ) no explosive force exists. or FEXP = The diesel explosive force (in pounds) B-3.

800 SPECIAL NOTE Where anything listed for Prob. If no plot is desired. draw an is 158. (a) Enter "1" if the forces of gravity be changed in the NC column and then the stiffness of are to be included in the calculations. As soon as this (b) Enter "2" if the forces of gravity problem is completed. 19 A II 4. 7 8 9 10 I I I 1 2 3 . ft lb.. sumed to be embedded for its full length. spring K(NC) in the K(NC) column. This psi and its unit weight is 154 lb/ft3.I 1 3 1 4 3 . NOTE . The anvil is assumed rigid and weighs tion. erated for RU(T0TAL) VS BLOW/ B7 Comments on Data Input IN. provisions are made data. lations. deformations. 1150 Ib. VS RU(T0TAL). Option 15 = 3 should be used only Pile hammer: Hypothetical diesel hammer with when Option 11 = 2. I . This alternate in effect excludes be reset automatically to the value on page 1 of the the weight of the pile from the calcu. 5 . There is no Option 15 = This option provides for versatility limit on the number of problems that can be run for in the outpnt format. 2 0 I .. R U (TOTAL) NOT REQUIRED 07 0 Y 5 i: > o a$. specified Pile: 16 in.. It is used when the pile driv- er is in a horizontal position or for The program is capable of handling pile idealiza- an extreme batter. The stiffness of the ram is given as 42. Consider the pile shown in Figure B-6. square prestressed concrete pile.5 X lo6 lb/in.. The modulus of the concrete is 7.82 X lo6 (c) Enter '13" for short output. etc. 4850 lb ram with an input ram kinetic energy of 39. K ( l ) through blank. 4. in the hammer or pile idealization. . 26 ft as IPRINT on page 1.5+ z 0704 O Y A C C Z ( L L U L PAGE FIFTY . 4 . in length. . 4 d 2. A A 1 1 6 17 1. K(NC) will are to be excluded from the calcula- tion. (a) Enter "1" for a normal data printout. (a) Enter "1" for computer plot of On page 2 of the input forms. 3 J .25 arrow down through the last problem to indicate repeti. The capblock stiffness is 24.. 0. I 8. K ( P . 1 1 . I . tions with a maximum of 149 segments. This alternate gives perti. at the print interval. X lo6 lb/in. IF OPTION ell = I.. an . 3. - 6 J. 0. dm 1 . (b) Enter "2" for extra detail in Sample Problem printout. velocities. the spring stiffnesses. This is Option 14 = This is used to include or exclude accomplished by entering the number of the spring to gravity in the calculations. I " tl I 1 1 5 J 4. each case. 1 II n <% 1 8 J. nent stresses. input forms.l ) . . The explosive force by the diesel fuel lem 1 is to be repeated for Problem 2. The pile is as- alternate gives only a tabular sum- mary of BLOW/IN. (Option 11 = 1).700 lb. etc. leave for varying the stiffness of any spring. 1 1 .

NSEGl = 4." E ( 3 ) .6 X lo6 lb/in. of the output option (OPTION 15). ance (same as Problem 2 ) . but the Page 1 (Same for all 4 problems) thickness is 3% in. all areas are entered manually in soil resistance produced by one blow of the hammer. The combined stiffness of K (3) 0 and K ( 3 ) . tions for the hammer and pile idealization.32 X lo6 psi L(3).10 in. thick and has a modulus of elas. investigate the penetration of a pile to 200 tons of static OPTION 1 = 2.) For Problem 2 and 4 similar calculation yields for one blow of the hammer. see Figure B6 (b). i t is desired to print output every 10 itera- The following calculations illustrate the computa. four prob- lems are considered. therefore ( b ) Cushion: Spring K ( 3 ) in Figure B6 (b) represents the combined stiffness of the cushion and first pile segment." E ( 3 ) c = 1.00 X lo6 psi L ( 3 ) c = 6. cushion. in Problem 4. since OPTION 12 is used to describe along the side with 10% at the point. OPTION 3 = 1. hammer and 8 for the pile)./ft. 10% point resistance.50. OPTION 15 = 2.0. PAGE FIFTY-ONE . of Problems = 4. of the pile. plete looseness between the ram. pile cap. and pile Problems 3 and 4 illustrate the use of program to head. Sample problem./ft. The soil constants are: l/DELTA T = 0. P = 11. In AREA rows.0. tions.05 sec. Problem 1 and Problem 2 are concerned with the driving effects produced by two different cushions. anvil. capblock. SLACK'S = all set equal to 1000 since there is com- (c) J' = 0. length segments of 39 in. IPRINT = 10. ( a ) Pile: The ~ i l eis broken into eight equal W'S = enter the weight of each element in lb.0 X lo6 psi. is 634 in. In Problem 2 the cushion area and properties are the same as in Problem 1. angular distribution along the side with 10% soil resist.3 X lo6 Ib/in. be entered on page 2. where A(3). all pile segments are connected. there are 4 problems to be solved friction is assumed to have a triangular distribution with on page 2. there are 11 weights ( 3 for the ( b ) J = 0.25 in. In Problem 4 the soil has a tri. The output data sheets are completed as follows: ticity of 1. since the program will calculate the correct value. In Problem 1. = 254 in. is In order to illustrate the utilization of the input data sheets and explain the output data sheets. the first pile segment. springs is assumed to be 0. = 7. static resistance curves (RU(T0TAL) VS BLOWS/IN. = 39 in. the cushion is assumed to have a cross sectional area equal to that K(3) 31. (a) Q Q' = 0. FRICTIONAL In Problem 1 and 3 RESISTANCE where A ( 3 ) c = 254 in. Problem 4 will also illustrate the use A&M routine. POINT RESISTA then (a) ACTUAL P I L E ~ (b) IDEALIZED P I L E Figure B. The The coefficient of restitution for the combined object of these two cases is to determine the dynamic. The cushion is the same OPTION 4 = left blank since it is desired to use the as in Problem 2. Problem 3 the soil resistance is distributed uniformly OPTION 2 = 1. K ( 3 ) = 22. hence SLACK (4) to SLACK (10) = 0. The cushion is the soil distribution. The spring Note that W ( l ) is blank since it will stiffness for each segment is. the same as in Case 1.6.15 sec. In Problem 1 and 2 the soil side No.

The value of K(3) and the OPTIONS a r e changed.. K(NC) = Only the value of K(3). K(3) = 22. the OPTION 11 = 1. IPRINT on page 1.* with side soil K(NC) = resistance. NC = 3 bined springs. OPTION 15 = 1. ticular hammer blow. resistance. distribution. the diesel explosive force. K'S = enter all spring stiffnesses f o r the pile FEXP = 158. J.00. Q'. OPTION 15 = 2. ERES(1) = 0. OPTION 12 = 1. curve is not desired. Problem 3 ENERGY = 39. values f o r curve generation. (TOTAL) = 400.80. NC = 3. EFF = 1..05.000. NC = 3 MO = 4.500. see Fig.300. curve. K(NC) = 31. for uniform side soil resistance dis- i.000. Page 2. W'S AND AREAS I TO P INCL. diesel hammers a r e considered to K(3) = 3.50. J'.. system considered t o b e basic. JPOINT = 0.000. for triangular side soil resistance distribution. coefficient of restitution of com. OPTION 11 = 2. Q. Page 2-Problem 1 OPTION 14 = 1.10. lb.) PAGE FIFTY-TWO . K'S AND SLACK'S I TO P-l INCL. coefficient of restitution of cap.700. (P+I I S % RU UNDER POINT OF PILE. ~ ( 3 ') = 22. K(3) = 31.000 @POINT = 0.300. OPTION 12 = 2. for program generated RU(T0TAL) program will automatically reset the VS BLOWS/IN.000. t-he first pile sezment . Page 2. for output a t interval expressed by JSIDE := 0..500.15. be 100% efficient. stiffnesses to these values after each problem on page 2.800. RU'S I TO P + I INCL.e. ~OINT = 10%. OPTION 12 = 2. for triangular side soil resistance ($SIDE = 0. Problem 2 ure B6 (b).000 lb f o r a 200 ton total static soil block material. for single calculation using RU bined cushion and first pile spring.e. to indicate gravity. RU(T0TAL) = leave blank. coefficient of restitution of steel on steel impact. ERES(3) = 0. is changed. A'S = enter all cross sectional areas of pile OPTION 13 = leave blank since computer plotted segments only.60. i. the cushion spring number. since OPTION 11 = 1. P a g e 2. the input energy f o r this par. RU(T0TAL) = 400. w(1) = 4850 lb.10. the stiffness of the com. for normal data output. t h e program will generate suitable tribution. ERES(2) = 0. Problem 4 % AT I n t h i s problem the cushion and the options a r e changed. the r a m weight.

03 1I 254. 1 OF 4 IlOELTAT P OPTIONS 1 2 3 4 11 12 13 14 15 EXP.7.43 PERMANENT SET OF P I L E = 0.07 3 254.00 1040962.17 4 254.487338 0.C 0.39 10 254. 30 2491.168807 -0.10 0.10 0.000 11 7432. FORCE 9443.000 15 7107. Figure B7 is the output total static soil resistance for which this problem was for one point on the RU(T0TAL) VS BLOWS/IN.1 is the in Figures B7 through B-11.000 7 2245092. PAGE FIFTY-THREE . RU (TOTAL) NOT REQUIRED lilI I I I The output for the four sample problems are shown data.223646 -3. 42 -0. 0 -0.359616 -1.HSP 1 0 PROBLEM NO.167608 0.359616 0.000 35 4195. 0 -0.430214 4.166761 -1.962.15 0. 0 -0.406179 -0.0 0.430214 0. I . The RU(T0TAL) value of 1.0g0. The block of data on only one point of 10 used to develop the data for the the upper part of the figure is a printout of the input total RU(T0TAL) VS BLOWS/INCH curve shown in T E X ~ SA • M U N I V E R S I T Y P I L E D R I V I N G ANALYSIS CASE NO.0 0.211913 0. 0 -0.79113579 TOTAL INTERVALS = Figure B.80 5 254.NOTE : IF OPTION ell = I.9 11 2 1 1 2 1 2 0 1 1 1 5 8 7 0 0.000 13 7324.05 125 M WIM) KIM) AREAIM) RUIM) SLACKIMI ERESlMl VSTARTlMl KPRIMEIMI SEGMENT AREA TIME N MAX C STRESS TIME N MAX T STRESS OMAXIM) DIM1 VIM) 1 1. 0. run.000 27 1320.50 2 1.1 10. ENERGY HAMMER EFFIENCY RUITOTALI PERCENT UNDER POINT MU R I P O I N T I ~ P I S I D E 1 JIPOINT) JISIDE) N2 39800.0 4 0. Normal output ( o p ~ i o n15=1) for Prob. This value was generated by the program and is - curve generated for Problem 1.172878 0.0 0. 0 -0.238627 0.000 4 2RR3699.0 0.00 1.06760806 INCHES NUMBER OF BLOWS PER INCH = 14.231331 0.0 0.

mum compressive and tensile stresses and the maximum displacement of each segment. IPRINT = 1).100000 (the ground quake Q) or 0. TIMEN is the time interval at which the maximum R(M) = force in each soil spring. Effect of varying cushion stiffness. A CASE I Figure B-10 is a typical output when RU(T0TAL) CASE 2 is specified.e. (in.) . P I L E D R I V I N G ANALYSIS CASE NUMBER HSP 1 0 PROBLEM NUVBER 1 OPOINT = 0 .15 B L ~ H SPER IN.).8.9. RUTOTAL POINT FORCE MAX c STRESS SEG M A X r STRESS SEG Figure B. Figure B9 shows the summary of the data for the RU(T0TAL) VS BLOWS/IN. (lb). (in.. K ( 3 ) c. 1 and 2. (in.373011 in. listed under DMAX(M). The column labeled F(M) = force in each spring. The maximum penetration of the point of the pile under one blow of the hammer is 0. The input information is listed in the BLOWS PER INCH first block of data.473011-0. Figure B8. maximum compressive stress of 7432 psi occurred in V(M) = velocity of each segment.. Note the stiffer cushion (Problem 2) produces the most efficient driving since for a specified resistance the penetration per blow is larger (BLOWS/IN. Note that the input data is listed as well as the maximum stresses and the displacement of each segment. shown in Figure B8. The next two blocks show the stress- es at time interval N = O and N = 1. (fps). compressive stress (MAX C STRESS) occurred. These curves can be used to compare the effects of cushion stiffness (the cushion stiffness. 1 0 JPOINT = 0. for Problems 1 and 2.9 sec.). in Problem 2 was twice that in Problem 1 ) . (psi).473011 in. PAGE FIFTY-FOUR . Data of this type can be used to construct curves like that shown in Figure B8. (lb). data is printed for each point on the RU(T0TAL) VS BLOWS/IN. ae. and the permanent set is 0. C(M) = the compression in each spring. Summary output for RU (total) us blows/in. Figure B-11 is a sampling of the output when data is desired at some specified interval (OPTION 15 = 2.ment 5 at time interval 11 (11/9443.15 BLCWS PER I N . The data is Figure B. The second block of data shows the maxi.). STRESS(M) = stress in each segment. (lb). (option I 1 = I ) for Prob. 1 0 JPOINT = 0. i. defined as follows: D(M) = displacement of each mass point. RUTOTAL P O I N T FORCE MAX C STRESS SEG MAX T STRESS SEG P I L E D R I V I N G ANALYSIS CASE NUMBER HSP 1 0 PROBLEM NUMBER 2 QPOINT = 0 . the W(M) = weight of each segment. Similar DPRIME(M) = elastic displacement of soil. is smaller).

.

4 * E F F * I E N E R G Y / W ( L I l I 1 SN 0062 0 0 9 0 0 9 M=1. 0 ~ F 3 . 2 ~ F 6 .O ISN 0010 I F 1 IllPT4.LE.P ISN 0024 6 WPILE=WPILE+W(JTI ISN 0025 1SN 0026 ISN 0027 1SN 0028 ISN 0029 ISN 0030 ISN 0031 ISN 0032 5 0 8 8 READ I5.LE.BLUWS PER I N C H C LCCSEITIGHT.R=L. for reference.LE. to follow. TO DECOCE NOTE THAT C NFMAXT = NO. ISN 00.PLESSII ISN 0044 5 1 0 5 S L A C K I P I = 1000. l ~ I 3 ~ 4 F 3 . 4 X v 5 H P R O U l A b r 7 4 H RU PERCENTACES ON OATA SHC LET PAGE 1 SHOULD TOTAL 1 0 0 .3I ISN 0051 5115 FCRMAT18F10.OK L I M I T E D MOTION AT J O I N T S C CAXIMUM S T R t S S E S OR FORCES C I O P T USCD FOR OPTION.0 ISN 0067 5141 ULCHSX = 0.50 ISN 0063 FTVAXIMI=O. .PPLUSlrPLESS1~PKOC. APPENDIX C 0s-360 Fortran IV Program Statements The listing that follows is known as an XREF list. 1 SH 0023 0 0 6 JT=NSEGI..01 NSEGl=2 1SN 0016 TCELTA=TTDtLr IS& 0017 5 0 7 0 UELTAT = l .OI IPRlNTrl 1 Siv 0014 IFINbEGL.LE. 1. INPUT -. J T ~ J T H .0 ~ 5 - ISN 0043 5 1 0 4 READ (5. NKCNT=O ISN 0066 5140 KUTTLX = 0.5lL4IISLACKIMI. C I .5 ~..1. consecu.. The variables and program statement numbers are indexed by their A flow diagram of the program logic is included reference number.50031 ISY 0007 5003 FOHMATILHII ISN 0008 IFITTOELT. O ~ 3 F 3 .5104 ISN 0040 5 1 0 1 0 0 5 1 0 2 M=4.71 5117 FOYMAT l l 2 ~ F 8 ~ 2 ~ 1 1 1 F 9 .64 9009 FCCAXIMI=O. tively from the first to the last statement.0 ISN 0042 5 1 0 3 GO TO.) TTCELT=l. OF T I M E I N T E R V A L WHERE FORCE = MAXIMUM I N T E N S I O N ISY 0002 5 0 0 0 REAL J P O l N T l J S l U E t K t K P R l M E ~ N P A S S t N P 1 v K H U L D D C A S E ~ 8 I 5 N 0003 5 0 0 1 IKTEbER P.01 IOPT4=2 ISN 0012 1FIIPdINT. C N O T A T I O N FOLLOWS S M I T H S ASCE PAPER CLOSELY.01 ISN 0052 5116 FOHMATI8F10. C TEXAS A * M U N I V C R S I T Y C P l L E D R I V I N G A N A L Y S I S BY THE WAVE E O U A T I U N C TEXAS A AN0 M PROGRAM R t V I S E D 1 2 / 1 / 6 5 BY E A S C PERMANENT SET.5114IlAREAlMI. O . 2 ~ F 9 . variable in the program and makes the logic much easier ing.0 ISN 0046 ISN 0047 ISN 0048 ISN 0049 ISN 0050 5114 FCRMATIRFl0.0. Each statement is numbered. DO 5 5 7 0 SflLVES PROBLEMS ONE AFTER ANOTHER ISN 0055 NC= I LSN 0056 ISN 0057 ISN 0058 ISN 0059 ISN 0061 VSTAHT= S Q R T 1 6 4 .PROBS ISY 0004 5 0 0 2 UICCNSION A R E A ( 1 5 0 1 ~ C 1 1 5 0 1 ~ C X I 1 5 0 1 ~ C M A X ( 1 5 0 I ~ 0 1 1 5 0 1 ~ 0 X I 1 5 0 1 C 2 4 CF EACH OF ADOVE S U F F I C I k N T FOR USUAL PRUBLEMS C---.71 C---. GEYERAL 5 0 1 0 K E A U ( 5 ~ 5 1 1 3 IC 4 S E I P R O B S ~ T T D E L T I P ~ S L n C K ( l I ~ S L A C K ( 2 I ~ S L A C K 1 3 I ~ I U P T L ~ I LCPT211UPT3~IOPT411PRINT~NSEGl kKITE16. L A Y I L T ~ L A C K ~ I R E U S E 0 FOR CONTROL C X AT END OF NAME = L A S T PRECEDING VALUE EXCkPT I N MAX = MAXIMUM C N ALWAYS MEANS NUMBER OF T l M E I N T E R V A L . F I R S T DETERMINE VALUE OF HUTOTL 5 1 5 4 IFIIUPTll-215151v5160~5151 PAGE FIFTY-SIX .511 1 ISN 0054 5 1 1 8 F G R M A T I 1 H O 9 5 H C A S E 1 A 7 . l r F 4 .FL5.0 ISN 0045 5 1 0 6 S L A C K I P P L U S L I = -0. L A M P . 2 ~ F 9 . I T U E L T A ISN 0018 ISN 0019 ISN 0020 ISH 0021 C-----CALCULATL P I L E WCIGHT ISN 0022 L"PILE=O.K=I. 5 1 1 6 1 ( K U L I S T ( M I ~ M = I I P P L U S I I 1SN 0039 5 1 0 0 IF(lOPT3-215101~5104.PLESSI ISN 0041 5 1 0 2 S L A C K I M I = 0.. 0 BUT ACTUALLY TUTAL. This listing facilitates finding each for reference.P) ISN 0033 1SN 0035 1SN 0037 ISN 0038 5 0 9 2 READ ( 5 .0 ISN 0068 5150 V I I I = VSTART ISN 0009 5152 LT = 0 C---.

C FUR CURVE P L O T T I N G 5 1 5 1 KUTOTL = Y l l l * V l l ) * * 2 / 1 2 . I 2 l .0 1SN 0134 KPRIMEIPPLUSLI=O.NL ISN 0142 5 1 9 5 WRITE (6.P 1SN 0 1 0 0 145 HUIM1 = I2. T H l R U U E T E H M I N E S T A R T I N G VALUES OF V I M ) ISN 0112 713 VIl)=V~TART ISN 0113 DO 1 8 0 M=2.5201) ISN 0139 5192 URITEl6..0 ISN 0126 NFMAXCIMI = 0 ISN 0127 NFMAXTIM) = 0 U H A X I M I = 0. 5186 LT = LT + 1 C----CHECK ON O E L T A T CALL D E L T C K I N P A S S ~ T T O E L T ~ P ~ U U K K T O E L T A ~ O E L T A I ~ N ~ ~ C----EN0 OELTAT-CHECK 1SN 0119 ISN 0120 ISN 0121 C I P ) = 0. S I X T H P R I N T I N P U T FOR ONE PROBLEM ISN 0137 5190 WRITE 16. 9 H CASE N U .P ISN 0114 1 8 0 VIP) = 0.MU ISN 0092 13 R U I M ) = 0.O*lRUTOTL-RUPINTIr(FLOATIM-M0~+0O5~)/1FL0AT1P-M0+1~1*42 ISN 0101 5 1 7 5 K U l P P L U S l ~= HUPINT GC T U 7 1 3 C FCH U I S T K I B U T I O N PER R U L I S T ON GATA SHEET ISN 0103 5 1 7 6 TOTAL = 0 .5205) ISN 0143 5 1 9 6 WRITE l 6 ~ 5 2 0 6 ) l M ~ U I M l r K I M ~ ~ A K E A l H ~ ~ R U l M ~ ~ S L A C K l M ~ ~ E H E S l M l . PROBLEM N0.0 ISN 0136 LAPP = 1 C---. 2 2 H P I L E D R I V I N G ANALY l S I S 1 4 X .L~15111X415~10X5155F18.JSI 10E.0)*RUTOTL ISN 0094 5172 1F110PT12-2)143~146~5176 C FOR U N I F O R M U l S T R l R U T l O N ISN 0095 ISN 0096 ISN 0097 ISN 0098 C FCR T R I A N G U L A H O L S T H l f l U T l U N 1SN 0 0 9 9 1 4 6 UO I 4 5 M=CO. F O L R T H D E T E R M I N E V A L U E FOR K I P ) 5 1 8 4 K I P ) = RUIPPLUS1)IQPOINT C F I F T H CHANGE C Y C L E .JPOINT. SECOND D E T E R M I N E A L L V A L U E S OF R U I M ) ISN 0091 5170 DO I 3 M=l.0 ISN 0132 H I M ) = 0. ISN 0135 O P R I M P = 0.0 NOPAXIMI = 0 F M A X C I M ) = 0. 3 X .3H OF114) ISN 0145 5 2 0 1 FORMATl2XIOH I l D E L T A T3XIHP4XbZHUPTIONS I 2 3 4 1 I1 12 I 3 14 151OXLOHEXP.52021 T D E L T A ~ P ~ I U P T l ~ I O P T 2 ~ I O P T 3 ~ l O P T 4 I~O P T l I .0) 1SN 0 1 4 7 5 2 0 3 F O R M A T l I I 3 H ENERGY HAMMER E F F I E N C Y HUITOTAL) PERCENT UN PAGE FIFTY-SEVEN .0 ISN 0115 5 1 8 3 V I P P L U S L I = -0. 0 ISN OIU4 IIC 5 1 7 7 M = l .0 ISN 0122 F l P ) = 0.0 ISN 0123 C M A X I M ) = 0.0 1SN 0093 5171 HUPINT = lPERCNT/100. 1 IOPTl2rlOPTL3~1UPTl4~1OPTI5tFEXP 1SN 0 1 4 0 5 1 9 3 WRITE 16~52031 ISN 0141 5194 WHITEl6.0 ISN 0133 5218 D P R I M E I M ) = 0. 1 VIM)lKPRIMEIM)lM=lrPPLUSll ISN 0144 5 2 0 0 F O R M A T 1 / / / 2 7 H TEXAS A 4 M U N I V E R S I T Y 1 3 X . P P L U S l 1514 OlUZ 5 1 7 7 TCTAL = T O T A L + R U L I S l I M I ISV 0106 1SN 0107 ISN OLUR ISN 0109 ISN 0110 Isri 0111 C---.0 C---.0 ISN 0124 LAPlM)=L ISN 0125 O l l r ) = 0.52001CASEIPROB~PROflS ISN 0138 5191 WRITE 16. ~ A 7 .14.5204) ENERCYIEFF~RUTOTL~PCRCNT~MO~QPOINTtQSIDF.0 F M A X T I M ) = 0.COUNT . FORCE) ISN 0146 5 2 0 2 FORMATIFII. 0 C FOR S I N G L E PROBLEM ISN 0073 5 1 6 0 RUTOTL=RUSUM 1SN 0 0 1 4 GO TO 5 1 7 0 C COPPUTEI< C Y C L E S FROP 7 0 7 NEAR E N 0 OF PROGRAM ISN 0075 ISN 0076 lSN 0077 ISN 0078 1SN 0079 ISN 0080 ISN 0081 ISN 0082 ISN 00b3 ISN 0084 ISN 0085 ~ ~ GO TO 7 0 6 706 RUTTLX = RUTOTL KUTOTL = R U T T L X + I OB+SLOPE) ISN 0090 DLCWSX = BLOWS C---.

5234)N.5231. D Y N A M I C COMPUTATION B A S F D ON S M I T H S PAPER M O D I F I E D ( T E X A S R E P N I ISN Old9 5 2 4 0 LACK = 1 ISN 0199 5 2 4 1 LJLI 6 8 M=l.- 3 4 C I C ) = U(Ml-U~M+l)-V~M+l)*l2.67 ISN 0162 6 7 I ) ( P ) = (F(PLESS1I+W(PI)/IKPRIMEIPI+K(PII ISN 0163 IFIPSIUE-DIPIl64r65.2~171 ISN 0149 5 2 0 6 FCRMATIl3.P C 6 8 I S UETWECN 5 4 3 9 AND 5 4 4 0 U I P ) = O(Ml+ViM)*l2.1~l11~F1O02~F9~2~F10.35p15 ISN 0209 1 5 F 1 P ) = FXIM)+(ICIM)-CX(M)I*K(Mll ISN 0210 GO TO 3 5 lSN 0211 1 2 FIG) = FX(M)+((C(P)-CX(M)I*KIM)/ERESlM1**21 ISN 0212 3 5 r ( v ) = AMAXIIO.65 ISN 0164 6 4 K I P ) = RU(P1 ISN 0165 F ( P 1 = F ( P L E S S 1 I + W(P) -R(PI ISN 0166 UlPl = FIP)/K(PI ISN 0167 GC TO 6 3 ISN 0168 6 5 K I P 1 = U(P)*KPRIME(PI ISN 0169 FIP) = O(PI* KIP1 ISN 0170 6 3 CONTINUE lSlv 0171 0 0 111 JT = lrPLESSl ISN 0172 JTM = P-JT ISN 0173 C(JTM1 = F(JTMIIKIJTM1 ISN 0174 UlJTMl = O(JTM+II+CIJTMI ISN 0175 O P R I M E I J T M ) = DCJTMI-WTDTAL*QSIUE/RTOTAL ISN 0176 I 1 1 CONTINUE ISN 0177 DO 8 0 0 0 M=l.5H W(M1.7~F10. L7X5HY1 = 15.5240 ISN 0182 5 2 3 1 WRITE(6.FICI) ISN 0213 L O TO 5 4 0 0 C A TCXAS K O U T I N E FOR GAMNA I S O M I T T E D HEKE C---. LUEH P O I N T MD O ( P 0 1 ~ f QISIOEI J(PbINtl J(SID61 k21 15. --.T E X A S A AN0 M SMITHS GRAVITY ISN 0151 5 2 5 8 IFIIOPT14-2)5220~5221r5221 ISN 0152 5 2 2 0 WTCTAL = 0 .7X15H K ( M I n 7 X v 8 H A R E A I M l r 6 X v 6 H R U ( M I r 7 X ~ 4 1 I H SLACKlMl EKES(M1 VSTARTIMI KPRIME(M1) C---.PLESS1 1SN 0158 ISN 0159 ISN 0160 ISN 0161 6 6 lF(KPRIME(P))67w63.00001138t38t14 3 8 F i r ) = CIM)*KIM) 20 TO 5 4 0 0 1SN 0208 14 IF(C(M)-CXIM))12. E F F E C T OF G R A V I T Y BEFORE KAM S T R I K E S .O*OELTAT C 5TATCMEUT 3 4 MUST USE A CDMPUrEO V A L U E FOR THE A C T U A L D ( M + L ) 5242 lFlC(M))5243. 3 6 TO 3 5 I S A TEXAS R O U T I N E R C P L A C I N G S M I T H R O U T I N E 3 OR 4 3 6 1F~AB~IEKES(Ml-1~0)-. F14.3rE15.7X..P ISN 0178 0000 SIRESSIM)=F(M)/AKEA(Ml ISN 0179 5 2 7 1 N=O ISN 0160 LAY = 1 ISN 0161 5 2 3 0 IFIIOPT15-215240.71 15N 0150 5 2 0 5 b C U Y A T ( 3 H M. 0 ISN 0153 R T G T A L = 0.0 lSN 0154 DO 5 J T = 2 .22F1112tE15.DPRIPPPN2 ISN 0183 5 2 3 2 WRITC (6.2XSHN2 = 1 5 ) ISN 0187 5 2 3 5 F O R X A T ( 1 2 O H SEGMENT M D(MI C(M) STRESSIMI F(M) 1 K(MI W(M1 V(M1 DPKIMEIMI KPRIMEtM) FMAXCtM) FMAXTIM)) :Sfi 0188 5236 ~ C R M A T ~ ~ ~ ~ F ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ F I O ~ ~ ~ F ~ I I O O ~ F ~ O ~ O ~ F ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ F ~ O . P P L U S L ISN 0155 WTCTAL = WTUTAL + W l J T l ISN 0156 5 KTCTAL = RTOTAL + R U I J T I ISN 0157 0 0 8 J T = 2.1~F16. S P I T H H O U T I h E 3 OR 4 ISN 0218 ISN 0219 ISiu 02ZO 1SN 0222 ISN 0223 1SN 3224 ISN 0225 ISN 0226 ISN 0227 ISN 022'3 ISN 0231 PAGE FIFTY-EIGHT .N 0 1 4 8 5204 FCRM&TI2F10~2r10XF12.30.3~2F14433F9.6.O.O*DELTA1 ~ .2~F9. ~ ~ ~ F ~ C ~ O ~ C---.30 ISN 020U 1SN 0 2 0 1 ISN 0262 C NOTE T l l A T ONLY A N E G A T I V E V A L U E GF C ( M ) H E S U L T S FHOP 5 2 4 6 ISN 0203 3 0 FX(:+I = F l M l C 4 TCXAS K O U T I N E F D K B ( M I I S O M I T T E D HEKE 15'4 0 2 0 4 C---.5235) ISN 0184 5233 W K ~ T E ( 6 ~ 5 2 3 6 ) ~ M ~ D ~ M l r C ( M I ~ S T K E S S ( M ~ ~ F l M l ~ R l M ~ ~ H ( M l ~ V l M ~ ~ O P R l M E i M l ~ ~KPRIMEIYI~FMAXC(M)IFMAXTIM)~M=I~P~ ISN 0 1 8 5 NKCNT=O ISN 0116 5 2 3 4 F O R Y A T I / / l 8 H TIME INTERVAL N = I 6 * 7 X 1 8 H N E T PENETRATION = f10.

I S. TO 1 9 0 ISN ~. L A P 1SN 0 2 4 8 1 0 IF(U(M1-GPKIME(M)-QSIOE156b57.UPKIMP.1 ) 7 0 0 0 ~ 7 0 0 1 ~ 7 0 0 O ISN 0294 7 0 0 0 kUCNT=NKONT+l ISN 0295 IFIYKONT-IPIIINTI5444. L 7 2 ~ t I O P T 1 5 ISN 0311 1'14 k l t I T E 1 6 .lC TU 1 7 1 ISN 0263 7 8 F ( P ) = Ib(PI-DPRIMP+JPOINT*CPOINT*V(Pl~*K(P) ISN 0264 LAPP = 2 1SN 0 2 6 5 1 7 1 F I P I = AMAXLIO.2) GO TO 5 4 4 7 IFIhl-N21524U15447r5447 C---.EC. 1 0 5 ) ISN 0316 1 0 5 tOHElATI74H THE d 4 T I l l OF THC V E L O C I T Y OF W ( 2 ) TO THE VELCICITY O t T LHk RAN CXCLCUS 3 .11 GO TO 5 4 3 0 151. 0 3. 1 ) ISN 0317 GO TU 5 5 7 0 ISN 0316 ISN 0319 1SN 0320 lSN 0321 1 0 6 F C R W A T l 7 4 H THE R1.17*DELTAT/Wl1) ISN 0276 5 4 2 5 LACK = 2 ISN 0277 GO TO 5 4 2 9 1SN 0278 5427 VIP) = V(MI+(FIM-II-FIM)-RIMIl*32Z17*OELTAT/WlMl 5 4 2 9 CONTINUE ISN 0280 IFIK.5441.7001.ANU.UIP GI.LE. CNC OF TEXAS REPN 1 6 3 LCATlNUC IF(LAY.CT.ti TO ( 1 9 2 r L 9 4 . 5 2 3 4 1 N.71 ISN 0255 74 IF(UPK1MP-O(Pl+OPOINT)75.54 I S N 0244 5 4 OPRIME(MI = U l M l + Q S I D E ISN 0245 5 3 CONTINUE ISN 0246 5 4 1 0 LAP = LAMIMI lSN 0247 GO T 0 ( 1 0 ~ 5 7 ) .N 0 2 .') ISN 0304 0 0 1'13 JA=NSEGL.0 8 ~ L C TI1 I 4 2 ISN 0309 1 9 0 LAY=2 1SN 0310 (. L A M P ISN 0260 77 I F ~ D ~ P ) .7 5 5424 V I 1 ) = Vll~-lF(1l+R11))*32.5444 ISM 0299 .-0.VIl).Q P O I N T ISN 0257 76 CONTINUE IS4 0250 L n r P = LAMP ISN 0259 GO TO 1 7 7 * 7 B ) ..FIM~) 5439 IF~FMAXC(M)-FlMII166~1677166 15N 0287 1 6 7 NFCAXC(M) = Y + l 1SN 0268 I66 IFlr#AXTlMl-F(M~168~69968 ISN 028'2 6 9 NFPfiXT(F1I = Y + l ISN 0290 6 8 STRESS(M)=FIM)/AKEA(Ml IS$.U P R I M P .O.FIP)I ISN 0266 7 1 CONTINUE C GRAVITY UPTIUN ISN 0267 ISN 0268 ISN 0269 ISN 0270 LACK = 7 GO TO 5 4 2 9 ISN 0272 1SN 0273 ISN 0274 ISN ~ 0 2.AND..0.76.N2 WllITt(L.bMAXIPI.LT.GT.5735) ~ R I T ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ) ( M ~ D ( M ) ~ C I M ~ ~ S T K E S S ~ M ~ ~ F ( M ~ I R ~ N ~ ~ W ~ M ~ I V ~ M ~ ~ U P ~ I M E ~ M ~ .P ISN 0305 193 hV=hV+WIJA)*VIJAl ISh 0306 IFIVII). ISN 0300 ISN 0301 ISN 0303 Wv=Il.O. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O O ~ O 1SN 0 3 1 5 60 h R l T E (O. 5 2 4 0 CYCLES FOR NEXT T I M E I N T t K V A L PAGE FIFTY-NINE .ANO.O+JPOIYT~VIP)I ISN 0262 .~ . lKPHIv~E(M1~FMAXCINl~FMAXTIH)~M=l~PI ISN 0314 192 ~ F ( V ( ~ ) / V S T A K T .Q P O I N T ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ISN 0261 7 9 F ( P ) = (UIPI-OPRIMPl*KlPl*ll.57 ISN 0249 ISN 0250 1SN 0 2 5 1 ISN 0252 ISN 0253 lSN 0254 73 IFIM-P)71~74.WV.1 0 2 8 2 lF(FllI.LE.LT.34 1SN 0 2 3 5 ISN 0236 ISN 0237 ISN 0238 1SN 0239 ISN 0240 ISN 0241 1SN 0 2 4 2 5 2 CONTINUE ISN 0243 IFIOPRIME(M1-DlM)-QSlUEi53953.. 0291 N=N+ 1 C T H I S I S END OF 0 0 6 8 S T A R T I N G AT 5 2 4 1 ISN 0292 5 4 4 0 IF(I[lPT15-715444.11O OF THE V t L U C l T Y [IF WII') TO THE V E L U C I T Y OF T I H C K 4 N FXCEEOS 3 . 1 ) C --.1) Vll)=-VSTART ISN 0 2 8 4 ISN 0286 - 5 4 3 0 FPAXC(M) = AMAXI(FMPXCIM).5444 ISN 0293 5441 l ~ I N .FIM)I FPAXT(M) AMINLIFMAXTIMI.76 ISN 0256 75 DPRIMP = U I P I .O.

FPAXC(M)) ISN 0347 IFIFCMAXILTI-FMAXCIM) l556O1556Lv5560 lSN 0340 5 5 6 1 NCPAX(LTl=M ISN 0349 5560 IF(FTMAX(LT)-FMAXT(rI)55631556215563 ISN 0350 5562 NTPAXILT)=M ISN 0351 5 5 6 3 CCNTINUE ISN 0352 5 5 5 5 IF(IOPTl1-215556.VIMI.0) BLOWS=l. I I O X I I Z H L A S E N U M H E K ~ 3 X ~ A 6 ~ 1 0 X ~FKOBLEM I5H NUMDER.NUMBER OF R 1 L O h S PER I N C H = F l 6 ..5570 ISN 0353 5 5 5 6 I F (UPRIMP-0.P 0327 5 4 4 8 FPnXC(M1 = FMAXCIM)/AREA(M) 0378 5449 FPbXTIM)=FMAXTIMI/I-AKEAIM)) 0329 GC T U ( 5 4 4 2 ~ 5 4 4 2 ~ 5 5 5 3 1 ~ I O P T 1 5 0330 5 4 4 2 WHITE (6.L~UOLOWS. IS.5572) C IJU S ~ ~ O ' S T A ~ AT T S5 1 2 0 5572 FOflElArI L H L I 5571 G O TU 5 9 1 0 LNC HhAL 51 UL21 C222 0125 C244 0122 C222 C284 0360 0004 C224 0020 OC43 C114 0144 C184 0196 C201r PAGE S I X T Y . 3 8 H ~ I N C H E. 8 0 3 ) CASE.P ISN 0345 FTVAX(LTI=AMAXL(FTMAX(LT).GT..O. 2 X 7 H R U T O T A L 7 X l l H P O l N T FOKCEZXIZHMAX C STR ltSS2X3HSCGZXL2HMAX T STRE5SZX3HSEG//) C-----PLCTTING HOUTINF IFIIOPTl3-115570~5574~5574 5574 CALL uK~kIWTOTn.C4SEIPKUD) C-----F hC P L O T T I N G K O U T I N E 1 siu 5570 WHITt(6. 8 .2~11X19HJP111NT = F5.6~F1O.O/OPKIHP 0335 5 5 5 1 U D L O W S I L T ) = BLOWS 0336 U H L T T L I L T ) = RUTOTL 0337 UFPAXC(LT) = FMAXCIP)*AREAIPI C I N I T I A L U ABOVE I O E N T I F I € S F I G U R E S U S E 0 I N SUMMARY 0338 GO T 0 1 5 5 5 2 e 5 5 5 2 .0)701170L~59 ISN 0335 5 9 CONTINUE 1SN 0356 W ? I T E ( 6 .LT.3~18rFI2.O~ll4~FL2ZO~F16.O 0333 5 5 5 3 IFIOPRIMP. 150~~IOPT15 0339 5552 WKlTt I6~2107)OPKIMP. 2 2 H P I L E U R l V l N G A N A-L Y S ~~.5570.FIrAXTIMI) ISN 0346 FCPAXILTl=ACAXl(FCMAX(LT).2) 8 0 5 FORMAT(2XL3HULOWS PER I N ..PKO8 8 0 3 FORM41 I l H U .RLOUS~k 2 1 0 5 F C R M A T ( / / 1 0 3 H SEGPEhT AREA T I M E N MAX C STKESS TlMt N 1 PAX T STRESS CMAXIMI DIM) V(M)) I5N 0341 2106 FCRMATl13~F15. 8 .2105) 0331 5550 W R I T t ( 6 ~ 2 L 0 6 ) I M ~ A K E A l M ) ~ N F M A X C I M ) ~ F M A X C ( M ) ~ N F M A X T I M ) ~ F M A X T I M ~ ~ O M A X lIV).6rFl3~2) ISN 0342 2 1 0 7 F C K M A T 1 2 4 H PERMANENT SET U F P I L E = F 1 5 . I O X . 2 2 H TOTAL I N T E R V A L 5 = 1 8 ) ISN 0343 1 5 0 CCNTINUE ISN 0344 5 5 5 8 UO 5 5 6 3 M=NSEGL.~XII~) 804 FOHl~lAT(l9X~9HOPOIN= T F5.UIM).S .rvmr.001)59r707~707 I5N 0354 707 I F (HLOWS-60.M=LIPI 0332 DLCWS=O. 0326 5 4 4 7 UO 5 4 4 9 M = l .

...S FCMAX FLUPT FHAXC FMAXT FTMAX IUPTL JSIDE KHVLD NCMAX NUMbX NKUNT NPASS NSEGI NTMAX PKOBS QSlDE RUHlL KUSUM HWENH SLACK SLOPE SYMBOL I ~ T E K ~ ASLT A T E X E R T NUMHCRS TUTAL 0103 0105 0105 ill06 0107 WPlLE . * * * * * F O R T R A N C K C S S R E F E R E N C E L I S T I N G * * * * * a'lMOOL I N T C R h A L STbTEMEkT NllMDFRC -~ .- AOS 0106 0199 0205 EFF 0058 C061 0141 JTM 0172 0173 0173 0173 0174 0174 0174 0175 0175 LAM 0004 0124 0246 0252 LAP 0746 0747 LAY NPI AREA CASE CMAX DMAX DRAW EltES FCXP L4CK LAMP PKOD SOH1 AMAX 1 AMlNl BL0I.Os72 0024 0024 XPLOT 0004 YPLUT 0004 HLOWSX 0067 0075 0090 0197 UtLTLK DPR IME 0184 OPKIMP 0256 0357 0094 0267 0292 0295 0261 0134 0331 0331 0040 OO2h 0255 KTLITAL ill58 HUL l ST OLIO KUPIVT OLOO~ KUTllTL OOHH KUTTLX 0389 UwEIICH STHESS 0299 PAGE S I X T Y ... .O N E .

LABEL DEFINED KEFEHENCES 5 0156 0154 0024 0159 0248 0211 0092 0208 0209 0193 LABEL DEFINED HEFEHENCES 78 0263 0259 0260 0260 79 0261 0260 P A G E SIXTY-TWO .

LABEL DEFINED 5084 0029 5086 0030 5087 5088 5090 5092 5100 * * * * * F O R T R A N C R O S S R E F E R E N C E L I S T I N G * * * * * LABEL DEFINED REFERENCES 5184 0116 5186 0117 PAGE SIXTY-THREE .

LE.400. 4****FORTAAN C R O S S R E F E R E N C E LISTING***** LAUEL REFERENCES 5422 5423 5424 5425 5427 5429 5430 5439 5440 5441 5442 5443 5444 5447 5448 5449 COPPILEU OPTICNS .1 GO TO 5 1SN 0018 IFlY~AX. P K O B I ISN 0003 DIPENSINN U R U T T L 1 1 5 0 l ~ U R L O W S l 1 5 O l ~ Y P L O T l 5 1 l ~ X P L O I l 5 l l 1Sk 0004 5574 YPLUTII I=WTOTAC lSN 0005 XPLrJTlll=O.800.LE." 0002 LCBHOUTINE U ~ A W ~ W T O T A L ~ U R U T T L . ISN 0009 5573 XPLOT(IP+ll=URLUWSIIPl 1SN 0010 YCAX=YPLUTlLTPLl 1SN 0011 NZ=N2 I SY 0012 IF(YMAX.1 GO TO 3 ISN 0014 IFIYMAX-LE.1 GO TO 6 1SN 0020 3 DY=50.N A M E = . ISN 0027 10 DX=10. ISN 0025 G O TO 10 ISN 0026 6 UY-400. ISN 0023 G C TO 10 lSN 0024 5 I)Y=200.l600. C ~ S E .M A I N ~ O P T = ~ ~ ~ L I N E C N T = ~ O O S O U R C E ~ E ~ C D I C I N U L ~ S T ~ N O D E C K ~ L U A U ~ N O M A P ~ N O E U I T ~ ~ D ~ X R E F IS.3200.LE.1 6 0 TO 4 ISN 0016 IFIYHAX. L T . ISN 0028 PPKUU=PKOfl IS!4 0029 HETU!<N ISN 0030 t hU **+**FORrRAN C R O S S R E F E K E N C E LISTING***** SyrndL ox UY IP LT N2 CASE DRAW LTPl PKUC YMAX PPROU XPLOT YPLOT UHLUWS UHUTTL HTllTAL P A G E SIXTY-FOUR . lSN 0006 LTPI=LT+l 1SN 0007 UO 5573 IP=l. ISN 0021 G C TO 10 ISK 0022 4 bY=lOO.LT 1SN OOeB YPLUT(IP+ll-UKUTTLIIPl12000. U D L ~ W S .

~POOlLA49394.-UELTATI5I616 ISN 0024.T1454C5.UPOOl.KPOOl. O E L T A T ~ N 2 ) ISN 0006 ISN 0007 ISN 0008 ISN 0010 ISN 0011 ISN 0012 ISN 0014 ISN 0015 1SN 0 0 1 6 .A49394. IEF2851 SYSCUT SYSOUT ltF285l VOL SER NOS- ICF2851 SYS68L34.F I V E . LABEL C t l lNE0 REFERENCES 3 0020 0012 4 0022 0014 5 0024 0016 **+**a CNIJ OF C U C P I L A T I O N ****** OS/36O FORTRAN H COCPILFK OPTICNS NAME= - MAIN. I S- .ROO00444 DELETED IFF2851 VOL SEH l i U S = 5 5 5 5 5 5 .R0000445 OELETEO IEF2U51 VOL SEK NOS= STURAU.T145405.- ISN 0019 G C TU 3 ISN 0020 2 UEL1I1NI=SCRTl~~Pl/K1P~l/lY. N ISN 0022 4 TCIN=AMINIIT~IN~UELTlIMI) ISN 0023 lFITHIN/2.RPOOl. ICFZH.LOAOSET PASSED ILF285I VCL SEW NUS= 6 6 6 6 6 6 .O/UtLTAT ISN 0026 ISN 0027 ISN 0028 KETUXN EhC SOH T TMIY AMlivl UCLTl NPASS UELTAT UtLTCK LABEL DEFIhtD REFCKENCES 1 0015 0012 **t*++ENO OF C O M P l L h T l C N ****** ILF2851 SYS68134.LOADSET DELETE0 PAGE S I X T Y . N 0 0 -~ 75 lGELlA=l. T T D E L T t P t W w K r T O E L T A . 5 UELTAT-TMINI2.A49394.0PT=OO. ICF2851 SYS68134.T145405.TL454C5.LINECNT=50~SUUKCttEHCUIC~NOLIST~NOUECK~LUAO~NOMAP~NO~UIT~IU~XR~F 1SN 0 0 0 2 SUEXOUTINE G E L T C K 1 N P A S S .A49394.l SYS68134.648 ISN 002 1 3 UC 4 M = l .

0 WPlLE r 0.0 i" . JSIDE. PROB. . PPLUSI. C START CHANGE TO FLDATING POINT JPOINT. PLESSI.l'l" WPlLE WPILE tW(37) PAGE SIXTY-SIX . IPRINT-I *TDELTA TTDELT DELTAT PLESSI- - - M ' I TOP ~(PPLusI). 0 . PROGRAM VARIABLES Y 1 I PROGRAM VARIABLES TTDELT - . . CHAN6E TO FIXED P O I N T P.

I PAGE SIXTY-SEVEN .0 VI.V S T A I T LT-0 .I BLOWSX-0.

) r RUTOTL -- I1 PAGE SIXTY-EIGHT .MO RU[M)=(Z OI~RUTOTL - M-I 7 RUPINT)(I FLOAT(M-~d. (RUTOTL-RUPINT) +. RU(M). TOTAL M-l 4 RU(MI =(RULI ST(M)/IOO. PROB. ~~/(FLOAT(P-MO*I)) *a w /FLOAT(P-MOII) TOTAL. I I J M.T O T A L + RU(PPLUS~)s R U P I N T RU(PPLUSI)= RUPINT I WRITE CASE.

TDELTA-TTDELT DELTAT. P I O I .ITDELTA CRSE. PROBS PERCENT. P A G E SIXTY-NINE . I v I MAKE REAL 1 MAKE INTERGER I DIMENSION I VARIABLES I TMIN = I.QSIDE. OPOINT.).

P-JT I I LAY-I I u LACK-I PAGE S E V E N T Y . 0 RETURN 0 CONTINUE I I I I JTM.

PAGE SEVENTY-ONE .

FEXP <0 e 51 NPI-N*I DELTAT I AND 0.0 I 07 KPRIME (M) 1 CONTINUE 1 I CONTINUE I PAGE SEVENTY-TWO .

. a - LAMP LAMP v~M)=v~M)+F(M+). El CONTWM DPRINP -DIP)-QPOINT CONTINUE I LAMP.F(MI vi~\-vl~\-(rcd+RII)) -RIM))*32.17 *32.17* D E L T A T PAGE SEVENTY-THREE .

I1
YES
& CONTINUE

NO

NO

FNAX(M-AMAXI PICK
u
V(I) =-V S T A R T

THE MAXIM POSITIVE

1 FMAXT(M)-AMAII

I
PICK
T H E M A X I M U M POSITIVE
v n L u E FROM F M A X ~

PAGE SEVENTY-FOUR

0
- LAY 2

CONTINUE
W R I T E THC RATIO OF

':\. y
9
.
THE VELOCITY W e ) TO
rue VELOCITY OF THE
RAM EXCEEDS 3.1 1

PAGE SEVENTY-FIVE

I I

YES
BLOWS = '.%PR~ME
BLOWS I O . 0
I

URUTTL(LT)- RUTOTL

UFMAXC(LT)- FMAXC(P)

CONTINUE

FTMAX(LT) - A M A X 1
PICK A POSITIVE MAX.
VALUE FROM FTMAX(LT)

I CONTINUE 1

P A G E SEVENTY-SIX

r-l
CONTINUE

CASE, PRO8

URUTON -URUTTL(J)/
I
2000.
I RUTTLX =RUTOTL 1

CALL SUBROUTINE

- 9
DIMENSION
VARIABLES

IP-LT

RETURN

P A G E SEVENTY-SEVEN

1938. L.Y.. ASCE. 7. 1963. 1967. Research Report No. A. 2.. Fox. "Chesapeake Bay Bridge-Tunnel Project.10 Cumrnings. N.2 Housel. J. R. "Pile Foundations. 3608. Y. A. New York. L. p.. p. J. New 6.. and Hirsch.1 Chan. W.. Wave Equation.. 3306." British ceedings. 33-7A. Pile F o u n d ~ i o n sMcGraw-Hill . Octo- ber 22. I REFERENCES 1. "Dynamic Pile Driving For. and Davies. ASME. ASCE.1 Isaacs.. Con- January. Aust. Piles and Soils.7 Mansur. E. "Pile-Soil System Response in Clay as a Function 2. Vol. W." Research Foundations Division.. I. 1962. New York.6 Fowler. 1963. 6. Presented at ASCE Convention." Foundation the Institute of Civil Engineers. S.2 Smith. mulas. - D. 1962. T.-N. Foundation Engineering. J. Edwards. and Hirsch. 3. Vol." Engineering Contract Record. 1967. sity. and Samson. Book 6. 1931. D. C. ?AGE SEVENTY-EIGHT ." Proceed. tudinal Wave Transmission" by E. ASME. 1955. 2.. L. E. and Holt. J. Discussion of "Impact and Longi- tudinal Wave Transmission" by E.I .." Civil Engineering. September..1 Rand.. ings. December.. 1967. Eng. 7 . 1951.. 2. Research Report 33-10.. T. M. V. 33-8... 2. A. 2. W.. August. Part I. T. "Pile Driving Analysis by the Co. "Computer Study of The Dynamic Behavior of Pilinq. January. p. Report No.ASCE. 127.pst. "~einforcedConcrete Pile Formula. and Coyle.. 1940. J.3 Smith.3 Smith. H. New York. E. 8. Wave Equation. T.. Smith. 127. 6. L. J... J. 2. "Pile Driving Impact. June. ST4. A." Texas Transportation Institute. Wave Equation Analysis. G.. 1931. G.." Proceed. C. P.. ings. a Pile-Soil System. Transportation Institute. 18..3 Smith.6 Forehand." Transactions." Texas Transportation Institute. E. Industrial Computation Seminar. 3. L. September.. 1951. nology. E. Smith. ASCE. Report No. 1955. T.4 Hirsch. H.3 Lowery. 1." 6. T.. 1962. Re- 1960. Research 2. H. Industrial Computation Seminar. 12. Engineers.S. 20. crete Pile Division. New York. G." Trans~ctions. A.12 Glanville. W. International Business Machines Corp. Vol.5 Smith. 1967. "Pile Driving Impact. and Lowery. Hirsch. J.9 Janes. December. Princeton Univer- Book Co. "Explosion Adds Driving Force to 8. Bldg. L. L. "Pile Load Capacity: Estimates and 8.. 1960. York." J o u r d o f the Boston Society of Civil Au. Vol. Part I. 12.2 Smith. 1950. 1950.3 Airhart.. McGraw-Hill Science in Engineering Thesis..." McGraw-Hill Graw-Hill Book Company.. Texas Transportation Institute.. E. R. Inst. D. P. L. 1145." Graw-Hill Book Co. "Pile Driving and Loading Test. D. W." Proceedings.1 Lowery. Laboratory Study of Dynamic Load-Deformation 1." Texas 2. "Use of the Wave Equation to Predict Soil Resistance on a Pile During Driving. 1955. 2.. J. D. J.. W. Inst. T. A.. V. New York. Hirsch. Paper No. 6.2 Heisinq. 1951. New York. "Pile Driving Analysis by the and Damping Properties of Sands Concerned with Wave Equation. Grime. with Prestressed Concrete Piles. Properties. "Some Experiences 7. Eng. London. 2.. L.4 Dunham. W. V. "Investigation of Sands Subjected to Dynamic Loading. 1961. Pile Foundations. August. Mc. 1962. New 6.. August. 2. Hirsch. 1960. International Business Machines Corp. September. Pro- forced Concrete Piles During Driving. L.." Journal o f the Soil Mechanics and stressed Concrete Piles During Driving. 1964. "Pile Driving Analysis-Simulation of Hammers. Proc. 413. T. 33-7. H. "Reinforced Concrete Pile Formula." Proceedings of Arkansas. December. C.. M." Texas Transportation Institute. New York..." Dissertation at Illinois Institute of Tech. L. A. Mc. Paper No. P. L.. D. No. A. Coyle. August. L. 963." Research Report 33-9. Foundations o f Structures. and Reese. 963. Book Co. P.. 1963. Texas Transportation Institute. A.. N.. L." Proceedings. H. 1967.I. p. Research Board Technical Paper No..2 Moseley.. J. and Coyle..1 Isaacs. D. "A York. Jr." Master of 2. E. Hirsch. 1968. September. M. Raymond International. August." 3..1 Samson. L.. 1965. A.R. Facts. August. "Test Piles in Sand at Helena. p.13 Heising. 44. Cushions. Vol." Journal o f the Structural Division. Vol. "Pile Driving Analysis by the of -Excess Pore Water Pressure and Other Soil Wave Equation.5 Chellis. R.. Transactions. Discussion of "Impact and Longi. Aust. S. 1951.. C.7 Chellis. T.2 Reeves. H.4 Chellis. 2. W. R. Paper 4483. 8. June. E. "A Report on Stresses in Long Pre- Test Results. Transactions. 1951.. 1962. September. "Pile Driving Analysis Using the Wave Equation. W. 3. "Driving Stresses in Steel Bearing Piles. ASCE. p. C.8 Leonards. ASCE. Mogens. search Report No. "An Investigation of the Stresses in Rein. N. 44. C. L. P. 27.11 Gardner. E. L. "Pile Driving Analysis by the Diesel Hammer.

" Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundations Division. Texas Transportation Institute. L... J. American Society of Civil Engineers. Cushions. August. T. 12. Project 2-5-62-33. 1967.6 Lowery.. Smith. May. and Lowery. and Emrich. "A Report on Field Tests of Pre. "Pile Driving Analysis by the Wave Equation." Research Report No. Hirsch." Progress 33-9. 33-9.5 Lowery. L. Proc. August. J. April. Proceed- "Use of the Wave Equation to Predict Soil Resist. Smith. Hirsch. L. T. 1967.. 47. August. p. T. August. and Edwards. C. 2574. B2. August. J. J. L. Project No. C. L." Research Report No. Report. PAGE SEVENTY-NINE . "Prob. H. "Impact Load- 9.. E.. 2574. SM4. and Foundations Division. ST4. L.. Hirsch.. L.. T. E. Texas Transportation Institute. pp." Francisco.. T. L. 33-10.5 Hirsch. H. "Pile Driving Analysis by the 1967. and Edwards. A. T. T. Hirsch. and Samson. Project Piling Behavior. September.. San "Computer Study of Dynamic Behavior of Piling. ance on a Pile During Driving. 44." Research Report No. B5. Smith. T. J. 1967.... Texas. W. Texas Transporta- tion Institute. 2-5-62-33. Wave Equation.8. B1. College Station. Texas Transportation Institu'e. C. 1960. Journal of the Structural Division. Samson." J o u r d of the Soil Mechunics 1965. Texas Transportation Institute. Piles During Driving. Texas Transportation Institute. SM4. 1963. Proceedings of the 9. ings Paper 3608. Paper Cushions. ference on Civil Engineering in the Oceans. 1960. "Pile Driving Analysis by the port 33-3. p. August. E. 84. 419. lems in Design and Installation of Heavily Load- ed Pipe Piles. T. Piles and Soils." Journal of the Soil Mechanics 8. American Society of Civil Engineers. J. Hirsch. August. 35-61. Paper 9. August. the American Society of Civil Engineers. "Driving Prac- tices for Prestressed Concrete Piles. B. H. Proc.." Presented to ASCE Specialty Con.. 9." Research Report 33-4. Proc. 1960. Proceedings of the "Pile Driving Analysis-Simulation of Hammers. Texas Transportation Institute. A." Research Re.4 Lowery. 1963. Wave Equation.. T. and Samson. Texas A&M University. stressed Concrete Piles During Driving. L. SM4. 2-5-62-33. A.. C. H.. 2574. Paper "Pile Driving Analysis-Simulation of Hammers. Piles and Soils. C. Proceedings of the American Society of Civil Engineers.3 McClelland. J. No. B3.1 Hirsch.. L. April. L. J. and Foundations Division. Focht. "A Report on Computer Study of Deformation Properties of Pile Cushioning Ma- Variables which Affect the Behavior of Concrete terials. and Samson..2 Hirsch." Progress Report. p. 1966.. 1963. C.. p. J. Proceedings of 9.