Computers and Geotechnics 41 (2012) 106–113

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Computers and Geotechnics

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/compgeo

Design and implementation of a drilled shaft load test database

Shiu-Shin Lin, Maria Cecilia M. Marcos, Hsin-Wen Chang, Yit-Jin Chen ⇑
Department of Civil Engineering, Chung Yuan Christian University, Chung-Li 32023, Taiwan

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This paper details the development and potential of the drilled shaft load test (DSLT) database in which
Received 28 July 2011 351 case histories of static load tests from various countries can be freely retrieved and utilized world-
Received in revised form 3 December 2011 wide. Employing the Entity-Relationship (ER) model to the structure design of the database provides con-
Accepted 4 December 2011
siderable flexibility and extensibility while the open source MySQL server systematically compiles the
historic data. DSLT enables quick browsing, inexpensive query, and utility of data as pile design tools
or as relevant data for advanced research. Moreover, it can serve as a data platform for a centralized stor-
Keywords:
age of information among interested pile data holders worldwide.
Database
MySQL program
Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Drilled shafts
Load tests

1. Introduction
Drilled shaft foundations are among the most commonly used
structures in deep foundation designs. From the process shown
in Fig. 1, shafts are typically designed based on analysis models
(estimate pile capacity). However, these methods are associated
with a certain level of uncertainty due to factors such as soil
parameter variations or construction factors. Hence, numbers of
static load tests are often required (verify pile capacity) to make
the pile reliable and cope with the possible risks associated with
drilled shafts for every single project. As a result, large amounts
of static pile load tests have been conducted. However, there has
been very little effort to systematically compile historic pile test
data or effectively utilize such data.
Over the years, pile load tests have been regarded as an effective
tool for verifying estimated results. Knowledge about pile case his-
tories can provide better insights when designing piles. Further-
more, these load test data can be used as bases for evaluating
new design methods or pile practices. Therefore, sufficient data
from field load tests are essential for pile foundation analyses.
Researchers [1,2] previously used axial load tests on drilled
shafts to develop a relational database that reflected data quality
and usefulness. Several researchers [3–11] subsequently collected
a wide variety of drilled shaft load test case history data from all
over the world. Using these load tests, they assessed the soil and
shaft behavior, evaluated failure criteria, and predicted drilled
shaft capacity. However, these data are in a flat-file storage system
⇑ Corresponding author. Tel.: +886 03 265 4227.
E-mail addresses: linxx@cycu.edu.tw (S.-S. Lin), g9802203@cycu.edu.tw (M.C.
Marcos), swen@cycu.org.tw (H.-W. Chang), yjc@cycu.edu.tw (Y.-J. Chen).
without a well-organized data structure and are thus difficult to re-
trieve whenever particular data are needed.
To compile and share large amounts of field data with the full
extent of scalability and extensibility necessary for the most effec-
tive public usage, a well-designed database must be developed to
meet the following functions:
(a) systematically compile historic drilled shaft data from
around the world including pile information, soil investiga-
tion data, static load test results, and case-based shaft data;
(b) allow practicing geotechnical engineers and researchers to
freely retrieve and utilize extremely large numbers of useful
field data;
(c) provide relevant data for pile evaluation and design; and
(d) establish a data platform for centralized information storage.
This paper presents an approach that uses the Entity-Relation-
ship (ER) model to develop the drilled shaft load test (DSLT) database
with significant scalability, extensibility and usability in an open do-
main. A powerful tool for creating the DSLT database schema is
clearly assessed and implemented to compile extremely large
amounts of data into a well-structured information format and
make the database available to the public. Convenient browsing,
querying, and data collection for various scheme options are then
clearly demonstrated. The results from selected interpretation crite-
ria and analysis models that were applied to these piles are con-
tained in the database to provide case-based drilled shaft data. The
usefulness and applications of these case-based data for pile capac-
ity evaluation are explored in detail. Finally, a call for extensibility
and enhancement of stored data among pile data holders worldwide
is initiated to provide the geotechnical community with a central-
ized information storage system.

0266-352X/$ - see front matter Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.compgeo.2011.12.001
 S.-S. Lin et al. / Computers and Geotechnics 41 (2012) 106–113 107

In addition, data consistency can be maintained with minimal

START
redundancy, especially for large amounts of information.
The relational database design using the ER model introduced
Site Investigation by Chen [14,15] is adopted for several reasons: (1) it logically rep-
Soil Properties resents data and is general enough to model data in a meaningful,
Data Collection
Design Loads natural, and specific way; (2) it is flexible, extendable, and adapts
Design Stage

Others easily to change; (3) it can be understood by non-data processing

Select Pile Properties
Estimate Pile Capacity
Verify Pile Capacity
Construction Stage
personnel; and (4) it can be easily translated into the implementa-
Pile Type tion of a particular Relational Database Management System
Diameter (RDBMS).
Depth Subsequently, MySQL (server 5.1) and SQL (Structured Query
Language) are utilized as a database server and programming lan-
guage, respectively, to allow flexible data manipulation. MySQL is
Tip Capacity
among the several RDBMSs, characterized as a free, fast, and reli-
Side Resistance
able open source management system providing multi-user access
to the database. Finally, MySQL Workbench, a free integrated envi-
ronment that enables users to visually design a MySQL database, is
Pile Load Test used as a tool to create the ER diagram.

3. Components of the database

Pile Production and Information on 351 drilled shafts from various sites worldwide
Construction was collected from different journals, literature, and load tests re-
ports. The information included pile and soil investigation data and
Fig. 1. Simplified pile design and construction process. static load test results. Pile capacities from the 12 interpretation
criteria were then deduced, and selected pile design parameters
were back-calculated for additional data utility. To facilitate data
Table 1 retrieval, the information was grouped into six categories: site
Description of representative interpretation criteria. data, soil characteristics, shaft information, interpreted capacity,
Interpretation method Description shaft displacement, and design parameters. The information lo-
cated in each category is as follows:
L1 Hirany and Kulhawy’s method
0.2%B Load at 0.2%Ba displacement
0.25%B Load at 0.25%B displacement 1. Site data: Field load tests were conducted at 205 sites in 16 dif-
0.3%B Load at 0.3%B displacement ferent countries at different points in time.
0.4%B Load at 0.4%B displacement 2. Soil characteristics: Tests were conducted in a wide variety of
0.5in Load at 0.5 in displacement
soil profiles with useful soil parameters. The standard penetra-
L2 Hirany and Kulhawy’s method
4%B Load at 4%B displacement tion test results and undrained shear strength (su) values are
STC O’Rourke and Kulhawy’s method under this category.
Fuller and Hoy Fuller and Hoy’s method 3. Shaft information: Straight-sided drilled shafts with diameters
Terzaghi and Peck Terzaghi and Peck’s method
ranging from 0.14 to 2.0 m and depths ranging from 1.37 to
DeBeer DeBeer’s method
van der Veen van der Veen’s method
77 m were carried out in the tests. Shaft installation methods,
Chin Chin’s method equipment used, and reported construction or test issues are
a
incorporated in this set.
B = shaft diameter.
4. Interpreted capacity: Load capacities were interpreted from the
load–displacement curves using the 12 representative interpre-
tation criteria (L1, 0.2%B (B = shaft diameter), 0.25%B, 0.3%B,
2. Database requirements
0.4%B, 0.5 in, L2, 4%B, slope tangent, Fuller and Hoy, Terzaghi
and Peck, DeBeer, van der Veen, and Chin methods). These cri-
The collected drilled shaft records are currently in the form of
teria were selected because they present a wide distribution of
flat-file storage. A relational database is adopted in this study be-
interpreted results from the lower, middle, and higher ranges
cause it provides more advantages over flat-file storage [12,13].
wherein the variation of results is apparent and can easily be

Table 2
Analysis models for drilled shaft capacity.

Pile capacity Undrained soils Drained soils

Tip resistance qult ¼ 6:17su fcd fcr þ q qult ¼ q0 N q fqs fqd fqr þ 0:3c0 BN c fcr
P
Side resistance Q s ðaÞ ¼ pB N n¼1 an sun t n
PN
Q s ðkÞ ¼ pB n¼1 kn ½rv n þ 2 sun  t n
PN h i
Q s ðbÞ ¼ pB KKo n¼1 rv n K on tan /n  /d

Note: qult = ultimate tip capacity, Qs = side resistance, a = empirical adhesion factor, k = empirical factor, b = K tand, su = soil’s
undrained shear strength, fcd, fcr = modifiers of Nc for foundation depth and soil rigidity respectively, fqs, fqd, fqr = modifiers of
Nq for foundation shape, depth, and soil rigidity, respectively, fcr = modifier of Nc for soil rigidity, (Nc, Nq, Nc = bearing capacity
factors), q = total vertical stress, q0 = effective vertical stress, c0 = soil’s effective unit weight, B = shaft diameter, N = number of
soil layers, t = thickness, K = coefficient of horizontal soil stress, Ko = in situ K, rv = vertical effective stress, / = effective stress
friction angle, d = interface friction angle for soil and shaft.
108 S.-S. Lin et al. / Computers and Geotechnics 41 (2012) 106–113

Displacement Capacity

Displacement No. Interpreted No.

correspond
L1 L1 Site
0.2%B 0.2%B
0.25%B 0.25%B belong Site No.
0.3%B 0.3%B Interpret Location
0.4%B 0.4%B GWT (m)
0.5in 0.5in Soil Description
L2 L2 Country
4%B 4%B
STC STC Shaft
F&H F&H
T&P T&P Shaft No.
DeBEER DeBEER Depth, D(m) has
van der Veen van der Veen Dia., B(m)
Chin Chin Const_Method
Equipment
Loading Type Soil
back-calculate
Side Resistance
Tip Resistance Soil No.
D/B soil location
Desparameter Remarks -relative to the shaft
SPT-N
Parameter ID
Soil Type
Su(CIUC)
LL
alpha(CIUC)
PL
Mean vertical effe
has Dr
-ctive stress (kN/m2)
Unit Weight
Ko
Su Test Type
Measured Beta
Su
Predicted Beta
Friction Angle-TC
lambda(CIUC)
K/Ko

Fig. 2. Entity-relationship diagram – analysis phase.

Table 3
Description of DSLT database attributes.

Entity Attribute Description

Site idSite Unique number and primary key of ‘‘site’’ table
Site no. Site number
Country Country’s name where the pile test was conducted
Location Specific location where the pile test was conducted
Soil description Detailed description of soil
GWT (m) Location of groundwater table

Shaft idShaft Unique number and primary key of ‘‘shaft’’ table

Shaft no. Shaft number
Const. method General construction method imposed on the shaft
Equipment Equipment name/model
Depth, D (m) Embedded depth of the shaft
Dia., B (m) Shaft diameter
D/B Ratio of depth and diameter
Loading type Type of load test (compression, uplift)
Side resistance Load capacity along the shaft’s length (kN)a
Tip resistance Load capacity at the tip of the shaft (kN)a
Remarks Reported construction/test details/issues

Capacity and displacement idCapacity Unique number and primary key of ‘‘capacity’’ table
idDisplacement Unique number and primary key of ‘‘displacement’’ table
12 Interpretation criteria Refer to Table 1

Soil idSoil Unique number and primary key of ‘‘soil’’ table

Soil location Soil location relative to ‘‘side’’ or ‘‘tip’’ of the shaft
SPT N Standard penetration test N value
Soil type Type of soil divided into ‘‘drained’’ and ‘‘undrained’’
LL Liquid limit
PL Plastic limit
Dr Relative density
Unit weight Soil unit weight
su test type Type of undrained shear test
su Undrained shear strength
Friction angle Soil friction angle
 S.-S. Lin et al. / Computers and Geotechnics 41 (2012) 106–113 109

Table 3 (continued)

Entity Attribute Description

Desparameter idDesparameter Unique number and primary key of ‘‘desparameter’’ table
su (CIUC) Undrained shear strength from consolidated-isotropically undrained triaxial compression (CIUC) test
Alpha (CIUC) Empirical factor a from CIUC test
Measured and predicted beta Empirical factor b
Lambda (CIUC) Empirical factor k
Ko In situ horizontal soil stress coefficient
K/Ko Ratio of horizontal soil stress coefficient to in situ horizontal soil stress coefficient
a
Refer to Table 2.

compared. The descriptions of the 12 interpretation criteria are
presented in Table 1. The definitions of the interpreted load
capacities of these criteria are summarized elsewhere [7,8].
5. Shaft displacement: Allowable displacement is an important
aspect in drilled shaft design, especially in the serviceability limit
design analysis. Therefore, the pile butt (top) displacement corre-
sponding to each interpreted capacity is included in the database.
6. Design parameters: Pile design parameters were back-calculated
from selected analysis models shown in Table 2. For simplicity,
the L2 method by Hirany and Kulhawy [16] was adopted for the
back-calculation of case-based design parameters, including
mean vertical effective stress (rv m ), Ko (coefficient of lateral
earth pressure at rest), K/Ko (ratio of in situ coefficient of lateral
earth pressure and lateral earth pressure at rest), su (CIUC)
[undrained shear strength from consolidated-isotropically
undrained triaxial compression (CIUC) test], empirical factors
alpha (aCIUC), beta (b), lambda (k), bearing capacity factors (Nc,
Nc, Nq), bearing capacity modifiers for foundation shape (fcs,
fcs, fqs), depth (fcd, fcd, fqd) and rigidity (fcr, fcr, fqr), and total
and effective vertical stresses (q and q0 , respectively). The
detailed back-calculation processes of these parameters are
presented elsewhere [9].
4. Database design and implementation
The ER model is developed through the relationships among the
categories. Fig. 2 illustrates the generated entities, their attributes,
and their relationships. Six entities are established to enable users
to have an initial view of the database’s objects of interest [the site,
shaft, capacity, displacement, soil, and desparameter (a code for
the design parameter)]. The attributes, which are factors relative
to entities, are detailed in Table 3 and summarized in Fig. 2.
The broken lines show the connections of the entities and indi-
cate whether a relationship connects one entity to many, one to
one, or many to many (M:N) [13]. The underlined attributes are
the keys for the entities. Using MySQL Workbench, Fig. 2 is

Fig. 3. Entity-relationship diagram – design phase.

110 S.-S. Lin et al. / Computers and Geotechnics 41 (2012) 106–113

Fig. 4. Screenshot of DSLT database viewed on input format.

transformed into a new ER diagram to apply the model to the imple-

mentation of the DSLT database. The schema is shown in Fig. 3.
However, a M:N relationship (see Fig. 2) for the soil and shaft
entities is not recognized by the MySQL program. This relationship
is separated into two ‘‘one-to-many’’ relationships by creating a Begin QUERY
composite entity between shaft and soil as illustrated in Fig. 3.
(e.g. Undrained-
The composite entity is named ‘‘soil_has_shaft,’’ representing the
linking table between soil and shaft. compression load
A logical representation of drilled shaft data is clearly estab- testscases )
lished. Records are systematically imported from the flat-file stor-
age system and integrated into a well-organized relational
database. Finally, the DSLT database is implemented on a SQL ser-
“FROM” statement
ver to allow data manipulation and multi-user access.
to retrieve the data from
5. DSLT database applications multiple tables
(e.g. shaft, site, soil)
The DSLT database systematically holds records and provides
access from simple browsing to collecting large quantities of infor-
mation. The mechanism can serve as a pool of information capable “WHERE” statement
of assisting the geotechnical community in pile design, analysis, to filter records satisfying the
and research. SQL search functions facilitate data retrieval when retrieval conditions
searching for a particular case, piles at a particular site, interpreted
(e.g. ‘Loading Type’ = ‘Compression’,
capacity results, back-calculated design parameters, or piles
‘Soil Type’ = ‘Undrained’)
matching certain search conditions (such as soil type, shaft length,
or shaft capacity).

5.1. Browsing, query, and load test cases collection “SELECT” statement
to select the desired information
Fig. 4 displays the graphical interface database design format, (e.g. Shaft No., Depth, Dia., Location, Soil
which is provided by the MySQL server for a particular case (shaft
Description, Loading Type, Soil Type)
2). Data are divided into six information sheets including shaft,
site, soil, interpreted capacity, desparameter, and displacement.
Queries and data collections can be executed through the SQL
‘‘search’’ function. Display the query result
For example, when evaluating a required shaft depth or diame-
ter for a new piling project specifically dealing with shafts under
undrained compression loading condition, relevant records can
be viewed and used as a reference for that project. The typical
End
SQL query flow is demonstrated in Fig. 5, where the ‘‘SELECT’’
statement is chosen as the data manipulation statement and other
clauses (such as ‘‘FROM’’ and ‘‘WHERE’’) are chosen to retrieve the Fig. 5. SQL query flowchart.
 S.-S. Lin et al. / Computers and Geotechnics 41 (2012) 106–113 111

Shaft No. Depth, D (m) Dia., B (m) Location Soil Description Loading Type Soil Type
UC001 6.4 1.45 Ottawa, Ontario Leda marine clay Compression Undrained
UC002-1 10.2 0.88 Munich, Germany Fill over lake clay Compression Undrained
UC002-2 12.4 0.88 Munich, Germany Fill over lake clay Compression Undrained
UC002-3 12.7 1.30 Munich, Germany Fill over lake clay Compression Undrained
UC002-4 9.4 1.30 Munich, Germany Fill over lake clay Compression Undrained
UC002-5 10.0 1.80 Munich, Germany Fill over lake clay Compression Undrained
UC003-1 7.0 0.76 Houston, TX Stiff fissured Beaumont Compression Undrained
UC003-2 13.0 0.76 Houston, TX Stiff fissured Beaumont Compression Undrained
UC004 11.9 0.76 Chicago, IL Stiff to hard silty Compression Undrained
UC005-1 20.8 1.00 Bangkok, Thailand Soft to stiff silty clay Compression Undrained
UC005-2 21.7 1.00 Bangkok, Thailand Soft to stiff silty clay Compression Undrained
UC005-3 25.0 1.20 Bangkok, Thailand Soft to stiff silty clay Compression Undrained
UC006 23.0 0.63 Houston, TX Stiff clay Compression Undrained
UC007 13.3 0.22 Boston, MA Soft to stiff silty clay Compression Undrained
UC008-1 6.5 0.76 Phuenix, AZ Hard clay Compression Undrained
UC008-2 9.7 0.76 Phuenix, AZ Hard clay Compression Undrained
UC008-3 4.9 0.91 Phuenix, AZ Hard clay Compression Undrained
UC008-4 4.8 0.91 Phuenix, AZ Hard clay Compression Undrained
UC009-1 49.5 1.00 Bangkok, Thailand Hard clay Compression Undrained
UC009-2 48.9 1.20 Bangkok, Thailand Very stiff hard clay Compression Undrained
UC010 12.8 0.76 West Bryan, TX Stratified soft to hard claCompression Undrained
UC011 8.8 0.76 Southeastern, OK Thin plastic clay over limCompression Undrained
UC012 11.0 0.80 San Antonio, TX Fissured expansive clay Compression Undrained
UC013 7.4 0.76 Phuenix, AZ Hard clay Compression Undrained
UC014 4.3 0.18 College Station, TX Stratified clay Compression Undrained
UC015-1 6.1 0.41 Edmonton, Alberta Plastic clay over silt Compression Undrained
UC015-2 15.6 0.55 Edmonton, Alberta Plastic clay over silt Compression Undrained
UC015-3 4.9 0.51 Edmonton, Alberta Plastic clay over silt Compression Undrained
UC015-4 11.6 0.44 Edmonton, Alberta Plastic clay over silt Compression Undrained
UC016 6.2 0.46 Wendte, SD Silty clay Compression Undrained
UC017-1 4.6 0.91 I49/LA3132 Interchange, LStratified plastic clay Compression Undrained
UC017-2 9.2 0.91 I49/LA3132 Interchange, LStratified plastic clay Compression Undrained
UC017-3 13.7 0.91 I49/LA3132 Interchange, LStratified plastic clay Compression Undrained
UC018-1 1.8 0.30 Jabalpur, India Highly expansive black cCompression Undrained
UC018-2 3.7 0.30 Jabalpur, India Highly expansive black cCompression Undrained
UC018-3 1.8 0.23 Jabalpur, India Highly expansive black cCompression Undrained
UC018 4 3 7 0 23 Jabalpur India Highly expansive black cCompression Undrained
Fig. 6. List of undrained-compression drilled shaft load test cases.

data from multiple tables in the database. Using the SQL query
command, the desired criteria are selected SELECT shaft. ‘Shaft
No.’, shaft. ‘Depth’, shaft. ‘Dia.’, site. ‘Location’, soil. ‘Soil Descrip-
tion’, shaft. ‘Loading Type’, soil. ‘Soil Type’ and the data are re-
trieved from the shaft, site, and soil tables. These data are then
filtered using the ‘‘WHERE’’ statement by setting the loading type
to shaft. ‘Loading Type’ = ‘Compression’ and soil type to soil.
‘Soil Type’ = ‘Undrained’ . Subsequently, records of ‘‘undrained’’
soil type and ‘‘compression’’ test are promptly listed, as shown in
Fig. 6. Because the database contains basic information on each pile
case, reliable references for any new designs can be provided and
retrieved rapidly.
5.2. Case-based drilled shaft data
5.2.1. Interpreted capacity
As previously mentioned, numerous static load tests are often
required to verify the reliability of the estimated capacity. Because
the database holds interpreted capacities deduced from the 12 rep-
resentative criteria, the number of load tests that need to be car-
ried out for new projects could be reduced by searching for cases
that are most similar to the current pile design. In addition, similar
past cases can provide solutions to problems that may be encoun-
tered during the pile load tests.
Meanwhile, results from these methods vary significantly,
which greatly influences the pile design. The database can assist
engineers and designers in effectively choosing the appropriate
method to use when designing the shaft. Detailed information of
every pile case can always be explored to gain better insights into
the pile measured capacity.
The SQL query pattern shown in Fig. 5 can be followed to re-
trieve the load capacities derived from L1, L2, and Chin methods
for undrained soil type under uplift loading. The query is executed
by selecting the capacities L1, L2, and Chin, along with the shaft
depth, diameter, and D/B from the shaft, soil, and capacity tables.
The data are then filtered shaft. ‘Loading Type’ = ‘Uplift’ and
soil. ‘Soil Type’ = ‘Undrained’ to retrieve all cases of undrained
soil type and uplift loading. The corresponding pile length, pile
diameter, depth/diameter (D/B), and interpreted capacities from
L1, L2, and Chin methods are displayed in Fig. 7. Moreover, when
a range of D/B is desired, specified values (e.g., 10–35) can be
plugged in using the SQL syntax HAVING shaft. ‘D/B’ BETWEEN
10 AND 35 .
For more advanced applications, the retrieved data can be fur-
ther analyzed and compared. Other queries associated with inter-
preted capacity can be exported to different file locations
wherein a comparative analysis, performance evaluation, or reli-
ability analysis can be performed.
5.2.2. Case-based design parameters
Chang [5] and Fang [6] previously used most of the load test re-
sults and field data and back-calculated design parameters using
112 S.-S. Lin et al. / Computers and Geotechnics 41 (2012) 106–113

the authors recognize that it is not complete. Therefore, continuous

Shaft No. Depth, D (m) Dia., B (m) D/B L1 L2 Chin storage of relatively important data would enable this database to
UU9-2 7.0 0.52 13.4 249 516 556 enhance and extend its purpose to more advanced applications,
UU020-1 10.0 0.50 20.0 400 614 700 such as performance evaluation, LRFD load and resistance factors
UU020-2 10.0 0.50 20.0 400 667 809 calibration, reliability analysis, or data statistics. In addition, gen-
UU5 18.8 0.91 20.6 1223 1668 1774 eral trends of pile foundation behavior can be examined. These
UU19 26.5 1.20 22.1 2315 3781 4048 ways, geotechnical engineers can be fully assisted in future pile de-
UU11 12.0 0.53 22.6 285 676 714 sign and analysis. Moreover, researchers will be at an advantage
UU9-1 8.0 0.35 22.8 231 409 512 when utilizing the essential and large amounts of data contained
UU021 35.0 1.20 29.2 2990 >3562 4679 in the DSLT database. Therefore, pile data holders worldwide are
UU18 48.0 1.50 32.0 7117 12098 12709 encouraged to extend their efforts in building a centralized infor-
UU016 52.0 1.50 34.7 6138 13433 21795 mation storage system by depositing qualified data in the system.

Fig. 7. Interpreted capacities of undrained-uplift load test cases for a range of D/B. 6. Availability of the DSLT database

the analysis methods. These design parameters are contained in
the database and may be utilized to examine existing design
parameters, the reliability of analysis models used in shaft design,
or correlations of various parameters. More accurate and reliable
values can be derived because the DSLT database contains large
amounts of cases. The back-calculated design parameters can also
be adopted in pile design when the current design is most similar
to a pile case history because these data are the results of actual
tests. To retrieve soil information (unit weight and friction angle)
and empirical factors (alpha and beta) of undrained soil condition
for shafts under uplift loading, soil type is set as soil. ‘Soil
Type’ = ‘Undrained’ and shaft. ‘Loading Type’ = ‘Uplift’ . In addi-
tion, undrained shear strength (su) value, which is the most com-
mon soil parameter for undrained soils, can also be filtered. As
such, parameter su (CIUC) can be set as greater than 100 kN/m2.
The output of this query is illustrated in Fig. 8, where the basic
information and the empirical factors alpha [a(CIUC)] and beta
(b) are detailed. When a specific range of su is set, relatively consis-
tent values of a(CIUC) emerged. With this application, general
trends can also be developed for the other design parameters.
These trends can be used as bases for evaluating the suitability
of existing parameters for certain pile types.
5.3. Future database platform
The power of this database lies in the number of collated load
test data and their applications. While the database is extensive,
The DSLT database will be maintained by the server
140.135.120.167. It can be accessed by as many computers as pos-
sible with a database program requirement MySQL Query Browser
(recommended) or MySQL Command Line Client installed in the
computer; these requirements can be downloaded on the Internet
site www.mysql.com. Users have to key in the username cycu_dslt
and password guest to begin a session on the DSLT database.
7. Summary and conclusions
This study has demonstrated the development and applications
of an extensive pile load test (DSLT) database containing 351
drilled shaft static load test results. The database is useful as a pre-
liminary design tool for pile designers and resource for experi-
enced engineers that are applying best practices and local
knowledge to develop successful designs. In addition, the database
can be a source of essential data for many researchers in this field.
The ER model has proven to be a useful tool in designing the
DSLT relational database with flexible and manageable relational
tables, in all aspects of drilled shaft information. MySQL program
has served its purpose well in developing a well-structured format
drilled shaft database for the systematic compilation, storage, and
retrieval of extremely large amounts of historic data in an open
domain.
The DSLT database enables quick browsing, inexpensive query-
ing, or collecting of large amounts of drilled shaft load test data,
which can be used for pile analyses or as references for advanced
studies. Such a database can impart a real and reliable source of

Shaft No. Location Soil Description Depth, D (m) Dia., B (m) D/B Unit Weight Friction Angle-TC Su(CIUC) alpha(CIUC) Measured Beta
UU8-4 Keraug , Australia Firm brown silty clay of 4.3 0.41 10.4 18.1 32 101 0.531 2.600
UU1-1 Melbourne , Australia Basaltic clay (CH) 2.8 0.61 4.6 20.0 29 102 0.575 2.090
UU1-2 Melbourne , Australia Basaltic clay (CH) 3.7 0.61 6.1 20.0 29 102 0.570 1.670
UU1-3 Melbourne , Australia Basaltic clay (CH) 4.6 0.61 7.5 20.0 29 102 0.632 1.499
UU1-4 Melbourne , Australia Basaltic clay (CH) 5.5 0.61 9.0 20.0 29 102 0.794 1.579
UU1-5 Melbourne , Australia Basaltic clay (CH) 2.7 0.76 3.6 20.0 29 102 0.523 2.074
UU1-6 Melbourne , Australia Basaltic clay (CH) 3.7 0.76 4.9 20.0 29 102 0.520 1.538
UU1-7 Melbourne , Australia Basaltic clay (CH) 4.6 0.76 6.0 20.0 29 102 0.635 1.514
UU7-1 Keilor Terminal, Australia Residual basaltic clay 1.8 0.38 4.8 27.0 32 112 0.433 2.620
UU7-2 Keilor Terminal, Australia Residual basaltic clay 2.3 0.38 6.0 27.0 32 112 0.447 2.240
UU7-3 Keilor Terminal, Australia Residual basaltic clay 2.7 0.38 7.2 27.0 32 112 0.500 2.100
UU7-4 Keilor Terminal, Australia Residual basaltic clay 1.8 0.46 4.0 27.0 32 112 0.233 1.750
UU7-5 Keilor Terminal, Australia Residual basaltic clay 2.3 0.46 5.0 27.0 32 112 0.291 1.840
UU7-6 Keilor Terminal, Australia Residual basaltic clay 2.7 0.46 6.0 27.0 32 112 0.335 1.760
UU16 Taipei, Taiwan Silty clay 57.0 1.20 47.5 19.0 28 120 0.562 0.228
UU17 Taipei, Taiwan Silty clay 56.0 1.00 56.0 20.0 30 120 0.399 0.190
UU15-1 Delta, CA Silty Clay 3.1 0.65 4.7 19.2 35 182 0.395 2.480
UU15-2 Delta, CA Silty Clay 4.6 0.66 6.9 19.2 35 182 0.419 1.734
UU5 Houston, TX Very stiff to hard silty clay 18.8 0.91 20.6 18.9 30 285 0.321 0.330
UU2-1 Mound City, SD Sandy Clay with trace of 2.4 0.61 4.0 18.1 35 307 0.233 2.980
UU2-2 Mound City, SD Sandy Clay with trace of 2.4 0.61 4.0 18.1 35 307 0.248 3.650

Fig. 8. Design parameters of undrained-uplift load test cases for su > 100 kN/m2.
 S.-S. Lin et al. / Computers and Geotechnics 41 (2012) 106–113
shaft, test, site, and soil information. Moreover, the interpreted
capacities can provide guidance for effectively choosing the most
appropriate interpretation criterion to be used when designing
the shaft. It is also useful when comparing predicted and measured
load capacity results or finding solutions to problems encountered
during pile load tests. The case-based design parameters provide
important geotechnical data helpful in the preliminary stage of
the pile design. Furthermore, general trends of design parameter
values may emerge that can be adopted in pile design.
However, the usage and applications that the database can pro-
vide are based purely on the information available on drilled shaft
load tests. This implies that careful judgment of these empirical
data must be exercised. In addition, a sound knowledge of other
influencing factors that are of limited information in the database
(e.g., detailed construction processes and effects), which may lead
to a different soil and shaft behavior, must be employed when
using the database.
As the extensibility of the database also relies on the amount of
collated load test data and their applications, pile data holders
around the world are encouraged to deposit qualified data in the
system to provide the geotechnical community with a centralized
storage of information.
Acknowledgment
This study was supported by the National Science Council,
Taiwan, under Contract Number: NSC 100-2221-E-033-073-MY3.
113
References
[1] Long JH, Shimel S. Drilled shafts – a database approach. In: Found Eng Cong;
1989. p. 1091–108.
[2] Wysockey MH, Long JH. Utility of drilled shaft load test results. In: Int Conf
Design Const Deep Found 1994. p. 1789–803.
[3] Electric Power Research Institute. Transmission line structure foundations for
uplift-compression loading: Load test summaries. Rpt EL-3160 EPRI, Palo Alto;
1983.
[4] Chen YJ, Kulhawy FH. Case history evaluation of drilled shafts behavior. Rpt
TR-104601 EPRI, Palo Alto; 1994.
[5] Chang HW. Evaluation of side resistance and uplift interpretation criteria for
drilled shafts. Master Thesis. Taiwan: Chung Yuan Christian University; 2007.
[6] Fang YC. Evaluation of tip resistance and compression interpretation criteria
for drilled shafts. Master Thesis. Taiwan: Chung Yuan Christian University;
2007.
[7] Chen YJ, Chang HW, Kulhawy FH. Evaluation of uplift interpretation criteria for
drilled shaft capacity. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng, ASCE 2008;134(10):1459–68.
[8] Chen YJ, Fang YC. Critical evaluation of compression interpretation criteria for
drilled shafts. J Geotech Geoenviron Eng, ASCE 2009;135(8):1056–69.
[9] Chen YJ, Chang HW, Chiu TJ. Evaluation of side resistance of drilled shafts in
multilayered soils. GSP 185, ASCE 2009:71–8.
[10] Chen YJ, Fang YC, Chu TH. Evaluation of compression tip capacity for drilled
shafts. GSP 185, ASCE 2009:63–70.
[11] Chen YJ, Lin SS, Chang HW, Marcos MC. Evaluation of side resistance capacity
for drilled shafts. J Marine Sci Technol 2011;19(2):210–21.
[12] Bradley DC, Mascaro M, Santhakumar S. A relational database for trial based
behavioral experiments. J Neurosci Methods 2005;141:75–82.
[13] Rob P, Coronel C. Database system: Design, implementation and management.
6th ed: Thompson Course Technology; 2004.
[14] Chen PP. The entity-relationship model: toward a unified view of data. ACM
Trans Database Syst 1976:9–36.
[15] Chen PP. The entity-relationship approach to logical database design. Q.E.D.
Monograph series. Massachusetts: Q.E.D. Info Sci Inc.; 1977.
[16] Hirany A, Kulhawy FH. Conduct and interpretation of load tests on drilled shaft
foundations: Detailed guidelines. Rpt No. EL-5915(1). Palo Alto: Electric Power
Research Institute; 1988.