State of Practice:

Advanced Solutions for Deep Foundations

Benefits, Methods, Risks and Implementation

of Deep Foundation Practices
Who are we ?

Brent Robinson
Vice President, PDI
Principal Engineer, GRL Engineers, Inc.
216-831-6131

brobinson@pile.com
Manufacturer of deep Provider of deep foundation
foundation testing equipment testing and analysis services
Who are you ? Do you:
• Structural Engineers • Perform testing yourself?
• Geotechnical Engineers • Hire out testing?
• Testing Consultants
• Deep Foundation Contractors
• General Contractors
• Construction Managers
• Government Agencies
• Owners / Developers
 Session I
– Overview of the benefits of testing
– Method selection
– How to implement testing into a project
 Session I
– Overview of the benefits of testing
– Method selection
– How to implement testing into a project
Overview of the Benefits of Testing
• Design Verification / Optimization
 Overview of the Benefits of Testing
• Economics – Driven Piles

ASD: Ru = DL x FS LRFD: Rn = FL / 

With more or more reliable testing, FS decreases or  increases and

the required ultimate capacity or nominal resistance decreases.

This can result in: • A reduced number of piles

• Shortened pile lengths = less $
• Reduced risk
Overview of the Benefits of Testing
• Economics – Driven Piles
ASD LRFD
pre 2007 after 2007
AASHTO: F.S. *
Geotechnical Analysis --- 0.25 – 0.50
FHWA mod. Gates Formula 3.50 0.40
Wave Equation Analysis 2.75 0.50
DLT (≥2 and ≥2%) 2.25 0.65
DLT (100%) --- 0.75
SLT (≥1) 2.00 0.75
SLT (≥1) + DLT (≥2 and ≥2%) 1.90 0.80
(#) – the number or percentage of tests per soil condition
* -  based on redundant foundations  5 piles, for non-redundant foundations use 0.8 
Overview of the Benefits of Testing
• Economics – Drilled Shafts
Test Method AASHTO ASD AASHTO LRFD FHWA GEC-10
(2007) (2010) (2018)
F.S.  
Geotechnical Analysis 2.5 0.40 – 0.60 0.40 – 0.60

Dynamic Load Test --- --- 0.60

Bi-Directional Load Test --- may be considered 0.70

Static Load Test 2.0 up to 0.70 0.70

( based on redundant foundations, for single columns supported by one shaft use 0.8  )
Overview of the Benefits of Testing
• Risk Mitigation
Overview of the Benefits of Testing
• Risk Mitigation

Pier suddenly dropped 11 ft (3.3 m)

 Session I
– Overview of the benefits of testing
– Method selection
– How to implement testing into a project
 QA/QC Method Selection for Driven Piles

Driving Hammer Pile Axial

Stresses Performance Integrity Capacity

Wave Dynamic Dynamic Saximeter Visual Dynamic Low Strain Static Dynamic Dynamic
Equation Pile Pile or Observation Pile Integrity Load Pile Load
Analysis Monitoring Monitoring Energy of Stroke Monitoring Testing Test Monitoring Test
(WEAP) (PDA) (PDA) Saximeter (PDA) (PIT) (SLT) (PDA) (DLT)
QA/QC Method Selection for Drilled Shafts
During Excavation

Drill Hole Drill Hole Base

Verticality Radius / Volume Cleanliness

Mechanical Ultrasonic Mechanical Ultrasonic Concrete Weighted Mini Ding Shaft

Calipers Calipers Calipers Calipers Volume-Depth Tape Shaft Inspection Quantitative
Plot Inspection Device Inspection
Device (DID) Device
(Mini-SID) (SQUID)

Sonic Shaft Area Sonic Shaft Area

Caliper Profile Caliper Profile
Evaluator Evaluator
(SHAPE) (SHAPE)
QA/QC Method Selection for Drilled Shafts
Post Concreting

Concrete Concrete Axial

Integrity Cover Capacity

Pile Crosshole Thermal Thermal Gamma Static Bi-Direction Dynamic Rapid

Integrity Sonic Integrity Integrity Gamma Load Static Load Load
Testing Logging Profiling Profiling Logging Test Load Test Test Test
(PIT) (CSL) (TIP) (TIP) (GGL) (SLT) (BDSLT) (DLT) (RLT)
D5882 D6760 D7949 D7949 --- D1143 D8169 D4945 D7383
Any Method Selection
Questions?
 Session I
– Overview of the benefits of testing
– Method selection
– How to implement testing into a project
Implementing Testing on a Project
Rationale for Quantity, Type and Magnitude of Testing Depends Upon:
• Foundation type
• Driven Piles
• Drilled Shafts
• ACIP / CFA Piles
• Helical Piles
• Building code or specification driven (% of foundation units)
• Foundation redundancy / stress level (less redundant, higher stressed = more testing)
• Subsurface variability (more variability = more testing)
• Risk mitigation (limit damage / integrity issues, check capacity)
• Schedule considerations (SLT or DLT, CSL or TIP)
• Construction techniques (wet shaft vs dry shaft)
• Testing budget
Implementing Testing on a Project
Load Tests on Drilled Shafts – AASHTO (2020) or FHWA GEC-10 (2018)*

Static Load Test - Compression  = 0.70

Static Load Test - Tension  = 0.60

Bi-Directional Static Load Test  = 0.70*

Rapid Load Test  = 0.65*

Dynamic Load Test  = 0.60*

* Brown D.A., Turner, J.P., Casteli, R.J., and Loehr, E.J. (2018). FHWA GEC-10, Drilled Shafts: Construction
Procedures and Design Methods, National Highway Institute, U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal
Highway Administration, Washington D.C.
Implementing Testing on a Project
Dynamic Monitoring – PDA

Why ?
o Installation stress control / hammer performance (initial driving),
o Capacity (restrikes),
o Quantify soil setup / relaxation (initial drive and restrike)

How Many Test Piles ?

The number of dynamic test piles is based upon the structure type and size as well as the
subsurface variability. A typical recommendation may be one test pile plus one additional test
pile for every 5000 square feet of building footprint.

For bridges, two piles per site condition but not less than 2% of the production piles is a common
requirement (AASHTO).
Implementing Testing on a Project
Dynamic Monitoring – PDA

When to Restrike ? Clean Sands: 1 day

Silty Sands: 2 days
Sandy Silts: 3-5 days
Silty Clays: 7-14 days*
Shales: 10-14 days*
* - longer times sometimes required

How Many Production Piles ?

Dynamic pile testing shall also be performed on (2, 5, 10, 100%) of production piles as chosen
by the Engineer. The production pile testing shall be performed during (initial driving, restrike,
initial driving and restrike) to monitor hammer and drive system performance, assess pile
installation stresses and integrity, as well as to evaluate pile capacity.

Performed By ? Engineer on-site or via SiteLink

Implementing Testing on a Project
Integrity Testing – Low Strain Pile Integrity Testing (PIT)

Why ?

o Identify major integrity problems within the testable depth (typically 30 L/D +/-).

How Many Piles or Shafts ?

Quick test allows testing many piles per day (10 to 50) subject to pile access and pile head
preparation.

When ?

ASTM D5882 states that the tests shall be performed no sooner than 7 days after casting or after
strength achieves at 75% of its design strength.

Performed By ? Engineer on-site.

Implementing Testing on a Project
Integrity Testing – Crosshole Sonic Logging (CSL)
Why ?
o Evaluate concrete integrity inside the shaft area delineated by the CSL access tubes.

How Many Shafts ?

Per AASHTO Bridge Construction Specification (2017), CSL testing is used as a regular inspection
method for wet placed shafts using tremie concrete methods.

When ?

ASTM D6760 states that the tests shall be performed no sooner than 3 to 7 days after casting
depending on concrete strength and shaft diameter (larger diameter shafts may take closer
to 7 days)

Performed By ? Engineer on-site.

Implementing Testing on a Project
Integrity Testing – Thermal Integrity Profiling (TIP)
Why ?
o Evaluate concrete integrity inside and outside the reinforcing cage as well as the concrete cover,

How Many Shafts or Piles?

The shafts or piles to be tested must be identified on the plans or designated by the Engineer in
advance so that the required lengths of Thermal Wire Cables can be ordered and available at the
time of foundation installation.

When ?

Data analysis typically performed between ½ peak and peak temperature. For most shafts, this
data analysis window occurs between 12 and 48 hours after casting. Larger diameter shafts or
shafts with substantial mix retarders may take longer.

Performed By ? TIP data sent to Cloud in real time or stored on shaft, Engineer in office.
 What Level of Integrity Testing is Needed?
Item Description Numerical Risk Factor Weighting
Weighting
Factor
Factor
1 2 3
1 Magnitude of Foundation ≤≤$300,000
$300,000 $300,000 to $1,000,000 ≥ $1,000,000 1.0 1.0
Contract (1997 USD) (2021 $) $586,000 to $1,955,000
2 Experience and Equipment of Excellent Adequate
Adequate Marginal 1.5 3.0
Drilled Shaft Contractor
3 Thoroughness of Subsurface High
High Medium Low 1.5 1.5
Exploration & Geotechnical
Experience of the Inspector
4 Anticipated Construction Low
Low Medium High 1.5 1.5
Difficulties
5 Uniformity (predictability) of High
High Medium Low 1.5 1.5
Subsurface Conditions
6 Load Resistance Mechanism Shaft
Shaft Combined Base 1.0 1.0
Assumed in Design
7 Anticipated Construction Dry 1.0
Method
Perm. Casing 0.5
Temp. Casing 1.5
Wetw/
Wet w/ Temp
Temp Casing
Casing 2.5 7.5
Wet w/o Temp Casing 3.0
8 Type of Loading Axial Axial Battered Lateral
Lateral 1.0 3.0
9 Load Duration Mainly Static, Short
Short Mainly Static, Long 1.0 1.0
Term Live Loads Term Dead Loads
Impact or Seismic 2.0
Reference: FHWA-IF-99-025 O’Neill and Reese (1999)
FHWA-RD-92-004 Baker et al., (1993) NRF x WF Subtotal = 21.0
 What Level of Integrity Testing is Needed ?
Item Description Numerical Risk Factor Subtotal
1 2 3
1-9 Subtotal
21
10 Stress Ratio ≤ 0.4 > 0.4 but < 0.8 ≥ 0.8
> 0.4 but < 0.8
sdesign / smax allowable design
( Subtotal 1-9 ) x ( NRF 10 )
42
11 Risk Level for Loss of Low Medium High
Medium
Human Life or Economic
Catastrophe

Numerical Risk Factor, Z = ( Subtotal 10 ) x ( NRF 11 )

84
( 42 ) ( 2 ) = 84

If Numerical Risk Factor, Z < 42, NDT probably not necessary

Z ≥ 42 and ≤ 60, use some NDT (PIT or TRM)

(stress ratio < 0.4 and minimal lateral loading)

Z > 60, extensive planned NDT program

(CSL and/or gamma-gamma)
Logical update in 2022 (CSL and/or TIP)
 Any

Relative Energy Reduction

Implementation 12dB

9dB

Questions?
0
0 15% 30%
First Arrival Delay