Mechanics of Micropiles Permance From Instrumented Load Tests PDF

FMGM 2007: Seventh International Symposium on Field Measurements in Geomechanics © 2007 ASCE
Downloaded from ascelibrary.org by MISSOURI, UNIV OF/COLUMBIA on 05/05/13. Copyright ASCE. For personal use only; all rights reserved.
Mechanics of Micropile Performance from Instrumented Load Tests
Terence P. Holman1, Ph.D., P.E., M.ASCE and Brian D. Barkauskas2, A.M. ASCE
ABSTRACT: Micropiles, commonly employed for retrofit of existing foundations

and new foundation construction in urban areas, present complex problems in
analysis and performance prediction. This paper presents analyses of the three
instrumented micropile load tests from two case histories. A total of 34 strain gauges
were employed for the three load tests, consisting of spot-weldable gauges on the
centralized reinforcing bars and embedment gauges within the neat cement grout
surrounding the bars. Two of three test piles were tested to plunging failure and one
to impending failure. The composite pile modulus was found to decrease with
increasing strain levels within the pile, primarily due to the nonlinear behavior of the
grout. The load distribution in the bond zone of the test piles was generally
nonuniform, indicating that the mobilized unit bond stress is not constant. Significant
pile tip resistance was generated as a function of total pile load and displacement for
the two piles that plunged, even at loads less than those causing failure. Dissimilar
strain levels measured by strain gauges within the grout and on the reinforcement
indicate that perfect strain compatibility may not be present as is commonly assumed.
INTRODUCTION
Micropiles are frequently employed by engineers and design-build specialty

geotechnical contractors for retrofit of existing foundations and installation of new
foundations, particularly in urban areas or in difficult geologic conditions. Unlike
many conventional deep foundations, load transfer in micropiles can be isolated to
desirable strata through the use of extended pile casing and enhanced through
pressure grouting techniques. The subsurface conditions, drilling and grouting
method, and the materials from which they are constructed, control the field
performance. Static load testing is almost always performed for micropiles,
particularly for those with higher design capacities and whose load transfer zone, or
bond zone, is in soil materials. Instrumentation, in the form of strain gauges, is less
commonly installed within the micropiles to assess the load transfer within competent
strata. The interpretation of the instrumentation data is not as straightforward as for
other deep foundations due to the variations in the construction process and pile
1
Senior Engineer, MORETRENCH, 100 Stickle Avenue, Rockaway, NJ 07866, tholman@mtac.com
2
Project Engineer, MORETRENCH, 100 Stickle Avenue, Rockaway, NJ 07866,
bbarkauskas@mtac.com
Copyright ASCE 2007 Field Measurements in Geomechanics (FMGM 2007)

7th FMGM 2007
geometry, and the highly composite nature of the micropile. The mechanics of
micropile performance can be successfully extracted from instrumented load test data
if these issues are considered and factored into the analysis.
This paper discusses two case histories and three strain gauge-instrumented
micropile compression load tests in order to demonstrate the complexities in
understanding micropile mechanics and field performance. All three load tests were
carried to plunging failure or the verge of failure and conducted in general
accordance with ASTM D1143 (1994) and/or the New York City Building Code
(2003).
CASE HISTORY-DUBLIN ROAD PUMP STATION
The Dublin Road Pump Station project involves micropiles used to resupport a settled
pump station next to a deep excavation which had suffered basal failure and ground
loss. The general contractor had constructed the three pump station structures in
early 2006. The geologic conditions beneath the project site, as seen in Figure 1,
consisted of loose/soft to medium dense/stiff sand, silt, and clay to a depth of 12.2 m
below ground surface, underlain by medium dense to dense glauconitic silty fine
sand. During construction of the wet well by the general contractor, which involved
an internally-supported sheet pile excavation 9.8 m below the ground surface and 8.5
m below the static groundwater level, basal failure, boils, and ground loss occurred.
Driven piles were installed to support the wet well structure, but additional ground
loss was observed within and outside the sheet pile excavation, followed by
settlement of the adjacent pump chamber structure. Post-failure investigations by the
consulting engineer concluded that the ground losses around the pump station
structures had compromised the supportive capabilities of the natural subsoils
(MRCE, 2006).
A specialty geotechnical contractor was contacted by the owner to develop a design-
build solution for resupport of the pump station structures in conjunction with the
consulting engineer. The team concluded that micropiles could be employed to
effectively raise and relevel the settled pump chamber and to provide deep foundation
support for the wet well and inlet chamber structures. The use of micropiles was also
favored to bypass the zones below grade in which ground loss has occurred. These
zones can be seen in Figure 1 to have Standard Penetration Test N-values less than 10
blows/0.3 m in the upper 12 m of the profile.
A strain-gauge instrumented compression load test was conducted on a production
pile to verify the design and construction method. The test pile was installed adjacent
to the pump chamber structure, which had settled differentially from 25 to 300 mm.
The selected design capacity of the micropiles to be used was 534 kN, and the test
load was 1068 kN. The consultant’s micropile design called for a total pile length of
21.3 m, with 13.7 m of 194 mm outside diameter casing left in place, resulting in a
bond length of 7.6 m. An isolation casing was employed to minimize any frictional
resistance between the steel pile casing and the soils above the bond zone. A No. 43
Grade 520 centralized reinforcing bar was specified for the entire bond length and
extending 1.5 m into the cased portion of the micropile. Vibrating wire strain gauges
were specified for the top, middle, and bottom of the bond zone for the test micropile.
2
7th FMGM 2007
The geotechnical specialty contractor opted to use spot-weldable (SW) strain gauges
with integral plucking coils and mount them directly to prepared spots on the high
strength centralized steel reinforcing bar. All of the vibrating wire strain gauges were
manufactured with the wire tension set at approximately midrange to provide
approximately equal linear ranges for tension and compression. The linear range for
the gauges was 3000 µ and the active gauge length was 51 mm. Pairs of strain
gauges were installed at each level for redundancy. Gauge locations and designations
with respect to the ground surface are shown in Figure 2.
SILTY
B-1 (pre-failure)
SAND
(SM)
B-2 (pre-failure)
B-3
0m
3 B-4
SAND, SILT, AND CLAY

Depth below Ground Surface (m)
B-5
B-6
6
(SM, ML, CL)

194mm OD
9 Casing
12
SW Strain
GLAUCONITIC F/M SAND
Gauges
15 1.5 m
13.6 m SG-1
18
16.8 m
SG-2
21
20.3 m
24 SG-3
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Uncorrected SPT N-value (blows/0.3 m)
FIG. 1. Stratigraphy and SPT data for FIG. 2. Schematic of instrumented

Dublin Road site test pile for Dublin Road site
The test pile was installed using rotary duplex drilling methods with water flush.
The pile was initially tremie-grouted, and then pressure grouted using a minimum
total pressure of 345 kPa while the pile casing was retracted. The neat cement grout
used for the micropile construction had a minimum design compressive strength of
27.6 MPa, but this value was typically exceeded in 3 days and reached 55.2 MPa after
28 days. Grout volumes injected into the pile during tremie and pressure grouting
were used to estimate the bond zone diameter at about 254 mm. However, the bond
zone diameter was expected to vary significantly along the length of the bond zone as
a function of in-situ soil density and the presence of disturbed zones.
The static axial compression load test was conducted in accordance with ASTM
D1143 standards with the goal of applying a test load of twice the design capacity. A
calibrated hydraulic jack and pressure gauge applied and maintained the test loads to
the pile. Three dial gauges were used to measure settlement at the pile butt to
accuracies of 0.025 mm relative to independent reference beams. Vibrating wire
strain gauge readings were recorded manually using a readout and data storage device
along with an 8-channel switch selectable terminal box.
3
7th FMGM 2007
The load-settlement plot for the load test is shown in Figure 3. Following an
increase in creep with each increment of applied load, the test pile plunged at a pile
top load of about 933 kN, less than the maximum test load of 1067 kN. A large
increase in the rate of settlement occurred and the test pile could not maintain the
peak load of 933 kN. The load was allowed to stabilize at 818 kN prior to unloading
back to zero load. The maximum settlement after failure reached 40 mm. The net
permanent butt settlement of the test pile was 26 mm at the conclusion of the test.
0
Plunging Failure
at 933 kN
10
Pile Butt Settlement (mm)
20
Net Permanent
30 Settlement=26 mm
40
50
0 200 400 600 800 1000
Applied Pile Top Load (kN)
FIG. 3. Load-settlement plot for the Dublin Road load test
Strain gauge readings for this load test were reduced to derive the strain distribution
within the bond zone of the pile. The data from each gauge were zeroed with respect
to the initial reading prior to the application of any pile load, and then averaged with
the other gauge at that depth. The strain data are plotted versus depth in Figure 4 for
various applied pile top loads, the post-failure condition, and the residual condition
after unloading of the test micropile. Strain accumulated at all points within the bond
zone with increasing pile-top load. Of particular note is that the measured strain is
significant near the pile tip, indicating that a larger than expected tip resistance is
being mobilized as the generated bond stresses approach ultimate levels within the
bond length. The estimation of load distribution within the instrumented test pile will
be discussed in following analysis and interpretation sections.
Following failure of the test pile, modifications were made to the design pile
capacity and required bond length. The design pile capacity for a 7.6 m bond length
was reduced to 400 kN. For parts of the project in which the original 534 kN was
required, the design bond length was increased to 10.7 m. During construction of the
production piles, very large grout volumes were required around the wet well, target
grouting pressures could not be reached, and loss of seal around the pile casing
occurred. These were considered symptoms of significant ground loss and potential
voids in the subsoils and resulted in increased casing lengths and a number of
additional micropiles.
4
7th FMGM 2007
13
SG-1 Level

14
15
16
17 SG-2 Level
18
P=267 kN
19 P=534 kN
P=801 kN
P=934 kN
20 Post Failure
SG-3 Level Full Unload
21
0 200 400 600 800 1000
Measured Strain (µ )
FIG. 4. Measured strain versus depth for the Dublin Road load test at
various applied pile-top loads
CASE HISTORY – 167 JOHNSON STREET RESIDENTIAL HIGH-RISE
The 167 Johnson Street project, located in the Borough of Brooklyn, New York,
involved a design-based micropile load testing program to develop foundation
performance characteristics and parameters for final design of a residential high-rise
structure. The proposed building is planned to be situated on spread footings bearing
on dense sand/sand and gravel with the exception of the heavily loaded core, which
was to be founded on a concrete mat. Due to predicted differential settlements well
in excess of 25 mm, the geotechnical engineer of record investigated the use of
micropiles to create a piled raft foundation beneath the core. Final design of the
foundation, which was to be performed using three-dimensional finite element
analysis, required an instrumented field load testing program from which parameters
could be extracted to model micropile and general foundation behavior.
A geotechnical contractor was contacted to develop and conduct the instrumented
load testing program for the project owner. The objective of the program was to
develop a conceptual design for a single micropile with a minimum ultimate capacity
of 2224 kN that would settle approximately 25 mm under the applied loading from
the mat foundation. An additional constraint was that the micropile design developed
as a result of the program had to be in accordance with the allowable stresses in the
New York City Building Code. The design capacity of the pile was selected to be
1112 kN. The structural design of the pile section resulted in the upper cased portion
of the pile consisting of 273 mm outside diameter casing, a No. 57 Grade 520
threadbar, and 41.1 MPa compressive strength grout.
The design of the bond length for the piles was carried out using assumed
parameters correlated to the soil types and densities beneath the project site. The
geotechnical conditions consisted of loose to very dense urban fills to a depth of
5
7th FMGM 2007
about 6 m below grade, underlain by medium dense to very dense natural sands with
variable amounts of gravel. Figure 5 shows the variation in Standard Penetration Test
N-values with depth below ground surface compiled from the data provided by
Langan (2006). A minimum cased length of 9.1 m was used to bypass the upper 6.1
m of urban fills and about 3 m of looser natural sands. A 324-mm outside diameter,
6.1-m long isolation casing was specified to eliminate any load transfer to the urban
fills. Two test piles were to be constructed and tested with two different bond zone
lengths to meet the design criteria above. The first test pile, designated SR-1, was
installed with a 6.1 m bond length, sized based on an assumed unit bond stress of
380 kPa in the bond zone. The second pile, called SR-2, was installed with a 9.1 m
bond length, based on an assumed unit bond stress of 255 kPa. The assumed
diameter of the bond zone was about 300 mm. The schematic geometry of each test
pile is shown in Figure 6.
A total of 14 strain gauges were incorporated into each test pile as shown in Figure
6. Of these, 10 strain gauges were of the spot-weldable (SW) type with integral
plucking coils. Four of the gauges were embedment-type (EB) gauges with
detachable plucking coils. Spot-weldable gauges were mounted directly to prepared
locations on the centralized reinforcing bar. The embedment gauges were placed so
that they were situated within the grout at the very top of the cased portion and at the
top of the bond zone length. All of the vibrating wire strain gauges were
manufactured with the wire tension set at approximately midrange to provide
approximately equal linear ranges for tension and compression. The linear range for
the gauges was 3000 µ and the active gauge lengths for the SW and EB gauges were
51 mm and 153 mm, respectively. All gauges were installed in pairs for redundancy.
0 SR-1 SR-2
LB-1
URBAN FILL
LB-2 0m
3 LB-3 SG-1 384 mm SG-1
LB-4 Isolation
LB-5 Casing
LB-6
6
LB-7
273 mm
LB-8
LB-9
Casing
9
SAND, SM TO TR GRAVEL (SP)
SG-2 SG-2 6.1 m

12 EB Strain
Gauge
9.1 m
15 SG-3 SG-3
18
12.2 m
SG-4
21 13.7 m
SG-4
15.2 m
SG-5
24
SW Strain
0 25 50 75 100 125 150 Gauge
Uncorrected SPT N-value (blows/0.3 m) 17.8 m
SG-5
FIG. 5. Stratigraphy and SPT data for FIG. 6. Schematic of instrumented

167 Johnson Street site test piles for 167 Johnson Street
6
7th FMGM 2007
The test piles were installed using rotary duplex drilling methods with water flush.
During drilling of the piles and reaction anchors, very dense urban fills consisting of
concrete, brick batts, and remnant foundation walls were encountered but were
penetrable using a hard-formation roller bit. The pile was initially tremie-grouted,
and then pressure grouted using a minimum total pressure of 345 kPa while the pile
casing was retracted. The neat cement grout used for the micropile construction had
a minimum design compressive strength of 41.4 MPa, but this value was typically
exceeded in 3 days and reached 62.1 MPa after 28 days. Elastic modulus testing of
152 mm diameter grout cylinders yielded secant moduli of 13.45 to 14.5 GPa on the
day of the load tests. These secant moduli are obtained at axial strain levels of
approximately 0.001. Grout volumes injected into the pile during tremie and pressure
grouting were used to estimate the bond zone diameter at about 356 mm.
The static axial compression load tests were conducted in accordance with the New
York City Building Code (2003) and ASTM D1143 standards, with the goal of
applying a minimum test load of twice the design capacity but attempting to carry
each test to plunging failure. The maximum test load or post-failure load was held
for 96 hours for each pile. The load test reaction assembly was designed to sustain a
maximum applied test load of 2669 kN. Two sets of load-unload cycles were
conducted during each test to assess the hysteretic behavior of the piles under cyclic
axial loading, the first between zero and 1112 kN and the second between 1112 kN
and 2224 kN. A calibrated hydraulic jack and pressure gauge applied and maintained
the test loads to the piles. An electrical resistance load cell was also used to
accurately measure the applied loads. Three dial gauges were used to measure
settlement at the pile butt to accuracies of 0.025 mm relative to independent reference
beams. Vibrating wire strain gauge readings were recorded manually using a readout
and data storage device and a 16-channel switch selectable terminal box.
The load-settlement plot for each load test is shown in Figure 7. Pile SR-1
exhibited plunging failure at a pile top load of 2224 kN, immediately after the
conclusion of the load cycling between 1112 and 2224 kN. The load was allowed to
stabilize at about 1800 kN prior to the beginning of the 96-hour hold period. At the
conclusion of the hold period, the average butt settlement of micropile SR-1 was 39
mm. The permanent settlement after unloading to zero load was 29 mm. Pile SR-2
was tested successfully to 2224 kN and reached a total settlement of 16 mm. The
load was increased to 2669 kN, the limit of the testing frame, at which time plunging
failure appeared to initiate. The load became stable at 2500 kN prior to unloading
back to zero load. The net permanent butt settlement of the test pile was 8 mm at the
conclusion of the test.
Strain gauge readings for these load tests were reduced to derive the strain
distribution within the bond zone of each pile in a similar fashion as for the Dublin
Road Pump Station project. The strain data are plotted versus depth in Figure 8 and
Figure 9 for various applied pile top loads, the post-failure condition, and the residual
condition after unloading of the test micropile where applicable. Of particular note is
that the measured strain is significant near the pile tip for SR-1, but not for SR-2, the
pile with a 3 m longer bond length. The changes in pile geometry also resulted in
drastic variations in measured strain, particularly at the transition between the cased
and uncased portion of the pile. The estimation of load distribution within the
7
7th FMGM 2007
instrumented test piles will be analyzed in the following analysis and interpretation
sections.
Max. Test
10 Load= 2669 kN
Pile Butt Settlement (mm)

Net Permanent
Settlement=8 mm
20
Net Permanent
30 Settlement=29 mm
Plunging Failure
at 2224 kN
40
SR-1 (6.1 m Bond)

SR-2 (9.1 m Bond)
50
0 1000 2000 3000
Applied Pile Top Load (kN)
Figure 7. Load-settlement plots for the micropiles SR-1 and SR-2
0 0
2 2
4 4
Tip Isolation Casing Tip Isolation Casing
6 Geometry Change 6 Geometry Change
8 8
Tip Pile Casing
Geometry Change
10 10
Tip Pile Casing
Geometry Change
12 12
14 P=556 kN 14 P=556 kN
P=1112 kN
P=1669 kN P=1112 kN
P=1669 kN
16 P=2224 kN 16 P=2224 kN
Post Failure (1771 kN)
Residual P=2669 kN
18 18
0 200 400 600 800 1000 0 400 800 1200 1600 2000
Measured Strain (µ ) Measured Strain (µ )
FIG. 8. Measured strain versus FIG. 9. Measured strain versus

depth for micropile SR-1 depth for micropile SR-2
8
7th FMGM 2007
ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF INSTRUMENTED LOAD TEST

DATA
The load-deformation and strain-depth data shown in Figures 3, 4, 7, 8, and 9 can be

analyzed and interpreted to derive information regarding the nonlinear nature of the
composite micropile section, load distribution as a function of depth, and strain
compatibility of the pile materials. The data from these instrumented load tests
indicates that the secant moduli of the cased and bond zone vary as a function of the
measured strain. Derivation of the load distribution in the micropiles allows load
transfer from the pile to the soil to be examined. For these tests, the load transfer or
bond stress is not necessarily constant within the bond zone at any applied pile top
load. A further complication in the analysis of the strain gauge data observed in some
of these load tests is that the measured strain from the SW-type gauges is not
consistent with that measured from the EB-type gauges, suggesting that strain
compatibility may not exist in the composite micropile section.
Nonlinear Behavior of Composite Micropiles

The common goal following use of strain gauges in deep foundation load tests is to
derive the load distribution within the pile as a function of applied pile top load.
Assuming linear elastic behavior of the pile materials, as might be expected for steel
bearing piles, this process should be straightforward. Assuming elastic fixed-end
column-like behavior, the strain gauge data allow the load P in the pile at any point to
be calculated as
P = ApEp (1)
where is the strain, Ap is the cross-sectional area of the pile, and Ep is the secant
modulus of elasticity of the pile material at the depth or point of analysis.
For micropiles, the required parameters Ap and Ep are not constant because of the
variability in pile geometry and the composite nature of the micropile. The cross
sectional area Ap varies between the cased and uncased portions of the pile, and
varies in the uncased portion or bond zone as a function of drilling and grouting
techniques. Approximate diameters can be estimated from grouting volumes. The
overall secant modulus of the pile section at any point is a function of the geometries
of the pile material (i.e. neat cement grout, reinforcing steel, and casing), and
assuming elastic compatibility, the secant moduli of each of the materials.
Furthermore, it is widely recognized that cementitious materials like Portland cement
concrete or neat cement grout are inherently nonlinear and inelastic (Fellenius, 1989
and Deschamps and Richards, 2005). The secant modulus Eg of neat cement grout is
therefore considered to be strain-level dependent and variable throughout the load
test.
Placement of strain gauges in the uppermost portion of the pile or at the very
bottom of the isolation casing allows the measured strain to be correlated to a
known average load or stress on the cross section. For both case histories, this was
done and a second order polynomial was fitted to the data to analytically describe the
relationship between and . This relationship was then used to derive the secant
9
7th FMGM 2007
modulus as a function of strain for the pile as suggested by Fellenius (1989). In the
instance of the Dublin Road Pump Station project, the pile was completely isolated to
the top of the bond zone, so the load was assumed to be known at that point,
corresponding to the first level of strain gauges. The calculated variation of secant
modulus with measured strain for both case histories is illustrated in Figures 10 and
11. From these plots, one can observe that the calculated secant modulus decreases
with increasing strain. These curves can be thought of as modulus degradation curves
where the degradation is primarily due to the nonlinear behavior of the neat cement
grout.
28 70
Estimated Secant Modulus (GPa)
Estimated Secant Modulus (GPa)

Cased Zone Secant Modulus
Approx. Secant Modulus (Field Data)
60
Bond Zone Secant Modulus
26
50
24 40
Esec (GPa)= -0.0081 + 42.89 (Cased)
Esec (MPa)= -0.0063 + 27.46 30
22
20
Esec (GPa)= -0.0104 + 26.32 (Bond)
20 10
0 200 400 600 800 1000 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
Measured Strain (µ ) Measured Strain (µ )
FIG.10. Calculated secant modulus FIG. 11. Calculated secant

versus strain for bond zone of modulus versus strain for pile
Dublin Road test pile SR-1
Similar data analysis was performed for 167 Johnson Street pile SR-2. In addition to
the synthesized modulus degradation relationship in Figure 11 for the cased portion
of pile SR-1, the approximated secant modulus curve for the field data is also shown.
For this curve, the estimated average axial stress is divided directly by the measured
strain. At strains greater than 200 µ , the field data approaches then directly parallels
the synthesized degradation line, verifying the process being employed to generate
strain-level dependent secant moduli. Also in Figure 11, a modulus degradation
curve is shown for the bond zone of test pile SR-1. This curve was developed using a
back-calculated grout secant modulus from the cased portion of the pile. Assuming
elastic axial strain compatibility, the pile secant modulus can be estimated to be
EcAc + Eg Ag + E b Ab
Ep = (2)
Ap
where Ec and Ac are the casing modulus and area, Eg and Ag are the grout modulus
and area, and Eb and Ab are the reinforcing bar modulus and area, respectively. From
Eq. 2, Eg can be calculated for each strain data point. The secant modulus of
elasticity for the bond zone of the pile can then be estimated for each strain data point
using the same equation, but eliminating the terms related to the casing modulus and
10
7th FMGM 2007
area. In this way, the strain-level dependent secant modulus can be calculated from
the measured data for the bond zone of the pile and used to estimate pile load at any
strain data point.
Load Transfer
Once the Ep is known or approximated at the strain gauge levels as described above,
the load can be calculated using Eq. 1 provided the pile cross sectional area Ap is
known or assumed. Figures 12, 13, and 14 show the load distribution with depth for
the instrumented load tests analyzed.
0 0
2 2

4 4
6 6
8 8
10 10
12 12
P=556 kN
14 P=1112 kN 14 P=556 kN
P=1669 kN
P=1112 kN
P=2224 kN
P=1669 kN
16 Post Failure 16 P=2224 kN
(1771 kN)
Residual P=2669 kN
18 18
0 400 800 1200 1600 2000 2400 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
Interpreted Load (kN) Interpreted Load (kN)
FIG. 12. Load distribution for SR-1 FIG. 13. Load distribution for SR-2
13
14
15
16
17
18
19 P=267 kN
P=534 kN
P=801 kN
20 P=934 kN
Post Failure
Full Unload
21
0 200 400 600 800 1000
Interpreted Load (kN)
FIG.14. Load distribution for Dublin Road test pile
11
7th FMGM 2007
From Figures 12 through 14, the method of load transfer from the pile bond zone to
the ground can be assessed, both qualitatively and quantitatively. For pile SR-1 and
the Dublin Road test piles, which experienced plunging failure, a nonlinear load
distribution exists in the bond zone for all pile top load levels. This implies that the
mobilized bond stress is not necessarily constant as is commonly assumed in state
of the practice micropile design. The data imply that for design-level loading, the
mobilized is not constant along the bond length, but begins to exhibit constant
with large pile deflections or as failure is approached. Furthermore, the nonlinear
nature could suggest that has some dependence on effective overburden stress
levels; a concept also ignored in common micropile design practice. For the Dublin
Road pile at the failure load of 934 kN, the load transfer rate in the bond zone varies
from 8.5 to 12.1 kN/m and the ultimate is 115 to 163 kPa. At the failure load of
2225 kN for SR-1, the load transfer rate in the bond zone varies from 15.9 to 22.6
kN/m. Based on these load transfer rates, the ultimate is about 153 to 218 kPa. For
pile SR-2, the load distribution is somewhat more linear with depth, especially as the
pile top load increases, implying that is approaching a constant mobilized value.
The load transfer rate for SR-2 at the maximum test load of 2667 kN ranges from 25
to 28.5 kN/m, resulting in a maximum mobilized of 276 kPa.
The load distributions in Figures 12 and 14 also demonstrate that significant tip
resistance was mobilized during the loading and pile failure process. Again, this is
contrary to the state of practice for micropile design, which commonly assumes that
micropiles carry their entire load in bond stress only. Figure 15 shows the
mobilization of tip load with pile top settlement for each test pile. It is apparent from
the data points for the Dublin Road test pile and pile SR-1 that the micropiles develop
tip capacity relative to the pile top settlement, but in a nonlinear fashion. To be more
correct, the mobilized tip resistance should be plotted versus pile tip movement, but
this would require that a tell-tale be installed at the pile tip. Even for the design
capacity of each of these two piles, the tip resistance makes up from 19 to 25% of the
total pile load. The trend of the plotted data indicates that ultimate tip capacity was
being approached by the Dublin Road Pile and pile SR-1. For micropiles with shorter
bond lengths the potential to build up tip resistance seems greater, and when designed
properly could make the pile perform more efficiently.
800
Mobilized Tip Load (kN)
Dublin Road Pile

Pile SR-1
600 Pile SR-2
400
200
0
0 10 20 30 40 50
Average Pile Top Settlement (mm)
FIG. 15. Generation of micropile tip load
12
7th FMGM 2007
Comparison of Spot-Weldable and Embedment Strain Gauges

The strain gauge data from the SW and EB gauges for piles SR-1 and SR-2 suggest
that true strain compatibility may not be satisfied in the composite pile section. For
perfectly concentric loading and load levels below those expected to produce material
failures, the SW and EB gauges were expected to show very similar strain values.
Differences were observed in the measured strains for the two gauge types, even
though they were situated within 150 mm of each other within the test piles. Table 1
summarizes these companion strain gauge readings for the applied pile top loads of
1112 kN and 2224 kN. Possible reasons for the discrepancy between the
measurements include lack of perfectly concentric loading on the pile top or poor
preparation of the pile top. Poor pile top preparation prior to load testing could result
in the majority of the test loads being applied directly to either the reinforcing bar or
grout such that load transfer to the other material would have to occur in shear. It is
likely that inadequate pile top preparation resulted in some of the observed
differences, but not all.
Table 1. Comparison of spot-weldable (SW) and embedment (EB) strains
Applied SR-1: z = 0 m SR-1: z = 9.14 m SR-2: z = 0 m SR-2: z = 9.24 m

Load
(kN) SW EG SW EG SW EG SW EG
556 268 151 184 90 61 92 252 73
1112 519 358 346 259 225 202 487 213
1668 741 689 484 478 463 290 759 389
1946 837 895 537 576 689 329 850 466
2224 960 1130 616 670 1294 483 1107 655
NOTE: All SW and EB readings in microstrains (µ )
CONCLUSIONS
Instrumented load tests on micropiles in which strain gauges are employed allow
insights into the mechanics of micropile performance. For the load test case studies
discussed in this paper, a total of 34 vibrating wire spot-weldable and embedment
strain gauges were installed in a total of 3 test piles. Two of the three load tests,
conducted under compression conditions, experienced plunging failure. The strains
measured at various depths within the piles provide an indication of the pattern of
load transfer to the surrounding soil and can point out where significant changes in
pile geometry or stiffness are present. The instrumentation data, when analyzed and
interpreted, allow for an examination of the nonlinear nature of the composite
micropile, the nonuniform load transfer along the bond length and at the pile tip, and
point out potential problems in strain compatibility when the test pile is not prepared
properly. The data were directly analyzed to develop the relationship between secant
13
7th FMGM 2007
micropile modulus and generated strain. It was found that the pile secant modulus
degrades with increased strain level, primarily as a function of the nonlinear behavior
of the neat cement grout. Linearized degradation relationships were synthesized for
the load test data sets and found to be reasonable when compared to the field data.
The developed relationships for the secant modulus were utilized to calculate the load
distribution in the micropile. The load distribution was generally found to be
nonuniform at all applied loads up to plunging failure. The two test piles that
experienced plunging failure demonstrated that significant tip resistance was

mobilized in a nonlinear fashion, even at loads less than that causing plunging failure.
This finding conflicts with the assumed behavior in state of practice micropile design,
but could potentially be used to produce more efficient pile designs for suitable
situations. Additional testing on instrumented micropiles with short bond lengths in
varying soil types would be required to quantify the mobilization of tip resistance.
Finally, the observed differences in spot-weldable and embedment strain gauges
could indicate that strain compatibility is questionable within the composite micropile
section and highly dependent on pile-top preparation procedures.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors would like to extend their gratitude to their employer for the opportunity
to employ instrumentation on these projects. The authors would like to thank their
coworkers and field staff for their patience, attention to detail and careful
construction methods for these instrumented piles, in particular Messrs. Peter Erik,
Ray Gaines, Marek Olszewski, Steven Boyd, and Fred R. Smith.
REFERENCES
Deschamps, R. and Richards, T. (2005). “Installation, measurement, and

interpretation of “sister bar” strain gauges in micropiles.” Proc. of the GEO
Construction Quality Assurance/Quality Control Technical Conference, ADSC: The
International Association of Foundation Drilling, 167-178.
Fellenius, B. (1989). “Tangent modulus of piles determined from strain data.” Proc.
of the Congress on Foundation Engineering: Current Principles and Practices,
ASCE, Vol. 1, 500-510.
Langan (2006). “Load Testing – Request for Proposal, 167 Johnson Street”. Langan
Engineering and Environmental Sciences, New York, 34 pp.
MRCE (2006). “Additional Subsurface Investigation, Dublin Road Pump Station.”

Mueser Rutledge Consulting Engineers, New York, 30 pp.
14
7th FMGM 2007

Mechanics of Micropiles Permance From Instrumented Load Tests PDF

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Mechanics of Micropiles Permance From Instrumented Load Tests PDF

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

FMGM 2007: Seventh International Symposium on Field Measurements in Geomechanics © 2007 ASCE

Mechanics of Micropile Performance from Instrumented Load Tests

ABSTRACT: Micropiles, commonly employed for retrofit of existing foundations

Micropiles are frequently employed by engineers and design-build specialty

Copyright ASCE 2007 Field Measurements in Geomechanics (FMGM 2007)

CASE HISTORY-DUBLIN ROAD PUMP STATION

SAND, SILT, AND CLAY

(SM, ML, CL)

FIG. 1. Stratigraphy and SPT data for FIG. 2. Schematic of instrumented

FIG. 3. Load-settlement plot for the Dublin Road load test

Depth below Ground Surface (m)

CASE HISTORY – 167 JOHNSON STREET RESIDENTIAL HIGH-RISE

SG-2 SG-2 6.1 m

FIG. 5. Stratigraphy and SPT data for FIG. 6. Schematic of instrumented

Pile Butt Settlement (mm)

SR-1 (6.1 m Bond)

Figure 7. Load-settlement plots for the micropiles SR-1 and SR-2

Depth below Ground Surface (m)

FIG. 8. Measured strain versus FIG. 9. Measured strain versus

ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF INSTRUMENTED LOAD TEST

The load-deformation and strain-depth data shown in Figures 3, 4, 7, 8, and 9 can be

Nonlinear Behavior of Composite Micropiles

Estimated Secant Modulus (GPa)

FIG.10. Calculated secant modulus FIG. 11. Calculated secant

Depth below Ground Surface (m)

FIG.14. Load distribution for Dublin Road test pile

Dublin Road Pile

FIG. 15. Generation of micropile tip load

Comparison of Spot-Weldable and Embedment Strain Gauges

Table 1. Comparison of spot-weldable (SW) and embedment (EB) strains

Applied SR-1: z = 0 m SR-1: z = 9.14 m SR-2: z = 0 m SR-2: z = 9.24 m

experienced plunging failure demonstrated that significant tip resistance was

Deschamps, R. and Richards, T. (2005). “Installation, measurement, and

MRCE (2006). “Additional Subsurface Investigation, Dublin Road Pump Station.”

S-ar putea să vă placă și