Comparative geotechnical analysis for ultimate bearing capacity of precast concrete piles using cone resistance measurements
Computing the axial load capacity of pile foundations is often challenging for geotechnical engineers. Different theoretical and empirical approaches were proposed for determining the ultimate bearing capacity. Among these approaches, the in situ testing methods are based on cone penetration test (C...
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
De Gruyter
2024-04-01
|
| Series: | Open Engineering |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1515/eng-2024-0007 |
| _version_ | 1797208533531361280 |
|---|---|
| author | Shaban Alaa M. Al-Hashimi Zahraa H. Aleshaiqer Bashar H. Cosentino Paul J. |
| author_facet | Shaban Alaa M. Al-Hashimi Zahraa H. Aleshaiqer Bashar H. Cosentino Paul J. |
| author_sort | Shaban Alaa M. |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Computing the axial load capacity of pile foundations is often challenging for geotechnical engineers. Different theoretical and empirical approaches were proposed for determining the ultimate bearing capacity. Among these approaches, the in situ testing methods are based on cone penetration test (CPT) measurements. This study compares five CPT methods in estimating the axial load capacity of precast concrete piles evaluated at four piling construction projects in Northwest and Central Florida. The analytical methods used in this work are the Aoki and De Alencar method (1975), the Schmertmann method (1978), the Bustamante and Gianeselli Laboratoire Central des Ponts et Chausees method (1982), the Eslami and Fellenius method (1997), and the Eurocode 7 (2007). The outcomes indicated that the Eurocode method 7 had the most increased load capacity estimates, whereas the Eslami and Fellenius method yielded the lowest estimates. The results also indicated that the Aoki and De Alencar (1975) method consistently demonstrated the slightest differences among these values, showing its potential for reliable and consistent pile-bearing capacity estimations. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-24T09:40:19Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-cab0b1a7e6dd4eb5a41aad981303eeae |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2391-5439 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-24T09:40:19Z |
| publishDate | 2024-04-01 |
| publisher | De Gruyter |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Open Engineering |
| spelling | doaj.art-cab0b1a7e6dd4eb5a41aad981303eeae2024-04-15T07:41:26ZengDe GruyterOpen Engineering2391-54392024-04-0114119722810.1515/eng-2024-0007Comparative geotechnical analysis for ultimate bearing capacity of precast concrete piles using cone resistance measurementsShaban Alaa M.0Al-Hashimi Zahraa H.1Aleshaiqer Bashar H.2Cosentino Paul J.3Civil Engineering Department, College of Engineering, University of Kerbala, Karbala, IraqCivil Engineering Department, College of Engineering, University of Kerbala, Karbala, IraqCivil Engineering Department, University of Warith Al-Anbiyaa, Karbala, IraqCivil Engineering Department, Engineering College, Florida Institute of Technology, Melbourne, Florida, United States of AmericaComputing the axial load capacity of pile foundations is often challenging for geotechnical engineers. Different theoretical and empirical approaches were proposed for determining the ultimate bearing capacity. Among these approaches, the in situ testing methods are based on cone penetration test (CPT) measurements. This study compares five CPT methods in estimating the axial load capacity of precast concrete piles evaluated at four piling construction projects in Northwest and Central Florida. The analytical methods used in this work are the Aoki and De Alencar method (1975), the Schmertmann method (1978), the Bustamante and Gianeselli Laboratoire Central des Ponts et Chausees method (1982), the Eslami and Fellenius method (1997), and the Eurocode 7 (2007). The outcomes indicated that the Eurocode method 7 had the most increased load capacity estimates, whereas the Eslami and Fellenius method yielded the lowest estimates. The results also indicated that the Aoki and De Alencar (1975) method consistently demonstrated the slightest differences among these values, showing its potential for reliable and consistent pile-bearing capacity estimations.https://doi.org/10.1515/eng-2024-0007axial load capacityprecast concrete pilescpt measurement |
| spellingShingle | Shaban Alaa M. Al-Hashimi Zahraa H. Aleshaiqer Bashar H. Cosentino Paul J. Comparative geotechnical analysis for ultimate bearing capacity of precast concrete piles using cone resistance measurements Open Engineering axial load capacity precast concrete piles cpt measurement |
| title | Comparative geotechnical analysis for ultimate bearing capacity of precast concrete piles using cone resistance measurements |
| title_full | Comparative geotechnical analysis for ultimate bearing capacity of precast concrete piles using cone resistance measurements |
| title_fullStr | Comparative geotechnical analysis for ultimate bearing capacity of precast concrete piles using cone resistance measurements |
| title_full_unstemmed | Comparative geotechnical analysis for ultimate bearing capacity of precast concrete piles using cone resistance measurements |
| title_short | Comparative geotechnical analysis for ultimate bearing capacity of precast concrete piles using cone resistance measurements |
| title_sort | comparative geotechnical analysis for ultimate bearing capacity of precast concrete piles using cone resistance measurements |
| topic | axial load capacity precast concrete piles cpt measurement |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1515/eng-2024-0007 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT shabanalaam comparativegeotechnicalanalysisforultimatebearingcapacityofprecastconcretepilesusingconeresistancemeasurements AT alhashimizahraah comparativegeotechnicalanalysisforultimatebearingcapacityofprecastconcretepilesusingconeresistancemeasurements AT aleshaiqerbasharh comparativegeotechnicalanalysisforultimatebearingcapacityofprecastconcretepilesusingconeresistancemeasurements AT cosentinopaulj comparativegeotechnicalanalysisforultimatebearingcapacityofprecastconcretepilesusingconeresistancemeasurements |