Post on 23-Feb-2018
transcript
7/24/2019 Ultimate Load Test Report
1/24
i
INSTRUMENTED
PILE LOAD
TEST
REPORT
PROPOSED ERECTION OF A BLOCK OF 25 STOREYS
CONDOMINIUM
FLATS DEVELOPMENT (TOTAL
8
UNITS)
WITH 3 BASEMENT CARPARKS,
SWIMMING
POOL &
COMMUNAL FACILITES ON LOT
1 7 N TS 24
RYOBI KISO (S) PTE LTD
58A, SUNGEI l
7/24/2019 Ultimate Load Test Report
2/24
T BLE
OF
CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION
1 1 GENERAL
1 2 SOIL PROFILE AND PRELIMINARY DESIGN
OF
PILE
2 INSTRUMENTATION AND TEST
2 1
VIBRATING WIRE
STRAIN GAUGES
VWSG)
2 2 STATIC PILE LOAD
TEST
3.
RESULTS
3 1 LOAD
SETTLEMENT
CURVE
3.2 LOAD DISTRIBUTION
CURVE
3.2.1 Modulus o pile
3 2 2
VIBR TING WIRE STR IN G UGES
3 3
UNIT END
BEARING
RESISTANCE
4 CONCLUSIONS
1
1
2
2
3
3
4
5
5
1
2
5
l
s .
r
E
1-2
I
1
l
r; -
1r.:-
1
y
I
_
_
1 ~
--
I
Ji,
--
j
I
7/24/2019 Ultimate Load Test Report
3/24
Table 1
Table 2
Table 3
Table 4
Table 5
Fig.1
Fig.
2
Fig.
3
Fig.
4
Fig.
5
Fig.
6
Fig. 7
Fig.
8
Fig.
9
LIST OF T BLES
Variation of skin
friction with
depth
Average Strain
vs
depth
Average Force vs depth
Skin Friction vs depth
Tell tale extensometers settlement
LIST OF
FIGURES
Instrumentation detail of bored pile.
Load &
Average Settlement vs Time.
Load
settlement
curve
from
scale rule
Load settlement
curve
from
dial gauge
Tangent modulus versus microstrain.
Unit
Skin Friction vs Applied Load Plot - at 405 WL
Unit End Bearing vs Applied Load Plot - at 405 WL
Mobilised Unit Skin Friction - at 405 WL
Calculated Load
vs
Depth
PPENDIX
Appendix A:- Pile Head Settlement Readings (Dial Gauges and
Scale
Rule)
VWSG's and Extensometer Readings
Appendix
B:
Bored Pile Record
Concrete Cube Test
Soil Investigation WW
Design Calculation For Pile Length
Appendix
C:
Calibration Certificates
Appendix
D:
Design
for
Kentledge system
7/24/2019 Ultimate Load Test Report
4/24
INSTRUMENTED
PILE LOAD TEST REPORT
1 INTRODUCTION
1 1 General
This report serves
to
transfer
the
data
from
instrumented static pile load
test
conducted
for PROPOSED ERECTION OF
A
BLOCK OF 25 STOREYS
CONDOMINIUM
FLATS DEVELOPMENT
TOTAL 80
UNITS)
WITH 3
BASEMENT CARPARKS,
SWIMMING
POOL
COMMUNAL
FACILITES ON LOT
01070N
TS
24, which was started on 5
October 2012 and completed on 8 October 2012. The purpose
of
instrumentation
on pile load
test
is
to
ascertain the load distr ibution characteristics of soil
supporting the pile shaft and
to
establish the design of the pile.
1 2
Soil profile and preliminary design
o
pile
The Ultimate Test Pile UTP) is a
1000mm
diameter bored pile, with embedded pile
length 39.68m from RL115.09m (Ground Level). The working load for the test pile is
600.4Ton. The
UTP is
tested to 4.05 times
of the
working load, which
is
2431.6Ton.
As
seen
from
the piling records,
the
soil profile consists
of
a 3m upper layer
of
brown mixed with dark brown gravelly Sandy SILT with concrete (Backfill) (0-3m),
followed by 17m of Firm
to
Stiff light brown and light brownish, yellow fine
to
coarse Sandy
SILT,
Bu
kit Timah Granite-Residual Soil)
GVI
(3-20m). The successive
layers are Very
stiff
light brownish
yellow
Sandy
SILT
(Bukit Timah Granite-Residual
Soil)
GVI 20-2sm) to
28m depth, Hard brownish yellow Sandy
SILT
(BukitTimah
Granite-Residual Soil)
GVI
28-33m)
to
33m depth, Hard light bluish grey slightly
gravelly fine
to
coarse Sandy
CLAY
very Sandy
SILT
(Bukit Timah Granite) GV
(33-38.48m)
to
38.48m depth, Moderately strong medium grey spotted with white
Granite moderately weathered, medium spaced fractures Bu kit Ti mah Granite) Giii
(38.48-39.48m)
to
39.48m depth, Moderately strong
to
strong medium grey
Granite slightly weathered, medium spaced fractures
Bu
kit Timah Granite) Gii
(39.48-39.68m)
to
39.68m depth.
7/24/2019 Ultimate Load Test Report
5/24
INSTRUMENTED PILE LOAD TEST REPORT
2 INSTRUMENTATION AND TEST
The
UTP consisted
of
56nos
of
vibrating wire type strain
gauges (VWSGs) t
14
different layers and three tellta le extensometers
as
shown in
Fig.
1.
Three tell tale extensometers were installed at depth 39m, 33.3m
and
14.89m
below the pile head level (RL115.3m).
Load
cell was equipped at pile top to monitor
the applied load on pile head at each increment, while dial gauges and dumpy level
were used to monitor the pile head settlements.
2.1 VIBRATING WIRE STRAIN GAUGES VWSG)
Vibrating wire strain gauges
(VWSG)
consist
of
a calibrated wire tensioned
to
a
known distance between two end blocks.
The
VWSG's are connected with electrical
wires to a power source and digital readout box. At
each
applied load increments
during the pile load test, a signal
is
sent to a plucking coil which plucks the wire and
creates a vibration.
The
frequency
of
the vibration
is
recorded and referenced to a
change in length, or strain. The theory is, when pile
is
loaded; the VWSG experience
the
same strain as pile. Knowing the strain at
each
load and elastic modulus allows a
calculation
of
load along the pile profile as explained in Section 2.2. Skin friction can
be calculated in the same way as explained in Section 2.2 using Eq. (3).
2.2 Static pile load test
The pile was tested after 8 days of its installation. l
7/24/2019 Ultimate Load Test Report
6/24
3 RESULTS
3 1 Load settlement curve
The load & average settlement vs time
is
shown in Fig
2
The load settlement curve
as obtained
is
shown in
Fig
3 and
Fig
4 Elastic compression of a free standing pile
and Davisson's (1972) failure criteria has also been plotted.
During
the
test,
as
obtained from average readings,
the
pile head settled by
39.66mm and 47.345mm (Average reading of scale ruler and dial gauge) when
subjected to 2431Ton and 2461Ton (405 and 410 ofWL .
3 2 Load distribution curve
As described in Section 2.1,
the
load distribution urve can be evaluated
from the
strain measurements along the length of pile.
F
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
7/24/2019 Ultimate Load Test Report
7/24
INSTRUMENTED
PILE LOAD TEST REPORT
3 2 1 Modulus of pile
The concrete modulus is a function of stress on pile. Over the large stress range
imposed during a static loading test, the difference between the initial and final
tangent module for pile material may be substantial and the conclusion based
upon a constant modulus may lead to wrong interpretation of shaft and toe
bearings. Fellenius 2006) has suggested the conversion of every measured strain
value to stress via its corresponding strain-dependent secant modulus. The
equation
for the
tangent modulus line is:
M ~ ; ) = a s + b
4)
which
can
be integrated
to
er = ~ } , bs
However,
er
Ess
Therefore,
a = = 0.5ai +b
sand
Es 0.5 as +b
where
M
=tangent modulus of composite pile material
,=secant modulus of composite pile material
a= stress load divided by cross section area)
7)
da =
cr,.1-
an =
change
of
stress
from
one load increment
to
the next
a=
slope of the tangent modulus line
s
=measured strain
ds =
(s,,,- sn)
=change of strain
from
one load increment to the next
b
=
y-intercept of the tangent modulus line i.e., initial tangent modulus)
5)
6)
The plot of tangent modulus
with
microstrain is shown in Fig.
4.
The equation of
stress dependent secant modulus is given by:
Es 0.5 as +b
Where, a =-0.028 and b = 42
7/24/2019 Ultimate Load Test Report
8/24
INSTRUMENTED
PILE LOAD
TEST
REPORT
3 2 2
VIBR TING
WIRE
STR IN
G UGES
The load distribution curves, using VWSG's data, have been plotted in
Fig
9.
Whereas
the
mobilized unit skin friction for this pile are shown in Fig 8.
The Unit
Skin
Friction of
Pile
at maximum load of 405 WL is shown
in
Fig
6.
3 3 nit end bearing resistance
The variation of
unit
end bearing with applied load at maximum load of 405 WL is
shown in Figure
7.
It is obtained from VWSG s readings.
The
toe bearing increased
linearly with the additional load. The
toe
bearing mobilized at 2431Ton (4.05 X WL),
equals
to
896.STon which
is
equivalent
to
11414.6kN/m
2
unit end bearing. Design
unit end bearing
is
7500kN/m2.
4 onclusions
The test pile was loaded to 2431Ton (4.05 X
WL)
during this load test. The estimated
shaft resistance and toe bearings obtained from
VWSG s
readings are 1534.5Ton
(63.12 ) and 896.STon (36.88 ) at 2431Ton (4.05 X
WL).
The corresponding unit toe bearing
is
11414.6kN/m2.
For the detail distribution of mobilized parameter refer to Table 1.
Load
(Ton)
Pile Head Settlement at Settlement fter release to
recovery
max load (mm) zero load (mm)
2431(405 ) 38.2mm-39.66mm
N A
N A
2461(410 )
47.345mm 29.29mm
38.13
From the settlement performance and
the
details analysis from the instrumentation,
we
concluded
th t
the geotechnical capacity
of
this
PTP has not
been fully mobilized
when
loaded to 405 WL. The PTP pile encountered structural failure at 410 WL
(2461Ton).
7/24/2019 Ultimate Load Test Report
9/24
Table
Table 2
Table 3
Table 4
Table 5
LIST OF T BLES
Variation o skin friction with depth
Average Strain vs depth
Average Force
vs
depth
Skin Friction vs depth
Tell tale extensometers settlement
INSTRUMENTED PILE LO D TEST REPORT
7/24/2019 Ultimate Load Test Report
10/24
S.No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
INSTRUMENTED
PILE
LOAD
TEST REPORT
Table 1 : Variation o
skin
friction with depth
Unit skin friction as per
VWSG
levels at 405 WL.
Soil prof ile from piling Depth (m) Thickness SPT (N) Mobilized
re ords
of
soil
value average
unit
Mobilised
layer skin
friction
Parameter
(m)
(Ton/m2)
From
to
Brown mixed
with
dark 0 0.58 0.58
0
0 0
brown gravelly Sandy
SILT with concrete
0.58 3 2.42
ON12
0.7 0.58N
(Backfill)
Firm
to
Stiff light brown
3
7.38
4.38 12 0.7 0.58N
and light brownish
yellow fine to coarse
7.38 13.88 6.5
12 1.6
l 33N
Sandy SILT (Bukit Timah
Granite - Residual Soil)
13.88 14.98 1.1 12 8 6.67N
GVI
14.98 17.33 2.35 12 16.8 14N
17.33 19.93 2.6 12 8.4 7N
Very
stiff
light brownish 19.33
23.98 4.05 20 8.4 4.2N
yel low Sandy SILT (Bukit
Timah Granite -
23.98 27.88 3.9
23 13.2
5.74N
Residual Soil)
GVI
Hard brownish yellow 27.88 30.48 2.6 59
15.8
2.68N
Sandy SILT (Bukit Timah
Granite - Residual Soil)
30.48 32.93 2.45
50
\
2.70N
GVI
Hard light bluish grey
32.93 35.48
2.55 100
/28 8 \
2.88N
slightly gravelly fine to
coarse Sandy CLAY very
35.48 38.18 2.7 100
28.8 )
2.88N
Sandy SILT (Bukit Timah
l
Granite)
GV
38.18 38.68
0.5 100
~ o 7 j
3.07N
.__
Moderately strong
medium grey spotted 38.68 39.18
0.5
RQD=59
77.3
773kN/m2
with
white Granite
moderately weathered,
medium spaced
0.5
773kN/m2
fractures
(Bu
kit Timah
39.18
39.68 RQD=59,
77.3
Granite) Giii
88 (estimate
unit
(estimate
unit
skin friction)
skin friction)
Note:
Unit skin friction from 0
to
39.18m is from
VWSG
analysis. Refer
to
table 4.
Unit skin friction from 39.18 to 39.68m is estimated using the last layer unit skin
friction, 77.3Ton/m2.
Total skin friction is equal to 1534.STon at 405 WL, so end bearing 896.STon at
405%.
Unit end bearing 11414.6kN/m2, design
unit
end bearing 7500kN/m2.
J'
esign I
Parameter
for
PTPl
{
2N
~
(MAX
150KN/m2)
2N
i
MAX
150KN/m2)
I
l
E
N
(MAX
150KN/m2)
2N
I
MAX
..
150KN/m2)
I
2N
(MAX
i
50KN/m2)
.
I
600KN/m2
-
'' -
I
I
7/24/2019 Ultimate Load Test Report
11/24
- - 1
......_,;,
> ....J
....____J
WESTWOOD AT ORCHARD BOULEYARD
ULTIMATE LOAD
TEST
SUMMARY
l..----.J
< 1
< 1
Table 2: Average Strain (mirco strain) vs Depth
of
Gauges
39.18 38.68 38.18
35.48 32.93
Ap1>lit'(l
load (tons)
( ~ /
162
27%.
2.9
5.1
5.2
6.6 8.l
313
52%.
3.9
15.3
15.9
17.3
22.5
480
80%
28.5 3 l.5 34.9
36.5 45.2
614
102'% 44.5
48.0 53.5
56.1 66.5
773
129%
57.7
62.l 69.6
79.2
89.l
916
1 5 3 o / ~
73.8 79.8
88.5
103.0 113.0
1093
182'l'o 94.9
103.3 112.0
132.2 143.3
1208
2 0 t Y ~
116.6
125.9 134.9
160.6
174.3
1261
210% 124.4 133.8 146.8 169.9 186.7
1324
221% 13 l.6 141.0 156.J 180.6 202.2
1 .180
230%
140.0 149.2 165.9
194.J
221.4
1445
241 144.8 156.9
174.J
207.2
242.0
1519
253'% 151.9
166.3 184.4
221.6
266.5
1557 259 159.l 176.9
192.l
227.8 284.7
1621
2 7 0 ~ ~ 171.0
189.2 205.4
235.9
307.J
1696 282"/o
181.5
199.9
215.0
278.9 342.l
1744
290'% 190.4 208.4 223.7 291.5 365.7
1819
3 0 3 ~ Q
226.7
245.4
264.5
336.2 392.7
1878 J l 3 Y ~ 230.2
257.2
273.5
343.6
406.0
1951 325o/o
241.5 274.l 294.0 369.4 441.5
1988
331' -'n 249.6
282.4 299.0 377.2
450.7
2049 341%.
258.l
293.7 308.4 389.l 466.7
2112
352'%
259.7 296.l
312.4
400.5 487.0
2157 359o/. 260.J
297.l 316.3
404.6
495.8
2231
3 7 2 / ~
266.1 306.6
325.0
432.S
508.0
2297
383Q/
300.6 342.4
359.4
457.0
520.8
2347 391 /fi 314.6
355.6 368.7
458.0 547.8
2431
405"(,,
316.4
357.9
370.6
460.5
544.7
___;
30.48
IO.I
27.3
52.7
76.l
106.5
132.0
163.3
196.6
204.6
222.5
241.2
264.2
284.4
301.6
324.l
353.8
374.9
407.5
422.0
456.0
465.0
480.8
501.3
506.9
542.4
556.2
577.3
578.4
-'
-'
-
: :_ - - . l _ -
t ft
,
,
27.88
23.98
19.93
17.33 14.98
13.88 7.38
0.58
12.l 16.0
27.4
27.0 24.7
23.7
26.8
38.9
3
l l
42 7
73.3
58.4
54.8
51 2
61.3 82.4
62.4
80.8
138.9
05.8 98.7
91.6
104.6
13
l.5
89.9 113.5
195.7 140.2
132.0
124.0 140.0
170.4
I
17.5
150.3
260.5
187.l 171.0
158.8 184.2 214.1
149.9 187.0 321.7
229.5
208.3
195.3
223.5 252.6
187.0
231.7
395.2
280.9 258.l
239.9 272 3
299.7
225.5 274.9
461.6
322.7 30 l.2
278.5 312.4 336.3
242.3 289.8
484.I
336.5
311.2
292.3
329.2
349.4
256.9 3 0.4 515.5
354.6
33 l.4
31 l.7
350.l
370.I
278.0
332.0
549.8 370.8 348.9 329.0 369.9
385.3
299.8
355.5
591.6 409.0
369.5
347.4 390.l
401.4
325.2 383.1
648.7
433.3 393.7
370.l 415.5 419.9
342.I
400.5
690.9 448.7 409.6 383.5
430.3 429.7
364.7 425.3
753.8
471.7 429.9
402.4 452.3 440.7
399.0 461.3 842.l 504.0 459.6
429.2
479.4
459.3
420.6
480.9
906.0
525.0 479.9
445.l
497.0 470.8
455.3
529.6
1086.9 543.6
502.9
471.9 524.8 497.2
464.5
544.2
1095.7
565.0 524.3
490.2
544.2 514.8
506.9
584.l
1112.8 597.5 560.3
519.9
571.2 550.0
515.l
589.8
1124.7 604.0
568.3
527.0
578.2
565.0
530.2 602.3 1141.5
614.61 585.7
541.5
597.5
581.4
546.l
616.3
1157.8
633.2 603.5
560.0 628.2 597.0
549.3 622.5 ll63.4 640.I 609.3
565.4 638.9 615.7
586.0 652.9
1217.3 691.4
664.6
615.3 673.2 634.2
602.4
672.8
1236.0
717.7 688.8
639.2
699.8
655.7
620.3 683.l
1250.4
741.6
716.8
661.5 718.0
670.2
626.9
695.5
1272.7
758.7 722.7
669.7 733 I 685.0
RYOlll KlSO S)
PTE
LTD
7/24/2019 Ultimate Load Test Report
12/24
WESTWOOD AT ORCHARD BOULEVARD
ULTIMATE LOAD TEST SUMMARY
Table
3 :
Average Force Ton) vs Depth o Gauges
39.18
38.68
38.18
Appli ed Lo:td tons)
(' )
162
27% 9.7 16.7 17.4
313 52% 45.7 50.4
52.9
480
80%
93.7 103.3 115.5
614 102% 145.7
157.l
176.6
773
129'}'0
188.4 202.7 229.1
916
153'}'0 240.6 259.8 290.5
1093
182'%
308.0 334.9 366.3
1208
201%
377.1
406.6 439.4
1261
210%
401.9 431.6
477.2
1324
221'%
424.6 454.1 506.6
1380 230%
451.l 479.9
537.5
445
241 /o
466.l 504.0
563.4
1519
253'% 488.3
533.4
595.5
1557 259o/e 5ll.I
566 3
619.5
1621
210/o
548.1 604 5
660.8
1696
282'Vi
580.6 637.5 690.7
1744 290% 608.1 663.6 717.4
1819 3 0 3 ~ ' . . 719.5
776.3
842.4
1878
313'% 730.2
812.1 869.8
1951
325 /o
764.4
862.7 931.5
1988
331 /o
789.0 887.6 946.5
2049
341 /a
814.6 921.5 974.7
2112
352o/.
819.6 928.7 986.6
2157 359%
820.8 931.6 998.4
2231
312 1
838.9 959.7 1024.2
2297
383 /o
942.0 1065.0 1125.7
2347
391"/
.
983.4 1103.4 1152.9
2431
40So/o
988.8 1110.3 1158.5
35.48 32.93 30.48
21.8 26.7
33.5
56.8 73.8
90.4
119.7 147.9 173.6
183.4 217.0
249.9
257.7 289.7 347.9
334.1 365.6 429.3
426.4 461.3 528.2
515.6 558.2 632.2
544.5 596.6 657.2
577.7 644.5 712.5
619.6 703.2 769.9
659.8
766.1 839.8
703.9
840.1
900.8
723.0 894.6 952.5
747.7
96l.I
1019.6
877.4
1064.l
1106.9
914.8 1132.7 1168.8
1047.0 1210.5 1263.0
1068.6 1248.6 1304.4
1143.6
1349.3 1401.0
1166. l 1375.2 1426.2
1200.3 1419.6 1470.7
1232.9 1476.0
1527.5
1244.6 1500.2 1543.1
1324.8 1534.0 1640.4
1392.6 1568.9 1677.8
1395.4
1642.0 1734.8
1402.5 1633.6 1737.7
27.88 23.98 19.93 17.33
14.98 13.88
7.38 0.58
40.1 52.5 75.0 89.4 90.1
93.6 99.1 152.8
102.9 139.8 171.7 192.2 199.0
201.l 225.0 321.8
205.4 262.8 313.3 345.6 355.5 357.0
381.3
509.3
294.5
367.4
421.0 455.4 472.6
480.8 507.6
655 5
383.l
483.4
556.1 602.7 608.3
612.0
662.5 817.1
486.0 597.7 680.6 733.8
736.1 747.8 798.4 957.9
602.3 734.9
829.5
890.3 904.4 911.5
964.5 1127.2
721.8 865.2 956 5 1015.2 1047.4
1051.4 1099.1 1256.7
773.2
909.8 998.8 1056.0 1080.3
1100.7 1154.5
1302.5
817.7 970.9 1055.3 1109.5 1146.4
1169.7 1223.5 1374.5
881.5
1034.6
1109.0
1156.7 1203.I 1230.8
1288.l 1427.2
947.0 1103.1 1203.1 1267.3 1269.6 1295.4 1353.6 1482.5
1022.7
1183.0 1276.5 1336.6
1347.l 1374.5 1435.2
1545.7
1072.7 1233.0 1322.8
1380.5
1397.4 1420.9 1482.2 1579.0
1139.0 1303.4 1389.7
1445.2 1461.4 1486.0 1552.0
1616.4
1238.6 1404.8 1484.2
1535.1
1553.8 1577.4 1637.0
1678.9
1300.6 1459.1 1540.6 1592.9
1616.6
1631.3 1691.7 1717.3
1398.9 1592.7 1623.8 1643.8 1687.1 1721.0 1777.2 1805.0
1425.1 1632.4 1674.7
1701.8
1751.9 1781.7 1836.4 1863.0
1543.1 1739.3 1769.4 1788.7 1860.I 1879.8
1918.0 1977.6
1565.7 1754.2 1785.9 1806.2 1883.7 1902.8 1938.9 2025.9
1607.1 1787.3 1815.9 1834.2
1935.1
1950.0 1996.6 2078.4
1650.6 1824.2
1860.1
1883.2 1987.6 2009.7 2087.2
2128.I
1659.3 1840.3
1877.5 1901.4
2004.4 2027.2 2118.6 2187.0
1758.1 1919.4 1989.3 2034.1 2163.9
2185.7 2218.I 2244.9
1801.8 1970.5 2050.0 2101.0 2232.5 2260.7 2294.1
2311.9
1849.3 1996.8 2096.9 2161.2 2311.0 2329.9 2345.7 2356.6
1866.7
2028.3 2135.1
2203.6
2327.5
2355.2 2388.0 2401.9
RYOBJ
KISO
(S)
PTE
LTD
.r' " '\ r """\_J ;
, ""'""'l
1"'""'I
J
........
; J
f -l""""" . ...... . ......
-l 't -l 't """'I
-""""'l
;" "'"'II
..
l J
k.W>' oU -'I
~ ' ' '
h . ~ = c i
~ w ~ \ 1 ~ ' = 10 ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' 4 ' ' ~ e w > l
i
7/24/2019 Ultimate Load Test Report
13/24
WESTWOOD AT ORCHARD BOULEVARD
ULTIMATE LOAD TEST SUMMARY
Table 4 : Skin Friction
(Ton nh
Dcpth(m}
39 18 38 68
Appiled Load (tons)
(%) M N
L M
162 27 YD
4.4
0.4
313 52%.
3 0
1.6
480
80%,
6.1
7 7
614
1 0 2 1 ~
7.3
12.4
773
129%.
9 l 16.8
916
I53'Vo
12.2
19.5
1093
182o/o
17.2 20 0
1203
20l'Yo
18.8
20 9
1261 210 /o
18.9
29.1
1324 22.lo/o 18.8 33.5
1380
230'}'(,
18.3 36.7
1445
241%
24.1
37.8
1519
253'1'
28.8 39.5
1557
259/o
35 2 33.8
1621
270 /o 35.9
35.8
1696 282 /o
36.2
33 9
1744 290'Vo
35.3
34.2
1819
303'Vo
36.1 42.1
187
313 /,,
52.1 36 7
1951
3 2 5 ~ ; , ,
62 6 43.S
1988 33lo/n
62 7 37.5
2049
3.JI'%
68 0
33 9
2112
352%.
69.4 36.9
2157
359
70 6 42 5
:? 231
3 7 2 ' 1 - ~ 76 9 41 0
2297 383o/.
78.3
38 6
2347
391 1- U
76.4
31.5
2431
4D5o/o
77.3 30 7
38 18
35 48
32.93 30 48
K L
J K
1-J
11 1
0.5
0 6
0.9 0.8
0.5
2.1
2.2
1.5
0.5
3.5
3 3
3.9
0.8
4.2 4.3
5 5
3 4
4.0 7 6 4 3
5.1
3 9 8.3 6.9
7.1 4 4
8.7 9.1
9 0
5.3
9 6 11.0
7 9
6 5 7 9
14.2
8.4 S.3 8.8 12.9
9 7 10.4
8.7 13.7
11.4
13.3
9 6
13.1
12.8
17.0
7 9 14.9
12.2
21 4
7.5
14.7
10.3
26.6
7 6 14.6
22 0
23.3 5 6 16.1
23 3
27 2 4.7 16.1
24.1
20 4
6 8
16.6
23.4
22 5
7 2
14.8
25.0
25 7 6 7 17.4
25 9 26 I 6 6
17.I
26 6
27 4 6 6 16.7
29 0
30.3
6.7
15.I
29 0
31 9 5 6
14.2
35 4
26 l
13.8 14.4
31 5
22.0
14.2
15.2
28 6
30.8
12.0 14.0
28 8
28 8 13.5
15.8
27.88
23 98
19.93
17 33
14 98 13 88
7 38 0 58
G 11 F G E F D E C D
B C A B
GL A
1.0
1.8
1.8
0.1
1.0
0.3 2.5
0.0
3 0 2.5
2.5
0.9 0 6
1.2 4.5
0.0
4 7 4.0 4 0
l.3
0 4
1.2
6 0 0.0
6 0 4.2
4.2 2.3
2 4 1 3 6 9
0.0
8.2 5.7
5.7 0.8 I.
I
2.5
7.2
0 0
9.1
6.5
6.5
0.3
3 4
2.5
7.5 0.0
10.8 7 4 7 4
1.9
2.1 2 6
7 6 0.0
I
1.7
7.2
7.2
4 4 I.I
2.3 7 4 0.0
I
I.I
7 0
7.0 3.3
5 9
2 6 6 9 0.0
125 6 6
6 6 5.0 6 7
2.6
7.1
0.0
12.5
5.8
5.8
6.3 8 0
2 8
6.5
0.0
12.7 7.9
7 9
0.3
7 5
2.8
6 0 0.0
13.I
7 4
7 4 1.4 8 0
3 0
5.2
0.0
13.1
7.1
7.1
2.3
6.S
3 0
4.5 0.0
13.4 6.8
6 8 2.2
7.1
3 2
3.0
0 0
13.6 6.2
6 2 2.5 6 8
2.9 2 0
0 0
12.9 6 4
6 4
3 2 4 2
3 0 l.2 0 0
15.8 2 4
2.4 5 9
9.8
2.8
1.3
0.0
16.9
3.3
3.3
6 8
8 6
2.7 1 2 0.0
16.0
2 4
2.4 9 7 5 7 1.9
2 8 0.0
15.4
2.5
2.5
10.5 5.5 1.8 4.1
0 0
14.7
2.2 2.2 13.7 4.3
2.3 3 8 0 0
14.2
2.8
2.8
14.1 6 4
3.8
1.9
0.0
14.8 2.9
2.9
13.9 6 6
4.5 3 2
0.0
13.2 5.5
5 5
17.6 6 3 1.6 1.3
0.0
13.8
6.2 6.2 17.8 8.1
1.6
0.8 0 0
12.0
7 9
7 9
20.3
5.5
0.8 0.5
0 0
13.2
8 4 8 4 16.8 8 0
1.6 0.7 0 0
RYOBI KISO S) PTE
1;ro
7/24/2019 Ultimate Load Test Report
14/24
INSTRUMENTED PILE LO D TEST REPORT
Table : Telltale extensometers settlement mm)
Tell Tale Extensometer
Load
kN) increment
ettlement
(mm)
39m 33.3m 14.89m
TTl
TT2
TT3
0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00
150 25 1.03 1.07 0.18
300 50 1.37 1.75 1.13
450 75 2.25 2.02 1.21
600 100 3.18 2.35
1.46
751
125
4.33 2.79 1.76
901 150 5.53 3.20
2.03
1051 175 6.66 3.69
2.27
1201
200
7.63
4.04
2.46
1261 210 8.10 4.25 2.39
1321 220 8.63
4.40
2.45
1381 230 9.47 4.57 2.60
1441
240 10.14
4.73
2.70
1501 250 11.07
5.00
2.81
1561 260 11.69 5.18
2.86
1621
270 12.20
5.24
2.86
1681 280 13.43 5.67 3.00
1741 290 14.08 5.87
3.02
1801
300 15.76
6.28
3.24
1861 310 15.98 6.30 3.19
1921 320 17.43 6.65
3.37
1981
330
17.84
6.72
3.41
2041 340 18.54
7.28
3.45
2101 350 19.46
7.98
3.48
2161 360 19.68 7.25 3.64
2221
370
22.43 7.57
3.68
2282 380 24.00 8.05
3.76
2342 390 25.46
8.30
3.79
2432
405
32.15 8.60
4.13
[
-
-
-
0 0 19.26 2.77
1.03
1
7/24/2019 Ultimate Load Test Report
15/24
1
INSTRUMENTED PILE LOAD
TEST REPORT
LIST
OF
FIGUR S
Fig. 1 Instrumentation detail of bored pile.
Fig. 2 Load & Average Settlement vs Time.
Fig.
3 Load settlement curve
from
scale rule
Fig. 4 Load settlement curve from dial gauge
Fig.
5 Tangent modulus versus microstrain.
Fig. 6 Unit Skin Friction
vs
Applied Load Plot - at 405
WL
Fig. 7 Unit End Bearing
vs
Applied Load Plot-
t
405 WL
Fig. 8 Mobilised Unit Skin Friction at 405 WL
Fig.
9 Calculated
Load
vs Depth
7/24/2019 Ultimate Load Test Report
16/24
Figure 1 Details of Test Pile Instrumentation
PTP1(BH-WW4)
Soil
Description
Brown mixed with dark brown gravelly Sandy
SilT with concrete (Sackfill)
Firm
to
Stiff light
brown
and
light brownish
yellow flne to
coarse Sandy
SILT
{Bukltlimah Granite - Residual Soil) GV
Very
stiff light brownish yellow Sandy
S L
T
(Bu kit Ti mah Granite Residual Soil) GVI
H;ird brownish yellow
Sandy
SILT
(Bukit Tim
ah
Granite -
Residual Soll)
GVI
Hard light bluish grey slightly gravelly fine to
coarse Sandy ClAY ve;y Sandy SILT
{Bukit Timah Granite) GV
Moderately strong medium grey spotted
with white Granite moderately
weathered,
medium spaced fractures
(Boldt
Tim
ah
Granite)
Giii
Moderately :Strong to strong
medium
grey
Granite
slightly
weathered, medium
spaced
fractures
(Bukit
Tlmah
Granite)
GI
Note:
NValue Depth
(m)
From Gl
Ground
Level
RUlS.09
0
12
22.5
54.5
100
RQD=88
0
3
3
20
20
28
28
33
33
38.48
38.48
39.48
39.48
-39.68
Rod Extensometers
~
3nos
T:f :;: f
~
PUe
Top' ' '
RL115.3
Depth (m) VWSG
'nm r I
Ground
Level
RUlS.09
11
~ 1 4 5 1
~ 1 ~ 0 1 1 1 r
~ W S G
I{
~ 0 1 2 1 ,.
RL:lOO.S{FEL)
~ 0 0 1 1 )
~ S 1 6
~ 7 2 1
~ l : = 8 4 6 1
~ 2 1 6
~ 9 6 1
~ 7 6 9 1
~ 6 4 1
RL:75.41 (
0.58
7.38
13.88
14.98
17.33
19.93
23.98
27.88
30.48
32.93
35.48
38.18
38.68
39.18
VWSGTotal
0
Layout of stain gauges
{Cross
Section)
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
56
1. The estimated pile length in this proposal
is
based on Soil profile of Bore Hole WW4
2.
Tl
from
RL115.3
to
Rl76.3 length=39rn;
T2
from
RL115.3
to
RL82.0 length=33.3rn;
~
[ ~
r: .
r
L
J
. .
[ ~ r
I
l
[ ;
[
[
[ I
[ I
~
[
J
;
[
l ~
f
7/24/2019 Ultimate Load Test Report
17/24
2
0
~
'
0
0
QJ
:>
'
J
c:
QJ
E
E
e
.s
QJ
:>
'
Iii
i5
-
-
:
QJ
E
QJ
E
QJ
Vl
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
-500
-1000
-1500
-2000
-2500
-3000
-3500
-4000
-4500
-5000
Figure 2: PTP WESTEOOD
@ORCHARD
BLVD
Load Average Settlement vs
Time
20
40 60
'fime (Hours)
- ---
.. .. ~ ~ ~
.
-
---.-- ----- - - - ~ -
O
7/24/2019 Ultimate Load Test Report
18/24
(I)
-
l
::l
0
0::
0
Cl
IJ
~
ro
l.J
I I
V ) co
-
J.I
Cl
.....
s
::
:
IJ
0
C
E
I-
:c
0..
u
IJ
0::
':p
'f'I
0
IJ
IJ
@
VI
....
(/)
::l
>
~
I.I..
O
ro
0
...I
50 r
I
5 i
J
< l ~ v r
.
-(,,., ,;,.,;;;, -
+
/ 'ffim
/
4 0 5 W L 2 4 3 ~ T o n ) 7 1
I
settlement 40.25mm
~ I
.o/--
..
l
"
- ----
; o m w c 1 m ~ '
I
15
10
o
'
o nn
settlement 20mm
1nnn
A
Note:
1
GeotechnicalFailure at
settlement=lD,lOOmm.
2
Skin
Friction and End
bearing
fully
mobilization at
settlement=O.SD, 50mm,
3
Pile structure failed at
410 , settlement=48.25mm.
?nnn
?c;nn
~
[.
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
250% WLNo increase insettlement withloads?
7/24/2019 Ultimate Load Test Report
19/24
-
I
b.O
0
::I
0
I'll
0
( 1
s:
0
.
0
V'l
CQ
-
0
+-'
~
s:
t
0::
QI
:;;
Cl.
7/24/2019 Ultimate Load Test Report
20/24