尼日利亚河流州两个地点的地基承载力试验结果

O. Akande, N. Ekeocha
{"title":"尼日利亚河流州两个地点的地基承载力试验结果","authors":"O. Akande, N. Ekeocha","doi":"10.9790/0990-0404022735","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Vertical pile load tests using the maintained load test and twice the safe working load (SWL) were used in two different locations (A & B) in Rivers State. Four pre-cast concrete piles of dimension 400mm by 400mm were tested using Kentledge method in location A while three cased piles of 406mm diameter were tested in location B using reaction method. The range of pile head movement (settlement) at maximum load of 1000KN (200% of SWL) was 2.76mm 5.73mm while the range of 10% of the pile width was 11.04mm 22.92mm. The elastic rebound varies from 80.49% 97.65%. In location B, where reaction method was employed, the cumulative settlement at maximum load of 544.4KN was between 1.088mm and 5.70mm while the range of 10% of the pile width was 8.16mm 23.142mm. The elastic rebound varied from 39.20% 66.83%. The soil bearing capacity values at depth of 15.0m ranged from 570KN/m 2 710KN/m 2 while the pile bearing capacity at depth of 12.0m was 6350KN/m 2 in location A. A pile bearing capacity of 4188KN/m 2 and pile allowable load of between 361KN and 2275KN were respectively recorded at depth of 30m in location B. The pile bearing capacity was greater than soil bearing capacity. Results showed that the piles did not fail the test in both locations since cumulative settlements were much lower than 10% of the pile width. This could be due to factors like skin friction of the piles, elasticity, stiffness and pore water pressure of the soil. Therefore, test piles are capable of withstanding anticipated imposed stress from the super structure without failure. The Kentledge system produced greater influence on the test piles probably because weight used was higher than the safe load capacity of the test pile for safety consideration. The Kentledge weight increased the pile –soil interaction by increasing the unit shaft resistance of the piles. This could probably account for the high values of elastic rebound in location A. Insufficient time interval between driving and testing affected the elastic rebound values of test piles in location B. This is because piles in cohesive soil should be tested after sufficient time has elapsed for excess pore water to dissipate.","PeriodicalId":111900,"journal":{"name":"IOSR Journal of Applied Geology and Geophysics","volume":"98 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Subsoil Bearing Capacity from Load Test Results In Two Locations in Rivers State, Nigeria\",\"authors\":\"O. Akande, N. Ekeocha\",\"doi\":\"10.9790/0990-0404022735\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Vertical pile load tests using the maintained load test and twice the safe working load (SWL) were used in two different locations (A & B) in Rivers State. Four pre-cast concrete piles of dimension 400mm by 400mm were tested using Kentledge method in location A while three cased piles of 406mm diameter were tested in location B using reaction method. The range of pile head movement (settlement) at maximum load of 1000KN (200% of SWL) was 2.76mm 5.73mm while the range of 10% of the pile width was 11.04mm 22.92mm. The elastic rebound varies from 80.49% 97.65%. In location B, where reaction method was employed, the cumulative settlement at maximum load of 544.4KN was between 1.088mm and 5.70mm while the range of 10% of the pile width was 8.16mm 23.142mm. The elastic rebound varied from 39.20% 66.83%. The soil bearing capacity values at depth of 15.0m ranged from 570KN/m 2 710KN/m 2 while the pile bearing capacity at depth of 12.0m was 6350KN/m 2 in location A. A pile bearing capacity of 4188KN/m 2 and pile allowable load of between 361KN and 2275KN were respectively recorded at depth of 30m in location B. The pile bearing capacity was greater than soil bearing capacity. Results showed that the piles did not fail the test in both locations since cumulative settlements were much lower than 10% of the pile width. This could be due to factors like skin friction of the piles, elasticity, stiffness and pore water pressure of the soil. Therefore, test piles are capable of withstanding anticipated imposed stress from the super structure without failure. The Kentledge system produced greater influence on the test piles probably because weight used was higher than the safe load capacity of the test pile for safety consideration. The Kentledge weight increased the pile –soil interaction by increasing the unit shaft resistance of the piles. This could probably account for the high values of elastic rebound in location A. Insufficient time interval between driving and testing affected the elastic rebound values of test piles in location B. This is because piles in cohesive soil should be tested after sufficient time has elapsed for excess pore water to dissipate.\",\"PeriodicalId\":111900,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"IOSR Journal of Applied Geology and Geophysics\",\"volume\":\"98 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"IOSR Journal of Applied Geology and Geophysics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.9790/0990-0404022735\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"IOSR Journal of Applied Geology and Geophysics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.9790/0990-0404022735","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

采用保持荷载试验和两倍安全工作荷载(SWL)在河流州的两个不同地点(A和B)进行了垂直桩荷载试验。在A位置采用Kentledge法对4根尺寸为400mm × 400mm的预制混凝土桩进行了试验,在B位置采用反应法对3根直径为406mm的套管桩进行了试验。1000KN (200% SWL)最大荷载作用下,桩头移动(沉降)范围为2.76mm 5.73mm, 10%桩宽范围为11.04mm 22.92mm。弹性回弹范围为80.49% 97.65%。B位置采用反力法,最大荷载544.4KN时累积沉降在1.088 ~ 5.70mm之间,桩宽10%范围为8.16mm ~ 23.142mm。弹性回弹在39.20% ~ 66.83%之间变化。在水深为15.0m处测得的土承载力值为570KN/ m2 ~ 710KN/ m2,在水深为12.0m处测得的桩承载力值为6350KN/ m2。在水深为30m处测得的桩承载力为4188KN/ m2,在水深为361KN ~ 2275KN之间,桩承载力大于土承载力。结果表明,由于累积沉降量远低于桩宽的10%,两个位置的桩均未通过测试。这可能是由于桩的表面摩擦、弹性、刚度和土壤孔隙水压力等因素造成的。因此,试桩能够承受上部结构预期施加的应力而不发生破坏。Kentledge体系对试桩的影响较大,可能是因为所使用的自重高于试桩安全考虑的安全承载能力。肯特里奇自重通过增加桩的单位轴阻力来增加桩土相互作用。这可能是a点弹性回弹值较高的原因。打桩与试验时间间隔不足,影响了b点试桩的弹性回弹值。这是因为在粘性土中,桩应在足够的时间使多余孔隙水消散后进行试验。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Subsoil Bearing Capacity from Load Test Results In Two Locations in Rivers State, Nigeria
Vertical pile load tests using the maintained load test and twice the safe working load (SWL) were used in two different locations (A & B) in Rivers State. Four pre-cast concrete piles of dimension 400mm by 400mm were tested using Kentledge method in location A while three cased piles of 406mm diameter were tested in location B using reaction method. The range of pile head movement (settlement) at maximum load of 1000KN (200% of SWL) was 2.76mm 5.73mm while the range of 10% of the pile width was 11.04mm 22.92mm. The elastic rebound varies from 80.49% 97.65%. In location B, where reaction method was employed, the cumulative settlement at maximum load of 544.4KN was between 1.088mm and 5.70mm while the range of 10% of the pile width was 8.16mm 23.142mm. The elastic rebound varied from 39.20% 66.83%. The soil bearing capacity values at depth of 15.0m ranged from 570KN/m 2 710KN/m 2 while the pile bearing capacity at depth of 12.0m was 6350KN/m 2 in location A. A pile bearing capacity of 4188KN/m 2 and pile allowable load of between 361KN and 2275KN were respectively recorded at depth of 30m in location B. The pile bearing capacity was greater than soil bearing capacity. Results showed that the piles did not fail the test in both locations since cumulative settlements were much lower than 10% of the pile width. This could be due to factors like skin friction of the piles, elasticity, stiffness and pore water pressure of the soil. Therefore, test piles are capable of withstanding anticipated imposed stress from the super structure without failure. The Kentledge system produced greater influence on the test piles probably because weight used was higher than the safe load capacity of the test pile for safety consideration. The Kentledge weight increased the pile –soil interaction by increasing the unit shaft resistance of the piles. This could probably account for the high values of elastic rebound in location A. Insufficient time interval between driving and testing affected the elastic rebound values of test piles in location B. This is because piles in cohesive soil should be tested after sufficient time has elapsed for excess pore water to dissipate.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信