U.S. Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE
Washington, DC 20590
202-366-4000
Federal Highway Administration Research and Technology
Coordinating, Developing, and Delivering Highway Transportation Innovations
 |
| This report is an archived publication and may contain dated technical, contact, and link information |
|
Publication Number:
FHWA-HRT-04-107
|
PDF files can be viewed with the Acrobat® Reader®
FOREWORD
A full-scale experiment on fiber-reinforced polymer (FRP) piles, including static and dynamic load tests, was conducted at a site provided by the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey at its Port of Elizabeth facility in New Jersey, with the cooperation and support of its engineering department and the New York State Department of Transportation. The engineering use of FRP-bearing piles required field performance assessment and development and evaluation of reliable testing procedures and design methods to assess short-term composite material properties, load-settlement response and axial-bearing capacity, drivability and constructability of composite piling, soil-pile interaction and load transfer along the installed piling, and creep behavior of FRP composite piles under vertical loads.
Gary L. Henderson
Director, Office of Infrastructure
Research and Development
This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The U.S. Government assumes no liability for the use of the information contained in this document.
The U.S. Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. Trademarks or manufacturers' names appear in this report only because they are considered essential to the objective of the document.
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) provides high-quality information to serve Government, industry, and the public in a manner that promotes public understanding. Standards and policies are used to ensure and maximize the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of its information. FHWA periodically reviews quality issues and adjusts its programs and processes to ensure continuous quality improvement.
Technical Report Documentation Page
| 1. Report No.
FHWA-HRT-04-107 |
2. Government Accession No. | 3. Recipient's Catalog No. | ||
| 4. Title and Subtitle
BEHAVIOR OF FIBER-REINFORCED POLYMER (FRP) COMPOSITE PILES UNDER VERTICAL LOADS |
5. Report Date
August 2006 |
|||
| 6. Performing Organization Code | ||||
| 7. Author(s)
Ilan Juran and Uri Komornik |
8. Performing Organization Report No. | |||
| 9. Performing Organization Name and Address
Urban Utility Center |
10. Work Unit No. | |||
| 11. Contract or Grant No.
DTFH61-99-X-00024 |
||||
12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address
Office of Infrastructure Research and Development |
13. Type of Report and Period Covered
Final Report |
|||
| 14. Sponsoring Agency Code | ||||
| 15. Supplementary Notes
Contracting Officer's Technical Representative (COTR): Carl Ealy, HRDI-06 |
||||
| 16. Abstract
Composite piles have been used primarily for fender piles, waterfront barriers, and bearing piles for light structures. In 1998, the Empire State Development Corporation (ESDC) undertook a waterfront rehabilitation project known as Hudson River Park. The project is expected to involve replacing up to 100,000 bearing piles for lightweight structures. The corrosion of steel, deterioration of concrete, and vulnerability of timber piles has led ESDC to consider composite materials, such as fiber-reinforced polymers (FRP), as a replacement for piling made of timber, concrete, or steel. Concurrently, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) initiated a research project on the use of FRP composite piles as vertical load-bearing piles. A full-scale experiment, including dynamic and static load tests (SLT) on FRP piles was conducted at a site provided by the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (PANY&NJ) at its Port of Elizabeth facility in New Jersey, with the cooperation and support of its engineering department and the New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT). The engineering use of FRP-bearing piles required field performance assessment and development and evaluation of reliable testing procedures and design methods to assess short-term composite material properties, load-settlement response and axial-bearing capacity, drivability and constructability of composite piling, soil-pile interaction and load transfer along the installed piling, and creep behavior of FRP composite piles under vertical loads. This project includes:
The dynamic and static loading test on instrumented FRP piles conducted in this project demonstrated that these piles can be used as an alternative engineering solution for deep foundations. The engineering analysis of the laboratory and field test results provided initial data basis for evaluating testing methods to establish the dynamic properties of FRP piles and evaluating their integrity and drivability. Design criteria for allowable compression and tension stresses in the FRP piles were developed considering the equation of the axial force equilibrium for the composite material and assuming no delamination between its basic components. However, the widespread engineering use of FRP piles will require further site testing and full-scale experiment to establish a relevant performance database for the development and evaluation of reliable testing procedure and design methods. |
||||
| 17. Key Words Piles, fiber-reinforced polymers, static load tests, dynamic load tests | 18. Distribution Statement
No restrictions. This document is available to the public through the National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161. |
|||
| 19. Security Classif. (of this report)
Unclassified |
20. Security Classif. (of this page)
Unclassified |
21. No. of Pages
97 |
22. Price | |
Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) Reproduction of completed pages authorized
SI* (Modern Metric) Conversion Factors
CHAPTER 2. MECHANICAL SHORT-TERM BEHAVIOR OF FRP COMPOSITE MATERIALS UNDER AXIAL COMPRESSION LOADS
CHAPTER 3. BEHAVIOR OF FRP COMPOSITE PILES UNDER VERTICAL LOADS
CHAPTER 4. EVALUATION OF FRP COMPOSITE PILING CAPACITY USING WAVE EQUATION ANALYSIS
CHAPTER 5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Figure 3. Photo. Fender piles in the U.S. Naval Submarine Base, San Diego, CA
Figure 4. Photo. Fendering system in the U.S. Navy Pier 10, San Diego, CA
Figure 5. Photo. Fendering system, Nashville Avenue Marine Terminal, Port of New Orleans, LA
Figure 6. Photo. Floating dock project
Figure 7. Photo. Port of Elizabeth demonstration site
Figure 8. Illustration. Locations of pile manufacturers
Figure 9. Photo. SEAPILE composite marine piles
Figure 10. Graph. Stress-strain relationship of 4.4-cm (1.75-inch) fiberglass bars
Figure 11. Photo. Fiberglass bar before axial compression test and disintegrated fiberglass parts
Figure 12. Graph. Stress-vertical strain relationship of SEAPILE pile recycled plastic
Figure 14. Graph. Force-vertical strain relationship of SEAPILE pile sample. 13
Figure 15. Graph. SEAPILE pile sample after axial compression test
Figure 16. Equation. Applied load F
Figure 17. Equation. Young's modulus E
Figure 23. Equation. Bending moment M
Figure 24. Equation. Moment of inertia Ic(1)
Figure 25. Equation. Moment of inertia Ic(2)
Figure 26. Equation. Relative inertia moment coefficient λ
Figure 28. Equation. Critical buckling force Pcr
Figure 29. Equation. Pcr of an axially loaded bar
Figure 30. Equation. Equivalent critical buckling load for composite material
Figure 31. Equation. Critical buckling load factor BLF
Figure 32. Equation. Critical buckling load decomposed
Figure 33. Graph. Buckling force versus length for SEAPILE pile sample and fiberglass bars
Figure 35. Graph. PPI pile—stress-strain relationship
Figure 37. Graph. Trimax pile—vertical stress-strain curves at different rates
Figure 39. Photo. Port of Elizabeth demonstration site
Figure 40. Photo. Equipment used in the in-load tests
Figure 41. Illustration. Schematic of the equipment used in the in-load tests
Figure 42. Illustration. Data acquisition system
Figure 43. Photo. Strain gauges installation in pile of Lancaster Composite, Inc.
Figure 44. Photo. Vibrating and foil strain gauges attached to steel cage in PPI pile
Figure 45. Photo. Vibrating and foil strain gauges attached to SEAPILE composite marine pile
Figure 46. Illustration. Schematic drawing of Port Elizabeth site
Figure 47. Graph. Lancaster pile—settlement-time relationship
Figure 48. Graph. PPI pile—settlement-time relationship
Figure 49. Graph. SEAPILE pile—settlement-time relationship
Figure 50. Graph. American Ecoboard pile—settlement-time relationship
Figure 51. Equation. Settlement, S
Figure 52. Graph. Lancaster Composite pile—Davisson criteria and measured load-settlement curve
Figure 53. Graph. PPI pile—Davisson criteria and measured load-settlement curve
Figure 54. Graph. SEAPILE pile—Davisson criteria and measured load-settlement curve
Figure 55. Graph. American Ecoboard pile—Davisson criteria and measured load-settlement curve
Figure 56. Graph. DeBeer criterion plotted for FRP piles
Figure 57. Chin-Kondner method plotted for FRP piles
Figure 58. Chin-Kondner method plotted for American Ecoboard pile
Figure 59. Equation. Ultimate load capacity Puc
Figure 60. Equation. Ultimate shaft friction in compression fs
Figure 61. Equation. Ultimate end bearing resistance fb
Figure 62. Equation. Relationship between fs and in situ stresses
Figure 63. Equation. Empirical correlations for shaft friction
Figure 64. Equation. Empirical correlation for end bearing resistance
Figure 65. Graph. PPI pile, measured loads versus depth
Figure 66. Graph. SEAPILE pile, measured loads versus depth
Figure 67. Graph. Lancaster Composite, Inc., pile, measured loads versus depth
Figure 69. Photo. SEAPILE pile
Figure 70. Photo. Lancaster Composite, Inc., pile
Figure 71. Photo. American Ecoboard pile
Figure 72. Equation. Dynamic modulus E
Figure 73. Equation. Pile particle speed v
Figure 74. Graph. American Ecoboard pile—blows per foot versus elastic modulus
Figure 75. Graph. PPI pile—blows per foot versus elastic modulus
Figure 76. Graph. SEAPILE pile—blows per foot versus elastic modulus
Figure 78. Graph. SLT and CAPWAP analysis—Lancaster Composite, Inc., pile
Figure 79. Graph. SLT and CAPWAP analysis—PPI pile
Figure 80. Graph. SLT and CAPWAP analysis—SEAPILE pile
Figure 81. Graph. SLT and CAPWAP analysis—American Ecoboard pile
Figure 82. Equation. Applied axial force F
Figure 83. Equation. Equivalent axial stress σt
Figure 84. Graph. Stress versus penetration depth for Lancaster Composite, Inc., SLT pile
Figure 85. Graph. Stress versus penetration depth for PPI SLT pile
Figure 86. Graph. Stress versus penetration depth for SEAPILE SLT pile
Figure 87. Graph. Stress versus penetration depth for American Ecoboard splice SLT pile
Table 1. Material properties—test results and model calculations
Table 2. Selected design material properties (published by Lancaster Composite, Inc.)
Table 3. Compression strength testing of the concrete
Table 4. Testing program details, Port Elizabeth site
Table 5. Soil profile and soil properties at Port Elizabeth site
Table 6. Comparison of measured and calculated ultimate loads
Table 7. Total stress analysis approaches for estimating fs.(34)
Table 8. Effective stress analysis approaches for estimating ultimate shaft friction
Table 9. Factor CN for base resistance.(43)
Table 10. Comparison between SLT results and several analysis methods and design codes
Table 11. Elastic modulus of FRP piles estimated from PIT and PDA tests
Table 13. CAPWAP program calculation results
Table 14. Quake and damping values recommended by GRL
Table 15. Comparison of GRLWEAP results with measured elastic modulus, number of blows, and energy
Table 16. Comparison, static and dynamic elastic modulus of SEAPILE, PPI, and steel piles
Table 17. Comparison between CAPWAP analysis and static load test results
