Reliability analysis and evaluation of LRFD resistance factors for CPT-based design of driven piles

Junhwan Lee, Minki Kim, Seung Hwan Lee

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

There has been growing agreement that geotechnical reliability-based design (RBD) is necessary for establishing more advanced and integrated design system. In this study, resistance factors for LRFD pile design using CPT results were investigated for axially loaded driven piles. In order to address variability in design methodology, different CPT-based methods and load-settlement criteria, popular in practice, were selected and used for evaluation of resistance factors. A total of 32 data sets from 13 test sites were collected from the literature. In order to maintain the statistical consistency of the data sets, the characteristic pile load capacity was introduced in reliability analysis and evaluation of resistance factors. It was found that values of resistance factors considerably differ for different design methods, load-settlement criteria, and load capacity components. For the total resistance, resistance factors for LCPC method were higher than others, while those for Aoki-Velloso’s and Philipponnat’s methods were in similar ranges. In respect to load-settlement criteria, 0.1B and Chin’s criteria produced higher resistance factors than DeBeer’s and Davisson’s criteria. Resistance factors for the base and shaft resistances were also presented and analyzed.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)17-34
Number of pages18
JournalGeomechanics and Engineering
Volume1
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2009 Mar

Fingerprint

reliability analysis
Reliability analysis
Piles
pile
design method
shaft
methodology
evaluation
method

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Civil and Structural Engineering
  • Geotechnical Engineering and Engineering Geology

Cite this

@article{f0d798c80a46455e875fa6fafa1bce82,
title = "Reliability analysis and evaluation of LRFD resistance factors for CPT-based design of driven piles",
abstract = "There has been growing agreement that geotechnical reliability-based design (RBD) is necessary for establishing more advanced and integrated design system. In this study, resistance factors for LRFD pile design using CPT results were investigated for axially loaded driven piles. In order to address variability in design methodology, different CPT-based methods and load-settlement criteria, popular in practice, were selected and used for evaluation of resistance factors. A total of 32 data sets from 13 test sites were collected from the literature. In order to maintain the statistical consistency of the data sets, the characteristic pile load capacity was introduced in reliability analysis and evaluation of resistance factors. It was found that values of resistance factors considerably differ for different design methods, load-settlement criteria, and load capacity components. For the total resistance, resistance factors for LCPC method were higher than others, while those for Aoki-Velloso’s and Philipponnat’s methods were in similar ranges. In respect to load-settlement criteria, 0.1B and Chin’s criteria produced higher resistance factors than DeBeer’s and Davisson’s criteria. Resistance factors for the base and shaft resistances were also presented and analyzed.",
author = "Junhwan Lee and Minki Kim and Lee, {Seung Hwan}",
year = "2009",
month = "3",
doi = "10.12989/gae.2009.1.1.017",
language = "English",
volume = "1",
pages = "17--34",
journal = "Geomechanics and Engineering",
issn = "2005-307X",
publisher = "Techno Press",
number = "1",

}

Reliability analysis and evaluation of LRFD resistance factors for CPT-based design of driven piles. / Lee, Junhwan; Kim, Minki; Lee, Seung Hwan.

In: Geomechanics and Engineering, Vol. 1, No. 1, 03.2009, p. 17-34.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Reliability analysis and evaluation of LRFD resistance factors for CPT-based design of driven piles

AU - Lee, Junhwan

AU - Kim, Minki

AU - Lee, Seung Hwan

PY - 2009/3

Y1 - 2009/3

N2 - There has been growing agreement that geotechnical reliability-based design (RBD) is necessary for establishing more advanced and integrated design system. In this study, resistance factors for LRFD pile design using CPT results were investigated for axially loaded driven piles. In order to address variability in design methodology, different CPT-based methods and load-settlement criteria, popular in practice, were selected and used for evaluation of resistance factors. A total of 32 data sets from 13 test sites were collected from the literature. In order to maintain the statistical consistency of the data sets, the characteristic pile load capacity was introduced in reliability analysis and evaluation of resistance factors. It was found that values of resistance factors considerably differ for different design methods, load-settlement criteria, and load capacity components. For the total resistance, resistance factors for LCPC method were higher than others, while those for Aoki-Velloso’s and Philipponnat’s methods were in similar ranges. In respect to load-settlement criteria, 0.1B and Chin’s criteria produced higher resistance factors than DeBeer’s and Davisson’s criteria. Resistance factors for the base and shaft resistances were also presented and analyzed.

AB - There has been growing agreement that geotechnical reliability-based design (RBD) is necessary for establishing more advanced and integrated design system. In this study, resistance factors for LRFD pile design using CPT results were investigated for axially loaded driven piles. In order to address variability in design methodology, different CPT-based methods and load-settlement criteria, popular in practice, were selected and used for evaluation of resistance factors. A total of 32 data sets from 13 test sites were collected from the literature. In order to maintain the statistical consistency of the data sets, the characteristic pile load capacity was introduced in reliability analysis and evaluation of resistance factors. It was found that values of resistance factors considerably differ for different design methods, load-settlement criteria, and load capacity components. For the total resistance, resistance factors for LCPC method were higher than others, while those for Aoki-Velloso’s and Philipponnat’s methods were in similar ranges. In respect to load-settlement criteria, 0.1B and Chin’s criteria produced higher resistance factors than DeBeer’s and Davisson’s criteria. Resistance factors for the base and shaft resistances were also presented and analyzed.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79954989250&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=79954989250&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.12989/gae.2009.1.1.017

DO - 10.12989/gae.2009.1.1.017

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:79954989250

VL - 1

SP - 17

EP - 34

JO - Geomechanics and Engineering

JF - Geomechanics and Engineering

SN - 2005-307X

IS - 1

ER -