EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Loadtest tested a 30-inch (762-mm) diameter dedicated test pile constructed to a depth of 121.5-foot (37.03-meter). Sub-surface conditions at the test pile location consist primarily of medium dense sand and coquina limestone of varying degree of cementation.
The maximum sustained bi-directional load applied to the pile was 2,665 kips (11.85 MN). At the maximum load, the displacements above and below the O-cell were 0.176 inches (4.47 mm) and 2.026 inches (51.46 mm), respectively. Unit shear data indicated an average maximum net unit side shear of 16.5 ksf (788 kPa) below the O-cell as calculated using data collected from Strain Gage Level 1. We also calculated a maximum applied end bearing pressure of 279.7 ksf (13,390 kPa) after correcting for the aforementioned unit side shear value.
Using the procedures described in the report text and in Appendix C, we constructed an equivalent top load curve for the test pile. For a top loading of 1,250 kips (5.6 MN), the adjusted test data indicate this pile would settle approximately 0.47 inches (11.8 mm) essentially all of which is estimated elastic compression.
LIMITATIONS OF EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
We include this executive summary to provide a very brief presentation of some of the key elements of this O-cell test. It is by no means intended to be a comprehensive or stand-alone representation of the test results. The full text of the report and the attached appendices contain important information which the engineer can use to come to more informed conclusions about the data presented herein.
TEST RESULTS AND ANALYSES
General: The loads applied by the O-cell act in two opposing directions, resisted by the capacity of the pile above and below. Theoretically, the O-cell does not impose an additional upward load until its expansion force exceeds the buoyant weight of the pile above the O-cell. Therefore, net load, which is defined as gross O-cell load minus the buoyant weight of the pile above, is used to determine side shear resistance above the O-cell and to construct the equivalent top-loaded load-settlement curve. For this test we calculated a buoyant weight of pile of 52 kips (0.23 MN) above the O-cell.
Upper Side Shear Resistance: The maximum upward applied net load to the upper side shear was 2,613 kips (11.62 MN) which occurred at load interval 1L-13. At this loading, the upward movement of the O-cell top was 0.176 inches (4.47 mm) (Appendix A, Page 2).
In order to assess the side shear resistance of the test pile, loads are calculated based on the strain gage data (Appendix A, Page 3) and an estimate of pile stiffness (AE) which is presented below. We used the ACI formula (Ec=57000f´c) to calculate an elastic modulus for the concrete, where f’c was reported to be 5,940 psi (40.96 MPa) at the 28-day break on July 1, 2005. This, combined with the area of reinforcing steel and nominal pile diameter, provided an average pile stiffness (AE) of 3,260,000 kips (14,500 MN) for the length of pile. Net unit shear curves are presented in Appendix F. Net unit shear values for loading increment 1L-13 follow in Table A:
| Load Transfer Zone | Displacement | Net Unit Side Shear |
| Top of Pile to Strain Gage Level 6 | up | 0.0 ksf (0 kPa) |
| Strain Gage Level 6 to Strain Gage Level 5 | up | 0.1 ksf (3 kPa) |
| Strain Gage Level 5 to Strain Gage Level 4 | up | 0.4 ksf (20 kPa) |
| Strain Gage Level 4 to Strain Gage Level 3 | up | 0.4 ksf (21 kPa) |
| Strain Gage Level 3 to Strain Gage Level 2 | up | 12.9 ksf (616 kPa) |
| Strain Gage Level 2 to O-cell | up | 10.2 ksf (487 kPa) |
| O-cell to Strain Gage Level 1 | down | 16.5 ksf (788 kPa) |
The test pile was loaded to a combined side shear and end-bearing load of 5,278 kips (23.5 MN). For a top loading of 1,250 kips (5.6 MN), the adjusted test data indicate this pile would settle approximately 0.47 inches (11.8 mm) essentially all of which is estimated elastic compression.
Note that, as explained previously, the equivalent top load curve applies to incremental loading durations of eight minutes. Creep effects will reduce the ultimate resistance of both components and increase pile top movement for a given loading over longer times. The Engineer can estimate such additional creep effects by suitable extrapolation of time effects using the creep data presented herein. However, our experience suggests that such corrections are small and perhaps negligible for top loadings below the creep limit indicated in Figure 2.