Control and Quality of Piles by Non-Destructive Express Methods: Low Strain Method and Cross-Hole Sonic Logging

Abstract

EVWUDFW 7KLV SDSHU GHVFULEHG XVLQJ /RZ 6WUDLQ 0HWKRG DQG &URVV+ROH 6RQLF ORJJLQJ &6/ IRU LGHQWLI\ RI LQWHJULW\ RI EULGJH IRXQGDWLRQV RI /57 LQ $VWDQD .D]DNKVWDQ 7KH &6/ LV D PHWKRG SUHVFULEHG E\ $670 ' ± 6WDQGDUG 7HVW 0HWKRG IRU ,QWHJULW\ 7HVWLQJ RI &RQFUHWH 'HHS )RXQGDWLRQV 7KLV PHWKRG LV FRQVLGHUHG WR EH PRUH DFFXUDWH WKDQ VRQLF HFKR WHVWLQJ LQ WKH GHWHUPLQDWLRQ RI VRXQGQHVV RI FRQFUHWH 7KH VRQLF DFFHVV WXEHV GR QRW FRQWULEXWH WR WKH VWUXFWXUDO FDSDFLW\ RI WKH SLOH 7KH ERUHG SLOHV RI /57 DUH · P RI GLDPHWHUV DQG ·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

A Review of Cross-Hole Ultrasonic Logging for Foundation Integrity Testing and its Evaluation Criteria

“…Various studies conducted by numerous researchers over the years have proven the ability of CSL in detecting different types of structural defects in drilled shafts and bored piles [2,3,[10][11][12][13][14][15]. In a study, the authors summarized the results of CSL of more than 400 shafts constructed in South Carolina where only 24 % were anomalies free while the majority of the anomalies were detected within the upper or lower two diameters of the shaft [16].…”

“…However, some studies only applied a single criterion to delineate good and defective concrete, instead of classifying the CSL results based on both parameters. For instance, the study by [15] defined concrete with at least 20 % of FAT delay as a defect, while a different study by [22] defined concrete with less than 6 dB RE as good quality concrete. On the contrary, some studies applied more than one criterion, such as the study by [23] where the authors applied the criteria based on FAT increase, RE reduction, and velocity.…”

A review of non-destructive methods applied in deep foundations

“…The common factor of all the seismic based methods is that they are fast and they have the ability to determine efficiently the localisation of defect in deep foundation. Table 1 summarizes the inherent advantages and limitations of each one of these method [1,[3][4][5][6][7][8].…”

Evaluasi Keutuhan Borepile Metode Crosshole Sonic Logging (CSL) Pembangunan Jembatan Pulau Balang II

“…Gambar tepi kiri (wavespeed) memetakan First Arrival Time (FAT) menampilkan kecepatan gelombang yang dihitung sedangkan gambar disebelah kanan (Arrival) menyajikan pusat data berupa kekuatan sinyal yang ditampilkan. Dari hasil pengamatan dan pembacaan data [16] menunjukkan terjadinya kontaminasi kecil beton yang meragukan, yaitu hasil uji FAT meningkat 11 sampai 20% dan Energy < 9 db, sedangkan jika dilihat dari kecepatan gelombang (impact wapespeed) pada bagian beton yang diduga terjadi penurunan mutu, kecepatan masih berkisar diantara 2750 -3300 m/sec [17], artinya integritas beton tidak terlalu jelek (dapat diterima). Untuk itu tiang borepile P1-37 dikategorikan masuk klasifikasi Questionable (Q).…”