Appendix A: The Case Method, Wave

Mechanics, Theory and Derivations

A.1 Foreword
In order to understand how the PDA calculates certain quantities from pile top force and
velocity measurements it is necessary to understand the underlying theory. The best way
to study the underlying theory is with the treatment found in Timoshenko’s Theory of
Elasticity (note references can all be found on www.pile.com) which is a summary of
closed form solutions and examples developed by various mathematicians in the 19 th
century. These closed form solutions have been applied to the Case Method
measurements. The collection of formulas and equations developed for the purpose of
calculating soil resistance, pile stresses, hammer performance parameters, pile integrity
factors and other quantities are all part of the Case Method which was developed during
the late 1960s and 1970s both at Case Western Reserve University and Pile Dynamics.
Besides looking at the papers and books referenced in this description, ample references
contained in www.pile.com are recommended reading for the PDA user. Furthermore,
the user should be familiar with ASTM D4945, latest edition.

The following derivations of wave speed and proportionality are not strictly correct in a
mathematical sense. They should be understood as an illustration of the basic wave
propagation process and should provide the reader with a “feel” as to what is happening
in a pile when it is struck by a rigid mass. All formulas of the Case Method were derived
on the assumption of a uniform (constant area, elastic modulus and mass density),
linearly elastic rod whose length is much greater than its diameter or width. We may
sometimes violate these requirements in actual piling situations and we then should try
to evaluate how large an error may result.

This document uses a variety of symbols and 2-letter codes for various material and
other pile properties. In derivations we will represent with Greek letters certain material

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations:

202

properties while for actual problem solving we may show the PDA 2-letter codes. The
following are traditional and PDA symbols frequently encountered in this document.

Table A.1:

Common PDA Sym-

Name SI Units US Units
Symbol bol

Elastic Modulus E EM MPa Ksi

Specific Weight  SP kN / m3 lbs / ft3

Wave Speed c WS m/s ft / s

Cross-sectional Area A AR cm2 inch2

Mass density  - kg (N s2 / m) kips s2 / ft

A variety of subscripted symbols are used to represent the various dynamic quantities
and in the mathematical formulations; however for certain values of these curves, the
PDA uses 3 letter acronyms for output description. Important quantities are listed in the
following table (additional quantities can be found in the PDA’s “Quantity” listing.

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations:

 203

Table A.2:

Quantity Representation in Related PDA Related PDA

description (units) Equations Quantities output
acronyms

Force (kN, kips) F(t) Max. Force, FMX,

Force at time 1, 2 FT1, FT2

Acceleration (g’s) a(t) Max. Acceleration AMX

Velocity (m/s, ft/s) v(t) Max. velocity VMX,

Velocity at time 1, 2 VT1, VT2

Strain (10 -6 ) (t) Max. Strain MEX

Stress (MPa, ksi) (t) Max. Measured CSX

Compressive Stress

Wave-down (kN, kips) F d (t), F d1 Force in Wave-down WD1

at time 1

Wave-up (kN, kips) F u (t), F u2 Force in Wave-up at WU2

time 2

Displacement (mm, u(t) Max. Displacement DMX,

inch)
Displacement at end DFN

Transferred Energy Et Max. transferred EMX

(kJ, ft-kips) energy

Transferred Energy nt Transferred Energy ETR

Ratio (1) Ratio (or efficiency)

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations:

204

A.1 The Wave Speed

Consider a rod that is suddenly loaded by a force, F , creating a stress wave to travel
down the pile at wavespeed, c . The particles are at rest at time t , just before an impact
occurs. Suppose then a short time, t , later, the impact force has compressed a portion
of the pile top having length L .

time t time t+Δt

F
F

Δu
P P

ΔL

Figure A.1: As a compression stress wave encounters a particle the particle is deformed in
compression and displaced down the pile
Since L has been compressed within a time t , we consider the speed with which the
pile top has been compressed the wave speed c , where

c = L
------- eqn A.1.1
t

Because of the compression, point P, has moved a distance, u . The displacement, u ,

being the result of compressing the rod with the impact force F over a distance L can
be computed from rod cross-sectional area, A , and elastic modulus, E , as:

u = FL
----------- eqn A.1.2
EA

The velocity of the point P pile particle, actually its change of velocity due to force F , is
called the particle velocity, v . It can be calculated from the deformation u divided by
the time increment during which it occurs.

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: The Wave Speed
 205

v = u
------- eqn A.1.3a
t

Combining eqn A.1.2 and eqn A.1.3a the change of particle velocity can be calculated
from

F L
v =  --------  ------- eqn A.1.3b
EA t

And remembering eqn A.1.1 we obtain

Fc
v = -------- eqn A.1.3c
EA

Since this velocity was achieved during time period t , we can also calculate the
acceleration of our particle.

v
a = ----- eqn A.1.4a
t

or

Fc
a = -------------
- eqn A.1.4b
EAt

Using Newton’s Second Law, which is

F = ma eqn A.1.5a

and knowing that the accelerated mass at the point is equal to the product of the mass
density of the pile material,  , the cross sectional area, A , and the compressed pile
length, L , OR m = AL , the force can now be written as

 AdL Fc
F = --------------------------- eqn A.1.5b
EAt

After canceling the A and F terms and remembering that  L    t  is the wave speed c,
we obtain

2
c = E
--- eqn A.1.6


Thus, we have found that the wave speed, c , depends only on the pile material
properties and not, for example, the frequency of the applied force (admittedly though
this is only true for our simplifying assumptions of a very slender, elastic rod)

In summary, let us remember that

1 The “Wave Speed” is the speed with which a compression (or tension) wave (or zone)
moves along a rod.

2 The “Particle Velocity” is the speed with which a particle in a rod moves as a wave
passes by.

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: The Wave Speed
206

Example Problem 1: Wave Speed

a Calculate the wave speed for concrete with a dynamic elastic modulus of 35,000 MPa
(5,000 ksi) and unit weight = 24 kN/m 3 (150 lb/ft 3 ).
Repeat the calculation for

b timber (E = 12,000 MPa or 1,800 ksi and = 8 kN/m 3 or 50 lb/ft 3 )

c and steel (E = 210,000 MPa or 30,000 ksi and = 77 kN/m 3 or 492 lb/ft 3 ).

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: The Wave Speed
 207

A.2 Proportionality and Pile Impedance

Let us again consider the uniform elastic rod and a stress wave traveling along its length
at wave speed, c . If the force at the wave front is F , we noted in the previous section,
eqn A.1.3b, that the change of particle velocity and v =  du    dt  can be expressed as a
relationship between the force and the particle velocity in a stress wave:

Fc
v = -------
- eqn A.2.1
EA

or in relationship to stress

v = c
------ eqn A.2.1a
E

or in relationship to strain

v = c eqn A.2.1b

These relationships express a proportionality between the particle velocity v and either
applied force or stress or strain. The proportionality factors are composed of pile
material properties A , E , c and/or  . While we normally use velocity, v , in these
expressions, it is important to remember

1 That the force really caused an increase of velocity (if the velocity was not zero before
impact) and

2 that this proportionality only holds if no effects other than one wave traveling in a
given direction is present.

The inverse of the proportionality constant, c/EA, is

Z = EA
-------- eqn A.2.2a
c

which is also called the pile impedance. This term implies that rod offers a resistance
to (impedes) the change in velocity. In fact, the impedance (which has the units of force
divided by velocity) is that force which changes the pile particle velocity by 1 m/s (ft/s)

Note the following alternate forms of impedance.

2
For example, by replacing E in eqn A.2.2a with c (eqn A.1.6) we obtain

Z = cA eqn A.2.2b

M
or after replacing A with the pile mass per unit length -----
L

Z = Mc
-------- eqn A.2.2c
L

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Proportionality and Pile Impedance
208

Example Problem 2: Impedance

Compute the impedance of a pile for a 27.5 cm (11 inch) square concrete pile of 30 m
(100 ft) length using concrete properties in Example Problem 1. Do the computations
for all three equations 2.2 a, b and c.

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Proportionality and Pile Impedance
 209

A.3 Basic Wave Mechanics

A.3.1 The Wave Equation

Figure A.2: The pile displaces downward as the stress wave travels down the pile
The foregoing considerations can be put in a stricter mathematical form (from Hooke’s
and Newton’s Laws) leading to the one-dimensional wave equation:

2 2
u u
 2
= E 2
eqn A.3.1
t x

where u is the rod displacement at time t and location x and where the left and right
hand partial derivatives are the acceleration and strain in the rod, respectively. This
equation is referred to as the linear one-dimensional wave equation which has a general
solution

u = f  x – ct  + g  x + ct  eqn A.3.2

which implies that a displacement pattern in the rod may consist of two components, g
and f . Note that the f displacement pattern will have the same argument if, for
increasing times t + t , the x-coordinate increases by ct ; similarly the g pattern will
have the same argument if, for increasing times t + t , the x-coordinate decreases by
ct .

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Basic Wave Mechanics
210

f  x – ct  = f  x + cdt  – c  t + dt  eqn A.3.3a

and

g  x + ct  = g  x – ct + c  t + t   eqn A.3.3b

time t time t+Δt

c't
f
f
g
g
c't

x
Figure A.3: The displacement pattern of a slender rod consists of and upward and
downward traveling component
Thus, the g and f displacement patterns have merely shifted downward (positively) and
upward (negatively) along the pile as time increases. They shift at a speed c as seen
before. We will, therefore call the two traveling displacement patterns a downward wave
and an upward wave.

Since the particle velocity, v , and the acceleration, a , are time derivatives of the
displacement, the velocity and acceleration patterns are also downward and upward
traveling waves.

Similarly, since the strain, stress and force can be derived from the displacement pattern
by derivative with respect to x , these three quantities also do not change pattern as they
shift upward or downwards along the pile.

The solution to the wave equation shows also that the total particle displacement, and
therefore all of its derivatives, is the sum of the displacements in the upward and the
downward wave. Thus,

Displacement: u = u d + u u eqn A.3.4a

Velocity: v = v d + v u eqn A.3.4b

Acceleration: a = a d + a u eqn A.3.4c

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Basic Wave Mechanics
 211

Strain:   =  d +  u eqn A.3.4d

Stress:  =  d +  u eqn A.3.4e

Force: F = F d + F u eqn A.3.4f

If we apply these findings to piles during impact, then we may get the following
situation (assuming no soil resistance).

time t time t+Δt

F F

cΔt

Figure A.4: The compression wave, induced by the hammer at the pile top, moves
downward a distance ct during the time interval t
Remember that within the initial downward input wave, there are compressive forces,
causing proportional downward directed particle velocities.

Let us designate the forces and velocities in the downward wave with the subscript “d”
and write the proportionality condition as:

F d = Zv d eqn A.3.5

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Basic Wave Mechanics
212

time t time t+Δt

F F

Figure A.5: The compression wave arrives at the pile toe where it is reflected
After a time L  c ( L is the pile length), the impact wave caused by the pile driving
hammer arrives at the pile bottom where it is reflected.

An example for a wave induced by a pile driving hammer is shown in the above figure.
We will study what happens at the time of wave reflection a little later.

As we will see in more detail, an upward traveling tension wave has a downward
directed particle velocity (like the downward traveling compressive wave), which means
that on a free pile bottom, the velocity (and thus the displacement and acceleration)
doubles while the forces cancel each other. The initial compression wave pushes the pile
down while the reflected tension wave pulls the pile down. Thus all motion is in the
downward direction.

A.3.2 Upward and Downward Traveling Waves

We now define a sign convention:

• Compressive forces, stresses, strains are positive

• Tension forces, stresses, strains are negative

• Downward directed particle velocities, displacements, accelerations are positive

• Upward directed velocities, displacements, accelerations are negative.

Consider an impact against the bottom of the pile. It will generate an upward traveling
compressive wave (positive) with upward directed (negative) particle velocities, while an
applied tension (negative) wave pulls the pile particles in a downward (positive)

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Basic Wave Mechanics
 213

direction. Thus for upward traveling waves the proportionality condition includes a
minus sign.

Upward traveling waves, therefore, have a particle velocity that is negative (upward) for
positive (compression) forces and positive (downward) for negative (tension) forces.
Thus, for upward traveling waves

Fu = –Z vu eqn A.3.6

The total force, F , and velocity, v , measured at any location is the total force and total
velocity at the measurement point and, as we have seen in the general solution to the
basic wave equation, they are the result of superposition of the forces and velocities in
the downward and upward traveling waves.

F = Fd + Fu eqn A.3.7

and

v = vd + vu eqn A.3.8a

If the velocities are converted to forces by multiplication with the impedance Z ,

eqn A.3.8a becomes

Zv = F d – F u eqn A.3.8b

which can be combined with eqn A.3.7 to solve for the forces (and thus also velocities)
in the upward and downward traveling waves.

F d = ---------------------
F + Zv 
- eqn A.3.9a
2

and

F u = --------------------
F – Zv 
- eqn A.3.9b
2

In other words, if we measure the force, F , and the velocity, v , at a point of the pile,
then the force in the downward traveling wave at that point can be determined from the
average of force, F , and velocity times impedance, Zv .Similarly, the force in the upward
traveling wave can be determined from one half of the difference between force, F , and
velocity times impedance, Zv .

By proportionality we also find that

Z+v
vd = F
-------------------- eqn A.3.10a
2

and

FZ+v
v u = –-----------------------
- eqn A.3.10b
2

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Basic Wave Mechanics
214

A.3.3 The Classical Reflection Model

The type and magnitude of the reflection depends on the type of resistance at the pile
bottom. Let us first consider the simple case of a free pile bottom. If the compressive
wave arrives at a free pile bottom an imbalance exists since the wave has no pile mass to
accelerate and no pile material to strain; therefore a reflection occurs. Because the pile
end is free, the force at that point must be zero. The classical way to look at what
happens at the free end of a pile when the compressive wave arrives is described in the
following figure.

Real Pile

Free End
no Force
Virtual Pile

Figure A.6: Free End Wave Reflection

On the left we see the compressive wave moving downward in the real pile. At the same
time a wave is assumed to travel upwards in an imaginary ‘virtual pile’. The two waves
will arrive at the same time at the real pile bottom. In order to satisfy the condition of no
force at the pile bottom, the upward traveling wave has to be a tension wave which
moves the particles downward. So after the reflection is finished, there is an upward
traveling tension wave in the real pile which has downward directed particle velocities.

Putting these considerations in equation form, if the pile bottom is free (in other words,
if there is no resistance force acting at the bottom and the resistance R = 0) from
superposition we obtain

Fd + Fu = 0 eqn A.3.11

Therefore, the force in the upward traveling wave is equal and opposite the downward
traveling incident wave.

Fu = –Fd eqn A.3.12a

The associated velocities are

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Basic Wave Mechanics
 215

–F F
v u = ---------u = -----d- = v d eqn A.3.12b
Z Z

And therefore

2F
v = v d + v u = ---------d eqn A.3.12c
Z

In other words the velocity at the bottom will be twice the velocity in the downward (or
upward) wave.

If we now consider a pile encountering a rigid pile bottom support, then the pile bottom
condition is one of zero motion (velocity, displacement, acceleration). Thus when the
compressive wave arrives at the bottom, the reflection wave has to have an upward
directed (negative) particle velocity (so that the velocities cancel). The proportionality
condition for the upward traveling requires a negative sign and we therefore get an
upward traveling compressive force (positive) wave.

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Basic Wave Mechanics
216

Example Problem 3: Example Problem 3: Wave-down and Wave-up Values

Force
Velocity

t1 t2

Given force and velocity at the pile top of a square prestressed, precast concrete pile (see
figure above), what is the magnitude of both the downward and upward traveling wave
forces at both times, t 1 and t 2 given the following values:

SI English

Elastic Modulus 42,000 MPa 6000 ksi

Square Pile Width 610 mm 24 in

Specific Weight 24 kN/m3 150 pcf

Force at t1 4000 kN 900 kips

Force at t2 -200 kN -50 kips

Velocity at t1 1.0 m/s 3.3 ft/s

Velocity at t2 1.0 m/s 3.3 ft/s

(Note, force and velocity values were rounded and cannot be exactly scaled in the
figure).

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Basic Wave Mechanics
 217

A.4 Soil Resistance Assessment

A.4.1 Resistance Waves

Suppose that an impact wave has reached a point along the pile which is located a
distance x below the top. The impact wave reaches that point at a time x  c after the
impact. The soil responds to the pile’s sudden downward motion, caused by the impact
wave, with a sudden upward directed resistance force R . This shaft resistance force R is
a concentrated passive force representing the unit resistance times the pile perimeter
times a certain length increment x . Note that R is a passive force, i.e., it acts against
the direction of motion and only while the pile is moving (residual stresses are ignored at
this point).

The suddenly applied force R creates upwards and downwards traveling waves above
and below. The two waves add their force and velocity effects to the impact wave
(superposition). The two resistance waves each have a magnitude R  2 . To satisfy
equilibrium and continuity, the upward wave is in compression and the downward wave
in tension. Both waves (generated by the resistance R ) therefore have an upward
directed particle velocity satisfying the continuity condition at x (the pile does not tear
apart). The forces in the waves together balance R , satisfying the equilibrium condition;
the compressive wave pushes downward above the resistance force application; the
tensile waves pulls downward underneath the force application.

Upward Travelling Compression Wave

x Fur=R/2; vur=-R/2Z
'x

Ri
Downward Travelling Tension Wave
Fdr=-R/2; vur=-R/2Z

Figure A.7:
Again, the forces and particle velocities in the upward and downward resistance waves
are:

F dr = –------
R
- eqn A.4.1a
2

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Soil Resistance Assessment
218

F ur = R
--- eqn A.4.1b
2

v dr = –------
R eqn A.4.1c
-
2Z

v ur = –------
R eqn A.4.1d
-
2Z

which means that the forces are compression and tension to balance the resistance force
and the particle velocities are directed upward (negative) in either wave to maintain
continuity.

The end bearing, R b , is a force applied at the pile toe and therefore generates only a
single, upward traveling compression wave with upward directed particle motions. Since
the end bearing is only activated by the impact wave at time L  c , its effect will be felt at
the pile top only a time 2L  c after impact.

A.4.2 Shaft Resistance from Force-Velocity Difference

Of course, we can divide the pile in many sections, each having a concentrated shaft
resistance force, however, in the following we will only consider one shaft resistance
force R i located at x as representative of all shaft resistance forces. The upward traveling

compressive shaft resistance wave caused by R i reaches the pile top at time t = 2x  c
after the impact. The tensile resistance wave reaches the pile bottom together with the
impact wave at time t = L  c where it is reflected in compression while the impact wave
is reflected in tension. Both the original tension wave from the shaft resistance waves,
now compressive, and the impact wave, now tensile, are joined by the end bearing
compressive wave and all three waves then travel upward to the top where they arrive at
time t = 2L  c . This process is illustrated in the Depth-Time (x-t) plot below. Note that
compressive and tensile waves are represented by solid and dashed arrows, respectively,
and that the waves due to impact, shaft resistance and end bearing are distinguished
with blue, orange and red colors, respectively.

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Soil Resistance Assessment
 219

Ri (assumes a fixed pile top)

L/c 2L/c t

Fd,1 ½Ri -Fd,1

½Ri ½Ri
x
Rb
L

Ri

-½Ri

Rb

Figure A.8: Wave path as resistance is activated in the pile.

If we assume a fixed pile top (velocity is prescribed), then forces in the upwards
traveling resistance wave have to be met by a downward traveling compressive wave so
that there is no change in velocity at the pile top. Therefore, the pile top force will
suddenly increase by a magnitude R i  Z , relative to the pile top velocity times

impedance, vZ , before time 2L  c . (Note that we could also have assumed a free top in
which case the forces would have to cancel and the velocities would double leading to a
sudden negative velocity change at the pile top of magnitude – R i  Z relative to the pile

top force, F ). In any case, upon arrival at x  c , the upward traveling compressive shaft
resistance wave causes a separation of the pile top force and velocity (times impedance,
Z) curves by an amount R i .

Actually the foregoing consideration is also valid even if the measurements are not made
at the pile top. Consideration of the upward compressive resistance wave of magnitude
R i  2 , having an upward particle velocity equal to – R i  2Z gives a total difference

between the force and proportional velocity of R i = R i  2 –  – R i  2Z Z . Therefore it is not

an assumption or requirement of the Case Method that measurements be taken at the
pile top. Since we are measuring both F and v , we can separate upward from
downward waves at the point of measurements. In fact, measurement at the very top
would contain undesirable local contact stresses, so we generally measure at least two
pile diameters below the top (preferably one circumference).

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Soil Resistance Assessment
220

Example Problem 4: Shaft Resistance from Force and Velocity times

Impedance
Study the following graph and notes.

Force
Velocity
Shaft Resistance
begins to have effect
Toe Reflection begins to arrive
at the pile top

2xb/c
Ri
2xa/c

xa a
Maximum effect of impact wave is
apparent (2L/c after max top velocity)

Ri

xb b

a Determine the apparent shaft resistance force, R i , acting between points A and B.
Calculate R i as a percentage of the maximum impact force.

b Is R i the total shaft resistance?

c Is R i a static resistance force?

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Soil Resistance Assessment
 221

A.4.3 Resistance from Wave-up

While it is instructive to work with F and vZ, it is even more helpful to work with the
force in the upward wave, F u . This is because the Wave-up does not include impact
waves or other downward wave effects which distract from what we want to see: the
effect of soil and pile end on the top measurements.

We have seen in Section A.3.2 that the forces in the upward traveling and downward
traveling waves (in the following we will just refer to Wave-up and Wave-down to refer
to these forces) can be calculated from the measured force and velocity with the
following two simple formulas (eqn A.3.9a and eqn A.3.9b).

F d = ---------------------
F + Zv 
-
2

and

F u = --------------------
F – Zv 
-
2

In other words the force in the Wave-up is one half the difference between F and vZ
which in turn is one half the shaft resistance according to what we learned in
Section A.4.2. We, therefore, can state that

Ri = 2  F uB – F uA  eqn A.4.2
B–A

In words: the shaft resistance acting on the pile between points A and B is equal to twice
the quantity Wave-up force at time t B minus the Wave-up force at time t A .

Figure A.9 shows the transformation of the measurements to the wave forces in the
typical PDA display. The graph includes scale (or rather full scale range) information
[measured force, F, force in Wave-up, WU, Wave-down, WD, (all forces in kN), measured
velocity v (m/s), total display time, TS (ms) and Start of display from the beginning of
the record, TB (ms)] and the active sensors A3, A4, F3, F4.

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Soil Resistance Assessment
222

F (1500)
V (6.98)
vZ

WU (1500)
WD (1500)

Fd

Fu

Figure A.9: Wave-up and Wave-down calculations for a free-end pile

This is a record where the soil resistance is really low; in fact F – vZ and, therefore the
shaft resistance is practically zero just before the return of the impact wave. At time
2L  c the velocity sharply increases and the force decreases. At that time the Wave-up
curve, being one half of the difference between F and vZ , goes negative, indicating that
Wave-up is then a tension force. Before that Wave-up is practically zero, again,
indicating a very low shaft resistance.

A.4.4 Calculating the Soil Resistance from Wave-up and Wave-down

Let us designate as time t 1 the time when the impact wave passes by the sensor location

and as time t 2 = t 1 + 2L  c when the toe reflected impact wave returns to the sensor

location. Thus, at time t 1 we have an impact wave of magnitude F d1 traveling

downward towards the pile toe. If the resistance force R i acts constant (e.g. velocity is

always downward or positive) throughout the time x  c  t  L  c , then at time

t 2 = t 1 + 2L  c the upward traveling wave contains the effects of :

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Soil Resistance Assessment
 223

1 the impact wave after reflection at the pile toe where it became an upward traveling
tension wave of magnitude – F d1

2 the directly upwards traveling compressive wave from the shaft resistance,
magnitude R i  2

3 the initially downward traveling tension resistance wave, now traveling upward in
compression after reflection at the bottom, magnitude R i  2

4 the compressive wave caused by the end bearing, magnitude R b

Combining all upwards waves at time t 2 we obtain in the order (1) through (4) for the

Wave-up at time t 2 :

R R
F u2 = – F d1 + -----i + -----i + R b eqn A.4.3a
2 2

Upward Travelling Force Wave (WU) ½Ri-Fd,1+½Ri+Rb

½Ri

L/c 2L/c t

Fd,1 -Fd,1
½Ri ½Ri
x
Rb
L

Ri

-½Ri

Rb

Figure A.10: Upward traveling resistance waves

The second and third term on the right hand side of eqn A.4.3a represent the total shaft
resistance; adding to it the end bearing makes up for the total resistance R Total . Thus,
the combination of all upward traveling waves contains the resistance and the bottom
reflected (negative) impact wave of time t 1 . We can, therefore, rewrite eqn A.4.3a as:

R Total = F d1 + F u2 eqn A.4.3b

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Soil Resistance Assessment
224

eqn A.4.3b can also be expressed in terms of measured forces and velocities at time t 1

and t 2 as:

 Ft + Ft  Z  vt – vt 
R Total = -------------------------
1 2
- + --------------------------
1 2
- eqn A.4.4
2 2

R Total is the total resistance encountered during a complete passage of the wave

between time t 1 and t 2 , i.e., during a time period of 2L  c . There are differences
between this total resistance and the ultimate static capacity of the pile and various
considerations are necessary to calculate R Static .

a Elimination of soil damping.

b Proper choice of time t 1 such that R Static is fully mobilized when F and v samples
are taken.

c Correction for an R Static that decreases between t 1 and t 2 because of early pile

rebound or unloading indicated by a negative velocity before 2L  c .

d Time dependent soil strength changes (setup or relaxation). Since the dynamic
methods give the resistance at the time of testing, it is always recommended to test
piles both at the end of driving for an assessment of the strength of the remolded
soil and by restriking after a waiting period for the determination of the long-term
ultimate capacity. It should not be surprising that the capacity at the end of driving
is not equal to the long term pile capacity after an extended waiting period. The
waiting period has to be appropriate for the type of soil at the test site.

e The pile penetration under the hammer blow. The pile must experience a
permanent set (in general we recommend at least 2.5 mm or 0.1”) during the
testing for a full mobilization of the soil resistance. If no (or very little) permanent
set is achieved then the indicated capacity relates to the mobilized value only
which may be less than the pile’s ultimate capacity. This condition is roughly
analogous to a static proof test not run to failure because of a limitation of the test
setup. The pile set should also not be too large (say more than 12 mm) under the
test blow or dynamic effects in the soil could lead to calculated capacities which are
greater than the ultimate pile capacity.

Considerations (d) and (e) are self-explanatory. The first three considerations will now be
investigated in more detail.

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Soil Resistance Assessment
 225

Example Problem 5: Calculating total Resistance

In Example Problem 3 determine the total resistance R Total

a from Wave-down and Wave-up and

b from the corresponding individual force and velocity values.

use the data points identified in the Example Problem 3, i.e., with time 1 at the first
major peak.

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Soil Resistance Assessment
226

A.4.5 Calculation and consideration of soil damping

Damping is associated with the pile velocity and a case can be made that the major soil
damping occurs at the pile tip. We can obtain the pile toe velocity from consideration of
the arrival and reflection of the impact wave, the R i waves and from the R b wave.From
Figure A.10 we can see the various wave components at the pile tip, and convert to
velocities using the proportionality for upward and downward waves, to obtain the
velocity at the pile tip.

 2F – 2  R - – R b
i
 d1  ----
2
v b = ---------------------------------------------------- eqn A.4.5
Z

Again the R terms amount to the total resistance and we, therefore obtain under
consideration of Eq. 4.3b:

 2F d1 – R Total 
v b = --------------------------------------- eqn A.4.6a
Z

or

 F d1 – F u2 
v b = ----------------------------- eqn A.4.6b
Z

Knowing the pile toe velocity, the damping component of the total resistance force, R d ,
may be estimated using a simple linear damping model as

R Dynamic = J v v b eqn A.4.7

The viscous damping factor has units of N/m/s or kips/ft/s. This is a quantity which is
rather difficult to work with. For simplification we non-dimensionalize it by division with
the pile impedance Z, which has the same unit; we call the new non-dimensional
constant the Case damping factor, J c .

J
J c = ----v- eqn A.4.8
Z

Multiplying the toe velocity (Eq. 4.6b) with the Case damping factor leads to the
estimated damping resistance:

R Dynamic = J c  F d1 – F u2  eqn A.4.9

The total resistance is the sum of the static and damping resistance. The static resistance
can be expected to be the ultimate static resistance, R u , if the pile has been penetrating
into the soil permanently under the hammer blow We then can calculate the ultimate
capacity of the pile from:

R Static = R Total – R Dynamic eqn A.4.10

and therefore

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Soil Resistance Assessment
 227

R Static =  F d1 + F u2  – J c  F d1 – F u2  eqn A.4.11a

or

R Static =  1 – J c F d1 +  1 + J c F u2 eqn A.4.11b

The J c damping constant primarily relates to the soil grain size near the pile tip or the
major bearing layer and can be back calculated from eqn A.4.11b if measurements have
been taken on the pile and its ultimate static capacity, R Static , is known from either a

static test run to failure or from CAPWAP. In that case J c is the only unknown in
eqn A.4.11a or eqn A.4.11b.

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Soil Resistance Assessment
228

Example Problem 6: Calculating Ru for t1at First Peak Velocity

a Using the expressions for Wave-down and Wave-up in terms of the measured force and
velocity at times t 1 and t 2 , rewrite eqn A.4.11b in terms of the measured force and
velocity.

b In Example Problems 3 and 5, for times t 1 and t 2 identified, calculate the toe

velocity and, assuming a Case Damping factor J c = 0.2 , calculate the damping
force and determine the static capacity by subtracting the damping force from the
total resistance.

c Discuss the R Static result obtained. How sensitive is it to the damping factor J c (for

example, calculate R Static also for J c = 0.3 )? Why would the static resistance be so
sensitive?

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Soil Resistance Assessment
 229

A.4.6 Selection of time t1 and the RMX method

Static soil resistance is mobilized and increases with pile displacement. To mobilize the
ultimate resistance requires that the pile moves under the hammer blow sufficiently
enough to activate the resistance both along pile shaft and at the toe. The required
maximum displacement can be quite large for large displacement piles. Fortunately, the
hammer impact generally produces a relatively large temporary displacement, even if
the pile has only a small permanent set. In general, therefore, we expect the ultimate
capacity to be mobilized, if the pile set is greater than 2.5 mm or 0.1 inches. That would
require that the maximum (temporary) pile set was large enough to cause soil failure.
Figure A.11 shows a force, velocity, wave-up and displacement record. Note that the
displacement reaches a DMX value (at the sensor location) of 25mm or 1 inch before it
rebounds settling at a final permanent set of 2 mm or 0.08 inches.

F (1500)
V (6.97)

WU (1500)
D (20)

Figure A.11: Example EX-17 shows a pile driven to a hard end bearing layer
It is informative to look at the above record more closely. The Wave-up is near zero until
at the second solid time line (2L/c after the first major force and velocity peak) where the
Wave-up sharply increases, corresponding to an increase in force and a decrease in
velocity. This compressive Wave-up is caused by a high toe resistance while shaft
resistance in this case is nearly zero. Indeed, this pile was driven to rock, encountering
high stress both at the bottom and the top (to be discussed below).

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Soil Resistance Assessment
230

Figure A.12 shows six curves. On top are the measured force, F , and velocity, vZ . Below
F and vZ we see the Wave-up, F u (WU) and displacement, u (D), curves and below that

the total and static resistance curves, R Total (RT) and R Static (RS). R Static has been

calculated with a damping factor J c = 0.6 . Also marked on this graph are certain
important points: maximum force, FMX, maximum velocity, VMX, maximum
displacement, DMX, Wave-up at time t 2 , WU2, static resistance at the first Peak (t 1 ) RP6
and maximum static resistance RX6 (also called RMX for J c = 0.6 ).

F (8000)
V (4.25)
FMX, VMX
F

vZ
WU (8000)
D (20) DMX
u
Fu

WU2
RS [JC=0.6]
RT (8000)

RX6: 3050kN
RTotal

RP6: 1510kN RStatic

Figure A.12:
The displacement reaches a maximum of about 15 mm (0.6 inches) shortly after time t 2

( 2L  c after the first major peak velocity). Not shown in this graph is that the
displacement will eventually decrease to a final value DFN = 2.5 mm or 0.1 inches. The
resistance curves in the bottom set of curves were calculated by evaluating eqn A.4.11b
for each point in time beginning at the first major force and velocity peak. The resulting
R Total and R Static values were then plotted at the associated time t 1 . As mentioned
above, in the figure below, the static resistance curve was calculated for a damping
factor J c = 0.6 . The difference between the static and the dynamic curve is the dynamic

resistance, R Dynamic . The static curve increases from an RP6 value of 1510 kN (340 kips)
reaching a maximum value RX6 = 3050 kN (690 kips). The maximum Total Resistance is
5200 kN (1180 kips). The highest damping force exists at the time t 1 where the R Total

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Soil Resistance Assessment
 231

value is 4810 kN (1080 kips) and the damping force is therefore at that time 4810 –
1510 = 3300 kN (1080 - 340 = 740 kips). The damping force decreases while the static
resistance increases which is due to the fact that the velocity decreases while the
displacement still increases. It is obvious from this example, that the RMX method is
more reasonable for this pile of 610 mm or 24 inch width.

Three observations are important and support the conclusion that the RP method should
not normally be used. It is a method easily understood and evaluated in hand
calculations (and therefore used in our example problems), but is not generally used in
practical applications. Also please note the following:

1 Damping factors have to be chosen differently for the RPi and the RXi methods. In the
present case RP3 (RP with J c = 0.3 ) and RX6 (RX with J c = 0.6 ) would yield
approximately the same results. The literature still shows damping factors for the RPi
method. In most instances these values would be too low for the RXi method.

2 The sensitivity of the results to an improper damping factor choice is much greater
for the RPi than the RXi method. As a demonstration the table below shows the
Case Method results for damping factors of 0.5, 0.6 and 0.7. Obviously, the RPi
capacities are much more sensitive to damping than RXi values (about 35% vs 7%
per each 0.1 change of J c ), because of the higher velocities at time t 1 .

3 The RPi values tend to be too low for large displacement piles because the
resistance would not be fully mobilized at t 1 .

Table of various Case Method results for the above example case (note the data was
taken from PDA Example 1).

Table A.3: Case Method Comparison

SI (kN) English (kips)

Method Jc = 0.5 Jc = 0.6 Jc = 0.7 Jc = 0.5 Jc = 0.6 Jc = 0.7

RPi 2060 1510 960 460 340 220

RXi 3290 3050 2920 740 690 660

RAU 2630 640

RA2 2850 590

A.4.7 Other methods of interest: RAU, RA2

If the toe velocity (eqn A.4.6a) becomes zero some time after impact, then according to
the Case Method definition, the damping resistance R Dynamic is also zero. This implies
that any resistance present at this time is static and therefore independent of a damping
constant. This solution occurs when v b = 0 .or after substituting for the toe velocity we

find that F d1 = F u2 at the time when the bottom velocity is zero. Therefore, calling the
associated capacity RAU we can write the following equation:

RAU = F d1 + F u2 eqn A.4.12

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Soil Resistance Assessment
232

With the condition that F d1 = F d2 . We call this capacity value RAU, because it is
automatically static and no damping factor has to be chosen. Graphically it can be seen
in Figure A.12 resistance versus time curves when R Total and R Static are for the first time
equal. Since this equation assumes resistance to be at the pile toe, it generally will work
well if there is little skin friction. One of its applications is also for early, easy driving
cases. However, the RAU method may give unrealistically low results in harder driving
where large distributed skin friction is present; the result will be conservative, i.e. a
lower bound solution.

It would be convenient to obtain an estimate of capacity without having to guess a

damping factor even in cases of friction piles. For this reason, the RA2 method was
formulated which is more generally applicable than RAU. However, both RAU and RA2
methods may underpredict. Since 2011 it is therefore preferred to run the iCAP analyses
during data collection and in that way determine the appropriate damping factor during
testing.

In Figure A.12, the RA2 method gives a capacity prediction of 2850 kN (640 kips) and is,
therefore, in reasonably good agreement with the RX6 method while RAU with 2630 kN
(590 kips) is somewhat low (indicated at the bottom of the table).

A.4.8 The Unloading Correction Method, RSU

The Case Method of capacity prediction “measures” the soil resistance acting at the
same time all along the pile. If the energy is sufficient to move the whole pile at the
same time downwards when the resistance reaches ultimate, this method leads to
satisfactory results. For piles which have a deep embedment relative to the impact
induced wave length, the Case Method may underpredict if a substantial amount of the
total soil resistance is distributed along the shaft and if, during hard driving, the pile top
already rebounds before the resistance is fully activated along the bottom part of the
pile. When the pile top velocity becomes negative (e.g. rebounds) before the stress wave
returns at time 2L/c, the pile top is moving upward and some of the skin friction near the
top begins to unload.

For the RPi Method an approximate correction can be calculated in the manner
demonstrated in the figure below. Note that this correction is only applicable if the pile
top velocity becomes negative prior to t 2 = t 1 + 2L  c . Also, t 1 must be chosen at the first
major velocity peak.

• Determine the difference time, t u , between the time that the pile top velocity

becomes zero and the wave return time t 2 (The time, t u , multiplied by the wave

speed, c , and divided by 2 represents the length of pile, L u , over which unloading
has likely occurred.)

• Measure the resistance, R un , that may have unloaded by taking the Wave-up value

at time t 1 + t u . (note that this is only one half of the resistance at t 1 + t u ; the
assumption is here that not all resistance has fully unloaded.

• Add R UN to RTL which leads to the corrected RTL U .

• Determine the toe with RTL U taking the place of RTL in eqn A.4.6a.

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Soil Resistance Assessment
 233

• Apply the proper damping factor (to be verified by CAPWAP).

F (5000)
V (2.64)
2L/c
tu

time of zero velocity

WU (5000)
D (10)

tu

'Run

RS [JC=0.3]
RT (5000)

Figure A.13: Record illustrates a pile with ‘early unloading’

In Figure A.13 (PDA Example data Ex-21c), the bottom graph shows again the R Total and

R Static curves. Both decrease at a rather steep slope immediately after time t 1 . This is
typical for unloading cases where the energy provided by the hammer is just not
sufficient to maintain a downward pile motion for a sufficiently long time for complete,
simultaneous resistance activation. This immediate decrease of the resistance curves also
means that RPi and RXi are identical.

In this example, RTL is 4480 kN (1010 kips) and RTL U is 5240 kN (1180 kips) which
means that the unloading correction, R UN , was 760 kN (170 kips). Assuming a damping
factor J c = 0.3 (relatively low damping factors are used for the RPi Method) we obtain
RP3 = 3550 kN (800 kips) and RU3 = 4540 kN (1020 kips). Note that, compared to RTL,
the increased RTL u causes the toe velocity and therefore the damping resistance to
decrease.

A.4.9 Total and static shaft resistance (skin friction)

We have seen in Section A.4.2 and Section A.4.3 that the upwards traveling shaft
resistance waves create a difference between F and vZ or an increasing Wave-up before
time 2L  c . The question is now, how we can get a closed form estimate of both the total
shaft resistance and the total static shaft resistance acting on the pile. Consider the

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Soil Resistance Assessment
234

figure below. It shows F and vZ on top and F d and F u below. Indicated are also times t 1

(first major velocity peak and t 2 = t 1 + 2L  c . A black heavy horizontal bar between the

top and bottom graph, beginning at t 1 and ending at t 2 is a schematic of the pile with

its top at t 1 and its toe at t 2 .

F (1200)
V (9.30)

WU (1200)
D (1.00)
A B C

tcl tcl

½SFT

t1 t2

Figure A.14: Total shaft resistance is calculated through extrapolation

The A-time line indicates where the Wave-up curve is still zero. Assuming that any shaft
resistance acting at the top (actually at the sensor location) would be activated at time
t 1 , we can say that from the top to the point A along the pile, no (or not much) shaft
resistance acts. At Point B a small amount of shaft resistance has its effect and from this
point on the Wave-up curve increases somewhat linearly to point C. The difference
F uC – F uB is ½ of the total (static plus damping) shaft resistance acting between point B
and C.

The problem is now, that we do not know the shaft resistance acting between C and the
peak pile toe reflection, because of the superimposed reflected impact wave which
creates a valley in the Wave-up curve. We solve this problem by going back from point C
a distance t c and extrapolating linearly to t 2 . The point thus determined defines ½ SFT,
providing an estimate of one half of the total (damping plus static) shaft resistance.

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Soil Resistance Assessment
 235

The next question is how we can figure what the static shaft resistance is. We solve this
problem in an approximate manner by reducing SFT proportionally to the RMX
resistance. Thus, the reduced shaft resistance is calculated as

SFR = SFJ = SFT  -----------

RXJ
eqn A.4.13
 RX0

and the associated end bearing is

EBJ = RXJ – SFJ eqn A.4.14

(e.g., for Jc=0.5: SF5 = SFT(RX5/RX0) and EB5 = RX5 – SF5).

Note that in the above derivation of end bearing it is assumed that the shaft resistance
will be activated at time t 1 , however the end bearing (and therefore the maximum
capacity value) will take more displacement and thus a longer time for complete
activation. For that reason, the sum EBR + SFR does in general not equal the RPJ result.
Note also that this method can only yield a reasonable static shaft resistance estimate for
uniform piles without a major unloading problem which would be apparent by the
Wave-up curve becoming negative before 2L  c .

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Soil Resistance Assessment
236

Example Problem 7: Estimates of Shaft Resistance and End Bearing

Force
Velocity

WaveUp
WaveDown

t1 t2

SI English

Pile Size 450 mm 18 in

Specific Weight  23.6 kN/m3 150 lb/ft3

Length Below Sensors (LE) 23.5 m 77 ft

Time 1 22.7 s 22.7 s

Time 2 (t1+2L/c) 35.3 s 35.3 s

Force at t1 (FT1) 2790 kN 630 kips

Force at t2 (FT2) 650 kN 150 kips

velocity at t2 (VT2) -0.14 m/s -0.45 ft/s

With the measurements and information shown above taken on a uniform square
prestressed concrete pile, calculate:

a The cross-sectional area (A):

b The wavespeed of the pile (c):

c The elastic modulus (E):

d The pile impedance (Z):

e The velocity at time 1 (VT1)

f The force Wave-down at time 1 (WD1):

g The force Wave-up at time 2 (WU2):

h The total resistance at time 1 (RTL):

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Soil Resistance Assessment
 237

i The Static resistance at time 1(assume J c = 0.5) (RP5)

j The total shaft resistance at time 1 (SFT):

k The static shaft resistance at time 1(assume J c = 0.5) (SF5):

l The estimated end bearing at time 1(assume J c = 0.5) (EB5):

m Would the RAU method be appropriate?

n Would this be a case benefiting from the unloading correction?

Note: Since the maximum resistance does not occur at t 1 , the EBR value which relates to
the RMX method will be different from your estimate for t 1

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Soil Resistance Assessment
238

A.4.10 Energy Approach Capacities QUS, QUT

This method of capacity calculation from F and v measurements is not an original Case
Method approach, but has been described by others, for example Paikowsky. The Case
Method looks at individual force and velocity values and determines resistance from a
force equilibrium point of view. The Energy Approach is based on the conservation of
energy as it was done for years in dynamic formulas; in contrast, however, this Energy
Approach uses measured values for energy and energy losses (pile rebound) instead of
estimates.

Resistance
0
Ru
Displacement

q 1

umax

ufin 2

Figure A.15: The energy method calculates a resistance from the measured energy and
blow count
Figure A.15 shows a simplified plot of elasto-plastic resistance, R , vs. pile displacement,
u . Beginning at point “0” this simple plot suggests that the resistance increases linearly
with displacement until point “1” where the displacement reaches the quake value and
the ultimate resistance, R u . Beyond that point the resistance does not increase while the
displacement increases further to point “2” where the maximum displacement is
reached. Beyond that point 3, the pile rebounds with the resistance decreasing linearly
at a slope as defined by the quake.

At point “2” where the maximum displacement is reached, the soil resistance has done a
maximum amount of work, after that energy is given back to the hammer. This amount
of energy is equivalent to the area under the force-displacement curve or

E max = R u  u max – q--- eqn A.4.15a

 2

And substituting for q

 u max – u fin 
E max = R u  u max – -------------------------------
- eqn A.4.15b
 2

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Soil Resistance Assessment
 239

or solving for R u

2E max
R u = --------------------------------
- eqn A.4.16
 u max + u fin 

As shown in Section A.7, the maximum energy transferred to the pile, called EMX, can
be calculated from force and velocity records. Furthermore, the measured maximum pile
top displacement is DMX. So, if we knew the u fin value we could readily evaluate Eq.
4.16. PDA-W solves this problem by accepting a set per blow value, SET, as an input.
Alternatively it can use the final displacement, DFN, from double integration of the
measured acceleration. The corresponding results calculated are then

2EMX
QUS = ------------------------------------
-
 DMX + SET 

or

2EMX
QUT = --------------------------------------
-
 DMX + DFN 

Note that when the drive log is used, corrections to the displacement curve are applied
such that the set is final displacement, DFN, is equated to the measured set per blow and
thus QUS and QUT become essentially the same value.

The program also calculates an RQJ value which is either QUT or RXJ, whichever is
greater. The problem with this approach is that either QUS or QUT are really dynamic
resistance values (not static) and that they therefore tend to be non-conservative. Also
using pile top quantities is not strictly correct if we consider an energy balance for the
soil. And finally, the soil does not offer a total concentrated resistance force which is
elasto-plastic, for example, the real damping forces are ignored in this computation.
Considering the resistance is distributed along the pile and considering it consisting of a
static and a damping component is definitely a more realistic approach. A thorough
study has not been made, but it appears that for end-of drive situations, the result is
about 40% higher than CAPWAP and for restrikes it is, on the average, about twice as
high as CAPWAP. Thus the energy result should clearly be reduced. However, on a case-
by-case basis the percentage reduction may be quite variable and thus unreliable to use
one factor for every case. The reader is strongly encouraged to read the following
reference: (Rausche, et.al, 2004)

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Soil Resistance Assessment
240

A.5 Stress Calculations

Pile damage can be the result of poor hammer alignment (high local contact or bending
stresses), obstructions in the ground which cause the pile to be bent or subjected to a
non-uniform toe resistance (high local contact or bending stresses). The most common
cause for pile damage is, however, an overstressing due to high hammer impact forces
which can generate excessive compression stresses at the pile top or bottom (high end
bearing) or also high tension stresses somewhere along the length of the piles. Concrete
piles are particularly vulnerable to excessive tension stresses.

A.5.1 Pile top (sensor location) stresses

The PDA measurements of strain on two or even four sides of a pile, multiplied by the
elastic modulus, yield stresses at the measurement location. The single highest stress at a
transducer location is called CSI by the PDA. If the transducer happens to be in the plane
of highest bending then CSI is a good indicator of bending stresses at the sensor cross
section. It is calculated simply as:

CSI = EM  max   i   eqn A.5.1

where max   i  is the highest strain measured by anyone of the two or four strain
transducers.

Of course, other cross sections may have different bending stresses. Static bending, e.g.,
due to an inappropriate or other methods of guiding the pile, cannot be detected by the
PDA. Thus, while CSI may be helpful to judge the hammer-pile alignment, particularly
when 4 strain sensors are used, the PDA cannot provide a thorough bending assessment
neither at the top nor anywhere else along the pile. Important is also the average stress
at the sensor location, CSX, because it is what is normally compared with the allowable
driving stresses. CSX can be calculated from the average of the strain readings as
follows:

 1 + 2 
CSX =  ---------------------- EM eqn A.5.2a
 2 

for two strain transducer applications or

 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 
CSX =  ---------------------------------------------- EM eqn A.5.2b
 4 

for four strain transducers.

Also, please note that the stresses above the sensor location cannot be easily calculated
from measurements.

A.5.2 Pile toe stresses

Suppose a pile is driven to a very hard layer. As we have seen, in that case it is
theoretically possible that the pile will experience a pile bottom force which is twice the
impact force (or twice the force in the Wave-down at the initial impact). In general, since
not even a hard rock is absolutely rigid, such high end bearing force cannot fully

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Stress Calculations
 241

materialize, however, it is definitely possible that the pile toe stresses exceed those at the
top; amplification factors of 1.5 or more have been observed. The total toe resistance
force is calculated by the PDA considering the maximum total (static plus damping)
resistance minus the effect of the shaft resistance. This force is called CFB; approximately
it is equal to

CFB = RX0 – c b SFT eqn A.5.3a

where c b is an adjustment factor which since 2011 is chosen by the PDA as 0.5 for
conservatism and to match theory. The corresponding stress is

CSB = CFB
------------ eqn A.5.3b
AR

F (1500)
V (6.97) CSX: 233 MPa (33.8 ksi)
CS1: 169 MPa (24.5 ksi)

CSB: 264 MPa (38.2 ksi)

F1 (1500)
F2 (1500)
CSI: 245 MPa (35.5 ksi)

Figure A.16: Stresses at the pile toe become a concern in hard driving scenarios, especially
with little shaft resistance.
The Figure A.5.3 shows an F and vZ record for a pile with little shaft resistance and high
end bearing (note the strong increase of force at time 2L  c ). At the top the maximum
stress, averaged over the cross section (233 MPa or 33.8 ksi) happens not at impact, but
when the wave returns from the pile toe. Evaluating this record for pile toe stresses
according to Figure A.5.3a&b yields a pile to stress of 264 MPa (38.2 ksi) or about 56%

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Stress Calculations
242

more than the stress at impact (time t 1 ). The individual strain records also indicated
bending of 5% above the average stress at the peak stress level; at impact, where the
stresses were lower, the bending effect was more pronounced.

A.5.3 Pile tension stresses caused by Wave-up

For concrete piles it is highly desirable to know the tension stresses, but at the sensor
location, measured tension stresses are usually not very high, because of the reflection
taking place at the pile top where tension has to be zero. We therefore have to calculate
the tension stresses at points below the location of the sensors. We can do this by
remembering that the force at a point is the sum of the forces in Wave-down plus the
force in the Wave-up. In easy driving we normally see a tension wave traveling upwards
arriving at the pile top around the time 2L  c . In hard driving we sometimes see a
downward traveling tension wave after 2L  c .

For the easy driving case, consider Figure A.17. It shows both Wave-down (purple) and
Wave-up (green). Wave-up becomes strongly negative at time 2L  c . Thus a tension
wave travels up from the pile bottom due to the reflection of the impact wave. Let us call
t = 0 as the time at which the maximum impact force is apparent. As shown in the L-t
plot underneath the record, we can calculate the force at any level x as the sum of the
downward wave emanating from the top at time y = 2  L – x   c after the time of impact
plus the upward wave arriving at the top at time t=2L/c. If we chose t = 0 such that the
upwards traveling wave, F u2 , represents the highest tension and if we choose x such

that F d3 is the lowest downward traveling compression during the first 2L  c , then F x

will be the highest tension force in the pile during the first 2L  c .

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Stress Calculations
 243

Wave Up
Wave Down

L/c 2L/c t

Figure A.17: From time L/c the upward tension wave encounters all points on the
downward traveling force wave.
The Figure A.18 shows how we can expand on this concept to determine the tension
stress envelope caused by the recorded event. (The PDA calculates the tension envelope
in the same way.)

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Stress Calculations
244

F (2000)
V (9.2)

WU (2000)
Pile Pile
WD (2000) Toe Head
Tension Envelope

min Fu

min Fu

Figure A.18: The maximum traveling tension force in the Wave-up curve will encounter all
points of the Wave-down curve from time L/c.
• Determine the point of minimum Wave-up and determine minFu .

• At the time of minimum Wave-up we draw a heavy bar backward in time for 2L  c
and call the beginning “the pile top” and the end point “the pile toe”. The reason
is that a downward compression wave observed just before the time of minimum
Wave-up will have a tension reducing effect very near the pile top.

• In the Wave-down plot, draw a horizontal line at a distance of minFu above the
zero line from “pile top” to “pile toe”

• Where the Wave-down is less than minF u , the difference between the horizontal
line and the Wave-down curve is the net tension force along the pile.

• Determine the point of minimum Wave-down, minFd , which happens to be the

point where the maximum net tension occurs. You can calculate the distance below
the pile top where the tension is maximum from the relative distance of the point
of minFd from the point of minFu .

Again, the maximum net computed tension (CTN) occurs when the downward
compression force is a minimum (time t 3 ) and can be found mathematically by

CTN = minF u + minF d eqn A.5.4a

The associated stress is

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Stress Calculations
 245

CSN = CTN
------------ eqn A.5.4b
AR

Obviously, this method is only correct for uniform, undamaged piles.

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Stress Calculations
246

Example Problem 8: Tension Stress Calculation from Wave-up

WaveUp
WaveDown

100%
t1 t2

In the above Wave-down and Wave-up record, determine the following values:

a Minimum (maximum tension) Wave-up as a percentage of maximum Wave-down;

b Minimum Wave-down as a percentage of maximum Wave-down;

c Relative distance from the pile top where maximum net tension occurs.

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Stress Calculations
 247

A.5.4 Pile tension stresses caused by Wave-down

At the end of Section A.3.3 we have considered a situation of a rigid support at the
bottom of a pile and we have seen that this situation causes a compressive Wave-up
reflection at the pile toe. This upward traveling wave will have an upward directed
particle velocity. When this wave arrives at the pile top it can encounter either a
downward moving ram which causes a compressive downward wave or, particularly if
the ram is very light and has lost its momentum, something close to a free pile top which
then causes a downward tension reflection. In general, when driving is very hard (which
means the hammer does not have enough momentum to keep the pile in compression),
damaging tension waves can happen in the hard driving case. The F , vZ records in such
cases have a large negative velocity at a time when the force is relatively low. Obviously,
with F d =  F + vZ   2 , the negative velocity will make the Wave-down a tension wave.

F (2000)
V (9.2)

Pile
Head

WU (2000)
WD (2000)

minimum upward
traveling compression wave
2L/c

Pile
Toe

2L/c
maximum downward
traveling tension wave

Figure A.19: While no tensile stresses occur in the first 2L/c, tension in the downward
traveling wave after 2L/c cause net tensile stresses near the pile toe.
Figure A.19 shows the example of a large negative velocity not offset by a positive force
and, therefore, a negative Wave-up curve. The PDA determines the minimum Wave-
down value in tension and then searches for a trailing minimum compressive Wave-up;
adding it to the maximum tensile Wave-down yields the maximum net tension force,
CTX. The associated stress TSX is calculated by division with the cross sectional area.
Again this only works for uniform piles. Note, however, that the PDA outputs TSX as
always the greater of the tension from upward or downward waves.

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Stress Calculations
248

A.6 Damage Detection

For a uniform pile, an upward traveling tension wave should be observed only after
reflection from the pile tip and should therefore come at time 2L  c . If an upward
tension wave is observed prior to 2L  c , it must be due to a reduction in pile impedance,
i.e., either a reduced cross sectional area or a reduced elastic modulus or a reduced mass
density all of which should be considered either a damage or defect in a uniform pile.

Wave Up
Wave Down

L/c 2L/c t

Fd1 Fd1 Fd1 Fd1

x Z1

Fu1 Fu1 Fu1 Fu1

A
L B
Fd2 Fd2 Fd2 Fd2
Z2

Figure A.20:
Consider the figure below showing on the left hand side a schematic pile which has
impedance Z 1 on top and which has a reduced impedance, Z 2 , below x . As shown on
the right hand side of the figure, because of the impedance reduction the impact wave
F d1 will be partially reflected at x sending a reflection wave F u1 upwards which arrives

at the top at time 2x  c . It will be apparent at the pile top and can then be evaluated.
Additionally, the initial input wave, F d2 will continue to travel to the pile toe but at a
reduced magnitude due to the section reduction to satisfy equilibrium. Consider the
wave forces acting at section A and B, i.e. just above and below the impedance
reduction; because they have to be in equilibrium we have:

F d1 + F u1 = F d2 eqn A.6.1

Similarly, the velocities in these waves have to be equal on both sides or else we would
not have continuity (the pile would separate):

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Damage Detection
 249

v d1 + v u1 = v d2 eqn A.6.2a

Considering proportionality we can replace the velocities in eqn A.6.2a by the

corresponding wave forces:

F d1 F u1 F d2
--------- – --------- = --------- eqn A.6.2b
Z1 Z1 Z2

We are now defining the integrity factor

Z
 = -----2- eqn A.6.3
Z1

which is 1 for Z 2 = Z 1 (undamaged) and zero for a completed damaged pile. Now after

multiplication with Z 2 , eqn A.6.2b can be expressed as

F d2 =   F d1 – F u1  eqn A.6.3a

and combining eqn A.6.1 and eqn A.6.3a to eliminate F d2 we find that

 F d1 + F u1 
 = -----------------------------
- eqn A.6.4
 F d1 – F u1 

Let us assume that F u1 is an upward traveling wave which is tensile and 30% of the

 1 – 0.3  0.7
magnitude of the impact wave. In that case  = ---------------------- = ------- = 0.54 . Thus in that case
 1 + 0.3  1.3
Z 2 would be slightly more than ½ of the pile top impedance.

Reality is actually more complicated because the wave F d1 , by the time it has reached

the point A has already possibly lost some intensity due to the resistance, R x , acting over

the distance x above the section reduction. For that reason then PDA-S program uses a
modified equation which considers the effect of soil resistance:

 F d1 – 1.5R x + F u1 
 = -------------------------------------------------- eqn A.6.5
 F d1 – 0.5R x – F u1 

The eqn A.6.5 gives reasonable and conservative results in most cases. Several additional
considerations can be given, among them:

• Theoretically an extrapolation of the shaft resistance to the point of highest tensile

wave ( F d1 ) should be made (particularly, where damage is gradually worsening
with depth).

• Soil damping reduces the downward wave more than indicated by the R x value,
because of its temporary (velocity dependent) nature.

• Structural/pile material damping reduces impact and reflection waves, particularly

in concrete piles with microcracks.

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Damage Detection
250

• Soil resistance at the bottom of the damage (in extreme cases like an end bearing)
reduces the reflection.

• Compressive wave reflections from an impedance increase may be observed at the

end of the damage (if the damaged portion is shorter than the wave length).

• Resistance from connecting steel strands or other damaged pile sections at the
bottom of the damage may affect the calculated magnitude and location of the
damage.

While these and other effects add resistance or resistance like effects and therefore
reduce the apparent damage reflection, the PDA generally calculates a ß-value that is
low or conservative where high shaft resistance exists above the damage.

In order to provide a guideline for uniform damage assessment, the following table
shows a classification scale which has been proposed (Rausche et al., 1979), a paper
which is also the source of eqn A.6.5.

Additional considerations for damage at the toe are discussed in detail under this paper
(Likins and Rausche, 2014)

Damage Assessment based on  -values

Table A.4: Beta Recommendations

ß Suggested Pile Condition

1.0 Uniform

0.8 - 1.0 Slightly Damaged

0.6 - 0.8 Damaged

< 0.6 Broken

Of course, such damage assessment cannot be directly applied to a crack, broken weld,
bent steel pipe or many other damage situations which do not conform to the basic
assumption in the derivation:  is a measure of the remaining impedance or cross-
section. However, if the impedance ratio becomes 0.6 or less, it is unlikely that the pile
can be fully functional. Also, a distinct pile toe reflections is then rarely observed. In all
cases it is suggested to try modeling the supposedly damaged pile with CAPWAP to
confirm the findings by the simpler  -method.

Finally a word should be said about the determination of the location of the damage.
The PDA calculates the time 2x  c from the onset of Wave-down at impact to the
beginning of the apparent tensile reflection, F u1 . This time multiplied by ½ of the wave
speed is the best estimate of the beginning of the damage. Obviously, an incorrect wave
speed will produce an incorrect length x . In fact, if the wave speed had been assumed
too low, the PDA might indicate damage just above the pile toe. If and only if damage
can be definitely ruled out, then the wave speed can be determined by increasing it until
the PDA’s damage indication disappears.

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Damage Detection
 251

F (2600)
V (2.12)

Onset
of Fd1
L

F
x=0.75L
vZ

WU (2600)
WD (2600)

Fd1=100%

Fu

Fd
Fu1=30%
½Rx=4.4%

Figure A.21:
Figure A.21 shows a record was taken on a 356 mm (14 inch) square prestressed
concrete pile. Before damage occurred, given the length of LE=19.5 m (63 ft) below
gages and a clear toe reflection, the wave speed was determined to be WS=4,040 m/s
(13,250 ft/s). The record’s force scale was adjusted so that F d1 = 100% (actually 2600 kN,
but we can do the calculation non-dimensionally). Clearly the Wave-up record shows a
tensile reflection beginning at a time which is 75% of 2L  c . Thus damage is apparent at
a depth of 14.5 m (47.6 ft). The Wave-up value just before the tensile reflection is 4.4%
of full scale ( R x is therefore 8.8%). The tensile reflection F u1 is -30%. Introducing these
values in eqn A.6.5 leads to:

 = --------------------------------------------------------------
100 – 1.5  8.8  +  – 30   = 0.45
-
 100 – 4.4 –  – 30  

indicating a broken pile. Note that ignoring the relatively minor resistance effect would
have yielded a  of 0.54 (eqn A.6.4).

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Damage Detection
252

Example Problem 9: Damage Assessment

Force
Velocity

Wave Up
Wave Down

For the above record of a 35.7 m (117 ft) long (below sensors) steel pile, calculate the
depth of damage and its severity. What could be the reason for such a clear damage
reflection in a steel pile?

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Damage Detection
 253

A.7 Hammer Performance

The energy transferred to the pile, E t  t  , can be found from the work done on the pile

Et  t  =  F  t  du =  F  t v  t  dt eqn A.7.1

which we can obtain if we integrate the product of force ‘F’ and velocity ‘v’ over time.
The maximum value is the maximum transferred energy EMX.

EMX = max  E t  t   eqn A.7.2

It is important to realize that only this transferred energy, EMX, is capable of actually
doing work, rather than the hammers rated energy, Er (called ER by the PDA). The
transferred energy only allows the hammer’s performance to be judged, but only in a
statistical manner, by its energy transfer ratio (or transfer efficiency,  t ) which is defined
as

 t = ETR = EMX
------------- eqn A.7.3
ER

Additional definitions of interest are the impact velocity which for a given stroke ‘h’ is

vi = 2gh eqn A.7.4

with g being the gravitational acceleration.

Given the ram mass, m r , the kinetic energy is

2
mr vi
E k = -----------
- eqn A.7.5
2

If we measure the impact velocity of the ram then we can calculate the actual kinetic
energy and from it the actual hammer efficiency,  H , as the ratio of the measured kinetic
energy divided by the rated energy. Note: the hammer efficiency expresses losses in the
hammer, occurring prior to impact. The transfer ratio expresses energy losses occurring
in hammer, driving system (cushions and helmet) and at the pile top surface.

While Radar (PDI’s Hammer Performance Analyzer, HPA) or other device can measure the
effective impact velocity in most situations, it is also possible under certain
circumstances (and it may be simpler) to calculate it from the F and v records. The
evaluation of the records would require applying the principles of impulse and
conservation of linear momentum. The impulse can be calculated from either the
measured force as

MFO =  F  t  dt eqn A.7.6

The integral should be evaluated from time 0 (when the force at the pile top begins to
increase) until the time when the ram velocity again becomes zero. Since we don’t know

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Hammer Performance
254

that time we have to assume that the ram velocity becomes zero together with the pile
top velocity. This assumption can be verified by wave equation analysis and precludes
the application of the impulse-momentum relationship for concrete piles with soft
cushioning. Also, since diesel hammers have energy added during the impulse evaluation
period, this hammer type does not lend it to this method either.

A force impulse can also be calculated from the Wave-down curve:

MWO =  Fd  t  dt eqn A.7.7

This integration should go from time 0 until the time when the Wave-down becomes
zero. Equating the impulse to the momentum of the ram, which is equal to ram mass
times impact velocity ( m R v i ) we can calculate the ram impact velocity as either

v i = MFO
-------------- eqn A.7.8a
mR

or

MWO
v i = --------------- eqn A.7.8b
mR

This ram impact velocity can be used to obtain the kinetic energy

2
mR v i
E k = ------------
- eqn A.7.9
2

which can be compared with the rated energy, E R , to obtain the hammer efficiency

E
 H = ------k- ??? ?.7.10
ER

Also, comparing the kinetic energy with the maximum transferred energy EMX will
demonstrate the effectiveness of the rest of the driving systems.

In summary, two energy ratios are important and must be distinguished:

E
The hammer efficiency:  H = ------k-
ER

E EMX
The transfer ratio (efficiency):  t = ETR = ------t- = -------------
ER ER

For open end diesel hammers, it is also important to check the hammer stroke. Given the
time between hammer blows, T, and assuming that the ram travels freely (no friction or
other losses of energy) the time for the ram fall (or ram rise) is equal to T/2. If the
velocity increases linearly due to the gravitational acceleration, g , then

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Hammer Performance
 255

v i = g  ---
T
eqn A.7.11a
 2

and combining with eqn A.7.4 to cancel v i , we obtain

2gh = g  ---
T
eqn A.7.11b
2

or

h =  --- T
g 2
eqn A.7.11c
 8

Since a diesel hammer loses some of its ram velocity due to the precompression of the
gases in the combustion chamber, based on field tests and wave equation simulations we
found that h would be more correctly calculated after subtracting a loss term, h L = 0.1m

or 0.3ft . Thus the Saximeter formula is

h =  --- T – h L
g 2
eqn A.7.11d
8

or in terms of blows per minute

s 2
 60 ----------
h =  ---  ---------------- – h L
g min
eqn A.7.11e
 8  BPM 
 

For example, if the time between two hammer blows is 1.5 s, then h is 2.66 m (8.75 ft).

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Hammer Performance
256

Example Problem 10: Hammer Performance

a Calculate the stroke of a diesel hammer if the hammer runs at 38 blows/minute.

Consider a hammer with a 44.5 kN (10 kip) ram with a rated stroke of 1.0 m (3.3 ft) and
an observed impulse (MFO) of 17.8 kN-s (4.00 k-sec) and EMX of 24.4kJ (18.0 k-ft).

Calculate the hammer’s:

b Rated energy,

c Rated impact velocity,

d Actual impact velocity,

e Kinetic energy,

f Hammer efficiency,

g Transfer ratio (efficiency)?

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Hammer Performance
 257

A.8 Results of Example Problems

Answer to Example Problem 1: Wave Speed, c

Calculate the wave speed for

a concrete with a dynamic elastic modulus of 35,000 MPa (5,000 ksi) and unit weight = 24
kN/m 3 (150 lb/ft 3 ).

2
E Eg 35000MPa  1000MPa/KPa   9.81m  s 
c = --- = ----------------- = - = 3782m  s
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  24kN  m
3

2 2 2
E Eg  5000ksi   1000kip/ft   144in  ft   32.2ft  s 
c = --- = ----------------- = ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- = 12432ft/s
  150pcf

Repeat the calculation for

b timber (E = 12,000 MPa or 1,800 ksi and = 8 kN/m 3 or 50 lb/ft 3 )

2
E Eg 12000MPa  1000MPa/KPa   9.81m  s 
c = --- = ----------------- = - = 3836m  s
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  8kN  m
3

2 2 2
E Eg  1800ksi   1000kip/ft   144in  ft   32.2ft  s 
c = --- = ----------------- = ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- = 12920ft/s
  50pcf

c and steel (E = 210,000 MPa or 30,000 ksi and = 77 kN/m 3 or 492 lb/ft 3 ).

2
E Eg  210000MPa  1000MPa/KPa   9.81m  s 
c = --- = ----------------- = --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- = 5172m  s
  77kN  m
3

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Results of Example Problems
258

2 2 2
E E g   30000ksi   1000kip/ft   144in  ft   32.2ft  s 
c = --- = ----------------- = -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- = 16833ft/s
  492pcf

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Results of Example Problems
 259

Answer to Example Problem 2: Impedance, Z

Compute the impedance of a pile for a 27.5 cm (11 inch) square concrete pile of 30 m
(100 ft) length using concrete properties in Example Problem 1. Do the computations
for all three equations 2.2 a, b and c.

2 2
A =  27.5cm  = 756.25cm
2 2
A =  11in  = 121in

2 2 2
 35000MPa   1000kN  MN   756.25cm   1m  10000cm 
Z = EA
-------- = --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- = 700kN   m  s 
c 3782m  s

2
 5000ksi   121in 
Z = EA
-------- = ----------------------------------------------- = 48.7kip   ft  s 
c 12432ft/sec

3
24kN  m 2 2 2
Z = cA = -------------------------  3782m  s   756.25cm   1m  10000cm  = 700kN   m  s 
9.81m  s

150pcf 2 2 2
Z = cA = --------------------2-  12432ft/sec   121in   1ft  144in  = 48.7kip   ft  s 
32.2ft/s

 24kN  m 3 2 2 2
 ------------------------2-  756.25cm   1m  10000cm   30m   3782m  s 
 9.81m  s 
Z = Mc
-------- = ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ = 700kN   m  s 
L 30m

150pcf  
 -------------------- - 1000 --------  121in   1ft  144in   100ft   12432ft/sec 
lb 2 2 2
 2  kip
32.2ft/s
Z = Mc
-------- = ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- = 48.7kip   ft  s 
L 100ft

for the two remaining materials

SI English

Material E c Z E c Z

Wood 12,000 8 3,836 237 1,800 50 12,934 16.8

Steel 210,000 77 5,172 3070 30,000 492 16,833 215.6

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Results of Example Problems
260

Answer to Example Problem 3: Wave-down and Wave-up Values

Force
Velocity

t1 t2

Given force and velocity at the pile top of a square prestressed, precast concrete pile (see
figure above), what is the magnitude of both the downward and upward traveling wave
forces at both times, t 1 and t 2 given the following values:

SI English

Elastic Modulus 42,000 MPa 6000 ksi

Square Pile Width 610 mm 24 in

Specific Weight 24 kN/m3 150 pcf

Force at t1 4000 kN 900 kips

Force at t2 -200 kN -50 kips

Velocity at t1 1.0 m/s 3.3 ft/s

Velocity at t2 1.0 m/s 3.3 ft/s

(Note, force and velocity values were rounded and cannot be exactly scaled in the
figure)

First we need to calculate the wavespeed, c, of the pile:

E 42000MPa  1000kPa/MPa  m
c = --- = - = 4143 ----
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 3
  24kN/m    9.81m  s  
2 s

2 2
E 6000ksi  1000lb/kip   144in  ft  ft
c = --- = - = 13619 ---
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  150pcf  32.2ft/s 
2 s

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Results of Example Problems
 261

Then we can calculate the pile impedance, Z:

2
 42000MPa   1000kPa/MPa   0.61m  m
Z = EA
-------- = --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- = 3772kN  ----
c m s
4143 ----
s
2
 6000ksi   24in  ft
Z = EA
-------- = -------------------------------------------- = 253.7kip  ---
c ft s
13619 ---
s

We can now calculate the Wave-Down and Wave-Up terms:

 4000kN  +  1.0m/s   3772kN  ----

· m
Ft + vt Z  s
F d1 = ------------------------ = ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- = 3886kN
1 1

2 2

 900kip  +  3.3ft/s   253.7kip  ---

· ft
Ft + vt Z  s
F d1 = -----------------------
1 1
- = --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- = 868.6kip
2 2

 – 200 kN  +  1.0m/s   3772kN  ----

· m
Ft + vt Z s
F d2 = -----------------------
2 2
- = ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- = 1786kN
2 2

 – 50 kip  +  3.3ft/s   253.7kip  ---

· ft
Ft + vt Z s
F d2 = -----------------------
2 2
- = --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- = 393.6kip
2 2

 4000kN  –  1.0m/s   3772kN  ----

m
Ft – vt Z  s
F u1 = ----------------------
1 1
- = ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- = 114kN
2 2

 900kip  –  3.3ft/s   253.7kip  ---

· ft
Ft – vt Z  s
F u1 = ----------------------- = -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- = 31.4kip
1 1

2 2

 – 200kN  –  1.0m/s   3772kN  ----

m
Ft – vt Z s
F u2 = ----------------------- = ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- = – 1986k N
2 2

2 2

 – 50kN  –  3.3ft/s   253.7kip  ---

· ft
Ft – vt Z s
F u2 = ----------------------- = -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- = – 443.6kip
2 2

2 2

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Results of Example Problems
262

Answer to Example Problem 4: Shaft Resistance from Force and Velocity times
Impedance
tudy the following graph and notes.

Force
Velocity
Shaft Resistance
begins to have effect
Toe Reflection begins to arrive
at the pile top

2xb/c
Ri
2xa/c

xa a
Maximum effect of impact wave is
apparent (2L/c after max top velocity)

Ri

xb b

a Determine the apparent shaft resistance force, R i , acting between points A and B.
Calculate R i as a percentage of the maximum impact force.

The resistance force between point A and B amounts to approximately 47% of the impact
force.

b Is R i the total shaft resistance?

There could be additional resistance on the shaft below point B, but the magnitude is not
obvious from the record. There is little or no shaft resistance acting above point A.

c Is R i a static resistance force?

The resistance force between point A and B includes both static and dynamic resistance
components.

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Results of Example Problems
 263

Answer to Example Problem 5: Calculating total Resistance

In Example Problem 3 determine the total resistance R Total

a from Wave-down and Wave-up and

recalling eqn A.4.3b

R Total = F d1 + F u2 = 3886kN +  – 1986kN  = 1900kN

R Total = F d1 + F u2 = 868.6kip +  – 443.6kip  = 425kip

b from the corresponding individual force and velocity values.

use the data points identified in the Example Problem 3, i.e., with time 1 at the first
major peak.

recalling eqn A.4.4

3772kN  ----  1.0 ---- – 1.0 ----

m m m
 Ft + Ft  Z  vt – vt   4000kN +  – 200 kN   s s s
R Total = -------------------------
1 2
- + --------------------------
1 2
- = --------------------------------------------------------- + ------------------------------------------------------------------- = 1900kN
2 2 2 2

· ·
253.7kip  ---  3.3 --- – 3.3 ---
ft ft ft
 Ft + Ft  Z  vt – vt   900kip +  – 50k ip   s s s
R Total = -------------------------
1 2
- + --------------------------
1 2
- = ----------------------------------------------------- + ------------------------------------------------------------------- = 425kip
2 2 2 2

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Results of Example Problems
264

Answer to Example Problem 6: Calculating Ru for t1 at First Peak Velocity

a Using the expressions for Wave-down and Wave-up in terms of the measured force and
velocity at times t 1 and t 2 , rewrite eqn A.4.11b in terms of the measured force and
velocity.
R Static =  1 – J c F d1 +  1 + J c F u2

Ft – vt Z Ft – vt Z
R Static =  1 – J c  ----------------------
1 1
- +  1 + J c  ----------------------
2 2
-
2 2

1
R Static = ---  F t + v t Z + F t – v t Z – J c  F t + v t Z – F t + v t Z  
2 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 2

b In Example Problems 3 and 5, for times t 1 and t 2 identified, calculate the toe

velocity and, assuming a Case Damping factor J c = 0.2 , calculate the damping
force and determine the static capacity by subtracting the damping force from the
total resistance.
2  F d1  – R Total 2  3886kN  – 1900kN = 1.56 m
v b = --------------------------------------- = ------------------------------------------------------
- ----
Z m s
3772kN  ----
s

2  F d1  – R Total  868.6kip  – 425kip = 5.17 ft

v b = --------------------------------------- = 2------------------------------------------------------
- ---
Z ft s
253.7kip  ---
s

R Dynamic = J c v b Z = 0.2  1.56 ----  3772kN  ---- = 1177kN

m m
 s s

R Dynamic = J c v b Z = 0.2  5.17 ---  253.7kip  --- = 262.3kip

ft ft
 s  s

R Static = R Total – R Dynamic = 1900kN – 1177kN = 723kN

R Static = R Total – R Dynamic = 425kip – 262.3kip = 162.7kip

c Discuss the R Static result obtained. How sensitive is it to the damping factor J c (for

example, calculate R Static also for J c = 0.3 )? Why would the static resistance be so
sensitive?

Increasing the damping factor from 0.2 to 0.3 would increase the damping resistance from
1150 to 1725 kN and therefore reduce RU to 175 kN. A further increase of Jc would make
the RU negative (note that the Case Method will not allow negative resistance forces and just
set the result to zero.)

This high RU sensitivity to damping can be attributed to the high velocity return at 2L/c,
being as high as the impact velocity and, therefore a relatively low RTL (less than ½ of Fd1).

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Results of Example Problems
 265

Answer to Example Problem 7: Estimates of Shaft Resistance and End Bearing

Force
Velocity

WaveUp
WaveDown

½SFT=51%Fd1

t1 t2

SI English

Pile Size 450 mm 18 in

Specific Weight  23.6 kN/m3 150 lb/ft3

Length Below Sensors (LE) 23.5 m 77 ft

Time 1 22.7 ms 22.7 ms

Time 2 (t1+2L/c) 35.3 ms 35.3 ms

Force at t1 (FT1) 2790 kN 630 kips

Force at t2 (FT2) 650 kN 150 kips

velocity at t2 (VT2) -0.14 m/s -0.45 ft/s

With the measurements and information shown above taken on a uniform square
prestressed concrete pile, calculate:

a The cross-sectional area (A):

2 2
A =  0.45m  = 0.2025m
2 2
A =  18in  = 324in

b The wavespeed of the pile (c):

2L 2  23.5m  m
c = -------------------
- = ------------------------------------------------ = 3730 ----
 t2 – t1   35.3ms – 22.7ms  s

2L 2  77ft  ft
c = -------------------
- = ------------------------------------------------ = 12220 ---
 t2 – t1   35.3ms – 22.7ms  s

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Results of Example Problems
266

c The elastic modulus (E):

3
 2 23.6kN/m  m 2
-  3730 ---- = 33470Mpa
2
E = c = --- c = --------------------------
2
g 9.81m  s s

 2 150pcf 1kip 1ft ft 2

E = c = --- c = --------------------2-  ------------------  --------------  12220 --- = 4831ksi
2
g 32.2ft/s 1000lb 144in s

d The pile impedance (Z):

2
 33470Mpa   0.2025m  m
Z = EA
-------- = --------------------------------------------------------------- = 1817kN  ----
c 3730m  s s

2
 4831ksi   324in  ft
Z = EA
-------- = ------------------------------------------------ = 128.1kip  ---
c 12220ft  s s

e The velocity at time 1 (VT1):

because we see that the force and velocity stay proportional through the initial peak, t 1
Ft 2790kN m
v t = -------1 = ----------------------------- = 1.54 ----
1 Z m s
1817kN  ----
s

Ft 630kip ft
v t = -------1 = ------------------------------- = 4.92 ---
1 Z ft s
128.1kip  ---
s

f The force Wave-down at time 1 (WD1):

 2790kN  +  1.54m/s   1817kN  ----

· m
Ft + vt Z  s
F d1 = ------------------------ = ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- = 2790kN
1 1

2 2

 630kip  +  4.92 ---  128.1kip  ---

ft ft
Ft + vt Z  s  s
F d1 = ------------------------ = ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- = 630kip
1 1

2 2

g The force Wave-up at time 2 (WU2):

 650kN  –  – 0.14 m/s   1817kN  ----

m
Ft – vt Z  s
F u2 = ----------------------- = ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- = 452.2kN
2 2

2 2

 150kip  –  – 0.45 ---  128.1kip  ---

ft ft
Ft – vt Z  s  s
F u2 = ----------------------- = ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ = 103.8kip
2 2

2 2

h The total resistance at time 1 (RTL):

R Total = F d1 + F u2 = 2790kN + 452.2kN = 3242kN

R Total = F d1 + F u2 = 630kip + 103.8kip = 733.8kip

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Results of Example Problems
 267

i The Static resistance at time 1(assume J c = 0.5) (RP5)

R Static =  1 – J c F d1 +  1 + J c F u2 =  1 – 0.5   2790kN  +  1 + 0.5   452kN  = 2073kN

R Static =  1 – J c F d1 +  1 + J c F u2 =  1 – 0.5   630kip  +  1 + 0.5   104kip  = 471kip

j The total shaft resistance at time 1 (SFT):

if we extrapolate the Wave-up curve to t2 it would be approximately 51% of Fd1, thus:

SFT = 2  F d1   51%  = 2  2790kN   51%  = 2846kN

SFT = 2  F d1   51%  = 2  630kip   51%  = 642.6kip

k The static shaft resistance at time 1(assume J c = 0.5) (SF5):

R Static 2073kN
SF5 = SFT  ---------------- = SFT  ----------- =  2846kN   -------------------- = 1820kN
RP5
 R Total   RP0  3242kN
R Static 471kip
SF5 = SFT  ---------------- = SFT  ----------- =  642.6kip   ---------------------- = 412.5kip
RP5
R Total RP0 733.8kip

l The estimated end bearing at time 1(assume J c = 0.5) (EB5):

EB5 = RP5 – SF5 = 2073kN – 1820kN = 253kN
EB5 = RP5 – SF5 = 471kip – 412.5kip = 58.5kip

m Would the RAU method be appropriate?

No, there is too much shaft resistance.

n Would this be a case benefiting from the unloading correction?

Possibly, because the velocity becomes negative prior to 2L/c

Note: Since the maximum resistance does not occur at t 1 , the EBR value which relates to
the RMX method will be different from your estimate for t 1

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Results of Example Problems
268

Answer to Example Problem 8: Tension Stress Calculation

WaveUp
WaveDown

100%
t1 t2

In the above Wave-down and Wave-up record, determine the following values:

a Minimum (maximum tension) Wave-up as a percentage of maximum Wave-down;

minFu = -45%

b Minimum Wave-down as a percentage of maximum Wave-down;

minFd = 0%

c Relative distance from the pile top where maximum net tension occurs.

x = 23% of LE

Based on (a) and (b), the maximum tension in the pile CTN = 45 – 0 = 45% of the maximum
Wave-down.

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Results of Example Problems
 269

Answer to Example Problem 9: Damage Assessment

Force
Velocity

x=0.5L

Wave Up
Wave Down

Fd1=100%

Fu1=43%
½Rx=7%

a For the above record of a 35.7 m (117 ft) long (below sensors) steel pile, calculate the
depth of damage and its severity.
Assuming F u1 is 100% we can approximately scale the resistance wave is F uR = 7% and R x is
therefore 14%

The damage tensile wave is F u1 = -43% , therefore:

 = ------------------------------------------------------------
100 – 1.5  14  +  – 43   = 36 = 25%
- ---------
 100 – 0.5  14  –  – 43   136

The damage is located approximately 50% of LE (i.e., 17.2m or 56.2 ft) below the sensors or
19.5 (64.2 ft) below pile top.

b What could be the reason for such a clear damage reflection in a steel pile?

For steel piles, this could be an indication of a broken weld or a sharp bend in the pile. Of
course, if the damage happened on a hard layer at a depth corresponding to the damage
length, this could also be a collapsed (accordion type damage) pile bottom. In any case, the
ß value would not be a true indication of Z2.

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Results of Example Problems
270

Answer to Example Problem 10: Hammer Performance

a Calculate the stroke of a diesel hammer if the hammer runs at 38 blows/minute.
2
9.81m  s 60s  min 2
h =  --- T – h L =  -------------------------  ---------------------------------- – 0.1m = 2.96m
g 2
8 8 38blow  min

2
32.2ft  s 60s  min 2
h =  --- T – h L =  ------------------------  ---------------------------------- – 0.3ft = 9.7ft
g 2
8 8 38blow  min

Consider a hammer with a 44.5 kN (10 kip) ram with a rated stroke of 1.0 m (3.3 ft) and
an observed impulse (MFO) of 17.8 kN-s (4.00 k-sec) and EMX of 24.4kJ (18.0 k-ft).

Calculate the hammer’s:

b Rated energy,
ER = 44.5kN  1m  = 44.5kJ

ER = 10kip  3.25ft  = 33.0kip – ft

c Rated impact velocity,

2  9.81 ----2-  1.0m  = 4.42 ----

m m
v ir = 2gh =
  s
s

2  32.2 ----2-  3.3ft  = 14.6 ---

ft ft
v ir = 2gh =
  s
s

d Actual impact velocity,

17.8kN – s m
v i = MFO
-------------- = --------------------------------------------- = 3.92 ----
mR  44.5kN  9.81 ---- m
-
s
 2
s
4.0kip – s ft
v i = MFO
-------------- = ----------------------------------------- = 12.8 ---
mR  10kip  32.2 ---- ft 
-
s
 2
s

e Kinetic energy,
 44.5kN  9.81 ---- m  m 2
2  - 3.92 ----
2 
mR v i s s
E k = ------------- = --------------------------------------------------------------------- = 34.9kJ
2 2
2
 10kip  32.2 ---- ft  
- 12.8 ---
ft
2
mR v i  2  s
s
E k = ------------- = ----------------------------------------------------------------- = 25.5kip – ft
2 2

f Hammer efficiency,
E
 h = ------k- = 34.9kJ 25.2kip – ft
----------------- = ----------------------------- = 78%
ER 44.5kJ 33.0kip – ft

g Transfer ratio (efficiency)?

E
 t = ------t- = 24.4kJ 18.0kip – ft
----------------- = ----------------------------- = 55%
ER 44.5kJ 33.0kip – ft

The Case Method, Wave Mechanics, Theory and Derivations: Results of Example Problems