Smart questions
Smart answers
Smart people
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Member Login




Remember Me
Forgot Password?
Join Us!

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips now!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!

Join Eng-Tips
*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Donate Today!

Do you enjoy these
technical forums?
Donate Today! Click Here

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.
Jobs from Indeed

Link To This Forum!

Partner Button
Add Stickiness To Your Site By Linking To This Professionally Managed Technical Forum.
Just copy and paste the
code below into your site.

foreng (Civil/Environmental)
28 Sep 09 14:36
We currently use Engineering News with a FS of 3 for temporary work bridge installation in remote areas with little to no geotechnical information. I noticed then FWHA has adopted the modified Gates formula. Could any give advice on risks ? as I realize the Engineering News formula has it's own draw backs.
BigH (Geotechnical)
28 Sep 09 20:20
Do a google search - there are some good downloads out there that discuss the pros and cons of the various pile driving formulas (and I am not going into the fact that many don't like them!).  Olson and Flaate back in the 60s did a number of papers that studied the various formulas in detail.  Gates and the Danish seem the best (from memory):

http://www.google.co.id/search?num=100&hl=en&q=Flaate+dynamic+formula+piles&btnG=Search&meta=

 
jdonville (Geotechnical)
29 Sep 09 20:59
Gates is promulgated by AASHTO/FHWA as the "best" method. Produces results similar to wave equation method.

Jeff
 
vulcanhammer (Geotechnical)
7 Oct 09 23:20
FHWA has adopted Gates as its preferred formula, but I generally use it only as a starting point, to proceed into the wave equation from there.  That software (it's old, I know) is at

http://www.vulcanhammer.info/drivability/weap-spile.php

http://www.pz27.net

foreng (Civil/Environmental)
8 Oct 09 12:28
The sites are quite remote 1000's of KM away from nearest PDA. Gates seems to provide a reasonable alternative to ENR. I've noted that the capacity requirements appear to less stringent or volatile with Gates in most cases.

When I compared the factored equations ENR @ FS=3, ENR @ FS=6, and Gates @ FS=3.5, the results are all over the map. The gates formula seems to be more stable.
The ENR @ FS=3 and Gates seem to be correlate up to around 300 KN at lower energy ratings, and up to 600 KN and higher values. Can anyone give recommendation on when to not apply equations, i.e. (less the 400-500 KN) See attachments.
 
foreng (Civil/Environmental)
8 Oct 09 12:32
lat post should of read, (i.e. only at ratings less the 400-500 KN)

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!

Close Box

Join Eng-Tips® Today!

Join your peers on the Internet's largest technical engineering professional community.
It's easy to join and it's free.

Here's Why Members Love Eng-Tips Forums:

Register now while it's still free!

Already a member? Close this window and log in.

Join Us             Close