
doi: 10.1139/t2012-051
Our research evaluated current cone penetration test (CPT) pile design methodologies (Schmertmann, Laboratoire Central des Ponts et Chaussées (LCPC), etc.), modified one of these methods (Philipponnat method), and proposed a new one to improve future driven pile designs. This was accomplished by evaluating 14 pile-capacity-design methods based on CPT data. Furthermore, load and resistance factor design (LRFD) resistance factors for each method were calculated using 21 cases from Florida and 28 from Louisiana. The resulting resistance factors were not satisfactory for any of these methods. A new design method — the University of Florida (UF) method — was proposed taking into account cementation, soil type, and historical data. The LRFD resistance factor was also assessed for this new method. The proposed UF method provides better LRFD resistance factors for both Florida and Louisiana soils. It could be a promising alternative for improving pile design.
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 17 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
