Assessment of the Integrity of Piles by Impedance Log Technique

Jiunnren Lai1, a, Chih-Peng Yu1,b and Shu-Tao Liao2,c

1

Chaoyang Univ. of Tech., 168 Gifeng E. Rd., Wufeng, Taichung County, Taiwan
2

Chunghwa Univ., 707, Sec.2, WuFu Rd., Hsinchu, Taiwan

jrlai@cyut.edu.tw, bcpyu@cyut.edu.tw, cshutao@ccu.edu.tw

Keywords: Integrity, Piles, Impedance, Stress wave.

Abstract. The objective of this paper is to investigate the capabilities of the Impedance Log (IL)
method in profiling the geometry of a pile along its length. The main idea of this method is to
introduce a transient stress wave into the pile and then utilize the reflected signals to obtain the
impedance profile of the pile. The impedance profile can then be used to recover the cross-sectional
profile (or material property) along the length of the pile. Any anomaly, which results in changes in
impedance, would be detected by this method.
To gain an insight into the Impedance Log nondestructive evaluation technique, this paper starts
with reviewing its theoretical background. A numerical program was developed to convert the time
domain velocity waveform recorded at pile head into the impedance profile of the pile. Four model
piles with plan defects of weak zones and necks were constructed and tested. Results of these tests
show that interpretation of signals using the proposed method is more straightforward than the other
traditional methods such as the Sonic Echo method or the Impulse Response method. It is concluded
that the Impedance Log method is a tool with high potential for evaluating the integrity of piles.
Introduction
Evaluating the integrity of drilled shafts or driven piles has long been recognized as an important
means for quality control in the construction industry [1]. For this purpose, several nondestructive
testing techniques such as the Impact Echo (IE) [2], the Impulse Response (IR) [3,4], the Sonic Echo
(SE) [5], the Cross-hole Sonic Logging (CSL) [1], and the Parallel Seismic (PS) [6] methods have
been developed to access the integrity of piles. These methods were usually classified into two groups,
surface reflection and direct transmission methods. Surface reflection methods are usually more
economic, but they are unable to provide a complete picture of a pile with multiple defects. Direct
transmission methods may diagnose a pile through its length in a more detail yet also more expensive
way.
Of the NDE methods mentioned above, the SE
and IR methods are of particular interest here
because of their close relationship with the
Impedance Log method. As shown schematically in
Fig. 1, both methods involve impacting the top of a
pile with a hammer to introduce a downward
traveling transient stress wave. When the stress
wave reaches a defect, such as a neck or a bulge, or
the bottom of the pile, it will be reflected back to the
pile head and can be recorded by a receiver. The SE
method requires only the particle response history to
perform integrity analysis. An idealized velocity
waveform of a pile containing a bulge and a neck is
illustrated in Fig. 2, stress waves reflected from the
defects or the bottom of the pile can easily be Fig.1 Schematic drawing of SE/IR test on a pile.
identified.

For the IR method, the impact force and the

Neck
Bottom
particle velocity response must be both measured
versus time on the impacted surface. These two
time histories are then transformed to the
Bulge
frequency domain using the Fast Fourier
Transform (FFT). The mechanical admittance (or
mobility) of the pile is defined as the ratio of the
amplitudes of the particle velocity and the force in
Fig.2 Velocity time history of SE method
the frequency domain. From the repeated pattern
in the mobility curve (Fig. 3) one can usually find
the existence of defects or bottom [7].
Bulge
Bottom
In the last decade, a relatively new method for
evaluating the integrity of piles, the Impedance
Log (IL) method was proposed and briefly
described by Paquet [8,9]. The reported main
capability of this method is to recover the changes
of the cross-sectional area of the pile by obtaining
its impedance as a function of the distance from
Fig.3 Mobility profiles of IR method
the pile head. In other words, the method provides
the geometric profile of the pile and its variation with depth. This is indeed the major purpose that a
nondestructive testing technique for piles is intended to achieve. However, research results related to
this method, either of a theoretical or an experimental nature [10], are still scarce.
Theoretical Background of the IL Method
(a)

F1(t)
V1(t)

(b)

F2 (t)
V2 (t)

Referring to Fig. 4, the procedures for

application of the IL method can be summarized
as follows [8]:
(1)Perform the Impulse Response test on the
SOIL
pile to be evaluated. Use the particle velocity
response and the force functions in the
frequency domain, V1( f ) and F1( f ), to
obtain the mobility curve of this target pile,
as denoted by V1( f ) / F1( f ).
(2)Generate the theoretical mobility curve of a Fig. 4 SE/IR tests on (a) a practical pile and
(b) a fictitious defect-free pile of infinite length
fictitious pile, which has the same nominal
diameter and same geometric configuration
as the target pile but is defect-free and infinitely long. This curve is denoted by V2( f ) / F2( f ).
(3)A new mobility curve, V3( f ) / F3( f ), that contains only the effect of reflections from defects and
from the end of the shaft, can then be obtained by subtracting the experimental and theoretical
mobility functions.
V3( f ) / F3 ( f ) = V1( f ) / F1( f ) - V2( f ) / F2( f )

(1)

(4)Perform the inverse FFT on V3( f ) / F3( f ) to obtain the relative reflectogram X(t) in the time
domain. The relative reflectogram is then scaled to get the reflection coefficient, r(t). The
impedance of the pile, as a function of time, can then be determined through
t

Z ( t ) = Z 0 exp[ 2 r ( ) d ]
0

(2)

where Z0 = E0 A0 / Cp is the impedance at the pile head, E0 and A0 are Youngs modulus and the
cross-sectional area of the pile, and Cp is the wave propagation velocity in the pile.
(5)Finally the time function of the impedance Z(t) can be converted to the space function Z(x) using
the equation x=Cpt, where x is the distance measured from the pile head. The cross-sectional area
of the pile at any distance from the top can thus be recovered using the impedance function Z(x).
Earlier work [11] had concluded that where a free-end boundary condition is encountered, the
amplitude of the recorded response is actually twice that of the reflected wave. In this case, Eq. 2
should be further modified to be:
Z ( t ) = Z 0 exp [

r ( ) d ]

(3)

The normalized reflection coefficient r(t) can be obtained from the following equation:
Z
r (t ) o
po Am

v R (t )

(4)

Where po Am is the area of the fictitious impulse, and vR(t) can be estimated from the velocity time
history recorded in the SE method or from the mobility data computed in the IR method.
Base on Eqs. 3 and 4, a numerical program was developed to convert the time domain velocity
waveform recorded at pile head into the impedance profile of the pile. Comparison between results of
these three NDT pile integrity testing methods will be discussed in the flowing sections.
Testing Program

As shown schematically in Fig. 5, four 3 meters long, 0.3-m in diameter concrete model piles were
constructed for this study. Among these four piles, pile P1 is an intact pile. Pile P2 contains a
10cm-long, 2-cm deep necking (about 25% cross-sectional area reduction), at a distance of 1.2 meter
below the pile head. Pile P3 contains a 10-cm-thick weak zone (compressive wave velocity, Cp , of
this poor quality concrete is about 80% of the normal value) also at 1.2 meter below the pile head. Pile
P4 contains two 10cm-long necking defects. The first necking has 25% cross-sectional area reduction,
while the cross-sectional area reduction of the second necking is about 36%.

1.2 m

1.2 m

1.2 m

30cm

10 cm

2.0 cm
necking

10 cm

weak
zone

10 cm

(a) Intact Pile

P2

(b) Single Neck Pile

P3

(c) Weak Zone Pile

10 cm

3.0 cm
necking

0.8 m

2.0 cm
necking

3.0 m
P1

P4

(d) Double Neck Pile

Fig. 5 Schematic drawing of model piles tested in this paper

All these four model piles were tested using the SE, IR, and IL nondestructive testing techniques.
Results of these tests will be discussed in the next section.
Test Results
Sonic Echo Method. The velocity waveforms recorded at the head of the four model piles from the
SE test are shown in Figs. 6a - 6d. For the intact pile (P1), the stress wave reflected from the bottom
of the pile (circled in Fig. 6a) can easily be identified. For the two model piles contain single defect
(P2 and P3), signal reflected from the defect (boxed in Figs. 6b and 6c), as well as signal reflected
from the bottom (circled) can both be identified. However, there are also reflected signals, shown as
question mark in Figs. 6b and 6c, maybe misidentified as defects. On the other hand, for the pile
contains double necking defects (P4), only the signal reflected from the bottom of the pile can be
identified. Signals reflected from the two defects were all mixed together, thus increase the difficulty
in identifying them (Fig. 6d).
20

Velocity (10 m/s)

-3

-3

Velocity (10 m/s)

10

-10
-20

(a) Intact Pile

0

-3

10
0

-10
-20

(b) Single Neck Pile

0

Elapsed Time (10 sec)

-0.06

-3

10

Velocity (10 m/s)

-0.08

-3

Velocity ( m/s)

Elapsed Time (10 sec)

-0.10

(c) Weak Zone Pile

-0.12
0

-3

Elapsed Time (10 sec)

-10
-20
(d) Double Neck Pile

-30
0

-3

Elapsed Time(10 sec)

Fig. 6 Velocity waveforms of model piles from the Sonic Echo test
Impulse Response Method. The mobility spectra of the four model piles from the IR test are shown
in Figs. 7a to 7d, respectively. For the intact pile (P1), the periodical event of stress wave reflected
from the bottom can be seen as shown in Fig. 7a. For the two piles contain single defect (P2 and P3),
both the periodical events of defect and bottom can be seen (Fig. 7b and 7c). For the double necking
pile (P4), only the periodical events of the bottom and the first necking defect can be identified as
shown in Fig. 7d. It should be noted that identification of these periodical events requires some
experience with the IR test. Furthermore, the IR method and the SE method can only obtain
information about the location of a defect, but not the magnitude of the defect.
Impedance Log Method. The Impedance profiles of the four model piles from the IL test are shown
in Figs. 8a to 8d. For the intact pile P1, the IL method can obtain the exact profile of this model pile
(Fig. 8a). For piles P2 and P3 that contain single defect, except for a little lag, the impedance profiles
from the IL test are very similar to the actual geometry of the two piles (Figs. 8b and 8c). Even for the
pile with double necking defects (P4), the impedance profiles from the IL test are still very close to
the actual geometry except for the little delay. Furthermore, the magnitude of defect, express in the
form of change in impedance can also be determined by the IL method. In comparison to the other

(a) Intact Pile

-6

f of bottom

Mobility (10 m/s2)

-6

Mobility (10 m/s )

3
2
1
0

(b) Single Neck Pile

8
f of bottom

6
4
2
0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

Frequency (Hz)
(c) Weak Zone Pile

25

-6

f of bottom

20

2000

f of weak zone

15
10
5

3.0

3000

4000

5000

(d) Double Neck Pile

30

1000

Frequency (Hz)
Mobility (10 m/s )

-6

Mobility (10 m/s )

f of neck

2.5
2.0

f of bottom

f of first neck

1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

Frequency (Hz)

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

Frequency (Hz)

Fig. 7 Mobility spectra of model piles from the Impulse Response test
(a) Intact Pile

0.8
0.4

Tested Profile
Actual Geometry

1.2

Impedance Ratio

Impedance Ratio

1.2

0.0

(b) Single Neck Pile

0.8
0.4

Tested Profile
Actual Geometry
0.0

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

0.0

Distance from Pile Head (m)

(c) Weak Zone Pile

0.8
0.4

Tested Profile
Actual Geometry
0.0

1.2

Impedance Ratio

Impedance Ratio

1.2

1.0

2.0

3.0

Distance from Pile Head (m)

(d) Double Neck Pile

0.8
0.4

Tested Profile
Actual Geometry

0.0
0.0

1.0

2.0

Distance from Pile Head (m)

3.0

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

Distance from Pile Head (m)

Fig. 8 Impedance profiles of model piles from the Impedance Log test
two traditional pile integrity testing methods such as the SE method and the IR method mentioned
above, interpretation of the test results is much straight forward and requires less experience,
especially for piles with multiple defects.
Summary and Conclusion

In this paper the theoretical background for the Impedance Log method was first presented and then
results of a series of tests on model piles were shown to demonstrate the capability of this method in
recovering the profiles of defective piles. From the available results the ability of this method to
evaluate the integrity of individual pile seems very promising.
Based on the results of this study, the following conclusions can be made:

1. The traditional Sonic Echo and the Impulse Response pile integrity testing methods can only
detect the location of single defect inside the model piles. Furthermore, interpretation of signal
from these two tests requires some experience.
2. The Impulse Response method not only can detect the location of defects but also show the
magnitude of defects inside the model piles.
3. Interpretation of signals using the IL method is more straightforward and requires less experience,
especially for piles with multiple defects.
It is thus concluded that the Impedance Log method is a tool with high potential for evaluating the
integrity of piles.
Acknowledgement

The work presented in this paper is sponsored by the National Science Council of Taiwan under
Grant No. NSC-92-2211-E324-011 and NSC-93-2211-E324-002. The authors wish to thank the NSC
for its continuing support for research in the area of nondestructive testing on the integrity of piles.
References

[1] Baker, C.N., Jr., Drumright, E.E., Mensah, F.D., Parikh, G., & Ealy, C.D.: Integrity Testing of
Foundations, Transportation Research Record, No. 1331 (1991), pp.28-35.
[2] Lin, Y., Sansalone & M., Carino, N.J.: Geotechnical Testing Journal, Vol.14, No. 2 (1997),
pp.121-137.
[3] Finno, R.J. & Gassman, S.L.: Journal of Geotechnical and Enviromental Engineering, ASCE,
Vol.124, No. 10 (1998), pp.965-975.
[4] Liao, S. T. & Roesset, J. M.: International Journal for Numerical and Analytical Methods in
Geomechanics, 21, No. 4 (1997), pp. 255-275..
[5] Rausche, F., Shen, R.K., & Likins, G. E., Jr.: Integrity Testing of Foundations, Transportation
Research Record, No. 1331 (1991), pp.21-27.
[6] Stein, R. T.: Civil Engineering, April (1982), pp.54-59.
[7] Liao, S.T., Roesset, J.M., & Chen, C.H.: Proceedings of the Sixth East Asia-Pacific Conference
on Structural Engineering and Construction, Taipei, Taiwan, Jan. (1998), pp.1997-2003.
[8] Paquet, J.: Proceedings of the International Colloquium on Deep Foundations, Paris, March
(1991), pp. 1-10.
[9] Paquet, J.: Piling: European Practice and Wordwide Trends, Tthomas Telford, London (1992),
pp.206-216.
[10] Davis, A. G. & Hertlein, B. H.: Integrity Testing of Foundations, Transportation Research
Record, No. 1331 (1991), pp.15-20.
[11] Yu, C.P. & Liao, S.T.: Proceedings of the Fifth Far-East Conference on Nondestructive Testing,
Kenting, Taiwan, Nov. (1999), pp.227-233.