CAPWAP

Models, Procedures, Parameters

Load (kN) Pile Top

Bottom
0.0 1000.0 2000.0 3000.0 4000.0
0.00

Ru = 3425.2 kN
Rs = 1458.6 kN
5.00 Rb = 1966.6 kN
Dy = 18.8 mm
Dx = 18.8 mm

10.00

15.00

20.00

2008 - GRL Engineers, Inc. - Pile Dynamics, Inc.

CAPWAP
CAse Pile Wave Analysis Program
since 1969

Automatic (Univac Main Frame – 3 sec/trial) until 1974

Interactive (Varian, Minc, Early PC’s – 60 to 170 sec/trial)
Automatic and interactive since 1988 (2 sec/trial)
Windows compatible since 1995 (0.02 sec/trial?)
 CAPWAP is a
Signal Matching Program
(System Identification Analysis or Reverse Analysis)

Load System Movement

•We
W measured
d Load
L d and
d Movement.
M t
•We don’t know the
“System”, i.e., the Soil Model Parameters

We could plot Measured Force

vs Measured Displacement, but…
…. The results would be meaningless, because the
dynamic quantities include:
•Impact and wave effects
•Static resistance effects
•Dynamic
D i resistance
i t effects
ff t
1500

1250
op force in kN

1000

750
Pile to

500

250

0
0 5 10 15 20 25
Pile top displacement in mm

For End Bearing Piles, we can solve

in closed form with estimated damping
Load (kips)
Load (kips)
0.0 225.0 450.0 675.0 900.0
0.00
Calculate
RTL
RTL, RMX
0.05 dtoe (from vtoe);
RX7
plot RTL, RMX
0.10 vs dtoe

PEBWAP is
0.15 available in
CAPWAP
Toe Set (inches)
0.20
 In contrast:

CAPWAP calculates the damping resistance

and the resistance distribution and the soil
stiffness in an iterative procedure.

WDM
THE CAPWAP METHOD
WUM
WUC
1 Set up
p pile
p and soil model and
assume Rshaft and Rtoe

2 Apply measured WDM to pile model at top

and calculate complementary WUC

3 Compare
p WUC with measured WUM
Rshaft
4 Adjust Rshaft and Rtoe

5 If not satisfactory Repeat until match

is satisfactory
match: Go to Step 2
Rtoe
 Final match (good)

Adjustments

First try (poor)

CAPWAP is an iterative process

The Pile Model

The Pile is divided in Np
uniform pile segments of
approximately
pp y 1 m length.
g
Segment lengths are
Fun
chosen for equal time
Fdo
i
i increment ∆t = ∆Li/ci.
∆Li
Seg.. i
Seg Each Segment has:
Fdn Rui
i
Fuo impedance Zi,,= EiAi/ci ,
i
Rdi mass mi = Zi ∆t and
Ri
stiffness ki = Zi/∆t .
 The Combined Pile and Soil Model
t
Pile Model: Soil segment length:
t LSi = Nfac Li
Impedance
p
Zi = EiAi/ci t

Pile t
Segment
Length Li t Spring (static resistance)
Dashpot
p (dynamic
( y resistance))
Wave Travel t
time in Pile
t = Li/ci t

The Basic
CAPWAP
Rui, qi Ji
Soil Model

tG

End Rt, qt JT
Shaft Resistance,
Bearing Ns times
 Some
CAPWAP
Soil Model Ji
Rui, qi
Extensions
ms
mSP
JSK
tG
mPL
Rt, qt Add Radiation Damping
JT
mt Inertia Resistance

JBT

Static Shaft Resistance Model

Rs

Ru,s
us

Rs

u
Rs
quake, qs unloading
quake, qs cs

Ru,n : UN = -Ru,n/Ru,s
CAPWAP Static Toe Resistance Model

Rt
Ru,toe

Rt

quake, qt
d
unloading
quake, qt ct

Toe gap: tg

Pile CAPWAP Damping Model

Viscous (Option=0)
Rd = JC Z v = RU JS v
velocity Js = Jc Z/RU
v
Smith (Option=1)
Rd = RS JS v

Combined (Option=2)
Rd = RS JS v until
til RS = RU

Rd = RU JS v after RU has
been reached
 CAPWAP Unknowns – in General
Rui: NS values at shaft +1 value at toe
qi: NS values at shaft +1 value at toe
Ji: NS values at shaft +1 value at toe
1 shaft + 1 toe unloading quake multiplier
1 shaft unloading level + 1 toe plug + 1 toe gap
1 toe damping option + 4 rad
rad. damping values

Total 3 NS + 13 unknowns
(plus other trimming parameters)
For 20 m pile penetration: 43 unknowns

CAPWAP Unknowns - Normally

Main Parameters
Rui: NS values at shaft +1 value at toe
Ji: 1 value
l att shaft
h ft +1 value
l att ttoe
qi: 1 value at shaft +1 value at toe
Major Trimming Parameters
qunloading: 1 value at shaft +1 value at toe
Shaft unloading level: 1 value

Total NS + 8 unknowns
For 20 m pile penetration: 18 unknowns
 CAPWAP Record Divisions

Shaft resistance begins to develop

Fx

Toe res. begins, total capacity develops

Unloading period begins

tr

CAPWAP Record Divisions

2L/c – Shaft Res. Toe Res. and total

Distr. develops
Capacity develops

Unloading develops

tr
 Match Quality Time periods

Period I: 2L/c III: tr+5ms IV: 25 ms

II:
tr+3ms

tr

CAPWAP Match Quality

MQ is the sum of the absolute values of differences
between computed and measured values at individual
points in time divided by
p y the maximum ppile top
p force
plus a blow count penalty, BCP (BCP > 0)

MQ = Periodtime[FM -FC]/FX  + BCP

BCP = 0 if ∆SET < 1 mm

BCP = ∆SET - 1 if ∆SET ≥ 1
∆SET =  Measured Set – Computed Set 
 Signal Matching Example

First Trial Analysis (Lousy Match)

Input v
Matching F
or

Input F
Matching v
or

Input F
Matching F
 Working with Wave
Wave--Up
RU = 782 kips
RT = 68 kips
JS/JT = .05/.15 s/ft
(JCS/JCT = .75/.22)
QS/QT = .10/.12”
10/ 12”

RU = 782 kips
RT = 400 kips

RU = 782 kips
RT = 600 ki
kips

RU = 782 kips
RT = 705 kips
JS/JT = .45/.02 s/ft
QS/QT = .10/.12”

Working with Wave

Wave--Up
RU/RT = 782/705 kips
JS/JT = .45/.02 s/ft
(JCS/JCT = .75/.22)
QS/QT = .10/.12”

RU/RT = 782/705 kips

JS/JT = .30/.05 s/ft
(JCS/JCT = .50/.76)

RU/RT = 782/
782/702
702 kips Prev.

JS/JT = .29/.05 s/ft

(JCS/JCT = .50/.76)
 Working with Wave
Wave--Up
RU/RT = 782/702 kips
JS/JT = .29/.05 s/ft
(JCS/JCT = .50/.76)

RU/RT = 765/686 kips

JS/JT = .28/.06 s/ft
(JCS/JCT = .48/.82)

RU/RT = 765/686 kips

JS/JT = .26/.07 s/ft
(JCS/JCT = .44/.97)
QS/QT = .06/.12”
Unloading Parameters
Pretty good match: let’s quit

Plotted Output
 Table Output
Ri, qi, Ji Extrema
EX2; CLARK; SOFT-ROCK; Pile: EX-2 Test: 02-Jun-1993 EX2; CLARK; SOFT-ROCK; Pile: EX-2 Test: 02-Jun-1993
MKT DE 70B, HP 14 X 89; Blow: 627 CAPWAP® 2003-1 MKT DE 70B, HP 14 X 89; Blow: 627 CAPWAP® 2003-1
GRL Engineers, Inc.
GRL Engineers, Inc.

CAPWAP FINAL RESULTS

EXTREMA TABLE
Total CAPWAP Capacity: 764.6; along Shaft 79.5; at Toe 685.1 kips
Pile Dist. max. min. max. max. max. max. max.
Sgmnt Below Force Force Comp. Tens. Trnsfd. Veloc. Displ.
No. Gages Stress Stress Energy
ft ft kips kips kips kips/ft ksf s/ft in
ft kips kips ksi ksi kip-ft ft/s in
764.6
1 6.7 4.2 2.0 762.6 2.0 0.30 0.06 0.255 0.060 1 3.4 586.4 -24.4 22.549 -0.937 23.53 11.7 0.738
2 13.5 11.0 1.0 761.6 3.0 0.15 0.03 0.255 0.060 2 6.7 588.7 -24.1 22.635 -0.927 23.40 11.6 0.725
3 20.2 17.7 1.0 760.6 4.0 0.15 0.03 0.255 0.060 4 13.5 585.7 -22.1 22.520 -0.849 22.79 11.5 0.699
4 26.9 24.4 1.0 759.6 5.0 0.15 0.03 0.255 0.060 6 20.2 587.3 -21.1 22.583 -0.810 22.30 11.4 0.670
5 33.7 31.2 2.0 757.6 7.0 0.30 0.06 0.255 0.060 8 26.9 590.1 -19.6 22.691 -0.753 21.73 11.2 0.637
6 40.4 37.9 3.0 754.6 10.0 0.45 0.10 0.255 0.060
7 47.1 44.6 4.0 750.6 14.0 0.59 0.13 0.255 0.060
10 33.7 594.8 -18.4 22.870 -0.706 21.02 11.0 0.600
8 53.8 51.3 18.6 732.0 32.6 2.76 0.59 0.255 0.060 11 37.0 592.6 -17.0 22.787 -0.653 20.42 10.9 0.579
9 60.6 58.1 1.0 731.0 33.6 0.15 0.03 0.255 0.060 12 40.4 598.9 -17.2 23.029 -0.661 20.09 10.8 0.559
10 67.3 64.8 1.0 730.0 34.6 0.15 0.03 0.255 0.060 13 43.8 596.6 -15.3 22.940 -0.590 19.39 10.6 0.539
11 74.0 71.5 1.0 729.0 35.6 0.15 0.03 0.255 0.060 14 47.1 607.0 -16.4 23.339 -0.629 19.05 10.4 0.518
12 80.8 78.3 4.9 724.1 40.5 0.73 0.16 0.255 0.060 15 50.5 602.3 -15.2 23.161 -0.585 18.21 10.2 0.496
13 87.5 85.0 39.1 685.1 79.5 5.80 1.24 0.255 0.060 16 53.8 608.4 -15.4 23.393 -0.592 17.79 10.0 0.473
17 57.2 568.4 -7.2 21.857 -0.276 15.45 9.9 0.449
Avg. Skin 6.1 0.94 0.19 0.255 0.060 18 60.6 576.1 -17.7 22.152 -0.682 14.91 9.8 0.423
Toe 685.1 503.31 0.066 0.120 19 63.9 589.0 -27.0 22.650 -1.039 14.16 9.7 0.394
20 67.3 624.9 -35.8 24.028 -1.376 13.38 9.6 0.363
Soil Model Parameters/Extensions Skin Toe 21 70.7 668.4 -42.0 25.701 -1.613 12.39 9.4 0.329
22 74.0 718.3 -48.2 27.622 -1.852 11.36 9.2 0.293
Case Damping Factor 0.437 0.971 23 77.4 756.7 -54.5 29.095 -2.095 10.14 8.8 0.255
Unloading Quake (% of loading quake) 99 100
24 80.8 785.1 -61.7
61.7 30.188 -2.371
2.371 8.94 8.1 0.216
Reloading Level (% of Ru) 100 100
25 84.1 793.0 -61.2 30.492 -2.355 7.59 6.8 0.178
Unloading Level (% of Ru) 78
26 87.5 806.4 -63.8 31.007 -2.451 6.21 5.3 0.140

Absolute 87.5 31.007 (T = 27.2 ms)

87.5 -2.451 (T = 44.2 ms)
CAPWAP match quality: 2.88 (Wave Up Match)
Observed: final set = 0.050 in; blow count = 240 b/ft
Observed: final set = 0.009 in; blow count = 1323 b/ft
CASE METHOD
J = = 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
RS1 830.3 799.1 767.8 736.6 705.3 674.1 642.9 611.6 580.4 549.2
RMX 862.6 839.8 821.8 808.3 795.0 782.0 769.8 757.8 745.7 733.7
RSU 836.4 805.8 775.2 744.6 713.9 683.3 652.7 622.1 591.4 560.8

Case Method RAU= 595.0 (kips);

Current CAPWAP Ru=

RA2= 757.7 (kips)

764.6 (kips); Corresponding J(Rs)= 0.21; J(Rx)=0.64

ft/s ft/s kips kips kips in in kip-ft kips

11.95 0.00 554.8 587.9 587.9 0.747 0.054 23.7 709.9

CAPWAP vs PEBWAP Result

Load (kips)
0.0 225.0 450.0 675.0 900.0
0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20
Recommended CAPWAP Procedure
1. Data input: select the proper record
1. Data adjustment (normally automatic)
2. Build pile model (normally automatic)
1. Improve resistance distribution
1. Check quake (particularly toe effect)
2. Check damping effects
3. Check unloading effects
2. Repeat
3. Repeat and find “absolutely” best match quality
2. Produce output

Record Selection - Quality

1. Use record of good quality

• Good proportionality
• No electronic or mechanical noise
• Integrates out to final set and zero velocity
• Force returns to zero
• Short rise time
2nd to Last Blow:
•Proportionality: OK
•Integration:
g Not so
good

Last Blow:
•Proportionality OK
•Integration
g OK
•Energy OK
 Check individual traces:
•Moderate
M d B di  OK
t Bending
•Velocities track

Record Selection - Quality

2. Use record with appropriate energy

• Low energy for easy driving
• High energy for hard driving
 Record Selection – Energy Level

a) For high resistance situation (set less

than 3 mm/blow), find high energy/high
force record
b) For low resistance (set more than 10
mm/blow), find low energy/low force record
c)) Consider
C id loss
l off setup
t or relaxation
l ti for
f
restrike blow selection

Setup Model and Begin Matching

• Pile and soil model are normally

done automatically (except nonnon--
uniform piles)
• Data adjustment (hopefully automatic
or not needed)
• Initial set of soil parameters
(automatic)
 Build Pile Model
1. Use 1 m pile segments in most cases
2. For records with very high frequency
content
t t (SPT)
(SPT), use shorter
h t pile
il segments
t -
no point using less than .25 m segment
length (
(t = .05 to .06 ms)
3. Use 2 m soil segments in most cases
4 Use
4. U 1 1m soil
il segments
t where
h shallow
h ll
penetrations would yield less than 4 soil
segments or when very good resolution is
needed and warranted.

First Trial Analysis: Ru = Case Method

J=0.16/0.5 s/m; qs=2.5 mm; qt=D/120; Ri automatic
2. Determine resistance distribution from difference
between calculated and measured wave
wave--up

Changed
1: 59 to 10
2: 110 to 10

Determine resistance distribution from difference

between calculated and measured wave
wave--up

Changed
3: 163 to 100
4: 218 to 100
5: 273 to 100
Determine resistance distribution from difference
between calculated and measured wave
wave--up

Used AF

Determine resistance distribution from difference

between calculated and measured wave
wave--up

Used Further
Manual
Improvements
 Adjust CAPWAP variables

Used AQ
adjusting
damping,
quakes, toe and
unloading
parameters

Iterate for total capacity, CAPWAP Variables,

damping mode, toe resistance magnitude

Check
C ec tota
total
capacity (ARD),
Recheck AQ
Check toe Smith
damping and
resistance
Toe quake
sensitivity

Qt: 0.2  0.71

(inch)
Shaft damping sensitivity

Js: 0.336  0.200 (s/ft)

 Matching procedure – the easy part
1. Resistance distribution (AF)
2. Damping parameter adjustments (AQ)
3
3. Quake
Q k adjustments
dj t t (AQ)
4. Unloading parameters (AQ)
5. Did Match Improve? Then go back to 1.
6. Static resistance exchange (ARD or RD); go
back to 1.
7. Vary toe/shaft resistance (also try AT); assure
reasonable resistance distribution; go to 1.

Difficulties? Try Special Procedures

1. Poor Match?
1. You may try AC now
2. Check adjustments
j
3. Check pile model including wave speed
4. Cracked piles use impedance reduction or slacks
5. For open ended pipes or H H--piles try increased impedance or PS
6. Flexible friction pile – try RSA and check convergence; keep RSA
if match is improved
2. Very high damping?
1. In clay – no worries
2. drilled shafts with low velocities – no worries
3. In granular soil – try radiation damping: keep if improved match
possible
 Final considerations
• You tried everything
• Resistance distribution reasonable
• Agreement with other methods
reasonable
• Match better than 5
• You can quit and do output

Summary of CAPWAP’s
Automatic Features
AC Automatic CAPWAP (after user initialization)
AF Calculate shaft resistance parameters
AQ Select and change CW quantities for BM
AQ Change current CW quantity for BM
AQ--Std
AQ Change CW standard quantities* for BM
AT Calculate a set of toe parameters
ARD Static/dynamic resistance exchange for with
user interaction for BM
ARDQ Quick Static/dynamic resistance exchange

*CW standard quantities: SS, ST, QS, QT, TG, UN, CS, CT
 Output

CAPWAP FINAL RESULTS

Total CAPWAP Capacity: 804.4; along Shaft 96.4; at Toe 708.0 kips
Soil
Sgmnt
No.
Dist.
Below
Gages
Depth
Below
Grade
Ru Force
in Pile
Sum Unit Unit
of Resist. Resist.
Ru (Depth) (Area)
Smith
Damping
Factor
Quake
Output Tables:
ft ft kips kips kips kips/ft ksf s/ft in

1
2
79.4
86.0
5.8
12.4
16.9
9.5
804.4
787.5
778.0
16.9
26.4
2.55
1.44
0.27
0.15
0.243
0.243
0.100
0.100
Calculated Soil
3 92.6 19.0 1.9 776.1 28.3 0.29 0.03 0.243 0.100
4
5
6
99.2
105.8
112.5
25.7
32.3
38.9
0.0
0.0
0.0
776.1
776.1
776.1
28.3
28.3
28.3
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.100
0.100
0.100
Model
7 119.1 45.5 6.5 769.6 34.8 0.98 0.10 0.243 0.100
8 125.7 52.1 11.3 758.3 46.1 1.71 0.18 0.243 0.100
9 132.3 58.7 11.3 747.0 57.4 1.71 0.18 0.243 0.100
10 138.9 65.3 6.5 740.5 63.9 0.98 0.10 0.243 0.100
11 145.5 72.0 6.5 734.0 70.4 0.98 0.10 0.243 0.100

Ri, ΣRi, Ri/∆L, Ri/Ai,

12 152.2 78.6 6.5 727.5 76.9 0.98 0.10 0.243 0.100
13 158.8 85.2 6.5 721.0 83.4 0.98 0.10 0.243 0.100
14 165.4 91.8 6.5 714.5 89.9 0.98 0.10 0.243 0.100
15

Avg. Skin
172.0 98.4 6.5

6.4
708.0 96.4 0.98

0.98
0.10

0.10
0.243

0.243
0.100

0.100
Ji, qi
Toe 708.0 100.16 0.092 0.830 +
S il MModel
Soil d l PParameters/Extensions

Case Damping Factor

t /E t i Ski
Skin

0.111
T
Toe

0.309 Smith Type

S il Model
Soil M d l Extensions
E i
Reloading Level (% of Ru) 100 100
Unloading Level (% of Ru) 75
Resistance Gap (included in Toe Quake) (in) 0.030

CAPWAP match quality: 3.96(Wave Up Match)

Observed: final set = 0.197 in; blow count = 61 b/ft
Computed: final set = 0.121 in; blow count = 100 b/ft
 EXTREMA TABLE

Pile Dist. max. min. max. max. max. max. max.

Output Tables:
Sgmnt Below Force Force Comp. Tens. Trnsfd. Veloc. Displ.
No. Gages Stress Stress Energy
ft kips kips ksi ksi kip-ft ft/s in
1 3.3 1419.4 -559.9 2.914 -1.150 69.27 6.7 1.301

Extrema,
2 6.6 1419.4 -566.2 2.914 -1.163 69.21 6.7 1.296
5 16.5 1420.0 -551.5 2.915 -1.132 69.00 6.7 1.277
8 26.5 1419.5 -518.3 2.914 -1.064 68.68 6.7 1.253
11 36.4 1418.3 -476.7 2.912 -0.979 68.25 6.7 1.225
14 46.3 1419.8 -434.1 2.915 -0.891 67.67 6.7 1.195
17 56.2 1431.7 -394.7 2.939 -0.810 66.93 6.7 1.161

Case Method
20 66.2 1440.1 -353.3 2.957 -0.725 65.98 6.6 1.126
23 76.1 1442.1 -297.7 2.961 -0.611 64.73 6.6 1.106
26 86.0 1401.1 -267.7 2.877 -0.550 60.86 6.6 1.091
29 95 9
95.9 1378 0
1378.0 -196.0
196 0 2 829
2.829 -0.402
0 402 57 21
57.21 6 5
6.5 1 074
1.074
32 105.8 1393.5 -118.1 2.861 -0.242 55.58 6.7 1.054
35 115.8 1404.9 -117.0 2.884 -0.240 55.11 7.2 1.033
38 125.7 1397.5 -107.4 2.869 -0.221 53.35 8.0 1.010
41 135.6 1253.0 -82.1 2.572 -0.169 48.50 8.5 0.985
44 145.5 1079.6 -74.0 2.217 -0.152 46.60 9.6 0.960
47 155.5 954.6 -57.3 1.960 -0.118 43.37 9.8 0.932
48 158.8 873.8 -57.2 1.794 -0.117 43.10 9.2 0.923
49 162.1 843.2 -51.8 1.731 -0.106 41.59 8.8 0.913
50 165.4 790.2 -53.2 1.622 -0.109 41.30 9.0 0.903
51 168.7 813.5 -49.6 1.670 -0.102 39.80 9.1 0.893
52 172.0 865.3 -54.5 1.777 -0.112 39.52 9.0 0.883

Absolute 79.4 2.963 (T = 30.8 ms)

6.6 -1.163 (T = 47.4 ms)

CASE METHOD
J = 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
RS1 666.8 493.6 320.5 147.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
RMX 1060.4 974.9 948.5 922.0 897.9 880.5 874.2 873.5 872.7 871.9
RSU 666.8 493.6 320.5 147.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

RAU= 864.6 (kips); RA2= 891.2 (kips)

Current CAPWAP Ru= 804.4 (kips); Corresponding J(Rs)= 0.00; J(Rx)=1.00

VMX VFN VT1*Z FT1 FMX DMX DFN EMX RLT

ft/s ft/s kips kips kips in in kip-ft kips
6.86 0.00 1221.9 1176.6 1420.4 1.313 0.197 69.5 1104.1

Demo; Pile: p66-rst - H-pile Test: 26-Apr-2006 08:01:

HP14*89; Blow: 4 CAPWAP(R) 2006
GRL Engineers, Inc. OP: jiu

Output Tables: QS
2.520
UN
0.200
CS
0.707
LS
1.000
CAPWAP ANNOTATIONS

JS
2.641
SS
0.652
OSP
0
SK
0.000
MS
0.000
PS
0.000

Annotations
QT TG CT LT JT ST OP BT MT PL
2.848 0.445 0.300 1.000 0.134 0.080 2 0.000 0.000 1.853
RSA PI
0 0.010

TV AC T1 T2 A12 T3 T4 A34
20.5 0.08 0.0 20.5 0.05 20.5 24.5 -3.86

Replay Factor 1 2 Avg.

Force 0.990 0.990 0.990
Veloctiy 1.000 1.010 1.005

Since the data was adjusted through PDA-W,

no other data adjustment parameters available.

To review complex
PE M_BLct C_BLct CI BT MQ FR J_Rx J_Rs
20.5 1049.9 744.6 1.422 0.126 1.50 5000 0.72 0.71

Added E-Modulus Cut-off Toe Quake and Uplift Frictn

Models, Adjustments Quake

0.00
Multiplier
0.00 1.00
Damping Optn
0
Reduct. Factr
0.80

Added Impedance
13
87.56

Added Damping
None

Damping Multipliers
All ones

Capacity Reduction Factors

All ones

Page 1 Analysis: 03-Aug-2006

 In general:

Double Check Results

Adjustments,
Pile Model,
Capacity/Damping

Absolutely best MQ?

Completely automatic searches generally fail because:

• A match achieved with an unreasonable set of

parameters is invalid

• Unusual data characteristics can lead to unreasonable

results

• Pile model adjustments may be required – an

engineer’s decision
 CAPWAP Help Features
HC CAPWAP Variable Help

HR CAPWAP Resistance
vs Displacement Help

HM CAPWAP Match suggestions

CAPWAP Static Analysis Options

Load (kips)
Pile Top
Smoothing 0.0
0.00
300.0 600.0 900.0 1200.0 1500.0 Bottom
Pile Top*

User Capacity Ru =
Bottom*
Bottom

1105.4 kips
0.30

Uplift Test Rs =
Rb =
780.0 kips
325.4 kips
Dy = 0.79 in

Extrapolation 0.60 Dx = 1.41 in

*Extrap.

0.90

1.20

1.50
 CAPWAP Summary
• CAPWAP is a Signal Matching Procedure, which
primarily uses ultimate resistance values, damping
factors and quakes to match computed with measured
pile top quantities.
• Results include
• the total capacity,
• the shaft resistance and end bearing,
• the stiffness of the soil at the pile-
pile-soil interface and
• the damping properties of the soil.
• Calculated soil stiffness plus the known pile stiffness
yield the static load
load--set curve, corresponding to a very
quick load test.