Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 35
35 10 9 0.175 log-normal distribution 8 mlnx = -0.270 0.15 lnx = 0.428 7 0.125 Number of Pile-Cases 6 Relative Frequency 0.1 5 normal distribution x = 0.349 4 0.075 3 0.05 mx = 0.832 2 0.025 1 0 0 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 KSX = Ratio of Static Load Test Results over the Pile Capacity Prediction using the -API method Figure 17. Histogram and frequency distributions of Ksx for 52 cases of all pile types (concrete, pipe, H) in clay. Histogram and frequency distributions were prepared for the method performs well for BOR (last restrike) cases and, the identified critical categories in order to examine the match (2) the simple Energy Approach provides a good prediction between the actual data and PDFs. Figures 28 through 35 for pile capacity during driving (EOD). These conclusions present histograms of some of the datasets, along with the suggest that construction delays due to restrike and costly best-fitting normal and lognormal distributions. By and large, signal matching analyses need to be examined in light of the lognormal distributions seem to match the data well and capacity-time dependency and economic factors. hence are the preferable choice to the normal distributions. Moreover, the lognormal distribution matches the low end tail of the cases (lower left corner of the data), where the extreme 3.1.3 Drilled Shafts--Static Analysis overpredicting cases exist. Appendix B presents detailed graphical presentations of the data and various correlations. Table 18 presents a summary of the analysis results used for static capacity evaluation of drilled shafts, compared with the nominal resistance based on the FHWA failure 126.96.36.199 Intermediate Conclusions criterion. The data in Table 18 are limited to cases within two standard deviations of the mean of the initial analysis The data presented in Table 17 and Figures 27 through results of all the drilled shafts. The resistance factors for the 35 lead to the following intermediate conclusions: (1) Sig- different target reliability values were calculated for a ratio nal matching generally underpredicts pile capacity, while of dead load to live load of 2.0. Reviewing the information