278 Vibration Analysis

Ground vibrations induced by impact pile driving.
Massarsch, K.M., and Fellenius, B.H., 2008.

Prediction of ground vibrations induced by
impact pile driving. The Sixth International
Conference on Case Histories in Geotechnical
Engineering, Edited by S. Prakash, Missouri
University of Science and Technology,
August 12-16, 2008, Arlington, Virginia, 38 p.
Ground Vibrations Induced by Impact Pile Driving
K. Rainer Massarsch Bengt H. Fellenius
Vibisol International AB Bengt Fellenius Consultants Inc.
Ferievägen 25, S-161 51 Bromma, Sweden 1905 Alexander St. SE, Calgary, AB, T2G 4J3
E-mail: <[email protected]> E-mail : <[email protected]>
ABSTRACT
The importance of vibration problems induced by pile driving is addressed and guidelines for establishing limiting vibration levels
with respect to buildings with different foundation conditions are presented. Basic concepts of pile dynamics and stress-wave
measurements, which were developed for the determination of driving resistance and bearing capacity of impact-driven piles, provide
important information about ground vibration induced by pile penetration. Dynamic hammer properties and geometry as well as the
driving process are important for ground vibration emission from the pile. It is shown that the energy-based, empirical approach,
which is still widely used by practicing engineers, is too crude for reliable analysis of ground vibrations and can even be misleading.
The main limitations of the energy approach are the assumption that driving energy governs ground vibrations, the omission of
geotechnical conditions and soil resistance, and the uncertainty with regard to input values.
Three types of ground waves are considered when analyzing pile driving: spherical waves emitted from the pile toe, cylindrical waves
propagating laterally from the pile shaft, and surface waves, which are generated by wave refraction at the ground surface at a critical
distance from the pile. These three wave types depend on the velocity-dependent soil resistance at the pile-soil interface. The most
important factor for analyzing ground vibrations is the impedance of each system component, i.e., the pile hammer, the pile, and the
soil along the shaft and at the pile toe. Guidance based on geotechnical conditions is given as to the selection of appropriate
impedance values for different soil types.
A theoretical concept is presented, based on a simplified model that considers the strain-softening effect on wave velocity in the soil,
making it possible to calculate the attenuation of spherical and surface waves and of cylindrical waves generated at the pile toe and the
pile shaft, respectively. The concept is applied to define k-values, which have been used in empirically developed models and
correlated to type of wave and soil properties.
An important aspect of the proposed prediction model is the introduction of vibration transmission efficacy, a factor which limits the
amount of vibration force that can be transmitted along the pile-soil interface (toe and shaft). Results from detailed vibration
measurements are compared to values calculated from the proposed model. The agreement is very good and suggests that the new
model captures the important aspects of ground vibration during penetration of the pile into different soil layers. Finally, based on the
presented model, factors influencing the emission of ground vibrations during impact pile driving are discussed.
INTRODUCTION At present, and in contrast to other aspects of pile dynamics,

the calculation of ground vibrations is still based on crude
Pile driving is an age-tested method of constructing empirical rules developed about 30 years ago. For example,
foundations where adequate ground support is not directly while energy-based relations for calculating pile bearing
available. However, it is also a source of negative environ- capacity (so-called dynamic formulae) have been discarded
mental effects. Noise and air pollution are the most commonly due to their lack of sound theoretical base and, therefore,
expressed concerns, but they are also relatively easily inherent inaccuracy, the concept is still being used to predict
alleviated. In contrast, vibrations originating from the impact ground vibrations due to pile driving. For either application,
driven pile are both difficult to determine beforehand and however, energy-based methods are irrational and neglect
costly to mitigate, while potentially having serious adverse fundamental aspects of dynamic pile-soil interaction (Goble
effect on adjacent structures and their foundations, as well as et al., 1980; Hope and Hiller, 2000; Martin 1980; Massarsch
on vibration-sensitive installations and occupants of buildings. 1992 and 2005; Selby 1991). On the other hand, without an
Not having confidence in how to assess the risk of ground understanding of the fundamental aspects of hammer-pile-soil
vibrations during pile driving, regulatory authorities often feel interaction, it is difficult even with sophisticated numerical
compelled to impose restriction on the use of driven piles and methods to model the dynamic pile penetration and to predict
sheet piles or to choose alternative foundation solutions. ground vibrations. Surprisingly few publications have
1
addressed in a scientific way vibrations due to pile driving as a RISK OF BUILDING DAMAGE
dynamic pile-soil interaction problem. Most published case
records suffer from lack of basic information regarding the When planning a project, where driven piles or sheet piles are
equipment and method of pile driving, dynamic properties of to be used, the design engineer must identify potentially
the pile and the surrounding soil or details about the vibration vulnerable structures and installations in the vicinity of the
response obtainable from dynamic measurements. project site and propose limiting values of ground vibrations.
Geotechnical information is often insufficient and has resulted As part of this task, the risks must be assessed of vibration
in difficulties to interpret results of case histories and to damage to structures and vibration-susceptible installations or
advance empirically developed prediction models. environmental aspects affecting occupants of buildings. As
the prediction of building damage can be complex, theoretical
The current reliance on empirical models puts the construction methods have low reliability. However, it is possible to assess
industry in a precarious situation in the light of recent rapid the potential damage to buildings based on statistical
development of potentially powerful construction equipment observations. This approach is used in codes and standards
for installing piles, such as hydraulic impact hammers and but is limited to the specific conditions in the region where the
advanced vibratory driving equipment, when their use is observations were made. Therefore, local building standards
restricted due to vibration concerns. The advancement of field should be applied with caution in other regions, where pile
measurements and electronic data acquisition systems has now driving methods, geological conditions, and building standards
made it possible to monitor and document not just pile may be different.
penetration resistance and rate, but also the dynamic response
of the ground and of adjacent structures. Sophisticated
computer programs are available to the engineer, offering a Swedish Standard for Pile Driving Vibrations
variety of methods to analyze signals in the time and
frequency domain. The main constraint at present is lack of Several standards pertaining to ground vibrations from traffic
understanding how to interpret results of vibration and construction activities have been developed (Massarsch
measurements. Significant progress has also been made with and Broms 1991). The Swedish Standard SS 02 542 11 (SIS
respect to determining dynamic soil parameters from seismic 1999) is one of the more elaborate standards currently
field and laboratory tests, which were developed primarily for available. It deals with vibrations caused by piling, sheet
earthquake and machine foundation applications, but could piling but also includes soil compaction and provides
also be applied to the analysis of vibrations from pile driving. guidance levels (limit values) for acceptable vibrations of
buildings based on more than 30 years of practical experience
In this paper, the authors discuss the most important aspects in a wide range of Swedish soils. It is important to note that
that govern the propagation of driving energy from the source the vibration limit values apply to buildings at the foundation
of the vibrations — the pile driving hammer — to the level and do not take into consideration psychological
surrounding soil layers. It is shown that current models result consequences (noise or comfort) for occupants of buildings.
in crude predictions that ignore the influence of geotechnical Neither do they consider the effects of vibrations on sensitive
site conditions and neglect the fact that the velocity-dependent machinery or equipment in buildings. Although, the guidance
resistance between the pile and the soil is the source of ground levels given in the Swedish standard should be used with
vibrations. This effect can be analyzed using concepts caution in areas with different geological conditions and
developed in dynamic pile analysis. building construction methods, they can provide useful
information as to which factors should be taken into
Based on a rational concept, the authors put forward a method consideration when assessing the risk of building damage.
for estimating vibrations from pile driving, which includes the
force that is applied to the pile head, the dynamic stresses in The guidance levels are based on experience from measured
the pile and the dynamic resistance along the pile toe and pile ground vibrations in terms of the vertical component of
shaft. Emphasis is placed on the development of a prediction vibration velocity and observed damage to buildings with
method applicable to engineering practice that incorporates comparable foundation conditions. This is a severe limitation
essential aspects of the pile driving and wave propagation when considering the effect of horizontal vibrations on
process, as well as geotechnical conditions. The proposed buildings founded on long piles, as piles provide little
model is compared to field measurements from a well- resistance to horizontal excitation. Moreover, the standard
documented case history. Finally, factors influencing ground does not address the risk of liquefaction or densification of the
vibrations during impact pile driving are discussed as well as soil (especially disregarding the risk for loose sand and silt),
measures to reduce ground vibrations. which can lead to unacceptable total or differential settlement
of the structure.
The standard defines a vibration limit value, v, in terms of

peak value of the vertical vibration velocity, which is taken to
Manuscript No. 2/38

be the maximum acceptable value. If this value is not limiting value should be adjusted, as pile-supported
exceeded, damage to buildings and their foundation is unlikely foundations has a low resistance to horizontal excitation. Also,
to occur. Vibrations should be measured at the building the effect of vibrations on loose, granular soils is not
foundation level in the closest location from the piling site. Its considered in the standard, but such soils may be particularly
value is modified according to range of soil types into which susceptible to vibration-induced settlements (Massarsch,
the piles are driven, building types, building materials, and 2000).
foundation types, as expressed in Eq. 1.
ν = ν 0 Fb Fm Fg (1) Table 2. Building Factor, Fb
where ν = guidance level (vertical component) of Class Type of Structure Building

vibration velocity (mm/s) Factor
v0 = vibration velocity based on soil type (mm/s) 1 Heavy structures such as bridges, quay 1.70
Fb = Building Factor walls, defense structures etc.
Fm = Material Factor
2 Industrial or office buildings 1.20
Fg = Foundation Factor
3 Normal residential buildings 1.00
Recommended values for ν0 are given in Table 1 for vibrations 4 Especially susceptible buildings and 0.65
caused by pile driving in sedimentary soil, glacial till, and to buildings with high value or structural
bedrock, considering two cases: driving of piles and soil elements with wide spans, e.g., church
compaction. The values indicated for the latter work are often or museum
assigned to vibratory driving of piles and sheet piles.
5 Historic buildings in a sensitive state as 0.50
well as certain sensitive ruins
Table 1. Vibration velocity for different soil types, ν0, mm/s Swedish Standard SS 02 542 11 (SIS 1999)
Soil Type Piling, Sheet Compaction

Table 3. Material Factor, Fm
Piling, or Work
Excavation
Class Type of Building Material Building
Clay, silt, sand, 9 6 Factor
or gravel
1 Reinforced concrete, steel, or wood 1.20
Glacial till 12 9
2 Unreinforced concrete, bricks, concrete 1.00
Bedrock 15 12
blocks with voids, light-weight concrete
Swedish Standard SS 02 542 11 (SIS 1999) elements, masonry
3 Light concrete blocks and plaster 0.75
The Building Factor, Fb, depends on the susceptibility of 4 Limestone 0.65
building with regard to vibrations separated on five classes as Swedish Standard SS 02 542 11 (SIS 1999)
shown in Table 2. Classes 1 - 4 apply to structures in good
condition. As suggested for Class 5, buildings in poor
structural condition should be assigned a lower building Table 4. Foundation Factor, Fg
factor.
The Material Factor, Fm, depends on vibration sensitivity of Class Type of Foundation Foundation
the structural material and is divided into four classes, as Factor
shown in Table 3. The most sensitive material component of 1 0.60
Spread footings, raft foundations
the structure determines the class to be applied.
2 Buildings founded on shaft-bearing 0.80
The Foundation Factor, Fg, separates between building on type piles
of foundation, as shown in Table 4. Buildings on piled 3 Buildings founded on toe-bearing 1.00
foundations are accorded higher factors due to their reduced piles
sensitivity to ground vibrations in the vertical direction.
Swedish Standard SS 02 542 11 (SIS 1999)
However, if the horizontal vibration component is high, this
Manuscript No. 3/38

Application Example A. Wave propagation in the pile: energy generated by the
impact of the hammer (1) at the pile cap and pile head (2)
As an example on the use of the Swedish standard (SIS 1999), which is transmitted through the pile (3).
assume that piles are driven in clayey soils in the vicinity of a
residential building (Building Factor, Fb: 1.0) with walls of B. Pile-soil interaction: along the pile shaft (4) and at the
light concrete blocks and plaster (Material Factor Fm: 0.75), pile toe (5).
and supported on shaft-bearing piles (Foundation Factor,
Fg: 0.8). According to Table 1, the ground vibration velocity, C. Wave propagation in the ground: transmission of
v0, to choose is 9 mm/s and the values inserted into Eq. 1 vibrations through soil layers and the groundwater.
provide a maximum acceptable (“allowable”) vertical
vibration velocity, v, of 5.4 mm/s. Thus, in a risk analysis for D. Dynamic soil-structure interaction: dynamic response of
this piling project, the design engineer should limit foundations, vibration amplification in structures, and
permissible building vibrations to 5.4 mm/s (to be measured in installations.
the vertical direction at the base of the building).
When assessing vibrations caused by pile driving, most
investigations focus on the generation of energy by the
GROUND VIBRATIONS FROM IMPACT PILE DRIVING impacting hammer (A) and the propagation of vibrations in the
ground (C). In some cases, the soil-structure interaction and
Vibration Transmission Chain dynamic response of buildings subjected to vibrations (D) are
addressed without considering the important aspect of transfer
This paper focuses on ground vibrations induced by impact of stresses and vibrations through the entire system: including
pile driving and should not be applied without due vibrations transmitted from the hammer to the pile and the
modifications to vibratory driving of piles or sheet piles. For dynamic properties of the soil (B), despite that this is the most
aspects of vibrations from vibratory pile driving, basic important part in the vibration transmission chain.
principles of the pile penetration process and ground
vibrations, reference is made to Massarsch and Westerberg Usually in current practice, the initiating conditions of energy
(1995) and Massarsch (2002). When the pile driving hammer transfer from the hammer to the pile are simply assumed and
impacts the pile head, a stress (or strain) wave, i.e., vibration, the vibration attenuation is taken as a function of the distance
is created that propagates at certain frequencies and from the source, omitting the gradual penetration of the pile
amplitudes down the pile, into the soil, and in under and into into soil layers with variable dynamic resistances, an aspect
adjacent structures. The main aspects of vibration propagation that governs both the propagation of waves in the pile (A) and
during the driving of piles with an impact hammer consist of the dynamic pile-soil interaction (A to B) in Fig. 1. This is an
four main points as illustrated in Fig. 1. Unless the entire unnecessary and unacceptable oversimplification of the actual
chain of vibration transmission is considered, it is not possible condition, because, as will be shown, the initiating conditions
to appreciate fully the cause of ground vibration problem. of force transfer can be rationally developed and included in
an analysis.
The dynamic soil-structure interaction of piled foundations at

small strains, such as the dynamic response of machine
foundations, is described extensively in the literature (e.g.,
Novak and Janes 1989). However, for dynamic pile-soil
interaction at large strain levels (as will be the case during pile
penetration), only limited information is available. Yet, this is
the case applicable to vibrations induced during pile driving
(Massarsch 2005).
Stress-wave Measurements During Pile Driving
Major advances have been made in measuring and analyzing

dynamic wave propagation in piles during impact driving
(Goble et al. 1968, 1980; Goble 1995). Dynamics measure-
ments consist of attaching pairs of strain gages and
Fig. 1. Transfer of vibrations from the hammer, through the accelerometers to the pile below the pile head. The strain
pile, into surrounding soil, under and into adjacent buildings measurement corresponds to the stress (force) in the pile, and
(Massarsch 2005). the acceleration measurement, integrated, provides the particle
Manuscript No. 4/38

velocity during the impact. The event is brief, but its duration mobilized static and dynamic resistance. Fig. 3A shows the
is measurable and is illustrated in curves of force versus time, measured force and velocity wave traces. Fig. 3B shows
so-called wave traces. As indicated by many (e.g., Fellenius calculated Wave Down traces.
2006), a key to the understanding and analysis of the
measurements is that the ratio between the force and the 8,000
Pile with shaft resistance and
160
7,000 140
acceleration integrated to velocity is proportional to the pile
TRASNFERRED ENERGY (KJ)

minimal toe resistance
ENERGY
6,000 120
impedance, ZP, as expressed in Eq. 2. 5,000 100
FORCE (KN)
4,000 80
3,000 60
P P
E A FORCE
ZP = = AP c P ρ P
2,000 40
(2)
cP
1,000 20
0 0
-1,000 -20
VELOCITY x EA/c
where ZP = impedance of pile -2,000
-2 0 2 4 6
-40
EP = modulus of elasticity of pile material A TIME (L/c)
AP = pile cross section area

cP = velocity of stress wave in pile 7,000
ρP = density of pile material 6,000
5,000
WAVE DOWN
FORCE (KN)
4,000
Note that in the following, to avoid confusion between 3,000
different notations, symbols referring to pile (P) and hammer 2,000

WAVE UP
(H) will be indicated by raised indices while notations 1,000
referring to soil properties will be denoted by lowered indices. 0
-1,000
-2 0 2 Start of Toe 4 6
In the absence of any resistance along the pile, the force trace B TIME (L/c) Reflection
is exactly the same as the velocity trace multiplied by pile

impedance—the two traces overlap. However, during pile Fig. 2. Examples of force and velocity wave traces measured
penetration, soil resistance is not absent. When the impact in a 30 m long pipe pile driven into silty sand in British
wave propagating down the pile encounters resistance, a Columbia and encountering mostly shaft resistance. (Data
reflected stress wave is generated that propagates upward from courtesy of AATech Scientific Inc.).
the resistance location. The interesting part is that, when the
reflected wave reaches the gage location, in superimposing the
strain from the hammer energy still entering the pile, strain 2,500 25
increases — the force curve rises. At the same time, the 2,000
FORCE
20
TRANSFERRED ENERGY (KJ)

reflected wave slows down the pile and the velocity reduces ENERGY
1,500 15
— the curve for velocity times impedance trace dips. The
FORCE (KN)
1,000 10
effect is a separation of the two curves, which is a measure of
500 5
the total (dynamic and static) soil resistance at the location of
0 0
the reflection along the pile.
-500 -5
VELOCITY x EA/c
The resistance to the driving can be considered in terms of -1,000 Pile with toe resistance and -10
minimal shaft resistance

penetration (blow count) or driving resistance (force). (Note -1,500
-4 -2 0 2 4 6 8
-15
that it is only the dynamic resistance which gives rise to A TIME (L/c)
ground vibrations—emitted from the pile shaft and/or pile toe
2,000
to the surrounding soil layers). When plotting the WAVE DOWN
measurement against time scaled to the length of time for the 1,500
FORCE (KN)
impact wave to reach the pile toe, i.e., in L/c units, a visual 1,000
display is obtained of the magnitude and location along the

500
pile of the encountered soil resistance — static plus dynamic WAVE UP
combined. To illustrate, Figs. 2 and 3 present dynamic 0
records from the driving of two piles, one meeting mostly -500
-4 -2 0 2 4 6 8
shaft resistance, and one mostly toe resistance. Fig. 2A shows TIME (L/c) Start of Toe
measured force and velocity wave traces and calculated B Reflection
transferred energy trace. Fig. 2B shows calculated Wave Fig. 3. Examples of force and velocity wave traces measured
Down trace, the mean of the two wave traces and the force in an 8 m long H-pile driven through soft soil into weathered
entering the pile from the hammer, and calculated Wave Up bedrock in Oklahoma and encountering mostly toe resistance.
trace, half the difference between the wave traces, i.e. the (Data courtesy of AATech Scientific Inc.).
Manuscript No. 5/38

By analyzing the records with the CAPWAP program confusion in the literature as it is not dimensionless. In many
(Rausche et al., 1985), the total shaft and toe resistances can cases, the units applied to the vibration factor were not in
be numerically determined and the static resistance separated agreement with those of the vibration velocity. Attewell and
from the dynamic. Usually, dynamic monitoring during the Farmer (1973) did not indicate which distance to be used in
driving of a pile is continuous until the end of driving. Eq. 3. Therefore, often the shortest distance from the pile on
Information on the conditions for when the pile toe enters a the ground surface to the point of observation is selected by
specific layer can then be subjected to a CAPWAP analysis practicing engineers, disregarding the depth of pile penetration
and provide the reference to a vibration analysis. (thus not considering the actual location of the source of the
vibrations).
Note, that a routine CAPWAP analysis aims to determine the
distribution of static resistance, while a vibration analysis Brenner and Viranuvut (1975) used Eq. 3 to compare results
requires the distribution of dynamic resistance, which is of vibration measurements from pile driving in terms of
normally not reported in a CAPWAP analysis. However, also vibration velocity with information from projects reported in
the dynamic resistance can easily be established from the the literature, as shown in Fig. 4. The results indicate values
CAPWAP results. Thus, stress-wave measurements in of the empirical factor, k, ranging from 0.3 through 4.0
combination with ground vibration measurements, could (velocity in mm/s).
provide valuable quantitative information regarding the
transmission of vibrations during pile penetration.
100
PEAK PARTICLE VELOCITY (mm/s)

k = 4.0
Empirical Vibration Attenuation Concepts
75 k = 0.75
Theories regarding ground vibration attenuation were initially
developed for rock blasting applications. Field measurements
of ground surface vibrations indicated that these could be 50
related to the energy released in a blast (Wiss 1981).
Empirical relations were developed, showing magnitude of
blasting vibration as function of energy release. Similar 25
relations were developed for the prediction of vibrations
caused by other types of energy sources, for example, pile k = 0.30
driving or soil compaction, which are still widely used 0
(Jedele 2005). Attewell and Farmer (1973) analyzed results of 0 50 100 150
measurements in a variety of soils of vibration induced by the √ENERGY/DISTANCE (J½/m)
driving of different types of piles. They suggested that a
conservative energy-based estimate of vibration velocity, v, at Fig. 4. Attenuation of peak particle velocity versus scaled
distance, r, from the energy source (pile) can be made from energy (data from Brenner and Viranuvut 1975).
the relation expressed by Eq. 3.
As shown in Fig. 4, the scatter of values is large and would be

W
ν =k (3) unacceptable for most conventional geotechnical design
r applications. Yet, the energy-based relation of Eq. 3 is still
frequently used for prediction of ground vibrations (Woods
where v = vibration velocity (m/s) and Jedele 1985; Jedele 2005).
W = energy input at source (J)
k = an empirical vibration factor (m2/s√J) One of the most widely referenced publications on this subject
r = distance from pile (m) is a state-of-the-art paper by Wiss (1981) on construction
vibrations, who proposed Eq. 4, a relation similar to Eq. 3,
The vibration velocity is not defined in terms of direction of where the peak particle velocity, ν, is expressed as a function
measurement (vertical, horizontal, or resultant of of the distance from the energy source, r (when the exponent,
components). Rather surprising, they reached the conclusion n, equals unity, "k" and "K" in Eqs. 3 and 4 are identical).
that the attenuation of ground vibration amplitude with Wiss (1981) used imperial units in Eq. 4, which adds to the
distance from a pile is largely independent of the type and confusion when applying the equation in practice.
strength or stiffness of the ground. An additional important
aspect, which is not considered in Eq. 3, is whether the −n
⎛ D ⎞
nominal hammer energy or an adjusted energy value should be ν = K⎜ ⎟ (4)
used. Note also that the empirical factor, k, has caused some ⎝ E⎠
Manuscript No. 6/38

where v = peak particle velocity (inches per second)
K = intercept value of vibration amplitude (inches/s)
at "scaled distance" D/√E = 1 (ft/lb)1/2
n = slope or attenuation rate
D = distance from source (feet)
E = energy input at source (in foot-pounds)
or explosive charge weight per delay (pounds)
The value of the attenuation rate, n, in Eq. 4 generally lies

between 1.0 and 2.0 with a commonly assumed value
of 1.5 — units unknown. Note that the expression (Eq. 4) is
ambiguous as the value of the exponent, n, affects K. This
makes the comparison of the K-values impossible for different
attenuation rates. Same as Attewell and Farmer (1973), Wiss
(1981) provides neither guidance on how the distance should
be chosen when a pile penetrates into the ground, nor a
definition of the driving energy. This aspect will be discussed
in the following.
Influence of Pile Penetration Depth Fig. 5. Influence of pile penetration depth on the distance to
measuring points at two locations, A and B.
The above presented energy-based relationships refer to the
attenuation of vibrations from the vibration source to the The distance to the vibration source depends also on the
observation point. However, in the case of pile driving, the variation of soil resistance along the pile shaft, RS and at the
location of the source of the vibration energy is not well pile toe, RT. This case is illustrated in Fig. 6, showing two
defined (in contrast, for example, to the case for blasting) as penetration resistance curves, Cases 1 and 2, which typically
vibrations can be emitted from the shaft or the toe of the pile would be obtained from pile driving records or, for
— or from both at the same time — and also more from some predictions, be determined from in-situ tests, such as the cone
layers penetrated by the pile and less from others. Thus, as the penetrometer, or be calculated in a wave equation analysis.
pile encounters dense soil layers close to the ground surface at
the beginning of driving and then continues into weaker soil,
the depth of the energy source will change and, accordingly,
so will the distance from the source to the observation point.
However, most cases reporting results from vibration
measurements use the horizontal distance at the ground
surface in correlating energy source and vibrations. The
problem is illustrated in Fig. 5, showing two ground surface Case 1
measuring points, A and B, located at different distances from Dense sand
a long pile.
RS
Point A is located close to the pile, while the distance to Case 2
Point B at the end of driving may correspond to more than one
pile length. When the horizontal distance is used for the Soft soil on
vibration measurements at Point A during the penetration of stiff soil
the pile, neglecting the gradually increasing pile penetration
length, the vibration amplitude will be overestimated due to a
much shorter assumed propagation distance. The effect of the
neglect is smaller for a measuring point away from the pile RT Driving Resistance, R S +R T
location, such as at Point B. In most cases, problems
associated with vibrations from pile driving occur at distances
up to approximately one to two pile lengths, which cases are Fig. 6. Conceptual picture of soil resistance along the shaft,
representative for a point located between A and B. It is RT and toe, RS when driving a pile into dense sand and soft
obvious that consistent results cannot be expected from clay on a stiff layer, respectively. Note, the driving resistance
analyses based on horizontal distance values. is indicated in units of force, not in units of penetration
resistance ("blow count").
Manuscript No. 7/38

In Case 1, it is assumed that the pile is driven into a sand be transmitted to the surrounding soil layers. When the pile is
deposit with gradually increasing density, where a significant driven into the ground by impact, “dynamic” velocity-
amount of the resistance will be generated along the shaft of dependent soil resistance will develop that will increase the
the pile, especially if a group of piles is driven, resulting in total driving resistance and at the same time give rise to
gradual soil densification. Waves will then propagate mainly ground vibrations.
as cylindrical shear waves, with wave attenuation similar to
surface waves (New 1986, Selby 1991, Massarsch 1992). The analysis of energy propagation from the pile into the
surrounding soil is based on elasticity theory. However, this
In Case 2, it is assumed that the pile is driven into a clay layer concept is strictly only applicable when soil deformation
with a dry crust (or surface fill). As the pile driving begins, (strain) is very low, which is the case for properly designed
the vibrations will travel along the ground surface in the form and functioning machine foundations. During pile driving, the
of surface waves. When the pile toe has penetrated into the soil along the shaft and at the toe is in a state of failure, as it is
soft clay layer, ground vibrations will decrease and the subjected to large strains (plastic deformations occur). The
vibrations may even become negligible at this time, as little aspect of strain softening of soils near the pile could be readily
energy can be transferred through the surrounding remolded incorporated in a more elaborate prediction model. In addition,
soil. During the final phase (termination) of pile driving (hard especially along the shaft, the soil will be remolded.
driving is assumed), when the toe of the pile has reached the Therefore, only part of the energy applied to the pile head and
dense bottom layer, most of the soil resistance will be transmitted to the pile will cause vibrations in the surrounding
generated at the pile toe, and the vibrations will mainly be soil, a fact which is not recognized in the empirical, energy-
transmitted in the form of spherical waves from the pile toe. based prediction model. As will be described in this chapter,
it is possible to estimate the vibrations which can be
Simple stress-wave measurements, as discussed above, can transmitted from the pile shaft and the pile toe using rationally
provide valuable insight into the magnitude and distribution of developed correction factors.
dynamic soil resistance and vibration transmission along the
pile shaft and the pile toe, respectively. Obviously, during The dynamic soil resistance can be a major component of the
impact driving, vibrations can be transmitted along the pile total driving resistance, and its variation during pile
shaft and/or at the pile toe, depending on the soil conditions. penetration can be determined accurately by stress-wave
The location of the source of vibration emission (origin of measurements. As yet, however, in assessing ground
dynamic soil resistance) will change during pile penetration. vibrations, the profession has not considered this aspect and
Information on the geotechnical conditions, such as soil has not taken advantage of the important information.
stratification and strength/stiffness properties, are therefore
essential when analyzing ground vibrations and need to be Two main factors must be considered when determining
incorporated in a realistic prediction model. Moreover, pile ground vibrations: the dynamic force in the pile generated by
driving can generate vibrations simultaneously in the form of the impact and the dynamic soil resistance at the pile-soil
cylindrical waves and surface waves from the pile shaft and interface, which is a function of the pile physical velocity
spherical waves from the pile toe. This aspect is important (relative velocity between the pile and the soil) and the
and therefore discussed in detail below. dynamic soil properties. The maximum value of the dynamic
force propagating down the pile can be reliably measured or
estimated with sufficient accuracy. The maximum value of
DYNAMIC PILE-SOIL INTERACTION the dynamic soil resistance can be established from the
dynamic properties of the soil (soil impedance and soil
Velocity-dependent Soil Resistance damping). The ratio between the impact force in the pile and
the dynamic soil resistance is the fundamental parameter
A key aspect of understanding the source of ground vibrations, which controls ground vibrations, and it can be estimated and
which is not generally appreciated by geotechnical engineers, used to assess the transmission of ground vibrations from the
is the fact that the intensity of vibrations in the ground pile to the surrounding soil layers.
depends on the velocity-dependent (dynamic) soil resistance
generated along the shaft and at the pile toe. The dynamic soil For understanding ground vibrations induced by impact pile
resistance defines the maximum value of vibration velocity driving, it is imperative to apply the fundamentals of pile
which actually can be transmitted at the pile-soil interface. A dynamics and dynamic pile-soil interaction. These will
simple example can illustrate the concept. When a pile is therefore be outlined in the following.
pushed at very slow penetration speed into the ground
(e.g., static loading test), the total soil resistance is composed
of the static shaft and toe resistances, respectively. Of course,
as no dynamic forces are involved, no ground vibrations will
Manuscript No. 8/38

Pile Hammer Efficiency and Energy Ratio Force Imparted to Pile
Hammer efficiency is defined as the ratio between the kinetic A dynamic model of pile driving forces is shown in Fig. 7,
energy of a gravity hammer (ram) on impacting the helmet which can be analyzed using stress-wave theory (e.g., Smith
cushion (or, for a diesel hammer on impacting the anvil) over 1960; Goble et al. 1980; Broms and Bredenberg 1982;
the kinetic energy of the ram free-falling the same distance Massarsch 2005). The model shows a pile being driven with
without loss of energy. Hammer efficiency can only be an impact hammer having a mass, MH, and a height-of-fall, h.
determined by field measurements of impact velocity The impact mobilizes soil resistance along the pile shaft, RS,
(Rausche, 2000). The hammer efficiency should not be used to and at the pile toe, RT. The relationship between the axial
imply that one hammer is better or worse than another. force, Fi, and the particle velocity (i.e., physical velocity) of
However, it is an important input to a wave equation analysis the pile, vP, as defined by Eq. 5, is a starting point for the
of pile driving. In the absence of any measurements, the analysis. Note that the model is a simplification of reality,
practice applies an approximate hammer efficiency input, a showing velocities as rectangular waves, as opposed to
factor, FH, chosen based on experience. Table 7 presents an increasing to a peak and attenuating thereafter.
array of recommended ranges of efficiency factors according
to Rausche (2000). It should be noted that, for a conservative Fi = Z P v P (5)
prediction, it is recommended to use the larger value of the
ranges, unless otherwise prompted.
where Fi = force in pile
vP = particle velocity (physical velocity) of pile
Table 7. Recommended values of hammer efficiency
factor, FH (after Rausche, 2000)
Note, that several notations are shared between equations. In
order to save space, notations are defined only at their first
Hammer Type Hammer mention below the equation. All notations are provided in the
Efficiency Notation Appendix.
Factor, FH
The pile impedance, ZP, can be determined from Eq. 6. See
Free-fall hammer (free release) 0.90 – 0.95
also Eq. 2.
Single-acting air/steam hammer:
Steel piles (end of driving) 0.55 – 0.70 Z P = AP c P ρ P (6)
Concrete or wood piles (end 0.40 – 0.60
of driving) where cP = velocity of stress wave in pile
ρP = density of pile material
Double and differential acting
AP = cross section area of the pile
air/steam hammers:
Steel piles (end of driving) 0.35 – 0.50
Equations 2 and 6 can be used to calculate the axial impact
of driving)
force in a pile based on measurement of the particle velocity
Diesel hammers during driving. The parameters defining the propagation of a
Steel piles (end of driving) 0.30 – 0.40 stress wave caused by the impact of a drop hammer on a pile
are given in Fig. 7.
of driving)
At impact, the particle velocity, ν0, of the hammer (the ram)
Hydraulic drop hammers (self- 0.85 – 0.95 with mass, MH, hammer length, LH, and a height-of-fall, h,
monitored) while the particle velocity of the pile head is zero. The
Hydraulic drop hammers (other types) 0.55 – 0.85 velocity of the hammer immediately before (i.e. at) impact, ν0,
can be estimated from the hammer height-of-fall, assuming no
loss of energy in the fall, as expressed in Eq. 7.
Energy ratio, or transferred-energy ratio, is the ratio between
the maximum energy transferred through the driving system
(air, anvil, hammer cushion, pile cushion, etc.) to the pile over ν 0 = 2 gh (7)
the potential or positional energy of the impact. The
transferred energy is obtained from dynamic measurements as where v0 = velocity of hammer at impact
the integration of measured force times velocity times pile g = acceleration of earth gravity.
impedance. h = hammer-height-of-fall
Manuscript No. 9/38

ν0
νP = (10)
ZP
1+ H
Z
Inserting ZH = ZP, into Eq. 10 yields Eq. 11, which shows that
when the impedances of the hammer and the pile are equal,
the peak particle velocity of the pile, vP, will be half the
hammer impact velocity, v0, (the velocity immediately before
touching the pile head).
ν P = 0.5ν 0 (11)
The particle velocity in the pile (and, therefore, the force in the
pile) is not affected by the hammer mass, MH, but rather by the
hammer height-of-fall, h (Eq. 7), and the impedance ratio of
the impact hammer and the pile. However, neither the height-
of-fall nor the impedance ratio is normally mentioned when
measurements of ground vibrations are reported in the
literature. Combining Eqs. 5 and 11 yields Eq. 12 which
expresses the magnitude of the impact force, Fi, the peak
force, at the pile head for equal impedance of hammer and
pile. Note, in the terminology common in dynamic pile
a) b) c) testing, the time of impact is the instant of the peak force
(occurs when acceleration becomes negative).
Fig. 7. Definition of parameters governing stress wave
propagation in piles. Fi = Z P 0.5 ν 0 (12)
When the hammer strikes the pile, a stress wave will be Another important aspect of pile driving is the duration of the
generated simultaneously in the pile and in the hammer, as impact, as this determines the length of the propagating stress
indicated in Fig. 7b. The hammer velocity starts to slow wave. The upward traveling stress wave in the hammer
down, by a velocity denoted vH, while the pile head starts to caused by the impact with the pile is reflected when the front
accelerate, gaining a velocity of vP. Since the force between reaches the top of the hammer. The upper end of the hammer
the hammer and the pile must be equal, applying Eq. 5 yields is a free end, which means that the force is equal to zero at all
the relationship expressed in Eq. 8. times. Therefore, the upward traveling wave reflected from
the pile head is now reflected as a tension wave. The time, t,
during which the pile head and the hammer are in contact is
Z Hν H = Z Pν P (8)
the time it takes for the strain wave to travel the length of the
hammer, LH, twice, i.e., from the top of the hammer to the
where ZH = impedance of hammer (ram) bottom end and back up to the top, is expressed in Eq. 13.
vH = particle velocity of wave reflected backup
the hammer
2L H
t= (13)
At the contact surface, the hammer velocity—decreasing—and cH
the pile head velocity—increasing—are equal, as expressed in
Eq. (9). where t = duration of impact (i.e., duration of contact
between hammer and pile head)
ν 0 −ν H = ν P (9) LH = length of hammer
cH = velocity of stress wave in hammer
Note, the change of hammer particle velocity is directed Then, if the impedances of the hammer and the pile are equal,
upward, while the velocity direction of the pile head is during the same time interval, the stress wave will travel the
downward. The hammer and the pile will remain in contact length expressed in Eq. 14, which defines the length of the
only for a short time, the impact time. Combining Eqs. 8 stress wave in the pile (and the length of pile along which
and 9 and rearranging the terms, yields Eq. 10. vibrations are transferred to the surrounding soil).
Manuscript No. 10/38

The specific soil impedance, zS, is a material property with the
LW = t c P (14) units kNs/m3 (note, "z" written in lower case letter) and should
not be confused with for instance the pile impedance ZP,
where LW is the length of the stress wave propagating down which also depends on the cross section area of the pile with
the pile. If the materials in the hammer and the pile are the units kNs/m.
different, but the impedances are the same due to difference in
cross-section and material, the length of the stress wave in the Due to the relative movement between the pile and the soil, a
pile will be as expressed in Eq. 15. zone surrounding the pile shaft will be disturbed and often
remolded. Consequently, even at relatively small strains, the
soil stiffness (and thus the wave velocity) decreases. The
cP
LW = 2 LH (15) effect of shear strain on the shear wave velocity depends on
cH soil type, expressed by the Plasticity Index, PI, and driving
resistance, as indicated in Fig. 8. As discussed by Massarsch
Equation 15 is of practical importance for calculation of
(2004, 2005), when selecting a representative value for the
ground vibrations, because the length of the impact time and
shear wave velocity, a reduction of the small-strain shear-
length of the wave propagating down the pile determine the
wave velocity, RC, needs to be introduced. It is also necessary
length of time during which the force is transmitted to the pile
to apply a factor RR, which is representative for the
shaft and out into the soil. In conclusion, it can be stated that
disturbance and remolding effects.
the impact velocity (which depends on the hammer height-of-
fall) and the length of the pile hammer (which governs the
1.0
duration of the impact) are the two most important pile driving
SHEAR WAVE REDUCTION FACTOR, R C

parameters governing ground vibrations. 0.9
0.8
DYNAMIC SOIL RESISTANCE AT SHAFT AND TOE 0.7
0.6
During pile penetration, dynamic soil resistance will be
generated along the pile shaft and at the same time at the pile 0.5
toe. This important aspect, which governs ground vibration 0.4

emission during pile driving, is now discussed and equations
0.3
are given showing how to estimate dynamic resistance values. Hard PRES
0.2 Medium PRES
0.1 Easy PRES
Dynamic Soil Resistance along Pile Shaft
Very Easy PRES
0.0
The dynamic soil resistance along the pile shaft, RS, can be 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
estimated if the specific soil impedance (shear wave), zS, along PLASTICY INDEX, Ip (%)
the pile shaft and the contact area, between the shaft and soil,
Fig. 8. Shear wave velocity reduction factor, RC as function of
S, are known, as indicated in Eq. 16.
plasticity index, IP, for different conditions of penetrations
resistance, PRES, modified from Massarsch (2005).
Rs = zS ν P S P (16)
The dynamic shaft resistance, which is the source of
where RS = dynamic soil resistance along the pile shaft cylindrical (shear) waves emitted from the pile shaft, can now
zS = specific soil impedance for shear waves be determined by combining Eqs. 12, 16, and 17 and assuming
vP = particle velocity of the pile that the pile length in contact with the soil is equal to the
SP = contact area between the shaft and soil length of the stress wave in the pile. Then, for a pile with a
cylindrical shape and a diameter, bP, the dynamic shaft
The specific soil impedance, zS, is determined from Eq. 17. resistance, RS, is expressed in Eq. 18.
z S = cS ρ soil (17) RS = 0.5ν 0 Rc RR cS ρ soil b P π LW (18)
where cS = shear-wave velocity of the soil at the where RC = reduction factor for strain-softening
pile-soil interface vP = particle velocity of the ram at impact
ρsoil = total (bulk) soil density RR = reduction factor for remolding/disturbance
bP = pile diameter

Typical values of the P-wave (stress wave) and S-wave (shear is driven into loose or medium dense sand, gradual
wave) velocities at small strains (<10-3 %) are given in densification and increased lateral earth pressure may cause a
Table 8. Note that the wave velocity in soil layers depends on significant increase of shaft resistance. Note that stress-wave
several factors, such as the effective stress, void ratio, measurements would provide directly applicable, quantitative
preconsolidation stress, etc., and normally increases with information regarding the resistance distribution during pile
depth. Therefore, the values in Table 8 are approximate and penetration.
should be used only for preliminary assessment but can be
determined by empirical methods or field measurements.
Vibration Transmission Along Pile Shaft
Normally, the shear wave velocity is not affected by the
presence of water in the ground. However, in the case of pile It is important to express in quantitative terms how much of
driving, the shear wave velocity can decrease due to excess the potential driving energy can actually be transferred to the
pore water pressure and soil disturbance. In contrast, the surrounding soil. There are two limiting situations. The
P-wave (compression) velocity of soils below the groundwater maximum force applied to the pile head can be estimated from
table corresponds to that of water (assumed to 1,450 m/s). Eq. 5. On the other hand, the dynamic soil resistance, RS,
During penetration of the pile, the shaft resistance diminishes which depends on the soil impedance adjacent to the pile
as a result of soil disturbance (remolding). Due to this and shaft, is the upper limit of vibrations which can be transferred
because of the large strains imposed, it would be wrong to to the surrounding soil. It is useful to define a ratio of the
apply the low-strain condition (“elastic”) shear wave velocity dynamic soil resistance along the pile shaft, RS, divided with
as listed in Table 8 to Eq. 18, because this would yield too the impacting force, Fi (Eq. 5), called shaft vibration
high dynamic resistance values (in contrast to the design of, transmission efficacy, ES. If, again, it is assumed that the pile
for example, machine foundations which operate in the elastic has cylindrical shape with diameter, b, and effective contact
range and where small-strain values apply). length, LW, then, division of Eq. 18 by Eq. 5 combined with
Eq. 2 yields Eq. 19.
Table 8. Range of compression (P-) and shear (S-) wave cS ρ soil LW zS LW

velocities at small strains for different soil types ES = 2 Rc RR = 2 R R (19)
c P ρ P bP
c R
z P bP
Soil Type P-Wave Velocity S-Wave Velocity
where ES = vibration transmission efficacy along
(m/s) (m/s) the pile shaft = RS/Fi
zS = specific soil impedance for shear waves
Water 1,450 0
zP = specific impedance of pile
Glacial till 600 - 1,800 300 - 600
Dry gravel 500 - 1,000 250 - 400
Note that the term “impedance” is almost unknown to most
Saturated gravel 1,450 300 - 400 geotechnical engineers in spite of its great practical
Dry sand 300 - 600 150 - 200 importance! Equation 19 shows that the length of the stress
Saturated sand 1,450 150 - 250 wave (which is the effective contact length of the stress wave
with the soil, a function of hammer length) governs the
Silts and stiff clays 1,450 100 - 200 transmission efficacy of vibrations from the pile shaft to the
Plastic clay 1,450 50 - 100 surrounding soil. That is, the transmission efficacy is a
Organic soils 1,450 30 - 50 function of the ratio of soil to pile impedance. A typical upper
range of reduction factor for disturbance (which will provide
conservative estimates of ground vibrations) is in the range 0.2
to 0.4, as indicated in Fig. 9.
The resistance along the pile during penetration will also be
affected by stress changes in the soil during driving. This is
It should be noted that ES cannot be larger than unity, i.e., the
most significant in sensitive, fine-grained soils, where large
dynamic soil resistance controls the maximum force that can
excess pore water pressure can develop. If pile driving is
be transmitted to the soil. For an example of the range of
interrupted, for example in connection with splicing of piles,
typical values for ES in different soils and driving conditions,
the excess pore water pressure can dissipate rapidly and
increase the shaft resistance. This effect can result in assume that the average density of a soil, ρs, is 1,800 kg/m3,
increased ground vibrations when the driving is resumed. and that the density of the pile material, ρP, is 2,450 kg/m3 (a
Also in dense granular soils, the soil strength and stiffness concrete pile is assumed). The relationship between ES and
along the pile shaft will most likely be reduced when the pile- the contact length of the pile shaft with the surrounding soil,
soil interface is sheared. On the other hand, if a group of piles LW/b, for this pile is shown in Fig. 9. Two values of the shear

wave velocity reduction factor, RC have been chosen (0.2 where RT = dynamic portion of the driving resistance
and 0.4). The Es-values in Fig. 9 are considered to be upper at the pile toe
limits, as the reduction effect of soil disturbance and Jc = dimensionless damping factor
remolding is not included. ZP = pile impedance (Eq. 2)
vP = particle velocity in the pile
1
The damping factor, Jc, is generally considered to depend only
VIBRATION TRANSMISSION EFFICACY, E S
Hard Driving on the dynamic properties of the soil and independent of the

pile type. However, Fellenius et al. (1989) showed that
Jc-factors correlated to pile capacity were different for
different piles (different impedance) tested at the same site.
Range for
Typical Driving Iwanowski and Bodare (1988) derived Jc analytically, using
0.1 Conditions the model of a vibrating circular plate in an infinite elastic
body to describe the interaction between the pile toe and the
Easy Driving surrounding soil. They made the important observation that Jc
depends not only soil alone but also on the ratio between the
Shear Wave Velocities, m/s
pile impedance, ZP, at the pile toe and the soil impedance for
Rc = 0.4 100 200 300 P-waves, ZP, as shown in Eq. 21.
Rc = 0.2 100 200 300
0.01 ZP
1 10 100 Jc = 2 (21)
RELATIVE CONTACT LENGTH, L /b
W P ZP
The soil impedance, ZP, is defined in Eq. 22, which is similar

Fig. 9. Vibration transmission efficacy, ES, along the shaft of to Eq. 6.
a concrete pile as function of relative pile contact length for
different driving conditions, assuming a cylindrical pile driven
into soils with different shear wave velocity (Table 8). Z P = AP c P ρ soil (22)
The vibration transmission efficacy can be determined from where ZP = soil impedance for P-waves at the pile toe
Eq. 19 for any pile shape and effective contact length of the AP = cross section area of the pile toe
pile shaft. It is evident that the impedance ratio zs/zP and cP = velocity of P-wave in the soil
the LW/b-ratio are important factors which need to be
considered when determining the emission of cylindrical [Note, the two impedance symbols, ZP and ZP, the pile
waves from the pile shaft. For example, the LW/bP-ratio will be impedance and the soil impedance, respectively, can easily be
large in the case of sheet piles or H-piles, as these have a confused with each other].
larger average diameter (read: surface area) than cylindrical
piles. It must be expected, therefore, that ground vibrations The soil impedance for P-waves, ZP, depends on the cross-
will be higher when driving sheet piles as opposed to driving section area of the contact between the pile toe and the
cylindrical piles. underlying soil and is not the same as the specific soil
impedance, zP, for P-waves, which is a material property of the
During pile penetration, friction between the pile shaft and soil and does not involve the pile geometry. Also, the soil
granular soil can also give rise to a horizontal vibration impedance is strain-dependent and needs to be adjusted for
component, which is important in the case of vibratory strain level during pile driving/testing. The dynamic portion
driving, but is usually neglected in the case of impact driving. of the driving resistance at the pile toe, RT, can now be readily
calculated by combining Eqs. 20 and 21 to arrive at Eq. 23.
Dynamic Soil Resistance at Pile Toe RT = 2 Z P ν P (23)
The dynamic force at the pile toe, RT, which is the source of The damping factor Jc does not appear in Eq. 23, in contrast to
spherical waves emitted from the pile toe, can be estimated the widely used relationship given in Eq. 20. Indeed, the soil
from Eq. 20 (Goble et al. 1980). impedance, ZP, of the P-wave is sufficient to determine the
dynamic resistance at the pile-soil interface. Note that the
RT = J c Z P ν P (20) P-wave depends on the degree of water saturation (ground
water conditions) in loose soils, an aspect which is not
generally appreciated.

By combining Eqs. 11 and 23, and assuming that the hammer the soil stiffness (impedance) at the pile toe and it is safe to
and pile impedances are equal, the dynamic toe resistance, can assume RR = 0.2 – 0.5. For conservative predictions, it is
now be expressed in terms of the hammer impact velocity, ν0, recommended to use upper boundary values. However, it is
as shown in Eq. 24. suggested to determine this parameter based on field tests.
RT = Z P ν 0 (24) Equation 25 shows that the vibration transmission efficacy

increases with decreasing pile impedance and increases with
increasing soil density. For example, driving a concrete pile
Vibration Transmission at Pile Toe with an assumed wave velocity of 4,000 m/s and a bulk
density of 2,400 kg/m3, into a saturated soil with a P-wave
The ratio of the dynamic soil resistance at the pile toe, RT, velocity of 1,450 m/s and a bulk density of 1,800 kg/m3, then,
divided with the impacting force, Fi (Eq. 5), is called toe the toe vibration transmission factor, ET, becomes 0.25. If
vibration transmission efficacy, ET. Division of Eq. 24 by instead, the pile is driven into a glacial till with a P-wave
Eq. 12 yields Eq. 25a velocity of 1,500 m/s and a density of 2,200 kg/m3, the toe
factor becomes 0.35. If the pile is a steel H-pile with a wave
velocity of 5,000 m/s and a density of 7,800 kg/m3, then, the
ZP
ET = 2 (25a) toe factor becomes 0.06 and 0.07, respectively. Obviously,
ZP the pile material and impedance are decisive aspects of the
vibration transmission.
where ET = vibration transmission efficacy at
the pile toe = RT/Fi
Comparison with Field Data
If it is assumed that the pile shaft and the pile toe have the
same cross section area, Eq. (25a) can be simplified to The damping factor, Jc which is widely used in pile dynamics,
is usually thought to depend only on soil type. However, as
cP ρ soil z shown in Eq. 21, it is a function of the ratio between the pile
ET = 2 = 2 PP (25b)
c ρ
P P
z impedance and the soil impedance for P-waves, that is, it also
depends on the pile size and material. This fact, not generally
where zP = specific soil impedance for P-waves recognized, is verified by a reanalysis of the vibration
zP = specific impedance of pile material measurements reported by Heckman and Hagerty (1978), who
measured the intensity of ground vibrations at different
Note that the specific pile impedance, zP is a material property, distances away from piles being driven. The piles were of
as pointed out above, and should not be confused with the pile different type, size, and material. Heckman and Hagerty
impedance, ZP. In the case of driving a pipe pile, the contact (1978) determine the k-factor of Eq. 3 as a function of pile
area with the soil at the pile toe can be different to the cross impedance and measurements of peak particle vibration
section area of the pile and in that case, Eq. 25a should be velocity. The results are shown in Fig. 10a. [The one
used. During pile penetration, the soil stiffness (and therefore deviating point located away from the average curve through
the soil impedance at the pile toe) will change. This effect is the other data points was obtained at the surface of a dense
taken into account by introducing an empirical factor, RR, rubble fill through which the pile was driven using a follower,
which, inserted into Eq. 25a yields Eq. 25c. the impedance of which is not known].
The measurements were taken at different horizontal distances

cP ρ soil z
ET = 2 RR = 2 RR PP (25c) from different types and sizes of piles driven with hammers of
c ρ
P P
z different rated energies. Unfortunately, Heckman and Hagerty
(1978) is somewhat short on details regarding the driving
where RR = an empirical factor that takes into account method, ground conditions, and vibration measurements. As
soil compaction (loose, coarse-grained shown in the figure, there is a strong correlation between the
soils) or disturbance (clays) at the pile toe pile impedance and the k-factor, despite that the data also
include effects of ground vibration attenuation and possibly
At present, limited information is available regarding the exact effects of vibration amplification in soil layers. It can be seen
value in different soils of the factor, RR. However, it can be that ground vibrations increased markedly when the
assumed that in loose and medium dense coarse-grained soils impedance of the pile decreased. In fact, ground vibrations
due to compaction or densification, RR will increase with can be ten times larger in the case of a pile with low
increasing driving resistance. As a preliminary indication, a impedance, as opposed to vibrations generated at the same
conservative value of RR = 2 should be assumed in such soils. distance from the driving of a pile with high impedance
In overconsolidated clays, pile driving will gradually reduce (Massarsch 1992).

2.5 (1978) confirm that the energy transmission efficacy correctly
Pipe Sheet reflects the vibration emission from the pile shaft and the pile
Piles Piles toe to the surrounding soil layers. They also confirm the
H-Piles Concrete validity of the Eq. 21 and the fact, that the Jc-factor depends
2.0 Mandrel-driven Piles
Piles on the ratio between the soil and pile impedance values.
k-Factor (m /s√J)
1.5 Effect of
2
follower ENERGY PROPAGATION IN ELASTIC MEDIUM
1.0 The emission and propagation of vibrations from the pile to

the surrounding soil layers is a complex process, as vibrations
k = 1000 (Z )
P (-1.14) will be affected by the strain level. The vibration velocity is
0.5 not directly proportional to strain. For example, wave velocity
decreases more rapidly in granular soils than in clays at the
same strain level. Vibrations are also affected by soil layering
0.0 (resulting in refraction of wave rays), impedance difference
0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 between soil layers (causing partial reflection or refraction of
PILE IMPEDANCE, Z (kNs/m) P vibration energy). Another potentially important aspect is
vibration amplification due to resonance effects in soil layers.
Fig. 10a. Influence of pile impedance on the vibration factor, k The below presented, simplified model can be used to
(Eq. 3). (Data from Heckman and Hagerty 1978). calculate the propagation of different types of waves emitted
from the pile shaft (cylindrical waves) and at the pile toe
(spherical waves). In the future, it would be possible to
Considering the implications of Eqs. 19 and 25, which show develop a more sophisticated soil model using more advanced
that vibration transmission efficacy is inversely proportional to numerical methods. However, it is believed that
the pile impedance, the data from Fig. 10a have been replotted simplifications will facilitate the understanding of the problem
in Fig. 10b to show the linear correlation between the k-factor and that the present model captures the most important aspects
and the inverse of the pile impedance. of ground vibrations induced by pile driving.
2.0
Wave Attenuation in Elastic Medium
The transmission of vibrations can be analyzed based on

theoretical considerations of energy propagation in an elastic
1.5 medium (Clough and Penzien 1975). The energy source is
k-Factor (m /s√J)
k = 436 (1/ZP) assumed to be located in a homogeneous, isotropic elastic

material. The vibrations generated by pile driving can be
2
generated by strain energy, We and kinetic energy (of the

1.0
accelerated mass), Wk , which both are a function of time,
density (mass) and velocity, as shown in Eqs. 26 and 27.
0.5 We (t ) = 0.5 ρ ν 2 (t ) (26)
Wk (t ) = 0.5 ρ ν 2 (t ) (27)
0.0
0.000 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.004
P -1
where ρ = material density of soil
INVERSE OF PILE IMPEDANCE, (Z ) (m/kNs) v(t ) = v0 sin(ω t)
Fig. 10b. Relationship between K-factor and inverse of pile

impedance, data from Fig. 10a replotted. As can be see, the maximum value of the strain energy and
kinetic energy are equal but vary with time, t. In a
The correlation is surprisingly good, considering that the conservative system, the total energy, W0, is constant and the
measurements were taken in different soil conditions and principle of conservation of energy applies, as expressed
acknowledging the limitations of using the “energy concept” in Eq. 28.
of Eq. 3. Indeed, the data reported by Heckman and Hagerty

W0 = We (t ) + Wk (t ) = ρ ν 2 (t ) (28) where vS = particle velocity at point of measurement
(m/s) of the spherical wave
vC = particle velocity at point of measurement
For the case of pile vibrations, two types of energy sources are
(m/s) of the cylindrical wave
considered, a spherical source and a cylindrical source,
W0 = energy of wave at source (hammer) (J)
respectively. Based on elasticity theory, the particle velocity
ρ = material density (kg/m3)
at any distance can be determined as a function of the released
rS = distance between vibration source and
energy. It can be shown that the particle velocity also depends
measuring point for spherical wave (m)
on the wave length, λ, of the propagating wave, which can be
rC = horizontal distance from vibration source to
determined from Eq. 29.
measuring point for cylindrical wave (m)
kS = material coefficient (m2/kg)0.5
c
λ= (29) kC = material coefficient (m/kg)0.5
f λ = wave length (m) according to Eq. 29.
hC = height of cylinder of propagating wave
where λ = wave length energy
c = wave propagation velocity
f = frequency of vibration
Appendix A gives the derivation of expressions for vibration

velocity (Eqs. A16 and A20) as function of energy at the
vibration source and distance from the affected point and the
source. Table 9 summarizes the theoretically derived
equations and parameters needed for calculating vibration
attenuation.
The distances, rS and rC, should be distance to the source of

the vibration, as illustrated in Fig. 11 for spherical, and
cylindrical waves. Note that the direction of vibration
amplitude of the spherical wave is in the radial direction from
the source, while that of the cylindrical wave is in the
perpendicular (vertical) direction.
Table 9. Wave Attenuation Equations for Spherical and

Cylindrical Waves, cf. Appendix A
Fig. 11. Illustration of vibrations emitted during pile driving
at the pile toe and along the pile shaft; cS = shear wave
Spherical Wave Cylindrical Wave velocity in the soil; cP = stress wave velocity in the soil.
dcrit = critical distance from pile.
(Eq. A14) (Eq. A16)
Fig. 12 shows the relationship between the k-factors according
Particle (W0 ) (W0 )
0.5 0.5
1 1 to Table 9 and wave lengths for spherical and cylindrical
Velocity, vS = vC =
( 2πρλ ) (πρλ h ) ( rC )
0.5 0.5 0.5
rS waves. The k-factors for spherical waves and cylindrical
v(m/s) waves bracket the empirical range of values shown in Fig. 4.
For the case of cylindrical waves, different intervals of
k-factor cylinder heights have been chosen, within a range covering the
1 1
kS = kC = respective wave length (it is reasonable to assume that the
( 2πρλ ) (πρλh )
0.5 0.5
wave length is approximately of the same magnitude as the
cylinder height). The k-factors for the cylindrical waves are
smaller than those of the spherical waves, cf. Table 9.
Units of k- m2 m However, the attenuation of particle velocity also depends on
factor the distance rS and rC, (different values of exponent, 1.0
kg kg
and 0.5, respectively). It should also be pointed out that the
units of the k-factors are different for spherical and cylindrical
waves. The two are therefore not directly comparable. This
fact emphasizes the limitations of using Eqs. 3 or 4.

sin ΘS 1 − 2ν
0.010
s= = (31)
Spherical Wave Cylinder height = 5m
sin ΘP 2(1 − ν )
Cylinder height = 10m
0.008 Cylinder height = 15m
The amplification factor Fv and Fh according to Eqs. 30a
and 30b are shown in Figs. 13a and 13b for different values of
k‐FACTOR
0.006
Poisson’s ratio, ν, and angles of incidence.
Upper Empirical Range
0.004
2
0.002
Amplification Factor, FV
1.5
Lower Empirical Range
0.000
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Cylindrical Wave 1
WAVE LENGTH (m) Cylindrical Wave ν = 0.25
hC = 5 m hC = 30 m
ν = 0.30
Fig. 12. Variation of k-factor (Eq. 3) as function of wave 0.5
ν = 0.35
length according to Table 9 for a spherical wave and cylinder
waves with height ranging from 5 m through 30 m. Soil ν = 0.49
0
density is 1,800 kg/m3. Upper and Lower Empirical Range
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
according to Fig. 4.
A Angle of Incidence (°)
Reflection of Spherical Waves
When spherical waves, such as those emitted from the pile toe, 2.0
ν = 0.25
encounter a free surface (ground surface), the waves are
A m plification Factor, Fh
reflected or refracted as illustrated in Fig. 11. The reflection ν = 0.30

and refraction of waves depend on the angle of incidence, Θ. 1.5
ν = 0.35
The analysis of waves which are reflected at a free surface is a
complex task. However, it is possible to study a simplified ν = 0.49
case, that of an impinging P-wave (which is the dominant 1.0
wave emitted from the pile toe) at the free surface for which
the amplification factor, Fv, in the vertical direction, and the
amplification factor, Fh, in the horizontal direction can be 0.5
calculated from Eqs. 30a and 30b (Bodare 2005).
cos θ P cos 2θ S 0.0

Fv = 2 (30a) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
s sin 2θ P sin 2θ S + cos2 2θ S
2
B Angle of Incidence (°)
cos θ P sin 2θ S Fig. 13. Variation of vibration amplification factor at free
Fh = 2 (30b)
s sin 2θ P sin 2θ S + cos2 2θ S
2 surface of impinging P-wave for different values of Poisson’s
ratio.
where ΘP = angle of incidence of P-wave (cylindrical)
ΘS = angle of incidence of S-wave (spherical)
s = ratio of sinus for angles of incidence of the It is apparent that the vertical vibration amplification factor is
not strongly affected by Poisson’s ratio. However, in the case
P-wave and the S-wave
of the horizontal vibration amplitude, a significant difference
Fv = amplification factor vertical direction
Fh = amplification factor horizontal direction is obtained for horizontal amplification factors in granular
(small Poisson's ratios) and fine-grained soils (large Poisson's
ratios), respectively. For clays with a Poisson’s ratio of 0.50,
The angles of incidence, Θ are measured to the vertical. The
ratio between the angles of incidence of the P-wave and the amplification effect due to the incidence angle can be
disregarded. This is not the case for granular soils with
S-wave is conveniently expressed by s, which depends on
Poisson’s ratio ranging typically between 0.25 and 0.35.
Poisson’s ratio, ν, according to the relationship in Eq. 31.

Directly above the source, the vibration amplitude of a is not widely used in pile driving practice, but it is well-known
vertically propagating P-wave (angle of incidence equal to 0o) in soil dynamics.
will double, (Fv = 2). At an angle of about 55 to 65 degrees,
the amplification effect has vanished (Fv ≈ 1). In most Table 10. Ratio of Critical Distance, dcrit to pile penetration
practical cases, P-waves will be of importance within a radius depth D at which R-waves are emitted (Eq. 32), cf. Fig. 11
corresponding to one to two pile lengths, within which Fv
varies between 2 and 1. At larger distances, the significance Poisson’s ratio, ν Θcrit rcrit/D
of the vertical amplitude gradually disappears. No amplifi-
degrees
cation occurs directly above the vibration source in the
horizontal direction (Fh = 0). However, at an incidence angle 0.20 28 0.53
larger than 35 degrees, the vibration amplification effect 0.25 25 0.46
should be taken into account.
0.30 21 0.39
0.35 18 0.32
Refraction of Spherical Waves at Ground Surface 0.40 14 0.25
Waves encountering a free surface can be reflected or 0.49 4 0.07

refracted. Figure 11 indicates a distance called critical
distance, dcrit, which is the distance from the pile to where a
spherical wave (P-wave) emitted from the pile toe refracts as a Propagation of Surface Waves
surface wave on reaching the ground surface, also called
Rayleigh wave (R wave). (The term R-wave is being used Surface (R-) waves, which are generated by refracted P- and
here to avoid confusion with shear waves—S waves). The S-waves at the free surface, attenuate along the ground surface
angle Θcrit denotes the angle of incidence of the wave which according to Eq. 34 (Massarsch 1992).
can be determined from Eq. 32 (Bodare 1997).
−n
⎛R ⎞
⎛c ⎞ A2 = A1 ⎜⎜ 2 ⎟⎟ e −α ( R2 − R1 ) (34)
Θcrit = arcsin⎜⎜ S ⎟⎟ (32) ⎝ R1 ⎠
⎝ cP ⎠
where A1 = vibration amplitude at distance R1 from source
where cP = P -wave velocity A2 = vibration amplitude at distance R2 from source
cS = S-wave velocity α = absorption coefficient
It is now possible to estimate the critical distance, rcrit, from For surface waves, the exponent n is equal to 0.5. Equation 34
the pile at which wave refraction will occur at the ground is shown in Fig. 14. Note that in the vicinity of the pile, shear
surface (i.e. where surface waves will be generated), as strain levels can be larger and reduce wave velocities; this
indicated by Eq. 33. effect should be taken into consideration in a detailed analysis.
RELATIVE DISTANCE, R2/R1
rcrit = tan Θcrit D (33) 1 10
1
R1 = 10 m
R ELATIVE VIBR ATIO N AM PLITU D E , A 2 / A 1
n = 0.5
where D = pile penetration depth
rcrit = critical distance from pile at ground surface at
which surface waves are generated
Typical values of the critical distance are given in Table 10 for 0.1
different values of Poisson’s ratio. The table suggests that in
dry coarse-grained soil (Poisson’s ratio between 0.20 – 0.35),
the critical distance from the pile, rcrit, is located at a distance ABSORPTION COEFFICIENT, α (m-1)
approximately equal to half the embedment depth of the 0.000 0.005 0.010 0.020
pile, D. In loose or soft soils below the groundwater level, the
0.030 0.050 0.070 0.100
critical distance becomes much shorter and is in the case of 0.01
clay almost zero.
Fig. 14. Attenuation of surface waves (n = 0.5): relative
The procedure expressed in Eqs. 30a and 30b of determining
the R-wave amplification factor is a powerful approach which amplitude, A2 /A1, as a function of relative distance, R2 R1, for
a range of absorption coefficients (R1 = 10 m). cf. Fig 15.

It is important to appreciate that the absorption coefficient, α, • Calculate the propagation of spherical wave energy
is not a material-independent constant, as often assumed, but from the pile toe to the ground surface, taking into
one that varies with vibration frequency and wave propagation account wave reflection
velocity (and thus also indirectly with shear strain). The • At the critical distance from the pile on the ground
absorption coefficient, α, is of importance for the vibration surface, calculate the vibration attenuation of surface
attenuation, as can be estimated from the Eq. 35 (Massarsch waves
1992). • Calculate the f cylindrical waves from the pile shaft.
2π DM f The calculation method of ground vibrations due to spherical

α= (35)
cR waves, surface waves and cylindrical waves is explained
below. As has been pointed out earlier in this paper, all three
waves can occur at the same time and their intensity will
where α = absorption coefficient (m-1)
DM = material damping (Hz s)-1 depend on the driving method and vary with respect to the
f = vibration frequency (Hz) dynamic soil resistance along the pile shaft and at the pile toe.
cR = surface wave velocity (m/s)
For elastic waves (at a distance of at least one wave length), Spherical Waves
the material damping can be assumed to be within the range
Spherical waves are caused by the dynamic resistance at the
of 3 to 5 %.
pile toe. Assuming only P-waves is a simplification of the real
situation, but makes it possible to capture the most important
The surface wave velocity is for most practical purposes the
aspects of vibration transmission. The attenuation of vibration
same as that of the shear wave velocity. The variation of the
velocity emitted from the pile toe can be calculated based
absorption coefficient is shown in Fig. 15 as a function of the
on Eq. A14 as given in Table 9. Note that the vibration
wave velocity and for different values of vibration frequency.
amplitude is taken in the radial direction from the pile toe.
WAVE VELOCITY, c (m/s)
10 100 The vibration transmission factor at the pile toe, ET, defines
ABSORPTION COEFFICIENT, α (m-1)
1 the maximum vibration velocity that can be transmitted to the

Frequency (Hz)
50
soil at the toe, as well as the hammer efficiency factor, FH,
takes into account the loss of impact energy from the hammer
40
to the pile head. The amplification effect due to vertical
35 reflection of vertical vibration amplitudes at the ground
30 surface is accounted for by Fv, considering also the angle of
0.1
25 incidence of the emitted wave at the ground surface Θ.
20
The vertical ground vibration velocity, vSv, due to spherical
15
(body) waves emitted from the pile toe can now readily be
10
determined from Eq. 36.
5
0.01
( F HW 0)0.5
ν Sv = k s Fv ET cos Θ (36)
Fig. 15. Absorption coefficient α as function of wave rr
velocity for different vibration frequencies (the assumed
value of material damping is 4 %). where vSv = vertical component of spherical
wave amplitude
kS = vibration factor for spherical waves
CALCULATION OF GROUND VIBRATIONS (Table 9)
Fv = vibration amplification factor (Eq. 9a)
The concept of calculating ground vibrations induced by pile ET = vibration transmission efficacy at pile toe
driving is based on the following approach: (Eq. 25)
FH = hammer efficiency factor (Table 7)
• Determine the dynamic pile hammer properties W0 = potential energy generated of pile hammer
• Determine the dynamic pile properties Θ = angle of incidence of spherical wave at
• Estimate the peak particle velocity of the stress wave ground surface
• Assess the vibration transmission efficacy along the rr = radial distance to the pile toe
pile shaft and at the pile toe

Cylindrical Waves component of ground vibrations of R-waves can be readily
determined for different soil types (Poisson’s ratio) and
Cylindrical waves are emitted from that part of the pile shaft solutions are available in the literature (Richart et al. 1970).
where the stress wave is in contact with the surrounding soil.
(It is appreciated that other types of waves can be emitted It should be mentioned that the emission of vibrations from
along the pile shaft and in other directions, but these are the pile shaft and the pile toe can occur at the same time and
neglected in the case of impact pile driving). It is assumed result in amplification of ground vibrations due to wave
that the cylindrical waves propagate horizontally from the pile superposition. However, at this stage, and since the waves
shaft. Their vertical vibration amplitude and the rate of propagate at different velocities and over varying distances,
vibration attenuation are similar to that of surface waves. The this effect is neglected. The above outlined concept of
vertical vibration velocity at the ground surface can be calculating ground vibrations will now be applied to an
determined based on Eq. A16 given in Table 9. The vibration analysis of field measurements from a well-documented case
transmission efficacy, ES, defines the maximum vibration history.
velocity that can be transmitted to the soil along the shaft. The
hammer efficiency factor (or ratio), FH, takes into account the
loss in impact (kinetic) energy. The velocity of the vertical CASE HISTORY OF PILE DRIVING VIBRATIONS
ground vibration, vC, due to cylindrical (shear) waves emitted
along part of the pile shaft (which depends on the wave length General Comments on Data from Case Histories
of the stress wave) can now readily be determined
from Eq. 37. Most case histories reporting vibration measurements from
pile driving contain insufficient information for a scientific
( F HW0 ) 0.5 analysis. Many — even peer reviewed papers and academic
vc = k c E S (37) theses — lack basic information about the pile driving method
( rc )0.5 (hammer and pile dynamic information), geotechnical site
conditions (penetration tests) and dynamic soil properties, how
where vC = vertical component of cylindrical the vibration measurements were performed, time histories
wave amplitude and frequency content of vibrations, direction of measured
kc = vibration factor for spherical waves amplitude (vertical or horizontal), definition of measured
(Table 9) parameters (RMS values, peak or peak-to-peak values), depth
ES = vibration transmission efficacy along pile of pile at the time of measurement, definition of distance (at
shaft (Eq. 19) ground surface or from pile toe), and interpretation of
FH = hammer efficiency factor (Table 7) measurement results. Although simple records of the
W0 = potential energy of pile hammer penetration resistance (blow-count) and a comparison with
rC = horizontal distance from the pile shaft penetration test results can provide valuable information, it is
rarely available. As has been demonstrated in this paper, also
the geometric dimensions and dynamic properties of the pile
Surface Waves hammer and of the pile constitute important information
essential for the assessment of ground vibrations.
Surface waves are caused by refraction of P- and S-waves at
the ground surface at the critical distance, rcrit , which can be
determined from Eq. 33. The vertical vibration amplitude is Case histories reporting ground vibration measurements
determined according to Eq. 36 and vibration attenuation can should— as a minimum — contain the following information.
then be calculated with input of Eqs. 34 and 35. Note that a
spherical wave emitted from the pile toe can reach a • the geotechnical site conditions (location of
measuring point both directly and as a refracted surface groundwater table and soil layering, preferably
wave. However, the spherical wave attenuates more rapidly based on cone penetration test data)
and has little practical consequences beyond a horizontal • dynamic soil properties (shear wave velocities of
distance from the source equal to about 2 pile-embedment soil layers — obtainable in a cone penetration
depths, i.e., corresponding to a 2(H):1(v) distance ratio. test)
• details on the piles (geometry and material
Equations 36 and 37 express the vertical vibration velocity properties including impedance)
generated at a point from a pile driven at a certain distance • pile driving equipment (type of hammer, ram
away. As such, they, combined with Eqs. 19 and 25, allow a travel or height-of-fall, and impedance of
rational analysis of the effect of driving piles near a vibration hammer)
susceptible structure and allow the potential disturbance to be • detailed description of pile installation process
estimated prior to construction start. The horizontal (penetration resistance records, depth of pile toe

at time of measurement), and detailed description not available. The geotechnical properties (with interpreted
of measuring equipment (type of sensors, values) of the soil layers are summarized in Table 11.
direction of measurement, distance and direction)
• vibration measurements in at least two directions,
preferably all three directions, at least at one Table 11. Geotechnical soil profile at test site
reference location
• documentation of measured data (at least a few Soil Layer Stiffness/ Density Shear Poisson
time history traces), preferably available also in Thick- Strength (kg/m3) wave ratio
digital format ness (kPa) velocity
m/s*)
• results of data analyses (frequency spectra). (m)
Fill of 3 - 1,900 150 – 200 0.3
With the availability of highly accurate sensors, powerful data slag
acquisition systems, and efficient analytical tools, it should no
and
longer be difficult to collect and interpret even large quantities
of measurement data – even in real time. This fact is sand
illustrated by the widely used, and cost-effective application of
Clay 12 30 1,600 100 – 150 0.5
stress-wave measurements for obtaining driving records and
bearing capacity analysis. In this context, it is surprising that Sand 7 loose 1,800 250 – 350 0.3
in the past, pile dynamic measurements have focused and
exclusively on the determination of penetration resistance and gravel to
pile bearing capacity, completely neglecting the wealth of dense
information that stress-wave measurements can provide for the
evaluation of ground vibrations. Glacial 3 stiff 1,900 400 – 600 0.3
till
*) Assumed
Site Conditions and Measurement Arrangement at Test Site
The authors have had access to comprehensive field tests Test Pile
published by Nilsson (1989), describing vibration
measurements during the driving of a series of test piles. The The existence of a stiff surface layer on top of the clay
main objective was to establish site-specific driving methods indicated that vibration problems would likely occur during
and to select the optimal pile type which would minimize the beginning of the driving. Vibration problems could also
ground vibrations. Ground vibrations were of major concern be expected during seating of the piles into the bearing layer
due to the fact that several buildings and installations in the at 24 to 25 m depth. Allowable vibration values with respect
vicinity were susceptible to vibrations. Although the reported to damage to the existing structures and installations were
data are not complete (stress-wave measurements were carried estimated according to Swedish standard SS 02 52 11
out, but data were not available), they offer the possibility of (SIS 1999). As the piles were driven into sandy, clayey soils,
analyzing the field data and to compare these with the the standard indicated a vibration velocity, v0, equal to 9 mm/s
theoretical concepts proposed in this paper. (Table 1). The buildings were of normal type (Fb = 1),
constructed of reinforced concrete (Fm = 1.2), and with
The field tests were performed in the southern part of Sweden foundations on toe-bearing piles (Fg = 1.0). Therefore,
near the city of Skövde. In this area, located inland, the soil according to Eq. 1, the maximum allowable vibration velocity
conditions are somewhat different to the well-known, soft clay (vertical component) was vmax = 10.8 mm/s. A separate study
deposits in the coastal regions. The soil profile in the test area regarding the environmental effects of pile driving (noise and
was about 2 m to 4 m of surface fill, consisting of well- vibrations) on occupants of buildings and installations was
compacted, alternating layers of furnace slag sand-size performed, but is not addressed in this paper.
particles and sand and gravel. Below followed a relatively
homogeneous, 12 m thick layer of medium stiff clay with In order to assess the effect of ground vibrations at the site
average undrained shear strength of 30 kPa deposited on a from driving different pile types, a series of piles were
layer of sand with a thickness of 7 m on glacial till. Bedrock installed and extensive vibration measurements were
was encountered at a depth of about 25 m below the ground performed (Nilsson, 1989). The present paper is limited to the
surface. The groundwater table was located about 3 to 4 m results of driving one test pile, a reinforced concrete pile with
below the ground surface at the top of the clay layer. a square cross section (270 x 270 mm). The concrete pile has
Unfortunately, data from more detailed geotechnical a wave velocity of 4,000 m/s, a bulk density of 2,400 kg/m3,
investigations (such as penetration tests or soil sampling) are and a cross section area of 0.0729 m2, which corresponds to a

pile impedance, ZP, of 714 kNs/m. The pile was made up by vibration components are known, it is possible to determine
three segments of lengths (13.3 + 10 + 6 = 29.3 m), which the resultant of vibration amplitudes. It should be noted that
were jointed in the field with a mechanical type splice. The the resultant amplitude was calculated from the maximum
test pile was driven by a hydraulic hammer type Banut with a (peak) values in three directions, and may therefore slightly
ram mass of 4,000 kg and a length, LH, of 3.65 m. overestimate the actual maximum amplitude (the maximum
may not necessarily have occurred at the same time in all three
During the driving through the overburden soils, the hammer directions). The 40-m measuring point is 1.6 pile lengths
height-of-fall was kept to 0.40 m. It was increased to 0.50 m horizontal distance away from the pile and 1.9 pile
during the termination driving into the stiff glacial till at a lengths distance away from the pile toe at end of driving.
final depth of approximately 25 m. Figure 16 shows the pile Because the vibration measurements were made
driving diagram, where the number of blows per 0.5 m is simultaneously in both radial and vertical directions, it is
plotted as well as the accumulated number of blows. Also possible to determine also the inclination of the resultant
shown are the soil layers described in Table 11, as well as the vibration amplitude in the direction of wave propagation, as
depths where vibration measurements were performed. indicated in Fig. 18. Also shown in the figure is the calculated
inclination of waves which, theoretically, would be emitted
from the pile toe only—assuming linear wave paths.
Vibration Measurements
H5
Vibration measurements were performed using five geophones
of type SM-6/9 (three gages measuring vertical vibration, i.e., PILE H4
particle velocity, and two gages measuring horizontal V1 V2 V3
vibration). The "vertical" geophones were placed at 10 (V1),
20 (V2) and 40 m (V3) distance from the test pile, Fig. 17. A
10 m 10 m 20 m
data logger recorded the peak value of vibration velocity at
each hammer blow as well as the depth of the pile at each 40 m
measurement. At a horizontal distance of 20 m, vibrations
were also measured horizontally in the radial (H4) and Fig. 17. Arrangement of vibration sensors during driving of
transverse (H5) directions of wave propagation. The signals the test pile. V1, V2, and V3 indicate "vertical" and H4 and
were amplified and registered by a tape recorder, stored H5 indicate "horizontal” geophones.
digitally, and later analyzed.
ANGLE OF INCLINATION (°)
Pile Penetration Resistance (Blows/0.5 m)
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
0
DEPTH OF PILE TOE (m)
0
FILL
5
5
10
DEPTH (m)
10 CLAY Inclination of
Waves from
15 the Pile Toe
15
COARSE- 20
GRAINED
20 SOIL
25
TILL
25
0 400 800 1,200 1,600 2,000 2,400 2,800 3,200 3,600 4,000
Fig. 18. Inclination of resultant vibration amplitude (as
Total Number of Blows
angle to the vertical) and estimated angle of incidence of
waves emitted from pile toe. Note that a low angle of
Fig. 16. Penetration resistance during driving of 29 m long inclination implies a larger vertical vibration amplitude.
concrete pile with hydraulic hammer to 25 m depth. Also
indicated are main soil layers and by arrows the depths at The inclination of vibration amplitudes during pile driving
which detailed vibration analyses were carried out. through the surface fill and clay layer is clearly lower than the
inclination if vibrations would have been emitted from the pile
At 20 m horizontal distance from the pile, ground vibrations toe only. Therefore, in these layers, it can be concluded that a
were measured in three directions, during penetration of the large part of vibration energy occurs at, and is transmitted
pile and termination driving at 25 m depth. Since all three along the pile shaft and/or propagate as surface waves.

However, when the pile toe encountered the dense glacial till propagation), which explains why the measured vibration
at 17 m depth, the measured inclination of vibration amplitude amplitudes are almost the same.
(horizontal component) increases and vibrations agree best
with those emitted as spherical waves from the pile toe. During the driving of the pile, vibration records in the time
domain (vibration time histories) were obtained at several
Based on these simple vibration measurements it is possible to distances and these records were also analyzed in the
estimate the likely origin of the ground vibrations during pile frequency domain (as Fourier spectra). Figures 20 through 23
penetration into different soil layers at a distance of 20 m. show the time histories of vibration records at 10, 20 and 40 m
Above 17 m depth, a large part of ground vibration energy is from the pile at a toe penetration depth of 3 m. The time of
emitted in the form of cylindrical waves (or surfaces waves at hammer impact is also indicated. The dominant vibration
later distance) while below 17 m, most vibrations are emitted frequency is for all three locations in the range of 8 through
from the pile toe. Note that the interpretation of ground 15 Hz, with a similar distribution of the frequency content at
vibration amplitudes depends on the relative distance between all measurement locations. The dominant (central) frequency
the pile and the point of observation, as illustrated in Fig. 2. is found at 13 Hz. It is of interest to investigate the difference
Of course, a more detailed analysis of pile resistance in frequency content at one location between the vertical, the
distribution would be possible from analysis of stress-wave radial, and transversal vibration amplitude.
measurements. Nevertheless, even the simple vibration
measurements results reported here provide valuable insight There is a distinct difference between the frequency spectra of
into the pattern of vibration propagation. the vertical, radial, and transversal vibration amplitudes.
While in the case of vertical vibrations, there appears to be
The vertical vibration velocity was measured at three distances one dominant frequency range (about 13 Hz), the frequency
from the pile and the results are shown in Fig. 19. spectra of the horizontal records are much broader, with
dominant frequency peaks at 45 Hz. This underscores the
VERTICAL VIBRATION VELOCITY (mm/s) assumption that horizontal vibrations are due to P-waves,
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 while vertical vibrations are caused by the cylindrically
0 expanding wave front, which propagates at the velocity of
shear waves. Figs. 22 and 23 compare the effect of soil
V3 V1 resistance on ground vibrations in the vertical and radial
5 V2
DEPTH TO PILE TOE (m)
h = 0.4m direction. The time history traces are shown for three
interesting depths, 11.5 m (where pile driving was halted to
10
splice the pile), at 17 m depth (during penetration into the stiff
layer of sand and gravel) and at 25 m depth (during end-of-
driving).
15
When the driving was resumed at 11.5 m depth, the
penetration resistance showed an increase relative the
20 resistance before the pause. (It is well-known that piles driven
h = 0.5m
in clay and left to rest, excess pore water pressure dissipates
causing pile “set up”. The increased penetration resistance
25
resulted in an increase of vibration velocity, as can be seen in
Fig. 22 and Fig. 23, an effect which also is even more apparent
Fig. 19. Vertical vibration velocity at three distances as in Fig. 19. The velocity decreased as the shaft resistance
function of pile depth together with the hammer height-of-fall. diminished in the continued driving.
When the pile was driven through the surface fill, the At 17 m depth, the driving resistance increases sharply as the
magnitude of the vibration amplitudes at 10 and 20 m distance pile enters into the denser layer of sand and gravel. However,
are relatively equal, compared to that at 40 m distance. The it is noted that the vertical ground vibrations did not increase
vertical vibration velocity decreases markedly with increasing correspondingly, while the horizontal vibration rose sharply.
horizontal distance to the pile. This observation reinforces the
previously mentioned observation that cylindrical waves (or During termination driving at 25 m depth (with hammer
surface waves) dominate during pile driving through the upper height-of-fall increased to 0.5 m), the width of dominant
soil layers. However, when the pile toe encounters stiff soil frequencies of the horizontal vibrations increased and covered
layers, spherical waves begin to dominate. At a pile depth a much wider range, while the dominant frequency of vertical
range of 17 to 25 m, the direct distance from the pile toe to the vibrations remained low at around 10 Hz. The vertical and
measurement points V1 and V2 are 26 m and 32 m, horizontal vibration amplitude were now almost equal.
respectively (small difference in terms of vibration

Fig. 20. Vertical vibration velocity records and normalized Fig. 21. Vibration velocity records and normalized Fourier
Fourier spectra for measurement locations V1, V2, and V3 spectra at 20 m distance for sensors V2 (vertical), H4 (radial)
during pile driving at 3 m depth. The arrow indicates the time and H5 (transversal) during pile driving at 3 m depth. The
of hammer impact. arrow indicates the instant of hammer impact.

Fig. 22. Vertical vibration velocity records and normalized Fig. 23. Vertical vibration velocity records and normalized
Fourier spectra for measurement location V2, during pile Fourier spectra for measurement location H4 (radial), during
driving at 11.5, 17, and 25 m depth. The arrow indicates the pile driving at 11.5, 17, and 25 m depth. The arrow indicates
time of hammer impact. the time of hammer impact.

Vibration Velocities
500
From the records of vertical particle vibrations, the wave 450
propagation velocities can be estimated since the time of 400
hammer impact is known. Two methods were used to
350
determine wave velocities: interval time from hammer impact
WAVE VELOCITY (m/s)
to first peak, using horizontal propagation direction 300
(cylindrical waves emitted from pile shaft) and interval time 250
from hammer impact to first arrival (spherical waves emitted 200
from pile toe). It is acknowledged that the method is crude,
150
but it provides useful insight which wave velocity values Depth of Pile Toe (m)
should be used when analyzing pile vibrations. Figure 24 100
17 18 20
shows the calculated wave velocities determined from 0.5 m 50
to 16 m depth, for which depth range most of the vibration 21 25
0
energy propagated by cylindrical waves. This wave velocity 0 10 20 30 40 50
was close to the average shear wave velocity of the soil layers DIRECT DISTANCE FROM PILE TOE TO SENSOR (m)
of 125 through 175 m/s.
Fig. 25. Velocity of direct (spherical) wave determined from
400 first arrival from pile toe to sensors V1, V2, and V3,
respectively, as measured at different pile toe depths.
350
300
WAVE VELOCITY (m/s)
INTERPRETATION OF VIBRATION MEASUREMENTS

250
200 Unfortunately, the geotechnical information from the case

history is not complete. In particular, results from penetration
150
tests would have provided valuable information regarding soil
100 stiffness and strength. However, based on the general soil
Horizontal Distance to Sensors profile and the penetration resistance from the test pile, it has
50
10 m 20 m 40 m been possible to compile representative geotechnical data for
0 the analysis and compile typical values of soil data to establish
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 a reference to the analysis method. The so-compiled soil data
PILE TOE DEPTH (m) are summarized in Table 12 and were chosen based on the pile
penetration resistance distribution shown in Fig. 16.
Fig. 24. Velocity of cylindrical wave, determined from first
peak of velocity amplitude at sensors V1, V2, and V3,
respectively, as measured at different pile toe depths. Table 12. Assumed geotechnical properties of soil layers
For penetration depths from 17 to 25 m, wave velocities were

Layer
determined from the time interval between hammer impact Poisson's
Soil Thick- Density cP cS
and first arrival of vibrations at the three sensor locations. The Rc
Type ness (kg/m3) (m/s) (m/s) Ratio
direct distance from the pile toe to the sensor locations on the
(m)
ground surface were used to calculate the wave velocities, as
presented in Fig. 25. Sand
3.5 1,900 400 200 0.33 0.25
fill
The highest velocities were measured at sensor location V1,
where the waves were propagating at a steeper angle than at Clay 12.0 1,600 1,450 125 0.49 0.30
locations V2 and V3. Wave velocities increased with pile
penetration depth, confirming that wave velocities increase in Sand
the stiffer bottom layers. Also the groundwater table will have 7.0 1,800 1,450 300 0.33 0.30
gravel
affected the wave propagation velocity at steeper propagation
angles. The wave velocities range from 425 m/s at V1 to 200 Glacial
1.5 1,900 1,450 500 0.33 0.35
m/s at V3. The difference between wave velocities decreased till
at larger distances from the pile.

Hammer and Pile Dynamic Data The vibration transmission efficacy, ET can be determined
from Eq. 25. Below the groundwater table, the P-wave
An important factor affecting ground vibrations is the dynamic velocity, cP, is assumed to correspond to that of saturated
performance of the pile driving hammer. The test pile was water (1,450 m/s) from which the corresponding specific soil
driven by a hydraulic hammer of type Banut with properties impedance, zP, is determined. Note, however, in coarse-
given in Table 13, while the dynamic data for the pile are grained soils, the P-wave velocity is likely to increase below
compiled in Table 14. the pile toe due to compaction and may be reduced in fine-
grained soils due to disturbance and pore water pressure
increase.
Table 13. Data for the Banut hydraulic hammer (i.e., ram)
From Eq. 36 the vertical ground vibration velocity vS,v caused
Mass (kg) by emission of spherical waves, can be calculated at different
4,000
radial distances from the pile toe, rr taking into account the
3
Steel density (kg/m ) 7,800 inclination of the incident wave, Θ.
H
Velocity Steel, c (m/s) 5100
H The calculation steps of spherical waves emitted from the pile
Hammer length, L (m) 3,65
toe are summarized in Table 15. The vibration velocities
Hammer Impedance (kNs/m) 27,200 determined in Table 15 are shown in Fig. 26 together with the
Height-of-fall during driving (m) 0.4 measured vertical vibration velocities. The comparison
between calculated and measured vibration velocities indicates
Height-of-fall at end-of-driving (m) 0.5 that the waves emitted during the driving are not in the form
of spherical waves (P-waves). The spherical waves—as
expected—will not dominate until the pile penetrates into the
Table 14. Pile Data. stiff bottom layers (sandy gravel and moraine), and they have
little significance when the pile penetrates the surface layer
Cross section area (m2) 0.0729 and the soft clay deposit.
Bulk density (kg/m3) 2,400
P
Velocity, c (m/s) 4,000 Table 15. Calculation of Spherical Waves (P-waves) emitted
H from Pile Toe
Total Length, L (m) 29.3
Impedance (kNs/m) 714
The driving energy, W0, can now be calculated, using a

hammer efficiency factor of FH = 0.9, which is a typical upper
value for hydraulic hammers. Note that for the calculation of
ground vibration, applying upper limits is a conservative
approach.
Calculation of Spherical Waves Emitted from the Pile Toe
When the pile toe penetrates into a soil layer, vibrations are
Calculation of Surface Waves due to Spherical Waves
emitted in the form of spherical waves (mainly P-waves).
The vertical vibration (mainly P-wave) amplitude was
In the theoretical assessment of the vibration propagation from
measured when the pile toe was at four depths (3.0, 11.5, 17.0,
the pile, it was shown that surface waves (R-waves) can be
and 24 m) for the three vibration sensors at the horizontal
generated when P-waves encounter a free surface (ground
distances, 10, 20 and 40 m from the pile. The calculation
surface) at a critical angle, Eq. 33. The critical incidence
depths are indicated in the pile driving diagram, Fig. 16. As a
angle for the different soil layers is given in Table 16 and
first step, the incidence angle of the wave at the ground
depends on the ratio of the S-wave and P-wave velocity.
surface is calculated, assuming a straight ray path from the
pile toe to the ground surface. The vibration amplification
Once the critical distance at the ground surface, rcrit, has been
factor Fv can then be determined, assuming Poisson’s ratio
calculated, and the vibration amplification factor Fv, is known,
of 0.33. Next, the kS-factor is calculated according to the
the vibration velocity at the critical distance vcrit, can be
equations presented in Table 9 (Eqs. A14 and A16).
calculated. The results of the calculations for the example pile

are shown in Table 17. The same calculation method was Table 17. Calculation of Surface Waves (R-waves) emitted
used as for P-waves as described above. It is now necessary to from pile toe at critical distance
determine the attenuation of ground vibrations due toe
geometrical damping and material damping. The absorption
coefficient can be estimated from the following relationship,
assuming material damping (4 %) and a dominant frequency
(15 Hz). An absorption coefficient, α, equal to 0.02 m-1 was
obtained from Eq. 35. The vibration amplitude, A2, at
distance, R2, can now be readily calculated from Eq. 34. For
surface waves, with an exponent, n, equal to 0.5, the vertical Fig. 27 shows a good correlation between calculated and
vibration velocities at 10, 20 and 40 m can be calculated, as actually measured vibration velocities. However, the vibration
presented in Table 17. amplitudes in the upper soil layers are somewhat higher than
calculated. This may be due to a higher soil resistance (P and
VERTICAL VIBRATION VELOCITY (mm/s) S-wave velocities) than assumed. Moreover, several factors,
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 which can influence ground vibrations, have not been
0 considered, such as superposition of vibrations from different
P-Wave sources (although they occur at different vibration
5 frequencies). An additional possible aspect is that vibration

amplification occurs due to resonance effects in the upper soil
10
layer. This effect is not taken into account in the present
V1 @ 10m analysis. In spite of the many simplified assumptions, the
V2 @ 20m model appears to capture the main factors influencing the
15 generation of surface waves, which are caused by emission of
V3 @ 40 m
vibrations at the pile toe.
Calc. @ 10m
20
Calc. @ 20 m VERTICAL VIBRATION VELOCITY (mm/s)
Calc. @ 40 m 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
25
0
R-Wave
Fig. 26. Measured vertical vibration velocities (dashed lines) 5

and calculated (solid lines) spherical waves (P-waves) emitted
from pile toe at 10, 20, and 40 m distance from the pile. Note, 10
V1 @10m
P-waves are emitted from the pile toe and do not dominate the
V2 @ 20m
measured vibration until the pile toe encounters toe resistance 15
V3 @ 40m
(below about 17 m depth).
Cal. @ 10m
20
Calc. @ 20m
Calc. @ 40m
Table 16. Determination of critical distance at ground surface 25
at which surface waves are generated. Also shown is the
corresponding amplification factor, FV Fig. 27. Vertical vibration velocities (dashed lines) measured
at 10, 20, and 40 m distance from the pile and calculated
cP cS Hcrit rcrit Fv (solid lines) velocities caused by surface waves (R-waves)
emitted from pile toe and refracted at the surface.
Sand
fill 400 200 30 1.73 1.7
Clay 1,450 125 5 2.47 2.00 Calculation of Cylindrical Waves Emitted Along Pile Shaft
Sandy Similar to the P-wave emitted from the pile toe, the dynamic
gravel 1,450 300 12 3.20 1.85 resistance along the pile shaft can also be a source of ground
Glacial vibrations, emitted when the pile shaft moves relative to the
till 1,450 500 20 5.01 1.65 soil. Therefore, during the driving through the overburden
before the pile toe encounters significant resistance to the
The calculated vertical vibration velocities according to penetration, the emitted vibration waves are expected to be
Table 17 are shown in Fig. 27, together with the measured cylindrical waves. Vibration attenuation is similar to that of
vibration velocities at corresponding pile penetration depths surface waves, but the source and emission pattern are
and distances. fundamentally different. When the stress wave moves down

the pile, only the part of the pile which corresponds to the
VERTICAL VIBRATION VELOCITY (mm/s)
wave length of the propagating wave will emit vibrations to
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
the surrounding soil. To calculate the transfer of cylindrical
0
waves along the pile shaft, the wave length, LW, of the wave C-Wave

propagating in the pile is first calculated from Eq. 14. Then,
5
the vibration efficacy factor ES that defines the vibrations
transferred from the shaft is calculated according to Eq. 19.
10
Note that the shear wave velocity reduction factor RC is V1 @ 10m
chosen considering the resistance developing along the pile V2 @ 20m
15
shaft during the driving, as indicated from the penetration V3 @ 40m
resistance (Fig. 16). The variation of the vibration velocity in Calc. @ 10m
20
the horizontal direction from the pile shaft can now be Calc. at 20m
determined from Eq. 37. Calc. @40m
25
An important aspect, which needs to be taken into account, is

the effect of soil remolding along the pile shaft, using the Fig. 28. Measured vertical vibration velocities (dashed lines)
empirical RR-coefficient. In the case of shaft resistance, the and calculated (solid lines) spherical waves (C-waves) emitted
value is in most soils lower than unity and can for concrete from pile toe at 10, 20, and 40 m distance from the pile. Note,
piles be assumed to be approximately 0.5 (in contrast to toe cylindrical waves are emitted from the pile shaft and cease to
resistance, where the value can be larger or smaller than unity, dominate the measured vibration when the pile toe encounters
depending on soil type). It should also be pointed out that toe resistance (below about 17 m depth).
when driving a pile group at close spacing, the lateral earth
stress can increase significantly and increase the shaft
resistance. The calculation of vC is summarized in Table 18. Comparison of Calculated and Measured Vibrations
In Fig. 29, the vertical vibration velocities determined

Table 18. Calculation of cylindrical waves (C-waves) emitted according to the theoretical approach presented in this paper
along the pile shaft (for four different depths) are compared with measured
vertical vibrations. The theoretical model agrees very well the
variation of vibration velocities with distance and envelopes
the measured values. However, as has been pointed out in
connection with the discussion of Fig. 28 above, vibrations
caused by the cylindrical waves in the sandy gravel and glacial
till (where pile penetration was small) should be disregarded.
7
P-Waves: 3.0 11.5 17.0 24.0
VERTICAL VIBRATION VELOCITY (mm/s)
R-Waves: 3.0 11.5 17.0 24.0

6 C-Waves: 3.0 11.5 17.0 24.0
MEASURED: V1 @ 10m V2 @ 20m V3 @ 40 m

5
4
The calculated cylindrical waves according to Table 18 are
shown in Fig. 28 and compared with the measured ground 3
vibrations.
2
Considering the simplified analysis, the agreement shown in
1
Fig. 28 between calculated and measured vibrations is very
good during the driving through the overburden above about 0
15 m depth. Note that during the final phase of driving, 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
cylindrical waves are overestimated as the relative dis- DISTANCE (m)
placement between the pile shaft and the surrounding soil will
be small. Therefore, vibration velocities calculated for the last Fig. 29. Comparison of measured and calculated vertical
about 8 m of driving are not representative. However, they are vibration velocities as function of distance for different pile
included in Fig. 28 to illustrate the point. penetration depths for spherical, surface and cylindrical
waves, respectively.

Calculation Based on Energy Concept CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
For comparison, the empirical relationship given in Eq. 3 and General Comments
shown in Fig. 4 has been used to calculate vibration velocities
for the case history. Figure 30 presents the calculated ground In spite of the wide use of driven piles and sheet piles and the
vibrations at the horizontal distances from the pile of the three increasing awareness of the public and authorities for
sensor locations for different penetration depths, when environmental problems, little progress has been made in the
assuming a k-value, equal to 0.75 and a nominal energy, W0, understanding of ground vibrations caused by impact pile
equal to 1,600 J (mass of 4,000 kg and height-of-fall driving. Local codes and standards are available giving advice
of 0.4 m). Similar to Fig. 26 to 29, the measured vibration regarding limiting values of vibration velocity based on local
velocities are also plotted in the figure. As can be seen, the or regional experience, which can be used to assess broadly
vibration velocities calculated from the energy concept the risk for damage to nearby structures.
underestimate the actual velocities considerably. It should
also be noted that if only the horizontal distance from the pile The engineering profession has accepted crude prediction
location at the ground surface would have been used in Eq. 3, models, based on empirically developed concepts, which do
the calculated values shown in Fig. 30 would correspond to not reflect the key factors controlling the pile driving with
those at zero pile penetration depth—agreeing very poorly regard to vibration emission. This is surprising, because
with the actually measured vibration velocities. dynamic pile testing and sophisticated analytical methods are
commonly used to predict pile drivability and bearing capacity
and, as shown, they can be easily adapted to vibration
Risk of Damage to Buildings problems.
The main purpose of the pile driving tests at the site was to
determine the distance where ground vibrations could be Requirements Regarding Case History Data
expected to be lower than the limiting value recommended by
the Swedish standard. From Eq. 1, the maximum allowable Most case histories describing vibration measurements during
vibration velocity (vertical component) is vmax = 10.8 mm/s. pile driving provide insufficient information for a scientific
According to Fig. 29, at 40 m distance, the maximum vertical evaluation and interpretation of measurement results. Case
vibration velocity would not exceed 4 mm/s and even at 10 m histories documenting stress-wave measurements in
distance the expected maximum value would be combination with ground vibration measurements at different
below 7 mm/s. The project was completed without any distances from the driven pile would offer important
damage to the structures. However, some concern was information which would facilitate the assessment of how
expressed with regard to environmental considerations vibration energy is transferred from the pile hammer, along
(occupants in buildings and vibration-sensitive equipment and the pile shaft, to the pile toe, and to the surrounding soil
installations). layers. However, such information is not available for
application to ground vibration problems.
VIBRATION VELOCITY (mm/s)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
0 Importance of Pile and Soil Impedance
10 m
40 m
20 m
A fundamental aspect of ground vibrations induced by pile
5
PILE TOE DEPTH (m)
driving is the realization that vibrations are caused by the

velocity-dependent soil resistance along the shaft and at the
10 pile toe, which set upper limits to the vibration energy, which
can be transferred. Applying the theoretical aspects of pile
15
10 m
dynamics, it is possible to estimate with satisfactory accuracy
20 m the dynamic forces at the pile head, along the pile shaft and at
20
40 m the pile toe. The guidance provided in this paper combined
V1 @ 10m
V2 @ 20m
with basic geotechnical information is in many cases sufficient
V3 @ 40 m to assess the dynamic soil properties
25
The impedance of the pile and of the soil are the single most
Fig. 30. Ground vibrations calculated according to Eq. 3 at important parameters for calculating ground vibrations as
three horizontal distances from the test pile during the driving these govern the transfer and propagation of vibrations in the
to the 25 m depth assuming a value of k = 0.75. pile, along the pile-soil interface, and in the surrounding soil.

Limitations of Empirical Methods disturbance and excess pore water pressure. The paper
introduces a vibration transmission factor—vibration
Empirical calculation methods used for predicting ground efficacy—which adjusts the dynamic force which can be
vibrations induced by impact pile driving are based on energy transmitted along the pile-soil interface and thus also the
concepts, were initially developed for estimating blasting magnitude of ground vibrations.
vibrations. However, the parameters used in the empirical
relationships are inconsistent with respect to their units and
the different parameters are not defined. For example, the Vibrations Generated By Pile Driving
distance to use in assessing the propagation of ground
vibrations from the source is not indicated. Consequently, the Based on elastic theory, the propagation of waves from the
horizontal distance at the ground surface is often chosen for pile shaft (cylindrical waves) and at the pile toe (spherical
the predictions, neglecting the fact that in most cases the waves) can be analyzed. It can be shown that serious errors
source of vibrations is either located along the pile shaft are made if empirical concepts are used without taking into
and/or at the pile toe. account the origin of vibration energy. Closed-form solutions
are presented for estimating the parameters needed for the
assessment of vibration propagation.
New Method for Vibration Prediction
The elastic wave velocities, as determined from seismic field
This paper presents a new concept that makes it possible to or laboratory measurements must be adjusted, taking into
distinguish between different vibration sources (pile shaft and account the effect of strain level. The shear strain level
pile toe). It also makes it possible to estimate the maximum induced by vibrations in soil will be high in the vicinity of the
vibration transmission, which can occur at the pile-soil pile and affect the magnitude of wave velocity (the soil will be
interface. The maximum dynamic force imparted to the pile in the non-elastic range). Thus, also the soil impedance will
head by the drop hammer can be estimated with sufficient be affected by strain level.
accuracy, provided that the hammer properties (length and
impedance) and the hammer height-of-fall are known. The An important aspect is the fact that vibrations can be amplified
particle velocity in the pile, generated by the propagating or reduced at the ground surface and that the angle of
stress wave, is an important parameter as this defines the incidence must be taken into consideration. When spherical
dynamic force. In contrast to present practice, the potential or waves encounter the ground surface at a particular critical
nominal energy of the pile driving hammer is not relevant for angle, the vibrations give rise to waves, propagating along the
assessing ground vibrations. It is shown that, instead, the ground surface — surface waves. Solutions are available to
hammer properties (impedance and hammer height) as well as determine the vertical vibration amplitude at the critical
the driving method (height-of-drop) govern ground vibration distance and to establish the attenuation of the surface wave,
emission. taking into account the wave velocity.
Three wave types can be caused by pile driving: spherical The most important advantage of the presented analysis is the
waves emitted from the pile toe (primarily P-waves), improved understanding of how geotechnical and dynamic
cylindrical wave due to shear along the pile shaft and surface parameters affect ground vibrations—factors that have been
waves which are composed of refracted P- and S-waves, when completely neglected in the past. It is believed that, with the
these encounter the ground surface at a critical angle. It is increasing availability of stress-wave measurements and
possible, based on the concepts presented in the paper, to ground vibration recordings in the three principal directions
determine the vibration amplitude generated by each of these and at several distances from the source, the present model can
wave types. be further refined.
The dynamic (velocity-dependent) soil resistance can be

estimated based on the soil impedance at the pile shaft and at Evaluation of the Case History
the pile toe. Basic concepts developed in pile dynamics can
be used to determine these parameters, taking into account that A case history providing detailed ground vibration
the shear wave velocity of the soil decreases at large strain. measurements was analyzed, where a concrete pile was driven
Guidelines based on soil plasticity are given which help to into a soil deposit consisting of a stiff surface layer on medium
estimate the shear wave velocity and reduction factor. stiff clay below which granular soil and glacial till was
encountered. This geological formation is rather complex and
In most soils, the shaft resistance will decrease due to shear makes it possible to evaluate the different modes of ground
strain and remolding. At the pile toe, the soil stiffness and, vibration emission from the pile shaft and at the pile toe.
therefore, the wave velocity can increase due to gradual Based on detailed vibration measurements and frequency
densification of granular soils, or be reduced as a result of soil analysis of vibration records, it was possible to identify

different wave types and their likely source of origin (shaft a hammer with a smaller driving energy (without also a
and/or toe) as well as the angle of incidence of waves. smaller impact force) does not necessarily reduce ground
vibrations.
The theoretical concepts presented in this paper were used to
calculate ground vibrations during different phases of the Based on the approach proposed in this paper, the following
driving of a test pile. The calculated vibration values are in recommendations are offered for ways to alleviate vibration
good agreement with measured velocities, in spite of the concerns.
simplifications on which the theory has been based.
1. Ground vibrations are not directly affected by the driving
energy. However, reducing the drop height of the hammer
Limitations of Proposed Prediction Method (and thus the impact velocity) will decrease ground
vibrations.
It should be emphasized that the theoretical models presented
2. The length of the pile hammer influences the length of the
in this paper are based on assumptions, which limit the
stress wave (and thus the transfer of vibrations from the
validity of vibration predictions. As vibration estimates in
pile to the soil). A shorter stress wave will reduce the
most cases must be made prior to field tests, it is necessary to
length of force transfer along the pile shaft, but it can at the
assume a range of input parameters, such as pile driving
same time reduce the ability to drive the pile, in particular
equipment and installation process, different pile types, and
for piles with high shaft resistance in sandy soils.
soil profiles. The strength of the proposed model is the
possibility to identify the relative importance of different input 3. One of the most important parameters affecting ground
parameters and their consequence on ground vibrations. No vibrations is pile impedance: ground vibrations increase
effect of vibration amplification (superposition of different dramatically with decreasing pile impedance.
wave types) has been included. Moreover, this simplified
model for the transmission of vibrations from the pile to the 4. Ground vibrations will increase with increasing specific
soil impedance (zP at the pile toe and zS along the pile
soil and the propagation of waves (assuming straight rays in
shaft).
each soil layer) and the effect of wave refraction/reflection is
expected to be improved, as more case data become available. 5. Reduction of the contact area between the pile and the soil
will decrease ground vibrations.
Another uncertainty is the superposition of ground vibrations
during pile penetration, as the wave propagation process from 6. Ground vibrations can be reduced by decreasing soil
different depths and sources (at different frequencies) can lead stiffness (impedance), which can be achieved by different
to superposition or canceling of vibration amplitudes. measures, such as pre-boring, water jetting, or changing of
pile type.
The frequency content of ground vibrations is of great
practical importance. For instance, when the effect of ground
vibrations on buildings are considered, the analysis will show ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
whether or not there is a potential for amplified vibration.
The first author wishes to acknowledge the close cooperation
However, in spite of the simplifications and uncertainties, the and stimulating discussions with Prof. Anders Bodare of the
proposed method has shown good correlation with the Royal Institute of Technology (KTH) in Stockholm, Sweden.
vibration values measured during the driving of the test pile, His profound theoretical knowledge of vibration problems and
and demonstrated that the intensity of ground vibrations is ability to find solutions to challenging problems has been of
strongly affected by soil resistance along the pile shaft and at great importance for the concepts described in this paper.
the pile toe. Theses supervised by Dr. Bodare, such as the excellent field
measurements presented by Mr. Gunnar Nilsson, have been a
valuable source for scientific evaluation. The diligent work
Measures to Reduce Ground Vibrations and assistance by Mr. Nilsson in making available detailed
results of vibration measurements is acknowledged.
When planning piling projects, the design engineer is often
required to propose measures to reduce ground vibrations. As The valuable comments by Dr. Martin Jonsson, Dr. Mauricio
has been demonstrated above, the empirical, energy-based Ochoa, and David Klingberg in their thorough review of the
model is incorrect and can be misleading. For example, using manuscript are appreciated.

REFERENCES Goble, G.G., [1995]. “What causes piles to penetrate”. Deep
Foundations Institute 20th Annual Members Conference and
Attewell, P.B. and Farmer, I.W., [1973]. “Attenuation of Meeting October 16–18, [1995], Charleston, South Carolina,
ground vibrations from pile driving”. Ground Engineering, Proceedings, pp. 95-101.
6(4) 26 - 29.
Heckman, W.S. and Hagerty, D.J., [1978]. “Vibrations
Bodare, A., [1997]. “Jord och bergdynamik” (Soil and Rock associated with pile driving”. American Society of Civil
dynamics). In Swedish. Lecture Handouts, Dept. of Soil and Engineering, Journal of the Construction Division,
Rock Mechanics, Royal Institute of Technology (KTH), 104 (CO4) 385-394.
Stockholm, Sweden, 165 p.
Hope, V.S and Hiller, D.M., [2000]. “Prediction of ground
Bodare, A., [2005]. ”Härledning av förstoringsfaktor vid borne vibration from percussive piling”, Canadian
reflektion av tryckvåg vid fri bergyta” (Derivation of Geotechnical Journal 37(3) 700-711.
Amplification Factor on Reflection of Pressure Wave at Free
Rock Surface). Bilaga 3, SKB Report R-04-06 Iwanowski, T. and Bodare, A., [1988]. “On soil damping
(Inkapslingsanläggning, Byggbarhetsanalys av bergschakt) by factor used in wave analysis of pile driving”. International
Fredriksson, A. and Johansson S-E., Nitro Consult AB, conference on Application of Stress-wave Theory to Piles,
Niklasson, B. Skanska Teknik AB, December 2005, Ed. B.H. Fellenius, Ottawa, May 25-27, 1988, pp. 343-352.
pp. 109-112.
Jedele, L.P., [2005]. “Energy-attenuation relationships from
Brenner, R.P. and Viranuvut, S., [1977], “Measurement and vibrations revisited”. GeoFrontiers 2005. Soil dynamics
prediction of vibrations generated by drop hammer piling in symposium in honor of professor Richard D. Woods. Eds:
Bangkok subsoils”. Proceedings of the 5th Southeast Asian Stoke, KH II, Anderson, D, Ratje, EM. Austin, Texas,
Conference on Soil Engineering, Bangkok, July 1977, January 24-26, 2005, American Society of Civil Engineers,
pp. 105-119. Geotechnical Special Publication 134, pp. 1467-1480
Broms, B.B. and Bredenberg, H., [1982]. “Applications of Martin, D.J., [1980]. “Ground vibrations from impact pile
stress wave theory to pile driving, a State-of-the-Art Report”. driving during road construction”. Transport and Road
The 7th Southeast Asian Geotechnical Conference, Hong Research Laboratory, TRRL Supplementary Report 544, 16 p.
Kong, 22nd to 26th November 1982, Vol. 2, pp. 195-238.
Massarsch, K.R., [1992]. “Static and dynamic soil
Clough, R.W. and Penzien, J., [1975]. “Dynamics of displacements caused by pile driving”. Keynote Lecture,
structures”, McGraw-Hill, 634 p. Fourth International Conference on the Application of Stress
Wave Theory to Piles, the Hague, the Netherlands, September
Fellenius, B.H., [2006]. “Basics of foundation design”. 21-24, 1992, pp. 15 - 24.
Electronic edition, [www.Fellenius.net], 274 p.
Massarsch, K.R., [1995]. “Engineering vibrations and
Fellenius, B.H., Riker, R.E., O'Brien, A.J. and Tracy, G.R., solutions”. General Report, Third International Conference on
[1989]. "Dynamic and static testing in a soil exhibiting Recent Advances in Geotechnical Earthquake Engineering and
setup". American Society of Civil Engineering, Journal of Soil Dynamics, April 2-7, 1995, St. Louis, Missouri., Vol. III.,
Geotechnical Engineering, 115(7) 984-1001. pp. 1349-1353.
Goble, G.G., Tomko, J.J., Rausche, F., and Green, P.M., Massarsch, K.R., [2000]. “Settlements and damage caused by
[1968]. Dynamic studies on the bearing capacity of piles, construction-induced vibrations”. Proceedings, Intern.
Vols. 1 and 2, Report No. 31, Division of Solid Mechanics, Workshop Wave 2000, Bochum, Germany, December 13 - 15,
Structures, and Mechanical Design, Case Western Reserve 2000, pp. 299 - 315.
University.
Massarsch, K.R., [2002]. “Ground Vibrations Caused by Soil
Goble, G.G., Rausche, F., and Likins, G., [1980]. The analysis Compaction”. Wave 2002. Proceedings, International
of pile driving—a state-of-the-art. Proceedings of the 1st Workshop, Okayama, Japan, pp 25 - 37.
International Seminar of the Application of Stress-Wave
Theory to Piles, Stockholm June 1980, Ed. H. Bredenberg, Massarsch, K.R., [2004]. “Deformation properties of fine-
A.A. Balkema Publishers Rotterdam, pp. 131-162. grained soils from seismic tests”. Keynote lecture,
International Conference on Site Characterization, ISC’2,
September 19-22, 2004, Porto, 133- 146.

Massarsch, K.R., [2005]. “Ground Vibrations Caused by Rausche, F., [2000]. “Pile Driving Equipment. Capabilities,
Impact Pile Driving”. Invited Lecture, Proceedings, and Properties”. Sixth Conference on the Application of
Environmental Vibrations: Prediction, Monitoring, Mitigation Stress-wave Theory to Piles. Edited by Niyama and Beim, 11-
and Evaluation (ISEV 2005). Okayama University, Japan, 13 September 2000, Sao Paulo, Brazil, pp. 75 – 98.
September 20–22, 2005, Taylor & Francis, pp. 369 - 379.
Richart, F.E., Woods, R.D. and Hall, J.R. [1970]. “Vibrations
Massarsch, K.R. and Broms, B.B., [1991]. “Damage Criteria of Soils and Foundations”. Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood
for Small Amplitude Ground Vibrations”, Second Cliffs, New Jersey. 414 p.
International Conference on Recent Advances in Geotechnical
Earthquake Engineering and Soil Dynamics, St. Louis, Swedish Standard. [1999]. “Vibration and shock – Guidance
Missouri, March 11-15, 1991, Vol. 2, pp. 1451-1459. levels and measuring of vibrations in buildings originating
from piling, sheet piling, excavating and packing to estimate
Massarsch, K.R., Westerberg, E., [1995]. ”Frequency-variable permitted vibration levels“, (In Swedish). SS 02 52 11.
vibrators and their application to foundation engineering”. Swedish Institute for Standards, SIS. Stockholm 1999, 7 p.
Proceedings, Deep Foundation Institute, 20th Annual
Conference, October 16 – 18, 1995, Charleston, South Selby, A.R., [1991]. “Ground vibrations caused by pile
Carolina, pp. 153 – 166. installation”. Proceedings of the 4th International Conference
on Piling and Deep Foundations, Stresa, Italy, April 7–12,
New, B.M., [1986]. “Ground vibrations caused by civil 1991, pp 497–502.
engineering works”. Transport and Road Research Laboratory,
TRRL Research Report 53, 19 p. Smith, E.A.L., [1960]. “Pile driving analysis by the wave
equation”. Journal of the Soil Mechanics and Foundation
Nilsson, G., [1989]. “Markvibrationer vid pålslagning” Engineering Division, Proceedings ASCE 86(SM4) 35–61.
(Ground vibrations during pile driving). Examensarbete Nr.
3:89. Dept. of Soil and Rock Mechanics, Royal Institute of Wiss, J.F., [1981]. “Construction vibrations. State of the Art”.
Technology (KTH). Stockholm, Sweden, 43 p. and Appendix. American Society of Civil Engineering, Journal of Geo-
technical Engineeringl 107(GT2) 167-181.
Novak, M. and Janes, M., [1989]. “Dynamic and static
response of pile groups”. Proceedings of the 12th International Woods R.D. and Jedele, L.P., [1985]. “Energy attenuation
Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, relationships from construction vibrations”. Proceedings,
Rio de Janeiro, 13 – 18 August, 1989. Vol. 2, pp. 1175-1178. Proceedings of a Symposium sponsored by the Geotechnical
Engineering Division in conjunction with the American
Rausche, F., Goble, G.G. and Likins, G.E., [1985]. “Dynamic Society of Civil Engineering, Convention in Detroit,
determination of pile capacity”. American Society of Civil Michigan. October 22, 1985, pp. 229-246.
Engineering, Journal of Geotechnical Engineering.
111(GT3) 367-383.

NOTATIONS
A = wave front area MH = mass of hammer (ram)

AP = pile cross section area
A1 = vibration amplitude at distance R1 from source n = slope or attenuation rate
A2 = vibration amplitude at distance R2 from source
r = distance from pile (m)
bP = pile diameter rcrit = critical distance from pile at ground surface at which
surface waves are generated
c =
wave propagation velocity rC = horizontal distance from the pile shaft
cH =
velocity of stress wave in hammer rr = radial distance to the pile toe
cP =
velocity of stress wave in pile
cC =
velocity of cylindrical wave (C-wave) in the soil R1 = distance of vibration amplitude A1
cP =
velocity of stress wave (P-wave) in the soil R2 = distance of vibration amplitude A2
cR =
velocity of surface wave (R-wave) in the soil RC = reduction factor of shear wave velocity
approximately equal to shear wave velocity RR = reduction factor for remolding
cS = velocity of shear-wave (S-wave) in the soil RS = dynamic soil resistance along the pile shaft
RT = dynamic portion of the driving resistance
D = pile embedment depth at the pile toe
D = distance from source (feet)
DM = material damping in soil s = ratio of sinus for angles of incidence of the
P-wave and the S-wave
EP = modulus of elasticity of pile material SP = contact area between the pile shaft and soil
E = energy input at source (in foot-pounds)
or explosive charge weight per delay (pounds) t = duration of impact (i.e., duration of contact
ES = vibration transmission efficacy along pile shaft between hammer and pile head)
ET = vibration transmission efficacy at pile toe
v = vibration velocity
f = vibration frequency v = peak particle velocity
ν = guidance level (vertical component) of critical
Fb = Building Factor vibration velocity Swedish Standard
Fh = amplification factor horizontal direction vH = particle velocity of wave reflected backup
FH = hammer efficiency factor (Table 7) the hammer (ram)
Fi = force in pile vP = particle velocity (physical velocity) of pile
Fv = amplification factor vertical direction v0 = vibration velocity based on soil types — Swedish
Fm = Material Factor Standard.
Fg = Foundation Factor ν0 = particle velocity of the ram at impact
vv = vertical component of vibration velocity
g = acceleration of earth gravity.
W = energy input at source (J)
h = hammer-height-of-fall We = strain energy
Wk = kinetic energy
Jc = dimensionless damping factor W0 = potential energy of pile hammer
k = wave number x = distance (m)

k = an empirical vibration factor, a function
of impedance (m2/s√J) ZH = impedance of hammer (ram)
kc = factor for spherical waves given (Table 5) ZP = impedance of pile
kS = factor for spherical waves (Table 5) ZP = soil impedance for P-waves, at the pile toe
ZS = soil impedance
K = intercept value of vibration amplitude zP = specific impedance of pile
at D/√E = 1 (ft/lb)1/2), (inch) zP = specific soil impedance for P-waves, (at the pile toe)
zS = specific soil impedance for shear waves, (at pile shaft)
LH = length of hammer
LW = length of stress-wave in pile α = absorption coefficient

λ = wave length ρsoi l=total (bulk) soil density
Θ = angle of incidence of spherical wave at
ρ = total density of soil ground surface (to the vertical)
ρ = material density of soil Θcrit = critical angle of incidence (from origin of surface
waves)
ρP = density of pile material

APPENDIX A. A.2 Energy Transmission
THEORETICAL ASSESSMENT OF ENERGY
TRANSMISSION The energy transmitted into an elastic medium can now be
determined, assuming sinusoidal motion as a function of
The empirical approach expressed in Eqs. 2 and 3 is Time t.
unsatisfactory as it does not consider important aspects, such
as the location of energy source (on, near or below the ground Eq. (A4) ν = ν 0 sin(kx − ωt )
surface), material properties, and type of wave propagation.
However, if assessing the transmission of vibration energy
from an energy source in an elastic medium, it is possible to where v0 = particle velocity (m/s)
consider these aspects (Clough and Penzien, 1975). ω = circular frequency, 2πf
f = frequency of vibration
A.1 Energy in Elastic Medium x = distance (m)
k = wave number
In a conservative system the total energy, W0, is constant and
the differential equation of motion can be established by the The wave number, k, is expressed in Eq. A5.
principle of conservation of energy. The kinetic energy, Wk, is
stored in the mass by virtue of its velocity, whereas the 2π
Eq. (A5) k=
potential energy is stored in the form of strain energy in elastic λ
deformation (or work done), We,. As the total energy is
constant, its rate of change is zero (the sum of the elastic and where λ = wave length (m)
the kinetic energy).
The wave length λ is obtained from Eq. A6.
Eq. (A1) W0 = We (t ) + Wk (t ) = constant
c
Eq. (A6) λ=
Energy density (energy per volume, J/m3) can be used to f
describe energy transmission into an elastic medium.
where λ = wave length
The energy density, W, is represented by c = is the wave propagation velocity
f = frequency
W = 0.5 ρ ν 2
Eq. (A2)
The energy contained in one wave length, λ, is obtained from
where W = energy density (J/m3) Eq. A7.
v = particle velocity (m/s)
Eq. (A7) W = ρ ν 02 A∫ 0λ sin 2 kx dx
The energy can be potential (positional), We, or kinetic, Wk. where W = energy density (J/m3)
When the particle velocity, v, is zero, the kinetic energy is ρ = material density (kg/m3)
zero and all energy has been stored as the elastic strain energy.
In contrast, when the displacement is zero, the velocity and v0 = initial particle velocity (m/s)
kinetic energy are at maximum, and all the elastic strain A = area of the wave front
energy has been released. The total energy, W0, is therefore k = wave number (Eq. 8)
limited to: x = pile penetration (m)
Eq. (A3) W0 = We (t ) + Wk (t ) = 0.5 ρ ν 2 (t ) By integration of Eq. A7 to yield Eq. A8, the solution of the
total energy density is obtained.
where W0 = total energy density (J/m3)
We = potential energy density (J/m3) Eq. (A8) W = 0.5ρν 02 A λ
Wk = kinetic energy density (J/m3)
ρ = material density (kg/m3) The maximum vibration energy can now readily be calculated
v = particle velocity (m/s) for different types of waves (P-waves, S-waves or R-waves).
It is possible to determine quantitatively the k-value (Eqs. A5
and A6) for different wave types, taking into account several
important factors, such as wave length and material properties

A.3 Spherical Wave
−1
1 ⎡ r1 ⎤
The energy density, W1, at the distance, r1, of an expanding Eq. (A14) ν1 = ⎢ (W ) 0.5 ⎥
( 2 π ρ λ ) 0. 5 ⎣ 0 ⎦
wave front of a spherical wave (compression or shear wave) in
an infinite elastic medium is expressed in Eq. 12. If the
energy contained by the body wave at the source is W0, then, A.4 Rayleigh Wave
the energy density, W1, at the distance, r1, with a wave front
area, A, is expressed in Eq. A9. The energy density, W1, at the distance, r1, of an expanding
wave front of a wave traveling along the surface, a Rayleigh
Eq. (A9) W0 = W1 = 0.5 ( ρ ν 12 λ )( 4π r12 ) wave, in an infinite elastic medium is expressed in Eq. A15.
The area of the cylindrical surface is 2πr1h.
where W0 = energy of wave at source Eq. (A15) Error! Bookmark not
W1 = energy of wave at distance, r1, from source defined. W0 = W1 = 0.5 ( ρ ν 12 λ )(2π r1 h )
ν0 = particle velocity at distance, r1 (m/s)
λ = wave length (m) Rearranging Eq. A15 for v1 yields Eq. A16.
A = wave front area
1 (W0 ) 0.5
The wave front area, A, is expressed in Eq. A10. Eq. (A16) ν1 =
( π ρ λ h) 0. 5
( r1 ) 0.5
Eq. (A10) A = 4 π r12
A coefficient, kR, is defined as expressed in Eq. A17. The
units of kR are (m/kg)0.5. Note that these units are not the same
Solving Eq. 12 for v, Eq. A11 is obtained.
as those of kS.
1 (W0 ) 0.5
Eq. (A11) ν1 = Eq. (A17) kR =
1
(2 π ρ λ ) 0.5
r1 (π ρ λ h ) 0.5
A coefficient, kS, can now be defined according to Eq. A12. With the coefficient kR, taken as a constant, Eq. A17 can be
expressed in a simplified form, as shown in Eq. A18.
Eq. (A12) 1
kS =
( 2 π ρ λ ) 0.5 (W0 ) 0.5
Eq. (A18) ν1 = kR
( r1 ) 0.5
The coefficient kS has the units (m2/kg)0.5. Combining

Eq. A18 can be transformed as shown in Eq. A19.
Eqs. A11 and A12, yields Eq. A13.
−1
(W )0.5 ⎛ r1 ⎞
Eq. (A13) ν 1 = kS 0
Eq. (A19) ν 1 = k R r10.5 ⎜⎜ ⎟
0. 5 ⎟
r1 ⎝ (W0 ) ⎠
It is convenient to transform Eq. A11 into Eq. A14.

278 Vibration Analysis

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

278 Vibration Analysis

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

278 Vibration Analysis

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ground vibrations induced by impact pile driving.

Massarsch, K.M., and Fellenius, B.H., 2008.

INTRODUCTION At present, and in contrast to other aspects of pile dynamics,

The standard defines a vibration limit value, v, in terms of

Manuscript No. 2/38

ν = ν 0 Fb Fm Fg (1) Table 2. Building Factor, Fb

where ν = guidance level (vertical component) of Class Type of Structure Building

Soil Type Piling, Sheet Compaction

Manuscript No. 3/38

The dynamic soil-structure interaction of piled foundations at

Stress-wave Measurements During Pile Driving

Major advances have been made in measuring and analyzing

Manuscript No. 4/38

TRASNFERRED ENERGY (KJ)

EP = modulus of elasticity of pile material A TIME (L/c)

AP = pile cross section area

ρP = density of pile material 6,000

different notations, symbols referring to pile (P) and hammer 2,000

referring to soil properties will be denoted by lowered indices. 0

is exactly the same as the velocity trace multiplied by pile

TRANSFERRED ENERGY (KJ)

minimal shaft resistance

display is obtained of the magnitude and location along the

Manuscript No. 5/38

PEAK PARTICLE VELOCITY (mm/s)

As shown in Fig. 4, the scatter of values is large and would be

Manuscript No. 6/38

The value of the attenuation rate, n, in Eq. 4 generally lies

Manuscript No. 7/38

Manuscript No. 8/38

Manuscript No. 9/38

Manuscript No. 10/38

SHEAR WAVE REDUCTION FACTOR, R C

DYNAMIC SOIL RESISTANCE AT SHAFT AND TOE 0.7

toe. This important aspect, which governs ground vibration 0.4

z S = cS ρ soil (17) RS = 0.5ν 0 Rc RR cS ρ soil b P π LW (18)

Manuscript No. 11/38

Table 8. Range of compression (P-) and shear (S-) wave cS ρ soil LW zS LW

Manuscript No. 12/38

Hard Driving on the dynamic properties of the soil and independent of the

The soil impedance, ZP, is defined in Eq. 22, which is similar

Dynamic Soil Resistance at Pile Toe RT = 2 Z P ν P (23)

Manuscript No. 13/38

RT = Z P ν 0 (24) Equation 25 shows that the vibration transmission efficacy

The measurements were taken at different horizontal distances

Manuscript No. 14/38

follower ENERGY PROPAGATION IN ELASTIC MEDIUM

1.0 The emission and propagation of vibrations from the pile to

The transmission of vibrations can be analyzed based on

k = 436 (1/ZP) assumed to be located in a homogeneous, isotropic elastic

generated by strain energy, We and kinetic energy (of the

0.5 We (t ) = 0.5 ρ ν 2 (t ) (26)

Fig. 10b. Relationship between K-factor and inverse of pile

Manuscript No. 15/38

Appendix A gives the derivation of expressions for vibration

The distances, rS and rC, should be distance to the source of

Table 9. Wave Attenuation Equations for Spherical and

Manuscript No. 16/38

reflected or refracted as illustrated in Fig. 11. The reflection ν = 0.30