Reliability analysis and evaluation of LRFD resistance factors for CPT-based design of driven piles

Junhwan Lee, Minki Kim, Seung Hwan Lee

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

2 Citations (Scopus)


There has been growing agreement that geotechnical reliability-based design (RBD) is necessary for establishing more advanced and integrated design system. In this study, resistance factors for LRFD pile design using CPT results were investigated for axially loaded driven piles. In order to address variability in design methodology, different CPT-based methods and load-settlement criteria, popular in practice, were selected and used for evaluation of resistance factors. A total of 32 data sets from 13 test sites were collected from the literature. In order to maintain the statistical consistency of the data sets, the characteristic pile load capacity was introduced in reliability analysis and evaluation of resistance factors. It was found that values of resistance factors considerably differ for different design methods, load-settlement criteria, and load capacity components. For the total resistance, resistance factors for LCPC method were higher than others, while those for Aoki-Velloso’s and Philipponnat’s methods were in similar ranges. In respect to load-settlement criteria, 0.1B and Chin’s criteria produced higher resistance factors than DeBeer’s and Davisson’s criteria. Resistance factors for the base and shaft resistances were also presented and analyzed.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)17-34
Number of pages18
JournalGeomechanics and Engineering
Issue number1
Publication statusPublished - 2009 Mar

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2009, Techno Press. All rights reserved.

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Civil and Structural Engineering
  • Geotechnical Engineering and Engineering Geology


Dive into the research topics of 'Reliability analysis and evaluation of LRFD resistance factors for CPT-based design of driven piles'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this