Authors

How long do we hold on? A review of static maintained load tests

C.K. Lee

Arup

ABSTRACT

Maintained pile load tests commonly require loads to be held for extended periods, often with unequal loading stages and unload-reload cycles. While such practice may be justified in some ground conditions, it can be excessive where negligible settlement rates and equilibrium are reached within shorter durations. This paper reviews the relevance of extended maintained loading using case reference results from driven injected square precast concrete piles and bored piles in Kenny Hill residual soils in Malaysia. Trial and proof load tests are compared through load-movement behaviour, settlement-rate histories, and interpreted t-z and q-z responses. The results indicate that, for the medium- to high-permeability ground conditions considered, faster proof-test loading sequences did not materially affect mobilised resistances; observed differences were more plausibly attributed to localised ground variability and workmanship effects. The paper therefore supports a more pragmatic, observational approach to pile load testing, in which holding durations are rationalised based on test response rather than arbitrary time requirements. A conceptual AI-assisted workflow is also introduced, using structured site investigation, construction, instrumentation, and pile test data to support future pile behaviour prediction and digital twin calibration.

KEYWORDS: Time and cost savings, pile load tests, carbon reduction, smart construction, big data, prediction