Report Date

Mr. Client
Firm
Address
Address

Re: Low Strain Integrity Test Report GRL Job No. XXXX
Project
City, State

Dear Mr. Client:

This report presents test results and summarizes our findings from the low strain integrity testing
performed on XX ACIP piles on November 11 through 15, 2002 at the above referenced site.
The purpose of the testing was to assess the structural integrity of the ACIP piles as required by
project specifications.

Details of the test method are described in Appendix A. In summary, the method involves
inducing a low strain stress wave into the pile by striking the top of the pile with a small hand
held hammer and measuring the pile top response with an accelerometer. Records of several
hammer impacts are averaged, filtered, and exponentially amplified to enhance record features.
The processed records are the measured pile-top velocity versus time curves. These curves
are evaluated for indications of stress wave reflections which, based on arrival time and
magnitude, may indicate impedance reductions, impedance increases, or the pile toe.

Pile Details

The ACIP piles tested were located in the XXX project. The piles have a nominal diameter of 18
inches and were reported to be between 38 and 58 ft long, depending on pile location. The
piles were reinforced with a full length #11 center bar and a 20 ft long reinforcing cage
consisting of 10 #8 bars. The reinforcing cage was approximately 12 inches in diameter leaving
a pile perimeter width of about 3 inches available for conducting the tests.

Soil Conditions

GRL was not furnished with information on the subsurface conditions at the site. For details on
the subsurface conditions, please refer to the project’s geotechnical report.
Client Report Date
GRL Job No. XXXXX
Page 2

Instrumentation

The equipment used for integrity testing included a PIT Collector manufactured by Pile Dynamics,
Inc., an accelerometer, and multiple hammers with nylon or lexan tips. Hammer weights between
two twelve six pounds were used. The PIT Collector acquired the pile top motion records under
a series of hammer blows with each hammer type. Typically five hammer blows were delivered
at these impact locations around the pile top surface and the pile response was measured with an
accelerometer located on a different prepared surface. Records from each series of blows with
each hammer were then averaged and the average record was stored in the PIT Collector for later
data processing.

Analysis and Interpretation Procedures

Records were transferred from the PIT Collector to a computer. After checking and, if necessary,
adjusting the field input parameters for amplification, filtering, etc., the processed velocity curves
were plotted. These records were evaluated for reflections from the pile toe and for reflections
from variations in the pile impedance above the toe. The records were processed using the
reported lengths with the wave speed adjusted based on the toe reflection observed in the records.
These adjustments resulted in wave speeds ranging from 11,000 to 14,000 ft/sec. A typical wave
speed for ACIP pile of the age tested is around 13,000 ft/sec with an expected variation of +/- 10%
across a site. Hence, wave speeds ranging from 11,700 to 14,300 ft/sec would be within normal
variations. Piles with wave speeds less than 11,700 ft/sec may indicate the pile is slightly longer
than reported. Conversely, wave speeds faster than 14,300 ft/sec may indicate the pile is slightly
shorter than the reported length. Processed records for each pile tested are in Appendix B.

Integrity testing is based on stress wave propagation and reflection theory. A stress wave
generated by a hammer impact on a “one dimensional” rod is only reflected if the wave encounters
an impedance change or a strong soil effect. The impedance, EA/c, of a pile is defined as the
product of the pile’s elastic modulus, E, and cross sectional area, A, divided by its stress wave
speed, c. The pile impedance, therefore, reflects both the pile’s cross sectional size and its
material quality.

A structurally sound pile is indicated by a clear reflection from the pile toe and only relative minor
variations of the record amplitudes (created by reflections from impedance changes) between the
times of impact and toe reflection. A sound pile is also indicated by negative velocity reflections
which are often caused by so-called bulges where softer soils or auger wobble allow for an
enlargement of the pile diameter. An impedance reduction due to decreases in area or concrete
quality is indicated by a positive velocity reflection before the toe. This can indicate either a

GRL Engineers, Inc.

Client Report Date
GRL Job No. XXXXX
Page 3

reduction in pile cross section such as from a void, soil inclusion, necking, or crack. It can also
indicate a reduction in elastic modulus which could be due to poor quality grout, or soil, or ground
water mixing during installation. Generally, it is not possible to determine whether an impedance
reduction is due to area or elastic modulus changes based on the PIT record alone, only that a
reduction in impedance occurs.

Because of the large number of piles tested on this project, the piles were categorized as follows:

A. Clear toe response, no indication of significant pile defect and therefore clear
indication of a sound pile shaft.

B. Clear indication of a serious defect, in other words a strong reflection of an

impedance reduction occurring prior to the expected time of toe reflection. Toe
reflection is not apparent.

C. Indication of a possibly defective pile shaft which often means that a toe signal is
apparent in addition to a reflection from an apparent impedance reduction.

D. No toe signal and/or a complex signal prevent a definite conclusion on shaft integrity
at least for a portion of the pile. Often data is inconclusive because of poor pile top
quality, high soil resistance, excessive pile length, low concrete strength or one or
more major impedance changes which block signals from below the impedance
change.

Test Results

The (#) ACIP piles tested are identified and diagnosed in Table 1 (Note: this table is abbreviated
in this sample report). PIT records on which Table 1 is based are included in Appendix B. (Note:
these plots have been compressed for this report).

(#) of the piles tested had clear toe signals with no signs of significant reductions. Records for
many of these piles indicated bulges or strong soil resistance effects near the pile toe and no major
impedance reductions. Please refer to Table 1 for the identity of these 113 “Class A” piles.

Several piles showed reflections from significant impedance reductions above to the pile toe.
Three of these piles showed signs of early toe reflections (typically three to four feet shorter than
expected). Three piles showed significant reflections from impedance reductions and no signal
from the pile toe. These piles were placed in “Class B.”

GRL Engineers, Inc.

Client Report Date
GRL Job No. XXXXX
Page 4

(#) of the piles tested showed signs of an impedance reduction, but still showed a reflection from
the pile toe. This result indicates a continuous shaft, with a slight reduction in impedance at the
noted depths. We recommend first examining the pile top cross sectional area. If the pile top is
oversized, the reductions observed could be returns to the design cross section. These piles were
placed in “Class C.”

The results for the remaining piles indicated inconclusive results. In most cases, neither
impedance reductions nor a clear toe signal were observed. The energy of the hammer impact is
likely being dissipated in these piles prior to reflecting off the toe; the absence of reflections from
major impedance reductions is still an important finding. In other cases, impedance increases from
high soil resistance or increased cross sectional area (“bulges”) made interpreting the measured
velocity signals too complex. As such, we cannot infer anything beneath the location of the
apparent bulge. These piles were placed in “Class D.”

Uncertainties in the collected integrity records, variations in the assumed wave speed, and
difficulties in record interpretation limit the direct, unquestioned use of our conclusions. We
recommend that the responsible engineers use these results together with the soil borings,
foundation installation reports, PIR-A construction records, and information from the structural
engineer regarding loads and safety factors. In no way do we suggest that these test results be
used as the sole factor in establishing foundation acceptance or rejection criteria.

If you have any questions regarding this report, or if we may be of further service.

Sincerely,

GRL Engineers, Inc.

GRL Engineers, Inc.

 Table 1: Summary of Pile Integrity Testing Results
Organized by PIT Classification

Project:
Location
Pile Date Reported Wave Class Remarks
Tested Length Speed
ft ft/s

1088 11/14/2002 58 14000 A Clear Toe

1089 11/14/2002 57 13500 A Clear Toe
1090 11/14/2002 58 13250 A Weak toe
1091 11/14/2002 57 13250 A Clear Toe
1092 11/14/2002 57 13750 A Clear Toe
1096 11/15/2002 38 13000 A Toe Apparent
1097 11/15/2002 38 12400 A Toe Apparent
1112 11/14/2002 57 13250 A Clear Toe
1129 11/11/2002 58 13833 A Clear Toe
1130 11/11/2002 58 13000 A Clear Toe
1132 11/12/2002 58 13250 A Weak toe signal
1133 11/15/2002 38 12700 A Toe Apparent, Bulbs from 15 ft. down.
1135 11/15/2002 38 12900 A Toe Apparent
1136 11/15/2002 38 14000 A Toe at ~34'
1137 11/15/2002 38 13000 A Weak toe
1134 11/15/2002 38 14000 B Toe at 35 feet
1172 11/13/2002 58 14000 B Early toe at ~54 feet
1184 11/15/2002 38 14000 B Toe at 35 feet.
1192 11/15/2002 38 13000 B Reduction at 25 ft; no toe
1278 11/15/2002 38 13000 B Apparent reduction at 8 ft.
1059 11/13/2002 38 13250 C Clear toe; neck at 22 feet
1060 11/13/2002 38 13750 C Neck at 22 ft; Clear toe
1085 11/12/2002 58 13250 C Neck at 20 ft; Clear toe
1126 11/12/2002 58 13250 C Neck at 20 ft; Clear toe
1018 11/13/2002 38 13250 D No Clear toe, no reductions
1020 11/13/2002 38 13250 D No clear toe, no reductions
1021 11/13/2002 38 13250 D Bulge at 5 feet
1044 11/13/2002 38 13250 D Weak toe, no major reductions
 Appendix A

An Introduction into Pile Integrity Testing

 PIT - PILE INTEGRITY TESTING
BY LOW STRAIN PULSE ECHO AND TRANSIENT RESPONSE METHOD

DISCLAIMER: Because of the limitations of the Low Strain Test method, described below, it is
suggested that PIT results are not used as the sole means of rejecting or accepting a shaft or
pile.
The following may only be copied with the express written permission of GRL Engineers, Inc.

INTRODUCTION top motion occurs. If this reflection wave occurs at the

correct time and if no other earlier reflection is
Pile integrity testing of driven concrete or timber piles, received at the pile top, then the pile shaft is most
auger cast piles and drilled shafts (all simply referred probably free of major defects.
to as “piles” in the following) using the Pile Integrity
Tester™ made by Pile Dynamics, Inc., is reliably and When a lightweight hand held hammer strikes the pile
easily applied, quick, inexpensive and, therefore, top, a small pile top motion (velocity) is generated and
routinely used world-wide. Because of its economy all measured. The associated pile strains are of such a
piles on a site can be tested and problem piles are low magnitude that they would be measured in the pile
identified for corrective action. only with great difficulty. This test is therefore also
known as low strain integrity test. However, the force
The method uses signals from a hand held hammer applied by the hammer can be easily measured by
impacting the pile top and generating a compressive instrumenting the hammer itself. Primarily, the
stress wave in the pile. Stress wave reflections from velocity record and to a lesser degree the force record
non-uniformities or the pile toe are observed at the pile contain information about the location and magnitude
top, processed and interpreted by the experienced test of pile non-uniformities. Under the assumption of
engineer. proportional force and velocity records, and for short
duration impact pulses, the velocity record may be
The experienced test engineer can choose from sufficient to judge the quality of a shaft.
several modes of the basic Low Strain Test :
STRESS WAVE PROPAGATION IN A PILE
• The Pulse Echo Method (PEM) is the simplest
method, merely requiring that pile top velocity An impact applied to the pile top generates a
records are displayed as a function of time. momentary compression and a particle motion of the
pile top surface. The compression is related to the
• The Transient Response Method (TRM) displays the force, F; the motion causes a particle velocity, v. In
mobility, i.e., pile top velocity divided by force, as a concrete or timber, the stress wave travels along the
function of frequency. pile with a compressive stress wave speed, c, ranging
from 3,000 to 4,500 m/s or from10,000 to 15,000 ft/s.
• A combination of PEM and TRM which displays the The wave speed depends only on pile material
velocity in both time and frequency domain. properties:

• The Profile analysis which determines an

approximate shape of the test pile based on the pile (1)
top velocity curve.

BACKGROUND where E is the pile's elastic modulus and D is its mass

density.
When a long rod, such as a precast, driven or drilled
shaft or pile, is struck with a small hammer, a stress
wave is generated which travels down the shaft to the
pile bottom where it is reflected. When the reflected
stress wave returns to the pile top, a measurable pile

A-1
 low strain test is the preparation of the pile top
surface. In fact, depending on the construction
method, it may be necessary to remove several
inches of the upper concrete if it has been
contaminated with soil, bentonite slurry or other
foreign materials during construction. After a clean,
healthy and hard concrete top surface has been
exposed, the accelerometer is attached to the pile top
surface with a thin layer of a soft paste like Vaseline,
petro wax, etc.

An impact is then applied with the hand held hammer

which typically generates accelerations in the 10 to
Figure 1: Traveling stress waves and the principle of 100 g range, pile strains around 10-5, velocities near
the pile profile estimate. 30 mm/s or .1 ft/s and displacements less than 25
microns or .001 inches. Acceleration signals
produced by several hammer blows are integrated
Figure 1 shows, in the form of a time-depth plot, the and displayed as velocities (which are cleaner and
path of the stress wave in a pile and the resulting pile more useful curves than the accelerations) on the
top velocity v. Clearly, the pile top velocity is affected processor's screen. Figure 3 shows three individual
by and therefore indicates the arrival of both tensile velocity records. Consistent records are selected,
and compressive reflection waves; as a consequence averaged, scaled and then redisplayed. Averaging
the pile top record contains information that can be reinforces the repetitive information from pile or soil
used for estimating the pile profile. effects while reducing random noise effects.

LENGTH SCALE, WAVE SPEED AND PILE

THE PULSE ECHO METHOD LENGTH CALCULATIONS

The time after impact and time at which reflections

Figure 2 shows the schematic of the PIT reach the pile top are directly related to the distance
instrumentation with the Pile Integrity Tester (PIT) of the origin of the reflection wave from the pile top.
being the central data acquisition and processing unit. Therefore conversion of time to length scale can be
Other hardware components include a hand held made, if the wave speed, c, in the pile is known. The
hammer with an integral plastic cushion and an following two procedures are used by the test
accelerometer. PIT provides signal conditioning, digital engineer to determine the wave speed, for the time to
signal processing, digital signal storage and, for data length scale conversion.
inspection, an LCD screen. Hard copy output may be
obtained from a graphics printer or plotter. Various • Assuming that the pile or shaft length is known
other configurations of this system are possible. accurately, the wave speed is back calculated from
The first and sometimes most important step for any the time between impact and pile toe reflection (if
that is apparent).

• If the shaft length is not known then a wave speed

is assumed (usually 13,000 ft/s or 4,000 m/s for
concrete) and the pile length is then calculated from
the time of toe reflection (if apparent). Since wave
speeds of the concrete at the same site normally
fluctuate within ± 5%, errors of similar magnitude
must be expected for the calculated length.

Figure 2: Schematic of P.I.T. Devices (Collector)

A-2
 amplification of 20 was applied. Note that the pile toe
refection now is clearly identifiable. For longer piles
or stronger soils, even higher amplification factors
may be used; this process requires signal conditioning
and digital processing equipment with very low noise
to signal ratios. If the toe signal is apparent, then it is
possible to confirm or correct the originally assumed
wave speed.

Figure 4 is the standard PIT output. It includes the

exponential amplification function with the multiplier at
time 2L/c. The assumed wave speed, pile length, and
other useful information is shown in the output. A
clearly indicated toe signal together with a fairly
steady velocity trace between the impact and toe
signal are signs of a sound pile. Strong velocity
variations may be the result of changes in pile cross
section, concrete quality or soil resistance. For
example, relative increases in pile top velocity may be
the result of either a cross sectional decrease or a soft
soil layer. In the absence of soil resistance changes,
pile top variations are caused by pile impedance
changes. The pile impedance is defined as

Z = EA/c = A%ED = AcD (2)

with A being the pile's cross sectional area. Thus, an

impedance reduction can be caused by a decrease
either in area, A, or in the concrete's modulus, E, or in
density, D. Since both modulus and density are
related to concrete strength, it is fair to say that

Figure 3: Individual velocity record output from

PITPLOT.

RECORD ENHANCEMENT AND INSPECTION

The test engineer inspects the average velocity signal.

Plotted over time the velocity record shows on the left
a sharp pulse caused by the impact. Following the
impact pulse would be reflection pulses caused by
variations in pile properties or soil resistance. The first Figure 4: Amplified velocity record.
record check concerns the "toe signal". If the reflection
from the pile toe is not readily apparent (as in the
example of Figure 3), then the velocity record is usually impedance depends on cross sectional area and
multiplied with an amplification function whose concrete quality.
magnitude is unity at impact, increasing exponentially
with time until it reaches its maximum intensity at time
2L/c after impact (2L/c is the time which the stress
wave requires to travel at speed c along the pile of
length L and return). Figure 4 shows a velocity trace
from the same pile test as in Figure 3 but after an

A-3
In general, relatively sharply defined reflections are
attributed to impedance changes. Slowly changing
reflections are thought to be caused by the soil. This
basic assumption limits damage recognition or integrity
assessment to situations which occur over a distance
given by one impact pulse width. Gradual
pile tapers therefore cannot be detected. On the other
hand, if the effect of soil resistance is known from
reference piles, then unusual shaft shapes can be
more easily identified. Improved quantitative
interpretations may require pile profile calculations and
comparison with records of other piles at the same site.
But even more sophisticated analysis methods may not
fully resolve the question of the effect of soil
resistance.

THE TRANSIENT RESPONSE METHOD Figure 5: Coherence, Mobility, and Dynamic

Stiffness.
The TRM requires that both the pile top motion and the
impact force be measured. This concept has been
borrowed from standard Non-Destructive Testing where T and f are the frequency in radians per second
technology. In fact, the first applications of NDT to and Hz, respectively. In practice, a low frequency
piles required the measurement of force and velocity value is divided by the associated mobility yielding Ed.
under a steady state vibrator which could apply This quantity increases with decreasing pile toe
substantial forces at variable frequencies. Fortunately, response. A low pile toe response is often the result
the force frequency spectrum of a hand held impact of high soil resistance. However, it may also be
hammer is flat over a relatively wide frequency band. caused by highly variable pile properties or internal
A simple hand held hammer can therefore adequately pile damping and is therefore only indirectly related to
produce the frequency components necessary to test quantitative pile bearing capacity. However, Ed is
both well constructed or defective piles with TRM. calculated since it does provide a quantitative result
for the evaluation of pile quality. Figure 5 shows the
The standard result of TRM is a plot of the frequency example of a mobility (right graph) and, at the bottom,
spectrum of the ratio of velocity to force. This so-called the associated dynamic stiffness value.
mobility is the pile's velocity response, v(T), to a
particular excitation force, F(T). THE PROFILE ANALYSIS

M(T) = v(T)/F(T) (3) An estimated pile profile may be calculated based on

the difference between calculated and measured pile
A mobility peak occurs at a frequency indicative of the top velocity. The basis of the pile profile calculation is
time when the velocity changes due to a reflection from the fact that a step-wise change in impedance causes
the pile toe or an intermediate impedance reduction. a pulse-like velocity wave effect at the pile top (Figure
Mobility peaks occurring at regular intervals are 1). In other words, the effect of an impedance change
indicative of a dominant frequency )f. The has the appearance of the derivative of the impedance
corresponding distance below the top (“39.8" down on change. Inversely, the profile is the integral of the
the second line in Figure 5) at which the change occurs wave effects at the pile top. In the absence of soil
is calculated from resistance effects, the profile therefore has the
appearance of the pile top displacement. Please note
x = c/2)f (4) that the Pile Profile option will not identify and correct
for secondary reflections. Furthermore, any
Furthermore, dividing the velocity by frequency leads impedance reduction, whether crack or lack of
to displacement. Dividing force by displacement at a concrete quality, will be plotted in the form of a
given frequency leads to the so-called dynamic decreasing cross sectional area.
stiffness.

Ed = TF(T)/v(T) = 2Bf/M(T) (5)

A-4
 • Shaft or pile length based on the time of a measured
toe signal and an assumed wave speed.

• Alternatively, the shaft or pile material wave speed

for an assumed or known pile length and a clear toe
signal.

• Quantitative estimates of impedance changes from

intermediate reflections and their distance from the
shaft or pile top.

• Estimated shaft profile

• Mobility magnitude and dynamic stiffness

LIMITATIONS
Figure 6: PIT-Profile for a non-uniform pile.
1. Even at sites where concrete quality is well
maintained, wave speed variations of 5% are not
An example profile result is shown in Figure 6. It uncommon. A pile length calculated from a toe
includes the following record components. signal may therefore only be known within ± 5%.

• the original (raw) velocity record (left) 2. Certain reflections produce secondary and even
tertiary wave reflections. For example, if an
• the filtered (convoluted) velocity record. Filtering is impedance reduction occurs in the middle of the
used to eliminate soil resistance effects (second from pile, then what may appear to be the pile toe
left) response may actually be a secondary reflection
of the mid-pile defect.
• a length scale and a scale in pile diameters
3. The stress wave will be reflected at locations of
• the calculated pile profile, including an indicator of severe cracks or manufactured mechanical joints.
the minimum impedance relative to the top Therefore no information can be retrieved from
impedance (upper pointer) locations below such cracks or joints.

• a summary of analysis parameters; the upper half of 4. Assumption is made that impedance variations
these parameters can be input for a change of happen over short distances; gradually (tapering)
analysis results shaft properties can therefore not be determined.

TESTING OF PILES UNDER STRUCTURES 5. Shafts with multiple or highly variable impedance
(cross section) changes produce complex records
Piles which are rigidly attached to other parts of a which are difficult or impossible to analyze after
structure can sometimes be tested and analyzed the first or second major reflection.
successfully, but often their analysis is more difficult
than that of isolated piles. To assure success it is often 6. Soil resistance and pile material damping effects
necessary to make the side of the pile accessible for reduce the intensity of the incident and reflected
the attachment of an accelerometer. If a pile length wave. For that reason, a rule of thumb suggests
greater than 2 m (6 ft) is accessible then it is worth that the test pile length should be limited to 30
while to attach a second accelerometer to the pile for diameters. However, this is probably only correct
a measurement of the wave speed and the separation for soils with relatively high resistance. For piles
of reflection from the structure from those from the pile through water or soft soils the pile length may be
bottom. greater than 30 diameters. For extremely high soil
resistance or strongly variable shaft impedance,
SUMMARY the test length may be less than 30 diameters.

PIT is a quick, inexpensive but, naturally, limited pile 7. Where complex situations exist, a single pile test
or shaft integrity test. It provides the following results: may be impossible to interpret while comparing
records of a large number of piles or by using the

A-5
 record of a statically loaded (or high strain tested)
reference pile may give the needed additional • For Category D records where the test is
information. inconclusive due to a great length or embedment, it
may be sufficient to accept the shafts if the upper
The force measurement of TRM provides supplemental shaft portion appears to be of good quality.
information of cross sectional changes near the pile
top, i.e., within the distance corresponding to the • For Category D records, additional PIT testing may
impact signal. The extra effort of the force be scheduled after removing poor pile top concrete
measurement is, therefore, worthwhile, whenever or after allowing concrete to achieve greater
questions arise as to the integrity of upper pile portion strength.
(say 5 ft, or 1.5 m).
• For Categories B, C and D, tests by another method
IMPLEMENTATION such as the high strain dynamic load test method,
excavation around the pile, core drilling, etc. may be
Before doing PIT, consensus must exist among owner, required.
engineer and contractor on corrective actions should
the tests indicate defects or produce inconclusive
results. It is therefore often helpful to categorize the
records obtained from PIT as follows.

A. Clear toe response, no indication of significant

pile defect and therefore clear indication of a
sound pile shaft.

B. Clear indication of a serious defect, in other

words a strong reflection of an impedance
reduction occurring prior to the expected time of
toe reflection. Toe reflection is not apparent.

C. Indication of a possibly defective pile shaft which

often means that a toe signal is apparent in
addition to a reflection from an apparent
impedance reduction.

D. No toe signal and/or a complex signal prevent a

definite conclusion on shaft integrity at least for a
portion of the pile. Often data is inconclusive
because of poor pile top quality, high soil
resistance, excessive pile length, low concrete
strength or one or more major impedance
changes which block signals from below the
impedance change.

Based on these record categories the following

decisions may be made.

• For Category B records, a contingency plan must be

in place which allows the engineer(s)-in-charge to
choose from a menu of additional tests or corrective
measures such as replacement pile, core drilling,
pressure injection, etc. App-A-PIT-9-01

• For Category C records, a reduced pile capacity may

be assessed based on conservative shaft property
assumptions or the shaft may be retested by other
methods (e.g. dynamic load testing).

A-6
 Appendix B

Processed Records for Each Pile

GRL Engineers, Inc. 10/20/2004
Sample Report
\\Server3\Pub\GRL Sample Reports\PIT\Sample.PIT PIT- W 2 00 3- 2

9 1298 21 1299
11/14/2002 11/14/2002
6 LB 12 LB

x 20 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 10 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

57.00 ft (13750 ft/s) 57.00 ft (13250 ft/s)

10 1298 22 1299
11/14/2002 11/14/2002
12 LB 6 LB

x 20 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 10 L/D=2.1E+003 (D=0.3192 in)

57.00 ft (13750 ft/s) 57.00 ft (13250 ft/s)

2 1144 25 1112
11/14/2002 11/14/2002
3 LB 12 LB

x 10 L/D=1.4E+003 (D=0.3192 in) x 20 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

38.00 ft (13250 ft/s) 57.00 ft (13250 ft/s)

3 1144 26 1112
11/14/2002 11/14/2002
6 LB 6 LB

x 10 L/D=1.3E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 20 L/D=2.1E+003 (D=0.3192 in)

38.00 ft (13250 ft/s) 57.00 ft (13250 ft/s)

13 1089 15 1068
11/14/2002 11/14/2002
6 LB 6 LB

x 10 L/D=2.1E+003 (D=0.3192 in) x 10 L/D=1.3E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

57.00 ft (13500 ft/s) 38.00 ft (13250 ft/s)

14 1089 16 1068
11/14/2002 11/14/2002
12 LB 3 LB

x 10 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 10 L/D=1.4E+003 (D=0.3192 in)

57.00 ft (13500 ft/s) 38.00 ft (13250 ft/s)

5 1067 32 2015
11/14/2002 11/14/2002
3 LB 6 LB

x 10 L/D=1.3E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 10 L/D=1.3E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

38.00 ft (13250 ft/s) 38.00 ft (11500 ft/s)

6 1067 33 2015
11/14/2002 11/14/2002
6 LB 3 LB

x 10 L/D=1.3E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 10 L/D=1.4E+003 (D=0.3192 in)

38.00 ft (13250 ft/s) 38.00 ft (11500 ft/s)

19 2014 41 1300
11/14/2002 11/14/2002
3 LB 6 LB

x 10 L/D=1.3E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 20 L/D=2.1E+003 (D=0.3192 in)

38.00 ft (13250 ft/s) 57.00 ft (11500 ft/s)

20 2014 42 1300
11/14/2002 11/14/2002
6 LB 6 LB

x 10 L/D=1.3E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 20 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

38.00 ft (13250 ft/s) 57.00 ft (11500 ft/s)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120

GRL Engineers, Inc. 10/20/2004
Sample Report
\\Server3\Pub\GRL Sample Reports\PIT\Sample.PIT PIT- W 2 00 3- 2

35 1223 54 1301
11/14/2002 11/14/2002
12 LB 12 LB

x 20 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 20 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

57.00 ft (11500 ft/s) 57.00 ft (13250 ft/s)

36 1223 55 1301
11/14/2002 11/14/2002
6 LB 6 LB

x 20 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 20 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

57.00 ft (11500 ft/s) 57.00 ft (13250 ft/s)

43 1157 52 1224
11/14/2002 11/14/2002
12 LB 6 LB

x 20 L/D=2.1E+003 (D=0.3192 in) x 10 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

57.00 ft (13000 ft/s) 57.00 ft (12500 ft/s)

44 1157 53 1224
11/14/2002 11/14/2002
6 LB 12 LB

x 20 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 10 L/D=2.1E+003 (D=0.3192 in)

57.00 ft (13000 ft/s) 57.00 ft (12500 ft/s)

30 1069 62 2017
11/14/2002 11/14/2002
3 LB 6 LB

x 10 L/D=1.4E+003 (D=0.3192 in) x 10 L/D=1.3E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

38.00 ft (13250 ft/s) 38.00 ft (13250 ft/s)

31 1069 63 2017
11/14/2002 11/14/2002
6 LB 3 LB

x 10 L/D=1.3E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 10 L/D=1.4E+003 (D=0.3192 in)

38.00 ft (13250 ft/s) 38.00 ft (13250 ft/s)

48 2016 73 1324
11/14/2002 11/14/2002
3 LB 12 LB

x 10 L/D=1.4E+003 (D=0.3192 in) x 10 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

38.00 ft (13250 ft/s) 57.00 ft (13250 ft/s)

49 2016 74 1324
11/14/2002 11/14/2002
6 LB 6 LB

x 10 L/D=1.3E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 10 L/D=2.1E+003 (D=0.3192 in)

38.00 ft (13250 ft/s) 57.00 ft (13250 ft/s)

60 1323 71 1302
11/14/2002 11/14/2002
6 LB 6 LB

x 10 L/D=2.1E+003 (D=0.3192 in) x 10 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

57.00 ft (11750 ft/s) 57.00 ft (11500 ft/s)

61 1323 72 1302
11/14/2002 11/14/2002
12 LB 12 LB

x 10 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 10 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

57.00 ft (11750 ft/s) 57.00 ft (11500 ft/s)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120

GRL Engineers, Inc. 10/20/2004
Sample Report
\\Server3\Pub\GRL Sample Reports\PIT\Sample.PIT PIT- W 2 00 3- 2

65 1225 95 1327
11/14/2002 11/14/2002
12 LB 6 LB

x 10 L/D=2.1E+003 (D=0.3192 in) x 10 L/D=2.1E+003 (D=0.3192 in)

57.00 ft (11500 ft/s) 57.00 ft (12750 ft/s)

66 1225 96 1327
11/14/2002 11/14/2002
6 LB 12 LB

x 10 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 10 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

57.00 ft (11500 ft/s) 57.00 ft (12750 ft/s)

83 1325 99 1090
11/14/2002 11/14/2002
6 LB 6 LB

x 10 L/D=2.1E+003 (D=0.3192 in) x 20 L/D=2E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

57.00 ft (13250 ft/s) 58.00 ft (13250 ft/s)

84 1325 100 1090

11/14/2002 11/14/2002
12 LB 12 LB

x 10 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 20 L/D=2E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

57.00 ft (13250 ft/s) 58.00 ft (13250 ft/s)

77 1303 101 1328

11/14/2002 11/14/2002
12 LB 12 LB

x 10 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 10 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

57.00 ft (11500 ft/s) 57.00 ft (13250 ft/s)

78 1303 102 1328

11/14/2002 11/14/2002
6 LB 6 LB

x 10 L/D=2.1E+003 (D=0.3192 in) x 10 L/D=2.1E+003 (D=0.3192 in)

57.00 ft (11500 ft/s) 57.00 ft (13250 ft/s)

89 1326 105 1091

11/14/2002 11/14/2002
12 LB 12 LB

x 10 L/D=2.1E+003 (D=0.3192 in) x 20 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

57.00 ft (13500 ft/s) 57.00 ft (13250 ft/s)

90 1326 106 1091

11/14/2002 11/14/2002
6 LB 6 LB

x 10 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 20 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

57.00 ft (13500 ft/s) 57.00 ft (13250 ft/s)

87 1304 111 1318

11/14/2002 11/14/2002
6 LB 6 LB

x 20 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 15 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

57.00 ft (13250 ft/s) 57.00 ft (13750 ft/s)

88 1304 112 1318

11/14/2002 11/14/2002
12 LB 12 LB

x 20 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 15 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

57.00 ft (13250 ft/s) 57.00 ft (13750 ft/s)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120

GRL Engineers, Inc. 10/20/2004
Sample Report
\\Server3\Pub\GRL Sample Reports\PIT\Sample.PIT PIT- W 2 00 3- 2

113 1092 134 2000

11/14/2002 11/14/2002
12 LB 3 LB

x 20 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 10 L/D=1.3E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

57.00 ft (13750 ft/s) 38.00 ft (12250 ft/s)

114 1092 135 2000

11/14/2002 11/14/2002
6 LB 6 LB

x 20 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 10 L/D=1.3E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

57.00 ft (13750 ft/s) 38.00 ft (12250 ft/s)

119 1170 139 2001

11/14/2002 11/14/2002
6 LB 6 LB

x 20 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 10 L/D=1.3E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

57.00 ft (13250 ft/s) 38.00 ft (12750 ft/s)

120 1170 140 2001

11/14/2002 11/14/2002
12 LB 3 LB

x 20 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 10 L/D=1.3E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

57.00 ft (13250 ft/s) 38.00 ft (12750 ft/s)

121 1093 144 1198

11/14/2002 11/14/2002
12 LB 6 LB

x 20 L/D=2.1E+003 (D=0.3192 in) x 10 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

57.00 ft (13250 ft/s) 57.00 ft (13250 ft/s)

122 1093 145 1198

11/14/2002 11/14/2002
6 LB 12 LB

x 20 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 10 L/D=2.1E+003 (D=0.3192 in)

57.00 ft (13250 ft/s) 57.00 ft (13250 ft/s)

131 1174 136 1143

11/14/2002 11/14/2002
6 LB 6 LB

x 10 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 20 L/D=1.3E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

57.00 ft (13250 ft/s) 38.00 ft (14000 ft/s)

132 1174 137 1143

11/14/2002 11/14/2002
12 LB 3 LB

x 10 L/D=2.1E+003 (D=0.3192 in) x 20 L/D=1.3E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

57.00 ft (13250 ft/s) 38.00 ft (14000 ft/s)

125 1152 146 1088

11/14/2002 11/14/2002
12 LB 12 LB

x 20 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 10 L/D=2E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

57.00 ft (13250 ft/s) 58.00 ft (14000 ft/s)

126 1152 147 1088

11/14/2002 11/14/2002
6 LB 6 LB

x 20 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 10 L/D=2.2E+003 (D=0.3192 in)

57.00 ft (13250 ft/s) 58.00 ft (14000 ft/s)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120

GRL Engineers, Inc. 10/20/2004
Sample Report
\\Server3\Pub\GRL Sample Reports\PIT\Sample.PIT PIT- W 2 00 3- 2

9 1298 21 1299
11/14/2002 11/14/2002
6 LB 12 LB

x 20 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 10 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

57.00 ft (13750 ft/s) 57.00 ft (13250 ft/s)

10 1298 22 1299
11/14/2002 11/14/2002
12 LB 6 LB

x 20 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 10 L/D=2.1E+003 (D=0.3192 in)

57.00 ft (13750 ft/s) 57.00 ft (13250 ft/s)

2 1144 25 1112
11/14/2002 11/14/2002
3 LB 12 LB

x 10 L/D=1.4E+003 (D=0.3192 in) x 20 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

38.00 ft (13250 ft/s) 57.00 ft (13250 ft/s)

3 1144 26 1112
11/14/2002 11/14/2002
6 LB 6 LB

x 10 L/D=1.3E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 20 L/D=2.1E+003 (D=0.3192 in)

38.00 ft (13250 ft/s) 57.00 ft (13250 ft/s)

13 1089 15 1068
11/14/2002 11/14/2002
6 LB 6 LB

x 10 L/D=2.1E+003 (D=0.3192 in) x 10 L/D=1.3E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

57.00 ft (13500 ft/s) 38.00 ft (13250 ft/s)

14 1089 16 1068
11/14/2002 11/14/2002
12 LB 3 LB

x 10 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 10 L/D=1.4E+003 (D=0.3192 in)

57.00 ft (13500 ft/s) 38.00 ft (13250 ft/s)

5 1067 32 2015
11/14/2002 11/14/2002
3 LB 6 LB

x 10 L/D=1.3E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 10 L/D=1.3E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

38.00 ft (13250 ft/s) 38.00 ft (11500 ft/s)

6 1067 33 2015
11/14/2002 11/14/2002
6 LB 3 LB

x 10 L/D=1.3E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 10 L/D=1.4E+003 (D=0.3192 in)

38.00 ft (13250 ft/s) 38.00 ft (11500 ft/s)

19 2014 41 1300
11/14/2002 11/14/2002
3 LB 6 LB

x 10 L/D=1.3E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 20 L/D=2.1E+003 (D=0.3192 in)

38.00 ft (13250 ft/s) 57.00 ft (11500 ft/s)

20 2014 42 1300
11/14/2002 11/14/2002
6 LB 6 LB

x 10 L/D=1.3E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 20 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

38.00 ft (13250 ft/s) 57.00 ft (11500 ft/s)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120

GRL Engineers, Inc. 10/20/2004
Sample Report
\\Server3\Pub\GRL Sample Reports\PIT\Sample.PIT PIT- W 2 00 3- 2

35 1223 54 1301
11/14/2002 11/14/2002
12 LB 12 LB

x 20 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 20 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

57.00 ft (11500 ft/s) 57.00 ft (13250 ft/s)

36 1223 55 1301
11/14/2002 11/14/2002
6 LB 6 LB

x 20 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 20 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

57.00 ft (11500 ft/s) 57.00 ft (13250 ft/s)

43 1157 52 1224
11/14/2002 11/14/2002
12 LB 6 LB

x 20 L/D=2.1E+003 (D=0.3192 in) x 10 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

57.00 ft (13000 ft/s) 57.00 ft (12500 ft/s)

44 1157 53 1224
11/14/2002 11/14/2002
6 LB 12 LB

x 20 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 10 L/D=2.1E+003 (D=0.3192 in)

57.00 ft (13000 ft/s) 57.00 ft (12500 ft/s)

30 1069 62 2017
11/14/2002 11/14/2002
3 LB 6 LB

x 10 L/D=1.4E+003 (D=0.3192 in) x 10 L/D=1.3E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

38.00 ft (13250 ft/s) 38.00 ft (13250 ft/s)

31 1069 63 2017
11/14/2002 11/14/2002
6 LB 3 LB

x 10 L/D=1.3E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 10 L/D=1.4E+003 (D=0.3192 in)

38.00 ft (13250 ft/s) 38.00 ft (13250 ft/s)

48 2016 73 1324
11/14/2002 11/14/2002
3 LB 12 LB

x 10 L/D=1.4E+003 (D=0.3192 in) x 10 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

38.00 ft (13250 ft/s) 57.00 ft (13250 ft/s)

49 2016 74 1324
11/14/2002 11/14/2002
6 LB 6 LB

x 10 L/D=1.3E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 10 L/D=2.1E+003 (D=0.3192 in)

38.00 ft (13250 ft/s) 57.00 ft (13250 ft/s)

60 1323 71 1302
11/14/2002 11/14/2002
6 LB 6 LB

x 10 L/D=2.1E+003 (D=0.3192 in) x 10 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

57.00 ft (11750 ft/s) 57.00 ft (11500 ft/s)

61 1323 72 1302
11/14/2002 11/14/2002
12 LB 12 LB

x 10 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 10 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

57.00 ft (11750 ft/s) 57.00 ft (11500 ft/s)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120

GRL Engineers, Inc. 10/20/2004
Sample Report
\\Server3\Pub\GRL Sample Reports\PIT\Sample.PIT PIT- W 2 00 3- 2

65 1225 95 1327
11/14/2002 11/14/2002
12 LB 6 LB

x 10 L/D=2.1E+003 (D=0.3192 in) x 10 L/D=2.1E+003 (D=0.3192 in)

57.00 ft (11500 ft/s) 57.00 ft (12750 ft/s)

66 1225 96 1327
11/14/2002 11/14/2002
6 LB 12 LB

x 10 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 10 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

57.00 ft (11500 ft/s) 57.00 ft (12750 ft/s)

83 1325 99 1090
11/14/2002 11/14/2002
6 LB 6 LB

x 10 L/D=2.1E+003 (D=0.3192 in) x 20 L/D=2E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

57.00 ft (13250 ft/s) 58.00 ft (13250 ft/s)

84 1325 100 1090

11/14/2002 11/14/2002
12 LB 12 LB

x 10 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 20 L/D=2E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

57.00 ft (13250 ft/s) 58.00 ft (13250 ft/s)

77 1303 101 1328

11/14/2002 11/14/2002
12 LB 12 LB

x 10 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 10 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

57.00 ft (11500 ft/s) 57.00 ft (13250 ft/s)

78 1303 102 1328

11/14/2002 11/14/2002
6 LB 6 LB

x 10 L/D=2.1E+003 (D=0.3192 in) x 10 L/D=2.1E+003 (D=0.3192 in)

57.00 ft (11500 ft/s) 57.00 ft (13250 ft/s)

89 1326 105 1091

11/14/2002 11/14/2002
12 LB 12 LB

x 10 L/D=2.1E+003 (D=0.3192 in) x 20 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

57.00 ft (13500 ft/s) 57.00 ft (13250 ft/s)

90 1326 106 1091

11/14/2002 11/14/2002
6 LB 6 LB

x 10 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 20 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

57.00 ft (13500 ft/s) 57.00 ft (13250 ft/s)

87 1304 111 1318

11/14/2002 11/14/2002
6 LB 6 LB

x 20 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 15 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

57.00 ft (13250 ft/s) 57.00 ft (13750 ft/s)

88 1304 112 1318

11/14/2002 11/14/2002
12 LB 12 LB

x 20 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 15 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

57.00 ft (13250 ft/s) 57.00 ft (13750 ft/s)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120

GRL Engineers, Inc. 10/20/2004
Sample Report
\\Server3\Pub\GRL Sample Reports\PIT\Sample.PIT PIT- W 2 00 3- 2

113 1092 134 2000

11/14/2002 11/14/2002
12 LB 3 LB

x 20 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 10 L/D=1.3E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

57.00 ft (13750 ft/s) 38.00 ft (12250 ft/s)

114 1092 135 2000

11/14/2002 11/14/2002
6 LB 6 LB

x 20 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 10 L/D=1.3E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

57.00 ft (13750 ft/s) 38.00 ft (12250 ft/s)

119 1170 139 2001

11/14/2002 11/14/2002
6 LB 6 LB

x 20 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 10 L/D=1.3E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

57.00 ft (13250 ft/s) 38.00 ft (12750 ft/s)

120 1170 140 2001

11/14/2002 11/14/2002
12 LB 3 LB

x 20 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 10 L/D=1.3E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

57.00 ft (13250 ft/s) 38.00 ft (12750 ft/s)

121 1093 144 1198

11/14/2002 11/14/2002
12 LB 6 LB

x 20 L/D=2.1E+003 (D=0.3192 in) x 10 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

57.00 ft (13250 ft/s) 57.00 ft (13250 ft/s)

122 1093 145 1198

11/14/2002 11/14/2002
6 LB 12 LB

x 20 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 10 L/D=2.1E+003 (D=0.3192 in)

57.00 ft (13250 ft/s) 57.00 ft (13250 ft/s)

131 1174 136 1143

11/14/2002 11/14/2002
6 LB 6 LB

x 10 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 20 L/D=1.3E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

57.00 ft (13250 ft/s) 38.00 ft (14000 ft/s)

132 1174 137 1143

11/14/2002 11/14/2002
12 LB 3 LB

x 10 L/D=2.1E+003 (D=0.3192 in) x 20 L/D=1.3E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

57.00 ft (13250 ft/s) 38.00 ft (14000 ft/s)

125 1152 146 1088

11/14/2002 11/14/2002
12 LB 12 LB

x 20 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 10 L/D=2E+003 (D=0.3568 in)

57.00 ft (13250 ft/s) 58.00 ft (14000 ft/s)

126 1152 147 1088

11/14/2002 11/14/2002
6 LB 6 LB

x 20 L/D=1.9E+003 (D=0.3568 in) x 10 L/D=2.2E+003 (D=0.3192 in)

57.00 ft (13250 ft/s) 58.00 ft (14000 ft/s)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120