describe the image

Follow us

Smart Structures News & Blog

Current Articles | RSS Feed RSS Feed

SmartPile® Cost Savings Demonstrated on a range of projects

  
  
  

It has been often asked:  Does the SmartPile™ System save money on the driven pile Foundation?  And if so, how and where?   Smart Structures has teamed with Armeni Consulting, a specialist in bridge costing and planning, to create costing scenarios to answer this question.  

The scenarios created represent true project costs for the driven foundation (beyond the cost per linear foot of pile) in order to best understand the cost savings realized with SmartPile™.   All aspects of the foundation installation are considered including the expendable materials, crew, equipment, overhead, etc. To understand the regional impacts, cost modeling was performed using high and low dollar regional costs and overhead..

 The results show that in all cases a SmartPile™ foundation costs less than a comparable foundation installed using 10% Dynamic Testing.  Of course, the savings vary based on the size of the foundation, its location (over land or water) and the labor/equipment rates applied.  Here are is the quick summary:

  150 Pile Project, 15 Piers at varying Tip Elevations

Low Labor and Equipment rate based on SE Florida (Pile Driving),  High Labor and Equipment rate using NJ

Scenario

Low Labor and Equipment Rate Cost Savings

High Labor and Equipment Rate Cost Savings

1. 18” PSC Piles (80’ Typical Length) over Land

1%

5%

2. 18” PSC Piles (95’ Typical Length) over Land

1%

5%

3. 18” PSC Piles (80’ Typical Length) over Water

3%

7%

4. 18” PSC Piles (95’ Typical Length) over Water

4%

7%

5. 24” PSC Piles (90’ Typical Length) over Land

2%

5%

6. 24” PSC Piles (105’ Typical Length) over Land

4%

7%

7. 24” PSC Piles (90’ Typical Length) over Water

7%

10%

8. 24” PSC Piles (105’ Typical Length) over Water

7%

10%

9. 30” PSC Piles (115’ Typical Length) over Land

7%

9%

10. 30” PSC Piles (130’ Typical Length) over Land

7%

8%

11. 30” PSC Piles (115’ Typical Length) over Water

9%

11%

12. 30” PSC Piles (130’ Typical Length) over Water

10%

12%

 

1000 Pile Project, 50 Piers of 20 Piles each at varying Tip Elevations

 

13. 18” PSC Piles (80’ Typical Length) over Land

.3%

4%

14. 18” PSC Piles (95’ Typical Length) over Land

1%

4%

15. 18” PSC Piles (80’ Typical Length) over Water

4%

7%

16. 18” PSC Piles (95’ Typical Length) over Water

4%

7%

17. 24” PSC Piles (90’ Typical Length) over Land

5%

5%

18. 24” PSC Piles (105’ Typical Length) over Land

5%

7%

19. 24” PSC Piles (90’ Typical Length) over Water

8%

8%

20. 24” PSC Piles (105’ Typical Length) over Water

8%

10%

21. 30” PSC Piles (115’ Typical Length) over Land

7%

9%

22. 30” PSC Piles (130’ Typical Length) over Land

7%

8%

23. 30” PSC Piles (115’ Typical Length) over Water

10%

12%

24. 30” PSC Piles (130’ Typical Length) over Water

10%

12%

All cost models fully characterize the crew, activities and equipment and were processed using cost models/expertise developed by using the HCSS Costing Estimating tool suite ().  The modeling assumes a reduction in the pile length and that this reduction meets the project minimum tip elevation (versus perhaps going with fewer piles).

Where do the Savings Come From?

There are several areas where time and materials savings can be potentially realized, as summarized below:

  1. Up to 15% on the Foundation Materials Costs: Fewer or Shorter Piles.
  2. Smaller Piles can translate into lower transportation costs and the use of smaller equipment (with lower rental/amortization costs).
  3. Less time driving piles … we’ve modeled a 20% savings in time (using 15% shorter piles).  Again, driving a shorter pile or fewer piles, fewer cushion changes, and no limitations based on a conservative driving criteria.
  4. If you spend less time driving each pile, the total labor, rent and overhead costs are less.
  5. No Test Pile (mobilization) costs.

Combine this with the added benefit of complete Quality Assurance (Drive Monitoring) reports for every single pile in every foundation element for the Customer (ensuring that what they’ve purchased is complete and to their requirements).

In short, the models consistently showed that construction using a SmartPile Foundation is less expensive than construction using a conventional foundation while achieving a tremendous increase in quality assurance.

To learn more visit us at  www.smartpile.com. Or to request further disclosure on the cost model and findings, send an email to: info@smartpile.com.