Deep Foundation - Final Rev1
Deep Foundation - Final Rev1
1.1
General Principles
INTRODUCTION
In some cases, shallow foundations are inadequate to support the structural loads,
so deep foundations or pile foundations are required.
In this chapter, you will study about the basic principles of pile foundations, its
function, type, load transfer mechanisms, and standard procedures in design.
Learning Outcomes:
Appreciate and understand the complexity of the stress and strain states
imposed by pile installation and structural loads on the soil.
Understand the function and type of pile foundations
Understand the load transfer mechanism from pile to surrounding soils.
Function of piles
Piles are columnar elements in a foundation which have the function of
transferring the structural loads include axial loads, lateral loads, and moments
from the superstructure through weak compressible strata or through water, onto
stiffer or more compact and less compressible soils or onto rock. They may be
required to carry uplift loads when used to support tall structures subjected to
overturning forces from winds or waves. Piles used in marine structures are
subjected to lateral loads from the impact of berthing ships and from waves.
Combinations of vertical and horizontal loads are carried where piles are used to
support retaining walls, bridge piers and abutments, and machinery foundations.
Pile foundations are used when:
The soil near the surface does not have sufficient bearing capacity to support
the structural loads.
The estimated settlement of the soil exceeds tolerable limits (i.e., settlement
greater than the serviceability limit state).
Differential settlement due to soil variability or non-uniform structural loads is
excessive.
The structural loads consist of lateral loads, moments, and uplift forces, singly
or in combination.
Excavations to construct a shallow foundation on a firm soil layer are difficult
or expensive.
1.2
CLASSIFICATION OF PILES
Piles may be classified as long or short in accordance with the L/D ratio of the pile
(where L = length, D = diameter of pile). A short pile behaves as a rigid body and
rotates as a unit under lateral loads. The load transferred to the tip of the pile bears
a significant proportion of the total vertical load on the top. In the case of a long
pile, the length beyond a particular depth loses its significance under lateral loads,
but when subjected to vertical load, the frictional load on the sides of the pile
bears a significant part to the total load.
Piles may further be classified as vertical piles or inclined piles. Vertical piles are
normally used to carry mainly vertical loads and very little lateral load. When
piles are inclined at an angle to the vertical, they are called batter piles. Batter
piles are quite effective for taking lateral loads, but when used in groups, they also
can take vertical loads.
Piles may be classified in a number of ways based on different criteria:
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
1.2.1
Composite piles
These may be made of either concrete and timber or concrete and steel. These are
considered suitable when the upper part of the pile is to project above the water
table. Lower portion may be of untreated timber and the upper portion of
concrete. Otherwise, the lower portion may be of steel and the upper one of
concrete.
1.2.2
Pile types based on the method of load transfer can be placed into the following
four categories:
Classification of piles based on the method of load transfer from the pile to the
surrounding soil consists of end-bearing piles, friction piles, combining endbearing and friction piles, and laterally loaded piles. End-bearing piles are driven
through soft and loose material and their tips rest on the underlying stiff stratum,
such as dense sand and gravel, clay shale, or hard rock. Friction piles primarily
transfer the load to various soil layers along its shaft. Figure 1.1 gives an
3
Figure 1.1 Types of bearing piles (a) Friction or Adhesion piles (b) Point or End-bearing piles
Commonly used to support retaining walls, bridges, dams, and wharves and as
fenders for harbour construction.
1.3
FACTORS GOVERNING CHOICE OF TYPE OF PILE
The advantages and disadvantages of the various forms of pile described in
previous sections affect the choice of pile for any particular foundation project
and these are summarized in the following subsections:
1.3.1
Advantages
(1) Material forming pile can be inspected for quality and soundness before
driving
(2) Not liable to squeezing or necking
(3) Construction operations not affected by groundwater
(4) Projection above ground level advantageous to marine structures
(5) Can be driven in very long lengths
(6) Can be designed to withstand high bending and tensile stresses
(7) Can be re-driven if affected by ground heave
(8) Pile lengths in excess of 25 m are common and pile loads over 10000kN are
feasible for large diameter piles.
Disadvantages
(1) Un-jointed types cannot readily be varied in length to suit varying levels of
bearing stratum
(2) May break during driving, necessitating replacement piles
(3) May suffer unseen damage which reduces carrying capacity
(4) Uneconomical if cross-section is governed by stresses due to handling and
driving rather than by compressive, tensile or bending stresses caused by
working conditions
(5) Noise, and vibration, and pollution due to driving may be unacceptable
(6) Displacement of soil during driving may lift adjacent piles or damage
adjacent structures
(7) End enlargements, if provided, destroy or reduce shaft friction over shaft
length
(8) Cannot be driven in conditions of low headroom.
1.3.2
Advantages
(1) Length can easily be adjusted to suit varying levels of bearing stratum
(2) Driving tube driven with closed end to exclude groundwater
(3) Enlarged base possible
(4) No spoil to remove; important on contaminated sites
(5) Formation of enlarged base does not destroy or reduce shaft friction
(6) Material in pile not governed by handling or driving stresses
(7) Noise and vibration can be reduced in some types by driving with internal
drop-hammer
(8) Reinforcement determined by compressive, tensile or bending stresses
caused by working conditions
6
Advantages
(1) Length can readily be varied to suit variation in levels of bearing stratum
(2) Soil or rock removed during boring can be inspected for comparison with
site investigation data
(3) In-situ loading tests can be made in large-diameter pile boreholes, or
penetration tests made in small boreholes
(4) Very large (up to 7.3 m diameter) bases can be formed in favourable ground
(5) Drilling tools can break up boulders or other obstructions which cannot be
penetrated by any form of displacement pile
(6) Material forming pile is not governed by handling or driving stresses
(7) Can be installed in very long lengths
(8) Can be installed without appreciable noise or vibration
(9) No ground heave
(10) Can be installed in conditions of low headroom
(11) Pile lengths up to 50 m over 3 m in diameter with working loads over
30000kN are feasible.
Disadvantages
(1) Concrete in shaft liable to squeezing or necking in soft soils where
conventional types are used
(2) Special techniques needed for concreting in water-bearing soils
(3) Concrete cannot be inspected after installation
(4) Enlarged bases cannot be formed in coarse-grained soils
(5) Cannot be extended above ground level without special adaptation
(6) Low end-bearing resistance in coarse-grained soils due to loosening by
conventional drilling operations
7
(7) Drilling a number of piles in a group can cause loss of ground and settlement
of adjacent structures.
1.4
LOAD TRANSFER MECHANISM
The load transfer mechanism from a pile to the soil is complicated. To understand
it, consider a pile of length L, as shown in Figure 1.2a. The load on the pile is
gradually increased from zero to Q(z=0) at the ground surface. Part of this load will
be resisted by the side friction developed along the shaft, Q1 and part by the soil
below the tip of the pile, Q2. Now, how are Q1 and Q2 related to the total load? If
measurements are made to obtain the load carried by the pile shaft, Q(z) at any
depth z, the nature of the variation found will be like that shown in curve 1 of
Figure 1.2b. The frictional resistance per unit area at any depth z may be
determined as
(1.1)
where p = perimeter of the cross section of the pile. If the load Q at the ground
surface is gradually increased, maximum frictional resistance along the pile shaft
will be fully mobilized when the relative displacement between the soil and the
pile is about 5 to 10 mm, irrespective of the pile size and length L. However, the
maximum point resistance Q2 = Qp will not be mobilized until tip the pile has
moved about 10 to 25% of the pile width (or diameter). (The lower limit applies to
driven piles and the upper limit to bored piles). At ultimate load (curve 2 in Figure
1.2b), Q(z=0) = Qu. Hence,
Q1 = Qs, and Q2 = Qp
(1.2)
The preceding explanation indicates that Qs (or the unit skin friction, f, along the
pile shaft) is developed at a much smaller pile displacement compared with the
point resistance, Qp.
This means if piles are designed to carry a working load equal to 1/3 to 1/2 the
total failure load, there is every likelihood of the shaft resistance being fully
mobilized at the working load. This has an important bearing on the design.
The type of load-settlement curve for a pile depends on the relative strength
values of the funding and underlying soil. Fig. 1.3 gives the types of failure
(Kezdi, 1975). They are as follows:
Figure1.3 Types of failure of piles. (a) buckling in very weak surrounding soil; (b) general shear failure in the stro
1.5
Calculate the total load acting on the pile. The loads to be used for bearing
capacity analysis and the loads for the settlement analysis have to be
identified.
Sketch the soil profile and the soil properties up to a depth beyond the
expected maximum length of piles. Locate the ground water level in the
sketch.
Determine the type and length of the pile with alternatives.
Evaluate the single pile capacity.
Establish the number and spacing of piles based on the pile capacity and
loads to be supported. Establish the pile group and the number of piles in
each group and size of the pile cap.
Check the stresses transmitted to lower strata, particularly if there is a weak
layer of soil below the bottom of the piles.
Carry out the structural design of piles and pile cap.
Carry out settlement analysis of the pile group.
Check for uplift pressure and lateral load capacity of each pile group.
Plan for proper pile load tests for verifying the computed values.
The details of vertical load on piles and design are presented in detail in Chapter
2. The input for the pile design such as length, diameter and pile capacity
determination, and settlement analysis etc. are discussed in the following sections.
10
Learning Outcomes:
Estimate the allowable axial load capacity of single piles based on; static
method, semi-empirical correlation with in-situ testing, field static loading
test, and driving formulas.
2.1
INTRODUCTION
The load carrying capacity of piles is governed both by its structural strength and
the supporting soil properties. Obviously, the smaller of the two values should be
used for the design. Usually, the pile capacity based on soil properties governs the
design except probably in timber piles. However, the methods for determination
of these values are similar in all these types of piles. The capacity of piles based
on structural strength can be obtained by multiplying the area of pile cross section
with the allowable compressive strength of the material of the pile.
The bearing capacity of groups of piles subjected to vertical or vertical and lateral
loads depends upon the behavior of a single pile. The bearing capacity of a single
pile depends upon: (1) Type, size and length of pile, (2) Type of soil, and (3) The
method of installation.
In order to be able to design a safe and economical pile foundation, we have to
analyze the interactions between the pile and the soil, establish the modes of
failure and estimate the settlements from soil deformation under dead load,
service load etc. The design should comply with the following requirements.
1. It should ensure adequate safety against failure; the factor of safety used
depends on the importance of the structure and on the reliability of the soil
parameters and the loading systems used in the design.
2. The settlements should be compatible with adequate behavior of the superstructure to avoid impairing its efficiency.
The pile capacity determination of supporting soil can be divided into three
categories:
11
2.2
These methods are developed for piles and deep foundations using the soil
properties in which they are founded. They assume equilibrium of the pile under
the applied loads and resistance offered by the soil in terms of point bearing
capacity and the friction and adhesion of the shaft. A single pile subjected to a
vertical load and the mechanism of load transfer to the soil is shown in Figure 2.1.
Thus the load is transferred to the soil partly as point bearing pressure at its base
and partly as friction and or adhesion along the surface of the shaft.
2.2.1 Equation of Estimation Single Pile Capacity
The ultimate load-carrying capacity Qu of a pile is given by the equation
(2.1)
where
Qu
Qp
Qs
Numerous published studies cover the determination of the values of Qp and Qs,
for example Meyerhof (1976), Berezantsev (1961), and Coyle and Castello
(1981).
Qu
Steel
Soil plug
Qs
L = Lb
Steel
Soil plug
Qp
L = length of embankment
Lb = length of embankment in
bearing stratum
12
(2.2a)
(2.2b)
Similarly, the general bearing capacity equation for shallow foundations was
given in (for vertical loading) as:
(2.2c)
Hence in general, the unit ultimate bearing capacity maybe express as
(2.3)
where Nc*, Nq*, and N* are the bearing capacity factors that include the necessary
shape and depth factors.
The ultimate resistance per unit area developed at the pile tip qp, may be expressed
by an equation similar in form to Eq. 2.3, although the bearing capacity values
will change.
Hence, Eq. (2.3) can be rewrite as:
(2.4)
Because the width B of a pile is relatively small, the term BN* may be dropped
from the right side of the preceding equation without introducing a serious error;
thus, we have
(2.5)
Note that the term q has been replaced by 'V 0 in Eq. (2.4), to signify effective
vertical stress. Thus, the point bearing of piles is
(2.6)
Ap =
qp =
c =
'V 0
=
=
L =
o =
Nc*, Nq*=
bearing capacity factors = f ()
=
angle of internal friction of soil
Shaft Resistance, Qs
Shaft or skin resistance due to the frictional or adhesion resistance of a pile may
be written as
(2.7)
where
As
p
L
fs
=
=
=
=
Ultimate Load, Qu
The ultimate load-carrying capacity Qu of a pile is given in equation (2.1) can be
rewritten as:
(2.8a)
(2.8b)
(2.8c)
The various methods for estimating Qp and Qs are discussed in the next several
sections. It needs to be reemphasized that in the field, for full mobilization of the
point resistance the pile tip must go through a displacement of 10 to 25% of the
pile width (or diameter).
Allowable Load, Qall
After the total ultimate load-carrying capacity of a pile has been determined by
summing the point bearing capacity and the frictional (or skin) resistance, a
reasonable factor of safety should be used to obtain the total allowable load for
each pile, or
(2.9)
Where:
Qall = allowable load-carrying capacity for each pile
Qu = ultimate load-carrying capacity for each pile
FS = factor of safety
The factor of safety generally used ranges from 2.5 to 4, depending on the
uncertainties surrounding the calculation of ultimate load.
14
15
qp=ql
L/B=Lb/B
Figure 2.2 Nature of variation of point unit resistance in homogeneous sand
16
The variation of Nq* with soil friction angle is shown in Figure 2.3. The
interpolated values of Nq* for various friction angles are also given in Table 2.1.
However, Qp should not exceed the limiting value Ap ql that is,
(2.11)
The limiting point resistance is
(2.12)
Figure 2.3 Bearing capacity factors and critical depth ratios L/d for driven piles
(after Meyerhof, 1976)
Nq*
Nq*
Nq*
12.4
13.8
15.5
17.9
21.4
26.0
29.5
34.0
39.7
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
46.5
56.7
68.2
81.0
96.0
115.0
143.0
168.0
194.0
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
231.0
276.0
346.0
420.0
525.0
650.0
780.0
930.0
17
18
In Figure 2.5 the Berezantsev factors are compared with those of Brinch Hansen.
The latter have been adopted by the American Petroleum Institute.
L/D
Brinch Hansen
Berezantsev
Figure 2.5 Bearing capacity factors of Berezantsev et al. & Brinch Hansen
19
For driven piles in sand, the vibration caused during pile driving helps
densify the soil around the pile. The zone of sand densification may be as
much as 2.5 times the pile diameter, in the sand surrounding the pile.
It has been observed that the nature of variation of fs in the field is
approximately as shown in Figure 2.6. The unit skin friction increases with
depth more or less linearly to a depth of L and remains constant thereafter.
The magnitude of the critical depth may be 15 to 20 pile diameters. A
conservative estimate would be
L 15D
Unit frictional resistance, fs
fs
(a)
Depth
(b)
Figure2.6
resistance for
in sand
sand
Figure
11.11 Unit
Unit frictional
frictional resistance
for piles
piles in
3.
4.
At similar depths, the unit skin friction in loose sand is higher for a highdisplacement pile, compared with a low-displacement pile.
At similar depths, bored, or jetted, piles will have a lower unit skin friction
compared with driven piles.
(2.15a)
And for z = L to L
(2.15b)
20
In these equations,
K = earth pressure coefficient
effective vertical stress at the depth under consideration
'o =
= soil-pile friction angle
The value of K that will use in Eq. (2.15a) can be obtained as follows:
Pile type
Bored or jetted
Low-displacement
High-displacement
K
K0 = 1 - sin
K0 to 1.4 K0
K0 to 1.8 K0
Based on load test results in the field, Mansur and Hunter (1970) reported the
following average value of K.
Pile type
H piles
Steel pipe piles
Precast concrete piles
K
1.65
1.26
1.5
The value of from various investigations appears to be in the range from 0.5
to 0.8.
Coyle and Castellos Methods (1981)
In conjunction with the material previously presented, Coyle and Castello (1981)
proposed that,
(2.16)
where
average effective overburden pressure
'v0 =
= soil-pile friction angle = 0.8
The lateral earth pressure K, can be obtained from Figure 2.7, so
(2.17)
21
22
23
The value of changes with the depth of penetration of the pile can be obtained
from Figure 2.8 or Table 2.2.
Figure 2.8 & Table 2.2 Variation of with pile embedment length, L
Depth of penetration, m
Value of
fs =(0+2cu)
Embedment
length, L (m)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
50
60
70
80
90
0.5
0.336
0.245
0.200
0.173
0.150
0.136
0.132
0.127
0.118
0.113
0.110
0.110
0.110
Figure 2.9 gives an illustration how to calculate the mean value of effective
vertical stress and un-drained shear strength for entire embedment length by
weighted area method.
L1
cu1
cu2
cu3
Hence, the mean value of undrained shear strength cu = (cu1L1 + cu2L2 + cu3L3)/L
and the mean effective stress is 0 = (A1 + A2 +A3)/L.
It should be noted that method has been found very useful for the design of
heavily loaded pipe piles for offshore structures.
Method
According to the method, the unit skin resistance in clayey soils can be
represented by the equation
(2.22)
where = empirical adhesion factor. The approximate variation of the value of
is shown in Table 2.3. It is important to realize that the values of may vary
somewhat, since is actually a function of vertical effective stress and the undrained cohesion. Sladen (1992) has shown that
(2.23)
where
average vertical effective stress
'v0 =
C = 0.4 to 0.5 for bored piles, and 0.5 for driven piles
The ultimate side resistance can thus be given as
(2.24)
25
1.00
0.92
0.82
0.74
0.62
0.54
0.48
0.42
0.40
0.38
0.36
0.35
0.34
0.34
Method
When piles are driven into saturated clays, the pore water pressure will be buildup in the soil around the piles. The excess pore water pressure in normally
consolidated clays may be four to six times. However, within a month or so, this
pressure gradually dissipates. Hence, the unit frictional resistance for the pile can
be determined on the basis of the effective stress parameters of the clay in a
remolded state. Thus, at any depth,
(2.25)
where
'v0
=
R =
K =
=
vertical effective stress
K tan R
drained friction angle of remolded clay
earth pressure coefficient
(2.26)
(2.27)
(2.28)
(2.29)
(2.30)
26
With the value of fs determined, the ultimate shaft or skin resistance may be
evaluated as
(2.31)
2.2.4 Capacity of pile in sandy clayey soils (c- -soils)
Where piles are installed in sandy clays or clayey sands which are sufficiently
permeable to allow dissipation of excess pore pressure caused by application of
load to the pile, the base and shaft resistance can be calculated for the case of
drained loading using Eq. 2.6.
The angle of shearing resistance used for obtaining the bearing capacity factor Nq
should be the effective angle , obtained from unconsolidated drained triaxial
compression tests. In a uniform soil deposit, Eq. 2.6 gives a linear relationship for
the increase of base resistance with depth. Therefore, the base resistance should
not exceed the peak value of 11 MN/m2 unless pile loading tests show that higher
ultimate values can be obtained. The effective overburden pressure, 'v0 , in Eq.
2.6 is the total overburden pressure minus the pore water pressure at the pile toe
level. It is important to distinguish between uniform c- soils and layered c and
soils, as sometimes the layering is not detected in a poorly executed soil
investigation.
(2.32)
27
2.3
Today, due to its simplicity, many engineers were interested to estimate pile load
capacity based on the results of in-situ tests. In-situ methods are based on cone
penetration tests (CPT), standard penetration tests (SPT), or other in-situ tests. In
principle, these methods are applicable to all soil types, but have been most often
applied to sandy soils because they are difficult to sample and thus are not well
suited to laboratory testing.
2.3.1
The Cone Penetration Test is the measurement of the resistance at tip and friction
along sides when an instrumented cone (electrical or mechanical) is pushed into
the ground. The cone penetration test may be considered as a small scale pile load
test. As such the results of this test yield the necessary parameters for the design
of piles subjected to vertical load. Various methods for using CPT results to
predict vertical pile capacity have been proposed. The following methods will be
discussed:
1. Vander Veen's method.
2. Schmertmann's method.
Vander Veen's Method for Piles in Cohesionless Soils
In the Vander Veen et al., (1957) method, the ultimate end-bearing resistance of a
pile is taken equal to the point resistance of the cone. To allow for the variation of
cone resistance which normally occurs, the method considers average cone
resistance over a depth equal to three times the diameter of the pile above the pile
point level and one pile diameter below point level. Experience has shown that if a
safety factor of 2.5 is applied to the ultimate end resistance as determined from
cone resistance, the pile is unlikely to settle more than 15 mm under the working
load (Tomlinson, 1986). The equations for ultimate bearing capacity and
allowable load may be written as,
pile point resistance,
qp = q
Qp = Ap q
where, q
pile toe.
(cone)
c
(2.33)
(2.34)
The skin friction on the pile shaft in cohesionless soils is obtained from the
relationships established by Meyerhof (1956) as follows.
For displacement piles, the ultimate skin friction, fs, is given by
(2.35)
28
and for H-section piles, the ultimate limiting skin friction is given by
(2.36)
where, q c = average cone resistance in kg/cm2 over the length of the pile shaft
under consideration.
Meyerhof states that for straight sided displacement piles, the ultimate unit skin
friction, fs, has a maximum value of 107 kPa and for H-sections, a maximum of 54
kPa (calculated on all faces of flanges and web). The ultimate skin load is
Qs = As fs
(2.37)
(2.38)
29
Soil Condition
Sand with OCR = 1
Very gravelly course sand; and with OCR = 2 to 4
Fine gravel; sand with OCR = 6 to 10
1.00
0.67
0.50
Depth
z =8D
8D
4D
0.7D
4D
below
pile
tip greater
than that at pile tip within depth 4D
qc below pile tip lower than that at pileqctip
within
depth
4D
30
(2.42)
For z 8D:
(2.43)
where
fs
fsc
z
s
D
L
=
=
=
=
=
=
Note that s is based on the overall L/D ratio of the pile. Do not assign a difference
value to each pile segment. Schmertmann suggested a limit of 120 kPa on fs.
Table 2.5 Frictional resistance modification
factor, s (for Mechanical CPT)
L/D
5
10
15
20
25
Timber
1.49
0.85
0.58
0.49
0.48
Concrete
0.78
0.59
0.50
0.44
0.44
Steel
1.19
0.68
0.46
0.39
0.38
(2.44)
31
where: c is a reduction factor, which varies from 0.2 to 1.25 for clayey soil, and
fsc is the sleeve friction. Figure 2.11 depicts the variation of c with fsc for different
pile types in clay.
Steel piles
Example 2.1
The CPT (mechanical cone) data shown on Table 2.5 represent the soil conditions
at a proposed construction site. Based on Figure 2.12, the test results indicate that
the upper 4.5 m is sand, and it is underlain by 3.4 m of clay, then additional sand.
Compute the allowable load capacity of on 457 mm square, 10.36 m long prestressed concrete pile is to be driven into the soil.
Solution
Evaluation of CPT data shows that the lower qc value in a range of 4D below pile
tip was found at the level 11.00 meter below the surface, so use Case 1.
Calculate qc1 and qc2 use a minimum path rule as follows:
qc1 = 1/8 {115 + 105 + 108 + 5(99)} = 102.9 kg/cm2
The upper limit of qc2 averaging located at the level of L-8D = 10.36 (8 x 0.457)
= 6.70 meter
qc2 = 1/18[5(99) + 2(93) + 85 + 3(70) + 50 + 0.6{8 + 2(7) + 3(6)}] = 58.3 kg/cm2
(Note: the factor 0.6 in this equation reflects the use of the mechanical cone in a
cohesive soil)
32
33
Depth (m)
qc (kg/cm2)
fsc
FR
Depth (m)
qc (kg/cm2)
fsc
FR
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1.20
1.40
1.60
1.80
2.00
2.20
2.40
2.60
2.80
3.00
3.20
3.40
3.60
3.80
4.00
4.20
4.40
4.60
4.80
5.00
5.20
5.40
5.60
5.80
6.00
6.20
6.40
6.60
6.80
0.00
15.00
23.00
25.00
24.00
29.00
27.00
20.00
23.00
33.00
30.00
25.00
30.00
30.00
25.00
26.00
32.00
25.00
22.00
30.00
35.00
37.00
34.00
15.00
9.00
5.00
4.00
3.50
4.00
4.50
6.50
5.50
5.50
5.00
7.00
0.00
0.32
0.44
0.40
0.41
0.52
0.43
0.30
0.37
0.56
0.40
0.43
0.46
0.21
0.32
0.43
0.45
0.50
0.52
0.53
0.54
0.52
0.54
0.52
0.49
0.26
0.25
0.21
0.23
0.28
0.39
0.30
0.26
0.30
0.43
0.0
2.1
1.9
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.6
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.3
1.7
1.5
0.7
1.3
1.7
1.4
2.0
2.4
1.8
1.6
1.4
1.6
3.5
5.4
5.2
6.3
6.0
5.8
6.2
6.0
5.5
4.7
6.0
6.1
7.00
7.20
7.40
7.60
7.80
8.00
8.20
8.40
8.60
8.80
9.00
9.20
9.40
9.60
9.80
10.00
10.20
10.40
10.60
10.80
11.00
11.20
11.40
11.60
11.80
12.00
12.20
12.40
12.60
12.80
13.00
13.20
13.40
13.60
13.80
7.00
6.00
8.50
7.00
8.00
50.00
75.00
72.00
70.00
85.00
98.00
93.00
103.00
110.00
107.00
102.00
109.00
115.00
105.00
108.00
99.00
108.00
114.00
117.00
111.00
105.00
96.00
86.00
89.00
85.00
115.00
165.00
180.00
173.00
200.00
0.44
0.35
0.51
0.38
0.50
1.20
0.90
0.72
0.91
1.27
0.88
1.02
1.03
1.32
1.17
1.33
1.20
1.15
1.57
1.19
1.39
1.84
1.60
1.52
1.22
1.36
0.96
1.20
1.16
1.36
1.95
1.98
1.62
1.73
-
6.3
5.8
6.0
5.4
6.3
2.4
1.2
1.0
1.3
1.5
0.9
1.1
1.0
1.2
1.1
1.3
1.1
1.0
1.5
1.1
1.4
1.7
1.4
1.3
1.1
1.3
1.0
1.4
1.3
1.6
1.7
1.2
0.9
1.0
-
34
Friction ratio FR
Sand
Clay
6.7
8D
10.3
Sand
4D
12.1
Skin Friction Qs
Layer depth
(m)
z
(m)
fsc
(kg/cm2)
0.00 - 3.66
3.66 - 4.50
4.50 - 7.90
7.90 - 10.36
1.83
4.08
6.20
9.13
0.42
0.53
0.36
1.08
0.44
0.44
0.85
0.44
fs
(kg/cm2)
0.092
0.233
0.306
0.475
As
(cm2)
Qs
(kg)
66,905
15,355
226,672
44,969
6,182
3,581
69,362
21,369
Total
100,494
35
2.3.2
(2.46)
( N 60 )
(2.47)
kN/m2
(2.48)
kN/m2
(2.49)
36
Example 2.2
Consider a concrete pile that is 300 mm x 300 mm in cross section in sand. The
pile is 15.00 meter long. The following are the variation of N60 with depth.
Calculate the allowable load-carrying capacity of the pile based on Meyerhofs
and Briauds method. Use a factor of safety, FS=3.
1.0
3.0
4.0
6.0
7.5
9.0
10.5
12.0
13.5
15.0
16.5
18.0
19.0
21.0
N60
6
10
11
12
14
18
11
17
20
28
29
32
30
27
Solution
Based on Meyerhofs method
The tip of the pile is 15.0 meter below the ground surface, and the pile diameter,
D = 300 mm. The average of N60, measured 10D = 10 x 0.3 = 3.0 meter above and
4D = 4 x 0.3 = 1.2 meter below the tip of the pile is
Thus, select:
Qp = 864 kN
37
Meyerhofs method:
Based on Briauds method
From equation (2.11)
Qp = Ap qp = Ap{1970 (N60)0.36}=(0.300 x0.300){(1970)(24)0.36} = 575.4 kN
From equation (2.11)
f s=22.4 ( N
60) 0.29=22.4 ( 15 )0.29 =49.13 kN / m2
Qs= pL f s=( 4 x 0.300 )( 15.0 ) ( 49.13 ) =88 4 kN
Briauds method:
38
2.4
The most precise way to determine the ultimate downward and upward capacities
for pile foundation is to build a full-size prototype foundation at the proposed site,
and slowly load it to a certain load or until failure. This method is known as a
(conventional) static load test. However, static load test are much more expensive
and time-consuming, and thus must be used more selective.
The objective of a static load test is to develop a load-settlement curve or, in the
case of uplift tests, a load-leave curve. This curve is then used to determine the
ultimate load capacity of that pile.
The purposes of a pile load test are:
Load tests may be made either on a single pile or a group of piles, but tests on a
pile group are very costly and may be undertaken only in very important projects.
Pile load tests on a single pile or a group of piles are conducted for the determination of, (1) vertical load bearing capacity, (2) uplift load capacity, and (3)
lateral load capacity.
Figure 2.13(a) and (b), shows a schematic diagram of the pile load arrangement
for testing axial compression in the field, known as kentledge system and tension
pile system respectively.
Kentledge is still commonly used in Indonesia; this involves the use of dead
weights supported by a deck of steel beams sitting on crib pads. The area of the
crib should be sufficient to avoid bearing failure or excessive settlement of the
ground. It is recommended that the crib pads are placed at least 1.3 m from the
edge of the test pile to minimize interaction effects (ICE, 1988). If the separation
distance is less than 1.3 m, the surcharge effect from the kentledge should be
determined and allowed for in the interpretation of the loading test results.
Tension piles used to provide reaction for the applied load should be located as far
as practicable from the test pile to minimize interaction effects. A minimum
centre-to-centre spacing of 2.0 m or three times test pile diameters, whichever is
greater, between the test pile and tension piles is recommended. If the centre
spacing between piles is less than three pile diameters, there may be significant
pile interaction and the observed settlement of the test pile will be less than what
should have been. A minimum of three reactions piles should be used to prevent
instability of the set up during pile loading tests.
39
Stiffener
s
Dial gauge
Load cel
Tension
member
Hydraulic jack
Test pile
Reaction pile
Load tests may be carried out either on; (1) a working pile or (2) a test pile.
A working pile (known as un-failed test) is a pile driven or cast-in-situ along with
the other piles to carry the loads from the superstructure. The maximum test load
on such piles should not exceed one and a half times the design load.
A test pile (known as failed test) is a pile which does not carry the loads coming
from the structure. The maximum load that can be put on such piles may be about
21/2 times the design load or the load imposed must be such as to give a total
settlement not less than one-tenth the pile diameter.
Procedure
The load is applied to the pile by a hydraulic jack. Step loads are applied to the
pile, and sufficient time is allowed to elapse after each load so that a small amount
of settlement occurs. The settlement of the pile is measured by dial gauges. Most
building codes require that each step load be about one-fourth of the proposed
working load. The load test should be carried out to at least a total load of two
times the proposed working load. After the desired pile load is reached, the pile is
gradually unloaded.
There are two categories of static load test: (1) Controlled stress tests (also known
as Maintained Load or ML test), and (2) Controlled strain tests
ML tests uses predetermined loads (the independent variable) and measured the
settlement (the dependent variable), while the other one uses an opposite
approach. The disturbance of surrounding soils can generate excess pore water
pressures during driving process will temporarily change the ultimate load
capacity. Therefore, it is best to allow time for these excess pore water pressures
to dissipate before conducting the test. This typically requires a delay of at least 2
days in sands and at least 30 to 60 days in clays.
Interpretation of Pile Load Test result
Figure 2.14 shows a typical loadsettlement diagram obtained from field loading
and unloading. Once we have obtained the load settlement curve, it is necessary to
determine the ultimate load capacity, which means we must define where failure
occurs.
For piles in soft clay this is relatively straightforward, because its load-settlement
curve has a distinct plunge, as shown by curve 1 in Figure 2.14b, and the ultimate
capacity is the load that corresponds to this plunge. However piles in sands,
intermediate soils, and stiff clays have slope with no clear point of failure, as
shown by curve 2.
41
(a)
(a)
(b)
(b)
Figure 2.14 (a) Plot of load against total settlement; (b) plot of load against net settlement
For any load Q, the net pile settlement can be calculated as follows:
When Q = Q1, ---------- Net settlement, Snet(1) = St(1) Se(1)
When Q = Q2, ---------- Net settlement, Snet(2) = St(2) Se(2)
Where:
Snet
St
Se
= net settlement
= total settlement
= elastic settlement of the pile it self
Qu
D
Dr
L
Ap
Ep
=
=
=
=
=
=
0.12Dr + 0.1(D/Dr)
QuL/AE
Eq. (11.22)
Settlement, s (mm)
Example 2.3
A 305-mm steel pipe pile with a length of 16.00 meter was subjected to a pile load
test.
The results of the test were plotted and the load-settlement curve is shown in
Figure 2.16
The local building code states that the allowable pile load is taken as one-half of
that load which produces a net settlement of not more than 0.025 mm/kN, but in
no case more than 20 mm.
Required: Allowable pile load
Solution:
Net settlement = Total settlement Net (rebound) settlement
43
500
1000
1500
0.00
10.00
20.00
30.00
Settlement (mm)
40.00
50.00
60.00
70.00
80.00
Load (kN)
Test Load
(kN)
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
Settlement (mm)
Loading Unloading
0
55.90
5,10
60.70
11,40
64.50
19,30
67.10
31,80
69.30
71,10
71.10
Rebound (Se)
(mm
55.90-55.90 = 0
60.7055.90 = 4.80
64.5055.90 = 8.60
67.1055.90 = 11.20
69.3055.90 = 13.40
71.1055.90 = 15.20
Net Settlement
(mm)
Buliding
Code
0
5.10-4.80 = 0.30
11.40-8.60= 2.80
19.30-11.20= 8.10
31.80-13.40=18.40
71.10-15.20
=55.90
12.5
25.0/20.0
37.5/20.0
50.0/20.0
62,5/20.0
St
Since a test load of 2000 kN produces a net settlement of 18.40 mm and the
maximum allowable settlement is 20 mm.
Allowable load = 2000/2 = 1000 kN
44
2000
Example 2.4
The load-settlement data shown in Figure 2.15 were obtained from a full-scale
static load test on a 406-mm square, 20.0-m long concrete pile (Ep = 30 x 106
kN/m2) embedded in sand. Use Davissons method to compute the ultimate load
Qu optimum downward load capacity.
Solution
Dr = 300 mm, D =406 mm, L = 20 m = 20,000 mm, Ap = 406 mm x 406 mm =
164,836 mm2, and Ep = 30 kN/mm2. Hence,
45
2.5
These formulae have been developed for driven piles (precast type) using dynamic
principles. A drop/falling hammer is used to drive the pile to the desired depth or
until refusal. It is assumed that the kinetic energy of the hammer falling from a
height is used partly to drive the pile into the soil and partly as a loss due to
damping and so on. Using the dynamic penetration of the pile, several empirical
formulae have been developed by various professional bodies and manufacturers
(Teng, 1964; Bowles, 1996; Das, 2007).
Since most of these formulae are empirical and involve several parameters which
are difficult to quantify, the evaluation of pile capacity may have a large range of
variation, thus their utility may be limited.
These dynamic equations are widely used in the field to determine whether a pile
has reached a satisfactory bearing value at the predetermined depth. One of the
earliest such equations commonly referred to as the Engineering News Record
(ENR) formula is derived from the work-energy theory. That is,
(2.51)
where
WR
h
S
C
=
=
=
=
46
Formula
47
The maximum stress developed on a pile during the driving operation can be
estimated from the pile-driving formulas presented in Table 2.16. To illustrate, we
use the modified EN formula:
(2.53)
In this equation, S is the average penetration per hammer blow, which can also be
expressed as,
(2.54)
48
Qu (kN)
Ap (m2)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
20
0
632
1084
1423
1687
1898
2070
2530
654 x 10-4
654 x 10-4
654 x 10-4
654 x 10-4
654 x 10-4
654 x 10-4
654 x 10-4
654 x 10-4
Qu/Ap (MN/m2)
0
9.79
16.80
22.06
26.16
29.43
32.12
39.22
Both the number of hammer blows N and the stress can be plotted in a graph, as
shown in Figure 2.3.
Qu /Ap (MN/m2)
Number of blows/25.4 mm
If such a curve is prepared, the number of blows per inch (25.4mm) of pile
penetration corresponding to the allowable pile-driving stress can easily be
determined.
Actual driving stresses in wooden piles are limited to about 0.7 fu. Similarly, for
concrete and steel piles, driving stresses are limited to about 0.6 f 'c and 0.85fy
respectively. In most cases, wooden piles are driven with a hammer energy of less
than 60 kN-m.
Driving resistances are limited mostly to 4 to 5 blows per inch of pile penetration.
For concrete and steel piles, the usual values of N are 6 to 8 and 12 to 14,
respectively.
49
Learning Outcomes:
Estimate the axial load capacity of pile groups by using of individual and
block action concept.
3.1 INTRODUCTION
In most cases, piles are used in groups, as shown in Figure 3.1, to
transmit the structural load to the soil. A pile cap where
constructed over group piles can be in contact with the ground,
as in most cases (Figure 3.1a), or well above the ground, as in
the case of offshore platforms (Figure 3.1b).
PILE CAP
PILE CAP
GWL
L
L
s
Lb
Lg
Bg
(a)
50
51
If the overlap is large, the soil may fail in shear or settlement will
be very large. Though the overlapping zone of stresses obviously
decreases with increased pile spacing, it may not be feasible
since the pile cap size becomes too large and hence expensive.
In practice, the minimum center to center pile spacing, s, is 2.5D
and, in ordinary situations, is actually about 3 to 3.5D.
Qg
Q1
Single pile
Q1
Qg
In fine-grained soils, the outer piles tend to carry more loads than
the piles in the center of the group. In coarse-grained soils, the
piles in the center take more loads than the outer piles.
The ratio of the load capacity of a pile group Qg(u) to the total load
capacity of the piles acting as individual piles (n Qu), is called the
efficiency factor that is,
(3.1)
52
Where
=
group
Qg(u) =
Qu
=
n
=
effisiency factor
ultimate load capacity of the pile group
ultimate load capacity of a single pile
number of piles in the group
53
3.2
Depending on their spacing within the group, the piles may act in
one of two ways: (1) as a block, with dimensions Lg x Bg x L, or (2)
as individual piles. If the piles as a block, the frictional capacity is
fav pgL Qg(u). Where pg = perimeter of the cross section of block =
2 (n1 + n2 2)s + 4D, and fav = average unit frictional resistance.
The key assumption in single pile failure mode is that each pile
mobilizes its full load capacity. Thus, the group load capacity is
Qg(u)= nQu, hence,
(3.2a)
(3.2b)
Hence,
(3.3)
Qg(u) = n Qu
(3.4)
and if 1, then
Qg(u) = n Qu
(3.5)
There are several other equations like Eq. (3.12) for calculating
the group efficiency of friction piles. It is important, however, to
recognize that relationships such as Eq. (3.13) are simplistic and
should not be used. In fact, in a group pile, the magnitude of
depends on the location of the pile in the group (ex., Figure 3.8).
Converse-Labare equation
(3.6)
3.3
As shown in Figure 3.4, the ultimate load bearing capacity of group piles in
saturated clay can estimate in the following manner:
Qg(u)
Pile cap
2(Lg +Bg)cu(s)L
cu(s)1
L
cu(s)2
cu(s)3
Lg Bg cu(p) LNc*
Bg
Lg
Figure 3.4 Load capacities of group piles in clay
Step 1. Determine
Qg(u) = n1n2(Qp+Qs)
Qp = Ap (9cu(p))
(3.8)
(3.9)
Qg(u)
(3.10)
(3.11)
Step 2. Determining the ultimate capacity by assuming that the piles in the group
act as block with dimension Lg x Bg x L. The skin resistance of the block is,
Qsg = pg cu(s) L = 2(Lg + Bg)cu(s)L
(3.12)
55
(3.13)
Obtain the value of the bearing capacity factor Nc* from Figure 11.11.
Thus, the ultimate load is
Qg(u) = LgBgcu(p) Nc*+ 2(Lg + Bg)cu(s)L
(3.14)
Step 3. Compare the values obtained from Eqs. (3.711) and (3.814), the lower of
the two values is Qg(u).
3.4
56
batter piles and second, eccentric vertical load on vertical piles-are analyzed by
this method.
1.
As shown in (b), draw pile cap and lines parallel to RA, RB, and
RC
(ii) Extend R to intersect RA at point a.
(iii) Extend RB, and RC, to intersect at point b. Join point a and b.
(iv) As shown in (c), first draw line ac parallel to and equal to
R by selecting an appropriate scale. From a draw ab parallel to
ab shown in item (b). Then from point c draw cb parallel to RA to
intersect ab at point b. From b draw a line parallel to RB and from
point a draw a line parallel to RC to obtain point d.
Then RA, will equal cb, RB will equal bd and RC will equal ad. Figure 3.5,
case (A), item (c), shows these forces drawn to scale: The force
direction (e.g., tension and compression) are also shown on this force
diagram. Similarly, when the piles are subjected to a resultant pullout force
(Qpull), then the force polygon can be drawn as shown in Figure 3.5, case
(B).
2.
The load on any particular pile within a pile group may be computed using the
elastic equation:
(3.15)
where
Qm = axial load on any pile m
Qg = total vertical load at the centroid of the pile group
57
n = number of piles
Mx, My = moment with respect to x and y axes, respectively
x, y = distance from pile to y and x axes, respectively
It should be noted that shears and bending moment can be determined for any
section of pile cap by using elastic and static equations.
kN
kN
kN
kN
Figure 3.5 Analysis of load distribution for vertical and batter piles
Example 3.1
The section of a 3x4 group pile in a layered saturated clay is shown in Figure 2.5.
The piles are square in cross section (350 mm x 350 mm). The center-to-center
spacing, s, of the piles is 875 mm. Determine the allowable load-bearing capacity
58
of the pile group. Use FS = 4. Note that the groundwater table coincides with the
ground surface.
GWT
4.50 m
Clay-1
cu(s) = 52.0 kN/m2
sat = 17.6 kN/m3
14..00 m
Clay-2
cu(s) = 85.0 kN/m2
sat = 19.0 kN/m3
875 mm
Solution
From equation,
+ 2(Lg + Bg)cu L
59
Learning Outcomes:
4.1
Estimate the elastic and consolidation settlement of single piles and pile
groups.
Elastic Settlement of Group Piles
In general, the settlement of a group pile under a similar working load per pile
increases with the width of the group (Bg) and the center-to-center spacing of the
piles (s). Several investigations relating to the settlement of group piles have been
reported in the literature, with widely varying results. The simplest relation for the
settlement of group piles was given by Vesic (1969), namely,
(4.1)
where
Sg(e) = elastic settlement of group piles
Bg =width of group pile section
D = width or diameter of each pile in the group
Se = elastic settlement of each pile at comparable working load
For group piles in sand and gravel, for elastic settlement, Meyerhof (1976)
suggested the empirical relation
(4.2)
and,
q = Qg/(LgBg) kN/m2
(4.3)
where
Lg and Bg = length and width of the group pile section, respectively (m)
N60 = average standard penetration number within seat of settlement (
deep below the tip of the piles)
I
= influence factor = 1 L/8Bg 0.5
L = length of embedment of piles (m)
60
Similarly, the group pile settlement is related to the cone penetration resistance by
the formula.
(4.4)
The consolidation settlement of a group pile in clay can be estimated by using the
2:1 stress distribution method. The calculation involves the following steps (see
Figure 4.1):
Qg
Clay layer 1
GWL
L
a
Clay layer 2
z
2V:1H
Clay layer 3
L2
L3
Clay layer 4
b
Rock
Step 1.
Step 2.
Step 3.
Calculate the increase in effective stress caused at the middle of each soil
layer by the load Qg. The formula is Qg.
(4.5)
Where
'i
Lg, Bg
zi
Step 4.
=
=
=
(4.6a)
(4.6b)
where
Sc(i)
e(i)
eo(i)
Hi
Cc(i)
'o (i)
'1 (i )
Step 5.
=
=
=
=
=
Sc(g) = Sc(i)
(4.7)
62
Example 4.1
A group pile in clay is shown in Figure 4.2. Determine the consolidation
settlement of the piles. All clays are normally consolidated. Pile group dimension:
Lg = 3.3 m, and Bg = 2.2 m.
Solution
Because the lengths of the piles are 15 m each, the stress distribution starts at a
depth of 10 m below the top of the pile. We are given that Qg = 2000 kN .
Calculation of Settlement of Clay Layer 1
Qg = 2000 kN
GWL
Sand
15m
2m
Sand:
= 16.2 kN/m2
10m
16m
Clay 1:
sat = 18.0 kN/m2
eo = 0.82
Cc = 0.3
Clay 2
4m
Clay 2:
sat = 18.9 kN/m2
eo = 0.7
Cc = 0.2
Clay 3
2m
Clay 1
2V:1H
Rock
Clay 3:
sat = 19 kN/m2
eo = 0.75
Cc = 0.25
Hence,
Hence,
Hence, the total consolidation settlement is: Sc = 162.4 +15.7 + 5.4 = 183.5 mm
64
INSTALATION OF PILE
Learning Outcomes:
5.1
5.2
The rating of a piling hammer is based on the gross energy per blow. However,
different types of hammers have differing efficiencies in terms of the actual
energy transmitted through the pile being driven. The range of typical efficiencies
of different types of hammers is shown in Table 5.1.
Type of Hammer
Drop hammers
Hydraulic hammers
66
Diesel hammers
In a diesel hammer, the weight is lifted by fuel combustion. The hammer can be
either single-acting or double-acting. Usually, only a small crane base unit is
required to support the hammer. Due to the high noise level and pollutant exhaust
gases associated with diesel hammers, the use of diesel hammers has been phased
out in populated areas.
The driving characteristics of a diesel hammer differ appreciably from those of a
drop or steam hammer in that the pressure of the burning gases also acts on the
anvil (i.e. driving cap) for a significant period of time. As a result, the duration of
the driving forces is increased. The length of the stroke varies with the driving
resistance, and is largest for hard driving. In soft soils, the resistance to pile
penetration may be inadequate to cause sufficient compression in the ram cylinder
of a 'heavy' hammer to produce an explosion, leading to stalling of hammer. In
this case, a smaller hammer may be necessary in the early stages of driving.
The ram weight of a diesel hammer is generally less than a drop hammer but the
blow rate is higher. The actual efficiency is comparatively low (Table 5.1)
because the pressure of the burning gas renders the ram to strike at a lower
velocity than if it were to fall freely under gravity. The efficiency is dependent
upon the maintenance of the hammer. Furthermore, as the hammer needs to
exhaust gas and dissipate heat, shrouding to reduce noise can be relatively
difficult.
Where a diesel hammer is used to check the final set on re-strike at the beginning
of a working day, results from the first few 'cold' blows may be misleading in that
the hammer is not heated up properly and the efficiency may be very low. This
source of error may be avoided by warming the hammer up through driving on an
adjacent pile.
Hydraulic hammers
A hydraulic hammer is less noisy and does not produce polluting exhaust.
Modern hydraulic hammers, e.g. double-acting hydraulic hammers, are more
efficient and have high-energy transfer ratios. The ram of the hammer is
connected to a piston, which is pushed upward and downwards by hydraulic
power. Some complex models have nitrogen charged accumulator system, which
stores significant energy allowing a shortened stroke and increased blow rate. As
such, the kinetic energy of the hammer depends not only on the height of the
stroke but also the acceleration due to the injection of hydraulic pressure. Most
new hydraulic hammers are equipped with electronic sensors that directly measure
the velocity of the ram and calculate the kinetic energy just before impact. An
equivalent stroke height is computed by dividing the measured kinetic energy
by the weight of the ram and is used in the pile driving formulae. HKCA (2004)
reported that the energy transfer ratio of hydraulic hammers ranges between 0.8
and 0.9.
Vibratory drivers
67
A vibratory driver consists of a static weight together with a pair of contrarotating eccentric weights such that the vertical force components are additive.
The vibratory part is attached rigidly to the pile head and the pulsating force
facilitates pile penetration under the sustained downward force.
The vibratory driver may be operated at low frequencies, typically in the range of
20 to 40 Hz, or at high frequencies around 100 Hz (i.e. 'resonance pile driving').
Vibratory drivers are not recommended for precast or prestressed concrete piles
because of the high tensile stresses that can be generated.
Jetting Piles
Water jetting may be used to aid the penetration of a pile into dense sand or dense
sandy gravel. Jetting is ineffective in firm to stiff clays or any soil containing
much coarse to stiff cobbles or boulders.
Where jetting is required for pile penetration a stream of water is discharged near
the pile point or along the sides of the pile through a pipe 5 to 7.5 cm in diameter.
An adequate quantity of water is essential for jetting. Suitable quantities of water
for jetting a 250 to 350 mm pile for fine sand, coarse sand, sandy gravels are, 1525 liters/second, 25-40 liters/second, and 45-600 liters/second respectively.
A pressure of at least 5 kg/cm2 or more is required.
68
Static
weight
RAM
RAM
RAM
Figure 5.1 Principles of operation of pile-driving hammers (Vesic, 1977). (a) Drop hammer, (b) single-acting hammer
69
References
BerezanTsev, V. G. et al. (1961). Load bearing capacity and deformation of piled
foundations, Proceedings of the 5th International Conference, ISSMFE, Paris, Vol.
2, 1961, pp. 1112.
Bowles, J. E. (1996). Foundation Analysis and Design, 5th. ed, McGraw-Hill,
New York.
Briaud,J. L. et al. (1985). Behavior of Piles and Pile Groups, Report No. Federal
Highway Administration,Washington, DC.
Budhu, M. (2011). Soil Mechanics and Foundations, 3rd ed., JohnWiley & Sons,
Ltd., USA.
Chellis, R.D. (1961). Pile Foundations, McGraw Hill, New York.
Coduto, D. P. (2001). Foundation Design, Principles and Practices, 2 nd ed.
PrenticeHall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
Coyle, H. M., and Castello, R. R. (1981). New Design Correlations for Piles in
Sand, Journal of the Geotechnical Engineering Division, American Society of
Civil Engineers, Vol. 107, No. GT7, pp. 965986.
Craig, R.F. (2004). Craigs Soil Mechanics 7th Ed., Spon Press Taylor &
Francis, London & New York
Das, B.M. (2009). Shallow Foundation Bearing Capacity and Settlement, 2nd ed.,
Thomson, CRC Press Taylor & Francis Group, Boca Raton, FL.
Davisson, M. T. (1973). High Capacity Piles in Innovations in Foundation
Construction, Proceedings of a Lecture Series, Illinois Section, American Society
of Civil Engineers, Chicago.
Hansen, J. B. (1968). A general formula for bearing capacity, Danish Geotechnical
Institute, Bulletin No. 11, 1961; also, A revised and extended formula for bearing
capacity, Danish Geotechnical Institute, Bulletin No. 28.
Kameswara Rao, N. S. V. (2011). Pile Foundation Design Theory and Practice,
John Wiley & Sons.
Kerisel, J. (1961). Fondations Profondes en Milieu Sableux, Proc. 5th Int. Conf.
SM and FE, Vol. 2.
Meyerhof, G.G. (1959). Compaction of Sands and Bearing Capacity of Piles,
JSMFD, ASCE, Vol. 85, SM6.
70
71
LIST OF NOTATIONS
Ap
As
Bg
Cc
c
cu
D
Db
DR
Dr
E
Ec
Ei
Ep
Er
Es
eo
FS
fs
fsc
Ix, Iy
Ko
Kp
Ks
L
Lb
Lc
Lg
Mx, My
N
Nc, Nq, N
n
Q
Qall
Qg
Qs
Qu
Sc
Se
Snet
St
WR
p
72
qc
qp
xi, yi
'
w
s
'
v
73
GLOSSARY OF TERMS
End-bearing resistance. Load-carrying capacity of pile due to bearing capacity
of the soil below pile tip.
Composite piles. Special piles of various combinations of materials in driven
piles or combinations of bored piles with driven piles.
Downdrag. The downward movement of a pile due to negative skin friction and
is expressed in terms of settlement.
Dragload. The load transferred to a pile due to negative skin friction.
Driven cast-in-place piles. Piles formed by driving a steel tube into the ground
to the required set or depth and withdrawing the tube after concrete placement.
Hand-dug caisson. A bored pile in which the bore is formed manually by using
hand tools in stages.
Kentledge. The use dead load as counter weight in pile load test
Large-diameter bored piles. Bored piles of diameter greater than about 750
mm, e.g. machine bored piles.
Large-displacement piles. All solid driven piles, including precast concrete
piles, and steel or concrete tubes closed at the lower end by a driving shoe or a
plug.
Mini-piles. Small diameter piles which are formed by small drilling rigs with the
use of down-the-hole hammers, rotary or rotary percussive drills and are
subsequently grouted.
Negative skin friction. Soil traction act downward along the pile shaft as a result
of a downdrag and induce compression in pile.
Neutral plane. The depth where there is no relative movement between the pile
and the surrounding soil.
Precast concrete piles. Reinforced concrete piles, with or without prestress, cast
and then driven into ground.
Replacement pile. Pile formed by machine boring, grabbing or hand digging.
Shaft resistance. Load-carrying capacity of pile due to soil resistance developed
at pile/soil interface in response to applied load.
Small-diameter bored piles. Bored piles of small diameter less than about 750
mm.
74
75